Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 1 of 36 - Page ID#: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
At FRANKFORT

[Filed Electronically]

OSCAR ADAMS and MICHAEL KNIGHTS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY (for injunctive relief only) Serve: Jack Conway
Office of the Attorney General 700 Capitol Avenue, Suite 118 Frankfort, Kentucky 40601
KENTUCKY JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY CABINET (for injunctive relief only) Serve: J. Michael Brown
Office of the Secretary 125 Holmes Street Frankfort, KY 40601-2108
KENTUCKY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (for injunctive relief only) Serve: LaDonna Thompson
Office of the Commissioner Kentucky Department of Corrections 275 East Main Frankfort, KY 40601-2321
J. MICHAEL BROWN, individually and in his official capacity as Secretary of the Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet Serve: Office of the Secretary
125 Holmes Street Frankfort, KY 40601-2108
LADONNA THOMPSON, individually and in her official capacity as Commissioner of the Kentucky Department of Corrections

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. _____________ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

X:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\GOODMANS\DESKTOP\COMPLAINT.DOCX

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 2 of 36 - Page ID#: 2

Serve: Office of the Commissioner

)

Kentucky Department of Corrections

)

275 East Main

)

Frankfort, KY 40601-2321

)

)

KIMBERLY POTTER-BLAIR, individually and

)

in her official capacity as Deputy Commissioner

)

of Support Services of the Kentucky Department

)

of Corrections

)

Serve: Office of the Deputy Commissioner of

)

Support Services

)

Kentucky Department of Corrections

)

275 East Main

)

Frankfort, KY 40601-2321

)

)

PAULA HOLDEN, individually and in her

)

official capacity as Deputy Commissioner of

)

Community Services of the Kentucky Department

)

of Corrections

)

Serve: Office of the Deputy Commissioner of

)

Community Services

)

Kentucky Department of Corrections

)

275 East Main

)

Frankfort, KY 40601-2321

)

)

JIM ERWIN, individually and in his official

)

capacity as Deputy Commissioner of Adult

)

Institutions of the Kentucky Department of

)

Corrections

)

Serve: Kentucky Department of Corrections

)

Education Branch

)

275 East Main

)

Frankfort, KY 40601-2321

)

)

RANDY WHITE, individually and in his official

)

capacity as Warden of the Kentucky State

)

Penitentiary

)

Serve: Office of the Warden

)

Kentucky State Penitentiary

)

266 Water Street

)

Eddyville, KY 42038

)

2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 3 of 36 - Page ID#: 3

GREGORY HOWARD, individually and in his

)

official capacity as Warden of the Luther Luckett

)

Correctional Complex

)

Serve: Office of the Warden

)

Luther Luckett Correctional Complex

)

Dawkins Road, Box 6

)

LaGrange, KY 40031

)

)

CLARK TAYLOR, individually and in his official

)

capacity of Warden of the Kentucky State

)

Reformatory

)

Serve: Office of the Warden

)

Kentucky State Reformatory

)

3001 West Highway 146

)

LaGrange, KY 40032

)

)

Defendants.

)

COMPLAINT

1. This is a class action lawsuit based on the willful and deliberate refusal of the

Defendants to comply with federal laws protecting the rights of the Plaintiffs, who are deaf or

hard of hearing individuals in the custody of Defendant Kentucky Department of Corrections

(“KDOC”).

2. The state agencies, entities, and officials named as Defendants in this case have

failed to comply with federal laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C.

§ 12131 et seq., the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794 et seq., and the Constitution of the

United States.

3. Through their policies and practices, Defendants discriminate against deaf and

hard of hearing individuals in KDOC’s custody. They have done this by denying deaf and hard

of hearing individuals in their custody adequate and equally effective means of communication

with individuals outside of prison—including effective communications between the Plaintiffs

and their loved ones. Defendants have also failed to provide adequate access to other auxiliary

aids and services necessary to accommodate deaf and hard of hearing individuals in a variety of

3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 4 of 36 - Page ID#: 4
settings, including in connection with educational, religious, healthcare, and rehabilitative programs. Defendants also refuse to provide deaf and hard of hearing individuals in KDOC custody with adequate notification of important daily events and safety announcements, or to provide adequate interpretative services at disciplinary hearings. Additionally, Defendants have discriminated against inmates who are deaf or hard of hearing in work assignments.
4. As a result of the Defendants’ discriminatory policies and practices, deaf and hard of hearing individuals in KDOC’s custody and care:
• have been prevented from effectively communicating by telephone with family, friends, and attorneys outside of prison;
• have been unable to receive necessary and adequate medical treatment; • have missed prison-wide safety announcements, prison counts, and
announcements for meals and other important daily activities; • have been excluded from participation in educational and counseling programs
offered by KDOC, including those required under the terms of their sentencing; • have been unable to and discouraged from attending standard religious services
due to inadequate accommodations; • have been discriminated against in work assignments; • have been denied the ability to meaningfully participate and defend themselves in
disciplinary hearings; and • have been prevented from learning a trade and receiving educational and
industrial credits that could reduce their overall incarceration time. 5. Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief, and damages from the individual Defendants named herein in their individual capacities, on their own behalf and on behalf of the
4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 5 of 36 - Page ID#: 5
class of all deaf and hard of hearing individuals in KDOC’s custody for the harms they have suffered and continue to suffer as a result of the Defendants’ discrimination.
I. JURISDICTION 6. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (Federal Question).
II. VENUE 7. Venue is proper in this District, under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), because all Defendants reside in this District in Kentucky, and a substantial part of the events giving rise to claims herein occurred within this District.
III. PARTIES A. Plaintiffs 8. Named Plaintiff Michael Knights (“Mr. Knights”), inmate # 233021, has a hearing disability and is currently incarcerated at Kentucky State Penitentiary (“KSP”), and under KDOC’s custody and control. 9. Named Plaintiff Oscar Adams (“Mr. Adams”), inmate # 243676, has a hearing disability and is currently incarcerated at Kentucky State Reformatory (“KSR”), and under KDOC’s custody and control. 10. Mr. Knights is profoundly deaf, and has been deaf since birth. Mr. Knights is educated and relies on American Sign Language (“ASL”) to communicate. To further his education, Mr. Knights is currently trying to pursue a GED within the KDOC system. Mr. Knights requires a sign language interpreter to effectively communicate with persons who do not know ASL, and due to his deafness cannot use a standard telephone. 11. Mr. Adams is profoundly deaf, and has been deaf since birth. Mr. Adams relies on American Sign Language (“ASL”) to communicate. Mr. Adams attended and successfully
5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 6 of 36 - Page ID#: 6
graduated from the Kentucky School for the Deaf in 1999. Mr. Adams cannot use a standard telephone and requires an interpreter to communicate with those who are not proficient in ASL.
B. Defendants 1. State Agencies
12. KDOC is the Kentucky state agency responsible for the operation of 12 correctional facilities. KDOC is a division of Defendant the Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet (“the Cabinet”), which in turn is a governmental subdivision of Defendant the Commonwealth of Kentucky. KDOC’s Mission Statement is: To protect the citizens of the Commonwealth and to provide a safe, secure and humane environment for staff and offenders in carrying out the mandates of the legislative and judicial processes; and, to provide opportunities for offenders to acquire skills which facilitate non-criminal behavior.
2. Individuals 13. J. Michael Brown is Secretary of the Cabinet, is responsible for the training and supervision of employees of the Cabinet and the KDOC, and is responsible for their recognition of and compliance with Kentucky laws. 14. LaDonna H. Thompson is the Commissioner of the KDOC and is responsible for the day-to-day operations of KDOC. On information and belief, she is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals. 15. Kimberly Potter-Blair is the Deputy Commissioner of Support Services of the KDOC and is responsible for administrative services, corrections training, budget management, offender information, information technology, population management, and re-entry branch. On information and belief, she is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals.
6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 7 of 36 - Page ID#: 7
16. Paula Holden is the Deputy Commissioner of Community Services of the KDOC and is responsible for the oversight of KDOC’s Probation & Parole Division and Local Facilities. On information and belief, she is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals.
17. Jim Erwin is the Deputy Commissioner of Adult Institutions of the KDOC and is responsible for the oversight of KDOC’s Adult Institutions Division. On information and belief, he is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals.
18. Randy White is the Warden of the Kentucky State Penitentiary (“KSP”). KSP is a maximum and supermax security correctional facility located in Eddyville, Kentucky. The facility opened in 1889. Upon information and belief, at least some of the KDOC’s deaf inmates are in custody at KSP. As Warden, Mr. White is the legal custodian of individuals under the custody and care of KSP, and is responsible for their safe, secure, and humane treatment. On information and belief, he is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals and he is aware of specific written complaints by deaf and hard of hearing individuals at KSP regarding the violation of their rights.
19. Gregory Howard is the Warden of the Luther Luckett Correctional Complex (“LLCC”). LLCC is a minimum and medium security correctional facility located in LaGrange, Kentucky. The facility opened in 1981. Upon information and belief, at least some of the KDOC’s deaf inmates are in custody at LLCC. As Warden, Mr. Howard is the legal custodian of individuals under the custody and care of LLCC, and is responsible for their safe, secure, and humane treatment. On information and belief, he is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals and he is aware of specific written complaints by deaf and hard of hearing individuals at LLCC regarding the violation of their rights.
7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 8 of 36 - Page ID#: 8
20. Clark Taylor is the Warden of the Kentucky State Reformatory (“KSR”). KSR is a medium security correctional facility located in LaGrange, Kentucky. The facility was established in 1936. Upon information and belief, at least some of the KDOC’s deaf inmates are in custody at KSR.As Warden, Mr. Taylor is the legal custodian of individuals under the custody and care of KSR, and is responsible for their safe, secure, and humane treatment. On information and belief, he is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals and he is aware of specific written complaints by deaf and hard of hearing individuals at KSR regarding the violation of their rights.
21. Defendants Brown, Thompson, Potter-Blair, Holden, Erwin, White, Howard and Taylor (“the Individual Defendants”) are all state actors, acting under color of Kentucky statutes and regulation in all activities relevant to this action.
IV. FACTS 22. For years, KDOC has failed to provide the deaf and hard of hearing inmates housed at its facilities the accommodations that are required by the Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (“Section 504”). In January 2013, Plaintiff Michael Knights and other deaf and hard of hearing inmates at LLCC retained the services of Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP (“Weil”) and the Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs (“WLC”) to assist them in obtaining the lacking accommodations. Attorneys at Weil and the WLC first began to raise these matters with the KDOC, LLCC, and KSR in May 2013, through correspondence with the KDOC’s Commissioner, Ms. Thompson, and the two correctional facilities’ wardens, Messrs. Howard and Taylor, respectively. 23. Defendants are aware of their obligations under state and federal laws. Nevertheless, Defendants have not remedied their past pattern and practice of discrimination and
8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 9 of 36 - Page ID#: 9
continue to discriminate against deaf and hard of hearing individuals, resulting in disabilitybased discrimination in at least five different areas: (A) ineffective access to telecommunications; (B) ineffective access to auxiliary aids and services; (C) ineffective access to prison alerts and announcements; (D) ineffective communication during disciplinary proceedings; and (E) inadequate access to prison vocational opportunities.
A. Ineffective Access to Telecommunications 24. KDOC provides hearing individuals in its custody access to telecommunications services in order for them to communicate with family, friends, and other individuals outside of prison. 25. As the federal government has recognized, “[t]elephone privileges are a supplemental means of maintaining community and family ties that will contribute to an inmate’s personal development.” 28 C.F.R. § 540.100. Telephone and other forms of telecommunication are very important to individuals in KDOC’s custody because they foster the family and community ties that are fundamental to motivate incarcerated individuals to improve themselves and to prepare them to make a positive transition back to civilian life once their sentence is complete. 26. Because of their disability, most deaf and hard of hearing KDOC inmates cannot use traditional telephones to communicate with individuals outside of prison.
1. Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TDDs) 27. Some KDOC facilities, including KSR and KSP, provide deaf individuals in their custody with limited access to telecommunications devices for the deaf, or “TDDs”. TDDs are electronic devices for text communication via a telephone line to enable people with hearing and speech disabilities to communicate by telephone. Based on fifty-year-old technology, the TDD is basically a telephone equipped with a keyboard and a display screen. To communicate with
9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 10 of 36 - Page ID#: 10
the deaf, the user of a TDD must type out everything that is said in a conversation. A TDD is effectively useless if both parties to a conversation do not have TDD devices. In other words, a deaf person with a TDD device cannot communicate with other deaf individuals who do not have TDD devices.
28. With special assistance (i.e., a relay service), deaf TDD users can communicate with hearing persons. Relay services are federally-mandated services that operate as follows: the party using the TDD places a call to a relay center, and a relay operator answers the call using another TDD. The caller provides the operator with the phone number of the party with whom they wish to communicate, and the operator places the call. When a hearing person answers the phone, the relay operator explains the relay service and states the name of the caller. The responses of the hearing person are typed by the relay operator into a TDD, and transmitted over the telephone lines to the TDD user. The call proceeds with the relay operator voicing what the TDD user types to the hearing person receiving the call, and typing what the hearing person speaks. The process can also work the other way—a hearing person who has no TDD can call deaf individuals from a traditional telephone by using the relay service.
29. The relay service is free of cost to the users and the caller pays only for the cost of the call to the party with whom the caller wishes to converse. To connect to a relay services center, an individual can either dial “711” from anywhere within the United States or dial the toll-free “800” number of the relay service in the caller’s locality. Accordingly, TDD relay services in Kentucky may be accessed either by calling 711 or by calling Kentucky’s toll-free relay service number.
30. For the most part, deaf individuals in the United States who use ASL have abandoned the 50-year-old TDD technology and now utilize up-to-date and much more
10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 11 of 36 - Page ID#: 11
convenient videophones. For those deaf individuals still using a TDD, it is impossible to communicate with a videophone user.
31. On information and belief, KSR has at least one TDD; however, deaf and hard of hearing individuals incarcerated at KSR are repeatedly denied access to it. On information and belief, KSP and LLCC similarly have at least (and likely only) one TDD which deaf and hard of hearing inmates are also frequently denied access.
32. In those rare instances when deaf and hard of hearing individuals are granted access to the TDD it is ordinarily, yet inexplicably, for a shorter period of time than they would have on a normal phone. This is especially detrimental where, as here, the conversations are necessarily slower and more drawn out given the drawbacks of the technology.
33. KSR has never addressed the problem related to the resultant inequality when it comes to TDD use.
2. Videophones 34. Videophones and free or low-cost internet-based video links (collectively, “videophones”) are (and have been for quite some time) replacing TDDs among deaf people because they allow deaf individuals to communicate with one another directly in ASL, without having to communicate through written English (an effectively foreign language, that is especially difficult for many deaf persons to communicate in) and without the use of relay services. When using a videophone, callers can see each other, usually over an internet connection. As a result, many deaf households no longer own a TDD and have no way to accept a TDD call, as they rely exclusively on videophones for telecommunication. 35. Deaf individuals using videophones can also call a Video Relay Service (“VRS”) to place calls to people who do not understand ASL or do not have a videophone. The mechanics of VRS are very similar to those of traditional TDD relay service–the caller is routed
11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 12 of 36 - Page ID#: 12
to an interpreter, the caller gives the interpreter the number of the party he is trying to reach, and the interpreter then interprets the conversation into spoken English.
36. Videophones and VRS permit deaf people to use ASL instead of having to carry out every telephone call in written English through a TDD. Due to the fact that TDDs rely on written communications, they are by nature an unsatisfactory and ineffective means of communication for many deaf individuals. Writing usually does not provide effective communication for a deaf individual. Many deaf individuals who became deaf before acquiring language skills consider ASL to be their native language and English to be their second language. Additionally, many deaf people acquire English as their second language much later in life. Therefore, the English reading and writing skill level of many deaf individuals, including those incarcerated at KDOC institutions, is generally much lower than that of hearing people.
37. Provision of videophones would also ensure that deaf inmates could place telephone calls to deaf family and friends, the vast majority of whom no longer have TDD devices.
38. Deaf individuals in Defendants’ custody have repeatedly requested videophone access, but have been denied this access.
a. Videophones at KSP 39. There are deaf inmates at KSP who use ASL and who are denied effective telecommunication services due to the failure of KSP to provide videophone services to them. 40. Plaintiff Michael Knights cannot communicate with his friends and family who have videophones but not TDD. Without the videophone, it virtually impossible for Mr. Knights to contact his sister, his daughter, his daughter’s mother, and his friends. 41. Plaintiff Michael Knights filed a formal Grievance with Warden White to specifically request access to videophones. Warden White stated in his first stage response that
12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 13 of 36 - Page ID#: 13
the TDD system provides effective communication because Mr. Knights can call his legal counsel. Despite Mr. Knights’ ability to call his legal counsel using TDD, it is still inadequate because Mr. Knights cannot effectively communicate with his family and friends. Additionally, deaf inmates at KSP have extremely restricted and an unacceptable level of access to the TDD, especially in relation to hearing inmates’ access to standard telephones.
b. Videophones at KSR 42. There are deaf inmates at KSR who use ASL and who are denied effective telecommunication services due to the failure of KSR to provide videophone services to them. 43. Plaintiff Oscar Adams cannot communicate with his friends and family on the outside given the lack of videophone services. In particular, Mr. Adams is very close to his mother, but cannot communicate with her because she only has a videophone. Unfortunately, Mr. Adams cannot even communicate with his mother in person because the evolution of her fight with lupus prevents her now from visiting him. Mr. Adams is allowed to use the TDD service just once a week for 10-15 minutes.
c. Videophones at LLCC 44. On August 10, 2012, Plaintiff Michael Knights, filed a formal Grievance with Warden Howard to address the unequal treatment afforded to deaf inmates with respect to the phone system and specifically requested access to videophones. On September 20, 2012, Warden Howard dismissed the request on the basis that Mr. Knights and other deaf inmates are not mistreated because they can use the TDD. 45. On information and belief, despite the initial refusal, LLCC eventually understood, at least in part, the significant unconstitutional hardships it was placing on its deaf inmates and, at least provisionally, installed a videophone.
13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 14 of 36 - Page ID#: 14
46. On information and belief, to the extent that videophone is still accessible to deaf inmates at LLCC it is available on unnecessarily and unconstitutionally restrictive terms – including prohibitively short periods of time.
d. Videophones at other KDOC Facilities 47. Additionally, there are at least some hearing inmates housed at LLCC who have deaf family on the outside. These individuals can only communicate with their deaf family on an irregular basis. 48. Upon information and belief, deaf and hard of hearing inmates at other KDOC facilities have been denied equal and consistent access to telecommunication services at those facilities. B. Inadequate Access to Auxiliary Aids and Services 49. Individuals in the custody of KDOC are by necessity wholly dependent on KDOC for medical, dental, educational, mental health, employment, and religious services, among other services. Individuals in the custody of KDOC are also dependent on KDOC and its staff for all of their basic daily needs, including food, exercise, and safety.
1. Sign Language Interpreter Services 50. For deaf or hard of hearing individuals who rely on ASL as their primary form of communication, use of a qualified ASL interpreter is necessary to ensure effective communication between a deaf or hard of hearing individual and an individual who does not use ASL to communicate. 51. A qualified sign language interpreter is necessary because ASL is a complete, complex language that employs signs made with the hands and other movements, including facial expressions and postures of the body. It is a language distinct from English—it is not
14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 15 of 36 - Page ID#: 15
simply English in hand signals-it has its own vocabulary, and its own rules for grammar and syntax.
52. As noted above, writing usually does not provide effective communication for a deaf individual. English is generally considered a second language for most deaf persons who became deaf before acquiring language—ASL is their native language. Also, several deaf people acquire English as their second language later in life, past the critical period of language acquisition. Therefore, the English reading and writing skill level of many deaf individuals, including those incarcerated in KDOC facilities, is generally much lower than that of hearing people.
53. Lip-reading usually does not provide effective communication for a deaf individual and is generally far less effective than written communication. It is extremely difficult to lip-read English because only a small fraction of the sounds used in the language are clearly visible on the mouth, and many sounds that are visible look identical on the lips. In addition to these difficulties in lip-reading, the ability to accurately lip-read is affected by the speaker’s facial bone structure, facial musculature, facial hair, lighting, and other external factors. Moreover, even if an ASL user were able to understand the sounds appearing on a speaker’s lips, for the reasons discussed above she would not necessarily understand the English language or the vocabulary the speaker was using.
54. Thus, the provision of qualified sign language interpreter services is the auxiliary service necessary to allow deaf individuals who use ASL in KDOC’s custody and under KDOC’s supervision to effectively communicate with KDOC officials, KDOC employees, and medical personnel.
15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 16 of 36 - Page ID#: 16
55. Defendants, through their policies and practices, fail to provide adequate access to sign language interpreters for deaf individuals in KDOC’s custody and control and under KDOC’s supervision.
56. On information and belief, Defendants do not provide adequate access to sign language interpreters at KDOC facilities throughout Kentucky.
a. Interpreters for Access to Medical Services 57. Defendants are responsible for the medical care of all individuals incarcerated by KDOC. 58. Deaf individuals who rely on ASL require sign language interpreters to communicate effectively with medical staff. 59. After receiving numerous written requests, Defendants are aware that deaf individuals need sign language interpreters for their medical appointments. 60. Nonetheless, deaf inmates at LLCC are still denied interpreter services at medical appointments. 61. Deaf inmates at facilities other than LLCC, including those housed at KSR and KSP, are consistently denied interpreter services for medical appointments. Mr. Adams, an inmate at KSR, has been denied access to interpreters for medical appointments despite known and serious medical conditions.
b. Interpreters for Access to Administrative Meetings 62. Defendants provide educational, mental health and counseling programs for individuals in KDOC’s custody. 63. Interpreters are not provided by Defendants for such programs, including for educational classes and for religious ceremonies. The same holds true for KSP, KSR and LLCC.
16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 17 of 36 - Page ID#: 17
c. Interpreters for Access to Prison Programs 64. Interpreters are not provided by Defendants for meetings between prison employees and inmates. 65. Mr. Adams was denied an ASL qualified interpreter at his reclassification meeting at KSR.
2. Other Auxiliary Aids and Services 66. For deaf and hard of hearing inmates who do not use ASL, other auxiliary aids and services are necessary to ensure their effective participation in and understanding of Defendants’ services and programs. 67. Computer Assisted Real Time (“CART”) is a system that provides access to spoken information for people with hearing loss. CART operators use a court reporting machine to input spoken text. The output of the court reporting machine is fed to a computer, which produces a text document that corresponds very closely to the words used by the speaker. Once in the computer, the text can be displayed on a computer monitor (for one or two users) or projected onto a screen (for more users.) CART is generally the system of choice for latedeafened people attending classes or meetings. 68. An Assistive Listening Device or System (“ALDS”) can be any one of several technologies that are used to improve the reception of speech for people with impaired hearing, including Mr. Adams, when it might be difficult or impossible to hear otherwise. 69. Thus, CART and/or ALDS is necessary to allow certain deaf or hard of hearing individuals in KDOC’s custody and under KDOC’s supervision to effectively understand and participate in KDOC programs and services.
17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 18 of 36 - Page ID#: 18
70. Defendants, through their policies and practices, fail to provide adequate access to CART or ALDS for deaf or hard of hearing individuals in KDOC’s custody and control and under KDOC’s supervision.
71. On information and belief, Defendants do not provide adequate access to CART or ALDS at KDOC facilities throughout Kentucky.
a. Auxiliary Aids and Services at KSP 72. Deaf and hard of hearing inmates at KSP are unconstitutionally denied the conveniences of effectively all auxiliary aids and services.
b. Auxiliary Aids and Services at KSR 73. Deaf and hard of hearing inmates at KSR have been denied effective access to programs, such as stress management, anger management and educational classes, due to the lack of any system of providing them with effective communication, such as CART and/or ALDS.
c. Auxiliary Aids and Services at LLCC 74. Deaf and hard of hearing inmates at LLCC have also been denied educational opportunities, such as classes to achieve a General Educational Development (“GED”) degree, due to the lack of any system of providing them with effective communication, such as CART and/or ALDS. 75. For example, Mr. Knights, while incarcerated at LLCC, had attempted to complete his GED, but was unable to because of the inadequate accommodations for the deaf.
d. Auxiliary Aids and Services at other KDOC Facilities 76. Upon information and belief, deaf and hard of hearing inmates at other KDOC facilities have been denied auxiliary aids and services at those facilities.
18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 19 of 36 - Page ID#: 19
C. Access to Visual Notification of Announcements 77. Deaf and hard of hearing inmates throughout KDOC institutions have difficulty in accessing public address and other audio alerts and announcements available to other inmates.
1. Visual Notification at LLCC 78. Because deaf and hard of hearing inmates have been unable to hear daily announcements made by LLCC staff, such as announcements requiring inmates to report to their cells for head counts, special accommodations are necessary to assure that the deaf inmates are aware of the announcements. Often times the deaf are punished for failing to abide by such announcements; however, the deaf inmates are not ignoring the announcements, rather they are unaware such announcements were ever made. 79. LLCC does on occasion use bed shakers for awakening deaf inmates in the morning. However, the extent of even this minimal convenience is insufficient and does not address the numerous other accommodations that must be provided to assure that deaf inmates are apprised of prison announcements, emergencies, and roll calls.
2. Visual Notification at KSP 80. KSP also only provides minimal, if any, visual accommodations to deaf inmates. There is no paging system or other system to adequately notify deaf inmates of public announcements.
3. Visual Notification at KSR 81. KSR also only provides minimal visual accommodations to deaf inmates and does not provide any type of paging system or other adequate notifications of public announcements.
4. Visual Notification at Other KDOC Facilities 82. Upon information and belief, deaf and hard of hearing inmates at other KDOC facilities have been denied visual notification of announcements at those facilities.
19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 20 of 36 - Page ID#: 20
D. Failure to Provide Effective Communication at Disciplinary Proceedings 83. Deaf and hard of hearing inmates are subjected to disciplinary proceedings without effective communication. 84. Although they are punished, many of these inmates do not understand the charges against them or the parameters of their punishment. Moreover, the inmates are denied the ability to defend themselves when they cannot hear what is happening during the hearings. 85. When inmates violate rules and regulations of LLCC, KSP, and KSR, they undergo disciplinary proceedings conducted by hearing officers. During these proceedings, the inmates have an opportunity to defend themselves, to hear the allegations against them, and to understand the parameters of their punishment. 86. KDOC, LLCC, KSP, KSR, and their agents are denying the deaf and hard of hearing inmates full due process by failing to provide appropriate auxiliary services, interpreters, or other means of interpretation. 87. The deaf and hard of hearing inmates are subjected to these proceedings without understanding what is happening during the hearings. Because they are denied interpreters and/or assistive listening devices or other auxiliary aids or services the inmates are unable to hear the adjudicator(s), the allegations against them, or any of the results of the proceeding. They are disciplined without complete knowledge of the claims against them or the length of their punishment. E. Access to Employment Opportunities 88. Deaf and hard of hearing inmates are, solely because of their disabilities, routinely denied employment opportunities within KDOC facilities. Further they are denied training opportunities.
20

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 21 of 36 - Page ID#: 21
89. On information and belief, deaf inmates at KSP, KSR and LLCC have been discriminated against in their efforts to participate fully and fairly in both training and employment opportunities in “Prison Industries.”
90. Upon information and belief, deaf and hard of hearing inmates at other KDOC facilities have been denied the same opportunities.
91. Defendants’ failure to provide its deaf and hard of hearing inmates with access to telecommunication devices and services, effective communication within KDOC institutions, access to announcements and alerts within the KDOC institutions, and access to employment opportunities within KDOC institutions, has resulted in harm, and may result in future harm, to deaf and hard of hearing individuals in KDOC custody. It also violates their rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the United States Constitution.
V. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF COUNT I
DISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF A DISABILITY IN VIOLATION OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (42 U.S.C. § 12131 ET SEQ.)
(Against all Defendants by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated individuals)
92. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation above as if fully set forth herein.
93. On July 12, 1990, Congress enacted the ADA “to provide a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities.” 42 U.S.C. § 12101(b) (l). Title II of the ADA states that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be
21

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 22 of 36 - Page ID#: 22
denied the benefits of services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.” 42 U.S.C. § 12132.
94. Plaintiffs are qualified individuals with a disability within the meaning of Title II of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12131(2).
95. The claims under the ADA are brought against the Defendants as departments, agencies, or instrumentalities of the State of Kentucky.
96. Defendants are each a “public entity” within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 12131(1) (B).
97. At all times relevant to this action, the ADA was in full force and effect in the United States and Plaintiffs had a right not to be subjected to discrimination on the basis of their disability by the Defendants. 42 U.S.C. § 12132.
98. The U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) regulation implementing Title II of the ADA clearly requires the provision of effective communication as part of its nondiscrimination mandate. 28 C.F.R. 35.160.
99. The regulation states that “[a] public entity shall take appropriate steps to ensure that communications with applicants, participants, and members of the public . . . With disabilities are as effective as communications with others.” 28 C.F.R. § 35.160(a).
100. Defendants’ failure to provide effective communication for individuals with hearing disabilities denied and continues to deny, on the basis of their disability, Plaintiffs the same access to Defendants’ services, benefits, activities, programs, or privileges as the access provided to hearing individuals.
101. Plaintiffs have been unable to communicate effectively by telephone with individuals outside of prison, unable to participate in educational, mental health, employment,
22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 23 of 36 - Page ID#: 23
disciplinary, and other KDOC services, and unable to learn of daily life and safety alert and other notifications as effectively as hearing individuals in KDOC’s custody.
102. In order to ensure effective communication, the ADA requires that “a public entity shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford qualified individuals with disabilities . . . an equal opportunity to participate in, and enjoy the benefits of, a service, program, or activity conducted by a public entity.” 28 C.F.R. § 35.160(b) (l).
103. Auxiliary aids and services include, but are not limited to, “qualified interpreters or other effective methods of making aurally delivered materials available to individuals with hearing impairments,” 42 U.S.C. § 12103, such as computer-aided transcription services, assistive listening systems, closed caption decoders, open and close captioning, TDDs, videophones, and videotext displays. 28 C.F.R. § 35.104.
104. Defendants subjected Plaintiffs to discrimination solely on the basis of their disability, in violation of their rights under the ADA. They have done this by failing to provide effective communication, and by not ensuring that adequate access to qualified sign language interpreter services and other auxiliary aids and services is made available to individuals with hearing impairments in KDOC’s custody or under KDOC supervision.
105. In determining what type of auxiliary aid and service is necessary, “a public entity shall give primary consideration to the requests of the individual with disabilities.” 28 C.F.R. §160(b) (2).
106. Defendants have failed to give consideration to Plaintiffs’ requests, in most instances flat out denying them their requests for videophone services, or providing unfairly limited access to such services, for visual alert and notification systems, for interpreter services, and for other auxiliary aids and services.
23

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 24 of 36 - Page ID#: 24
107. On information and belief, the failure to provide effective communication and the failure to provide comparable access to services, benefits, activities, programs, or privileges are policies, regular practices, and/or customs of Defendants. These failures are ongoing and continue to this date.
108. Defendants’ failure to provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services has subjected Plaintiffs to discrimination on the basis of their disability in violation of their rights under the ADA, in ways that include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. inadequate access to sign language interpreters and other appropriate auxiliary aids and services to enable them to participate in and benefit from Defendants’ programs; b. inadequate access to prison audio alerts and notifications; and c. inadequate access to telecommunication devices. 109. The DOJ regulation implementing Title II of the ADA also requires that public entities, either directly or indirectly through other contractual or private arrangements, provide disabled individuals with the same opportunities to participate and benefit from services as is afforded to other individuals. 28 C.F.R. 35.160. 110. The regulation states, in relevant portion, that “[a] public entity, in providing any aid, benefit, or service, may not, directly or through contractual, licensing, or other arrangements, on the basis of disability—(i) [d]eny a qualified individual with a disability the opportunity to participate in or benefit from the aid, benefit, or service; (ii) [a]fford a qualified individual with a disability an opportunity to participate in or benefit from the aid, benefit, or service that is not equal to that afforded others.” 28 C.F.R. 35.130(b)(1)(i)‒(ii). 111. Defendants are in violation of this regulation directly and indirectly through private entities, by refusing to permit certain deaf and hard of hearing inmates to participate in vocational and employment opportunities because of their hearing disabilities.
24

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 25 of 36 - Page ID#: 25
112. As a proximate result of Defendants’ violations of Plaintiffs’ rights under the ADA, Plaintiffs have suffered and continue to suffer from discrimination, unequal treatment, exclusion (including exclusion from Defendants’ services, benefits, activities, programs, and privileges), violations of their rights under the laws of the United States, financial loss, loss of dignity, frustration, humiliation, emotional pain and suffering, anxiety, trauma, embarrassment, and unnecessary loss of rights and privileges, including unnecessary disciplinary measures.
113. Defendants’ failure to comply with the ADA has resulted, and will continue to result, in harm to Plaintiffs, as Plaintiffs will continue to be in the custody or under the supervision of KDOC and will continue to attempt to use or avail themselves of the services, benefits, activities, programs, and privileges of the Defendants. This harm will continue unless and until the Defendants are ordered by this Court to make modifications to the policies, practices, and procedures of KDOC pursuant to the ADA.
COUNT II Discrimination on the Basis of a Disability in Violation of the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C.
§ 794 et seq.) (Against all Defendants by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated
individuals) 114. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation above as if fully set forth herein. 115. The purpose of the Rehabilitation Act is to ensure that no “qualified individual with a disability in the United States . . . shall, solely by reason of [] disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. . . .” 29 U.S.C. § 794(a). 116. Plaintiffs are qualified “individual[s] with a disability” within the meaning of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 705(20).
25

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 26 of 36 - Page ID#: 26
117. Defendants receive “Federal financial assistance” within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 794(a).
118. The operations of KDOC and Defendants are “program[s] or activit[ies]” within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 794(b)(l)(A)‒(B) and/or (b)(2)(B).
119. At all times relevant to this action, the Rehabilitation Act was in full force and effect in the United States and Plaintiffs had a right not to be subjected to discrimination on the basis of their disability by defendants. 29 U.S.C. § 794(a).
120. The DOJ regulation implementing the Rehabilitation Act clarifies the requirements for Federal financial recipients, including correctional facilities, stating that “[a] recipient that employs fifteen or more persons shall provide appropriate auxiliary aids to qualified handicapped persons with impaired sensory, manual, or speaking skills where a refusal to make such provision would discriminatorily impair or exclude the persons in the program receiving federal financial assistance.” 28 C.F.R. § 42.503(f).
121. Appropriate auxiliary aids include, but are not limited to, “qualified interpreters . . . and telephonic devices.” 28 C.F.R. § 42.503(f).
122. Defendants discriminatorily impaired Plaintiffs’ ability to communicate effectively with medical personnel, prison staff, and individuals outside of prison and/or excluded Plaintiffs from educational, vocational, and prison-wide announcements. They have done this by failing to provide appropriate auxiliary aids in violation of the Rehabilitation Act.
123. Defendant’s failure to provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services for individuals with hearing disabilities denied and continues to deny, on the basis of their disabilities, Plaintiffs the same access to Defendant’s services, benefits, activities, programs, or privileges as the access provided to hearing individuals.
26

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 27 of 36 - Page ID#: 27
124. On information and belief, the failure to provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services and the failure to provide comparable access to services, benefits, activities, programs or privileges are policies, regular practices, and/or customs of Defendants. These failures are ongoing and continue to this date.
125. Defendants’ failure to provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services has subjected Plaintiffs to discrimination on the basis of their disability in violation of their rights under the Rehabilitation Act, in ways that include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. inadequate access to appropriate auxiliary aids and services to enable them to participate in and benefit from Defendants’ programs; b. inadequate access to prison alerts and announcements; and c. inadequate access to telecommunication devices. 126. Defendants have also violated Section 504 and its implementing regulation by excluding inmates who are deaf or hard of hearing from Defendants’ employment and vocational benefits and opportunities. 28 C.F.R. 42.503(a). 127. As a proximate result of Defendants’ violations of Plaintiffs’ rights under the Rehabilitation Act, Plaintiffs have suffered, and continue to suffer, from discrimination, unequal treatment, exclusion (including exclusion from defendant’s services, benefits, activities, programs, and requirements), financial loss, loss of dignity, frustration, humiliation, emotional pain and suffering, anxiety, trauma, embarrassment, unnecessary loss of rights and privileges, including unnecessary disciplinary measures, and injury to their health. 128. Defendants’ failure to comply with the Rehabilitation Act has resulted in harm to Plaintiffs, and Defendants are liable to Plaintiffs for harm suffered. Defendants’ failure to comply with the Rehabilitation Act will continue to result in harm to Plaintiffs, as Plaintiffs will continue to be in the custody or under the supervision of KDOC and will continue to attempt to
27

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 28 of 36 - Page ID#: 28
use or avail themselves of the services, benefits, activities, programs, and privileges of Defendants. This harm will continue unless and until Defendants are ordered by this Court to make modifications to their policies, practices, and procedures pursuant to the Rehabilitation Act.
COUNT III Violation of Free Speech Rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United
States Constitution (Against all Defendants by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated
individuals) 129. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation above as if fully set forth herein. 130. Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, States “shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech.” U.S. Const. amends. I. 131. 42 U.S.C. § 1983 creates a cause of action when a “person who under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.” 132. The Individual Defendants are state actors, acting under color of Kentucky statutes and regulation in all activities relevant to this action, deprived and continue to deprive Plaintiffs of their freedom of speech, as secured by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment, by preventing Plaintiffs from communicating with people outside of the prison. Despite multiple complaints in writing to KDOC, KDOC through the official actions of the Individual Defendants, has denied
28

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 29 of 36 - Page ID#: 29
and continues to deny Plaintiffs access to telecommunication devices that would give them the ability and opportunity to communicate with people outside of prison.
COUNT IV Violation of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 “Substantial
Burden on Religious Exercise” (42 U.S.C. § 2000cc et seq.) (Against all Defendants by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated
individuals) 133. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation above as if fully set forth herein. 134. Governments may not impose substantial burdens on the religious exercises of institutionalized persons even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability. 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1(a). 135. Plaintiffs are “institutionalized persons” within the meaning of The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (“RLUIPA”). 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1. 136. As a department, agency, or instrumentality of Kentucky, LLCC and KSR are government within the meaning of RLUIPA. 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-5(4). 137. KDOC and the Defendants have deprived and continue to deprive Plaintiffs of their right to the free exercise of religion, as secured by RLUIPA, by unlawfully imposing a substantial burden on Plaintiffs’ religious exercise. They have done this by failing to provide interpreters or other means for enabling Plaintiffs to effectively communicate at weekly worship services. The substantial burden defendants have imposed on Plaintiffs’ religious exercise affects programs or activities that receive Federal financial assistance. 138. Defendants’ failure to comply with RLUIPA has resulted in harm to Plaintiffs, and will continue to result in harm to Plaintiffs, as Plaintiffs will continue to be in KDOC’s custody and continue to be deprived of participation in weekly worship services unless and until
29

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 30 of 36 - Page ID#: 30
Defendants are ordered by this Court to make modifications to KDOC policies, practices, and procedures pursuant to RLUIPA.
COUNT V Violation of the United States Constitution Free Exercise of Religion: First and Fourteenth
Amendments (42 U.S.C. § 1983) (Against all Defendants by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated
individuals) 139. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation above as if fully set forth herein. 140. Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, States “shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” U.S. Const. amend. I. 141. Defendants have, in their individual and official capacities, deprived and continue to deprive Plaintiffs of their free exercise of religion, as secured by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment, by discriminating against Plaintiffs because of their mode of speech and by substantially burdening their religious exercise. 142. Defendants’ failure to comply with the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution has resulted in harm to Plaintiffs, and will continue to result in harm to Plaintiffs, as Plaintiffs will remain in the custody of KDOC and continue to be denied adequate weekly worship services unless and until Defendants are ordered by this Court to make modifications to their policies, practices, and procedures pursuant to the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.
30

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 31 of 36 - Page ID#: 31
COUNT VI Violation of the United States Constitution Freedom from Cruel and Unusual Punishment:
Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments (42 U.S.C. § 1983) (Against all Defendants by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated
individuals) 143. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation above as if fully set forth herein. 144. Under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, “[e]excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” U.S. Const. amends. VIII. 145. Defendants have, in their individual and official capacities, deprived and continue to deprive Plaintiffs of their right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment as secured by the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment. 146. Defendants have systematically denied Plaintiffs access to basic human services and vital information during their incarceration. Defendants have failed to notify Plaintiffs of prison alerts, announcements, and safety instructions. Defendants refuse to provide Plaintiffs with individual hearing devices. Moreover, Defendants have not provided effective communication between Plaintiffs and prison officials and medical staff. Defendants’ actions place Plaintiffs at a substantial risk of serious future harm. 147. Defendants have actual knowledge of the unconstitutional conditions to which Plaintiffs were, and continue to be, subject, as Plaintiffs have submitted numerous written complaints to KDOC staff requesting that sign language interpreters and other auxiliary aids and services be made available to them and that an alternative notification system be installed.
31

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 32 of 36 - Page ID#: 32
148. Despite actual knowledge of the substantial medical and safety risks Plaintiffs face while in their custody, defendants continue to disregard Plaintiffs’ medical and other needs in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.
149. Defendants’ failure to comply with the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution has resulted in harm to Plaintiffs, and will continue to result in harm to Plaintiffs, as Plaintiffs will remain in the custody of KDOC and continue to receive inadequate medical treatment and other services unless and until Defendants are ordered by this Court to make modifications to their policies, practices, and procedures pursuant to Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.
COUNT VII Violation of the Kentucky Civil Rights Act Provision of Interpreters (KRS 344.500) (Against all Defendants by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated
individuals) 150. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation above as if fully set forth herein. 151. The Kentucky Civil Rights Act provides that a “qualified interpreter shall be appointed in any proceeding before a board, commission, agency, or licensing authority of the state or any of its political subdivisions, when the principal party in interest or a witness is deaf, hard of hearing, or speech impaired.” KRS 344.500. 152. KDOC, KSP, LLCC, and KSR are state agencies that sponsor many inmate proceedings before a state board, commission, or agency, including, for example, parole and disciplinary hearings.
32

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 33 of 36 - Page ID#: 33
153. Despite specific requests for interpreters, Plaintiffs have been subjected to many KDOC proceedings falling within the scope of KRS 344.500 without the aid of any interpreter, let alone a qualified interpreter.
154. Defendants, through their policies and practices, consistently fail and even refuse to provide adequate access to qualified interpreters during inmate proceedings that fall within the scope of KRS 344.500.
155. Defendants’ failure to comply with the KRS 344.500 has resulted in harm to Plaintiffs, and will continue to result in harm to Plaintiffs, as Plaintiffs will remain in the custody of KDOC and continue to be unable to adequately participate in the Defendants’ sponsored proceedings unless and until Defendants are ordered by this Court to make modifications to their policies, practices, and procedures pursuant to KRS 344.500.
COUNT VIII Violation of the Kentucky Civil Rights Act (KRS 344.120) (Against all Defendants by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated
individuals) 156. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation above as if fully set forth herein. 157. The Kentucky Civil Rights Act provides that “it is an unlawful practice for a person to deny an individual the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of a place of public accommodation.” KRS 344.120. 158. Defendants are state actors that fall within the Kentucky Civil Rights Act’s definition of “person.” KRS 344.010.
33

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 34 of 36 - Page ID#: 34
159. Despite specific requests for interpreters, videophones, and other accommodations to fully enjoy the goods and services purportedly offered by Defendants, Plaintiffs have been in a large part denied their requests. Plaintiffs continue to be discriminated against due to their disability and are unable to enjoy Defendants’ accommodations.
160. Defendants, through their policies and practices, consistently fail and even refuse to provide the full scope of their available accommodations to Plaintiffs.
161. Defendants’ failure to comply with the KRS 344.120 has resulted in harm to Plaintiffs, and will continue to result in harm to Plaintiffs, as Plaintiffs will remain in the custody of KDOC and continue to be unable to adequately enjoy the Defendants’ goods and services unless and until defendants are ordered by this Court to make modifications to their policies, practices and procedures pursuant to KRS 344.120.
COUNT IX Damages
(Against all Individual Defendants in their individual capacities by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated individuals)
162. The individual Defendants, by their violation of the constitutional provisions and statutes specified above, have harmed Plaintiffs, and will continue to harm Plaintiffs, as Plaintiffs will remain in the custody of KDOC or under the supervision of KDOC and will continue to attempt to communicate with people outside prison. Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to recover from the Individual Defendants, in their individual capacities, the actual damages they have sustained by virtue of the Individual Defendants’ conduct. In addition, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover from the Individual Defendants, in their individual capacities, punitive damages to punish the individual Defendants for their past violations and to deter future violations against Plaintiffs by these Defendants and until all Defendants are ordered by this Court to make the
34

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 35 of 36 - Page ID#: 35
modifications to their policies, practices, and procedures pursuant required by statute and the United States Constitution.
VI. REQUEST FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray that the Court:	
   1. Certify this case as a Plaintiff class action pursuant to Rule 23(b)(2) and (3) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; 2. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C.§ 794(a), 42 U.S.C.§ 12133, and KRS 344.450 award the
named Plaintiffs and the class members recovery of any and all damages, incurred because of the Individual Defendants’ actions, from the Individual Defendants in their individual capacities; 3. Preliminarily and permanently enjoin Defendants from refusing to provide the proper interpretative services, TTD, videophones, and other hearing devices that are required for deaf and hard of hearing inmates to fully participate in the programs offered by the federally funded prison system; 4. Preliminarily and permanently enjoin Defendants from refusing to provide the proper interpretative services, TTD, videophones, and other hearing devices that are required for deaf and hard of hearing inmates to fully participate in and benefit from the programs offered by these public entities; 5. Preliminarily and permanently enjoin Defendants from depriving Plaintiffs and Plaintiff class members of the protections of the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983; 6. Award prejudgment interest; 7. Award reasonable attorneys’ fees; 8. Award monetary punitive and/or compensatory damages against the Individual Defendants in their individual capacities; and 9. Award Plaintiffs such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
35

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/01/14 Page: 36 of 36 - Page ID#: 36
VII. JURY TRIAL DEMAND Plaintiffs, by their counsel and pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b), hereby demand a trial by jury on all claims so triable in this action.
Respectfully submitted, /s/ Gregory A. Belzley Gregory A. Belzley Camille A. Bathurst BelzleyBathurst Attorneys P.O. Box 278 Prospect, KY 40059 502/292-2452 gbelzley@aol.com P.J. McCarthy Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP 1300 Eye Street NW, Suite 900 Washington, DC 20005-3314 202/682-7041 202/857-0940 Fax patrick.mccarthy@weil.com Deborah Golden Washington Lawyers' Committee
for Civil Rights & Urban Affairs 11 DuPont Circle, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 202/319-1000 202/319-1010 Fax deborah_golden@washlaw.org Counsel for Plaintiffs
36

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 1 of 42 - Page ID#: 1159

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
At FRANKFORT

[Filed Electronically]

OSCAR ADAMS and MICHAEL KNIGHTS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY (for injunctive relief only) Serve: Jack Conway
Office of the Attorney General 700 Capitol Avenue, Suite 118 Frankfort, KY 40601
KENTUCKY JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY CABINET (for injunctive relief only) Serve: J. Michael Brown
Office of the Secretary 125 Holmes Street Frankfort, KY 40601-2108
KENTUCKY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (for injunctive relief only) Serve: LaDonna Thompson
Office of the Commissioner Kentucky Department of Corrections 275 East Main Frankfort, KY 40601-2321
J. MICHAEL BROWN, individually and in his official capacity as Secretary of the Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet Serve: Office of the Secretary
125 Holmes Street Frankfort, KY 40601-2108
LADONNA THOMPSON, individually and in her official capacity as Commissioner of the Kentucky Department of Corrections

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 3:14-CV-00001-GFVT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 2 of 42 - Page ID#: 1160

Serve: Office of the Commissioner

)

Kentucky Department of Corrections

)

275 East Main

)

Frankfort, KY 40601-2321

)

)

KIMBERLY POTTER-BLAIR, individually and

)

in her official capacity as Deputy Commissioner

)

of Support Services of the Kentucky Department

)

of Corrections

)

Serve: Office of the Deputy Commissioner of

)

Support Services

)

Kentucky Department of Corrections

)

275 East Main

)

Frankfort, KY 40601-2321

)

)

PAULA HOLDEN, individually and in her

)

official capacity as Deputy Commissioner of

)

Community Services of the Kentucky Department )

of Corrections

)

Serve: Office of the Deputy Commissioner of

)

Community Services

)

Kentucky Department of Corrections

)

275 East Main

)

Frankfort, KY 40601-2321

)

)

JIM ERWIN, individually and in his official

)

capacity as Deputy Commissioner of Adult

)

Institutions of the Kentucky Department of

)

Corrections

)

Serve: Kentucky Department of Corrections

)

Education Branch

)

275 East Main

)

Frankfort, KY 40601-2321

)

)

RANDY WHITE, individually and in his official

)

capacity as Warden of the Kentucky State

)

Penitentiary

)

Serve: Office of the Warden

)

Kentucky State Penitentiary

)

266 Water Street

)

Eddyville, KY 42038

)

)

GREGORY HOWARD, individually and in his

)

official capacity as Warden of the Luther Luckett

)

Correctional Complex

)

Serve: Office of the Warden

)

2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 3 of 42 - Page ID#: 1161

Luther Luckett Correctional Complex

)

Dawkins Road, Box 6

)

LaGrange, KY 40031

)

)

CLARK TAYLOR, individually and in his official

)

capacity as Warden of the Kentucky State

)

Reformatory

)

Serve: Office of the Warden

)

Kentucky State Reformatory

)

3001 West Highway 146

)

LaGrange, KY 40032

)

)

AARON SMITH, individually and in his official

)

capacity as Warden of the Kentucky State

)

Reformatory

)

Serve: Office of the Warden

)

Kentucky State Reformatory

)

3001 West Highway 146

)

LaGrange, KY 40032

)

)

KATHY LITTERAL, individually and in her official )

capacity as Warden of the Bell County Forestry

)

Camp

)

Serve: Office of the Warden

)

Bell County Forestry Camp

)

560 Correctional Drive

)

Pineville, KY 40977

)

)

STEVE HANEY, individually and in his official

)

capacity as Warden of the Blackburn Correctional )

Complex

)

Serve: Office of the Warden

)

Blackburn Correctional Complex

)

3111 Spurr Road

)

Lexington, KY 40511

)

)

GARY BECKSTROM, individually and in his official )

capacity as Warden of the Eastern Kentucky

)

Correctional Complex

)

Serve: Office of the Warden

)

Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex

)

200 Road to Justice

)

West Liberty, KY 41472

)

)

ALAN BROWN, individually and in his official

)

capacity as Warden of the Green River Correctional )

3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 4 of 42 - Page ID#: 1162

Complex

)

Serve: Office of the Warden

)

Green River Correctional Complex

)

1200 River Road

)

P.O. Box 9300

)

Central City, KY 42330

)

)

JANET CONOVER, individually and in her official )

capacity as Warden of the Kentucky Correctional

)

Institute for Women

)

Serve: Office of the Warden

)

Kentucky Correctional Institute for Women

)

300 Ash Ave.

)

P.O. Box 337

)

Peewee Valley, KY 40056

)

)

JOSEPH MEKO, individually and in his official

)

capacity as Warden of the Little Sandy Correctional )

Complex

)

Serve: Office of the Warden

)

Little Sandy Correctional Complex

)

505 Prison Connector

)

Sandy Hook, KY 41171

)

)

DON BOTTOMS, individually and in his official

)

capacity as Warden of the Northpoint Training

)

Center

)

Serve: Office of the Warden

)

Northpoint Training Center

)

P.O. Box 479

)

Burgin, KY 40310

)

)

RAVONNE SIMS, individually and in her official

)

capacity as Warden of the Roederer Correctional

)

Complex

)

Serve: Office of the Warden

)

Roederer Correctional Complex

)

P.O. Box 69,

)

LaGrange, KY 40031

)

)

STEVE WOODWARD, individually and in his official )

capacity as Warden of the Western Kentucky

)

Correctional Complex

)

Serve: Office of the Warden

)

Western Kentucky Correctional Complex

)

374 New Bethel Church Road

)

4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 5 of 42 - Page ID#: 1163

Fredonia, KY 42411

)

)

BOBBIE UNDERWOOD, individually and in her

)

official capacity as Personnel Branch Manager

)

of the Kentucky Department of Corrections

)

Serve: Kentucky Department of Corrections

)

Personnel Division

)

275 East Main

)

Frankfort, KY 40601-2321

)

)

Defendants.

)

)

AMENDED COMPLAINT

1. This is a class action lawsuit based on the willful and deliberate refusal of the

Defendants to comply with federal laws protecting the rights of the Plaintiffs, who are deaf or

hard of hearing individuals in the custody of Defendant Kentucky Department of Corrections

(“KDOC”).

2. The state agencies, entities, and officials named as Defendants in this case have

failed to comply with federal laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C.

§ 12131 et seq., the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794 et seq., and the Constitution of the

United States.

3. Through their policies and practices, Defendants discriminate against deaf and

hard of hearing individuals in KDOC’s custody. They have done this by denying deaf and hard

of hearing individuals in their custody adequate and equally effective means of communication

with individuals outside of prison—including effective communications between the Plaintiffs

and their loved ones. Defendants have also failed to provide adequate access to other auxiliary

aids and services necessary to accommodate deaf and hard of hearing individuals in a variety of

settings, including in connection with educational, religious, healthcare, and rehabilitative

programs. Defendants also refuse to provide deaf and hard of hearing individuals in KDOC

5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 6 of 42 - Page ID#: 1164
custody with adequate notification of important daily events and safety announcements, or to provide adequate interpretative services at disciplinary hearings. Additionally, Defendants have discriminated against inmates who are deaf or hard of hearing in work assignments.
4. As a result of the Defendants’ discriminatory policies and practices, deaf and hard of hearing individuals in KDOC’s custody and care:
• have been prevented from effectively communicating by telephone with family, friends, and attorneys outside of prison;
• have been unable to receive necessary and adequate medical treatment; • have missed prison-wide safety announcements, prison counts, and
announcements for meals and other important daily activities; • have been excluded from participation in educational and counseling programs
offered by KDOC, including those required under the terms of their sentencing; • have been unable to and discouraged from attending standard religious services
due to inadequate accommodations; • have been discriminated against in work assignments; • have been denied the ability to meaningfully participate and defend themselves in
disciplinary hearings; and • have been prevented from learning a trade and receiving educational and
industrial credits that could reduce their overall incarceration time. 5. Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief, and damages from the individual Defendants named herein in their individual capacities, on their own behalf and on behalf of the class of all deaf and hard of hearing individuals in KDOC’s custody for the harms they have suffered and continue to suffer as a result of the Defendants’ discrimination.
6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 7 of 42 - Page ID#: 1165
I. JURISDICTION 6. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (Federal Question).
II. VENUE 7. Venue is proper in this District, under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), because all Defendants reside in this District in Kentucky, and a substantial part of the events giving rise to claims herein occurred within this District.
III. PARTIES A. Plaintiffs 8. Named Plaintiff Michael Knights (“Mr. Knights”), inmate # 233021, has a hearing disability and is currently incarcerated at Kentucky State Penitentiary (“KSP”), and under KDOC’s custody and control. 9. Named Plaintiff Oscar Adams (“Mr. Adams”), inmate # 243676, has a hearing disability and is currently incarcerated at Kentucky State Reformatory (“KSR”), and under KDOC’s custody and control. 10. Mr. Knights is profoundly deaf, and has been deaf since birth. Mr. Knights is educated and relies on American Sign Language (“ASL”) to communicate. To further his education, Mr. Knights is currently trying to pursue a GED within the KDOC system. Mr. Knights requires a sign language interpreter to effectively communicate with persons who do not know ASL, and due to his deafness cannot use a standard telephone. 11. Mr. Adams is profoundly deaf, and has been deaf since birth. Mr. Adams relies on American Sign Language (“ASL”) to communicate. Mr. Adams attended and successfully graduated from the Kentucky School for the Deaf in 1999. Mr. Adams cannot use a standard telephone and requires an interpreter to communicate with those who are not proficient in ASL.
7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 8 of 42 - Page ID#: 1166
B. Defendants 1. State Agencies
12. KDOC is the Kentucky state agency responsible for the operation of 12 correctional facilities. KDOC is a division of Defendant the Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet (“the Cabinet”), which in turn is a governmental subdivision of Defendant the Commonwealth of Kentucky. KDOC’s Mission Statement is: To protect the citizens of the Commonwealth and to provide a safe, secure and humane environment for staff and offenders in carrying out the mandates of the legislative and judicial processes; and, to provide opportunities for offenders to acquire skills which facilitate non-criminal behavior.
2. Individuals 13. J. Michael Brown is Secretary of the Cabinet, is responsible for the training and supervision of employees of the Cabinet and the KDOC, and is responsible for their recognition of and compliance with Kentucky laws. 14. LaDonna H. Thompson is the Commissioner of the KDOC and is responsible for the day-to-day operations of KDOC. On information and belief, she is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals. 15. Kimberly Potter-Blair is the Deputy Commissioner of Support Services of the KDOC and is responsible for administrative services, corrections training, budget management, offender information, information technology, population management, and re-entry branch. On information and belief, she is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals. 16. Paula Holden is the Deputy Commissioner of Community Services of the KDOC and is responsible for the oversight of KDOC’s Probation & Parole Division and Local Facilities.
8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 9 of 42 - Page ID#: 1167
On information and belief, she is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals.
17. Jim Erwin is the Deputy Commissioner of Adult Institutions of the KDOC and is responsible for the oversight of KDOC’s Adult Institutions Division. On information and belief, he is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals.
18. Randy White is the Warden of the Kentucky State Penitentiary (“KSP”). KSP is a maximum and supermax security correctional facility located in Eddyville, Kentucky. The facility opened in 1889. On information and belief, at least some of the KDOC’s deaf inmates are in custody at KSP. As Warden, Mr. White is the legal custodian of individuals under the custody and care of KSP, and is responsible for their safe, secure, and humane treatment. On information and belief, he is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals and he is aware of specific written complaints by deaf and hard of hearing individuals at KSP regarding the violation of their rights.
19. Gregory Howard is the Warden of the Luther Luckett Correctional Complex (“LLCC”). LLCC is a minimum and medium security correctional facility located in LaGrange, Kentucky. The facility opened in 1981. On information and belief, at least some of the KDOC’s deaf inmates are in custody at LLCC. As Warden, Mr. Howard is the legal custodian of individuals under the custody and care of LLCC, and is responsible for their safe, secure, and humane treatment. On information and belief, he is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals and he is aware of specific written complaints by deaf and hard of hearing individuals at LLCC regarding the violation of their rights.
20. Clark Taylor was the Warden of the Kentucky State Reformatory (“KSR”). Since the initiation of this action, Aaron Smith has become the Warden of KSR. KSR is a medium
9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 10 of 42 - Page ID#: 1168
security correctional facility located in LaGrange, Kentucky. The facility was established in 1936. On information and belief, at least some of the KDOC’s deaf inmates are in custody at KSR.As Warden, Mr. Taylor and Mr. Smith is the legal custodian of individuals under the custody and care of KSR, and is responsible for their safe, secure, and humane treatment. On information and belief, Mr. Taylor and Mr. Smith are aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals and are aware of specific written complaints by deaf and hard of hearing individuals at KSR regarding the violation of their rights.
21. Kathy Litteral is the Warden of the Bell County Forestry Camp (“BCFC”). BCFC is a minimum security correctional facility located in Bell County near Pineville, Kentucky. The facility opened in 1962. On information and belief, at least some of the KDOC’s deaf inmates are in custody at BCFC. As Warden, Ms. Litteral is the legal custodian of individuals under the custody and care of BCFC, and is responsible for their safe, secure, and humane treatment. On information and belief, she is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals and she is aware of specific written complaints by deaf and hard of hearing individuals at BCFC regarding the violation of their rights.
22. Steve Haney is the Warden of the Blackburn Correctional Complex (“BCC”). BCC is a minimum security correctional facility located near Lexington, Kentucky. The facility opened in 1972. On information and belief, at least some of the KDOC’s deaf inmates are in custody at BCC. As Warden, Mr. Haney is the legal custodian of individuals under the custody and care of BCC, and is responsible for their safe, secure, and humane treatment. On information and belief, he is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals and he is aware of specific written complaints by deaf and hard of hearing individuals at BCC regarding the violation of their rights.
10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 11 of 42 - Page ID#: 1169
23. Gary Beckstrom is the Warden of the Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (“EKCC”). EKCC is a medium security institution located in the Appalachian Region of Morgan County in Eastern Kentucky. The facility opened in 1990. On information and belief, at least some of the KDOC’s deaf inmates are in custody at EKCC. As Warden, Mr. Beckstrom is the legal custodian of individuals under the custody and care of EKCC, and is responsible for their safe, secure, and humane treatment. On information and belief, he is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals and he is aware of specific written complaints by deaf and hard of hearing individuals at EKCC regarding the violation of their rights.
24. Alan Brown is the Warden of the Green River Correctional Complex (“GRCC”). GRCC is a minimum and medium security correctional facility located in Mulenberg County near Central City, Kentucky. The facility opened in 1994. On information and belief, at least some of the KDOC’s deaf inmates are in custody at GRCC. As Warden, Mr. Brown is the legal custodian of individuals under the custody and care of GRCC, and is responsible for their safe, secure, and humane treatment. On information and belief, he is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals and he is aware of specific written complaints by deaf and hard of hearing individuals at GRCC regarding the violation of their rights.
25. Janet Conover is the Warden of the Kentucky Correctional Institute for Women (“KCIW”). KCIW is a maximum and supermax security correctional facility located in Shelby County near the town of Pewee Valley, Kentucky. The facility opened in 1938. On information and belief, at least some of the KDOC’s deaf inmates are in custody at KCIW. As Warden, Ms. Conover is the legal custodian of individuals under the custody and care of KCIW, and is
11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 12 of 42 - Page ID#: 1170
responsible for their safe, secure, and humane treatment. On information and belief, she is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals and she is aware of specific written complaints by deaf and hard of hearing individuals at KCIW regarding the violation of their rights.
26. Joseph Meko is the Warden of the Little Sandy Correctional Complex (“LSCC”). LSCC is a medium and maximum supermax security correctional facility located in Elliott Country near Sandy Hook, Kentucky. The facility opened in 2005. On information and belief, at least some of the KDOC’s deaf inmates are in custody at LSCC. As Warden, Mr. Meko is the legal custodian of individuals under the custody and care of LSCC, and is responsible for their safe, secure, and humane treatment. On information and belief, he is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals and he is aware of specific written complaints by deaf and hard of hearing individuals at LSCC regarding the violation of their rights.
27. Don Bottoms is the Warden of the Northpoint Training Center (“NTC”). NTC is a medium security correctional facility located near Burgin, Kentucky. The facility opened in 1983. On information and belief, at least some of the KDOC’s deaf inmates are in custody at NTC. As Warden, Mr. Bottoms is the legal custodian of individuals under the custody and care of NTC, and is responsible for their safe, secure, and humane treatment. On information and belief, he is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals and he is aware of specific written complaints by deaf and hard of hearing individuals at NTC regarding the violation of their rights.
28. Ravonne Sims is the Warden of the Roederer Correctional Complex (“RCC”). RCC is an Assessment and Classification Center for the KDOC located in LaGrange, Kentucky.
12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 13 of 42 - Page ID#: 1171
The facility opened in 1976. On information and belief, at least some of the KDOC’s deaf inmates are in custody at RCC. As Warden, Mr. Sims is the legal custodian of individuals under the custody and care of RCC, and is responsible for their safe, secure, and humane treatment. On information and belief, she is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals and she is aware of specific written complaints by deaf and hard of hearing individuals at RCC regarding the violation of their rights.
29. Steve Woodward is the Warden of the Western Kentucky Correctional Complex (“WKCC”). WKCC is a minimum and medium security correctional facility located in Lyon County, Kentucky. The facility opened in 1977. On information and belief, at least some of the KDOC’s deaf inmates are in custody at WKCC. As Warden, Mr. Woodward is the legal custodian of individuals under the custody and care of WKCC, and is responsible for their safe, secure, and humane treatment. On information and belief, he is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals and he is aware of specific written complaints by deaf and hard of hearing individuals at WKCC regarding the violation of their rights.
30. Bobbie Underwood is the Personnel Branch Manager of the Personnel Branch of the Kentucky Department of Corrections. On information and belief, she is responsible for KDOC employee compliance with federal laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12131 et seq., the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794 et seq., and the Constitution of the United States. On information and belief, she is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals and he is aware of whether KDOC employees and KDOC policies comply with federal law.
13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 14 of 42 - Page ID#: 1172
31. Defendants Brown, Thompson, Potter-Blair, Holden, Erwin, White, Howard and Taylor, Smith, Litteral, Haney, Beckstrom, Brown, Conover, Meko, Bottoms, Sims, Woodward , and Underwood (“the Individual Defendants”) are all state actors, acting under color of Kentucky statutes and regulation in all activities relevant to this action.
IV. FACTS 32. For years, KDOC has failed to provide the deaf and hard of hearing inmates housed at its facilities the accommodations that are required by the Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (“Section 504”). In January 2013, Plaintiff Michael Knights and other deaf and hard of hearing inmates at LLCC retained the services of Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP (“Weil”) and the Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs (“WLC”) to assist them in obtaining the lacking accommodations. Attorneys at Weil and the WLC first began to raise these matters with the KDOC, LLCC, and KSR in May 2013, through correspondence with the KDOC’s Commissioner, Ms. Thompson, and the two correctional facilities’ wardens, Messrs. Howard and Taylor, respectively. 33. Defendants are aware of their obligations under state and federal laws. Nevertheless, Defendants have not remedied their past pattern and practice of discrimination and continue to discriminate against deaf and hard of hearing individuals, resulting in disabilitybased discrimination in at least five different areas: (A) ineffective access to telecommunications; (B) ineffective access to auxiliary aids and services; (C) ineffective access to prison alerts and announcements; (D) ineffective communication during disciplinary proceedings; and (E) inadequate access to prison vocational opportunities.
14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 15 of 42 - Page ID#: 1173
A. Ineffective Access to Telecommunications 34. KDOC provides hearing individuals in its custody access to telecommunications services in order for them to communicate with family, friends, and other individuals outside of prison. 35. As the federal government has recognized, “[t]elephone privileges are a supplemental means of maintaining community and family ties that will contribute to an inmate’s personal development.” 28 C.F.R. § 540.100. Telephone and other forms of telecommunication are very important to individuals in KDOC’s custody because they foster the family and community ties that are fundamental to motivate incarcerated individuals to improve themselves and to prepare them to make a positive transition back to civilian life once their sentence is complete. 36. Because of their disability, most deaf and hard of hearing KDOC inmates cannot use traditional telephones to communicate with individuals outside of prison.
1. Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TDDs) 37. Some KDOC facilities, including KSR and KSP, provide deaf individuals in their custody with limited access to telecommunications devices for the deaf, or “TDDs”. TDDs are electronic devices for text communication via a telephone line to enable people with hearing and speech disabilities to communicate by telephone. Based on fifty-year-old technology, the TDD is basically a telephone equipped with a keyboard and a display screen. To communicate with the deaf, the user of a TDD must type out everything that is said in a conversation. A TDD is effectively useless if both parties to a conversation do not have TDD devices. In other words, a deaf person with a TDD device cannot communicate with other deaf individuals who do not have TDD devices.
15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 16 of 42 - Page ID#: 1174
38. With special assistance (i.e., a relay service), deaf TDD users can communicate with hearing persons. Relay services are federally-mandated services that operate as follows: the party using the TDD places a call to a relay center, and a relay operator answers the call using another TDD. The caller provides the operator with the phone number of the party with whom they wish to communicate, and the operator places the call. When a hearing person answers the phone, the relay operator explains the relay service and states the name of the caller. The responses of the hearing person are typed by the relay operator into a TDD, and transmitted over the telephone lines to the TDD user. The call proceeds with the relay operator voicing what the TDD user types to the hearing person receiving the call, and typing what the hearing person speaks. The process can also work the other way—a hearing person who has no TDD can call deaf individuals from a traditional telephone by using the relay service.
39. The relay service is free of cost to the users and the caller pays only for the cost of the call to the party with whom the caller wishes to converse. To connect to a relay services center, an individual can either dial “711” from anywhere within the United States or dial the toll-free “800” number of the relay service in the caller’s locality. Accordingly, TDD relay services in Kentucky may be accessed either by calling 711 or by calling Kentucky’s toll-free relay service number.
40. For the most part, deaf individuals in the United States who use ASL have abandoned the 50-year-old TDD technology and now utilize up-to-date and much more convenient videophones. For those deaf individuals still using a TDD, it is impossible to communicate with a videophone user.
41. On information and belief, KSR has at least one TDD; however, deaf and hard of hearing individuals incarcerated at KSR are repeatedly denied access to it. On information and
16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 17 of 42 - Page ID#: 1175
belief, KSP and LLCC similarly have at least (and likely only) one TDD which deaf and hard of hearing inmates are also frequently denied access.
42. In those rare instances when deaf and hard of hearing individuals are granted access to the TDD it is ordinarily, yet inexplicably, for a shorter period of time than they would have on a normal phone. This is especially detrimental where, as here, the conversations are necessarily slower and more drawn out given the drawbacks of the technology.
43. KSR has never addressed the problem related to the resultant inequality when it comes to TDD use.
2. Videophones 44. Videophones and free or low-cost internet-based video links (collectively, “videophones”) are (and have been for quite some time) replacing TDDs among deaf people because they allow deaf individuals to communicate with one another directly in ASL, without having to communicate through written English (an effectively foreign language, that is especially difficult for many deaf persons to communicate in) and without the use of relay services. When using a videophone, callers can see each other, usually over an internet connection. As a result, many deaf households no longer own a TDD and have no way to accept a TDD call, as they rely exclusively on videophones for telecommunication. 45. Deaf individuals using videophones can also call a Video Relay Service (“VRS”) to place calls to people who do not understand ASL or do not have a videophone. The mechanics of VRS are very similar to those of traditional TDD relay service–the caller is routed to an interpreter, the caller gives the interpreter the number of the party he is trying to reach, and the interpreter then interprets the conversation into spoken English. 46. Videophones and VRS permit deaf people to use ASL instead of having to carry out every telephone call in written English through a TDD. Due to the fact that TDDs rely on
17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 18 of 42 - Page ID#: 1176
written communications, they are by nature an unsatisfactory and ineffective means of communication for many deaf individuals. Writing usually does not provide effective communication for a deaf individual. Many deaf individuals who became deaf before acquiring language skills consider ASL to be their native language and English to be their second language. Additionally, many deaf people acquire English as their second language much later in life. Therefore, the English reading and writing skill level of many deaf individuals, including those incarcerated at KDOC institutions, is generally much lower than that of hearing people.
47. Provision of videophones would also ensure that deaf inmates could place telephone calls to deaf family and friends, the vast majority of whom no longer have TDD devices.
48. Deaf individuals in Defendants’ custody have repeatedly requested videophone access, but have been denied this access.
a. Videophones at KSP 49. There are deaf inmates at KSP who use ASL and who are denied effective telecommunication services due to the failure of KSP to provide videophone services to them. 50. Plaintiff Michael Knights cannot communicate with his friends and family who have videophones but not TDD. Without the videophone, it virtually impossible for Mr. Knights to contact his sister, his daughter, his daughter’s mother, and his friends. 51. Plaintiff Michael Knights filed a formal Grievance with Warden White to specifically request access to videophones. Warden White stated in his first stage response that the TDD system provides effective communication because Mr. Knights can call his legal counsel. Despite Mr. Knights’ ability to call his legal counsel using TDD, it is still inadequate because Mr. Knights cannot effectively communicate with his family and friends. Additionally,
18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 19 of 42 - Page ID#: 1177
deaf inmates at KSP have extremely restricted and an unacceptable level of access to the TDD, especially in relation to hearing inmates’ access to standard telephones.
b. Videophones at KSR 52. There are deaf inmates at KSR who use ASL and who are denied effective telecommunication services due to the failure of KSR to provide videophone services to them. 53. Plaintiff Oscar Adams cannot communicate with his friends and family on the outside given the lack of videophone services. In particular, Mr. Adams is very close to his mother, but cannot communicate with her because she only has a videophone. Unfortunately, Mr. Adams cannot even communicate with his mother in person because the evolution of her fight with lupus prevents her now from visiting him. Mr. Adams is allowed to use the TDD service just once a week for 10-15 minutes.
c. Videophones at LLCC 54. On August 10, 2012, Plaintiff Michael Knights, filed a formal Grievance with Warden Howard to address the unequal treatment afforded to deaf inmates with respect to the phone system and specifically requested access to videophones. On September 20, 2012, Warden Howard dismissed the request on the basis that Mr. Knights and other deaf inmates are not mistreated because they can use the TDD. 55. On information and belief, despite the initial refusal, LLCC eventually understood, at least in part, the significant unconstitutional hardships it was placing on its deaf inmates and, at least provisionally, installed a videophone. 56. On information and belief, to the extent that videophone is still accessible to deaf inmates at LLCC it is available on unnecessarily and unconstitutionally restrictive terms – including prohibitively short periods of time.
d. Videophones at other KDOC Facilities
19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 20 of 42 - Page ID#: 1178
57. Additionally, there are at least some hearing inmates housed at LLCC who have deaf family on the outside. These individuals can only communicate with their deaf family on an irregular basis.
58. On information and belief, deaf and hard of hearing inmates at other KDOC facilities have been denied equal and consistent access to telecommunication services at those facilities.
B. Inadequate Access to Auxiliary Aids and Services 59. Individuals in the custody of KDOC are by necessity wholly dependent on KDOC for medical, dental, educational, mental health, employment, and religious services, among other services. Individuals in the custody of KDOC are also dependent on KDOC and its staff for all of their basic daily needs, including food, exercise, and safety.
1. Sign Language Interpreter Services 60. For deaf or hard of hearing individuals who rely on ASL as their primary form of communication, use of a qualified ASL interpreter is necessary to ensure effective communication between a deaf or hard of hearing individual and an individual who does not use ASL to communicate. 61. A qualified sign language interpreter is necessary because ASL is a complete, complex language that employs signs made with the hands and other movements, including facial expressions and postures of the body. It is a language distinct from English—it is not simply English in hand signals-it has its own vocabulary, and its own rules for grammar and syntax. 62. As noted above, writing usually does not provide effective communication for a deaf individual. English is generally considered a second language for most deaf persons who became deaf before acquiring language—ASL is their native language. Also, several deaf
20

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 21 of 42 - Page ID#: 1179
people acquire English as their second language later in life, past the critical period of language acquisition. Therefore, the English reading and writing skill level of many deaf individuals, including those incarcerated in KDOC facilities, is generally much lower than that of hearing people.
63. Lip-reading usually does not provide effective communication for a deaf individual and is generally far less effective than written communication. It is extremely difficult to lip-read English because only a small fraction of the sounds used in the language are clearly visible on the mouth, and many sounds that are visible look identical on the lips. In addition to these difficulties in lip-reading, the ability to accurately lip-read is affected by the speaker’s facial bone structure, facial musculature, facial hair, lighting, and other external factors. Moreover, even if an ASL user were able to understand the sounds appearing on a speaker’s lips, for the reasons discussed above she would not necessarily understand the English language or the vocabulary the speaker was using.
64. Thus, the provision of qualified sign language interpreter services is the auxiliary service necessary to allow deaf individuals who use ASL in KDOC’s custody and under KDOC’s supervision to effectively communicate with KDOC officials, KDOC employees, and medical personnel.
65. Defendants, through their policies and practices, fail to provide adequate access to sign language interpreters for deaf individuals in KDOC’s custody and control and under KDOC’s supervision.
66. On information and belief, Defendants do not provide adequate access to sign language interpreters at KDOC facilities throughout Kentucky.
21

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 22 of 42 - Page ID#: 1180
a. Interpreters for Access to Medical Services 67. Defendants are responsible for the medical care of all individuals incarcerated by KDOC. 68. Deaf individuals who rely on ASL require sign language interpreters to communicate effectively with medical staff. 69. After receiving numerous written requests, Defendants are aware that deaf individuals need sign language interpreters for their medical appointments. 70. Nonetheless, deaf inmates at LLCC are still denied interpreter services at medical appointments. 71. Deaf inmates at facilities other than LLCC, including those housed at KSR and KSP, are consistently denied interpreter services for medical appointments. Mr. Adams, an inmate at KSR, has been denied access to interpreters for medical appointments despite known and serious medical conditions.
b. Interpreters for Access to Administrative Meetings 72. Defendants provide educational, mental health and counseling programs for individuals in KDOC’s custody. 73. Interpreters are not provided by Defendants for such programs, including for educational classes and for religious ceremonies. The same holds true for KSP, KSR and LLCC.
c. Interpreters for Access to Prison Programs 74. Interpreters are not provided by Defendants for meetings between prison employees and inmates. 75. Mr. Adams was denied an ASL qualified interpreter at his reclassification meeting at KSR.
22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 23 of 42 - Page ID#: 1181
2. Other Auxiliary Aids and Services 76. For deaf and hard of hearing inmates who do not use ASL, other auxiliary aids and services are necessary to ensure their effective participation in and understanding of Defendants’ services and programs. 77. Computer Assisted Real Time (“CART”) is a system that provides access to spoken information for people with hearing loss. CART operators use a court reporting machine to input spoken text. The output of the court reporting machine is fed to a computer, which produces a text document that corresponds very closely to the words used by the speaker. Once in the computer, the text can be displayed on a computer monitor (for one or two users) or projected onto a screen (for more users.) CART is generally the system of choice for latedeafened people attending classes or meetings. 78. An Assistive Listening Device or System (“ALDS”) can be any one of several technologies that are used to improve the reception of speech for people with impaired hearing, including Mr. Adams, when it might be difficult or impossible to hear otherwise. 79. Thus, CART and/or ALDS is necessary to allow certain deaf or hard of hearing individuals in KDOC’s custody and under KDOC’s supervision to effectively understand and participate in KDOC programs and services. 80. Defendants, through their policies and practices, fail to provide adequate access to CART or ALDS for deaf or hard of hearing individuals in KDOC’s custody and control and under KDOC’s supervision. 81. On information and belief, Defendants do not provide adequate access to CART or ALDS at KDOC facilities throughout Kentucky.
a. Auxiliary Aids and Services at KSP
23

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 24 of 42 - Page ID#: 1182
82. Deaf and hard of hearing inmates at KSP are unconstitutionally denied the conveniences of effectively all auxiliary aids and services.
b. Auxiliary Aids and Services at KSR 83. Deaf and hard of hearing inmates at KSR have been denied effective access to programs, such as stress management, anger management and educational classes, due to the lack of any system of providing them with effective communication, such as CART and/or ALDS.
c. Auxiliary Aids and Services at LLCC 84. Deaf and hard of hearing inmates at LLCC have also been denied educational opportunities, such as classes to achieve a General Educational Development (“GED”) degree, due to the lack of any system of providing them with effective communication, such as CART and/or ALDS. 85. For example, Mr. Knights, while incarcerated at LLCC, had attempted to complete his GED, but was unable to because of the inadequate accommodations for the deaf.
d. Auxiliary Aids and Services at other KDOC Facilities 86. On information and belief, deaf and hard of hearing inmates at other KDOC facilities have been denied auxiliary aids and services at those facilities. C. Access to Visual Notification of Announcements 87. Deaf and hard of hearing inmates throughout KDOC institutions have difficulty in accessing public address and other audio alerts and announcements available to other inmates.
1. Visual Notification at LLCC 88. Because deaf and hard of hearing inmates have been unable to hear daily announcements made by LLCC staff, such as announcements requiring inmates to report to their cells for head counts, special accommodations are necessary to assure that the deaf inmates are
24

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 25 of 42 - Page ID#: 1183
aware of the announcements. Often times the deaf are punished for failing to abide by such announcements; however, the deaf inmates are not ignoring the announcements, rather they are unaware such announcements were ever made.
89. LLCC does on occasion use bed shakers for awakening deaf inmates in the morning. However, the extent of even this minimal convenience is insufficient and does not address the numerous other accommodations that must be provided to assure that deaf inmates are apprised of prison announcements, emergencies, and roll calls.
2. Visual Notification at KSP 90. KSP also only provides minimal, if any, visual accommodations to deaf inmates. There is no paging system or other system to adequately notify deaf inmates of public announcements.
3. Visual Notification at KSR 91. KSR also only provides minimal visual accommodations to deaf inmates and does not provide any type of paging system or other adequate notifications of public announcements.
4. Visual Notification at Other KDOC Facilities 92. On information and belief, deaf and hard of hearing inmates at other KDOC facilities have been denied visual notification of announcements at those facilities. D. Failure to Provide Effective Communication at Disciplinary Proceedings 93. Deaf and hard of hearing inmates are subjected to disciplinary proceedings without effective communication. 94. Although they are punished, many of these inmates do not understand the charges against them or the parameters of their punishment. Moreover, the inmates are denied the ability to defend themselves when they cannot hear what is happening during the hearings.
25

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 26 of 42 - Page ID#: 1184
95. When inmates violate rules and regulations of LLCC, KSP, and KSR, they undergo disciplinary proceedings conducted by hearing officers. During these proceedings, the inmates have an opportunity to defend themselves, to hear the allegations against them, and to understand the parameters of their punishment.
96. KDOC, LLCC, KSP, KSR, and their agents are denying the deaf and hard of hearing inmates full due process by failing to provide appropriate auxiliary services, interpreters, or other means of interpretation.
97. The deaf and hard of hearing inmates are subjected to these proceedings without understanding what is happening during the hearings. Because they are denied interpreters and/or assistive listening devices or other auxiliary aids or services the inmates are unable to hear the adjudicator(s), the allegations against them, or any of the results of the proceeding. They are disciplined without complete knowledge of the claims against them or the length of their punishment.
E. Access to Employment Opportunities 98. Deaf and hard of hearing inmates are, solely because of their disabilities, routinely denied employment opportunities within KDOC facilities. Further they are denied training opportunities. 99. On information and belief, deaf inmates at KSP, KSR and LLCC have been discriminated against in their efforts to participate fully and fairly in both training and employment opportunities in “Prison Industries.” 100. On information and belief, deaf and hard of hearing inmates at other KDOC facilities have been denied the same opportunities. 101. Defendants’ failure to provide its deaf and hard of hearing inmates with access to telecommunication devices and services, effective communication within KDOC institutions,
26

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 27 of 42 - Page ID#: 1185
access to announcements and alerts within the KDOC institutions, and access to employment opportunities within KDOC institutions, has resulted in harm, and may result in future harm, to deaf and hard of hearing individuals in KDOC custody. It also violates their rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the United States Constitution.
V. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF COUNT I
DISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF A DISABILITY IN VIOLATION OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (42 U.S.C. § 12131 ET SEQ.)
(Against all Defendants by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated individuals)
102. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation above as if fully set forth herein.
103. On July 12, 1990, Congress enacted the ADA “to provide a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities.” 42 U.S.C. § 12101(b) (l). Title II of the ADA states that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.” 42 U.S.C. § 12132.
104. Plaintiffs are qualified individuals with a disability within the meaning of Title II of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12131(2).
105. The claims under the ADA are brought against the Defendants as departments, agencies, or instrumentalities of the State of Kentucky.
106. Defendants are each a “public entity” within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 12131(1) (B).
27

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 28 of 42 - Page ID#: 1186
107. At all times relevant to this action, the ADA was in full force and effect in the United States and Plaintiffs had a right not to be subjected to discrimination on the basis of their disability by the Defendants. 42 U.S.C. § 12132.
108. The U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) regulation implementing Title II of the ADA clearly requires the provision of effective communication as part of its nondiscrimination mandate. 28 C.F.R. 35.160.
109. The regulation states that “[a] public entity shall take appropriate steps to ensure that communications with applicants, participants, and members of the public . . . With disabilities are as effective as communications with others.” 28 C.F.R. § 35.160(a).
110. Defendants’ failure to provide effective communication for individuals with hearing disabilities denied and continues to deny, on the basis of their disability, Plaintiffs the same access to Defendants’ services, benefits, activities, programs, or privileges as the access provided to hearing individuals.
111. Plaintiffs have been unable to communicate effectively by telephone with individuals outside of prison, unable to participate in educational, mental health, employment, disciplinary, and other KDOC services, and unable to learn of daily life and safety alert and other notifications as effectively as hearing individuals in KDOC’s custody.
112. In order to ensure effective communication, the ADA requires that “a public entity shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford qualified individuals with disabilities . . . an equal opportunity to participate in, and enjoy the benefits of, a service, program, or activity conducted by a public entity.” 28 C.F.R. § 35.160(b) (l).
113. Auxiliary aids and services include, but are not limited to, “qualified interpreters or other effective methods of making aurally delivered materials available to individuals with
28

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 29 of 42 - Page ID#: 1187
hearing impairments,” 42 U.S.C. § 12103, such as computer-aided transcription services, assistive listening systems, closed caption decoders, open and close captioning, TDDs, videophones, and videotext displays. 28 C.F.R. § 35.104.
114. Defendants subjected Plaintiffs to discrimination solely on the basis of their disability, in violation of their rights under the ADA. They have done this by failing to provide effective communication, and by not ensuring that adequate access to qualified sign language interpreter services and other auxiliary aids and services is made available to individuals with hearing impairments in KDOC’s custody or under KDOC supervision.
115. In determining what type of auxiliary aid and service is necessary, “a public entity shall give primary consideration to the requests of the individual with disabilities.” 28 C.F.R. §160(b) (2).
116. Defendants have failed to give consideration to Plaintiffs’ requests, in most instances flat out denying them their requests for videophone services, or providing unfairly limited access to such services, for visual alert and notification systems, for interpreter services, and for other auxiliary aids and services.
117. On information and belief, the failure to provide effective communication and the failure to provide comparable access to services, benefits, activities, programs, or privileges are policies, regular practices, and/or customs of Defendants. These failures are ongoing and continue to this date.
118. Defendants’ failure to provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services has subjected Plaintiffs to discrimination on the basis of their disability in violation of their rights under the ADA, in ways that include, but are not limited to, the following:
29

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 30 of 42 - Page ID#: 1188
a. inadequate access to sign language interpreters and other appropriate auxiliary aids and services to enable them to participate in and benefit from Defendants’ programs; b. inadequate access to prison audio alerts and notifications; and c. inadequate access to telecommunication devices. 119. The DOJ regulation implementing Title II of the ADA also requires that public entities, either directly or indirectly through other contractual or private arrangements, provide disabled individuals with the same opportunities to participate and benefit from services as is afforded to other individuals. 28 C.F.R. 35.160. 120. The regulation states, in relevant portion, that “[a] public entity, in providing any aid, benefit, or service, may not, directly or through contractual, licensing, or other arrangements, on the basis of disability—(i) [d]eny a qualified individual with a disability the opportunity to participate in or benefit from the aid, benefit, or service; (ii) [a]fford a qualified individual with a disability an opportunity to participate in or benefit from the aid, benefit, or service that is not equal to that afforded others.” 28 C.F.R. 35.130(b)(1)(i)‒(ii). 121. Defendants are in violation of this regulation directly and indirectly through private entities, by refusing to permit certain deaf and hard of hearing inmates to participate in vocational and employment opportunities because of their hearing disabilities. 122. As a proximate result of Defendants’ violations of Plaintiffs’ rights under the ADA, Plaintiffs have suffered and continue to suffer from discrimination, unequal treatment, exclusion (including exclusion from Defendants’ services, benefits, activities, programs, and privileges), violations of their rights under the laws of the United States, financial loss, loss of dignity, frustration, humiliation, emotional pain and suffering, anxiety, trauma, embarrassment, and unnecessary loss of rights and privileges, including unnecessary disciplinary measures.
30

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 31 of 42 - Page ID#: 1189
123. Defendants’ failure to comply with the ADA has resulted, and will continue to result, in harm to Plaintiffs, as Plaintiffs will continue to be in the custody or under the supervision of KDOC and will continue to attempt to use or avail themselves of the services, benefits, activities, programs, and privileges of the Defendants. This harm will continue unless and until the Defendants are ordered by this Court to make modifications to the policies, practices, and procedures of KDOC pursuant to the ADA.
COUNT II Discrimination on the Basis of a Disability in Violation of the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C.
§ 794 et seq.) (Against all Defendants by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated
individuals) 124. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation above as if fully set forth herein. 125. The purpose of the Rehabilitation Act is to ensure that no “qualified individual with a disability in the United States . . . shall, solely by reason of [] disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. . . .” 29 U.S.C. § 794(a). 126. Plaintiffs are qualified “individual[s] with a disability” within the meaning of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 705(20). 127. Defendants receive “Federal financial assistance” within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 794(a). 128. The operations of KDOC and Defendants are “program[s] or activit[ies]” within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 794(b)(l)(A)‒(B) and/or (b)(2)(B).
31

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 32 of 42 - Page ID#: 1190
129. At all times relevant to this action, the Rehabilitation Act was in full force and effect in the United States and Plaintiffs had a right not to be subjected to discrimination on the basis of their disability by defendants. 29 U.S.C. § 794(a).
130. The DOJ regulation implementing the Rehabilitation Act clarifies the requirements for Federal financial recipients, including correctional facilities, stating that “[a] recipient that employs fifteen or more persons shall provide appropriate auxiliary aids to qualified handicapped persons with impaired sensory, manual, or speaking skills where a refusal to make such provision would discriminatorily impair or exclude the persons in the program receiving federal financial assistance.” 28 C.F.R. § 42.503(f).
131. Appropriate auxiliary aids include, but are not limited to, “qualified interpreters . . . and telephonic devices.” 28 C.F.R. § 42.503(f).
132. Defendants discriminatorily impaired Plaintiffs’ ability to communicate effectively with medical personnel, prison staff, and individuals outside of prison and/or excluded Plaintiffs from educational, vocational, and prison-wide announcements. They have done this by failing to provide appropriate auxiliary aids in violation of the Rehabilitation Act.
133. Defendant’s failure to provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services for individuals with hearing disabilities denied and continues to deny, on the basis of their disabilities, Plaintiffs the same access to Defendant’s services, benefits, activities, programs, or privileges as the access provided to hearing individuals.
134. On information and belief, the failure to provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services and the failure to provide comparable access to services, benefits, activities, programs or privileges are policies, regular practices, and/or customs of Defendants. These failures are ongoing and continue to this date.
32

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 33 of 42 - Page ID#: 1191
135. Defendants’ failure to provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services has subjected Plaintiffs to discrimination on the basis of their disability in violation of their rights under the Rehabilitation Act, in ways that include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. inadequate access to appropriate auxiliary aids and services to enable them to participate in and benefit from Defendants’ programs; b. inadequate access to prison alerts and announcements; and c. inadequate access to telecommunication devices. 136. Defendants have also violated Section 504 and its implementing regulation by excluding inmates who are deaf or hard of hearing from Defendants’ employment and vocational benefits and opportunities. 28 C.F.R. 42.503(a). 137. As a proximate result of Defendants’ violations of Plaintiffs’ rights under the Rehabilitation Act, Plaintiffs have suffered, and continue to suffer, from discrimination, unequal treatment, exclusion (including exclusion from defendant’s services, benefits, activities, programs, and requirements), financial loss, loss of dignity, frustration, humiliation, emotional pain and suffering, anxiety, trauma, embarrassment, unnecessary loss of rights and privileges, including unnecessary disciplinary measures, and injury to their health. 138. Defendants’ failure to comply with the Rehabilitation Act has resulted in harm to Plaintiffs, and Defendants are liable to Plaintiffs for harm suffered. Defendants’ failure to comply with the Rehabilitation Act will continue to result in harm to Plaintiffs, as Plaintiffs will continue to be in the custody or under the supervision of KDOC and will continue to attempt to use or avail themselves of the services, benefits, activities, programs, and privileges of Defendants. This harm will continue unless and until Defendants are ordered by this Court to make modifications to their policies, practices, and procedures pursuant to the Rehabilitation Act.
33

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 34 of 42 - Page ID#: 1192
COUNT III Violation of Free Speech Rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United
States Constitution (Against all Defendants by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated
individuals) 139. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation above as if fully set forth herein. 140. Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, States “shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech.” U.S. Const. amends. I. 141. 42 U.S.C. § 1983 creates a cause of action when a “person who under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.” 142. The Individual Defendants are state actors, acting under color of Kentucky statutes and regulation in all activities relevant to this action, deprived and continue to deprive Plaintiffs of their freedom of speech, as secured by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment, by preventing Plaintiffs from communicating with people outside of the prison. Despite multiple complaints in writing to KDOC, KDOC through the official actions of the Individual Defendants, has denied and continues to deny Plaintiffs access to telecommunication devices that would give them the ability and opportunity to communicate with people outside of prison.
34

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 35 of 42 - Page ID#: 1193
COUNT IV Violation of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 “Substantial
Burden on Religious Exercise” (42 U.S.C. § 2000cc et seq.) (Against all Defendants by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated
individuals) 143. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation above as if fully set forth herein. 144. Governments may not impose substantial burdens on the religious exercises of institutionalized persons even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability. 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1(a). 145. Plaintiffs are “institutionalized persons” within the meaning of The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (“RLUIPA”). 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1. 146. As a department, agency, or instrumentality of Kentucky, LLCC and KSR are government within the meaning of RLUIPA. 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-5(4). 147. KDOC and the Defendants have deprived and continue to deprive Plaintiffs of their right to the free exercise of religion, as secured by RLUIPA, by unlawfully imposing a substantial burden on Plaintiffs’ religious exercise. They have done this by failing to provide interpreters or other means for enabling Plaintiffs to effectively communicate at weekly worship services. The substantial burden defendants have imposed on Plaintiffs’ religious exercise affects programs or activities that receive Federal financial assistance. 148. Defendants’ failure to comply with RLUIPA has resulted in harm to Plaintiffs, and will continue to result in harm to Plaintiffs, as Plaintiffs will continue to be in KDOC’s custody and continue to be deprived of participation in weekly worship services unless and until Defendants are ordered by this Court to make modifications to KDOC policies, practices, and procedures pursuant to RLUIPA.
35

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 36 of 42 - Page ID#: 1194
COUNT V Violation of the United States Constitution Free Exercise of Religion: First and Fourteenth
Amendments (42 U.S.C. § 1983) (Against all Defendants by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated
individuals) 149. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation above as if fully set forth herein. 150. Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, States “shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” U.S. Const. amend. I. 151. Defendants have, in their individual and official capacities, deprived and continue to deprive Plaintiffs of their free exercise of religion, as secured by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment, by discriminating against Plaintiffs because of their mode of speech and by substantially burdening their religious exercise. 152. Defendants’ failure to comply with the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution has resulted in harm to Plaintiffs, and will continue to result in harm to Plaintiffs, as Plaintiffs will remain in the custody of KDOC and continue to be denied adequate weekly worship services unless and until Defendants are ordered by this Court to make modifications to their policies, practices, and procedures pursuant to the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.
COUNT VI Violation of the United States Constitution Freedom from Cruel and Unusual Punishment:
Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments (42 U.S.C. § 1983) (Against all Defendants by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated
individuals)
36

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 37 of 42 - Page ID#: 1195
153. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation above as if fully set forth herein.
154. Under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, “[e]excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” U.S. Const. amends. VIII.
155. Defendants have, in their individual and official capacities, deprived and continue to deprive Plaintiffs of their right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment as secured by the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment.
156. Defendants have systematically denied Plaintiffs access to basic human services and vital information during their incarceration. Defendants have failed to notify Plaintiffs of prison alerts, announcements, and safety instructions. Defendants refuse to provide Plaintiffs with individual hearing devices. Moreover, Defendants have not provided effective communication between Plaintiffs and prison officials and medical staff. Defendants’ actions place Plaintiffs at a substantial risk of serious future harm.
157. Defendants have actual knowledge of the unconstitutional conditions to which Plaintiffs were, and continue to be, subject, as Plaintiffs have submitted numerous written complaints to KDOC staff requesting that sign language interpreters and other auxiliary aids and services be made available to them and that an alternative notification system be installed.
158. Despite actual knowledge of the substantial medical and safety risks Plaintiffs face while in their custody, defendants continue to disregard Plaintiffs’ medical and other needs in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.
37

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 38 of 42 - Page ID#: 1196
159. Defendants’ failure to comply with the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution has resulted in harm to Plaintiffs, and will continue to result in harm to Plaintiffs, as Plaintiffs will remain in the custody of KDOC and continue to receive inadequate medical treatment and other services unless and until Defendants are ordered by this Court to make modifications to their policies, practices, and procedures pursuant to Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.
COUNT VII Violation of the Kentucky Civil Rights Act Provision of Interpreters (KRS 344.500) (Against all Defendants by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated
individuals) 160. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation above as if fully set forth herein. 161. The Kentucky Civil Rights Act provides that a “qualified interpreter shall be appointed in any proceeding before a board, commission, agency, or licensing authority of the state or any of its political subdivisions, when the principal party in interest or a witness is deaf, hard of hearing, or speech impaired.” KRS 344.500. 162. KDOC, KSP, LLCC, and KSR are state agencies that sponsor many inmate proceedings before a state board, commission, or agency, including, for example, parole and disciplinary hearings. 163. Despite specific requests for interpreters, Plaintiffs have been subjected to many KDOC proceedings falling within the scope of KRS 344.500 without the aid of any interpreter, let alone a qualified interpreter.
38

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 39 of 42 - Page ID#: 1197
164. Defendants, through their policies and practices, consistently fail and even refuse to provide adequate access to qualified interpreters during inmate proceedings that fall within the scope of KRS 344.500.
165. Defendants’ failure to comply with the KRS 344.500 has resulted in harm to Plaintiffs, and will continue to result in harm to Plaintiffs, as Plaintiffs will remain in the custody of KDOC and continue to be unable to adequately participate in the Defendants’ sponsored proceedings unless and until Defendants are ordered by this Court to make modifications to their policies, practices, and procedures pursuant to KRS 344.500.
COUNT VIII Violation of the Kentucky Civil Rights Act (KRS 344.120) (Against all Defendants by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated
individuals) 166. Plaintiffs allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation above as if fully set forth herein. 167. The Kentucky Civil Rights Act provides that “it is an unlawful practice for a person to deny an individual the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of a place of public accommodation.” KRS 344.120. 168. Defendants are state actors that fall within the Kentucky Civil Rights Act’s definition of “person.” KRS 344.010. 169. Despite specific requests for interpreters, videophones, and other accommodations to fully enjoy the goods and services purportedly offered by Defendants, Plaintiffs have been in a large part denied their requests. Plaintiffs continue to be discriminated against due to their disability and are unable to enjoy Defendants’ accommodations.
39

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 40 of 42 - Page ID#: 1198
170. Defendants, through their policies and practices, consistently fail and even refuse to provide the full scope of their available accommodations to Plaintiffs.
171. Defendants’ failure to comply with the KRS 344.120 has resulted in harm to Plaintiffs, and will continue to result in harm to Plaintiffs, as Plaintiffs will remain in the custody of KDOC and continue to be unable to adequately enjoy the Defendants’ goods and services unless and until defendants are ordered by this Court to make modifications to their policies, practices and procedures pursuant to KRS 344.120.
COUNT IX Damages
(Against all Individual Defendants in their individual capacities by the Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated individuals)
162. The individual Defendants, by their violation of the constitutional provisions and statutes specified above, have harmed Plaintiffs, and will continue to harm Plaintiffs, as Plaintiffs will remain in the custody of KDOC or under the supervision of KDOC and will continue to attempt to communicate with people outside prison. Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to recover from the Individual Defendants, in their individual capacities, the actual damages they have sustained by virtue of the Individual Defendants’ conduct. In addition, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover from the Individual Defendants, in their individual capacities, punitive damages to punish the individual Defendants for their past violations and to deter future violations against Plaintiffs by these Defendants and until all Defendants are ordered by this Court to make the modifications to their policies, practices, and procedures pursuant required by statute and the United States Constitution.
VI. REQUEST FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray that the Court:
40

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 41 of 42 - Page ID#: 1199
1. Certify this case as a Plaintiff class action pursuant to Rule 23(b)(2) and (3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;
2. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C.§ 794(a), 42 U.S.C.§ 12133, and KRS 344.450 award the named Plaintiffs and the class members recovery of any and all damages, incurred because of the Individual Defendants’ actions, from the Individual Defendants in their individual capacities;
3. Preliminarily and permanently enjoin Defendants from refusing to provide the proper interpretative services, TTD, videophones, and other hearing devices that are required for deaf and hard of hearing inmates to fully participate in the programs offered by the federally funded prison system;
4. Preliminarily and permanently enjoin Defendants from refusing to provide the proper interpretative services, TTD, videophones, and other hearing devices that are required for deaf and hard of hearing inmates to fully participate in and benefit from the programs offered by these public entities;
5. Preliminarily and permanently enjoin Defendants from depriving Plaintiffs and Plaintiff class members of the protections of the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983;
6. Award prejudgment interest;
7. Award reasonable attorneys’ fees;
8. Award monetary punitive and/or compensatory damages against the Individual Defendants in their individual capacities; and
9. Award Plaintiffs such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
VII. JURY TRIAL DEMAND
Plaintiffs, by their counsel and pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b),
hereby demand a trial by jury on all claims so triable in this action.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Gregory A. Belzley Gregory A. Belzley Camille A. Bathurst BelzleyBathurst Attorneys P.O. Box 278
41

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 42 Filed: 10/01/14 Page: 42 of 42 - Page ID#: 1200
Prospect, KY 40059 502/292-2452 gbelzley@aol.com P.J. McCarthy Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP 1300 Eye Street NW, Suite 900 Washington, DC 20005-3314 202/682-7041 202/857-0940 Fax patrick.mccarthy@weil.com Deborah Golden Washington Lawyers' Committee
for Civil Rights & Urban Affairs 11 DuPont Circle, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 202/319-1000 202/319-1010 Fax deborah_golden@washlaw.org Counsel for Plaintiffs
42

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 48 Filed: 10/30/14 Page: 1 of 4 - Page ID#: 1276

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT FRANKFORT

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:14-CV-00001-GPVT

ELECTRONICALLY FILED

OSCAR ADAMS and MICHAEL KNIGHTS,

PLAINTIFFS

v.

MOTION TO DISMISS ON BEHALF OF BOBBIE UNDERWOOD

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, et al.,

DEFENDANTS

Comes Defendant Bobbie Underwood, (hereinafter referred to as “Underwood”), by counsel, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) and other applicable law, and move this honorable Court to dismiss the above-styled action for failure to state a claim for which relief may be granted. In support of this motion, Defendants submit the following memorandum of law.

INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs, Kentucky Department of Corrections inmates who identify themselves as deaf and/or hard of hearing, filed the initial Complaint in this action alleging that their rights have been violated. At the core of their action are complaints regarding accommodations for them as deaf and/or hard of hearing inmates. Plaintiffs have now filed an Amended Complaint adding several defendants, including Bobbie Underwood. In the Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs assert that it is their information and belief that Underwood is responsible for KDOC employee compliance with federal laws including the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §12131, et seq., the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. §794, et seq., and the Constitution of the United State and that she is aware of KDOC’s policies and practices regarding deaf and hard of hearing individuals and

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 48 Filed: 10/30/14 Page: 2 of 4 - Page ID#: 1277
whether KDOC employees KDOC policies comply with federal law. (DN 42, Amended Complaint, p. 13).
STANDARD OF REVIEW Underwood is due to be dismissed from this action because Plaintiffs fail to state a claim against her. As set out below, Underwood has no contact with on inmates nor is she involved in establishing or enforcing policy and procedure as they relate to accommodations for inmates housed at KYDOC institutions. As such, Plaintiffs do not and cannot state a claim against Underwood unless they are bringing this action as KYDOC employees challenging her activities in her oversight of activities tied to employee personnel, payroll, recruitment, or in various areas of employee Human Resources. In presenting this argument to the Court, Underwood attaches an Affidavit explaining her job responsibilities. While consideration of material outside the pleadings can result in the Court converting the Motion to Dismiss into a Motion for Summary Judgment, it is Underwood’s understanding that introduction of this Affidavit under these circumstances without converting the Motion to Dismiss into a Motion for Summary Judgment is appropriate under Weiner v. Klais & Co., 108 F.3d 86, 89 (6th Cir., 1997). Nonetheless, to the extent the Court converts the Motion to Dismiss into a Motion for Summary Judgment, Underwood is still due to be dismissed from this action for the reasons stated.
DISCUSSION Underwood is due to be dismissed from this action because Plaintiffs fail to state a claim against her. Specifically, Plaintiffs do not state any factual allegations concerning Underwood.
2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 48 Filed: 10/30/14 Page: 3 of 4 - Page ID#: 1278
While Underwood has general knowledge regarding the ADA and other laws that are relevant in the human resources area, her knowledge of those areas are only as they relate to employees. Underwood is employed in a central office position and her position is not tied to any institution. Underwood’s position involves oversight of activities tied to employee personnel, payroll, and recruitment, as well as various employee Human Resources responsibilities. Underwood’s job duties do not involve KYDOC inmates – she does not oversee inmate issues, she is not assigned to any KYDOC institution, she has no contact with inmates, her job duties do not involve making or enforcing policy or procedure for inmates, and issues regarding accommodations of any type for KYDOC inmates do not fall within her job responsibilities. While Underwood has basic knowledge of various federal and state laws as they apply to human resources and personnel for KYDOC employees, she has no knowledge of these laws as they apply to KYDOC inmates. (See Affidavit of Bobbie Underwood attached as Exhibit A). At a minimum, to state a claim for relief, Plaintiffs must show how Underwood is accountable because she was personally involved in the acts about which Plaintiffs complain. See Rizzo v. Goode, 423 U.S. 362, 375-76 (1976). Plaintiffs Complaint is not filed on behalf of any KYDOC employee, nor does it allege any violation of rights relevant to KYDOC employee personnel, payroll, recruitment, or Human Resources. Plaintiffs Complaint not only fails to show that Underwood was personally involved in the acts about which Plaintiffs complain, they fail to allege any facts concerning Underwood or her position within KYDOC.
CONCLUSION
3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 48 Filed: 10/30/14 Page: 4 of 4 - Page ID#: 1279
With Plaintiffs failure to show how Underwood is involved at all in the acts about which they complain, and failure to allege any facts concerning Underwood, Underwood should be dismissed from this action.
WHEREFORE, based on the foregoing, Underwood, by counsel, respectfully moves this Court to dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims against her and dismiss her from this action.
Respectfully submitted, /s/ Angela T. Dunham ANGELA T. DUNHAM J. TODD HENNING DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Office of Legal Services 275 East Main Street P.O. Box 2400 Frankfort, Kentucky 40602-2400 Telephone: (502) 782-2299 Fax: (502) 564-8765
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on October 30, 2014, I electronically filed this document with the Clerk of the United States District Court, Eastern District of Kentucky by using the CM/ECF system. I further that it is my understanding that all participants in the case are registered CM/ECF users and that service will be accomplished by the CM/ECF system:
/s/ Angela T. Dunham _________________________________ COUNSEL FOR UNDERWOOD
4

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 49 Filed: 10/30/14 Page: 1 of 5 - Page ID#: 1283

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT FRANKFORT

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:14-CV-00001-GPVT

ELECTRONICALLY FILED

OSCAR ADAMS and MICHAEL KNIGHTS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated

PLAINTIFF

v.

ANSWER TO AMENDED COMPLAINT

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY KENTUCKY JUSTICE & PUBLIC SAFETY CABINET KENTUCKY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al.,

DEFENDANTS

Come Defendants Commonwealth of Kentucky (“Commonwealth”), Justice and Public Safety Cabinet (“Cabinet”), Kentucky Department of Corrections (“Department”), J. Michael Brown (“Brown”), LaDonna Thompson (“Thompson”), Kimberly Potter-Blair (“Potter-Blair”), Paula Holden (“Holden”), Jim Erwin (“Erwin”), Randy White (“White”), Gregory Howard (“Howard”), Clark Taylor (“Taylor”), and Aaron Smith (Smith), (“Defendants”) and state as follows for their response to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint:
1. In response to paragraphs 1-20 of Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint, Defendants incorporate by reference, as if restated herein, the February 10, 2014 Answer to paragraphs 1-20 of the original Complaint.
2. In response to paragraph 21, Defendants deny that some of the KDOC’s deaf inmates are in custody at Bell County Forestry Camp and deny that grievances have been filed at Bell County Forestry Camp regarding accommodations for deaf and hard of hearing inmates. Defendants admit the remainder of allegations contained in paragraph 21 of Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 49 Filed: 10/30/14 Page: 2 of 5 - Page ID#: 1284
3. In response to paragraph 22, Defendants deny that grievances have been filed at Blackburn Correctional Complex regarding accommodations for deaf and hard of hearing inmates. Defendants admit the remainder of allegations contained in paragraph 22 of Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint.
4. In response to paragraph 23, Defendants deny that grievances have been filed at Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex regarding accommodations for deaf and hard of hearing inmates. Defendants admit the remainder of allegations contained in paragraph 23 of Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint.
5. In response to paragraph 24, Defendants deny that grievances have been filed at Green River Correctional Complex regarding accommodations for deaf and hard of hearing inmates. Defendants admit the remainder of allegations contained in paragraph 24 of Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint.
6. Defendants admit the allegations contained in paragraph 25 of Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint.
7. In response to paragraph 26, Defendants deny that grievances have been filed at Little Sandy Correctional Complex regarding accommodations for deaf and hard of hearing inmates. Defendants admit the remainder of allegations contained in paragraph 26 of Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint.
8. In response to paragraph 27, Defendants deny that grievances have been filed at Northpoint Training Center regarding accommodations for deaf and hard of hearing inmates. Defendants admit the remainder of allegations contained in paragraph 27 of Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint.
2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 49 Filed: 10/30/14 Page: 3 of 5 - Page ID#: 1285
9. In response to paragraph 28, Defendants deny that some of the KDOC’s deaf inmates are in custody at Roederer Correctional Complex and deny that grievances have been filed at Roederer Correctional Complex regarding accommodations for deaf and hard of hearing inmates. Defendants admit the remainder of allegations contained in paragraph 28 of Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint.
10. In response to paragraph 29, Defendants deny that grievances have been filed at Western Kentucky Correctional Complex regarding accommodations for deaf and hard of hearing inmates. Defendants admit the remainder of allegations contained in paragraph 29 of Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint.
11. In response to paragraph 30, Defendants admit so much of the allegations regarding Underwood’s knowledge and experience regarding issues that impact employees. Defendants deny so much of the allegations regarding Underwood’s knowledge and experience regarding issues that impact inmates.
12. In response to paragraphs 31-172 of Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint (on page 40 of the Amended Complaint, what is numbered 162 seems to be a mistake, and should be number 172), Defendants incorporate by reference, as if restated herein, the February 10, 2014 Answer to paragraphs 21-162 of the original Complaint.
13. Defendants deny that Plaintiffs are entitled to the relief requested. 14. Defendants deny any allegations not specifically admitted herein. 15. Defendants deny each and every allegation that they deprived the Plaintiffs of any
Constitutional right or infringed upon any state or federally protected rights.
3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 49 Filed: 10/30/14 Page: 4 of 5 - Page ID#: 1286
16. Defendants at all times acted reasonably and prudently in accordance with the existing law, state of the art, and/or custom in the profession during the relevant time periods thus barring any recovery herein.
17. Any requests for damages against defendants in their official capacities are claims against the Commonwealth and are barred by the Eleventh Amendment.
18. Any requests for damages are barred pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act. 19. Plaintiffs have failed to comply with the Prison Litigation Reform Act by failing to
exhaust their administrative remedies as to some or all claims. 20. Defendants plead the affirmative defenses of Estoppel and/or waiver, thus barring any
recovery herein. 21. Plaintiffs’ claims are barred by the doctrines of absolute, sovereign, official,
governmental, good faith, and/or qualified immunities. 22. Defendants reserve the right to assert such other affirmative defenses as may appear
appropriate after discovery has been conducted in this matter. WHEREFORE, Defendants demand as follows:
A. That Plaintiffs’ Complaint be dismissed; B. That Defendants recover any and all costs and fees incurred herein; C. Any and all other proper relief to which the Defendants may appear entitled; and D. Trial by jury on all applicable claims.
Respectfully submitted, /s/ Angela T. Dunham ANGELA T. DUNHAM J. TODD HENNING DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Office of Legal Services 275 East Main Street
4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 49 Filed: 10/30/14 Page: 5 of 5 - Page ID#: 1287 P.O. Box 2400 Frankfort, Kentucky 40602-2400 Telephone: (502) 782-2299 Fax: (502) 564-8765
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on October 30, 2014, I electronically filed this document with the Clerk of the United States District Court, Eastern District of Kentucky by using the CM/ECF system. I further certify that it is my understanding that all participants in the case are registered CM/ECF users and that service will be accomplished by the CM/ECF system:
/s/ Angela T. Dunham _________________________________ COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS
5

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 50 Filed: 10/30/14 Page: 1 of 4 - Page ID#: 1288

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT FRANKFORT

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:14-CV-00001-GPVT

ELECTRONICALLY FILED

OSCAR ADAMS and MICHAEL KNIGHTS,

PLAINTIFFS

v.

MOTION TO DISMISS ON BEHALF OF GARY BECKSTROM, DON

BOTTOMS, ALAN BROWN, JANET CONOVER, STEVE HANEY, KATHY

LITTERAL, JOSEPH MEKO, RAVONNE SIMS, AND STEVE WOODWARD

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, et al.,

DEFENDANTS

Come Defendants Gary Beckstrom (“Beckstrom”), Don Bottoms (“Bottoms”), Alan Brown (“Brown”), Janet Conover (“Conover”), Steve Haney (“Haney”), Kathy Litteral (“Litteral”), Joseph Meko (“Meko”), Ravonne Sims (“Sims”), and Steve Woodward (“Woodward”), by counsel, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) and other applicable law, and move this honorable Court to dismiss the above-styled action for failure to state a claim for which relief may be granted. In support of this motion, Defendants Beckstrom, Bottoms, Brown, Conover, Haney, Litteral, Meko, Sims, and Woodward submit the following:

INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs, Kentucky Department of Corrections inmates who identify themselves as deaf and/or hard of hearing, filed the initial Complaint in this action alleging that their rights have been violated. At the core of their action are complaints regarding accommodations for them as deaf and/or hard of hearing inmates. Plaintiffs have now filed an Amended Complaint adding several defendants, including Beckstrom (Warden at Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex), Bottoms (Warden at Northpoint Training Center, Brown (Warden at Green River Correctional Complex), Conover

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 50 Filed: 10/30/14 Page: 2 of 4 - Page ID#: 1289
(Warden at Kentucky Correctional Institute for Women), Haney (Warden at Blackburn Correctional Complex), Litteral (Warden at Bell County Forestry Camp), Meko (Warden at Little Sandy Correctional Complex), Sims (Warden at Roederer Correctional Complex), and Woodward (Warden at Western Kentucky Correctional Complex).1 In the Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs assert that it is their information and belief that these defendants are Wardens of various Kentucky Department of Corrections Adult institutions, that deaf or hard of hearing inmates are housed at these institutions, and grievances regarding accommodations for deaf and hard of hearing inmates have been filed at these institutions. (DN 42, Amended Complaint, p. 10-14).
DISCUSSION Beckstrom, Bottoms, Brown, Conover, Haney, Litteral, Meko, Sims, and Woodward are due to be dismissed from this action because Plaintiffs fail to state a claim against them. Specifically, Plaintiffs do not state any factual allegations concerning any of these defendants. Simply being a Warden at an adult institution where deaf and hard of hearing inmates may be housed, where grievances have at some time in the past been filed, does not state a claim against these defendants.2 At a minimum, to state a claim for relief, Plaintiffs must show how these defendants are accountable because they were personally involved in the acts about which Plaintiffs complain. See Rizzo v. Goode, 423 U.S. 362, 375-76 (1976). Plaintiffs never allege any personal involvement by these defendants in the acts about which they complaint. Plaintiffs
1 Plaintiffs also named Assistant Director of Personnel Bobbie Underwood as a defendant. A motion to dismiss on behalf of Defendant Underwood is already pending before the Court. 2 Even under these facts, why Defendants Sims and Litteral were named in the Amended Complaints is confusing as last check, which was during the responses to discovery, there were no deaf and/or hard of hearing inmates housed at Bell County Forestry Camp or Roederer Correctional Complex. (See attached response to interrogatory No. 2).
2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 50 Filed: 10/30/14 Page: 3 of 4 - Page ID#: 1290
are not housed at the institutions where these defendants are wardens. Plaintiffs do not claim that they filed grievances regarding accommodations for deaf and hard of hearing at the institutions where these defendants are wardens. The only basis for including these defendants is their position as warden as that is an insufficient basis for Plaintiffs claims. Liability under §1983 must be based on active unconstitutional behavior. Shehee v. Luttrell, 199 F.3d 295, 300 (6th Cir. 1999). Plaintiffs’ amended complaint alleges no active unconstitutional behavior or any personal involvement at all in the alleged acts set out in the Complaint.
CONCLUSION With Plaintiffs failure to show how Beckstrom, Bottoms, Brown, Conover, Haney, Litteral, Meko, Sims, or Woodward are involved at all in the acts about which they complain, and failure to allege any facts concerning these defendants, Beckstrom, Bottoms, Brown, Conover, Haney, Litteral, Meko, Sims, and Woodward should be dismissed from this action. WHEREFORE, based on the foregoing, Beckstrom, Bottoms, Brown, Conover, Haney, Litteral, Meko, Sims, and Woodward, by counsel, respectfully moves this Court to dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims against them and dismiss them from this action.
Respectfully submitted, /s/ Angela T. Dunham ANGELA T. DUNHAM J. TODD HENNING DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Office of Legal Services 275 East Main Street P.O. Box 2400 Frankfort, Kentucky 40602-2400 Telephone: (502) 782-2299 Fax: (502) 564-8765 Counsel for Defendants
3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 50 Filed: 10/30/14 Page: 4 of 4 - Page ID#: 1291 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on October 30, 2014, I electronically filed this document with the Clerk of the United States District Court, Eastern District of Kentucky by using the CM/ECF system. I further that it is my understanding that all participants in the case are registered CM/ECF users and that service will be accomplished by the CM/ECF system:
/s/ Angela T. Dunham _________________________________ COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS
4

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 1 of 3 - Page ID#: 1466

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT FRANKFORT

Eastfll'n District of lont,uoky
F I LED

MICHAEL KNIGHTS AND OSCAR ADAMS, )

on behalf of themselves and

)

all others similarly situated,

)

)

Plaintiffs

)

)

v.

)

)

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, et al. )

)

Defendants.

)

JUN 242015
AT FRANKFORT ROBERT R. CARR CLERK U.S. DISTRICT COURT
Case No.: 3: 14-cv-00001-GFVT

CONSENT JUDGMENT WHEREAS, Plaintiffs Michael Knights and Oscar Adams (collectively, the "Plaintiffs") filed an action alleging violations of their rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12131 et seq., the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794 et seq., the Constitution of the United States, the Religious Land use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000,42. U.S.C. § 200cc et seq., the Kentucky Civil Rights Act Provision of Interpreters, KRS 344.500, and the Kentucky Civil Rights Act, KRS 344.l20 (the "Complaint"); WHEREAS, the Plaintiffs and the Kentucky Department of Corrections (the "Department, and, together with Plaintiffs, the "Parties") have entered into a settlement agreement, attached hereto as Exhibit A (the "Settlement Agreement"), to resolve all claims against all those named as defendants in the Complaint without trial or adjudication of any further issue of fact or law; WHEREAS, the Parties have agreed that this Consent Judgment may be signed by a Judge in the Eastern District of Kentucky and consent to the entry of this Judgment;

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 2 of 3 - Page ID#: 1467 • 

WHEREAS, the Department confirms, agrees and acknowledges, that it will perform the obligations and duties set forth in the Settlement Agreement;
NOW THEREFORE, the Court finds that there is good and sufficient cause to enter this Consent Judgment, and that it is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED:
1. The Department, any person or entity under the Department's control, and all of the Department's officers, assigns, successors in interest, predecessors in interest, parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, licensees and employees are enjoined and restrained, for the duration of the Settlement Agreement (see Sections 1. and XVII.!), from directly or indirectly breaching any terms of the Settlement Agreement.
2. This Court will retain jurisdiction over the Parties to enforce the Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction pursuant to Section XVLB. of the Settlement Agreement.
3. Pursuant to Section XV. of the Settlement Agreement, the Court appoints Margo Schlanger to serve as a Settlement Monitor to monitor the implementation of the Settlement Agreement. Pursuant to Section XV.B. of the Settlement Agreement, the Settlement Monitor will provide semi-annual reports to the Court and to the Parties concerning the status of Defendants' compliance with the Settlement Agreement or report to the Court pursuant to any schedule hereafter set by the Court.
4. Except as provided herein, all claims alleged in the Complaint are dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Section XVLB. of the attached Settlement Agreement and all pending motions are withdrawn.
2 


Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 3 of 3 - Page ID#: 1468 •

Dated: May 29, 2015
On behalf of Plaintiffs,
/s/ Ralph Miller 
 Ralph Miller (admitted pro hac vice) 
 Kristen Murphy (admitted pro hac vice) 
 W. Sutton Ansley (admitted pro hac vice) Zachary C. Garthe (admitted pro hac vice) Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP 1300 Eye Street, NW, Suite 900 Washington Dc 20005-3314 (202)682-7000 Fax: (202) 857-0939 ralph.miller@weil.com kristen.murphy@weil.com sutton.ansley@weil.com zachary.garthe(a1weil.com
Gregory A. Blezley 
 BelzleyBathurst Attorneys 
 P.O. Box 278 
 Prospect, KY 40059 
 (502) 292-2452 
 gbelzley(a1aol.co,l1! 

Deborah Golden Elliot Mincberg (admitted pro hac vice) Washington Lawyers' Committee
For Civil Rights & Urban Affairs 11 DuPont Circle, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 319-1000 
 (202)319-1010 (fax) 
 deborah golden(a1washlaw.org 
 elliot mincberg@washlaw.org 

Counselfor Plaintiffs

On behalf of Defendants,
lsI Angela Dun=-h=a",-,-,m,---~_ ANGELA T. DUNHAM DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Office of Legal Services 275 East Main Street P.O. Box 2400 Frankfort, Kentucky 40602-2400 Telephone: (502) 782-2299 Fax: (502) 564-8765
Counselfor Defendants

The Honorable Judge Gregory F. Van Tatenhove

* Dated: , ...

,2015

3 


 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 1 of 65 - Page ID#: 1509

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT FRANKFORT

OSCAR ADAMS AND MICHAEL KNIGHTS )

on behalf of themselves and

)

all others similarly situated,

)

)

Plaintiffs

)

)

v.

)

)

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, et al. )

)

Defendants.

)

__________________________________________)

Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT

First Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor
February 2, 2016
Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 625 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 2 of 65 - Page ID#: 1510

I. INTRODUCTION
Pursuant to the Court’s order dated June 24, 2015, this is the first semi-annual report to the Court and the Parties concerning the status of compliance with the Settlement Agreement, which comprehensively governs how the Kentucky Department of Corrections (“Department”) deals with inmates who are deaf or hard-of-hearing (“Deaf”).
I thank the Department’s personnel, both at headquarters and at the various affected institutions, for their work on implementing the improvements that are required by the Settlement Agreement. The Department has made a significant start towards compliance during the Agreement’s first seven months. In particular, each institution that houses one or more Deaf inmates now has an ADA Coordinator and a videophone.
However, much remains to be done. Most notably, the Department has failed to make any progress with respect to staff training, which the Agreement required to be provided by October 2015. In addition, I have not yet assessed progress towards many Agreement provisions, but the inmate interviews I have conducted demonstrate that, at least at some institutions, Kentucky’s Deaf inmates feel they are continuing to struggle to get interpreters, auxiliary aids and services, and effective communication more generally. I look forward to more comprehensively evaluating compliance across the Department, over the next months and the Agreement’s full term.
Note: The Agreement included heading numbers, but not every paragraph and provision is clearly numbered. To facilitate reference to specific paragraphs, I have numbered them all, and attach the agreement with that as the only change, as Exhibit B to this report. In this report, I refer to the settlement provisions using these numbers.
This report has five Exhibits:
A) Margo Schlanger CV B) Settlement Agreement with additional numbering C) Compliance reporting form for Agreement items with deadlines (Jan. 4, 2016) D) Quarterly Compliance reporting form (Jan. 18, 2016) E) Summary of common themes in inmate interviews

II. TIMELINE

The Settlement was filed with the Court on May 29, 2015, and ordered by the Court on June 24, 2015. The Settlement Agreement specified that its effective date would be 30 days after filing. Accordingly, the pertinent deadlines for the agreement are:

• June 28, 2015 • July 28, 2015 • Aug. 27, 2015 • Sept. 26, 2015

Effective date Effective date plus 30 days Effective date plus 60 days Effective date plus 90 days

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 3 of 65 - Page ID#: 1511
In order to line up the Agreement’s various reporting deadlines with the State’s quarterly calendar, I have shifted those deadlines a few days or weeks. Quarterly reports will therefore cover the ordinary quarters (using calendar years, not fiscal years), with reports due two weeks after the close of the quarter.
• 1st Quarter: Jan. 1 to Mar. 31; reporting due Apr. 14 • 2nd Quarter: Apr. 1 to June 30; reporting due July 14 • 3rd Quarter: July 1 to Sept. 30; reporting due Oct. 14 • 4th Quarter: Oct. 1 to Dec. 31; reporting due Jan. 14
The Agreement does not specify precise timing for my Semi-Annual Reports, but barring some reason to do otherwise, I plan to file them in February and July.
III. COMPLIANCE WITH SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ITEMS WITH SPECIFIED DEADLINES.
A. Items with deadlines in the first 90 days.
1. Designation and information re. ADA Coordinators.
The Agreement required the designation of ADA Coordinators for each facility, along with notice to me and Deaf Inmates, physical posting of the information in a secure area in any housing unit in which a Deaf inmate is held, and web-posting. All this was to be complete by July 28, 2015. (II.B.1, II.B.2)
Status: Nearly compliant. I received timely notice of this information from KDOC for each institution. All but one of the Deaf inmates I have communicated with knew the identity of their ADA Coordinator. And I received photographs of the physical posting of the information. The web-posting is here: http://corrections.ky.gov/depts/AI/Pages/ADA.aspx. As of today (February 2, 2016), the webpage is nearly complete; it is missing the Department’s newest facility, the Ross-Cash Center. In addition, the online information for the Western Kentucky Correctional Complex is not up to date; a change in ADA Coordinator that occurred sometime before December 7, 2015, is not reflected.
Necessary compliance steps: • Add Ross-Cash Center and update Western Kentucky Correctional Complex on http://corrections.ky.gov/depts/AI/Pages/ADA.aspx. • Implement a system to ensure timely updating of the webpage and report that system to me.
2. Videophone installation.
The Agreement (IX.D.3.a) required that Deaf inmates at all institutions have access to videophones by the end of August 2015. The Department has reported to me that this has been accomplished in every facility. Deaf inmates at five institutions have used the videophones to

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 4 of 65 - Page ID#: 1512
discuss with me (via a law student assistant) their observations about compliance with the agreement.
Status: Apparently compliant.
It is worth noting that the videophone requirement does not exhaust all the Settlement Agreement’s provisions governing access to telephone services. For example, the Agreement, also requires ready access to a TTY for all Deaf inmates (IX.D.1). This is a topic for future reporting, but I have been informed that the Deaf inmate at the Ross-Cash Center does not sign well enough to be able to use the videophone; instead, she uses a TTY. The Ross-Cash Center is currently able to borrow a TTY from Western Kentucky Correctional Complex, which is colocated with it, but apparently does not have its own TTY for its inmates’ more ready use.
3. Videophone access.
The Agreement (IX.D.3) is clear that videophone and TTY usage must be cost-free for Deaf inmates, and that Deaf inmates must have at least as much access to videophones as nonDeaf inmates have to conventional telephones. In particular, it provides “videophones . . . will not require permission for use to the same extent that conventional telephones do not require permission for use.”
I have been told by one inmate that because the phone is in another housing area, he needs to request special permission and an escort (and that time under escort is counted against his limited phone time), whereas non-Deaf inmates have access to phones in their own housing areas and without special request. In a compliance reporting form that covered the 90-day requirements of the Agreement, attached as Exhibit C, I asked the ADA Coordinators to selfreport on this issue. Most of their responses indicate that phones are accessible, but are not entirely clear about the need for escort. For the Western Kentucky Correctional Complex (WKCC), the self-report was that Deaf inmates are charged for the use of videophones, and that they “have to have staff set up the system for them on an individual basis upon their request.” WKCC does not (as of the latest report) house any Deaf inmates, but it used to house one; she was transferred to another facility. WKCC’s self-report is inconsistent with this Agreement provision.
It is important that the videophones be as available to Deaf inmates as conventional phones are to non-Deaf inmates—including in the same unit, if that is the arrangement for other inmates. In addition, the time it takes to set up a videophone or transport Deaf inmates to it should be counted against their allocated phone time.
In future reports, I will examine this issue in more depth.
Status: Unclear.
Necessary compliance steps: • Ensure that Deaf inmates are not charged for videophone use

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 5 of 65 - Page ID#: 1513
• Give Deaf inmates access to videophones at least equal to non-Deaf inmates’ access to conventional phones (in the same unit, if that’s the arrangement for conventional phones).
• Transport and set-up time for the videophones should not be taken from Deaf inmates’ phone time.
4. Informational materials for Deaf Inmates.
The Agreement required that by the end of September 2015, all Deaf inmates be provided with “materials providing information about the Auxiliary Aids and Services available to Deaf Inmates and instructions for how to obtain, request, or use those Auxiliary Aids and Services.” The language of these materials is required to be “designed to be accessible to each Deaf Inmate.” (III.F.1) The same deadline applied, as well, to a Settlement Agreement requirement that Deaf Inmates be given “a schedule showing when Qualified Interpreters and/or other Auxiliary Aids and Services are available.” (IV.B)
In response to my questions (see Exhibit C), several institutions provided me the written notice they shared with Deaf inmates. ADA Coordinator self-reports indicate that most inmates have received this documentation. (The Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women’s coordinator stated only that both its Deaf inmates are aware of the available services. The RossCash Center’s ADA Coordinator stated “Auxiliary Aids and services are done by are medical staff. Interpreter is available through Purple phone.” No written documents were provided by either; I infer that notification to the inmates may have been oral rather than written.)
When provided, the content of the informational materials is not ideal:
• For many of the institutions, the notice does not use “language designed to be accessible.” For example, two of the notices state: “This memorandum serves as notification to you of an auxiliary aide available for your use,” but never explain what an auxiliary aid is.
• The best of the informational handouts is the one for the Roederer Correctional Complex, which specifies the circumstances in which interpretation services are provided. Others do not have this detail, which is important.
• All of the information focuses on telephone equipment (TTY and videophone). There is nothing in any of the materials that informs Deaf inmates that they are entitled to other auxiliary aids and services, including: o Hearing aids (and how to get them) o Computer-aided transcription services o Assistive listening systems o Closed caption decoders o Open and closed captioning (for example for shared televisions or video provided by the institution) o Non-auditory alert or alarm systems o Bed shakers o Other medically-necessary devices o TVs that support open- or closed-captioning (at the inmate’s expense)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 6 of 65 - Page ID#: 1514
• No information tells inmates that they can ask to purchase devices such as vibrating clocks and in-line amplifiers, even if not deemed medically necessary.
Status: Partially compliant.
Necessary compliance steps: • Written notification to all Deaf inmates • Improvement of written materials so that they satisfy the following criteria: o They explain in clear and simple terms what an auxiliary aid is. o They explain in clear and simple terms how to request an auxiliary aid or qualified interpretation. o They list the occasions when interpretive services are available, and when such services may be by video or in-person. o They explain how to use a TTY and a videophone. o They explain what non-telephonic auxiliary aids are available, under what circumstances, and how to request them. This should especially include hearing aids, open- or closed-captioning, non-auditory alerts, bed shakers, etc. It should cover which items are free of charge, and which are available only at the inmate’s expense.
5. Qualified Interpreters for unscheduled medical emergencies.
Starting at the end of September 2015, the Agreement (VI.C.4) requires the Department to provide a Qualified Interpreter via Video Remote Interpreting (“VRI”) for unscheduled medical emergencies. Using the form attached as Exhibit C, I asked the ADA Coordinators at facilities with at least one Deaf inmate to self-report if any such situation has arisen, and what arrangements their facility has made to be ready for this obligation, if the time does come. All reported no emergencies so far. They also each reported some preparation, usually by informing medical staff about the availability of a VRI laptop and the like. However, the self-reports do leave some compliance questions unanswered:
• At Roederer Correctional Center, the ADA Coordinator reported that use could be scheduled—which leaves unanswered the question about unscheduled medical emergencies. I note, as well, that the Agreement (VI.A) actually provides for in-person rather than video interpretation for scheduled medical appointments.
• At the Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women, the ADA Coordinator reported, “We will inform the off site provider and let them know they would be coming and the estimated arrival time.” This again leaves unanswered the question of effective communication both on-site and if the provider is not prepared to meet the need.
• At the Ross-Cash Center, the ADA Coordinator reported that discussions with a provider are ongoing.
Status: Unclear. Necessary compliance steps: Unclear.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 7 of 65 - Page ID#: 1515
6. Training.
The Agreement includes very substantial provisions governing training, which was supposed to be provided by the end of September 2015 on numerous specified topics to “KDOC employees who interact with the Inmate population.” (XIII.A.1) In addition, the Agreement requires that ADA Coordinators be “trained on the requirements of federal and state law regarding the contents of this Agreement and the KDOC’s obligations to provide full and equal access to, and enjoyment of, its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations to Deaf Inmates.” (II.B.1) There are procedural requirements, as well: the Department is required to receive input from the Kentucky Commission on the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (KCDHH) and from me. (XIII.A.1)
Unfortunately, the Department as a whole has made no evident progress towards implementing this crucial aspect of the Settlement Agreement. Apparently even scheduling a meeting with the KCDHH has been challenging. This is not a sufficient excuse for failing to at least develop a draft on which to receive input.
I note, however, that the ADA Coordinator at the Kentucky State Reformatory has developed a useful PowerPoint training offering tips on communication with Deaf inmates. I do not know whether that training has been delivered, or to whom. It does not cover all the needed topics, but it is a start.
Status: Non-compliant.
Necessary compliance steps: • Confer with KCDHH and with me • Develop and deliver training for ADA Coordinators and for prison staff.
7. Disciplinary hearings without a Qualified Interpreter.
The Agreement specifies: “If, as of the Effective Date of this Agreement, a Deaf Inmate is being punished or is scheduled to be punished for a disciplinary infraction as the result of a hearing in which he or she did not waive his or her right to a Qualified Interpreter, then the disciplinary hearing must be re-heard at a time that a Qualified Interpreter can be present.” (VII.B.3) I have requested a list of any inmates who, as of June 28, 2015 (the Agreement’s effective date), met these criteria. But KDOC has not provided me with a list. Therefore, I do not know if KDOC is or is not in compliance with this provision.
Status: Unclear. Necessary compliance steps:
• Identify any inmates covered, and redo their disciplinary hearings if need be.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 8 of 65 - Page ID#: 1516
8. Payments to plaintiffs and their counsel.
The Settlement Agreement required payment of a total of $253,077.62 to plaintiffs and their counsel (mostly counsel). Plaintiffs’ counsel report to me that these payments have been made in full.
Status: Compliant.
9. Routine reporting.
Grievances: The Agreement requires that the Department provide me, quarterly, a written summary of grievances filed by Deaf Inmates that relate to the Agreement. (XIV.3) There are very few such grievances, so mostly this provision requires negative reports. I received summaries for the first relevant period (July 2015) by several emails from Department headquarters. For the next reporting period, I received individual emails from ADA Coordinators. In order to facilitate this reporting, I then created a web-based reporting form (and aligned the reporting with ordinary quarters). A PDF version of the form is attached as Exhibit D. For the 2015 4th Quarter reports, covering October 1 to December 31, 2015, I sent a link to it to each of the ADA Coordinators on Monday, January 18, 2016, and requested it be filled out by Thursday, January 28. Unfortunately, as of close of business the following Monday, February 1, there remained two institutions (out of thirteen) that had not yet reported. It remains my hope that use of this form will considerably facilitate reporting. (There have so far been just a handful of grievances reported to me; I will be examining their resolution on my site visit to Kentucky State Reformatory, later this month.)
Deaf inmates. The Agreement requires that the Department provide me, every six months, a current and up-to-date list of Deaf inmates in the KDOC’s custody, identifying the inmates’ names, DOC numbers and institutions. Of the Department’s thirteen adult institutions, I understand seven to have one or more Deaf inmates. I received the first set of these reports from a central administrative contact at the Department; the second set came to me via individual emails from different ADA Coordinators, and required numerous email reminders. Even then, three institutions did not provide their lists. To make this reporting requirement easier in the future, I will use the web-based reporting form just discussed. (The 2015 Quarter 4 version does not include this question, because it is required only every other quarter.)
Status: Compliant, but difficult.
Necessary compliance steps: • Ensure timely and complete responses to the reporting forms I provide by all ADA Coordinators.
10. Situational reporting.
The Agreement specifies five situations in which the Department is supposed to notify me promptly. They are:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 9 of 65 - Page ID#: 1517
• When a Deaf Inmate is barred from a program or activity because the Department has determined that participation would present a “Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates.” (II.A)
• When a Deaf Inmate is barred from a work assignment because that assignment would “present a Direct Threat of injury or death to a Deaf Inmate or others” (VI.F)
• When the Department is considering a non-auditory alert system that will notify Deaf Inmates, in real time, of prison-wide events and emergencies, and events specific to that inmate (VIII.B.1; VIII.B.3; VIII.C)
• When the Department has determined that it is appropriate to adjust the number of minutes afforded Deaf Inmates to make TTY and videophone calls. (IX.C)
• When the Department has made a determination to allow or disallow a Deaf Inmate to use devices such as vibrating clocks or in-line amplifiers, if those devices are not deemed medically necessary. (XII)
I have not received any such notices. In order to ascertain whether any of these situations has arisen, I included questions about these five situations in the quarterly reporting form already discussed, and attached as Exhibit D. Most of the Department’s institutions have responded to that form. Of those, several institutions have considered a non-auditory alert system, and may have made determinations to allow or disallow various covered devices, without providing me the required notice.
Status: Partially non-compliant. Necessary compliance steps: Train ADA Coordinators as to their prompt situational reporting obligations.
IV. DEFENDANT’S OTHER OBLIGATIONS
The Settlement Agreement is 24 pages long and includes many other requirements not discussed in this report. But those requirements do not specify a date for achievement. The Agreement’s term is five years.
Two interpretations of the absence of a date seem plausible: Perhaps when no date is specified, the requirement should be considered effective immediately. Or perhaps the Department is required to implement the requirement moving with reasonable speed. (I don’t think it is plausible to interpret the absence of a date as leaving the implementation time frame completely to the discretion of the Defendant.)
Before beginning to monitor compliance with all the provisions that have no dates, I asked the Department to inform me when its institutions will be compliant, in its view. I felt that that if the Department specified a reasonable date, it would be appropriate to delay site visits and the monitoring they enable until after that date. I asked, as well, for particular attention to be paid to compliance at the Kentucky State Reformatory (KSR), since it houses several dozen Deaf Inmates, with only about eight others spread among a handful of other institutions.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 10 of 65 - Page ID#: 1518
The Department informed me that it would be in compliance with the Agreement at KSR by the middle of February. Therefore, I have scheduled a site visit to KSR for February 24 and 25, 2016. In advance of that visit, I am completing a draft Compliance Instrument, which I will share with plaintiffs’ counsel and with the Department.
In order to keep abreast on issues at other institutions, I have made contact with each of the Deaf inmates who is not at KSR; a law student assistant has interviewed nearly all of them about their experiences with matters covered by the Settlement Agreement. Those experiences are referenced in this report, and their common themes are summarized in Exhibit E.
Status: Unclear
Necessary compliance steps: The Department should specify reasonable dates for full compliance at each institution, which will allow my site visits to be as useful as possible.
V. CONCLUSION, AND SUMMARY OF NECESSARY COMPLIANCE STEPS.
The Kentucky Department of Corrections has made a significant start towards compliance with the Settlement Agreement since the Agreement became effective on June 28, 2015. Much remains to be done; I will report in more depth in the next report.
Summary of Necessary Compliance Steps 1. Designation and information re. ADA Coordinators. • Add Ross-Cash Center and update Western Kentucky Correctional Complex on http://corrections.ky.gov/depts/AI/Pages/ADA.aspx. • Implement a system to ensure timely updating of the webpage and report that system to me. 2. Videophone installation. • None 3. Videophone access. • Ensure that Deaf inmates are not charged for videophone use. • Give Deaf inmates access to videophones at least equal to non-Deaf inmates’ access to conventional phones (in the same unit, if that’s the arrangement for conventional phones). • Transport and set-up time for the videophones should not be taken from Deaf inmates’ phone time. 4. Informational materials for Deaf Inmates. • Written notification to all Deaf inmates • Improve materials so that they satisfy the following criteria: o They explain in clear and simple terms what an auxiliary aid is. o They explain in clear and simple terms how to request an auxiliary aid or qualified interpretation. o They list the occasions when interpretive services are available, and when such services may be by video or in-person. o They explain how to use a TTY and a videophone.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 11 of 65 - Page ID#: 1519
o They explain what non-telephonic auxiliary aids are available, under what circumstances, and how to request them. This should especially include hearing aids, open- or closed-captioning, non-auditory alerts, bed shakers, etc. It should cover which items are free of charge, and which are available only at the inmate’s expense.
5. Qualified Interpreters for unscheduled medical emergencies. • Unclear
6. Training. • Confer with KCDHH and with me • Develop and deliver training for ADA Coordinators and for prison staff.
7. Disciplinary hearings without a Qualified Interpreter. • Identify any inmates covered, and redo their disciplinary hearings if need be.
8. Payments to plaintiffs and their counsel. • None.
9. Routine reporting. • Ensure timely and complete responses by all ADA Coordinators to the reporting forms I provide.
10. Situational reporting. • Train ADA Coordinators as to their prompt situational reporting obligations.
11. Defendant’s other obligations. • Specify reasonable dates for full compliance at each non-KSR institution.
Dated: February 2, 2016
Respectfully submitted,
____________________________________ Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 610 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109 (202) 277-2506 Margo.schlanger@gmail.com Adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 12 of 65 - Page ID#: 1520
First Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor (Feb. 2, 2016)
Exhibits
A) Margo Schlanger CV B) Settlement Agreement with additional numbering C) Compliance reporting form for Agreement items with deadlines (Jan. 4, 2016) D) Quarterly Compliance reporting form (Jan. 18, 2016) E) Summary of common themes in inmate interviews

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 13 of 65 - Page ID#: 1521
Exhibit A: Margo Schlanger CV

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 14 of 65 - Page ID#: 1522
MARGO SCHLANGER http://margoschlanger.net
mschlan@umich.edu 734-615-2618
EMPLOYMENT
Henry M. Butzel Professor of Law, University of Michigan (2009–present; on leave 2010 and 2011). Director, Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse, http://clearinghouse.net. Visiting Professor of Law, Fall 2009.
Settlement Monitor, Adams & Knights v. Kentucky Department of Corrections (3:14-cv-00001, E.D. Ky.), June 2015–present. Court-appointed monitor in settlement of state-wide case about deaf prisoners.
Counsel to the Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Special Government Employee, parttime, 2012-2013). Advised Secretary of Homeland Security on civil rights matters.
Officer for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Presidential appointment, 2010 & 2011). (Chair, Privacy, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties Subcommittee of the federal Information Sharing Environment’s Information Sharing and Access Interagency Policy Committee; Chair, Interagency Coord. Council on Emergency Preparedness and Individuals with Disabilities; Member, U.S. Delegation, Universal Periodic Review.)
Visiting Professor of Law, University of California, Los Angeles (Spring 2009).
Professor of Law, Washington University in St. Louis (2004–2009); Director, Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. Elected 2008 “David M. Becker Professor of the Year” by law students.
Faculty Fellow, Harvard University Center for Ethics and the Professions (2001/02).
Assistant Professor of Law, Harvard Law School (1998–2004).
Senior Trial Attorney, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Special Litigation Section (1995– 1998). Division Special Achievement Awards, 1996 and 1997.
Law clerk, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg; Supreme Court of the United States (1993–1995).
Fact-checker, The New Yorker (1989–1990).
OTHER APPOINTMENTS
Member, Department of Homeland Security Family Residential Center Federal Advisory Committee, Nov. 2015–present.
Reporter, American Bar Association task force on Standards relating to the Legal Status of Prisoners (2007–Jan. 2010). See http://www.americanbar.org/publications/criminal _justice_section_archive/crimjust_standards_treatmentprisoners.html.
Commissioner, Commission on Safety and Abuse in America’s Prisons (2006–2008). See http://www.prisoncommission.org.
EDUCATION
Yale Law School, J.D. 1993. Book Reviews Editor, Yale Law Journal (Vol. 102); Vinson Prize for excellence in clinical casework.
Yale College, B.A. 1989. Honors: magna cum laude, distinction in the History major, National Merit Scholar.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 15 of 65 - Page ID#: 1523
Schlanger cv, page 2 of 9 (12/20/2015)
COURSES TAUGHT
Torts; Prisons and the Law; Constitutional Equality; Constitutional Law. Seminars include Police and Surveillance Reform; Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and the Law; Civil Rights and Homeland Security; Empirical Inquiries into Civil Litigation; Institutional Reform Litigation.
SCHOLARLY PUBLICATIONS, forthcoming and published (for links, see margoschlanger.net)
The Just-Barely-Sustainable California Prisoners’ Rights Ecosystem, forthcoming, ANNALS OF THE AM. ACAD. POL. & SOC. SCI. (2016).
No Reason To Blame Liberals (Or, The Unbearable Lightness of Perversity Arguments, THE NEW RAMBLER REVIEW (online, June 15, 2015) (reviewing NAOMI MURAKAWA, THE FIRST CIVIL RIGHT: HOW LIBERALS BUILT PRISON AMERICA).
Against Solitary Confinement: Jonah’s Redemption and Our Need for Mercy, , 16 RUTGERS J. LAW & RELIGION 345 (2015) (symposium: People of the Book).
Stealth Advocacy Can (Sometimes) Change the World (review of ALISON L. GASH, BELOW THE RADAR: HOW SILENCE CAN SAVE CIVIL RIGHTS (2015)), 113 U. MICH. L. REV. 897 (2015).
Trends in Prisoner Litigation as the PLRA Enters Adulthood, 5 U.C. IRVINE L. REV 153 (2015).
Prisoners’ Rights Lawyers’ Strategies for Preserving the Role of the Courts, 69 U. MIAMI L. REV. 519 (2015).
Intelligence Legalism and the National Security Agency’s Civil Liberties Gap, 6 HARV. NAT. SEC. L.J. 112 (2015).
Offices of Goodness: Influence Without Authority within Federal Agencies, 36 CARDOZO L. REV. 53 (2014).
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Structural Reform of the American Workplace (with Pauline Kim), 91 WASH. U. L. REV. 1519 (2014).
Prison Segregation: Symposium Introduction and Preliminary Data on Racial Disparities, 18 MICH. J. RACE & LAW 241 (2013).
Plata v. Brown and Realignment: Jails, Prisons, Courts, and Politics, 48 HARV. CIV. RIGHTS-CIV. LIB. L. REV. 165 (2013).
Women Behind the Wheel: Gender and Transportation Law, 1860-1930, in Tracy A. Thomas & Tracey Jean Boisseau, eds., FEMINIST LEGAL HISTORY: ESSAYS ON WOMEN AND LAW (2011).
Regulating Segregation: The Contribution of the ABA Criminal Justice Standards on the Treatment of Prisoners, 47 AM. CRIM. L. REV. 1421 (2010)
Against Secret Regulation: Why and How We Should End the Practical Obscurity of Injunctions and Consent Decrees, 59 DEPAUL L. REV. 515 (2010).
How to Study District Judge Decision-Making, 29 WASH. U. J. LAW & POL’Y 83 (2009) (with Pauline Kim, Christina Boyd, Andrew D. Martin).
Preserving the Rule of Law in America’s Prisons: The Case for Amending the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 11 U. PENN. J. CONST. LAW 139 (2008) (with Giovanna Shay).
Jail Strip-Search Cases: Patterns and Participants, 71 LAW & CONTEMP. PROB. 65 (2008).

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 16 of 65 - Page ID#: 1524
Schlanger cv, page 3 of 9 (12/20/2015)
Operationalizing Deterrence: Claims Management (in Hospitals, a Large Retailer, and Jails and Prisons), 2 JOURNAL OF TORT LAW (Aug. 2008).
Hedonic Damages, Hedonic Adaptation, and Disability, 60 VAND. L. REV. 745 (2007) (with Samuel Bagenstos).
The Washington University Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse: Using Court Records for Research, Teaching, and Policymaking, 75 UMKC L. REV. 153 (2006) (Symposium: Federal Civil Court Records of the National Archives: Opportunities for Empirical, Historical and Legal Research and Curriculum Design) (with Denise Lieberman). What We Know and What We Should Know About American Trial Trends, 2006 J. DISP. RES. 35 (2006) (Vanishing Trial Symposium).
Civil Rights Injunctions Over Time: A Case Study of Jail and Prison Court Orders, 81 N.Y.U. L. REV. 550 (2006). Reprinted in 23 CIVIL RIGHTS LITIGATION AND ATTORNEY FEES ANNUAL HANDBOOK (Steven Saltzman, ed., 2007).
Second Best Damage Action Deterrence, 55 DEPAUL L. REV. 517 (2006) (Clifford Symposium on Tort Law and Social Policy).
Determinants of Civil Rights Filings in Federal District Court by Jail and Prison Inmates, 1 J. EMPIRICAL LEG. STUD. 79 (2004) (with Anne Piehl).
The Reliability of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts Database: An Initial Empirical Analysis, 78 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 1455 (2003) (with Theodore Eisenberg) (symposium issue)
Inmate Litigation, 116 HARV. L. REV. 1555 (2003).
Gender Matters: Teaching a Reasonable Woman Standard in Personal Injury Law, 45 ST. LOUIS U. L.J. 769 (2001).
Beyond the Hero Judge: Institutional Reform Litigation as Litigation, 76 MICH. L. REV. 1994 (1999).
Injured Women Before Common Law Courts, 1860–1930, 21 HARV. WOMEN’S L.J. 79 (1998).
NON-SCHOLARLY PUBLICATIONS
Class-Action Suit Brings Sweeping Changes to Solitary Confinement in New York, Prospect.org, Dec. 23, 2015 (with Amy Fettig), available at http://prospect.org/article/class-action-suit-brings-sweepingchanges-solitary-confinement-new-york.
Solitary Reform Milestones, Solitary Watch (with Amy Fettig), available at http://solitarywatch.com/milestones.
Eight Principles for Reforming Solitary Confinement, American Prospect, Fall 2015 (with Amy Fettig), available at http://prospect.org/article/eight-principles-reforming-solitary-confinement-0.
With one decision, Obama and Lynch could reshape the criminal justice system, WashingtonPost.com, Aug. 3, 2015 (with Robert Ferguson & Judith Resnik), available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/08/03/with-one-decision-obama-could-totallyreform-the-criminal-justice-system/.
A Civil Rights Vision for Countering Violent Extremism, The Hill (Congress Blog), July 14, 2015, available at http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/civil-rights/247769-a-civil-rights-vision-for-counteringviolent-extremism.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 17 of 65 - Page ID#: 1525
Schlanger cv, page 4 of 9 (12/20/2015)
The Declining Prisoner Docket, Alliance for Justice Blog, Feb. 25, 2015, available at http://www.afj.org/blog/the-declining-prison-litigation-docket.
U.S. Intelligence Reforms Still Allow Plenty of Suspicionless Spying on Americans, JustSecurity.org, Feb. 13, 2015, available at http://justsecurity.org/20033/guest-post-intelligence-reforms-plentysuspicionless-surveillance-americans/.
When is it Ok to Racially Profile? Politico Magazine, Dec. 18, 2014, available at http://justsecurity.org/20033/guest-post-intelligence-reforms-plenty-suspicionless-surveillance-americans/.
Intelligence Legalism and the Torture Report, JustSecurity.org, Dec. 17, 2014, available at http://justsecurity.org/18510/intelligence-legalism-torture-report/.
Infiltrate the NSA, Democracy (Issue #35, Winter 2015); Dec. 15, 2014 and TheAtlantic.com, Dec. 30, 2014, available at http://www.democracyjournal.org/35/infiltrate-the-nsa.php.
A Civil Rights Lawyer Explains Why Obama's Immigration Order is an Even Bigger Deal than it Seems, TheNewRepublic.com, Nov. 25, 2014, available at http://justsecurity.org/17117/cult-rules-originsintelligence-legalism/.
The Problem with Legalism in the Surveillance State, JustSecurity.org, Nov. 7, 2014, available at http://justsecurity.org/17163/problem-legalism-surveillance-state/.
A Cult of Rules: The Origins of Legalism in the Surveillance State, JustSecurity.org, Nov. 5, 2014, available at http://justsecurity.org/17117/cult-rules-origins-intelligence-legalism/.
Justice Alito Would Be Just Fine if Congress Undid Yesterday's Landmark Privacy Decision, TheNewRepublic.com, June 26, 2014, available at http://www.newrepublic.com/article/118403/justicealito-privacy-reading-his-concurring-opinion-privacy.
The Bigger No Fly List Problem, JustSecurity.org, June 25, 2014, available at http://justsecurity.org/12215/guest-post-no-fly-list-problem/.
The Supreme Court Gives a Subtle Boost to Free Speech, The New Republic, May 28, 2014, available at http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117925/wood-v-moss-subtle-victory-free-speech.
Even Conservative Judges Can’t Deny the Constitutional Logic of Same-Sex Marriage, Daily Beast, May 18, 2014, available at http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/05/18/even-conservative-judges-can-tdeny-the-constitutional-logic-of-same-sex-marriage.html.
In the Story of Jonah, an Urgent Lesson About the Dangers of Solitary Confinement, TABLET MAGAZINE, Sept. 11, 2013, available at http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-life-and-religion/143081/jonahsolitary-confinement.
ABA Criminal Justice Standards on the Treatment of Prisoners, CRIM. JUSTICE MAG., Summer 2010, at 14 (with Margaret Colgate Love & Carl Reynolds).
Prison Litigation Reform Act Update, in THE STATE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, 2007-2008 (American Bar Association, Criminal Justice Section, Apr. 2008).
Professor Notes PLRA Flaws: Will Congress Act to Correct Them?, CORRECTIONAL LAW REP., Feb./Mar. 2008, at 65 (reprints testimony before the House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security: Review of the Prison Litigation Reform Act: A Decade of Reform or an Increase in Prison Abuses (Nov. 2007)).
The Political Economy of Prison and Jail Litigation, PRISON LEGAL NEWS, June 2007, at 1.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 18 of 65 - Page ID#: 1526
Schlanger cv, page 5 of 9 (12/20/2015)
Preserving the Rule of Law in America’s Prisons: The Case for Amending the Prison Litigation Reform Act, American Constitution Society Issue Brief, Mar. 28, 2007 (with Giovanna Shay). National Prison Commission Begins Work, CORRECTIONAL LAW REP., June/July 2005, at 1, and PRISON LEGAL NEWS, July 2005, at 17. Inmate Litigation: Results of a National Survey, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CORRECTIONS LARGE JAIL NETWORK EXCHANGE, July 2003, at 1.
OTHER WORKS IN PROGRESS
Executive Order 12,333 and civil liberties; Racial housing in the California prison system; Crimigration and the Equal Protection Clause.
GRANTS
National Science Foundation SES-0718831 (co-PI, with Pauline Kim and Andrew Martin), “The Litigation Process in Government-Initiated Employment Discrimination Suits” (2007), $213,999.
Harvard University William F. Milton Fund (with Anne Morrison Piehl), “Litigated Intervention in the Management of Correctional Facilities” (2002), $33,607.
SERVICE AND MEMBERSHIPS
Professional Bar admissions: New York, District of Columbia (inactive), Missouri; Supreme Court; 9th Cir., Eastern District of Missouri.
Organizing committee member, Prisoners’ Advocates Conference (Los Angeles, Sept. 2016; New Orleans, Feb. 2014). Chair, Prison Litigation: A Workshop for Plaintiffs’ Attorneys (Washington, DC, Mar. 2008).
Counsel for amici curiae former corrections officials, Prison Legal News v. Florida (11th Cir. 2015)
Member, expert advisory committee on data collection and confidential reporting, Prison Rape Elimination Act Commission (2007).
Drafter, ABA Litigation Section Project, The Rule of Law in Times of Calamity (2006).
Counsel of record for amici curiae ACLU and other prison advocacy organizations, Woodford v. Ngo, 05-416 (U.S. Supreme Court, filed Feb. 2, 2006).
General Academic Member, Editorial Board, Journal of National Security Law & Policy (2015-present) Co-editor (with Sharon Dolovich), SSRN abstracting “journal,” Corrections & Sentencing Law &
Policy (2006–2009, 2012-present). See http://ssrn.com. Chair, American Association of Law Schools, Remedies Section (2014) Chair, American Association of Law Schools, Section on Law & the Social Sciences (2007/08). Member, Law & Society Association Dissertation Prize Committee (2007). Member, Law & Society Association.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 19 of 65 - Page ID#: 1527

University of Michigan

Schlanger cv, page 6 of 9 (12/20/2015)

Member, Provost’s Faculty Advisory Committee

Chair, Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs, Committee on Civil Rights and Liberties (2014-16), Member (2013/2014)
Member, Law School Curriculum Committee (2014-2016) Member, Law School Tenure Committee (2015/16, 2012/2013); Chair (2013/2014) Faculty Advisor, Journal of Race & Law symposia: criminalization of poverty (2016); solitary confinement (2013) Convenor, Prison Law & Scholarship Roundtable (2014, 2012)

Washington University in St. Louis
Member, Law School Promotions Committee (2007/08) Advisory Board, Washington University Center for Empirical Research in the Law (2007/08) Standing participant: Workshop on Empirical Research in Law (2004–2009) Chair, Law School Lateral Appointments Committee (2006/07) Chair, Law School Dean’s Advisory Group on Improving Student Career Prospects (2005/06) Chair, Law School Rules and Petitions Committee (2005/06) Chair, Law School Ad Hoc Committee on Tenure Standards and Process (2004/5) Member, University Committee on Senate By-Laws (2004/5) Member, Law School Clerkship Committee (Fall 2004)

PRESENTATIONS (2004–present)
U. Mich. American Constitution Society, Is This When Mass Incarceration Ends (Nov. 2015)
U. Mich. Women Law Students Association, Incarcerated Women (Oct. 2015)
Panelist/Discussant (2015/16): • 9th Circuit Corrections Summit, Grievances and Gripes: A Problem Solving Approach for All Stakeholders (Nov. 2015) • U. Mich. Institute for Research on Women and Gender, Incarcerated Women: A Conversation about Realities (Oct. 2015) • Society for Empirical Legal Studies annual conference. Discussant for Aziz Huq, The Predicates of Military Detention at Guantanamo: The Role of Individual Acts and Affiliations; Chang, Chen & Lin, Attorney and Judge Experience in Torts Litigation: An Empirical Study (Oct. 2015)
Studying Injunctions Quantitatively, Center for Political Studies, Interdisciplinary Workshop on Politics and Policy (Mar. 2015)
Intelligence Legalism and the NSA’s Civil Liberties Gap • Association of American Law Schools, Annual Conference, National Security Law Section (chosen in call for papers) (Jan. 2015) • University of Iowa Law School Faculty Workshop (Nov. 2014) • University of Michigan Law School Legal Theory Workshop (Sept. 2014) • 7th Annual National Security Law Workshop (May 2014)
Offices of Goodness: Influence without Authority in Federal Agencies • Emory Law School (Mar. 2014)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 20 of 65 - Page ID#: 1528

• Cardozo Law School (Feb. 2014) • Law & Society Ass’n (May 2013)

Schlanger cv, page 7 of 9 (12/20/2015)

Panelist/Discussant (2014/15-) • Brennan Center: Strengthening Intelligence Oversight--Executive Branch Oversight (May 2015) • Michigan Department of Education, Teaching the Movement in Michigan: Civil Rights
Education Forum (May 2015) • Clifford Symposium (DePaul Law): The Supreme Court, Business and Civil Justice--Civil
Procedure (Apr. 2015) • Columbia University, Deliberate Resistance: LGBT Prisoner Rights 20 Years After Farmer v.
Brennan (Nov. 2014) • 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Pro Se Conference--the Prison Rape Elimination Act (Sept. 2014)

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Structural Reform of the American Workplace • EEOC Datanet Conference (May 2014) • Labor Law Research Network (June 2013) • Stanford Law Faculty Workshop (Oct. 2009) • Brooklyn Law School Faculty Workshop (Sept. 2009) • Building Theory Through Empirical Legal Studies, Berkeley Center for the Study of Law &
Society (April 2009) • UCLA Law Faculty Workshop (Feb. 2009) • University of Arizona Law Faculty Workshop (Feb. 2009)
The Prison Litigation Reform Act and Litigation Dynamics • Loyola University New Orleans College of Law, Prisoners’ Advocates Conference (Feb. 2014)

The Present and Future of Institutional Reform Litigation: Current Trends in Prisoner Cases • U.C. Irvine Law School, Prisoners Access to Justice Symposium (Feb. 2014) • University of Miami Law School, Leading from Below Symposium (Feb. 2014)
Marriage Equality and the Constitution, Alma College Constitution Day Speaker (Sept. 2013)
Plata v. Brown and Realignment: Jails, Prisons, Courts, and Politics, • Law & Society Ass’n (May 2013) (as discussant in panel on Plata v. Brown) • University of Illinois faculty workshop (Mar. 2013)
Race and civil rights injunctions, Ass’n of American Law Schools, Remedies Section (Jan. 2013)
Chair/discussant, panel on Immigration, Law & Society Association Conference (June 2012)
Operationalizing Deterrence: Claims Management (in Hospitals, a Large Retailer, and Jails and Prisons) • University of Michigan Law Faculty Workshop (Sept. 2008) • Insurance & Society Seminar, Boston (May 2008) • Southern Methodist University Law Faculty Workshop (Jan. 2008) • Law & Society Ass’n, Berlin (July 2007) • University of North Carolina Law Faculty Workshop (Nov. 2006) • Law & Society Ass’n, Baltimore (July 2006)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 21 of 65 - Page ID#: 1529
Schlanger cv, page 8 of 9 (12/20/2015)
Seminar teaching • Ass’n of American Law Schools, Workshop for New Law Teachers (June 2008) • Ass’n of American Law Schools, Workshop for New Law Teachers (June 2007)
Hedonic Damages, Hedonic Adaptation, and Disability • University of Illinois Law School, Seminar on Law, Psychology & Economics (Apr. 2008) • Washington University Law Faculty Workshop (Aug. 2006)
Civil Rights Injunctions Over Time: A Case Study of Jail and Prison Court Orders • University Management Team, Washington University in St. Louis (Apr. 2008) • Prison Litigation: A Workshop for Plaintiffs’ Attorneys (Washington, D.C., Mar. 2008) • Law and Society Ass’n (Las Vegas, NV, June 2005) • Junior Scholars Empirical Legal Studies conference, Cornell Law School (Oct. 2004)
The Prison Litigation Reform Act • Preserving the Rule of Law in America’s Prisons: The Case for Amending the PLRA, Symposium, Penn. J. of Constitutional Law, Litigating the Eighth Amendment (Feb. 2008) • Witness, National Prison Rape Elimination Comm’n, The Role of Courts and Litigation in Regulating Prison and Jail Prevention of Sexual Violence and Misconduct (Dec. 2007) • Witness, House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, hearing: Review of the Prison Litigation Reform Act: A Decade of Reform or an Increase in Prison Abuses (Nov. 2007) • Congressional staff briefing, proposed amendments to the PLRA (Sept. 2007) • Preserving the Rule of Law in America’s Prisons: The Case for Amending the PLRA American Constitution Society issue brief presentation, Washington DC (Apr. 2007) • The Past and Future of the PLRA, National Association of Attorneys General, Baltimore, MD (Feb. 2007) • Witness, ABA Criminal Justice Section Council, on proposed ABA policy to amend the Prison Litigation Reform Act (Nov. 2006).
The Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse: Using Court Records for Research, Teaching, and Policymaking
• Association of American Law Schools annual conference, Washington University Law breakfast (Jan. 2008)
• Presentation to social studies coordinators, Missouri Cooperating School Districts (Feb. 2007) • Conference presentation (“Federal Civil Court Records of the National Archives: Opportunities
for Empirical, Historical and Legal Research and Curriculum Design”), University of Missouri at Kansas City & National Archives and Records Administration (Oct. 2005)
Moderator/discussant, panel on Race, Empirical Legal Studies Conference (Nov. 2007).
Fault and the Constitutional Law of Equality. Invited response to David Strauss, Childress Lecture (Little Rock and the Legacy of Brown), Saint Louis University (Oct. 2007)
Teaching the Equal Protection Clause. Presentation to high school teachers, Street Law (Oct. 2007)
The Plaintiffs’ Bar and the Conceptualization of Litigation • Law & Society Ass’n, Berlin (July 2007) • Washington University Law Faculty Workshop (May 2007) • Conference presentation (The Plaintiff’s Bar), New York Law School (Mar. 2006)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 22 of 65 - Page ID#: 1530
Schlanger cv, page 9 of 9 (12/20/2015)
The Litigation Process in Government-Initiated Employment Discrimination Suits (hypotheses and preliminary evidence). Duke Law School Faculty Workshop (Apr. 2007)
Discussant, Katherine Barnes et al., Life and Death Decisions: Prosecutorial Discretion and Capital Punishment in Missouri, St. Louis U. conference (Mar. 2007).
Discussant, J.J. Prescott, Empirical Evidence of Prosecutorial Charging Manipulation: And What it Tells Us About What Prosecutors are Trying to Do, Empirical Legal Studies Conference, Austin Texas (Oct. 2006).
Moderator, panel on Empirical Inquiries in Criminal Justice, Law and Society Ass’n (July 2006).
Women and the New Supreme Court: University of Missouri–St. Louis, Sue Shear Institute for Women in Public Life (Jan. 2006).
Moderator, panel discussion of Problems and Solutions in American Criminal Justice, in conjunction with hearing held at Washington University in St. Louis by the Commission on Safety and Abuse in America’s (Oct. 2005).
What We Know and What We Could Know About the Vanishing Trial: Featured Comment on Marc Galanter, “A World Without Trials,” University of Missouri at Columbia, Distinguished Lecture on Alternative Dispute Resolution (Sept. 2005).
Incarceration, Reform, and Politics: presentation to undergraduate student groups (Apr. 2005).
Second Best Damage Action Deterrence • University of Missouri at Columbia (Apr. 2005). • Clifford Conference on Torts and Social Policy, DePaul University College of Law (Apr. 2005). • UCLA faculty workshop (Mar. 2005)
Collateral Consequences of Incarceration: Background on the Scope of the Carceral System: Symposium on Poverty, Wealth and the Working Poor: Clinical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives (Apr. 2005).
Respondent to James B. Jacobs, The Future of Imprisonment: Leadership, and Prison Reform, St. Louis University Ass’n of Criminal Justice and Sociology (Oct. 2004).

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 23 of 65 - Page ID#: 1531
Exhibit : Settle ent Agree ent ith bering

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 24 of 65 - Page ID#: 1532

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN DEFENDANTS THE COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY ET AL. AND PLAINTIFFS OSCAR ADAMS AND MICHAEL KNIGHTS [NUMBERED FOR USE IN COMPLIANCE MONITORING]

I. DEFINITIONS

[I.]1. “ADA” means the Americans with Disabilities Act, codified at 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., as amended by the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-325).

[I.]2.

“Auxiliary Aids and Services” include, but are not limited to, “Qualified Interpreters or other effective methods of making aurally delivered materials available to individuals with hearing impairments,” 42 U.S.C. § 12103, such as hearing aids, computer-aided transcription services, assistive listening systems, closed caption decoders, open and closed captioning, “TDDs” or “TTYs” as defined below, videotext displays, written materials (see 28 C.F.R. § 35.104); as well as Videophones, access to telephone relay services, visual alert or alarm systems, and bed shakers.

[I.]3.

“Deaf Inmates” means Inmates who are unable to hear well enough to rely on their hearing as a means of processing information, who rely on Auxiliary Aids and Services to Effectively Communicate and who qualify as individuals with disabilities under the ADA, including deaf, hard of hearing, or hearing impaired persons. See 42 U.S.C. § 12102(4). .

[I.]4.

“Direct Threat” means a significant risk to the health or safety of one or more Deaf Inmates or others that cannot be reduced or eliminated by reasonable accommodation. A finding of Direct Threat must be based on and supported by objective evidence.

[I.]5.

“Effective Communication” and “Effectively Communicate” means communication with Deaf Inmates that is substantially as effective as communication with the general Inmate population (see 28 C.F.R. § 35.160(a)) and will, when necessary, include the provision of appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, such as Qualified Interpreters. Effective Communication affords Deaf Inmates an opportunity to participate in, and enjoy the benefits of, the KDOC’s services, programs, or activities in a way that is substantially equal to the opportunity provided to a similarly situated non-Deaf Inmate. In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, primary consideration shall be given to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)).

[I.]6. “Effective Date” means thirty (30) days after this Agreement is filed with the Court.

[I.]7. “Inmate” means any person in the custody of the KDOC.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 25 of 65 - Page ID#: 1533
[I.]8. “KCDHH” means the Kentucky Commission on the Deaf and Hard of Hearing.
[I.]9. “KDOC” means Kentucky Department of Corrections.
[I.]10. “KDOC program” means any program or activity, or aid, benefit, or service as defined by the ADA and Section 504 (see 28 C.F.R. § 35.130, § 41.51) available to Inmates of KDOC for which the KDOC does more than only provide physical space at its facilities, including but not limited to, programs, activities, aids, benefits, or services mandated by law, qualifying for educational or early release credits, and/or ordered as part of an Inmate’s sentence.
[I.]11. “KDOC employees,” “KDOC staff,” and “KDOC personnel” each and collectively include all employees, contractors, agents, and other staff of the KDOC whose job responsibilities place them on a regular basis in contact with Deaf Inmates, and the supervisors of those employees, contractors, agents, or other staff.
[I.]12. “KDOC Adult Institution” means any facility owned or operated by the KDOC for the care and custody Inmates, including but not limited to Bell Country Forestry Camp, Blackburn Correctional Complex, Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex, Green River Correctional Complex, Kentucky Correctional Institute for Women, Kentucky State Penitentiary, Kentucky State Reformatory, Little Sandy Correctional Complex, Luther Luckett Correctional Complex, Northpoint Training Center, Roederer Correctional Complex, and Western Kentucky Correctional Complex.
[I.]13. “Off-site Medical Care” means medical care that is provided at a location not owned or operated by the KDOC.
[I.]14. “On-site Medical Care” means medical care that is provided at a KDOC facility, including medical care provided by third parties in facilities owned or operated by the KDOC.
[I.]15. “Parole hearing” means any hearing or meeting during which an Inmate is being offered the opportunity to be released from KDOC custody on parole.
[I.]16. “Plaintiffs” means, for purposes of this Agreement, Oscar Adams (inmate #243676) and Michael Knights (inmate #233021).
[I.]17. “Plaintiffs’ Counsel” means attorneys-of-record for Plaintiffs in Oscar Adams and Michael Knights, et al., v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, et al., Case No. 3:14-cv00001 (E.D. Ky.) at the time this Agreement is signed.
[I.]18. “Qualified Interpreter” means a person who is able to interpret effectively, accurately, and impartially, both receptively and expressively, with an individual Deaf Inmate using any necessary specialized vocabulary. See 28 C.F.R. §35.104. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 26 of 65 - Page ID#: 1534
A Qualified Interpreter could include an ASL interpreter, a sign language interpreter using more English-based signs, an oral interpreter, a cued speech transliterator or a tactile interpreter for a Deaf Inmate who is also blind. For sign language interpreters, a Qualified Interpreter is one who holds current, valid certifications and licensure by the Kentucky Board of Interpreters for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing.
A Qualified Interpreter may be provided by the KDOC either in person, or via Video Remote Interpreting, videoconferencing or other similar means that provide Effective Communication.
[I.]19. “Section 504” means Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, codified at 29 U.S.C. § 701 et seq. (2014).
[I.]20. “Settlement Monitor” means Margo Schlanger, whose curriculum vitae is attached as Exhibit 1.
[I.]21. “TTYs” or “TDDs” means teletypewriters or telecommunications devices for the Deaf, which are devices used with a telephone to communicate with persons who are Deaf by typing and reading communications.
[I.]22. “Video Remote Interpreting” or “VRI” means a video-telecommunication interpreting service, which uses Qualified Interpreters and is delivered over a high-speed Internet connection. See 28 C.F.R. § 35.160(d).
[I.]23. “Videophone” means a telephone with a camera and screen for visual, real-time communications. The term Videophone as used in this Agreement is limited to Videophones intended for the use by Deaf Inmates within the custody of the KDOC, and does not include Videophones within KDOC Adult Institutions intended for the use of the general Inmate population.
II. GENERAL POLICIES
[II.]A. Non-discrimination Based on Disability
The KDOC will ensure that Deaf Inmates have full and equal access to and enjoyment of all services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations available to similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates. The KDOC shall provide Deaf Inmates with access to services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations substantially equivalent to those offered to similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates. The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain activities present a Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates and therefore may not be able to provide such Deaf Inmates full and equal enjoyment of some of its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination.
3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 27 of 65 - Page ID#: 1535

[II.]B. ADA Coordinator

[II.B.1.] Within thirty (30) days after the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will assign a staff member at each KDOC Adult Institution the title, duties, and responsibilities of ADA Coordinator. The KDOC will maintain the ADA Coordinator position at each KDOC Adult Institution as required by law. The ADA Coordinator responsibilities will be a part of the official duties assigned to the person in this role. The ADA Coordinator shall be trained on the requirements of federal and state law regarding the contents of this Agreement and the KDOC’s obligations to provide full and equal access to, and enjoyment of, its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations to Deaf Inmates.

[II.B.2.] Within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will notify the Settlement Monitor of the identity of each KDOC employee assigned the title, duties and responsibilities of ADA Coordinator. The name and contact information for each ADA Coordinator will be displayed and regularly updated on the KDOC’s website. The name and contact information of each KDOC Adult Institution’s ADA Coordinator will be communicated to all Deaf Inmates incarcerated in each respective KDOC Adult Institution, and will also be prominently posted in a secure area in any housing unit in which Deaf Inmates are held.

[II.B.3.] ADA Coordinators will assist with providing, coordinating, and overseeing Auxiliary Aids and Services for Deaf Inmates and for implementing this Agreement. The ADA Coordinators will be provided with and responsible for knowing the contents of this Agreement, and will assist with implementing this Agreement. The ADA Coordinators will be available to assist with various aspects of accommodating Deaf Inmates. In such situations, ADA Coordinators will ensure Effective Communication for the Deaf Inmates.

III. INITIAL CLASSIFICATION, ASSESSMENT, AND ASSIGNMENT

[III.]A. General Policy

[III.A.1.] The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates at initial intake, assessment, and classification with Effective Communication. The purpose is to facilitate communication between the Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel (or other persons) during medical, psychological, and educational testing and evaluation, as well as to provide an explanation of prison policies and procedures, including Inmate discipline, grievances, and how to utilize the TTY, Videophone and other Auxiliary Aids and Services.

[III.A.2.] As of the date of this Agreement, initial intake, assessment, and classification for male Inmates occurs at Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC) and for female Inmates at the Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women (KCIW).

[III.]B.

Hearing Assessment

As part of the initial intake, assessment, and classification, medical staff will assess and, if necessary, test all persons who may be a Deaf Inmate for Deafness. If medical staff determines that an Inmate is Deaf, medical staff will note the disability in the Inmate’s institutional file, and
4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 28 of 65 - Page ID#: 1536
will promptly notify the appropriate ADA Coordinator. Any Deaf Inmate who was not assessed at the initial intake, assessment, and classification will be assessed at the annual classification review.
[III.]C. Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment
[III.C.1.] After medical staff determine that an Inmate is Deaf, the KDOC will presume that Auxiliary Aids and Services in the form of Qualified Interpreters, visual notifications, telecommunication devices, and other aids and services set forth in this Agreement are necessary to ensure Effective Communication and substantially equal services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations.
[III.C.2.] If any Deaf Inmate indicates that he or she does not require any or all of the Auxiliary Aids and Services set forth in this Agreement, he or she will sign a Waiver of Auxiliary Aids and Services and that document will be kept in the Inmate’s institutional file.
[III.C.3.] If an Inmate is not found to have a hearing impairment at his or her initial intake, assessment, and classification, initially refuses, or does not request Auxiliary Aids and Services, but later believes that Auxiliary Aids and Services are necessary to ensure Effective Communication, he or she will fill out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services Form. KDOC will provide the Inmate who was initially not found to have a hearing impairment with a hearing assessment if so ordered by medical staff. If that individual is found to be Deaf, KDOC will follow the procedures set forth in this section.
[III.]D. Ensuring Staff Awareness Through Identification Cards
[III.D.1.] The KDOC will take appropriate steps to ensure that all KDOC personnel having regular contact with any Deaf Inmate are made aware of such Inmate’s need for Auxiliary Aids and Services so that Effective Communication with, and the safety of, the Deaf Inmate will be ensured. Upon identifying an Inmate as Deaf during initial intake, assessment, and classification, the Deaf Inmate will receive a distinct identification (ID) card that clearly identifies him or her as a Deaf Inmate. The ID card will signify to the KDOC personnel that the Inmate is Deaf, may not respond to verbal commands, and may require Auxiliary Aids and Services. If any KDOC staff takes any Deaf Inmate’s ID card, the Deaf Inmate will be given another official indicator of his or her Deaf status.
[III.D.2.] All KDOC staff having regular contact with any Deaf Inmate will be trained on the meaning of the distinct ID cards.
[III.D.3.] The KDOC will post at the entrance to all KDOC Adult Institutions housing Deaf Inmates a notice clearly stating that the KDOC Adult Institution houses Deaf Inmates and that the Deaf Inmates carry an ID card or other official indicator with them. The notice will include a picture of the ID card and other official indicator carried by Deaf Inmates. The Notice will also be posted outside each housing unit where Deaf Inmates are held.
5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 29 of 65 - Page ID#: 1537

[III.D.4.] If any Deaf Inmate indicates that he or she does not wish to wear an ID card identifying him or her as Deaf as set forth in this Agreement, he or she will sign a Waiver of Deaf Inmate ID Card and that document will be kept in the Inmate’s institutional file. If any Deaf Inmate signs a Waiver of Deaf Inmate ID Card but later requests to wear an ID card identifying him or her as Deaf as set forth in this Agreement, he or she will promptly be provided an opportunity to fill out a Request for Deaf Inmate ID Card form. The KDOC will then promptly provide the Inmate with a Deaf Inmate ID card and update the Deaf Inmate’s institutional file.

[III.]E.

Interpretation of Materials

The KDOC will provide the Deaf Inmate materials it provides to all Inmates. In providing these materials, the KDOC agrees to Effectively Communicate with the Deaf Inmate. See, e.g., 28 CFR 35.160(b)(2). At the request of the Deaf Inmate, the KDOC will provide that Deaf Inmate with a meaningful opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member and a Qualified Interpreter to ask any questions regarding the written or interpreted materials.

[III.]F. Creation and Interpretation of Rights Materials

[III.F.1.] Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will provide each Deaf Inmate with materials providing information about the Auxiliary Aids and Services available to Deaf Inmates and instructions for how to obtain, request, or use those Auxiliary Aids and Services. The KDOC will create these materials using language designed to be accessible to each Deaf Inmate. The KDOC will provide these materials to Deaf Inmates with the orientation materials provided to all other Inmates at initial intake, assessment, and classification.

[III.F.2.] In providing these materials, the KDOC agrees to Effectively Communicate with the Deaf Inmate. See, e.g., 28 CFR 35.160(b)(2). At the request of the Deaf Inmate, the KDOC will provide that Deaf Inmate with a meaningful opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member and a Qualified Interpreter to ask any questions regarding the written or interpreted materials.

IV. HOUSING

[IV.]A. General Policy

[IV.A.1.] The KDOC has the discretion to house Deaf Inmates at whatever KDOC Adult Institution it deems appropriate. See, e.g., KY Corrections Policy and Procedure 18.7.

[IV.A.2.] Wherever a Deaf Inmate is housed, that Deaf Inmate retains all rights as required by this Agreement, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws, and this Agreement.

6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 30 of 65 - Page ID#: 1538
[IV.]B. Schedule of Accommodations
Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, KDOC personnel at those KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are housed shall provide each Deaf Inmate with a schedule showing when Qualified Interpreters and/or other Auxiliary Aids and Services are available. When the schedule of accommodations changes, including when a Qualified Interpreter will be available, an updated schedule of accommodations will be given to all Deaf Inmates.
V. PROVISION OF AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
[V.]A. General Policy
[V.A.1.] In order to ensure substantial equality for Deaf Inmates, the KDOC will provide appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, as required by this Agreement, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws. This substantial equality will extend to include KDOC programs for or to Deaf Inmates provided by third party vendors, contractors, or state-funded entities, such as community colleges.
[V.A.2.] Appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, including Qualified Interpreters, will be made available so that Deaf Inmates may have an equal opportunity to participate in all services, privileges, and programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC’s custody. These services, privileges, and programs will include, but not be limited to: orientation; medical evaluations; On-site Medical Care and healthcare appointments; classification and transfer hearings; grievance, disciplinary, and Parole hearings; and rehabilitative, educational, work, or transitional KDOC programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC’s custody.
[V.A.3.] In those instances where the KDOC permits volunteers to provide activities (religious or otherwise)—including programs, services, or meetings—to Inmates in KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are housed, the KDOC will allow the volunteer organization or individual to bring a Qualified Interpreter, subject to the KDOC Adult Institution’s security requirements, and will work with the volunteer organization or individual in an effort to have a Qualified Interpreter at the volunteer-provided activities. Such an accommodation must be initiated by request from the Deaf Inmate to the volunteer organization or individual. The responsibility for finding the interpreter will not rest with the KDOC, and proper notice allowing the KDOC to conduct appropriate security clearances must be provided. To the extent the KDOC provides, now or in the future, any religious activities at facilities housing Deaf Inmates, the KDOC shall provide a Qualified Interpreter at such activities upon the request of any Deaf Inmate.
[V.A.4.] The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain activities present a Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates and may therefore choose not to provide such Deaf Inmates substantially equal enjoyment of some of its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any
7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 31 of 65 - Page ID#: 1539
such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination.
[V.A.5.] The KDOC will provide instructions for the use of all Auxiliary Aids and Services to ensure Deaf Inmates’ full use and enjoyment of the Auxiliary Aids and Services.
[V.]B. Medical Devices
All Auxiliary Aids and Services required by this Agreement, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws, which are deemed medically necessary, will be provided promptly upon request, free of charge, to Deaf Inmates subject to a co-payment for that medical device, just as non-Deaf Inmates are charged a co-payment for other medical appliances or devices. This copay shall not apply, however, to hearing aid batteries or for any Deaf Inmate who is deemed indigent pursuant to Kentucky Corrections Policy and Procedure 15.7.
[V.]C. Maintenance of Auxiliary Aids and Services
The KDOC shall maintain all Auxiliary Aids and Services in its custody in good working condition at all times.
VI. QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS
[VI.]A. General Policy
[VI.A.1.] The KDOC will provide Qualified Interpreters as required by this Agreement, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws. The KDOC agrees that Deaf Inmates in need of interpreter services will receive a Qualified Interpreter able to facilitate Effective Communication with that particular Deaf Inmate. The KDOC shall provide an in-person Qualified Interpreter at KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are incarcerated in the following circumstances:
● communications concerning medical care and attention, including dental, vision, audiological, and mental health care;
● disciplinary hearings in which the Deaf Inmate may be a suspect of or charged with a rule infraction;
● transfer and classification processes that impact on the Deaf Inmate’s status; ● transitional programming; ● rehabilitative programming, including, but not limited to, Alcoholics
Anonymous (AA) and Narcotics Anonymous (NA); and ● educational programming.
[VI.A.2.] The KDOC shall also provide an in-person Qualified Interpreter at KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are incarcerated as circumstances warrant. The KDOC will be responsible for scheduling and overseeing the provision of Qualified Interpreters.
8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 32 of 65 - Page ID#: 1540
[VI.A.3.] When a Deaf Inmate is scheduled to appear at a Parole hearing, the appropriate ADA Coordinator will notify the Kentucky Parole Board of the Deaf Inmate’s need for, and the Kentucky Parole Board’s duty to provide, Auxiliary Aids and Services for Effective Communication. This notice shall be given no later than seven (7) days before the Deaf Inmate’s scheduled Parole hearing. In the event that the Deaf Inmate will be physically present at a KDOC Adult Institution for the Parole hearing, the KDOC will work with the Kentucky Parole Board to ensure that any appointed Qualified Interpreter obtains security clearances in a timely manner.
[VI.]B. Other Means of Communication
KDOC employees will communicate with Deaf Inmates for such purposes, and to the same extent, as they would communicate with non-Deaf Inmates using all available means of communication. This provision in no way lessens the KDOC’s obligation to provide Qualified Interpreters in certain situations and in a timely manner.
[VI.]C. On-site Medical Care
[VI.C.]1. General Policy
The KDOC will provide Effective Communication for all scheduled appointments between Deaf Inmates and medical personnel at KDOC facilities, including, but not limited to, review of medical history, medical appointments, follow up meetings or appointments, and treatment meetings. The parties agree that for many Deaf Inmates, a Qualified Interpreter may be a necessary means of providing Effective Communication in these circumstances.
[VI.C.]2. Informing Appropriate Medical Staff
The KDOC will ensure that all medical staff are made aware of an Inmate’s Deafness. For each Deaf Inmate, the medical staff will note, in bold marking, the Deaf Inmate’s disability on the medical file cover and in the Deaf Inmate’s medical file.
[VI.C.]3. Scheduling Medical Appointments with Qualified Interpreters
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with the ability to request Auxiliary Aids and Services to ensure Effective Communication at medical appointments. The KDOC will provide space on any forms used to request medical appointments for Deaf Inmates to request Auxiliary Aids and Services. Appointments for Deaf Inmates requiring Auxiliary Aids and Services will be scheduled within the same time period from the initial request as those for similarly situated nonDeaf Inmates.
[VI.C.]4. Emergency Events
Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will provide a Qualified Interpreter via VRI service for use in unscheduled medical emergencies. If VRI
9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 33 of 65 - Page ID#: 1541
services are not appropriate in the situation, KDOC personnel will work in conjunction with medical staff to attempt to secure an in-person Qualified Interpreter as soon as possible. Lifesaving medical care should never be delayed because no interpretation services are available.
[VI.]D. Off-site Medical Care
[VI.D.1.] As early as practicable, the KDOC will inform all off-site medical providers that a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service will be seeking medical care from those off-site medical providers at a particular date and time.
[VI.D.2.] In the case of an emergency, the KDOC will, as soon as possible, inform an off-site medical provider that a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service is being transported to the off-site medical provider. Notification will include the Deaf Inmate’s estimated time of arrival.
[VI.]E. Educational, Vocational, and Rehabilitative Programming
The KDOC shall provide appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services for all KDOC programs, which are offered at KDOC Adult Institutions and which Deaf Inmates are qualified for, admitted into, or in which Deaf Inmates are actively participating. The following appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services will be provided:
[VI.E.]1. Educational Programs
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closed-captioned education materials where available. In addition, the KDOC will provide Effective Communication for educational KDOC program classes. The educational program classes include, without limitation, literacy, adult basic education, GED preparatory, and technical education and certification classes. In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services are necessary, the KDOC shall give primary consideration to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)).
[VI.E.]2. Vocational/Work Programs
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closed-captioned vocational/work materials where available. In addition, and as necessary, the KDOC will provide Effective Communication for vocational/work KDOC programs. In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, the KDOC shall give primary consideration to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)).
[VI.E.]3. KDOC Rehabilitative, Counseling, Therapeutic, Substance Abuse, and Evidence-Based Programs
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closed-captioned materials where available. In addition, and as necessary, the KDOC will provide Effective Communication for rehabilitative, counseling, therapeutic, substance abuse, and evidence-based
10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 34 of 65 - Page ID#: 1542
KDOC programs. In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, the KDOC shall give primary consideration to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)). The KDOC will provide Qualified Interpreters for Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) and Narcotics Anonymous (NA) programs. (
[VI.]F. Work Assignments
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates opportunities for institutional work assignments that are consistent with the opportunities for the same assignments given to similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates. The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain work assignments present a Direct Threat of injury or death to a Deaf Inmate or others and may therefore choose not to provide the Deaf Inmate a substantially equal opportunity to those work assignments. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination.
[VI.]G. Religious Services
[VI.G.1.] The KDOC shall encourage outside volunteers providing religious services to provide Effective Communication for Deaf Inmates as long as the volunteer meets the same security requirements that are imposed on all other outside volunteers.
[VI.G.2.] No Deaf Inmate will be required to attend a religious service where a Qualified Interpreter is not provided in order to receive any religious meal, diet, or otherwise offered religious accommodation.
[VI.G.3.] To the extent that the KDOC provides any religious services, now or in the future, the KDOC shall provide a Qualified Interpreter.
[VI.]H. Transfer and Classification Matters
The KDOC will provide a Qualified Interpreter for any hearings or meetings relating to a Deaf Inmate’s transfer to another facility, change in security classification, or any other classification hearing involving the exchange of information between the Deaf Inmate and the KDOC personnel that could affect the Deaf Inmate’s status.
[VI.]I. Transitional Programming – Post-Release Supervision (Including Parole)
Upon request, the KDOC will provide appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, which may include Qualified Interpreters, for Deaf Inmates under post-release supervision to Effectively Communicate with the individual supervising their post-release supervision.
[VI.]J. Additional Communications
The KDOC will provide Effective Communication, which may include Qualified Interpreters, for any significant communications between Deaf Inmates and KDOC staff that is not specifically discussed in this Agreement. A significant communication includes any
11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 35 of 65 - Page ID#: 1543
communication for which the Deaf Inmate requests an interpreter, subject to approval by the ADA Coordinator, the Warden, and/or the Warden’s designee.
VII. DISCIPLINARY MATTERS
[VII.]A. Qualified Interpreters For Disciplinary Proceedings
[VII.A.1.] The KDOC must provide Deaf Inmates with a Qualified Interpreter in any disciplinary proceeding in which a Deaf Inmate is suspected of, charged with, or a witness to, a disciplinary infraction, including those proceedings carried out under Chapter 15 of the Kentucky Corrections Policy and Procedure and any other disciplinary policies and procedures now in force or subsequently adopted by the KDOC. A Qualified Interpreter must be available to a Deaf Inmate at the following stages of the above-described disciplinary proceedings:
● staff investigations involving the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel, prior to filing a disciplinary report or equivalent;
● investigative interviews that involve the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel (such as when an adverse party is interviewed);
● during any part of the preparation of the disciplinary report that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel;
● during any part of the shift supervisor’s review of the disciplinary report that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel;
● during any part of the investigator’s review of the disciplinary report that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel;
● giving Miranda warnings to a Deaf Inmate; ● advising a Deaf Inmate of his or her right to consult with an assigned legal
aide; ● advising a Deaf Inmate of the anticipated date, time, and place of hearing; and ● during any part of the hearing, or re-hearing, before the Adjustment
Committee, Adjustment Officer or Unit Hearing Officer that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel. [VII.A.2.] Inmate or staff advisors will be provided and accessible to Deaf Inmates who are suspected of, charged with, or witnesses to a disciplinary infraction, on the same terms as they are provided to non-Deaf Inmates. To the extent that a Deaf Inmate has access to his or her advisor, a Qualified Interpreter shall be made available to the Deaf Inmate for any exchange of information between the Deaf Inmate and his or her advisor.
12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 36 of 65 - Page ID#: 1544
[VII.]B. Miscellaneous
[VII.B.1.] If any Deaf Inmate is a witness at a disciplinary hearing, the KDOC will provide a Qualified Interpreter at the hearing.
[VII.B.2.] The KDOC must hold disciplinary hearings for Deaf Inmates within the same time frame as it holds disciplinary hearings for non-Deaf Inmates.
[VII.B.3.] Nothing in this Agreement precludes any Deaf Inmate who is suspected of or charged with a disciplinary infraction from voluntarily waiving his or her right to a Qualified Interpreter and to proceed through any stage of a disciplinary proceeding without the benefits of a Qualified Interpreter. If, as of the Effective Date of this Agreement, a Deaf Inmate is being punished or is scheduled to be punished for a disciplinary infraction as the result of a hearing in which he or she did not waive his or her right to a Qualified Interpreter, then the disciplinary hearing must be re-heard at a time that a Qualified Interpreter can be present.
VIII. NON-AUDITORY ALERT NOTIFICATIONS
[VIII.]A. General Policy
Deaf Inmates incarcerated at KDOC facilities should not miss announcements, alarms, or any other information audibly conveyed from KDOC staff to the general Inmate population solely because of their disability.
[VIII.]B. Relaying Information
[VIII.B.1.] The KDOC shall provide an effective non-auditory alert system that will notify Deaf Inmates of both prison-wide events (including but not limited to announcements, visitations, and roll-calls) and events specific to Deaf Inmates. The non-auditory alert system must be capable of effectively alerting Deaf Inmates of such events in real time.
[VIII.B.2.] In addition, the KDOC will continue to publish the institution schedule in the handbook that every Inmate receives and to post promptly any schedule changes, which are done by memorandum from the Warden, in all dormitories, the library, and the gym at each KDOC Adult Institution in which a Deaf Inmate is housed. Further, the KDOC will provide all medically necessary hearing aids and assisting devices, including but not limited to, bed shakers.
[VIII.B.3.] The KDOC has the discretion as to which type of non-auditory alerts it shall employ and to change that system as it deems necessary. Nonetheless, the KDOC will promptly advise the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH of all non-auditory alert systems that the KDOC is considering, and will consult with the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH in determining whether such devices are acceptable for the stated purpose.
13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 37 of 65 - Page ID#: 1545
[VIII.]C. Non-Auditory Alarms and Emergency Evacuation
[VIII.C.1.] The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with an effective non-auditory alert system that will advise them of an emergency evacuation or other emergency. Such non-auditory alert systems must be sufficient to effectively notify Deaf Inmates of emergencies in real-time and can include flashing strobe lights and bed shakers. The KDOC has the discretion as to which type of non-auditory alerts it shall employ and to change that system as it deems necessary. Nonetheless, the KDOC will promptly advise the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH of the non-auditory alert systems that the KDOC is considering, and will consult with the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH in determining whether such systems are acceptable for the stated purpose.
[VIII.C.2.] KDOC personnel shall be responsible for the evacuation or safe relocation of Deaf Inmates during an emergency. Therefore, during emergencies, KDOC employees will personally and Effectively Communicate adequate information about the emergency to Deaf Inmates.
IX. TELECOMMUNICATIONS
[IX.]A. General Policy
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with access to telecommunication devices that enable them to have communication with people outside of the KDOC and that are substantially equivalent—in terms of the amount and quality of the information conveyed—to the communications that non-Deaf Inmates have with people outside of the KDOC using traditional telecommunication devices such as telephones.
[IX.]B. Monitoring Communications
The KDOC may only provide for the monitoring of communications between Deaf Inmates and individuals outside of the KDOC to the same extent and with the same discretion applied to the monitoring of communications between non-Deaf Inmates and those outside of the KDOC.
[IX.]C. Additional Time for Communication
The KDOC will implement a policy that allows Deaf Inmates at least twice as many minutes to complete a Videophone call, and at least three times as many minutes to complete a TTY call, as the number of minutes afforded to other non-Deaf Inmates to make calls using traditional telecommunication devices such as telephones. In the event the KDOC determines this usage arrangement results in less than equitable access to telephones and Videophones for non-Deaf Inmates and Deaf Inmates, after considering the needs and abilities of Deaf and non-Deaf Inmates, the KDOC may adjust the ratio of time provided for Videophone calls and TTY calls. The KDOC will document this determination, including the evidence and reasons in support thereof. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made, and will explain the reasoning in support of such determination.
14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 38 of 65 - Page ID#: 1546
[IX.]D. Technology KDOC Will Provide
The KDOC will make the following communications technologies available at KDCO Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are incarcerated to facilitate communication between Deaf Inmates and people outside of KDOC facilities. This list of technological equipment is not exhaustive. The KDOC will keep abreast of evolving technology and will consider adding additional equipment to reflect technological advances, as it deems appropriate or as required by applicable federal and state law. KDOC will provide a list of available communications equipment to Deaf Inmates upon their arrival at the KDOC Adult Institutions in which they are housed.
[IX.D.]1. TTY or TDD
The parties acknowledge that there may be reasonable concerns over the theft and destruction of the TTY/TDD device(s), and that the TTY/TDD device(s) therefore must be maintained in a secured location when not in use. The parties also acknowledge that access to the TTY/TDD device(s) will be made available at times that the KDOC will designate. Nonetheless, for every KDOC Adult Institution at which any Deaf Inmate is incarcerated, in no event will TTY/TDD access for Deaf Inmates be less than equal to the access non-Deaf Inmates have to conventional telephones, except to the extent that Deaf Inmates must request access to the otherwise secured TTY/TDD device(s). A reasonable request by a Deaf Inmate to access the TTY/TDD device(s) will be granted. TTY/TDDs will be located in areas substantially as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. TTY/TDDs will be available for Deaf Inmate use during the same days and hours as conventional telephones. At each KDOC Adult Institution where any Deaf Inmate is incarcerated, the KDOC will ensure that an alternate TTY or TDD unit is available for use when the regular TTY or TDD is broken or otherwise unavailable.
[IX.D.]2. Relay Services
For every KDOC Adult Institution at which any Deaf Inmate is incarcerated, the KDOC will enable all TTYs and TDDs to access publicly available relay service phone numbers such as 711 and 1-800 numbers. Deaf Inmates will not be charged any more than similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates for the use of relay services.
[IX.D.]3. Videophones
[IX.D.3.a.] Within sixty (60) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, Videophones shall be installed and accessible to Deaf Inmates in any KDOC Adult Institution that houses Deaf Inmates. Access to the Videophone will be made available at times that the KDOC will designate, but in no event will Videophone access for Deaf Inmates be less than equal to the access non-Deaf Inmates have to conventional telephones. Videophones will be located in areas as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. Videophone will be available during the same days and hours as conventional telephones and will not require permission for use to the same extent that conventional telephones do not require permission for use. Deaf Inmates will not be charged for the use of Videophones.
15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 39 of 65 - Page ID#: 1547
[IX.D.3.b.] Videophones will allow voice carry-over features.
[IX.]E. Responsibility for Maintaining Equipment and Training Staff
[IX.E.1.] The KDOC will ensure that the technology used to permit communication between Deaf Inmates and people outside of KDOC Adult Institutions is in good working order. Further, the KDOC will ensure that all equipment under the KDOC’s control that is used to accommodate Deaf Inmates is kept in good working order. KDOC staff shall attempt to resolve complaints about any malfunctioning equipment within a reasonable time of receiving that complaint. To the extent services, equipment, and resources that are outside KDOC’s control are involved (for example services or equipment provided by cable, telephone, utilities, or various other companies), KDOC will agree to notify those providers/companies of any problems and, to the extent necessary or possible under the circumstances, work with them expeditiously to resolve the problem.
[IX.E.2.] The KDOC will ensure that KDOC employees are adequately trained in the operation of the technology.
X. MEDIA
[X.1.] The KDOC will ensure that all audio-visual media purchased for Inmate use in KDOC Adult Institutions housing Deaf Inmates includes open- or closed-captioning. Televisions purchased by the KDOC for Inmate use shall support open- or closed-captioning. Captioning will be turned on and remain on at any Deaf Inmate’s request.
[X.2.] The KDOC will permit Deaf Inmates to purchase TVs, which reliably support open- or closed-captioning, with their own funds. In the event that the closed-captioning feature contained on TVs purchased through approved commercial channels malfunctions, KDOC personnel will work with the Deaf Inmate to the same extent that the KDOC works with other Inmates regarding malfunctioning personal property to address and resolve the problem within a reasonable time.
XI. HAND RESTRAINTS
[XI.]A. General Policy
[XI.A.1.] According to the KDOC’s hand restraint policies, the KDOC will use hand restraints on Deaf Inmates only in the following circumstances:
16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 40 of 65 - Page ID#: 1548
● when transporting a Deaf Inmate to or from a KDOC Adult Institution; ● when transferring a Deaf Inmate into or out of the special management unit;
and ● as needed in response to security threats. [XI.A.2.] The applicable portions of the KDOC hand restraint policy, summarized above, have been reviewed to confirm when hand restraints are used on Inmates confined to KDOC Adult Institutions. While the policy does not specify the manner in which mechanical restraints are used during Off-site Medical Care, an Affidavit is included as Appendix A to this Agreement describing the two-point bed restraint system used during Off-site Medical Care. The two-point system would allow a Deaf Inmate to use his or her hands for communicating via sign language to some degree. KDOC training will include both the two-point system as well as the agreement that hand restraints will be removed from a Deaf Inmate when the Deaf Inmate is in a secure environment, when security is no longer a threat, or there are other security devices in place to allow the Deaf Inmate to Effectively Communicate.
[XI.]B. Off-site Medical Care
[XI.B.1.] During Off-site Medical Care, the KDOC shall use a two-point hand restraint system to allow for the Deaf Inmate’s need for Effective Communication while considering the safety and security of the Deaf Inmate and those located at Off-site Medical Care facilities. The KDOC will include training on use of the two-point hand restraint system in its regularly scheduled training for new and existing employees.
[XI.B.2.] In the event a medical decision made by medical professionals or medical staff that requires or calls for removal or adjustment of hand restraints, the KDOC will follow its secured policy regarding the removal of mechanical restraints where necessary for treatment or emergencies.
[XI.]C. On-Site Medical Care
The KDOC’s hand restraint policy, summarized above in Section XI.A., will be followed for Onsite Medical Care.
XII. MISCELLANEOUS DEVICES AND AIDS
Where devices such as vibrating clocks and in-line amplifiers are not deemed medically necessary, the KDOC agrees to consider on a case by case basis whether it will allow a particular Deaf Inmate the opportunity to purchase these devices at his or her own expense. The KDOC’s decision in this regard will consider, among other issues, whether these devices pose a security risk. The KDOC will have the discretion to make the determination whether any of these devices, and the type of device, is permissible. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination. Deaf Inmates will be allowed to purchase alerting devices, vibrating clocks, telephone amplifications, headset amplifiers, and televisions that meet the particular needs of
17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 41 of 65 - Page ID#: 1549
their disability from an approved vendor so long as the items do not pose a security risk. The KDOC retains the discretion to limit purchases to devices that are available through the Commissary. Deaf Inmates may submit a request in writing to the ADA Coordinator responsible for the KDOC Adult Institution in which they are housed for devices not available from the Commissary. The KDOC will not deny any Deaf Inmate the right to purchase these devices except where they present an articulable security risk, which shall be documented. The ADA Coordinator will maintain written records of all Deaf Inmate requests for these devices and the disposition of the request.
XIII. TRAINING
[XIII.]A. General Policy
[XIII.A.1.] The KDOC, with input from the KCDHH, will provide training as defined in Section XIII.B below to KDOC employees who interact with the Inmate population. The KDOC will incorporate this training into its regularly scheduled training for new and existing employees. This training will be included in current KDOC training within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement. The KDOC will update the training materials as required by law, including but not limited to, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws.
[XIII.A.2.] The KDOC will provide any materials that may be used for training, as specified under Section XIV of this Agreement, to the Settlement Monitor for review prior to the first training session. In addition, the KDOC, with input from the KCDHH, will update and allow the KCDHH and the Settlement Monitor to review the training as defined in Section XIII.B. at least every two years.
[XIII.]B. KDOC Employee Training
Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will begin training KDOC employees on the following topics:
● best practices for communicating with Deaf individuals; ● the unique needs and problems encountered by Deaf and late-Deafened
individuals; ● identification of communication needs of persons who are Deaf; ● the psychological implications of Deafness and its relationship to interaction
with hearing corrections personnel; ● the proper use and role of Qualified Interpreters; ● directions about using TTYs, TDDs, Videophones and any other
telecommunication equipment, and other Auxiliary Aids and Services, currently available at the facility that facilitate communication with Deaf people;
18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 42 of 65 - Page ID#: 1550
● disciplinary matters, described in Section VII, and grievance proceedings, described in Section XIV;
● the KDOC’s anti-discrimination policy; ● all equipment, services, and accommodations available to Deaf Inmates; ● hand restraint policies in the context of Deaf Inmates; and ● the requirements of this Agreement.
XIV. GRIEVANCES
[XIV.1.] All KDOC grievance coordinators will inform Deaf Inmates who file a grievance of the option to share that grievance (or any responses or outcomes) with the ADA Coordinator of the KDOC Adult Institution in which the Deaf Inmate is housed. If the Deaf Inmate agrees to share the grievance (or any responses or outcomes) with the ADA Coordinator, the grievance coordinator will forward a copy of that grievance (or grievance response or outcome) to the ADA Coordinator for review.
[XIV.2.] A written record of all Deaf Inmates’ grievances (and any responses and outcomes) will be maintained by the KDOC. For five years following the Effective Date of this Agreement, the Settlement Monitor may request the records of any Deaf Inmate’s grievances, as long as the Deaf Inmate signs a waiver of confidentiality pursuant to KRS 197.023, and a copy of that Deaf Inmate’s records will be provided, free of charge, to the Settlement Monitor.
[XIV.3.] Within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, and every three months thereafter, the KDOC will provide the Settlement Monitor with a written summary of grievances filed by Deaf Inmates concerning access to Effective Communication, Auxiliary Aids and Services, or any other issues raised in this Agreement. This written summary will describe, for each grievance, the issue raised by the Deaf Inmate, the KDOC Adult Institution where the grievance was filed, a summary of KDOC’s response, and whether and how the grievance was resolved.
XV. MONITORING AND COMPLIANCE
[XV.]A. Plaintiffs’ Counsels’ Right of Access
To the extent Plaintiffs’ Counsel maintains a current or prospective attorney-client relationship with any Deaf Inmate, they shall be provided the same access to that Deaf Inmate and to the records relating to that Deaf Inmate, as any other attorney with a similar relationship to another non-Deaf Inmate.
19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 43 of 65 - Page ID#: 1551
[XV.]B. The Settlement Monitor’s Investigation
[XV.B.1.] For a period of five years after the Effective Date, the following will apply to the extent necessary to permit the Settlement Monitor to thoroughly and objectively assess the KDOC’s compliance with and implementation of this Agreement:
● [XV.B.1.a] The Settlement Monitor will have unlimited access to all records, files, and papers maintained by the KDOC that relate to the terms of this Agreement. The KDOC will provide a written explanation for any refusal by the KDOC to provide any requested records, files, or papers, and the KDOC and the Settlement Monitor will attempt to reach an agreement before either the KDOC or the Settlement Monitor seek assistance from the Court.
● [XV.B.1.b] The Settlement Monitor will have access to all other materials relating to the case Adams, et al. v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, et al., Case no. 14-cv-00001, except for those materials protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Any requested materials protected by the attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine will be logged with information including the author, date, nature of the material, reason for the claim of privilege, and persons to whom the material was disseminated, and this log will be provided to the Settlement Monitor.
● [XV.B.1.c] The Settlement Monitor will have access to all pertinent staff members and employees of the KDOC. The Settlement Monitor may engage in both formal and informal conferences with staff members and employees, including confidential or group interviews, and such persons will cooperate will the Settlement Monitor fully and will respond to all reasonable inquiries and requests relating to compliance efforts. The Settlement Monitor will contact the Warden or the Warden’s designee to schedule these conferences and/or interviews, which will be treated as attorney visits under CPP 14.4.
● [XV.B.1.d] The Settlement Monitor may conduct confidential interviews with any Deaf Inmate or with groups of Deaf Inmates incarcerated at Adult KDOC Institutions. Within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, and every six months thereafter, the KDOC will provide the Settlement Monitor with a current and up-to-date list of Deaf Inmates in the KDOC’s custody, which identifies the name, DOC numbers and the KDOC Adult Institution for each Deaf Inmate. The Settlement Monitor will contact the Warden or the Warden’s designee to schedule these conferences and/or interviews, which will be treated as attorney visits under CPP 14.4.
● [XV.B.1.e] The Settlement Monitor may request KDOC staff members and employees to prepare, where appropriate, written responses to any questions by the Settlement Monitor related to the implementation of the Agreement or issues in this litigation, so long as the request does not interfere with security
20

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 44 of 65 - Page ID#: 1552
obligations of KDOC staff members and employees. The KDOC will not refuse or fail to respond to reasonable requests. Responses to these requests shall be provided in a timely manner that is reasonable and shall not interfere in the security obligations of any KDOC staff members or employees. The KDOC will provide a written explanation for any refusal by the KDOC staff members or employees to provide any requested responses, and the KDOC and the Settlement Monitor will attempt to reach an agreement before either the KDOC or the Settlement Monitor seek assistance from the Court.
● [XV.B.1.f] The Settlement Monitor may visit each KDOC Adult Institution so long as the KDOC is provided notice a minimum of thirty (30) days prior to the visit. All visits will be supervised by a KDOC employee. Visits will be limited to only those areas of a KDOC Adult Institution that are affected by this Agreement. Absent Court order or a separate agreement, the Settlement Monitor may visit each KDOC Adult Institution only once in a calendar year. The KDOC will pay the cost of and associated with providing Qualified Interpreters for the Settlement Monitor’s visits to KDOC Adult Institutions.
[XV.B.2.] The parties will not refuse reasonable requests for records, files, papers, or other materials or for access to people or other information. The Settlement Monitor will conduct the bulleted monitoring, above, in a reasonable manner to minimize interference with the daily operations of the KDOC. Absent a Court order requiring otherwise, the KDOC retains discretion to prohibit the Settlement Monitor from conducting the aforementioned monitoring on the buildings and premises under the control of the KDOC, but the KDOC will not unreasonably refuse requests for visits.
[XV.B.3.] The Settlement Monitor may hire other persons as the Settlement Monitor determines to be necessary to carry out the Settlement Monitor’s duties.
[XV.B.4.] For a period of five years after the Effective Date of this Agreement, the Settlement Monitor will issue semi-annual reports to the Court and the parties detailing the parties’ compliance with and implementation of this Agreement.
[XV.B.5.] The KDOC will not pay for the fees and expenses due to the Settlement Monitor for the Settlement Monitor’s services under this section.
XVI. RELEASE AND SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS
[XVI.]A. Release
In consideration of the representations, promises and agreements set forth herein, including the payments as set forth in this Agreement, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Plaintiffs, on their behalf and on behalf of their assignees, heirs, executors, family members, beneficiaries, administrators, successors, and anyone acting, or claiming to act, on their behalf, hereby releases and forever discharges the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, KDOC, J. Michael Brown, Ladonna Thompson, Kimberly Potter-Blair,
21

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 45 of 65 - Page ID#: 1553
Paula Holden, Jim Erwin, Randy White, Gregory Howard, Clark Taylor, Aaron Smith, Kathy Litteral, Steve Haney, Gary Beckstrom, Alan Brown, Janet Conover, Joseph Meko, Don Bottoms, Ravonne Sims, Steve Woodward, and Bobbie Underwood from any and all claims and causes of action, known and unknown, asserted and unasserted, direct and indirect, and of any kind, nature or description whatsoever, which they had on or before the date of the execution of this Agreement arising out of the facts set forth in the discrimination charge they filed with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, Frankfort Division.
[XVI.]B. Dismissal
[XVI.B.1.] The Plaintiffs agree to dismiss with prejudice all claims of the Amended Complaint filed with the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Kentucky, Frankfort Division (the “Court”), Case Number 3:14-cv-00001.
[XVI.B.2.] The parties agree that the Court will retain jurisdiction over this Agreement as set out in Section XVI.E of this Agreement, below.
[XVI.]C. Attorneys’ Fees, Costs, Disbursements and Expenses
In settlement of all claims for attorneys’ fees and costs, any disbursements and expenses, including expert fees, incurred on behalf of Plaintiffs in this litigation up to and including the Effective Date, the parties agree that within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC shall pay $250,000.00 as directed by Plaintiffs’ counsel.
[XVI.]D. Damages
Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC shall directly pay (1) Plaintiff Oscar Adams $1,500.00 in damages and (2) Plaintiff Michael Knights $1,500.00 in damages. The KDOC also agrees to pay within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement Plaintiff Michael Knights $77.62 to compensate for lien charges assessed against him for communications with Plaintiffs’ Counsel regarding this case and settlement.
[XVI.]E. Enforcement Powers
[XVI.E.1.] During the term of the Agreement, as set out in Section XVII.H, Plaintiffs may move the court for reinstatement of the lawsuit, or may elect to seek specific performance or institute an action for breach. An action to enforce this Agreement does not include any action for damages, except for enforcement of Section XVI.D. A Plaintiff seeking to enforce this Agreement can only seek to have a court order the KDOC to comply with the terms of this Agreement.
[XVI.E.2.] The lawsuit may not be reinstated, nor a claim for breach or specific performance of this Agreement brought, before a Plaintiff first notifies the KDOC of the nature of the alleged material non-compliance and gives the KDOC sixty (60) days to cure the alleged breach. The parties agree to non-binding mediation prior to any Plaintiff moving to reinstate the lawsuit or filing an enforcement action.
22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 46 of 65 - Page ID#: 1554
XVII. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
[XVII.]A. Non-Admission
It is understood and agreed that this Agreement is a compromise of disputed claims, facts, or allegations. Nothing in this Agreement constitutes an admission of any liability, wrongdoing, or violation of any law, or the admission of the validity of any defense.
[XVII.]B. Private Settlement Agreement
This Agreement is a private settlement agreement within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3626.
[XVII.]C. Confidentiality
No part of this Agreement is or will be considered confidential by the parties. This Agreement will be made available by request under the Freedom of Information Act.
[XVII.]D. Entire Agreement
[XVII.D.1.] This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties. There were no inducements or representations leading to the execution of this document, except as stated within the document itself. The terms of this Agreement are contractual in nature.
[XVII.D.2.] All parties agree that the relief provided in this Agreement is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary, and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct the violation of Plaintiffs’ federally protected rights.
[XVII.]E. Execution
This Agreement may be executed in counterpart originals, all of which, when so executed and taken together, shall be deemed an original and all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. Each counterpart may be delivered by email (as a .pdf attachment) or facsimile, and an email or facsimile signature shall have the same force and effect as an original signature.
[XVII.]F. Binding
This Agreement is final and binding on the Parties. Each Party has a duty to so inform any such successor in interest.
[XVII.]G. Non-Waiver
Failure by the Plaintiffs to seek enforcement of this Agreement pursuant to its terms with respect to any instance or provision will not be construed as a waiver to such enforcement with regard to other instances and provisions.
23

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 47 of 65 - Page ID#: 1555
[XVII.]H. Severability In the event that a court determines that any provision of this Agreement is unenforceable, such provision will be severed from this Agreement and all other provisions will remain valid and enforceable, provided however that if the severance of any such provision materially alters the rights and obligations of the Parties hereunder, the Parties will attempt, through reasonable, good faith negotiations, to agree upon such other amendments to this Agreement as may be necessary to restore the Parties as closely as possible to the relative rights and obligations initially intended by them hereunder.
[XVII.]I. Term of Agreement This Agreement shall remain in effect for five years from the Effective Date. The KDOC, however, will continue to provide all accommodations required under the law, including under the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws, regardless of any term limit applicable to this Agreement. Signed: /s/
24

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 48 of 65 - Page ID#: 1556
Exhibit C: Co liance re orting or or Agree ent ite ith ea line an

Adams &amp; Knights v. KDOC, compliance questions (1/4/2016) - Form+
Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 49 of 65 - Page ID#: 1557
Form+
Adams & Knights v. KDOC, compliance questions (1/4/2016)
In preparation of the first monitoring report, I am checking with each KDOC ADA Coordinator for facilities with Deaf Inmates about Settlement Agreement items that include a deadline on or before September 26, 2015. (The agreement was filed with the court on May 29, 2015. So that means that its effective date is June 28, 2015, 30 days later. Ninety days after that was September 26, 2015.) Please respond to the attached questions no later than January 15. Thanks for your assistance. Margo Schlanger Adams & Knights v. Kentucky DOC Settlement Monitor
Identifying information
Your name
Your phone number
Your email
Your institution
http://www.formpl.us/form/830029631/[1/21/2016 10:17:41 AM]

Adams &amp; Knights v. KDOC, compliance questions (1/4/2016) - Form+
Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 50 of 65 - Page ID#: 1558
1. Videophones: Within sixty (60) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, Videophones shall be installed and accessible to Deaf Inmates in any KDOC Adult Institution that houses Deaf Inmates. Access to the Videophone will be made available at times that the KDOC will designate, but in no event will Videophone access for Deaf Inmates be less than equal to the access non-Deaf Inmates have to conventional telephones. Videophones will be located in areas as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. Videophone will be available during the same days and hours as conventional telephones and will not require permission for use to the same extent that conventional telephones do not require permission for use. Deaf Inmates will not be charged for the use of Videophones. (IX.D.3.a)
a. Are videophones installed and
accessible to Deaf Inmates?
b. Are videophones located in areas as accessible to Deaf
Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf
Inmates?
c) Are videophones available during the same days and hours
as conventional telephones? What are those days and hours?
d) Are videophones available to use without particular permission to
the same extent that conventional
telephones are available to use without
http://www.formpl.us/form/830029631/[1/21/2016 10:17:41 AM]

Adams &amp; Knights v. KDOC, compliance questions (1/4/2016) - Form+

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16

particular permission?

1559

When is permission

required?

Page: 51 of 65 - Page ID#:

e) Are Deaf Inmates charged for the use of
Videophones?

2. KDOC will provide each Deaf Inmate with materials providing information about the Auxiliary Aids and Services available to Deaf Inmates and instructions for how to obtain, request, or use those Auxiliary Aids and Services. The KDOC will create these materials using language designed to be accessible to each Deaf Inmate. (III.F.1)

Please provide the materials described in
this provision.

no file selected

Please explain whether these materials have
been provided to each Deaf Inmate in your facility, and when.

3. KDOC personnel at those KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are housed shall provide each Deaf Inmate with a schedule showing when Qualified Interpreters and/or other Auxiliary Aids and Services are available. (IV.B.)

Please provide the schedule described in
this provision.

no file selected

Please explain whether these materials have
http://www.formpl.us/form/830029631/[1/21/2016 10:17:41 AM]

Adams &amp; Knights v. KDOC, compliance questions (1/4/2016) - Form+

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16

been provided to each

1560

Deaf Inmate in your

facility, and when.

Page: 52 of 65 - Page ID#:

4. KDOC will provide a Qualified Interpreter via VRI service for use in unscheduled medical emergencies. (VI.C.4.)

Please describe the arrangements made to
be ready for this circumstance, should it
occur.
Please provide a list of all such emergencies that have taken place since September 26, 2015, and whether a Qualified Interpreter was or was not provided.
5. The KDOC, with input from the KCDHH, will provide training as defined in the Agreement to KDOC employees who interact with the Inmate population. (It is my understanding that this training has been delayed.)

This training

Has taken place Has not taken place

If the training has taken place, please provide the training materials, and details on the dates, times, trainers, and attendees of the training

Training materials

no file selected

http://www.formpl.us/form/830029631/[1/21/2016 10:17:41 AM]

Adams &amp; Knights v. KDOC, compliance questions (1/4/2016) - Form+
Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 53 of 65 - Page ID#: 1561

Details on dates, times, trainers, attendees

no file selected

Submit
You're strongly advised not to submit passwords (and other potentially confidential information) via Form+
Report Abuse

Create your own awesome forms now

http://www.formpl.us/form/830029631/[1/21/2016 10:17:41 AM]

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 54 of 65 - Page ID#: 1562
Exhibit : arterl Co liance re orting or an

Adams v. KDOC, Quarterly Compliance Reporting (Jan. 2016) - Form+
Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 55 of 65 - Page ID#: 1563
Form+
Adams v. KDOC, Quarterly Compliance Reporting (Jan. 2016)
Jan. 18. This reporting form will be used each quarter; in the future I will circulate it immediately at the close of the quarter, and ask for the information to be provided within 2 weeks. This time, I ask that you complete it by January 28. Thank you. Definition: Under the agreement, Deaf means unable to hear well enough to rely on hearing as a means of processing information. It includes deaf, hard of hearing, or hearing impaired.
Your identifying information
Your name
Your institution
Your email
Your phone number
Are you the current ADA Coordinator? If http://www.formpl.us/form/5109298686328832/[1/31/2016 8:50:09 PM]

Adams v. KDOC, Quarterly Compliance Reporting (Jan. 2016) - Form+

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16

not, please list the

1564

name, phone number,

and email of the

current ADA

Coordinator

Page: 56 of 65 - Page ID#:

If your institution does not currently have any Deaf inmates, and has not had any Deaf inmates since July 2015, you can skip the rest of this form. Just say so here.

Any Deaf inmates? My institution does not have any current Deaf inmates, and has not had any since July 2015
1) Grievances (Agreement XIV.3) In the fourth quarter of 2015 (October through December, 2015), did any Deaf Inmate file any grievance concerning access to Effective Communication, Auxiliary Aids and Services, or any other issues raised in this Agreement?

Any grievances?

If yes, please upload a summary that describes, for each grievance, the issue raised, KDOC’s response, and whether and how the grievance was resolved.

Grievance summary

no file selected

2) Arrangements (contractual or otherwise) with qualified interpreters, to facilitate their availability when called for by the Agreement

a. Do you have an arrangement with a
http://www.formpl.us/form/5109298686328832/[1/31/2016 8:50:09 PM]

Adams v. KDOC, Quarterly Compliance Reporting (Jan. 2016) - Form+
Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 57 of 65 - Page ID#:

provider of in-person

1565

interpreter services?

If so, please name the provider(s) and
describe the terms of the arrangement in detail.

b. Do you have an arrangement with provider of video interpretation services?

If yes, please name the provider(s) and
describe the terms of the arrangement in detail.

Situational reporting under the Agreement
For each of the following questions, I first provide you the relevant paragraph of the Agreement, and then ask whether the situation described has arisen, since July 1, 2015. If it has, I ask for the required documentation.

3) Non-Discrimination Based on Disability (II.A): “The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain activities present a Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates and therefore may not be able to provide such Deaf Inmates full and equal enjoyment of some of its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination.”
a. Since July 1, 2015, have you at any point determined that any activities present a direct threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates and therefore been unable to provide those inmates full and equal enjoyment of any facility services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations?

http://www.formpl.us/form/5109298686328832/[1/31/2016 8:50:09 PM]

Adams v. KDOC, Quarterly Compliance Reporting (Jan. 2016) - Form+

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16

Direct threat

1566

determination?

Page: 58 of 65 - Page ID#:

b. If so, please upload documentation of: (1) the service, privilege, facility, advantage or accommodation; (2) the risk presented; (3) a list of inmate(s) affected.

Direct threat documentation

no file selected

4) Work Assignments: (VI.F) “The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain work assignments present a Direct Threat of injury or death to a Deaf Inmate or others and may therefore choose not to provide the Deaf Inmate a substantially equal opportunity to those work assignments. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination.”
a. Since July 1, 2015, have you at any point determined that a work assignment presented a Direct Threat of injury or death to a Deaf Inmate or others and therefore chosen not to provide the Deaf Inmate a substantially equal opportunity to that work assignment?*

Work direct threat determination?
b. If so, please upload documentation of: (1) the work assignment(s); (2) the risk(s) presented; (3) the names of inmate(s) affected.

Work direct threat documentation

no file selected

5) Non-Auditory Alert Systems (VIII.B.3; VIII.C) “The KDOC will promptly advise the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH of all non-auditory alert systems that the KDOC is considering, and will consult with the
http://www.formpl.us/form/5109298686328832/[1/31/2016 8:50:09 PM]

Adams v. KDOC, Quarterly Compliance Reporting (Jan. 2016) - Form+
Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH in determining whe1t5h6er7such devices
are acceptable for the stated purpose.”

Page: 59 of 65 - Page ID#:

a. Have you considered any nonauditory alert systems?
b. If so, what systems have been under consideration?
6) Additional Time for Communication: “The KDOC will implement a policy that allows Deaf Inmates at least twice as many minutes to complete a Videophone call, and at least three times as many minutes to complete a TTY call, as the number of minutes afforded to other nonDeaf Inmates to make calls using traditional telecommunication devices such as telephones. In the event the KDOC determines this usage arrangement results in less than equitable access to telephones and Videophones for non-Deaf Inmates and Deaf Inmates, after considering the needs and abilities of Deaf and non-Deaf Inmates, the KDOC may adjust the ratio of time provided for Videophone calls and TTY calls. The KDOC will document this determination, including the evidence and reasons in support thereof. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made, and will explain the reasoning in support of such determination.”

a. How much time are non-Deaf inmates allowed to use for phone calls?

Time per call, and per day or week

b. How much time are Deaf inmates allowed to use for Videophone
calls?

Time per call and per day or week.

c. How much time are Deaf inmates allowed
http://www.formpl.us/form/5109298686328832/[1/31/2016 8:50:09 PM]

Adams v. KDOC, Quarterly Compliance Reporting (Jan. 2016) - Form+
Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 60 of 65 - Page ID#: to use for TTY calls? Time per call, and per day or w1ee5k6.8

d. Since July 2015, have you made any determination that the usage arrangements
are inequitable?
e. If you have made such a determination,
please provide documentation of the
reasoning.

no file selected

7) Miscellaneous Devices and Aids: (XII) “Where devices such as vibrating clocks and in-line amplifiers are not deemed medically necessary, the KDOC agrees to consider on a case by case basis whether it will allow a particular Deaf Inmate the opportunity to purchase these devices at his or her own expense. The KDOC’s decision in this regard will consider, among other issues, whether these devices pose a security risk. The KDOC will have the discretion to make the determination whether any of these devices, and the type of device, is permissible. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination.”

a. Since July 2015, have you made any determinations allowing or disallowing devices?

Considered a device

b. If you have considered a devie–whether you granted or refused permission– please upload documentation of the device(s), the reasoning, and the names of affected inmate(s).

http://www.formpl.us/form/5109298686328832/[1/31/2016 8:50:09 PM]

Adams v. KDOC, Quarterly Compliance Reporting (Jan. 2016) - Form+

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16

Documentation of

no file selected 1569

devices granted or

refused

Page: 61 of 65 - Page ID#:

Submit
You're strongly advised not to submit passwords (and other potentially confidential information) via Form+
Report Abuse

Create your own awesome forms now

http://www.formpl.us/form/5109298686328832/[1/31/2016 8:50:09 PM]

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 62 of 65 - Page ID#: 1570
Exhibit E: S ar o co on the e in in ate inter ie o e ber an ar

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 63 of 65 - Page ID#: 1571

Exhibit E: Notes from Kentucky Department of Corrections Inmate Interviews
My assistant, a third year law student, conducted seven inmate interviews between November 2015 and January 2016. Five interviews were conducted by videophone service. Two inmates preferred not to utilize the videophone service; she interviewed one by conventional telephone and one by TTY. The interviews covered five facilities, which is all but two of the facilities that house Kentucky’s deaf inmates. (For those two remaining facilities, one interview is scheduled and one inmate requested to communicate by letter, instead of phone.) Many additional interviews focusing on the Kentucky State Reformatory (KSR) will be reported separately, as part of the future report on a KSR site visit. Where a denominator is reported in the right-hand column, it indicates how many inmates were asked the relevant question. No denominator means that the inmate volunteered the information, without a specific question that was also posed to other inmates.

Topic
ADA Coordinators 1. Inmate knows the ADA coordinator at his/her facility and how to get in
touch with the ADA coordinator 2. Inmate fears that reporting problems to the ADA coordinator will lead to
the revocation of privileges or other disciplinary action 3. ADA coordinator is unwilling to accommodate inmate’s hearing
impairment (for example, by writing back and worth or facing the inmate while speaking to facilitate lip-reading)

Inmates reporting
5/6 1
1

Aids and Services

1. Inmate has not been provided information about how to request or obtain 6/6

devices or services

2. Hearing aids—functionality

Inmate’s hearing aid is in good working order

2/4

Inmate’s hearing aid is not in good working order

2/4

3. Hearing aid: repairs and replacements

Inmate has been waiting for a month or longer for a new hearing aid,

3/4

or repairs

Repairs to inmate’s hearing aid have been made quickly

2/4

4. Inmate did not have to pay for a hearing aid and/or repairs to an existing

3/3

aid

5. Inmate did not have to pay for a hearing aid batteries

3/3

Alert Systems

1. Has the prison installed a bed shaker and/or strobe light in the inmate’s

cell?

No

6/7

Yes

1/7

2. Inmate does not feel safe in case of an emergency

5/7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 64 of 65 - Page ID#: 1572

3. The prison has not provided an effective method to communicate day-to- 6/7 day announcements to deaf inmates

Closed Captioning

1. Closed captioning is available and turned on upon request

4/6

2. Closed captioning is not available or not turned on upon request

2/6

Discipline

1. Inmate fears that requests for services or aids will lead to revocation of

3

other privileges or other disciplinary measures

2. Inmate has been unable to understand why disciplinary proceedings were

3

initiated due to ineffective communication with corrections staff. (Note:

the timing of this issue is unclear, but at least one or two seem to be since

the Agreement’s effective date.)

3. Inmate faced disciplinary action as a result of being unable to hear

3

commands or alerts. (Note: The timing of these reported issues is unclear,

but at least one may have been since the Agreement’s effective date)

Effective Communication

1. Inmate does not feel communication with medical staff is effective

6/6

2. Inmate does not feel communication with corrections staff is effective

5/7

3. Corrections staff are unwilling to accommodate inmate’s hearing

3

impairment (for example, by writing back and worth or facing the inmate

while speaking to facilitate lip-reading)

Hand Restraints

1. Inmate has been placed in hand restraints (Note: the timing of these

5/7

reported issues is unclear, but they may all have preceded the

Agreement’s effective date)

2. Hand restraints undermined inmate’s ability to communicate

4/6

Hearing Assessments

1. Inmate has never received a hearing assessment.

3/7

Notification Regarding Deaf Inmates

1. Inmate was given a distinct identification card identifying him/her as

7/7

deaf or hearing impaired or signed a waiver

2. Inmate misplaced the distinct identification card and requested a new one

1

but has not yet received a replacement.

3. There is no sign outside the inmate’s assigned dorm indicating that a deaf 5/7

inmate is housed there

4. Inmates report a sign outside the assigned dorm, but because it says “hard

2

of hearing,” not “deaf,” believe that COs therefore do not understand that

they cannot hear at all and have unrealistic expectations of their abilities.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 83-1 Filed: 02/04/16 Page: 65 of 65 - Page ID#: 1573

Programming

1. Inmate is unable to participate effectively in classes due to

5/6

communication or hearing issues

Qualified Interpreters

1. Facility has not provided in-person qualified interpreters for medical

6/6

appointments.

2. Facility has provided video interpretation (VRI) at medical appointments 2/6

3. Facility has not provided in-person qualified interpreters for classes and

6/6

programming

4. Facility has provided VRI for some, if not all, classes and programming

2

5. Facility provided a VRI at intake

1

6. Inmate requested qualified interpreters at religious services and was

2

denied

7. Inmate was not provided a schedule of when qualified interpreters or

5/6

other aids/services would be available

8. The prison’s VRI is not easily accessible because the process of

2

requesting and acquiring it is time consuming.

Work Assignments

1. Inmate’s request for work assignments was denied due to the inmate’s

2/6

hearing disability. (Note: the timing of these reports is unclear; they may

both predate the Settlement’s effective date)

2. Inmate has not been denied a work assignment due to the inmate’s

4/6

hearing disability

Videophones

1. A videophone is installed at the inmate’s facility

6/6

2. The videophone is usually in good working order

6/6

3. Inmate is not charged to use the videophone

5/5

4. The videophone is located in a different dorm than the inmate is housed

1

in, which creates barriers to access and reduces the amount of time the

inmate is able to spend on the videophone

5. Inmate must request permission to use the videophone, a process not

1

required for hearing inmates

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 1 of 38 - Page ID#: 1469
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN DEFENDANTS THE COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY ET AL. AND PLAINTIFFS OSCAR ADAMS AND MICHAEL KNIGHTS
I. DEFINITIONS
1. "ADA" means the Americans with Disabilities Act, codified at 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., as amended by the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-325).
"Auxiliary Aids and Services" include, but are not limited to, "Qualified Interpreters or other effective methods of making aurally delivered materials available to individuals with hearing impairments," 42 U.S.C. § 12103, such as hearing aids, computer-aided transcription services, assistive listening systems, closed caption decoders, open and closed captioning, "TDDs" or "TTYs" as defined below, videotext displays, written materials (see 28 C.F.R. § 35,104); as well as Videophones, access to telephone relay services, visual alert or alarm systems, and bed shakers.
3. "Deaf Inmates" means Inmates who are unable to hear well enough to rely on their hearing as a means of processing information, who rely on Auxiliary Aids and Services to Effectively Communicate and who qualify as individuals with disabilities under the ADA, including deaf, hard of hearing, or hearing impaired persons. See 42 U.S.C. § 12102(4). .
4, "Direct Threat" means a significant risk to the health or safety of one or more Deaf Inmates or others that cannot be reduced or eliminated by reasonable accommodation. A finding of Direct Threat must be based on and supported by objective evidence.
"Effective Communication" and "Effectively Communicate" means communication with Deaf Inmates that is substantially as effective as communication with the general Inmate population (see 28 C.F.R. § 35.160(a)) and will, when necessary, include the provision of appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, such as Qualified Interpreters. Effective Communication affords Deaf Inmates an opportunity to participate in, and enjoy the benefits of, the KDOC's services, programs, or activities in a way that is substantially equal to the opportunity provided to a similarly situated non-Deaf Inmate. In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, primary consideration shall be given to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)).
6. "Effective Date" means thirty (30) days after this Agreement is filed with the Court.
7. "Inmate" means any person in the custody of the KDOC.
8. "KCDHH" means the Kentucky Commission on the Deaf and Hard of Hearing.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 2 of 38 - Page ID#: 1470
9. "KDOC" means Kentucky Department of Corrections.
10. "KDOC program" means any program or activity, or aid, benefit, or service as defined by the ADA and Section 504 (see 28 C.F.R. § 35.130, § 41.51) available to Inmates of KDOC for which the KDOC does more than only provide physical space at its facilities, including but not limited to, programs, activities, aids, benefits, or services mandated by law, qualifying for educational or early release credits, and/or ordered as part of an Inmate's sentence.
11. "KDOC employees," "KDOC staff" and "KDOC personnel" each and collectively include all employees, contractors, agents, and other staff of the KDOC whose job responsibilities place them on a regular basis in contact with Deaf Inmates, and the supervisors of those employees, contractors, agents, or other staff.
12. "KDOC Adult Institution" means any facility owned or operated by the KDOC for the care and custody Inmates, including but not limited to Bell Country Forestry Camp, Blackburn Correctional Complex, Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex, Green River Correctional Complex, Kentucky Correctional Institute for Women, Kentucky State Penitentiary, Kentucky State Reformatory, Little Sandy Correctional Complex, Luther Luckett Correctional Complex, Northpoint Training Center, Roederer Correctional Complex, and Western Kentucky Correctional Complex.
13. "Off-site Medical Care" means medical care that is provided at a location not owned or operated by the KDOC.
14. "On-site Medical Care" means medical care that is provided at a KDOC facility, including medical care provided by third parties in facilities owned or operated by the KDOC.
15. "Parole hearing" means any hearing or meeting during which an Inmate is being offered the opportunity to be released from KDOC custody on parole.
16. "Plaintiffs" means, for purposes of this Agreement, Oscar Adams (inmate #243676) and Michael Knights (inmate #233021).
17. "Plaintiffs' Counsel" means attorneys-of-record for Plaintiffs in Oscar Adams and Michael Knights, et al., v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, et al., Case No. 3:14-cv00001 (E.D. Ky.) at the time this Agreement is signed.
18. "Qualified Interpreter" means a person who is able to interpret effectively, accurately, and impartially, both receptively and expressively, with an individual Deaf Inmate using any necessary specialized vocabulary. See 28 C.F.R. §35.104. A Qualified Interpreter could include an ASL interpreter, a sign language interpreter using more English-based signs, an oral interpreter, a cued speech transliterator or a tactile interpreter for a Deaf Inmate who is also blind. For sign language interpreters, a
2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 3 of 38 - Page ID#: 1471
Qualified Interpreter is one who holds current, valid certifications and licensure by the Kentucky Board of Interpreters for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing,
A Qualified Interpreter may be provided by the KDOC either in person, or via Video Remote Interpreting, videoconferencing or other similar means that provide Effective Communication.
19, "Section 504" means Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, codified at 29 U.S.C. § 701 et seq. (2014).
20. "Settlement Monitor" means Margo Schlanger, whose curriculum vitae is attached as Exhibit 1.
21. "TTYs" or "TDDs" means teletypewriters or telecommunications devices for the Deaf, which are devices used with a telephone to communicate with persons who are Deaf by typing and reading communications.
22. "Video Remote Interpreting" or "VRI" means a video-telecommunication interpreting service, which uses Qualified Interpreters and is delivered over a high-speed Internet connection. See 28 C.F.R. § 35.160(d).
23. "Videophone" means a telephone with a camera and screen for visual, real-time communications. The term Videophone as used in this Agreement is limited to Videophones intended for the use by Deaf Inmates within the custody of the KDOC, and does not include Videophones within KDOC Adult Institutions intended for the use of the general Inmate population.
II. GENERAL POLICIES
A. Non- discrimination Based on Disability
The KDOC will ensure that Deaf Inmates have full and equal access to and enjoyment of all services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations available to similarly situated non-Deaf Imnates. The KDOC shall provide Deaf Inmates with access to services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations substantially equivalent to those offered to similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates. The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain activities present a Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates and therefore may not be able to provide such Deaf Inmates full and equal enjoyment of some of its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination.
B. ADA Coordinator
Within thirty (30) days after the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will assign a staff member at each KDOC Adult Institution the title, duties, and responsibilities of ADA Coordinator. The KDOC will maintain the ADA Coordinator position at each KDOC Adult

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 4 of 38 - Page ID#: 1472
Institution as required by law. The ADA Coordinator responsibilities will be a part of the official duties assigned to the person in this role. The ADA Coordinator shall be trained on the requirements of federal and state law regarding the contents of this Agreement and the KDOC's obligations to provide full and equal access to, and enjoyment of, its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations to Deaf Inmates.
Within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will notify the Settlement Monitor of the identity of each KDOC employee assigned the title, duties and responsibilities of ADA Coordinator. The name and contact information for each ADA Coordinator will be displayed and regularly updated on the KDOC's website. The name and contact information of each KDOC Adult Institution's ADA Coordinator will be communicated to all Deaf Inmates incarcerated in each respective KDOC Adult Institution, and will also be prominently posted in a secure area in any housing unit in which Deaf Inmates are held.
ADA Coordinators will assist with providing, coordinating, and overseeing Auxiliary Aids and . Services for Deaf Inmates and for implementing this Agreement. The ADA Coordinators will be provided with and responsible for knowing the contents of this Agreement, and will assist with implementing this Agreement. The ADA Coordinators will be available to assist with various aspects of accommodating Deaf Inmates. In such situations, ADA Coordinators will ensure Effective Communication for the Deaf Inmates.
III. INITIAL CLASSIFICATION, ASSESSMENT, AND ASSIGNMENT
A. General Policy
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates at initial intake, assessment, and classification with Effective Communication. The purpose is to facilitate communication between the Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel (or other persons) during medical, psychological, and educational testing and evaluation, as well as to provide an explanation of prison policies and procedures, including Inmate discipline, grievances, and how to utilize the TTY, Videophone and other Auxiliary Aids and Services.
As of the date of this Agreement, initial intake, assessment, and classification for male Inmates occurs at Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC) and for female Inmates at the Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women (KCIW).
B. Hearing Assessment
As part of the initial intake, assessment, and classification, medical staff will assess and, if necessary, test all persons who may be a Deaf Inmate for Deafness. If medical staff determines that an Inmate is Deaf, medical staff will note the disability in the Inmate's institutional file, and will promptly notify the appropriate ADA Coordinator. Any Deaf Inmate who was not assessed at the initial intake, assessment, and classification will be assessed at the annual classification review.
ri

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 5 of 38 - Page ID#: 1473
C. Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment
After medical staff determine that an Inmate is Deaf, the KDOC will presume that Auxiliary Aids and Services in the form of Qualified Interpreters, visual notifications, telecommunication devices, and other aids and services set forth in this Agreement are necessary to ensure Effective Communication and substantially equal services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations.
If any Deaf Innate indicates that he or she does not require any or all of the Auxiliary Aids and Services set forth in this Agreement, he or she will sign a Waiver of Auxiliary Aids and Services and that document will be kept in the Inmate's institutional file.
If an Inmate is not found to have a hearing impairment at his or her initial intake, assessment, and classification, initially refuses, or does not request Auxiliary Aids and Services, but later believes that Auxiliary Aids and Services are necessary to ensure Effective Communication, he or she will fill out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services Form. KDOC will provide the Innate who was initially not found to have a hearing impairment with a hearing assessment if so ordered by medical staff If that individual is found to be Deaf, KDOC will follow the procedures set forth in this section.
D. Ensuring Staff Awareness Through Identification Cards
The KDOC will take appropriate steps to ensure that all KDOC personnel having regular contact with any Deaf Inmate are made aware of such Inmate's need for Auxiliary Aids and Services so that Effective Communication with, and the safety of, the Deaf Inmate will be ensured. Upon identifying an Inmate as Deaf during initial intake, assessment, and classification, the Deaf Innate will receive a distinct identification (ID) card that clearly identifies him or her as a. Deaf Inmate. The ID card will signify to the KDOC personnel that the Innate is Deaf, may not respond to verbal commands, and may require Auxiliary Aids and Services. If any KDOC staff takes any Deaf Inmate's ID card, the Deaf Inmate will be given another official indicator of his or her Deaf status.
All KDOC staff having regular contact with any Deaf Innate will be trained on the meaning of the distinct ID cards,
The KDOC will post at the entrance to all KDOC Adult Institutions housing Deaf Inmates a notice clearly stating that the KDOC Adult Institution houses Deaf Inmates and that the Deaf Inmates carry an ID card or other official indicator with them. The notice will include a picture of the ID card and other official indicator carried by Deaf Inmates. The Notice will also be posted outside each housing unit where Deaf Inmates are held.
If any Deaf Innate indicates that he or she does not wish to wear an ID card identifying him or her as Deaf as set forth in this Agreement, he or she will sign a Waiver of Deaf Irunate ID Card and that document will be kept in the Inmate's institutional file. If any Deaf Inmate signs a Waiver of Deaf Inmate ID Card but later requests to wear an ID card identifying him or her as Deaf as set forth in this Agreement, he or she will promptly be provided an opportunity to fill out

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 6 of 38 - Page ID#: 1474
a Request for Deaf Innate ID Card form, The KDOC will then promptly provide the Inmate with a Deaf Inmate ID card and update the Deaf Inmate's institutional file.
E. Interpretation of Materials
The KDOC will provide the Deaf Inmate materials it provides to all Inmates. hi providing these materials, the KDOC agrees to Effectively Communicate with the Deaf Inmate. See, e.g., 28 CFR 35.160(b)(2). At the request of the Deaf Inmate, the KDOC will provide that Deaf Inmate with a meaningful opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member and a Qualified Interpreter to ask any questions regarding the written or interpreted materials.
F. Creation and Interpretation of Rights Materials
Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will provide each Deaf Inmate with materials providing information about the Auxiliary Aids and Services available to Deaf Inmates and instructions for how to obtain, request, or use those Auxiliary Aids and Services. The KDOC will create these materials using language designed to be accessible to each Deaf Inmate. The KDOC will provide these materials to Deaf Inmates with the orientation materials provided to all other Inmates at initial intake, assessment, and classification.
In providing these materials, the KDOC agrees to Effectively Communicate with the Deaf Inmate. See, e.g., 28 CFR 35.160(b)(2). At the request of the Deaf Inmate, the KDOC will provide that Deaf Inmate with a meaningful opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member and a Qualified Interpreter to ask any questions regarding the written or interpreted materials.
IV. HOUSING
A. General Policy
The KDOC has the discretion to house Deaf Inmates at whatever KDOC Adult Institution it deems appropriate. See, e.g., KY Corrections Policy and Procedure 18.7.
Wherever a Deaf Innate is housed, that Deaf Innate retains all rights as required by this Agreement, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws, and this Agreement.
B. Schedule of Accommodations
Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, KDOC personnel at those KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are housed shall provide each Deaf Inmate with a schedule showing when Qualified Interpreters and/or other Auxiliary Aids and Services are available. When the schedule of accommodations changes, including when a Qualified Interpreter will be available, an updated schedule of accommodations will be given to all Deaf Inmates.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 7 of 38 - Page ID#: 1475
V. PROVISION OF AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
A. General Policy
In order to ensure substantial equality for Deaf Inmates, the KDOC will provide appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, as required by this Agreement, the U,S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws. This substantial equality will extend to include KDOC programs for or to Deaf Inmates provided by third party vendors, contractors, or state-funded entities, such as community colleges.
Appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, including Qualified Interpreters, will be made available so that Deaf Inmates may have an equal opportunity to participate in all services, privileges, and programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC's custody. These services, privileges, and programs will include, but not be limited to: orientation; medical evaluations; On-site Medical Care and healthcare appointments; classification and transfer hearings; grievance, disciplinary, and Parole hearings; and rehabilitative, educational, work, or transitional KDOC programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC's custody.
In those instances where the KDOC permits volunteers to provide activities (religious or otherwise)—including programs, services, or meetings—to Inmates in KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are housed, the KDOC will allow the volunteer organization or individual to bring a Qualified Interpreter, subject to the KDOC Adult Institution's security requirements, and will work with the volunteer organization or individual in an effort to have a Qualified Interpreter at the volunteer-provided activities. Such an accommodation must be initiated by request from the Deaf Inmate to the volunteer organization or individual. The responsibility for finding the interpreter will not rest with the KDOC, and proper notice allowing the KDOC to conduct appropriate security clearances must be provided. To the extent the KDOC provides, now or in the future, any religious activities at facilities housing Deaf Inmates, the KDOC shall provide a Qualified Interpreter at such activities upon the request of any Deaf Inmate.
The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain activities present a Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates and may therefore choose not to provide such Deaf Inmates substantially equal enjoyment of some of its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination.
The KDOC will provide instructions for the use of all Auxiliary Aids and Services to ensure Deaf Inmates' full use and enjoyment of the Auxiliary Aids and Services.
B. Medical Devices
All Auxiliary Aids and Services required by this Agreement, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws, which are deemed medically necessary, will be provided promptly upon request, free of charge, to Deaf Inmates subject to a co-payment for that medical device, just as

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 8 of 38 - Page ID#: 1476
non-Deaf Inmates are charged a co-payment for other medical appliances or devices. This copay shall not apply, however, to hearing aid batteries or for any Deaf Inmate who is deemed indigent pursuant to Kentucky Corrections Policy and Procedure 15.7.
C. Maintenance of Auxiliary Aids and Services
The KDOC shall maintain all Auxiliary Aids and Services in its custody in good working condition at all times.
VI. QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS
A. General Policy
The KDOC will provide Qualified Interpreters as required by this Agreement, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws. The KDOC agrees that Deaf Inmates in need of interpreter services will receive a Qualified Interpreter able to facilitate Effective Communication with that particular Deaf Inmate. The KDOC shall provide an in-person Qualified Interpreter at KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are incarcerated in the following circumstances:
• communications concerning medical care and attention, including dental, vision, audiological, and mental health care;
• disciplinary hearings in which the Deaf Inmate may be a suspect of or charged with a rule infraction;
• transfer and classification processes that impact on the Deaf Inmate's status;
• transitional programming;
• rehabilitative programming, including, but not limited to, Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) and Narcotics Anonymous (NA); and
• educational programming.
The KDOC shall also provide an in-person Qualified Interpreter at KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are incarcerated as circumstances warrant. The KDOC will be responsible for scheduling and overseeing the provision of Qualified Interpreters.
When a Deaf Inmate is scheduled to appear at a Parole hearing, the appropriate ADA Coordinator will notify the Kentucky Parole Board of the Deaf Inmate's need for, and the Kentucky Parole Board's duty to provide, Auxiliary Aids and Services for Effective Communication. This notice shall be given no later than seven (7) days before the Deaf Inmate's scheduled Parole hearing. In the event that the Deaf Inmate will be physically present at a KDOC Adult Institution for the Parole hearing, the KDOC will work with the Kentucky Parole

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 9 of 38 - Page ID#: 1477
Board to ensure that any appointed Qualified Interpreter obtains security clearances in a timely manner.
B. Other Means of Communication
KDOC employees will communicate with Deaf Imnates for such purposes, and to the same extent, as they would communicate with non-Deaf Inmates using all available means of communication. This provision in no way lessens the KDOC's obligation to provide Qualified Interpreters in certain situations and in a timely manner.
C. On-site Medical Care
General Policy
The KDOC will provide Effective Communication for all scheduled appointments between Deaf Inmates and medical personnel at KDOC facilities, including, but not limited to, review of medical history, medical appointments, follow up meetings or appointments, and treatment meetings. The parties agree that for many Deaf Inmates, a Qualified Interpreter may be a necessary means of providing Effective Communication in these circumstances,
2. Informing Appropriate Medical Staff
The KDOC will ensure that all medical staff are made aware of an Inmate's Deafness. For each Deaf Innate, the medical staff will note, in bold marking, the Deaf Inmate's disability on the medical file cover and in the Deaf Inmate's medical file.
3. Scheduling Medical Appointments with Qualified Interpreters
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with the ability to request Auxiliary Aids and Services to ensure Effective Communication at medical appointments. The KDOC will provide space on any forms used to request medical appointments for Deaf Imnates to request Auxiliary Aids and Services. Appointments for Deaf Inmates requiring Auxiliary Aids and Services will be scheduled within the same time period from the initial request as those for similarly situated nonDeaf Imnates.
4. Emergency Events
Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will provide a Qualified Interpreter via VRI service for use in unscheduled medical emergencies. If VRI services are not appropriate in the situation, KDOC personnel will work in conjunction with medical staff to attempt to secure an in-person Qualified Interpreter as soon as possible. Lifesaving medical care should never be delayed because no interpretation services are available.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 10 of 38 - Page ID#: 1478
D. Off-site Medical Care
As early as practicable, the KDOC will inform all off-site medical providers that a Deaf Innate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service will be seeking medical care from those off-site medical providers at a particular date and time.
In the case of an emergency, the KDOC will, as soon as possible, inform an off-site medical provider that a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service is being transported to the off-site medical provider. Notification will include the Deaf Inmate's estimated time of arrival.
E. Educational, Vocational, and Rehabilitative Programming
The KDOC shall provide appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services for all KDOC programs, which are offered at KDOC Adult Institutions and which Deaf Inmates are qualified for, admitted into, or in which Deaf Inmates are actively participating. The following appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services will be provided:
Educational Programs
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closed-captioned education materials where available. In addition, the KDOC will provide Effective Communication for educational KDOC program classes. The educational program classes include, without limitation, literacy, adult basic education, GED preparatory, and technical education and certification classes. In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services are necessary, the KDOC shall give primary consideration to the request of the Deaf Innate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F,R. § 160(b)(2)).
Vocational/Work Programs
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closed-captioned vocational/work materials where available. In addition, and as necessary, the KDOC will provide Effective Communication for vocational/work KDOC programs. In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, the KDOC shall give primary consideration to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § l60(b)(2)).
3. KDOC Rehabilitative, Counseling, Therapeutic, Substance Abuse, and Evidence-Based Programs
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closed-captioned materials where available. In addition, and as necessary, the KDOC will provide Effective Communication for rehabilitative, counseling, therapeutic, substance abuse, and evidence-based KDOC programs. In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, the KDOC shall give primary consideration to the request of the Deaf Innate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)). The KDOC will provide Qualified Interpreters for Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) and Narcotics Anonymous (NA) programs.
10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 11 of 38 - Page ID#: 1479
F. Work Assignments
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates opportunities for institutional work assignments that are consistent with the opportunities for the same assignments given to similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates. The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain work assignments present a Direct Threat of injury or death to a Deaf Inmate or others and may therefore choose not to provide the Deaf Inmate a substantially equal opportunity to those work assignments. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination.
G. Religious Services
The KDOC shall encourage outside volunteers providing religious services to provide Effective Communication for Deaf Inmates as long as the volunteer meets the same security requirements that are imposed on all other outside volunteers,
No Deaf Inmate will be required to attend a religious service where a Qualified Interpreter is not provided in order to receive any religious meal, diet, or otherwise offered religious accommodation.
To the extent that the KDOC provides any religious services, now or in the future, the KDOC shall provide a Qualified Interpreter.
H. Transfer and Classification Matters
The KDOC will provide a Qualified Interpreter for any hearings or meetings relating to a Deaf Inmate's transfer to another facility, change in security classification, or any other classification hearing involving the exchange of information between the Deaf Inmate and the KDOC personnel that could affect the Deaf Inmate's status.
I. Transitional Programming — Post-Release Supervision (Including Parole)
Upon request, the KDOC will provide appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, which may include Qualified Interpreters, for Deaf Inmates under post-release supervision to Effectively Communicate with the individual supervising their post-release supervision.
J. Additional Communications
The KDOC will provide Effective Communication, which may include Qualified Interpreters, for any significant communications between Deaf Inmates and KDOC staff that is not specifically discussed in this Agreement. A significant communication includes any communication for which the Deaf Inmate requests an interpreter, subject to approval by the ADA Coordinator, the Warden, and/or the Warden's designee.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 12 of 38 - Page ID#: 1480
VII. DISCIPLINARY MATTERS
A. Qualified Interpreters For Disciplinary Proceedings
The KDOC must provide Deaf Inmates with a Qualified Interpreter in any disciplinary proceeding in which a Deaf Inmate is suspected of, charged with, or a witness to, a disciplinary infraction, including those proceedings carried out under Chapter 15 of the Kentucky Corrections Policy and Procedure and any other disciplinary policies and procedures now in force or subsequently adopted by the KDOC. A Qualified Interpreter must be available to a Deaf Inmate at the following stages of the above-described disciplinary proceedings:
• staff investigations involving the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel, prior to filing a disciplinary report or equivalent;
• investigative interviews that involve the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel (such as when an adverse party is interviewed);
• during any part of the preparation of the disciplinary report that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel;
• during any part of the shift supervisor's review of the disciplinary report that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel;
• during any part of the investigator's review of the disciplinary report that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel;
• giving Miranda warnings to a Deaf Inmate;
• advising a Deaf Innate of his or her right to consult with an assigned legal aide;
• advising a Deaf Inmate of the anticipated date, time, and place of hearing; and
• during any part of the hearing, or re-hearing, before the Adjustment Committee, Adjustment Officer or Unit Hearing Officer that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Innate and KDOC personnel.
Innate or staff advisors will be provided and accessible to Deaf Inmates who are suspected of, charged with, or witnesses to a disciplinary infraction, on the same terms as they are provided to non-Deaf Inmates. To the extent that a Deaf Inmate has access to his or her advisor, a Qualified Interpreter shall be made available to the Deaf Inmate for any exchange of information between the Deaf Inmate and his or her advisor.
12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 13 of 38 - Page ID#: 1481
B. Miscellaneous
If any Deaf Inmate is a witness at a disciplinary hearing, the KDOC will provide a Qualified Interpreter at the hearing.
The KDOC must hold disciplinary hearings for Deaf Inmates within the same time frame as it holds disciplinary hearings for non-Deaf Inmates.
Nothing in this Agreement precludes any Deaf Inmate who is suspected of or charged with a disciplinary infraction from voluntarily waiving his or her right to a Qualified Interpreter and to proceed through any stage of a disciplinary proceeding without the benefits of a Qualified Interpreter. If, as of the Effective Date of this Agreement, a Deaf Inmate is being punished or is scheduled to be punished for a disciplinary infraction as the result of a hearing in which he or she did not waive his or her right to a Qualified Interpreter, then the disciplinary hearing must be reheard at a time that a Qualified Interpreter can be present.
VIII. NON-AUDITORY ALERT NOTIFICATIONS
A. General Policy
Deaf Inmates incarcerated at KDOC facilities should not miss announcements, alarms, or any other information audibly conveyed from KDOC staff to the general Inmate population solely because of their disability.
B. Relaying Information
The KDOC shall provide an effective non-auditory alert system that will notify Deaf Inmates of both prison-wide events (including but not limited to announcements, visitations, and roll-calls) and events specific to Deaf Immates. The non-auditory alert system must be capable of effectively alerting Deaf Inmates of such events in real time.
In addition, the KDOC will continue to publish the institution schedule in the handbook that every Inmate receives and to post promptly any schedule changes, which are done by memorandum from the Warden, in all dormitories, the library, and the gym at each KDOC Adult Institution in which a Deaf Imnate is housed. Further, the KDOC will provide all medically necessary hearing aids and assisting devices, including but not limited to, bed shakers.
The KDOC has the discretion as to which type of non-auditory alerts it shall employ and to change that system as it deems necessary. Nonetheless, the KDOC will promptly advise the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH of all non-auditory alert systems that the KDOC is considering, and will consult with the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH in determining whether such devices are acceptable for the stated purpose.
13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 14 of 38 - Page ID#: 1482
C. Non-Auditory Alarms and Emergency Evacuation
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with an effective non-auditory alert system that will advise them of an emergency evacuation or other emergency. Such non-auditory alert systems must be sufficient to effectively notify Deaf Inmates of emergencies in real-time and can include flashing strobe lights and bed shakers, The KDOC has - the discretion as to which type of nonauditory alerts it shall employ and to change that system as it deems necessary. Nonetheless, the KDOC will promptly advise the Settlement Monitor and the KCDI -11-I of the non-auditory alert systems that the KDOC is considering, and will consult with the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH in determining whether such systems are acceptable for the stated purpose.
KDOC personnel shall be responsible for the evacuation or safe relocation of Deaf Inmates during an emergency. Therefore, during emergencies, KDOC employees will personally and Effectively Communicate adequate information about the emergency to Deaf Inmates.
IX. TELECOMMUNICATIONS
A. General Policy
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with access to telecommunication devices that enable them to have communication with people outside of the KDOC and that are substantially equivalent—in terms of the amount and quality of the information conveyed—to the communications that non-Deaf Inmates have with people outside of the KDOC using traditional telecommunication devices such as telephones.
B. Monitoring Communications
The KDOC may only provide for the monitoring of communications between Deaf Inmates and individuals outside of the KDOC to the same extent and with the same discretion applied to the monitoring of communications between non-Deaf Inmates and those outside of the KDOC.
C. Additional Time for Communication
The KDOC will implement a policy that allows Deaf Inmates at least twice as many minutes to complete a Videophone call, and at least three times as many minutes to complete a TTY call, as the number of minutes afforded to other non-Deaf Immates to make calls using traditional telecommunication devices such as telephones. In the event the KDOC determines this usage arrangement results in less than equitable access to telephones and Videophones for non-Deaf Inmates and Deaf Inmates, after considering the needs and abilities of Deaf and non-Deaf Inmates, the KDOC may adjust the ratio of time provided for Videophone calls and TTY calls. The KDOC will document this determination, including the evidence and reasons in support thereof. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made, and will explain the reasoning in support of such determination.
14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 15 of 38 - Page ID#: 1483
D. Technology KDOC Will Provide
The KDOC will make the following communications technologies available at KDCO Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are incarcerated to facilitate communication between Deaf Inmates and people outside of KDOC facilities. This list of technological equipment is not exhaustive. The KDOC will keep abreast of evolving technology and will consider adding additional equipment to reflect technological advances, as it deems appropriate or as required by applicable federal and state law. KDOC will provide a list of available communications equipment to Deaf Inmates upon their arrival at the KDOC Adult Institutions in which they are housed.
TTY or TDD
The parties acknowledge that there may be reasonable concerns over the theft and destruction of the TTY/TDD device(s), and that the TTY/TDD device(s) therefore must be maintained in a secured location when not in use. The parties also acknowledge that access to the TTY/TDD device(s) will be made available at times that the KDOC will designate. Nonetheless, for every KDOC Adult Institution at which any Deaf Inmate is incarcerated, in no event will TTY/TDD access for Deaf Inmates be less than equal to the access non-Deaf Inmates have to conventional telephones, except to the extent that Deaf Inmates must request access to the otherwise secured TTY/TDD device(s). A reasonable request by a Deaf Inmate to access the TTY/TDD device(s) will be granted. TTY/TDDs will be located in areas substantially as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. TTY/TDDs will be available for Deaf Inmate use during the same days and hours as conventional telephones. At each KDOC Adult Institution where any Deaf Inmate is incarcerated, the KDOC will ensure that an alternate TTY or TDD unit is available for use when the regular TTY or TDD is broken or otherwise unavailable.
2. Relay Services
For every KDOC Adult Institution at which any Deaf Inmate is incarcerated, the KDOC will enable all TTYs and TDDs to access publicly available relay service phone numbers such as 711 and 1-800 numbers. Deaf Inmates will not be charged any more than similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates for the use of relay services,
Videophones
Within sixty (60) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, Videophones shall be installed and accessible to Deaf Inmates in any KDOC Adult Institution that houses Deaf Inmates. Access to the Videophone will be made available at times that the KDOC will designate, but in no event will Videophone access for Deaf Inmates be less than equal to the access non-Deaf Inmates have to conventional telephones. Videophones will be located in areas as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. Videophone will be available during the same days and hours as conventional telephones and will not require permission for use to the same extent that conventional telephones do not require permission for use. Deaf Inmates will not be charged for the use of Videophones.
15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 16 of 38 - Page ID#: 1484
Videophones will allow voice carry-over features.
E. Responsibility for Maintaining Equipment and Training Staff
The KDOC will ensure that the technology used to permit communication between Deaf Inmates and people outside of KDOC Adult Institutions is in good working order. Further, the KDOC will ensure that all equipment under the KDOC's control that is used to accommodate Deaf Inmates is kept in good working order. KDOC staff shall attempt to resolve complaints about any malfunctioning equipment within a reasonable time of receiving that complaint. To the extent services, equipment, and resources that are outside KDOC's control are involved (for example services or equipment provided by cable, telephone, utilities, or various other companies), KDOC will agree to notify those providers/companies of any problems and, to the extent necessary or possible under the circumstances, work with them expeditiously to resolve the problem. The KDOC will ensure that KDOC employees are adequately trained in the operation of the technology.
X. MEDIA
The KDOC will ensure that all audio-visual media purchased for Innate use in KDOC Adult Institutions housing Deaf Imnates includes open- or closed-captioning. Televisions purchased by the KDOC for Inmate use shall support open- or closed-captioning. Captioning will be turned on and remain on at any Deaf Inmate's request.
The KDOC will permit Deaf Inmates to purchase TVs, which reliably support open- or closedcaptioning, with their own funds. In the event that the closed-captioning feature contained on TVs purchased through approved commercial channels malfunctions, KDOC personnel will work with the Deaf Innate to the same extent that the KDOC works with other Inmates regarding malfunctioning personal property to address and resolve the problem within a reasonable time.
XI. HAND RESTRAINTS
A. General Policy
According to the KDOC's hand restraint policies, the KDOC will use hand restraints on Deaf Inmates only in the following circumstances:
• when transporting a Deaf Inmate to or from a KDOC Adult Institution;
when transferring a Deaf Inmate into or out of the special management unit; and
• as needed in response to security threats.
16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 17 of 38 - Page ID#: 1485
The applicable portions of the KDOC hand restraint policy, summarized above, have been reviewed to confirm when hand restraints are used on Inmates confined to KDOC Adult Institutions. While the policy does not specify the manner in which mechanical restraints are used during Off-site Medical Care, an Affidavit is included as Appendix A to this Agreement describing the two-point bed restraint system used during Off-site Medical Care. The two-point system would allow a Deaf Innate to use his or her hands for communicating via sign language to some degree. KDOC training will include both the two-point system as well as the agreement that hand restraints will be removed from a Deaf Inmate when the Deaf Inmate is in a secure environment, when security is no longer a threat, or there are other security devices in place to allow the Deaf Innate to Effectively Communicate.
B. Off-site Medical Care
During Off-site Medical Care, the KDOC shall use a two-point hand restraint system to allow for the Deaf Imnate's need for Effective Communication while considering the safety and security of the Deaf Inmate and those located at Off-site Medical Care facilities. The KDOC will include training on use of the two-point hand restraint system in its regularly scheduled training for new and existing employees.
In the event a medical decision made by medical professionals or medical staff that requires or calls for removal or adjustment of hand restraints, the KDOC will follow its secured policy regarding the removal of mechanical restraints where necessary for treatment or emergencies.
C. On-Site Medical Care
The KDOC's hand restraint policy, summarized above in Section XI.A., will be followed for Onsite Medical Care.
XII. MISCELLANEOUS DEVICES AND AIDS
Where devices such as vibrating clocks and in-line amplifiers are not deemed medically necessary, the KDOC agrees to consider on a case by case basis whether it will allow a particular Deaf Inmate the opportunity to purchase these devices at his or her own expense. The KDOC's decision in this regard will consider, among other issues, whether these devices pose a security risk, The KDOC will have the discretion to make the determination whether any of these devices, and the type of device, is permissible. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination. Deaf Inmates will be allowed to purchase alerting devices, vibrating clocks, telephone amplifications, headset amplifiers, and televisions that meet the particular needs of their disability from an approved vendor so long as the items do not pose a security risk. The KDOC retains the discretion to limit purchases to devices that are available through the Commissary. Deaf Inmates may submit a request in writing to the ADA Coordinator responsible for the KDOC Adult Institution in which they are housed for devices not available from the Commissary. The KDOC will not deny any Deaf Innate the right to purchase these devices except where they present an articulable security risk, which shall be documented. The ADA
17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 18 of 38 - Page ID#: 1486
Coordinator will maintain written records of all Deaf Inmate requests for these devices and the disposition of the request.
XIII. TRAINING
A. General Policy
The KDOC, with input from the KCDHH, will provide training as defined in Section XIILB below to KDOC employees who interact with the Inmate population. The KDOC will incorporate this training into its regularly scheduled training for new and existing employees. This training will be included in current KDOC training within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement. The KDOC will update the training materials as required by law, including but not limited to, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws.
The KDOC will provide any materials that may be used for training, as specified under Section XIV of this Agreement, to the Settlement Monitor for review prior to the first training session. In addition, the KDOC, with input from the KCDHH, will update and allow the KCDHH and the Settlement Monitor to review the training as defined in Section XIII.B, at least every two years.
B. KDOC Employee Training Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will begin training KDOC employees on the following topics:
• best practices for communicating with Deaf individuals;
• the unique needs and problems encountered by Deaf and late-Deafened individuals;
• identification of communication needs of persons who are Deaf;
• the psychological implications of Deafness and its relationship to interaction with hearing corrections personnel;
• the proper use and role of Qualified Interpreters;
• directions about using TTYs, TDDs, Videophones and any other telecommunication equipment, and other Auxiliary Aids and Services, currently available at the facility that facilitate communication with Deaf people;
• disciplinary matters, described in Section VII, and grievance proceedings, described in Section XIV;
18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 19 of 38 - Page ID#: 1487
• the KDOC's anti-discrimination policy; • all equipment, services, and accommodations available to Deaf Inmates; • hand restraint policies in the context of Deaf Inmates; and • the requirements of this Agreement. XIV. GRIEVANCES All KDOC grievance coordinators will inform Deaf Inmates who file a grievance of the option to share that grievance (or any responses or outcomes) with the ADA Coordinator of the KDOC Adult Institution in which the Deaf Inmate is housed. If the Deaf Inmate agrees to share the grievance (or any responses or outcomes) with the ADA Coordinator, the grievance coordinator will forward a copy of that grievance (or grievance response or outcome) to the ADA Coordinator for review. A written record of all Deaf Inmates' grievances (and any responses and outcomes) will be maintained by the KDOC. For five years following the Effective Date of this Agreement, the Settlement Monitor may request the records of any Deaf Inmate's grievances, as long as the Deaf Inmate signs a waiver of confidentiality pursuant to KRS 197,023, and a copy of that Deaf Inmate's records will be provided, free of charge, to the Settlement Monitor. Within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, and every three months thereafter, the KDOC will provide the Settlement Monitor with a written summary of grievances filed by Deaf Inmates concerning access to Effective Communication, Auxiliary Aids and Services, or any other issues raised in this Agreement. This written summary will describe, for each grievance, the issue raised by the Deaf Inmate, the KDOC Adult Institution where the grievance was filed, a summary of KDOC's response, and whether and how the grievance was resolved. XV. MONITORING AND COMPLIANCE A. Plaintiffs' Counsels' Right of Access To the extent Plaintiffs' Counsel maintains a current or prospective attorney-client relationship with any Deaf inmate, they shall be provided the same access to that Deaf Inmate and to the records relating to that Deaf Inmate, as any other attorney with a similar relationship to another non-Deaf Inmate.
19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 20 of 38 - Page ID#: 1488
B. The Settlement Monitor's Investigation
For a period of five years after the Effective Date, the following will apply to the extent necessary to permit the Settlement Monitor to thoroughly and objectively assess the KDOC's compliance with and implementation of this Agreement:
The Settlement Monitor will have unlimited access to all records, files, and papers maintained by the KDOC that relate to the terms of this Agreement. The KDOC will provide a written explanation for any refusal by the KDOC to provide any requested records, files, or papers, and the KDOC and the Settlement Monitor will attempt to reach an agreement before either the KDOC or the Settlement Monitor seek assistance from the Court.
The Settlement Monitor will have access to all other materials relating to the case Adams, et al. v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, et al., Case no. 14-cv00001, except for those materials protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Any requested materials protected by the attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine will be logged with information including the author, date, nature of the material, reason for the claim of privilege, and persons to whom the material was disseminated, and this log will be provided to the Settlement Monitor.
The Settlement Monitor will have access to all pertinent staff members and employees of the KDOC. The Settlement Monitor may engage in both formal and informal conferences with staff members and employees, including confidential or group interviews, and such persons will cooperate will the Settlement Monitor fully and will respond to all reasonable inquiries and requests relating to compliance efforts. The Settlement Monitor will contact the Warden or the Warden's designee to schedule these conferences and/or interviews, which will be treated as attorney visits under CPP 14.4,
The Settlement Monitor may conduct confidential interviews with any Deaf Inmate or with groups of Deaf Inmates incarcerated at Adult KDOC Institutions. Within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, and every six months thereafter, the KDOC will provide the Settlement Monitor with a current and up-to-date list of Deaf Inmates in the KDOC's custody, which identifies the name, DOC numbers and the KDOC Adult Institution for each Deaf Inmate. The Settlement Monitor will contact the Warden or the Warden's designee to schedule these conferences andlor interviews, which will be treated as attorney visits under CPP 14.4.
• The Settlement Monitor may request KDOC staff members and employees to prepare, where appropriate, written responses to any questions by the Settlement Monitor related to the implementation of the Agreement or issues in this litigation, so long as the request does not interfere with security obligations of KDOC staff members and employees. The KDOC will not
20

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 21 of 38 - Page ID#: 1489
refuse or fail to respond to reasonable requests. Responses to these requests shall be provided in a timely manner that is reasonable and shall not interfere in the security obligations of any KDOC staff members or employees. The KDOC will provide a written explanation for any refusal by the KDOC staff members or employees to provide any requested responses, and the KDOC and the Settlement Monitor will attempt to reach an agreement before either the KDOC or the Settlement Monitor seek assistance from the Court,
The Settlement Monitor may visit each KDOC Adult Institution so long as the KDOC is provided notice a minimum of thirty (30) days prior to the visit. All visits will be supervised by a KDOC employee. Visits will be limited to only those areas of a KDOC Adult Institution that are affected by this Agreement. Absent Court order or a separate agreement, the Settlement Monitor may visit each KDOC Adult Institution only once in a calendar year. The KDOC will pay the cost of and associated with providing Qualified Interpreters for the Settlement Monitor's visits to KDOC Adult Institutions.
The parties will not refuse reasonable requests for records, files, papers, or other materials or for access to people or other information. The Settlement Monitor will conduct the bulleted monitoring, above, in a reasonable manner to minimize interference with the daily operations of the KDOC. Absent a Court order requiring otherwise, the KDOC retains discretion to prohibit the Settlement Monitor from conducting the aforementioned monitoring on the buildings and premises under the control of the KDOC, but the KDOC will not unreasonably refuse requests for visits.
The Settlement Monitor may hire other persons as the Settlement Monitor determines to be necessary to carry out the Settlement Monitor's duties.
For a period of five years after the Effective Date of this Agreement, the Settlement Monitor will issue semi-annual reports to the Court and the parties detailing the parties' compliance with and implementation of this Agreement.
The KDOC will not pay for the fees and expenses due to the Settlement Monitor for the Settlement Monitor's services under this section.
XVI. RELEASE AND SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS
A. Release
In consideration of the representations, promises and agreements set forth herein, including the payments as set forth in this Agreement, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Plaintiffs, on their behalf and on behalf of their assignees, heirs, executors, family members, beneficiaries, administrators, successors, and anyone acting, or claiming to act, on their behalf, hereby releases and forever discharges the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, KDOC, J. Michael Brown, Ladonna Thompson, Kimberly Potter-Blair, Paula Holden, Jim Erwin, Randy White, Gregory Howard, Clark Taylor, Aaron Smith, Kathy Litteral, Steve Haney, Gary Beckstrom, Alan Brown, Janet Conover, Joseph Meko, Don
21

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 22 of 38 - Page ID#: 1490
Bottoms, Ravonne Sims, Steve Woodward, and Bobbie Underwood from any and all claims and causes of action, known and unknown, asserted and unasserted, direct and indirect, and of any kind, nature or description whatsoever, which they had on or before the date of the execution of this Agreement arising out of the facts set forth in the discrimination charge they filed with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, Frankfort Division.
B. Dismissal
The Plaintiffs agree to dismiss with prejudice all claims of the Amended Complaint filed with the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Kentucky, Frankfort Division (the "Court"), Case Number 3:1 4-cv-0000 1.
The parties agree that the Court will retain jurisdiction over this Agreement as set out in Section XVI.E of this Agreement, below.
C. Attorneys' Fees, Costs, Disbursements and Expenses
In settlement of all claims for attorneys' fees and costs, any disbursements and expenses, including expert fees, incurred on behalf of Plaintiffs in this litigation up to and including the Effective Date, the parties agree that within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC shall pay $250,000.00 as directed by Plaintiffs' counsel.
D. Damages
Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC shall directly pay (1) Plaintiff Oscar Adams $1,500.00 in damages and (2) Plaintiff Michael Knights $1,500.00 in damages. The KDOC also agrees to pay within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement Plaintiff Michael Knights $77.62 to compensate for lien charges assessed against him for communications with Plaintiffs' Counsel regarding this case and settlement.
E. Enforcement Powers
During the tern of the Agreement, as set out in Section XVII.H, Plaintiffs may move the court for reinstatement of the lawsuit, or may elect to seek specific performance or institute an action for breach. An action to enforce this Agreement does not include any action for damages, except for enforcement of Section XVI.D. A Plaintiff seeking to enforce this Agreement can only seek to have a court order the KDOC to comply with the terms of this Agreement.
The lawsuit may not be reinstated, nor a claim for breach or specific performance of this Agreement brought, before a Plaintiff first notifies the KDOC of the nature of the alleged material non-compliance and gives the KDOC sixty (60) days to cure the alleged breach. The parties agree to non-binding mediation prior to any Plaintiff moving to reinstate the lawsuit or filing an enforcement action.
22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 23 of 38 - Page ID#: 1491
XVII. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS A. Non -Admission
It is understood and agreed that this Agreement is a compromise of disputed claims, facts, or allegations. Nothing in this Agreement constitutes an admission of any liability, wrongdoing, or violation of any law, or the admission of the validity of any defense.
B. Private Settlement Agreement This Agreement is a private settlement agreement within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3626.
C. Confidentiality No part of this Agreement is or will be considered confidential by the parties. This Agreement will be made available by request under the Freedom of Information Act.
D. Entire Agreement This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties. There were no inducements or representations leading to the execution of this document, except as stated within the document itself. The terms of this Agreement are contractual in nature. All parties agree that the relief provided in this Agreement is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary, and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct the violation of Plaintiffs' federally protected rights.
E. Execution This Agreement may be executed in counterpart originals, all of which, when so executed and taken together, shall be deemed an original and all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. Each counterpart may be delivered by email (as a .pdf attachment) or facsimile, and an email or facsimile signature shall have the same force and effect as an original signature.
F. Binding This Agreement is final and binding on the Parties. Each Party has a duty to so inform any such successor in interest.
G. Non-Waiver Failure by the Plaintiffs to seek enforcement of this Agreement pursuant to its terms with respect to any instance or provision will not be construed as a waiver to such enforcement with regard to other instances and provisions.
23

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 24 of 38 - Page ID#: 1492

H. Severability
In the event that a court determines that any provision of this Agreement is unenforceable, such provision will be severed from this Agreement and all other provisions will remain valid and enforceable, provided however that if the severance of any such provision materially alters the rights and obligations of the Parties hereunder, the Parties will attempt, through reasonable, good faith negotiations, to agree upon such other amendments to this Agreement as may be necessary to restore the Parties as closely as possible to the relative rights and obligations initially intended by them hereunder.
I. Term of Agreement
This Agreement shall remain in effect for five years from the Effective Date. The KDOC, however, will continue to provide all accommodations required under the law, including under the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws, regardless of any term limit applicable to this Agreement,

Sign

t t~Ntiirr
:`.:

C,faiXuzw iJ4

Kentucky IY6partrnenf o"f'C'drrecti ns

Attorney for Plaintiffs

Date

Date

24

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 25 of 38 - Page ID#:

2703885529

1493

10:37:45 a.m. 05-18-2015

2/2

ML Ct
Printed me 0
Sign ture Date

Printed Name Signature Date

Printed Name Signature Date

Printed Name Signature Date

Printed Name Signature Date

Printed Name Signature Date

Printed Name Signature Date

Printed Name Signature Date

25

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 26 of 38 - Page ID#:

I'IHT - 7.D c iD 1b-4b

Wtr1L UUTSHRL & 111A4N9G4E5

282 857 0940 P.27

Printed Name

Date

Printed Name Signature Date

Printed Name

Signature µ

~"

Date

Printed Name Signature Date

Printed Name Signature Date
Printed Name Signature
Date
P14nted Name
Signature
Date
Printed Name 1gnatuxe
Date

25

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 27 of 38 - Page ID#: 1495
Approved as to ¶(XVI(e) WEIL, GOTSIIAL & MANGES LLP
for Ralph I. Miller with permission

Approved as to ¶XVI(e) WASHINGTON LAWYERS' COMMITTEE

By:

_

for Deborah M. Golden with permission

Dat

Approved as to ¶(XVI(c)
BELZLEYBATHURST ATTORNEYS
By:
Date:

for Greg Belzley with permission

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 28 of 38 - Page ID#: 1496
EXHIBIT 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 29 of 38 - Page ID#: 1497
MARGO SCHLANGER http://tnargoschlan rer.net
nischlan@uinich.edu 734-615-2618
EMPLOYMENT
Henry M. Butzel Professor of Law, University of Michigan (2009-present; on leave 2010 and 2011). Director, Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse, litq)://cleariiigliouse.iieG Visiting Professor of Law, Fall
2009. Counsel to the Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Special Government Employee, parttime, 2012-2013). Advised Secretary of I -Iomeland Security on civil rights matters. Officer for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, U.S. Department of I -Iomeland Security (Presidential appointment, 2010 & 2011). (Chair, Privacy, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties Subcommittee of the federal Information Sharing Environment's Information Sharing and Access Interagency Policy Committee; Chair, Interagency Coord. Council on Emergency Preparedness and Individuals with Disabilities; Member, U.S. Delegation, Universal Periodic Review.) Visiting Professor of Law, University of California, Los Angeles (Spring 2009). Professor of Law, Washington University in St. Louis (2004-2009); Director, Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. Elected 2008 "David M. Becker Professor of the Year" by law students. Faculty Fellow, Harvard University Center for Ethics and the Professions (2001/02). Assistant Professor of Law, Harvard Law School (1998-2004). Senior Trial Attorney, U.S. Dept. ofjustice, Civil Rights Division, Special Litigation Section (19951998). Division Special Achievement Awards, 1996 and 1997. Law clerk, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg; Supreme Court of the United States (1993-1995). Fact-checker, The New Yorker (1989-1990).
COURSES TAUGHT Torts; Constitutional Law; Prisons and the Law; Constitutional Equality. Seminars include Civil Rights and Homeland Security; Empirical Inquiries into Civil Litigation; Institutional Reform Litigation.
OTHER APPOINTMENTS Reporter, American Bar Association task force on Standards relating to the Legal Status of Prisoners (2007-,Jana 2010). See lrttp://~vLV~v, ulicricazzbar.or r~>ublicat.ioi~s/ c rinunal Justice section archiv e/crimiust standards treatmnentln - isoners.lrt.ml . Commissioner, Commission on Safety and Abuse in America's Prisons (2006-2008). See
lift.p://wr~ryv.prisonommissionorY .
EDUCATION
Yale Law School, J.D. 1993. Book Reviews Editor, Yale Lawjourmd (Vol. 102); Vinson Prize for excellence in clinical casework. Yale College, B.A. 1989. Honors: magma cum laude, distinction in the History major, National Merit Scholar.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 30 of 38 - Page ID#: 1498

SCHOLARLY PUBLICATIONS, forthcoming and published

Schlanger cv, page 2 of 7 (10/27/2014)

Intelligelice Le, ath n a iid the National Security Agency's Civil Liberties Gap, forthcoming HARV. NAT• SEC. U. (2015), available at http://ssrii ,corri abstract:=219,5844,.

Trends in Prisoner Lihi ati'on as the PLRA Filters Adulthood, forthcoming, U.C, IRVINE L. REv (2015), available at http://ssril.cozim/abstract=2506378,

IIowPt:rsoiiers, Riglits Lawyers are Preserving the Role of the Courts, forthcoming, U. Miami L. Rev. (2015), available at hum/ssrri.com/abstract=2478884.

Offices of Goodness: Influence W thoutAuthorlty widilli Federal Agencies, 36 CARDO%O L. REV. 53 (2014).

The Equal Liriployinesit Opportunity Commission and Shrrlctulal Refti -in of the Amelicari Workplace (with Pauline Kim), forthcoming WASH, U. I.... REv. (2014) (draft available at
p:JLssrn.com/abstract23.514..

Prison Seg7 -Cgdtl011: Sympo,siuln Introduction and Preln7mnar)y Data on Racial Disparities, 18 MICH. J. RACE & LAW 241 (2013).

Plata v. Brown and Realigllinellt:Ja.ils, Prisons, Courts, amid Politics,48 1-IARV. CIV. RIGHTS-Clv. LIB. L. REv. 165 (2013).

14oinen Behind /lie 11 heel. Gender and Transportation L aw, 18601.930, in Tracy A. Thomas & Tracey Jean Boisseau, eds., FEMINIST LEGAL HISTORY: ESSAYS ON WOMEN AND LAW (2011).

Regulatnig Se'g7'egatioil: The Contribution of time ABA Criiniiial Justice Standards oil the Treatlneiit of Prisoners, 47 AM. CRIM. L. REv. 14.21 (2010)

Against Secret J?egu latl oil: Wily and How We .Should bid the Practical Obscurity of Injunctions and Consent Decrees, 59 DEPAULL. REv. 515 (2010).

How to .Study Di,SI17C t Judge Decision MaIClll; 29 WASH. U, J. LAW & POL'Y 83 (2009) (with Pauline Kim, Christina Boyd, Andrew D. Martin).

Present igg the Rule of iaaw11n Anie17ca2 S Prisons: Dil; Case forAln ending the Prison Litigation RefSrni Act, 11 U. PENN.J. CONST. LAW 139 (2008) (with Giovauuna Slhay).

,jail Strip-Search Cases.' Patterns and Particmoa1115', 71LAW & CONTEMP. PROB. 65 (2008).

Operationafiring Deterrence: Clailvs Mallagelne t (in Hospitlls, a Large Retailer, and jaiillss andl37'sons), 2 JOURNAL OIL TORT LAW (Aug. 2008).

Hedolmic Damages, I-Iedollle AdapGltion, and Disability; 60 VAND. L. REv. 745 (2007) (with Samuel B agenstos) .

The Washington University Civil Rights Litigation Cleai711gh0use; Usnig Court RecordsTOr Research, Teaching; and Policyn7akiiig, 75 UMKC L. REV. 153 (2006) (Symposium: Federal Civil Court. Records of the National Archives: Opportunities for Empirical, Historical and Legal Research and Curriculum Design) (with Denise Liebermain),

What We Know and What We Sliould KizowAhoutArrleiican Trial Trends, 2006,J. DISP. RES. 35 (2006) (Vannishinig Trial Symposium).

Civil Rights In,/illretloms Over Tilnc: A G:a,cc Sturdy ofJail and I'larson Court Order:S, 81 N.Y.U. L. REV. 550 (2006). Reprinted in 23 CIVIL RIGHTS LITIGATION AND ATTORNEY FEES ANNUAL HANDBOOK (Steven Saltzman, ed., 2007).

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 31 of 38 - Page ID#: 1499
Schlanger cv, page 3 of 7 (10/27/2014) Second Best Damage Action Deterrence, 55 DEPAUL L. REv, 517 (2006) (Clifford Symposium oii Tort Law and Social Policy). Deterin pants of Civil Rights Filings in Federal District Cm-t by, Jail and Pr con Imnates, 1 J. EMPIRICAL LEG. STUD. 79 (2004) (with Anne Piehi). The Reliability of the Aclinhnstrative Office of the U.S. Courts Database: All Initial FinpiricalAnalysis, 78 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 1455 (2003) (with Theodore Eisenberg) (symposium issue) Inmate Litigation, 116 HARV. L. REV. 1555 (2003). Gender Matters: Teaching a Reasonable Woman Standard in Personal IiljulyL are, 45 ST. LOUIS U. U. 769 (2001). 13eyoncl the Hero, judge: Institutional Reloim Litigation as Litigation, 76 MICH. L. REV. 1994 (1999). Injured Women Beforc Common Law Couirs, 1860-1930, 21 HARV. WOMEN'S L.J. 79 (1998).
NON-SCHOLARLY PUBLICATIONS 'The Supreme Court Gives a Subtle Boost to Free Speech, The New Republic, May 28, 2014, available at littl>: /www.ucwzepublic.com/article /117925/wood-v-moss-subtle-victory-free-speech. Even Conservative, judges Can 't Deny the C onstitutioilal Logic of Seine-Sex Marrthge, Daily Beast, May 18, 2014, available at http://www.tlie (lailybea.st.coin/articles/ 2014/05/18/even-coiiseivative-judges-caii-tdeuy-the-col)stitutioii<al-lo ic-of=saint-sex-inarriat .htnil. Iii the Story ol,Jonali, an Urgent Lesson About the Dangers ofSolilaly Conlineinent, TABLET MAGAZINE, Sept. 11, 2013. ABA CriininalJustice Standards on the Treatment ofPnsoners, CRIM. JUSTICE MAG,, Summer 2010, at 14 (with Margaret Colgate Love & Carl Reynolds). Prison Litigation Reform Act Update, in THE STATE OF CRIMINALJUSTICE, 2007-2008 (American Bar Association, Criminal Justice Section, Apr. 2008). ProfessorNotes I'LRA Flaws: Will Congress Act to Correct Thcini , CORRECTIONAL LAW REP., Feb. /Mar. 2008, at 65 (reprints testimony before the House Judiciay Committee, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security: Review of the Prison Litigation Refonii Act: A Decade of Re/in -in or an Increase in I'r:rson Abuses (Nov. 2007)). The Political Economy of Prison and/au Litigation, PRISON LEGAL NEWS, June 2007, at 1. Pfeser ruing the Rule ofl awin America Pr sons: The Case forAmending the Prison Litigation Refolin Act, American Constitution Society Issue Brief, Mar. 28, 2007 (with Giowuina Shay). National Pr on Commission Begins Work, CORRECTIONAL LAW REP., Julie/July 2005, at 1, and PRISON LEGAL NEWS, July 2005, at 17. Inmate Litigation: Results ol'e National Survey; NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CORRECTIONS LARGEJAIL NETWORK EXCHANGE, July 2003, at 1.
OTHER WORKS IN PROGRESS
Executive Order 12,333 and Civil Liberties; California Realignment in the Counties

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 32 of 38 - Page ID#: 1500

GRANTS

Schlanger cv, page 4 of 7 (10/27/2014)

National Science Foundation SES-0718831 (co-PI, with Pauline Kim and Andrew Martin), "The 1.,itigation Process in Government-Initiated Employment Discrimination Suits" (2007), $213,999.

Harvard University William F. Milton Fund (with Anne Morrison Pichl), "Litigated Intervention in the Management of Correctional Facilities" (2002), $33,607.

SERVICE AND MEMBERSHIPS
Professional Bar admissions: New York, District of Columbia (inactive), Missouri; Supreme Court; 9th Cir., Eastern District of Missouri.
Organizing committee member, Prisoners' Advocates Conference (New Orleans, LA, Feb. 2014). Chair, Prison Litigation: A Workshop for Plaintiffs' Attorneys (Washington, DC, Mar. 2008);
Member, expert advisory committee on data collection and confidential reporting, Prison Rape Elimination Act Commission (2007).
Drafter, ABA Litigation Section Project, The Rule of Law in Times of Calamity (2006).
Counsel of record for amici curiae ACLU and other prison advocacy organizations, Woodford V. Ngo, 05-416 (U.S. Supreme Court, filed Feb. 2, 2006).
General Academic Co-editor (with Sharon Dolovich), SSRN abstracting "journal," Corrections & Sentencing Law &
Policy (2006-2009, 2012-present). See hip://ssrnn.com . Chair, American Association of Law Schools, Remedies Section (2014) Chair, Americain Association of Law Schools, Section on Law & the Social Sciences (2007/08). Member, Law & Society Association Dissertation Prize Committee (2007). Member, Law & Society Association.
Uxuvers fjycgx-i_ Chair, Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs, Committee on Civil Liberties Member, L<aw School Curriculum Committee (2014/2014) Chair, Law School Tenure Committee (2013/2014), Member (2012/2013) Chair, University of Michigan Committee on Civil Liberties (2014/2015), Member (2013/2014) Faculty Advisor, Journal of Race & Law Symposium on Solitary Confinement (2013) Convenor, Prison Law & Scholarship Roundtable (2012)
Washn ton University in St. Louis Member, Law School Promotions Committee (2007/08) Advisory Board, Washington University Center for Empirical Research in the Law (2007/08) Standing participant: Workshop on Empirical Research in Law (2004-2009) Chair, Law School Lateral Appointments Committee (2006/07) Chair, Law School Dean's Advisory Group on Improving Student Career Prospects (2005/06) Chair, Law School Rules and Petitions Committee (2005/06) Chair, Law School Ad I-Ioc Committee on Tenure Standards and Process (2004/5) Member, University Committee on Senate By-Laws (2004/5) Member, Law School Clerkship Committee (Fall 2004)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 33 of 38 - Page ID#: 1501

PRESENTATIONS (2004-present)

Schlanger cv, page 5 of 7 (10/27/2014)

Intelligence Lcboah)on and the NSA's Civil Liberties Cap • Association of American Law Schools, Annual Conference, National Security .Law Section (chosen in call for papers) (Jan. 2014) • University of Iowa Law School Faculty Workshop (Nov. 2014) • University of Michigan Law School Legal Theory Workshop • 7th Annual National Security Law Workshop (May 2014)

Offices of Goodness: Influence without Audlority in Federal Agencies • Emory Law School (Mar. 2014) • Carclozo I.,aw School (Feb. 2014) • Law & Society Ass'n (May 2013)

The Equal Employment. Opportunity Commission and Structural Reforin of the Alnericall Workplace • EEOC Datrnret Conference (May 2014) • Labor Law Research Network (June 2013) • Stanford Law Faculty Workshop (Oct. 2009) • Broolclyn Law School Faculty Workshop (Sept. 2009) • Building Theory Through Empirical Legal Studies, Berkeley Center for the Study of Law & Society (April 2009) • UCLA Law Faculty Workshop (Feb. 2009) • University of Arizona Law Faculty Workshop (Feb. 2009)
The Prison I_.itlgation Refbrmn Act and IJtigatiou Dynvuics • Loyola University New Orleans College of Law, Prisoners' Advocates Conference (Feb. 2014)

The Present and Future of lnst tutiolmal Refbrmn Llt/ga(lore Current Tie li(ls 111 Prisoner Case.c • U.C. Irvine Law School, Prisoners Access to Justice Symposium (Feb. 2014) • University of Miami Law School, Leading from Below Symposium (Feb. 2014)
Marriage Equality and the Constitution, Anna College Constitution Day Speaker (Sept. 2013)
Plata v. Brown and Realignment:Jails, Prisons, Courts, and Politics, • Law & Society Ass'n (May 2013) (as discussant in panel on Plata v. Brown) • University of Illinois faculty workshop (Mar. 2013)
Race and (ll?llllrts Infilll! Uons, Ass'n of American Law Schools, Remedies Section (Jan. 2013)
Chair/discussant, panel on Immigration, Law & Society Association Conference (June 2012)
OperalionalizirlgDeterrence: Claims Mvragennent (in Hospitals, a Lar e Rettilel; ,vld,Jails and Prisons) • University of Michigan Law Faculty Workshop (Sept. 2008) • Insurance & Society Seminar, Boston (May 2008) • Southern Methodist University Law Faculty Workshop (Jan. 2008) • Law & Society Ass'n, Berlin (July 2007) • University of North Carolina Law Faculty Workshop (Nov. 2006) • Law & Society Ass' ii, Baltimore (July 2006)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 34 of 38 - Page ID#: 1502
Schlanger cv, page 6 of 7 (10/27/2014)
Seminar teaching • Ass'n of American Ixaw Schools, Workshop for New Law Teachers (June 2008) • Ass'n of American Law Schools, Workshop for New Law Teachers (June 2007)
Hedonic Damages, Hedonic Adaptation, and Disability • University of Illinois Law School, Seminar on Law, Psychology & Economics (Apr. 2008) • Washington University Law Faculty Workshop (Aug. 2006)
CIT?1R1ghis Illfunctions Over Iln)e: A Case Study ofJarl amid Prison Court Orders • University Management Team, Washington University in St. Louis (Apr. 2008) • Prison Litigation: A Workshop for Plaintiffs' Attorneys (Washington, D.C., Mar. 2008) • Law and Society Ass'n (Las Vegas, NV, June 2005) • Junior Scholars Empirical Legal Studies conference, Cornell I.,aw School (Oct. 2004)
The Prison Litigation Reform Act • Preserving the Rule ofLawin America Prisons: The Case for - Amending the PLRA, Symposium, Penn. J. of Constitutional I.aw, Litigating the Eighth Amendment (Feb. 2008) • Witness, National Prison Rape Elimination Corrnn'nn, The Role of Courts and Litigation in Regulating Prison and.jv1Preveution of Sexual Violence and Misconduct (Dec. 2007) • Witness, House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, hearing: Review of the Prison Litigation .Reform Act: A Decade ofRefonn or an Increase in Prison Abuses (Nov. 2007) • Congressional staff bricfing, proposed amendments to the PLRA (Sept_ 2007) • Preserving the Rude of La w in America's Persons: The Case for Amending the PLRA American Constitution Society issue brief presentation, Washington DC (Apr. 2007) • The Past amid Future of the PLRA, National Association of Attorneys General, Baltimore, MD (Feb. 2007) • Witness, ABA Criminal Justice Section Council, on proposed ABA policy to amend the Prison Litigation Reform Act (Nov. 2006).
The Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse: Using Court Records for Research, Teaching amid 1'olicJanakiug.
• Association of American Law Schools annual conference, Washington University Law breakfast (Jan. 2008)
• Presentation to social studies coordinators, Missouri Cooperating School Districts (Feb. 2007) • Conference presentation ("Federal Civil Court Records of the National Archives: Opportunities
for Empirical, Historical and Legal Research and Curriculum Design"), University of Missouri at. Kansas City & National Archives and Records Administration (Oct. 2005)
Moderator/discussant, panel on Race, Empirical Legal Studies Conference (Nov. 2007).
Fault and the Constitirtlor)al Law ofEqualily. Invited response to David Strauss, Childress Lecture (Little Rock and the Legacy of Brown), Saint Louis University (Oct. 2007)
Teaching the Equal Protectror) Clause. Presentation to high school teachers, Street Law (Oct. 2007)
s' The 1'Izir)tifl Bar and the Conceptualizatiol) of 'Litigatrou
• Law & Society Ass'n, Berlin (July 2007) • Washington University Law Faculty Workshop (May 2007) • Conference presentation (The Plaintiff's Bar), New York Law School (Mar. 2006)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 35 of 38 - Page ID#: 1503
Schlanger cv, page 7 of 7 (10/27/2014) The Litigation Process in Govcrmnentlnitiated Employment Discrimination Suits (hypotheses and preliminary evidence). Duke Law School Faculty Workshop (Apr. 2007) Discussant, Katherine Banrics et al., Life and Dealt Decisions: Prosecutorial Discretion and Capital Punislnnent in A[ssourr; St. Louis U. conference (Mar. 2007). Discussant,,J,,J. Prescott, Ernpirica] Evidence of Prosecutorial Charging lt'lamp u/a lion; And What it Tells [Is About What Prosecutors are Trying to Do, Empirical Legal Studies Conference, Austin Texas (Oct. 2006). Moderator, panel on Empirical Inquiries in Cnirninaljustice, Law and Society Ass'n (July 2006). Women and the New Supreme Court: University of Missouri-St. Louis, Sue Shear Institute for Women in Public Life (Jan. 2006). Moderator, panel discussion of Problems and Solutions in American Criminal Justice, hi conjunction with hearing held at Washington University in St. Louis by the Commission on Safety and Abuse in America's (Oct. 2005). What We Know and What We Could Know About the Vanrslring Trim Featured Comment on Marc Galanter, "A World Without Trials," University of Missouri at Columbia, Distinguished Lecture on Alternative Dispute Resolution (Sept. 2005). Incarceration, Reform, and Politics: presentation to undergraduate student groups (Apr. 2005), Second Best Damage Action Deterrence
• University of' Missouri at Columbia (Apr. 2005). • Clifford Conference on Torts and Social Policy, DePaul University College of Law (Apr. 2005). • UCLA faculty workshop (Mar. 2005)
Collateral Consequences olIrncarcerltion: Background onn the ,Scope oft/me Carceral System: Symposium on Poverty, Wealth and the Working Poor: Clinical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives (Apr. 2005). Respondent to James B. Jacobs, 7iine .future ol'Innprisonnnernt: Leadership, and Prison Reform, St. Louis University Ass'n of Criminal, Justice and Sociology (Oct. 2004).

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 36 of 38 - Page ID#: 1504
APPENDIX A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 37 of 38 - Page ID#: 1505

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT FRANKFORT

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:14-CV-00001-GPVT

ELECTRONICALLY FILED

OSCAR ADAMS and MICHAEL KNIGHTS,

PLAINTIFFS

v.

AFFIDAVIT OF JAMES ERWIN

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, et al.,

DEFENDANTS

Comes now the Affiant, James Erwin, and having been duly sworn and cautioned, states the following:
I. I, James Erwin, am the Deputy Commissioner for Adult Institutions for the Department of Corrections, Commonwealth of Kentucky.
2. In my official capacity, I am familiar with Corrections Policy and Procedure for the Kentucky Department of Corrections.
3. I have reviewed Corrections Policy and Procedure ("CPP") 9.14 (a secured policy), that addresses, among other matters, hospital security protocol.
4. CPP 9.14 provides that, typically, inmate patients admitted to a hospital are secured using arm bed restraints and leg bed restraints.
5. The use of arm bed restraints rather than handcuffs allows hand movement which should make it possible for Deaf inmates who need their hands to communicate, to do so.
6. While this should be the typical protocol, the Department as always has the responsibility to safe-guard officers, inmates, the public, etc., which could require an escalation of security depending upon the inmate and the situation.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 81-1 Filed: 06/24/15 Page: 38 of 38 - Page ID#: 1506

7. Further, the Affiant saith naught.

lmsErwin ATfi ant

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY

)

COUNTY OF

)

Subscribed, sworn and acknowledged before me, a Notary Public, by James Erwin, on

this the

day of Febxoa

, 2015.

My commission expires: NpVemher 3, y

Notary Public

Adams et al v. Commonwealth of Kentucky et al, Docket No. 3:14-cv-00001 (E.D. Ky. Jan 01, 2014), Court Docket
General Information

Court
Federal Nature of Suit Docket Number Status

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky; United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky
Prisoner Petitions - Prison Condition[555]
3:14-cv-00001
Closed

© 2016 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Service // PAGE 39

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 1 of 1 - Page ID#: 1574

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
CENTRAL DIVISION FRANKFORT

OSCAR ADAMS AND MICHAEL

)

KNIGHTS, on behalf of themselves and all )

those similarly situated,,

)

)

Plaintiffs,

)

)

V.

)

)

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, et )

al,

Civil No. 14-01-GFVT ORDER

Defendants.

*** *** *** ***

This matter is before the Court on its own motion concerning the Second Semi-Annual

Report received in chambers on November 13, 2016, from Margo Schlanger, the court-appointed

settlement monitor in the above-referenced matter. Accordingly, the Court hereby DIRECTS

the Clerk to file this report in the record.

This 5th day of December, 2016.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-1 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 1 of 7 - Page ID#: 1575

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT FRANKFORT

OSCAR ADAMS and MICHAEL KNIGHTS )

)

Plaintiffs

)

)

v.

)

)

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, et al. )

)

Defendants.

)

__________________________________________ )

Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT

Second Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor
November 13, 2016
Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 625 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-1 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 2 of 7 - Page ID#: 1576
I. INTRODUCTION
Pursuant to the Court’s order dated June 24, 2015, this is my second semi-annual report to the Court and the parties concerning the status of compliance with this case’s Settlement Agreement, which comprehensively governs how the Kentucky Department of Corrections (“Department”) deals with inmates who are deaf or hard-of-hearing.
As in my first report, I thank the Department’s personnel, both at headquarters and at the various affected institutions, for their work on implementing the improvements that are required by the Settlement Agreement, and their professionalism and accommodation of my requests for information. The Department has continued to make progress towards compliance. In particular, since my last report, it has implemented training for staff and has worked towards prompt hearing aid evaluation and provision. Much remains to be done; as usual, implementation of any complex new initiative poses challenges, which I discuss below and in this report’s Appendices B and D.
In my first report, I explained that some of the Settlement Agreement’s terms set explicit deadlines, while others do not. I suggested that two interpretations of the absence of a date seemed plausible: Perhaps when no date is specified, the requirement should be considered effective immediately. Or perhaps the Department is required to implement the requirement moving with reasonable speed. Either way, at this point, over 16 months into the Agreement’s implementation period, I believe it should be deemed effective in its entirety. Thus this report and future ones can address all the Agreement’s terms.
Note: The Agreement included heading numbers, but not every paragraph and provision is clearly numbered. As in my prior report, to facilitate reference to specific paragraphs (the numbered agreement is Exhibit G to Appendix IV). In this report, I refer to the settlement provisions using these numbers.
This report has six Appendices (two with their own exhibits)
I) Site visit recommendations II) Site visit report for Kentucky State Reformatory (KSR), with exhibits (April 21, 2016) III) KSR response to KSR site visit report (May 2, 2016) IV) Site visit report for six KYDOC institutions, with exhibits (Nov. 7, 2016) V) Recommended staff training (Sept. 7, 2016)
II. TIMING OF THIS REPORT
The Settlement Agreement does not specify precise timing for my semi-annual reports, but as I stated in my first report, I had planned to file them in February and July. Further experience suggests that this plan was not ideal: because I will generally do several site visits over the summer, October is better timing than July for each year’s second report. My goal had been to file this report in October, but it was delayed while I discussed next steps with the Department of Corrections. (See Part V, below.)
-1-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-1 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 3 of 7 - Page ID#: 1577
III. DEPARTMENT-LEVEL COMPLIANCE WITH THE AGREEMENT
Most of the Settlement Agreement is being implemented at the level of individual institutions. I discuss the relevant issues below, in Part IV. But a few of the Agreement’s requirements are being implemented at the Department level:
A. Designation of and public notice (via departmental website) of ADA Coordinators.
The Settlement Agreement requires that the “the name and contact information for each ADA Coordinator will be displayed and regularly updated on the KDOC’s website.” (II.B.2)
Status: Partial compliance. In my last report, I pointed out that the Department’s webpage, http://corrections.ky.gov/depts/AI/Pages/ADA.aspx, was not up-to-date, and I recommended that the Department “implement a system to ensure timely updating of the webpage and report that system to me.” Keeping the web page up-to-date remains a problem: the listed ADA Coordinator is incorrect today (November 7, 2016) for three out of twelve institutions (Blackburn Correctional Complex; Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex; Luther Luckett Correctional Complex).
Necessary compliance steps: • The Department should implement a system to ensure timely updating of its ADA Coordinator webpage and report that system to me.
B. Training of KDOC employees.
As I explained in my first report, the Agreement includes very substantial provisions governing training, which was supposed to be provided by the end of September 2015 on numerous specified topics to “KDOC employees who interact with the Inmate population.” (XIII.A.1) In addition, the Agreement requires that ADA Coordinators be “trained on the requirements of federal and state law regarding the contents of this Agreement and the KDOC’s obligations to provide full and equal access to, and enjoyment of, its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations to Deaf Inmates.” (II.B.1) There are procedural requirements, as well: the Agreement instructs the Department to receive input from the Kentucky Commission on the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (KCDHH) and from me. (XIII.A.1)
Status: Partial compliance. In a very significant step toward Agreement compliance, the Department has initiated employee training on issues faced by deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. I discuss the training in Part VIII of Appendix IV to this report, my site-visit report from summer visits to six institutions. While, as the Settlement Agreement requires, the training was developed with the assistance of the Kentucky Commission on the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, the training was not, as it should have been, “provide[d] . . . to the Settlement Monitor for review prior to the first training session.” (XIII.A.1) At this point, however, I have reviewed the training and in September offered comprehensive feedback to the Department. My recommended training materials are included as Appendix V to this report. I am meeting with the Department in early December to discuss that feedback.
-2-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-1 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 4 of 7 - Page ID#: 1578
As for the required ADA Coordinator training, the ADA Coordinators seem to all be ADA Title II training provided online by the ADA National Network, at http://www.adatitle2.org.. This is excellent training as far as it goes, but it covers only federal law, and does not discuss the Agreement at all. I plan to provide recommended ADA Coordinator training materials to the Department in the next several weeks; we will discuss this in the same early December meeting, and I will update the Court in my next semi-annual report.
Necessary compliance steps: • Review my recommendations on training, and improve the training offered, so that it is more comprehensive and more effective.
C. Parole hearings.
The Agreement requires that appropriate auxiliary aids and services, including qualified interpreters, be made available for parole hearings. (V.A.2) My April 2016 site visit report, about KSR, describes a parole hearing in February 2016 at which a deaf prisoner (who is also largely illiterate) was unable to communicate because no interpreter was provided. I am pleased to report that after reading that report, the Parole Board agreed to redo the hearing; KSR’s ADA Coordinator facilitated the provision of an in-person interpreter. At the first hearing, when he could not participate, the inmate was denied parole for five years; at the second, compliant, hearing, he was denied for one year. The Department is now working to provide him an inperson interpreter for the programming that may facilitate his parole at his next hearing.
More generally, it seems that the Parole Board and the Department of Corrections may now be working better together on provision of interpreter services more generally during parole hearings. I will monitor this going forward, but I commend both organizations for the progress they have made in this area.
IV. INSTITUTION-LEVEL COMPLIANCE WITH THE AGREEMENT
Now that I have visited seven of the Department’s twelve adult institutions, I am able to evaluate compliance in my site visit reports, which are attached. I plan a visit to four of the remaining five institutions for next month; that site visit report will be included in my next semiannual court report. The site visit reports both assess Settlement compliance as of the date of my visits and make recommendations for how to improve compliance. In fact, between the two site visit reports, covering my visits to seven institutions, I have made 79 recommendations to the Department, each designed to help the Department implement the Settlement Agreement. These recommendations are set out in Appendix I to this report.
I have developed the practice of giving both the Department and plaintiffs’ counsel an opportunity to comment on each site visit report before it becomes final. For the KSR report, both sides offered a few comments; I was then able to finalize the report, and asked the Department to respond in writing to each recommendation; the Department agreed to carry out each one. See Appendix II to this report. For the multiple-institution site visit covering my six visits made during the summer of 2016, in September, I offered the parties the same opportunity to comment. Again, plaintiffs’ counsel had two or three comments. But this time, after some
-3-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-1 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 5 of 7 - Page ID#: 1579

weeks for review, the Department requested an in-person meeting to discuss my recommendations; this was just scheduled for early December. Rather than holding up finalization of my report for that meeting, the site-visit document is included in this filing. I will provide information on the Department’s response to the recommendations in my next semiannual court report.
The site visit reports are detailed, and I will not repeat them here. A few general comments on compliance trends may, however, be useful.
Inmate Tracking. The Settlement requires the ADA Coordinators to periodically report to me the names of their institution’s inmates who are deaf or hard-of-hearing. During my first site visit, to the Kentucky State Reformatory, I discovered that many of the other institutions were mistakenly limiting their reporting to me to inmates with the most severe hearing impairments—those listed in the table below as “deaf.” Somewhat less-impaired inmates—listed below as “hard-of-hearing”—were not being reported to me. This problem is now solved, which has enabled me to accurately understand the size of the population affected by the Settlement Agreement, and prioritize accordingly.
Table 1: Distribution of Kentucky Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates

Institution

First Site Visit Date

Bell County Forestry Camp Blackburn Correctional Complex Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex Green River Correctional Complex Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women Kentucky State Penitentiary Kentucky State Reformatory Little Sandy Correctional Complex Luther Luckett Correctional Complex Northpoint Training Center Roederer Correctional Complex Western Kentucky Correctional Complex
Ross-Cash Center TOTAL

December 2016 December 2016 7/28/2016 6/23/2016 7/27/2016 2/24/2016 December 2016 6/24/2016 December 2016 6/22/2016 7/25/2016

Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing Inmates (#)
0 5 9 26 13 6 64 18 6 15 10 5 1 178

But while institutional tracking of deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates is far better now than a year ago, each quarter so far, there have been some glitches. These seem to mostly involve inmates who were transferred to the institution but failed to come to the attention of the ADA Coordinator. It is clear that a better tracking method is needed.
Videophone services. One of the most important compliance steps has been installation of videophones in each institution. This seems to mostly be working very well. Some small

-4-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-1 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 6 of 7 - Page ID#: 1580
problems remain. For example, at KSR, the phones are not yet in a place that is as accessible to inmates as the location of the conventional phones. In addition, most of the institutions have not yet figured out a way to allow inmates in segregated housing to access the videophones. I have made some recommendations to the Department about addressing these issues, and will continue to work with the institutions on them.
Qualified Intepreter Services. The institutions that house inmates who use sign language to communicate have begun to make qualified interpreter services available to them, using Video Remote Interpretation (VRI). This works reasonably well for some purposes, and as staff gain experience with it, perhaps it will work better yet. VRI is not, however, being used as routinely as the Settlement calls for. In addition, most institutions have not put in place the systems necessary to provide in-person qualified interpreter services, when necessary.
Hearing Aid Access. It is proving extremely challenging for the Department to identify inmates in need of a hearing aid and to timely provide that hearing aid. I have observed numerous process failures. For example, inmates who fail the hearing screening test sometimes never receive appropriate followup, and audiology consults are frequently not being carried out in a timely fashion. Provision of needed hearing aids sometimes stalls completely, and sometimes is extremely slow. The absence of a case-management approach means that often nobody at the prison notices when there is a problem or delay and it therefore goes unsolved. I have been facilitating the hearing-aid process, bringing issues to the ADA Coordinators’ attention—but a more systemic fix is needed. This is discussed in Part III of Appendix IV; I recommend that the Department provide necessary hearing aids within two months of when the inmate first reports a hearing issue, and that each facility’s ADA Coordinator use (and provide to me quarterly) a tracking form for the case management that will be necessary to meet that deadline.
Once existing inmates receive the hearing aids they need, the most crucial facility for diagnosis and hearing aid provision will be Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC), the Department’s men’s reception facility. I am informed that since my site visit to RCC, the Department has been able to bring in on-site audiology services, to make the process more efficient and effective. This is an excellent development; I look forward to seeing resulting improvements in the tracking forms.
Informational Materials for Deaf Inmates. The Agreement requires that all deaf and hardof-hearing inmates be provided with “materials providing information about the Auxiliary Aids and Services available to Deaf Inmates and instructions for how to obtain, request, or use those Auxiliary Aids and Services.” The language of these materials is required to be “designed to be accessible to each Deaf Inmate.” (III.F.1) The materials provided inmates have not, however, been either comprehensive or accessible. In my September site visit report, I recommended significant changes to those materials. See Appendix IV’s exhibit D-2.
Other Auxiliary Aids for Hard-of-Hearing Inmates. A variety of auxiliary aids can assist with effective communication for hard-of-hearing inmates. Different institutions have made different good moves in this direction. For example, some facilities broadcast television audio on a radio channel, so that inmates can listen via a personal radio and earbuds; this reduces ambient
-5-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-1 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 7 of 7 - Page ID#: 1581
noise in shared space and also enables inmates who need amplification to hear the tv. One institution is providing wireless personal amplification in congregate religious services. Much more work remains, but the steps already taken are starting the Department on the path it needs to follow.
V. CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS The Kentucky Department of Corrections continues to progress towards compliance with
the Settlement Agreement. In this court report and the prior one, I have identified several department-wide “necessary compliance steps.” Much more detail is included in the attached site visit reports (Appendices III and IV), which assess both the progress made and remaining issues, along with recommendations (Appendix II) about how the Department should address those issues. I will meet with Department officials next month to discuss all my recommendations, and will describe the outcome of that discussion in my next semi-annual court report. That next report will also include a site-visit report for four more institutions. (The only institution for which I will not have conducted a site visit is Bell County Forestry Camp, which currently does not house any deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates.) In addition, once I have completed the next four site visits, I plan to implement some reporting structures that will enable me to assess both institution-specific and department-wide compliance more routinely, in between visits. Dated: November 13, 2016 Respectfully submitted,
____________________________________ Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 610 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109 (202) 277-2506 Margo.schlanger@gmail.com Adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com
-6-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 1 of 326 - Page ID#: 1582

Second Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor (November 13, 2016) Appendices

I. Site Visit Recommendations

II. Site visit report for Kentucky State Reformatory (KSR), with exhibits (Apr. 21, 2016)

Exhibit A

Staff interviewed

Exhibit B-1

[Current] Hearing Screening Questionnaire

B-2

[Recommended] Hearing Screening Questionnaire and Instructions

Exhibit C-1

[Current] memo to staff re. equipment for deaf and hearing

impaired inmates

C-2

[Current] memo to inmates re. equipment available

C-3

[Current] KSR Request for a Qualified Interpreter

C-4

[Current] KSR Request form – Auxiliary Aids and Services

Exhibit D-1

[Recommended] Communications assistance for deaf and hard-of-

hearing inmates (memo to staff)

D-2

[Recommended] Communications assistance for deaf and hard-of

hearing inmates (memo to inmates)

D-3

[Recommended] Request for Qualified Interpreter Services

D-4

[Recommended] Request for communications assistance

D-5

[Recommended] Auxiliary Aids/Services Assessment Form

Exhibit E-1

[Current] Correct Care Solutions Healthcare Request

E-2

[Recommended] Addition to Healthcare Request

Exhibit F

Plaintiffs’ comments on draft report

III. KSR response to KSR site visit report (May 2, 2016)

IV. Site visit report for six KYDOC institutions, with exhibits (Nov. 7, 2016)

Exhibit A

Staff Interviewed

Exhibit B

Hearing Screening Questionnaire

B-1

Hearing Screening Questionnaire as given

B-2

Recommended Hearing Screening

Exhibit C

KSR Report (April 21, 2016)

Exhibit D

Recommended Forms and Memos

D-1

Communications assistance for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates

(memo to staff)

D-2

Informational Brochure for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates

D-3

Request for Qualified Interpreter Services

D-4

Request for Communications Assistance

D-5

Auxiliary Aids/Services Assessment Form

Exhibit E

Healthcare Request

E-1

Current Correct Care Solutions Healthcare Request

E-2

Recommended addition to Healthcare Request

Exhibit F

Recommended Medical Tracking Form

Exhibit G

Settlement Agreement and summary for inmate law library

V. Recommended staff training (Sept. 7, 2016)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Doc

#:

84-2 Filed: 1583

1/2/P0W5/16$PPaVgSeU:32FQoPf S3U
2"6Q-QPFOaEgJeYI*D#:

Site Visit Report of Settlement Monitor
Adams & Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky.)
Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor June and July Site Visit Report Recommendations
Draft circulated to parties for comment: September 7, 2016 Final (November 7, 2016)
RECOMMENDATIONS
I present, first, the prior recommendations I made in April 2016, followed by the new recommendations. The numbering continues from one group to the next.
PRIOR RECOMMENDATIONS (FROM KSR REPORT, APRIL 21, 2016)
Note: These are edited from their original wording in April; they are phrased more generally, in order eliminate the references to KSR.
I. IDENTIFICATION OF INMATES COVERED BY THE AGREEMENT
Recommendation 1: Each facility should identify all inmates who meet the Agreement’s definition of “Deaf.” This is necessary both in order to report names to me and to ensure that appropriate services are provided to hard-of-hearing inmates.
Recommendation 2: Include additional questions in the screening questionnaire, along the lines of:
x Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? x Have you ever been diagnosed with hearing loss? x Have you ever used a hearing aid that you no longer use? (If yes, Why don’t you use
it anymore?) A “yes” answer to any of the these three questions should be followed up by a provider visit, unless the inmate explains that he no longer uses the hearing aid because his hearing has improved so that it is no longer necessary.
x If you currently have a hearing aid, is it working ok? A “no” answer to this question should be followed up by a provider visit.
x Note to tester: If the inmate seems unable to understand these questions due to a hearing impairment, provider follow-up is indicated.
Recommendation 3: Staff administering the questionnaire should be alert to (and trained on) the possibility of low literacy, and should ask questions orally when appropriate. Among illiterate inmates, a hearing impairment sufficient to undermine their ability to answer these questions ought to itself trigger referral to the appropriate provider.

11/2016 Court Report, App-1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 3 of 326 - Page ID#: 1584
Recommendation 4: Further assessment of the inmate should include not just the medical decision whether to send the inmate to an audiologist, but a separate, explicit, charted and electronically-tracked decision whether he is deaf or hard-of-hearing.
Recommendation 5: The KDOC Electronic Medical Record system should include a single electronic code that flags inmates who are deaf, hard-of-hearing, or hearing-impaired (hereinafter Deaf, in this report), to facilitate provision of services to them.
II. PROVISION OF AUDIOLOGY SERVICES
Recommendation 6: Inmates in need of a hearing aid—both initially or because the device they have is no longer working for them—should wait no longer than two months to obtain the necessary device. That time period should begin the day the potential need is indicated by the inmate’s request for evaluation, answers on the questionnaire, etc. Each KYDOC facility should track the time from request/questionnaire to provider visit to audiology visit to hearing aid provision, and ensure that inmates do not have a longer wait. (In future quarterly reporting periods, I will request this tracking data from all facilities.) One way to accomplish less expensive and more comprehensive assessment for any backlog might be to bring in an audiologist to each applicable facility for two or three days.
III. AUXILIARY AIDS/SERVICES
A. Personal hearing devices: Hearing aids and amplifiers
Recommendation 7: Full information about hearing aids and hearing evaluations, including the availability of batteries without charge, should be provided to inmates. See Exhibit D-2.
Recommendation 8: Inmates waiting for an audiologist evaluation or for hearing aid service should be offered an amplifier while they wait.
B. Qualified Interpretation
Recommendation 9: For inmates who use sign language to communicate, some kind of qualified interpretive services should be readily available for any communication between an inmate and staff when the inmate requests interpretation. The availability of interpretation should not be limited to only certain types of encounters, communications, or settings.
Recommendation 10: For inmates who use sign language to communicate, no special request should be needed to obtain VRI services for auxiliary aid/service assessment, emergency health care on-site, classification and transfer hearings and related meetings, grievance meetings and hearings, disciplinary hearings and all related processes, parole meetings and hearings.
Recommendation 11: Interpretation services should be offered without special request to any inmate (known to prison staff to use sign language to communicate) during initial classification and orientation. These encounters are vital to the terms of each inmate’s living situation, and inmates are unlikely to know, during these early stages, that they need to request interpretation and how to do so.
11/2016 Court Report, App-2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 4 of 326 - Page ID#: 1585
Recommendation 12: Both the existing VRI contract and the standing arrangement with a provider of in-person qualified interpretive services are crucial and should remain in place. Inperson interpretation should be provided to inmates who communicate by signing when it is necessary for effective communication. This includes during group classes in which student participation is key, and in parole hearings. For other situations, an in-person interpreter should be provided if remote interpretation is unlikely to be, or has not been, effective.
Recommendation 13: More generally, more clarity and a better process for picking a qualified interpretation method—VRI or in-person—are needed. The various memos, forms, and training should be modified to support that process. The facility should give “primary consideration” to the affected inmate’s view on this question. Revised versions of all the relevant forms and memos are attached as Exhibit D. The information in Exhibit D-5—in particular, the preferred communication method—should be made available to all KYDOC staff who need it, including both medical and custody staff, including electronically.
Recommendation 14: Each facility should track the effectiveness of communication via VRI in other situations, in order to decide whether there are any situations in which in-person interpretation should be the first recourse. As part of this assessment process, each time a VRI is used, the inmate should be asked how effective the resulting communication was. This can be done by a scaled question:
Please check the box that best indicates your views.
The Video Remote Interpretation I just used provided fully effective communication:
 Strongly agree  Weakly agree  Weakly disagree  Strongly disagree
If there was any problem with the communication, please explain:
These responses can be collected and analyzed. This recommendation is reflected in Exhibit D.
Recommendation 15: Inmates who communicate via sign language should not have their hands restrained when there is a need for effective communication, absent an individualized finding of security threat even with use of substitute security procedures (if necessary). If avoiding restraint of inmates’ hands requires substitute security procedures, those should be written up and included in the documentation of the necessary processes for both VRI and in-person interpretation, and any appropriate equipment should be obtained and installed wherever it might be needed.
Recommendation 16 [Applies to KSR only]: For situations since June 2015 in which KSR’s procedures did not allow an inmate to communicate during a disciplinary hearing—most importantly, in Inmate C’s October 2015 hearing—the inmate should be given an opportunity to redo the hearing. This opportunity must be effectively communicated to the inmate, which itself should be done using interpretive services.
Recommendation 17 [Applies to KSR only]: Inmate D’s 2016 Parole hearing should be redone, with an in-person Qualified Interpreter.
Recommendation 18: When a Deaf inmate is seeking/receiving off-site medical care, staff at each facility should, as early as practicable, inform the relevant medical provider(s) that a Deaf
11/2016 Court Report, App-3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 5 of 326 - Page ID#: 1586
Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service will be seeking medical care from those off-site medical providers at a particular date and time; in the case of an emergency, staff should provide such information as soon as possible, and should include the Deaf inmate’s estimated time of arrival. There should be policies and procedures in place, implemented by appropriate training, to ensure that these notifications occur.
Recommendation 19: The process/forms for inmates to request interpretive services and other auxiliary aids and services should clearly encompass religious and any other volunteer-provided programming.
Recommendation 20: Significant communications by the chaplains are covered by the requirement of effective communication. Therefore the chaplains, like other staff, should be trained in the requirements of this Agreement, and should ensure that if they have occasion to minister to a Deaf inmate—or simply inform him that a family member has died—they do so effectively, including using interpreter services if the inmate communicates using sign language.
Recommendation 21: The process for obtaining and using the VRI laptop should be communicated to each staff member who might have occasion to need it, and also to each inmate who communicates using sign language. Each such staff member should actually do a practice run using the machine—to figure out how/where internet access and power will be obtained, and how to use the program. The laptops themselves should be checked each time they are returned to their resting area, to ensure that they have sufficient battery power. Training should ensure that staff understand that the person communicating with the Deaf inmate should sit within easy reach of the laptop’s microphone, and that the inmate must not have his hands handcuffed. (It would be useful to include a diagram or instructions on a piece of paper taped to the laptop’s cover.)
Recommendation 22: There should be some flexibility in the timing of VRI requests and usage; where a need arises that does not allow for 48 hours notice, VRI should nonetheless be made available if possible. Each facility should work out a process for VRI availability after hours and on weekends, as well as in emergencies.
C. Videos
Recommendation 23: Check each existing video used to determine whether it has captioning and obtain replacements with captioning if available. Provide captions for all orientation videos, for newly acquired entertainment and educational videos, and other videos when captioning is available. For television captioning to be a real option, training for staff about how to turn it on and periodic testing are required. This should be done on a schedule, perhaps quarterly or twice a year, and it should be logged.
Recommendation 24: For Deaf inmates who cannot hear crucial informative videos, and whose literacy level is insufficient to allow them to readily read captions, an alternative method of effective communication is necessary. For those who communicate using sign language, the prison should provide either a sign language inset, or an in-person Qualified Interpreter.
11/2016 Court Report, App-4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 6 of 326 - Page ID#: 1587
D. Speech-to-text
Recommendation 25 [KSR only, for right now]: KSR should continue to investigate the possibility of speech-to-text software for use in classroom and other appropriate settings. I will ask for a report on this issue six months.
E. Assistive listening systems
Recommendation 26 [KSR only, for right now]: Investigate assistive listening systems for use in classroom and other appropriate settings. I will ask for a report on this issue in six months.
Recommendation 27: Each facility should inform Deaf inmates of the various ways in which educational programming can be made more accessible to them; the school should put in place a process to facilitate requests for such accommodations and assess the need for them.
F. Written communication
Recommendation 28: Written communication should be relied upon only for simple communication with literate inmates. For complex communications or less literate inmates, alternative methods are required. Staff should make best efforts to communicate with each deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate using that inmate’s preferred communication method (which is assessed and recorded by Exhibit D-5).
G. Non-auditory alerts
Recommendation 29: Each facility should expand the availability of non-auditory alert systems, providing them to inmates who cannot hear the fire alarm and/or the alert for count. To maximize the communication effectiveness of each non-auditory alert, it should be programmed to signal, in different ways, the several predictable alerts: fire/emergency; count, chow, “report to office.” Staff must also be trained to use the office switch. Whether this is occurring will need monitoring; perhaps by using a daily log or checking in periodically with affected inmates. The monitoring system should be made formal. I will ask for a description of it, and perhaps relevant records, in the next quarterly reporting period.
Recommendation 30 [KSR only, for right now]: Investigate the costs and benefits of a TV-based visual paging system. I will ask for a report on this issue in six months.
Recommendation 31: Each facility should train staff to be alert to the possibility that a Deaf inmate may miss the alert for count, chow, or pill call—and to ensure nondiscrimination in that event.
H. Miscellaneous devices
Recommendation 32: Each facility’s commissary list should include various alerting devices that inmates might wish to purchase: caption-capable TVs, vibrating alarm clocks, and the like. Inmates should be informed that if they seek to purchase adaptive equipment that is not available via the commissary, they should request assistance from the ADA Coordinator; the ADA
11/2016 Court Report, App-5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 7 of 326 - Page ID#: 1588
Coordinator should then facilitate the inmate’s purchase unless the requested device presents an articulable and documented security risk.
I. Other communications aids
Recommendation 33: Investigate all the available topics for medical EZ Boards—both word and picture versions—and buy those that are useful, making them available for use by Deaf inmates.
J. Methods of communicating with Deaf inmates
Recommendation 34: Staff should be trained on, and should use, best practices for communicating with hard-of-hearing inmates.
Recommendation 35: Each facility should continue to provide Deaf inmates with ID cards that identify them as Deaf, and to post similar identification outside their cells. The notices required by the Agreement outside each housing unit and at the entrance to the institution should also be posted.
K. Teaching sign-language
Recommendation 36: Each facility should try to offer classes in sign language, and should give Deaf inmates who would like to learn to sign both affirmative notice and preference for these classes.
L. Telecommunications equipment and rules
Recommendation 37: Videophones should be located in areas as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. The videophone should be available during the same days and hours as conventional telephones and should require permission for use only if the facility requires inmates to seek permission to use conventional telephones. If an escort is required to use the videophone at night, on weekends, or in other circumstances, such an escort should be routinely provided.
Recommendation 38: Even if an escort is required, there should be no requirement that inmates seeking to use the videophone, including with VRS, schedule such use in advance. Non-Deaf inmates are not required to schedule their phone calls, and that should be true for Deaf inmates, as well.
Recommendation 39: Ensure all staff are trained on videophone rules, so that they know that videophone access is to be provided during the same hours as conventional phone access, without pre-scheduling, and that time in transit doesn’t count.
Recommendation 40 (Edited): Deaf inmates in segregated housing must be allowed access to telecommunications services equal to that of non-Deaf inmates in the same disciplinary or administrative status. The best solution would be to work out a method for such inmates— including those on “max assault status”—to use the videophone, with VRS when needed. This could be done by escorting the prisoner to the videophone or by enabling videophone capabilities
11/2016 Court Report, App-6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 8 of 326 - Page ID#: 1589
on the VRI laptop. If there are individualized reasons that an inmate cannot have his hands unshackled consistent with security, he, and others in his situation, should be allowed access to the TTY. I will request each facility to report on what method for telecommunications access is developed for Deaf inmates in segregation, and why.
Recommendation 41: Ensure that disciplinary oversight of videophone is no more intense than oversight of conventional phone calls. The disciplinary committee should explicitly consider and rule on this issue when it is deciding a disciplinary matter involving the videophone or TTY.
Recommendation 42 [New recommendation 74 substitutes for this recommendation]: KSR should review auxiliary aids that would allow hard-of-hearing inmates effective access to telecommunications, and should implement improvements— perhaps involving TTY, captioned telephones, and/or handset amplification. Asking inmates what does and doesn’t work is a necessary part of this process. I will request a report on this review—both how it was conducted and the results—in six months.
IV. PROCESSES FOR ASSESSING AND REQUESTING AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
A. Intake/Orientation
Recommendation 43: Each facility should develop a process by which inmates whose hearing impairment substantially impedes communication are noted and assessed right away on arrival at the institution, immediate steps taken to ensure effective communication, including immediate interpretative services if necessary.
B. Literacy assessment
Recommendation 44: Staff at each facility should assess each Deaf inmate’s literacy prior to conducting additional assessment of necessary auxiliary aids and services. Educational staff should be able to propose and implement one of several quick assessment tools. For example, the Slosson Oral Reading Test - Revised (SORT-R) might be suitable. If an inmate is not literate at at least the 8th grade level, reliance on written communication is unlikely to succeed in providing effective communication, and alternative methods should be used.
C. Individual assessment meetings
Recommendation 45: For each Deaf inmate, the ADA Coordinator should conduct an individual services assessment meeting, at which the inmate’s available methods of communication are expressly ascertained and recorded, and the inmate is informed about the available auxiliary aids and services. For an inmate who can hear (with or without an amplifier or hearing aid) well enough to understand the coordinator, information should be conveyed orally as well as in writing. If the inmate uses sign language, VRI would be the appropriate way to communicate for a meeting of this nature. The greatest challenge is presented if the inmate is not literate, does not hear well enough to understand spoken communication, and does not sign. In that case, visual demonstrations of the various auxiliary aids and services may be required. The assessment should be updated annually, ideally at the inmate’s annual classification meeting.
11/2016 Court Report, App-7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 9 of 326 - Page ID#: 1590
D. Form and options
Recommendation 46: The various forms related to requesting and using Auxiliary Aids and Services form should be changed in a number of ways:
x To list available aids and services more comprehensively x To more clearly explain what the various services and aids are, in what circumstances
they are available, and how to request them. x To explain how to use the various devices. x To ask inmates, expressly, about their preferred modes of communication or needed
services, and why those are useful. To explain which items are free of charge, and which are available only at the inmate’s expense.
Recommendation 47: I recommend replacement of the existing forms with several different ones, explaining the various options available, allowing requests for various types of communications assistance, and obtaining feedback from inmates (see Recommendation 14, above). These recommended forms are attached as Exhibit D, which also includes a recommended staff memo about the various available devices and accommodations, and an assessment form. These forms should be explained/filled out during the individual assessment meetings.
E. Additional methods for inmates to seek auxiliary aids and services
Recommendation 48: The Healthcare Request form should include boxes to check if auxiliary aids or services, including remote or in-person interpretation, are needed. My recommended additions to this form are attached as Exhibit E-2.
Recommendation 49: All the forms by which inmates apply for jobs, educational programming, etc., should have language similar to that in the recommended Healthcare Request form. So should classification and disciplinary forms that notify inmates of impending hearings or meetings. I have not provided recommended versions of these forms, but will in a future reporting period ask to see them all.
Recommendation 50: When Deaf inmates and staff discuss enrollment or application for a particular activity or program, communication should be effective—which means an interpreter may be required for the discussion—and should cover potential accommodations, auxiliary aids/services that could provide equal access to the activity/program.
V. TRAINING
A. ADA Coordinator Training
Recommendation 51: KYDOC should develop training on the Settlement Agreement and make it available to ADA Coordinators. For training on the ADA, the ADA National Network training is appropriate.
11/2016 Court Report, App-8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 10 of 326 - Page ID#: 1591
B. Staff Training
Recommendation 52 [Training slides have now been provided and comments offered]: Training should be developed on all topics listed in the Settlement Agreement as requiring training. Once drafted, materials should be shared with me and with the Kentucky Commission on the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, for our input. This training is already long overdue; it should be provided to me for my input no later than July 1, finalized within 30 days after my comments are returned, and delivered to staff as soon as possible thereafter.
VI. REPORTING
Recommendation 53: Ensure that all relevant staff know about the Agreement’s reporting obligations, so that I am appropriately notified when any of the reporting-triggering events takes place.
NEW RECOMMENDATIONS
I. IDENTIFICATION OF INMATES COVERED BY THE AGREEMENT.
Recommendation 54: Identification processes a) Each facility should ask each inmate about any hearing difficulties during his or her initial medical screening, in their first day or two in the facility. Questions about hearing should be at the start of that screening, to allow accommodations, if needed, during the rest of the process. b) All inmates should also fill out, in writing or orally, the multiple-question hearing screening. Exhibit B-2 is the recommended form. (See also prior recommendation 2.) This form should be administered by medical staff, to facilitate necessary medical followup. c) If an inmate answers “yes” or “sometimes” in response to three or more of the screening questions, he should be seen in the next several days by a medical provider—a physician or nurse practitioner—for further evaluation, including a “whisper test” or other examination to assess whether there is a functional hearing problem. d) If an inmate fails the “whisper test” or other hearing evaluation, the following should occur: x The inmate should receive an identification card to carry on his person, which states that the inmate is deaf or hard-of-hearing. x The inmate’s name should be shared with the facility’s ADA coordinator. x Two different alerts should be placed in his record, one in KOMS (the Kentucky Offender Management System), to alert correctional staff to the issue whenever they retrieve his computerized file, and the other in the EMR (Electronic Medical Record), to do the same for medical staff. Both alerts should be immediately obvious when the electronic file is opened. (See Figures A and B, above).
11/2016 Court Report, App-9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 11 of 326 - Page ID#: 1592
e) All inmates so identified should be included in the facility’s semi-annual reports to me; if a particular inmate turns out not to be deaf or hard-of-hearing, because, for example, a medical problem that was obstructing his or her hearing is solved, that can be explained. (Note: the decision to send an inmate to an audiologist for evaluation or treatment is not the same as the decision to flag the inmate as deaf or hard-ofhearing.)
Recommendation 55: In order to ensure appropriate identification of deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates, all inmates’ annual or other routine physicals should include the hearing questionnaire (Exhibit B-2).
Recommendation 56: Each facility should ensure that the ID cards used to identify inmates as deaf or hard-of-hearing are clear, and should avoid abbreviations or other language that may not be clear. Each facility should ensure that every deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate is able to carry such a card at all times. If an inmate misplaces the card, a replacement should be promptly provided.
II. ENSURING EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION DURING INTAKE
Recommendation 57: Interpretation services should be offered without special request to any inmate (known by prison staff to use sign language to communicate) during initial medical screening or other intake medical encounters. Inmates are unlikely to know, during these early stages, that they need to request interpretation and how to do so. Medical staff should ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if they use sign language to communicate, rather than waiting for the ADA Coordinator’s assessment.
Recommendation 58: Each facility’s medical office should keep pocket amplifiers on hand for all intake staff—medical, mental health, and custody—to use when the need arises.
III. PROVISION OF AUDIOLOGY SERVICES
Recommendation 59: The ADA Coordinator for each KYDOC facility should maintain a document that tracks each deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate’s progress through the process of obtaining any needed hearing aid, including the dates and outcomes of:
x the initial request/questionnaire x each relevant medical visit x any audiology visit x hearing aid provision. In order to ensure that inmates do not wait longer than two months for a necessary hearing aid, the ADA coordinator should check for progress for each affected inmate every week or two, updating the tracking document and working with medical staff to solve any procedural hurdles that arise. A recommended sample tracking document is provided as Exhibit F.
11/2016 Court Report, App-10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 12 of 326 - Page ID#: 1593
IV. AUXILIARY AIDS/SERVICES
Recommendation 60: I commend KYDOC for developing a user-friendly pamphlet to cover the information needed by deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates; I recommend facilities use the edited version in Exhibit D-2; each facility should fill in the items marked with curly brackets ({ and }).
A. Personal hearing devices: Hearing aids and amplifiers
Recommendation 61: Inmates with hearing aids should be able to obtain replacement batteries seven days a week, without difficulty or charge, regardless of their housing or programming assignment.
Recommendation 62: Each facility should inform staff responsible for property moves that it is important for inmates to keep their hearing aids with them, even when they are moved into segregation or transferred. When an inmate is accidentally separated from his or her hearing aids, policy should allow the inmate to promptly obtain the hearing aids from storage or medical, or to get replacements.
B. Qualified Interpretation
1. Video Relay Interpretation (VRI): Use and Procedures
Recommendation 63: Absent an emergency in which time is of the essence and VRI services are unavailable, no facility should rely on an inmate to interpret a communication that would ordinarily be private for another inmate.
Recommendation 64: Each facility should obtain and test a “splitter” for each VRI laptop, so that the laptop can be used alongside a computer.
Recommendation 65: Each facility should ensure that the VRI laptop routinely receives necessary software updates.
2. Religious and Volunteer-provided programming
Recommendation 66: For any religious programming—worship services, counseling, bible study, etc.—that is provided directly by the chaplain, each facility should provide qualified interpretation when requested by an inmate who needs it.
Prior Recommendation 20: Significant communications by the chaplains are covered by the requirement of effective communication. Therefore the chaplains, like other KSR staff, should be trained in the requirements of this Agreement, and should ensure that if they have occasion to minister to a Deaf inmate—or simply inform him that a family member has died—they do so effectively, including using interpreter services if the inmate communicates using sign language.
11/2016 Court Report, App-11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 13 of 326 - Page ID#: 1594
C. Video captioning
D. Speech-to-text
E. Assistive listening systems
Recommendation 67: Each religious, educational, and programming area should have available a device to allow wireless amplification for individual hard-of-hearing inmates. Recommendation 68: KSR should inform deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates of the various ways in which religious, educational, rehabilitative, and recreational programming can be made more accessible to them; all programming providers (educational, rehabilitative, and recreational) should put in place a process to facilitate requests for such accommodations and assess the need for them.
F. Written communication
G. Non-auditory alerts
Recommendation 69: In any unit where there are deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates, each facility should implement (and ensure use of) written announcement boards. That is, all general announcements should also be promptly displayed on a written announcement board (e.g.: “X class is cancelled this evening,” or “all inmates in X category are allowed an X privilege this afternoon”). Staff use of this announcement board must be monitored and audited. Recommendation 70: In order to provide effective and equal communications to deaf and hardof-hearing inmates who are being individually paged, staff should check KOMS to see if that inmate has a deaf/hard-of-hearing alert; if a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate does not answer the auditory page in a minute or two, he or she should be individually alerted to the page by a staff member. This could be done by in-person notification or by provision of a personal paging system. Recommendation 71: Each facility should train staff to be alert to the possibility that a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate may be unable to hear an order or instruction issued verbally; training should cover strategies to avoid bad results.
H. Miscellaneous devices
I. Speech
Recommendation 71: In each facility’s settings in which staff ordinarily talk to a group of inmates—orientation, education, etc.—consideration should be given to talking to any hard-ofhearing inmate one-on-one, instead. For example, for someone who is having difficulty hearing a teacher in a group setting, even with assistive listening devices (see IV.E, above), a tutor might be a better option than a congregate GED class.
11/2016 Court Report, App-12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 14 of 326 - Page ID#: 1595
J. Teaching sign-language Recommendation 72: Deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates who do not have their GED should be among those allowed to enroll in any classes in sign language. Each facility should obtain resources relating to sign language—books or computer-based instruction—and make those available to deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates.
K. Telecommunications equipment and rules 1. Videophone and VRS 2. TTY
Recommendation 73: Each facility should maintain its TTY and develop a facility protocol for how to make it available to inmates, covering who the inmate should request it from, where it should be connected, etc. In addition, each facility should annually test its TTY and the protocol by calling me at an agreed upon time using direct TTY and the relay service. TTY instructions should be left with the TTY at all times.
3. Hard-of-hearing inmates Recommendation 74 (substitutes for prior recommendation 42): Each facility should improve access of hard-of-hearing inmates to telecommunications, by:
(a) Allowing them access to TTYs. (b) Informing them that amplified phones are available, and ensuring that at least one such phone, whose amplification is compatible with a hearing aid but does not require one, is available in every group of phones used by any hard-of-hearing inmate. (c) Providing access to captioned telephones, unless on investigation such telephones are not available in the institutional setting. I will request a report on implementation each aspect of this recommendation.
V. THE INTERACTION OF COMMUNICATION NEEDS AND HOUSING ASSIGNMENT
A. Segregated housing B. Other housing needs Recommendation 75: Each facility should develop a method for considering how communications difficulties with deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates can be minimized by particular housing assignments, and shall make such assignments when appropriate.
11/2016 Court Report, App-13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 15 of 326 - Page ID#: 1596
VI. PROCESSES FOR ASSESSING AND REQUESTING AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
VII. FORM AND OPTIONS
Recommendation 76: Each facility should include notice in its Inmate Handbook of the facility’s basic obligation to avoid discrimination and provide effective communication, and inform inmates to contact the ADA Coordinator if needed. Something like the following would be appropriate:
Americans with Disabilities Act and Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates
An inmate with a verified disability will have the opportunity to participate in services, privileges, and programs similar to other inmates at this institution. If you are deaf or hard-of-hearing, you should contact the designated institutional ADA Coordinator; each living unit and inmate public areas has contact information posted. All {name facility here}-provided services will provide effective communication and make available qualified interpreters when needed. Qualified Interpreters and Auxiliary Aids and Services are available for an inmate with a verified disability upon request. It is the inmate’s responsibility to request an interpreter from volunteer organizations or individuals that are providing activities and services. An inmate who meets criteria to be accommodated under the ADA will be provided identification to facilitate effective communication. If at any time an inmate chooses to not wear the identification, he/she shall sign a waiver document to be placed in the institutional file.
VIII. TRAINING
A. ADA Coordinator Training
B. Staff Training
Recommendation 77: In addition to the computer-based KYDOC training, live, in-service training should cover, at least:
a) For all staff: x The identity and role of the ADA Coordinator x Existence of KOMS and EMR alerts for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates, and the obligation to check for the alerts. x The occasions and process for obtaining access to the VRI laptop, and how to use the laptop, including where different people should sit to maximize communication effectiveness. (For medical, educational, and housing staff, this training should be done on-site, so each affected staff member can see where and how the laptop can be set up.) x The occasions and process for obtaining an in-person qualified interpreter.
b) For housing area staff: x The use of cell/bed notices that an inmate is deaf or hard-of-hearing x The use of the bed shaker switch.
11/2016 Court Report, App-14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 16 of 326 - Page ID#: 1597
x Telecommunications issues, including how to obtain and use a TTY, and the policies and procedures governing TTY and videophone usage.
x The obligation to notify deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates of alerts, including emergency alerts and non-emergency pages.
c) For all corrections staff: x The requirements to accommodate inmates who use sign language to communicate by using restraints that allow them to sign, and how to implement those requirements. x Strategies for dealing with inmates who may not hear directions or orders, especially when given from behind or above them.
d) For medical staff: x The responsibility of running a process to provide medically necessary hearing aids within two months, and what that actually entails, in terms of adjusting ordinary processes and timing. x The obligation to notify off-site medical provider(s) that a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service will be seeking medical care, and how this obligation is being assigned.
IX. REPORTING Recommendation 78: The ADA Coordinator should obtain monthly reports based on both KOMS and medical records of each inmate in the facility who is deaf or hard-of-hearing, and should check those reports too add to the Coordinator’s tracking list. Recommendation 79: Each facility’s quarterly written summary of grievances by deaf and hardof-hearing inmates should include all such grievances, not only the ones that are deemed related to effective communication, auxiliary aids and services, or other issues raised in the Settlement Agreement.
11/2016 Court Report, App-15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Doc

#: 84-2 Filed: ID#: 1598

12/0/5/P1W6Pag$eP:V1SU73oFfQ3P2SU6
"- QPQaFgOeEJY**

Site Visit Report of Settlement Monitor
Adams & Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky.)
Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor
Kentucky State Reformatory Visit date: February 24-25, 2016 Draft circulated to parties for comment: March 29, 2016
Final (April 21, 2016)
INTRODUCTION
The Settlement Agreement in this case became effective June 28, 2015, and allows me to visit each of the 13 Kentucky Department of Corrections (KDOC) facilities each calendar year. After consultation with both defendants and plaintiffs’ counsel, I decided that the most effective approach to monitoring would be to ask KDOC which facilities were in compliance with the Agreement, and start with those. I urged KDOC to begin with the Kentucky State Reformatory (KSR), because a large majority of the Deaf inmates who have been identified to me are housed at KSR. KDOC agreed, and I visited the Kentucky State Reformatory (KSR), in LaGrange, Kentucky, on February 24-25, 2016. KSR is functioning as a leader in KDOC’s compliance efforts. As my first site-visit report, this document is more discursive and explanatory than may be useful in future reports. It is intended to be helpful not just to KSR but to all of KDOC’s facilities, as they continue to move towards compliance with the Agreement in this case.
The visit was ably facilitated by KSR’s ADA Coordinator Anthony Hillebrandt and Deputy ADA Coordinator Paul Sloan, who, like the other KSR staff I spoke to, conducted themselves with exemplary professionalism throughout the tour. Prior to the visit, my assistant Abbye Klamann, a third-year law student, conducted seven phone interviews of KSR inmates, and I reviewed her notes and numerous other documents. During the visit, I was able to see every thing and every place I requested and to review all requested records. I spoke freely and confidentially with inmates and custody and non-custody staff. Warden Aaron Smith welcomed the visit and my feedback, which I shared at an exit interview with him and other senior staff. Everyone at the prison was helpful, and I found the visit extremely productive. Exhibit A lists the names and titles of each staff member I spoke with. Between the pre-tour phone interviews and more interviews conducted during my visit, I spoke with twenty inmates; to maximize their confidentiality I do not list them or use their names in this report, referring to them as Inmate A, Inmate B, etc. I am providing KSR staff and plaintiffs’ counsel a key that identifies those whose situations are specifically referenced in the report. (Note: when an inmate shared information with me confidentially, I do not identify that inmate at all.)
My recommendations are numbered and in bold; I have also pulled them out for ease of reference into their own document, which precedes this report. References to the Settlement Agreement appear in parentheses; such references use the fully numbered version of the

11/2016 Court Report, App-16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 18 of 326 - Page ID#: 1599
Agreement, which was Exhibit B to my first semi-annual report, in February 2016. (I have not reattached this version of the Agreement, but can provide it on request.)
On March 29, 2016, I provided this report in draft to KSR, KDOC, and plaintiffs’ counsel, giving each two weeks for comments or corrections. KSR’s ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt informed me via email that KSR had no comments. I did not hear anything back from KDOC headquarters. Plaintiffs’ counsel provided a written response, which is attached as Exhibit F. In addition, I received a written response from plaintiff Michael Knights to my first semi-annual report, which prompted me to propose a change to Exhibit D-2, to better facilitate inmate contact with the ADA Coordinator. I am not submitting this report to the Court separately, but I will include this report and others in the future in my semi-annual reports.
KSR has made very significant progress towards compliance with the Settlement Agreement. Much remains to be done, but important groundwork has been laid. I look forward to working with KSR and KDOC personnel on the next steps.
I. IDENTIFICATION OF INMATES COVERED BY THE AGREEMENT.
The Settlement Agreement covers both deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. Although the phrase “Deaf Inmates” is used throughout the agreement, that phrase is defined broadly, to mean
“Inmates who are unable to hear well enough to rely on their hearing as a means of processing information, who rely on Auxiliary Aids and Services to Effectively Communicate and who qualify as individuals with disabilities under the ADA, including deaf, hard of hearing, or hearing impaired persons. See 42 U.S.C. § 12102(4).” (I.3)
Pursuant to the Agreement (XV.B.1.d) KSR has therefore shared with me their list of all inmates whose medical record includes any relevant diagnostic labels (“deaf,” “hearing impaired,” etc.). On the most recent list, provided to me on February 9, 2016, these totaled 53 inmates; three were noted as entirely deaf, the rest as hearing impaired. I note in this regard that out of all the Kentucky DOC facilities, so far only KSR and Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (EKCC) have provided me with the names of any hard-of-hearing inmates; the other facilities have told me only about inmates who are entirely deaf. In fact, the total number of inmates whose names I have received from non-KSR prisons is 8, with just one noted as hard-of-hearing, even though I learned during this KSR visit that there are about 100 non-KSR inmates whose medical records include some indication that they have a hearing impairment.
Recommendation 1: I commend KSR for its identification practices; the other facilities are not in compliance with the reporting requirements of the Agreement, and should emulate KSR’s procedure and identify all inmates who meet the Agreement’s definition of “Deaf.” This is necessary both in order to report names to me and to ensure that appropriate services are provided to hard-of-hearing inmates.
KSR medical staff are implementing a process to improve diagnosis and inclusion on the list, administering a 10-question questionnaire to inmates during their initial medical assessment. The questionnaire is included as Exhibit B-1; it is apparently used throughout KDOC facilities. If
11/2016 Court Report, App-17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 19 of 326 - Page ID#: 1600
an inmate answers three or more of the question with “sometimes” or “yes,” he is supposed to see a medical provider (a physician or nurse practitioner) who in turn can assess whether he should be referred to an audiologist.
The questionnaire itself appears to be adapted from a screening instrument posted online by the Rochester Hearing and Speech Center.1 But because KDOC is relying on the questionnaire to identify not just who needs to see an audiologist, but who should be flagged for assessment of hearing services, I recommend several changes.
x The questionnaire is designed to be part of a screening process to decide who should see an audiologist for fuller hearing testing. Presumably that’s why it begins, “If you use a hearing aid, please answer according to the way you hear with the aid.” Because KSR is using it to decide, in addition, who might need non-hearing-aid services, the questionnaire should include several other preliminary identification (rather than diagnostic) questions. My specific suggestions are described below.
x In addition, the questionnaire does not cover current problems with a hearing aid (such as pain or buzzing or other problems). Again, I recommend additional questions below.
I have provided a recommended revised version of the questionnaire, and written instructions for its administration, as Exhibit B-2.
Recommendation 2: Include additional questions in the screening questionnaire, along the lines of:
x Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? x Have you ever been diagnosed with hearing loss? x Have you ever used a hearing aid that you no longer use? (If yes, Why don’t
you use it anymore?) A “yes” answer to any of the these three questions should be followed up by a provider visit, unless the inmate explains that he no longer uses the hearing aid because his hearing has improved so that it is no longer necessary.
x If you currently have a hearing aid, is it working ok? A “no” answer to this question should be followed up by a provider visit.
1 See Rochester Hearing & Speech Center, Hearing Screening Questionnaire, available at http://www.rhsc.org/hearing/files/2014/01/HearingScreeningQuestionnaire1.pdf. Seven questions are identical; for three others, there are substitutions, two from the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) SelfTest for Hearing Loss, and one that may be from the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly-Screening Version (HHIE-S). See also American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Self-Test for Hearing Loss, available at http://www.asha.org/public/hearing/Self-Test-for-Hearing-Loss/; The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly—Screening Version, available at http://familymed.uthscsa.edu/geriatrics/tools/Hearing_Assessment.pdf.
11/2016 Court Report, App-18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 20 of 326 - Page ID#: 1601
x Note to tester: If the inmate seems unable to understand these questions due to a hearing impairment, provider follow-up is indicated.
Finally, because use of a written questionnaire is problematic for inmates who are illiterate—and literacy rates are particularly high among people with hearing impairments—it is important for the questionnaire to be administered orally for any inmate whose literacy seems to be low. See Part IV.B, below, for a further discussion of literacy assessment. (Of course if an inmate’s hearing impairment seems to be making this ineffective, that alone should trigger further evaluation.)
Recommendation 3: Staff administering the questionnaire should be alert to (and trained on) the possibility of low literacy, and should ask questions orally when appropriate. Among illiterate inmates, a hearing impairment sufficient to undermine their ability to answer these questions ought to itself trigger referral to the appropriate provider.
For each inmate whose questionnaire indicates that he is or might have a hearing impairment, the next step is a medical assessment. I spoke with KSR physician Dr. Frederick Kemen about his screening protocols. Dr. Kemen explained that currently, at KSR, this is accomplished by use of a “whisper test.” The administrator of the test stands at arms’ length behind the patient (so he cannot read lips), and after instructing the patient to place one finger on the tragus of one ear to obscure sound, whispers three or four words towards the patient’s other ear, and asks the patient to repeat the word back. The test is then repeated for the other ear. If an inmate fails the test for either ear, he is referred to an audiologist.
Dr. Kemen stated that he plans to consult his corporate office to find out if there are other, better screening techniques that KSR medical staff might follow. In addition, he stated that he would like to have access to an audiometer, in order to use it in addition to the whisper test. He emphasized, however, that the whisper test has some advantages over audiometry because the whisper test is more function-based—it tests ability to understand words, not just hear tones.
The purpose of the follow-up provider visit is both to determine whether an inmate needs additional assessment or medical services and to determine whether he should be flagged as deaf or hard-of-hearing, offered auxiliary aids, and included on the inmate list provided to me semiannually. For example, an inmate with a functional hearing aid might not need additional medical services, but should be included on the list and provided any other necessary auxiliary aids.
Recommendation 4: Further assessment of the inmate should include not just the medical decision whether to send the inmate to an audiologist, but a separate, explicit, charted and electronically-tracked decision whether he is deaf or hard-of-hearing.
KSR staff explained to me that a new Electronic Medical Record system will soon be implemented, which provides a perfect opportunity for necessary improvements.
11/2016 Court Report, App-19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 21 of 326 - Page ID#: 1602
Recommendation 5: The KDOC Electronic Medical Record system should include a single electronic code that flags inmates who are deaf, hard-of-hearing, or hearing-impaired (hereinafter Deaf, in this report), to facilitate provision of services to them.
II. PROVISION OF AUDIOLOGY SERVICES
Currently, KSR sends inmates who fail the whisper test to an off-site audiologist (or, if indicated, an Ear, Nose & Throat doctor). This is expensive, and interviews with both inmates and staff suggest that there are frequently long waits for the assessment visit and for the eventual audiologist visits. In fact, in recent years, only in the past few months has KSR started sending inmates to an audiologist. Several KSR inmates reported to me that they had been seeking such a visit for over a year—whether for initial audiology assessment or because their hearing aid is either no longer working well for them or seems to be malfunctioning. When an inmate who needs hearing aids doesn’t receive them, KSR’s communication with that inmate is almost certain to be ineffective. Prompt assessment and provision of treatment is therefore very important. Both an inmate and Dr. Kemen told me that several years ago, there was an audiologist who came— perhaps just occasionally—to KSR and did assessments there. This approach seems like it might be a useful one to revive.
Recommendation 6: Inmates in need of a hearing aid—both initially or because the device they have is no longer working for them—should wait no longer than two months to obtain the necessary device. That time period should begin the day the potential need is indicated by the inmate’s request for evaluation, answers on the questionnaire, etc. KSR should track the time from request/questionnaire to provider visit to audiology visit to hearing aid provision, and ensure that inmates do not have a longer wait. (In future quarterly reporting periods, I will request this tracking data.) One way to accomplish less expensive and more comprehensive assessment for the current backlog might be to bring in an audiologist to KSR for two or three days.
III. AUXILIARY AIDS/SERVICES
Once an inmate is identified as fitting the Agreement’s definition of “Deaf,” KSR is obligated (in the absence of a voluntary waiver) to provide effective communication by using auxiliary aids and services. The Agreement instructs that “[a]fter medical staff determine that an Inmate is Deaf, the KDOC will presume that Auxiliary Aids and Services in the form of Qualified Interpreters, visual notifications, telecommunication devices, and other aids and services set forth in this Agreement are necessary to ensure Effective Communication and substantially equal services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations.” (III.C.1) Deaf inmates might need any of several different types of such aids/services. In this section, I discuss them in turn.
To figure out what services may be needed, it’s necessary to think through each type of communication that takes place at KSR. Different situations call for different services or devices. Much of this is covered in detail by the Agreement, but sometimes the Agreement just states the general obligation of effective communication and equal access to services, programs, and activities.
11/2016 Court Report, App-20

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 22 of 326 - Page ID#: 1603
A. Personal hearing devices: Hearing aids and amplifiers
In Parts I-II, above, I discussed KSR’s approach to provision of audiology evaluation and hearing aids. KSR’s current (and appropriate) practice is that hearing aids must be prescribed by an audiologist, and the recommendations already offered are aimed at improving the effectiveness and timeliness of the necessary evaluations. My on-site interviews with KSR inmates also suggest that inmates with hearing loss who have not so far been prescribed hearing aids are not well informed about the process for requesting an evaluation, or about the fact that batteries are medical costs not billed to inmates. In fact, one inmate told me that even though he had used a hearing aid before he came to prison, he did not want one in prison because batteries were so hard to obtain and so expensive. And one health care provider told me that he/she believed one inmate, Inmate A, got himself sent to segregation because that was the only place he could get free hearing aid batteries. (I did not talk to Inmate A myself or otherwise confirm whether the provider’s belief was plausible.) In fact, I have been told both by KSR staff and by inmates who actually have hearing aids that they do not face battery access issues. The Agreement provides that batteries are available free of charge, without co-pay, “for any Deaf Inmate who is deemed indigent pursuant to Kentucky Corrections Policy and Procedure 15.7.” (V.B) Commendably, KSR has decided that since hearing aid batteries are medically necessary, no charge is appropriate even for inmates who do not meet this criterion. I do not think I spoke to any inmate who was being charged for hearing aid batteries.
Recommendation 7: Full information about hearing aids and hearing evaluations, including the availability of batteries without charge, should be provided to inmates. See Exhibit D-2.
While Deaf inmates are waiting for audiologist evaluation, or when their degree of hearing impairment is small, other medical staff at KSR sometimes provide those inmates with personal amplifiers, which both inmates and staff often refer to as “pocket talkers.” It seems that only some of the Deaf inmates who might benefit from amplifiers know that they are available. In fact, amplifiers are apparently readily available when requested by medical staff; in my interview of clinic assistant Barbara Handley, she explained that a stock is kept on hand, and that when more are needed, it takes a week or less to obtain them.
Recommendation 8: Inmates waiting for an audiologist evaluation or for hearing aid service should be offered an amplifier while they wait.
B. Qualified Interpretation
1. The availability of Qualified Interpreter services
For Deaf inmates who use sign language to communicate, interpreter services are essential. Most such inmates use American Sign Language (ASL), or a combination of ASL and gestures. ASL is not a version of English—it is a different language, with its own syntax. Native ASL-speakers are often not entirely fluent in English, including written English. Accordingly, trying to get by with writing is not just slower, it’s often quite ineffective.
The Agreement defines “Qualified Interpreter” to mean:
11/2016 Court Report, App-21

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 23 of 326 - Page ID#: 1604
“[A] person who is able to interpret effectively, accurately, and impartially, both receptively and expressively, with an individual Deaf Inmate using any necessary specialized vocabulary. See 28 C.F.R. §35.104. A Qualified Interpreter could include an ASL interpreter, a sign language interpreter using more English-based signs, an oral interpreter, a cued speech transliterator or a tactile interpreter for a Deaf Inmate who is also blind. For sign language interpreters, a Qualified Interpreter is one who holds current, valid certifications and licensure by the Kentucky Board of Interpreters for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing.” (I.18)
I will refer in this report to qualified interpreters, QI, or sometimes “interpreter” or “interpretive services”; in each case, I am referring to qualified interpretation.
The same section also explains that “A Qualified Interpreter may be provided by the KDOC either in person, or via Video Remote Interpreting, videoconferencing or other similar means that provide Effective Communication.” (I.18) Video Remote Interpreting (VRI) is a method by which a hearing person and a Deaf person in the same space can communicate with each other via a remote interpreter, often through software installed on a laptop. KSR has made important strides with respect to offering both in-person interpretation and VRI. The prison has entered an arrangement with a provider that can send an interpreter to the prison when needed, usually on 48 hours notice or more. In addition, KSR now has a VRI contract and owns two dedicated VRI laptops. So far, however, interpretation has been used at KSR only for certain types of communications—in particular, reclassification and disciplinary hearings (VRI), and Narcotics Anonymous (in person). When I did my visit, education and medical staff had not used the VRI laptops—and most staff members were, on my questioning, unaware of their availability.
The Settlement Agreement includes many provisions relating to both types of interpretation. In its most general relevant provision, the Agreement requires “[a]ppropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, including Qualified Interpreters,” in order to offer Deaf inmates the equal opportunity for participation in all aspects of prison life, including “orientation; medical evaluations; On-site Medical Care and healthcare appointments; classification and transfer hearings; grievance, disciplinary, and Parole hearings; and rehabilitative, educational, work, or transitional KDOC programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC’s custody.” (V.A.2) The Agreement then adds a number of specifics, both as to the situations in which effective communication may be needed and the particular need for interpretation to succeed in meeting the requirement of effective communication:
x Auxiliary aid/service assessment (III.F.2: “At the request of the Deaf Inmate, the KDOC will provide that Deaf Inmate with a meaningful opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member and a Qualified Interpreter to ask any questions regarding the written or interpreted materials.”)
x All medical, dental, and mental health evaluations and healthcare appointments (VI.C.1: “[F]or many Deaf Inmates, a Qualified Interpreter may be a necessary means of providing Effective Communication.”)
x Unscheduled medical and mental health emergencies (VI.C.4: “[T]he KDOC will provide a Qualified Interpreter via VRI service for use in unscheduled medical emergencies. If VRI services are not appropriate in the situation, KDOC personnel will work in
11/2016 Court Report, App-22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 24 of 326 - Page ID#: 1605
conjunction with medical staff to attempt to secure an in-person Qualified Interpreter as soon as possible.”) x Classification and transfer hearings (VI.H: “The KDOC will provide a Qualified Interpreter for any hearings or meetings relating to a Deaf Inmate’s transfer to another facility, change in security classification, or any other classification hearing involving the exchange of information between the Deaf Inmate and the KDOC personnel that could affect the Deaf Inmate’s status.”) x Meetings when a Deaf inmate has questions about written materials provided by the prison (III.E: “At the request of the Deaf Inmate, the KDOC will provide that Deaf Inmate with a meaningful opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member and a Qualified Interpreter to ask any questions regarding the written or interpreted materials.”) x Disciplinary hearings, including when the inmate is a witness or facing charges. (VII.A.1: “The KDOC must provide Deaf Inmates with a Qualified Interpreter in any disciplinary proceeding in which a Deaf Inmate is suspected of, charged with, or a witness to, a disciplinary infraction.”) This includes not just the hearing itself but also:
o staff investigations or investigative interviews involving the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel
o any other discipline-related encounter that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel, including the shift supervisor’s or investigator’s review,
o rights or other advisements (Miranda warnings; right to consult with an assigned legal aide; advisement of the anticipated date, time, and place of hearing;
o meetings with legal aides or advisors (VI.A.2: “To the extent that a Deaf Inmate has access to his or her advisor, a Qualified Interpreter shall be made available to the Deaf Inmate for any exchange of information between the Deaf Inmate and his or her advisor.”)
x Narcotics Anonymous and Alcoholics Anonymous (VI.E.3: “The KDOC will provide Qualified Interpreters for Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) and Narcotics Anonymous (NA) programs.”)
x If the prison directly provides religious services (V.A.3: “To the extent the KDOC provides, now or in the future, any religious activities at facilities housing Deaf Inmates, the KDOC shall provide a Qualified Interpreter at such activities upon the request of any Deaf Inmate.”; VI.G.3: essentially the same).
x Conversations between inmates and the individual supervising their post-release supervision. (VI.I: “Upon request, the KDOC will provide appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, which may include Qualified Interpreters, for Deaf Inmates under postrelease supervision to Effectively Communicate with the individual supervising their post-release supervision.”)
x Any other significant communications (VI.J: “The KDOC will provide Effective Communication, which may include Qualified Interpreters, for any significant communications between Deaf Inmates and KDOC staff that is not specifically discussed in this Agreement.”)
In addition: Paragraph VI.A.1 of the Agreement specifies:
11/2016 Court Report, App-23

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 25 of 326 - Page ID#: 1606

“The KDOC shall provide an in-person Qualified Interpreter at KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are incarcerated in the following circumstances:
x communications concerning medical care and attention, including dental, vision, audiological, and mental health care
x disciplinary hearings in which the Deaf Inmate may be a suspect of or charged with a rule infraction;
x transfer and classification processes that impact on the Deaf Inmate’s status; x transitional programming; x rehabilitative programming, including, but not limited to, Alcoholics Anonymous
(AA) and Narcotics Anonymous (NA); and x educational programming.”
And VI.A.2 requires, additionally, an in-person Qualified Interpreter “as circumstances warrant.”

The Agreement is thus ambiguous as to which method of qualified interpretive services is needed when. Table 1 summarizes all of the provisions just described:

Table 1: Settlement Agreement Provisions Relating to Interpretative Services

Situation

Auxiliary Aids, which

may include QI

Initial intake/assessment/classification III.A.1

Auxiliary aid/service assessment and III.B.3

other accommodation assistance

Orientation

V.A.2

Meetings about materials

Medical evaluations

V.A.2

Scheduled on-site medical, mental V.A.2, VI.C.1

health and dental care/ appointments

Emergency health care, on-site

V.A.2

Classification and transfer hearings and related meetings Grievance hearings Disciplinary hearings and all related processes Parole hearings Rehabilitative and educational programming Work Transitional programs Conversations with post-release supervisor Religious programming provided by KDOC Other significant communications

V.A.2 V.A.2 V.A.2 V.A.2 V.A.2 V.A.2 V.A.2 VI.I: On request
VI.J

QI, via VRI or In-person qualified

in-person

interpreter

III.F.2: on request

VI.A.1

III.E: on request

VI.A.1

VI.C.4 VI.H

VI.C.4: when VRI services are inappropriate VI.A.1 VI.A.1

VII.A.1

VI.A.1

VI.E.3: NA and VI.A.1 AA
VI.A.1

V.A.3: On request

VI.A.2: as circumstances warrant

11/2016 Court Report, App-24

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 26 of 326 - Page ID#: 1607
Bringing all this together into an operational rule is challenging. I do not think, for example, that in-person interpretation needs to be available for every single medical encounter— but it would be possible to read VI.A.1 to so require. In addition, the Agreement states, as one way of resolving the issue: “In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, primary consideration shall be given to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)).” (I.5; 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2) includes essentially the same language.)
I move to the choice between VRI and in-person interpretation in Part III.B.1, below. As far as when some kind of qualified interpretation is needed, I recommend the following:
Recommendation 9: For inmates who use sign language to communicate, some kind of qualified interpretive services should be readily available for any communication between an inmate and staff when the inmate requests interpretation. The availability of interpretation should not be limited to only certain types of encounters, communications, or settings. (Below, at IV.D, I address modifications to various forms to help operationalize this recommendation.)
Recommendation 10: For inmates who use sign language to communicate, no special request should be needed to obtain VRI services for auxiliary aid/service assessment, emergency health care on-site, classification and transfer hearings and related meetings, grievance meetings and hearings, disciplinary hearings and all related processes, parole meetings and hearings.
Recommendation 11: The items identified in Recommendation 10 are based on the Agreement’s language. Functionally, I also recommend that interpretation services be offered without special request to any inmate (known to prison staff to use sign language to communicate) during initial classification and orientation. These encounters are vital to the terms of each inmate’s living situation, and inmates are unlikely to know, during these early stages, that they need to request interpretation and how to do so.
2. The choice between Video Relay Interpretation (VRI) and in-person interpretation
As explained above and demonstrated by Table 1, the Settlement Agreement is mostly ambiguous in terms of when interpretation services should be offered via VRI or an in-person interpreter. VRI is less costly than in-person interpretation, and therefore frequently more attractive to organizations responsible for ensuring effective communication. Deaf people who use sign language to communicate, however, tend to prefer in-person interpretation, for a number of reasons: VRI equipment is inconsistent in practice; technical difficulties are common. In addition, the environmental cues available in-person mean that a good in-person interpreter is better able than a good remote interpreter to check that the Deaf person is understanding what’s being said. And similarly, a good in-person interpreter may be better able to understand idiosyncratic signing. Finally, VRI technology requires that each person involved in the communication be close to the computer camera and microphone, so it doesn’t work well when more than two people are involved in the communication, or one or both of them cannot remain still and near the laptop.
11/2016 Court Report, App-25

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 27 of 326 - Page ID#: 1608
In total, VRI may, generally, be suitable when only two people (the Deaf inmate and the hearing person) are communicating; the pace of communication can be slow; and there is no need to move around. VRI is less suitable when there are many people communicating (for example in a class or a parole hearing), or there is a need to move around (for example, during some physical medical exams). In those situations, an in-person interpreter is most appropriate, and likely necessary for effective communication.
At KSR, at the time of my visit, an in-person interpreter had been provided only in one situation, in response to a grievance filed January 2016. The record of that grievance (described in more detail below), includes ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt’s explanation that he hadn’t approved an in-person interpreter because he “thought the VRI was going to work for the meeting and cost is less for laptop.” In response, Inmate B wrote, “It only work for one on one to be effective but not group.”
In fact, Inmate B has brought two grievances on this question. The first, 15-0828, was initiated August 26, 2015, soon after the effective date of the agreement. In it, Inmate B argued that VRI was not sufficient for his NA meeting. The staff response at the informal resolution stage was “Kentucky State Reformatory has Video Remote Interpreting “VRI” available for reclassification, N.A., court call, or any other program meeting.”
The processing of this grievance shows one way that things can go wrong in efforts to provide interpretation. There was a delay in the grievance committee meeting with the inmate, because, the form notes, “Chair forgot to acquire VRI laptop.” Once the meeting was held, the answer provided was a flat ‘no’: “the committee agrees with the informal resolution and find[s] that the memo addresses any need for a physical interpreter.” There are two memos which are attached as Exhibits C-1 and C-2. The memo to staff (Exhibit C-1) says:
“In the event that KSR needs an outside-qualified interpreter [that is, an in-person interpreter], you are to contact my office 48 hours prior to the scheduled event. Outsidequalified interpreter will be scheduled to come in to provide communication between you and deaf/hearing-impaired inmate.”
And the corresponding memo to inmates (Exhibit C-2) states:
“To schedule an in person-qualified interpreter, you are to contact my office in writing 48 hours prior to the scheduled event place your letter in the institutional mail box. In person-qualified interpreter will be scheduled to come in to provide effective communication.”
(The grievance documentation does not mention the “Request for a Qualified Interpreter” form— which may not yet have been created; it is attached as Exhibit C-3. This form, provided to inmates seeking interpretation services, states, “In the event that VRI laptop is out of service, Anthony Hillebrandt, ADA Coordinator will schedule in-person qualified interpreter.”)
After this point in the grievance proceedings, it seems that the issue—Inmate B’s request for an in-person interpreter rather than a VRI—may have become confused, perhaps because there are some references in the grievance documents to the issue of how much advance notice was required for access to interpreter services. In any event, subsequent documentation does not clearly address the in-person vs. VRI issue.
11/2016 Court Report, App-26

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 28 of 326 - Page ID#: 1609
As discussed in Part IV.D, below, these memos and forms are not adequate: they must be modified to clearly present in-person interpretation as a possibility and to allow inmates to request it and explain the circumstances that may justify the request. See Agreement I.5: “In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, primary consideration shall be given to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2))”; 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2) includes essentially the same language.
On Feb. 2, 2016, as already described, Inmate B filed another grievance, explaining that the VRI laptop had failed to working for his NA meeting. This time ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt agreed, and said KSR would provide an in-person interpreter for that meeting going forward.
Learning from experience, inmates who need interpretation services should be provided an in-person interpreter for classes or programs that involve more than one person talking, and for parole hearings. For these situations, it is inappropriate to delay the provision of effective communication by trying (nearly-certain-to-be-inadequate) remote interpretation first. In addition, going forward, if VRI has been attempted in a particular situation, Deaf inmates should be able to request in-person interpretation instead, if the VRI didn’t turn out to be effective. For example, in-person interpretation can cope more easily than VRI with unorthodox signing. There is one KSR inmate, Inmate D, whose signing is not conventional ASL, but an amalgamation of ASL, gestures, finger spelling, and “home signing.”2 As of the date of my visit, KSR had not yet tried to facilitate communication with this inmate using the VRI laptop. It may be that remote interpretation is ineffective because of his unconventional signing; in that case, an in-person interpreter will be needed whenever interpretive services are necessary for effective communication. (Note: Inmate D has a low level of literacy, so for him, written communication is almost certainly not effective.)
These considerations are almost certainly not the only ones worth including. It would be worthwhile in the Agreement’s next year or two to assess the effectiveness of communication via VRI in other situations, to decide whether there are any such situations in which in-person interpretation should be the first recourse.
Recommendation 12: Both the existing VRI contract and the standing arrangement with a provider of in-person qualified interpretive services are crucial and should remain in place. In-person interpretation should be provided to inmates who communicate by signing when it is necessary for effective communication. This includes during group classes in which student participation is key, and in parole hearings. For other situations, an in-person interpreter should be provided if remote interpretation is unlikely to be, or has not been, effective.
Recommendation 13: More generally, more clarity and a better process for picking a qualified interpretation method—VRI or in-person—are needed. The various memos, forms, and training should be modified to support that process. KSR should give “primary consideration” to the affected inmate’s view on this question. Revised versions of all the relevant forms and memos are attached as Exhibit D. The information in Exhibit D-5—in
2 See N. Frishberg, Home Sign, in 3 GALLAUDET ENCYCLOPEDIA OF DEAF PEOPLE AND DEAFNESS 128 (1987).
11/2016 Court Report, App-27

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 29 of 326 - Page ID#: 1610
particular, the preferred communication method—should be made available to all KDOC staff who need it, including both medical and custody staff, including electronically.
Recommendation 14: KSR should track the effectiveness of communication via VRI in other situations, in order to decide whether there are any situations in which in-person interpretation should be the first recourse. As part of this assessment process, each time a VRI is used, the inmate should be asked how effective the resulting communication was. This can be done by a scaled question:
Please check the box that best indicates your views.
The Video Remote Interpretation I just used provided fully effective communication:
 Strongly agree  Weakly agree  Weakly disagree  Strongly disagree
If there was any problem with the communication, please explain:
These responses can be collected and analyzed. This recommendation is reflected in Exhibit D, discussed more fully below.
3. Hand Restraints
To be effective, communication must be two-way. It’s for that reason that the Agreement provides:
“According to the KDOC’s hand restraint policies, the KDOC will use hand restraints on Deaf Inmates only in the following circumstances:
x when transporting a Deaf Inmate to or from a KDOC Adult Institution; x when transferring a Deaf Inmate into or out of the special management unit; and x as needed in response to security threats.” (XI.A.1)
“KDOC training will include . . . the agreement that hand restraints will be removed from a Deaf Inmate when the Deaf Inmate is in a secure environment, when security is no longer a threat, or there are other security devices in place to allow the Deaf Inmate to Effectively Communicate.” (XI.A.2)
Under these provisions, it is vital that , for inmates who use sign language to communicate, decisions about using hand restraints be made individually, not merely on the basis of a policy that an inmate in a particular status must remain restrained. And it is equally important that other security devices that allow effective communication be used.
Inmate C is one of three KSR inmates who signs to communicate. At the time of my visit, he was designated “max assault status,” due to a recent finding that he had assaulted an officer. Under KSR’s rules, that status requires that inmates be handcuffed whenever they are out of their cell. But in order to interview him, I needed him to be able to sign. Warden Smith and his staff were able to implement an appropriate security response, using an alternative restraint technique (which they described as “side saddles”) that used a belt and chain to shackle him to the wall, but left his hands free. The interview proceeded without incident.
11/2016 Court Report, App-28

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 30 of 326 - Page ID#: 1611
Recommendation 15: Inmates who communicate via sign language should not have their hands restrained when there is a need for effective communication, absent an individualized finding of security threat even with use of substitute security procedures (if necessary). If avoiding restraint of inmates’ hands requires substitute security procedures, those should be written up and included in the documentation of the necessary processes for both VRI and in-person interpretation, and any appropriate equipment should be obtained and installed wherever it might be needed.
4. Past problems with provision of in-person Qualified Interpreters
I examined the disciplinary records since June 2015 of each current and recent KSR inmate who uses sign language to communicate. In every one of disciplinary incidents, there was a communication-related problem.
In each incident, no qualified interpreter was provided for at least some stages of the process:
x Inmate C, Report dated 8/5/2015: “Lieutenant [] had Inmate [C] read the disciplinary due to having hearing impairment.”
x Inmate B, Report dated 10/9/2015: “Attached is written correspondence due to not being able to reach an interpreter thru the ‘purple’ machine.”
x Inmate C, Report dated 10/20/2015: “Inmate [C] was asked several questions written on paper . . . . Inmate [C] was asked what it was about?” he replied “Something Act With Other Inmate.”
x Inmate D, Report dated 12/10/2015: “Inmate [D] stated the following with the help of an Inmate interpreter . . .” No record of any offer of a qualified interpreter.
x Inmate E, Report dated 12/14/2015: “Inmate [E] is hearing impaired therefore, all questions pertaining to this hearing was handwritten by myself . . . and handwritten answered by Inmate [E].”
x Inmate C, Report dated 1/18/2016: “The above Disciplinary Report was discussed with inmate [C] using a note pad, due to inmate [C] being deaf.” There is no report from the eventual disciplinary hearing.
There is no way to tell whether use of a qualified interpreter would have enabled these inmates to communicate their side of events with greater detail or would have resulted in a different outcome. In all but the second of the incidents, the consequences seems to have been relatively small, and may now be past: 15 days or less in segregation. I do not know whether any of these incidents had additional, more attenuated impacts on the affected inmates (for example, triggering or influencing a reclassification).
The second of these incidents, however, in which Inmate C was found to have assaulted a staff member, was quite serious, resulting in 180 days of disciplinary segregation and the loss of two years good time credit. The communications problems continued throughout the disciplinary process: at the formal disciplinary hearing VRI was provided, but Inmate C remained handcuffed. Questions were put to him in yes/no format; the interpreter signed to relay those questions, and he could shake or nod his head in response. (The same approach was taken during Inmate C’s most recent reclassification.) This account is based on my interviews; the disciplinary documentation notes that VRI was provided. It is notable, however, that the
11/2016 Court Report, App-29

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 31 of 326 - Page ID#: 1612
documentation never states Inmate C’s position about any of the events in question. The cryptic sentence quoted above from Inmate C’s written response (“Inmate [C] was asked what it was about?” he replied “Something Act With Other Inmate”) is the only evidence of his account.
This is not effective communication, and it undermined the fairness of Inmate C’s disciplinary hearing. The disciplinary hearing should be reheard. See Agreement VII.B.3: “If, as of the Effective Date of this Agreement, a Deaf Inmate is being punished or is scheduled to be punished for a disciplinary infraction as the result of a hearing in which he or she did not waive his or her right to a Qualified Interpreter, then the disciplinary hearing must be re-heard at a time that a Qualified Interpreter can be present.”
For the other incidents mentioned, the need to redo the hearings is less acute, given that the consequences seem to be already past. Still, under the Agreement, each of these inmates is entitled to a rehearing.
Recommendation 16: For situations since June 2015 in which KSR’s procedures did not allow an inmate to communicate during a disciplinary hearing—most importantly, in Inmate C’s October 2015 hearing—the inmate should be given an opportunity to redo the hearing. This opportunity must be effectively communicated to the inmate, which itself should be done using interpretive services.
Inmate D’s 2016 parole hearing was an additional incident in which a failure of effective communication tainted an even more consequential encounter. Inmate D communicates via sign language (albeit an unconventional kind of sign language). This has long been known to some staff at KSR. At Inmate D’s parole hearing in 2011, he had a sign language interpreter. And in December 2015, in the disciplinary hearing described above, an inmate interpreter helped out. Finally, Licensed Psychological Associate Chris Wiggins, who provides mental health services in the segregation unit and who knows some sign language, notes that he was able to communicate with Inmate D using sign language. However, presumably because accommodations and auxiliary aids have not been formally tracked, and because the system for evaluating each inmate’s need for such services has not been robust, more recently, the ADA Coordinator did not realize that Inmate D uses sign language. Instead, communications with him have relied on writing; since he is not very literate, this is ineffective.
Inmate D had a parole hearing in February 2016; he was not given parole and his next hearing date was set for April 2021. He did not receive any communication assistance at the February 2016 hearing.
The Agreement provides:
“Appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, including Qualified Interpreters, will be made available so that Deaf Inmates may have an equal opportunity to participate in all services, privileges, and programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC’s custody. These services, privileges, and programs will include, but not be limited to: orientation; medical evaluations; On-site Medical Care and healthcare appointments; classification and transfer hearings; grievance, disciplinary, and Parole hearings; and rehabilitative, educational, work, or transitional KDOC programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC’s custody.” (V.A.2; emphasis added)
11/2016 Court Report, App-30

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 32 of 326 - Page ID#: 1613
“When a Deaf Inmate is scheduled to appear at a Parole hearing, the appropriate ADA Coordinator will notify the Kentucky Parole Board of the Deaf Inmate’s need for, and the Kentucky Parole Board’s duty to provide, Auxiliary Aids and Services for Effective Communication. This notice shall be given no later than seven (7) days before the Deaf Inmate’s scheduled Parole hearing. In the event that the Deaf Inmate will be physically present at a KDOC Adult Institution for the Parole hearing, the KDOC will work with the Kentucky Parole Board to ensure that any appointed Qualified Interpreter obtains security clearances in a timely manner.” (VI.A.3)
These provisions were not followed for Inmate D’s February 2016 Parole hearing.
I raised the issue of Inmate D’s Parole hearing during the visit, and KSR in turn raised the matter to the Parole Board. On March 23, the Board declined to redo the hearing. In an email to KSR staff, Division of Parole and Victim Services staff member Melissa Chandler explained that it had been decided that any error was not very serious:
“We were made aware of [Inmate D’s] special needs prior to the hearing. DOC provided a staff person in the hearing with him and he seemed to be able to communicate with the Board Members. [Inmate D] had an LSCMI and Case plan with him, both of which would have required DOC staff to communication with him. The Board Members were under the impression that the form of communication that was present during the hearing was the best means to communicate with him for the hearing. He never asked for assistance during the hearing and the Board Members were able to proceed with the hearing and communicate with him for their purposes.”
But how was Inmate D supposed to ask for assistance? He writes poorly, if at all, and does not speak. There was no interpreter present to enable him to communicate even that he was unable to communicate.
In addition, Ms. Chandler’s email quoted the Board’s written decision:
“The inmate was given the written decision of the Board where it states: ‘The only reasons for reconsideration of this decision are: (a) If there is an allegation of misconduct by a board member that is substantiated by the record: (b) If there is significant procedural error by a board member; or (c) If there is significant new evidence that was not available at the time of the hearing. A request based on the availability of the new evidence or information shall be accompanied by adequate documentation. The inmate or his/her legal representative may submit a request for reconsideration within 21 days of the date the final disposition is made.’ Mr. Hatfield did not request a reconsideration.”
Inmate D is essentially illiterate, so unless this written decision was conveyed to him via an interpreter—which it was not—it was not functionally available to him. In my view, the failure to provide effective communication at the Parole hearing constitutes “significant procedural error.” And as Inmate D said to me (via interpreter): “I couldn’t understand anything. Where was the interpreter? I’m deaf.”
Recommendation 17: Inmate D’s 2016 Parole hearing should be redone, with an in-person Qualified Interpreter.
11/2016 Court Report, App-31

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 33 of 326 - Page ID#: 1614
5. Off-site medical providers
The Agreement distinguishes between on-site and off-site medical care. For off-site care, prison staff have the obligation to facilitate, but not provide, interpretive services. In particular, prison staff must inform off-site medical providers that “a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service will be seeking medical care from those off-site medical providers at a particular date and time,” or, in an emergency, that such a prisoner “is being transported to the off-site medical provider.”
I am not aware of any occasion since the Settlement Agreement’s effective date when an inmate who communicates via sign language has received off-site medical care. But considering that KSR medical staff have not themselves provided effective communication during care for Deaf inmates who use sign language to communicate, it seems unlikely that they are prepared and ready to inform off-site providers of the need to provide effective communication, and what is required.
Recommendation 18: When a Deaf inmate is seeking/receiving off-site medical care, KSR staff should, as early as practicable, inform the relevant medical provider(s) that a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service will be seeking medical care from those off-site medical providers at a particular date and time; in the case of an emergency, KSR staff should provide such information as soon as possible, and should include the Deaf inmate’s estimated time of arrival. There should be policies and procedures in place, implemented by appropriate training, to ensure that these notifications occur.
6. Volunteer-provided programming
The Agreement also distinguishes between KDOC and volunteer-provided activities. For the latter, KSR is not obligated to provide a qualified interpreter, but is instead required to facilitate, by “allow[ing] the volunteer organization or individual to bring a Qualified Interpreter, subject to the KDOC Adult Institution’s security requirements,” and “work[ing] with the volunteer organization or individual in an effort to have a Qualified Interpreter at the volunteerprovided activities.” (V.A.3)
And similarly: “The KDOC shall encourage outside volunteers providing religious services to provide Effective Communication for Deaf Inmates as long as the volunteer meets the same security requirements that are imposed on all other outside volunteers.” (VI.G.1)
The only volunteer-provided programming at KSR is religious programming, which is plentiful. Chaplains Art Turner and David Dillard told me that KSR religious programs are offered by 300 volunteers from several dozen organizations; they provide 130 services per month, in which about 25-30% of KSR’s inmates participate. None of them offers any interpretive services, although one of the chaplains did try several months ago to generally solicit them to do so, without success. (The chaplains thought if they knew a particular Deaf inmate who needed interpretation to understand services, they might be more successful in filling that more definite need.)
11/2016 Court Report, App-32

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 34 of 326 - Page ID#: 1615
The Agreement states that “[t]o the extent that the KDOC provides any religious services, now or in the future, the KDOC shall provide a Qualified Interpreter.” (Agreement VI.G.3; V.A.3 is materially the same) The chaplains explained to me that they mostly coordinate volunteer programming, but that they do provide one service themselves: telling inmates when there is a death in the family and then facilitating the inmates’ communication with their family members. The chaplains were unaware of the existence of interpretive services at KSR, whether in-person or VRI. It certainly seems that sign language interpretation would be the only effective way to communicate this kind of message to a Deaf inmate who uses sign language. This seems to me covered by VI.G.3, and other aspects of the Agreement. It would not make sense to require a request by the affected inmate, given that this is a one-time notice.
Recommendation 19: The process/forms for inmates to request interpretive services and other auxiliary aids and services should clearly encompass religious and any other volunteer-provided programming. See Part IV.D, below.
Recommendation 20: Significant communications by the chaplains are covered by the requirement of effective communication. Therefore the chaplains, like other KSR staff, should be trained in the requirements of this Agreement, and should ensure that if they have occasion to minister to a Deaf inmate—or simply inform him that a family member has died—they do so effectively, including using interpreter services if the inmate communicates using sign language.
7. Video Relay Interpretation (VRI): Procedures and Setup
Even when VRI is theoretically appropriate, it poses technical requirements that can be challenging—and especially so in a prison environment. In particular, VRI requires Internet access with sufficient band width, as well as a power outlet or a well-charged battery. During my visit, we made three different attempts to access VRI, only one of which was successful. We tried to use VRI in the KSR education area. To make this attempt, staff had to unplug one of their own computers and use that internet cable for the VRI laptop. Even then, the internet was apparently out for that moment, or some other technical difficulty interfered. The second attempt failed, as well, when we could not figure out how to get the program to behave properly. And of course, VRI can succeed only if the machine is timely obtained and has access to battery or outlet power.
KSR staff have not yet mastered the process of obtaining and using the VRI laptops. The laptop in the education area had not yet been used. The members of the medical staff who even knew about the VRI described it as available only to custody staff; they didn’t know it was available to them, much less the process required or how to use it effectively. And numerous records demonstrated that staff sometimes fail to request and obtain the VRI laptop in a timely manner, and are sometimes unable to operate it effectively. (What I understand to be frequent internet outages are also highly likely to disrupt VRI availability. Happily, Warden Smith informed me that an ongoing upgrade should soon improve internet availability at KSR.) The kinds of difficulties I am describing are very common in VRI usage, wherever it is attempted. Careful procedural planning and training are crucial for this approach to interpretation to succeed.
11/2016 Court Report, App-33

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 35 of 326 - Page ID#: 1616
In addition, even when VRI services have been used at KSR, the setup has not always been ideal. Correctional Unit Administrator John Grievious explained to me, for example, how the VRI was used during one “Court Call”—that is, disciplinary hearing, for Inmate C.
Figure 1: Use of the VRI (problematic)

Staff member 1 (Desk)

VRI laptop
Inmate Staff member 2

Staff member 1 spoke; and occasionally needed to have his words repeated by Staff member 2, who was nearer to the VRI laptop. The inmate was handcuffed, and therefore unable to sign, though he could see the interpretation of what the staff members said.
But for VRI to be effective, it is important that the person speaking be the one near (and in view of) the laptop. So if staff member 1 was going to be the most active speaker, he and staff member 2 should have switched locations. And if more than one staff member is going to play a major speaking role, in-person interpretation is called for.
Figure 2: Use of the VRI (recommended)
VRI laptop
Inmate Speaking staff member

Recommendation 21: The process for obtaining and using the VRI laptop should be communicated to each staff member who might have occasion to need it, and also to each inmate who communicates using sign language. Each such staff member should actually do a practice run using the machine—to figure out how/where internet access and power will be obtained, and how to use the program. The laptops themselves should be checked each time they are returned to their resting area, to ensure that they have sufficient battery power. Training should ensure that staff understand that the person communicating with the Deaf inmate should sit within easy reach of the laptop’s microphone, and that the

11/2016 Court Report, App-34

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 36 of 326 - Page ID#: 1617
inmate must not have his hands handcuffed. (It would be useful to include a diagram or instructions on a piece of paper taped to the laptop’s cover.)
Under KSR’s current VRI process, inmates must provide 48 hours notice for weekday usage; usage on the weekend is difficult even with that amount of notice. (At least, this is what I understand from ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt. The relevant memos do not list a timeframe for VRI scheduling.) This amount of notice is certainly useful, when possible—but it can be very impracticable, given that VRI is required to be available for situations that might happen faster— e.g., medical visits, medical emergencies, discussions of discipline, etc.
Recommendation 22: There should be some flexibility in the timing of VRI requests and usage; where a need arises that does not allow for 48 hours notice, VRI should nonetheless be made available if possible. KSR should work out a process for VRI availability after hours and on weekends, as well as in emergencies.
C. Videos
KSR uses video communication in several different situations: at orientation; for various rehabilitative programming sessions, both in the educational area and elsewhere; to provide inmates with information; and for entertainment. In each of these situations, some Deaf inmates will benefit from text captions—on-screen text descriptions that display a video product’s dialogue, identify speakers, and describe other relevant sounds otherwise inaccessible to people who are deaf or hard of hearing.3
In addition to its more general requirements governing effective communication, the Agreement includes five provisions relating to captions:
x “The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closedcaptioned education materials where available.” (VI.E.1)
x “The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closedcaptioned vocational/work materials where available.” (VI.E.2)
x “KDOC Rehabilitative, Counseling, Therapeutic, Substance Abuse, and Evidence-Based Programs. . . The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closed-captioned materials where available.” (VI.E.3)
x “The KDOC will ensure that all audio-visual media purchased for Inmate use in KDOC Adult Institutions housing Deaf Inmates includes open- or closed-captioning. Televisions purchased by the KDOC for Inmate use shall support open- or closed-captioning. Captioning will be turned on and remain on at any Deaf Inmate’s request.” (X.1)
x “The KDOC will permit Deaf Inmates to purchase TVs, which reliably support open- or closed-captioning, with their own funds. In the event that the closed-captioning feature contained on TVs purchased through approved commercial channels malfunctions, KDOC personnel will work with the Deaf Inmate to the same extent that the KDOC works with other Inmates regarding malfunctioning personal property to address and resolve the problem within a reasonable time.” (X.2)
3 Open captions always are in view and cannot be turned off, whereas closed captions can be turned on and off by the viewer.
11/2016 Court Report, App-35

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 37 of 326 - Page ID#: 1618
KSR has taken steps towards compliance, but is not yet consistently providing captioning. ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt informed me that the videos used at KSR’s school are generally captioned; I did not confirm this for any particular videos. The availability of captioning should be checked for each video used, and replacements obtained if necessary and available. Two orientation movies are shown to inmates—one about KSR and its policies and procedures, and one about the Prison Rape Elimination Act. According to Casey Dowden, the intake unit’s Classification and Treatment Officer, neither is currently captioned. In addition, an inmate who works on “Ed TV,” preparing videos for use at the prison, explained to me that they had just the week before met with someone from outside the prison (a contractor, perhaps) who had begun to explain how they could caption the videos used at KSR. When inmates are given access to video for entertainment—TV or movies—captioning should likewise be easily and routinely available, so that an inmate who needs it does not face an accessibility hurdle. It appears that KSR’s televisions are capable of displaying closed captioning—and several of the inmates I interviewed confirmed that captioning has been available to them when they request it. However, the visit surfaced some technical difficulties in turning captioning on. For some of the TVs, turning on captioning apparently requires use of the remote—and remotes were not readily available during my visit. In addition, some remotes that could be located needed new batteries.
I did not observe or hear about any issues with respect to captioning on inmate-owned televisions.
Recommendation 23: Check each existing video used at KSR to determine whether it has captioning and obtain replacements with captioning if available. Provide captions for all orientation videos, for newly acquired entertainment and educational videos, and other videos when captioning is available. For television captioning to be a real option, training for staff about how to turn it on and periodic testing are required. This should be done on a schedule, perhaps quarterly or twice a year, and it should be logged.
Sometimes, the reason that the prison uses video is because it is the most accessible and effective method of communicating vital information to inmates, including those whose literacy level is low. Of course, for inmates whose hearing impairment means they can’t hear even with a hearing aid or amplifier—or who have not yet received a hearing aid or amplifier—captioning will accomplish effective communication only if they are highly literate. For the two informative videos shown to inmates during intake, this is a particular problem. Two solutions seem possible: sign-language interpretation could be recorded for the videos and inset into it. This would require technological investigation and some investment, but would have the advantage of being reusable.4 Alternatively, when an inmate arriving at the prison communicates via sign language and is insufficiently literate to follow captions, an in-person Qualified Interpreter could be used to provide interpretation during the videos. (VRI would not be effective for a movie.) The interpreter might also be useful for other orienting conversations that take place at about the same time—for example, initial classification.
Recommendation 24: For Deaf inmates who cannot hear crucial informative videos, and whose literacy level is insufficient to allow them to readily read captions, an alternative
4 For some background information, see The World Wide Web Consortium, Understanding WCAG 2.0: A guide to understanding and implementing WCAG 2.0, “Sign Language (Prerecorded): Understanding SC 1.2.6,” available at https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/NOTE-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20160317/media-equiv-sign.html.
11/2016 Court Report, App-36

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 38 of 326 - Page ID#: 1619
method of effective communication is necessary. For those who communicate using sign language, the prison should provide either a sign language inset, or an in-person Qualified Interpreter.
D. Speech-to-text
Several inmates who wear hearing aids told me that they have found educational programming inaccessible to them; they too-often need the teacher to repeat him or herself or end up relying on a fellow inmate to repeat what the teacher said. This section and the next describe methods that can help achieve effective communication in educational settings, and perhaps others, such as religious programming.
For Deaf inmates who read well, the accessibility of educational programming could be improved by use of speech-to-text devices. Donna McClamroch, KSR’s head school administrator, informed me that she was exploring the implementation of a software package that could convert speech to text and project it onto a classroom’s smartboard. This software might be very helpful for Deaf inmates, once tested and working in a realistic situation. (It might be able to be used for religious presentations, as well.)
Recommendation 25: Continue to investigate the possibility of speech-to-text software for use in classroom and other appropriate settings. I will ask for a report on this issue six months.
E. Assistive listening systems
For situations in which a teacher or leader can use a microphone, inmates who are hard of hearing can benefit from amplification by way of an assistive listening system—a system in which sound is captured close to its source via a microphone (avoiding ambient noise) and transmitted directly to the ears or hearing aids of people with assistive listening devices.5 Ms. McClamroch told me that some kind of amplification system is under examination for educational programming, and Chaplains Art Turner and David Dillard emphasized that religious services are amplified—in fact, they are so loud, the Chaplains explained, that the noise sometimes interferes with nearby activity. The current amplification for religious services is general, however, and an assistive listening system is not used.
Recommendation 26: Investigate assistive listening systems for use in classroom and other appropriate settings. I will ask for a report on this issue in six months.
5 For more information on assistive listening devices and systems, see Hearing Loss Association of America, Get in the Hearing Loop, available at http://www.hearingloss.org/sites/default/files/docs/HLAA_ALDS_Brochure_0.pdf; David G. Myers, We’ve Looped in West Michigan. Could We Loop America?, HEARING LOSS MAGAZINE, September/October 2008, at 18, available at http://www.hearingloss.org/sites/default/files/docs/MeyerSepOct08 AudioLoopHLM.pdf. For a technical guide to choices available for educational settings in particular (though geared to children rather than adults), see American Academy of Audiology, Practice Guidelines: Remote Microphone Hearing Assistance Technologies for Children and Youth from Birth to 21 Years, updated April 2011, available at http://audiology-web.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/HAT_Guidelines_Supplement_A.pdf_53996ef7758497. 54419000.pdf; American Academy of Audiology, Practice Guidelines: Remote Microphone Hearing Assistance Technologies for Children and Youth from Birth to 21 Years, Supplement B: Classroom Audio Distribution Systems—Selection and Verification, July 2011, available at http://audiology-web.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/ 20110926_HAT_GuidelinesSupp_B.pdf_53996ef98259f2.45364934.pdf.
11/2016 Court Report, App-37

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 39 of 326 - Page ID#: 1620
While educational staff are exploring possibilities for various accommodations that would allow more effective communication to Deaf inmates enrolled in classes, KSR should ensure that those classes are accessible now, and that Deaf (including hard-of-hearing) inmates know that they can request classroom accommodations, such as sitting in the front row, getting materials in advance, interpretive services, etc. The school does not seem to have a process in place for either allowing requests for such accommodations or assessing the need for them. Several inmates told me about informal solutions. For example, one said that the person who sits next to him repeats what the teacher said. Despite this informal assistance, the inmates agreed that their hearing impairments make school a challenge for them.
Recommendation 27: KSR should inform Deaf inmates of the various ways in which educational programming can be made more accessible to them; the school should put in place a process to facilitate requests for such accommodations and assess the need for them.
F. Written communication
In many situations, writing can be a helpful communication method. The inmate handbook, for example, can explain to Deaf as well as non-Deaf inmates what prison rules and policies require. And writing a sentence on a piece of paper may enable quick communication on an uncomplicated topic. But while writing back and forth may work for simple communication, it takes too long and is too cumbersome for anything complex. In addition, it is important to recall that many Deaf inmates have a low literacy level. Before written communication can be relied upon to ensure effective communication with a Deaf inmate, it’s crucial to assess that inmate’s literacy. This is discussed in Part IV.B, below.
Recommendation 28: Written communication should be relied upon only for simple communication with literate inmates. For complex communications or less literate inmates, alternative methods are required. Staff should make best efforts to communicate with each deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate using that inmate’s preferred communication method (which is assessed and recorded by Exhibit D-5).
G. Non-auditory alerts
KSR frequently communicates with inmates using auditory alerts—fire alarms and PA announcements—which are routinely used for count (three times per day), chow (three times per day), pill call (two times per day), and more individual announcements (e.g., “Inmate Smith, please report to the Dorm 11 office”). The law’s requirement of non-discrimination means that this communication, like others, must be made effective for Deaf inmates. The Agreement includes several relevant provisions:
x “Deaf Inmates incarcerated at KDOC facilities should not miss announcements, alarms, or any other information audibly conveyed from KDOC staff to the general Inmate population solely because of their disability.” (VIII.A)
x “The KDOC shall provide an effective non-auditory alert system that will notify Deaf Inmates of both prison-wide events (including but not limited to announcements, visitations, and roll-calls) and events specific to Deaf Inmates. The non-auditory alert
11/2016 Court Report, App-38

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 40 of 326 - Page ID#: 1621
system must be capable of effectively alerting Deaf Inmates of such events in real time.” (VIII.B.1) x “The KDOC will provide all medically necessary hearing aids and assisting devices, including but not limited to, bed shakers.” (VIII.B.2) x “The KDOC has the discretion as to which type of non-auditory alerts it shall employ and to change that system as it deems necessary. Nonetheless, the KDOC will promptly advise the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH of all non-auditory alert systems that the KDOC is considering, and will consult with the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH in determining whether such devices are acceptable for the stated purpose.” (VIII.B.3) x “The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with an effective non-auditory alert system that will advise them of an emergency evacuation or other emergency. Such non-auditory alert systems must be sufficient to effectively notify Deaf Inmates of emergencies in realtime and can include flashing strobe lights and bed shakers. The KDOC has the discretion as to which type of non-auditory alerts it shall employ and to change that system as it deems necessary. Nonetheless, the KDOC will promptly advise the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH of the non-auditory alert systems that the KDOC is considering, and will consult with the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH in determining whether such systems are acceptable for the stated purpose.” (VIII.C.1)
KSR has taken significant steps along the necessary path. Some Deaf inmates are housed in strobe-light cells, which translate the fire alarm from auditory to visual. There are 18 such cells in the prison, spread through the housing areas. In addition, at the time of my visit, one cell had just been equipped with a “bed shaker”—a non-auditory vibrating device that sits under a pillow, and flashing light on a bed stand. The device is linked to the unit’s fire alarm, so whenever that alarm is triggered, so too are both the shaker and flasher. In addition, the device can be used as an alarm clock, and can be linked to a switch that’s been installed in the dorm’s control center. This enables staff in that area to flash the lights/shaker when there is an announcement for count or chow. As required, ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt did consult with me prior to installing this system, and received my feedback.
Recommendation 29: KSR should expand the availability of non-auditory alert systems, providing them to inmates who cannot hear the fire alarm and/or the alert for count. To maximize the communication effectiveness of each non-auditory alert, it should be programmed to signal, in different ways, the several predictable alerts: fire/emergency; count, chow, “report to office.” Staff must also be trained to use the office switch. Whether this is occurring will need monitoring; perhaps by using a daily log or checking in periodically with affected inmates. The monitoring system should be made formal. I will ask for a description of it, and perhaps relevant records, in the next quarterly reporting period.
One non-auditory system that has not been tried at KSR is a “visual paging system.” These systems create digital signage networks; messages are displayed on existing TV screens. I do not know enough about KSR’s existing infrastructure to assess how expensive or even possible it would be to implement this kind of system, but if such a system were practicable, it would provide some significant benefits, including allowing announcements to run across the TV screen, making them accessible to Deaf inmates. (On the other hand, it seems that Deaf inmates
11/2016 Court Report, App-39

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 41 of 326 - Page ID#: 1622
at KSR don’t often watch the common-space televisions in the housing units, so it’s possible the benefits I’m envisioning would not actually accrue.)
Recommendation 30: Investigate the costs and benefits of a TV-based visual paging system. I will ask for a report on this issue in six months.
Some inmates will not have non-auditory alerts, and even inmates who do have them will not always be in their cells when alerts are triggered. Given the difficulties with providing effective communication of alerts, it is unsurprising that occasionally Deaf inmates will miss count, chow, pill call, etc. I heard from more than one inmate that he occasionally or usually has trouble knowing when count or pill call is signaled. It is important that staff accommodate such situations. Disciplining an inmate for a missed count that he didn’t hear called, or refusing to provide an inmate with necessary medicine when he couldn’t hear pill call, would violate the ADA.
Recommendation 31: Train staff to be alert to the possibility that a Deaf inmate may miss the alert for count, chow, or pill call—and to ensure nondiscrimination in that event.
H. Miscellaneous devices
The Agreement provides:
“Where devices such as vibrating clocks and in-line amplifiers are not deemed medically necessary, the KDOC agrees to consider on a case by case basis whether it will allow a particular Deaf Inmate the opportunity to purchase these devices at his or her own expense. The KDOC’s decision in this regard will consider, among other issues, whether these devices pose a security risk. The KDOC will have the discretion to make the determination whether any of these devices, and the type of device, is permissible. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination.” (XII)
KSR has informed me that no such decision has been made since June 2015.
In addition, the Agreement states: “Deaf Inmates will be allowed to purchase alerting devices, vibrating clocks, telephone amplifications, headset amplifiers, and televisions that meet the particular needs of their disability from an approved vendor so long as the items do not pose a security risk. The KDOC retains the discretion to limit purchases to devices that are available through the Commissary.” (XII) KSR’s commissary includes several televisions that allow closed captioning; in addition, ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt told me that if a Deaf inmate sought to buy some device not on the commissary list, he would facilitate that.
Finally, the Agreement states:
“Deaf Inmates may submit a request in writing to the ADA Coordinator responsible for the KDOC Adult Institution in which they are housed for devices not available from the Commissary. The KDOC will not deny any Deaf Inmate the right to purchase these devices except where they present an articulable security risk, which shall be
11/2016 Court Report, App-40

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 42 of 326 - Page ID#: 1623
documented. The ADA Coordinator will maintain written records of all Deaf Inmate requests for these devices and the disposition of the request.” (XII)
KSR—like all the other KDOC institutions—has informed me that no such request has been made since June 28, 2015.
Recommendation 32: KSR’s commissary list should include various alerting devices that inmates might wish to purchase: caption-capable TVs, vibrating alarm clocks, and the like. Inmates should be informed that if they seek to purchase adaptive equipment that is not available via the commissary, they should request assistance from the ADA Coordinator; the ADA Coordinator should then facilitate the inmate’s purchase unless the requested device presents an articulable and documented security risk.
I. Other communications aids
Prompted by the medical needs of tracheotomy patients (who cannot speak), KSR medical staff have obtained what are called “EZ Boards” for them. These are two-sided heavy cardboard dry-erase boards. They are available in several versions: some use pictures and others words, and they cover different situations. (The boards available during my visit had been ordered by mistake: they were designed for Spanish-language speakers.) These boards could provide a useful method for medical staff to communicate with Deaf inmates in a pinch.
Recommendation 33: Investigate all the available topics for medical EZ Boards—both word and picture versions—and buy those that are useful, making them available for use by Deaf inmates.
J. Methods of communicating with Deaf inmates
No technologies or devices can entirely meet the communications needs of all hard-ofhearing inmates. The Agreement provides that KSR’s staff should be trained on “best practices for communicating with Deaf individuals.” (XIII.B) A number of inmates described to me the difficulties they have communicating with staff who are reluctant to repeat their communications, or unpracticed at such best practices. Training (and implementation) should include:
x Getting the Deaf inmate’s attention first, prior to beginning to speak. x Asking how to best facilitate communication. x Facing the Deaf inmate directly. x Ensuring that light is on the staff member’s face (not behind it) x Avoiding noisy backgrounds. x Avoiding shouting. x Speaking clearly, at a moderate pace. x Ensuring that the speaker’s mouth is uncovered, and that the speaker is not chewing gum
or food. x Rephrasing if the inmate does not seem to understand (and checking on understanding) x Using facial expressions and gestures.
11/2016 Court Report, App-41

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 43 of 326 - Page ID#: 1624
These tips are taken from the Hearing Loss Association of America’s “Communication Tips for Hearing People in Communicating with Those Who Have a Hearing Loss,” which is available as an easy-to-distribute “tip card” at http://www.hearingloss.org/sites/default/files/TipCards.pdf. I’ve also included this information in Exhibit D-2, a recommended memo to staff on “Communications assistance for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates”
Recommendation 34: Staff should be trained on, and should use, best practices for communicating with hard-of-hearing inmates.
In order is to provide staff with the knowledge that particular inmates are Deaf or hardof-hearing, and thereby facilitate these sorts of strategies, that the Agreement requires various notices that inmates are Deaf. There are three such notices required (III.D.3, III.D.4):
x At the entrance to the institution. (I did not check whether this notice was present.) x Outside each housing unit where Deaf inmates are housed. (I did not check whether this
notice was present.) x On each affected inmate’s ID card. (Each inmate I checked had such a notice.)
KSR has taken the valuable additional step—which seems to me functionally necessary, though not explicitly required in the Agreement—of posting a similar notice outside each Deaf inmate’s cell.
Recommendation 35: KSR should continue to provide Deaf inmates with ID cards that identify them as Deaf, and to post similar identification outside their cells. The notices required by the Agreement outside each housing unit and at the entrance to the institution should also be posted.
K. Teaching sign-language
Among the classes occasionally offered by KSR’s staff educators is one in sign language. There are at least a few inmates whose degree of hearing impairment is very severe, but who do not sign. For example, I found that I was almost entirely unable to communicate with Inmate F. Such inmates might find it very helpful to learn sign language.
Recommendation 36: KSR should continue to offer classes in sign language, and should give Deaf inmates who would like to learn to sign both affirmative notice and preference for these classes.
L. Telecommunications equipment and rules
As the Settlement requires, KSR has made two types of telecommunications devices available for deaf inmates: TTYs (TeleTYpewriters) and a videophone. The facility has two TTYs; one is kept in the administration control center, the other in the Dorm 11 security office. (I did not see them during my tour.) The videophone is referred to by inmates and staff alike as “Purple,” after the telecom company that provided it. See http://www.purple.us/. It is installed in the Dorm 11 security office. Access is allowed only for inmates who use sign language to communicate.
11/2016 Court Report, App-42

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 44 of 326 - Page ID#: 1625
The videophone allows two types of phone calls: inmates can communicate visually (via sign language) with the person on the other side, who also has a videophone. Or, by linking the videophone to a Video Relay Service (VRS), the inmate can sign to a remote interpreter, who then speaks to a person at the other end on a regular phone. (For information about VRS, see https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/video-relay-services). While the videophone itself is in the Dorm 11 control center, KSR uses the same laptop for VRI and VRS; that computer is kept in the administration control center.
1. Videophone and VRS
According to KSR’s rules, the videophone and VRS access are supposed to be available during the same time periods as conventional phones. But because the videophone is in staff space, an inmate must request access in order to use it. For an inmate housed in Unit B’s Dorm 11, or one of the other Dorms in Unit B, it should be that getting access to the phone is pretty easy; staff must simply allow the inmate in. It seems that this hasn’t worked very smoothly in practice, however. Inmate B is in fact housed in Dorm 11—but in August 2015, he filed a grievance explaining, “No night time I can’t be able to reach my loved ones family on weekend, and weekday, holidays not equal as non deaf inmates using blue telephones.” The answer he received was that the VRS was available “daytime, night and weekends,” and that “hearing impaired inmates are to get with Unit B staff to schedule use of the ‘VRS.’” The memos issued the next day that set out the policy on access (Exhibits C-1, C-2) confirmed that use of the videophone “[m]ust be scheduled.” Several weeks later the grievance committee found that implementation was a challenge: “The committee finds that staff need to be made aware of how VRS are to be allowed to use the system, off days, weekends & evening.”
As of my visit, there had been little further use of the videophone to allow me to see if implementation had improved, because Inmate B was barred from phone usage for 6 months; Inmate C was confined in disciplinary seg on max assault status, which meant the KSR deemed him ineligible for videophone usage; and Inmate D had not been offered use of the videophone, because the ADA Coordinator was not aware that he communicated via sign language. (When I interviewed Inmate D, he seemed not to know that a videophone was available.)
Even in theory, though, for inmates housed in a different Unit, videophone access is more constrained. Such inmates need permission (and a written pass) to get to and from the space where the phone is located. In addition, inmate movement after dark (or during a not-unusual dense fog) occurs only with staff escort. So while the phone is available after dark until 11:30 pm, there are substantial obstacles to its use by any inmate who is not housed in Unit B.
I have heard complaints from inmates at other KDOC institutions that the time they spend in transit on their way to the videophone is being counted against their allotted phone time. (Under the Agreement, that allowed time is twice the minutes allowed for a conventional phone call.) This issue has not arisen at KSR because no inmate who needs videophone access has received such access from anywhere except Dorm 11. But the issue could come up in the future.
There is another obstacle to access, as well. If the inmate using the videophone is speaking to someone who does not sign—that is, if he needs VRS, not just the videophone— KSR’s process is that he is supposed to request access to the VRI/VRS laptop well in advance,
11/2016 Court Report, App-43

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 45 of 326 - Page ID#: 1626
absent an emergency. I am not clear on how much notice is required: the forms provided to inmates do not seem to specify. But the amount of time required may be as much as 48 hours.
The Settlement Agreement provides:
“Videophones will be located in areas as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. Videophone will be available during the same days and hours as conventional telephones and will not require permission for use to the same extent that conventional telephones do not require permission for use.” (IX.D.3.a)
In explaining the requirements for where videophones are to be installed, the Agreement draws a sharp distinction between videophones (required to be in accessible areas) and TTYs (“the TTY/TDD device(s) . . . must be maintained in a secured location when not in use” IX.D.1). KSR is not in compliance with the videophone provisions, for several reasons. First, the videophone is in a staff-only area, and for that reason effectively requires permission for inmates to use it. Similarly, for inmates who are not housed in the relevant KSR unit, an escort is needed during certain hours. In addition, the access rules for the videophone are more limited than for a conventional phone: KSR policy instructs inmates that use of the videophone “[m]ust be scheduled”—which is not a requirement for the conventional phone. And use of the VRS requires staff to obtain the necessary laptop in advance, which takes time and planning.
Note: while KSR should not require in-advance scheduling of the videophone, it may occur that a Deaf inmate has to wait for access, because someone else is using the device. This is nondiscriminatory, and is not a breach of the Agreement.
Recommendation 37: Videophones should be located in areas as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. The videophone should be available during the same days and hours as conventional telephones and should not require permission for use, given that KSR does not require inmates to seek permission to use conventional telephones. It is regrettable that an escort is required to use the videophone at night and on weekends, but it seems unavoidable given that there is just one videophone (which is currently sufficient for the population of Deaf inmates at KSR).
Recommendation 38: Even if an escort is required, there should be no requirement that inmates seeking to use the videophone, including with VRS, schedule such use in advance. Non-Deaf inmates are not required to schedule their phone calls, and that should be true for Deaf inmates, as well. To allow use of a VRS without advance scheduling, KSR may need an additional laptop that is kept near the videophone.
Recommendation 39: Ensure all staff are trained on videophone rules, so that they know that videophone access is to be provided during the same hours as conventional phone access, without pre-scheduling, and that time in transit doesn’t count.
Finally, there are special obstacles to access for Deaf inmates in disciplinary or administrative segregation. Most such inmates are allowed to make one phone call per week. If a Deaf inmate were in this category, I understand that he could be escorted to the videophone, on request, once per week. This approach seems non-discriminatory. Inmates on “max assault status” receive one call per month. But for Deaf inmates on this status (such as Inmate C), the
11/2016 Court Report, App-44

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 46 of 326 - Page ID#: 1627
videophone is unavailable even on that limited basis, because “max assault status” comes with a requirement to wear handcuffs at all times out-of-cell—a requirement that makes signing impossible. See Part III.B.3. ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt told me that perhaps a TTY could be made available to Inmate C, but I’m not clear how, given that using a TTY also requires unfettered hands.
Recommendation 40: Deaf inmates in segregated housing must be allowed access to telecommunications services equal to that of non-Deaf inmates in the same disciplinary or administrative status. The best solution would be to work out a method for such inmates— including those on “max assault status”—to use the videophone, with VRS when needed. When safety allows the unshackling of Inmate C, and others in the same situation, they should have their hands unshackled and be allowed to use the videophone, as frequently as non-Deaf inmates are allowed phone calls. If there are individualized reasons that Inmate C, or others like him, cannot be unshackled consistent with security, he, and others in his situation, should be allowed access to the TTY. I will request KSR to report on what method for telecommunications access is developed for Deaf inmates in segregation, and why.
In the first month the videophone was available, Inmate B received two disciplinary write-ups for its misuse: one when a woman to whom he was speaking was deemed inappropriately dressed and seen by a staff member to expose her underwear to Inmate B. It seems that he was immediately placed on a phone restriction. While he was subject to that phone restriction, he received a second write-up for “three-way calling.” The incident in question occurred when Inmate E was using the videophone, and Inmate B signed to him through the office window; KSR officials deemed this a three-way call. For the two write-ups together, Inmate B received a 6-month ban on phone usage.
It is not my intent to second-guess these particular impositions of discipline, but I do note that it is important that Deaf inmates using the videophone not be subjected to stricter supervision or more exacting discipline than non-Deaf inmates using the conventional phone. The Agreement provides: “The KDOC may only provide for the monitoring of communications between Deaf Inmates and individuals outside of the KDOC to the same extent and with the same discretion applied to the monitoring of communications between non-Deaf Inmates and those outside of the KDOC.” (IX.B)
Applying this rule, the first disciplinary charge would be appropriate only if an inmate using the conventional phone would face discipline for having a similarly “sexy” conversation. ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt assured me that this would indeed be the case. And the second disciplinary charge would be appropriate only if an inmate on the conventional phone would be similarly disciplined for talking with someone who was simultaneously speaking on the phone. Again, I asked Mr. Hillebrandt if this would be considered misconduct, and his answer was yes.
Recommendation 41: Ensure that disciplinary oversight of videophone is no more intense than oversight of conventional phone calls. The disciplinary committee should explicitly consider and rule on this issue when it is deciding a disciplinary matter involving the videophone or TTY.
11/2016 Court Report, App-45

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 47 of 326 - Page ID#: 1628
2. Hard-of-hearing inmates
Hard-of-hearing inmates mostly don’t sign, so the videophone is not helpful to them. But several told me that they are unable to use a conventional phone, because their hearing is too impaired. And when my assistant has conducted telephone interviews with other hard-of-hearing inmates at KSR, communication has sometimes been very difficult and ineffective. Three solutions may help: (a) KSR could give hard-of-hearing inmates access to a TTY, and provide them the necessary training; (b) KSR could provide one or more captioned telephones, which simultaneously allow the user to listen to the speech and read it via real-time captioning (see, e.g., http://www.captel.com/captel); (c) KSR could provide handset amplification that is compatible with hearing aids but does not require them.
Recommendation 42: KSR should review auxiliary aids that would allow hard-of-hearing inmates effective access to telecommunications, and should implement improvements— perhaps involving TTY, captioned telephones, and/or handset amplification. Asking inmates what does and doesn’t work is a necessary part of this process. I will request a report on this review—both how it was conducted and the results—in six months.
IV. PROCESSES FOR ASSESSING AND REQUESTING AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
KSR has started but not routinized the process of assessment and assignment of services for Deaf inmates. This section develops what should be routine processes.
A. Intake/Orientation
For Deaf inmates, the first few days at the prison pose particular challenges because hearing and accommodations assessment comes after many important communications that occur in those first few days. Staff must be sensitive to the possibility that an inmate is Deaf or hard of hearing, and ensure effective communication from the beginning of his incarceration. Recommendations 23-24, above, are directed at predictable communication difficulties with respect to the orientation videos, but there are other situations in which effective communication is likewise necessary and which will require auxiliary aids/services, potentially including qualified interpretation. While partial hearing impairments cannot be easily ascertained prior to medical visits and assessments, a degree of impairment that substantially impedes communication should be able to be detected in the very first encounter prison staff have with an arriving inmate. This should trigger immediate steps to ensure effective communication.
Recommendation 43: Develop a process by which inmates whose hearing impairment substantially impedes communication are noted and assessed right away on arrival at the institution, immediate steps taken to ensure effective communication, including immediate interpretative services if necessary.
The difficulty just described should be ameliorated over time, as the initial intake, assessment, and classification currently done for male Inmates at Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC) and for female Inmates at the Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women
11/2016 Court Report, App-46

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 48 of 326 - Page ID#: 1629
(KCIW) comes into compliance with the Agreement, and inmates who received that initial assessment become a larger proportion of the population.
B. Literacy assessment
Very often, effective communication can be furthered by written materials—handbooks, captioning, etc. In addition, the best way to inform inmates of the variety of auxiliary aids and services may often be use of written forms or other materials. But for inmates who are illiterate, different approaches must be used—and, again, illiteracy is particularly likely for Deaf inmates. Thus in order to understand how best to provide effective communication, and to comply with the Agreement’s requirements about it, it is necessary to assess each Deaf inmate’s literacy. The level of literacy required for captioning varies with the vocabulary and scroll rate of the text. Television programs have a captioning rate of between 74 and 231 words per minute.6 The average silent reading rate for students with an 8th grade reading level is between 150 and 200 words per minute7; for deaf students, the average reading rate for someone who reads at the 7th to 9th grade level is 185 words per minute.8
Recommendation 44: Staff should assess each Deaf inmate’s literacy prior to conducting additional assessment of necessary auxiliary aids and services. Educational staff should be able to propose and implement one of several quick assessment tools. For example, the Slosson Oral Reading Test - Revised (SORT-R) might be suitable. If an inmate is not literate at at least the 8th grade level, reliance on written communication is unlikely to succeed in providing effective communication, and alternative methods should be used.
C. Individual assessment meetings
The Agreement (III.C) requires an “auxiliary aids and services assessment.” The best way to assess the need for aids/services necessary for effective communication and to avoid discrimination is an individual meeting with each Deaf inmate. (This approach is similar to the “interactive process” required by the ADA under Title I, which deals with employment.) The idea of the meeting is for KSR staff to understand the communications needs of the inmate. At the meeting, the ADA coordinator or deputy ADA coordinator can inform the inmate about available aids and the inmate can discuss his communication needs. The inmate’s request is entitled, both under the Agreement and the operative regulation, to “primary consideration.” (I.5: “In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, primary consideration shall be given to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2))”; 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2) includes essentially the same language.)
6 Margaret Jelinek Lewis, Television Literacy: Comprehension of Program Content Using Closed-Captions for the Deaf (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, 1998), citing Carl Jensema, Ralph McCann & Scott Ramsey, Closed-Captioned Television Presentation Speed and Vocabulary, 141 AM. ANN. OF THE DEAF 284 (1996). 7 Ronald P. Carver, Silent Reading Rates in Grade Equivalents, 21 J. READING BEHAVIOR 155 (1989) (citing three studies). 8 Edgar H. Shroyer and Jack Birch, Captions and Reading Rates of Hearing-Impaired Students, 125 AM. ANNALS OF THE DEAF 916, 921 (1980).
11/2016 Court Report, App-47

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 49 of 326 - Page ID#: 1630
KSR has not yet done such a meeting for most of its Deaf inmates. The meeting must itself constitute effective communication. A complex written form, alone, is unlikely to do so— the items described are technical and the inmate may well not understand the available options. It seems likely that a meeting like this could have prevented the problem described above when Inmate D’s need for sign language interpretation was not understood by relevant prison staff.
Given that over eight months have passed since the Agreement’s effective date, these meetings should be done right away.
Recommendation 45: For each Deaf inmate, the ADA Coordinator should conduct an individual services assessment meeting, at which the inmate’s available methods of communication are expressly ascertained and recorded, and the inmate is informed about the available auxiliary aids and services. For an inmate who can hear (with or without an amplifier or hearing aid) well enough to understand the coordinator, information should be conveyed orally as well as in writing. If the inmate uses sign language, VRI would be the appropriate way to communicate for a meeting of this nature. The greatest challenge is presented if the inmate is not literate, does not hear well enough to understand spoken communication, and does not sign. In that case, visual demonstrations of the various auxiliary aids and services may be required. The assessment should be updated annually, ideally at the inmate’s annual classification meeting.
D. Form and options
KSR has done substantial work to develop a menu of auxiliary aids and services, and to provide staff and inmates written information about what is available. This includes:
x A memo to staff describing some of the available auxiliary aids/services and procedures for their use (Exhibit C-1)
x A similar memo for inmates describing some of the available auxiliary aids/services and how to request them (Exhibit C-2)
x KSR Request for a Qualified Interpreter (Exhibit C-3) x KSR Request form—Auxiliary Aids and Services (Exhibit C-4)
These forms are not adequate, for several reasons. First, the inmate memo, which is supposed to explain the available aids/services, is very technical and no doubt difficult to understand for many inmates. (The Agreement requires the materials to “us[e] language designed to be accessible to each Deaf Inmate.” III.F.1) The memos are also incomplete, as is the Auxiliary Aids/Services form. In addition, the qualified interpreter form does not adequately provide inmates a chance to request an in-person interpreter. And none of the forms offer inmates a chance to explain why their requested aid/service is necessary for effective communication.
Recommendation 46: The various forms related to requesting and using Auxiliary Aids and Services form should be changed in a number of ways:
x To list available aids and services more comprehensively
11/2016 Court Report, App-48

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 50 of 326 - Page ID#: 1631
x To more clearly explain what the various services and aids are, in what circumstances they are available, and how to request them.
x To explain how to use the various devices. x To ask inmates, expressly, about their preferred modes of communication or needed
services, and why those are useful. x To explain which items are free of charge, and which are available only at the
inmate’s expense.
Finally, inmates who communicate by signing may not realize that they need to request an interpreter separately at each occasion they need one. Not unreasonably, they may think that when they have received an interpreter for a particular type of encounter (say, a medical appointment, or a classification meeting), the prison authorities know that they continue to need interpretive services. And similarly, if they have been denied an interpreter, they may—again not unreasonably—conclude that there’s little point in renewing the request.
Recommendation 47: I recommend replacement of the existing forms with several different ones, explaining the various options available, allowing requests for various types of communications assistance, and obtaining feedback from inmates (see Recommendation 14, above). These recommended forms are attached as Exhibit D, which also includes a recommended staff memo about the various available devices and accommodations, and an assessment form. These forms should be explained/filled out during the individual assessment meetings discussed in Part IV.C, above. Note: I have not provided the recommended memos to staff and inmates explaining precisely how to use the various devices, but that too should be developed, and should cover all the devices deployed.
E. Additional methods for inmates to seek auxiliary aids and services
In addition to forms like those just discussed, when Deaf inmates request medical, mental health, dental, or vision care, they may need auxiliary aids or services. The Agreement requires that they have a way to indicate that need on the form used for a request: “The KDOC will provide space on any forms used to request medical appointments for Deaf Inmates to request Auxiliary Aids and Services.” (VI.C.3) The “Healthcare Request” form currently used for medical requests is attached as Exhibit E-1; it does not comply with this requirement.
Recommendation 48: The Healthcare Request form should include boxes to check if auxiliary aids or services, including remote or in-person interpretation, are needed. My recommended additions to this form are attached as Exhibit E-2.
More generally, the opportunity to request auxiliary aids/services, including qualified interpretation, could usefully be incorporated into the other KSR/KDOC forms related to programs, services, and activities provided at the prison. That way, the request will be made more timely and provision of the services will be more routine.
Recommendation 49: All the forms by which inmates apply for jobs, educational programming, etc., should have language similar to that in the recommended Healthcare Request form. So should classification and disciplinary forms that notify inmates of
11/2016 Court Report, App-49

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 51 of 326 - Page ID#: 1632
impending hearings or meetings. I have not provided recommended versions of these forms, but will in a future reporting period ask to see them all.
Sometimes when inmates make a request—for a job assignment, course enrollment, etc. —KSR does not use a form at all, but rather assigns staff to receive and assess the request. In this situation, it’s important that communication be effective. Staff evaluating requests for a job assignment or course enrollment must be alert to the fact that Deaf inmates may need various accommodations, and/or auxiliary aids/services to ensure effective communication, both during the discussion and during the assignment/program. The availability of those accommodations should be communicated to inmates who might need them. This issue seems particularly related to educational programming: Several inmates told me that they had not enrolled in classes because in past education efforts, they have not been able to understand the teacher. The kinds of accommodations in question could be as simple as assigning an inmate to a seat close to the front of a classroom or giving him copies of projected materials. Or they might include auxiliary aids/services or a qualified interpreter.
Recommendation 50: When Deaf inmates and staff discuss enrollment or application for a particular activity or program, communication should be effective—which means an interpreter may be required for the discussion—and should cover potential accommodations, auxiliary aids/services that could provide equal access to the activity/program.
V. TRAINING
The Agreement requires training for the ADA Coordinator and for all staff who interact with inmates.
A. ADA Coordinator Training
The Agreement requires: “The ADA Coordinator shall be trained on the requirements of federal and state law regarding the contents of this Agreement and the KDOC’s obligations to provide full and equal access to, and enjoyment of, its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations to Deaf Inmates.” (II.B.1)
KDOC has not yet developed training on the Settlement Agreement, so as I understand the situation, KSR ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt has become familiar with the Agreement by reading it many times. Mr. Hillebrandt also himself located high-quality ADA Title II training provided online by the ADA National Network, at http://www.adatitle2.org. As that site explains (http://www.adatitle2.org/objectives.php#content):
“This free self-paced, online tutorial is designed to provide the basic principles and core concepts of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). This tutorial is a valuable educational tool to orient ADA coordinators to their roles and how to address key ADA-related requirements applicable to state and local government under Title II of the ADA.”
This on-line class covers the following objectives:
11/2016 Court Report, App-50

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 52 of 326 - Page ID#: 1633
x Discuss the purpose of the ADA using a civil rights framework. x Summarize what is required under Title II of the ADA. x Explain each nondiscrimination requirement for Title II of the ADA. x Identify the defenses or limitations of each nondiscrimination requirement for Title II of
the ADA. x Locate and use various resources for information on the ADA.
And it includes:
x Introduction and Overview of the ADA (6 pages) x Overview of Title II of the ADA (8 pages) x Steps to Achieve Compliance for Title II (7 pages) x General Nondiscrimination Requirements of Title II (9 pages) x Equally Effective Communication under Title II (10 pages) x Serving & Working with Individuals with Disabilities (4 pages) x Interacting with Individuals who have Disabilities (5 pages) x Employment - Self Evaluation of Employment Practices (7 pages) x Nondiscrimination in Employment (8 pages)
This was a very good choice of training source. Indeed, some of the training materials can be adapted for use in the general staff training.
Recommendation 51: KDOC should develop training on the Settlement Agreement and make it available to ADA Coordinators. For training on the ADA, the ADA National Network training is appropriate. This training is already long overdue; it should be developed and delivered to each ADA Coordinator no later than July 1, 2016.
B. Staff Training
The Agreement (XIII.B) requires training of all KDOC employees who have contact with inmates on:
x best practices for communicating with Deaf individuals; x the unique needs and problems encountered by Deaf and late-Deafened individuals; x identification of communication needs of persons who are Deaf; x the psychological implications of Deafness and its relationship to interaction with hearing
corrections personnel; x the proper use and role of Qualified Interpreters; x directions about using TTYs, TDDs, Videophones and any other telecommunication
equipment, and other Auxiliary Aids and Services, currently available at the facility that facilitate communication with Deaf people; x disciplinary matters, described in Section VII, and grievance proceedings, described in Section XIV; x the KDOC’s anti-discrimination policy; x all equipment, services, and accommodations available to Deaf Inmates (see also IX.E.2); x hand restraint policies in the context of Deaf Inmates; and
11/2016 Court Report, App-51

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 53 of 326 - Page ID#: 1634
x the requirements of this Agreement.
In addition, the Agreement sets out additional details on the restraint training (XI.A.2: “KDOC training will include both the two-point system as well as the agreement that hand restraints will be removed from a Deaf Inmate when the Deaf Inmate is in a secure environment, when security is no longer a threat, or there are other security devices in place to allow the Deaf Inmate to Effectively Communicate”) and ID cards (III.D.2: “All KDOC staff having regular contact with any Deaf Inmate will be trained on the meaning of the distinct ID cards.”)
This training has not yet been developed. ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt has developed training on a couple of these topics (best practices for communicating; how to obtain telecommunication and VRI equipment); but not on the others.
Recommendation 52: Training should be developed on all topics listed in the Settlement Agreement as requiring training. Once drafted, materials should be shared with me and with the Kentucky Commission on the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, for our input. This training is already long overdue; it should be provided to me for my input no later than July 1, finalized within 30 days after my comments are returned, and delivered to staff as soon as possible thereafter.
VI. REPORTING
As described in my February 2016 semi-annual report, the Agreement specifies five situations in which the Department is supposed to notify me promptly. They are:
x When a Deaf Inmate is barred from a program or activity because the Department has determined that participation would present a “Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates.” (II.A)
x When a Deaf Inmate is barred from a work assignment because that assignment would “present a Direct Threat of injury or death to a Deaf Inmate or others” (VI.F)
x When the Department is considering a non-auditory alert system that will notify Deaf Inmates, in real time, of prison-wide events and emergencies, and events specific to that inmate (VIII.B.1; VIII.B.3; VIII.C)
x When the Department has determined that it is appropriate to adjust the number of minutes afforded Deaf Inmates to make TTY and videophone calls. (IX.C)
x When the Department has made a determination to allow or disallow a Deaf Inmate to use devices such as vibrating clocks or in-line amplifiers, if those devices are not deemed medically necessary. (XII)
KSR has provided me with appropriate notice of the third item—a non-auditory alert system. ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt informed me that none of the other events has taken place.
As far as the more routine quarterly reporting, KSR has timely provided all reports and information I have requested.
11/2016 Court Report, App-52

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 54 of 326 - Page ID#: 1635
Recommendation 53: Ensure that all relevant staff know about the Agreement’s reporting obligations, so that I am appropriately notified when any of the reporting-triggering events takes place.
11/2016 Court Report, App-53

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 55 of 326 - Page ID#: 1636
Site Visit Report of Settlement Monitor
Adams & Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky.) Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor Kentucky State Reformatory Visit date: February 24-25, 2016
Draft circulated to parties for comment: March 29, 2016 Final (April 21, 2016) Exhibits
A: Staff interviewed B-1: [Current] Hearing Screening Questionnaire B-2: [Recommended] Hearing Screening Questionnaire and Instructions C-1: [Current] memo to staff re. equipment for deaf and hearing impaired inmates C-2: [Current] memo to inmates re. equipment available C-3: [Current] KSR Request for a Qualified Interpreter C-4: [Current] KSR Request form – Auxiliary Aids and Services D-1: [Recommended] Communications assistance for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates
(memo to staff) D-2: [Recommended] Communications assistance for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates
(memo to inmates) D-3: [Recommended] Request for Qualified Interpreter Services D-4: [Recommended] Request for communications assistance D-5: [Recommended] Auxiliary Aids/Services Assessment Form
E-1: [Current] Correct Care Solutions Healthcare Request E-2: [Recommended] Addition to Healthcare Request F: Plaintiffs’ comments on draft report
11/2016 Court Report, App-54

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 56 of 326 - Page ID#: 1637
Kentucky State Reformatory Visit date: February 24-25, 2016
Exhibit A Staff interviewed David Dillard, Chaplain Casey Dowden, Classification and Treatment Officer John Grevious, Correctional Unit Administrator I Barbara Handley, LPN, Clinic Assistant Anthony Hillebrandt, ADA Coordinator Brooke Howard, LPN Frederick Kemen, M.D. Donna McClamroch, Administration Director, Education Department Kristy Mullins, Medical Director, Correct Care Solutions Kristen Schramm, Psy. D. Paul Sloan, Deputy ADA Coordinator (Lieutenant) Art Turner, Chaplain Chris Wiggins, Licensed Psychological Associate
11/2016 Court Report, App-55

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 57 of 326 - Page

ID#: 1638

&YIJCJU#

11/2016 Court Report, App-56

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 58 of 326 - Page ID#: 1639

Exhibit B-2 [Recommended] Hearing Screening Questionnaire and Instructions

Preliminary questions: a. Do you currently have and use a hearing aid?

No Yes

Ƒ

Ƒ

If you answered yes, is the hearing aid working ok?

____________________________________________________________________ (Describe)

b. Have you ever been diagnosed with hearing loss?

Ƒ

Ƒ

c. Have you ever used a hearing aid that you no longer use?

Ƒ

Ƒ

If the answer to question c is yes, why don’t you use the hearing aid any longer?

____________________________________________________________________ (Describe)

Below are ten situations typically difficult for people with hearing loss.
Please check the boxes that apply to you. x Answer No, Sometimes, or Yes for each question x Do not skip a question x If you currently have a hearing aid, please answer according to the way your hear with
the aid

No Sometimes Yes

1. I feel frustrated when talking to others.

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

2. I hear but I don't always understand what others are saying. Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

3. I hear but have trouble hearing when people speak softly.

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

4. I have trouble hearing others speak when they are not

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

facing me.

5. People tell me to turn down the TV/radio.

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

6. I find it hard to hear when I am in a group setting.

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

7. I have trouble hearing on the telephone.

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

8. I need to ask people to repeat themselves when talking.

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

9. I have trouble hearing with noise in the background.

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

10. I have trouble hearing others when I am at a restaurant /

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

chow hall.

If you answered “Sometimes” or “Yes” to three or more of these questions, a hearing loss is likely present and a hearing evaluation is recommended.

Note for medical staff: Was this questionnaire administered ƑLQZULWWHQIRUPRUƑRUDOO\"

11/2016 Court Report, App-57

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 59 of 326 - Page ID#: 1640
Instructions for person administering this questionnaire: The purpose of this questionnaire is both to identify inmates who are deaf or hard of hearing and to screen inmates to see which should receive further hearing evaluation. Literacy:
x You must ensure that the patient is sufficiently literate to answer these questions in written format, or else ask them out loud. Check the appropriate box at the bottom of the form.
Ability to hear the questions: x If the patient seems unable to understand these questions due to a hearing impairment, provider followup is indicated and should be promptly scheduled.
Preliminary questions: x A “yes” answer to any of the three preliminary questions (a, b, and c) should be followed up by a promptly scheduled provider visit, unless the inmate explains that he no longer uses a hearing aid because his hearing has improved so that it is no longer necessary. x If in the followup to question a, the patient reports that the hearing aid is not working well, that should be followed up by a promptly scheduled provider visit.
Evaluation questions: x If the patient answers “sometimes” or “yes” to three or more of these questions, a hearing loss is likely present and a hearing evaluation is recommended. The next step is a visit with the provider, which should be promptly scheduled.
11/2016 Court Report, App-58

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Pag&e:Y6I0JCoJfU3$26- Page
ID#: 1641
11/2016 Court Report, App-59

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 ID#: 1642

Pa&gYeI: J6C1JUof$326 - Page

11/2016 Court Report, App-60

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 ID#: 1643

&PaYgIeJ:C6J2U$of326 - Page

11/2016 Court Report, App-61

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Pag&e:Y6I3JCoJfU3$26- Page
ID#: 1644
11/2016 Court Report, App-62

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 64 of 326 - Page ID#: 1645
Kentucky State Reformatory Visit date: February 24-25, 2016
Exhibit D D-1: [Recommended] Communications assistance for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates
(memo to staff) D-2: [Recommended] Communications assistance for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates
(memo to inmates) D-3: [Recommended] Request for Qualified Interpreter Services D-4: [Recommended] Request for communications assistance D-5: [Recommended] Auxiliary Aids/Services Assessment Form
11/2016 Court Report, App-63

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 65 of 326 - Page ID#: 1646
Kentucky State Reformatory Visit date: February 24-25, 2016
Exhibit D-1 Communications assistance for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates
(Recommended memo for staff)
The ADA Coordinator for KSR is Anthony Hillebrandt; the Deputy ADA Coordinator is Paul Sloan. Call either of them to discuss any questions about anything in this memo.
1) ID and notice cards. Unless the inmate has signed a waiver, KSR lists hearing impairments on inmate ID card and on a notice outside their cells. These notices inform you that the inmate has a hearing impairment, so that you can take steps to make your communication with the inmate effective.
2) Hearing aids and amplifiers. Hearing aids and amplifiers are available if medical staff finds that they are appropriate. If an inmate tells you that he needs a hearing aid or amplifier, or batteries, {WHAT SHOULD THEY DO?}
3) Video captioning. Turn on TV/movie captioning at an inmate’s request.
4) Communications strategies. When you are speaking with an inmate with a hearing impairment, use the best practices from the attached “tip card.” Write simple things down. If these strategies are not working and the communication is important, you should use Video Remote Interpreting (VRI); see item 7.
5) Non-auditory alerts KSR has several devices for inmates unable to hear announcements. a. Strobe-light cells. In these cells, fire alarms automatically trigger a very bright flashing light. You don’t need to do anything for this. b. Bed shakers/flashing light alerts. This device sits under a bed pillow and vibrates/buzzes automatically when the housing unit’s fire alarm goes off. There is also what looks like a light switch installed in the control center of the dorm; when count or chow is announced, the on-duty officer is assigned to flip that switch, to notify the inmate of count/chow. This should be logged {HOW?}
6) Telecommunications devices. a. For inmates who communicate via sign language, KSR has a videophone with access to Video Relay Service (VRS) {Note: I’ve written this memo assuming my recommendation re. a laptop dedicated to the videophone is followed.} x The videophone is in the Dorm 11 security office, along with a laptop to hook up when needed for VRS. x Both are available during the same hours non-Deaf inmates have access to the regular phone: during the day, nights until 11:30 pm, weekends, and holidays. x If inmates with to use the videophone, with or without VRS, they can simply request access when they need it. No scheduling in advance should be required. They are allowed 30 minutes per call. b. KSR owns two TTY (TeleTYpewriter) machines.
11/2016 Court Report, App-64

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 66 of 326 - Page ID#: 1647
x One is in the Unit B office; the other is in the administration control center. Both must be logged out and logged back in after use.
x Inmates are allowed 45 minutes per TTY call. x Training for inmates is available if they don’t know how to use the TTY: they
should ask the ADA Coordinator.
7) Qualified Interpreter Services. For deaf inmates who communicate using sign language, qualified interpreter services are provided for significant communications, either using Video Remote Interpretation (VRI) or an in-person qualified interpreter.
For inmates who need it, interpretation is provided for: x Auxiliary aid/service assessment and other accommodation assistance x On-site medical, mental health and dental evaluations/care/appointments x Classification and transfer hearings and related meetings x Grievance hearings x Adjustment committee and court call x All meetings related to discipline x Parole hearings x Rehabilitative and educational classes and clubs x Transitional programs x Conversations with post-release supervisors x Other significant communications, on request
Inmates who use sign language to communicate are not required to specially request interpretation for auxiliary aid/service assessment, emergency health care on-site, classification and transfer hearings and related meetings, grievance meetings and hearings, disciplinary hearings and all related processes, parole meetings and hearings. In those situations, VRI should be used for these inmates without their special request, unless the inmate has requested and the ADA Coordinator approved in-person interpretation. If you are arranging one of those events for an inmate who uses sign language, you need to obtain the VRI.
Inmates must have their hands unrestrained in order to communicate via sign language. If an inmate’s status requires that his hands be cuffed or otherwise restrained, alternative methods are available during the interpreted communication. Consult with the ADA Coordinator.
a. KSR has two VRI laptops; one in the administration control center and the other in the school area. x Use of the laptops should be scheduled in advance if possible {HOW? AND HOW MUCH IN ADVANCE} and the laptop logged out and logged back in after use. x After a VRI laptop has been used, have the inmate fill out the bottom of form {Exhibit D-4} and return that form to the ADA Coordinator.
11/2016 Court Report, App-65

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 67 of 326 - Page ID#: 1648
b. Inmates can request an in-person qualified interpreter by filling out the top of form {Exhibit D-4}; that form should be sent to the ADA Coordinator 48 hours prior to the scheduled event if possible.
c. The inmate has the right to waive interpreter services. If an inmate waives his right to an interpreter, a waiver form shall be completed, signed, and placed into KOMS for documentation. You must ensure that the inmate understands what he is waiving.
11/2016 Court Report, App-66

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 68 of 326 - Page ID#: 1649 {NOTE: THIS TIP CARD COULD BE MODIFIED TO BETTER SUIT THE PRISON SETTING}
11/2016 Court Report, App-67

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 69 of 326 - Page ID#: 1650
Kentucky State Reformatory Visit date: February 24-25, 2016
Exhibit D-2 [Recommended] Communications assistance for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates (memo
for inmates)
The ADA Coordinator for KSR is Anthony Hillebrandt; the Deputy ADA Coordinator is Paul Sloan. Contact either of them to discuss any questions about anything in this memo, by {FILL THIS IN}.
For inmates who are deaf or hard-of-hearing, KSR has numerous devices and processes to help make sure prison staff communication with you is effective and that you receive equal access to prison programs, services, and activities. This document is for you to save: it is a guide to all those devices and processes.
For each of the listed devices or processes, if you do not want them, you can tell the ADA Coordinator. If you have any questions now or later, you should contact the ADA Coordinator.
1) ID and notice cards. KSR will list your hearing impairment on your ID card and on a notice outside your cell. These notices inform staff that you have a hearing impairment.
2) Hearing aids and amplifiers. Hearing aids and amplifiers are available if medical staff finds that they are appropriate. If you believe you would benefit from a hearing aid or amplifier, you can request an evaluation by filling out a Healthcare Request Form. These devices and their batteries are provided to you without charge, if they are medically necessary.
3) Video captioning. Most videos shown at KSR, and all television programs, can have captioning turned on. This includes educational and entertainment movies, orientation videos, etc. You can request that a video or movie display captions, if they are available, by asking {FILL THIS IN}. If you are taking a class, ask {FILL THIS IN} if you want any class videos to display captioning. In addition, the commissary sells personal TVs that can show captioning. If you need assistance getting captioning turned on, ask the ADA Coordinator.
4) Written materials. If you are unable to understand something that a staff member tells you verbally, you can ask the staff to write it down. If you are given written materials that you have questions about, and you communicate using sign language, you can ask for a meeting with the appropriate staff member to be interpreted using the VRI or, if needed, and inperson sign language interpreter.
5) Non-auditory alerts KSR has several devices available for inmates unable to hear announcements. These include: x Strobe-light cells. In these cells, fire alarms trigger a very bright flashing light.
11/2016 Court Report, App-68

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 70 of 326 - Page ID#: 1651
x Bed shakers/flashing light alerts. This device sits under a bed pillow and vibrates/buzzes when the housing unit’s fire alarm or other announcements go off. It can be set to alert for count and chow.
x At your own expense, you can buy a vibrating alarm clock or other adaptive equipment you may find useful, via the commissary or by making a request to the ADA coordinator.
6) Telecommunications devices. x For inmates who communicate via sign language, KSR has a videophone which makes it possible for you to sign to a person at the other end. Or, if you sign but the other person does not, you can link the videophone to a Video Relay Service (VRS) and then a remote interpreter will translate your signing into English, and the other person’s English into sign language. ¾ The videophone is in the Dorm 11 security office. ¾ Deaf inmates who communicate using sign language have access to the videophone during the same hours non-Deaf inmates have access to the regular phone. It is available during the day, nights until 11:30 pm, weekends, and holidays. ¾ Request general access to the videophone using the “Request for communications assistance” form. Once access is granted, you will be trained in how to use the videophone, with or without the VRS laptop. ¾ Once you are approved for videophone use, if you want to use the videophone, with or without the VRS laptop, let Unit staff or your dorm officer know. No advance scheduling is required. x KSR owns two TTY (TeleTYpewriter) machines, which allow you to type a phone message to another TTY-user; access to a relay service is available, which allows you to type and a relay operator then speaks the message to a voice-phone user at the other end. One is in the administration control center; the other is in the Dorm 11 security office. {HOW CAN INMATES GET ACCESS?}
7) Qualified Interpreter Services. If you are deaf and communicate using sign language, KSR will provide a qualified interpreter for significant communications. Once you are approved for interpreter services, KSR will provide one for disciplinary meetings and hearings, classification meetings and hearings, grievance meetings and hearings, and emergency health care. You need to request an interpreter each other time you want one, using the Communications Assistance Request Form. If possible, make requests 48 hours in advance.
Interpreter services are available if needed for: x Initial intake/classification x Auxiliary aid/service assessment and other accommodation assistance x On-site medical, mental health and dental evaluations/care/appointments x Classification and transfer hearings and related meetings x Grievance hearings x Adjustment committee and court call x All meetings related to discipline x Parole hearings
11/2016 Court Report, App-69

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 71 of 326 - Page ID#: 1652
x Rehabilitative and educational programming, including clubs x Transitional programs x Conversations with post-release supervisors x Other significant communications, on request Interpreter services may be available if needed and requested for religious programming. Qualified interpreter services are provided in one of two ways. Video Remote Interpretation (VRI) allows a hearing person and a Deaf person who signs, who are next to each other, to communicate with each other. The hearing person speaks into a laptop microphone and an interpreter on the other end translates the speech into sign language, which the Deaf person can see on the laptop screen. The Deaf person signs into the laptop camera, and the interpreter on the other end translates the sign language into English, which the hearing person can hear. KSR has two VRI laptops; one in the administration control center and the other in the school area. When necessary for effective communication, KSR will provide an in-person qualified interpreter. If you want an in-person qualified interpreter, your request must explain why VRI will probably not be effective.
11/2016 Court Report, App-70

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 72 of 326 - Page ID#: 1653

Kentucky State Reformatory Visit date: February 24-25, 2016
Exhibit D-3 [Recommended] KSR: Request for Qualified Interpreter Services

Please make your request at least 48 hours in advance, or explain why below. Send this form to the ADA Coordinator, using the institutional mail box.

I,___________________, inmate # ________ request a qualified interpreter for:

Ƒ(GXFDWLRQPlease specify: ____________________________________________________

Ƒ&OXEPlease specify: _________________________________________________________

Ƒ3DUROHERDUGPHHWLQJKHDULQJ

Ƒ0HGLFDO'HQWDO9LVLRQDSSRLQWPHnt or other on-site health care services } Please also use

Ƒ0HGLFDO'HQWDO9LVLRQDSSRLQWPHQWRURWKHURII-site health care services } the Healthcare

Ƒ0HQWDOKHDOWKHYDOXDWLRQRUVHUYLFHV

} Request form

Ƒ6LJQLILFDQW conversation with staff about communications needs or other topic.

Ƒ5HOLJLRXVSURJUDPPLQJ1RWHLQWHUSUHWDWLRQPD\RUPD\QRWEHDYDLODEOHIRUUHOLJLRXV

programming). Please specify:____________________________________________________

Ƒ2WKHUPlease specify:__________________________________________________________

ƑI request that the interpreter be in-person, rather than via the Video Remote Interpretation (VRI) laptop. Please explain why an in-person interpreter is more effective than VRI: ________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________

Date of scheduled event: _____________ Date you are making this request: __________________ If this request is less than 48 hours in advance of the event, please explain why: _____________ _____________________________________________________________________________

Action taken by ADA Coordinator: _________________________________________________ Type of interpretation (if any) authorized: Ƒ95,RUƑ,Q-SHUVRQRUƑ1RQH Why? ________________________________________________________________________ Date interpreter utilized: ___________________________
Feedback from inmate: Please check the box that best indicates your views. The Interpretation I just used provided fully effective communication:
 Strongly agree  Weakly agree  Weakly disagree  Strongly disagree
If there was any problem with the interpretation/communication effectiveness, please explain: _____________________________________________________________________________

Inmate signature _____________________ Date_______________________ Staff signature _______________________ Date_______________________

11/2016 Court Report, App-71

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 73 of 326 - Page ID#: 1654
Kentucky State Reformatory
Visit date: February 24-25, 2016
Exhibit D-4
[Recommended] KSR: Request for communications assistance
I,____________________, inmate # ________ request communications assistance.
I request each of the following items:
Ƒ+HDULQJDLGRUDPplifier (or evaluation for a hearing aid) ƑDeaf/hearing impaired Inmate ID card Ƒ'HDIKHDULQJLPSDLUHG+RXVLQJVLJQ Ƒ9LGHRFDSWLRQLQJ
For what video/situation? (e.g., orientation, education, etc.)
______________________________________________________________
Ƒ6WUREHOLJKWFHOORUEHGVKDNHUDOHUWGHYLFH Ƒ$FFHVVWRWKHYLGHRSKRQHZLWKRUZLWKRXWWKH9LGHR5HOD\6HUYLFHODSWRS Ƒ$FFHVVWRWKH77<7H[WWHOHSKRQH Ƒ2WKHU device or services. Please specify: __________________________________________________________________
ƑQualified Interpreter Services: I communicate best using sign language, and need qualified interpreter services for significant communications. (NOTE: this request is a general one; once you are approved to receive interpreter services, they will be provided via Video Remote Interpreter (VRI) for:
x Orientation x Auxiliary aid/service assessment x Emergency Health Care on-site x Classification and transfer meetings and hearings x Grievance meetings and hearings x Disciplinary meetings and hearings x Parole meetings and hearings
In addition, you can use the “Request for Qualified Interpreter” to ask for interpreter services at additional meetings or encounters, or to request an in-person qualified interpreter.
11/2016 Court Report, App-72

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 74 of 326 - Page ID#: 1655

Kentucky State Reformatory Visit date: February 24-25, 2016
Exhibit D-5 [Recommended] KSR: Auxiliary Aids/Services Assessment Form

Inmate Name: _______________________________ Inmate #: ___________________________________ Date of assessment: ___________________________ Date arrived at KSR: __________________________

Hearing situation:

Ƒ(IIHFWLYHO\FRPSOHWHO\GHDI

Ƒ9HU\KDUG-of-hearing

Ƒ0LOGO\KDUG-of-hearing

Ƒ&XUUHQWO\KDVKHDULQJDLGVƑ&XUUHQWO\KDVKHDULQJDLGƑ&XUUHQWO\KDVDPSOLILHU

Preferred communication method: Ƒ6LJQODQJXDJH6SHFLI\W\SHRIVLJQLQJ$6/HWFBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB Ƒ6SRNHQ(QJOLVK
Was VRI or in-person LQWHUSUHWDWLRQXVHGIRUWKLVPHHWLQJ"Ƒ95, ƑIn-person interpretation For inmates who communicate using sign language, some form of interpretation should be used.
Literacy level: ___________________________ Source of literacy level information: ___________________________ *LYHQOLWHUDF\OHYHOFDSWLRQVDQGWH[WƑDUHƑDUHQRWDSSURSULDWHFRPPXQLFDWLRQVPHWKRGV
Auxiliary aids assigned: Ƒ+HDULQJDLGRUDPSOLILHUNote particulars: _____________________________________ Ƒ(YDOXDWLRQIRUKHDUing aid or amplifier. Date requested: ___________________________ Ƒ'HDIKHDULQJLPSDLUHG,QPDWH,'FDUG Ƒ'HDIKHDULQJLPSDLUHG+RXVLQJVLJQ Ƒ9LGHRFDSWLRQLQJ
For what situation? (e.g., orientation, education, etc.) Please be specific.
______________________________________________________________
Ƒ6WUREHOLJKWFHOORUEHGVKDNHUDOHUWGHYLFH Ƒ$FFHVVWRWKHYLGHRSKRQHZLWKRUZLWKRXWWKH9LGHR5HOD\6HUYLFHODSWRS Ƒ$FFHVVWRWKH77<7H[WWHOHSKRQH Ƒ2WKHUGHYLFHRUVHUYLFHVPlease specify: __________________________________________________________________
Assessment conducted by: ______________________________________ Notes and comments:

11/2016 Court Report, App-73

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 &PYaIgJeC:J7U5&of326 - Page
ID#: 1656
11/2016 Court Report, App-74

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 76 of 326 - Page ID#: 1657
Kentucky State Reformatory Visit date: February 24-25, 2016
Exhibit E-2 [Recommended] Addition to Healthcare Request If you are deaf or hard-of-hearing, do you need any communication assistance for this healthcare visit? Ƒ No Ƒ Yes: Video Remote Interpreter (VRI) (via “purple” laptop) Ƒ Yes: in-person qualified interpreter Please explain why you need an in-person interpreter rather than VRI:______________ _______________________________________________________________________ Ƒ Yes: other: _________________________________________________________________ (please specify)
11/2016 Court Report, App-75

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Doc

#: 84-2 Filed: ID#: 1658

12/05/16

&PYaIgJCe:JU77'of

326

-

Page

Site Visit Report of Settlement Monitor – COMMENTS Adams & Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky.)
Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor
Kentucky State Reformatory Visit Date: February 24-25, 2016

Global Comment.
Essential to implementation of the Agreement are timelines and accountability. We believe a deadline, and a method of tracking compliance, should be made explicit for every recommendation. In particular, a timeline for KDOC staff training is absolutely necessary.

Recommendation 6: Inmates in need of a hearing aid—both initially or because the device they have is no longer working for them—should wait for no more than 2 months to obtain the necessary device. That time period should begin the day the potential need is indicated by the inmate’s request for evaluation, answers on the questionnaire, etc. KSR should track the time from request/questionnaire to provider visit to audiology visit to hearing aid provision, and ensure that inmates do not have a longer wait. (In future quarterly reporting periods, I will request this tracking data.) One way to accomplish less expensive and more comprehensive assessment for the current backlog might be to bring in an audiologist to KSR for two or three days.
Comment:
We believe two months is too long for an inmate who needs a hearing aid to wait. We do not believe this should take longer than a few weeks, or at most, one month.

Recommendation 13: More generally, more clarity and a better process for picking a qualified interpretation method—VRI or in-person—are needed. The various memos, forms, and training should be modified to support that process. KSR should give “primary consideration” to the affected inmate’s view on this question. Revised versions of all the relevant forms and memos are attached as Exhibit D.
Comment:
Each of the revised KDOC forms should be implemented. In particular, Exhibit D-5 includes a section for deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates to identify their preferred methods of communication. This information should be made available to any KDOC staff member who needs it, e.g., instructors, medical staff, etc. We recommend this information—the inmate’s

11/2016 Court Report, App-76

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 78 of 326 - Page ID#: 1659
preferred method of communication—not be kept in the inmate’s confidential medical files, but be made easily accessible.
Recommendation 17: Inmate D’s 2016 Parole hearing should be done over, with an inperson Qualified Interpreter.
Comment:
Inmate D’s treatment is nothing short of appalling. We understand the KDOC does not have statutory authority to require the Parole Board to grant a new hearing, but we nevertheless emphatically support Recommendation 17. Any assistance the KDOC can provide in this matter would be understood as a clear showing of its intention to provide dignity to its inmates under the law, in addition to its good faith in complying with the spirit of the Settlement Agreement.
Recommendation 23: Check each existing video used at KSR to determine whether it has captioning; obtain replacements with captioning if available. Provide captions for all orientation videos, for newly acquired entertainment and educational videos, and other videos when captioning is available. For television captioning to be a real option requires periodic testing and training for staff about how to turn it on. This should be done on a schedule: perhaps quarterly or twice a year.
Comment:
Closed-captioning capability should also be recorded and tracked, for example, in the maintenance log of each piece of equipment.
Recommendation 28: Written communication should be relied upon only for simple communication with literate inmates. For complex communications or less literate inmates, alternative methods are required.
Comment:
KDOC staff communicating with deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates should be made aware of inmates’s preferred methods of communication, and should make their best effort to communicate with each deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate in that preferred way. This recommendation should emphasize the standard by which effective communication is evaluated: from the perspective of the inmate, not the KDOC staff member. It should be clear that this recommendation is intended to limit the current—unacceptable— overuse of written communication.

2

11/2016 Court Report, App-77

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 79 of 326 - Page ID#: 1660
Recommendation 32: KSR’s commissary list should include various alerting devices that inmates might wish to purchase: caption-capable TVs, vibrating alarm clocks, and the like. Inmates should be informed that if they seek to purchase adaptive equipment that is not available via the commissary, they can request assistance from the ADA Coordinator.
Comment:
It is not enough that the inmate “can request” assistance. The ADA Coordinator should be required to assist the inmate, whenever possible, in purchasing other adaptive equipment when not provided at the commissary.
Recommendation 42: KSR should review auxiliary aids that would allow hard-of-hearing inmates effective access to telecommunications, and should implement improvements—perhaps involving TTY, captioned telephones, and/or handset amplification. Asking inmates what does and doesn’t work is a necessary part of this process.
Comment:
This recommendation should be formalized and documented over time. Recording the feedback will allow the KDOC to efficiently identify communication problems. As an example, consider Recommendation 14, which provides a mechanism to rack the effectiveness of communication via VRI.
Recommendation 45: For each Deaf inmate, the ADA Coordinator should conduct an individual services assessment meeting, at which the inmate’s available methods of communication are expressly ascertained and recorded, and the inmate is informed about the available auxiliary aids and services. For an inmate who can hear (with or without an amplifier or hearing aid) well enough to understand the coordinator, information should be conveyed orally as well as in writing. If the inmate uses sign language, VRI would be the appropriate way to communicate for a meeting of this nature. The greatest challenge is presented if the inmate is not literate, does not hear well enough to understand spoken communication, and does not sign. In that case, visual demonstrations of the various auxiliary aids and services may be required.
Comment:
Inmate needs change over time, such as with worsening deafness, or loss of eyesight (and the ability to communicate via sign). The individual services assessment is an important recommendation, and it should also include a method for updating inmate information. For example, the services assessment should be made annual, or the inmate should be able to submit a form to update their preferences. This important recommendation should be flexible to meet the changing needs of the deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates.

3

11/2016 Court Report, App-78

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 80 of 326 - Page

ID#: 1661

/PW$PVSU3FQPSU
"QQFOEJY***

Matthew G. Bevin Governor
John C. Tilley Secretary

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Aaron Smith, Warden
Kentucky State Reformatory 3001 W. Hwy 146
Lagrange, KY 40032 Phone: 502-222-9441 www.kentucky.gov

Rodney Ballard Commissioner
James Erwin Deputy Commissioner

Kentucky State Reformatory Response to Recommendations

I. IDENTIFICATION OF INMATES COVERED BY THE AGREEMENT x Recommendation 1: KSR is compliant on this recommendation. In
addition, KSR will hold a meeting for all ADA coordinators to review
the process of identifying the inmates who are deaf or hard of hearing. x Recommendation 2: KSR is in agreement on this recommendation.
KSR is currently in the process of updating the forms and is awaiting
approval from the Medical Department to implement new forms. x Recommendation 3: KSR is in agreement on this recommendation.
KSR is in the process of having all staff trained in how to assist low
literacy inmates. x Recommendation 4: KSR is in agreement on this recommendation.
Medical staff will document necessary information in the EMR in
order to identify the deaf and hard of hearing inmates. x Recommendation 5: Current EMR functions are under contract and not
up for revision at this time.

II. PROVISIONS OF AUDIOLOGY SERVICES x Recommendation 6: KSR is in agreement on this recommendation. Staff have been advised to refer inmates to the Medical Department
for audiology services.

III. AUXILIARY AIDS & SERVICES

A. Personal Hearing Devices x Recommendation 7: KSR is in agreement that information should be provided to inmates regarding hearing evaluations and shall be posted in all living areas. Also, KSR will make replacement batteries available without charge.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D
11/2016 Court Report, App-79

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 81 of 326 - Page ID#: 1662
x Recommendation 8: KSR is in agreement on this recommendation and is providing amplifiers at no cost to inmates awaiting an audiology exam.
B. Qualified Interpretation x Recommendation 9: KSR is in agreement on this recommendation and will make changes to the D-3 form to request an interpreter. x Recommendation10: KSR is in agreement on this recommendation. A spreadsheet of the deaf and hearing impaired inmates will be maintained on the H: Drive for staff to access. x Recommendation 11: KSR agrees with the recommendation that interpretation services shall be offered without a special request from the inmate and will ensure that all staff are made aware. x Recommendation 12: KSR agrees with the recommendation that an inperson interpreter shall be provided when VRI is not available. x Recommendation 13: KSR agrees that forms shall be provided and scanned into inmate files for record keeping. x Recommendation 14: KSR agrees with the recommendation that a D-3 form should be used for feedback and will employ such in practice. x Recommendation 15: KSR agrees with the recommendation and a special benches been installed to allow inmates to use their hands to sign in areas where they are typically in restraints. x Recommendation 16: As the disciplinary action referenced in this recommendation is finalized, policy does not allow for a rehearing. Given the severity of the incident and the facts presented, the disciplinary action taken appears to be appropriate and justified, thus it does not appear to warrant being voided which would be the only action allowable by policy. x Recommendation 17: KSR made three requests for a rehearing and was ultimately denied by the Parole Board. x Recommendation 18: KSR agrees with the recommendation. Information and training will be provided to all necessary staff. x Recommendation 19: KSR agrees with the recommendation that information should be provided for volunteers coming into the institution. x Recommendation 20: KSR agrees with the recommendation and training will be provided to the Chaplains on how to appropriately work with the hearing impaired inmates. x Recommendation 21: KSR agrees with the recommendation and VRI laptop training will be provided for all necessary staff.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

11/2016 Court Report, App-80

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 82 of 326 - Page ID#: 1663
x Recommendation 22: KSR agrees with the recommendation that a VRI laptop shall be available at all times and will ensure that all staff are made aware.
C. Videos x Recommendation 23: KSR is in agreement on this recommendation. Televisions currently have closed captioning capabilities and all staff will be trained on turning on this feature for inmates. Necessary changes will be made to orientation, educational and PREA videos.
x Recommendation 24: KSR agrees with the recommendation that a qualified interpreter shall be provided.
D. Speech-to-text x Recommendation 25: KSR is in agreement with this recommendation and the Educational Director is currently working on speech-to-text software.
E. Assistive Listening System x Recommendation 26: KSR agrees with this recommendation and the Educational Director is working on a listening system. x Recommendation 27: KSR is in agreement with this recommendation and necessary forms will be provided at the academic school.
F. Written Communication x Recommendation 28: KSR is in agreement and staff will avoid the use of written communication with more complex communications and with less literate inmates.
G. Non-Auditory Alerts x Recommendation 29: KSR is in agreement with this recommendation. KSR is currently working on the expansion of non-auditory alert systems as well as providing testing for inmates to identify need. x Recommendation 30: KSR is currently investigating the cost and benefit of providing a paging system via the television. x Recommendation 31: KSR is in agreement with this recommendation and training is being provided to ensure that inmates are being notified.
H. Miscellaneous Devices x Recommendation 32: Information on contacting the ADA coordinator for necessary items has been posted in all living areas.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

11/2016 Court Report, App-81

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 83 of 326 - Page ID#: 1664
I. Other Communication Aids x Recommendation 33: KSR agrees with this recommendation and both word and picture versions of EZ Boards are being provided.
J. Methods of Communicating with Deaf Inmates x Recommendation 34: KSR agrees with this recommendation and training will be implemented via annual Common Core for all staff. x Recommendation 35: KSR is in agreement with recommendation. Signs and identification cards have been posted in all living units.
K. Teaching Sign Language x Recommendation 36: KSR agrees with this recommendation and the deaf and hard of hearing inmates will be given preference for sign language classes.
L. Telecommunication’s Equipment & Rules x Recommendation 37: KSR currently provides the use of a videophone for deaf inmates. KSR will look into adding additional videophones to provide better accessibility. x Recommendation 38: KSR does not require the use of the VRS to be scheduled. Videophones are available on the same schedule as all other inmate telephones at the institution. x Recommendation 39: KSR is in agreement with this recommendation. All staff will be trained on the use of the VRI Laptop and TTY phones. x Recommendation 40: KSR agrees with the recommendation and is currently looking into a VRS machine for Segregation. x Recommendation 41: KSR is in agreement with this recommendation. Inmates who use the VRS or TTY will still need to adhere to the same rules as with a standard inmate telephone. x Recommendation 42: Telephones are under Departmental contract with Securus Phone Services and any upgrades would need to be approved at the Department level.
IV. PROCESS FOR ASSESSING AND REQUESTING AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
A. Intake/Orientation x Recommendation 43: KSR is in agreement with this recommendation. A questionnaire will be implemented in orientation to ensure inmates receive immediate interpretive services.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

11/2016 Court Report, App-82

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 84 of 326 - Page ID#: 1665
B. Literacy Assessment x Recommendation 44: KSR agrees with the recommendation and the SORT-R process is being revised for the inmates.
C. Individual Assessment Meetings x Recommendation 45: KSR is in agreement with this recommendation. Assessment meetings are taking place and are being documented.
D. Form and Option x Recommendation 46: KSR agrees with the recommendation and the provided forms will be used. x Recommendation 47: KSR is in agreement with this recommendation. Provided forms will be used and a memo will be sent out on the use of various devices.
E. Additional Methods for Inmates to seek auxiliary aids and services x Recommendation 48: KSR agrees with this recommendation and the E-2 form will be put into use. x Recommendation 49: KSR agrees with the recommendation and the E-2 form will be implemented into current job, educational, and program forms. x Recommendation 50: KSR agrees with the recommendation and staff will be required to assess the need for auxiliary aids or services during the application process.
V. TRAINING
A. ADA Coordinator Training x Recommendation 51: KSR agrees that settlement agreement training should be available to all ADA coordinators.
B. Staff Training x Recommendation 52: KSR agrees with the recommendation and training material on the settlement agreement will be developed and shared with the settlement monitor as well as KCDHH.
C. Reporting x Recommendation 53: KSR agrees with the recommendation and staff will be made aware of the proper reporting obligations.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

11/2016 Court Report, App-83

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 85 of 326 - Page

ID#: 1666

/PW$PVSU3FQPSU
"QQFOEJY*7

Site Visit Report of Settlement Monitor
Adams & Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky.)
Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor
June and July 2016 Site Visits
Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC) – June 22, 2016 Kentucky Correctional Institute for Women (KCIW) – June 23, 2016
Luther Luckett Correctional Complex (LLCC) – June 24, 2016 Western Kentucky Correctional Complex (WKCC), including the Ross-Cash Center – July 25, 2016 Kentucky State Penitentiary (KSP) – July 26-27, 2016
Green River Correctional Complex (GRCC) – July 28, 2016
Draft circulated to parties for comment: September 7, 2016 Final (November 7, 2016)

INTRODUCTION
The Settlement Agreement in this case addressing conditions for deaf and hard-ofhearing inmates in Kentucky became effective June 28, 2015, and allows me to visit each of the twelve Kentucky Department of Corrections (KYDOC) facilities each calendar year. After consultation with KYDOC officials, I decided that my second group of site visits in this case would be to three prisons in La Grange, Kentucky: Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC), Kentucky Correctional Institute for Women (KCIW), and Luther Luckett Correctional Complex (LLCC), from June 22, 2016 to June 24, 2016; and my third group of site visits to three prisons in Western Kentucky: Western Kentucky Correctional Complex (WKCC) (including the RossCash Center), Kentucky State Penitentiary (KSP), and Green River Correctional Complex (GRCC), from July 25 to July 28, 2016.
For efficiency, I have decided to write a group report covering all six visits. As with my previous site-visit report, this report is intended to be helpful not just to a particular prison, but to all of KYDOC’s facilities, as they continue to move towards compliance with the Agreement in this case.
The visits were each facilitated by the institutions’ ADA Coordinators, who, like the other staff I spoke to, conducted themselves with professionalism throughout the tour. Prior to the visit, two law students working as my assistants conducted 25 phone interviews of KYDOC inmates, and I reviewed their interview notes and numerous other documents provided by each facility. During the visits, I was able to see every thing and every place I requested and to review all requested records. I spoke freely and confidentially with inmates and custody and noncustody staff. Each Warden welcomed the visits and my feedback, which I shared at exit interviews at each facility. I found each of the visits extremely productive. Exhibit A lists the

11/2016 Court Report, App-84

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 86 of 326 - Page ID#: 1667
name and title of each staff member I spoke with, by prison. I also spoke to many inmates: between the pre-tour phone inmate interviews (many of which I followed up with in-person interviews), and in-person inmate interviews conducted during my visit, this report incorporates information learned from conversations with 36 inmates, out of the 47 inmates identified to me from those facilities as deaf or hard-of-hearing (several of whom had been transferred or been released). To maximize the confidentiality of the inmates I spoke to, I do not list them or use their names in this report, referring to them instead as Inmate A, Inmate B, etc. I am providing each institution’s staff and plaintiffs’ counsel a key that identifies those inmates whose situations are specifically referenced in the report. (Note: when an inmate shared information with me confidentially, I do not identify that inmate at all.)
In my Kentucky State Reformatory (KSR) Report, finalized April 21, 2016, and attached here as Exhibit C, I made 53 (numbered) recommendations. Nearly all of these are equally pertinent in the six institutions covered here. I repeat them in the body of this report when useful, preserving the recommendation numbering from the KSR report (but editing the phrasing slightly, to excise particular references to KSR), and then continuing with number 54. (I also indent the prior recommendations and put them in italics.) All new recommendations are numbered and in bold. I have also pulled both sets of recommendations out for ease of reference into their own document, which precedes this report. References to the Settlement Agreement appear in parentheses; such references use the fully numbered version of the Agreement, which was Exhibit B to my first semi-annual court report, in February 2016. I have not reattached this version of the Agreement, but can provide it on request. Finally, for those exhibits to this report that also were attached to the KSR report, I have kept their numbering the same between the two reports. That includes Exhibits B-1 (current Hearing Screening) and B-2 (recommended Hearing Screening); Exhibits D-1, D-3, D-4, and D-5 (Recommended Forms); and Exhibits E-1 (current Correct Care Solutions Healthcare Request) and E-2 (recommended addition to Healthcare Request). I changed the D exhibits a little bit, to generalize them where the prior text was KSRspecific and to clarify some of the wording. In addition, I have substituted a largely new version of Exhibit D-2, building on some good work done by KYDOC. The other exhibits to this report (A, C, F) are entirely new.
On September 7, 2016, I provided this report in draft to the Warden and ADA Coordinator at each referenced facility; KYDOC Director of Operations Chris Kleymeyer; KYDOC counsel Angela Dunham; and plaintiffs’ counsel, giving each two weeks for comments or corrections. I received some limited comments from plaintiffs’ counsel, and several requested factual details from the ADA Coordinators. Rather than offering comments on the report, however, Director Kleymeyer requested an in-person meeting; this will take place in December 2016. Accordingly, I have not yet asked KYDOC to respond in writing by telling me which of the recommendations the Department will accept; I will do that after the December meeting.
KYDOC has made very significant progress towards compliance with the Settlement Agreement. Not all processes are yet working smoothly, but the situation for deaf and hard-ofhearing inmates is much better than it was. I look forward to working with KYDOC headquarters and institution personnel on the next steps. This report and the KSR report that preceded it are evaluative—but in both I have concentrated more attention on advice. I am hopeful that this
11/2016 Court Report, App-85

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 87 of 326 - Page ID#: 1668
report and the prior one will be sufficiently helpful to both the facilities covered and the rest of KYDOC’s institutions that I can focus more simply on evaluation, going forward.
I. IDENTIFICATION OF INMATES COVERED BY THE AGREEMENT
The Settlement Agreement covers both deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. The phrase “Deaf Inmates” is used throughout the agreement, and is defined broadly, to mean:
Inmates who are unable to hear well enough to rely on their hearing as a means of processing information, who rely on Auxiliary Aids and Services to Effectively Communicate and who qualify as individuals with disabilities under the ADA, including deaf, hard of hearing, or hearing impaired persons. See 42 U.S.C. § 12102(4). (I.3)
Because often the appropriate accommodation or auxiliary aids and services vary depending on an inmate’s degree of hearing impairment, I will use the terms more specifically in this report. I will refer to someone as hard-of-hearing if he or she is able—with or without amplification—to hear substantial spoken language. I will refer to someone as deaf if he or she has very little or no functional hearing.
Identification of deaf inmates is mostly easy; their disability is usually obvious (particularly if they are non-verbal). But identification of hard-of-hearing inmates can be more difficult. The term covers a range of impairment, and inmates are unlikely to self-identify as hard-of-hearing if they are not asked. In addition, hard-of-hearing people use a variety of methods to try to minimize their difficulties or the appearance of difficulties—they ask friends to repeat things, or perhaps they nod and pretend to understand what’s being said, or they make do with 30% or less comprehension from lipreading. In prison, in particular, inmates may seek to avoid appearing vulnerable—so they will often not inform anyone that they are having trouble understanding verbal communication.
Accordingly, each KYDOC institution needs a process to screen both new and other inmates for hearing difficulty in a private setting in which inmates are unembarrassed to answer honestly. All six institutions that are the subject of this report have, indeed, begun to implement such a process.
Going forward, the most important facilities for systemwide identification of deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates are RCC and KCIW, because they are KYDOC’s reception facilities and will at least briefly house each new deaf or hard-of-hearing male inmate. They will be the first place for most inmates where hearing issues can be identified and the need for auxiliary aids assessed. Male inmates typically spend several months in the RCC Assessment Center before they move on to a more permanent housing assignment; this should usually be sufficient time to complete that assessment and provide equipment such as a hearing aid, if needed. Similarly, female inmates usually spend about 2 months in the KCIW Assessment Center.
RCC’s identification process was the most developed of the facilities I visited, so I will describe that. By the time of my visit, RCC had started to use a multi-step process to identify
11/2016 Court Report, App-86

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 88 of 326 - Page ID#: 1669
incoming deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates: 1) Inmates are asked about their hearing during the initial medical screening. (See Figure A, below.) 2) Whether or not an inmate reports any hearing difficulty in response to that single question, he is given a multiple-question hearing screening by a nurse. (See Exhibit B-1) 3) If he answers “yes” or “sometimes” in response to three or more of the screening questions, he is seen within a day or two by a medical provider—a physician or nurse practitioner—who further evaluates him, administering the “whisper test” to assess whether there is a functional hearing problem, and conducting an examination to try to understand the cause of the problem (e.g., ear wax buildup, infection, etc.). 4) If the inmate fails the “whisper test,” he is given a “pink card”—an identification card to carry with his inmate ID, which states that he is hard-of-hearing. This is useful, for example, if he needs to explain to a correctional officer why he didn’t hear something. 5) In addition, if the inmate fails the whisper test, his name is shared with RCC’s ADA Coordinator, Amy Robey, and two different alerts are placed in his record. One is placed in KOMS (the Kentucky Offender Management System), to alert correctional staff to the issue whenever they retrieve his computerized file. (See Figure B, below.) The other is placed in the EMR (Electronic Medical Record), to do the same for medical staff. (See Figure C, below.)
11/2016 Court Report, App-87

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 89 of 326 - Page ID#: 1670
Figure A: Systems Review in Medical Intake
Figure B: RCC KOMS Alert.
11/2016 Court Report, App-88

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 90 of 326 - Page ID#: 1671
Figure C: RCC EMR Precautions
This approach is generally reasonable—indeed, exemplary—and needs only two minor changes: Figure A, above, sets out the “systems review” part of the medical intake interview. The
interviews are conducted orally. The question about hearing difficulties is well down in the screen, meaning most of the interview will happen before the hearing question is asked. So the hearing question in Figure A (in Section 2: “Difficulty Hearing”) should be moved to the top of that screening, because if a patient has trouble hearing, that can undermine the effectiveness of the rest of the screening. In addition, the more complete hearing screening described in step 2, above (Exhibit B-1) should be modified as recommended in my KSR report, to conform to Exhibit B-2. See Part I of that report, which applies here, as well.
Other facilities vary from RCC’s practice in a variety of ways, some of which are less effective:
x Several facilities do not enter effective KOMS or EMR alerts for all deaf and hard-ofhearing inmates. In those facilities, it is not immediately obvious in an inmate’s correctional or health record that the inmate is deaf or hard-of-hearing. For example, in the KCIW inmates’ medical records, the inmate’s status as deaf or hard-of-hearing is listed under “problems,” but not as a header in the record. The header-type alert is necessary because difficulty in hearing impacts all staff interactions with the inmate, so it should be immediately apparent, without staff needing to go searching.
x LLCC has non-medical staff do the hearing screening in step 2. This makes it harder for the inmate to receive the necessary medical followup.
x Sometimes, inmates don’t get a pink card until after a doctor or nurse practitioner confirms that they have a hearing impairment, which can take several weeks after arrival.
11/2016 Court Report, App-89

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 91 of 326 - Page ID#: 1672
Recommendation 54: Identification processes
a) Each facility should ask each inmate about any hearing difficulties during his or her initial medical screening, in their first day or two in the facility. Questions about hearing should be at the start of that screening, to allow accommodations, if needed, during the rest of the process.
b) All inmates should also fill out, in writing or orally, the multiple-question hearing screening. Exhibit B-2 is the recommended form. (See also prior recommendation 2.) This form should be administered by medical staff, to facilitate necessary medical followup.
c) If an inmate answers “yes” or “sometimes” in response to three or more of the screening questions, he should be seen in the next several days by a medical provider—a physician or nurse practitioner—for further evaluation, including a “whisper test” or other examination to assess whether there is a functional hearing problem.
d) If an inmate fails the “whisper test” or other hearing evaluation, the following should occur: x The inmate should receive an identification card to carry on his person, which states that the inmate is deaf or hard-of-hearing. x The inmate’s name should be shared with the facility’s ADA coordinator. x Two different alerts should be placed in his record, one in KOMS (the Kentucky Offender Management System), to alert correctional staff to the issue whenever they retrieve his computerized file, and the other in the EMR (Electronic Medical Record), to do the same for medical staff. Both alerts should be immediately obvious when the electronic file is opened. (See Figures A and B, above).
e) All inmates so identified should be included in the facility’s semi-annual reports to me; if a particular inmate turns out not to be deaf or hard-of-hearing, because, for example, a medical problem that was obstructing his or her hearing is solved, that can be explained. (Note: the decision to send an inmate to an audiologist for evaluation or treatment is not the same as the decision to flag the inmate as deaf or hard-of-hearing.)
Because these screening processes are new, not all of KYDOC’s inmates have been through them. Therefore, it is important for the new screening processes to be included in other medical encounters, as well. Depending on their health status, some inmates get annual physicals; for others, their routine medical check-up is less often. Either way, the routine physicals should include the hearing questionnaire:
Recommendation 55: In order to ensure appropriate identification of deaf and hard-ofhearing inmates, all inmates’ annual or other routine physicals should include the hearing questionnaire (Exhibit B-2).
Once identification is complete, it needs to be tracked and made obvious in several ways. The ADA coordinator needs to know, of course, so that he or she can track the inmate’s information and ensure appropriate auxiliary aids and services. But more generally, staff need to know that particular inmates are deaf or hard-of-hearing in order to facilitate effective
11/2016 Court Report, App-90

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 92 of 326 - Page ID#: 1673
communication. It’s for this reason that the Settlement Agreement requires various notices: a notice outside each unit that houses a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate (III.D.3) and an ID card (usually pink or faded red in color) that identifies the inmate as deaf or hard-of-hearing (III.D.1). The facilities I visited were in compliance with these requirements, and each has taken the valuable additional step—which seems to me functionally necessary, though not explicitly required in the Agreement—of offering inmates the option of posting a similar notice for the outside of each their cell, or (in a dorm setting) their bed.
One purpose of the pink or red card is to be available if the inmate needs to explain to an officer why the inmate didn’t hear a question, or the like. The inmates I spoke to said that the card really is helpful in this regard—that they occasionally have a problem when an officer asks them a question or issues an order from behind them, which they cannot hear, and the card is useful to explain that the inmate was not willfully ignoring the officer. However, one minor change would be useful. The Settlement Agreement requires that the ID card “clearly identif[y]” each deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate. (III.D.1) In some facilities, the ID card simply states “hoh.” This is a little cryptic; the card should say “Deaf” or “Hard-of-Hearing,” spelling out the words, for clarity. In addition, I heard, as well, that facilities have not always promptly replaced misplaced cards; facilitating such replacements is important.
Prior Recommendation 35: Each facility should continue to provide Deaf inmates with ID cards that identify them as Deaf, and to post similar identification outside their cells. The notices required by the Agreement outside each housing unit and at the entrance to the institution should also be posted.
Recommendation 56: Each facility should ensure that the ID cards used to identify inmates as deaf or hard-of-hearing are clear, and should avoid abbreviations or other language that may not be clear. Each facility should ensure that every deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate is able to carry such a card at all times. If an inmate misplaces the card, a replacement should be promptly provided.
II. ENSURING EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION DURING INTAKE
During intake, a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate is unlikely to know what accommodations or auxiliary aids and services are available. So in this setting in particular, it’s important that assistance be offered to the inmate, rather than waiting for his or her request. In addition, this is an especially bad occasion to rely on lip-reading, which offers only partial comprehension to even its most skilled users. Accordingly, interpretive services should be offered.
Each facility I visited has taken steps to provide Qualified Interpretation, via remote video interpreter. Intake and medical staff generally seemed to know about the existence of the Video Remote Interpretation (VRI) laptop, although several staff members did not entirely understand how to obtain the laptop—particularly if the ADA Coordinator was not available, as on a weekend—or how to use it. Some staff did not seem to realize that it was up to them to offer interpretive services to the inmate during intake; this applies particularly to medical staff for intake physicals. The prior recommendation that interpretive services be offered in this situation was perhaps less clear than it should have been that it includes medical intake as well as other orientation.
11/2016 Court Report, App-91

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 93 of 326 - Page ID#: 1674
Prior Recommendation 11: Interpretation services should be offered without special request to any inmate (known to prison staff to use sign language to communicate) during initial classification and orientation. These encounters are vital to the terms of each inmate’s living situation, and inmates are unlikely to know, during these early stages, that they need to request interpretation and how to do so.
Recommendation 57: Interpretation services should be offered without special request to any inmate (known by prison staff to use sign language to communicate) during initial medical screening or other intake medical encounters. Inmates are unlikely to know, during these early stages, that they need to request interpretation and how to do so. Medical staff should ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if they use sign language to communicate, rather than waiting for the ADA Coordinator’s assessment.
For hard-of-hearing inmates, too, it’s important that staff immediately work to ensure effective communication while the remaining evaluation and accommodation process takes place. This can involve many different approaches—and in several facilities, medical staff explained to me the steps they take to improve communication with hard-of-hearing patients, including making sure that the inmate can see their face, speaking slowly and clearly, etc. None had received training on best approaches, however. For recommendations related to training, see Part VIII, below. In addition, even though several of the facilities had begun to issue pocket amplifiers to hard-of-hearing inmates awaiting audiology consult, none was using them during intake, while inmates were still being evaluated.
Recommendation 58: Each facility’s medical office should keep pocket amplifiers on hand for all intake staff—medical, mental health, and custody—to use when the need arises.
III. PROVISION OF AUDIOLOGY SERVICES
Medical care at all KYDOC institutions is provided by Correct Care. At all of the facilities I visited, medical staff have worked to facilitate inmate access to audiology services. Each sends inmates who fail the whisper test to an off-site audiologist (or, if indicated, an Ear, Nose & Throat doctor), for hearing testing, hearing aid evaluation, and hearing aid fitting.
Again, RCC provides a good model. At first, RCC was using University of Louisville audiology services, but when staff were unable to obtain services in a timely way, they switched to a new provider, Norton Hospital, and now are able to schedule audiology assessment visits in about two weeks. The process now works as follows:
1) The medical provider decides that an audiology consult is appropriate. This referral must be approved by Correct Care’s regional medical director, which takes about a week.
2) While the inmate is waiting to get to the audiologist, he is provided with a pocket amplifier. (RCC started providing these devices only a few days before my visit.)
3) At the time of my visit, staff had managed to schedule audiology visits within a week or two of the consult request. (Under Correct Care’s rules, the scheduling is allowed
11/2016 Court Report, App-92

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 94 of 326 - Page ID#: 1675
to take up to 6 weeks; using this amount of time would be inconsistent with prior recommendation 6, below.) 4) The audiologist conducts a hearing test, and if the impairment is sufficiently significant that he or she is recommending a hearing aid, does the necessary evaluation for that hearing aid at the same time. 5) Under KYDOC policy 13.2, effective July 31, 2015, “Hearing aids shall be provided to any inmate who has a hearing loss of a severe nature (greater than or equal to 80dB) at the department’s expense.” Once medical staff approve the ordering of the hearing aid, it takes about two weeks for it to arrive and for the inmate’s fitting to be scheduled and take place. 6) Once the inmate receives his hearing aid, he is told how he can get replacement batteries at no cost to him, by going to the nurses’ station.
Of the six KYDOC facilities I have visited, RCC seems to have by far the smoothest audiology process—the others take more time, require more specialist visits, and several have in fact not yet successfully provided anyone with hearing aids, though the process is underway for several inmates in each. At both KSP and WKCC, for example, I observed numerous process failures: inmates who failed the whisper test were never scheduled for a provider followup, or received only a chart review, without the provider actually understanding that the purpose of the followup was supposed to be for him or her to evaluate whether an audiology consult was appropriate. At several of the facilities, the audiology consults were not being carried out in a timely fashion, and/or the process required three trips out of the institution, rather than two: one to receive an audiology evaluation, a second for earmold impressions to be taken, and a third for them to be actually given to the inmate. This approach to appointments greatly increased the time and cost, and undermined effective communication for the inmate during that extra time. And LLCC has been relying on KSR staff to do the transport—which has sometimes meant that difficult-to-schedule audiology appointments may get cancelled, the day of the appointment, because transport officers are overbooked.
At each facility I tracked numerous inmates through the process, using their medical records; only at RCC did it appear that the process was actually proceeding reliably from one step to the next, and getting inmates evaluated and fitted for hearing aids. Even at RCC, moreover, there had been frequent glitches and difficulties. For example, inmates who arrived at RCC several months ago described to me that it took multiple requests and staff members “going to bat” for them to get hearing evaluations. On the other hand, an inmate who arrived shortly before my visit experienced a much smoother and faster process. For the progress that has been made to be maintained, it will be crucial for an assigned person to systematically track each inmate’s progress through the process, not just every quarter or six months, but every week or two.
I have been told, as well, that after my visit, RCC contracted with an audiology provider who comes on site. I do not know the details, but this is a welcome development; I look forward to finding out more about it.
My prior recommendation 6 continues to apply:
11/2016 Court Report, App-93

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 95 of 326 - Page ID#: 1676
Prior Recommendation 6: Inmates in need of a hearing aid—both initially or because the device they have is no longer working for them—should wait no longer than two months to obtain the necessary device. That time period should begin the day the potential need is indicated by the inmate’s request for evaluation, answers on the questionnaire, etc. Each KYDOC facility should track the time from request/questionnaire to provider visit to audiology visit to hearing aid provision, and ensure that inmates do not have a longer wait. (In future quarterly reporting periods, I will request this tracking data from all facilities.) One way to accomplish less expensive and more comprehensive assessment for any backlog might be to bring in an audiologist to each applicable facility for two or three days.
The way that RCC has improved its process can be a model for how other facilities can meet this recommendation:
x Find an audiologist whose schedule and recordkeeping are sufficiently robust to facilitate timely scheduling.
x Schedule the hearing test and hearing aid evaluation in the same appointment. x Medical staff should track each inmate who is deaf or hard-of-hearing to ensure
prompt scheduling and service provision, through each step: - identification/request for evaluation - hearing screening questionnaire - provider visit - audiology consult request - audiology scheduling - audiology visit - hearing aid order - hearing aid provision
x The ADA Coordinator should also monitor this progress, to ensure nobody gets stalled.
RCC staff who have worked through these issues are likely to have systems advice for staff at other facilities.
More detail may help compliance with the tracking recommendation (prior recommendation 6):
Recommendation 59: The ADA Coordinator for each KYDOC facility should maintain a document that tracks each deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate’s progress through the process of obtaining any needed hearing aid, including the dates and outcomes of:
x the initial request/questionnaire x each relevant medical visit x any audiology visit x hearing aid provision. In order to ensure that inmates do not wait longer than two months for a necessary hearing aid, the ADA coordinator should check for progress for each affected inmate every week or two, updating the tracking document and working with medical staff to solve any procedural hurdles that arise. A recommended sample tracking document is provided as Exhibit F.
11/2016 Court Report, App-94

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 96 of 326 - Page ID#: 1677
Exhibit F is based on real medical records, though it has been altered and anonymized. It demonstrates the kinds of obstacles to audiology services that can arise. Not one of the inmates listed has actually received a hearing aid; each had audiology service provisions stall at some point. The point is, someone needs to do case management work to ensure that this complicated pipeline actually keeps moving. If an audiology consult has been requested, has it been approved? If it’s been approved, has it been scheduled? If it’s been scheduled, did it actually take place, and has the second visit been scheduled? If it got cancelled, has it been rescheduled? And so on.
One special obstacle to timely provision of audiology services may arise when an inmate is transferred from one institution to another. If this occurs, it is important for any progress made at the transferring prison be continued in the receiving prison, rather than making the inmate start over. For example, if an inmate has already been evaluated and scheduled for an audiology visit, a new visit may need to be scheduled—but the evaluation that preceded it should not have to be done over. Similarly, if an audiologist has already fit the inmate for hearing aids, but the inmate has not yet received them, those hearing aids should be able to be delivered to the inmate after his transfer.
IV. AUXILIARY AIDS/SERVICES
As I explained in my KSR report, once an inmate is identified as fitting the Agreement’s definition of “Deaf,” each KYDOC facility is obligated (in the absence of a voluntary waiver) to provide effective communication by using auxiliary aids and services. The Agreement instructs that “[a]fter medical staff determine that an Inmate is Deaf, the KDOC will presume that Auxiliary Aids and Services in the form of Qualified Interpreters, visual notifications, telecommunication devices, and other aids and services set forth in this Agreement are necessary to ensure Effective Communication and substantially equal services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations.” (III.C.1) Deaf inmates might need any of several different types of such aids/services. In this section, I discuss them in turn.
To figure out what services may be needed, it is necessary to think through each type of communication that takes place at the facility. Different situations call for different services or devices. Much of this is covered in detail by the Agreement, but sometimes the Agreement just states the general obligation of effective communication and equal access to services, programs, and activities.
All of the facilities covered in this report use an identical pamphlet (except that RCC’s is a little more comprehensive than the others) to explain the available auxiliary aids to inmates. I am not sure who first created this document, which brings together information provided by the telecommunications company Purple and other descriptions of services and processes. Using such a pamphlet is a great idea; it is important that inmates know what services are available and how to access and use them. However, the pamphlet is sometimes vague, sometimes inaccurate, and quite incomplete. It should be improved. I have created a draft that combines the pamphlet with the memo I recommended for KSR; this recommended document is Exhibit D-2.
My prior recommendation 46 covered some of this territory:
11/2016 Court Report, App-95

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 97 of 326 - Page ID#: 1678
Prior Recommendation 46: The various forms related to requesting and using Auxiliary Aids and Services form should be changed in a number of ways:
• To list available aids and services more comprehensively • To more clearly explain what the various services and aids are,
in what circumstances they are available, and how to request them. • To explain how to use the various devices. • To ask inmates, expressly, about their preferred modes of communication or needed services, and why those are useful. • To explain which items are free of charge, and which are available only at the inmate’s expense.
Recommendation 60: I commend KYDOC for developing a user-friendly pamphlet to cover the information needed by deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates; I recommend facilities use the edited version in Exhibit D-2; each facility should fill in the items marked with curly brackets ({ and }).
A. Personal hearing devices: Hearing aids and amplifiers
In Part III, above, I discuss provision of audiology evaluation and hearing aids. Here I discuss some additional important issues related to personal hearing devices.
While deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates are waiting for audiologist evaluation, or when their degree of hearing impairment is small, medical staff at several facilities began a few days before my visit to provide personal amplifiers, which both inmates and staff often refer to as “pocket talkers.” It seems that only some of the inmates who might benefit from amplifiers know that they are available. At several of the facilities amplifiers are readily available when requested by medical staff; some facilities keep a small stock on hand. But in others, they have to be specially ordered. In some, they are considered “formulary” items; in others, they are “offformulary.” As far as I understand, all the KYDOC institutions order medical supplies from a company called McKesson, which does stock personal amplifiers. So all the institutions should be able to follow the recommendation that follows:
Prior Recommendation 8: Inmates waiting for an audiologist evaluation or for hearing aid service should be offered an amplifier while they wait.
Once provided, hearing aids need batteries (which require frequent changes). In addition, they need to stay with the inmate even when he is moved or transferred.
Hearing aid batteries come in many different types, and when the hearing aid is working correctly, they may last as little as 3 days or as long as 3 weeks. So each facility needs to work out a way for inmates who use hearing aids to easily obtain replacement batteries. This includes inmates in segregated housing or special programming housing. It might even be a good idea to allow inmates to keep one extra set of batteries with them, so that when their batteries run out, they are not without their hearing aid for the time it takes to get a new set. (If inmates were allowed to keep an extra set of batteries with them, then it would be acceptable to provide
11/2016 Court Report, App-96

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 98 of 326 - Page ID#: 1679
replacement batteries only on weekdays, because the extra set would be available for any weekend need.)
Recommendation 61: Inmates with hearing aids should be able to obtain replacement batteries seven days a week, without difficulty or charge, regardless of their housing or programming assignment.
Inmates are occasionally moved from one cell to another, or one prison to another. Either way, their hearing aids need to be moved with them. At KSP, Inmate A was transferred from regular housing into disciplinary segregation; apparently he was not wearing his hearing aids when he was moved, so they were put in storage, like his other property. The result was that he had difficulty hearing in disciplinary housing. During my visit, I requested that his hearing aids be restored to him, but that took several days. Similarly, when inmates are transferred from one prison to another, their hearing aids may sometimes not be moved with them. (This may have been the situation for Inmate B, when he was moved from LLCC to KSR.) If this occurs, it is an expensive mistake, since KYDOC likely paid for the device. In addition, it obstructs effective communication for the inmate for the months it takes for him to get replacements.
Recommendation 62: Each facility should inform staff responsible for property moves that it is important for inmates to keep their hearing aids with them, even when they are moved into segregation or transferred. When an inmate is accidentally separated from his or her hearing aids, policy should allow the inmate to promptly obtain the hearing aids from storage or medical, or to get replacements.
B. Qualified Interpretation
Some of the six facilities covered by this report did not have any inmates there who use sign language and therefore needed interpretive services. My recommendations in this section are based on the experiences of five inmates who used sign language to communicate at four of the six facilities.
x Inmate C, at the Green River Correctional Complex x Inmate D, at the Kentucky State Penitentiary x Inmates E & F, at KCIW x Inmate G, who spent several months at RCC, but was transferred before my visit.
1. The choice between in-person and remote interpretation methods
Generally speaking, each facility I visited that has had an inmate who uses sign language to communicate has successfully implemented use of Video Remote Interpretation (VRI), via laptop. I discuss some issues in this regard in the next subsection (IV.B.2).
The issue that is harder is whether in-person interpretive services are being provided when necessary. As I explained in Part III.B.2 of my report on KSR, which I here incorporate by reference, the Settlement Agreement is mostly ambiguous in terms of when interpretation services should be offered via VRI or an in-person interpreter. But it is clear that there will be occasions when an in-person interpreter is required for effective communication; each facility
11/2016 Court Report, App-97

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 99 of 326 - Page ID#: 1680
needs to prepare the ground for this situation, finding providers in advance, and working out when they may be required. Most of the facilities have apparently never provided an in-person interpreter in any situation.
My prior recommendations 12-14 hold:
Prior Recommendation 12: Both the existing VRI contract and the standing arrangement with a provider of in-person qualified interpretive services are crucial and should remain in place. In-person interpretation should be provided to inmates who communicate by signing when it is necessary for effective communication. This includes during group classes in which student participation is key, and in parole hearings. For other situations, an in-person interpreter should be provided if remote interpretation is unlikely to be, or has not been, effective.
Prior Recommendation 13: More generally, more clarity and a better process for picking a qualified interpretation method—VRI or in-person—are needed. The various memos, forms, and training should be modified to support that process. The facility should give “primary consideration” to the affected inmate’s view on this question. Revised versions of all the relevant forms and memos are attached as Exhibit D. The information in Exhibit D-5—in particular, the preferred communication method— should be made available to all KYDOC staff who need it, including both medical and custody staff, including electronically.
Prior Recommendation 14: Each facility should track the effectiveness of communication via VRI in other situations, in order to decide whether there are any situations in which in-person interpretation should be the first recourse. As part of this assessment process, each time a VRI is used, the inmate should be asked how effective the resulting communication was. This can be done by a scaled question:
Please check the box that best indicates your views.
The Video Remote Interpretation I just used provided fully effective communication:
 Strongly agree  Weakly agree  Weakly disagree  Strongly disagree
If there was any problem with the communication, please explain:
These responses can be collected and analyzed. This recommendation is reflected in Exhibit D.
2. Video Relay Interpretation (VRI): Use and Procedures
In each facility, the VRI laptop was available and staff seemed to know that it existed. I tested each one, and they all worked. This is a good base on which to build. Quite a few problems remain, however.
Most important, it is clear that VRI services are not being used in some situations when they should. The VRI laptops are being used in certain formal communication settings— classification and disciplinary hearings and meetings, for example. But there are many other
11/2016 Court Report, App-98

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 100 of 326 - Page ID#: 1681
situations where effective communication is necessary but obstacles to VRI usage remain. These include medical appointments, investigation meetings to prepare for discipline, meetings with grievance or other legal aides (inmates who assist other inmates with grievances or disciplinary hearings), and other conversations between staff and inmates who sign to communicate. Each facility needs to set up an easy process by which the VRI laptop can be available for interpretation of conversations with deaf inmates, without the need to cancel and reschedule meetings or the like. In order to make this work, staff must be trained that use of the VRI laptop is not a big deal or special, but is simply the most effective way for them to communicate with inmates who sign. It is particularly important that the VRI laptop be used routinely in segregated (or “restrictive”) housing, because various features of segregation obstruct many of the coping mechanisms deaf inmates might use to understand what someone is telling them—the ambient noise is extreme, visual cues are scarce, etc.
A particular issue has arisen at KCIW, where there are two inmates who use sign language to communicate. Inmate E is nearly entirely non-verbal as well as deaf (and not highly literate). Inmate F is a very skilled lip reader, and can speak as well as sign. I heard both from the inmates and from staff that staff frequently call upon Inmate F to interpret for Inmate E. Except in an emergency, this is bad practice. Inmate F is not certified as an interpreter, and cannot herself hear. So the quality of the interpretive services may well be too low. In addition, having one inmate interpret for another means that the inmate-interpreter knows about and has some responsibility for the other inmate’s business. This is inappropriate in a facility with real security risks. A solution is readily available: the laptop can be used for interpretation.
Perhaps the obstacle to more prevalent use of the VRI laptop is that not all staff know how to operate it. Lack of experience with the machine has also contributed to another problem. Similar to the situation I described in my KSR report, even when VRI services have been used, the setup has not always been ideal. The participants in several VRI sessions—both staff and inmates—reported to me that the interpreter sometimes had trouble hearing what was going on. In part, this seems likely to be because of the physical arrangement used, illustrated in Figure D:
Figure D: Use of the VRI (problematic)
Staff member 1
(Desk or table)
VRI laptop
Inmate
For VRI to be effective, it is important that the person speaking be near the laptop’s microphone—ideally in visual range. Two setups that can probably work are illustrated in Figure E:
11/2016 Court Report, App-99

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 101 of 326 - Page ID#: 1682

Figure E: Use of the VRI (recommended)

1.

2.

Staff member

(Desk or table)

(Desk or table)

Staff member Inmate

Inmate

Setup E.1 is the ideal—it puts both people conducting the conversation within both sound and sight range of the laptop camera and microphone. But where there is a security need for the inmate and the staff member to be on opposite sides of a table, setup E.2 may be adequate.

Setup E.2 and perhaps even the not-recommended spacing of Figure D are likely to work substantially better if a better microphone is plugged into the laptop. The microphone that comes built into the laptop computer has a very limited range. The type of microphone that seems most appropriate is a “conference microphone.”1 In fact, with a better microphone, if people are careful not to speak at the same time, it’s possible the VRI will even prove adequate for interpretation of a situation in which several people are speaking—for example, a class that includes some, though not a great deal, of class discussion. It would be worthwhile to try this out.

An additional technical issue that the visits revealed is that in

a number of facilities, staff using the laptop often cannot

simultaneously use their computer, because the internet cord for the

computer is unplugged from the computer and transferred to the

laptop. Sometimes two computers are within reach, so one internet

cord is taken out of a computer and used for the VRI laptop, and the

other computer is used. At least once, this was done by stringing a

cord many yards from an office down the hall into a medical exam

room. But generally, in these facilities, if a deaf inmate is having an

interpreted conversation—say, if he is being asked medical or intake

Figure F: KCIW Splitter

questions—the computer on which his answers would ordinarily be

recorded is unavailable until later. This can lead to ineffective recordkeeping and even

ineffective health care. Luckily, this is an easy problem to solve: KCIW and a couple other

facilities have implemented use of a “splitter” that allows one internet line to feed both the VRI

laptop and a computer. The splitter can be easily stored in the laptop bag.

1 Just to reference one, picked because it has good consumer ratings, see, e.g., MXL AC404 USB Conference Microphone, https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001TGTDFM/.

11/2016 Court Report, App-100

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 102 of 326 - Page ID#: 1683
Another technical issue that these visits revealed is that the intermittent use of the VRI means that it may not receive necessary software updates. This needs to be planned for and dealt with. (The method for solving the problem will vary depending on how a particular facility handles software updates more generally.)
Finally, I am not sure about how far in advance the various facilities require scheduling of the VRI to occur. (It’s not a good idea to require any particular time frame, because that bars use of VRI for routine conversations that are not typically scheduled at all. Of course encouraging in-advance scheduling is fine, where practicable.) In any event, I did hear numerous times that the basic method for obtaining the VRI is that the requesting staff member contacts the ADA Coordinator. That means that the VRI is, in practice if not policy, unavailable for situations that develop quickly or after hours, when the ADA Coordinator is not available. This can include some very important communication events—e.g., medical emergencies, investigations, etc.—as well as more routine communications that could benefit from interpretation.
Most of these issues are covered by my prior recommendations:
Prior Recommendation 10: For inmates who use sign language to communicate, no special request should be needed to obtain VRI services for auxiliary aid/service assessment, emergency health care on-site, classification and transfer hearings and related meetings, grievance meetings and hearings, disciplinary hearings and all related processes, parole meetings and hearings.
Prior Recommendation 11: Interpretation services should be offered without special request to any inmate (known to prison staff to use sign language to communicate) during initial classification and orientation. These encounters are vital to the terms of each inmate’s living situation, and inmates are unlikely to know, during these early stages, that they need to request interpretation and how to do so.
Prior Recommendation 21: The process for obtaining and using the VRI laptop should be communicated to each staff member who might have occasion to need it, and also to each inmate who communicates using sign language. Each such staff member should actually do a practice run using the machine—to figure out how/where internet access and power will be obtained, and how to use the program. The laptops themselves should be checked each time they are returned to their resting area, to ensure that they have sufficient battery power. Training should ensure that staff understand that the person communicating with the Deaf inmate should sit within easy reach of the laptop’s microphone, and that the inmate must not have his hands handcuffed. (It would be useful to include a diagram or instructions on a piece of paper taped to the laptop’s cover.)
Prior Recommendation 22: There should be some flexibility in the timing of VRI requests and usage; where a need arises that does not allow for 48 hours notice, VRI should nonetheless be made available if possible. Each facility should work out a process for VRI availability after hours and on weekends, as well as in emergencies.
To cover the additional issues just described:
11/2016 Court Report, App-101

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 103 of 326 - Page ID#: 1684
Recommendation 63: Absent an emergency in which time is of the essence and VRI services are unavailable, no facility should rely on an inmate to interpret a communication that would ordinarily be private for another inmate.
Recommendation 64: Each facility should obtain and test a “splitter” for each VRI laptop, so that the laptop can be used alongside a computer.
Recommendation 65: Each facility should ensure that the VRI laptop routinely receives necessary software updates.
3. Religious and volunteer-provided programming
As I discussed in my KSR report, the Agreement distinguishes between KYDOCprovided and volunteer-provided activities. For the latter, facilities are not obligated to provide a qualified interpreter, but are instead required to facilitate, by “allow[ing] the volunteer organization or individual to bring a Qualified Interpreter, subject to the KDOC Adult Institution’s security requirements,” and “work[ing] with the volunteer organization or individual in an effort to have a Qualified Interpreter at the volunteer-provided activities.” (V.A.3) And similarly: “The KDOC shall encourage outside volunteers providing religious services to provide Effective Communication for Deaf Inmates as long as the volunteer meets the same security requirements that are imposed on all other outside volunteers.” (VI.G.1)
It is my understanding that the only volunteer-provided programming at any of the facilities I visited is religious programming. As at KSR, the chaplains at each facility explained to me that they mostly coordinate volunteer programming. What emerged from my visits, however, is that a portion of religious programming is actually provided by the chaplain himself, a state employee. At LLCC, for example, the chaplain provides faith-based reentry programming; at KCIW and GRCC, the chaplain leads two worship services each month; and at KSP, the chaplain leads occasional worship services and bible study. (In addition, the sound system used by volunteers, like the other equipment they use—the chairs, projectors, and the like—are state-provided, which means that the sound equipment should be accessible even for volunteer-led programming. See Part IV.E, below.) The Agreement states that “[t]o the extent that the KDOC provides any religious services, now or in the future, the KDOC shall provide a Qualified Interpreter.” (Agreement VI.G.3; V.A.3 is materially the same). That provision covers all chaplain-provided services, but facility policy and practice have not yet implemented it.
In addition, as at KSR, the chaplains also confirmed that they have the role of telling inmates when there is a death in the family and then facilitating the inmates’ communication with their family members. Accordingly, the chaplains too need to be trained about the availability of VRI for interpreting conversations with a deaf inmate who uses sign language. As I noted in my KSR report, it would not make sense to require an interpretation request for this kind of communication by the affected inmate, given that this is a one-time notice. So like other KYDOC staff, the chaplains will need to be trained, as well, to look in the KOMS systems to see if an inmate they are about to talk with might need qualified interpretation.
11/2016 Court Report, App-102

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 104 of 326 - Page ID#: 1685
Prior Recommendation 19: The process/forms for inmates to request interpretive services and other auxiliary aids and services should clearly encompass religious and any other volunteer-provided programming.
Recommendation 66: For any religious programming—worship services, counseling, bible study, etc.—that is provided directly by the chaplain, each facility should provide qualified interpretation when requested by an inmate who needs it.
Prior Recommendation 20: Significant communications by the chaplains are covered by the requirement of effective communication. Therefore the chaplains, like other staff, should be trained in the requirements of this Agreement, and should ensure that if they have occasion to minister to a Deaf inmate—or simply inform him that a family member has died—they do so effectively, including using interpreter services if the inmate communicates using sign language.
C. Video captioning
Each facility uses video communication in several different situations: some use an orientation video; others use videos for various programming or education sessions; all use videos for entertainment. In each of these situations, some deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates will benefit from text captions—on-screen text descriptions that display a video product’s dialogue, identify speakers, and describe other relevant sounds otherwise inaccessible to people who are deaf or hard-of-hearing.2
My KSR report discusses the Agreement’s five provisions relating to captions. Each facility has taken steps towards compliance, but not all are yet consistently providing captioning. For the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) video, for example, KCIW sent its DVD out to KYDOC’s Central Region Training Center to be captioned, specially. But the PREA video used elsewhere had not been captioned. (I was, however, given this link of a captioned PREA video by Dan Smith, the KSP ADA Coordinator: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ag-__vbx5Mg.) It seems that the AV Club at LLCC, which makes videos for use by the institution, has not yet figured out how to ensure that those videos are captioned. I do not know about other similar clubs. In addition, I do not know if the videos used for educational programming are generally captioned. The availability of captioning should be checked for each video used, and replacements obtained if necessary and available. This includes videos/DVDs used in religious programming: KYDOC’s equipment makes captioning available, and volunteer church groups should be instructed to turn it on.
On the other hand, compliance seems much more consistent with respect to programming aired on the common-space televisions. Each one I tested was able to have captioning enabled, and I was told by staff and inmates alike that captioning is consistently activated for the institutional movies (which are played on a continuous loop over the weekends).
I did not observe or hear about any issues with respect to captioning on inmate-owned televisions.
2 Open captions always are in view and cannot be turned off, whereas closed captions can be turned on and off by the viewer.
11/2016 Court Report, App-103

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 105 of 326 - Page ID#: 1686
So compliance with my prior recommendation 23 is under way, but not yet complete:
Prior Recommendation 23: Check each existing video used to determine whether it has captioning and obtain replacements with captioning if available. Provide captions for all orientation videos, for newly acquired entertainment and educational videos, and other videos when captioning is available. For television captioning to be a real option, training for staff about how to turn it on and periodic testing are required. This should be done on a schedule, perhaps quarterly or twice a year, and it should be logged.
D. Speech-to-text
Several inmates who are hard-of-hearing told me that they have found educational programming inaccessible to them; they too-often need the teacher to repeat him or herself or end up relying on a fellow inmate to repeat what the teacher said. This section and the next describe methods that can help achieve effective communication in educational settings, and perhaps others, such as religious programming.
For deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates who read well, the accessibility of educational programming could be improved by use of speech-to-text devices. KSR is investigating this possibility, and is reporting back to me what it finds (Prior recommendation 25). If these investigations are fruitful, other facilities should implement solutions as well.
E. Assistive listening systems
An assistive listening system is a system in which sound is captured close to its source via a microphone (avoiding ambient noise) and transmitted directly to the ears or hearing aids of people with assistive listening devices.3 Some assistive listening systems transmit sound to special earphones or earbuds, via a receiver worn (say, hooked to a pocket) by the listener. Such systems can be extremely helpful to people who are hard-of-hearing, because they allow the listener to amplify the sound inside the ear, and without amplifying the ambient noise.
Several KYDOC facilities already use what is in effect an assistive listening system for their common-space televisions; they broadcast the institutionally available channels on a radio frequency, and then require inmates listening to the common televisions to use radio receivers, with earbuds, rather than playing the sound out loud. The purpose of this has been to keep the sound level down in common spaces—but there is a major benefit for hard-of-hearing inmates,
3 For more information on assistive listening devices and systems, see Hearing Loss Association of America, Get in the Hearing Loop, available at http://www.hearingloss.org/sites/default/files/docs/HLAA_ALDS_Brochure_0.pdf; David G. Myers, We’ve Looped in West Michigan. Could We Loop America?, HEARING LOSS MAGAZINE, September/October 2008, at 18, available at http://www.hearingloss.org/sites/default/files/docs/MeyerSepOct08 AudioLoopHLM.pdf. For a technical guide to choices available for educational settings in particular (though geared to children rather than adults), see American Academy of Audiology, Practice Guidelines: Remote Microphone Hearing Assistance Technologies for Children and Youth from Birth to 21 Years (updated April 2011) available at http://audiology-web.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/HAT_Guidelines_Supplement_A.pdf_53996ef7758497. 54419000.pdf; American Academy of Audiology, Practice Guidelines: Remote Microphone Hearing Assistance Technologies for Children and Youth from Birth to 21 Years, Supplement B: Classroom Audio Distribution Systems—Selection and Verification, July 2011, available at http://audiology-web.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/ 20110926_HAT_GuidelinesSupp_B.pdf_53996ef98259f2.45364934.pdf.
11/2016 Court Report, App-104

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 106 of 326 - Page ID#: 1687
who report that they can hear TVs that use that set up. Not every facility uses this approach, and even in facilities that do, some dorms are not set up with the necessary equipment. At the least, this is a good system to use in any dorm where hard-of-hearing inmates are housed.
Facilities should review their other communications venues and make available similar accommodations for hard-of-hearing inmates whenever possible. Here, RCC is ahead of the other KYDOC facilities I have visited. LLCC Chaplain Casey Heilman showed me a wireless system he had obtained that allows those speaking to use a microphone that transmits directly to a receiver, connected to earbuds worn by an inmate attending worship services who would otherwise have trouble hearing. This kind of system is not new—other chaplains said to me that they are very common in churches outside the prison system. On the inside, they could be enormously helpful, not just for religious services but for education, programming, and other settings. The necessary equipment could allow multiple microphones and multiple receivers, so that several hard-of-hearing inmates could use them at the same time.4
Recommendation 67: Each religious, educational, and programming area should have available a device to allow wireless amplification for individual hard-of-hearing inmates.
It is important that information about the availability of these devices be shared with inmates, so they know to ask for them if needed. My prior recommendation 27 was narrower than the need, so I broaden it here:
Recommendation 68: KSR should inform deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates of the various ways in which religious, educational, rehabilitative, and recreational programming can be made more accessible to them; all programming providers (educational, rehabilitative, and recreational) should put in place a process to facilitate requests for such accommodations and assess the need for them.
F. Written communication
As I noted in my KSR report, in many situations, writing can be a helpful communication method. However, it takes too long and is too cumbersome for any complex communication— and for someone who has a low level of literacy, it is mostly ineffective. During these visits, I heard numerous times about overreliance on writing, both for hard-of-hearing and deaf inmates. Inmate E explained to me, for example, that her language is ASL—she really does not know English, including written English, very well. Yet when she was housed in segregation, she was not provided access to interpretation services; instead, both custody and medical/mental health staff relied on writing. My prior recommendation 28 is particularly important in segregated housing, which I discuss in more depth in Part V.A, below.
Prior Recommendation 28: Written communication should be relied upon only for simple communication with literate inmates. For complex communications or less
4 Two examples of assistive listening systems that seem to allow both multiple microphones and multiple receivers are: https://www.conversorproducts.com/conversor-3rx-multi-channel-group-system.html; https://www.listentech.com/shop/product/portable-display-rf-receiver-72-or-216-mhz/. It would be useful to do further research into these potential products, and I would be happy to assist further on request. In addition, Rev. Heilman may have some insight into various systems.
11/2016 Court Report, App-105

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 107 of 326 - Page ID#: 1688
literate inmates, alternative methods are required. Staff should make best efforts to communicate with each deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate using that inmate’s preferred communication method (which is assessed and recorded by Exhibit D-5).
G. Non-auditory alerts
Each facility I visited frequently communicates with inmates using auditory alerts—fire alarms and PA announcements—which are routinely used for count, chow, pill call, and more individual announcements (e.g., “Inmate Smith, please report to the Dorm 11 office”). The law’s requirement of non-discrimination means that this communication, like others, must be made effective for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. I discussed the Settlement Agreement’s numerous relevant requirements in Part III.G of my KSR report.
The facilities I have visited have started to address the needs in this area, but have not yet come into compliance. In most, non-auditory alert systems have been installed. These are “bed shakers”—non-auditory vibrating devices that sit under a mattress, and also trigger a flashing light on a bed stand. Currently, in some facilities, the devices are linked to the unit’s fire alarm, so whenever that alarm is set off, so too are both the shaker and flasher. But it seems that in some facilities, the devices are not yet linked. In addition, the advantage of a bed shaker device is that it can be used as an alarm clock, and can be linked to a switch that’s been installed in a control center, enabling staff in that area to flash the lights/shaker when there is an announcement for count or chow. However, this functionality is not yet operative in most of the facilities—and where it is (KSP), seems not to be being used in that way. In KSP, the system is installed for Inmate D, who is housed in Protective Custody. Because he spends most of each day in-cell, and auditory announcements seem not to be used much in the unit, he does not have much need for the bed shaker. But if he did, it seems that staff are not actually flipping the switch for count and the like. In KCIW, the bed shaker is installed but it has insufficient range to be triggered from the staff area.
The point is, at many facilities, there are numerous alerts that are not being communicated to deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates even when they are in their cells; they have reported to me missing morning count, early morning alerts about medical care, special warning announcements about emergencies, calls to stand up to be let out for recreation, and the like. (The issue is less concerning for inmates in dorm-style housing, because the commotion caused by everyone else waking up for count or the like is itself a non-auditory alert.)
My prior recommendation 29 covers the needs I heard:
Prior Recommendation 29: Each facility should expand the availability of nonauditory alert systems, providing them to inmates who cannot hear the fire alarm and/or the alert for count. To maximize the communication effectiveness of each nonauditory alert, it should be programmed to signal, in different ways, the several predictable alerts: fire/emergency; count, chow, “report to office.” Staff must also be trained to use the office switch. Whether this is occurring will need monitoring; perhaps by using a daily log or checking in periodically with affected inmates. The monitoring system should be made formal. I will ask for a description of it, and perhaps relevant records, in the next quarterly reporting period.
11/2016 Court Report, App-106

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 108 of 326 - Page ID#: 1689
As I mentioned in my KSR report, the bed shaker is unlikely to meet the full need for non-auditory alerts and announcements. Some inmates will not have bed shakers installed, and even inmates who do have them will not always be in their cells when alerts are triggered. It is important to develop systems for communicating effectively with such inmates. I heard repeatedly that hard-of-hearing inmates cannot hear count (particularly early morning count, because their hearing aids are not yet on), cannot hear individualized yard or dorm pages, and cannot hear any unusual announcements. Many told me they rely on their friends to tell them about what they are missing, but several emphasized various times that this had not worked out. Two accommodations seem particularly useful: a written announcement board, whether (as I suggested in my prior recommendation 30) a TV-based visual paging system or something lower tech, and a system for individual notifications.
Recommendation 69: In any unit where there are deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates, each facility should implement (and ensure use of) written announcement boards. That is, all general announcements should also be promptly displayed on a written announcement board (e.g.: “X class is cancelled this evening,” or “all inmates in X category are allowed an X privilege this afternoon”). Staff use of this announcement board must be monitored and audited.
Recommendation 70: In order to provide effective and equal communications to deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates who are being individually paged, staff should check KOMS to see if that inmate has a deaf/hard-of-hearing alert; if a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate does not answer the auditory page in a minute or two, he or she should be individually alerted to the page by a staff member. This could be done by in-person notification or by provision of a personal paging system.
As I noted in my KSR report, given the difficulties with providing effective communication of alerts, it is unsurprising that occasionally deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates will miss count, chow, pill call, etc. I heard from more than one inmate that he or she occasionally or usually has trouble knowing when count or pill call is signaled. It is important that staff accommodate such situations. Disciplining an inmate for a missed count that he didn’t hear called, or refusing to provide an inmate with necessary medicine when she couldn’t hear pill call, would violate the ADA. This is adequately covered by prior recommendation 31. That recommendation also covers a situation I heard about during my recent visits. In some rehabilitative programs, inmates are given some authority over each other—so that if one inmate misses count, there are “accountability” consequences decided by other inmates. If such a situation adversely affects a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate who could not hear the announcement in question, staff must be alert to intervene and ensure nondiscrimination. It seems that the ADA Coordinator at RCC did, in fact, intervene in this way, over a situation involving a hard-of-hearing inmate in the prison’s Substance Abuse Program (SAP).
Prior Recommendation 31: Each facility should train staff to be alert to the possibility that a Deaf inmate may miss the alert for count, chow, or pill call—and to ensure nondiscrimination in that event.
In addition, it is important that correctional officers remain aware that some inmates cannot hear orders they issue verbally, particularly if the officers are behind the inmate, or above him or her (as from a tower). I heard of several incidents in which an officer had instructed an
11/2016 Court Report, App-107

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 109 of 326 - Page ID#: 1690
inmate to do something—step away from a gate, for example—from a spot behind or above the inmate, who couldn’t hear him and had no visual cues that he or she was being directed. In one such incident, the officer reportedly told the inmate she was lucky to avoid being tackled or pepper sprayed.
Recommendation 71: Each facility should train staff to be alert to the possibility that a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate may be unable to hear an order or instruction issued verbally; training should cover strategies to avoid bad results.
H. Miscellaneous devices
The settlement agreement has several provisions that are designed to facilitate inmates’ personal purchase of accommodating devices (XII). These are discussed in more detail in my KSR report, at Part III.H. So far, the facilities have been focused on less personal needs, and have not yet put in place any systems to deal with these kinds of requests. My prior recommendation 32 applies to the facilities covered in this report, as well:
Prior Recommendation 32: Each facility’s commissary list should include various alerting devices that inmates might wish to purchase: caption-capable TVs, vibrating alarm clocks, and the like. Inmates should be informed that if they seek to purchase adaptive equipment that is not available via the commissary, they should request assistance from the ADA Coordinator; the ADA Coordinator should then facilitate the inmate’s purchase unless the requested device presents an articulable and documented security risk.
I. Speech
As I discussed in my KSR report, no technologies or devices can entirely meet the communications needs of all hard-of-hearing inmates. The Agreement provides that all staff— custody, medical care, mental health care, chaplains, educational, etc.—should be trained on “best practices for communicating with Deaf individuals.” (XIII.B) Even more than during my KSR visit, during the visits described here, inmates repeatedly told me about difficulties they have communicating with staff who are reluctant to repeat their communications, or unexperienced in implementing good communications practices. The KYDOC training that has been promulgated since that report includes a good list of tips, taken from the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Disability Rights Section. A similar list is available from the Hearing Loss Association of America’s “Communication Tips for Hearing People in Communicating with Those Who Have a Hearing Loss,” and is available as an easy-to-distribute “tip card” at http://www.hearingloss.org/sites/default/files/TipCards.pdf. This card is also included in Exhibit D-1, a recommended memo to staff on “Communications assistance for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates.”
I note that some of these tips were included in live on-site training that I observed at RCC. That training was excellent in this regard. In particular, the trainer did a great job explaining how the kind of focus that facilitates communication with a hard-of-hearing inmate is unusual in a correctional setting, where staff are taught to maintain a high degree of situational awareness. If the location chosen for communication is insecure or very busy, some of the
11/2016 Court Report, App-108

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 110 of 326 - Page ID#: 1691
methods that facilitate communication—especially, facing the inmate directly without swiveling—may feel inappropriate. In that event, the staff member should pick a different, quieter, location for the conversation.
I discuss training issues more generally in Part VIII, below.
In group settings, in particular, these tips are very difficult to implement—which means that one accommodation that should be considered for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates is to substitute one-on-one conversation for groups.
Recommendation 71: In each facility’s settings in which staff ordinarily talk to a group of inmates—orientation, education, etc.—consideration should be given to talking to any hard-of-hearing inmate one-on-one, instead. For example, for someone who is having difficulty hearing a teacher in a group setting, even with assistive listening devices (see IV.E, above), a tutor might be a better option than a congregate GED class.
J. Teaching sign language
Among the classes occasionally offered at some of the facilities I visited is one in sign language. (This seems often to be offered as a college-level class, which would make it unavailable for any inmate who does not have his or her GED.) There are at least a few inmates whose degree of hearing impairment is very severe, or progressively getting more severe, but who do not sign. For example, Inmate H reported to me that his hearing is getting worse and he has been told that soon his hearing aids will no longer help very much. He is anxious to learn sign language, to prepare for that day. But, he says, he has been unable to get access even to an instructional book. I supplement my prior Recommendation 36 to cover not only classes but other resources, and to make clear that deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates who do not have their GED should nonetheless be among those allowed to enroll in any sign language classes.
Prior Recommendation 36: Each facility should try to offer classes in sign language, and should give Deaf inmates who would like to learn to sign both affirmative notice and preference for these classes.
Recommendation 72: Deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates who do not have their GED should be among those allowed to enroll in any classes in sign language. Each facility should obtain resources relating to sign language—books or computer-based instruction—and make those available to deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates.
K. Telecommunications equipment and rules
As the Settlement requires, each facility has made two types of telecommunications devices available for deaf inmates: TTYs (TeleTYpewriters) and videophones. The videophones are referred to by inmates and staff alike as “Purple,” the name of the telecom company that provides them. See http://www.purple.us/. Access is allowed only for inmates who use sign language to communicate. KSP has chosen to provide two different videophones—one provided by Purple and another by Sorenson.
11/2016 Court Report, App-109

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 111 of 326 - Page ID#: 1692
The videophones allow two types of phone calls: inmates can communicate visually (via sign language) with a person on the other side who also has a videophone. Or, using Video Relay Service (VRS), the inmate can sign to a remote interpreter, who then speaks to a person at the other end on a regular phone. (For information about VRS, see https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/video-relay-services) My report on VRS for KSR may not have been entirely accurate. Although I was told that somehow VRS at KSR required use of a laptop (the same laptop as KSR used for VRI), I have since learned—and tested—that both the Purple and Sorenson systems at other prisons actually allow VRS calls without any additional devices. (This is probably true at KSR, too.)
1. Videophone and VRS
The videophones are supposed to be available during the same periods of time as ordinary phones, and in each of the facilities I visited, this was generally the practice. At KCIW and GRCC, a videophone is available inside each unit in which an inmate who uses it is housed. At KSP, most inmates are housed in units that do not have any phones; phones are available to them on the yard. So the location of the videophones in the law library space, which is available during yard hours, provides equal access.
However, there has sometimes been a situation where an inmate who needs access to a videophone is housed in a location that constrains such access. Such inmates may, for example, need permission (and a written pass) to get to and from the space where the phone is located. My prior recommendations 37-39 (slightly reworded, to make them more general) apply to this circumstance:
Prior Recommendation 37: Videophones should be located in areas as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. The videophone should be available during the same days and hours as conventional telephones and should require permission for use only if the facility requires inmates to seek permission to use conventional telephones. If an escort is required to use the videophone at night, on weekends, or in other circumstances, such an escort should be routinely provided.
Prior Recommendation 38: Even if an escort is required, there should be no requirement that inmates seeking to use the videophone, including with VRS, schedule such use in advance. Non-Deaf inmates are not required to schedule their phone calls, and that should be true for Deaf inmates, as well.
Prior Recommendation 39: Ensure all staff are trained on videophone rules, so that they know that videophone access is to be provided during the same hours as conventional phone access, without pre-scheduling, and that time in transit doesn’t count.
Finally, there are special obstacles to access for deaf inmates in disciplinary or administrative segregation. Such inmates may be allowed to make limited phone calls—one call per week or even per month. Because the Settlement requires equal access, a deaf inmate in segregated housing must receive that same privilege (and the Settlement requires that the allowed call be twice as long, in minutes). But it is difficult to get a prisoner from segregation to
11/2016 Court Report, App-110

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 112 of 326 - Page ID#: 1693
the videophone. Luckily, the facilities have a choice. They can choose to escort prisoners from segregation to the videophone, or they can contract with Purple, which provides not only the existing videophones but also the VRI laptops, to provide videophone service via laptop. (ADA Coordinators looking for more insight about how to accomplish this can discuss it with KSP ADA Coordinator Dan Smith.) This capability, which I did not know about when I wrote my KSR report, makes it much easier for facilities to comply with the Settlement, and with my prior Recommendation 40, which I have reworded slightly to make it more accurate and more general:
Prior Recommendation 40 (Edited): Deaf inmates in segregated housing must be allowed access to telecommunications services equal to that of non-Deaf inmates in the same disciplinary or administrative status. The best solution would be to work out a method for such inmates—including those on “max assault status”—to use the videophone, with VRS when needed. This could be done by escorting the prisoner to the videophone or by enabling videophone capabilities on the VRI laptop. If there are individualized reasons that an inmate cannot have his hands unshackled consistent with security, he, and others in his situation, should be allowed access to the TTY. I will request each facility to report on what method for telecommunications access is developed for Deaf inmates in segregation, and why.
2. TTY
My KSR report did not describe the issues raised by TTYs in any detail. These are not currently very popular devices; they use 1960s and 1970s technology, and are far more cumbersome than most text messaging programs, which of course have grown ubiquitous. TTYs are increasingly unfamiliar, even to deaf users. (As reported recently in an academic journal, “TTY/TTD use, once overwhelmingly popular within the deaf community, was reportedly used rarely if ever by 70.1% of [a robust national] sample [of deaf adults].”5) TTYs can be used to communicate directly only with other TTYs, which have grown few and far between. And (like any text communication method) TTYs require their users to be literate.
On the other hand, the advantage of using a TTY is that each KYDOC facility already owns the device, and it does not require any additional phone lines or other technology. A TTY relay service allows communication with any person using a telephone, and the relay service is reachable simply by dialing 7-1-1, from any phone line. After I returned from the June site visits, I tested the TTYs by having the ADA coordinator call me using the facility’s TTY, first to my own TTY number, and then using the relay service to my regular phone. For each, making the calls took several attempts and false starts, but eventually we were able to complete each one. For my July site visits, I myself called out to a non-TTY phone using the relay.
All that is required for each facility’s TTY to work is for staff to facilitate access by connecting the device to a phone line that can reach the outside, dialing to the outside line using the universal 7-1-1 number, and (if necessary) showing the inmate how to use it. All this takes training—but Exhibit D-2 includes all the necessary instructions. These should be left with the
5 Michella Maiorana-Basas & Claudia M. Pagliaro, Technology Use Among Adults Who Are Deaf and Hard of Hearing: A National Survey, J. Deaf Stud. & Deaf Educ. (Mar. 2014).
11/2016 Court Report, App-111

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 113 of 326 - Page ID#: 1694
TTY machine itself. In order to be sure that someone stays informed about how to use the TTY, I will be asking each KYDOC facility to contact me via TTY and TTY relay, once each year. Recommendation 73: Each facility should maintain its TTY and develop a facility protocol for how to make it available to inmates, covering who the inmate should request it from, where it should be connected, etc. In addition, each facility should annually test its TTY and the protocol by calling me at an agreed upon time using direct TTY and the relay service. TTY instructions should be left with the TTY at all times.
3. Hard-of-hearing inmates Hard-of-hearing (as opposed to deaf) inmates mostly don’t sign, so the videophone is not helpful to them. But several told me that they are unable to use a conventional phone, because their hearing is too impaired. I heard numerous times that only one, or a few, or none, of a particular prison’s phones had handset amplification, and that without such amplification, phones were inaccessible. I discussed this issue in my KSR report, and proposed three solutions: (a) TTY access for hard-of-hearing inmates, (b) amplified handsets, and (c) captioned telephones. I here discuss my further investigation of each of these options: TTY. The pros and cons of the TTY are discussed above; hard-of-hearing inmates are likely to be even less familiar with the devices than are deaf inmates. Nonetheless, they are an option that can be used as a fallback solution for hard-of-hearing inmates. Amplified phones. Each facility I visited has at least some amplified phones. On some of the phones, these are obvious, but on others, the availability of the amplification is more subtle— easier to see if you know what you’re looking for. See Figure G.
Figure G: Amplified Phones
(Side of payphone)
At some facilities, most of the hard-of-hearing inmates I spoke to were unaware that any of the ordinary phones had amplification; others, at different facilities, told me that they could only make phone calls if they used one of the amplified phones, but that these were very popular
11/2016 Court Report, App-112

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 114 of 326 - Page ID#: 1695
among inmates and therefore only sporadically available to them. Some inmates in particular housing units—for example, the housing for KCIW’s Substance Abuse Program—did not have access to volume-controlled telephones and reported that they therefore could not make phone calls.
Captioned telephone. Out of prison, captioned telephones have been growing in popularity. These are phones that simultaneously allow the user to listen to the speech and read it via real-time captioning.6 The captioning service is free.7 Some models of captioned telephone require two phone lines or a phone line and an internet line. But there is at least one model of captioned telephone that can operate on a single (analog) phone line.8 This could be used in the same way as the TTYs are currently used, by plugging it into an existing outside line. Ideally, the phone could even be plugged into an existing (Securus) payphone, but this would need to be worked out by KYDOC with Securus. Purple, the company that provides the videophones, has a pending FCC application for an institutional kiosk captioned telephone. If that is approved, that might become a good option.
In light of the additional information just set out, Recommendation 74 substitutes for prior recommendation 42:
Recommendation 74: Each facility should improve access of hard-of-hearing inmates to telecommunications, by:
(a) Allowing them access to TTYs. (b) Informing them that amplified phones are available, and ensuring that at least one such phone, whose amplification is compatible with a hearing aid but does not require one, is available in every group of phones used by any hard-of-hearing inmate. (c) Providing access to captioned telephones, unless on investigation such telephones are not available in the institutional setting.
I will request a report on implementation each aspect of this recommendation.
V. THE INTERACTION OF COMMUNICATION NEEDS AND HOUSING ASSIGNMENT
A. Segregated housing
I discuss interpretive services and telecommunications issues for deaf and hard-ofhearing inmates in segregated housing in Part IV.B and IV.K, above, respectively. But it’s worth noting that such housing creates special obstacles to effective communication with deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. Much of the staff-inmate communication in segregated housing takes
6 See, e.g., Sergei Kochkin, The Importance of Captioned Telephone Service in Meeting the Communication Needs of People with Hearing Loss, HEARING REVIEW (March 5, 2013), http://www.hearingreview.com/2013/03/the-importance-of-captioned-telephone-service-in-meeting-thecommunication-needs-of-people-with-hearing-loss/. 7 The costs are subsidized by the Federal Communications Commission. 8 See http://www.captel.com/captel/840.
11/2016 Court Report, App-113

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 115 of 326 - Page ID#: 1696
place through the solid cell doors, or through the “crack”—the thin opening between the door and the cell wall. For someone who relies in part on visual cues to understand speech—that is, for most hard-of-hearing people—this undermines communication. Talking through an open meal tray is possible, but may raise security concerns. So if there is someone hard-of-hearing in segregated housing, staff need to actively problem solve, to make sure communication is effective; they may need to use the meal tray slot, or regularly pull the inmate out into an office to check in, or the like. This should be covered in training. (See Part VIII, below)
B. Other housing needs
Hearing needs may interact with housing assignments in other ways, as well. For example, it would often make sense to assign deaf inmates, who may use the videophone, to the unit where that phone is available. An inmate who needs a bed shaker should be assigned to a cell that is close enough to the staff office to allow it to be triggered. An inmate who wears a hearing aid may do much better in a quieter unit, and not need special alerts there, even though in a noisier unit he would need such alerts. And so on.
Recommendation 75: Each facility should develop a method for considering how communications difficulties with deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates can be minimized by particular housing assignments, and shall make such assignments when appropriate.
VI. PROCESSES FOR ASSESSING AND REQUESTING AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
My KSR report discusses the need for routinized processes of non-medical assessment and assignment of services for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. Its recommendations apply. The idea of these recommendations is that while medical staff is responsible for medical decision making, the ADA coordinator is responsible for ensuring that—apart from hearing aids— appropriate auxiliary aids and services, and other accommodations, are made. In addition, the assessment and resulting decision making should be part of the inmate’s KOMS file. Prior recommendation 44 discusses literacy testing; in some facilities, it may be possible to use already-conducted TABE (Test of Adult Basic Education) testing for this purpose.
Prior Recommendation 43: Each facility should develop a process by which inmates whose hearing impairment substantially impedes communication are noted and assessed right away on arrival at the institution, immediate steps taken to ensure effective communication, including immediate interpretative services if necessary.
Prior Recommendation 44: Staff at each facility should assess each Deaf inmate’s literacy prior to conducting additional assessment of necessary auxiliary aids and services. Educational staff should be able to propose and implement one of several quick assessment tools. For example, the Slosson Oral Reading Test - Revised (SORTR) might be suitable. If an inmate is not literate at at least the 8th grade level, reliance on written communication is unlikely to succeed in providing effective communication, and alternative methods should be used.
11/2016 Court Report, App-114

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 116 of 326 - Page ID#: 1697
The Agreement (III.C) requires an “auxiliary aids and services assessment.” The best way to assess the need for aids/services necessary for effective communication and to avoid discrimination is an individual meeting with each Deaf inmate. (This approach is similar to the “interactive process” required by the ADA under Title I, which deals with employment.) The idea of the meeting is for KSR staff to understand the communications needs of the inmate. At the meeting, the ADA coordinator or deputy ADA coordinator can inform the inmate about available aids and the inmate can discuss his communication needs. The inmate’s request is entitled, both under the Agreement and the operative regulation, to “primary consideration.” (I.5: “In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, primary consideration shall be given to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2))”; 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2) includes essentially the same language.)
Most of the facilities have done this kind of meeting for their deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. Unfortunately, the meetings have occasionally become more an occasion for paperwork than a real assessment of needed services. The idea is not simply to obtain waivers, but rather to explain to the inmate the various accommodations available, and figure out the best path forward to ensure effective communication and avoid discrimination.
Prior Recommendation 45: For each Deaf inmate, the ADA Coordinator should conduct an individual services assessment meeting, at which the inmate’s available methods of communication are expressly ascertained and recorded, and the inmate is informed about the available auxiliary aids and services. For an inmate who can hear (with or without an amplifier or hearing aid) well enough to understand the coordinator, information should be conveyed orally as well as in writing. If the inmate uses sign language, VRI would be the appropriate way to communicate for a meeting of this nature. The greatest challenge is presented if the inmate is not literate, does not hear well enough to understand spoken communication, and does not sign. In that case, visual demonstrations of the various auxiliary aids and services may be required. The assessment should be updated annually, ideally at the inmate’s annual classification meeting.
VII. FORM AND OPTIONS
Each facility has worked to develop a menu of auxiliary aids and services, and to provide staff and inmates written information about what is available. As discussed above at Part IV, the major document provided at the six facilities discussed in this report is a pamphlet; my recommended revisions are in Exhibit D-2. In addition, many of the facilities are continuing to use the inadequate forms I reviewed in my KSR report. I am therefore simply repeating my recommendations in this area, and resupplying my recommended forms. (Apparently Correct Care has revised its Healthcare Request Form to comply with my recommendation, which is in Exhibit E-2, but I have not yet seen the new version.)
The recommendations and forms have two changes: First, as part of my prior recommendation 47, I wrote the following: “Note: I have not provided the recommended memos to staff and inmates explaining precisely how to use the various devices, but that too should be developed, and should cover all the devices deployed.” I have now crossed this sentence out,
11/2016 Court Report, App-115

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 117 of 326 - Page ID#: 1698
because it is covered by the brochure described above; my recommended version of this brochure is Exhibit D-2. In addition, I have changed the form attached as Exhibit D-4 in two respects. First, based on feedback from Dan Smith, KSP’s ADA Coordinator, it now explains to inmates that hearing aids are medical decisions and instructs them to submit a healthcare request if they have a hearing aid issue. Second, it now includes volume-assisted telephones and assistive listening devices.
Prior Recommendation 46: The various forms related to requesting and using Auxiliary Aids and Services form should be changed in a number of ways: x To list available aids and services more comprehensively x To more clearly explain what the various services and aids are, in what
circumstances they are available, and how to request them. x To explain how to use the various devices. x To ask inmates, expressly, about their preferred modes of communication or
needed services, and why those are useful. x To explain which items are free of charge, and which are available only at the
inmate’s expense.
Prior Recommendation 47: I recommend replacement of the existing forms with several different ones, explaining the various options available, allowing requests for various types of communications assistance, and obtaining feedback from inmates (see Recommendation 14, above). These recommended forms are attached as Exhibit D, which also includes a recommended staff memo about the various available devices and accommodations, and an assessment form. These forms should be explained/filled out during the individual assessment meetings discussed in Part IV.C, above.
Prior Recommendation 48: The Healthcare Request form should include boxes to check if auxiliary aids or services, including remote or in-person interpretation, are needed. My recommended additions to this form are attached as Exhibit E-2.
Prior Recommendation 49: All the forms by which inmates apply for jobs, educational programming, etc., should have language similar to that in the recommended Healthcare Request form. So should classification and disciplinary forms that notify inmates of impending hearings or meetings. I have not provided recommended versions of these forms, but will in a future reporting period ask to see them all.
Sometimes when inmates make a request—for a job assignment, course enrollment, etc. —the facility does not use a form at all, but rather assigns staff to receive and assess the request. In this situation, it’s important that communication be effective. Staff evaluating requests for a job assignment or course enrollment must be alert to the fact that deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates may need various accommodations, and/or auxiliary aids/services to ensure effective communication, both during the discussion and during the assignment/program. The availability of those accommodations should be communicated to inmates who might need them. This issue seems particularly related to educational programming: inmates previously unable to understand the teacher are often reluctant to enroll in education. The kinds of accommodations in question could be as simple as assigning an inmate to a seat close to the front of a classroom or giving him
11/2016 Court Report, App-116

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 118 of 326 - Page ID#: 1699
copies of projected materials. Or they might include auxiliary aids/services or a qualified interpreter.
Prior Recommendation 50: When Deaf inmates and staff discuss enrollment or application for a particular activity or program, communication should be effective— which means an interpreter may be required for the discussion—and should cover potential accommodations, auxiliary aids/services that could provide equal access to the activity/program.
In addition, so that inmates can know their rights, a copy of the Settlement Agreement itself should be available to them in their institution’s law library, along with a summary of it which I have drafted and attach as Exhibit G. The availability of these documents should be mentioned in the pamphlet attached as Exhibit D-2.
Finally, it is important that inmates not identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing receive notice about what they should do if they newly face communications difficulties because of a hearing impairment, or if somehow they were passed over in the screening. The other facilities should follow the steps taken in this regard by KSP, which includes relevant notice in its Inmate Handbook, which all inmates receive.
Recommendation 76: Each facility should include notice in its Inmate Handbook of the facility’s basic obligation to avoid discrimination and provide effective communication, and inform inmates to contact the ADA Coordinator if needed. Something like the following would be appropriate:
Americans with Disabilities Act and Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates
An inmate with a verified disability will have the opportunity to participate in services, privileges, and programs similar to other inmates at this institution. If you are deaf or hard-of-hearing, you should contact the designated institutional ADA Coordinator; each living unit and inmate public areas has contact information posted. All {name facility here}-provided services will provide effective communication and make available qualified interpreters when needed. Qualified Interpreters and Auxiliary Aids and Services are available for an inmate with a verified disability upon request. It is the inmate’s responsibility to request an interpreter from volunteer organizations or individuals that are providing activities and services. An inmate who meets criteria to be accommodated under the ADA will be provided identification to facilitate effective communication. If at any time an inmate chooses to not wear the identification, he/she shall sign a waiver document to be placed in the institutional file.
VIII. TRAINING
The Agreement requires training for the ADA Coordinator and for all staff who interact with inmates.
11/2016 Court Report, App-117

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 119 of 326 - Page ID#: 1700
A. ADA Coordinator Training
The Agreement requires: “The ADA Coordinator shall be trained on the requirements of federal and state law regarding the contents of this Agreement and the KYDOC’s obligations to provide full and equal access to, and enjoyment of, its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations to Deaf Inmates.” (II.B.1)
KYDOC has decided that ADA Coordinators should use ADA Title II training provided online by the ADA National Network, at http://www.adatitle2.org. As I previously described (KSR Report Part V.A), this is a very good choice of training source. Indeed, some of the training materials can be adapted for use in the general staff training. However, it does not cover the Agreement itself, or the ADA Coordinator’s role. Therefore, it needs augmentation. My prior recommendation covers this:
Prior Recommendation 51: KYDOC should develop training on the Settlement Agreement and make it available to ADA Coordinators. For training on the ADA, the ADA National Network training is appropriate.
In light of the delay in development of this training, I will plan to provide a substantial outline/recommended draft by early December. I hope this will assist KYDOC in meeting this important requirement.
B. Staff Training
The Agreement requires that the training be developed “with input from the KCDHH [the Kentucky Commission on the Deaf and Hard of Hearing], and that the KYDOC “provide any materials that may be used for training, . . . to the Settlement Monitor for review prior to the first training session.” (XIII.A) Subsequently, training is to be updated (again with “input from the KCDHH,” and KCDHH’s and my “review”) “at least every two years.” (XIII.A)
At last report, KYDOC had not developed this training. In a significant step forward, it now has; the training is posted on the KYDOC Computer Based Training “crimcast” system, and has been taken by many employees. One ADA Coordinator told me that the plan is to incorporate the training into the KYDOC Common Core In-Service training in 2017. Unfortunately, however, the Department did not give me an opportunity for review prior to the training’s promulgation, as the Agreement requires.
I do have many comments on coverage of required subjects, accuracy of information conveyed, and training effectiveness. I am providing detailed feedback on the KYDOC computer-based training in the form of a separate powerpoint recommended training document. To create the powerpoint, I first reproduced the existing training, supplemented it with some excellent information provided during in-service training offered at RCC, and then revised it. I have been unable to perfectly match the formatting of the existing training, but that should be easy enough to fix. (A few notes on various small issues that need decisions by KYDOC are included as slide 2.) My training document is titled KYDOC Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Training: Settlement Monitor’s Recommended Revision. That training should be required for all staff who may come into contact with deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates—including correctional staff, programming staff, medical and mental health care staff, chaplains, etc.
11/2016 Court Report, App-118

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 120 of 326 - Page ID#: 1701
In addition to computer based training, some training will need to be live and on-site, in order to cover the facility’s particular processes and to improve effectiveness.
Recommendation 77: In addition to the computer-based KYDOC training, live, in-service training should cover, at least:
a) For all staff: x The identity and role of the ADA Coordinator x Existence of KOMS and EMR alerts for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates, and the obligation to check for the alerts. x The occasions and process for obtaining access to the VRI laptop, and how to use the laptop, including where different people should sit to maximize communication effectiveness. (For medical, educational, and housing staff, this training should be done on-site, so each affected staff member can see where and how the laptop can be set up.) x The occasions and process for obtaining an in-person qualified interpreter.
b) For housing area staff: x The use of cell/bed notices that an inmate is deaf or hard-of-hearing. x The use of the bed shaker switch. x Telecommunications issues, including how to obtain and use a TTY, and the policies and procedures governing TTY and videophone usage. x The obligation to notify deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates of alerts, including emergency alerts and non-emergency pages.
c) For all corrections staff: x The requirements to accommodate inmates who use sign language to communicate by using restraints that allow them to sign, and how to implement those requirements. x Strategies for dealing with inmates who may not hear directions or orders, especially when given from behind or above them.
d) For medical staff: x The responsibility of running a process to provide medically necessary hearing aids within two months, and what that actually entails, in terms of adjusting ordinary processes and timing. x The obligation to notify off-site medical provider(s) that a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service will be seeking medical care, and how this obligation is being assigned.
IX. REPORTING
It was not until June or July 2016 that I began to get full reporting (pursuant to Agreement XV.B.1.d) from these six institutions; prior to that time, I was told only about deaf inmates, not hard-of-hearing inmates. At this point, however, it seems that this basic reporting problem is solved for all six facilities. However, the quarterly reports continue to demonstrate that deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates who transfer facilities are not always coming to the attention of the ADA Coordinator, leading to a small but real continuing reporting problem, which is the topic of Recommendation 78:
11/2016 Court Report, App-119

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 121 of 326 - Page ID#: 1702
Recommendation 78: The ADA Coordinator should obtain monthly reports based on both KOMS and medical records of each inmate in the facility who is deaf or hard-of-hearing, and should check those reports too add to the Coordinator’s tracking list.
I have two additional reporting-related concerns. First, the Settlement Agreement provides that I should receive, every quarter “a written summary of grievances filed by Deaf Inmates concerning access to Effective Communication, Auxiliary Aids and Services, or any other issues raised in this Agreement.” (XIV.3) I do not seem to be getting all the appropriate grievances, perhaps because they are not always explicitly framed as relating to an accommodation. For example, if a deaf inmate files a medical grievance that she is not getting her medications because she can’t hear pill call announcements, I need to get that grievance. It seems that the safest method for ensuring compliance with the Settlement Agreement in this respect is just to send me a written summary of every grievance filed by any deaf or hard-ofhearing inmate, and let me sort it out.
Recommendation 79: Each facility’s quarterly written summary of grievances by deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates should include all such grievances, not only the ones that are deemed related to effective communication, auxiliary aids and services, or other issues raised in the Settlement Agreement.
The Agreement specifies five situations in which the Department is supposed to notify me promptly. They are:
x When a Deaf Inmate is barred from a program or activity because the Department has determined that participation would present a “Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates.” (II.A)
x When a Deaf Inmate is barred from a work assignment because that assignment would “present a Direct Threat of injury or death to a Deaf Inmate or others” (VI.F)
x When the Department is considering a non-auditory alert system that will notify Deaf Inmates, in real time, of prison-wide events and emergencies, and events specific to that inmate (VIII.B.1; VIII.B.3; VIII.C)
x When the Department has determined that it is appropriate to adjust the number of minutes afforded Deaf Inmates to make TTY and videophone calls. (IX.C)
x When the Department has made a determination to allow or disallow a Deaf Inmate to use devices such as vibrating clocks or in-line amplifiers, if those devices are not deemed medically necessary. (XII)
I am not yet confident that I am receiving all such notifications in real time, but there has certainly been progress.
Prior Recommendation 53: Ensure that all relevant staff know about the Agreement’s reporting obligations, so that I am appropriately notified when any of the reportingtriggering events takes place.
11/2016 Court Report, App-120

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 122 of 326 - Page ID#: 1703

Site Visit Report of Settlement Monitor
Adams & Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky.)

Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor

June and July 2016 Site Visit Report

EXHIBITS TABLE OF CONTENTS NOVEMBER 7, 2016

Exhibit A

Staff Interviewed

Exhibit B B-1* B-2*

Hearing Screening Questionnaire Hearing Screening Questionnaire as given Recommended Hearing Screening

Exhibit C

KSR Report (April 21, 2016)

Exhibit D D-1*
D-2 D-3* D-4* D-5*

Recommended Forms and Memos Communications assistance for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates (memo to staff) Informational Brochure for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates Request for Qualified Interpreter Services Request for Communications Assistance Auxiliary Aids/Services Assessment Form

Exhibit E E-1* E-2*

Healthcare Request Current Correct Care Solutions Healthcare Request Recommended addition to Healthcare Request

Exhibit F

Recommended Medical Tracking Form

Exhibit G

Settlement Agreement and summary for inmate law library

* These same documents were exhibits (with the same exhibit numbers) to my KSR Report. I have edited to eliminate the KSR-specific language.

Note: I am providing all recommended forms (Exhibits B-2, and D-1 to D-5, and F) separately in word processing and/or excel formats, to facilitate their use at the different facilities.

11/2016 Court Report, App-121

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 123 of 326 - Page ID#: 1704
Site Visit Report of Settlement Monitor
Adams & Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky.)
Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor June and July 2016 Site Visit Report
EXHIBIT A – STAFF INTERVIEWED
Green River Correctional Complex (GRCC) Ronald Carey, Health Services Administrator Sgt. Shivez Creecy (Intake) Stacy Dortch, ADA Coordinator Janetta Fulkerson, Director of Nursing Lt. Angela Hampton DeEdra Hart, Warden David Higgs, Deputy Warden, Operations William Kizziar, Chaplain Tina Moore, CTO, Reception Brian Noffsinger, CTO, Restricted Housing Unit Sherry Piper, Correctional education administrator Michael Robinson, Unit Administrator Robert Romans, Unit Administrator Darrell Wheeler, Unit Administrator
Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women (KCIW) Rachel Buchner, Psychology Associate Chris Buzick, Recreation Supervisor Amanda Chapman, Corrections Officer Janet Conover, Warden Tressi Cravens, Medical Scheduler Dawn Deckard, Unit Administrator Debra Gernert, LPN Kevin Hayes, Unit Manager (Administrator) Vanessa Kennedy, Deputy Warden and ADA Coordinator Brian King, Program Administrator Tina Lyons, Nurse Practitioner Capt. Lydia Ogletree Catherine Partlow, Classification and Treatment Officer Terry Seitz, PhD, Psychologist Kenny Talbott, Chaplain Jennifer Westphal, Education director Dr. Charity Whitehill, Teacher
11/2016 Court Report, App-122

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 124 of 326 - Page ID#: 1705
Kentucky State Penitentiary (KSP) Ms. Valetta Bledsoe, Teacher Darime Ellis, Unit Administrator Matt Herring, Educational Director Tim Lane, Deputy Warden Ben Mitchell, Classification and Treatment Officer Joy Myers, Social Clinician John Neece, Chaplain Gene Reaney, Licensed Psychology Associate John Shawn, Legal Officer Jill Shelton, Health Services Administrator, RN Daniel Smith, ADA Coordinator Karen Vickery, Nurse Practitioner Randy White, Warden
Luther Luckett Correctional Complex (LLCC) Jennifer Bogard, Corrections Program Administrator, licensed Psychology Associate Shera Brown, LPN Cathy Buck, Grievance Coordinator Kevin Drake, Intake Lynn Hillebrandt, Medical Scheduler Susan Goss, Director of Nursing Jeff Ingram, Nurse Practitioner Rev. Casey Heilman, Chaplain Phil Johnson, PhD Psychologist Scott Jordan, Warden Helen Long, Classification and Treatment Officer, Caseworker Michelle Maguire, Unit Administrator Amanda Mason, Sgt. Charles Spofford, ADA Coordinator Jesse Stack, Deputy Warden Lindsay Stemle, Unit Administrator Webb Strang, Deputy Warden Muhammad Thomas, Recreation Supervisor Hezzie Turner, Fire Safety Jennifer Westphal, Education Director
Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC) Dr. Elton Amos, Medical Director Bridgette Banta, Health Services Administrator Rebecca Barker, Unit Director and Back-up ADA Coordinator Aimee Harper, Medical Administrative Assistant Sgt. Josh Mattingly Donna McClamrock, Education Director Ann Raisor, LPN Marsha Recupero, Classification and Treatment Officer
11/2016 Court Report, App-123

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 125 of 326 - Page ID#: 1706
Amy Robey, Deputy Warden and ADA Coordinator Ravonne Sims, Warden Angela Steele, PhD Psychologist Western Kentucky Correctional Complex/Ross Cash (WKCC / RC) Kimberly Balentine, Correctional Officer Bobbi Jo Butts, Unit Administrator (RC) Dennis Cartwright, CTO Debbie Grimes, ADA Coordinator (WKCC) Chris Hatton, Deputy Warden Monique Jones, Health Services Administrator Ellen Hedges, Nurse Practitioner Shelia Joyce, Correctional Officer (RC) Vanessa Ladd, Correctional officer Cindy Neal, LPN Renata Putzek, LPN Paul Sesock, Chaplain John Tangerose, Unit Administrator Karen Vickery, Nurse Practitioner Frida Wallace, ADA Coordinator (RC) Steve Woodward, Warden
11/2016 Court Report, App-124

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 126 of 326 - Page

ID#: 1707

&YIJCJU#

11/2016 Court Report, App-125

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 127 of 326 - Page ID#: 1708

EXHIBIT B-2 RECOMMENDED HEARING SCREENING QUESTIONNAIRE AND INSTRUCTIONS

Preliminary questions: a. Do you currently have and use a hearing aid?

No Yes

Ƒ

Ƒ

If you answered “yes,” is the hearing aid working ok?

____________________________________________________________________ (Describe)

b. Have you ever been diagnosed with hearing loss?

Ƒ

Ƒ

c. Have you ever used a hearing aid that you no longer use?

Ƒ

Ƒ

If the answer to question (c) is “yes,” why don’t you use the hearing aid any longer?

____________________________________________________________________ (Describe)

Below are ten situations typically difficult for people with hearing loss.

Please check the boxes that apply to you.

x Answer “No,” “Sometimes,” or “Yes” for each question.

x Do not skip a question.

x If you currently have a hearing aid, please answer according to the way your hear with

the aid.

No Sometimes Yes

1. I feel frustrated when talking to others.

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

2. I hear but I don't always understand what others are

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

saying.

3. I hear but have trouble hearing when people speak softly. Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

4. I have trouble hearing others speak when they are not

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

facing me.

5. People tell me to turn down the TV/radio.

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

6. I find it hard to hear when I am in a group setting.

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

7. I have trouble hearing on the telephone.

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

8. I need to ask people to repeat themselves when talking.

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

9. I have trouble hearing with noise in the background.

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

10. I have trouble hearing others when I am at a restaurant /

Ƒ

Ƒ

Ƒ

chow hall.

If you answered “Sometimes” or “Yes” to three or more of these questions, a hearing loss is likely present and a hearing evaluation is recommended.

Note for medical staff: Was this questionnaire administered ƑLQZULWWHQIRUPRUƑRUDOO\"

11/2016 Court Report, App-126

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 128 of 326 - Page ID#: 1709
Instructions for person administering this questionnaire: The purpose of this questionnaire is both to identify inmates who are deaf or hard-of-hearing and to screen inmates to see which should receive further hearing evaluation. Literacy:
x You must ensure that the patient is sufficiently literate to answer these questions in written format, or else ask them out loud. Check the appropriate box at the bottom of the form.
Ability to hear the questions: x If the patient seems unable to understand these questions due to a hearing impairment, provider followup is indicated and should be promptly scheduled.
Preliminary questions: x A “yes” answer to any of the three preliminary questions (a, b, and c) should be followed up by a promptly-scheduled provider visit, unless the inmate explains that he or she no longer uses a hearing aid because hearing has improved so that it is no longer necessary. x If in the follow-up to question (a), the patient reports that the hearing aid is not working well, that should be followed up by a promptly scheduled provider visit.
Evaluation questions: x If the patient answers “sometimes” or “yes” to three or more of these questions, hearing loss is likely present and a hearing evaluation is recommended. The next step is a visit with the provider, which should be promptly scheduled.
11/2016 Court Report, App-127

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 P&a9g)e*:#1*259$of 326 - Page ID#: 1710
Site Visit Report of Settlement Monitor
Adams & Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky.)
Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor
Kentucky State Reformatory Visit date: February 24-25, 2016 Draft circulated to parties for comment: March 29, 2016
Final (April 21, 2016)
INTRODUCTION
The Settlement Agreement in this case became effective June 28, 2015, and allows me to visit each of the 13 Kentucky Department of Corrections (KDOC) facilities each calendar year. After consultation with both defendants and plaintiffs’ counsel, I decided that the most effective approach to monitoring would be to ask KDOC which facilities were in compliance with the Agreement, and start with those. I urged KDOC to begin with the Kentucky State Reformatory (KSR), because a large majority of the Deaf inmates who have been identified to me are housed at KSR. KDOC agreed, and I visited the Kentucky State Reformatory (KSR), in LaGrange, Kentucky, on February 24-25, 2016. KSR is functioning as a leader in KDOC’s compliance efforts. As my first site-visit report, this document is more discursive and explanatory than may be useful in future reports. It is intended to be helpful not just to KSR but to all of KDOC’s facilities, as they continue to move towards compliance with the Agreement in this case.
The visit was ably facilitated by KSR’s ADA Coordinator Anthony Hillebrandt and Deputy ADA Coordinator Paul Sloan, who, like the other KSR staff I spoke to, conducted themselves with exemplary professionalism throughout the tour. Prior to the visit, my assistant Abbye Klamann, a third-year law student, conducted seven phone interviews of KSR inmates, and I reviewed her notes and numerous other documents. During the visit, I was able to see every thing and every place I requested and to review all requested records. I spoke freely and confidentially with inmates and custody and non-custody staff. Warden Aaron Smith welcomed the visit and my feedback, which I shared at an exit interview with him and other senior staff. Everyone at the prison was helpful, and I found the visit extremely productive. Exhibit A lists the names and titles of each staff member I spoke with. Between the pre-tour phone interviews and more interviews conducted during my visit, I spoke with twenty inmates; to maximize their confidentiality I do not list them or use their names in this report, referring to them as Inmate A, Inmate B, etc. I am providing KSR staff and plaintiffs’ counsel a key that identifies those whose situations are specifically referenced in the report. (Note: when an inmate shared information with me confidentially, I do not identify that inmate at all.)
My recommendations are numbered and in bold; I have also pulled them out for ease of reference into their own document, which precedes this report. References to the Settlement Agreement appear in parentheses; such references use the fully numbered version of the
11/2016 Court Report, App-128

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 130 of 326 - Page ID#: 1711
Agreement, which was Exhibit B to my first semi-annual report, in February 2016. (I have not reattached this version of the Agreement, but can provide it on request.)
On March 29, 2016, I provided this report in draft to KSR, KDOC, and plaintiffs’ counsel, giving each two weeks for comments or corrections. KSR’s ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt informed me via email that KSR had no comments. I did not hear anything back from KDOC headquarters. Plaintiffs’ counsel provided a written response, which is attached as Exhibit F. In addition, I received a written response from plaintiff Michael Knights to my first semi-annual report, which prompted me to propose a change to Exhibit D-2, to better facilitate inmate contact with the ADA Coordinator. I am not submitting this report to the Court separately, but I will include this report and others in the future in my semi-annual reports.
KSR has made very significant progress towards compliance with the Settlement Agreement. Much remains to be done, but important groundwork has been laid. I look forward to working with KSR and KDOC personnel on the next steps.
I. IDENTIFICATION OF INMATES COVERED BY THE AGREEMENT.
The Settlement Agreement covers both deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. Although the phrase “Deaf Inmates” is used throughout the agreement, that phrase is defined broadly, to mean
“Inmates who are unable to hear well enough to rely on their hearing as a means of processing information, who rely on Auxiliary Aids and Services to Effectively Communicate and who qualify as individuals with disabilities under the ADA, including deaf, hard of hearing, or hearing impaired persons. See 42 U.S.C. § 12102(4).” (I.3)
Pursuant to the Agreement (XV.B.1.d) KSR has therefore shared with me their list of all inmates whose medical record includes any relevant diagnostic labels (“deaf,” “hearing impaired,” etc.). On the most recent list, provided to me on February 9, 2016, these totaled 53 inmates; three were noted as entirely deaf, the rest as hearing impaired. I note in this regard that out of all the Kentucky DOC facilities, so far only KSR and Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (EKCC) have provided me with the names of any hard-of-hearing inmates; the other facilities have told me only about inmates who are entirely deaf. In fact, the total number of inmates whose names I have received from non-KSR prisons is 8, with just one noted as hard-of-hearing, even though I learned during this KSR visit that there are about 100 non-KSR inmates whose medical records include some indication that they have a hearing impairment.
Recommendation 1: I commend KSR for its identification practices; the other facilities are not in compliance with the reporting requirements of the Agreement, and should emulate KSR’s procedure and identify all inmates who meet the Agreement’s definition of “Deaf.” This is necessary both in order to report names to me and to ensure that appropriate services are provided to hard-of-hearing inmates.
KSR medical staff are implementing a process to improve diagnosis and inclusion on the list, administering a 10-question questionnaire to inmates during their initial medical assessment. The questionnaire is included as Exhibit B-1; it is apparently used throughout KDOC facilities. If
11/2016 Court Report, App-129

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 131 of 326 - Page ID#: 1712
an inmate answers three or more of the question with “sometimes” or “yes,” he is supposed to see a medical provider (a physician or nurse practitioner) who in turn can assess whether he should be referred to an audiologist.
The questionnaire itself appears to be adapted from a screening instrument posted online by the Rochester Hearing and Speech Center.1 But because KDOC is relying on the questionnaire to identify not just who needs to see an audiologist, but who should be flagged for assessment of hearing services, I recommend several changes.
x The questionnaire is designed to be part of a screening process to decide who should see an audiologist for fuller hearing testing. Presumably that’s why it begins, “If you use a hearing aid, please answer according to the way you hear with the aid.” Because KSR is using it to decide, in addition, who might need non-hearing-aid services, the questionnaire should include several other preliminary identification (rather than diagnostic) questions. My specific suggestions are described below.
x In addition, the questionnaire does not cover current problems with a hearing aid (such as pain or buzzing or other problems). Again, I recommend additional questions below.
I have provided a recommended revised version of the questionnaire, and written instructions for its administration, as Exhibit B-2.
Recommendation 2: Include additional questions in the screening questionnaire, along the lines of:
x Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? x Have you ever been diagnosed with hearing loss? x Have you ever used a hearing aid that you no longer use? (If yes, Why don’t
you use it anymore?) A “yes” answer to any of the these three questions should be followed up by a provider visit, unless the inmate explains that he no longer uses the hearing aid because his hearing has improved so that it is no longer necessary.
x If you currently have a hearing aid, is it working ok? A “no” answer to this question should be followed up by a provider visit.
1 See Rochester Hearing & Speech Center, Hearing Screening Questionnaire, available at http://www.rhsc.org/hearing/files/2014/01/HearingScreeningQuestionnaire1.pdf. Seven questions are identical; for three others, there are substitutions, two from the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) SelfTest for Hearing Loss, and one that may be from the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly-Screening Version (HHIE-S). See also American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Self-Test for Hearing Loss, available at http://www.asha.org/public/hearing/Self-Test-for-Hearing-Loss/; The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly—Screening Version, available at http://familymed.uthscsa.edu/geriatrics/tools/Hearing_Assessment.pdf.
11/2016 Court Report, App-130

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 132 of 326 - Page ID#: 1713
x Note to tester: If the inmate seems unable to understand these questions due to a hearing impairment, provider follow-up is indicated.
Finally, because use of a written questionnaire is problematic for inmates who are illiterate—and literacy rates are particularly high among people with hearing impairments—it is important for the questionnaire to be administered orally for any inmate whose literacy seems to be low. See Part IV.B, below, for a further discussion of literacy assessment. (Of course if an inmate’s hearing impairment seems to be making this ineffective, that alone should trigger further evaluation.)
Recommendation 3: Staff administering the questionnaire should be alert to (and trained on) the possibility of low literacy, and should ask questions orally when appropriate. Among illiterate inmates, a hearing impairment sufficient to undermine their ability to answer these questions ought to itself trigger referral to the appropriate provider.
For each inmate whose questionnaire indicates that he is or might have a hearing impairment, the next step is a medical assessment. I spoke with KSR physician Dr. Frederick Kemen about his screening protocols. Dr. Kemen explained that currently, at KSR, this is accomplished by use of a “whisper test.” The administrator of the test stands at arms’ length behind the patient (so he cannot read lips), and after instructing the patient to place one finger on the tragus of one ear to obscure sound, whispers three or four words towards the patient’s other ear, and asks the patient to repeat the word back. The test is then repeated for the other ear. If an inmate fails the test for either ear, he is referred to an audiologist.
Dr. Kemen stated that he plans to consult his corporate office to find out if there are other, better screening techniques that KSR medical staff might follow. In addition, he stated that he would like to have access to an audiometer, in order to use it in addition to the whisper test. He emphasized, however, that the whisper test has some advantages over audiometry because the whisper test is more function-based—it tests ability to understand words, not just hear tones.
The purpose of the follow-up provider visit is both to determine whether an inmate needs additional assessment or medical services and to determine whether he should be flagged as deaf or hard-of-hearing, offered auxiliary aids, and included on the inmate list provided to me semiannually. For example, an inmate with a functional hearing aid might not need additional medical services, but should be included on the list and provided any other necessary auxiliary aids.
Recommendation 4: Further assessment of the inmate should include not just the medical decision whether to send the inmate to an audiologist, but a separate, explicit, charted and electronically-tracked decision whether he is deaf or hard-of-hearing.
KSR staff explained to me that a new Electronic Medical Record system will soon be implemented, which provides a perfect opportunity for necessary improvements.
11/2016 Court Report, App-131

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 133 of 326 - Page ID#: 1714
Recommendation 5: The KDOC Electronic Medical Record system should include a single electronic code that flags inmates who are deaf, hard-of-hearing, or hearing-impaired (hereinafter Deaf, in this report), to facilitate provision of services to them.
II. PROVISION OF AUDIOLOGY SERVICES
Currently, KSR sends inmates who fail the whisper test to an off-site audiologist (or, if indicated, an Ear, Nose & Throat doctor). This is expensive, and interviews with both inmates and staff suggest that there are frequently long waits for the assessment visit and for the eventual audiologist visits. In fact, in recent years, only in the past few months has KSR started sending inmates to an audiologist. Several KSR inmates reported to me that they had been seeking such a visit for over a year—whether for initial audiology assessment or because their hearing aid is either no longer working well for them or seems to be malfunctioning. When an inmate who needs hearing aids doesn’t receive them, KSR’s communication with that inmate is almost certain to be ineffective. Prompt assessment and provision of treatment is therefore very important. Both an inmate and Dr. Kemen told me that several years ago, there was an audiologist who came— perhaps just occasionally—to KSR and did assessments there. This approach seems like it might be a useful one to revive.
Recommendation 6: Inmates in need of a hearing aid—both initially or because the device they have is no longer working for them—should wait no longer than two months to obtain the necessary device. That time period should begin the day the potential need is indicated by the inmate’s request for evaluation, answers on the questionnaire, etc. KSR should track the time from request/questionnaire to provider visit to audiology visit to hearing aid provision, and ensure that inmates do not have a longer wait. (In future quarterly reporting periods, I will request this tracking data.) One way to accomplish less expensive and more comprehensive assessment for the current backlog might be to bring in an audiologist to KSR for two or three days.
III. AUXILIARY AIDS/SERVICES
Once an inmate is identified as fitting the Agreement’s definition of “Deaf,” KSR is obligated (in the absence of a voluntary waiver) to provide effective communication by using auxiliary aids and services. The Agreement instructs that “[a]fter medical staff determine that an Inmate is Deaf, the KDOC will presume that Auxiliary Aids and Services in the form of Qualified Interpreters, visual notifications, telecommunication devices, and other aids and services set forth in this Agreement are necessary to ensure Effective Communication and substantially equal services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations.” (III.C.1) Deaf inmates might need any of several different types of such aids/services. In this section, I discuss them in turn.
To figure out what services may be needed, it’s necessary to think through each type of communication that takes place at KSR. Different situations call for different services or devices. Much of this is covered in detail by the Agreement, but sometimes the Agreement just states the general obligation of effective communication and equal access to services, programs, and activities.
11/2016 Court Report, App-132

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 134 of 326 - Page ID#: 1715
A. Personal hearing devices: Hearing aids and amplifiers
In Parts I-II, above, I discussed KSR’s approach to provision of audiology evaluation and hearing aids. KSR’s current (and appropriate) practice is that hearing aids must be prescribed by an audiologist, and the recommendations already offered are aimed at improving the effectiveness and timeliness of the necessary evaluations. My on-site interviews with KSR inmates also suggest that inmates with hearing loss who have not so far been prescribed hearing aids are not well informed about the process for requesting an evaluation, or about the fact that batteries are medical costs not billed to inmates. In fact, one inmate told me that even though he had used a hearing aid before he came to prison, he did not want one in prison because batteries were so hard to obtain and so expensive. And one health care provider told me that he/she believed one inmate, Inmate A, got himself sent to segregation because that was the only place he could get free hearing aid batteries. (I did not talk to Inmate A myself or otherwise confirm whether the provider’s belief was plausible.) In fact, I have been told both by KSR staff and by inmates who actually have hearing aids that they do not face battery access issues. The Agreement provides that batteries are available free of charge, without co-pay, “for any Deaf Inmate who is deemed indigent pursuant to Kentucky Corrections Policy and Procedure 15.7.” (V.B) Commendably, KSR has decided that since hearing aid batteries are medically necessary, no charge is appropriate even for inmates who do not meet this criterion. I do not think I spoke to any inmate who was being charged for hearing aid batteries.
Recommendation 7: Full information about hearing aids and hearing evaluations, including the availability of batteries without charge, should be provided to inmates. See Exhibit D-2.
While Deaf inmates are waiting for audiologist evaluation, or when their degree of hearing impairment is small, other medical staff at KSR sometimes provide those inmates with personal amplifiers, which both inmates and staff often refer to as “pocket talkers.” It seems that only some of the Deaf inmates who might benefit from amplifiers know that they are available. In fact, amplifiers are apparently readily available when requested by medical staff; in my interview of clinic assistant Barbara Handley, she explained that a stock is kept on hand, and that when more are needed, it takes a week or less to obtain them.
Recommendation 8: Inmates waiting for an audiologist evaluation or for hearing aid service should be offered an amplifier while they wait.
B. Qualified Interpretation
1. The availability of Qualified Interpreter services
For Deaf inmates who use sign language to communicate, interpreter services are essential. Most such inmates use American Sign Language (ASL), or a combination of ASL and gestures. ASL is not a version of English—it is a different language, with its own syntax. Native ASL-speakers are often not entirely fluent in English, including written English. Accordingly, trying to get by with writing is not just slower, it’s often quite ineffective.
The Agreement defines “Qualified Interpreter” to mean:
11/2016 Court Report, App-133

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 135 of 326 - Page ID#: 1716
“[A] person who is able to interpret effectively, accurately, and impartially, both receptively and expressively, with an individual Deaf Inmate using any necessary specialized vocabulary. See 28 C.F.R. §35.104. A Qualified Interpreter could include an ASL interpreter, a sign language interpreter using more English-based signs, an oral interpreter, a cued speech transliterator or a tactile interpreter for a Deaf Inmate who is also blind. For sign language interpreters, a Qualified Interpreter is one who holds current, valid certifications and licensure by the Kentucky Board of Interpreters for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing.” (I.18)
I will refer in this report to qualified interpreters, QI, or sometimes “interpreter” or “interpretive services”; in each case, I am referring to qualified interpretation.
The same section also explains that “A Qualified Interpreter may be provided by the KDOC either in person, or via Video Remote Interpreting, videoconferencing or other similar means that provide Effective Communication.” (I.18) Video Remote Interpreting (VRI) is a method by which a hearing person and a Deaf person in the same space can communicate with each other via a remote interpreter, often through software installed on a laptop. KSR has made important strides with respect to offering both in-person interpretation and VRI. The prison has entered an arrangement with a provider that can send an interpreter to the prison when needed, usually on 48 hours notice or more. In addition, KSR now has a VRI contract and owns two dedicated VRI laptops. So far, however, interpretation has been used at KSR only for certain types of communications—in particular, reclassification and disciplinary hearings (VRI), and Narcotics Anonymous (in person). When I did my visit, education and medical staff had not used the VRI laptops—and most staff members were, on my questioning, unaware of their availability.
The Settlement Agreement includes many provisions relating to both types of interpretation. In its most general relevant provision, the Agreement requires “[a]ppropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, including Qualified Interpreters,” in order to offer Deaf inmates the equal opportunity for participation in all aspects of prison life, including “orientation; medical evaluations; On-site Medical Care and healthcare appointments; classification and transfer hearings; grievance, disciplinary, and Parole hearings; and rehabilitative, educational, work, or transitional KDOC programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC’s custody.” (V.A.2) The Agreement then adds a number of specifics, both as to the situations in which effective communication may be needed and the particular need for interpretation to succeed in meeting the requirement of effective communication:
x Auxiliary aid/service assessment (III.F.2: “At the request of the Deaf Inmate, the KDOC will provide that Deaf Inmate with a meaningful opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member and a Qualified Interpreter to ask any questions regarding the written or interpreted materials.”)
x All medical, dental, and mental health evaluations and healthcare appointments (VI.C.1: “[F]or many Deaf Inmates, a Qualified Interpreter may be a necessary means of providing Effective Communication.”)
x Unscheduled medical and mental health emergencies (VI.C.4: “[T]he KDOC will provide a Qualified Interpreter via VRI service for use in unscheduled medical emergencies. If VRI services are not appropriate in the situation, KDOC personnel will work in
11/2016 Court Report, App-134

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 136 of 326 - Page ID#: 1717
conjunction with medical staff to attempt to secure an in-person Qualified Interpreter as soon as possible.”) x Classification and transfer hearings (VI.H: “The KDOC will provide a Qualified Interpreter for any hearings or meetings relating to a Deaf Inmate’s transfer to another facility, change in security classification, or any other classification hearing involving the exchange of information between the Deaf Inmate and the KDOC personnel that could affect the Deaf Inmate’s status.”) x Meetings when a Deaf inmate has questions about written materials provided by the prison (III.E: “At the request of the Deaf Inmate, the KDOC will provide that Deaf Inmate with a meaningful opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member and a Qualified Interpreter to ask any questions regarding the written or interpreted materials.”) x Disciplinary hearings, including when the inmate is a witness or facing charges. (VII.A.1: “The KDOC must provide Deaf Inmates with a Qualified Interpreter in any disciplinary proceeding in which a Deaf Inmate is suspected of, charged with, or a witness to, a disciplinary infraction.”) This includes not just the hearing itself but also:
o staff investigations or investigative interviews involving the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel
o any other discipline-related encounter that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel, including the shift supervisor’s or investigator’s review,
o rights or other advisements (Miranda warnings; right to consult with an assigned legal aide; advisement of the anticipated date, time, and place of hearing;
o meetings with legal aides or advisors (VI.A.2: “To the extent that a Deaf Inmate has access to his or her advisor, a Qualified Interpreter shall be made available to the Deaf Inmate for any exchange of information between the Deaf Inmate and his or her advisor.”)
x Narcotics Anonymous and Alcoholics Anonymous (VI.E.3: “The KDOC will provide Qualified Interpreters for Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) and Narcotics Anonymous (NA) programs.”)
x If the prison directly provides religious services (V.A.3: “To the extent the KDOC provides, now or in the future, any religious activities at facilities housing Deaf Inmates, the KDOC shall provide a Qualified Interpreter at such activities upon the request of any Deaf Inmate.”; VI.G.3: essentially the same).
x Conversations between inmates and the individual supervising their post-release supervision. (VI.I: “Upon request, the KDOC will provide appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, which may include Qualified Interpreters, for Deaf Inmates under postrelease supervision to Effectively Communicate with the individual supervising their post-release supervision.”)
x Any other significant communications (VI.J: “The KDOC will provide Effective Communication, which may include Qualified Interpreters, for any significant communications between Deaf Inmates and KDOC staff that is not specifically discussed in this Agreement.”)
In addition: Paragraph VI.A.1 of the Agreement specifies:
11/2016 Court Report, App-135

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 137 of 326 - Page ID#: 1718

“The KDOC shall provide an in-person Qualified Interpreter at KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are incarcerated in the following circumstances:
x communications concerning medical care and attention, including dental, vision, audiological, and mental health care
x disciplinary hearings in which the Deaf Inmate may be a suspect of or charged with a rule infraction;
x transfer and classification processes that impact on the Deaf Inmate’s status; x transitional programming; x rehabilitative programming, including, but not limited to, Alcoholics Anonymous
(AA) and Narcotics Anonymous (NA); and x educational programming.”
And VI.A.2 requires, additionally, an in-person Qualified Interpreter “as circumstances warrant.”

The Agreement is thus ambiguous as to which method of qualified interpretive services is needed when. Table 1 summarizes all of the provisions just described:

Table 1: Settlement Agreement Provisions Relating to Interpretative Services

Situation

Auxiliary Aids, which

may include QI

Initial intake/assessment/classification III.A.1

Auxiliary aid/service assessment and III.B.3

other accommodation assistance

Orientation

V.A.2

Meetings about materials

Medical evaluations

V.A.2

Scheduled on-site medical, mental V.A.2, VI.C.1

health and dental care/ appointments

Emergency health care, on-site

V.A.2

Classification and transfer hearings and related meetings Grievance hearings Disciplinary hearings and all related processes Parole hearings Rehabilitative and educational programming Work Transitional programs Conversations with post-release supervisor Religious programming provided by KDOC Other significant communications

V.A.2 V.A.2 V.A.2 V.A.2 V.A.2 V.A.2 V.A.2 VI.I: On request
VI.J

QI, via VRI or In-person qualified

in-person

interpreter

III.F.2: on request

VI.A.1

III.E: on request

VI.A.1

VI.C.4 VI.H

VI.C.4: when VRI services are inappropriate VI.A.1 VI.A.1

VII.A.1

VI.A.1

VI.E.3: NA and VI.A.1 AA
VI.A.1

V.A.3: On request

VI.A.2: as circumstances warrant

11/2016 Court Report, App-136

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 138 of 326 - Page ID#: 1719
Bringing all this together into an operational rule is challenging. I do not think, for example, that in-person interpretation needs to be available for every single medical encounter— but it would be possible to read VI.A.1 to so require. In addition, the Agreement states, as one way of resolving the issue: “In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, primary consideration shall be given to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)).” (I.5; 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2) includes essentially the same language.)
I move to the choice between VRI and in-person interpretation in Part III.B.1, below. As far as when some kind of qualified interpretation is needed, I recommend the following:
Recommendation 9: For inmates who use sign language to communicate, some kind of qualified interpretive services should be readily available for any communication between an inmate and staff when the inmate requests interpretation. The availability of interpretation should not be limited to only certain types of encounters, communications, or settings. (Below, at IV.D, I address modifications to various forms to help operationalize this recommendation.)
Recommendation 10: For inmates who use sign language to communicate, no special request should be needed to obtain VRI services for auxiliary aid/service assessment, emergency health care on-site, classification and transfer hearings and related meetings, grievance meetings and hearings, disciplinary hearings and all related processes, parole meetings and hearings.
Recommendation 11: The items identified in Recommendation 10 are based on the Agreement’s language. Functionally, I also recommend that interpretation services be offered without special request to any inmate (known to prison staff to use sign language to communicate) during initial classification and orientation. These encounters are vital to the terms of each inmate’s living situation, and inmates are unlikely to know, during these early stages, that they need to request interpretation and how to do so.
2. The choice between Video Relay Interpretation (VRI) and in-person interpretation
As explained above and demonstrated by Table 1, the Settlement Agreement is mostly ambiguous in terms of when interpretation services should be offered via VRI or an in-person interpreter. VRI is less costly than in-person interpretation, and therefore frequently more attractive to organizations responsible for ensuring effective communication. Deaf people who use sign language to communicate, however, tend to prefer in-person interpretation, for a number of reasons: VRI equipment is inconsistent in practice; technical difficulties are common. In addition, the environmental cues available in-person mean that a good in-person interpreter is better able than a good remote interpreter to check that the Deaf person is understanding what’s being said. And similarly, a good in-person interpreter may be better able to understand idiosyncratic signing. Finally, VRI technology requires that each person involved in the communication be close to the computer camera and microphone, so it doesn’t work well when more than two people are involved in the communication, or one or both of them cannot remain still and near the laptop.
11/2016 Court Report, App-137

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 139 of 326 - Page ID#: 1720
In total, VRI may, generally, be suitable when only two people (the Deaf inmate and the hearing person) are communicating; the pace of communication can be slow; and there is no need to move around. VRI is less suitable when there are many people communicating (for example in a class or a parole hearing), or there is a need to move around (for example, during some physical medical exams). In those situations, an in-person interpreter is most appropriate, and likely necessary for effective communication.
At KSR, at the time of my visit, an in-person interpreter had been provided only in one situation, in response to a grievance filed January 2016. The record of that grievance (described in more detail below), includes ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt’s explanation that he hadn’t approved an in-person interpreter because he “thought the VRI was going to work for the meeting and cost is less for laptop.” In response, Inmate B wrote, “It only work for one on one to be effective but not group.”
In fact, Inmate B has brought two grievances on this question. The first, 15-0828, was initiated August 26, 2015, soon after the effective date of the agreement. In it, Inmate B argued that VRI was not sufficient for his NA meeting. The staff response at the informal resolution stage was “Kentucky State Reformatory has Video Remote Interpreting “VRI” available for reclassification, N.A., court call, or any other program meeting.”
The processing of this grievance shows one way that things can go wrong in efforts to provide interpretation. There was a delay in the grievance committee meeting with the inmate, because, the form notes, “Chair forgot to acquire VRI laptop.” Once the meeting was held, the answer provided was a flat ‘no’: “the committee agrees with the informal resolution and find[s] that the memo addresses any need for a physical interpreter.” There are two memos which are attached as Exhibits C-1 and C-2. The memo to staff (Exhibit C-1) says:
“In the event that KSR needs an outside-qualified interpreter [that is, an in-person interpreter], you are to contact my office 48 hours prior to the scheduled event. Outsidequalified interpreter will be scheduled to come in to provide communication between you and deaf/hearing-impaired inmate.”
And the corresponding memo to inmates (Exhibit C-2) states:
“To schedule an in person-qualified interpreter, you are to contact my office in writing 48 hours prior to the scheduled event place your letter in the institutional mail box. In person-qualified interpreter will be scheduled to come in to provide effective communication.”
(The grievance documentation does not mention the “Request for a Qualified Interpreter” form— which may not yet have been created; it is attached as Exhibit C-3. This form, provided to inmates seeking interpretation services, states, “In the event that VRI laptop is out of service, Anthony Hillebrandt, ADA Coordinator will schedule in-person qualified interpreter.”)
After this point in the grievance proceedings, it seems that the issue—Inmate B’s request for an in-person interpreter rather than a VRI—may have become confused, perhaps because there are some references in the grievance documents to the issue of how much advance notice was required for access to interpreter services. In any event, subsequent documentation does not clearly address the in-person vs. VRI issue.
11/2016 Court Report, App-138

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 140 of 326 - Page ID#: 1721
As discussed in Part IV.D, below, these memos and forms are not adequate: they must be modified to clearly present in-person interpretation as a possibility and to allow inmates to request it and explain the circumstances that may justify the request. See Agreement I.5: “In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, primary consideration shall be given to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2))”; 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2) includes essentially the same language.
On Feb. 2, 2016, as already described, Inmate B filed another grievance, explaining that the VRI laptop had failed to working for his NA meeting. This time ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt agreed, and said KSR would provide an in-person interpreter for that meeting going forward.
Learning from experience, inmates who need interpretation services should be provided an in-person interpreter for classes or programs that involve more than one person talking, and for parole hearings. For these situations, it is inappropriate to delay the provision of effective communication by trying (nearly-certain-to-be-inadequate) remote interpretation first. In addition, going forward, if VRI has been attempted in a particular situation, Deaf inmates should be able to request in-person interpretation instead, if the VRI didn’t turn out to be effective. For example, in-person interpretation can cope more easily than VRI with unorthodox signing. There is one KSR inmate, Inmate D, whose signing is not conventional ASL, but an amalgamation of ASL, gestures, finger spelling, and “home signing.”2 As of the date of my visit, KSR had not yet tried to facilitate communication with this inmate using the VRI laptop. It may be that remote interpretation is ineffective because of his unconventional signing; in that case, an in-person interpreter will be needed whenever interpretive services are necessary for effective communication. (Note: Inmate D has a low level of literacy, so for him, written communication is almost certainly not effective.)
These considerations are almost certainly not the only ones worth including. It would be worthwhile in the Agreement’s next year or two to assess the effectiveness of communication via VRI in other situations, to decide whether there are any such situations in which in-person interpretation should be the first recourse.
Recommendation 12: Both the existing VRI contract and the standing arrangement with a provider of in-person qualified interpretive services are crucial and should remain in place. In-person interpretation should be provided to inmates who communicate by signing when it is necessary for effective communication. This includes during group classes in which student participation is key, and in parole hearings. For other situations, an in-person interpreter should be provided if remote interpretation is unlikely to be, or has not been, effective.
Recommendation 13: More generally, more clarity and a better process for picking a qualified interpretation method—VRI or in-person—are needed. The various memos, forms, and training should be modified to support that process. KSR should give “primary consideration” to the affected inmate’s view on this question. Revised versions of all the relevant forms and memos are attached as Exhibit D. The information in Exhibit D-5—in
2 See N. Frishberg, Home Sign, in 3 GALLAUDET ENCYCLOPEDIA OF DEAF PEOPLE AND DEAFNESS 128 (1987).
11/2016 Court Report, App-139

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 141 of 326 - Page ID#: 1722
particular, the preferred communication method—should be made available to all KDOC staff who need it, including both medical and custody staff, including electronically.
Recommendation 14: KSR should track the effectiveness of communication via VRI in other situations, in order to decide whether there are any situations in which in-person interpretation should be the first recourse. As part of this assessment process, each time a VRI is used, the inmate should be asked how effective the resulting communication was. This can be done by a scaled question:
Please check the box that best indicates your views.
The Video Remote Interpretation I just used provided fully effective communication:
 Strongly agree  Weakly agree  Weakly disagree  Strongly disagree
If there was any problem with the communication, please explain:
These responses can be collected and analyzed. This recommendation is reflected in Exhibit D, discussed more fully below.
3. Hand Restraints
To be effective, communication must be two-way. It’s for that reason that the Agreement provides:
“According to the KDOC’s hand restraint policies, the KDOC will use hand restraints on Deaf Inmates only in the following circumstances:
x when transporting a Deaf Inmate to or from a KDOC Adult Institution; x when transferring a Deaf Inmate into or out of the special management unit; and x as needed in response to security threats.” (XI.A.1)
“KDOC training will include . . . the agreement that hand restraints will be removed from a Deaf Inmate when the Deaf Inmate is in a secure environment, when security is no longer a threat, or there are other security devices in place to allow the Deaf Inmate to Effectively Communicate.” (XI.A.2)
Under these provisions, it is vital that , for inmates who use sign language to communicate, decisions about using hand restraints be made individually, not merely on the basis of a policy that an inmate in a particular status must remain restrained. And it is equally important that other security devices that allow effective communication be used.
Inmate C is one of three KSR inmates who signs to communicate. At the time of my visit, he was designated “max assault status,” due to a recent finding that he had assaulted an officer. Under KSR’s rules, that status requires that inmates be handcuffed whenever they are out of their cell. But in order to interview him, I needed him to be able to sign. Warden Smith and his staff were able to implement an appropriate security response, using an alternative restraint technique (which they described as “side saddles”) that used a belt and chain to shackle him to the wall, but left his hands free. The interview proceeded without incident.
11/2016 Court Report, App-140

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 142 of 326 - Page ID#: 1723
Recommendation 15: Inmates who communicate via sign language should not have their hands restrained when there is a need for effective communication, absent an individualized finding of security threat even with use of substitute security procedures (if necessary). If avoiding restraint of inmates’ hands requires substitute security procedures, those should be written up and included in the documentation of the necessary processes for both VRI and in-person interpretation, and any appropriate equipment should be obtained and installed wherever it might be needed.
4. Past problems with provision of in-person Qualified Interpreters
I examined the disciplinary records since June 2015 of each current and recent KSR inmate who uses sign language to communicate. In every one of disciplinary incidents, there was a communication-related problem.
In each incident, no qualified interpreter was provided for at least some stages of the process:
x Inmate C, Report dated 8/5/2015: “Lieutenant [] had Inmate [C] read the disciplinary due to having hearing impairment.”
x Inmate B, Report dated 10/9/2015: “Attached is written correspondence due to not being able to reach an interpreter thru the ‘purple’ machine.”
x Inmate C, Report dated 10/20/2015: “Inmate [C] was asked several questions written on paper . . . . Inmate [C] was asked what it was about?” he replied “Something Act With Other Inmate.”
x Inmate D, Report dated 12/10/2015: “Inmate [D] stated the following with the help of an Inmate interpreter . . .” No record of any offer of a qualified interpreter.
x Inmate E, Report dated 12/14/2015: “Inmate [E] is hearing impaired therefore, all questions pertaining to this hearing was handwritten by myself . . . and handwritten answered by Inmate [E].”
x Inmate C, Report dated 1/18/2016: “The above Disciplinary Report was discussed with inmate [C] using a note pad, due to inmate [C] being deaf.” There is no report from the eventual disciplinary hearing.
There is no way to tell whether use of a qualified interpreter would have enabled these inmates to communicate their side of events with greater detail or would have resulted in a different outcome. In all but the second of the incidents, the consequences seems to have been relatively small, and may now be past: 15 days or less in segregation. I do not know whether any of these incidents had additional, more attenuated impacts on the affected inmates (for example, triggering or influencing a reclassification).
The second of these incidents, however, in which Inmate C was found to have assaulted a staff member, was quite serious, resulting in 180 days of disciplinary segregation and the loss of two years good time credit. The communications problems continued throughout the disciplinary process: at the formal disciplinary hearing VRI was provided, but Inmate C remained handcuffed. Questions were put to him in yes/no format; the interpreter signed to relay those questions, and he could shake or nod his head in response. (The same approach was taken during Inmate C’s most recent reclassification.) This account is based on my interviews; the disciplinary documentation notes that VRI was provided. It is notable, however, that the
11/2016 Court Report, App-141

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 143 of 326 - Page ID#: 1724
documentation never states Inmate C’s position about any of the events in question. The cryptic sentence quoted above from Inmate C’s written response (“Inmate [C] was asked what it was about?” he replied “Something Act With Other Inmate”) is the only evidence of his account.
This is not effective communication, and it undermined the fairness of Inmate C’s disciplinary hearing. The disciplinary hearing should be reheard. See Agreement VII.B.3: “If, as of the Effective Date of this Agreement, a Deaf Inmate is being punished or is scheduled to be punished for a disciplinary infraction as the result of a hearing in which he or she did not waive his or her right to a Qualified Interpreter, then the disciplinary hearing must be re-heard at a time that a Qualified Interpreter can be present.”
For the other incidents mentioned, the need to redo the hearings is less acute, given that the consequences seem to be already past. Still, under the Agreement, each of these inmates is entitled to a rehearing.
Recommendation 16: For situations since June 2015 in which KSR’s procedures did not allow an inmate to communicate during a disciplinary hearing—most importantly, in Inmate C’s October 2015 hearing—the inmate should be given an opportunity to redo the hearing. This opportunity must be effectively communicated to the inmate, which itself should be done using interpretive services.
Inmate D’s 2016 parole hearing was an additional incident in which a failure of effective communication tainted an even more consequential encounter. Inmate D communicates via sign language (albeit an unconventional kind of sign language). This has long been known to some staff at KSR. At Inmate D’s parole hearing in 2011, he had a sign language interpreter. And in December 2015, in the disciplinary hearing described above, an inmate interpreter helped out. Finally, Licensed Psychological Associate Chris Wiggins, who provides mental health services in the segregation unit and who knows some sign language, notes that he was able to communicate with Inmate D using sign language. However, presumably because accommodations and auxiliary aids have not been formally tracked, and because the system for evaluating each inmate’s need for such services has not been robust, more recently, the ADA Coordinator did not realize that Inmate D uses sign language. Instead, communications with him have relied on writing; since he is not very literate, this is ineffective.
Inmate D had a parole hearing in February 2016; he was not given parole and his next hearing date was set for April 2021. He did not receive any communication assistance at the February 2016 hearing.
The Agreement provides:
“Appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, including Qualified Interpreters, will be made available so that Deaf Inmates may have an equal opportunity to participate in all services, privileges, and programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC’s custody. These services, privileges, and programs will include, but not be limited to: orientation; medical evaluations; On-site Medical Care and healthcare appointments; classification and transfer hearings; grievance, disciplinary, and Parole hearings; and rehabilitative, educational, work, or transitional KDOC programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC’s custody.” (V.A.2; emphasis added)
11/2016 Court Report, App-142

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 144 of 326 - Page ID#: 1725
“When a Deaf Inmate is scheduled to appear at a Parole hearing, the appropriate ADA Coordinator will notify the Kentucky Parole Board of the Deaf Inmate’s need for, and the Kentucky Parole Board’s duty to provide, Auxiliary Aids and Services for Effective Communication. This notice shall be given no later than seven (7) days before the Deaf Inmate’s scheduled Parole hearing. In the event that the Deaf Inmate will be physically present at a KDOC Adult Institution for the Parole hearing, the KDOC will work with the Kentucky Parole Board to ensure that any appointed Qualified Interpreter obtains security clearances in a timely manner.” (VI.A.3)
These provisions were not followed for Inmate D’s February 2016 Parole hearing.
I raised the issue of Inmate D’s Parole hearing during the visit, and KSR in turn raised the matter to the Parole Board. On March 23, the Board declined to redo the hearing. In an email to KSR staff, Division of Parole and Victim Services staff member Melissa Chandler explained that it had been decided that any error was not very serious:
“We were made aware of [Inmate D’s] special needs prior to the hearing. DOC provided a staff person in the hearing with him and he seemed to be able to communicate with the Board Members. [Inmate D] had an LSCMI and Case plan with him, both of which would have required DOC staff to communication with him. The Board Members were under the impression that the form of communication that was present during the hearing was the best means to communicate with him for the hearing. He never asked for assistance during the hearing and the Board Members were able to proceed with the hearing and communicate with him for their purposes.”
But how was Inmate D supposed to ask for assistance? He writes poorly, if at all, and does not speak. There was no interpreter present to enable him to communicate even that he was unable to communicate.
In addition, Ms. Chandler’s email quoted the Board’s written decision:
“The inmate was given the written decision of the Board where it states: ‘The only reasons for reconsideration of this decision are: (a) If there is an allegation of misconduct by a board member that is substantiated by the record: (b) If there is significant procedural error by a board member; or (c) If there is significant new evidence that was not available at the time of the hearing. A request based on the availability of the new evidence or information shall be accompanied by adequate documentation. The inmate or his/her legal representative may submit a request for reconsideration within 21 days of the date the final disposition is made.’ Mr. Hatfield did not request a reconsideration.”
Inmate D is essentially illiterate, so unless this written decision was conveyed to him via an interpreter—which it was not—it was not functionally available to him. In my view, the failure to provide effective communication at the Parole hearing constitutes “significant procedural error.” And as Inmate D said to me (via interpreter): “I couldn’t understand anything. Where was the interpreter? I’m deaf.”
Recommendation 17: Inmate D’s 2016 Parole hearing should be redone, with an in-person Qualified Interpreter.
11/2016 Court Report, App-143

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 145 of 326 - Page ID#: 1726
5. Off-site medical providers
The Agreement distinguishes between on-site and off-site medical care. For off-site care, prison staff have the obligation to facilitate, but not provide, interpretive services. In particular, prison staff must inform off-site medical providers that “a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service will be seeking medical care from those off-site medical providers at a particular date and time,” or, in an emergency, that such a prisoner “is being transported to the off-site medical provider.”
I am not aware of any occasion since the Settlement Agreement’s effective date when an inmate who communicates via sign language has received off-site medical care. But considering that KSR medical staff have not themselves provided effective communication during care for Deaf inmates who use sign language to communicate, it seems unlikely that they are prepared and ready to inform off-site providers of the need to provide effective communication, and what is required.
Recommendation 18: When a Deaf inmate is seeking/receiving off-site medical care, KSR staff should, as early as practicable, inform the relevant medical provider(s) that a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service will be seeking medical care from those off-site medical providers at a particular date and time; in the case of an emergency, KSR staff should provide such information as soon as possible, and should include the Deaf inmate’s estimated time of arrival. There should be policies and procedures in place, implemented by appropriate training, to ensure that these notifications occur.
6. Volunteer-provided programming
The Agreement also distinguishes between KDOC and volunteer-provided activities. For the latter, KSR is not obligated to provide a qualified interpreter, but is instead required to facilitate, by “allow[ing] the volunteer organization or individual to bring a Qualified Interpreter, subject to the KDOC Adult Institution’s security requirements,” and “work[ing] with the volunteer organization or individual in an effort to have a Qualified Interpreter at the volunteerprovided activities.” (V.A.3)
And similarly: “The KDOC shall encourage outside volunteers providing religious services to provide Effective Communication for Deaf Inmates as long as the volunteer meets the same security requirements that are imposed on all other outside volunteers.” (VI.G.1)
The only volunteer-provided programming at KSR is religious programming, which is plentiful. Chaplains Art Turner and David Dillard told me that KSR religious programs are offered by 300 volunteers from several dozen organizations; they provide 130 services per month, in which about 25-30% of KSR’s inmates participate. None of them offers any interpretive services, although one of the chaplains did try several months ago to generally solicit them to do so, without success. (The chaplains thought if they knew a particular Deaf inmate who needed interpretation to understand services, they might be more successful in filling that more definite need.)
11/2016 Court Report, App-144

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 146 of 326 - Page ID#: 1727
The Agreement states that “[t]o the extent that the KDOC provides any religious services, now or in the future, the KDOC shall provide a Qualified Interpreter.” (Agreement VI.G.3; V.A.3 is materially the same) The chaplains explained to me that they mostly coordinate volunteer programming, but that they do provide one service themselves: telling inmates when there is a death in the family and then facilitating the inmates’ communication with their family members. The chaplains were unaware of the existence of interpretive services at KSR, whether in-person or VRI. It certainly seems that sign language interpretation would be the only effective way to communicate this kind of message to a Deaf inmate who uses sign language. This seems to me covered by VI.G.3, and other aspects of the Agreement. It would not make sense to require a request by the affected inmate, given that this is a one-time notice.
Recommendation 19: The process/forms for inmates to request interpretive services and other auxiliary aids and services should clearly encompass religious and any other volunteer-provided programming. See Part IV.D, below.
Recommendation 20: Significant communications by the chaplains are covered by the requirement of effective communication. Therefore the chaplains, like other KSR staff, should be trained in the requirements of this Agreement, and should ensure that if they have occasion to minister to a Deaf inmate—or simply inform him that a family member has died—they do so effectively, including using interpreter services if the inmate communicates using sign language.
7. Video Relay Interpretation (VRI): Procedures and Setup
Even when VRI is theoretically appropriate, it poses technical requirements that can be challenging—and especially so in a prison environment. In particular, VRI requires Internet access with sufficient band width, as well as a power outlet or a well-charged battery. During my visit, we made three different attempts to access VRI, only one of which was successful. We tried to use VRI in the KSR education area. To make this attempt, staff had to unplug one of their own computers and use that internet cable for the VRI laptop. Even then, the internet was apparently out for that moment, or some other technical difficulty interfered. The second attempt failed, as well, when we could not figure out how to get the program to behave properly. And of course, VRI can succeed only if the machine is timely obtained and has access to battery or outlet power.
KSR staff have not yet mastered the process of obtaining and using the VRI laptops. The laptop in the education area had not yet been used. The members of the medical staff who even knew about the VRI described it as available only to custody staff; they didn’t know it was available to them, much less the process required or how to use it effectively. And numerous records demonstrated that staff sometimes fail to request and obtain the VRI laptop in a timely manner, and are sometimes unable to operate it effectively. (What I understand to be frequent internet outages are also highly likely to disrupt VRI availability. Happily, Warden Smith informed me that an ongoing upgrade should soon improve internet availability at KSR.) The kinds of difficulties I am describing are very common in VRI usage, wherever it is attempted. Careful procedural planning and training are crucial for this approach to interpretation to succeed.
11/2016 Court Report, App-145

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 147 of 326 - Page ID#: 1728
In addition, even when VRI services have been used at KSR, the setup has not always been ideal. Correctional Unit Administrator John Grievious explained to me, for example, how the VRI was used during one “Court Call”—that is, disciplinary hearing, for Inmate C.
Figure 1: Use of the VRI (problematic)

Staff member 1 (Desk)

VRI laptop
Inmate Staff member 2

Staff member 1 spoke; and occasionally needed to have his words repeated by Staff member 2, who was nearer to the VRI laptop. The inmate was handcuffed, and therefore unable to sign, though he could see the interpretation of what the staff members said.
But for VRI to be effective, it is important that the person speaking be the one near (and in view of) the laptop. So if staff member 1 was going to be the most active speaker, he and staff member 2 should have switched locations. And if more than one staff member is going to play a major speaking role, in-person interpretation is called for.
Figure 2: Use of the VRI (recommended)
VRI laptop
Inmate Speaking staff member

Recommendation 21: The process for obtaining and using the VRI laptop should be communicated to each staff member who might have occasion to need it, and also to each inmate who communicates using sign language. Each such staff member should actually do a practice run using the machine—to figure out how/where internet access and power will be obtained, and how to use the program. The laptops themselves should be checked each time they are returned to their resting area, to ensure that they have sufficient battery power. Training should ensure that staff understand that the person communicating with the Deaf inmate should sit within easy reach of the laptop’s microphone, and that the

11/2016 Court Report, App-146

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 148 of 326 - Page ID#: 1729
inmate must not have his hands handcuffed. (It would be useful to include a diagram or instructions on a piece of paper taped to the laptop’s cover.)
Under KSR’s current VRI process, inmates must provide 48 hours notice for weekday usage; usage on the weekend is difficult even with that amount of notice. (At least, this is what I understand from ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt. The relevant memos do not list a timeframe for VRI scheduling.) This amount of notice is certainly useful, when possible—but it can be very impracticable, given that VRI is required to be available for situations that might happen faster— e.g., medical visits, medical emergencies, discussions of discipline, etc.
Recommendation 22: There should be some flexibility in the timing of VRI requests and usage; where a need arises that does not allow for 48 hours notice, VRI should nonetheless be made available if possible. KSR should work out a process for VRI availability after hours and on weekends, as well as in emergencies.
C. Videos
KSR uses video communication in several different situations: at orientation; for various rehabilitative programming sessions, both in the educational area and elsewhere; to provide inmates with information; and for entertainment. In each of these situations, some Deaf inmates will benefit from text captions—on-screen text descriptions that display a video product’s dialogue, identify speakers, and describe other relevant sounds otherwise inaccessible to people who are deaf or hard of hearing.3
In addition to its more general requirements governing effective communication, the Agreement includes five provisions relating to captions:
x “The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closedcaptioned education materials where available.” (VI.E.1)
x “The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closedcaptioned vocational/work materials where available.” (VI.E.2)
x “KDOC Rehabilitative, Counseling, Therapeutic, Substance Abuse, and Evidence-Based Programs. . . The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closed-captioned materials where available.” (VI.E.3)
x “The KDOC will ensure that all audio-visual media purchased for Inmate use in KDOC Adult Institutions housing Deaf Inmates includes open- or closed-captioning. Televisions purchased by the KDOC for Inmate use shall support open- or closed-captioning. Captioning will be turned on and remain on at any Deaf Inmate’s request.” (X.1)
x “The KDOC will permit Deaf Inmates to purchase TVs, which reliably support open- or closed-captioning, with their own funds. In the event that the closed-captioning feature contained on TVs purchased through approved commercial channels malfunctions, KDOC personnel will work with the Deaf Inmate to the same extent that the KDOC works with other Inmates regarding malfunctioning personal property to address and resolve the problem within a reasonable time.” (X.2)
3 Open captions always are in view and cannot be turned off, whereas closed captions can be turned on and off by the viewer.
11/2016 Court Report, App-147

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 149 of 326 - Page ID#: 1730
KSR has taken steps towards compliance, but is not yet consistently providing captioning. ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt informed me that the videos used at KSR’s school are generally captioned; I did not confirm this for any particular videos. The availability of captioning should be checked for each video used, and replacements obtained if necessary and available. Two orientation movies are shown to inmates—one about KSR and its policies and procedures, and one about the Prison Rape Elimination Act. According to Casey Dowden, the intake unit’s Classification and Treatment Officer, neither is currently captioned. In addition, an inmate who works on “Ed TV,” preparing videos for use at the prison, explained to me that they had just the week before met with someone from outside the prison (a contractor, perhaps) who had begun to explain how they could caption the videos used at KSR. When inmates are given access to video for entertainment—TV or movies—captioning should likewise be easily and routinely available, so that an inmate who needs it does not face an accessibility hurdle. It appears that KSR’s televisions are capable of displaying closed captioning—and several of the inmates I interviewed confirmed that captioning has been available to them when they request it. However, the visit surfaced some technical difficulties in turning captioning on. For some of the TVs, turning on captioning apparently requires use of the remote—and remotes were not readily available during my visit. In addition, some remotes that could be located needed new batteries.
I did not observe or hear about any issues with respect to captioning on inmate-owned televisions.
Recommendation 23: Check each existing video used at KSR to determine whether it has captioning and obtain replacements with captioning if available. Provide captions for all orientation videos, for newly acquired entertainment and educational videos, and other videos when captioning is available. For television captioning to be a real option, training for staff about how to turn it on and periodic testing are required. This should be done on a schedule, perhaps quarterly or twice a year, and it should be logged.
Sometimes, the reason that the prison uses video is because it is the most accessible and effective method of communicating vital information to inmates, including those whose literacy level is low. Of course, for inmates whose hearing impairment means they can’t hear even with a hearing aid or amplifier—or who have not yet received a hearing aid or amplifier—captioning will accomplish effective communication only if they are highly literate. For the two informative videos shown to inmates during intake, this is a particular problem. Two solutions seem possible: sign-language interpretation could be recorded for the videos and inset into it. This would require technological investigation and some investment, but would have the advantage of being reusable.4 Alternatively, when an inmate arriving at the prison communicates via sign language and is insufficiently literate to follow captions, an in-person Qualified Interpreter could be used to provide interpretation during the videos. (VRI would not be effective for a movie.) The interpreter might also be useful for other orienting conversations that take place at about the same time—for example, initial classification.
Recommendation 24: For Deaf inmates who cannot hear crucial informative videos, and whose literacy level is insufficient to allow them to readily read captions, an alternative
4 For some background information, see The World Wide Web Consortium, Understanding WCAG 2.0: A guide to understanding and implementing WCAG 2.0, “Sign Language (Prerecorded): Understanding SC 1.2.6,” available at https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/NOTE-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20160317/media-equiv-sign.html.
11/2016 Court Report, App-148

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 150 of 326 - Page ID#: 1731
method of effective communication is necessary. For those who communicate using sign language, the prison should provide either a sign language inset, or an in-person Qualified Interpreter.
D. Speech-to-text
Several inmates who wear hearing aids told me that they have found educational programming inaccessible to them; they too-often need the teacher to repeat him or herself or end up relying on a fellow inmate to repeat what the teacher said. This section and the next describe methods that can help achieve effective communication in educational settings, and perhaps others, such as religious programming.
For Deaf inmates who read well, the accessibility of educational programming could be improved by use of speech-to-text devices. Donna McClamroch, KSR’s head school administrator, informed me that she was exploring the implementation of a software package that could convert speech to text and project it onto a classroom’s smartboard. This software might be very helpful for Deaf inmates, once tested and working in a realistic situation. (It might be able to be used for religious presentations, as well.)
Recommendation 25: Continue to investigate the possibility of speech-to-text software for use in classroom and other appropriate settings. I will ask for a report on this issue six months.
E. Assistive listening systems
For situations in which a teacher or leader can use a microphone, inmates who are hard of hearing can benefit from amplification by way of an assistive listening system—a system in which sound is captured close to its source via a microphone (avoiding ambient noise) and transmitted directly to the ears or hearing aids of people with assistive listening devices.5 Ms. McClamroch told me that some kind of amplification system is under examination for educational programming, and Chaplains Art Turner and David Dillard emphasized that religious services are amplified—in fact, they are so loud, the Chaplains explained, that the noise sometimes interferes with nearby activity. The current amplification for religious services is general, however, and an assistive listening system is not used.
Recommendation 26: Investigate assistive listening systems for use in classroom and other appropriate settings. I will ask for a report on this issue in six months.
5 For more information on assistive listening devices and systems, see Hearing Loss Association of America, Get in the Hearing Loop, available at http://www.hearingloss.org/sites/default/files/docs/HLAA_ALDS_Brochure_0.pdf; David G. Myers, We’ve Looped in West Michigan. Could We Loop America?, HEARING LOSS MAGAZINE, September/October 2008, at 18, available at http://www.hearingloss.org/sites/default/files/docs/MeyerSepOct08 AudioLoopHLM.pdf. For a technical guide to choices available for educational settings in particular (though geared to children rather than adults), see American Academy of Audiology, Practice Guidelines: Remote Microphone Hearing Assistance Technologies for Children and Youth from Birth to 21 Years, updated April 2011, available at http://audiology-web.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/HAT_Guidelines_Supplement_A.pdf_53996ef7758497. 54419000.pdf; American Academy of Audiology, Practice Guidelines: Remote Microphone Hearing Assistance Technologies for Children and Youth from Birth to 21 Years, Supplement B: Classroom Audio Distribution Systems—Selection and Verification, July 2011, available at http://audiology-web.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/ 20110926_HAT_GuidelinesSupp_B.pdf_53996ef98259f2.45364934.pdf.
11/2016 Court Report, App-149

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 151 of 326 - Page ID#: 1732
While educational staff are exploring possibilities for various accommodations that would allow more effective communication to Deaf inmates enrolled in classes, KSR should ensure that those classes are accessible now, and that Deaf (including hard-of-hearing) inmates know that they can request classroom accommodations, such as sitting in the front row, getting materials in advance, interpretive services, etc. The school does not seem to have a process in place for either allowing requests for such accommodations or assessing the need for them. Several inmates told me about informal solutions. For example, one said that the person who sits next to him repeats what the teacher said. Despite this informal assistance, the inmates agreed that their hearing impairments make school a challenge for them.
Recommendation 27: KSR should inform Deaf inmates of the various ways in which educational programming can be made more accessible to them; the school should put in place a process to facilitate requests for such accommodations and assess the need for them.
F. Written communication
In many situations, writing can be a helpful communication method. The inmate handbook, for example, can explain to Deaf as well as non-Deaf inmates what prison rules and policies require. And writing a sentence on a piece of paper may enable quick communication on an uncomplicated topic. But while writing back and forth may work for simple communication, it takes too long and is too cumbersome for anything complex. In addition, it is important to recall that many Deaf inmates have a low literacy level. Before written communication can be relied upon to ensure effective communication with a Deaf inmate, it’s crucial to assess that inmate’s literacy. This is discussed in Part IV.B, below.
Recommendation 28: Written communication should be relied upon only for simple communication with literate inmates. For complex communications or less literate inmates, alternative methods are required. Staff should make best efforts to communicate with each deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate using that inmate’s preferred communication method (which is assessed and recorded by Exhibit D-5).
G. Non-auditory alerts
KSR frequently communicates with inmates using auditory alerts—fire alarms and PA announcements—which are routinely used for count (three times per day), chow (three times per day), pill call (two times per day), and more individual announcements (e.g., “Inmate Smith, please report to the Dorm 11 office”). The law’s requirement of non-discrimination means that this communication, like others, must be made effective for Deaf inmates. The Agreement includes several relevant provisions:
x “Deaf Inmates incarcerated at KDOC facilities should not miss announcements, alarms, or any other information audibly conveyed from KDOC staff to the general Inmate population solely because of their disability.” (VIII.A)
x “The KDOC shall provide an effective non-auditory alert system that will notify Deaf Inmates of both prison-wide events (including but not limited to announcements, visitations, and roll-calls) and events specific to Deaf Inmates. The non-auditory alert
11/2016 Court Report, App-150

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 152 of 326 - Page ID#: 1733
system must be capable of effectively alerting Deaf Inmates of such events in real time.” (VIII.B.1) x “The KDOC will provide all medically necessary hearing aids and assisting devices, including but not limited to, bed shakers.” (VIII.B.2) x “The KDOC has the discretion as to which type of non-auditory alerts it shall employ and to change that system as it deems necessary. Nonetheless, the KDOC will promptly advise the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH of all non-auditory alert systems that the KDOC is considering, and will consult with the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH in determining whether such devices are acceptable for the stated purpose.” (VIII.B.3) x “The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with an effective non-auditory alert system that will advise them of an emergency evacuation or other emergency. Such non-auditory alert systems must be sufficient to effectively notify Deaf Inmates of emergencies in realtime and can include flashing strobe lights and bed shakers. The KDOC has the discretion as to which type of non-auditory alerts it shall employ and to change that system as it deems necessary. Nonetheless, the KDOC will promptly advise the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH of the non-auditory alert systems that the KDOC is considering, and will consult with the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH in determining whether such systems are acceptable for the stated purpose.” (VIII.C.1)
KSR has taken significant steps along the necessary path. Some Deaf inmates are housed in strobe-light cells, which translate the fire alarm from auditory to visual. There are 18 such cells in the prison, spread through the housing areas. In addition, at the time of my visit, one cell had just been equipped with a “bed shaker”—a non-auditory vibrating device that sits under a pillow, and flashing light on a bed stand. The device is linked to the unit’s fire alarm, so whenever that alarm is triggered, so too are both the shaker and flasher. In addition, the device can be used as an alarm clock, and can be linked to a switch that’s been installed in the dorm’s control center. This enables staff in that area to flash the lights/shaker when there is an announcement for count or chow. As required, ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt did consult with me prior to installing this system, and received my feedback.
Recommendation 29: KSR should expand the availability of non-auditory alert systems, providing them to inmates who cannot hear the fire alarm and/or the alert for count. To maximize the communication effectiveness of each non-auditory alert, it should be programmed to signal, in different ways, the several predictable alerts: fire/emergency; count, chow, “report to office.” Staff must also be trained to use the office switch. Whether this is occurring will need monitoring; perhaps by using a daily log or checking in periodically with affected inmates. The monitoring system should be made formal. I will ask for a description of it, and perhaps relevant records, in the next quarterly reporting period.
One non-auditory system that has not been tried at KSR is a “visual paging system.” These systems create digital signage networks; messages are displayed on existing TV screens. I do not know enough about KSR’s existing infrastructure to assess how expensive or even possible it would be to implement this kind of system, but if such a system were practicable, it would provide some significant benefits, including allowing announcements to run across the TV screen, making them accessible to Deaf inmates. (On the other hand, it seems that Deaf inmates
11/2016 Court Report, App-151

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 153 of 326 - Page ID#: 1734
at KSR don’t often watch the common-space televisions in the housing units, so it’s possible the benefits I’m envisioning would not actually accrue.)
Recommendation 30: Investigate the costs and benefits of a TV-based visual paging system. I will ask for a report on this issue in six months.
Some inmates will not have non-auditory alerts, and even inmates who do have them will not always be in their cells when alerts are triggered. Given the difficulties with providing effective communication of alerts, it is unsurprising that occasionally Deaf inmates will miss count, chow, pill call, etc. I heard from more than one inmate that he occasionally or usually has trouble knowing when count or pill call is signaled. It is important that staff accommodate such situations. Disciplining an inmate for a missed count that he didn’t hear called, or refusing to provide an inmate with necessary medicine when he couldn’t hear pill call, would violate the ADA.
Recommendation 31: Train staff to be alert to the possibility that a Deaf inmate may miss the alert for count, chow, or pill call—and to ensure nondiscrimination in that event.
H. Miscellaneous devices
The Agreement provides:
“Where devices such as vibrating clocks and in-line amplifiers are not deemed medically necessary, the KDOC agrees to consider on a case by case basis whether it will allow a particular Deaf Inmate the opportunity to purchase these devices at his or her own expense. The KDOC’s decision in this regard will consider, among other issues, whether these devices pose a security risk. The KDOC will have the discretion to make the determination whether any of these devices, and the type of device, is permissible. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination.” (XII)
KSR has informed me that no such decision has been made since June 2015.
In addition, the Agreement states: “Deaf Inmates will be allowed to purchase alerting devices, vibrating clocks, telephone amplifications, headset amplifiers, and televisions that meet the particular needs of their disability from an approved vendor so long as the items do not pose a security risk. The KDOC retains the discretion to limit purchases to devices that are available through the Commissary.” (XII) KSR’s commissary includes several televisions that allow closed captioning; in addition, ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt told me that if a Deaf inmate sought to buy some device not on the commissary list, he would facilitate that.
Finally, the Agreement states:
“Deaf Inmates may submit a request in writing to the ADA Coordinator responsible for the KDOC Adult Institution in which they are housed for devices not available from the Commissary. The KDOC will not deny any Deaf Inmate the right to purchase these devices except where they present an articulable security risk, which shall be
11/2016 Court Report, App-152

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 154 of 326 - Page ID#: 1735
documented. The ADA Coordinator will maintain written records of all Deaf Inmate requests for these devices and the disposition of the request.” (XII)
KSR—like all the other KDOC institutions—has informed me that no such request has been made since June 28, 2015.
Recommendation 32: KSR’s commissary list should include various alerting devices that inmates might wish to purchase: caption-capable TVs, vibrating alarm clocks, and the like. Inmates should be informed that if they seek to purchase adaptive equipment that is not available via the commissary, they should request assistance from the ADA Coordinator; the ADA Coordinator should then facilitate the inmate’s purchase unless the requested device presents an articulable and documented security risk.
I. Other communications aids
Prompted by the medical needs of tracheotomy patients (who cannot speak), KSR medical staff have obtained what are called “EZ Boards” for them. These are two-sided heavy cardboard dry-erase boards. They are available in several versions: some use pictures and others words, and they cover different situations. (The boards available during my visit had been ordered by mistake: they were designed for Spanish-language speakers.) These boards could provide a useful method for medical staff to communicate with Deaf inmates in a pinch.
Recommendation 33: Investigate all the available topics for medical EZ Boards—both word and picture versions—and buy those that are useful, making them available for use by Deaf inmates.
J. Methods of communicating with Deaf inmates
No technologies or devices can entirely meet the communications needs of all hard-ofhearing inmates. The Agreement provides that KSR’s staff should be trained on “best practices for communicating with Deaf individuals.” (XIII.B) A number of inmates described to me the difficulties they have communicating with staff who are reluctant to repeat their communications, or unpracticed at such best practices. Training (and implementation) should include:
x Getting the Deaf inmate’s attention first, prior to beginning to speak. x Asking how to best facilitate communication. x Facing the Deaf inmate directly. x Ensuring that light is on the staff member’s face (not behind it) x Avoiding noisy backgrounds. x Avoiding shouting. x Speaking clearly, at a moderate pace. x Ensuring that the speaker’s mouth is uncovered, and that the speaker is not chewing gum
or food. x Rephrasing if the inmate does not seem to understand (and checking on understanding) x Using facial expressions and gestures.
11/2016 Court Report, App-153

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 155 of 326 - Page ID#: 1736
These tips are taken from the Hearing Loss Association of America’s “Communication Tips for Hearing People in Communicating with Those Who Have a Hearing Loss,” which is available as an easy-to-distribute “tip card” at http://www.hearingloss.org/sites/default/files/TipCards.pdf. I’ve also included this information in Exhibit D-2, a recommended memo to staff on “Communications assistance for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates”
Recommendation 34: Staff should be trained on, and should use, best practices for communicating with hard-of-hearing inmates.
In order is to provide staff with the knowledge that particular inmates are Deaf or hardof-hearing, and thereby facilitate these sorts of strategies, that the Agreement requires various notices that inmates are Deaf. There are three such notices required (III.D.3, III.D.4):
x At the entrance to the institution. (I did not check whether this notice was present.) x Outside each housing unit where Deaf inmates are housed. (I did not check whether this
notice was present.) x On each affected inmate’s ID card. (Each inmate I checked had such a notice.)
KSR has taken the valuable additional step—which seems to me functionally necessary, though not explicitly required in the Agreement—of posting a similar notice outside each Deaf inmate’s cell.
Recommendation 35: KSR should continue to provide Deaf inmates with ID cards that identify them as Deaf, and to post similar identification outside their cells. The notices required by the Agreement outside each housing unit and at the entrance to the institution should also be posted.
K. Teaching sign-language
Among the classes occasionally offered by KSR’s staff educators is one in sign language. There are at least a few inmates whose degree of hearing impairment is very severe, but who do not sign. For example, I found that I was almost entirely unable to communicate with Inmate F. Such inmates might find it very helpful to learn sign language.
Recommendation 36: KSR should continue to offer classes in sign language, and should give Deaf inmates who would like to learn to sign both affirmative notice and preference for these classes.
L. Telecommunications equipment and rules
As the Settlement requires, KSR has made two types of telecommunications devices available for deaf inmates: TTYs (TeleTYpewriters) and a videophone. The facility has two TTYs; one is kept in the administration control center, the other in the Dorm 11 security office. (I did not see them during my tour.) The videophone is referred to by inmates and staff alike as “Purple,” after the telecom company that provided it. See http://www.purple.us/. It is installed in the Dorm 11 security office. Access is allowed only for inmates who use sign language to communicate.
11/2016 Court Report, App-154

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 156 of 326 - Page ID#: 1737
The videophone allows two types of phone calls: inmates can communicate visually (via sign language) with the person on the other side, who also has a videophone. Or, by linking the videophone to a Video Relay Service (VRS), the inmate can sign to a remote interpreter, who then speaks to a person at the other end on a regular phone. (For information about VRS, see https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/video-relay-services). While the videophone itself is in the Dorm 11 control center, KSR uses the same laptop for VRI and VRS; that computer is kept in the administration control center.
1. Videophone and VRS
According to KSR’s rules, the videophone and VRS access are supposed to be available during the same time periods as conventional phones. But because the videophone is in staff space, an inmate must request access in order to use it. For an inmate housed in Unit B’s Dorm 11, or one of the other Dorms in Unit B, it should be that getting access to the phone is pretty easy; staff must simply allow the inmate in. It seems that this hasn’t worked very smoothly in practice, however. Inmate B is in fact housed in Dorm 11—but in August 2015, he filed a grievance explaining, “No night time I can’t be able to reach my loved ones family on weekend, and weekday, holidays not equal as non deaf inmates using blue telephones.” The answer he received was that the VRS was available “daytime, night and weekends,” and that “hearing impaired inmates are to get with Unit B staff to schedule use of the ‘VRS.’” The memos issued the next day that set out the policy on access (Exhibits C-1, C-2) confirmed that use of the videophone “[m]ust be scheduled.” Several weeks later the grievance committee found that implementation was a challenge: “The committee finds that staff need to be made aware of how VRS are to be allowed to use the system, off days, weekends & evening.”
As of my visit, there had been little further use of the videophone to allow me to see if implementation had improved, because Inmate B was barred from phone usage for 6 months; Inmate C was confined in disciplinary seg on max assault status, which meant the KSR deemed him ineligible for videophone usage; and Inmate D had not been offered use of the videophone, because the ADA Coordinator was not aware that he communicated via sign language. (When I interviewed Inmate D, he seemed not to know that a videophone was available.)
Even in theory, though, for inmates housed in a different Unit, videophone access is more constrained. Such inmates need permission (and a written pass) to get to and from the space where the phone is located. In addition, inmate movement after dark (or during a not-unusual dense fog) occurs only with staff escort. So while the phone is available after dark until 11:30 pm, there are substantial obstacles to its use by any inmate who is not housed in Unit B.
I have heard complaints from inmates at other KDOC institutions that the time they spend in transit on their way to the videophone is being counted against their allotted phone time. (Under the Agreement, that allowed time is twice the minutes allowed for a conventional phone call.) This issue has not arisen at KSR because no inmate who needs videophone access has received such access from anywhere except Dorm 11. But the issue could come up in the future.
There is another obstacle to access, as well. If the inmate using the videophone is speaking to someone who does not sign—that is, if he needs VRS, not just the videophone— KSR’s process is that he is supposed to request access to the VRI/VRS laptop well in advance,
11/2016 Court Report, App-155

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 157 of 326 - Page ID#: 1738
absent an emergency. I am not clear on how much notice is required: the forms provided to inmates do not seem to specify. But the amount of time required may be as much as 48 hours.
The Settlement Agreement provides:
“Videophones will be located in areas as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. Videophone will be available during the same days and hours as conventional telephones and will not require permission for use to the same extent that conventional telephones do not require permission for use.” (IX.D.3.a)
In explaining the requirements for where videophones are to be installed, the Agreement draws a sharp distinction between videophones (required to be in accessible areas) and TTYs (“the TTY/TDD device(s) . . . must be maintained in a secured location when not in use” IX.D.1). KSR is not in compliance with the videophone provisions, for several reasons. First, the videophone is in a staff-only area, and for that reason effectively requires permission for inmates to use it. Similarly, for inmates who are not housed in the relevant KSR unit, an escort is needed during certain hours. In addition, the access rules for the videophone are more limited than for a conventional phone: KSR policy instructs inmates that use of the videophone “[m]ust be scheduled”—which is not a requirement for the conventional phone. And use of the VRS requires staff to obtain the necessary laptop in advance, which takes time and planning.
Note: while KSR should not require in-advance scheduling of the videophone, it may occur that a Deaf inmate has to wait for access, because someone else is using the device. This is nondiscriminatory, and is not a breach of the Agreement.
Recommendation 37: Videophones should be located in areas as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. The videophone should be available during the same days and hours as conventional telephones and should not require permission for use, given that KSR does not require inmates to seek permission to use conventional telephones. It is regrettable that an escort is required to use the videophone at night and on weekends, but it seems unavoidable given that there is just one videophone (which is currently sufficient for the population of Deaf inmates at KSR).
Recommendation 38: Even if an escort is required, there should be no requirement that inmates seeking to use the videophone, including with VRS, schedule such use in advance. Non-Deaf inmates are not required to schedule their phone calls, and that should be true for Deaf inmates, as well. To allow use of a VRS without advance scheduling, KSR may need an additional laptop that is kept near the videophone.
Recommendation 39: Ensure all staff are trained on videophone rules, so that they know that videophone access is to be provided during the same hours as conventional phone access, without pre-scheduling, and that time in transit doesn’t count.
Finally, there are special obstacles to access for Deaf inmates in disciplinary or administrative segregation. Most such inmates are allowed to make one phone call per week. If a Deaf inmate were in this category, I understand that he could be escorted to the videophone, on request, once per week. This approach seems non-discriminatory. Inmates on “max assault status” receive one call per month. But for Deaf inmates on this status (such as Inmate C), the
11/2016 Court Report, App-156

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 158 of 326 - Page ID#: 1739
videophone is unavailable even on that limited basis, because “max assault status” comes with a requirement to wear handcuffs at all times out-of-cell—a requirement that makes signing impossible. See Part III.B.3. ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt told me that perhaps a TTY could be made available to Inmate C, but I’m not clear how, given that using a TTY also requires unfettered hands.
Recommendation 40: Deaf inmates in segregated housing must be allowed access to telecommunications services equal to that of non-Deaf inmates in the same disciplinary or administrative status. The best solution would be to work out a method for such inmates— including those on “max assault status”—to use the videophone, with VRS when needed. When safety allows the unshackling of Inmate C, and others in the same situation, they should have their hands unshackled and be allowed to use the videophone, as frequently as non-Deaf inmates are allowed phone calls. If there are individualized reasons that Inmate C, or others like him, cannot be unshackled consistent with security, he, and others in his situation, should be allowed access to the TTY. I will request KSR to report on what method for telecommunications access is developed for Deaf inmates in segregation, and why.
In the first month the videophone was available, Inmate B received two disciplinary write-ups for its misuse: one when a woman to whom he was speaking was deemed inappropriately dressed and seen by a staff member to expose her underwear to Inmate B. It seems that he was immediately placed on a phone restriction. While he was subject to that phone restriction, he received a second write-up for “three-way calling.” The incident in question occurred when Inmate E was using the videophone, and Inmate B signed to him through the office window; KSR officials deemed this a three-way call. For the two write-ups together, Inmate B received a 6-month ban on phone usage.
It is not my intent to second-guess these particular impositions of discipline, but I do note that it is important that Deaf inmates using the videophone not be subjected to stricter supervision or more exacting discipline than non-Deaf inmates using the conventional phone. The Agreement provides: “The KDOC may only provide for the monitoring of communications between Deaf Inmates and individuals outside of the KDOC to the same extent and with the same discretion applied to the monitoring of communications between non-Deaf Inmates and those outside of the KDOC.” (IX.B)
Applying this rule, the first disciplinary charge would be appropriate only if an inmate using the conventional phone would face discipline for having a similarly “sexy” conversation. ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt assured me that this would indeed be the case. And the second disciplinary charge would be appropriate only if an inmate on the conventional phone would be similarly disciplined for talking with someone who was simultaneously speaking on the phone. Again, I asked Mr. Hillebrandt if this would be considered misconduct, and his answer was yes.
Recommendation 41: Ensure that disciplinary oversight of videophone is no more intense than oversight of conventional phone calls. The disciplinary committee should explicitly consider and rule on this issue when it is deciding a disciplinary matter involving the videophone or TTY.
11/2016 Court Report, App-157

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 159 of 326 - Page ID#: 1740
2. Hard-of-hearing inmates
Hard-of-hearing inmates mostly don’t sign, so the videophone is not helpful to them. But several told me that they are unable to use a conventional phone, because their hearing is too impaired. And when my assistant has conducted telephone interviews with other hard-of-hearing inmates at KSR, communication has sometimes been very difficult and ineffective. Three solutions may help: (a) KSR could give hard-of-hearing inmates access to a TTY, and provide them the necessary training; (b) KSR could provide one or more captioned telephones, which simultaneously allow the user to listen to the speech and read it via real-time captioning (see, e.g., http://www.captel.com/captel); (c) KSR could provide handset amplification that is compatible with hearing aids but does not require them.
Recommendation 42: KSR should review auxiliary aids that would allow hard-of-hearing inmates effective access to telecommunications, and should implement improvements— perhaps involving TTY, captioned telephones, and/or handset amplification. Asking inmates what does and doesn’t work is a necessary part of this process. I will request a report on this review—both how it was conducted and the results—in six months.
IV. PROCESSES FOR ASSESSING AND REQUESTING AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
KSR has started but not routinized the process of assessment and assignment of services for Deaf inmates. This section develops what should be routine processes.
A. Intake/Orientation
For Deaf inmates, the first few days at the prison pose particular challenges because hearing and accommodations assessment comes after many important communications that occur in those first few days. Staff must be sensitive to the possibility that an inmate is Deaf or hard of hearing, and ensure effective communication from the beginning of his incarceration. Recommendations 23-24, above, are directed at predictable communication difficulties with respect to the orientation videos, but there are other situations in which effective communication is likewise necessary and which will require auxiliary aids/services, potentially including qualified interpretation. While partial hearing impairments cannot be easily ascertained prior to medical visits and assessments, a degree of impairment that substantially impedes communication should be able to be detected in the very first encounter prison staff have with an arriving inmate. This should trigger immediate steps to ensure effective communication.
Recommendation 43: Develop a process by which inmates whose hearing impairment substantially impedes communication are noted and assessed right away on arrival at the institution, immediate steps taken to ensure effective communication, including immediate interpretative services if necessary.
The difficulty just described should be ameliorated over time, as the initial intake, assessment, and classification currently done for male Inmates at Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC) and for female Inmates at the Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women
11/2016 Court Report, App-158

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 160 of 326 - Page ID#: 1741
(KCIW) comes into compliance with the Agreement, and inmates who received that initial assessment become a larger proportion of the population.
B. Literacy assessment
Very often, effective communication can be furthered by written materials—handbooks, captioning, etc. In addition, the best way to inform inmates of the variety of auxiliary aids and services may often be use of written forms or other materials. But for inmates who are illiterate, different approaches must be used—and, again, illiteracy is particularly likely for Deaf inmates. Thus in order to understand how best to provide effective communication, and to comply with the Agreement’s requirements about it, it is necessary to assess each Deaf inmate’s literacy. The level of literacy required for captioning varies with the vocabulary and scroll rate of the text. Television programs have a captioning rate of between 74 and 231 words per minute.6 The average silent reading rate for students with an 8th grade reading level is between 150 and 200 words per minute7; for deaf students, the average reading rate for someone who reads at the 7th to 9th grade level is 185 words per minute.8
Recommendation 44: Staff should assess each Deaf inmate’s literacy prior to conducting additional assessment of necessary auxiliary aids and services. Educational staff should be able to propose and implement one of several quick assessment tools. For example, the Slosson Oral Reading Test - Revised (SORT-R) might be suitable. If an inmate is not literate at at least the 8th grade level, reliance on written communication is unlikely to succeed in providing effective communication, and alternative methods should be used.
C. Individual assessment meetings
The Agreement (III.C) requires an “auxiliary aids and services assessment.” The best way to assess the need for aids/services necessary for effective communication and to avoid discrimination is an individual meeting with each Deaf inmate. (This approach is similar to the “interactive process” required by the ADA under Title I, which deals with employment.) The idea of the meeting is for KSR staff to understand the communications needs of the inmate. At the meeting, the ADA coordinator or deputy ADA coordinator can inform the inmate about available aids and the inmate can discuss his communication needs. The inmate’s request is entitled, both under the Agreement and the operative regulation, to “primary consideration.” (I.5: “In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, primary consideration shall be given to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2))”; 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2) includes essentially the same language.)
6 Margaret Jelinek Lewis, Television Literacy: Comprehension of Program Content Using Closed-Captions for the Deaf (unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, 1998), citing Carl Jensema, Ralph McCann & Scott Ramsey, Closed-Captioned Television Presentation Speed and Vocabulary, 141 AM. ANN. OF THE DEAF 284 (1996). 7 Ronald P. Carver, Silent Reading Rates in Grade Equivalents, 21 J. READING BEHAVIOR 155 (1989) (citing three studies). 8 Edgar H. Shroyer and Jack Birch, Captions and Reading Rates of Hearing-Impaired Students, 125 AM. ANNALS OF THE DEAF 916, 921 (1980).
11/2016 Court Report, App-159

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 161 of 326 - Page ID#: 1742
KSR has not yet done such a meeting for most of its Deaf inmates. The meeting must itself constitute effective communication. A complex written form, alone, is unlikely to do so— the items described are technical and the inmate may well not understand the available options. It seems likely that a meeting like this could have prevented the problem described above when Inmate D’s need for sign language interpretation was not understood by relevant prison staff.
Given that over eight months have passed since the Agreement’s effective date, these meetings should be done right away.
Recommendation 45: For each Deaf inmate, the ADA Coordinator should conduct an individual services assessment meeting, at which the inmate’s available methods of communication are expressly ascertained and recorded, and the inmate is informed about the available auxiliary aids and services. For an inmate who can hear (with or without an amplifier or hearing aid) well enough to understand the coordinator, information should be conveyed orally as well as in writing. If the inmate uses sign language, VRI would be the appropriate way to communicate for a meeting of this nature. The greatest challenge is presented if the inmate is not literate, does not hear well enough to understand spoken communication, and does not sign. In that case, visual demonstrations of the various auxiliary aids and services may be required. The assessment should be updated annually, ideally at the inmate’s annual classification meeting.
D. Form and options
KSR has done substantial work to develop a menu of auxiliary aids and services, and to provide staff and inmates written information about what is available. This includes:
x A memo to staff describing some of the available auxiliary aids/services and procedures for their use (Exhibit C-1)
x A similar memo for inmates describing some of the available auxiliary aids/services and how to request them (Exhibit C-2)
x KSR Request for a Qualified Interpreter (Exhibit C-3) x KSR Request form—Auxiliary Aids and Services (Exhibit C-4)
These forms are not adequate, for several reasons. First, the inmate memo, which is supposed to explain the available aids/services, is very technical and no doubt difficult to understand for many inmates. (The Agreement requires the materials to “us[e] language designed to be accessible to each Deaf Inmate.” III.F.1) The memos are also incomplete, as is the Auxiliary Aids/Services form. In addition, the qualified interpreter form does not adequately provide inmates a chance to request an in-person interpreter. And none of the forms offer inmates a chance to explain why their requested aid/service is necessary for effective communication.
Recommendation 46: The various forms related to requesting and using Auxiliary Aids and Services form should be changed in a number of ways:
x To list available aids and services more comprehensively
11/2016 Court Report, App-160

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 162 of 326 - Page ID#: 1743
x To more clearly explain what the various services and aids are, in what circumstances they are available, and how to request them.
x To explain how to use the various devices. x To ask inmates, expressly, about their preferred modes of communication or needed
services, and why those are useful. x To explain which items are free of charge, and which are available only at the
inmate’s expense.
Finally, inmates who communicate by signing may not realize that they need to request an interpreter separately at each occasion they need one. Not unreasonably, they may think that when they have received an interpreter for a particular type of encounter (say, a medical appointment, or a classification meeting), the prison authorities know that they continue to need interpretive services. And similarly, if they have been denied an interpreter, they may—again not unreasonably—conclude that there’s little point in renewing the request.
Recommendation 47: I recommend replacement of the existing forms with several different ones, explaining the various options available, allowing requests for various types of communications assistance, and obtaining feedback from inmates (see Recommendation 14, above). These recommended forms are attached as Exhibit D, which also includes a recommended staff memo about the various available devices and accommodations, and an assessment form. These forms should be explained/filled out during the individual assessment meetings discussed in Part IV.C, above. Note: I have not provided the recommended memos to staff and inmates explaining precisely how to use the various devices, but that too should be developed, and should cover all the devices deployed.
E. Additional methods for inmates to seek auxiliary aids and services
In addition to forms like those just discussed, when Deaf inmates request medical, mental health, dental, or vision care, they may need auxiliary aids or services. The Agreement requires that they have a way to indicate that need on the form used for a request: “The KDOC will provide space on any forms used to request medical appointments for Deaf Inmates to request Auxiliary Aids and Services.” (VI.C.3) The “Healthcare Request” form currently used for medical requests is attached as Exhibit E-1; it does not comply with this requirement.
Recommendation 48: The Healthcare Request form should include boxes to check if auxiliary aids or services, including remote or in-person interpretation, are needed. My recommended additions to this form are attached as Exhibit E-2.
More generally, the opportunity to request auxiliary aids/services, including qualified interpretation, could usefully be incorporated into the other KSR/KDOC forms related to programs, services, and activities provided at the prison. That way, the request will be made more timely and provision of the services will be more routine.
Recommendation 49: All the forms by which inmates apply for jobs, educational programming, etc., should have language similar to that in the recommended Healthcare Request form. So should classification and disciplinary forms that notify inmates of
11/2016 Court Report, App-161

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 163 of 326 - Page ID#: 1744
impending hearings or meetings. I have not provided recommended versions of these forms, but will in a future reporting period ask to see them all.
Sometimes when inmates make a request—for a job assignment, course enrollment, etc. —KSR does not use a form at all, but rather assigns staff to receive and assess the request. In this situation, it’s important that communication be effective. Staff evaluating requests for a job assignment or course enrollment must be alert to the fact that Deaf inmates may need various accommodations, and/or auxiliary aids/services to ensure effective communication, both during the discussion and during the assignment/program. The availability of those accommodations should be communicated to inmates who might need them. This issue seems particularly related to educational programming: Several inmates told me that they had not enrolled in classes because in past education efforts, they have not been able to understand the teacher. The kinds of accommodations in question could be as simple as assigning an inmate to a seat close to the front of a classroom or giving him copies of projected materials. Or they might include auxiliary aids/services or a qualified interpreter.
Recommendation 50: When Deaf inmates and staff discuss enrollment or application for a particular activity or program, communication should be effective—which means an interpreter may be required for the discussion—and should cover potential accommodations, auxiliary aids/services that could provide equal access to the activity/program.
V. TRAINING
The Agreement requires training for the ADA Coordinator and for all staff who interact with inmates.
A. ADA Coordinator Training
The Agreement requires: “The ADA Coordinator shall be trained on the requirements of federal and state law regarding the contents of this Agreement and the KDOC’s obligations to provide full and equal access to, and enjoyment of, its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations to Deaf Inmates.” (II.B.1)
KDOC has not yet developed training on the Settlement Agreement, so as I understand the situation, KSR ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt has become familiar with the Agreement by reading it many times. Mr. Hillebrandt also himself located high-quality ADA Title II training provided online by the ADA National Network, at http://www.adatitle2.org. As that site explains (http://www.adatitle2.org/objectives.php#content):
“This free self-paced, online tutorial is designed to provide the basic principles and core concepts of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). This tutorial is a valuable educational tool to orient ADA coordinators to their roles and how to address key ADA-related requirements applicable to state and local government under Title II of the ADA.”
This on-line class covers the following objectives:
11/2016 Court Report, App-162

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 164 of 326 - Page ID#: 1745
x Discuss the purpose of the ADA using a civil rights framework. x Summarize what is required under Title II of the ADA. x Explain each nondiscrimination requirement for Title II of the ADA. x Identify the defenses or limitations of each nondiscrimination requirement for Title II of
the ADA. x Locate and use various resources for information on the ADA.
And it includes:
x Introduction and Overview of the ADA (6 pages) x Overview of Title II of the ADA (8 pages) x Steps to Achieve Compliance for Title II (7 pages) x General Nondiscrimination Requirements of Title II (9 pages) x Equally Effective Communication under Title II (10 pages) x Serving & Working with Individuals with Disabilities (4 pages) x Interacting with Individuals who have Disabilities (5 pages) x Employment - Self Evaluation of Employment Practices (7 pages) x Nondiscrimination in Employment (8 pages)
This was a very good choice of training source. Indeed, some of the training materials can be adapted for use in the general staff training.
Recommendation 51: KDOC should develop training on the Settlement Agreement and make it available to ADA Coordinators. For training on the ADA, the ADA National Network training is appropriate. This training is already long overdue; it should be developed and delivered to each ADA Coordinator no later than July 1, 2016.
B. Staff Training
The Agreement (XIII.B) requires training of all KDOC employees who have contact with inmates on:
x best practices for communicating with Deaf individuals; x the unique needs and problems encountered by Deaf and late-Deafened individuals; x identification of communication needs of persons who are Deaf; x the psychological implications of Deafness and its relationship to interaction with hearing
corrections personnel; x the proper use and role of Qualified Interpreters; x directions about using TTYs, TDDs, Videophones and any other telecommunication
equipment, and other Auxiliary Aids and Services, currently available at the facility that facilitate communication with Deaf people; x disciplinary matters, described in Section VII, and grievance proceedings, described in Section XIV; x the KDOC’s anti-discrimination policy; x all equipment, services, and accommodations available to Deaf Inmates (see also IX.E.2); x hand restraint policies in the context of Deaf Inmates; and
11/2016 Court Report, App-163

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 165 of 326 - Page ID#: 1746
x the requirements of this Agreement.
In addition, the Agreement sets out additional details on the restraint training (XI.A.2: “KDOC training will include both the two-point system as well as the agreement that hand restraints will be removed from a Deaf Inmate when the Deaf Inmate is in a secure environment, when security is no longer a threat, or there are other security devices in place to allow the Deaf Inmate to Effectively Communicate”) and ID cards (III.D.2: “All KDOC staff having regular contact with any Deaf Inmate will be trained on the meaning of the distinct ID cards.”)
This training has not yet been developed. ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt has developed training on a couple of these topics (best practices for communicating; how to obtain telecommunication and VRI equipment); but not on the others.
Recommendation 52: Training should be developed on all topics listed in the Settlement Agreement as requiring training. Once drafted, materials should be shared with me and with the Kentucky Commission on the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, for our input. This training is already long overdue; it should be provided to me for my input no later than July 1, finalized within 30 days after my comments are returned, and delivered to staff as soon as possible thereafter.
VI. REPORTING
As described in my February 2016 semi-annual report, the Agreement specifies five situations in which the Department is supposed to notify me promptly. They are:
x When a Deaf Inmate is barred from a program or activity because the Department has determined that participation would present a “Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates.” (II.A)
x When a Deaf Inmate is barred from a work assignment because that assignment would “present a Direct Threat of injury or death to a Deaf Inmate or others” (VI.F)
x When the Department is considering a non-auditory alert system that will notify Deaf Inmates, in real time, of prison-wide events and emergencies, and events specific to that inmate (VIII.B.1; VIII.B.3; VIII.C)
x When the Department has determined that it is appropriate to adjust the number of minutes afforded Deaf Inmates to make TTY and videophone calls. (IX.C)
x When the Department has made a determination to allow or disallow a Deaf Inmate to use devices such as vibrating clocks or in-line amplifiers, if those devices are not deemed medically necessary. (XII)
KSR has provided me with appropriate notice of the third item—a non-auditory alert system. ADA Coordinator Hillebrandt informed me that none of the other events has taken place.
As far as the more routine quarterly reporting, KSR has timely provided all reports and information I have requested.
11/2016 Court Report, App-164

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 166 of 326 - Page ID#: 1747
Recommendation 53: Ensure that all relevant staff know about the Agreement’s reporting obligations, so that I am appropriately notified when any of the reporting-triggering events takes place.
11/2016 Court Report, App-165

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 167 of 326 - Page ID#: 1748

Site Visit Report of Settlement Monitor
Adams & Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky.)
Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor June and July 2016 Site Visit Report
EXHIBIT D: RECOMMENDED FORMS AND MEMOS, TABLE OF CONTENTS

D-1

Communications assistance for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates

(memo to staff)

D-2

Informational Pamphlet for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates

D-3

Request for Qualified Interpreter Services

D-4

Request for Communications Assistance

D-5

Auxiliary Aids/Services Assessment Form

11/2016 Court Report, App-166

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 168 of 326 - Page ID#: 1749
Exhibit D-1 Communications assistance for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates
(RECOMMENDED MEMO FOR STAFF)
{ADD ORDINARY MEMO HEADING HERE}
This memo tells you about the various devices available to provide communications assistance to deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. You may find it useful to also review the Informational Pamphlet for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates, which is attached; it includes pictures of many of the devices described here. Inmates can use the Request for Communications Assistance form and the Request for Qualified Interpreter Services form to seek access to the items described here.
1) ID and notice cards. Unless the inmate has signed a waiver, {FACILITY} lists hearing impairments on inmate ID card and on a notice outside their cells. These notices inform you that the inmate has a hearing impairment, so that you can take steps to make your communication with the inmate effective.
2) Hearing aids and amplifiers. Hearing aids and amplifiers are available if medical staff finds that they are appropriate. If an inmate tells you that he needs a hearing aid or amplifier, notify the ADA Coordinator and tell the inmate to submit a Healthcare Request form and a Request for Communications Assistance form. For batteries {DESCRIBE HERE HOW INMATES ARE SUPPOSED TO GET BATTERIES}
3) Video captioning. Turn on TV/movie captioning at an inmate’s request.
4) Communications strategies. When you are speaking with an inmate with a hearing impairment, use the best practices from the attached “tip card.” Write simple things down. If these strategies are not working for an inmate who signs to communicate, and the communication is important, you should use Video Remote Interpreting (VRI); see item 7.
5) Non-auditory alerts This facility has several devices for inmates unable to hear announcements. a. Strobe-light cells. In these cells, fire alarms automatically trigger a very bright flashing light. You don’t need to do anything for this. b. Bed shakers/flashing light alerts. This device sits under a bed pillow and vibrates/buzzes automatically when the housing unit’s fire alarm goes off. There is also what looks like a light switch installed in the control center of the dorm; when count or chow is announced, the on-duty officer is assigned to flip that switch, to notify the inmate of count/chow. This should be logged {HOW?}
6) Telecommunications devices. a. For inmates who communicate via sign language, {Facility} has a videophone, which also has access to Video Relay Service (VRS); it can be used to talk to someone who is also using a videophone, or to someone who is using a regular telephone. x The videophone is {WHERE}.
11/2016 Court Report, App-167

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 169 of 326 - Page ID#: 1750
x It is available during the same hours non-Deaf inmates have access to the regular phone: {WHAT ARE THOSE HOURS?} {E.g.: during the day, nights until 11:30 pm, weekends, and holidays.}
x If inmates wish to use the videophone, with or without VRS, they can simply request access when they need it. No scheduling in advance should be required. They are allowed 30 minutes per call.
b. {FACILITY} owns {one? two} TTY (TeleTYpewriter) machine(s). x {WHERE ARE THEY? WHAT PHONE ARE THEY SUPPOSED TO BE HOOKED UP TO?} TTYs must be logged out and logged back in after use. x Inmates are allowed 45 minutes per TTY call. x Training for inmates is available if they don’t know how to use the TTY: they should ask the ADA Coordinator.
7) Qualified Interpreter Services. For deaf inmates who communicate using sign language, qualified interpreter services are provided for significant communications, either using Video Remote Interpretation (VRI) or an in-person qualified interpreter.
For inmates who need it, interpretation is provided for: x Auxiliary aid/service assessment and other accommodation assistance x On-site medical, mental health and dental evaluations/care/appointments x Classification and transfer hearings and related meetings x Grievance hearings x Adjustment committee and court call x All meetings related to discipline x Parole hearings x Rehabilitative and educational classes and clubs x Transitional programs x Conversations with post-release supervisors x Other significant communications, on request
Inmates who use sign language to communicate are not required to specially request interpretation for auxiliary aid/service assessment, emergency health care on-site, classification and transfer hearings and related meetings, grievance meetings and hearings, disciplinary hearings and all related processes, parole meetings and hearings. In those situations, VRI should be used for these inmates without their special request, unless the inmate has requested and the ADA Coordinator has approved in-person interpretation. If you are arranging one of those events for an inmate who uses sign language, you need to obtain the VRI.
Inmates must have their hands unrestrained in order to communicate via sign language. If an inmate’s status requires that his hands be cuffed or otherwise restrained, alternative methods are available during the interpreted communication. Consult with the ADA Coordinator.
a. {FACILTY} has {one? two? } VRI laptops; {List here where they are}.
11/2016 Court Report, App-168

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 170 of 326 - Page ID#: 1751
x Use of the laptops should be scheduled 48 hours in advance if possible, but VRI laptops can be used if available even if not scheduled in advance.{HOW?}
x Log out the laptop each time you use it, and log it back in after use. x After a VRI laptop has been used, have the inmate fill out the bottom of the
Request for Qualified Interpreter Services form; return that form to the ADA Coordinator. b. Inmates can request an in-person qualified interpreter by filling out the top of the Request for Qualified Interpreter Services form; that form should be sent to the ADA Coordinator at least 48 hours prior to the scheduled event if possible. c. The inmate has the right to waive interpreter services. If an inmate waives his right to an interpreter, a waiver form shall be completed, signed, and placed into KOMS for documentation. You must ensure that the inmate understands what he is waiving. {NOTE: THIS TIP CARD COULD BE MODIFIED TO BETTER SUIT THE PRISON SETTING}
11/2016 Court Report, App-169

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 171 of 326 - Page ID#: 1752
&9)*#*5%
11/2016 Court Report, App-170

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 172 of 326 - Page ID#: 1753
Kentucky Department of Corrections {NAME OF FACILITY}
Information for Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing Inmates
11/2016 Court Report, App-171

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 173 of 326 - Page ID#: 1754
I. {FACILITY}’S OBLIGATIONS
{FACILITY} will provide deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates: x Non-discrimination x Effective Communication x Auxiliary Aids and Services
Non-discrimination: {FACILITY} will provide deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates with access to services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations substantially equivalent to those offered to similarly situated non-deaf inmates.
Effective Communication: {FACILITY} will communicate effectively with deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates—ensuring that inmates can receive information from and provide information to {FACILITY} staff.
Auxiliary Aids and Services: When needed for effective communication, {FACILITY} will provide “auxiliary aids and services.” This means devices or services that assist in communication. These may include, but are not limited to:
x Hearing aids x Amplifiers x Video captioning x Visual or other non-auditory alert or alarm systems x Videophone/Video Relay Service x TTY/TDD, including telephone relay services x Written materials x Qualified interpreters, via remote video interpretation or in-person x Computer-aided transcription services x Assistive listening systems
11/2016 Court Report, App-172

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 174 of 326 - Page ID#: 1755
II. PROCEDURES
For inmates who are deaf or hard-of-hearing, {FACILITY} has numerous devices and processes to help make sure prison staff communication with you is effective and that you receive equal access to prison programs, services, and activities. This brochure is for you to save: it is a guide to all those devices and processes.
For each of the listed devices or processes, if you do not want them, you can tell the ADA Coordinator. If you have any questions now or later, you should contact the ADA Coordinator. The ADA Coordinator is responsible for facilitating effective communication, including arranging for needed Qualified Interpreters.
x {FACILITY} provides notice of the availability of and procedure for requesting auxiliary aids and services through this brochure and through posted notices.
x Medical staff will assess whether an inmate is deaf or hard of hearing at initial intake and during annual assessments or when an inmate identifies himself as deaf, hard-of-hearing, or having difficulty hearing.
x If medical staff determines that an offender is deaf or hard-of-hearing, medical will note that in the inmate’s Electronic Medical Record, and will notify the ADA Coordinator; the ADA Coordinator will note the same thing in the Kentucky Offender Management System (KOMS) record.
x The inmate will be given this brochure and copies of the Request for Communication Assistance, and (if applicable) the Request for Qualified Interpreter Services forms
x The ADA Coordinator will consult with the individual and medical to determine what aids or services are necessary to provide effective communication in particular situations.
x The ADA Coordinator will note the inmate’s status as deaf or hard-ofhearing in the inmate’s electronic file.
x The offender may ask for services at this time or later, by requesting the services from the ADA Coordinator or other staff and/or completing the Request for Communication Assistance or the Request for Qualified Interpreter Services form.
x The offender may waive services. x At any time, the offender may request a service that he previously waived.
11/2016 Court Report, App-173

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 175 of 326 - Page ID#: 1756
III. AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
To request any auxiliary aid, submit a Request for Communications Assistance to the ADA Coordinator. If you are requesting a hearing aid or amplifier—or a repair or batteries for an existing hearing aid or amplifier—you must also submit a Healthcare Request Form.
When you request a particular auxiliary aid or service, {FACILITY} must give primary consideration to your request, but may meet the need for effective communication by providing some alternative aid or service.
COST: All necessary auxiliary aids and services shall be provided without cost to the offender, except for medical devices that are subject to standard co-payment. {WHICH ARE THESE? I THINK YOU’RE NOT CHARGING FOR ANY. SO CROSS THAT OUT.} Sick-call has the standard $3 co-pay.
The Auxiliary Aids and Services provided when necessary for effective communication (and described in this brochure) include:
A. Hard-of-hearing/Deaf ID Card B. Hard-of-hearing/Deaf Notice cards C. Hearing Aids and Amplifiers D. Qualified Interpreters (remote and in-person) E. Telecommunications Devices:
o Videophone (with or without interpreter relay) o TDD/TTY (with or without interpreter relay) o Volume-assisted telephone F. Video captioning G. Written materials H. Non-auditory alerts I. Assistive listening systems
11/2016 Court Report, App-174

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 176 of 326 - Page ID#: 1757
A. Hard-of-hearing ID Card
This card will be given to you by Medical, when they determine that you are deaf or hard-of-hearing. Carry it with your inmate ID.
Hard-of-Hearing ID card. If you lose or damage this card request a replacement from Medical. If this is not promptly provided, bring the issue to the attention of the ADA Coordinator.
B. Notice Cards
Unless you sign a waiver, {FACILITY} will alert others to your hearing impairment with a notice by your cell or bed.
Hard-of-Hearing [or Deaf] Inmate
11/2016 Court Report, App-175

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 177 of 326 - Page ID#: 1758

C. Hearing Aids and Amplifiers
If medical determines that you need a hearing aid, one will be provided. You can request evaluation for a hearing aid by using the standard healthcare request form; you should also alert the ADA coordinator to your request by filling out a {} form.
x If you have a hearing aid already—at prison or at home—you may be allowed to use that.
x If your hearing aid—whether provided by KYDOC or otherwise—needs a repair, you should bring that to the attention of medical staff and they will try to get the repair.
x Hearing aids are complex devices, and several medical visits may be necessary to test your hearing, evaluate the appropriateness of a hearing aid, and fit the hearing aid.
x Assuming there are no complications, it should take under two months for you to get a hearing aid, if one is necessary. If the process is taking longer than that, bring that issue to the attention of the ADA Coordinator.
x There is no co-pay for the hearing aid, but the standard $3 fee applies for your sick-call visit. You will be charged only one $3 fee for the related visits.
x Hearing aid batteries typically last two to three weeks. They are free to you, and available {HOW (varies by facility)}
While you are waiting for a hearing aid, if medical has determined that you are hard-of-hearing, they will give you a personal amplifier. This device is sometimes called a “pocket talker.”

Amplifier

11/2016 Court Report, App-176

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 178 of 326 - Page ID#: 1759
D. Qualified Interpreters
If you use sign language to communicate, you can request sign language interpretation by filling out a Request for a Qualified Interpreter Form, available from the ADA Coordinator {or how else?}. A qualified interpreter is “a person who is able to interpret effectively, accurately, and impartially, both receptively and expressively, with an individual Deaf Inmate using any necessary specialized vocabulary.”
If you use sign language to communicate, {FACILITY} will provide an interpreter (unless you sign a waiver) for disciplinary meetings and hearings, classification meetings and hearings, grievance meetings and hearings, and emergency health care. You need to request an interpreter each other time you want one, using the Request for a Qualified Interpreter Form. If possible, make requests 48 hours in advance. The form will then need to be submitted to the ADA Coordinator. The ADA Coordinator will schedule the qualified interpreter.
Qualified interpreters are available at {FACILITY} using a Video Remote Interpreting laptop, or—if necessary—in-person, for:
x Initial intake/classification x Auxiliary aid/service assessment and other accommodation assistance x On-site medical, mental health and dental evaluations/care/appointments x Classification and transfer hearings and related meetings x Grievance hearings x Adjustment committee and court call x All meetings related to discipline x Parole hearings x Rehabilitative and educational programming, including clubs x Transitional programs x Conversations with post-release supervisors x PREA reporting and/or follow-up with any PREA concerns x Inmate work and education programs x Other significant communications, on request x Interpreter services may be available if needed and requested for religious
programming.
11/2016 Court Report, App-177

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 179 of 326 - Page ID#: 1760
Video Remote Interpretation (VRI) allows a hearing person and a Deaf person who signs, who are next to each other, to communicate with each other. The hearing person speaks into a laptop microphone and an interpreter on the other end translates the speech into sign language, which the Deaf person can see on the laptop screen. The Deaf person signs into the laptop camera, and the interpreter on the other end translates the sign language into English, which the hearing person can hear. {FACILITY} has {one? two?} VRI laptops; {WHERE?}.
VRI using a laptop To request a Video Remote Interpreter, fill out the Request for a Qualified Interpreter Form, available from the ADA Coordinator. Video interpretation may not accomplish the goal of effective communication in some situations—for example, when there are many people communicating (as in a class or a parole hearing), or there is a need to move around (for example, during some physical medical exams). In those situations, an in-person interpreter may be necessary. When necessary for effective communication, {FACILITY} will provide an inperson qualified interpreter. If you want an in-person qualified interpreter, your request should explain why VRI will probably not be effective and if possible you should make the request several days before you need the interpreter.
11/2016 Court Report, App-178

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 180 of 326 - Page ID#: 1761
At some point, {FACILITY} may arrange with an in-person qualified interpreter to be here on a regular basis (for example, for a weekly class). If this happens, and you use sign language to communicate, the ADA Coordinator will notify you about the schedule, so that you can request needed other interpretation services more conveniently.
E. Telephone Communications
{FACILITY} has several types of devices available for deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates to have equal access to telephone communications.
x Videophone (with or without interpreter relay) x TDD/TTY (with or without interpreter relay) x Volume-assisted telephone
Videophone
Videophone “kiosk” x What is a Videophone? KYDOC uses ADA prison videophones provided by
the company “Purple.” They are locked-down videophone kiosks, where you can make videophone calls during the same periods as regular phones are available.
11/2016 Court Report, App-179

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 181 of 326 - Page ID#: 1762
x What types of calls can you make? {FACILITY’S}’s videophone allows two kinds of calls: ¾ “Point to point” or “video to video” calls allow a deaf sign language user to call anyone with a videophone, and communicate using sign language. ¾ Video Relay Service (“VRS”) calls allow a deaf inmate who uses sign language to call a hearing person who uses a regular telephone; sign language interpreters are connected automatically. The inmate signs and the remote interpreter then interprets, and speaks to the person on the regular telephone. ¾ For either point-to-point or video relay calls simply key in a 10-digit number and “dial.”
x Who qualifies for this service? Any KYDOC deaf inmate who uses sign language to communicate qualifies for this free, ADA-public-use video and video relay service, so the inmate can call anyone using a Purple ADA prison videophone. Purple Video Interpreters will terminate calls if inmates who do not use sign language try to use the ADA videophone.
x Prison restrictions. Videophones implement standard prison restrictions: ¾ No in-bound calls ¾ No 3-way calls ¾ No call history or contact list ¾ Ability to include call timer ¾ 911 button disabled ¾ Announcement to called party ¾ HIPAA privacy ¾ No video mail
x Rules for inmate use ¾ Purple VRS and point to point calls are recorded and monitored by KYDOC staff. ¾ Except if you have a specific phone restriction, deaf inmates are allowed to use the videophone during the same periods of time that non-deaf inmates can use the regular phone.
11/2016 Court Report, App-180

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 182 of 326 - Page ID#: 1763
¾ Videophones are provided as a part of Federal government program to provide sign language interpreters to relay communication between deaf person and a hearing person at no cost.
¾ Each call can last up to twice as long as {FACILITY} allows for regular phone calls.
¾ Because group calls are not allowed, you may not talk (or sign) to another inmate while you are using the videophone.
x How to use the videophone. ¾ Just turn on the videophone, and start making calls. There is no need to turn it off. If it is off, power it back on. ¾ Dial the telephone number you want to call to, by touching the telephone number on dial pad. Then, click on green “call” button. ¾ Choose your language preferences—click on English or Spanish before you dial your telephone number. Interpreters in either language are available to relay communication in English or Spanish. ¾ Callers who want other end user to hear the caller in voice can use Voice Carry Over (VCO) by simply clicking on VCO button. ¾ Announce Relay will tell the interpreter to let the other end-user know that this is a Video Relay Service (VRS) call. Click on Announce Relay button if this is a VRS call. ¾ After you are finished with your call, click on red button to “hang up”.
TTY/TTD
The second type of telecommunications device available at {FACILITY} for deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates is a TTY or TTD.
11/2016 Court Report, App-181

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 183 of 326 - Page ID#: 1764
x What is a TTY? A TTY (Teletypewriter) (sometimes called a TTD) is a device that allows users to send typed messages across a phone line. Many people who are deaf or hard of hearing use TTYs to call other individuals. The TTY has a keyboard and display that lets the user send and receive typed messages over telephone lines.
x What types of calls can you make? A stand-alone TTY cannot communicate directly with a regular phone; it can communicate only with another TTY. So TTY users can directly call other TTY numbers or they can call a regular phone using a Relay Service. The Relay Service operator will receive the messages on a TTY and relay the messages, by standard phone, to a person who does not have a TTY.
x Who qualifies for this service? Any KYDOC deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate who can use the TTY. And a non-deaf inmate can, too, if he needs to call someone who uses a TTY.
x Prison restrictions. TTYs conform to standard prison restrictions: ¾ No in-bound calls ¾ No 3-way calls ¾ No call history or contact list
x Rules ¾ Except if you have a specific phone restriction, deaf inmates are allowed to use the videophone during the same periods of time that non-deaf inmates can use the regular phone. ¾ Each call can last up to three times as long as {FACILITY} allows for regular phone calls.
x How to use the TTY 1. Request use of the TTY {How? From who? How long in advance?} 2. The TTY must be connected to a phone line with access to outside the prison. At {FACILITY}, {WHAT PHONE LINE ARE THEY SUPPOSED TO USE?, IN WHAT OFFICE} 3. Once you’re in the right place, plug the TTY in and push the “ON” switch.
11/2016 Court Report, App-182

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 184 of 326 - Page ID#: 1765
4. Place the telephone receiver on the TTY's rubber receptacles. Make sure that the receiver is firmly in place and that the telephone's receiver cord is on the LEFT side of the TTY.
5. Check the telephone indicator light; if it is lit, you have the line. 6. If you are making a direct TTY call:
x Dial the number of the receiving TTY, and watch the telephone light; if it is flashing slowly, this indicates that the device on the other end is ringing.
x When the person you are calling answers, you will see a phrase appear on the screen such as: "Hello, this is Richard GA." The "GA" stands for Go Ahead -- Don't forget to use "GA" whenever you have finished what you are saying, so that the other person will know it is his/her turn. Note: The person who receives the call is always the one who starts typing first.
x When you wish the call to end and you wish to advise the other person, type GA or SK ("Stop keying"). The person will respond by "SK" if he/she agrees. Be courteous - wait until the other person indicates "SK" before hanging up.
7. If you are making a relay call (that is, using the TTY to call a regular phone used by a hearing person), you will use the Kentucky Relay program: x Dial 711. x A Communication Assistant (CA) will answer by identifying Kentucky Relay and providing his/her CA number and gender. The CA will then type “NUMBER TO CALL PLS Q GA.” x Type the area code and telephone number you want to call and any additional instructions. x Once the call is connected, the CA will ask the person you are calling if he/she is familiar with Relay. If the person is not, the CA will explain how Relay works before the conversation begins. x The CA will type everything said by the other party, word for word, along with any background noises. x When you see GA, it is your turn to respond. x Type your response, and then “GA” when you are ready for a response.
11/2016 Court Report, App-183

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 185 of 326 - Page ID#: 1766
x The conversation will proceed in this manner until the call is complete. When you have completed the conversation, type “GA to SK” and the CA will close your call.
x Always switch the TTY "OFF" as soon as you have finished the call.
Phone volume control
Some but not all the payphones at {FACILITY} have volume controls. If you need to turn up the volume in order to use a phone, and none of the phones in your housing area have a volume control, you can submit a Request for Communications Assistance form to request that a volume control be added to at least one phone. The phones with volume controls have varied indicators:
11/2016 Court Report, App-184

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 186 of 326 - Page ID#: 1767
Payphone Volume Controls
F. Video captioning
Most videos shown at {FACILITY}, and all television programs, can have captioning turned on. This includes educational and entertainment movies, orientation videos, religious programming DVDs, etc. You can request that a video or movie display captions, if they are available, by asking {FILL THIS IN}. If you are taking a class, ask the teacher if you want any class videos to display captioning. In addition, the commissary sells personal TVs that can show captioning. If you need assistance getting captioning turned on, ask the ADA Coordinator.
G. Written materials
If you are unable to understand something that a staff member tells you verbally, you can ask the staff to write it down. If you are given written materials that you have questions about, and you communicate using sign language, you can ask for a meeting with the appropriate staff member to be interpreted using the VRI or, if needed, an in-person sign language interpreter.
11/2016 Court Report, App-185

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 187 of 326 - Page ID#: 1768

H. Non-auditory alerts

Bed Shaker

{FACILITY} has several devices

available for inmates unable to hear

announcements. These include:

x Strobe-light cells. In these

cells, fire alarms trigger a

very bright flashing light.

x Bed shakers/flashing light

alerts. This device sits under

a bed and vibrates/buzzes

when the housing unit’s fire

alarm or other announcements

go off. It can be set to alert

for count and chow.

x At your own expense, you can buy a vibrating alarm clock or other

adaptive equipment you may find useful, via the commissary or by making

a request to the ADA coordinator.

In addition, staff are trained to post written versions of announcements made over

the loudspeaker.

I. Assistive Listening Systems

If you are hard of hearing and have trouble hearing in some other situation, it may be possible to provide you an assistive listening system. For example, in church, programming, or a class, the teacher or other students could use a wireless microphone that sends the signal to an earbud that you wear. If you think a system like this would help you hear in a particular situation, submit a Request for Communications Assistance form to the ADA Coordinator.

11/2016 Court Report, App-186

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 188 of 326 - Page ID#: 1769
IV. FOR MORE INFORMATION
{Facility’s} obligations for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates are controlled by the Americans with Disabilities Act and by a settlement entered in the federal district court in a lawsuit. The Settlement Agreement and a summary of it are available in the law library. If you have a problem related to your hearing, discuss it with the ADA Coordinator. If necessary, you can file a grievance. The court monitor appointed by the federal court to track KYDOC’s compliance with the Agreement will receive a summary of the grievance and, if you give your permission, the grievance itself and the KYDOC response to it.
11/2016 Court Report, App-187

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 189 of 326 - Page ID#: 1770

Exhibit D-3 Request for Qualified Interpreter Services

Please make your request at least 48 hours in advance, or explain why below. Send this form to the ADA Coordinator, using the institutional mail box.

I,___________________, inmate # ________ request a qualified interpreter for:

Ƒ Education: Please specify: ____________________________________________________

Ƒ &OXEPlease specify: _________________________________________________________

Ƒ 3DUROHERDUGPHHWLQJKHDULQJ

Ƒ 0HGLFDO'HQWDO9LVLRQDSSRLQWPHQWRURWKHUon-site health care services } Please also use

Ƒ 0HGLFDO'HQWDO9LVLRQDSSRLQWPHQWRURWKHUoff-site health care services } the Healthcare

Ƒ 0HQWDOKHDOWKHYDOXDWLRQRUVHUYLFHV

} Request form

Ƒ 6LJQLILFDQWFRQYHUVDWLRQZLWKVWDIIDERXWFRPPXQLFDWLRQVQHHGVRUother topic.

Ƒ 5HOLJLRXVSURJUDPPLQJ1RWHLQWHUSUHWDWLRQPD\RUPD\QRWEHDYDLODEOHIRUUHOLJLRXV

programming). Please specify:____________________________________________________

Ƒ 2WKHUPlease specify:__________________________________________________________

Ƒ I request that the interpreter be in-person, rather than via the Video Remote Interpretation (VRI) laptop. Please explain why an in-person interpreter is more effective than VRI: ________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________

Date of scheduled event: _____________ Date you are making this request: __________________ If this request is less than 48 hours in advance of the event, please explain why: _____________ _____________________________________________________________________________

Action taken by ADA Coordinator: _________________________________________________ Type of interpretation (if any) authorized: Ƒ95,RUƑ,Q-SHUVRQRUƑ1RQH Why? ________________________________________________________________________ Date interpreter utilized: ___________________________
Feedback from inmate: Please check the box that best indicates your views. The Interpretation I just used provided fully effective communication:
 Strongly agree  Weakly agree  Weakly disagree  Strongly disagree
If there was any problem with the interpretation/communication effectiveness, please explain: _____________________________________________________________________________

Inmate signature _____________________ Date_______________________ Staff signature _______________________ Date_______________________

11/2016 Court Report, App-188

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 190 of 326 - Page ID#: 1771
Exhibit D-4 Request for Communications Assistance
I,____________________, inmate # ________ request communications assistance.
NOTE: If you have a request related to a hearing aid or amplifier, please submit it using the ordinary Healthcare Request, and use this form just to notify the ADA Coordinator that you are submitting that request.
Ƒ ,KDYHVXEPLWWHGDUHTXHVWIRUDKHDULQJDLGRUDPSOLILHURUDUHSDLURUHYDOXDWLRQRID hearing aid or amplifier to Medical.
I request each of the following items: Ƒ Deaf/hard-of-hearing Inmate ID card Ƒ 'HDIhard-of-hearing Housing sign Ƒ 9LGHRFDSWLRQLQJ
For what video/situation? (e.g., orientation, education, etc.)
______________________________________________________________
Ƒ 6WUREHOLJKWFHOORUEHGVKDNHUDOHUWGHYLFH Ƒ $FFHVVWRWKHYLGHRSKRQH Ƒ $FFHVVWRWKH77<7H[WWHOHSKRQH Ƒ $FFHVVWRDYROXPH-assisted telephone Ƒ $VVLVWLYHOLVWHQLQJGHYLFHWRDPSOLI\DVSHDNHUGXULQJSURJUDPPLQJRUFODVV Ƒ 2WKHUGHYLFHRUVHUYLFHV3OHDVHVSHFLI\ __________________________________________________________________
Ƒ Qualified Interpreter Services: I communicate best using sign language, and need qualified interpreter services for significant communications. *NOTE: this request is a general one; once you are approved to receive interpreter services, they will be provided via Video Remote Interpreter (VRI) for:
x Orientation x Auxiliary aid/service assessment x Emergency Health Care on-site x Classification and transfer meetings and hearings x Grievance meetings and hearings x Disciplinary meetings and hearings x Parole meetings and hearings
In addition, you can use the Request for Qualified Interpreter Services form to ask for interpreter services at additional meetings or encounters, or to request an in-person qualified interpreter.
11/2016 Court Report, App-189

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 191 of 326 - Page ID#: 1772

Exhibit D-5 Auxiliary Aids/Services Assessment Form

Inmate Name: _______________________________ Inmate #: ___________________________________ Date of assessment: ___________________________ Date arrived at {INSTITUTION}: __________________________

Hearing situation: (note: you may select more than one if applicable)

Ƒ (IIHFWLYHO\FRPSOHWHO\GHDI

Ƒ 9HU\KDUG-of-hearing

Ƒ 0LOGO\KDUG-of-hearing

Ƒ &XUUHQWO\KDVKHDULQJDLGV

Ƒ &XUUHQWO\KDVKHDULQJDLGƑ&XUUHQtly has amplifier

Preferred communication method: Ƒ 6LJQODQJXDJH6SHFLI\W\SHRIVLJQLQJ$6/HWFBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB Ƒ 6SRNHQ(QJOLVK Ƒ :ULWWHQ(QJOLVK
Was VRI or in-SHUVRQLQWHUSUHWDWLRQXVHGIRUWKLVPHHWLQJ"Ƒ95, ƑIn-person interpretation For inmates who communicate using sign language, some form of interpretation should be used.
Literacy level: ___________________________ Source of literacy level information: ___________________________ *LYHQOLWHUDF\OHYHOFDSWLRQVDQGWH[WƑDUHƑDUHQRWDSSURSULDWHFRPPXQLFDWLRQVPHWKRGV
Auxiliary aids assigned: Ƒ +HDULQJDLGRUDPSOLILHUNote particulars: _____________________________________ Ƒ (YDOXDWLRQIRUKHDULQJDLGRUDPSOLILHUDate requested: ___________________________ Ƒ 'HDIKHDULQJLPSDLUHG,QPDWH,'FDUG Ƒ 'HDIKHDULQJLPSDLUHG+RXVLQJVLJQ Ƒ 9LGHRFDSWLRQLQJ
For what situation? (e.g., orientation, education, etc.) Please be specific.
______________________________________________________________
Ƒ 6WUREHOLJKWFHOORUEHGVKDNHUDOHUWGHYLFH Ƒ $FFHVVWRWKHYLGHRSKRQHZLWKRUZLWKRXWWKH9LGHR5HOD\6HUYLFHODSWRS Ƒ $FFHVVWRWKH77<7H[WWHOHSKRQH Ƒ 2WKHUGHYLFHRUVHUYLFHVPlease specify: __________________________________________________________________
Assessment conducted by: ______________________________________ Notes and comments:

11/2016 Court Report, App-190

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 &PYagIeJC: 1JU92&of 326 - Page
ID#: 1773
11/2016 Court Report, App-191

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 193 of 326 - Page ID#: 1774 Exhibit E-2
Recommended addition to Healthcare Request If you are deaf or hard-of-hearing, do you need any communication assistance for this healthcare visit? Ƒ No Ƒ Yes: Video Remote Interpreter (VRI) (via “purple” laptop) Ƒ Yes: in-person qualified interpreter
Please explain why you need an in-person interpreter rather than VRI:______________ _______________________________________________________________________ Ƒ Yes: other: _________________________________________________________________
(please specify)
11/2016 Court Report, App-192

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 194 of 326 - Page ID#: 1775

Inmate LName

Johnson

Inmate Fname

David

Institution

LLCC

DOC number

Arrival at Institution

Screening results

Reported hearing issues

When was hearing problem first

presented to KYDOC?

Date hearing aid provided or finally

found inappropriate

Days to provide hearing aid

IN PROCESS

Days so far, if not provided yet

Medical visit/step 1, Date

Williams Joe LLCC 12345 6/1/2016 Reported hearing problem

23456 2/1/2013

6/7/2016

5/25/2016

IN PROCESS 91 6/17/2016

104 6/20/2016

Medical visit/step 1, outcome Medical visit/step 2, date

Needs to wait till cardiology issues are dealt with to work on hearing issues. Provider visit; ENT eval sought.

Medical visit/step 2 outcome Medical visit/step 3, date

Medical visit/step 3, outcome Medical visit/step 4, date

Medical visit/step 4, outcome Medical visit/step 5, date
Medical visit/step 5, outcome Etc.

11/2016 Court Report, App-193

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 195 of 326 - Page ID#: 1776

Inmate LName

Smith

Jones

Inmate Fname

Bill

John

Institution

LLCC

RCC

DOC number

34567

45678

Arrival at Institution

9/29/2015

4/15/2016

Screening results

Reported hearing problem

Reported hearing difficulty

When was hearing problem first

presented to KYDOC?

5/12/2016

4/15/2016

Date hearing aid provided or finally

found inappropriate

Days to provide hearing aid

IN PROCESS

IN PROCESS

Days so far, if not provided yet

117

144

Medical visit/step 1, Date

5/12/2016

4/15/2016

Medical visit/step 1, outcome Medical visit/step 2, date
Medical visit/step 2 outcome Medical visit/step 3, date
Medical visit/step 3, outcome Medical visit/step 4, date
Medical visit/step 4, outcome Medical visit/step 5, date
Medical visit/step 5, outcome Etc.

Care plan "Hard of Hearing" noted Hearing difficulty noted.

5/25/2016

6/16/2016

Plan for audiology consult

Audiology consult sought

5/31/2016

6/20/2016

Hearing screening offered; amplifier

Audiology consult approved

issued.

6/21/2016

Audiology consult scheduled for this

day, but cancelled; KSR overbooked

transport.

7/19/2016

Audiology visit rescheduled for this

day.

11/2016 Court Report, App-194

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 196 of 326 - Page ID#: 1777

Inmate LName

Jones

Inmate Fname

John

Institution

WKCC

DOC number

Arrival at Institution

Screening results

Reported hearing difficulty

When was hearing problem first

presented to KYDOC?

Date hearing aid provided or finally

found inappropriate

Days to provide hearing aid

IN PROCESS

Days so far, if not provided yet

Medical visit/step 1, Date

Williams

Joe

WKCC

45678

56789

7/7/2016

6/21/2016

Hearing aid noted on arrival

7/7/2016

6/21/2016

IN PROCESS 61 7/7/2016

77 7/6/2016

Medical visit/step 1, outcome Medical visit/step 2, date
Medical visit/step 2 outcome Medical visit/step 3, date

Screening given; needs next steps.

(Note transfer from RCC)

Hearing screen; 4 yesses.

7/25/2016

Saw provider, but no audiology

assessment done.

Medical visit/step 3, outcome Medical visit/step 4, date

Medical visit/step 4, outcome Medical visit/step 5, date
Medical visit/step 5, outcome Etc.

11/2016 Court Report, App-195

Inmate LName

(Column with forumulas only)

Inmate Fname

Institution

DOC number

Arrival at Institution

Screening results

When was hearing problem first

presented to KYDOC?

Date hearing aid provided or finally

found inappropriate

Days to provide hearing aid

IN PROCESS

Days so far, if not provided yet

42619

Medical visit/step 1, Date

Medical visit/step 1, outcome Medical visit/step 2, date
Medical visit/step 2 outcome Medical visit/step 3, date
Medical visit/step 3, outcome Medical visit/step 4, date

Medical visit/step 4, outcome Medical visit/step 5, date
Medical visit/step 5, outcome Etc.

11/2016 Court Report, App-196

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 197 of 326 - Page ID#: 1778

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 198 of 326 - Page ID#: 1779
&9)*#*5(
11/2016 Court Report, App-197

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 199 of 326 - Page ID#: 1780
Knights & Adams v. Kentucky Department of Corrections: Summary of the Settlement Agreement
In a federal lawsuit, Knights and Adams v. Kentucky Department of Corrections, the Department was sued because of the way it was treating deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. The case was settled in May 2014, with an agreement about policies and implementation going forward. This document summarizes the Knights & Adams agreement, to help you understand the general areas that agreement covers. To simplify and summarize, this summary uses different language than the agreement. If there’s any significant difference between them, the formal agreement wins. Not every detail of the settlement is included in this summary. In addition, a copy of the entire agreement is attached.
Note: When this summary (and the agreement) use the word “deaf,” that includes hard-ofhearing.
Timing and Grievances: Ɣ Only a few of the items in the agreement have a set deadline. Especially for the others, it may take the prison authorities some time before they actually do all the items here. Ɣ If there are any problems, now or in the future, you should file a grievance with the grievance coordinator for your facility. You have the option to share your grievances with the ADA coordinator, as well. Ɣ The Settlement Monitor assesses compliance with the Agreement and reports any problems to the court. She is not able to serve as a lawyer for any inmate, and is involved only in the issues covered by the Agreement. Ɣ The prison will keep records of all deaf prisoners’ grievances, and will tell the Settlement Monitor about them. The Settlement Monitor may request to review grievances in more detail, but will be able to do that only if you sign a waiver of confidentiality. Ɣ In addition, you can yourself report problems to the Settlement Monitor, by sending a letter to: Margo Schlanger, Kentucky Settlement Monitor 625 So. State Street, LR 910 Ann Arbor, MI 48109 For a letter to the Settlement Monitor to be confidential, mark it “LEGAL MAIL.”
No Discrimination: Ɣ Deaf prisoners should not be discriminated against because they are deaf. This means you should have access to services, privileges, facilities, and accommodations that is equal to other, non-deaf prisoners.
ADA Coordinator: Ɣ Every prison has an ADA coordinator. The name of the ADA coordinator for your prison should be posted in your housing unit. Ɣ The ADA coordinator is responsible for assisting with implementing the agreement, including requested accommodations and ensuring effective communication with deaf prisoners.
11/2016 Court Report, App-198

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 200 of 326 - Page ID#: 1781
Ɣ You should talk to the ADA coordinator if you want to request aids or services related to your status as deaf or hard-of-hearing.
Intake and Classification: Ɣ Inmates who arrive to prison beginning August 2015 should undergo a hearing assessment. If you were already in prison before then, your hearing will be assessed at your annual classification review. Ɣ During this assessment, medical staff will test your hearing and document the results. Ɣ If the medical team decides that you have a hearing impairment, they will assume you need aids and/or services--like a sign language interpreter, visual notification, or telecommunication devices. You can waive this if you would like.
Housing: Ɣ The prison gets to decide where to house you, just like they do with every other prisoner.
Identification Cards: Ɣ If you are identified as deaf, you will be given a special identification card saying you have a hearing impairment. These ID cards are to make sure that staff knows about your hearing impairment, so they can communicate effectively with you, and for your safety. Ɣ If you do not want the special ID card, you can sign a waiver. If you sign that waiver, you can change your mind. Ɣ There should be a notice at the entrance of your prison facility and outside your housing unit saying that deaf prisoners live there.
Materials: Ɣ The prison will provide you all the same materials it provides to other prisoners. Ɣ If you cannot understand the materials, you can ask to meet with a staff member and an interpreter to help.
Aids and Services: Ɣ The prison will give you appropriate aids and services so that you can participate in the same privileges, services, and programs as non-deaf prisoners. o Some examples of privileges, services, and programs are orientation, medical appointments, classification or transfer hearings, grievance or discipline hearings, educational or work programs, and religious services. o Some examples of aids and services are qualified interpreters, bed shakers, and videophones. Ɣ During orientation and intake, prison employees will give deaf prisoners information about what aids and services are available, and how to make a request for those aids and services. o If you don’t understand any of the materials, you can ask to meet with a staff member and a qualified interpreter and ask questions. Ɣ If the prison officials decide an aid or service is medically necessary for you, they will give it to you quickly and for free. o Officials will consider on a case-by-case basis whether you can purchase devices with your own money that the officials do not think are medically necessary.
11/2016 Court Report, App-199

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 201 of 326 - Page ID#: 1782
ƒ This might include devices like vibrating clocks, headset amplifiers, and special televisions. Prison officials will consider whether the device is a security risk when making this decision.
o Prison employees can decide whether devices are allowed and can limit what is available at commissary.
o You can request a device from the ADA Coordinator if it is not sold at commissary.
Paying for Medical Devices: Ɣ Deaf prisoners will have to pay a co-payment for any device, just as non-deaf prisoners are charged for medical applications or devices. Ɣ Prisoners who are deemed indigent will not be charged for medically necessary devices. Ɣ You will not be charged for hearing aid batteries.
Sign Language Interpreters: Ɣ The prison should provide in-person qualified interpreter for: o Medical care or medical appointments (including dental, hearing, mental health appointments and off-site medical care) o Disciplinary hearings o Transfer or classification processes that might affect your status o Transitional programming o Rehabilitative programming (for example, AA or NA) o Educational programs (for example, GED classes, literacy classes, or technical education and certification classes) Ɣ You can also request a qualified interpreter or other assistance that allow effective communication for: o Vocational or work programs and work assignments o Communication with whoever is responsible for your post-release supervision o Parole hearings (but the obligation to provide necessary assistance is the Parole Board’s, not the prison) o Religious services (but where the religious service is provided by an outside volunteer, the prison is not responsible for communication at that service) Ɣ The prison will give you a schedule of when qualified interpreters and other aids or services will be available. This schedule should be up to date. Ɣ You can request qualified interpreters for other communications, too, but you will need approval from the ADA coordinator or the warden.
Hand Restraints: Ɣ The prison will use hand restraints only when: o Transporting a deaf prisoner to or from a prison o Transferring a deaf prisoner into or out of a special management unit o As needed in response to security threats Ɣ In most circumstances, a two-point system will be used. Ɣ Hand restraints should be removed in secure environments, when security is no longer a threat, or there are other security devices in place.
11/2016 Court Report, App-200

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 202 of 326 - Page ID#: 1783
Ɣ Two-point restraints are used during off-site and on-site medical care visits, unless a medical professional requires or asks that they be removed or adjusted.
Discipline: Ɣ You can request a qualified interpreter for any disciplinary hearing where you are suspected of, charged with, or a witness to, an infraction. Ɣ The prison must provide an interpreter in the following situations: o staff investigations where you are exchanging information with a prison employee, even before a disciplinary report is filled out o investigative interviews between you and a prison employee o during preparation of the disciplinary report, if it involves the exchange of information between you and a prison employee o during the shift supervisor’s review of the disciplinary report, if it involves the exchange of information between you and a prison employee o during the investigator’s review of the disciplinary report, if it involves the exchange of information between you and a prison employee o if you are given Miranda warnings (when the prison employee tells you about your right to remain silent and to request a lawyer or that anything you say can be used against you) o if an employee tells you about your right to consult with an assigned legal aide o when employees tell you about the anticipated date, time, and place of hearing o during any part of the hearing or re-hearing that involves the exchange of information between you and a prison employee o if you are a witness during a disciplinary hearing for someone else Ɣ You can waive your right to an interpreter. Ɣ Like a non-deaf prisoner, if you are suspected of, charged with, or witness to a disciplinary infraction, you may be entitled to an inmate or staff adviser. If you do have an adviser, you are entitled to a sign language interpreter during these meetings. Ɣ Your disciplinary hearings must be held within the same time frame as disciplinary hearings for non-deaf prisoners.
Telecommunications: Ɣ The prison will give you access to telecommunication devices so that you can communicate with people outside the prison. Ɣ You should have access to TTY/TDD devices, relay services, and videophones. Ɣ These devices should enable you to communicate as effectively as non-deaf prisoners can communicate via telephone. Ɣ These devices should be available to you during the same days and hours as the phones. Ɣ You can request to use the TTY/TDD, relay services, or videophones; reasonable requests should be granted. Ɣ Your conversations will be monitored as much as and in the same way that non-deaf prisoners’ calls are monitored. Ɣ So if you want to use the system to talk to your lawyer, or to the Settlement Monitor, you need to request that from your Corrections Treatment Officer.
11/2016 Court Report, App-201

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 203 of 326 - Page ID#: 1784
Ɣ You can have twice as many minutes to complete a videophone call and three times as many minutes to complete a TTY call as non-deaf prisoners can have to use a traditional telephone.
Ɣ You will not be charged for the use of videophones. Ɣ Videophones will have voice carry-over features. Ɣ The prison is responsible for making sure this equipment is in good working order and
will address complaints in a reasonable amount of time. Ɣ Prison employees should be trained in how to use this equipment.
Media: Ɣ All audio-visual media should have open- or closed-captioning. Ɣ Captioning should be turned on and remain on if a deaf prisoner requests it. Ɣ You may purchase TVs with your own funds that have open- or closed-captioning. Ɣ If the captioning stops working, the prison employees will work with you to fix it within a reasonable time in the same way that they work with other prisoners to address their property.
Non-Auditory Alert Notifications: Ɣ Being deaf should not get in the way of your ability to receive any announcements, alarms, or other information. Ɣ The prison should have a non-auditory alert system to tell you about any prison-wide events at the same time that non-deaf prisoners are alerted (for example, announcements, visits, and roll-calls). Ɣ The prison will publish the institution schedule in your handbook and promptly post any schedule changes in all dormitories, the library, and the gym.
Emergency Evacuations: Ɣ An effective non-auditory alert system will go off in an emergency. This system might include flashing lights and bed shakers. Ɣ Prison staff will be trained to safely relocate you during an emergency.
Staff Training: Ɣ Prison employees should be trained to interact with the deaf prisoner population. Ɣ Employees will be trained in topics like: best practices to communicate with deaf prisoners, the unique needs and problems of deaf prisoners, identifying communication needs of deaf prisoners, psychological implications of deafness, proper role and use of interpreters, how to use TTY/TDD/videophones and other telecommunication systems, how to use auxiliary aids and services, disciplinary matters, the anti-discrimination policy, the hand restraint policy, and the requirements of this agreement.
11/2016 Court Report, App-202

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 204 of 326 - Page ID#: 1785

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN DEFENDANTS THE COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY ET AL. AND PLAINTIFFS OSCAR ADAMS AND MICHAEL KNIGHTS [NUMBERED FOR USE IN COMPLIANCE MONITORING]

I. DEFINITIONS

[I.]1. “ADA” means the Americans with Disabilities Act, codified at 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., as amended by the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-325).

[I.]2.

“Auxiliary Aids and Services” include, but are not limited to, “Qualified Interpreters or other effective methods of making aurally delivered materials available to individuals with hearing impairments,” 42 U.S.C. § 12103, such as hearing aids, computer-aided transcription services, assistive listening systems, closed caption decoders, open and closed captioning, “TDDs” or “TTYs” as defined below, videotext displays, written materials (see 28 C.F.R. § 35.104); as well as Videophones, access to telephone relay services, visual alert or alarm systems, and bed shakers.

[I.]3.

“Deaf Inmates” means Inmates who are unable to hear well enough to rely on their hearing as a means of processing information, who rely on Auxiliary Aids and Services to Effectively Communicate and who qualify as individuals with disabilities under the ADA, including deaf, hard of hearing, or hearing impaired persons. See 42 U.S.C. § 12102(4). .

[I.]4.

“Direct Threat” means a significant risk to the health or safety of one or more Deaf Inmates or others that cannot be reduced or eliminated by reasonable accommodation. A finding of Direct Threat must be based on and supported by objective evidence.

[I.]5.

“Effective Communication” and “Effectively Communicate” means communication with Deaf Inmates that is substantially as effective as communication with the general Inmate population (see 28 C.F.R. § 35.160(a)) and will, when necessary, include the provision of appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, such as Qualified Interpreters. Effective Communication affords Deaf Inmates an opportunity to participate in, and enjoy the benefits of, the KDOC’s services, programs, or activities in a way that is substantially equal to the opportunity provided to a similarly situated non-Deaf Inmate. In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, primary consideration shall be given to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)).

[I.]6. “Effective Date” means thirty (30) days after this Agreement is filed with the Court.

[I.]7. “Inmate” means any person in the custody of the KDOC.

11/2016 Court Report, App-203

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 205 of 326 - Page ID#: 1786
[I.]8. “KCDHH” means the Kentucky Commission on the Deaf and Hard of Hearing.
[I.]9. “KDOC” means Kentucky Department of Corrections.
[I.]10. “KDOC program” means any program or activity, or aid, benefit, or service as defined by the ADA and Section 504 (see 28 C.F.R. § 35.130, § 41.51) available to Inmates of KDOC for which the KDOC does more than only provide physical space at its facilities, including but not limited to, programs, activities, aids, benefits, or services mandated by law, qualifying for educational or early release credits, and/or ordered as part of an Inmate’s sentence.
[I.]11. “KDOC employees,” “KDOC staff,” and “KDOC personnel” each and collectively include all employees, contractors, agents, and other staff of the KDOC whose job responsibilities place them on a regular basis in contact with Deaf Inmates, and the supervisors of those employees, contractors, agents, or other staff.
[I.]12. “KDOC Adult Institution” means any facility owned or operated by the KDOC for the care and custody Inmates, including but not limited to Bell Country Forestry Camp, Blackburn Correctional Complex, Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex, Green River Correctional Complex, Kentucky Correctional Institute for Women, Kentucky State Penitentiary, Kentucky State Reformatory, Little Sandy Correctional Complex, Luther Luckett Correctional Complex, Northpoint Training Center, Roederer Correctional Complex, and Western Kentucky Correctional Complex.
[I.]13. “Off-site Medical Care” means medical care that is provided at a location not owned or operated by the KDOC.
[I.]14. “On-site Medical Care” means medical care that is provided at a KDOC facility, including medical care provided by third parties in facilities owned or operated by the KDOC.
[I.]15. “Parole hearing” means any hearing or meeting during which an Inmate is being offered the opportunity to be released from KDOC custody on parole.
[I.]16. “Plaintiffs” means, for purposes of this Agreement, Oscar Adams (inmate #243676) and Michael Knights (inmate #233021).
[I.]17. “Plaintiffs’ Counsel” means attorneys-of-record for Plaintiffs in Oscar Adams and Michael Knights, et al., v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, et al., Case No. 3:14-cv00001 (E.D. Ky.) at the time this Agreement is signed.
[I.]18. “Qualified Interpreter” means a person who is able to interpret effectively, accurately, and impartially, both receptively and expressively, with an individual Deaf Inmate using any necessary specialized vocabulary. See 28 C.F.R. §35.104.
11/2016 Court Report, App-204

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 206 of 326 - Page ID#: 1787
A Qualified Interpreter could include an ASL interpreter, a sign language interpreter using more English-based signs, an oral interpreter, a cued speech transliterator or a tactile interpreter for a Deaf Inmate who is also blind. For sign language interpreters, a Qualified Interpreter is one who holds current, valid certifications and licensure by the Kentucky Board of Interpreters for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing.
A Qualified Interpreter may be provided by the KDOC either in person, or via Video Remote Interpreting, videoconferencing or other similar means that provide Effective Communication.
[I.]19. “Section 504” means Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, codified at 29 U.S.C. § 701 et seq. (2014).
[I.]20. “Settlement Monitor” means Margo Schlanger, whose curriculum vitae is attached as Exhibit 1.
[I.]21. “TTYs” or “TDDs” means teletypewriters or telecommunications devices for the Deaf, which are devices used with a telephone to communicate with persons who are Deaf by typing and reading communications.
[I.]22. “Video Remote Interpreting” or “VRI” means a video-telecommunication interpreting service, which uses Qualified Interpreters and is delivered over a high-speed Internet connection. See 28 C.F.R. § 35.160(d).
[I.]23. “Videophone” means a telephone with a camera and screen for visual, real-time communications. The term Videophone as used in this Agreement is limited to Videophones intended for the use by Deaf Inmates within the custody of the KDOC, and does not include Videophones within KDOC Adult Institutions intended for the use of the general Inmate population.
II. GENERAL POLICIES
[II.]A. Non-discrimination Based on Disability
The KDOC will ensure that Deaf Inmates have full and equal access to and enjoyment of all services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations available to similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates. The KDOC shall provide Deaf Inmates with access to services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations substantially equivalent to those offered to similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates. The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain activities present a Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates and therefore may not be able to provide such Deaf Inmates full and equal enjoyment of some of its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination.
11/2016 Court Report, App-205

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 207 of 326 - Page ID#: 1788

[II.]B. ADA Coordinator

[II.B.1.] Within thirty (30) days after the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will assign a staff member at each KDOC Adult Institution the title, duties, and responsibilities of ADA Coordinator. The KDOC will maintain the ADA Coordinator position at each KDOC Adult Institution as required by law. The ADA Coordinator responsibilities will be a part of the official duties assigned to the person in this role. The ADA Coordinator shall be trained on the requirements of federal and state law regarding the contents of this Agreement and the KDOC’s obligations to provide full and equal access to, and enjoyment of, its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations to Deaf Inmates.

[II.B.2.] Within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will notify the Settlement Monitor of the identity of each KDOC employee assigned the title, duties and responsibilities of ADA Coordinator. The name and contact information for each ADA Coordinator will be displayed and regularly updated on the KDOC’s website. The name and contact information of each KDOC Adult Institution’s ADA Coordinator will be communicated to all Deaf Inmates incarcerated in each respective KDOC Adult Institution, and will also be prominently posted in a secure area in any housing unit in which Deaf Inmates are held.

[II.B.3.] ADA Coordinators will assist with providing, coordinating, and overseeing Auxiliary Aids and Services for Deaf Inmates and for implementing this Agreement. The ADA Coordinators will be provided with and responsible for knowing the contents of this Agreement, and will assist with implementing this Agreement. The ADA Coordinators will be available to assist with various aspects of accommodating Deaf Inmates. In such situations, ADA Coordinators will ensure Effective Communication for the Deaf Inmates.

III. INITIAL CLASSIFICATION, ASSESSMENT, AND ASSIGNMENT

[III.]A. General Policy

[III.A.1.] The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates at initial intake, assessment, and classification with Effective Communication. The purpose is to facilitate communication between the Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel (or other persons) during medical, psychological, and educational testing and evaluation, as well as to provide an explanation of prison policies and procedures, including Inmate discipline, grievances, and how to utilize the TTY, Videophone and other Auxiliary Aids and Services.

[III.A.2.] As of the date of this Agreement, initial intake, assessment, and classification for male Inmates occurs at Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC) and for female Inmates at the Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women (KCIW).

[III.]B.

Hearing Assessment

As part of the initial intake, assessment, and classification, medical staff will assess and, if necessary, test all persons who may be a Deaf Inmate for Deafness. If medical staff determines that an Inmate is Deaf, medical staff will note the disability in the Inmate’s institutional file, and

11/2016 Court Report, App-206

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 208 of 326 - Page ID#: 1789
will promptly notify the appropriate ADA Coordinator. Any Deaf Inmate who was not assessed at the initial intake, assessment, and classification will be assessed at the annual classification review.
[III.]C. Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment
[III.C.1.] After medical staff determine that an Inmate is Deaf, the KDOC will presume that Auxiliary Aids and Services in the form of Qualified Interpreters, visual notifications, telecommunication devices, and other aids and services set forth in this Agreement are necessary to ensure Effective Communication and substantially equal services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations.
[III.C.2.] If any Deaf Inmate indicates that he or she does not require any or all of the Auxiliary Aids and Services set forth in this Agreement, he or she will sign a Waiver of Auxiliary Aids and Services and that document will be kept in the Inmate’s institutional file.
[III.C.3.] If an Inmate is not found to have a hearing impairment at his or her initial intake, assessment, and classification, initially refuses, or does not request Auxiliary Aids and Services, but later believes that Auxiliary Aids and Services are necessary to ensure Effective Communication, he or she will fill out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services Form. KDOC will provide the Inmate who was initially not found to have a hearing impairment with a hearing assessment if so ordered by medical staff. If that individual is found to be Deaf, KDOC will follow the procedures set forth in this section.
[III.]D. Ensuring Staff Awareness Through Identification Cards
[III.D.1.] The KDOC will take appropriate steps to ensure that all KDOC personnel having regular contact with any Deaf Inmate are made aware of such Inmate’s need for Auxiliary Aids and Services so that Effective Communication with, and the safety of, the Deaf Inmate will be ensured. Upon identifying an Inmate as Deaf during initial intake, assessment, and classification, the Deaf Inmate will receive a distinct identification (ID) card that clearly identifies him or her as a Deaf Inmate. The ID card will signify to the KDOC personnel that the Inmate is Deaf, may not respond to verbal commands, and may require Auxiliary Aids and Services. If any KDOC staff takes any Deaf Inmate’s ID card, the Deaf Inmate will be given another official indicator of his or her Deaf status.
[III.D.2.] All KDOC staff having regular contact with any Deaf Inmate will be trained on the meaning of the distinct ID cards.
[III.D.3.] The KDOC will post at the entrance to all KDOC Adult Institutions housing Deaf Inmates a notice clearly stating that the KDOC Adult Institution houses Deaf Inmates and that the Deaf Inmates carry an ID card or other official indicator with them. The notice will include a picture of the ID card and other official indicator carried by Deaf Inmates. The Notice will also be posted outside each housing unit where Deaf Inmates are held.
11/2016 Court Report, App-207

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 209 of 326 - Page ID#: 1790

[III.D.4.] If any Deaf Inmate indicates that he or she does not wish to wear an ID card identifying him or her as Deaf as set forth in this Agreement, he or she will sign a Waiver of Deaf Inmate ID Card and that document will be kept in the Inmate’s institutional file. If any Deaf Inmate signs a Waiver of Deaf Inmate ID Card but later requests to wear an ID card identifying him or her as Deaf as set forth in this Agreement, he or she will promptly be provided an opportunity to fill out a Request for Deaf Inmate ID Card form. The KDOC will then promptly provide the Inmate with a Deaf Inmate ID card and update the Deaf Inmate’s institutional file.

[III.]E.

Interpretation of Materials

The KDOC will provide the Deaf Inmate materials it provides to all Inmates. In providing these materials, the KDOC agrees to Effectively Communicate with the Deaf Inmate. See, e.g., 28 CFR 35.160(b)(2). At the request of the Deaf Inmate, the KDOC will provide that Deaf Inmate with a meaningful opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member and a Qualified Interpreter to ask any questions regarding the written or interpreted materials.

[III.]F. Creation and Interpretation of Rights Materials

[III.F.1.] Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will provide each Deaf Inmate with materials providing information about the Auxiliary Aids and Services available to Deaf Inmates and instructions for how to obtain, request, or use those Auxiliary Aids and Services. The KDOC will create these materials using language designed to be accessible to each Deaf Inmate. The KDOC will provide these materials to Deaf Inmates with the orientation materials provided to all other Inmates at initial intake, assessment, and classification.

[III.F.2.] In providing these materials, the KDOC agrees to Effectively Communicate with the Deaf Inmate. See, e.g., 28 CFR 35.160(b)(2). At the request of the Deaf Inmate, the KDOC will provide that Deaf Inmate with a meaningful opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member and a Qualified Interpreter to ask any questions regarding the written or interpreted materials.

IV. HOUSING

[IV.]A. General Policy

[IV.A.1.] The KDOC has the discretion to house Deaf Inmates at whatever KDOC Adult Institution it deems appropriate. See, e.g., KY Corrections Policy and Procedure 18.7.

[IV.A.2.] Wherever a Deaf Inmate is housed, that Deaf Inmate retains all rights as required by this Agreement, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws, and this Agreement.

[IV.]B. Schedule of Accommodations

11/2016 Court Report, App-208

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 210 of 326 - Page ID#: 1791
Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, KDOC personnel at those KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are housed shall provide each Deaf Inmate with a schedule showing when Qualified Interpreters and/or other Auxiliary Aids and Services are available. When the schedule of accommodations changes, including when a Qualified Interpreter will be available, an updated schedule of accommodations will be given to all Deaf Inmates.
V. PROVISION OF AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
[V.]A. General Policy
[V.A.1.] In order to ensure substantial equality for Deaf Inmates, the KDOC will provide appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, as required by this Agreement, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws. This substantial equality will extend to include KDOC programs for or to Deaf Inmates provided by third party vendors, contractors, or state-funded entities, such as community colleges.
[V.A.2.] Appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, including Qualified Interpreters, will be made available so that Deaf Inmates may have an equal opportunity to participate in all services, privileges, and programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC’s custody. These services, privileges, and programs will include, but not be limited to: orientation; medical evaluations; On-site Medical Care and healthcare appointments; classification and transfer hearings; grievance, disciplinary, and Parole hearings; and rehabilitative, educational, work, or transitional KDOC programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC’s custody.
[V.A.3.] In those instances where the KDOC permits volunteers to provide activities (religious or otherwise)—including programs, services, or meetings—to Inmates in KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are housed, the KDOC will allow the volunteer organization or individual to bring a Qualified Interpreter, subject to the KDOC Adult Institution’s security requirements, and will work with the volunteer organization or individual in an effort to have a Qualified Interpreter at the volunteer-provided activities. Such an accommodation must be initiated by request from the Deaf Inmate to the volunteer organization or individual. The responsibility for finding the interpreter will not rest with the KDOC, and proper notice allowing the KDOC to conduct appropriate security clearances must be provided. To the extent the KDOC provides, now or in the future, any religious activities at facilities housing Deaf Inmates, the KDOC shall provide a Qualified Interpreter at such activities upon the request of any Deaf Inmate.
[V.A.4.] The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain activities present a Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates and may therefore choose not to provide such Deaf Inmates substantially equal enjoyment of some of its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination.
11/2016 Court Report, App-209

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 211 of 326 - Page ID#: 1792
[V.A.5.] The KDOC will provide instructions for the use of all Auxiliary Aids and Services to ensure Deaf Inmates’ full use and enjoyment of the Auxiliary Aids and Services.
[V.]B. Medical Devices
All Auxiliary Aids and Services required by this Agreement, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws, which are deemed medically necessary, will be provided promptly upon request, free of charge, to Deaf Inmates subject to a co-payment for that medical device, just as non-Deaf Inmates are charged a co-payment for other medical appliances or devices. This copay shall not apply, however, to hearing aid batteries or for any Deaf Inmate who is deemed indigent pursuant to Kentucky Corrections Policy and Procedure 15.7.
[V.]C. Maintenance of Auxiliary Aids and Services
The KDOC shall maintain all Auxiliary Aids and Services in its custody in good working condition at all times.
VI. QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS
[VI.]A. General Policy
[VI.A.1.] The KDOC will provide Qualified Interpreters as required by this Agreement, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws. The KDOC agrees that Deaf Inmates in need of interpreter services will receive a Qualified Interpreter able to facilitate Effective Communication with that particular Deaf Inmate. The KDOC shall provide an in-person Qualified Interpreter at KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are incarcerated in the following circumstances:
Ɣ communications concerning medical care and attention, including dental, vision, audiological, and mental health care;
Ɣ disciplinary hearings in which the Deaf Inmate may be a suspect of or charged with a rule infraction;
Ɣ transfer and classification processes that impact on the Deaf Inmate’s status; Ɣ transitional programming; Ɣ rehabilitative programming, including, but not limited to, Alcoholics
Anonymous (AA) and Narcotics Anonymous (NA); and Ɣ educational programming.
[VI.A.2.] The KDOC shall also provide an in-person Qualified Interpreter at KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are incarcerated as circumstances warrant. The KDOC will be responsible for scheduling and overseeing the provision of Qualified Interpreters.
11/2016 Court Report, App-210

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 212 of 326 - Page ID#: 1793
[VI.A.3.] When a Deaf Inmate is scheduled to appear at a Parole hearing, the appropriate ADA Coordinator will notify the Kentucky Parole Board of the Deaf Inmate’s need for, and the Kentucky Parole Board’s duty to provide, Auxiliary Aids and Services for Effective Communication. This notice shall be given no later than seven (7) days before the Deaf Inmate’s scheduled Parole hearing. In the event that the Deaf Inmate will be physically present at a KDOC Adult Institution for the Parole hearing, the KDOC will work with the Kentucky Parole Board to ensure that any appointed Qualified Interpreter obtains security clearances in a timely manner.
[VI.]B. Other Means of Communication
KDOC employees will communicate with Deaf Inmates for such purposes, and to the same extent, as they would communicate with non-Deaf Inmates using all available means of communication. This provision in no way lessens the KDOC’s obligation to provide Qualified Interpreters in certain situations and in a timely manner.
[VI.]C. On-site Medical Care
[VI.C.]1. General Policy
The KDOC will provide Effective Communication for all scheduled appointments between Deaf Inmates and medical personnel at KDOC facilities, including, but not limited to, review of medical history, medical appointments, follow up meetings or appointments, and treatment meetings. The parties agree that for many Deaf Inmates, a Qualified Interpreter may be a necessary means of providing Effective Communication in these circumstances.
[VI.C.]2. Informing Appropriate Medical Staff
The KDOC will ensure that all medical staff are made aware of an Inmate’s Deafness. For each Deaf Inmate, the medical staff will note, in bold marking, the Deaf Inmate’s disability on the medical file cover and in the Deaf Inmate’s medical file.
[VI.C.]3. Scheduling Medical Appointments with Qualified Interpreters
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with the ability to request Auxiliary Aids and Services to ensure Effective Communication at medical appointments. The KDOC will provide space on any forms used to request medical appointments for Deaf Inmates to request Auxiliary Aids and Services. Appointments for Deaf Inmates requiring Auxiliary Aids and Services will be scheduled within the same time period from the initial request as those for similarly situated nonDeaf Inmates.
[VI.C.]4. Emergency Events
Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will provide a Qualified Interpreter via VRI service for use in unscheduled medical emergencies. If VRI services are not appropriate in the situation, KDOC personnel will work in conjunction with
11/2016 Court Report, App-211

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 213 of 326 - Page ID#: 1794
medical staff to attempt to secure an in-person Qualified Interpreter as soon as possible. Lifesaving medical care should never be delayed because no interpretation services are available.
[VI.]D. Off-site Medical Care
[VI.D.1.] As early as practicable, the KDOC will inform all off-site medical providers that a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service will be seeking medical care from those off-site medical providers at a particular date and time.
[VI.D.2.] In the case of an emergency, the KDOC will, as soon as possible, inform an off-site medical provider that a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service is being transported to the off-site medical provider. Notification will include the Deaf Inmate’s estimated time of arrival.
[VI.]E. Educational, Vocational, and Rehabilitative Programming
The KDOC shall provide appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services for all KDOC programs, which are offered at KDOC Adult Institutions and which Deaf Inmates are qualified for, admitted into, or in which Deaf Inmates are actively participating. The following appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services will be provided:
[VI.E.]1. Educational Programs
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closed-captioned education materials where available. In addition, the KDOC will provide Effective Communication for educational KDOC program classes. The educational program classes include, without limitation, literacy, adult basic education, GED preparatory, and technical education and certification classes. In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services are necessary, the KDOC shall give primary consideration to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)).
[VI.E.]2. Vocational/Work Programs
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closed-captioned vocational/work materials where available. In addition, and as necessary, the KDOC will provide Effective Communication for vocational/work KDOC programs. In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, the KDOC shall give primary consideration to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)).
[VI.E.]3. KDOC Rehabilitative, Counseling, Therapeutic, Substance Abuse, and Evidence-Based Programs
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closed-captioned materials where available. In addition, and as necessary, the KDOC will provide Effective Communication for rehabilitative, counseling, therapeutic, substance abuse, and evidence-based KDOC programs. In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, the
11/2016 Court Report, App-212

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 214 of 326 - Page ID#: 1795
KDOC shall give primary consideration to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)). The KDOC will provide Qualified Interpreters for Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) and Narcotics Anonymous (NA) programs. (
[VI.]F. Work Assignments
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates opportunities for institutional work assignments that are consistent with the opportunities for the same assignments given to similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates. The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain work assignments present a Direct Threat of injury or death to a Deaf Inmate or others and may therefore choose not to provide the Deaf Inmate a substantially equal opportunity to those work assignments. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination.
[VI.]G. Religious Services
[VI.G.1.] The KDOC shall encourage outside volunteers providing religious services to provide Effective Communication for Deaf Inmates as long as the volunteer meets the same security requirements that are imposed on all other outside volunteers.
[VI.G.2.] No Deaf Inmate will be required to attend a religious service where a Qualified Interpreter is not provided in order to receive any religious meal, diet, or otherwise offered religious accommodation.
[VI.G.3.] To the extent that the KDOC provides any religious services, now or in the future, the KDOC shall provide a Qualified Interpreter.
[VI.]H. Transfer and Classification Matters
The KDOC will provide a Qualified Interpreter for any hearings or meetings relating to a Deaf Inmate’s transfer to another facility, change in security classification, or any other classification hearing involving the exchange of information between the Deaf Inmate and the KDOC personnel that could affect the Deaf Inmate’s status.
[VI.]I. Transitional Programming – Post-Release Supervision (Including Parole)
Upon request, the KDOC will provide appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, which may include Qualified Interpreters, for Deaf Inmates under post-release supervision to Effectively Communicate with the individual supervising their post-release supervision.
[VI.]J. Additional Communications
The KDOC will provide Effective Communication, which may include Qualified Interpreters, for any significant communications between Deaf Inmates and KDOC staff that is not specifically discussed in this Agreement. A significant communication includes any
11/2016 Court Report, App-213

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 215 of 326 - Page ID#: 1796
communication for which the Deaf Inmate requests an interpreter, subject to approval by the ADA Coordinator, the Warden, and/or the Warden’s designee.
VII. DISCIPLINARY MATTERS
[VII.]A. Qualified Interpreters For Disciplinary Proceedings
[VII.A.1.] The KDOC must provide Deaf Inmates with a Qualified Interpreter in any disciplinary proceeding in which a Deaf Inmate is suspected of, charged with, or a witness to, a disciplinary infraction, including those proceedings carried out under Chapter 15 of the Kentucky Corrections Policy and Procedure and any other disciplinary policies and procedures now in force or subsequently adopted by the KDOC. A Qualified Interpreter must be available to a Deaf Inmate at the following stages of the above-described disciplinary proceedings:
Ɣ staff investigations involving the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel, prior to filing a disciplinary report or equivalent;
Ɣ investigative interviews that involve the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel (such as when an adverse party is interviewed);
Ɣ during any part of the preparation of the disciplinary report that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel;
Ɣ during any part of the shift supervisor’s review of the disciplinary report that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel;
Ɣ during any part of the investigator’s review of the disciplinary report that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel;
Ɣ giving Miranda warnings to a Deaf Inmate; Ɣ advising a Deaf Inmate of his or her right to consult with an assigned legal
aide; Ɣ advising a Deaf Inmate of the anticipated date, time, and place of hearing; and Ɣ during any part of the hearing, or re-hearing, before the Adjustment
Committee, Adjustment Officer or Unit Hearing Officer that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel. [VII.A.2.] Inmate or staff advisors will be provided and accessible to Deaf Inmates who are suspected of, charged with, or witnesses to a disciplinary infraction, on the same terms as they are provided to non-Deaf Inmates. To the extent that a Deaf Inmate has access to his or her advisor, a Qualified Interpreter shall be made available to the Deaf Inmate for any exchange of information between the Deaf Inmate and his or her advisor.
11/2016 Court Report, App-214

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 216 of 326 - Page ID#: 1797
[VII.]B. Miscellaneous
[VII.B.1.] If any Deaf Inmate is a witness at a disciplinary hearing, the KDOC will provide a Qualified Interpreter at the hearing.
[VII.B.2.] The KDOC must hold disciplinary hearings for Deaf Inmates within the same time frame as it holds disciplinary hearings for non-Deaf Inmates.
[VII.B.3.] Nothing in this Agreement precludes any Deaf Inmate who is suspected of or charged with a disciplinary infraction from voluntarily waiving his or her right to a Qualified Interpreter and to proceed through any stage of a disciplinary proceeding without the benefits of a Qualified Interpreter. If, as of the Effective Date of this Agreement, a Deaf Inmate is being punished or is scheduled to be punished for a disciplinary infraction as the result of a hearing in which he or she did not waive his or her right to a Qualified Interpreter, then the disciplinary hearing must be re-heard at a time that a Qualified Interpreter can be present.
VIII. NON-AUDITORY ALERT NOTIFICATIONS
[VIII.]A. General Policy
Deaf Inmates incarcerated at KDOC facilities should not miss announcements, alarms, or any other information audibly conveyed from KDOC staff to the general Inmate population solely because of their disability.
[VIII.]B. Relaying Information
[VIII.B.1.] The KDOC shall provide an effective non-auditory alert system that will notify Deaf Inmates of both prison-wide events (including but not limited to announcements, visitations, and roll-calls) and events specific to Deaf Inmates. The non-auditory alert system must be capable of effectively alerting Deaf Inmates of such events in real time.
[VIII.B.2.] In addition, the KDOC will continue to publish the institution schedule in the handbook that every Inmate receives and to post promptly any schedule changes, which are done by memorandum from the Warden, in all dormitories, the library, and the gym at each KDOC Adult Institution in which a Deaf Inmate is housed. Further, the KDOC will provide all medically necessary hearing aids and assisting devices, including but not limited to, bed shakers.
[VIII.B.3.] The KDOC has the discretion as to which type of non-auditory alerts it shall employ and to change that system as it deems necessary. Nonetheless, the KDOC will promptly advise the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH of all non-auditory alert systems that the KDOC is considering, and will consult with the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH in determining whether such devices are acceptable for the stated purpose.
11/2016 Court Report, App-215

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 217 of 326 - Page ID#: 1798
[VIII.]C. Non-Auditory Alarms and Emergency Evacuation
[VIII.C.1.] The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with an effective non-auditory alert system that will advise them of an emergency evacuation or other emergency. Such non-auditory alert systems must be sufficient to effectively notify Deaf Inmates of emergencies in real-time and can include flashing strobe lights and bed shakers. The KDOC has the discretion as to which type of non-auditory alerts it shall employ and to change that system as it deems necessary. Nonetheless, the KDOC will promptly advise the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH of the non-auditory alert systems that the KDOC is considering, and will consult with the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH in determining whether such systems are acceptable for the stated purpose.
[VIII.C.2.] KDOC personnel shall be responsible for the evacuation or safe relocation of Deaf Inmates during an emergency. Therefore, during emergencies, KDOC employees will personally and Effectively Communicate adequate information about the emergency to Deaf Inmates.
IX. TELECOMMUNICATIONS
[IX.]A. General Policy
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with access to telecommunication devices that enable them to have communication with people outside of the KDOC and that are substantially equivalent—in terms of the amount and quality of the information conveyed—to the communications that non-Deaf Inmates have with people outside of the KDOC using traditional telecommunication devices such as telephones.
[IX.]B. Monitoring Communications
The KDOC may only provide for the monitoring of communications between Deaf Inmates and individuals outside of the KDOC to the same extent and with the same discretion applied to the monitoring of communications between non-Deaf Inmates and those outside of the KDOC.
[IX.]C. Additional Time for Communication
The KDOC will implement a policy that allows Deaf Inmates at least twice as many minutes to complete a Videophone call, and at least three times as many minutes to complete a TTY call, as the number of minutes afforded to other non-Deaf Inmates to make calls using traditional telecommunication devices such as telephones. In the event the KDOC determines this usage arrangement results in less than equitable access to telephones and Videophones for non-Deaf Inmates and Deaf Inmates, after considering the needs and abilities of Deaf and non-Deaf Inmates, the KDOC may adjust the ratio of time provided for Videophone calls and TTY calls. The KDOC will document this determination, including the evidence and reasons in support thereof. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made, and will explain the reasoning in support of such determination.
11/2016 Court Report, App-216

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 218 of 326 - Page ID#: 1799
[IX.]D. Technology KDOC Will Provide
The KDOC will make the following communications technologies available at KDCO Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are incarcerated to facilitate communication between Deaf Inmates and people outside of KDOC facilities. This list of technological equipment is not exhaustive. The KDOC will keep abreast of evolving technology and will consider adding additional equipment to reflect technological advances, as it deems appropriate or as required by applicable federal and state law. KDOC will provide a list of available communications equipment to Deaf Inmates upon their arrival at the KDOC Adult Institutions in which they are housed.
[IX.D.]1. TTY or TDD
The parties acknowledge that there may be reasonable concerns over the theft and destruction of the TTY/TDD device(s), and that the TTY/TDD device(s) therefore must be maintained in a secured location when not in use. The parties also acknowledge that access to the TTY/TDD device(s) will be made available at times that the KDOC will designate. Nonetheless, for every KDOC Adult Institution at which any Deaf Inmate is incarcerated, in no event will TTY/TDD access for Deaf Inmates be less than equal to the access non-Deaf Inmates have to conventional telephones, except to the extent that Deaf Inmates must request access to the otherwise secured TTY/TDD device(s). A reasonable request by a Deaf Inmate to access the TTY/TDD device(s) will be granted. TTY/TDDs will be located in areas substantially as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. TTY/TDDs will be available for Deaf Inmate use during the same days and hours as conventional telephones. At each KDOC Adult Institution where any Deaf Inmate is incarcerated, the KDOC will ensure that an alternate TTY or TDD unit is available for use when the regular TTY or TDD is broken or otherwise unavailable.
[IX.D.]2. Relay Services
For every KDOC Adult Institution at which any Deaf Inmate is incarcerated, the KDOC will enable all TTYs and TDDs to access publicly available relay service phone numbers such as 711 and 1-800 numbers. Deaf Inmates will not be charged any more than similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates for the use of relay services.
[IX.D.]3. Videophones
[IX.D.3.a.] Within sixty (60) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, Videophones shall be installed and accessible to Deaf Inmates in any KDOC Adult Institution that houses Deaf Inmates. Access to the Videophone will be made available at times that the KDOC will designate, but in no event will Videophone access for Deaf Inmates be less than equal to the access non-Deaf Inmates have to conventional telephones. Videophones will be located in areas as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. Videophone will be available during the same days and hours as conventional telephones and will not require permission for use to the same extent that conventional telephones do not require permission for use. Deaf Inmates will not be charged for the use of Videophones.
11/2016 Court Report, App-217

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 219 of 326 - Page ID#: 1800
[IX.D.3.b.] Videophones will allow voice carry-over features.
[IX.]E. Responsibility for Maintaining Equipment and Training Staff [IX.E.1.] The KDOC will ensure that the technology used to permit communication between Deaf Inmates and people outside of KDOC Adult Institutions is in good working order. Further, the KDOC will ensure that all equipment under the KDOC’s control that is used to accommodate Deaf Inmates is kept in good working order. KDOC staff shall attempt to resolve complaints about any malfunctioning equipment within a reasonable time of receiving that complaint. To the extent services, equipment, and resources that are outside KDOC’s control are involved (for example services or equipment provided by cable, telephone, utilities, or various other companies), KDOC will agree to notify those providers/companies of any problems and, to the extent necessary or possible under the circumstances, work with them expeditiously to resolve the problem. [IX.E.2.] The KDOC will ensure that KDOC employees are adequately trained in the operation of the technology.
X. MEDIA [X.1.] The KDOC will ensure that all audio-visual media purchased for Inmate use in KDOC Adult Institutions housing Deaf Inmates includes open- or closed-captioning. Televisions purchased by the KDOC for Inmate use shall support open- or closed-captioning. Captioning will be turned on and remain on at any Deaf Inmate’s request. [X.2.] The KDOC will permit Deaf Inmates to purchase TVs, which reliably support open- or closed-captioning, with their own funds. In the event that the closed-captioning feature contained on TVs purchased through approved commercial channels malfunctions, KDOC personnel will work with the Deaf Inmate to the same extent that the KDOC works with other Inmates regarding malfunctioning personal property to address and resolve the problem within a reasonable time.
XI. HAND RESTRAINTS [XI.]A. General Policy
[XI.A.1.] According to the KDOC’s hand restraint policies, the KDOC will use hand restraints on Deaf Inmates only in the following circumstances:
11/2016 Court Report, App-218

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 220 of 326 - Page ID#: 1801
Ɣ when transporting a Deaf Inmate to or from a KDOC Adult Institution; Ɣ when transferring a Deaf Inmate into or out of the special management unit;
and Ɣ as needed in response to security threats. [XI.A.2.] The applicable portions of the KDOC hand restraint policy, summarized above, have been reviewed to confirm when hand restraints are used on Inmates confined to KDOC Adult Institutions. While the policy does not specify the manner in which mechanical restraints are used during Off-site Medical Care, an Affidavit is included as Appendix A to this Agreement describing the two-point bed restraint system used during Off-site Medical Care. The two-point system would allow a Deaf Inmate to use his or her hands for communicating via sign language to some degree. KDOC training will include both the two-point system as well as the agreement that hand restraints will be removed from a Deaf Inmate when the Deaf Inmate is in a secure environment, when security is no longer a threat, or there are other security devices in place to allow the Deaf Inmate to Effectively Communicate.
[XI.]B. Off-site Medical Care
[XI.B.1.] During Off-site Medical Care, the KDOC shall use a two-point hand restraint system to allow for the Deaf Inmate’s need for Effective Communication while considering the safety and security of the Deaf Inmate and those located at Off-site Medical Care facilities. The KDOC will include training on use of the two-point hand restraint system in its regularly scheduled training for new and existing employees.
[XI.B.2.] In the event a medical decision made by medical professionals or medical staff that requires or calls for removal or adjustment of hand restraints, the KDOC will follow its secured policy regarding the removal of mechanical restraints where necessary for treatment or emergencies.
[XI.]C. On-Site Medical Care
The KDOC’s hand restraint policy, summarized above in Section XI.A., will be followed for Onsite Medical Care.
XII. MISCELLANEOUS DEVICES AND AIDS
Where devices such as vibrating clocks and in-line amplifiers are not deemed medically necessary, the KDOC agrees to consider on a case by case basis whether it will allow a particular Deaf Inmate the opportunity to purchase these devices at his or her own expense. The KDOC’s decision in this regard will consider, among other issues, whether these devices pose a security risk. The KDOC will have the discretion to make the determination whether any of these devices, and the type of device, is permissible. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination. Deaf Inmates will be allowed to purchase alerting devices, vibrating clocks, telephone amplifications, headset amplifiers, and televisions that meet the particular needs of
11/2016 Court Report, App-219

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 221 of 326 - Page ID#: 1802
their disability from an approved vendor so long as the items do not pose a security risk. The KDOC retains the discretion to limit purchases to devices that are available through the Commissary. Deaf Inmates may submit a request in writing to the ADA Coordinator responsible for the KDOC Adult Institution in which they are housed for devices not available from the Commissary. The KDOC will not deny any Deaf Inmate the right to purchase these devices except where they present an articulable security risk, which shall be documented. The ADA Coordinator will maintain written records of all Deaf Inmate requests for these devices and the disposition of the request.
XIII. TRAINING
[XIII.]A. General Policy
[XIII.A.1.] The KDOC, with input from the KCDHH, will provide training as defined in Section XIII.B below to KDOC employees who interact with the Inmate population. The KDOC will incorporate this training into its regularly scheduled training for new and existing employees. This training will be included in current KDOC training within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement. The KDOC will update the training materials as required by law, including but not limited to, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws.
[XIII.A.2.] The KDOC will provide any materials that may be used for training, as specified under Section XIV of this Agreement, to the Settlement Monitor for review prior to the first training session. In addition, the KDOC, with input from the KCDHH, will update and allow the KCDHH and the Settlement Monitor to review the training as defined in Section XIII.B. at least every two years.
[XIII.]B. KDOC Employee Training
Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will begin training KDOC employees on the following topics:
Ɣ best practices for communicating with Deaf individuals; Ɣ the unique needs and problems encountered by Deaf and late-Deafened
individuals; Ɣ identification of communication needs of persons who are Deaf; Ɣ the psychological implications of Deafness and its relationship to interaction
with hearing corrections personnel; Ɣ the proper use and role of Qualified Interpreters; Ɣ directions about using TTYs, TDDs, Videophones and any other
telecommunication equipment, and other Auxiliary Aids and Services, currently available at the facility that facilitate communication with Deaf people;
11/2016 Court Report, App-220

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 222 of 326 - Page ID#: 1803
Ɣ disciplinary matters, described in Section VII, and grievance proceedings, described in Section XIV;
Ɣ the KDOC’s anti-discrimination policy; Ɣ all equipment, services, and accommodations available to Deaf Inmates; Ɣ hand restraint policies in the context of Deaf Inmates; and Ɣ the requirements of this Agreement.
XIV. GRIEVANCES
[XIV.1.] All KDOC grievance coordinators will inform Deaf Inmates who file a grievance of the option to share that grievance (or any responses or outcomes) with the ADA Coordinator of the KDOC Adult Institution in which the Deaf Inmate is housed. If the Deaf Inmate agrees to share the grievance (or any responses or outcomes) with the ADA Coordinator, the grievance coordinator will forward a copy of that grievance (or grievance response or outcome) to the ADA Coordinator for review.
[XIV.2.] A written record of all Deaf Inmates’ grievances (and any responses and outcomes) will be maintained by the KDOC. For five years following the Effective Date of this Agreement, the Settlement Monitor may request the records of any Deaf Inmate’s grievances, as long as the Deaf Inmate signs a waiver of confidentiality pursuant to KRS 197.023, and a copy of that Deaf Inmate’s records will be provided, free of charge, to the Settlement Monitor.
[XIV.3.] Within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, and every three months thereafter, the KDOC will provide the Settlement Monitor with a written summary of grievances filed by Deaf Inmates concerning access to Effective Communication, Auxiliary Aids and Services, or any other issues raised in this Agreement. This written summary will describe, for each grievance, the issue raised by the Deaf Inmate, the KDOC Adult Institution where the grievance was filed, a summary of KDOC’s response, and whether and how the grievance was resolved.
XV. MONITORING AND COMPLIANCE
[XV.]A. Plaintiffs’ Counsels’ Right of Access
To the extent Plaintiffs’ Counsel maintains a current or prospective attorney-client relationship with any Deaf Inmate, they shall be provided the same access to that Deaf Inmate and to the records relating to that Deaf Inmate, as any other attorney with a similar relationship to another non-Deaf Inmate.
11/2016 Court Report, App-221

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 223 of 326 - Page ID#: 1804
[XV.]B. The Settlement Monitor’s Investigation
[XV.B.1.] For a period of five years after the Effective Date, the following will apply to the extent necessary to permit the Settlement Monitor to thoroughly and objectively assess the KDOC’s compliance with and implementation of this Agreement:
Ɣ [XV.B.1.a] The Settlement Monitor will have unlimited access to all records, files, and papers maintained by the KDOC that relate to the terms of this Agreement. The KDOC will provide a written explanation for any refusal by the KDOC to provide any requested records, files, or papers, and the KDOC and the Settlement Monitor will attempt to reach an agreement before either the KDOC or the Settlement Monitor seek assistance from the Court.
Ɣ [XV.B.1.b] The Settlement Monitor will have access to all other materials relating to the case Adams, et al. v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, et al., Case no. 14-cv-00001, except for those materials protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Any requested materials protected by the attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine will be logged with information including the author, date, nature of the material, reason for the claim of privilege, and persons to whom the material was disseminated, and this log will be provided to the Settlement Monitor.
Ɣ [XV.B.1.c] The Settlement Monitor will have access to all pertinent staff members and employees of the KDOC. The Settlement Monitor may engage in both formal and informal conferences with staff members and employees, including confidential or group interviews, and such persons will cooperate will the Settlement Monitor fully and will respond to all reasonable inquiries and requests relating to compliance efforts. The Settlement Monitor will contact the Warden or the Warden’s designee to schedule these conferences and/or interviews, which will be treated as attorney visits under CPP 14.4.
Ɣ [XV.B.1.d] The Settlement Monitor may conduct confidential interviews with any Deaf Inmate or with groups of Deaf Inmates incarcerated at Adult KDOC Institutions. Within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, and every six months thereafter, the KDOC will provide the Settlement Monitor with a current and up-to-date list of Deaf Inmates in the KDOC’s custody, which identifies the name, DOC numbers and the KDOC Adult Institution for each Deaf Inmate. The Settlement Monitor will contact the Warden or the Warden’s designee to schedule these conferences and/or interviews, which will be treated as attorney visits under CPP 14.4.
Ɣ [XV.B.1.e] The Settlement Monitor may request KDOC staff members and employees to prepare, where appropriate, written responses to any questions by the Settlement Monitor related to the implementation of the Agreement or issues in this litigation, so long as the request does not interfere with security
11/2016 Court Report, App-222

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 224 of 326 - Page ID#: 1805
obligations of KDOC staff members and employees. The KDOC will not refuse or fail to respond to reasonable requests. Responses to these requests shall be provided in a timely manner that is reasonable and shall not interfere in the security obligations of any KDOC staff members or employees. The KDOC will provide a written explanation for any refusal by the KDOC staff members or employees to provide any requested responses, and the KDOC and the Settlement Monitor will attempt to reach an agreement before either the KDOC or the Settlement Monitor seek assistance from the Court.
Ɣ [XV.B.1.f] The Settlement Monitor may visit each KDOC Adult Institution so long as the KDOC is provided notice a minimum of thirty (30) days prior to the visit. All visits will be supervised by a KDOC employee. Visits will be limited to only those areas of a KDOC Adult Institution that are affected by this Agreement. Absent Court order or a separate agreement, the Settlement Monitor may visit each KDOC Adult Institution only once in a calendar year. The KDOC will pay the cost of and associated with providing Qualified Interpreters for the Settlement Monitor’s visits to KDOC Adult Institutions.
[XV.B.2.] The parties will not refuse reasonable requests for records, files, papers, or other materials or for access to people or other information. The Settlement Monitor will conduct the bulleted monitoring, above, in a reasonable manner to minimize interference with the daily operations of the KDOC. Absent a Court order requiring otherwise, the KDOC retains discretion to prohibit the Settlement Monitor from conducting the aforementioned monitoring on the buildings and premises under the control of the KDOC, but the KDOC will not unreasonably refuse requests for visits.
[XV.B.3.] The Settlement Monitor may hire other persons as the Settlement Monitor determines to be necessary to carry out the Settlement Monitor’s duties.
[XV.B.4.] For a period of five years after the Effective Date of this Agreement, the Settlement Monitor will issue semi-annual reports to the Court and the parties detailing the parties’ compliance with and implementation of this Agreement.
[XV.B.5.] The KDOC will not pay for the fees and expenses due to the Settlement Monitor for the Settlement Monitor’s services under this section.
XVI. RELEASE AND SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS
[XVI.]A. Release
In consideration of the representations, promises and agreements set forth herein, including the payments as set forth in this Agreement, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Plaintiffs, on their behalf and on behalf of their assignees, heirs, executors, family members, beneficiaries, administrators, successors, and anyone acting, or claiming to act, on their behalf, hereby releases and forever discharges the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, KDOC, J. Michael Brown, Ladonna Thompson, Kimberly Potter-Blair,
11/2016 Court Report, App-223

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 225 of 326 - Page ID#: 1806
Paula Holden, Jim Erwin, Randy White, Gregory Howard, Clark Taylor, Aaron Smith, Kathy Litteral, Steve Haney, Gary Beckstrom, Alan Brown, Janet Conover, Joseph Meko, Don Bottoms, Ravonne Sims, Steve Woodward, and Bobbie Underwood from any and all claims and causes of action, known and unknown, asserted and unasserted, direct and indirect, and of any kind, nature or description whatsoever, which they had on or before the date of the execution of this Agreement arising out of the facts set forth in the discrimination charge they filed with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, Frankfort Division.
[XVI.]B. Dismissal
[XVI.B.1.] The Plaintiffs agree to dismiss with prejudice all claims of the Amended Complaint filed with the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Kentucky, Frankfort Division (the “Court”), Case Number 3:14-cv-00001.
[XVI.B.2.] The parties agree that the Court will retain jurisdiction over this Agreement as set out in Section XVI.E of this Agreement, below.
[XVI.]C. Attorneys’ Fees, Costs, Disbursements and Expenses
In settlement of all claims for attorneys’ fees and costs, any disbursements and expenses, including expert fees, incurred on behalf of Plaintiffs in this litigation up to and including the Effective Date, the parties agree that within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC shall pay $250,000.00 as directed by Plaintiffs’ counsel.
[XVI.]D. Damages
Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC shall directly pay (1) Plaintiff Oscar Adams $1,500.00 in damages and (2) Plaintiff Michael Knights $1,500.00 in damages. The KDOC also agrees to pay within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement Plaintiff Michael Knights $77.62 to compensate for lien charges assessed against him for communications with Plaintiffs’ Counsel regarding this case and settlement.
[XVI.]E. Enforcement Powers
[XVI.E.1.] During the term of the Agreement, as set out in Section XVII.H, Plaintiffs may move the court for reinstatement of the lawsuit, or may elect to seek specific performance or institute an action for breach. An action to enforce this Agreement does not include any action for damages, except for enforcement of Section XVI.D. A Plaintiff seeking to enforce this Agreement can only seek to have a court order the KDOC to comply with the terms of this Agreement.
[XVI.E.2.] The lawsuit may not be reinstated, nor a claim for breach or specific performance of this Agreement brought, before a Plaintiff first notifies the KDOC of the nature of the alleged material non-compliance and gives the KDOC sixty (60) days to cure the alleged breach. The parties agree to non-binding mediation prior to any Plaintiff moving to reinstate the lawsuit or filing an enforcement action.
11/2016 Court Report, App-224

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 226 of 326 - Page ID#: 1807
XVII. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS [XVII.]A. Non-Admission
It is understood and agreed that this Agreement is a compromise of disputed claims, facts, or allegations. Nothing in this Agreement constitutes an admission of any liability, wrongdoing, or violation of any law, or the admission of the validity of any defense.
[XVII.]B. Private Settlement Agreement This Agreement is a private settlement agreement within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3626.
[XVII.]C. Confidentiality No part of this Agreement is or will be considered confidential by the parties. This Agreement will be made available by request under the Freedom of Information Act.
[XVII.]D. Entire Agreement [XVII.D.1.] This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties. There were no inducements or representations leading to the execution of this document, except as stated within the document itself. The terms of this Agreement are contractual in nature. [XVII.D.2.] All parties agree that the relief provided in this Agreement is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary, and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct the violation of Plaintiffs’ federally protected rights.
[XVII.]E. Execution This Agreement may be executed in counterpart originals, all of which, when so executed and taken together, shall be deemed an original and all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. Each counterpart may be delivered by email (as a .pdf attachment) or facsimile, and an email or facsimile signature shall have the same force and effect as an original signature.
[XVII.]F. Binding This Agreement is final and binding on the Parties. Each Party has a duty to so inform any such successor in interest.
[XVII.]G. Non-Waiver Failure by the Plaintiffs to seek enforcement of this Agreement pursuant to its terms with respect to any instance or provision will not be construed as a waiver to such enforcement with regard to other instances and provisions.
11/2016 Court Report, App-225

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 227 of 326 - Page ID#: 1808
[XVII.]H. Severability In the event that a court determines that any provision of this Agreement is unenforceable, such provision will be severed from this Agreement and all other provisions will remain valid and enforceable, provided however that if the severance of any such provision materially alters the rights and obligations of the Parties hereunder, the Parties will attempt, through reasonable, good faith negotiations, to agree upon such other amendments to this Agreement as may be necessary to restore the Parties as closely as possible to the relative rights and obligations initially intended by them hereunder.
[XVII.]I. Term of Agreement This Agreement shall remain in effect for five years from the Effective Date. The KDOC, however, will continue to provide all accommodations required under the law, including under the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws, regardless of any term limit applicable to this Agreement. Signed: /s/
11/2016 Court Report, App-226

CaCsaes:e3::31:41-4c-vc-v0-00000010-1G-GFVFTV-TE-BEABADoDcoc#:#8:184-F2iledF:ile0d6:/2142//1055/1P6agPea: g1eo:f2328- Poaf g3e26ID-#P:a1g4e66 ID#: 1809
11/2016 Court Report, App-227

CaCsaes:e3::31:41-4c-vc-v0-00000010-1G-GFVFTV-TE-BEABADoDcoc#:#8:184-F2iledF:ile0d6:/2142//1055/1P6agPea: g2eo:f2329- Poaf g3e26ID-#P:a1g4e67 ID#: 1810
11/2016 Court Report, App-228

CaCsaes:e3::31:41-4c-vc-v0-00000010-1G-GFVFTV-TE-BEABADoDcoc#:#8:184-F2iledF:ile0d6:/2142//1055/1P6agPea: g3eo:f2330- Poaf g3e26ID-#P:a1g4e68 ID#: 1811
11/2016 Court Report, App-229

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 231 of 326 - Page ID#: 1812

/PW$PVSU3FQPSU
"QQFOEJY7
KYDOC Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Training: Settlement Monitor’s Recommended Revision
Adams & Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky.) Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor September 7, 2016
11/2016 Court Report, App-230

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 232 of 326 - Page ID#: 1813

Notes
• Slide 16 (“What It Sounds Like”) needs to be copied from the existing training.
• Slide 20 (“Deaf culture”): There’s nothing wrong with this, but I think it’s unnecessary.
• Slide 27 (“Deaf in Prison”) needs the video copied from the existing training.
• Slide 37 (“Identification”: Add an animation effect to highlight the words “Inmate Precaution” and then the comments about hearing loss.
• Slide 38: (“Identification”): Add an animation effect to highlight the word “HOH” in the picture.
• Slide 61 (“Communication Access Real Time (CART)”): Since there is no KYDOC facility providing CART at this point, this seems a little unnecessary.
• Slide 68 (“Assistive Technology in Prison): you could skip this page, and just use the very next slide, with pictures.
11/2016 Court Report, App-231

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 233 of 326 - Page ID#: 1814

Kentucky Department of Corrections
Communications Issues Involving Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Offenders
11/2016 Court Report, App-232

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 234 of 326 - Page ID#: 1815

Course Objectives, 1
Upon course completion, employees will understand:
• Needs and problems of deaf individuals, particularly in prison.
• KYDOC's anti-discrimination policy and the requirements of the deaf prisoners federal court settlement agreement.
• Identification used in KYDOC institutions to designate an offender as deaf or hard-of-hearing.
• Communication needs of persons who are deaf or hard-ofhearing.
• Best practices for communicating with deaf and hard-ofhearing inmates.
• Equipment, services, and accommodations available to deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates.
• How to use TTYs, videophones, and other auxiliary aids and services that facilitate communication with deaf and hard-ofhearing inmates.
11/2016 Court Report, App-233

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 235 of 326 - Page ID#: 1816

Course Objectives, 2
Upon course completion, employees will understand:
• Institutional practices and policies relating to deaf inmates and:
– Adjustment proceedings – Grievance proceedings – Other situations in which qualified interpretation
is needed – Hand restraints – Monitoring telecommunication of deaf offenders.
• The role of your institution’s ADA coordinator, and how to contact them.
11/2016 Court Report, App-234

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 236 of 326 - Page ID#: 1817

CHAPTER 4
KYDOC’S NON-DISCRIMINATION POLICY
11/2016 Court Report, App-235

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 237 of 326 - Page ID#: 1818

KYDOC’s Non-discrimination Policy
Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, and a settlement agreement entered in federal court, KYDOC provides deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates: • Non-Discrimination • Effective Communication • Auxiliary Aids and Services
Equal access is the law and it's the right thing to do!
11/2016 Court Report, App-236

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 238 of 326 - Page ID#: 1819

KYDOC’s Non-discrimination Policy
Non-discrimination: KYDOC will provide deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates with access to services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations substantially equivalent to those offered to similarly situated non-deaf inmates.
11/2016 Court Report, App-237

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 239 of 326 - Page ID#: 1820

KYDOC’s Non-discrimination Policy
Effective Communication: KYDOC will communicate effectively with deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates—ensuring that inmates can receive information from and provide information to staff.
11/2016 Court Report, App-238

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 240 of 326 - Page ID#: 1821

KYDOC’s Non-discrimination Policy

Auxiliary Aids and Services:

When needed for effective communication, KYDOC will provide “auxiliary aids and services.” This means devices or services that assist in communication, such as:

• Qualified interpreters, via remote video interpretation or in-person

• Hearing aids and amplifiers

• Video captioning

• Visual or other non-auditory alert or alarm systems

• Videophone/video relay service

• TTY/TDD, including telephone relay services

• Written materials

• Computer-aided transcription services

• Assistive listening systems

11/2016 Court Report, App-239

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 241 of 326 - Page ID#: 1822

Chapter 1
OVERVIEW OF DEAF AND HARD-OFHEARING OFFENDERS
11/2016 Court Report, App-240

This chapter presents information about working with offenders who have varying degrees of hearing loss.
This subject is a concern for correctional employees for many reasons, including some you may not have considered.

11/2016 Court Report, App-241

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 242 of 326 - Page ID#: 1823

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 243 of 326 - Page ID#: 1824

Demographics
• Nearly 50 million Americans have a hearing loss, roughly 17% of the U.S. population
• Nearly 700,000 deaf or hard-of-hearing Kentuckians
(third largest per capita).
• Hearing loss is currently the third largest health issue following heart disease and arthritis. It also the fastest growing, mostly due to noise.
• Hearing loss is currently the #1 war wound.
11/2016 Court Report, App-242

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 244 of 326 - Page ID#: 1825

Hearing loss can lead to:
• DEPRESSION • WITHDRAWAL • ISOLATION • BLUFFING • DEMENTIA • MISLABELING (aggressive, uncooperative,
dementia, anti-social, or low IQ)
11/2016 Court Report, App-243

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 245 of 326 - Page ID#: 1826

What It Looks Like 11/2016 Court Report, App-244

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 246 of 326 - Page ID#: 1827

11/2016 Court Report, App-245

[COPY FROM EXISTING TRAINING}

What It Sounds Like

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 247 of 326 - Page ID#: 1828

What’s in a Name?
Mute ... deef ... death .... DUMB?! Anyone experiencing deafness of hearing loss is not any of these.

Inappropriate: _Deaf and dumb _Hearing Impaired _Mute _Death

Appropriate: 9Deaf 9Hard-of-hearing 9Non-verbal

11/2016 Court Report, App-246

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 248 of 326 - Page ID#: 1829

Population Diversity

There is tremendous diversity within the deaf

and hard-of-hearing community. Some factors

that affect this are:
Type of hearing loss Degree of loss

Identification • Deaf • Hard-of-hearing

Age of onset Etc.

Communication Mode • Sign • Oral • Both

11/2016 Court Report, App-247

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 249 of 326 - Page ID#: 1830

To Speak, or Not to Speak...
• Individuals who lose their hearing after acquiring speech usually retain their speech to some degree.
• Deaf speech:
– Can be loud, fluctuate, or monotone. – May be very animated; speakers may seem mad but
they are not. They may stare, to facilitate lip-reading. – Body language doesn't mean disrespect.
• Being able to to speak does not mean they are able to hear.
11/2016 Court Report, App-248

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 250 of 326 - Page ID#: 1831

Deaf Culture
Did You Know? Some deaf and hearing-impaired people embrace what they call their "Deaf Culture.” This is a view of life manifested by the mores, beliefs, artistic expression, understandings and language (American Sign Language) particular to Deaf people. A capital "D" is often used in the word Deaf when it refers to community or cultural aspects of Deafness.
11/2016 Court Report, App-249

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 251 of 326 - Page ID#: 1832

Causes
• Genetic • Disease/illness • Medications • Physical trauma • Noise • Presbycusis: defined as the loss of hearing that
gradually occurs to most people as they age. According to the National Institutes of Health, about 30-35% of adults between 65-75 years, and 40-50% of adults 75 and older have a hearing loss. As our offender population ages, their incidence of hearing loss will increase.
11/2016 Court Report, App-250

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 252 of 326 - Page ID#: 1833

Amplification Options

These are not like glasses. They do not give 20/20 hearing, they only amplify sounds . . . the good and the bad. They do not make sounds more intelligible. Don't assume because an offender has one of these devices that he/she understands everything you say.

11/2016 Court Report, App-251

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 253 of 326 - Page ID#: 1834

CHAPTER 2
WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE TO BE DEAF IN PRISON?
11/2016 Court Report, App-252

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 254 of 326 - Page ID#: 1835

Challenges Facing Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates:
• Difficulty hearing announcements and alerts:
- Count - Chow - Pill-call - Pages - Other announcements
• Difficulty hearing orders issued orally • Need to avoid seeming vulnerable
11/2016 Court Report, App-253

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 255 of 326 - Page ID#: 1836

Special Barriers to Communication

• Prisons are very loud, with lots of ambient

noise and terrible acoustics.

• Prisons have many congregate situations,

which are particularly difficult to understand.

• Announcements made over intercom system

can be distorted and hard to understand.

• Prisoners—particularly deaf and hard-of-

hearing prisoners—often have low literacy, so

writing cannot always be used to substitute

for speech.

11/2016 Court Report, App-254

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 256 of 326 - Page ID#: 1837

Silent World
Try to imagine what it would be like to enter prison without the ability to hear:
“Deaf people in prison are isolated, frustrated, ignored, and vulnerable”
- Deaf Prison Project, DBA/BID
11/2016 Court Report, App-255

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 257 of 326 - Page ID#: 1838

“Deaf in Prison”
[video from existing training] 11/2016 Court Report, App-256

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 258 of 326 - Page ID#: 1839

Silent World
Individuals with a hearing loss are at a disadvantage. Howard E. Stone of Self-Help for Hard of Hearing People, Inc., commented:
“As people lose their hearing, things seem to change for them, and for those around them. Misperceptions of each other, fueled by interactions often caused by ignorance, evolve. Communication breaks down. Isolation – a feeling of being alone, even in the middle of a crowd – develops the trend toward withdrawal. Perceived rejection sets in, accompanied by poor self-esteem. The process of socialization gradually shuts down.” 11/2016 Court Report, App-257

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 259 of 326 - Page ID#: 1840

How does this affect you?
As an employee, you most likely take some things for granted. For instance, you probably expect offenders to respond when you order them to report to the visiting room, perform an emergency evacuation, move away from a perimeter fence, and respond to other spoken commands.
Deaf and hard-of-hearing offenders may have difficulty doing these things if you don't communicate effectively.
11/2016 Court Report, App-258

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 260 of 326 - Page ID#: 1841

The Need for Agency Identification
So you should be alert to who the deaf and hard-ofhearing inmates are in the areas where you work.
Why would you want to know this?
Simply put, it's a matter of improving your communication with the offender. In some cases, improved communication can mean the difference between life and death.
In the next chapter, you’ll learn how KYDOC institutions identify inmates who are deaf and hardof hearing.
11/2016 Court Report, App-259

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 261 of 326 - Page ID#: 1842

CHAPTER 3
IDENTIFYING DEAF AND HARD-OFHEARING OFFENDERS
11/2016 Court Report, App-260

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 262 of 326 - Page ID#: 1843

The Process and Result of Agency Identification
Offenders with hearing loss have documentation in their KOMS file and electronic medical record to show their degree of impairment. There are also several types of identification and other notices, pictured in the slides that follow.
If you think an offender may have a hearing loss, you can contact his/her case worker, unit administrator, or health services personnel to verify the degree of loss.
11/2016 Court Report, App-261

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 263 of 326 - Page ID#: 1844

Agency Identification
Our agency policy includes sections on identifying and assisting offenders with hearing loss.
When offenders enter our system, they undergo an initial health assessment for diagnosis of health conditions, preventive health maintenance, and treatment. This initial assessment includes screening for hearing loss.
11/2016 Court Report, App-262

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 264 of 326 - Page ID#: 1845

Signs of Hearing Loss
For inmates who entered KYDOC custody before screening became routine, who were missed, or who developed hearing loss after the screening, you may observe signs of hearing loss. If you do, you should refer the inmate to medical for screening. Signs include: • Seeking frequent repetition. • Having difficulty following conversations involving more
than two people. • Thinking that other people sound muffled or like they’re
mumbling. • Having difficulty hearing in noisy situations. • Answering or responding inappropriately in conversations. • Watching people’s faces intently when they speak. • Avoiding conversation and social interaction.
11/2016 Court Report, App-263

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 265 of 326 - Page ID#: 1846

Identification
Once an offender is identified as deaf or hardof-hearing that will be noted on a pink (or in some facilities red) Medical Alert Card.
11/2016 Court Report, App-264

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 266 of 326 - Page ID#: 1847

Identification
Offenders will also be offered a cell/bunk card. 11/2016 Court Report, App-265

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 267 of 326 - Page ID#: 1848

Identification
An alert will also be placed in KOMS 11/2016 Court Report, App-266

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 268 of 326 - Page ID#: 1849

Identification
And another alert is in the header of the inmate’s Electronic Medical Record.
11/2016 Court Report, App-267

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 269 of 326 - Page ID#: 1850

Stay Aware of Identifications
It’s your job to stay aware of these identifications, for both emergencies and routine interactions. For example:
• If you’re a housing officer, you should know who the deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates in your unit are, so you can make sure to use best practices for communication.
• If you don’t know an inmate you are about to page, check his or her KOMS file, to look for the Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing alert; the page may need to be made personally, instead of using the intercom.
11/2016 Court Report, App-268

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 270 of 326 - Page ID#: 1851

Emergency Procedures
Staff shall be aware of the deaf or hard-of-hearing offenders assigned to the living units where they work. • In the event of emergency, all cells of deaf or
hard-of-hearing offenders shall be promptly and individually checked by staff. • Remember, the symbol below is utilized to identify the cells that house deaf or hard of hearing offenders.
11/2016 Court Report, App-269

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 271 of 326 - Page ID#: 1852

Information given to inmates

Once identified, inmates identified as deaf or hardof-hearing are given an informational brochure, explaining the auxiliary aids and services available to them, and how they can make requests.

Inmates may waive any aid or service— but also can change their mind about that at any time.
If an offender completes and signs a waiver form, the form shall be placed in the offender's KOMS file to ensure consistent documentation of services offered and waived

11/2016 Court Report, App-270

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 272 of 326 - Page ID#: 1853

CHAPTER 5
COMMUNICATING WITH DEAF AND HARD-OF-HEARING OFFENDERS
11/2016 Court Report, App-271

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 273 of 326 - Page ID#: 1854

Communication Needs Assessment
Different deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates have different communications needs, which need to be individually assessed. For example: • Inmates who use sign language to communicate may
frequently need a qualified interpreter.
• Inmates who hear adequately with a hearing aid may need only the hearing aid during the day, but may need non-auditory alerts at night or first thing in the morning, before they put the hearing aid on.
• For inmates who can read, video captioning can assist with effective communication, but for inmates who do not read well (usually lower than 8th grade level) captioning is not usually helpful.
11/2016 Court Report, App-272

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 274 of 326 - Page ID#: 1855

Communication Needs Assessment
For each deaf and hard-of-hearing inmate, the ADA Coordinator performs a communication needs assessment, and puts the results in the inmate’s KOMS record.
11/2016 Court Report, App-273

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 275 of 326 - Page ID#: 1856

Communication Philosophies
Methods of teaching individuals with hearing loss to communicate have changed through the years, but basically fall into two philosophies: • Oralism: Deaf students are taught primarily to
listen, speak and read lips (also called speech reading). • Manualism: Deaf students are taught primarily to "sign" There have also been technological advances that have opened new ways of communication for the deaf and hard-of-hearing.
11/2016 Court Report, App-274

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 276 of 326 - Page ID#: 1857

A little about lip-reading
• Studies have shown that lip reading is 30%35% accurate AT BEST.
11/2016 Court Report, App-275

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 277 of 326 - Page ID#: 1858

American Sign Language (ASL)
• ASL is one of the most widely used languages in the United States. Taught in many public schools and universities across the U.S.
• Used primarily by deaf and hard-of-hearing Americans and Canadians.
• ASL is a distinct visual language with its own grammar and syntax. It’s actually closer to French than English. There is no written form of ASL.
• Some deaf people who use ASL are not fluent in English, written or spoken.
11/2016 Court Report, App-276

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 278 of 326 - Page ID#: 1859

American Sign Language (ASL)
ASL takes concentrated study to gain proficiency. However, you can learn a few basic words with online ASL dictionaries. For example, see
• http://www.lifeprint.com/ • http://www.aslpro.com/
11/2016 Court Report, App-277

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 279 of 326 - Page ID#: 1860

Other Modes of Communication

• Signed English • Cued Speech • Oral • Home Signing • Paper and pencil • Gestures

11/2016 Court Report, App-278

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 280 of 326 - Page ID#: 1861

Interpreters

• Knowing some sign language is not the same as being

an interpreter.

• Interpreting requires specialized expertise.

Interpreters are highly skilled professionals.

• Kentucky’s law requires the use of LICENSED

interpreters. Using non-licensed interpreters for legal,

professional, or educational matters is risky to the

inmate and the facility.

• Qualified interpreters can be accessed remotely via a

laptop computer (Video Remote Interpretation, or

VRI), or in person.

• Asking one inmate to interpret for another is against

KYDOC policy, and can threaten institutional security.

It is appropriate ONLY in an emergency, and only

when VRI is unavailable.

11/2016 Court Report, App-279

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 281 of 326 - Page ID#: 1862

When is an interpreter required?

For deaf inmates who use sign language to communicate,

KYDOC is obligated to provide interpreters whenever needed

for effective communication, including:

• Initial intake/classification

• Rehabilitative and educational

• Auxiliary aid/service assessment programming, including clubs

and other accommodation • Transitional programs

assistance

• Conversations with post-release

• On-site medical, mental health supervisors

and dental evaluations/ care • PREA reporting and/or follow-

• Classification and transfer

up with any PREA concerns

hearings and related meetings • Inmate work and education

• Grievance hearings

programs

• Adjustment committee, court • Other significant

call, and all meetings related to communications, on request

discipline

• Religious programming if

• Parole hearings

provided by a KYDOC employee.

11/2016 Court Report, App-280
Inmates can waive interpretation services, if they chose.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 282 of 326 - Page ID#: 1863

No request necessary

Inmates can request interpretation for any of the situations on the preceding slide. But no request is necessary for:

• Intake and orientation

• Classification and transfer hearings and related meetings

• Grievance meetings and hearings

• Disciplinary hearings and all related processes

• Parole meetings and hearings

• Emergency health care on-site

For these situations, interpretation must be offered to

the inmate by staff (the inmate can waive the right to

interpretation if he or she chooses).

11/2016 Court Report, App-281

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 283 of 326 - Page ID#: 1864

VRI or In-Person Interpretation?
KYDOC offers both video remote interpretation (VRI), via a laptop, and, when necessary, in-person interpretation. An inmate’s request for in-person interpretation should be passed on to the ADA Coordinator, who will grant it if it is necessary for effective communication, for example: • During group classes in which student
participation is key. • When remote interpretation is unlikely to be, or
has not been, effective.
11/2016 Court Report, App-282

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 284 of 326 - Page ID#: 1865

Communicating orally without an
interpreter
Some deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates are able to understand oral communication without an interpreter—perhaps their hearing impairment is only partial, or a hearing aid helps them sufficiently.
This will be noted in their KOMS file. When you are speaking to such a person, you should be aware of their hearing needs, and follow best communications practices to try to communicate effectively.
11/2016 Court Report, App-283

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 285 of 326 - Page ID#: 1866

Communication Tips
The U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Disability Rights Section, has published some practical suggestions for communicating effectively with deaf and hard-of-hearing people. The slides that follow present those tips.
11/2016 Court Report, App-284

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 286 of 326 - Page ID#: 1867

Communication Tips
Starting the conversation: 9 Always get the person’s attention before you start speaking . 9 Just because someone is wearing a hearing aid does not mean they
can hear you. 9 Ask if the person can understand you, or needs some adjustment;
you may want to write a note to ask him or her what communication aid or service is needed. 9 Provide accommodations if and when requested. 9 Minimize background noise and other distractions whenever possible. 9 Allow extra time for communication.
Lighting and facilitating lip-reading 9 Face the person and maintain normal eye contact. Do not turn away
while speaking. 9 Try to converse in a well-lit area, but avoid glare or back-lighting
that puts your mouth in shadow. 9 Do not cover your mouth or chew gum while you are speaking. 11/2016 Court Report, App-285

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 287 of 326 - Page ID#: 1868

Communication Tips
Simple language, normal speech 9 Speak at a normal pace, enunciating clearly. 9 Speak with simple, direct words. 9 Do not shout or exaggerate mouth movements .
Visual cues 9 Use gestures and facial expressions to reinforce
what you are saying. 9 Use visual aids when possible, such as pointing to
printed information on a document.
11/2016 Court Report, App-286

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 288 of 326 - Page ID#: 1869

Communication Tips

Check on understanding

9 Remember that only about 1/3 of spoken words can be

understood by speech (lip) reading.

9 Be conscious of bluffing.

9 Check on understanding: ask the hard-of-hearing

person to repeat back to you, so you can be sure he or

she understood.

9 For anything but the most simple communication,

written notes can be a problem. Keep in mind that

many people—especially those who use sign

language—may lack good English reading and writing

skills.

11/2016 Court Report, App-287

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 289 of 326 - Page ID#: 1870

Prison-Specific Communications Issues
• Prisons are noisy: To minimize noise from other inmates, fans, televisions, etc., you may want to step into an office or another quieter area.
• Prisons require situational awareness. To effectively communicate with deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates, an officer must face them directly and not move his or her head too much. This may make it difficult to monitor the surroundings. So you may want to have the conversation in a place that is out of the way, like a corner or an office, where situational awareness is less important.
• Restricted Housing Units are especially challenging locations for effective communication. (See next slide).
11/2016 Court Report, App-288

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 290 of 326 - Page ID#: 1871

Restrictive Housing

Restrictive housing can be especially noisy, and when you talk to an inmate “through the crack” in the door important visual cues are absent. When needed, your communication strategies should include:
• Talk through the meal slot.
• If the inmate can read, pass written notes through the door.
• For inmates who communicate using sign language, use the VRI laptop.
• Pull the inmate out of cell.

11/2016 Court Report, App-289

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 291 of 326 - Page ID#: 1872

Communication Access Real Time (CART)
• Instant translation of the spoken word into English text using a stenotype machine, notebook computer and realtime software; often called REALTIME CAPTIONING.
• On-site or Remote • Condensed RealTime (Cprint/Typewell) also
available onsite or remotely.
11/2016 Court Report, App-290

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 292 of 326 - Page ID#: 1873

Chapter 7
NON-INTERPRETATION AUXILIARY AIDS AND ACCOMMODATIONS
11/2016 Court Report, App-291

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 293 of 326 - Page ID#: 1874

Auxiliary Aids
In addition to qualified interpreters (via video remote interpretation or in-person), KYDOC provides other auxiliary aids and services, to ensure effective communication. These can include: • Hearing aids and amplifiers • Video captioning • Visual or other non-auditory alert or alarm systems • Videophone/Video Relay Service • TTY/TDD, including telephone relay services • Assistive listening systems • Written materials • Computer-aided transcription services
11/2016 Court Report, App-292

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 294 of 326 - Page ID#: 1875

Other Accommodations
Sometimes what is needed for effective communication is not equipment or technology but a different kind of accommodation: • A deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate may function better
in a quieter environment; you can consider this when you make a cell assignment. • A deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate may not be able to understand group instruction, so might need an individual tutor for a class or program, or one-on-one orientation. • A deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate may not hear an announcement or page, so might need individual notifications.
11/2016 Court Report, App-293

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 295 of 326 - Page ID#: 1876

Avoiding Discrimination
When deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates have not heard an announcement or order because of their disability, it would be discriminatory to penalize them. Use your discretion to avoid illegal discrimination.
11/2016 Court Report, App-294

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 296 of 326 - Page ID#: 1877

When are auxiliary aids/
accommodations required?
• Educational programs (literacy, adult basic education, GED, and technical education and certification classes).
• Vocational/work programs • Rehabilitative, counseling, therapeutic, substance abuse,
and evidence-based programs • Work assignments • Religious services (except KYDOC does not provide
interpretation for volunteer-led religious programming) • Transfer and classification matters • Transitional programming – post-release supervision • On-site medical care and healthcare appointments • Grievance and disciplinary hearings and meetings • All important conversations between staff and inmates.
11/2016 Court Report, App-295

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 297 of 326 - Page ID#: 1878

11/2016 Court Report, App-296

Chapter 8
TECHNOLOGY

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 298 of 326 - Page ID#: 1879

Assistive Technology in Prison
• Hearing aids/amplifiers • Video Remote Interpretation (VRI laptop) • Videophone • Phone volume controls • TTY • Captel or captioned telephone • Assistive listening systems • Closed captions
11/2016 Court Report, App-297

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 299 of 326 - Page ID#: 1880

Auxiliary Aids TV Closed Captioning

Bed Shaker

VRI Laptop

Hearing aids

TTY

Phone Volume Adjustment

Amplifier

11/2016 Court Report, App-298

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 300 of 326 - Page ID#: 1881

Hearing aids

There are many kinds of hearing aids. Medical provides these when medically necessary.

Remember: Hearing aids help the inmate hear, but they don’t mean he can hear well.

When you pack up an inmate’s property, he should

keep his hearing aids with him. Be sure not to lose

them!

11/2016 Court Report, App-299

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 301 of 326 - Page ID#: 1882

Amplifiers
Medical may also issue some inmates personal amplifiers (“pocket talkers”).
11/2016 Court Report, App-300

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 302 of 326 - Page ID#: 1883

Video Remote Interpretation

(VRI laptop)

VRI allows a hearing person and a deaf person who signs, who are next to each other, to communicate with each other. The hearing person speaks into a laptop microphone and an interpreter on the other end translates the speech into sign language, which the deaf person can see on the laptop screen. The deaf person signs into the laptop camera, and the interpreter on the other end translates the sign language into English, which the hearing person can hear.

VRI using a laptop computer.
11/2016 Court Report, App-301

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 303 of 326 - Page ID#: 1884

Video Remote Interpretation (VRI laptop)

How to use:
1. Plug blue Ethernet cable into laptop.
2. Click on Purple icon on laptop.
3. Sit near the microphone.
4. Talk at your normal rate or slightly slower.
5. Only one person should speak at a time.
6. Use short sentences and simple words.

More detailed Instructions about how to use the VRI – including special microphones and seating arrangements – are printed out and in the laptop bag.
11/2016 Court Report, App-302

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 304 of 326 - Page ID#: 1885

Videophones

KYDOC uses ADA prison videophones provided by the company “Purple.” They are locked-down videophone kiosks, where inmates who use sign language can make videophone calls during the same periods as regular phones are available. If needed, the videophones can access a relay interpreter, who interprets the inmate’s sign language for an ordinary phone user on the other end.

For an inmate authorized to use the videophone, no special request should be required to make a call.
Inmates are allowed twice as many minutes for a videophone call as for a regular phone call.

11/2016 Court Report, App-303

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 305 of 326 - Page ID#: 1886

Phone volume controls
Some of KYDOC’s Securus phones have volume controls, which can be essential for hard-ofhearing inmates. There should be at least one volume-controlled phone in any area where needed by such an inmate.
11/2016 Court Report, App-304

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 306 of 326 - Page ID#: 1887

TTY/TTD/Telephone Relay

A TTY (Teletypewriter) (sometimes called a TTD)

is a device that allows users to send typed

messages across a phone line. Some people who

are deaf or hard-of-hearing use TTYs to call

other individuals. The TTY has a keyboard and a

display. KYDOC has at least one TTY in every

institution.

How to use: Place a regular telephone’s handset in the rubber acoustic coupler and turn on the power. Dial out. More detailed instructions are printed out and available with the TTY at your institution.

Inmates receive three times as many minutes per TTY call as for regular phone calls.

11/2016 Court Report, App-305

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 307 of 326 - Page ID#: 1888

Using the TTY with a Relay Service

A TTY can only communicate with another TTY. If TTY users want to call a regular phone—as they usually do—they must use a Relay Service. The relay service operator receives the messages on a TTY, reads the messages over a standard phone to a person who does not have a TTY, and types that person’s responses back for the TTY user.

Just as you can dial 411 for information, you can

dial 711 to access the telephone relay service. It is

free.

11/2016 Court Report, App-306

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 308 of 326 - Page ID#: 1889

Captioned Telephones
Outside of prison, captioned telephones have been growing in popularity. These are phones that simultaneously allow the user to listen to the speech and read it via real-time captioning.
These may become available in your institution for inmates who need them. The ADA Coordinator will keep you informed, and make sure you know how to use them if applicable.
11/2016 Court Report, App-307

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 309 of 326 - Page ID#: 1890

Assistive listening systems
Assistive listening systems allow a speaker or speakers to use a wireless microphone that sends a signal to an earbud that a deaf or hardof-hearing inmate wears. If you run a program or a class, KYDOC institutions are making such systems available when needed. The ADA Coordinator will keep you informed.
11/2016 Court Report, App-308

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 310 of 326 - Page ID#: 1891

Closed captions
All KYDOC televisions and most videos are closed-caption-enabled. Institutional movies should have captions turned on. Turn on TV and video captioning on inmate request.
11/2016 Court Report, App-309

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 311 of 326 - Page ID#: 1892

Non-Auditory Alerts

Because deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates cannot hear alarms and announcements, they may be given “non-auditory” alert devices. These include:

• Strobe-light cells. In these cells, fire alarms trigger a very bright flashing light.

• Bed shakers/flashing light alerts. A receiver for this device sits next to a bed, and then the buzzer sits under the bed and vibrates/buzzes when the housing unit’s fire alarm or other announcements go off. It can be set to alert when housing officers flip a switch; officers can use that to inform the inmate about count, chow, or some other alert.

Receiver Buzzer 11/2016 Court Report, App-310

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 312 of 326 - Page ID#: 1893

Chapter 9
DEAF OFFENDERS AND DISCIPLINARY AND GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES
11/2016 Court Report, App-311

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 313 of 326 - Page ID#: 1894

Disciplinary Proceedings:
Effective Communication
• KYDOC must provide deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates with effective communication in any disciplinary proceeding in which the inmate is suspected of, charged with, or a witness to, a disciplinary infraction.
• This includes all meetings and communications related to the disciplinary charge—with an investigator, legal aide, adjustment committee, etc.
• If the inmate charged or inmate witnesses are deaf or hardof-hearing, the investigator must take steps to ensure effective communication.
• The investigator should contact the ADA Coordinator to coordinate the use of interpreters or other forms of effective communication deemed appropriate, throughout the process
11/2016 Court Report, App-312

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 314 of 326 - Page ID#: 1895

Disciplinary Proceedings: Effective Communication

Q: What parts of the Adjustment process are covered?

A: All of them.

Effective communication—including use of auxiliary aids and services, such as interpretation or others—is required for:

• Miranda warnings

• When notifying the inmate of the date, time and place of the hearing

• Meetings with the investigator

• Meetings with a legal aide

• The Adjustment Committee hearing

• Etc.

11/2016 Court Report, App-313

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 315 of 326 - Page ID#: 1896

Disciplinary Proceedings: Interpretation Issues
• For inmates who sign to communicate, effective communication relating to discipline usually requires interpretation.
• The VRI Laptop may ordinarily be used in these situations. It should be offered to inmates even without their request for it. (Inmates may waive use of VRI, if they choose.)
• An inmate who signs to communicate may not have his hands cuffed when he is using the VRI laptop. Discuss alternative security arrangements with the ADA Coordinator if the need arises. 11/2016 Court Report, App-314

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 316 of 326 - Page ID#: 1897

Other Proceedings That Require Effective Communication
Effective communication—including interpretation when appropriate—is also required for: • Classification • Grievance committee hearings and all related
meetings • Parole hearings—including communication to
inform the inmate about the hearing • Classes, programs, etc. • Other significant communications
11/2016 Court Report, App-315

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 317 of 326 - Page ID#: 1898

Chapter 10
SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS FOR DEALING WITH DEAF AND HARD-OFHEARING OFFENDERS
11/2016 Court Report, App-316

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 318 of 326 - Page ID#: 1899

Monitoring Communication
Monitoring communication of offenders with the outside world is a security need. Deaf and hard-ofhearing offender communication must also be monitored with the same discretion applied to nondeaf inmates; however, KYDOC may only provide for the monitoring of communications to the same extent as non-deaf inmates.
The “Purple” videophones have built-in security measures: No in-bound calls, no 3-way calls, 911 button disabled, announcement to called party.
11/2016 Court Report, App-317

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 319 of 326 - Page ID#: 1900

Direct Threat
Remember the anti-discrimination principle: The ADA requires KYDOC to provide deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates with access to services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations substantially equivalent to those offered to similarly situated non-deaf inmates.
HOWEVER, if something a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate seeks—a particular job, for example—would be dangerous, KYDOC can bar the inmate’s access to that job because it poses a direct threat of injury or death to the inmate or others. You must discuss any such situation with the ADA Coordinator, who will ensure that the court settlement monitor receives required notice. 11/2016 Court Report, App-318

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 320 of 326 - Page ID#: 1901

Deaf Offenders and Hand Restraints
Hand restraints interfere with the effective communication of inmates who use sign language. Therefore: • KYDOC uses hand restraints on such inmates only when
transporting to or from an adult institution, transferring into or out of special management unit, and as needed in response to security threats. • Hand restraints must be removed from a deaf inmate once the inmate is in a secure environment, when security is no longer a threat, or there are other security devices in place to allow the inmate to effectively communicate. • Your institution will implement measures to allow inmates who sign to communicate to have their hands unrestrained in situations like court call, etc. Discuss this
11/2016 Court Report, App-319
with the ADA Coordinator.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 321 of 326 - Page ID#: 1902

2-Point Restraint System
• Prior to transporting an offender to an outside appointment, review the precautions in KOMS to determine if the offender requires the use of his hands to communicate.
• If the KOMS notes state that the offender communicates by sign language, hospital restraints shall be taken on the transportation trip, and used once the offender is in a secure situation, so that he can communicate while outside the institution.
• The transport Officer must call the Captain’s office for approval to place the offender in the 2-point hospital restrains prior to the restraints being used.
11/2016 Court Report, App-320

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 322 of 326 - Page ID#: 1903

11/2016 Court Report, App-321

Chapter 11
CONCLUSION

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 323 of 326 - Page ID#: 1904

Conclusion
During the course of your career with our department, you may come into contact with deaf or hard-of-hearing offenders. Communication methods may range from sign language or finger spelling, using an interpreter (remotely or in person), using an assistive device, speaking loudly and clearly, or writing a note.
Regardless of the method, remember to communicate with these offenders in a courteous and dignified manner. To avoid misunderstandings and potentially dangerous incidents, make every effort to be sure that you are understood. Remember that deaf and hard-of-hearing offenders must understand what you are trying to communicate and have the right to effective communication.
11/2016 Court Report, App-322

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 324 of 326 - Page ID#: 1905

For More Information
This module was to inform you of the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act, KYDOC Policy, and the federal court Settlement Agreement between the KYDOC and deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. An overview of the settlement can be found in the resources tab at the top; it is labeled “Settlement Breakdown by Areas.”
11/2016 Court Report, App-323

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 325 of 326 - Page ID#: 1906

Questions?
Contact your institution’s ADA Coordinator with any questions. The ADA Coordinator has received training on federal and state law as well as the specifics of the settlement agreement. Each institution’s ADA Coordinator is listed at
http://corrections.ky.gov/depts/AI/Pages/ADA.aspx
11/2016 Court Report, App-324

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 84-2 Filed: 12/05/16 Page: 326 of 326 - Page ID#: 1907

Assistance and guidance provided by the

7FSTBJMMFT3PBE 'SBOLGPSE
,:  WUUZ
  WUUZ
  GBY
 XXXLDEIILZHPW

11/2016 Court Report, App-325

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 1 of 8 - Page ID#: 1909

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT FRANKFORT

OSCAR ADAMS and MICHAEL KNIGHTS )

)

Plaintiffs

)

)

v.

)

)

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, et al. )

)

Defendants.

)

__________________________________________ )

Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT

Third Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor
May 31, 2017
Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 625 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 2 of 8 - Page ID#: 1910
I. INTRODUCTION
Pursuant to the Court’s order dated June 24, 2015, this is my third semi-annual report to the Court and the parties concerning the status of compliance with this case’s Settlement Agreement, which comprehensively governs how the Kentucky Department of Corrections (“Department”) deals with inmates who are deaf or hard-of-hearing.
As in my prior reports, I thank the Department’s personnel, both at headquarters and at the various affected institutions, for their work on implementing the improvements that are required by the Settlement Agreement, and their professionalism and accommodation of my requests for information. The Department has continued to make progress towards compliance. In particular, since my last report, it has continued to make progress on the very challenging issue of hearing aids, and the computer-based training for staff has now been finalized. Much remains to be done; as usual for implementation of any complex new initiative, the challenges are many; I discuss the challenges and next steps below in this report, and in Appendix IV, my most recent site visit report.
This report has six Appendices.
I. Settlement Agreement (with numbered paragraphs, for ease of reference) II. ADA staff computer-based-training (Apr. 20, 2017) III. ADA Coordinator training (Feb. 25, 2017)
Part 1: Settlement Agreement Training Part 2: CReATE Compliance IV. Site visit report for Dec. 2016 and Feb. 2017 visits, with exhibits (May 4, 2017) Covered facilities: Blackburn Correctional Complex (Dec. 12, 2016) Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (Dec. 13, 2016) Little Sandy Correctional Complex (Dec. 13, 2016) Northpoint Training Center (Dec. 14, 2016) Kentucky State Reformatory (Feb. 27, 2017) Exhibits: A—Staff Interviewed
B—Consolidated Recommendations C—How to Communicate Effectively with Hard-of-Hearing Inmates D—Auxiliary Aids/devices currently in place or under test at KYDOC
institutions V. Recommended forms:
Inmate Pamphlet Memo for Staff Hard-of-Hearing Communications Tips VI. April 2017 quarterly reporting request
-1-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 3 of 8 - Page ID#: 1911
II. DEPARTMENT-LEVEL COMPLIANCE WITH THE AGREEMENT
Most of the Settlement Agreement is being implemented at the level of individual institutions. I discuss the relevant issues below, in Part III. But a few of the Agreement’s requirements are being implemented at the Department level:
A. Designation of and public notice (via departmental website) of ADA Coordinators.
The Settlement Agreement requires that the “the name and contact information for each ADA Coordinator will be displayed and regularly updated on the KDOC’s website.” (II.B.2)
Status: Compliant. The Department’s webpage, http://corrections.ky.gov/depts/AI/Pages/ADA.aspx, is now up-to-date. I have included in my quarterly reporting request a reminder to each ADA Coordinator to check the website and update it if necessary. This method appears to be working.
B. Training of KDOC employees.
The Agreement includes very substantial provisions governing training, which was supposed to be provided by the end of September 2015 on numerous specified topics to “KDOC employees who interact with the Inmate population.” (XIII.A.1) In addition, the Agreement requires that ADA Coordinators be “trained on the requirements of federal and state law regarding the contents of this Agreement and the KDOC’s obligations to provide full and equal access to, and enjoyment of, its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations to Deaf Inmates.” (II.B.1) There are procedural requirements, as well: the Agreement instructs the Department to receive input from the Kentucky Commission on the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (KCDHH) and from me. (XIII.A.1)
The Department is now providing computer-based training to its employees. After two rounds of comments, that training appears accurate and complete. It is attached as Appendix II.
As for the required ADA Coordinator training, the ADA Coordinators are being offered the ADA Title II training provided online by the ADA National Network, at http://www.adatitle2.org.. This is excellent training as far as it goes—it covers federal law. In addition, I have myself provided two powerpoints for ADA Coordinator Training to the Department, and conducted those trainings in February 2017. One is about the Settlement Agreement; the other is about the role of the ADA Coordinator. It is my understanding that the powerpoints are posted where each ADA Coordinator can refer to them, and that they are also included in the Department’s computer based training library, so that new ADA Coordinators can complete them on-line. These two powerpoints are attached as Appendix III.
Status: Largely compliant, some additional steps necessary. Now that the computer-basedtraining is available, KDOC needs to ensure that it is completed by all appropriate staff. Some version should be taken by medical contractors, as well, to facilitate their compliance with the agreement. In addition, the ADA Coordinators need to continue to develop and conduct rolespecific in-person training.
-2-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 4 of 8 - Page ID#: 1912
C. Coordination
The Department has made progress on useful coordination and information sharing related to the Agreement. The Director of Operations, Chris Kleymeyer, has designated the Department’s Safety Director, Webb Strang, to coordinate as useful. Mr. Strang has created a shared computer folder with a collection of useful documents, and has also worked on some information technology issues—modifying KOMS (the Kentucky Offender Management System) to include a Department-wide flag for inmates with disabilities particularly relevant to safety and security. In addition, the Department has instituted a practice of including the ADA Coordinators as recipients of routine transfer memos that inform facilities of the inmates being transferred in. The ADA Coordinators then have an opportunity to check to see if incoming inmates have any pertinent disability.
It would be useful to continue to strengthen coordination among the ADA Coordinators, so that information and insight can be shared.
III. INSTITUTION-LEVEL COMPLIANCE WITH THE AGREEMENT
I have at this point visited all but one of the Department’s twelve adult institutions. (I have not yet been to the Bell County Forestry Camp, which currently houses five hard-of-hearing inmates.) My site visit report for visits in December 2016 and February 2017 is attached as Appendix IV. As previously, the site visit report assesses Settlement compliance as of the date of my visits; it also makes a few recommendations for how to improve compliance.
The site visit report is detailed, and I will not repeat it here. A few general comments on compliance trends may, however, be useful.
Inmate Identification and Tracking. I am now getting more larger and more complete lists of deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. In the most recent quarter, I received notice of 227 inmates—a substantial increase from prior quarters. This increase marks improvements in identifying and tracking deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. The institutions continue to work on identifying inmates who are hard-of-hearing. Even once inmates are identified, however, some tracking problems remain, however: each quarter a few names are omitted from the lists I receive—and from the ADA Coordinators’ own records. It appears that there remain hand-off errors, when a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate moves from one institution to another. This is not just a matter of recordkeeping, but of services and accommodations. Inmates who are not appropriately tracked are unlikely to receive accommodations or audiology services they depend on. In the most recent quarterly report, I was able to identify 17 additional inmates from prior lists who should have been on institutional lists. As I describe in Part II.C, above, on my recent recommendation, the ADA Coordinators are now supposed to receive the routine transfer memos that list incoming inmates for each institution, and that should help solve the problem. In addition, I have been informed that the Department is implementing a system-wide KOMS improvement that will allow cross-institution tracking of deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates (and of inmates with other disabilities). I am hopeful that over the next several months, this issue will be fully resolved.
-3-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 5 of 8 - Page ID#: 1913

Table 1: Distribution of Kentucky Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates

Site Visits

Institution
Bell County Forestry Camp
Blackburn Correctional Complex Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex Green River Correctional Complex Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women Kentucky State Penitentiary
Kentucky State Reformatory Little Sandy Correctional Complex Luther Luckett Correctional Complex Northpoint Training Center
Roederer Correctional Complex Western Kentucky Correctional Complex
Ross-Cash Center TOTAL

Visit 1 Date NA Dec. 2016 Dec. 2016
July 2016
June 2016 July 2016 Feb. 2016 Dec. 2016
June 2016 Dec. 2016 June 2016
July 2016

Visit 2 Date Fall 2017, TBD Aug. 2017 Fall 2017, TBD
July 2017
Aug. 2017 July 2017 Feb. 2017 Fall 2017, TBD
Aug. 2017 Aug. 2017 Aug. 2017
July 2017

# of Deaf/HOH

Inmates

~Nov. Apr. 2016 2017

0

5

5

4

9

11

26

35

13

13

6

11

64

75

18

8

6

26

15

28

10

16

5

10

1

2

178

244

Qualified Interpreter Services. It continues to be the case that Video Remote Interpretation (VRI) is not being used as routinely as the Settlement calls for. In addition, most institutions have not put in place the systems necessary to provide in-person qualified interpreter services, when necessary.

Hearing Aid Access. One of the key compliance challenges for the Department is to identify inmates in need of a hearing aid and to timely provide that hearing aid. Process failures continue, so that provision of needed hearing aids sometimes stalls completely, and sometimes is extremely slow. I have devoted considerable attention to this issue over the past months, and in my most recent site visits and quarterly report request, sought an audiology progress report for each deaf/hard-of-hearing inmate at each institution. For all the inmates who may need a hearing aid but don’t yet have one, I have requested frequent updates, to track them through the process. I am hopeful that by the end of this summer, each facility will have smoothed out its process for ensuring timely provision of appropriate audiology services.

Once existing inmates receive the hearing aids they need, the most crucial facility for diagnosis and hearing aid provision will be Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC), the Department’s men’s reception facility. I am informed that since my 2016 site visit to RCC, the Department has been able to bring in on-site audiology services, to make the process more

-4-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 6 of 8 - Page ID#: 1914
efficient and effective. This is an excellent development; I look forward to learning more about it on my 2017 site visit.
Assessments and Materials for Deaf Inmates. The Agreement requires that all deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates be provided with “materials providing information about the Auxiliary Aids and Services available to Deaf Inmates and instructions for how to obtain, request, or use those Auxiliary Aids and Services.” The language of these materials is required to be “designed to be accessible to each Deaf Inmate.” (III.F.1) The materials provided inmates have not, however, been either comprehensive or accessible. I have recommended improvements; the recommended versions are Appendix V. In addition, the Agreement requires assessments of each inmate’s need for various types of auxiliary aids and services (III.C); these assessments are not yet reliably occurring at every institution.
Other Auxiliary Aids for Hard-of-Hearing Inmates. A variety of auxiliary aids can assist with effective communication for hard-of-hearing inmates. Different institutions have made different good moves in this direction. For example, some facilities broadcast television audio on a radio channel, so that inmates can listen via a personal radio and earbuds; this reduces ambient noise in shared space and also enables inmates who need amplification to hear the tv. One institution is providing wireless personal amplification in congregate religious services. Much more work remains, but the steps already taken are starting the Department on the path it needs to follow. I will direct additional attention to this issue in the coming year; for right now, a good deal of information on the auxiliary aid progress made thus far is included in Appendix IV’s Exhibit D.
Direct Threat Determinations. With respect to services, programs, and work, the Settlement Agreement requires that deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates receive access “substantially equivalent” to similarly situated non-deaf Inmates, but, consistent with the ADA, explains that the Department “retains the discretion to determine that certain activities present a Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates” and on that basis, bar deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates from the activity. (See I.4, II.A, V.A.4, VI.F.) Consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Settlement Agreement defines “Direct Threat” to mean “a significant risk to the health or safety of one or more Deaf Inmates or others that cannot be reduced or eliminated by reasonable accommodation. A finding of Direct Threat must be based on and supported by objective evidence.” (I.4). Whenever a Direct Threat is found, the Agreement requires prompt notification to me, as Settlement Monitor, that “explain[s] the reasoning in support of such determination.” (II.A, V.A.4, VI.F). My visits revealed that the staff who make decisions about job assignments, in particular, had not all been trained on the Settlement Agreement’s relevant provisions—either the substantive or the reporting obligations. Moreover, when I inquired, it became clear that the decisionmaking process was not appropriately individuated. Some jobs have been ruled off limits for all hard-of-hearing inmates, even though there is often no reason for such a bar. What the Settlement Agreement and the ADA require is individuated decisionmaking that considers the particular job and the particular inmate, with prompt reporting to me so I can offer technical assistance. I am working on this with the Department.
-5-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 7 of 8 - Page ID#: 1915
IV. RECOMMENDATIONS, FUTURE SITE VISISTS, AND DEPARTMENTAL REPORTING
As a result of my site visits and the light they have shed on implementation challenges, I have made 82 recommendations for the Department, to assist in compliance with the Agreement. These are compiled in Appendix IV’s Exhibit B.
Now that I have finished a full year of site visits, including two visits to KSR, the facility with the most deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates, I am finding many fewer items that need additional recommendations. Accordingly, I am shifting my approach to site visits. Beginning with the visits, scheduled for July and August of this year, I will develop and use a compliance checklist. I hope that sharing this checklist once it is developed will allow each institution to self-audit.
In addition, now that both I and the ADA Coordinators better understand the steps towards compliance, I am shifting more of the compliance monitoring to a more comprehensive records and information request, which I will issue twice each year. I have done the first of these requests (Appendix VI), and obtained most of the requested information from the 12 institutions; I am continuing to work through various followups with the individual institutions.
V. CONCLUSION
The Kentucky Department of Corrections continues to progress towards compliance with the Settlement Agreement, but implementation challenges remain. All the recommendations I have made so far are compiled in Appendix IV, Exhibit B. Going forward, my plan is to assess compliance institution-by-institution using itemized checklists, which I will include in future Court reports.
Dated: May 31, 2017
Respectfully submitted,
____________________________________ Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 610 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109 (202) 277-2506 Margo.schlanger@gmail.com Adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com
-6-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 8 of 8 - Page ID#: 1916
Third Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor (May 31, 2017) Appendices
I. Settlement Agreement (with numbered paragraphs, for ease of reference) II. ADA staff computer-based-training (Apr. 20, 2017) III. ADA Coordinator training (Feb. 25, 2017)
Part 1: Settlement Agreement Training Part 2: CReATE Compliance IV. Site visit report for Dec. 2016 and Feb. 2017 visits, with exhibits (May 4, 2017) Covered facilities: Blackburn Correctional Complex (Dec. 12, 2016) Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (Dec. 13, 2016) Little Sandy Correctional Complex (Dec. 13, 2016) Northpoint Training Center (Dec. 14, 2016) Kentucky State Reformatory (Feb. 27, 2017) Exhibits: A—Staff Interviewed
B—Consolidated Recommendations C—How to Communicate Effectively with Hard-of-Hearing Inmates D—Auxiliary Aids/devices currently in place or under test at KYDOC
institutions V. Recommended forms:
Inmate Pamphlet Memo for Staff Hard-of-Hearing Communications Tips VI. April 2017 quarterly reporting request

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 1 of 25 - Page ID#: 1917
Third Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor (May 31, 2017) Appendix I
Settlement Agreement (with numbered paragraphs, for ease of reference)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 2 of 25 - Page ID#: 1918

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN DEFENDANTS THE COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY ET AL. AND PLAINTIFFS OSCAR ADAMS AND MICHAEL KNIGHTS [NUMBERED FOR USE IN COMPLIANCE MONITORING]

I. DEFINITIONS

[I.]1. “ADA” means the Americans with Disabilities Act, codified at 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., as amended by the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-325).

[I.]2.

“Auxiliary Aids and Services” include, but are not limited to, “Qualified Interpreters or other effective methods of making aurally delivered materials available to individuals with hearing impairments,” 42 U.S.C. § 12103, such as hearing aids, computer-aided transcription services, assistive listening systems, closed caption decoders, open and closed captioning, “TDDs” or “TTYs” as defined below, videotext displays, written materials (see 28 C.F.R. § 35.104); as well as Videophones, access to telephone relay services, visual alert or alarm systems, and bed shakers.

[I.]3.

“Deaf Inmates” means Inmates who are unable to hear well enough to rely on their hearing as a means of processing information, who rely on Auxiliary Aids and Services to Effectively Communicate and who qualify as individuals with disabilities under the ADA, including deaf, hard of hearing, or hearing impaired persons. See 42 U.S.C. § 12102(4). .

[I.]4.

“Direct Threat” means a significant risk to the health or safety of one or more Deaf Inmates or others that cannot be reduced or eliminated by reasonable accommodation. A finding of Direct Threat must be based on and supported by objective evidence.

[I.]5.

“Effective Communication” and “Effectively Communicate” means communication with Deaf Inmates that is substantially as effective as communication with the general Inmate population (see 28 C.F.R. § 35.160(a)) and will, when necessary, include the provision of appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, such as Qualified Interpreters. Effective Communication affords Deaf Inmates an opportunity to participate in, and enjoy the benefits of, the KDOC’s services, programs, or activities in a way that is substantially equal to the opportunity provided to a similarly situated non-Deaf Inmate. In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, primary consideration shall be given to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)).

[I.]6. “Effective Date” means thirty (30) days after this Agreement is filed with the Court.

[I.]7. “Inmate” means any person in the custody of the KDOC.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 3 of 25 - Page ID#: 1919
[I.]8. “KCDHH” means the Kentucky Commission on the Deaf and Hard of Hearing.
[I.]9. “KDOC” means Kentucky Department of Corrections.
[I.]10. “KDOC program” means any program or activity, or aid, benefit, or service as defined by the ADA and Section 504 (see 28 C.F.R. § 35.130, § 41.51) available to Inmates of KDOC for which the KDOC does more than only provide physical space at its facilities, including but not limited to, programs, activities, aids, benefits, or services mandated by law, qualifying for educational or early release credits, and/or ordered as part of an Inmate’s sentence.
[I.]11. “KDOC employees,” “KDOC staff,” and “KDOC personnel” each and collectively include all employees, contractors, agents, and other staff of the KDOC whose job responsibilities place them on a regular basis in contact with Deaf Inmates, and the supervisors of those employees, contractors, agents, or other staff.
[I.]12. “KDOC Adult Institution” means any facility owned or operated by the KDOC for the care and custody Inmates, including but not limited to Bell Country Forestry Camp, Blackburn Correctional Complex, Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex, Green River Correctional Complex, Kentucky Correctional Institute for Women, Kentucky State Penitentiary, Kentucky State Reformatory, Little Sandy Correctional Complex, Luther Luckett Correctional Complex, Northpoint Training Center, Roederer Correctional Complex, and Western Kentucky Correctional Complex.
[I.]13. “Off-site Medical Care” means medical care that is provided at a location not owned or operated by the KDOC.
[I.]14. “On-site Medical Care” means medical care that is provided at a KDOC facility, including medical care provided by third parties in facilities owned or operated by the KDOC.
[I.]15. “Parole hearing” means any hearing or meeting during which an Inmate is being offered the opportunity to be released from KDOC custody on parole.
[I.]16. “Plaintiffs” means, for purposes of this Agreement, Oscar Adams (inmate #243676) and Michael Knights (inmate #233021).
[I.]17. “Plaintiffs’ Counsel” means attorneys-of-record for Plaintiffs in Oscar Adams and Michael Knights, et al., v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, et al., Case No. 3:14-cv00001 (E.D. Ky.) at the time this Agreement is signed.
[I.]18. “Qualified Interpreter” means a person who is able to interpret effectively, accurately, and impartially, both receptively and expressively, with an individual Deaf Inmate using any necessary specialized vocabulary. See 28 C.F.R. §35.104. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 4 of 25 - Page ID#: 1920
A Qualified Interpreter could include an ASL interpreter, a sign language interpreter using more English-based signs, an oral interpreter, a cued speech transliterator or a tactile interpreter for a Deaf Inmate who is also blind. For sign language interpreters, a Qualified Interpreter is one who holds current, valid certifications and licensure by the Kentucky Board of Interpreters for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing.
A Qualified Interpreter may be provided by the KDOC either in person, or via Video Remote Interpreting, videoconferencing or other similar means that provide Effective Communication.
[I.]19. “Section 504” means Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, codified at 29 U.S.C. § 701 et seq. (2014).
[I.]20. “Settlement Monitor” means Margo Schlanger, whose curriculum vitae is attached as Exhibit 1.
[I.]21. “TTYs” or “TDDs” means teletypewriters or telecommunications devices for the Deaf, which are devices used with a telephone to communicate with persons who are Deaf by typing and reading communications.
[I.]22. “Video Remote Interpreting” or “VRI” means a video-telecommunication interpreting service, which uses Qualified Interpreters and is delivered over a high-speed Internet connection. See 28 C.F.R. § 35.160(d).
[I.]23. “Videophone” means a telephone with a camera and screen for visual, real-time communications. The term Videophone as used in this Agreement is limited to Videophones intended for the use by Deaf Inmates within the custody of the KDOC, and does not include Videophones within KDOC Adult Institutions intended for the use of the general Inmate population.
II. GENERAL POLICIES
[II.]A. Non-discrimination Based on Disability
The KDOC will ensure that Deaf Inmates have full and equal access to and enjoyment of all services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations available to similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates. The KDOC shall provide Deaf Inmates with access to services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations substantially equivalent to those offered to similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates. The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain activities present a Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates and therefore may not be able to provide such Deaf Inmates full and equal enjoyment of some of its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination.
3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 5 of 25 - Page ID#: 1921

[II.]B. ADA Coordinator

[II.B.1.] Within thirty (30) days after the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will assign a staff member at each KDOC Adult Institution the title, duties, and responsibilities of ADA Coordinator. The KDOC will maintain the ADA Coordinator position at each KDOC Adult Institution as required by law. The ADA Coordinator responsibilities will be a part of the official duties assigned to the person in this role. The ADA Coordinator shall be trained on the requirements of federal and state law regarding the contents of this Agreement and the KDOC’s obligations to provide full and equal access to, and enjoyment of, its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations to Deaf Inmates.

[II.B.2.] Within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will notify the Settlement Monitor of the identity of each KDOC employee assigned the title, duties and responsibilities of ADA Coordinator. The name and contact information for each ADA Coordinator will be displayed and regularly updated on the KDOC’s website. The name and contact information of each KDOC Adult Institution’s ADA Coordinator will be communicated to all Deaf Inmates incarcerated in each respective KDOC Adult Institution, and will also be prominently posted in a secure area in any housing unit in which Deaf Inmates are held.

[II.B.3.] ADA Coordinators will assist with providing, coordinating, and overseeing Auxiliary Aids and Services for Deaf Inmates and for implementing this Agreement. The ADA Coordinators will be provided with and responsible for knowing the contents of this Agreement, and will assist with implementing this Agreement. The ADA Coordinators will be available to assist with various aspects of accommodating Deaf Inmates. In such situations, ADA Coordinators will ensure Effective Communication for the Deaf Inmates.

III. INITIAL CLASSIFICATION, ASSESSMENT, AND ASSIGNMENT

[III.]A. General Policy

[III.A.1.] The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates at initial intake, assessment, and classification with Effective Communication. The purpose is to facilitate communication between the Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel (or other persons) during medical, psychological, and educational testing and evaluation, as well as to provide an explanation of prison policies and procedures, including Inmate discipline, grievances, and how to utilize the TTY, Videophone and other Auxiliary Aids and Services.

[III.A.2.] As of the date of this Agreement, initial intake, assessment, and classification for male Inmates occurs at Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC) and for female Inmates at the Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women (KCIW).

[III.]B.

Hearing Assessment

As part of the initial intake, assessment, and classification, medical staff will assess and, if necessary, test all persons who may be a Deaf Inmate for Deafness. If medical staff determines that an Inmate is Deaf, medical staff will note the disability in the Inmate’s institutional file, and
4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 6 of 25 - Page ID#: 1922
will promptly notify the appropriate ADA Coordinator. Any Deaf Inmate who was not assessed at the initial intake, assessment, and classification will be assessed at the annual classification review.
[III.]C. Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment
[III.C.1.] After medical staff determine that an Inmate is Deaf, the KDOC will presume that Auxiliary Aids and Services in the form of Qualified Interpreters, visual notifications, telecommunication devices, and other aids and services set forth in this Agreement are necessary to ensure Effective Communication and substantially equal services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations.
[III.C.2.] If any Deaf Inmate indicates that he or she does not require any or all of the Auxiliary Aids and Services set forth in this Agreement, he or she will sign a Waiver of Auxiliary Aids and Services and that document will be kept in the Inmate’s institutional file.
[III.C.3.] If an Inmate is not found to have a hearing impairment at his or her initial intake, assessment, and classification, initially refuses, or does not request Auxiliary Aids and Services, but later believes that Auxiliary Aids and Services are necessary to ensure Effective Communication, he or she will fill out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services Form. KDOC will provide the Inmate who was initially not found to have a hearing impairment with a hearing assessment if so ordered by medical staff. If that individual is found to be Deaf, KDOC will follow the procedures set forth in this section.
[III.]D. Ensuring Staff Awareness Through Identification Cards
[III.D.1.] The KDOC will take appropriate steps to ensure that all KDOC personnel having regular contact with any Deaf Inmate are made aware of such Inmate’s need for Auxiliary Aids and Services so that Effective Communication with, and the safety of, the Deaf Inmate will be ensured. Upon identifying an Inmate as Deaf during initial intake, assessment, and classification, the Deaf Inmate will receive a distinct identification (ID) card that clearly identifies him or her as a Deaf Inmate. The ID card will signify to the KDOC personnel that the Inmate is Deaf, may not respond to verbal commands, and may require Auxiliary Aids and Services. If any KDOC staff takes any Deaf Inmate’s ID card, the Deaf Inmate will be given another official indicator of his or her Deaf status.
[III.D.2.] All KDOC staff having regular contact with any Deaf Inmate will be trained on the meaning of the distinct ID cards.
[III.D.3.] The KDOC will post at the entrance to all KDOC Adult Institutions housing Deaf Inmates a notice clearly stating that the KDOC Adult Institution houses Deaf Inmates and that the Deaf Inmates carry an ID card or other official indicator with them. The notice will include a picture of the ID card and other official indicator carried by Deaf Inmates. The Notice will also be posted outside each housing unit where Deaf Inmates are held.
5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 7 of 25 - Page ID#: 1923

[III.D.4.] If any Deaf Inmate indicates that he or she does not wish to wear an ID card identifying him or her as Deaf as set forth in this Agreement, he or she will sign a Waiver of Deaf Inmate ID Card and that document will be kept in the Inmate’s institutional file. If any Deaf Inmate signs a Waiver of Deaf Inmate ID Card but later requests to wear an ID card identifying him or her as Deaf as set forth in this Agreement, he or she will promptly be provided an opportunity to fill out a Request for Deaf Inmate ID Card form. The KDOC will then promptly provide the Inmate with a Deaf Inmate ID card and update the Deaf Inmate’s institutional file.

[III.]E.

Interpretation of Materials

The KDOC will provide the Deaf Inmate materials it provides to all Inmates. In providing these materials, the KDOC agrees to Effectively Communicate with the Deaf Inmate. See, e.g., 28 CFR 35.160(b)(2). At the request of the Deaf Inmate, the KDOC will provide that Deaf Inmate with a meaningful opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member and a Qualified Interpreter to ask any questions regarding the written or interpreted materials.

[III.]F. Creation and Interpretation of Rights Materials

[III.F.1.] Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will provide each Deaf Inmate with materials providing information about the Auxiliary Aids and Services available to Deaf Inmates and instructions for how to obtain, request, or use those Auxiliary Aids and Services. The KDOC will create these materials using language designed to be accessible to each Deaf Inmate. The KDOC will provide these materials to Deaf Inmates with the orientation materials provided to all other Inmates at initial intake, assessment, and classification.

[III.F.2.] In providing these materials, the KDOC agrees to Effectively Communicate with the Deaf Inmate. See, e.g., 28 CFR 35.160(b)(2). At the request of the Deaf Inmate, the KDOC will provide that Deaf Inmate with a meaningful opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member and a Qualified Interpreter to ask any questions regarding the written or interpreted materials.

IV. HOUSING

[IV.]A. General Policy

[IV.A.1.] The KDOC has the discretion to house Deaf Inmates at whatever KDOC Adult Institution it deems appropriate. See, e.g., KY Corrections Policy and Procedure 18.7.

[IV.A.2.] Wherever a Deaf Inmate is housed, that Deaf Inmate retains all rights as required by this Agreement, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws, and this Agreement.

6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 8 of 25 - Page ID#: 1924
[IV.]B. Schedule of Accommodations
Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, KDOC personnel at those KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are housed shall provide each Deaf Inmate with a schedule showing when Qualified Interpreters and/or other Auxiliary Aids and Services are available. When the schedule of accommodations changes, including when a Qualified Interpreter will be available, an updated schedule of accommodations will be given to all Deaf Inmates.
V. PROVISION OF AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
[V.]A. General Policy
[V.A.1.] In order to ensure substantial equality for Deaf Inmates, the KDOC will provide appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, as required by this Agreement, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws. This substantial equality will extend to include KDOC programs for or to Deaf Inmates provided by third party vendors, contractors, or state-funded entities, such as community colleges.
[V.A.2.] Appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, including Qualified Interpreters, will be made available so that Deaf Inmates may have an equal opportunity to participate in all services, privileges, and programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC’s custody. These services, privileges, and programs will include, but not be limited to: orientation; medical evaluations; On-site Medical Care and healthcare appointments; classification and transfer hearings; grievance, disciplinary, and Parole hearings; and rehabilitative, educational, work, or transitional KDOC programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC’s custody.
[V.A.3.] In those instances where the KDOC permits volunteers to provide activities (religious or otherwise)—including programs, services, or meetings—to Inmates in KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are housed, the KDOC will allow the volunteer organization or individual to bring a Qualified Interpreter, subject to the KDOC Adult Institution’s security requirements, and will work with the volunteer organization or individual in an effort to have a Qualified Interpreter at the volunteer-provided activities. Such an accommodation must be initiated by request from the Deaf Inmate to the volunteer organization or individual. The responsibility for finding the interpreter will not rest with the KDOC, and proper notice allowing the KDOC to conduct appropriate security clearances must be provided. To the extent the KDOC provides, now or in the future, any religious activities at facilities housing Deaf Inmates, the KDOC shall provide a Qualified Interpreter at such activities upon the request of any Deaf Inmate.
[V.A.4.] The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain activities present a Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates and may therefore choose not to provide such Deaf Inmates substantially equal enjoyment of some of its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any
7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 9 of 25 - Page ID#: 1925
such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination.
[V.A.5.] The KDOC will provide instructions for the use of all Auxiliary Aids and Services to ensure Deaf Inmates’ full use and enjoyment of the Auxiliary Aids and Services.
[V.]B. Medical Devices
All Auxiliary Aids and Services required by this Agreement, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws, which are deemed medically necessary, will be provided promptly upon request, free of charge, to Deaf Inmates subject to a co-payment for that medical device, just as non-Deaf Inmates are charged a co-payment for other medical appliances or devices. This copay shall not apply, however, to hearing aid batteries or for any Deaf Inmate who is deemed indigent pursuant to Kentucky Corrections Policy and Procedure 15.7.
[V.]C. Maintenance of Auxiliary Aids and Services
The KDOC shall maintain all Auxiliary Aids and Services in its custody in good working condition at all times.
VI. QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS
[VI.]A. General Policy
[VI.A.1.] The KDOC will provide Qualified Interpreters as required by this Agreement, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws. The KDOC agrees that Deaf Inmates in need of interpreter services will receive a Qualified Interpreter able to facilitate Effective Communication with that particular Deaf Inmate. The KDOC shall provide an in-person Qualified Interpreter at KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are incarcerated in the following circumstances:
● communications concerning medical care and attention, including dental, vision, audiological, and mental health care;
● disciplinary hearings in which the Deaf Inmate may be a suspect of or charged with a rule infraction;
● transfer and classification processes that impact on the Deaf Inmate’s status; ● transitional programming; ● rehabilitative programming, including, but not limited to, Alcoholics
Anonymous (AA) and Narcotics Anonymous (NA); and ● educational programming.
[VI.A.2.] The KDOC shall also provide an in-person Qualified Interpreter at KDOC Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are incarcerated as circumstances warrant. The KDOC will be responsible for scheduling and overseeing the provision of Qualified Interpreters.
8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 10 of 25 - Page ID#: 1926
[VI.A.3.] When a Deaf Inmate is scheduled to appear at a Parole hearing, the appropriate ADA Coordinator will notify the Kentucky Parole Board of the Deaf Inmate’s need for, and the Kentucky Parole Board’s duty to provide, Auxiliary Aids and Services for Effective Communication. This notice shall be given no later than seven (7) days before the Deaf Inmate’s scheduled Parole hearing. In the event that the Deaf Inmate will be physically present at a KDOC Adult Institution for the Parole hearing, the KDOC will work with the Kentucky Parole Board to ensure that any appointed Qualified Interpreter obtains security clearances in a timely manner.
[VI.]B. Other Means of Communication
KDOC employees will communicate with Deaf Inmates for such purposes, and to the same extent, as they would communicate with non-Deaf Inmates using all available means of communication. This provision in no way lessens the KDOC’s obligation to provide Qualified Interpreters in certain situations and in a timely manner.
[VI.]C. On-site Medical Care
[VI.C.]1. General Policy
The KDOC will provide Effective Communication for all scheduled appointments between Deaf Inmates and medical personnel at KDOC facilities, including, but not limited to, review of medical history, medical appointments, follow up meetings or appointments, and treatment meetings. The parties agree that for many Deaf Inmates, a Qualified Interpreter may be a necessary means of providing Effective Communication in these circumstances.
[VI.C.]2. Informing Appropriate Medical Staff
The KDOC will ensure that all medical staff are made aware of an Inmate’s Deafness. For each Deaf Inmate, the medical staff will note, in bold marking, the Deaf Inmate’s disability on the medical file cover and in the Deaf Inmate’s medical file.
[VI.C.]3. Scheduling Medical Appointments with Qualified Interpreters
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with the ability to request Auxiliary Aids and Services to ensure Effective Communication at medical appointments. The KDOC will provide space on any forms used to request medical appointments for Deaf Inmates to request Auxiliary Aids and Services. Appointments for Deaf Inmates requiring Auxiliary Aids and Services will be scheduled within the same time period from the initial request as those for similarly situated nonDeaf Inmates.
[VI.C.]4. Emergency Events
Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will provide a Qualified Interpreter via VRI service for use in unscheduled medical emergencies. If VRI
9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 11 of 25 - Page ID#: 1927
services are not appropriate in the situation, KDOC personnel will work in conjunction with medical staff to attempt to secure an in-person Qualified Interpreter as soon as possible. Lifesaving medical care should never be delayed because no interpretation services are available.
[VI.]D. Off-site Medical Care
[VI.D.1.] As early as practicable, the KDOC will inform all off-site medical providers that a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service will be seeking medical care from those off-site medical providers at a particular date and time.
[VI.D.2.] In the case of an emergency, the KDOC will, as soon as possible, inform an off-site medical provider that a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service is being transported to the off-site medical provider. Notification will include the Deaf Inmate’s estimated time of arrival.
[VI.]E. Educational, Vocational, and Rehabilitative Programming
The KDOC shall provide appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services for all KDOC programs, which are offered at KDOC Adult Institutions and which Deaf Inmates are qualified for, admitted into, or in which Deaf Inmates are actively participating. The following appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services will be provided:
[VI.E.]1. Educational Programs
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closed-captioned education materials where available. In addition, the KDOC will provide Effective Communication for educational KDOC program classes. The educational program classes include, without limitation, literacy, adult basic education, GED preparatory, and technical education and certification classes. In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services are necessary, the KDOC shall give primary consideration to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)).
[VI.E.]2. Vocational/Work Programs
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closed-captioned vocational/work materials where available. In addition, and as necessary, the KDOC will provide Effective Communication for vocational/work KDOC programs. In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, the KDOC shall give primary consideration to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)).
[VI.E.]3. KDOC Rehabilitative, Counseling, Therapeutic, Substance Abuse, and Evidence-Based Programs
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with written materials and open- or closed-captioned materials where available. In addition, and as necessary, the KDOC will provide Effective Communication for rehabilitative, counseling, therapeutic, substance abuse, and evidence-based
10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 12 of 25 - Page ID#: 1928
KDOC programs. In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, the KDOC shall give primary consideration to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)). The KDOC will provide Qualified Interpreters for Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) and Narcotics Anonymous (NA) programs. (
[VI.]F. Work Assignments
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates opportunities for institutional work assignments that are consistent with the opportunities for the same assignments given to similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates. The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain work assignments present a Direct Threat of injury or death to a Deaf Inmate or others and may therefore choose not to provide the Deaf Inmate a substantially equal opportunity to those work assignments. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination.
[VI.]G. Religious Services
[VI.G.1.] The KDOC shall encourage outside volunteers providing religious services to provide Effective Communication for Deaf Inmates as long as the volunteer meets the same security requirements that are imposed on all other outside volunteers.
[VI.G.2.] No Deaf Inmate will be required to attend a religious service where a Qualified Interpreter is not provided in order to receive any religious meal, diet, or otherwise offered religious accommodation.
[VI.G.3.] To the extent that the KDOC provides any religious services, now or in the future, the KDOC shall provide a Qualified Interpreter.
[VI.]H. Transfer and Classification Matters
The KDOC will provide a Qualified Interpreter for any hearings or meetings relating to a Deaf Inmate’s transfer to another facility, change in security classification, or any other classification hearing involving the exchange of information between the Deaf Inmate and the KDOC personnel that could affect the Deaf Inmate’s status.
[VI.]I. Transitional Programming – Post-Release Supervision (Including Parole)
Upon request, the KDOC will provide appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, which may include Qualified Interpreters, for Deaf Inmates under post-release supervision to Effectively Communicate with the individual supervising their post-release supervision.
[VI.]J. Additional Communications
The KDOC will provide Effective Communication, which may include Qualified Interpreters, for any significant communications between Deaf Inmates and KDOC staff that is not specifically discussed in this Agreement. A significant communication includes any
11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 13 of 25 - Page ID#: 1929
communication for which the Deaf Inmate requests an interpreter, subject to approval by the ADA Coordinator, the Warden, and/or the Warden’s designee.
VII. DISCIPLINARY MATTERS
[VII.]A. Qualified Interpreters For Disciplinary Proceedings
[VII.A.1.] The KDOC must provide Deaf Inmates with a Qualified Interpreter in any disciplinary proceeding in which a Deaf Inmate is suspected of, charged with, or a witness to, a disciplinary infraction, including those proceedings carried out under Chapter 15 of the Kentucky Corrections Policy and Procedure and any other disciplinary policies and procedures now in force or subsequently adopted by the KDOC. A Qualified Interpreter must be available to a Deaf Inmate at the following stages of the above-described disciplinary proceedings:
● staff investigations involving the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel, prior to filing a disciplinary report or equivalent;
● investigative interviews that involve the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel (such as when an adverse party is interviewed);
● during any part of the preparation of the disciplinary report that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel;
● during any part of the shift supervisor’s review of the disciplinary report that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel;
● during any part of the investigator’s review of the disciplinary report that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel;
● giving Miranda warnings to a Deaf Inmate; ● advising a Deaf Inmate of his or her right to consult with an assigned legal
aide; ● advising a Deaf Inmate of the anticipated date, time, and place of hearing; and ● during any part of the hearing, or re-hearing, before the Adjustment
Committee, Adjustment Officer or Unit Hearing Officer that involves the exchange of information between a Deaf Inmate and KDOC personnel. [VII.A.2.] Inmate or staff advisors will be provided and accessible to Deaf Inmates who are suspected of, charged with, or witnesses to a disciplinary infraction, on the same terms as they are provided to non-Deaf Inmates. To the extent that a Deaf Inmate has access to his or her advisor, a Qualified Interpreter shall be made available to the Deaf Inmate for any exchange of information between the Deaf Inmate and his or her advisor.
12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 14 of 25 - Page ID#: 1930
[VII.]B. Miscellaneous
[VII.B.1.] If any Deaf Inmate is a witness at a disciplinary hearing, the KDOC will provide a Qualified Interpreter at the hearing.
[VII.B.2.] The KDOC must hold disciplinary hearings for Deaf Inmates within the same time frame as it holds disciplinary hearings for non-Deaf Inmates.
[VII.B.3.] Nothing in this Agreement precludes any Deaf Inmate who is suspected of or charged with a disciplinary infraction from voluntarily waiving his or her right to a Qualified Interpreter and to proceed through any stage of a disciplinary proceeding without the benefits of a Qualified Interpreter. If, as of the Effective Date of this Agreement, a Deaf Inmate is being punished or is scheduled to be punished for a disciplinary infraction as the result of a hearing in which he or she did not waive his or her right to a Qualified Interpreter, then the disciplinary hearing must be re-heard at a time that a Qualified Interpreter can be present.
VIII. NON-AUDITORY ALERT NOTIFICATIONS
[VIII.]A. General Policy
Deaf Inmates incarcerated at KDOC facilities should not miss announcements, alarms, or any other information audibly conveyed from KDOC staff to the general Inmate population solely because of their disability.
[VIII.]B. Relaying Information
[VIII.B.1.] The KDOC shall provide an effective non-auditory alert system that will notify Deaf Inmates of both prison-wide events (including but not limited to announcements, visitations, and roll-calls) and events specific to Deaf Inmates. The non-auditory alert system must be capable of effectively alerting Deaf Inmates of such events in real time.
[VIII.B.2.] In addition, the KDOC will continue to publish the institution schedule in the handbook that every Inmate receives and to post promptly any schedule changes, which are done by memorandum from the Warden, in all dormitories, the library, and the gym at each KDOC Adult Institution in which a Deaf Inmate is housed. Further, the KDOC will provide all medically necessary hearing aids and assisting devices, including but not limited to, bed shakers.
[VIII.B.3.] The KDOC has the discretion as to which type of non-auditory alerts it shall employ and to change that system as it deems necessary. Nonetheless, the KDOC will promptly advise the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH of all non-auditory alert systems that the KDOC is considering, and will consult with the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH in determining whether such devices are acceptable for the stated purpose.
13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 15 of 25 - Page ID#: 1931
[VIII.]C. Non-Auditory Alarms and Emergency Evacuation
[VIII.C.1.] The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with an effective non-auditory alert system that will advise them of an emergency evacuation or other emergency. Such non-auditory alert systems must be sufficient to effectively notify Deaf Inmates of emergencies in real-time and can include flashing strobe lights and bed shakers. The KDOC has the discretion as to which type of non-auditory alerts it shall employ and to change that system as it deems necessary. Nonetheless, the KDOC will promptly advise the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH of the non-auditory alert systems that the KDOC is considering, and will consult with the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH in determining whether such systems are acceptable for the stated purpose.
[VIII.C.2.] KDOC personnel shall be responsible for the evacuation or safe relocation of Deaf Inmates during an emergency. Therefore, during emergencies, KDOC employees will personally and Effectively Communicate adequate information about the emergency to Deaf Inmates.
IX. TELECOMMUNICATIONS
[IX.]A. General Policy
The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with access to telecommunication devices that enable them to have communication with people outside of the KDOC and that are substantially equivalent—in terms of the amount and quality of the information conveyed—to the communications that non-Deaf Inmates have with people outside of the KDOC using traditional telecommunication devices such as telephones.
[IX.]B. Monitoring Communications
The KDOC may only provide for the monitoring of communications between Deaf Inmates and individuals outside of the KDOC to the same extent and with the same discretion applied to the monitoring of communications between non-Deaf Inmates and those outside of the KDOC.
[IX.]C. Additional Time for Communication
The KDOC will implement a policy that allows Deaf Inmates at least twice as many minutes to complete a Videophone call, and at least three times as many minutes to complete a TTY call, as the number of minutes afforded to other non-Deaf Inmates to make calls using traditional telecommunication devices such as telephones. In the event the KDOC determines this usage arrangement results in less than equitable access to telephones and Videophones for non-Deaf Inmates and Deaf Inmates, after considering the needs and abilities of Deaf and non-Deaf Inmates, the KDOC may adjust the ratio of time provided for Videophone calls and TTY calls. The KDOC will document this determination, including the evidence and reasons in support thereof. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made, and will explain the reasoning in support of such determination.
14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 16 of 25 - Page ID#: 1932
[IX.]D. Technology KDOC Will Provide
The KDOC will make the following communications technologies available at KDCO Adult Institutions where Deaf Inmates are incarcerated to facilitate communication between Deaf Inmates and people outside of KDOC facilities. This list of technological equipment is not exhaustive. The KDOC will keep abreast of evolving technology and will consider adding additional equipment to reflect technological advances, as it deems appropriate or as required by applicable federal and state law. KDOC will provide a list of available communications equipment to Deaf Inmates upon their arrival at the KDOC Adult Institutions in which they are housed.
[IX.D.]1. TTY or TDD
The parties acknowledge that there may be reasonable concerns over the theft and destruction of the TTY/TDD device(s), and that the TTY/TDD device(s) therefore must be maintained in a secured location when not in use. The parties also acknowledge that access to the TTY/TDD device(s) will be made available at times that the KDOC will designate. Nonetheless, for every KDOC Adult Institution at which any Deaf Inmate is incarcerated, in no event will TTY/TDD access for Deaf Inmates be less than equal to the access non-Deaf Inmates have to conventional telephones, except to the extent that Deaf Inmates must request access to the otherwise secured TTY/TDD device(s). A reasonable request by a Deaf Inmate to access the TTY/TDD device(s) will be granted. TTY/TDDs will be located in areas substantially as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. TTY/TDDs will be available for Deaf Inmate use during the same days and hours as conventional telephones. At each KDOC Adult Institution where any Deaf Inmate is incarcerated, the KDOC will ensure that an alternate TTY or TDD unit is available for use when the regular TTY or TDD is broken or otherwise unavailable.
[IX.D.]2. Relay Services
For every KDOC Adult Institution at which any Deaf Inmate is incarcerated, the KDOC will enable all TTYs and TDDs to access publicly available relay service phone numbers such as 711 and 1-800 numbers. Deaf Inmates will not be charged any more than similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates for the use of relay services.
[IX.D.]3. Videophones
[IX.D.3.a.] Within sixty (60) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, Videophones shall be installed and accessible to Deaf Inmates in any KDOC Adult Institution that houses Deaf Inmates. Access to the Videophone will be made available at times that the KDOC will designate, but in no event will Videophone access for Deaf Inmates be less than equal to the access non-Deaf Inmates have to conventional telephones. Videophones will be located in areas as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. Videophone will be available during the same days and hours as conventional telephones and will not require permission for use to the same extent that conventional telephones do not require permission for use. Deaf Inmates will not be charged for the use of Videophones.
15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 17 of 25 - Page ID#: 1933
[IX.D.3.b.] Videophones will allow voice carry-over features.
[IX.]E. Responsibility for Maintaining Equipment and Training Staff
[IX.E.1.] The KDOC will ensure that the technology used to permit communication between Deaf Inmates and people outside of KDOC Adult Institutions is in good working order. Further, the KDOC will ensure that all equipment under the KDOC’s control that is used to accommodate Deaf Inmates is kept in good working order. KDOC staff shall attempt to resolve complaints about any malfunctioning equipment within a reasonable time of receiving that complaint. To the extent services, equipment, and resources that are outside KDOC’s control are involved (for example services or equipment provided by cable, telephone, utilities, or various other companies), KDOC will agree to notify those providers/companies of any problems and, to the extent necessary or possible under the circumstances, work with them expeditiously to resolve the problem.
[IX.E.2.] The KDOC will ensure that KDOC employees are adequately trained in the operation of the technology.
X. MEDIA
[X.1.] The KDOC will ensure that all audio-visual media purchased for Inmate use in KDOC Adult Institutions housing Deaf Inmates includes open- or closed-captioning. Televisions purchased by the KDOC for Inmate use shall support open- or closed-captioning. Captioning will be turned on and remain on at any Deaf Inmate’s request.
[X.2.] The KDOC will permit Deaf Inmates to purchase TVs, which reliably support open- or closed-captioning, with their own funds. In the event that the closed-captioning feature contained on TVs purchased through approved commercial channels malfunctions, KDOC personnel will work with the Deaf Inmate to the same extent that the KDOC works with other Inmates regarding malfunctioning personal property to address and resolve the problem within a reasonable time.
XI. HAND RESTRAINTS
[XI.]A. General Policy
[XI.A.1.] According to the KDOC’s hand restraint policies, the KDOC will use hand restraints on Deaf Inmates only in the following circumstances:
16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 18 of 25 - Page ID#: 1934
● when transporting a Deaf Inmate to or from a KDOC Adult Institution; ● when transferring a Deaf Inmate into or out of the special management unit;
and ● as needed in response to security threats. [XI.A.2.] The applicable portions of the KDOC hand restraint policy, summarized above, have been reviewed to confirm when hand restraints are used on Inmates confined to KDOC Adult Institutions. While the policy does not specify the manner in which mechanical restraints are used during Off-site Medical Care, an Affidavit is included as Appendix A to this Agreement describing the two-point bed restraint system used during Off-site Medical Care. The two-point system would allow a Deaf Inmate to use his or her hands for communicating via sign language to some degree. KDOC training will include both the two-point system as well as the agreement that hand restraints will be removed from a Deaf Inmate when the Deaf Inmate is in a secure environment, when security is no longer a threat, or there are other security devices in place to allow the Deaf Inmate to Effectively Communicate.
[XI.]B. Off-site Medical Care
[XI.B.1.] During Off-site Medical Care, the KDOC shall use a two-point hand restraint system to allow for the Deaf Inmate’s need for Effective Communication while considering the safety and security of the Deaf Inmate and those located at Off-site Medical Care facilities. The KDOC will include training on use of the two-point hand restraint system in its regularly scheduled training for new and existing employees.
[XI.B.2.] In the event a medical decision made by medical professionals or medical staff that requires or calls for removal or adjustment of hand restraints, the KDOC will follow its secured policy regarding the removal of mechanical restraints where necessary for treatment or emergencies.
[XI.]C. On-Site Medical Care
The KDOC’s hand restraint policy, summarized above in Section XI.A., will be followed for Onsite Medical Care.
XII. MISCELLANEOUS DEVICES AND AIDS
Where devices such as vibrating clocks and in-line amplifiers are not deemed medically necessary, the KDOC agrees to consider on a case by case basis whether it will allow a particular Deaf Inmate the opportunity to purchase these devices at his or her own expense. The KDOC’s decision in this regard will consider, among other issues, whether these devices pose a security risk. The KDOC will have the discretion to make the determination whether any of these devices, and the type of device, is permissible. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination. Deaf Inmates will be allowed to purchase alerting devices, vibrating clocks, telephone amplifications, headset amplifiers, and televisions that meet the particular needs of
17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 19 of 25 - Page ID#: 1935
their disability from an approved vendor so long as the items do not pose a security risk. The KDOC retains the discretion to limit purchases to devices that are available through the Commissary. Deaf Inmates may submit a request in writing to the ADA Coordinator responsible for the KDOC Adult Institution in which they are housed for devices not available from the Commissary. The KDOC will not deny any Deaf Inmate the right to purchase these devices except where they present an articulable security risk, which shall be documented. The ADA Coordinator will maintain written records of all Deaf Inmate requests for these devices and the disposition of the request.
XIII. TRAINING
[XIII.]A. General Policy
[XIII.A.1.] The KDOC, with input from the KCDHH, will provide training as defined in Section XIII.B below to KDOC employees who interact with the Inmate population. The KDOC will incorporate this training into its regularly scheduled training for new and existing employees. This training will be included in current KDOC training within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement. The KDOC will update the training materials as required by law, including but not limited to, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws.
[XIII.A.2.] The KDOC will provide any materials that may be used for training, as specified under Section XIV of this Agreement, to the Settlement Monitor for review prior to the first training session. In addition, the KDOC, with input from the KCDHH, will update and allow the KCDHH and the Settlement Monitor to review the training as defined in Section XIII.B. at least every two years.
[XIII.]B. KDOC Employee Training
Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC will begin training KDOC employees on the following topics:
● best practices for communicating with Deaf individuals; ● the unique needs and problems encountered by Deaf and late-Deafened
individuals; ● identification of communication needs of persons who are Deaf; ● the psychological implications of Deafness and its relationship to interaction
with hearing corrections personnel; ● the proper use and role of Qualified Interpreters; ● directions about using TTYs, TDDs, Videophones and any other
telecommunication equipment, and other Auxiliary Aids and Services, currently available at the facility that facilitate communication with Deaf people;
18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 20 of 25 - Page ID#: 1936
● disciplinary matters, described in Section VII, and grievance proceedings, described in Section XIV;
● the KDOC’s anti-discrimination policy; ● all equipment, services, and accommodations available to Deaf Inmates; ● hand restraint policies in the context of Deaf Inmates; and ● the requirements of this Agreement.
XIV. GRIEVANCES
[XIV.1.] All KDOC grievance coordinators will inform Deaf Inmates who file a grievance of the option to share that grievance (or any responses or outcomes) with the ADA Coordinator of the KDOC Adult Institution in which the Deaf Inmate is housed. If the Deaf Inmate agrees to share the grievance (or any responses or outcomes) with the ADA Coordinator, the grievance coordinator will forward a copy of that grievance (or grievance response or outcome) to the ADA Coordinator for review.
[XIV.2.] A written record of all Deaf Inmates’ grievances (and any responses and outcomes) will be maintained by the KDOC. For five years following the Effective Date of this Agreement, the Settlement Monitor may request the records of any Deaf Inmate’s grievances, as long as the Deaf Inmate signs a waiver of confidentiality pursuant to KRS 197.023, and a copy of that Deaf Inmate’s records will be provided, free of charge, to the Settlement Monitor.
[XIV.3.] Within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, and every three months thereafter, the KDOC will provide the Settlement Monitor with a written summary of grievances filed by Deaf Inmates concerning access to Effective Communication, Auxiliary Aids and Services, or any other issues raised in this Agreement. This written summary will describe, for each grievance, the issue raised by the Deaf Inmate, the KDOC Adult Institution where the grievance was filed, a summary of KDOC’s response, and whether and how the grievance was resolved.
XV. MONITORING AND COMPLIANCE
[XV.]A. Plaintiffs’ Counsels’ Right of Access
To the extent Plaintiffs’ Counsel maintains a current or prospective attorney-client relationship with any Deaf Inmate, they shall be provided the same access to that Deaf Inmate and to the records relating to that Deaf Inmate, as any other attorney with a similar relationship to another non-Deaf Inmate.
19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 21 of 25 - Page ID#: 1937
[XV.]B. The Settlement Monitor’s Investigation
[XV.B.1.] For a period of five years after the Effective Date, the following will apply to the extent necessary to permit the Settlement Monitor to thoroughly and objectively assess the KDOC’s compliance with and implementation of this Agreement:
● [XV.B.1.a] The Settlement Monitor will have unlimited access to all records, files, and papers maintained by the KDOC that relate to the terms of this Agreement. The KDOC will provide a written explanation for any refusal by the KDOC to provide any requested records, files, or papers, and the KDOC and the Settlement Monitor will attempt to reach an agreement before either the KDOC or the Settlement Monitor seek assistance from the Court.
● [XV.B.1.b] The Settlement Monitor will have access to all other materials relating to the case Adams, et al. v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, et al., Case no. 14-cv-00001, except for those materials protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Any requested materials protected by the attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine will be logged with information including the author, date, nature of the material, reason for the claim of privilege, and persons to whom the material was disseminated, and this log will be provided to the Settlement Monitor.
● [XV.B.1.c] The Settlement Monitor will have access to all pertinent staff members and employees of the KDOC. The Settlement Monitor may engage in both formal and informal conferences with staff members and employees, including confidential or group interviews, and such persons will cooperate will the Settlement Monitor fully and will respond to all reasonable inquiries and requests relating to compliance efforts. The Settlement Monitor will contact the Warden or the Warden’s designee to schedule these conferences and/or interviews, which will be treated as attorney visits under CPP 14.4.
● [XV.B.1.d] The Settlement Monitor may conduct confidential interviews with any Deaf Inmate or with groups of Deaf Inmates incarcerated at Adult KDOC Institutions. Within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, and every six months thereafter, the KDOC will provide the Settlement Monitor with a current and up-to-date list of Deaf Inmates in the KDOC’s custody, which identifies the name, DOC numbers and the KDOC Adult Institution for each Deaf Inmate. The Settlement Monitor will contact the Warden or the Warden’s designee to schedule these conferences and/or interviews, which will be treated as attorney visits under CPP 14.4.
● [XV.B.1.e] The Settlement Monitor may request KDOC staff members and employees to prepare, where appropriate, written responses to any questions by the Settlement Monitor related to the implementation of the Agreement or issues in this litigation, so long as the request does not interfere with security
20

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 22 of 25 - Page ID#: 1938
obligations of KDOC staff members and employees. The KDOC will not refuse or fail to respond to reasonable requests. Responses to these requests shall be provided in a timely manner that is reasonable and shall not interfere in the security obligations of any KDOC staff members or employees. The KDOC will provide a written explanation for any refusal by the KDOC staff members or employees to provide any requested responses, and the KDOC and the Settlement Monitor will attempt to reach an agreement before either the KDOC or the Settlement Monitor seek assistance from the Court.
● [XV.B.1.f] The Settlement Monitor may visit each KDOC Adult Institution so long as the KDOC is provided notice a minimum of thirty (30) days prior to the visit. All visits will be supervised by a KDOC employee. Visits will be limited to only those areas of a KDOC Adult Institution that are affected by this Agreement. Absent Court order or a separate agreement, the Settlement Monitor may visit each KDOC Adult Institution only once in a calendar year. The KDOC will pay the cost of and associated with providing Qualified Interpreters for the Settlement Monitor’s visits to KDOC Adult Institutions.
[XV.B.2.] The parties will not refuse reasonable requests for records, files, papers, or other materials or for access to people or other information. The Settlement Monitor will conduct the bulleted monitoring, above, in a reasonable manner to minimize interference with the daily operations of the KDOC. Absent a Court order requiring otherwise, the KDOC retains discretion to prohibit the Settlement Monitor from conducting the aforementioned monitoring on the buildings and premises under the control of the KDOC, but the KDOC will not unreasonably refuse requests for visits.
[XV.B.3.] The Settlement Monitor may hire other persons as the Settlement Monitor determines to be necessary to carry out the Settlement Monitor’s duties.
[XV.B.4.] For a period of five years after the Effective Date of this Agreement, the Settlement Monitor will issue semi-annual reports to the Court and the parties detailing the parties’ compliance with and implementation of this Agreement.
[XV.B.5.] The KDOC will not pay for the fees and expenses due to the Settlement Monitor for the Settlement Monitor’s services under this section.
XVI. RELEASE AND SETTLEMENT OF CLAIMS
[XVI.]A. Release
In consideration of the representations, promises and agreements set forth herein, including the payments as set forth in this Agreement, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Plaintiffs, on their behalf and on behalf of their assignees, heirs, executors, family members, beneficiaries, administrators, successors, and anyone acting, or claiming to act, on their behalf, hereby releases and forever discharges the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, KDOC, J. Michael Brown, Ladonna Thompson, Kimberly Potter-Blair,
21

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 23 of 25 - Page ID#: 1939
Paula Holden, Jim Erwin, Randy White, Gregory Howard, Clark Taylor, Aaron Smith, Kathy Litteral, Steve Haney, Gary Beckstrom, Alan Brown, Janet Conover, Joseph Meko, Don Bottoms, Ravonne Sims, Steve Woodward, and Bobbie Underwood from any and all claims and causes of action, known and unknown, asserted and unasserted, direct and indirect, and of any kind, nature or description whatsoever, which they had on or before the date of the execution of this Agreement arising out of the facts set forth in the discrimination charge they filed with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, Frankfort Division.
[XVI.]B. Dismissal
[XVI.B.1.] The Plaintiffs agree to dismiss with prejudice all claims of the Amended Complaint filed with the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Kentucky, Frankfort Division (the “Court”), Case Number 3:14-cv-00001.
[XVI.B.2.] The parties agree that the Court will retain jurisdiction over this Agreement as set out in Section XVI.E of this Agreement, below.
[XVI.]C. Attorneys’ Fees, Costs, Disbursements and Expenses
In settlement of all claims for attorneys’ fees and costs, any disbursements and expenses, including expert fees, incurred on behalf of Plaintiffs in this litigation up to and including the Effective Date, the parties agree that within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC shall pay $250,000.00 as directed by Plaintiffs’ counsel.
[XVI.]D. Damages
Within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the KDOC shall directly pay (1) Plaintiff Oscar Adams $1,500.00 in damages and (2) Plaintiff Michael Knights $1,500.00 in damages. The KDOC also agrees to pay within ninety (90) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement Plaintiff Michael Knights $77.62 to compensate for lien charges assessed against him for communications with Plaintiffs’ Counsel regarding this case and settlement.
[XVI.]E. Enforcement Powers
[XVI.E.1.] During the term of the Agreement, as set out in Section XVII.H, Plaintiffs may move the court for reinstatement of the lawsuit, or may elect to seek specific performance or institute an action for breach. An action to enforce this Agreement does not include any action for damages, except for enforcement of Section XVI.D. A Plaintiff seeking to enforce this Agreement can only seek to have a court order the KDOC to comply with the terms of this Agreement.
[XVI.E.2.] The lawsuit may not be reinstated, nor a claim for breach or specific performance of this Agreement brought, before a Plaintiff first notifies the KDOC of the nature of the alleged material non-compliance and gives the KDOC sixty (60) days to cure the alleged breach. The parties agree to non-binding mediation prior to any Plaintiff moving to reinstate the lawsuit or filing an enforcement action.
22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 24 of 25 - Page ID#: 1940
XVII. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
[XVII.]A. Non-Admission
It is understood and agreed that this Agreement is a compromise of disputed claims, facts, or allegations. Nothing in this Agreement constitutes an admission of any liability, wrongdoing, or violation of any law, or the admission of the validity of any defense.
[XVII.]B. Private Settlement Agreement
This Agreement is a private settlement agreement within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3626.
[XVII.]C. Confidentiality
No part of this Agreement is or will be considered confidential by the parties. This Agreement will be made available by request under the Freedom of Information Act.
[XVII.]D. Entire Agreement
[XVII.D.1.] This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties. There were no inducements or representations leading to the execution of this document, except as stated within the document itself. The terms of this Agreement are contractual in nature.
[XVII.D.2.] All parties agree that the relief provided in this Agreement is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary, and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct the violation of Plaintiffs’ federally protected rights.
[XVII.]E. Execution
This Agreement may be executed in counterpart originals, all of which, when so executed and taken together, shall be deemed an original and all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. Each counterpart may be delivered by email (as a .pdf attachment) or facsimile, and an email or facsimile signature shall have the same force and effect as an original signature.
[XVII.]F. Binding
This Agreement is final and binding on the Parties. Each Party has a duty to so inform any such successor in interest.
[XVII.]G. Non-Waiver
Failure by the Plaintiffs to seek enforcement of this Agreement pursuant to its terms with respect to any instance or provision will not be construed as a waiver to such enforcement with regard to other instances and provisions.
23

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-1 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 25 of 25 - Page ID#: 1941
[XVII.]H. Severability In the event that a court determines that any provision of this Agreement is unenforceable, such provision will be severed from this Agreement and all other provisions will remain valid and enforceable, provided however that if the severance of any such provision materially alters the rights and obligations of the Parties hereunder, the Parties will attempt, through reasonable, good faith negotiations, to agree upon such other amendments to this Agreement as may be necessary to restore the Parties as closely as possible to the relative rights and obligations initially intended by them hereunder.
[XVII.]I. Term of Agreement This Agreement shall remain in effect for five years from the Effective Date. The KDOC, however, will continue to provide all accommodations required under the law, including under the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws, regardless of any term limit applicable to this Agreement. Signed: /s/
24

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 1 of 67 - Page ID#: 1942
Third Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor (May 31, 2017) Appendix II
ADA staff computer-based-training (Apr. 20, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 2 of 67 - Page ID#: 1943
Kentucky Department of Corrections
COMMUNICATING WITH DEAF AND HARD OF HEARING OFFENDERS
2017 INS

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 3 of 67 - Page ID#: 1944
KYDOC’s Non-discrimination Policy
Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, and a settlement agreement entered in federal court, KYDOC provides deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates:  Non-Discrimination  Effective Communication  Auxiliary Aids and Services
Equal access is the law and it's the right thing to do!

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 4 of 67 - Page ID#: 1945
Non-Discrimination Policy
The KYDOC will ensure that deaf and hard of hearing inmates have full and equal access to and enjoyment of all services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations available to similarly situated non-deaf inmates. The KYDOC shall provide deaf and hard of hearing inmates with access to services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations substantially equivalent to those offered to similarly situated non-deaf inmates.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 5 of 67 - Page ID#: 1946
Non-discrimination Policy
Effective Communication:
KYDOC will communicate effectively with deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates—ensuring that inmates can receive information from and provide information to staff.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 6 of 67 - Page ID#: 1947
Non-discrimination Policy
Auxiliary Aids and Services: When needed for effective communication, KYDOC will provide “auxiliary aids and services.” This means devices or services that assist in communication, such as:  Qualified interpreters, via remote video interpretation or in-
person  Hearing aids and amplifiers  Video captioning  Visual or other non-auditory alert or alarm systems  Videophone/video relay service  TTY/TDD, including telephone relay services  Written materials  Assistive listening systems

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 7 of 67 - Page ID#: 1948
Non-discrimination policy
Remember the anti-discrimination principle: The ADA requires KYDOC to provide deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates with access to services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations substantially equivalent to those offered to similarly situated non-deaf inmates. HOWEVER, if something a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate seeks—a particular job, for example—would be dangerous, KYDOC can bar the inmate’s access to that job because it poses a direct threat of injury or death to the inmate or others. You must discuss any such situation with the ADA Coordinator, who will ensure that the court settlement monitor receives required notice.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 8 of 67 - Page ID#: 1949
Overview Of Deaf And Hard Of Hearing Offenders
EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT AND INTERACTION

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 9 of 67 - Page ID#: 1950
Demographics
• Nearly 50 million Americans have a hearing loss, roughly 17% of
the U.S. population
• Nearly 700,000 deaf or hard of hearing Kentuckians
(third largest per capita)
• Hearing loss is currently the 3rd largest health issue following
heart disease and arthritis.
• Hearing loss is currently the #1 war wound.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 10 of 67 - Page ID#: 1951
Appropriate Terminology

Inappropriate:

Appropriate:

Deaf and dumb Hearing Impaired Mute Death

Deaf Hard of Hearing Non-Verbal

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 11 of 67 - Page ID#: 1952
Population Diversity

There is tremendous diversity within the deaf and hard of hearing community. Some factors that affect this are:

Type of Hearing Loss Degree of Loss Age of onset Etc.

• Deaf • Hard of Hearing • Late Deafened
•Sign •Oral •Both

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 12 of 67 - Page ID#: 1953
Understanding Differences
 Louder Speech  Culturally Different  Very Animated With Use Of Hand Gesture  Not Affected By Verbal Commands And Loud Noises

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 13 of 67 - Page ID#: 1954
Potential Side Effects Of Hearing Loss
•DEPRESSION •WITHDRAWAL •ISOLATION •BLUFFING •DEMENTIA •MISLABELING

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 14 of 67 - Page ID#: 1955
“DEAF IN PRISON”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AstF5kMaH_w

Challenges Facing Deaf Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 15 of 67 - Page ID#: 1956
and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates
• Difficulty hearing announcements and alerts:
‐ Count ‐ Chow ‐ Pill-call ‐ Pages ‐ Other announcements
• Difficulty hearing orders issued orally • Need to avoid seeming vulnerable

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 16 of 67 - Page ID#:
Special Barriers to1957 Communication
• Prisons are very loud, with lots of ambient noise and terrible acoustics.
• Prisons have many congregate situations, which are particularly difficult to understand.
• Announcements made over intercom system can be distorted and hard to understand.
• Prisoners—particularly deaf and hard-ofhearing prisoners—often have low literacy, so writing cannot always be used to substitute for speech.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 17 of 67 - Page ID#: 1958
Special Considerations
Try to imagine what it would be like to enter prison without the ability to hear:
"Deaf people in prison are isolated, frustrated, ignored and vulnerable." - Deaf Prison Project,
BDA/BID

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 18 of 67 - Page ID#: 1959
How does this affect you?
As an employee, you most likely take some things for granted. For instance, you probably expect offenders to respond when you order them to report to the visiting room, perform an emergency evacuation, move away from a perimeter fence, and respond to other spoken commands.
Deaf and hard-of-hearing offenders may have difficulty doing these things if you don't communicate effectively.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 19 of 67 - Page ID#: 1960
Identification Of Deaf And Hard Of Hearing Offenders
OFFENDERS ARE IDENTIFIED IN AN INITIAL ASSESSMENT FOR HEARING LOSS

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 20 of 67 - Page ID#: 1961
Identification & Assessment
 Medical staff shall assess for the presence of a hearing impairment
 If the assessment concludes the offender is deaf or hard of hearing,
 Medical staff shall notify the ADA Coordinator  The ADA coordinator will consult with the individual
and medical staff to determine what auxiliary aides or services are necessary  Previously waived aides or services can be requested at any time by the offender

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 21 of 67 - Page ID#: 1962
Signs of Hearing Loss
For inmates who entered KYDOC custody before screening became routine, who were missed, or who developed hearing loss after the screening, you may observe signs of hearing loss, such as:  Seeking frequent repetition.  Having difficulty following conversations involving more than
two people.  Thinking that other people sound muffled or like they’re
mumbling.  Having difficulty hearing in noisy situations.  Answering or responding inappropriately in conversations.  Watching people’s faces intently when they speak.  Avoiding conversation and social interaction.
If you see these, contact the inmate’s case worker, unit administrator, or health services personnel for additional screening.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 22 of 67 - Page ID#: 1963
Identification
Once an offender is identified as deaf or hard-ofhearing that will be noted on a pink (or in some facilities red) Medical Alert Card.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 23 of 67 - Page ID#: 1964
Identification
When an offender is identified as deaf this is the symbol that will be on their ID card and displayed on the cell door or bunk.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 24 of 67 - Page ID#: 1965
KOMS Notification
23
 All Deaf or Hard of Hearing offenders have a precaution entered into KOMS
 This is listed under the red exclamation point in the KOMS header; the precaution is entered as a serious medical issue
 The precaution states, Deaf or Hard of Hearing

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 25 of 67 - Page ID#: 1966
EMR Notification
24
 Medical staff enter a deaf or hard of hearing alert in the electronic medical record
 The alert is entered in the header of the electronic medical file

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 26 of 67 - Page ID#: 1967
Stay Aware of Identifications
Why would you want to know that an inmate is deaf or hardof-hearing? You need to know for both emergencies and routine interactions. It's a matter of improving your communication with the offender. In some cases, improved communication can mean the difference between life and death.
For example:
 If you’re a housing officer, you should know who the deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates in your unit are, so you can make sure to use best practices for communication.
 If you don’t know an inmate you are about to page, check his or her KOMS file, to look for the Deaf or Hard-ofHearing alert; the page may need to be made personally, instead of using the intercom.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 27 of 67 - Page ID#: 1968
Emergency Procedures
 Staff shall be aware of the deaf or hard of hearing offenders assigned to the living unit
 In the event of emergency, all cells of deaf or hard of hearing offenders shall be checked by staff
 The symbol below is utilized to identify the cells which house all deaf or hard of hearing offenders
HEARING IMPAIRED INMATE

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 28 of 67 - Page ID#: 1969
Effective Communication Strategies
ENSURE OPTIMAL SAFETY FOR OFFICERS AND INMATES

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 29 of 67 - Page ID#: 1970
Provide Effective Communication
 Remember: Part of KYDOC’s anti-discrimination policy is to communicate effectively with deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates—ensuring that inmates can receive information from and provide information to staff.
 Depending on the inmate’s needs, this can mean:  Using a sign-language interpreter (either on a laptop computer or in-person)  Using other auxiliary aids and services  Using strategies for talking with hard-of-hearing inmates

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 30 of 67 - Page ID#:
When is effective com19m71 unication required? (Sign language interpretation OR auxiliary aids)
 Educational programs (literacy, adult basic education, GED, and technical education and certification classes).
 Vocational/work programs  Rehabilitative, counseling, therapeutic, substance abuse,
and evidence-based programs  Work assignments  Religious services (except KYDOC does not provide
interpretation for volunteer-led religious programming)  Intake, transfer and classification matters  Transitional programming – post-release supervision  On-site medical care and healthcare appointments  Grievance and disciplinary hearings and meetings  All important conversations between staff and inmates.

Disciplinary Proceedings: Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 31 of 67 - Page ID#: 1972
Effective Communication
Q: What parts of the Adjustment process are covered? A: All of them. Effective communication—including use of auxiliary aids and interpretation when needed—is required for:  Miranda warnings  When notifying the inmate of the date, time and place of
the hearing  Meetings with the investigator  Meetings with a legal aide  The Adjustment Committee hearing  Etc.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 32 of 67 - Page ID#: 1973
Interpreters
• Knowing some sign language is NOT the same as being an interpreter
• Interpreting requires specialized expertise • Interpreters are highly skilled professionals • Kentucky has a licensure law that requires the use of
LICENSED interpreters • Using non licensed interpreters for legal, professional or
educational matters is extremely risky to the inmate as well as the facility • Can be in person or accessed remotely via technology • Using other inmates as interpreters creates problems with adequate understanding, confidentiality, and safety.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 33 of 67 - Page ID#: 1974
No request necessary
Inmates can request interpretation for any significant communication. But no request is necessary for:  Intake and orientation  Classification and transfer hearings and related
meetings  Grievance meetings and hearings  Disciplinary hearings and all related processes  Parole meetings and hearings  Emergency health care on-site For these situations, interpretation must be offered to the inmate by staff (the inmate can waive the right to interpretation if he or she chooses).

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 34 of 67 - Page ID#: 1975
VRI or In-Person Interpretation?
KYDOC offers both video remote interpretation (VRI), via a laptop, and, when necessary, in-person interpretation. An inmate’s request for in-person interpretation should be passed on to the ADA Coordinator, who will grant it if it is necessary for effective communication, for example:  During group classes in which student participation
is key.  When remote interpretation is unlikely to be, or has
not been, effective.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 35 ofB67e-dPaSgehIDa#k: er
1976
TV Closed
Auxiliary Aids Captioning

VRI Laptop

Hearing aids

TTY

Phone Volume

Adjustment

Amplifier

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 36 of 67 - Page ID#: 1977
Lip-reading
Studies have shown that lip reading is 30%-35% accurate AT BEST.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 37 of 67 - Page ID#: 1978
Communication Tips
The U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Disability Rights Section, has published some practical suggestions for communicating effectively with hardof-hearing people. The slides that follow present those tips.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 38 of 67 - Page ID#: 1979
Communication Tips
Starting the conversation:  Always get the person’s attention before you start speaking .  Just because someone is wearing a hearing aid does not mean
they can hear you.  Ask if the person can understand you, or needs some adjustment;
you may want to write a note to ask him or her what communication aid or service is needed.  Provide accommodations if and when requested.  Minimize background noise and other distractions whenever possible.  Allow extra time for communication. Lighting and facilitating lip-reading  Face the person and maintain normal eye contact. Do not turn away while speaking.  Try to converse in a well-lit area, but avoid glare or back-lighting that puts your mouth in shadow.  Do not cover your mouth or chew gum while you are speaking.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 39 of 67 - Page ID#: 1980
Communication Tips
Simple language, normal speech  Speak at a normal pace, enunciating clearly.  Speak with simple, direct words.  Do not shout or exaggerate mouth movements .
Visual cues  Use gestures and facial expressions to reinforce what
you are saying.  Use visual aids when possible, such as pointing to
printed information on a document.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 40 of 67 - Page ID#: 1981
Communication Tips
Check on understanding  Remember that only about 1/3 of spoken words can be
understood by speech (lip) reading.  Be conscious of bluffing.  Check on understanding: ask the hard-of-hearing person
to repeat back to you, so you can be sure he or she understood.  For anything but the most simple communication, written notes can be a problem. Keep in mind that many people—especially those who use sign language—may lack good English reading and writing skills.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 41 of 67 - Page ID#: 1982
Other Accommodations
Sometimes what is needed for effective communication is not equipment or technology but a different kind of accommodation:  A deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate may function better
in a quieter environment; you can consider this when you make a cell assignment.  A deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate may not be able to understand group instruction, so might need an individual tutor for a class or program, or one-on-one orientation.  A deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate may not hear an announcement or page, so might need individual notifications.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 42 of 67 - Page ID#: 1983
Procedures
CORRECTIONS POLICY AND PROCEDURE CPP 15.6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 43 of 67 - Page ID#: 1984
Follow Institutional Policy
 When interviewing an offender or engaging in any complex conversation with an individual whose primary language is sign language, interpretation is usually needed to ensure effective communication
 Check out the VRI Laptop to conduct the conversation. If the inmate does not want interpretation, have him fill out a waiver form.
 If indicated, write a note to inquire if communication aids or services are needed

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 44 of 67 - Page ID#: 1985
Right To Waive Services
• The offender has the right to waive any service • If an offender completes and signs a waiver form, the
form shall be placed in the offender's KOMS file to ensure consistent documentation of services offered and waived

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 45 of 67 - Page ID#: 1986
Transportation
 Prior to transporting an offender to an outside appointment, the precautions in KOMS shall be reviewed to determine if the offender requires the use of his or her hands to communicate
 If the KOMS precaution reflects the offender communicates by sign language, hospital restraints shall be taken on the transportation trip
 The Transport Officer is required to call the Captain’s Office for approval to place the offender in the 2-point hospital restraints PRIOR to the restraints being used

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 46 of 67 - Page ID#: 1987
Use of Hand Restraints
• Transporting to or from an adult institution • Transferring into or out of Restrictive Housing Units • Response to security threats • Hand restraints will be removed
• Once the inmate is in a secure environment • Security is no longer a threat • When possible use other security devices as to allow the
inmate to effectively communicate using his or her hands

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 47 of 67 - Page ID#: 1988
Monitoring Communication
 Monitoring communication of offenders with the outside world is a part of our security requirement
 Deaf and hard of hearing offender communication must also be monitored with the same discretion applied to non-deaf inmates; however, deaf inmates get twice as many minutes to complete a Videophone call, and at least three times as many minutes to complete a TTY call.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 48 of 67 - Page ID#: 1989
Avoiding Discrimination
When deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates have not heard an announcement or order because of their disability, it would be discriminatory to penalize them. Use your discretion to avoid illegal discrimination.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 49 of 67 - Page ID#: 1990
Auxiliary Aids and Services
USE OF APPROPRIATE COMMUNICATION AIDS

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 50 of 67 - Page ID#:
When is effective com19m91 unication required? (Sign language interpretation OR auxiliary aids)
 Educational programs (literacy, adult basic education, GED, and technical education and certification classes).
 Vocational/work programs  Rehabilitative, counseling, therapeutic, substance abuse,
and evidence-based programs  Work assignments  Religious services (except KYDOC does not provide
interpretation for volunteer-led religious programming)  Intake, transfer and classification matters  Transitional programming – post-release supervision  On-site medical care and healthcare appointments  Grievance and disciplinary hearings and meetings  All important conversations between staff and inmates.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 51 ofB67e-dPaSgehIDa#k: er
1992
TV Closed
Auxiliary Aids Captioning

VRI Laptop

Hearing aids

TTY

Phone Volume

Adjustment

Amplifier

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 52 of 67 - Page ID#:
Auxilia199r3y Aids

Definition
• Modifications used to assist with communicating with individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing
• Allow for equal access to expressive and receptive forms of communication

Examples
• Qualified Interpreters • Hearing Aids • Transcription Services • Assistive Listening Systems • Closed Caption Decoders • Open And Closed Captioning • Tdd/Tty • Videotext Displays • Videophones • Telephone Relay Services • Visual Alert Systems • Bed Shakers

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 53 of 67 - Page ID#: 1994
Videophones
 Allows point to point contact or a deaf user to call anyone with a telephone using purple sign language interpreters
 Same rules apply to videophone as conventional phones, except for doubled time limit to allow time for signing
 How to use: select a 10-digit number and dial  The videophones utilize standard correctional standards  No in-bound calls, no 3-way calls, no call history, and
HIPAA  Time limit per call: twice as long as
regular phone calls.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 54 of 67 - Page ID#: 1995
Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
 The FCC is required by Title 4 of the ADA to provide 24/7/365 Video Relay Services (VRS) to all deaf Americans
 VRS allows deaf individuals to communicate via sign language interpreters to anyone in the United States
 FCC provides financial reimbursement for each VRS call, which makes the service available at no cost to the individual
 State Department of Corrections are required by ADA (Title II) to make all programs and services accessible, including the offender telephone system.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 55 of 67 - Page ID#:
TTY/TD199D6 Phone
 Teletypewriter, or TTY, is a device that permits deaf or hard of hearing individuals to communicate using regular phones
 Location: Varies. Often at the officer's station of the offender's unit Time limit per call: 45 minutes (extended phone time to allow time for typing).
 How to use: Place the handset in the acoustic coupler attached to a regular telephone and turn on the power, or attach a phone cord to the input.
 Can be used to call another TTY or a regular phone, via relay. (see next slide)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 56 of 67 - Page ID#: 1997
TTY Relay
 A communications assistant (CA) relays the TTY input to the telephone user and types that person's response back to the TTY user.
 Telecommunications relay services can be reached by dialing 711 on the TTY.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 57 of 67 - Page ID#: 1998
Phone volume controls
Some of KYDOC’s Securus phones have volume controls, which can be essential for hard-of-hearing inmates. There should be at least one volumecontrolled phone in any area where needed by such an inmate.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 58 of 67 - Page ID#: 1999
VRI Laptop
 Allows same-room sign language interpreting  How to use:
1. Plug in blue Ethernet cable into laptop. 2. Click on Purple icon on desktop  Talk at your normal rate or slightly slower  Only one person should speak at a time  Use short sentences and simple words

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 59 of 67 - Page ID#: 2000
Who sits where for VRI ?
Use either of these setups for you and the inmate:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 60 of 67 - Page ID#: 2001
Closed captions
All KYDOC televisions and most videos are closedcaption-enabled. Institutional movies should have captions turned on. Turn on TV and video captioning on inmate request.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 61 of 67 - Page ID#: 2002
Fire Alarm System And Alarm Clock Shaker
• The bed shaker is connected to the Simplex fire system.
• The fire alarm is activated • The bed shaker will shake the bed of the user. • The bed shaker push button is located in the Control Center. • When pushed, it will shake the bed of the user.
• Use when any announcement is made

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 62 of 67 - Page ID#: 2003
Hearing Aids
• Hearing aids shall be provided to any inmate who has a hearing loss of a severe nature
• An inmate may request hearing aids be provided for hearing loss that is less than severe (less than 80dB), but the inmate shall pay for the full cost of the hearing aids.
• Hearing aids only amplify sound; they aren’t perfect.
• If a person is wearing a hearing aid, do not assume the person can hear you. Hearing aids help, but they don’t mean the inmate can hear well.
• Minimize background noise and other distractions whenever possible.
• When you pack up an inmate’s property, he should keep his hearing aids with him. Be sure not to lose them!

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 63 of 67 - Page ID#: 2004
Assistive listening systems
Assistive listening systems allow a speaker or speakers to use a wireless microphone that sends a signal to an earbud that a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate wears.
If you run a program or a class, KYDOC institutions are making such systems available when needed. The ADA Coordinator will keep you informed.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 64 of 67 - Page ID#: 2005
Review

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 65 of 67 - Page ID#: 2006
Summary
• The Department of Corrections houses many deaf and hard of hearing inmates.
• Remember to communicate with these offenders in a courteous and dignified manner
• To avoid misunderstandings and potentially dangerous incidents, make every effort to make sure that the communication is understood
• All inmates have the right to effective communication
• Lack of knowledge and training can cultivate the development of other issues

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 66 of 67 - Page ID#: 2007
Conclusion
Each institution has an assigned ADA Coordinator who has received training on federal and state law The ADA Coordinator is the institutional expert for questions regarding deaf and hard of hearing inmates When in doubt error on the side of understanding and ask the ADA Coordinator for help and clarification

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-2 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 67 of 67 - Page ID#: 2008
Thank You
STAY SAFE

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 1 of 82 - Page ID#: 2009
Third Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor (May 31, 2017) Appendix III
ADA Coordinator training (Feb. 25, 2017) Part 1: Settlement Agreement Training Part 2: CReATE Compliance

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 2 of 82 - Page ID#: 2010
Kentucky Department of Corrections
ADA Coordinator Training on the Federal Court
Deaf/Hard of Hearing Settlement Agreement
1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 3 of 82 - Page ID#: 2011
Training Overview (1)
In 2015, to settle a case in federal district court, the Commonwealth entered a Settlement Agreement governing treatment of deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates.
The case is formally titled Knights & Adams v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (Eastern District of Kentucky). It is before Judge Gregory F. Van Tatenhove.
This training will introduce and review some main points of the Settlement Agreement. It does not cover every aspect of the Agreement.
For more information, read the Agreement itself, the summary of it, and the Settlement Monitor’s Compliance Reports and Recommendations – all are in the KDOC G-drive folder called “ADA.”
2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 4 of 82 - Page ID#: 2012
Training Overview (2)
The settlement covers many topics, including:
1. Hearing assessment 2. Audiology services 3. Auxiliary aids assessment 4. Informing inmates 5. Educating staff 6. Auxiliary aids/services, in general 7. Interpretation 8. Other accommodations
3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 5 of 82 - Page ID#: 2013
Training Overview (3)
• For each category, this training describes:
a) Requirements b) Role of the ADA Coordinator c) Effective communications issues d) Outcomes
4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 6 of 82 - Page ID#: 2014
Training Overview (4)
Effective communication for: • Inmates who use sign language:
– providing live or remote interpretation when useful
• Inmates who do not use sign language:
– Amplification – Oral communications strategies – Non-auditory strategies
• Remember: Many inmates have low literacy!
5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 7 of 82 - Page ID#:
1. Hearing A2015ssessment:
a) Requirements
Medical staff should assess all persons who may be deaf or hard-of-hearing during initial intake, and also in routine (bi)annual physicals.
• All inmates receive hearing screening, administered by medical staff.
• If the screen indicates a hearing problem, a medical examination by a provider occurs in the next few days, followed up as necessary by specialist evaluation/services.
• The process is designed to both identify deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates, and to provide them necessary audiology and other care/services.
6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 8 of 82 - Page ID#:
1. Hearing A2016ssessment:
b) Role of the ADA Coordinator
1. Ensure medical staff are properly trained about the settlement’s requirements.
• Medical staff conduct hearing assessments, but YOU are responsible for making sure everything that needs to happen does happen.
2. Oversee and track screening and followup processes
• Track whether the hearing assessments are occurring as they should be, and whether the outcomes are being recorded/followed up appropriately.
• Oversee the process and identify problems. Ex., if a deaf inmate is not identified in the screening, why wasn’t he?
3. Track deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates, and report names etc. to the settlement monitor
4. Assess how the process can be improved, and fix it.
7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 9 of 82 - Page ID#:
1. Hearing A2017ssessment:

c) Effective Communication

Medical staff must:
• Ask questions about hearing early in the process. Provide accommodations, if needed, for the rest of the medical screening.

• Ask inmates with hearing difficulties whether they use sign language to communicate.

• Offer, without request, interpretation services to inmates who use sign language to communicate.

– Be able to readily access VRI laptops and know how to use them.

• Have pocket amplifiers on hand and available to

use if needed.

8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 10 of 82 - Page ID#:
1. Hearing A2018ssessment: d) Outcomes
For all inmates who are deaf or hard-of-hearing • Alerts placed in KOMS and EMR that are
immediately obvious when the inmate’s file is opened. • Notice provided to ADA Coordinator so nonmedical followups can be done. • Medical followups are started and tracked. • Identification card provided to inmate.
9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 11 of 82 - Page ID#:
2. Audiolog201y9 Services: a) Requirements
• Inmates who need hearing aids should be provided them promptly.
– 60 days from first request to provision of hearing aids is reasonable. If it takes longer, without good cause for the delay, that is a problem.
• Batteries should be readily available, without copay.
10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 12 of 82 - Page ID#:
2. Audiolo2g02y0 services: b) Role of the ADA Coordinator
Medical staff must evaluate/coordinate care for inmates in need of audiology services. But it’s the ADA Coordinator’s job to
• Monitor/track progress • Problem solve • Report to the Settlement Monitor
11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 13 of 82 - Page ID#:
2. Audiolog202y1 Services: c) Effective Communication
Ensure that inmates are told, effectively, that if they want a hearing aid, they need to request one.
12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 14 of 82 - Page ID#:
2. Audiolog202y2 Services: d) Outcomes
For all inmates who have requested hearing aids • Progress is tracked weekly. • Obstacles to service provision are eliminated. • Hearing aids are provided timely (within 60
days of the request) • Tracker with full and accurate information is
provided to the Settlement Monitor
13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 15 of 82 - Page ID#:
3. Auxiliary Aids2023 Assessment: a) Requirements
• Each institution must conduct an “auxiliary aids and services assessment” for each deaf/hard-of-hearing inmate.
• “Primary consideration” is to be given to an inmate’s requests as to what sorts of accommodations they prefer.
• Covers the whole range of potential needs and accommodations.
14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 16 of 82 - Page ID#:
3. Auxiliary Aids2024 Assessment: b) Role of the ADA Coordinator
• Plan and arrange the assessment meetings • Conduct the assessments • Ensure that the needs revealed in the
assessment are addressed with appropriate aids and accommodations. • Evaluate the effectiveness of accommodations
15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 17 of 82 - Page ID#:
3. Auxiliary Aids2025 Assessment:
c) Effective Communication
• This is an interactive meeting between the ADA Coordinator and the inmate.
• There must be effective communication during the meeting
– Sign language interpreters, amplifiers, or provision of written information may be necessary.
– Because this is the meeting that allows you to determine what exactly the inmates’ communication needs are, don’t make assumptions before the meeting; be aware of communications difficulties and be prepared to adjust as the meeting progresses.
– The point is not the paperwork but the substance.
16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 18 of 82 - Page ID#:
3. Auxiliary Aids2026 Assessment: d) Outcomes
• The assessment covers, and produces readily available documentation of:
– The inmate’s needs related to hearing. – The inmate’s preferences on auxiliary
aids/accommodations – A plan to put in place whatever
services/accommodations are necessary
17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 19 of 82 - Page ID#:
4. Informing20t27he Inmates: a) Requirements
The prison must inform inmates about their rights under the ADA and the Settlement Agreement, and about available accommodations and aids.
18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 20 of 82 - Page ID#:
4. Informing20t28he Inmates: b) Role of the ADA Coordinator
• Share written information, and ensure that it is understood: Brochure, policy, etc.
• Arrange the processes for informing inmates; gather feedback from inmates to evaluate information effectiveness.
• When other staff are providing inmates information on available services/ accommodations, to inmates, the ADA Coordinator trains/monitors staff effectiveness.
19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 21 of 82 - Page ID#:
4. Informing20t29he Inmates: c) Effective Communication
• Interpreters as needed.
– Use VRI – or, if necessary, live interpreter. – Check that other staff are using VRI; logs can
confirm that it is being used as required.
• For non-signing inmates:
– Remember low literacy. Written material does not communicate effectively for someone who can’t read.
– In-person demonstrations of equipment can be helpful.
20

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 22 of 82 - Page ID#:
4. Informing20t30he Inmates:
d) Outcomes

• Including, but not limited to:

– Each deaf/h-of-h inmate receives a written description and schedule for what aids and services are available, and (for those who sign) when interpreters are available, and how to request.

– Each deaf/h-of-h inmate receives forms to be used request services.

– Each deaf/h-of-h inmate receives explanation of

the above, and also of ways in which programs

can be made more accessible (e.g., assistive

listening, tutors, etc.)

21

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 23 of 82 - Page ID#:
5. Educatin20g31 the Staff: a) Requirements
• All prison staff who interact with inmates must receive training on:
– Their obligations under the Agreement. – How to communicate effectively with deaf/ hard-
of-hearing inmates.
• Some training is available via a computerbased-training module.
• Other training should be live and in-person. (E.g., how to use the VRI laptop).
22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 24 of 82 - Page ID#:
5. Educatin20g32 the Staff: a) Requirements (2)
Training should focus on concrete staff roles and responsibilities
E.g.: In the event a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate is paged, staff should know to check KOMS for a hearing alert and to individually alert the inmate if he or she does not respond to the page.
23

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 25 of 82 - Page ID#:
5. Educatin20g33 the Staff: b) Role of the ADA Coordinator
• Either conduct the training or make sure it is being provided regularly.
– Ensure that all staff have received computerbased-training.
– Offer live training as appropriate.
• Ensure the training is effective and up-to-date
– Update training as appropriate, if new issues arise – If staff do not understand the training, adjust as
necessary.
24

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 26 of 82 - Page ID#:
5. Educatin20g34 the Staff: d) Outcomes
• All staff receive training • Monitoring demonstrates when the training
“takes” – when staff are and are not acting on the training provided. • Retraining is offered as appropriate.
25

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 27 of 82 - Page ID#:
6-8. Accommodati20o35ns/Auxiliary Aids/ Interpretation (Overview)
When might accommodations/auxiliary aids/ interpretation be needed? • Certainly at formal meetings: Disciplinary
hearings, classification, grievance hearings, parole board hearings • At regular meetings as well: Classes and programs • Any time there is staff/inmate communication, including informal conversations.
26

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 28 of 82 - Page ID#:
6. Auxiliary Aids2036 and Services:
a) Requirements
• Auxiliary aids and services necessary and appropriate must be provided to deaf/hard-ofhearing inmates. Auxiliary aids include:
– Live or remote interpreters – Hearing aids – Assistive listening systems, amplifiers – Captioning – “TDDs” or “TTYs” – Videophone and access to telephone relays – Non-auditory alerts – Etc.
27

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 29 of 82 - Page ID#:
6. Auxiliary Aids2037 and Services: b) Role of the ADA Coordinator
• Track use; make sure equipment is available for use, in good working order, and actually being used.
• Videophone/TTY should be readily available without special request for inmates who need them for telecommunications.
• Evaluate effectiveness; regularly follow up to ensure that aids are effective. If not, adjust.
28

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 30 of 82 - Page ID#:
6. Auxiliary Aids2038 and Services: c) Effective Communication
• Make sure that communication with deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates about their preferences and needs for aids and services is effective. E.g.:
– Use VRI interpreter to help when you are explaining services to an inmate who signs.
– Do not rely on a written brochure to inform an inmate of aids and services if he has low literacy.
29

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 31 of 82 - Page ID#:
6. Auxiliary Aids2039 and Services: d) Outcomes
• Auxiliary aids and services are available and in working order.
• Auxiliary aids and services are used when appropriate.
30

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 32 of 82 - Page ID#:
7. Inter20p40reters: a) Requirements
• Interpreters (either in-person or through VRI) should be readily available when necessary for effective communication with inmates who use sign language.
31

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 33 of 82 - Page ID#:
7. Inter20p41reters:
b) Role of the ADA Coordinator
• Consider: which situations require in-person interpreters, and for which can VRI be effective?
• REady: ensure all staff who may need to use VRI or inperson interpretation know how to set that up.
• Arrange contract with interpretation service and VRI laptops, and ensure that laptops are updated, in good working condition, and have all necessary accessories available (e.g. splitters, chargers, instructions).
• Track and Evaluate: Ascertain that interpreters are being used in relevant situations. Follow up with deaf inmates and staff who use interpreters, make sure process is smooth, and adjust process to prevent any problems they report from recurring.
32

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 34 of 82 - Page ID#:
7. Inter20p42reters: c) Effective Communication
• Some situations are more appropriate for inperson rather than VRI interpretation.
– Especially when there are several people talking together (e.g., a class or group)
• VRI should be fully functional and easily accessible without in-advance arrangement, to be effective.
• VRI should not be reserved for special occasions. Any communication with an inmate who signs is appropriate for interpretation.
33

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 35 of 82 - Page ID#:
7. Inter20p43reters:
d) Outcomes

Interpretation services are provided (not just by

policy, but in practice) for

• Medical and mental health care

• Disciplinary hearings—including all meetings

• Transfer and classification processes

• Rehabilitative programming (including AA and

NA)

• Educational programming

• Other times

34

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 36 of 82 - Page ID#:
8. Other Acco204m4 modations a) Requirements
Non-auxiliary aid accommodations are also required when necessary/appropriate: • Housing assignment • Assistance in education • Etc.
35

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 37 of 82 - Page ID#:
8. Accomm2045 odations
b) Role of the ADA Coordinator
• Consider the needs of the inmates and how they might interact with various assignments/ programs. E.g.:
– Deaf inmates may need to be in a housing area with easy access to the videophone.
– A hard-of-hearing inmate may do better in a quieter unit, or closer to the loudspeaker, or to staff (so they can alert him in-person when necessary)
– Track housing assignments; if an inmate is moved, ensure accommodations are re-evaluated. This is particularly necessary for segregated housing.
– An inmate taking a class may need to sit up front, or to have an inmate tutor to repeat instructions as useful.
36

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 38 of 82 - Page ID#:
8. Accommodat2i0o46 ns for Housing: c) Effective Communication
• Inmates do not know what is available. This needs to be explained to them, and the explanation must be effectively communicated.
37

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 39 of 82 - Page ID#:
8. Accommodat2i0o47 ns for Housing: d) Outcomes
• ADA Coordinator knows where all deaf / hardof-hearing inmates are housed, and appropriate accommodations are tracked and provided, including in segregated housing.
• Same for education, jobs, etc.
38

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 40 of 82 - Page ID#: 2048
Questions?
• If you are wondering what is required, go back and read the Settlement Agreement and the Settlement Monitoring reports.
• Reach out to Margo Schlanger, the Settlement Monitor. Adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com.
39

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 41 of 82 - Page ID#: 2049
Kentucky Department of Corrections
ADA Coordinator Training: CREATE Compliance
1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 42 of 82 - Page ID#:
There are five steps to205e0 very task or problem you encounter as ADA Coordinator: C RE A T E
Consider Ready Arrange Track Evaluate
Compliance
You may not need to use every step for every problem you come across, but it’s important to consider each, every time!
2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 43 of 82 - Page ID#: 2051
Step One:
Consider REady Arrange Track Evaluate C RE A T E Compliance
3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 44 of 82 - Page ID#: 2052
Step One: Consider
First, consider three questions:
• What are the desired outcomes or goals? • What communications needs are relevant • What are the obstacles to success?
– For example, if an area is noisy, hearing aids will be ineffective.
Example: An inmate is in a class. • Goal: Equal access to educational services • Communications needs: Ongoing complex oral
communication, with many different speakers. • Obstacles: E.g., Background noise in the classroom or other
students talking at the same time make hearing aids and assistive listening devices less effective.
4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 45 of 82 - Page ID#: 2053
Step One: Consider
Remember, communications needs may vary by the inmate: • Examples:
– Low literacy or illiteracy makes written communication ineffective.
– Non-traditional signing makes VRI ineffective.
5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 46 of 82 - Page ID#: 2054
Step Two:
Consider REady Arrange Track Evaluate C RE A T E Compliance
6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 47 of 82 - Page ID#: 2055
Step Two: Ready
Next, ready other staff. • You must make sure other staff are know how to:
– Fulfill their obligations under the settlement agreement – Access and use technology (such as VRI laptops) – Effectively communicate with deaf and hard-of-hearing
inmates
• Without this step, it will be difficult or impossible to do your job successfully—almost every problem you will encounter will require the participation of other staff members.
– But, it is ultimately your responsibility to make sure that other staff members are fulfilling their duties under the Agreement.
7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 48 of 82 - Page ID#: 2056
Step Three:
Consider REady Arrange Track Evaluate C RE A T E Compliance
8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 49 of 82 - Page ID#: 2057
Step Three: Arrange
Next, arrange: prepare in advance so that equipment and processes are in place. • This step will look different depending on the situation
– Sometimes, arranging will be the bulk of your obligations – Other times, you won’t need to do anything for this step
(as long as you readied other staff effectively in Step Two).
• Example: an inmate who is deaf but cannot sign needs access to a TTY in order to communicate telephonically with family. You will need to arrange:
– Where the TTY goes and how the inmate can get ready access.
– That the inmate understands how to use the TTY
9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 50 of 82 - Page ID#: 2058
Step Four:
Consider REady Arrange Track Evaluate C RE A T E Compliance
10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 51 of 82 - Page ID#: 2059
Step Four: Track
Then, check in with all the people involved to track the progress of everything you arranged. • After checking in to track progress, you might
have to return to one of the earlier steps:
– Step One (Consider) to re-assess needs and barriers
– Step Two (Ready) to re-train other staff about how to perform their tasks
– Step Three (Arrange) to coordinate more action.
11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 52 of 82 - Page ID#: 2060
Step Four: Track
• When you are tracking, you may discover that something about the situation has changed
– For example, a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate has been moved to segregated housing
• Or perhaps an obstacle has appeared or something has stalled:
– For example, there may be a delay in payment of an audiologist, preventing pickup of a hearing aid.
• In addition, sometimes the Settlement Agreement requires that your formally track and report certain situations. That is also part of this step.
12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 53 of 82 - Page ID#: 2061
Step Five:
Consider REady Arrange Track Evaluate C RE A T E Compliance
13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 54 of 82 - Page ID#: 2062
Step Five: Evaluate
Finally, you need to gather accurate feedback and evaluate the effectiveness of whatever you just did. • Feedback might come from routine records
(logs, etc.), prison staff, outside providers (interpreters, etc.), or inmates.
14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 55 of 82 - Page ID#: 2063
Step Five: Evaluate
• You might gather feedback by asking for it at regular intervals.
– Example: asking an inmate if non-auditory alerts are effective.
• Or, gather feedback by creating a system to get feedback every time a certain event happens.
– Example: have a form that an inmate fills out evaluating effectiveness of communication after every disciplinary hearing.
• Make sure to gather feedback from every person involved
– Staff, inmate, outside providers (e.g., interpreters, audiologists)
• Once you obtain feedback, you need to evaluate the results—this may then lead you back to one of the first two steps to re-train staff (Step Two: Ready) or re-assess needs and barriers (Step One: Consider).
15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 56 of 82 - Page ID#: 2064
Example 1: Initial Screening
• Now, we will use the example of the initial screening for hearing difficulties to demonstrate how you can CREATE compliance.
16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 57 of 82 - Page ID#: 2065
Step One: Consider
• Consider, for initial hearing screening of inmates
– What is your desired outcome? – What are the communications needs of the
inmates? – What special obstacles does the situation
present?
17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 58 of 82 - Page ID#: 2066
Step One: Consider

• Goals:

– Medical staff will identify all deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates, offer them immediately necessary auxiliary aids and services (amplifiers, identification cards, alert in computer system), and communicate their presence to the ADA Coordinator.

• Communications Needs:

– The needs of inmates will vary and there won’t be any way to know, for any particular inmate, what they might be. So, you need to be prepared to accommodate every sort of communication need.

• Obstacles:

– Because inmates won’t know about the accommodations

available or that he can ask for them, it’s crucial at this

stage that he is offered all accommodations without

having to ask.

18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 59 of 82 - Page ID#: 2067
Step Two: Ready
• Readying staff is crucial to succeed at the task of initially screening all inmates for hearing problems.
• For this step, think of what staff are involved in the initial screening, what they need to know, and what physical tools they need to be successful.
–What did you come up with?
19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 60 of 82 - Page ID#: 2068
Step Two: Ready
Medical staff conduct initial screenings—make sure they know: • To screen all incoming inmates. • How to obtain and use a VRI laptop. • Next steps for inmates who are deaf or hard-of-
hearing:
– offer deaf/h-of-h identification cards – offer a pocket amplifier (if useful) – schedule for additional screening/evaluation/audiology
services if appropriate – note deaf/hard-of-hearing alert in the EMR – report that inmate is deaf/hard-of-hearing to the ADA
coordinator
20

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 61 of 82 - Page ID#: 2069
Step Three: Arrange
Next, arrange: prepare in advance so that equipment and processes are in place. What needs arranging for initial screening?
21

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 62 of 82 - Page ID#: 2070
Step Three: Arrange
• Is the VRI laptop available when medical needs it?
• Is there a splitter, to facilitate use of the laptop at the same time as another computer?
• Is internet bandwidth sufficient? • Etc.
22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 63 of 82 - Page ID#: 2071
Step Four: Track
What would be useful to track the progress of everything you arranged?
23

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 64 of 82 - Page ID#: 2072
Step Four: Track
• Check in with the medical staff regularly—make sure that the screenings are happening as they are supposed to, that new medical staff are properly trained, and that they can access the technology that they need to access (e.g., amplifiers and VRI laptops).
• This step makes sure that everything is happening the way you anticipated in Step One (Consider), as you readied for and arranged in Steps Two and Three
• Initial screenings have a recordkeeping and reporting component. (This is specified in the Settlement Agreement.) Add all reported deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates to your tracking list and include them in your reports to the settlement monitor.
24

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 65 of 82 - Page ID#: 2073
Step Five: Evaluate
How can you best evaluate the effectiveness of the initial screening? • What are good sources of feedback?
– Records – Staff – Other
25

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 66 of 82 - Page ID#: 2074
Step Five: Evaluate
• Ask medical staff what they think is working well; what could be improved.
• Run a check of the EMR and find all deaf/hardof-hearing inmates. Are there any you didn’t hear about, or didn’t hear about promptly? Why not?
• Gather information to figure out why any mistakes happened and evaluate how you can fix the process.
26

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 67 of 82 - Page ID#:
CREATE Co207m5 pliance:

Example 1 Summary

• Consider: Goals, Needs, Obstacles

– Medical staff will identify all deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates, offer them immediately necessary auxiliary aids and services (amplifiers, identification cards, alert in computer system), and communicate their presence to the ADA Coordinator.

– The needs of inmates will vary and there won’t be any way to know, for any particular inmate, what they might be. So, you need to be prepared to accommodate every sort of communication need. Make a plan.

– Because inmates won’t know about the

accommodations available or that he can ask for

them, it’s crucial at this stage that they be offered all

accommodations without having to ask.

27

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 68 of 82 - Page ID#:
CREATE Co207m6 pliance:

Example 1 Summary

• Ready medical staff to screen all incoming

inmates, to use a VRI laptop, and to take next

steps.

• Arrange: E.g., is the VRI laptop readily available,

appropriately equipped?

• Track:

– Are screenings happening as they should; do new medical staff know the requirements? Are amplifiers and VRI laptops being used as appropriate?

– Make sure inmate list stays up to date, and provide to settlement monitor.

• Evaluate: Check in with medical staff; cross

reference with EMR

28

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 69 of 82 - Page ID#: 2077
Example 2: Getting Hearing Aids
• A second example of how you can CREATE compliance with the Settlement Agreement: Prompt provision of necessary hearing aids.
29

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 70 of 82 - Page ID#: 2078
Step One: Consider
• Consider, for provision of hearing aids to an inmate who needs them
– Goals: What is your desired outcome? – Needs: What are the communications needs of
the inmates? – Obstacles: Are there obstacles to success?
30

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 71 of 82 - Page ID#: 2079
Step One: Consider
• Goals:
– Prompt (within 60 days) provision of necessary hearing aids
• Communications Needs:
– Need for effective communication at an audiologist
• Obstacles:
– Difficulties with scheduling, payment, transport.
31

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 72 of 82 - Page ID#: 2080
Step Two: Ready
• Readying staff is, as always, crucial.
• Who is involved in hearing aid provision? What do they need to know?
32

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 73 of 82 - Page ID#: 2081
Step Two: Ready Ready staff: Most importantly, train
staff on the requirement that getting hearing aids should take no more than two months.
33

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 74 of 82 - Page ID#: 2082
Step Three: Arrange
Next, arrange: prepare in advance so that equipment and processes are in place.
What needs arranging for hearing aid provision?
34

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 75 of 82 - Page ID#: 2083
Step Three: Arrange
• Someone needs to come up with an efficient system to schedule prompt audiologist appointments and payment, and arrange all transportation.
• If the inmate is transferred to a new institution at any point during the process, communicate with the new prison so that the process continues without interruption.
35

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 76 of 82 - Page ID#: 2084
Steps Four & Five: Track & Evaluate
What would be useful to track and evaluate the progress of everything you arranged?
36

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 77 of 82 - Page ID#: 2085
Steps Four & Five: Track & Evaluate
• The key to hearing aid progress is case management: tracking progress, and evaluating and solving problems.
• You should maintain a document tracking each inmate’s progress through the process of getting a hearing aid. This will be reported to the Settlement Monitor every quarter.
• Check in with medical every week or two to update the document and resolve any procedural hurdles.
37

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 78 of 82 - Page ID#: 2086
Steps Four & Five: Track & Evaluate
Suppose after checking in with medical and/or the inmate, you find out that the inmate has missed his second audiologist appointment because transportation was unavailable that day. What should you do now?
38

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 79 of 82 - Page ID#: 2087
Step Five: Evaluate
• Re-Consider: Was this a problem you anticipated?
– If yes, why were you unable to prevent it? – If no, what caused it and how can it be prevented in
the future?
• Re-Ready:
– Re-train staff to resolve the problem.
• Re-Arrange:
– Make sure the appointment is promptly rescheduled and expedited.
39

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 80 of 82 - Page ID#:
CREATE Co208m8 pliance:
Example 2 Summary
• Consider:
Goals, Communications Needs, Obstacles
– Prompt (60 days) provision of hearing aids
– Probably, audiologists can manage the communications needs of inmates.
– Scheduling, payment, transport are all complicated and slow.
40

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 81 of 82 - Page ID#:
CREATE Co208m9 pliance:
Example 2 Summary
• Ready medical staff to know about the 60 day goal, and the tracking obligations.
• Arrange: A system for audiologist scheduling, payment, etc.
• Track:
– Make sure tracking sheet stays up to date, and provide to settlement monitor.
• Evaluate: Use the tracking sheet to evaluate if the system is working, solve problems as they arise.
41

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-3 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 82 of 82 - Page ID#: 2090
Questions?
• If you are wondering what is required, go back and read the Settlement Agreement and the Settlement Monitoring reports.
• Reach out to Margo Schlanger, the Settlement Monitor. Adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com.
42

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 1 of 47 - Page ID#: 2091
Third Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor (May 31, 2017)
Appendix IV
Site visit report for Dec. 2016 and Feb. 2017 visits, with exhibits (May 4, 2017) Covered facilities: Blackburn Correctional Complex (Dec. 12, 2016) Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (Dec. 13, 2016) Little Sandy Correctional Complex (Dec. 13, 2016) Northpoint Training Center (Dec. 14, 2016) Kentucky State Reformatory (Feb. 27, 2017) Exhibits: A—Staff Interviewed
B—Consolidated Recommendations C—How to Communicate Effectively with Hard-of-Hearing Inmates D—Auxiliary Aids/devices currently in place or under test at KYDOC
institutions

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 2 of 47 - Page ID#: 2092
Site Visit Report of Settlement Monitor
Adams & Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky.)
Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor
December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits
Blackburn Correctional Complex (December 12, 2016) Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (December 13, 2016)
Little Sandy Correctional Complex (December 13, 2016) Northpoint Training Center (December 14, 2016) Kentucky State Reformatory (February 27, 2017)
May 4, 2017 (Draft circulated to parties for comment: April 19, 2017 )
INTRODUCTION
The Settlement Agreement in this case addressing conditions for deaf and hard-ofhearing inmates in Kentucky became effective June 28, 2015, and allows me to visit each of the twelve Kentucky Department of Corrections (KYDOC) facilities each calendar year. I completed my first round of site visits in December 2016, with visits to Blackburn Correctional Complex (BCC), Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (EKCC), Little Sandy Correctional Complex (LSCC), and Northpoint Training Center (NTC). At this point, the only Kentucky prison I have not visited is Bell County Forestry Camp (BCFC), which has had only a very small (and shifting) number of deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates. I then began my second round of site visits at the Kentucky State Reformatory (KSR) in February 2017; I previously inspected KSR in February 2016.
For efficiency, this report covers all five recent visits. In this report, I will refer together to the relevant prison as “the five institutions.” As with my previous site visit report, this report is intended to be helpful not just to a particular prison, but to all of KYDOC’s facilities, as they continue to move towards compliance with the Agreement in this case.
The visits were each facilitated by the institutions’ ADA Coordinators, who, like the other staff I spoke to, conducted themselves with professionalism throughout the tours. Prior to the visits, a law student working as my assistant conducted 41 phone interviews of KYDOC inmates, and I reviewed their interview notes and numerous other documents provided by each institution. During the visits, I was able to see every thing and every place I requested and to review all requested records, which were voluminous. I spoke freely and confidentially with inmates and custody and non-custody staff. Exhibit A lists the name and title of each staff member I spoke with, by institution. Between the pre-tour phone inmate interviews (many of which I followed up with in-person interviews), and in-person inmate interviews conducted during my visit, this report incorporates information learned from conversations with 53 inmates, out of the 112 inmates identified to me from those facilities as deaf or hard-of-hearing (several of whom had been transferred or been released). See Table A.
Monitor’s Report, December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits, p. 1 of 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 3 of 47 - Page ID#: 2093

Table A: Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing Inmates

All

Blackburn

5

EKCC

14

Little Sandy

6

Northpoint

20

KSR

67

TOTAL 111

Interviewed

All

In

Pre-Visit

person Phone

5

4

5

9

4

6

5

3

3

11

6

7

23

5

20

53

24

41

At each institution, I talked via in-person sign language interpretation to each inmate who uses sign language to communicate, except for one inmate whom my assistant interviewed prior to the visit, who chose not to speak with me again. I also made sure to talk to other hard-of-hearing inmates in a variety of housing and programming situations. To ensure representativeness at NTC, where my assistant and I spoke to 11 of 20 inmates, and at KSR, where we spoke to 23 of 67 inmates, I used a formal random sample method, stratified across housing type, to pick whom to interview. To maximize confidentiality, I do not list the inmates we spoke to or use their names in this report.

On April 19, I provided this report in draft to the Warden and ADA Coordinator at each referenced institution; KYDOC Director of Operations Chris Kleymeyer and Safety Director Webb Strang; KYDOC counsel Angela Dunham; and plaintiffs’ counsel, giving each two weeks for comments or corrections. No substantive comments were offered.

Each Warden welcomed the visits and my earlier oral feedback, which I shared at exit interviews at each institution. I found each of the visits extremely productive. KYDOC has made very significant progress towards compliance with the Settlement Agreement. Not all processes are yet working smoothly, but the situation for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates continues to improve. Unlike in prior site visit reports, I have few additional recommendations based on these site visits. I have previously made 79 recommendations; I have just three to add:

Recommendation 80: At each institution, the ADA Coordinator should be one of the staff members who receives each routine transfer memo listing arriving inmates. The ADA Coordinator should check, in advance, to see if any arriving inmate has a disability that may need accommodation in order to provide effective communication and full information during the intake/orientation process, and should make arrangements for that accommodation to be provided.

Recommendation 81: Medical staff should ensure that inmates with a need for audiology services are not charged inappropriately, and should avoid repeated charges for ongoing efforts to obtain hearing aids or other services.

Monitor’s Report, December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits, p. 2 of 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 4 of 47 - Page ID#: 2094
Recommendation 82: Each VRI should be the subject of a log sheet that tracks its usage, including staff member, date and purpose. In any institution that houses one or more inmates who use sign language to communicate, the ADA Coordinator should check the VRI log sheet at least once each week, and should ensure that the VRI is being used on appropriate occasions, not just for classification and disciplinary meetings, but for other important conversations between the inmate and staff.
Rather than new situations that call out for new approaches, what I saw during my visits was a need for more thorough implementation of the Settlement Agreement and of my prior recommendations. Accordingly, this report identifies and describes the areas in which there seem to be ongoing problems, and explains what is needed, citing the Settlement Agreement provisions and relevant prior recommendations that cover that topic. For ease of reference, Exhibit B includes the prior recommendations and the three new ones.
I. IDENTIFICATION OF INMATES COVERED BY THE AGREEMENT
As I have emphasized in prior reports, the Settlement Agreement covers both deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. The Agreement defines the phrase “Deaf Inmates” broadly, to mean:
Inmates who are unable to hear well enough to rely on their hearing as a means of processing information, who rely on Auxiliary Aids and Services to Effectively Communicate and who qualify as individuals with disabilities under the ADA, including deaf, hard of hearing, or hearing impaired persons. See 42 U.S.C. § 12102(4). (Settlement Agreement I.3)
Because often the appropriate accommodation or auxiliary aids and services vary depending on an inmate’s degree of hearing impairment, I will use the terms more specifically in this report. As in prior reports, I will refer to someone as hard-of-hearing if he or she is able—with or without amplification—to hear substantial spoken language. I will refer to someone as deaf if he or she has very little or no functional hearing.
Identification of deaf inmates is mostly easy; their disability is usually obvious, particularly if they are non-verbal. But identification of hard-of-hearing inmates can be more difficult. Some of the components of an identification system continue to be a challenge at the five facilities (and, I believe, for at least some others):
a) Computer Alerts. As soon as an inmate is identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing, an alert should be placed in both KOMS (Kentucky Offender Management System) and the Electronic Medical Record (EMR). The alert should be immediately apparent at the top of the record when the inmate’s record is opened, without a special search. This is happening only at some facilities and only some of the time.1 At the time of my last site visit to it, Roederer Correction Complex (RCC) had appropriate practices in place on this issue. Figures A and B illustrate:
1 Settlement Agreement III.B requires: “If medical staff determines that an Inmate is Deaf, medical staff will note the disability in the Inmate’s institutional file, and will promptly notify the appropriate ADA Coordinator.” And
Monitor’s Report, December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits, p. 3 of 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 5 of 47 - Page ID#: 2095
Figure A: RCC KOMS Alert
Figure B: RCC EMR Precautions
b) Transfers. When an inmate identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing at one institution is transferred to another, a robust system should ensure notification to the new institution’s ADA Coordinator. It seems that the easiest way to arrange this is for the ADA Coordinator to receive the routine transfer memo that accompanies any group of transferees. Then the ADA Coordinator can check the KOMS system and see if any incoming inmate is deaf or hard-of-hearing and make appropriate arrangements. There is no such system currently in place, and some hard-of-hearing
III.D.1 requires: “The KDOC will take appropriate steps to ensure that all KDOC personnel having regular contact with any Deaf Inmate are made aware of such Inmate’s need for Auxiliary Aids and Services so that Effective Communication with, and the safety of, the Deaf Inmate will be ensured.” See Recommendation 54(d) (“If an inmate fails the “whisper test” or other hearing evaluation . . . [t]wo different alerts should be placed in his record, one in KOMS (the Kentucky Offender Management System), to alert correctional staff to the issue whenever they retrieve his computerized file, and the other in the EMR (Electronic Medical Record), to do the same for medical staff. Both alerts should be immediately obvious when the electronic file is opened.”).
Monitor’s Report, December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits, p. 4 of 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 6 of 47 - Page ID#: 2096
inmates are not being appropriately accommodated or tracked after transfers. I recommend that a transfer tracking system be put in place:
Recommendation 80: At each institution, the ADA Coordinator should be one of the staff members who receives each routine transfer memo listing arriving inmates. The ADA Coordinator should check, in advance, to see if any arriving inmate has a disability that may require accommodation in order to provide effective communication and full information during the intake/orientation process, and should make arrangements for that accommodation to be provided.
c) Prompt provision of id cards. At each institution, inmates identified as deaf or hard-ofhearing receive a special id card.2 (There is, however, some inconsistency in implementation of this practice.) When an inmate is transferred, that card should go with the inmate to the new institution, and then should be replaced promptly by the analogous card at the new institution. I heard some reports that instead, the card was thrown away at the new institution, and that new cards could take weeks or even months to be issued. This is not appropriate.3
d) Intake screening. In addition, some transferees not previously identified as hard-ofhearing may in fact be so. Some come from facilities in which hearing screenings are not performed—jail or halfway houses, for example. Others who transfer from another KYDOC prison never received a hearing screening because they entered that other prison prior to implementation of the Settlement Agreement. And the passage of time means that some may have hearing impairments that are new or worse than at the time of prior screening. The five institutions seem to be doing hearing screenings as previously recommended, and I have been working with KYDOC centrally to improve the screening instrument.4
2 Settlement III.D.1 (“Upon identifying an Inmate as Deaf during initial intake, assessment, and classification, the Deaf Inmate will receive a distinct identification (ID) card that clearly identifies him or her as a Deaf Inmate. The ID card will signify to the KDOC personnel that the Inmate is Deaf, may not respond to verbal commands, and may require Auxiliary Aids and Services.”).
3 Settlement III.D.1 (“If any KDOC staff takes any Deaf Inmate’s ID card, the Deaf Inmate will be given another official indicator of his or her Deaf status.”); Recommendation 56 (“Each facility should ensure that every deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate is able to carry such a card at all times. If an inmate misplaces the card, a replacement should be promptly provided.”).
4 Settlement Agreement III.B (“As part of the initial intake, assessment, and classification, medical staff will assess and, if necessary, test all persons who may be a Deaf Inmate for Deafness. If medical staff determines that an Inmate is Deaf, medical staff will note the disability in the Inmate’s institutional file, and will promptly notify the appropriate ADA Coordinator. Any Deaf Inmate who was not assessed at the initial intake, assessment, and classification will be assessed at the annual classification.”); Recommendation 54 (“Each facility should ask each inmate about any hearing difficulties during his or her initial medical screening, in their first day or two in the facility. Questions about hearing should be at the start of that screening, to allow accommodations, if needed, during the rest of the process. . . . All inmates should also fill out, in writing or orally, the multiple-question hearing screening. . . . This form should be administered by medical staff, to facilitate necessary medical followup.”).
Monitor’s Report, December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits, p. 5 of 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 7 of 47 - Page ID#: 2097
e) Subsequent screening. Finally, as I have previously recommended, routine physicals should include renewed hearing screenings.5 Again, I have been working with KYDOC centrally to ensure implementation of this recommendation; it is not clear to me that implementation has yet begun.
II. PROVISION OF AUDIOLOGY SERVICES
The issue on which I spent the most time at each of the five institutions is prompt provision of audiology services. Medical care at all KYDOC institutions is provided by Correct Care Solutions (CCS). At each of the five institutions, medical staff have worked to facilitate inmate access to audiology services. Each institution sends inmates who fail the whisper test to an off-site audiologist (or, if indicated, an Ear, Nose & Throat doctor), for hearing testing, hearing aid evaluation, and hearing aid fitting. But at each institution, staff had at the time of the visit not yet succeeded in creating and managing a smooth and timely process. It was taking many months for some inmates to receive hearing aids, with delays coming from a variety of sources—transport issues, scheduling, billing, payment, loss of documents, and others. I have worked with both ADA Coordinators and medical staff to develop a tracking system for them to use to ensure that every deaf and hard-of-hearing inmate is appropriately and promptly assessed and provided with necessary audiology services,6 and I have asked for frequent followups. That has helped: several facilities have now switched to a more responsive audiology provider and others solved various problems that were obstructing prompt care. Even so, more than a few inmates remain in process even now, months after the site visits.
More progress is needed. It is crucial for each institution to partner with an audiologist capable of timely service provision, to smooth its own scheduling and payment systems, to ensure that inmates are not mistakenly removed from the hearing-aid process, and to systematically track each inmate’s progress towards receiving all necessary audiology services, checking not just every quarter or six months, but every week or two. As I have previously recommended, in the absence of special treatment needs or other circumstances, an appropriate amount of time for provision of a hearing aid is 60 days from when the inmate presents a hearing problem.7 I requested tracking information in April’s quarterly reporting form, and will continue to request updates every quarter. CCS is the medical provider, but the ADA Coordinator also has a key role in this area, to monitor and problem-solve.
5 Recommendation 55 (“In order to ensure appropriate identification of deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates, all inmates’ annual or other routine physicals should include the hearing questionnaire (Exhibit B-2).”).
6 Settlement Agreement V.B requires that “All Auxiliary Aids and Services required by this Agreement, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws, which are deemed medically necessary, will be provided promptly upon request, free of charge, to Deaf Inmates subject to” appropriate co-payments. Auxiliary Aids and Services include hearing aids. Settlement Agreement I.2. See Recommendation 6 (“Inmates in need of a hearing aid—both initially or because the device they have is no longer working for them—should wait no longer than two months to obtain the necessary device. That time period should begin the day the potential need is indicated by the inmate’s request for evaluation, answers on the questionnaire, etc. Each KYDOC facility should track the time from request/questionnaire to provider visit to audiology visit to hearing aid provision, and ensure that inmates do not have a longer wait.”).
7 Id.
Monitor’s Report, December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits, p. 6 of 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 8 of 47 - Page ID#: 2098
A related topic is medical copays for audiology services. I have heard from numerous inmates that when they have made repeated requests for audiology services, they have been charged not just one copay, but several. As I understand KYDOC policy, inmates with chronic conditions are not supposed to be charged repeated copays.8 Repeat charges discourage access to care. And so I have a new recommendation:
Recommendation 81: Medical staff should ensure that inmates with a need for audiology services are not charged inappropriately, and should avoid repeated charges for ongoing efforts to obtain hearing aids or other services.
III. INMATE ORIENTATION
There continue to be gaps in effective communication to inmates as they arrive at a new institution. For many facilities, orientation videos (both about the institution itself and about the Prison Rape Elimination Act) are not captioned. They should be. More broadly, facilities are not universally taking appropriate steps to ensure that deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates are receiving effective communication of orientating information. Inmates who use sign language to communicate are not receiving their orientation with sign language interpretation; hard-ofhearing inmates are not always receiving appropriate accommodations (e.g., one-on-one or small group conversation, perhaps with assistive listening devices (see Part IV.B, below); presentations in quiet spaces). 9 Recommendation 80, above, should assist with this set of problems.
In addition, inmate orientation about the KYDOC’s nondiscrimination obligations and the accommodations and services available for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates is not yet sufficiently robust. Each institution’s inmate handbook should include information about this,10
8 The Settlement Agreement provides that auxiliary aids, including hearing aids, may be subject to a copay, but requires that the copayment policy be the same as for non-hearing related issues. (Hearing aid batteries may not have a copay requirement and indigent inmates may not be charged.) See Settlement Agreement V.B.
9 Settlement III.A.1 (“The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates at initial intake, assessment, and classification with Effective Communication.”); Settlement V.A.2 (“Appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, including Qualified Interpreters, will be made available so that Deaf Inmates may have an equal opportunity to participate in all services, privileges, and programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC’s custody. These services, privileges, and programs will include, but not be limited to: orientation . . . .”); Recommendation 23 (“Provide captions for all orientation videos, for newly acquired entertainment and educational videos, and other videos when captioning is available.”); Recommendation 71 (“In each facility’s settings in which staff ordinarily talk to a group of inmates—orientation, education, etc.—consideration should be given to talking to any hard-of-hearing inmate one-on-one, instead.”).
10 Recommendation 76 states: Each facility should include notice in its Inmate Handbook of the facility’s basic obligation to avoid discrimination and provide effective communication, and inform inmates to contact the ADA Coordinator if needed. Something like the following would be appropriate:
Americans with Disabilities Act and Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates An inmate with a verified disability will have the opportunity to participate in services, privileges, and programs similar to other inmates at this institution. If you are deaf or hard-of-hearing, you should contact the designated institutional ADA Coordinator; each living unit and inmate public areas has contact
Monitor’s Report, December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits, p. 7 of 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 9 of 47 - Page ID#: 2099
and the various forms and brochures previously recommended11 should be provided to deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates and available in the inmate law library.
Finally, the ADA Coordinators have not yet developed a sufficient routine “auxiliary aids and services assessment” process.12 As I have previously explained, the best way to assess the need for aids/services necessary for effective communication and to avoid discrimination is an individual meeting with each Deaf inmate. (This approach is similar to the “interactive process” required by the ADA under Title I, which deals with employment.) The idea of the meeting is for staff to understand the communications needs of the inmate. At the meeting, the ADA Coordinator or deputy ADA Coordinator can inform the inmate about available aids and the inmate can discuss his communication needs. The inmate’s request is entitled, both under the Agreement and the operative regulation, to “primary consideration.”13
These meetings for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates appear to be happening in some institutions only when prompted by my impending site visit, rather than routinely on entry into the institution or at the annual classification review.14 In addition, there continue to be gaps in needed services, which appropriate annual assessments would uncover. For example, I heard from several inmates about difficulty they faced in effective communication during educational or programming sessions. Some of the difficulties are easily solved, but had not previously come to light: for example, one inmate told me that he couldn’t hear during one class because it was held too near laundry machines. The ADA Coordinator could easily arrange for that class to be held in a quieter space, if he or she knew of the need. The assessments should facilitate that knowledge and solution. In some facilities, these assessments are being done not by the ADA Coordinator but by a unit administrator. Unit administrators are less likely to know about
information posted. All {name facility here}-provided services will provide effective communication and make available qualified interpreters when needed. Qualified Interpreters and Auxiliary Aids and Services are available for an inmate with a verified disability upon request. It is the inmate’s responsibility to request an interpreter from volunteer organizations or individuals that are providing activities and services. An inmate who meets criteria to be accommodated under the ADA will be provided identification to facilitate effective communication. If at any time an inmate chooses to not wear the identification, he/she shall sign a waiver document to be placed in the institutional file.
11 Settlement Agreement III.F.1 (“[T]he KDOC will provide each Deaf Inmate with materials providing information about the Auxiliary Aids and Services available to Deaf Inmates and instructions for how to obtain, request, or use those Auxiliary Aids and Services.”); Settlement Agreement III.C.3, III.D, VI.C.3 (describing requirements relating to “Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services Form,” “Request for Deaf Inmate ID Card form,” medical request form); Recommendations 13, 46-47.
12 Settlement Agreement III.C (“Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment”). See Recommendation 45 (“For each Deaf inmate, the ADA Coordinator should conduct an individual services assessment meeting, at which the inmate’s available methods of communication are expressly ascertained and recorded, and the inmate is informed about the available auxiliary aids and services. . . . The assessment should be updated annually, ideally at the inmate’s annual classification meeting.”).
13 Settlement Agreement I.5 (“In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, primary consideration shall be given to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)).” 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2) includes essentially the same language..
14 Settlement Agreement III.B (“Any Deaf Inmate who was not assessed at the initial intake, assessment, and classification will be assessed at the annual classification review.”).
Monitor’s Report, December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits, p. 8 of 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 10 of 47 - Page ID#: 2100
available auxiliary aids and services and potential accommodations. Unless they are appropriately trained and informed about these matters, they cannot conduct an adequate auxiliary aid assessment.
IV. EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION WITH HARD-OF-HEARING INMATES
A. Staff training on communication with hard-of-hearing inmates
I have previously made a large number of recommendations relating to staff training,15 and am continuing to work with KYDOC headquarters staff on implementation of computer based training modules. In addition, I have recommended some on-site live training. These five site visits underscored the need for widespread training relating to two topics in particular: VRI use (see Part V.A, below) and talking to inmates who are hard of hearing. Exhibit C includes a tip sheet on the latter topic pulled from the previously recommended slides. It should be shared with all employees and contractors who talk with inmates, to assist them; it is designed to be saved and posted.
B. Assistive listening systems and amplifiers
As I have explained in prior reports, an assistive listening system captures sound close to its source via a microphone and transmits that sound directly to the earphones or hearing aids of people with assistive listening devices. Such systems can be extremely helpful to people who are hard-of-hearing, because they allow the listener to amplify the sound without distortion and without amplifying the ambient noise.
Several KYDOC facilities already use what is in effect an assistive listening system for their common-space televisions; they broadcast the institutionally available channels on a radio frequency, and then require inmates listening to the common televisions to use radio receivers, with earbuds, rather than playing the sound out loud. The purpose of this has been to keep the sound level down in common spaces—but there is a major benefit for hard-of-hearing inmates, who report that they can hear TVs that use that set up. Not every institution uses this approach, and even in facilities that do, some dorms are not set up with the necessary equipment. At the least, this is a good system to use in any dorm where hard-of-hearing inmates are housed.
But more broadly, there is a significant need for assistive listening in other communications venues. Several potential methods exist and are beginning to be tested at the various institutions. At Western Kentucky Correctional Complex (WKCC), the chaplain speaks into a microphone linked by way of a short-distance transmitter to FM radio; inmates can use their own radios to receive the signal. At LLCC, the chaplain uses an assistive listening system that was sold with several receivers and earbuds. Also at LLCC, education staff will soon test a portable induction loop system, which will link to the telecoil that is built in to most modern hearing aids; such a system can also be linked to earphones for hard-of-hearing inmates who
15 Settlement XIII (setting out many requirements for staff training); IX.E.2 (“The KDOC will ensure that KDOC employees are adequately trained in the operation of the technology” for communication between deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates and people outside of prison); Recommendations 51, 52, 77.
Monitor’s Report, December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits, p. 9 of 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 11 of 47 - Page ID#: 2101
don’t have hearing aids. In addition, on my recommendation, KSR is testing a personal FM system, which allows a speaker who wears a microphone to be better heard by a listener who wears earphones. At a gathering of all KYDOC’s ADA Coordinators, and in my most recent quarterly reporting form, I requested that each institution that tests one of these types of devices let me know the details; I can then share their experience with the other KYDOC institutions. The first such information-sharing document is attached to this Report as Exhibit D; it includes fuller descriptions of each of the above systems.
The point is that some such assistive listening systems are necessary for inmates who are hard-of-hearing, to enable their equal access to programming. More work is needed to develop solutions across KYDOC; each religious, educational, and rehabilitative programming area needs access to such systems.16 Once systems are developed and available, hard-of-hearing inmates should be informed about them, too, so that they can request them when helpful.
Phones pose a particular problem for hard-of-hearing inmates. They are, of course, very hard-used in prisons, which can degrade sound quality. And sometimes they are located close to noisy areas like showers or dayrooms. Securus, KYDOC’s current phone contractor, offers volume controls on phones, which are helpful—people with hearing impairments can turn the volume up. But many institutions don’t have volume-adjusted phones in all the areas where they are needed by hard-of-hearing inmates.17 In addition, the degree of amplification may be insufficient for some inmates. On my recommendation, Luther Luckett is currently testing a portable phone amplifier, described in Exhibit D. If that test works out, these devices would be useful for other institutions as well.
V. COMMUNICATION SERVICES FOR SIGN-LANGUAGE USERS
Two facilities covered by this report—EKCC and LSCC—were not at the time of my visit housing any inmates who use sign language to communicate, and therefore did not need interpretive services. Between them, the other three—BCC, NTC, and KSR—housed six inmates who communicate using sign language. The availability of sign language interpretation at those facilities has improved but is not yet sufficiently robust or routine.
A. Video Relay Interpretation (VRI): Use and Procedures
In each of the five institutions covered here, a VRI laptop was available during my visit and staff seemed to know that it existed. I tested each laptop and they all worked. This is a good
16 See Settlement Agreement V.A.2 (“Appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, including Qualified Interpreters, will be made available so that Deaf Inmates may have an equal opportunity to participate in all services, privileges, and programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC’s custody.”); I.2 (defining “Auxiliary Aids and Services” to include “assistive listening systems”); Recommendation 67 (“Each religious, educational, and programming area should have available a device to allow wireless amplification for individual hard-of-hearing inmates.”).
17 Recommendation 74 “Each facility should improve access of hard-of-hearing inmates to telecommunications, by . . . (b) Informing them that amplified phones are available, and ensuring that at least one such phone, whose amplification is compatible with a hearing aid but does not require one, is available in every group of phones used by any hard-of-hearing inmate.”).
Monitor’s Report, December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits, p. 10 of 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 12 of 47 - Page ID#: 2102
base on which to build. Some problems remain, however. Most important, it remains the case that VRI services are not being used in some situations when they should. The VRI laptops are being used in certain formal communication settings—classification and disciplinary hearings, for example. (Even in these situations, usage is inconsistent—at KSR, for at least one disciplinary hearing, staff communicated with an inmate by the inadequate method of pen and paper.) But even if VRIs were used for all such formal meetings, there are many other situations where effective communication is necessary but obstacles to VRI usage remain. These include medical appointments, investigation meetings to prepare for disciplinary hearings, meetings with grievance or other legal aides (inmates who assist other inmates with grievances or disciplinary hearings), and other conversations between staff and inmates who sign to communicate. Each institution needs to set up an easy process by which staff obtain and use the VRI laptop for interpretation of conversations with deaf inmates, without needing to cancel and reschedule meetings or the like. In order to make this work, staff must be trained that use of the VRI laptop is not a big deal or special, but is simply the most effective way for them to communicate with inmates who sign.18
It is particularly important that the VRI laptops be used routinely in segregated (or “restrictive”) housing, because various features of segregation obstruct many of the coping mechanisms deaf inmates might use to understand what someone is telling them—the ambient noise is extreme, visual cues are scarce, etc. That means that staff need to plan in advance for such usage, figuring out for each restrictive housing area where an internet signal will be tapped and how to appropriately restrain an inmate who needs to use his hands to sign.
One obstacle to more prevalent use of the VRI laptop is that not all staff know how to operate it. In addition, the technical preparation to facilitate usage has not been done universally. Some school areas do not have internet access, for example. And the VRI laptops do not all have in their bags long computer cords, signal splitters (See Figure C), and instructions.19
18 The Settlement Agreement requires effective communication, including interpretation, in many different kinds of situations: VI.A, III.C (auxiliary aids and services assessment); VI.C.4 (emergency on-site medical); VI.H (transfer and classification); V.A.2 (grievance hearings); VII.A (disciplinary hearings and related meetings); VI.J (“for any significant communications between Deaf Inmates and KDOC staff that is not specifically discussed in this Agreement.”). See especially Recommendation 10 (“For inmates who use sign language to communicate, no special request should be needed to obtain VRI services for auxiliary aid/service assessment, emergency health care on-site, classification and transfer hearings and related meetings, grievance meetings and hearings, disciplinary hearings and all related processes, parole meetings and hearings.”).
19 Settlement Agreement IX.E.1 (“The KDOC will ensure that all equipment under the KDOC’s control that is used to accommodate Deaf Inmates is kept in good working order.”); IX.E.2 (“The KDOC will ensure that KDOC employees are adequately trained in the operation of the technology.”); Recommendation 64 (“Each facility should obtain and test a “splitter” for each VRI laptop, so that the laptop can be used alongside a computer.”).
Monitor’s Report, December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits, p. 11 of 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 13 of 47 - Page ID#: 2103
Figure C: Splitter
At this point, it seems clear that additional monitoring/implementation methods are necessary to ensure effective VRI use. The recommendation that follows meets this need:
Recommendation 82: Each VRI should be the subject of a log sheet that tracks its usage, including staff member, date and purpose. In any institution that houses one or more inmates who use sign language to communicate, the ADA Coordinator should check the VRI log sheet at least once each week, and should ensure that the VRI is being used on appropriate occasions, not just for classification and disciplinary meetings, but for other important conversations between the inmate and staff. B. In-person interpretation At KSR, the ADA Coordinator has arranged for in-person interpretation for several repeat programming needs, for two different inmates. At BCC and NTC, however, it seems that staff have not ever arranged for an in-person interpreter. For a situation like orientation, where the need is known in advance, if VRI is not adequate, a professional in-person interpreter should be used. C. Interpretation for education and programming As I have discussed in prior reports, it may be that an in-person interpreter is necessary to provide effective communication and equal access to educational/programming services. Institutions can, however, try out VRI as an alternative. In order to do that, they will need to plan in advance for internet access in each applicable space, and, depending on the need, perhaps get a more suitable microphone, capable of picking up speech from the teacher and/or other inmates. What’s clear is that somehow, interpretive services must be available. Institutions need to plan systematically how to meet this need for academic education, groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous, and evidence-based programs like Moral Reconation Therapy. D. Telephone Access in Restrictive Housing When an inmate who uses sign language to communicate is housed in a restrictive housing unit (RHU), he or she is entitled to the same degree of telecommunications access as
Monitor’s Report, December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits, p. 12 of 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 14 of 47 - Page ID#: 2104
non-deaf inmates.20 Even an inmate whose status or history requires that he or she be restrained is entitled to the same degree of telecommunications access as a non-deaf inmate with a similar status or history. Accordingly, each institution must plan in advance how it will meet the telecommunications needs of deaf inmates, including those who sign to communicate, who are placed in restrictive housing. For inmates who sign, the VRI laptops are capable of being used as videophones, with or without video relay service (VRS). That the phone setting works on each VRI laptop should be ascertained in advance, and any problems solved. RHU staff should be trained to offer access in the same circumstances they offer non-deaf inmates telephone access. If restraints are going to be needed, the necessary adapted restraint equipment should be readily available, so that the inmate’s hands can be free for signing. It’s likely rare, but some inmates may prefer to use a TTY rather than a videophone or VRS. This is, for example, true for a deaf inmate at NTC. Accordingly, staff should also figure out (again, in advance) how to enable TTY access for an RHU inmate.
VI. MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES
A. Direct Threat determinations
The Settlement Agreement requires that deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates receive “access to services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations substantially equivalent to those offered to similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates,” but, consistent with the ADA, explains that the KYDOC “retains the discretion to determine that certain activities present a Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates and therefore may not be able to provide such Deaf Inmates full and equal enjoyment of some of its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations.” (Settlement Agreement II.A. V.A.4 says the same thing). Similarly, the Agreement requires that deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates be provided “opportunities for institutional work assignments that are consistent with the opportunities for the same assignments given to similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates,” but, again, gives KYDOC “the discretion to determine that certain work assignments present a Direct Threat of injury or death to a Deaf Inmate or others and may therefore choose not to provide the Deaf Inmate a substantially equal opportunity to those work assignments.” (Settlement Agreement VI.F). Consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Settlement Agreement defines “Direct Threat” to mean “a significant risk to the health or safety of one or more Deaf Inmates or others that cannot be reduced or eliminated by reasonable accommodation. A finding of Direct Threat must be based on and supported by objective evidence.” (Settlement Agreement I.4). Whenever a
20 Settlement Agreement II.A (“The KDOC will ensure that Deaf Inmates have full and equal access to and enjoyment of all services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations available to similarly situated nonDeaf Inmates. The KDOC shall provide Deaf Inmates with access to services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations substantially equivalent to those offered to similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates.”); IX.A (“The KDOC will provide Deaf Inmates with access to telecommunication devices that enable them to have communication with people outside of the KDOC and that are substantially equivalent—in terms of the amount and quality of the information conveyed—to the communications that non-Deaf Inmates have with people outside of the KDOC using traditional telecommunication devices such as telephones.”). See Recommendation 40 (“Deaf inmates in segregated housing must be allowed access to telecommunications services equal to that of non-Deaf inmates in the same disciplinary or administrative status. The best solution would be to work out a method for such inmates— including those on “max assault status”—to use the videophone, with VRS when needed.”).
Monitor’s Report, December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits, p. 13 of 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 15 of 47 - Page ID#: 2105
Direct Threat is found, the Agreement requires prompt notification to me, as Settlement Monitor, that “explain[s] the reasoning in support of such determination.” (Settlement Agreement II.A, V.A.4, VI.F).
My visits revealed that the staff who make decisions about job assignments had not all been trained on the Settlement Agreement’s relevant provisions—either the substantive or the reporting obligations. At BTC, hard-of-hearing inmates explained to me that they had been barred from certain jobs, and produced prison documentation of those decisions. I had not received the required report, and when I inquired, it became clear that the decisionmaking process was not appropriately individuated. Some of the inmates had quite mild impairments and there was no need for any restriction for them, and some of the jobs didn’t pose any risk even to inmates with a more significant degree of hearing impairment. In addition, the required report to me had not occurred. What the Settlement Agreement and the ADA require is individuated decisionmaking that considers the particular job and the particular inmate, with prompt reporting to me so I can offer technical assistance.21
B. Empowering the ADA Coordinator
At most of the five institutions, the ADA Coordinator (backed by the Warden and Deputy Wardens) has been able to obtain cooperation from staff whose conduct is governed by the Settlement Agreement. At LSCC, however, this has been less true. Instead, I have been told several times that LSCC’s ADA Coordinator cannot compel compliance by staff who do not report to her. The particular problems have now been solved, but the exchanges reveal a broader issue—it is crucial that ADA Coordinators have a high enough rank or receive sufficient support from their Warden and Deputy Warden to accomplish their compliance role.
VII. CONCLUSION
Implementation of the Settlement Agreement continues to progress. I am attaching my prior recommendations, adding the three new recommendations from this report, as Exhibit B to this report. This list should assist KYDOC staff with their ongoing compliance efforts. In addition, I plan for my subsequent visits and reports to proceed using a compliance checklist, which I will soon share with KYDOC. Much progress has been made, and I have every expectation that full compliance will be achieved soon.
21 See Recommendation 53 (“Ensure that all relevant staff know about the Agreement’s reporting obligations, so that I am appropriately notified when any of the reporting-triggering events takes place. (Settlement Agreement II.A; VI.F; VIII.B.1; VIII.B.3; VIII.C; IX.C; XII).”).
Monitor’s Report, December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits, p. 14 of 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 16 of 47 - Page ID#: 2106
Site Visit Report of Settlement Monitor
Adams & Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky.)
Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor
December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits
Blackburn Correctional Complex (December 12, 2016) Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (December 13, 2016)
Little Sandy Correctional Complex (December 13, 2016) Northpoint Training Center (December 14, 2016) Kentucky State Reformatory (February 27, 2017)
May 4, 2017
Exhibits
Exhibit A: Staff interviewed during site visits Exhibit B: Consolidated Recommendations Exhibit C: How to Communicate Effectively with Hard-of-Hearing Inmates Exhibit D: Auxiliary Aids/devices currently in place or under test at KYDOC institutions

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 17 of 47 - Page ID#: 2107
Exhibit A: Staff interviewed during site visits

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 18 of 47 - Page ID#: 2108
Staff interviews and meetings
Blackburn Correctional Complex (BCC), December 12, 2016 Thomas Bull, receiving and discharge officer Deanna Byrd, classification and treatment officer (orientation) Kim Cook-McDonald, Health Services Administrator Howard Ellison, volunteer chaplain Kristy Hicks, school administrator Jason Lotter, adjustment officer Joanna King, Director of Nursing Abigail McIntire, Deputy Warden, Programs Christy Peach, ADA Coordinator Tiffany Ratliff, Warden Belinda Sanchez, unit administrator Tiffany Taylor, HR administrator
Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (EKCC), December 13, 2016 Robert Blanton, Health Services Administrator (HSA) Jami Elam, unit administrator Abe Felton, Correctional Lieutenant, restrictive housing Jackie Kirby, classification treatment officer Dr. Lester Lewis Kathy Litteral, Warden Jill Miller, Director of Nursing Michael Prater, Correctional Lieutenant, Fire & Safety Officer, ADA Coordinator John Vaught, Correctional Lieutenant, intake Steven Ratliff, Education Director Timothy Doubblestein, Chaplain
Little Sandy Correctional Complex (LSCC), December 13, 2016 Heather Bossio, classification and treatment officer Lorie Conley, ADA Coordinator David Cary, Chaplain Kim Duvall, Health Services Administrator David Garris, Sgt., restrictive housing unit Paul Holbrook, Deputy Warden, Programs Tyara Hughes, Nurse Practitioner Danny McGraw, Deputy Warden Joe Meko, Warden Shawn Ramey, Sgt. Shadow Skaggs, Director of Nursing Christy Smith, educational instructor Roy Whitt, Corrections recreation leader
Monitor’s Report, December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits, p. 15 of 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 19 of 47 - Page ID#: 2109
Northpoint Training Center (NTC), December 14, 2016 Don Bottom, Warden Stephanie Boyd, Recreation Director Kelly Buckley, Administrative Assistant (medical department) Heather Caldwell, Director of Nursing Pam Coffman, ADA Coordinator Stephany Hughes, Unit Administrator Brandon Lynch, Back-up ADA Coordinator, Procedures Officer Aaron Mobley, Chaplain Daniel Napier, Restrictive Housing Unit, Unit Administrator Jonathan Rooney, Orientation CTO Stephanie Thompson, Health Services Administrator Kristy Hicks, Corrections Regional Education Administrator Shelli Conyers-Votaw, Nurse Practitioner Christopher Young, Correctional Sergeant, Receiving and Discharge Supervisor Kentucky State Reformatory (KSR), February 27, 2017 David Dillard, Chaplain Anthony Hillebrandt, ADA Coordinator Michael Jordan, Health Services Administrator Warren McLemore, Social Service Clinician, Sex Offenders Treatment Program Marla McMillan, GED teacher Karl Seitz, Intake caseworker Paul Sloan, Backup ADA Coordinator Aaron Smith, Warden Jim VanNort, Psychology program administrator Courtney Welsh, Licensed psychology associate
Monitor’s Report, December 2016 & February 2017 Site Visits, p. 16 of 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 20 of 47 - Page ID#: 2110
Exhibit B: Consolidated Recommendations

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 21 of 47 - Page ID#: 2111
Adams & Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky.)
Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor
CONSOLIDATED RECOMMENDATIONS
AS OF APRIL 19, 2017
I present, the recommendations I have made in three groups: First, those from April 2016; second, those from December 2016; third, those from April 2017. The numbering is continuous from one group to the next.
Group 1 (April 21, 2016)
Note: These are edited from their original wording; they are phrased more generally, in order eliminate the references to KSR.
I. IDENTIFICATION OF INMATES COVERED BY THE AGREEMENT
Recommendation 1: Each facility should identify all inmates who meet the Agreement’s definition of “Deaf.” This is necessary both in order to report names to me and to ensure that appropriate services are provided to hard-of-hearing inmates. (Settlement Agreement I.3; III.A; III.B; XV.B.1.d)
Recommendation 2: Include additional questions in the screening questionnaire, along the lines of:
• Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? • Have you ever been diagnosed with hearing loss? • Have you ever used a hearing aid that you no longer use? (If yes, Why don’t you use
it anymore?) A “yes” answer to any of the these three questions should be followed up by a provider visit, unless the inmate explains that he no longer uses the hearing aid because his hearing has improved so that it is no longer necessary.
• If you currently have a hearing aid, is it working ok? A “no” answer to this question should be followed up by a provider visit.
• Note to tester: If the inmate seems unable to understand these questions due to a hearing impairment, provider follow-up is indicated.
(Settlement Agreement I.3; III.A; III.B)
Recommendation 3: Staff administering the questionnaire should be alert to (and trained on) the possibility of low literacy, and should ask questions orally when appropriate. Among illiterate inmates, a hearing impairment sufficient to undermine their ability to answer these questions ought to itself trigger referral to the appropriate provider. (Settlement Agreement I.5; III.A; III.B)
Recommendation 4: Further assessment of the inmate should include not just the medical decision
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 1 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 22 of 47 - Page ID#: 2112
whether to send the inmate to an audiologist, but a separate, explicit, charted and electronicallytracked decision whether he is deaf or hard-of-hearing. (Settlement Agreement III.B; III.D [identification cards]; III.C [auxiliary aids and services assessment]; XV.B [reporting])
Recommendation 5: The KDOC Electronic Medical Record system should include a single electronic code that flags inmates who are deaf, hard-of-hearing, or hearing-impaired (hereinafter Deaf, in this report), to facilitate provision of services to them. (Settlement Agreement III.B)
II. PROVISION OF AUDIOLOGY SERVICES
Recommendation 6: Inmates in need of a hearing aid—both initially or because the device they have is no longer working for them—should wait no longer than two months to obtain the necessary device. That time period should begin the day the potential need is indicated by the inmate’s request for evaluation, answers on the questionnaire, etc. Each KYDOC facility should track the time from request/questionnaire to provider visit to audiology visit to hearing aid provision, and ensure that inmates do not have a longer wait. (In future quarterly reporting periods, I will request this tracking data from all facilities.) One way to accomplish less expensive and more comprehensive assessment for any backlog might be to bring in an audiologist to each applicable facility for two or three days. (Settlement Agreement V.B; VIII.B.2)
III. AUXILIARY AIDS/SERVICES
A. Personal hearing devices: Hearing aids and amplifiers
Recommendation 7: Full information about hearing aids and hearing evaluations, including the availability of batteries without charge, should be provided to inmates. See Exhibit D-2. (III.F)
Recommendation 8: Inmates waiting for an audiologist evaluation or for hearing aid service should be offered an amplifier while they wait. (Settlement Agreement V.B)
B. Qualified Interpretation
Recommendation 9: For inmates who use sign language to communicate, some kind of qualified interpretive services should be readily available for any communication between an inmate and staff when the inmate requests interpretation. The availability of interpretation should not be limited to only certain types of encounters, communications, or settings. (Settlement Agreement III; VI)
Recommendation 10: For inmates who use sign language to communicate, no special request should be needed to obtain VRI services for auxiliary aid/service assessment, emergency health care on-site, classification and transfer hearings and related meetings, grievance meetings and hearings, disciplinary hearings and all related processes, parole meetings and hearings. (Settlement Agreement VI.A; III.C [auxiliary aids and services assessment]; VI.C.4 [emergency on-site medical]; VI.H [transfer and classification]; V.A.2 [grievance hearings]; VII.A [disciplinary hearings]; VI.A.3 [parole hearings])
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 2 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 23 of 47 - Page ID#: 2113
Recommendation 11: Interpretation services should be offered without special request to any inmate (known to prison staff to use sign language to communicate) during initial classification and orientation. These encounters are vital to the terms of each inmate’s living situation, and inmates are unlikely to know, during these early stages, that they need to request interpretation and how to do so. (Settlement Agreement III.A.1)
Recommendation 12: Both the existing VRI contract and the standing arrangement with a provider of in-person qualified interpretive services are crucial and should remain in place. Inperson interpretation should be provided to inmates who communicate by signing when it is necessary for effective communication. This includes during group classes in which student participation is key, and in parole hearings. For other situations, an in-person interpreter should be provided if remote interpretation is unlikely to be, or has not been, effective. (Settlement Agreement VI.A; VI.E. VI.A.3)
Recommendation 13: More generally, more clarity and a better process for picking a qualified interpretation method—VRI or in-person—are needed. The various memos, forms, and training should be modified to support that process. The facility should give “primary consideration” to the affected inmate’s view on this question. Revised versions of all the relevant forms and memos are attached as Exhibit D. The information in Exhibit D-5—in particular, the preferred communication method—should be made available to all KYDOC staff who need it, including both medical and custody staff, including electronically. (Settlement Agreement VI.A; I.5)
Recommendation 14: Each facility should track the effectiveness of communication via VRI in other situations, in order to decide whether there are any situations in which in-person interpretation should be the first recourse. As part of this assessment process, each time a VRI is used, the inmate should be asked how effective the resulting communication was. This can be done by a scaled question:
Please check the box that best indicates your views.
The Video Remote Interpretation I just used provided fully effective communication:
 Strongly agree  Weakly agree  Weakly disagree  Strongly disagree
If there was any problem with the communication, please explain:
These responses can be collected and analyzed. This recommendation is reflected in Exhibit D. (Settlement Agreement VI.A)
Recommendation 15: Inmates who communicate via sign language should not have their hands restrained when there is a need for effective communication, absent an individualized finding of security threat even with use of substitute security procedures (if necessary). If avoiding restraint of inmates’ hands requires substitute security procedures, those should be written up and included in the documentation of the necessary processes for both VRI and in-person interpretation, and any appropriate equipment should be obtained and installed wherever it might be needed. (Settlement Agreement XI.A)
Recommendation 16 [Applies to KSR only]: For situations since June 2015 in which KSR’s procedures did not allow an inmate to communicate during a disciplinary
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 3 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 24 of 47 - Page ID#: 2114
hearing—most importantly, in Inmate C’s October 2015 hearing—the inmate should be given an opportunity to redo the hearing. This opportunity must be effectively communicated to the inmate, which itself should be done using interpretive services. (Settlement Agreement VII)
Recommendation 17 [Applies to KSR only]: Inmate D’s 2016 Parole hearing should be redone, with an in-person Qualified Interpreter. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2)
Recommendation 18: When a Deaf inmate is seeking/receiving off-site medical care, staff at each facility should, as early as practicable, inform the relevant medical provider(s) that a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service will be seeking medical care from those off-site medical providers at a particular date and time; in the case of an emergency, staff should provide such information as soon as possible, and should include the Deaf inmate’s estimated time of arrival. There should be policies and procedures in place, implemented by appropriate training, to ensure that these notifications occur. (Settlement Agreement VI.D)
Recommendation 19: The process/forms for inmates to request interpretive services and other auxiliary aids and services should clearly encompass religious and any other volunteer-provided programming. (Settlement Agreement VI.A.3; VI.G.1)
Recommendation 20: Significant communications by the chaplains are covered by the requirement of effective communication. Therefore the chaplains, like other staff, should be trained in the requirements of this Agreement, and should ensure that if they have occasion to minister to a Deaf inmate—or simply inform him that a family member has died—they do so effectively, including using interpreter services if the inmate communicates using sign language. (Settlement Agreement VI.J)
Recommendation 21: The process for obtaining and using the VRI laptop should be communicated to each staff member who might have occasion to need it, and also to each inmate who communicates using sign language. Each such staff member should actually do a practice run using the machine—to figure out how/where internet access and power will be obtained, and how to use the program. The laptops themselves should be checked each time they are returned to their resting area, to ensure that they have sufficient battery power. Training should ensure that staff understand that the person communicating with the Deaf inmate should sit within easy reach of the laptop’s microphone, and that the inmate must not have his hands handcuffed. (It would be useful to include a diagram or instructions on a piece of paper taped to the laptop’s cover.) (Settlement Agreement VI [qualified interpreters]; IX.E [training and technology]; XI [hand restraints])
Recommendation 22: There should be some flexibility in the timing of VRI requests and usage; where a need arises that does not allow for 48 hours notice, VRI should nonetheless be made available if possible. Each facility should work out a process for VRI availability after hours and on weekends, as well as in emergencies. (Settlement Agreement VI.J)
C. Videos
Recommendation 23: Check each existing video used to determine whether it has captioning
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 4 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 25 of 47 - Page ID#: 2115
and obtain replacements with captioning if available. Provide captions for all orientation videos, for newly acquired entertainment and educational videos, and other videos when captioning is available. For television captioning to be a real option, training for staff about how to turn it on and periodic testing are required. This should be done on a schedule, perhaps quarterly or twice a year, and it should be logged. (Settlement Agreement X.1)
Recommendation 24: For Deaf inmates who cannot hear crucial informative videos, and whose literacy level is insufficient to allow them to readily read captions, an alternative method of effective communication is necessary. For those who communicate using sign language, the prison should provide either a sign language inset, or an in-person Qualified Interpreter. (Settlement Agreement I.5; III.E; VI.J)
D. Speech-to-text
Recommendation 25 [KSR only, for right now]: KSR should continue to investigate the possibility of speech-to-text software for use in classroom and other appropriate settings. I will ask for a report on this issue six months. (Settlement Agreement V.A. 2; VI.E)
E. Assistive listening systems
Recommendation 26 [KSR only, for right now]: Investigate assistive listening systems for use in classroom and other appropriate settings. I will ask for a report on this issue in six months. (Settlement Agreement V.A. 2; VI.E)
Recommendation 27: Each facility should inform Deaf inmates of the various ways in which educational programming can be made more accessible to them; the school should put in place a process to facilitate requests for such accommodations and assess the need for them. (Settlement Agreement III.F; V.A. 2; VI.E)
F. Written communication
Recommendation 28: Written communication should be relied upon only for simple communication with literate inmates. For complex communications or less literate inmates, alternative methods are required. Staff should make best efforts to communicate with each deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate using that inmate’s preferred communication method (which is assessed and recorded by Exhibit D-5). (Settlement Agreement I.5)
G. Non-auditory alerts
Recommendation 29: Each facility should expand the availability of non-auditory alert systems, providing them to inmates who cannot hear the fire alarm and/or the alert for count. To maximize the communication effectiveness of each non-auditory alert, it should be programmed to signal, in different ways, the several predictable alerts: fire/emergency; count, chow, “report to office.” Staff must also be trained to use the office switch. Whether this is occurring will need monitoring; perhaps by using a daily log or checking in periodically with affected inmates. The monitoring system should be made formal. I will ask for a description of it, and perhaps relevant records, in the next quarterly reporting period. (Settlement Agreement VIII)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 5 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 26 of 47 - Page ID#: 2116
Recommendation 30 [KSR only, for right now]: Investigate the costs and benefits of a TV-based visual paging system. I will ask for a report on this issue in six months. (Settlement Agreement VIII)
Recommendation 31: Each facility should train staff to be alert to the possibility that a Deaf inmate may miss the alert for count, chow, or pill call—and to ensure nondiscrimination in that event. (Settlement Agreement VIII; II.A)
H. Miscellaneous devices
Recommendation 32: Each facility’s commissary list should include various alerting devices that inmates might wish to purchase: caption-capable TVs, vibrating alarm clocks, and the like. Inmates should be informed that if they seek to purchase adaptive equipment that is not available via the commissary, they should request assistance from the ADA Coordinator; the ADA Coordinator should then facilitate the inmate’s purchase unless the requested device presents an articulable and documented security risk. (Settlement Agreement XII)
I. Other communications aids
Recommendation 33: Investigate all the available topics for medical EZ Boards—both word and picture versions—and buy those that are useful, making them available for use by Deaf inmates. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2; VI.C; XII)
J. Methods of communicating with Deaf inmates
Recommendation 34: Staff should be trained on, and should use, best practices for communicating with hard-of-hearing inmates. (Settlement Agreement XIII.B)
Recommendation 35: Each facility should continue to provide Deaf inmates with ID cards that identify them as Deaf, and to post similar identification outside their cells. The notices required by the Agreement outside each housing unit and at the entrance to the institution should also be posted. (Settlement Agreement III.D.1)
K. Teaching sign-language
Recommendation 36: Each facility should try to offer classes in sign language, and should give Deaf inmates who would like to learn to sign both affirmative notice and preference for these classes. (Settlement Agreement II.A)
L. Telecommunications equipment and rules
Recommendation 37: Videophones should be located in areas as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. The videophone should be available during the same days and hours as conventional telephones and should require permission for use only if the facility requires inmates to seek permission to use conventional telephones. If an escort is required to use the videophone at night, on weekends, or in other circumstances, such an escort should be routinely provided. (Settlement Agreement IX.A)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 6 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 27 of 47 - Page ID#: 2117
Recommendation 38: Even if an escort is required, there should be no requirement that inmates seeking to use the videophone, including with VRS, schedule such use in advance. Non-Deaf inmates are not required to schedule their phone calls, and that should be true for Deaf inmates, as well. (Settlement Agreement IX.A)
Recommendation 39: Ensure all staff are trained on videophone rules, so that they know that videophone access is to be provided during the same hours as conventional phone access, without pre-scheduling, and that time in transit doesn’t count. (Settlement Agreement IX.A; XIII.B)
Recommendation 40 (Edited): Deaf inmates in segregated housing must be allowed access to telecommunications services equal to that of non-Deaf inmates in the same disciplinary or administrative status. The best solution would be to work out a method for such inmates— including those on “max assault status”—to use the videophone, with VRS when needed. This could be done by escorting the prisoner to the videophone or by enabling videophone capabilities on the VRI laptop. If there are individualized reasons that an inmate cannot have his hands unshackled consistent with security, he, and others in his situation, should be allowed access to the TTY. I will request each facility to report on what method for telecommunications access is developed for Deaf inmates in segregation, and why. (Settlement Agreement IX.A)
Recommendation 41: Ensure that disciplinary oversight of videophone is no more intense than oversight of conventional phone calls. The disciplinary committee should explicitly consider and rule on this issue when it is deciding a disciplinary matter involving the videophone or TTY. (Settlement Agreement IX.B)
Recommendation 42 [New recommendation 74 substitutes for this recommendation]: KSR should review auxiliary aids that would allow hard-of-hearing inmates effective access to telecommunications, and should implement improvements— perhaps involving TTY, captioned telephones, and/or handset amplification. Asking inmates what does and doesn’t work is a necessary part of this process. I will request a report on this review—both how it was conducted and the results—in six months. (Settlement Agreement IX; I.5)
IV. PROCESSES FOR ASSESSING AND REQUESTING AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
A. Intake/Orientation
Recommendation 43: Each facility should develop a process by which inmates whose hearing impairment substantially impedes communication are noted and assessed right away on arrival at the institution, immediate steps taken to ensure effective communication, including immediate interpretative services if necessary. (Settlement Agreement III.A; III.C)
B. Literacy assessment
Recommendation 44: Staff at each facility should assess each Deaf inmate’s literacy prior to conducting additional assessment of necessary auxiliary aids and services. Educational staff should be able to propose and implement one of several quick assessment tools. For example, the
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 7 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 28 of 47 - Page ID#: 2118
Slosson Oral Reading Test - Revised (SORT-R) might be suitable. If an inmate is not literate at at least the 8th grade level, reliance on written communication is unlikely to succeed in providing effective communication, and alternative methods should be used. (Settlement Agreement III.C; I.5)
C. Individual assessment meetings
Recommendation 45: For each Deaf inmate, the ADA Coordinator should conduct an individual services assessment meeting, at which the inmate’s available methods of communication are expressly ascertained and recorded, and the inmate is informed about the available auxiliary aids and services. For an inmate who can hear (with or without an amplifier or hearing aid) well enough to understand the coordinator, information should be conveyed orally as well as in writing. If the inmate uses sign language, VRI would be the appropriate way to communicate for a meeting of this nature. The greatest challenge is presented if the inmate is not literate, does not hear well enough to understand spoken communication, and does not sign. In that case, visual demonstrations of the various auxiliary aids and services may be required. The assessment should be updated annually, ideally at the inmate’s annual classification meeting. (Settlement Agreement III.C; I.5)
D. Form and options
Recommendation 46: The various forms related to requesting and using Auxiliary Aids and Services form should be changed in a number of ways:
• To list available aids and services more comprehensively • To more clearly explain what the various services and aids are, in what circumstances
they are available, and how to request them. • To explain how to use the various devices. • To ask inmates, expressly, about their preferred modes of communication or needed
services, and why those are useful. To explain which items are free of charge, and which are available only at the inmate’s expense. (Settlement Agreement III.C; III.F)
Recommendation 47: I recommend replacement of the existing forms with several different ones, explaining the various options available, allowing requests for various types of communications assistance, and obtaining feedback from inmates (see Recommendation 14, above). These recommended forms are attached as Exhibit D, which also includes a recommended staff memo about the various available devices and accommodations, and an assessment form. These forms should be explained/filled out during the individual assessment meetings. (Settlement Agreement III.C; III.F)
E. Additional methods for inmates to seek auxiliary aids and services
Recommendation 48: The Healthcare Request form should include boxes to check if auxiliary aids or services, including remote or in-person interpretation, are needed. My recommended additions to this form are attached as Exhibit E-2. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2; VI.C)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 8 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 29 of 47 - Page ID#: 2119
Recommendation 49: All the forms by which inmates apply for jobs, educational programming, etc., should have language similar to that in the recommended Healthcare Request form. So should classification and disciplinary forms that notify inmates of impending hearings or meetings. I have not provided recommended versions of these forms, but will in a future reporting period ask to see them all. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2; VI.F; VI.E; VI.H; VII.A)
Recommendation 50: When Deaf inmates and staff discuss enrollment or application for a particular activity or program, communication should be effective—which means an interpreter may be required for the discussion—and should cover potential accommodations, auxiliary aids/services that could provide equal access to the activity/program. (Settlement Agreement V.A; VI)
V. TRAINING
A. ADA Coordinator Training
Recommendation 51: KYDOC should develop training on the Settlement Agreement and make it available to ADA Coordinators. For training on the ADA, the ADA National Network training is appropriate. (Settlement Agreement XIII.B)
B. Staff Training
Recommendation 52 [Training slides have now been provided and comments offered]: Training should be developed on all topics listed in the Settlement Agreement as requiring training. Once drafted, materials should be shared with me and with the Kentucky Commission on the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, for our input. This training is already long overdue; it should be provided to me for my input no later than July 1, finalized within 30 days after my comments are returned, and delivered to staff as soon as possible thereafter. (Settlement Agreement XIII)
VI. REPORTING
Recommendation 53: Ensure that all relevant staff know about the Agreement’s reporting obligations, so that I am appropriately notified when any of the reporting-triggering events takes place. (Settlement Agreement II.A; VI.F; VIII.B.1; VIII.B.3; VIII.C; IX.C; XII)
Group 2 (December 2016)
I. IDENTIFICATION OF INMATES COVERED BY THE AGREEMENT.
Recommendation 54: Identification processes (Settlement Agreement III.A.1 [initial classification]; III.B [hearing assessment]; III.D.1 [identification cards])
a) Each facility should ask each inmate about any hearing difficulties during his or her initial medical screening, in their first day or two in the facility. Questions about hearing should be at the start of that screening, to allow accommodations, if needed, during the rest of the process.
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 9 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 30 of 47 - Page ID#: 2120
b) All inmates should also fill out, in writing or orally, the multiple-question hearing screening. Exhibit B-2 is the recommended form. (See also prior recommendation 2.) This form should be administered by medical staff, to facilitate necessary medical followup.
c) If an inmate answers “yes” or “sometimes” in response to three or more of the screening questions, he should be seen in the next several days by a medical provider—a physician or nurse practitioner—for further evaluation, including a “whisper test” or other examination to assess whether there is a functional hearing problem.
d) If an inmate fails the “whisper test” or other hearing evaluation, the following should occur: • The inmate should receive an identification card to carry on his person, which states that the inmate is deaf or hard-of-hearing. • The inmate’s name should be shared with the facility’s ADA coordinator. • Two different alerts should be placed in his record, one in KOMS (the Kentucky Offender Management System), to alert correctional staff to the issue whenever they retrieve his computerized file, and the other in the EMR (Electronic Medical Record), to do the same for medical staff. Both alerts should be immediately obvious when the electronic file is opened. (See Figures A and B, above).
e) All inmates so identified should be included in the facility’s semi-annual reports to me; if a particular inmate turns out not to be deaf or hard-of-hearing, because, for example, a medical problem that was obstructing his or her hearing is solved, that can be explained. (Note: the decision to send an inmate to an audiologist for evaluation or treatment is not the same as the decision to flag the inmate as deaf or hard-ofhearing.)
Recommendation 55: In order to ensure appropriate identification of deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates, all inmates’ annual or other routine physicals should include the hearing questionnaire (Exhibit B-2). (Settlement Agreement III.B)
Recommendation 56: Each facility should ensure that the ID cards used to identify inmates as deaf or hard-of-hearing are clear, and should avoid abbreviations or other language that may not be clear. Each facility should ensure that every deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate is able to carry such a card at all times. If an inmate misplaces the card, a replacement should be promptly provided. (Settlement Agreement III.D.1)
II. ENSURING EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION DURING INTAKE
Recommendation 57: Interpretation services should be offered without special request to any inmate (known by prison staff to use sign language to communicate) during initial medical screening or other intake medical encounters. Inmates are unlikely to know, during these early stages, that they need to request interpretation and how to do so. Medical staff should ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if they use sign language to communicate, rather than waiting for the ADA Coordinator’s assessment. (Settlement Agreement III.A.1)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 10 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 31 of 47 - Page ID#: 2121
Recommendation 58: Each facility’s medical office should keep pocket amplifiers on hand for all intake staff—medical, mental health, and custody—to use when the need arises. (Settlement Agreement III.A.1)
III. PROVISION OF AUDIOLOGY SERVICES
Recommendation 59: The ADA Coordinator for each KYDOC facility should maintain a document that tracks each deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate’s progress through the process of obtaining any needed hearing aid, including the dates and outcomes of:
• the initial request/questionnaire • each relevant medical visit • any audiology visit • hearing aid provision. In order to ensure that inmates do not wait longer than two months for a necessary hearing aid, the ADA coordinator should check for progress for each affected inmate every week or two, updating the tracking document and working with medical staff to solve any procedural hurdles that arise. A recommended sample tracking document is provided as Exhibit F. (Settlement Agreement V.B; VIII.B.2)
IV. AUXILIARY AIDS/SERVICES
Recommendation 60: I commend KYDOC for developing a user-friendly pamphlet to cover the information needed by deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates; I recommend facilities use the edited version in Exhibit D-2; each facility should fill in the items marked with curly brackets ({ and }). (Settlement Agreement III.F)
A. Personal hearing devices: Hearing aids and amplifiers
Recommendation 61: Inmates with hearing aids should be able to obtain replacement batteries seven days a week, without difficulty or charge, regardless of their housing or programming assignment. (Settlement Agreement V.B)
Recommendation 62: Each facility should inform staff responsible for property moves that it is important for inmates to keep their hearing aids with them, even when they are moved into segregation or transferred. When an inmate is accidentally separated from his or her hearing aids, policy should allow the inmate to promptly obtain the hearing aids from storage or medical, or to get replacements. (Settlement Agreement V.B)
B. Qualified Interpretation
1. Video Relay Interpretation (VRI): Use and Procedures
Recommendation 63: Absent an emergency in which time is of the essence and VRI services are unavailable, no facility should rely on an inmate to interpret a communication that would ordinarily be private for another inmate. (Settlement Agreement VI; I.18)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 11 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 32 of 47 - Page ID#: 2122
Recommendation 64: Each facility should obtain and test a “splitter” for each VRI laptop, so that the laptop can be used alongside a computer. (Settlement Agreement IX.E.1)
Recommendation 65: Each facility should ensure that the VRI laptop routinely receives necessary software updates. (Settlement Agreement IX.E.1)
2. Religious and Volunteer-provided programming
Recommendation 66: For any religious programming—worship services, counseling, bible study, etc.—that is provided directly by the chaplain, each facility should provide qualified interpretation when requested by an inmate who needs it.
Prior Recommendation 20: Significant communications by the chaplains are covered by the requirement of effective communication. Therefore the chaplains, like other KSR staff, should be trained in the requirements of this Agreement, and should ensure that if they have occasion to minister to a Deaf inmate—or simply inform him that a family member has died—they do so effectively, including using interpreter services if the inmate communicates using sign language.
C. Video captioning
D. Speech-to-text
E. Assistive listening systems
(Settlement Agreement VI.G.3)
Recommendation 67: Each religious, educational, and programming area should have available a device to allow wireless amplification for individual hard-of-hearing inmates. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2)
Recommendation 68: KSR should inform deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates of the various ways in which religious, educational, rehabilitative, and recreational programming can be made more accessible to them; all programming providers (educational, rehabilitative, and recreational) should put in place a process to facilitate requests for such accommodations and assess the need for them. (Settlement Agreement V.A; III.F)
F. Written communication
G. Non-auditory alerts
Recommendation 69: In any unit where there are deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates, each facility should implement (and ensure use of) written announcement boards. That is, all general announcements should also be promptly displayed on a written announcement board (e.g.: “X class is cancelled this evening,” or “all inmates in X category are allowed an X privilege this afternoon”). Staff use of this announcement board must be monitored and audited. (Settlement Agreement VIII.B.1)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 12 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 33 of 47 - Page ID#: 2123
Recommendation 70: In order to provide effective and equal communications to deaf and hardof-hearing inmates who are being individually paged, staff should check KOMS to see if that inmate has a deaf/hard-of-hearing alert; if a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate does not answer the auditory page in a minute or two, he or she should be individually alerted to the page by a staff member. This could be done by in-person notification or by provision of a personal paging system. (Settlement Agreement VIII.A)
Recommendation 71: Each facility should train staff to be alert to the possibility that a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate may be unable to hear an order or instruction issued verbally; training should cover strategies to avoid bad results. (Settlement Agreement XIII.B; II.A)
H. Miscellaneous devices
I. Speech
Recommendation 71: In each facility’s settings in which staff ordinarily talk to a group of inmates—orientation, education, etc.—consideration should be given to talking to any hard-ofhearing inmate one-on-one, instead. For example, for someone who is having difficulty hearing a teacher in a group setting, even with assistive listening devices (see IV.E, above), a tutor might be a better option than a congregate GED class. (Settlement Agreement XIII.B)
J. Teaching sign-language
Recommendation 72: Deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates who do not have their GED should be among those allowed to enroll in any classes in sign language. Each facility should obtain resources relating to sign language—books or computer-based instruction—and make those available to deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. (Settlement Agreement II.A)
K. Telecommunications equipment and rules
1. Videophone and VRS
2. TTY
Recommendation 73: Each facility should maintain its TTY and develop a facility protocol for how to make it available to inmates, covering who the inmate should request it from, where it should be connected, etc. In addition, each facility should annually test its TTY and the protocol by calling me at an agreed upon time using direct TTY and the relay service. TTY instructions should be left with the TTY at all times. (Settlement Agreement IX.D.1)
3. Hard-of-hearing inmates
Recommendation 74 (substitutes for prior recommendation 42): Each facility should improve access of hard-of-hearing inmates to telecommunications, by:
(a) Allowing them access to TTYs. (b) Informing them that amplified phones are available, and ensuring that at least one such phone, whose amplification is compatible with a hearing aid but does not require one, is
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 13 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 34 of 47 - Page ID#: 2124
available in every group of phones used by any hard-of-hearing inmate. (c) Providing access to captioned telephones, unless on investigation such telephones are not available in the institutional setting.
I will request a report on implementation each aspect of this recommendation.
(Settlement Agreement IX.A)
V. THE INTERACTION OF COMMUNICATION NEEDS AND HOUSING ASSIGNMENT
A. Segregated housing
B. Other housing needs
Recommendation 75: Each facility should develop a method for considering how communications difficulties with deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates can be minimized by particular housing assignments, and shall make such assignments when appropriate. (Settlement Agreement II.A)
VI. PROCESSES FOR ASSESSING AND REQUESTING AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
VII. FORM AND OPTIONS
Recommendation 76: Each facility should include notice in its Inmate Handbook of the facility’s basic obligation to avoid discrimination and provide effective communication, and inform inmates to contact the ADA Coordinator if needed. Something like the following would be appropriate:
Americans with Disabilities Act and Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates
An inmate with a verified disability will have the opportunity to participate in services, privileges, and programs similar to other inmates at this institution. If you are deaf or hard-of-hearing, you should contact the designated institutional ADA Coordinator; each living unit and inmate public areas has contact information posted. All {name facility here}-provided services will provide effective communication and make available qualified interpreters when needed. Qualified Interpreters and Auxiliary Aids and Services are available for an inmate with a verified disability upon request. It is the inmate’s responsibility to request an interpreter from volunteer organizations or individuals that are providing activities and services. An inmate who meets criteria to be accommodated under the ADA will be provided identification to facilitate effective communication. If at any time an inmate chooses to not wear the identification, he/she shall sign a waiver document to be placed in the institutional file.
(Settlement Agreement II.A)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 14 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 35 of 47 - Page ID#: 2125
VIII. TRAINING
A. ADA Coordinator Training
B. Staff Training
Recommendation 77: In addition to the computer-based KYDOC training, live, in-service training should cover, at least:
a) For all staff: • The identity and role of the ADA Coordinator • Existence of KOMS and EMR alerts for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates, and the obligation to check for the alerts. • The occasions and process for obtaining access to the VRI laptop, and how to use the laptop, including where different people should sit to maximize communication effectiveness. (For medical, educational, and housing staff, this training should be done on-site, so each affected staff member can see where and how the laptop can be set up.) • The occasions and process for obtaining an in-person qualified interpreter.
b) For housing area staff: • The use of cell/bed notices that an inmate is deaf or hard-of-hearing • The use of the bed shaker switch. • Telecommunications issues, including how to obtain and use a TTY, and the policies and procedures governing TTY and videophone usage. • The obligation to notify deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates of alerts, including emergency alerts and non-emergency pages.
c) For all corrections staff: • The requirements to accommodate inmates who use sign language to communicate by using restraints that allow them to sign, and how to implement those requirements. • Strategies for dealing with inmates who may not hear directions or orders, especially when given from behind or above them.
d) For medical staff: • The responsibility of running a process to provide medically necessary hearing aids within two months, and what that actually entails, in terms of adjusting ordinary processes and timing. • The obligation to notify off-site medical provider(s) that a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service will be seeking medical care, and how this obligation is being assigned.
(Settlement Agreement XIII; IX.E.2; III.D.2)
IX. REPORTING
Recommendation 78: The ADA Coordinator should obtain monthly reports based on both KOMS and medical records of each inmate in the facility who is deaf or hard-of-hearing, and
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 15 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 36 of 47 - Page ID#: 2126
should check those reports too add to the Coordinator’s tracking list. (Settlement Agreement XV.B.1) Recommendation 79: Each facility’s quarterly written summary of grievances by deaf and hardof-hearing inmates should include all such grievances, not only the ones that are deemed related to effective communication, auxiliary aids and services, or other issues raised in the Settlement Agreement. (Settlement Agreement XIV.3)
Group 3 (April 2017) Recommendation 80: At each institution, the ADA Coordinator should be one of the staff members who receives each routine transfer memo listing arriving inmates. The ADA Coordinator should check, in advance, to see if any arriving inmate has a disability that may need accommodation in order to provide effective communication and full information during the intake/orientation process, and should make arrangements for that accommodation to be provided. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2) Recommendation 81: Medical staff should ensure that inmates with a need for audiology services are not charged inappropriately, and should avoid repeated charges for ongoing efforts to obtain hearing aids or other services. (Settlement Agreement V.B) Recommendation 82: Each VRI should be the subject of a log sheet that tracks its usage, including staff member, date and purpose. In any institution that houses one or more inmates who use sign language to communicate, the ADA Coordinator should check the VRI log sheet at least once each week, and should ensure that the VRI is being used on appropriate occasions, not just for classification and disciplinary meetings, but for other important conversations between the inmate and staff. (Settlement Agreement VI.A, III.C; VI.C.4; VI.H; V.A.2; VII.A; VI.J)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 16 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 37 of 47 - Page ID#: 2127
Exhibit C: How to Communicate Effectively with Hard-of-Hearing Inmates

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 38 of 47 - Page ID#: 2128
How to Communicate Effectively with Hard-ofHearing Inmates
Adapted from material published by the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Disability Rights Section (last revised 4/19/2017)
Starting the conversation
 Always get the inmate’s attention before you start speaking .  Just because an inmate is wearing a hearing aid does not mean they can hear you.  Ask if the inmate can understand you, or needs some adjustment; you may want to write
a note to ask him or her what communication aid or service is needed.  Provide accommodations if and when requested.  Minimize background noise and other distractions whenever possible.  Allow extra time for communication.
Lighting and facilitating lip-reading
 Face the inmate and maintain normal eye contact. Do not turn away while speaking.  Try to converse in a well-lit area, but avoid glare or back-lighting that puts your mouth in
shadow.  Do not cover your mouth or chew gum while you are speaking.
Simple language, normal speech
 Speak at a normal pace, enunciating clearly.  Speak with simple, direct words.  Do not shout or exaggerate mouth movements .
Visual cues
 Use gestures and facial expressions to reinforce what you are saying.  Use visual aids when possible, such as pointing to printed information on a document.
Check on understanding
 Remember that only about 1/3 of spoken words can be understood by speech (lip) reading.
 Be conscious of bluffing.  Check on understanding: ask the hard-of-hearing inmate to repeat back to you, so you can
be sure he or she understood.  For anything but the most simple communication, written notes can be a problem. Keep
in mind that many people—especially those who use sign language—may lack good English reading and writing skills.
Prison-Specific Communications Issues
• Prisons are noisy: To minimize noise from other inmates, fans, televisions, etc., you may want to step into an office or another quieter area.
• Prisons require situational awareness. To effectively communicate with deaf or hard-ofhearing inmates, an officer must face them directly and not move his or her head too much. This may make it difficult to monitor the surroundings. So you may want to have the conversation in a place that is out of the way, like a corner or an office, where situational awareness is less challenging.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 39 of 47 - Page ID#: 2129
Exhibit D: Auxiliary Aids/devices currently in place or under test at KYDOC institutions

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 40 of 47 - Page ID#: 2130

Memo to: From: Re: Date:

KYDOC Director of Operations Chris Kleymeyer, Wardens, ADA Coordinators, Margo Schlanger Auxiliary Aids/devices currently in place or under test at KYDOC institutions April 19, 2017

This is a list of devices related to the communications needs of deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates that are currently in place at some KYDOC institutions. For each one, information is provided on the device (manufacturer, model, etc.) and on some of the considerations relevant to its use. If only one or two institutions are currently using the device, they are listed. At the end (part 11), I describe a few additional devices that may prove useful in the future.

1. VRI/VRS laptop ...................................................................................................................... 2 2. Non-auditory alert systems (“bed shakers”)............................................................................ 2 3. Personal amplifiers (“pocket talkers”) .................................................................................... 3 4. Videophone ............................................................................................................................. 3 5. TTY ......................................................................................................................................... 3 6. Phone volume control.............................................................................................................. 4 7. Phone amplifier ....................................................................................................................... 4 8. Captioned telephone ................................................................................................................ 5 9. Pager........................................................................................................................................ 5 10. Assistive listening systems...................................................................................................... 6
• FM transmitter for televisions or other sound sources ........................................................ 6 • Induction loop system .......................................................................................................... 6 • FM transmitters.................................................................................................................... 7 • Personal FM system............................................................................................................. 7 11. Other devices not yet in use .................................................................................................... 7 • Earphones for parole board.................................................................................................. 7 • Other personal FM devices .................................................................................................. 8 • Conference microphones ..................................................................................................... 8

-1-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 41 of 47 - Page ID#: 2131
1. VRI/VRS laptop
Video Remote Interpretation (VRI), accessible via a dedicated laptop, allows a hearing person and a deaf person who signs, who are next to each other, to communicate with each other. The hearing person speaks into a laptop microphone and an interpreter on the other end translates the speech into sign language, which the deaf person can see on the laptop screen. The deaf person signs into the laptop camera, and the interpreter on the other end translates the sign language into English, which the hearing person can hear.
Each KYDOC Institution has at least one dedicated VRI laptop, which have preloaded software from Purple, to facilitate easy use.
In order to work smoothly, the VRI should have the following items with it: a) A long computer cord. b) A splitter, to allow both a computer and
the VRI to be used simultaneously. c) A long extension cord. d) A log sheet, to record who uses it and
when e) Depending on the use, a special
external microphone may be helpful.
2. Non-auditory alert systems (“bed shakers”)
For inmates who cannot hear the fire alarm or various announcements for count or chow or pill call, when they are in their cells, a “bed shaker” can be a useful non-auditory alert system. Placed under an inmate’s mattress, it lights up and buzzes. It should be installed to go off automatically in the event of a fire alarm, and can be installed to go off (with a different signal) when triggered by a light switch in a control room. (This latter approach requires control room staff to flip the switch when it is needed—which staff may be reluctant to do.) A bed shaker is less necessary in a dorm setting, because in a dorm, other inmates’ responses to alarms or announcements alerts the deaf inmate about what is going on. In addition, some inmates feel that using a bed shaker in a bunk bed would probably disturb their bunkmate.
Bed shakers are plugged into the wall, like an alarm clock. The triggering signal is wireless—so they may work only in certain cells, depending on the configuration chosen for installation. Most of the KYDOC prisons are currently using bed shakers for one or two inmates. I believe several models are in current use at KYDOC, including the Silent Call Legacy Series (SU5001-V). See http://silentcall.com/product/legacy-series-shake-318-mhz-receiver-vibrator-su5001-v/.
-2-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 42 of 47 - Page ID#: 2132
3. Personal amplifiers (“pocket talkers”) Personal amplifier devices are offered to inmates in need of temporary amplification while they wait for more significant audiology services, or perhaps if they don’t qualify, medically, for a hearing aid. I believe that all the KYDOC institutions are using these devices; CCS buys them via McKesson, its medical supplier. Several models have been used, including the Posey 8274 Sound Amplifier and others; they cost under $40.
4. Videophone KYDOC mostly uses videophones provided by the company “Purple.” They are in videophone kiosks, made available to inmates who sign to communicate during the same hours as regular phones are available to other inmates. (At KSP, they have both a Purple videophone and also one from the company Sorenson.)
These videophones allow both “video to video” calls, which allow a sign language user to call anyone with a videophone and communicate using sign language, and Video Relay Service (“VRS”) calls, which allow sign language user to call a hearing person who uses a regular telephone; a sign language interpreter, connected automatically, relays the communication. For VRS, the inmate signs and the remote interpreter interprets, speaking to the person on the regular telephone. Because signing, with or without an interpreter, takes longer than talking, the Settlement Agreement specifies that institutional rules should allow each call to last up to twice as long as allowed for regular phone calls. 5. TTY A TTY or “TeleTYpewriter” (sometimes called a TDD, Telecommunications Device for the Deaf) is a device has a
-3-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 43 of 47 - Page ID#: 2133
keyboard and display that allows the user to send and receive typed messages over telephone lines. A stand-alone TTY cannot communicate directly with a regular phone; it can communicate only with another TTY. So TTY users can directly call other TTY numbers or they can call a regular phone using a Relay Service. The Relay Service operator will receive the messages on a TTY and relay the messages, by standard phone, to a person who does not have a TTY. The number for Kentucky’s relay service is 711. TTYs are used less than they used to be: most deaf people prefer to use a videophone, so they can sign rather than type to communicate. But every KYDOC facility has a TTY, and some deaf inmates will choose to use them. To work, TTYs need access to an outside phone line. In some facilities, they are placed near the videophone in a cabinet and access is provided without any special request. It is important that access to TTYs be made easy, just as access to other phones is. The ADA Coordinator should test the device and put very clear and explicit instructions with it, so users can avoid problems. Because using a TTY is very slow, the Settlement Agreement specifies that institutional rules should allow each call to last up to three times as long as allowed for regular phone calls 6. Phone volume control Some but not all the KYDOC payphones have volume controls. The phones with volume controls have varied indicators:
There should be at least one phone with a volume control in every group of phones where a hard-of-hearing prisoner might use phones— including in restrictive housing.
7. Phone amplifier For inmates who need more amplification than the built-in volume adjustment can offer, a portable telephone amplifier may be helpful.
-4-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 44 of 47 - Page ID#: 2134
This Harris Portable Telephone Amplifier (cost, approximately $20) is currently being tested at LLCC Its usefulness depends on the particular user’s degree of hearing impairment and hearing aid type. So far, some inmates find it very simple and helpful. Others don’t like it.
8. Captioned telephone
A captioned telephone works like a regular telephone but also displays, as text, every word the person on the other side of the line says. Captioned telephones are useful for people whose hearing impairment interferes with ordinary phone usage, but who speak to communicate. Captioned telephone users can listen to the person they have called, and can also read the written captions. (The captioning service is provided for free pursuant to FCC rules.)
Currently, KSP has installed one captioned telephone, a CapTel 840i. For more information, see http://www.captel.com/captel. It uses a phone line and an internet line. At KSP, it is installed in a locked cabinet: it is available to appropriate inmates during normal phone times, after they request the unit officer to unlock the box.
Because the phone uses an analog microphone, it is not easily compatible with the Securus voice recognition system. So KSP had Securus remove the voice biometrics password; the inmate still uses his pin number to complete a call. Approximate cost for the phone: $75. 9. Pager
For inmates who cannot hear themselves paged when they are on the yard or otherwise away from their cells, a pager may be helpful. KSP and KCIW are using alphanumeric pagers with several pre-programmed messages. Pagers have two parts: the transmitter and the receiver. The models pictured, which are used at KCIW, are made by Long Range Systems, or LRS:
Pagers work better for outdoor areas rather than inside thick walls. The pager above, the LRS TX-7470, has a range of about a mile. Approximate cost: $600 for a transmitter, $120 for a receiver
-5-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 45 of 47 - Page ID#: 2135
10. Assistive listening systems
Assistive listening systems capture sound close to its source via a microphone and transmit that sound directly to people’s earphones or hearing aids. Such systems can be extremely helpful to people who are hard-of-hearing, because they allow the listener to amplify the sound without distortion and without amplifying the ambient noise.
For more information on assistive listening devices and systems, see: • Hearing Loss Association of America, Get in the Hearing Loop, available at http://www.hearingloss.org/sites/default/files/docs/HLAA_ALDS_Brochure_0.pdf; • David G. Myers, We’ve Looped in West Michigan. Could We Loop America?, HEARING LOSS MAGAZINE, September/October 2008, at 18, available at http://www.hearingloss.org/sites/default/files/docs/MeyerSepOct08 AudioLoopHLM.pdf.
For a technical guide to choices available for educational settings in particular (though geared to children rather than adults), see: • American Academy of Audiology, Practice Guidelines: Remote Microphone Hearing
Assistance Technologies for Children and Youth from Birth to 21 Years (updated April 2011) available at http://audiologyweb.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/HAT_Guidelines_Supplement_A.pdf_53996ef775849 7. 54419000.pdf • American Academy of Audiology, Practice Guidelines: Remote Microphone Hearing Assistance Technologies for Children and Youth from Birth to 21 Years, Supplement B: Classroom Audio Distribution Systems—Selection and Verification, July 2011, available at http://audiology-web.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/ 20110926_HAT_GuidelinesSupp_B.pdf_53996ef98259f2.45364934.pdf.
Several systems are in use at KYDOC facilities:
• FM transmitter for televisions or other sound sources
Several KYDOC institutions currently use FM transmitters to transmit sound from dorm or dayroom TVs to FM radios inmates can purchase. At WKCC, they are also using the same kind of device as an assistive listening system for the chaple; it is attached to a sound system and then transmits to the radio (on a different frequency). Approximate cost: $50. See http://www.ccrane.com/transmitter.
• Induction loop system
Induction loop systems work with hearing aids or with specially purchased earphones. For permanent systems, an induction loop wire is installed (for example, around the walls or in the ceiling). For portable systems, the loop is portable and covers less distance—more like 4 or 5 feet in front of the system. Either way, the loop links to a microphone that is used by a speaker. The person talking into the microphone generates a current in the wire, which creates an
-6-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 46 of 47 - Page ID#: 2136
electromagnetic field in the room. Listeners with hearing aids can switch the hearing aids to the “T” (telecoil/telephone) setting; then the hearing aid telecoil picks up the electromagnetic signal. Listeners can then adjust the volume of the signal through the hearing aid. Most new and newish hearing aids have T-coils, including all those fitted by “Hears to You.” Receiving headphones can, however, be used by anyone, and cost very little. (E.g., http://www.harriscomm.com/ovalwindow-induction-loop-receiver-headphone.html.)
LLCC, is testing a portable induction loop system. See http://www.harriscomm.com/ovalwindow-portable-infoloop-induction-loop-system-with-external-clip-mic.html.
• FM transmitters
The FCC has reserved several FM frequencies for use for assistive listening (72-75 MHz and 216 MHz). For more details see https://www.listentech.com/shouldi-use-72-mhz-or-216-mhz/.
This kind of FM system is used by many churches to transmit to the earphones/receivers that are given to attendees. At LLCC, they are trying out a low wattage wireless system, the Peavey Assisted Listening system (72.9 Mhz).
• Personal FM system
Other FM systems, including a “personal FM system,” may use other frequencies. To use a personal FM transmitted system with a receiver, one person wears a microphone; the other puts some earbuds or a headset into the receiver. One such system is currently on order to test at KSR. See http://www.lssproducts.com/product/Nady-Personal-FMSystem/personal-fm-systems.
11. Other devices not yet in use
Finally, some other devices and technical resources I have mentioned, that may prove useful in the future, but will need testing.
• Earphones for parole board
Parole board hearings are done using remote video. For inmates who use sign language to communicate, an in-person interpreter is necessary for effective communication in these circumstances. For an inmate who is hard-of-hearing, the television speaker may be very difficult to hear. Such inmates should be offered earphones, ideally with a long cord and volume control.
-7-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 47 of 47 - Page ID#: 2137
• Other personal FM devices
There are a variety of personal FM transmitters and receivers available. This one may or may not work with a pocket talker – but it’s inexpensive enough that it seems worth trying. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01N6NH2Z2/.

•

Conference microphones

When the VRI laptop is being used, sometimes the microphone quality is insufficient. An external microphone may be helpful. The type of microphone that seems most appropriate is a “conference microphone.” In fact, with a better microphone, if people are careful not to speak at the same time, it’s possible the VRI will even prove adequate for interpretation of a situation in which several people are speaking—for example, a class that includes some, though not a great deal, of class discussion. It would be worthwhile to try this out. One possibility, which I have not tested but offer because it has good consumer ratings, is this:

MXL AC404 USB Conference Microphone, https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001TGTDFM/. Cost: ~ $85.

-8-

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 1 of 22 - Page ID#: 2138
Third Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor (May 31, 2017) Appendix V
Recommended forms: Inmate Pamphlet Memo for Staff Hard-of-Hearing Communications Tips

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 2 of 22 - Page ID#: 2139
Kentucky Department of Corrections
{NAME OF FACILITY} Information for Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing Inmates
last revised Sept. 7, 2016

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 3 of 22 - Page ID#: 2140
I. {FACILITY}’S OBLIGATIONS
{FACILITY} will provide deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates: • Non-discrimination • Effective Communication • Auxiliary Aids and Services
Non-discrimination: {FACILITY} will provide deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates with access to services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations substantially equivalent to those offered to similarly situated non-deaf inmates.
Effective Communication: {FACILITY} will communicate effectively with deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates—ensuring that inmates can receive information from and provide information to {FACILITY} staff.
Auxiliary Aids and Services: When needed for effective communication, {FACILITY} will provide “auxiliary aids and services.” This means devices or services that assist in communication. These may include, but are not limited to:
• Hearing aids • Amplifiers • Video captioning • Visual or other non-auditory alert or alarm systems • Videophone/Video Relay Service • TTY/TDD, including telephone relay services • Written materials • Qualified interpreters, via remote video interpretation or in-person • Computer-aided transcription services • Assistive listening systems
Page 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 4 of 22 - Page ID#: 2141
II. PROCEDURES
For inmates who are deaf or hard-of-hearing, {FACILITY} has numerous devices and processes to help make sure prison staff communication with you is effective and that you receive equal access to prison programs, services, and activities. This brochure is for you to save: it is a guide to all those devices and processes.
For each of the listed devices or processes, if you do not want them, you can tell the ADA Coordinator. If you have any questions now or later, you should contact the ADA Coordinator. The ADA Coordinator is responsible for facilitating effective communication, including arranging for needed Qualified Interpreters.
• {FACILITY} provides notice of the availability of and procedure for requesting auxiliary aids and services through this brochure and through posted notices.
• Medical staff will assess whether an inmate is deaf or hard of hearing at initial intake and during annual assessments or when an inmate identifies himself as deaf, hard-of-hearing, or having difficulty hearing.
• If medical staff determines that an offender is deaf or hard-of-hearing, medical will note that in the inmate’s Electronic Medical Record, and will notify the ADA Coordinator; the ADA Coordinator will note the same thing in the Kentucky Offender Management System (KOMS) record.
• The inmate will be given this brochure and copies of the Request for Communication Assistance, and (if applicable) the Request for Qualified Interpreter Services forms
• The ADA Coordinator will consult with the individual and medical to determine what aids or services are necessary to provide effective communication in particular situations.
• The ADA Coordinator will note the inmate’s status as deaf or hard-ofhearing in the inmate’s electronic file.
• The offender may ask for services at this time or later, by requesting the services from the ADA Coordinator or other staff and/or completing the Request for Communication Assistance or the Request for Qualified Interpreter Services form.
• The offender may waive services. • At any time, the offender may request a service that he previously waived.
Page 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 5 of 22 - Page ID#: 2142
III. AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
To request any auxiliary aid, submit a Request for Communications Assistance to the ADA Coordinator. If you are requesting a hearing aid or amplifier—or a repair or batteries for an existing hearing aid or amplifier—you must also submit a Healthcare Request Form.
When you request a particular auxiliary aid or service, {FACILITY} must give primary consideration to your request, but may meet the need for effective communication by providing some alternative aid or service.
COST: All necessary auxiliary aids and services shall be provided without cost to the offender, except for medical devices that are subject to standard co-payment. {WHICH ARE THESE? I THINK YOU’RE NOT CHARGING FOR ANY. SO CROSS THAT OUT.} Sick-call has the standard $3 co-pay.
The Auxiliary Aids and Services provided when necessary for effective communication (and described in this brochure) include:
A. Hard-of-hearing/Deaf ID Card B. Hard-of-hearing/Deaf Notice cards C. Hearing Aids and Amplifiers D. Qualified Interpreters (remote and in-person) E. Telecommunications Devices:
o Videophone (with or without interpreter relay) o TDD/TTY (with or without interpreter relay) o Volume-assisted telephone F. Video captioning G. Written materials H. Non-auditory alerts I. Assistive listening systems
Page 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 6 of 22 - Page ID#: 2143
A. Hard-of-hearing ID Card
This card will be given to you by Medical, when they determine that you are deaf or hard-of-hearing. Carry it with your inmate ID.
Hard-of-Hearing ID card. If you lose or damage this card request a replacement from Medical. If this is not promptly provided, bring the issue to the attention of the ADA Coordinator.
B. Notice Cards
Unless you sign a waiver, {FACILITY} will alert others to your hearing impairment with a notice by your cell or bed.
Hard-of-Hearing [or Deaf] Inmate
Page 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 7 of 22 - Page ID#: 2144
C. Hearing Aids and Amplifiers
If medical determines that you need a hearing aid, one will be provided. You can request evaluation for a hearing aid by using the standard healthcare request form; you should also alert the ADA coordinator to your request by filling out a {} form.
• If you have a hearing aid already—at prison or at home—you may be allowed to use that.
• If your hearing aid—whether provided by KYDOC or otherwise—needs a repair, you should bring that to the attention of medical staff and they will try to get the repair.
• Hearing aids are complex devices, and several medical visits may be necessary to test your hearing, evaluate the appropriateness of a hearing aid, and fit the hearing aid.
• Assuming there are no complications, it should take under two months for you to get a hearing aid, if one is necessary. If the process is taking longer than that, bring that issue to the attention of the ADA Coordinator.
• There is no co-pay for the hearing aid, but the standard $3 fee applies for your sick-call visit. You will be charged only one $3 fee for the related visits.
• Hearing aid batteries typically last two to three weeks. They are free to you, and available {HOW (varies by facility)}
While you are waiting for a hearing aid, if medical has determined that you are hard-of-hearing, they will give you a personal amplifier. This device is sometimes called a “pocket talker.”

Amplifier

Page 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 8 of 22 - Page ID#: 2145
D. Qualified Interpreters
If you use sign language to communicate, you can request sign language interpretation by filling out a Request for a Qualified Interpreter Form, available from the ADA Coordinator {or how else?}. A qualified interpreter is “a person who is able to interpret effectively, accurately, and impartially, both receptively and expressively, with an individual Deaf Inmate using any necessary specialized vocabulary.”
If you use sign language to communicate, {FACILITY} will provide an interpreter (unless you sign a waiver) for disciplinary meetings and hearings, classification meetings and hearings, grievance meetings and hearings, and emergency health care. You need to request an interpreter each other time you want one, using the Request for a Qualified Interpreter Form. If possible, make requests 48 hours in advance. The form will then need to be submitted to the ADA Coordinator. The ADA Coordinator will schedule the qualified interpreter.
Qualified interpreters are available at {FACILITY} using a Video Remote Interpreting laptop, or—if necessary—in-person, for:
• Initial intake/classification • Auxiliary aid/service assessment and other accommodation assistance • On-site medical, mental health and dental evaluations/care/appointments • Classification and transfer hearings and related meetings • Grievance hearings • Adjustment committee and court call • All meetings related to discipline • Parole hearings • Rehabilitative and educational programming, including clubs • Transitional programs • Conversations with post-release supervisors • PREA reporting and/or follow-up with any PREA concerns • Inmate work and education programs • Other significant communications, on request • Interpreter services may be available if needed and requested for religious
programming.
Page 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 9 of 22 - Page ID#: 2146
Video Remote Interpretation (VRI) allows a hearing person and a Deaf person who signs, who are next to each other, to communicate with each other. The hearing person speaks into a laptop microphone and an interpreter on the other end translates the speech into sign language, which the Deaf person can see on the laptop screen. The Deaf person signs into the laptop camera, and the interpreter on the other end translates the sign language into English, which the hearing person can hear. {FACILITY} has {one? two?} VRI laptops; {WHERE?}.
VRI using a laptop To request a Video Remote Interpreter, fill out the Request for a Qualified Interpreter Form, available from the ADA Coordinator. Video interpretation may not accomplish the goal of effective communication in some situations—for example, when there are many people communicating (as in a class or a parole hearing), or there is a need to move around (for example, during some physical medical exams). In those situations, an in-person interpreter may be necessary. When necessary for effective communication, {FACILITY} will provide an inperson qualified interpreter. If you want an in-person qualified interpreter, your request should explain why VRI will probably not be effective and if possible you should make the request several days before you need the interpreter.
Page 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 10 of 22 - Page ID#: 2147
At some point, {FACILITY} may arrange with an in-person qualified interpreter to be here on a regular basis (for example, for a weekly class). If this happens, and you use sign language to communicate, the ADA Coordinator will notify you about the schedule, so that you can request needed other interpretation services more conveniently.
E. Telephone Communications
{FACILITY} has several types of devices available for deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates to have equal access to telephone communications.
• Videophone (with or without interpreter relay) • TDD/TTY (with or without interpreter relay) • Volume-assisted telephone
Videophone
Videophone “kiosk” • What is a Videophone? KYDOC uses ADA prison videophones provided by
the company “Purple.” They are locked-down videophone kiosks, where you can make videophone calls during the same periods as regular phones are available.
Page 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 11 of 22 - Page ID#: 2148
• What types of calls can you make? {FACILITY’S}’s videophone allows two kinds of calls:  “Point to point” or “video to video” calls allow a deaf sign language user to call anyone with a videophone, and communicate using sign language.  Video Relay Service (“VRS”) calls allow a deaf inmate who uses sign language to call a hearing person who uses a regular telephone; sign language interpreters are connected automatically. The inmate signs and the remote interpreter then interprets, and speaks to the person on the regular telephone.  For either point-to-point or video relay calls simply key in a 10-digit number and “dial.”
• Who qualifies for this service? Any KYDOC deaf inmate who uses sign language to communicate qualifies for this free, ADA-public-use video and video relay service, so the inmate can call anyone using a Purple ADA prison videophone. Purple Video Interpreters will terminate calls if inmates who do not use sign language try to use the ADA videophone.
• Prison restrictions. Videophones implement standard prison restrictions:  No in-bound calls  No 3-way calls  No call history or contact list  Ability to include call timer  911 button disabled  Announcement to called party  HIPAA privacy  No video mail
• Rules for inmate use  Purple VRS and point to point calls are recorded and monitored by KYDOC staff.  Except if you have a specific phone restriction, deaf inmates are allowed to use the videophone during the same periods of time that non-deaf inmates can use the regular phone.
Page 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 12 of 22 - Page ID#: 2149
 Videophones are provided as a part of Federal government program to provide sign language interpreters to relay communication between deaf person and a hearing person at no cost.
 Each call can last up to twice as long as {FACILITY} allows for regular phone calls.
 Because group calls are not allowed, you may not talk (or sign) to another inmate while you are using the videophone.
• How to use the videophone.  Just turn on the videophone, and start making calls. There is no need to turn it off. If it is off, power it back on.  Dial the telephone number you want to call to, by touching the telephone number on dial pad. Then, click on green “call” button.  Choose your language preferences—click on English or Spanish before you dial your telephone number. Interpreters in either language are available to relay communication in English or Spanish.  Callers who want other end user to hear the caller in voice can use Voice Carry Over (VCO) by simply clicking on VCO button.  Announce Relay will tell the interpreter to let the other end-user know that this is a Video Relay Service (VRS) call. Click on Announce Relay button if this is a VRS call.  After you are finished with your call, click on red button to “hang up”.
TTY/TTD
The second type of telecommunications device available at {FACILITY} for deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates is a TTY or TTD.
Page 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 13 of 22 - Page ID#: 2150
• What is a TTY? A TTY (Teletypewriter) (sometimes called a TTD) is a device that allows users to send typed messages across a phone line. Many people who are deaf or hard of hearing use TTYs to call other individuals. The TTY has a keyboard and display that lets the user send and receive typed messages over telephone lines.
• What types of calls can you make? A stand-alone TTY cannot communicate directly with a regular phone; it can communicate only with another TTY. So TTY users can directly call other TTY numbers or they can call a regular phone using a Relay Service. The Relay Service operator will receive the messages on a TTY and relay the messages, by standard phone, to a person who does not have a TTY.
• Who qualifies for this service? Any KYDOC deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate who can use the TTY. And a non-deaf inmate can, too, if he needs to call someone who uses a TTY.
• Prison restrictions. TTYs conform to standard prison restrictions:  No in-bound calls  No 3-way calls  No call history or contact list
• Rules  Except if you have a specific phone restriction, deaf inmates are allowed to use the videophone during the same periods of time that non-deaf inmates can use the regular phone.  Each call can last up to three times as long as {FACILITY} allows for regular phone calls.
• How to use the TTY 1. Request use of the TTY {How? From who? How long in advance?} 2. The TTY must be connected to a phone line with access to outside the prison. At {FACILITY}, {WHAT PHONE LINE ARE THEY SUPPOSED TO USE?, IN WHAT OFFICE} 3. Once you’re in the right place, plug the TTY in and push the “ON” switch.
Page 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 14 of 22 - Page ID#: 2151
4. Place the telephone receiver on the TTY's rubber receptacles. Make sure that the receiver is firmly in place and that the telephone's receiver cord is on the LEFT side of the TTY.
5. Check the telephone indicator light; if it is lit, you have the line. 6. If you are making a direct TTY call:
• Dial the number of the receiving TTY, and watch the telephone light; if it is flashing slowly, this indicates that the device on the other end is ringing.
• When the person you are calling answers, you will see a phrase appear on the screen such as: "Hello, this is Richard GA." The "GA" stands for Go Ahead -- Don't forget to use "GA" whenever you have finished what you are saying, so that the other person will know it is his/her turn. Note: The person who receives the call is always the one who starts typing first.
• When you wish the call to end and you wish to advise the other person, type GA or SK ("Stop keying"). The person will respond by "SK" if he/she agrees. Be courteous - wait until the other person indicates "SK" before hanging up.
7. If you are making a relay call (that is, using the TTY to call a regular phone used by a hearing person), you will use the Kentucky Relay program: • Dial 711. • A Communication Assistant (CA) will answer by identifying Kentucky Relay and providing his/her CA number and gender. The CA will then type “NUMBER TO CALL PLS Q GA.” • Type the area code and telephone number you want to call and any additional instructions. • Once the call is connected, the CA will ask the person you are calling if he/she is familiar with Relay. If the person is not, the CA will explain how Relay works before the conversation begins. • The CA will type everything said by the other party, word for word, along with any background noises. • When you see GA, it is your turn to respond. • Type your response, and then “GA” when you are ready for a response.
Page 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 15 of 22 - Page ID#: 2152
• The conversation will proceed in this manner until the call is complete. When you have completed the conversation, type “GA to SK” and the CA will close your call.
• Always switch the TTY "OFF" as soon as you have finished the call.
Phone volume control
Some but not all the payphones at {FACILITY} have volume controls. If you need to turn up the volume in order to use a phone, and none of the phones in your housing area have a volume control, you can submit a Request for Communications Assistance form to request that a volume control be added to at least one phone. The phones with volume controls have varied indicators:
Page 13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 16 of 22 - Page ID#: 2153
Payphone Volume Controls
F. Video captioning
Most videos shown at {FACILITY}, and all television programs, can have captioning turned on. This includes educational and entertainment movies, orientation videos, religious programming DVDs, etc. You can request that a video or movie display captions, if they are available, by asking {FILL THIS IN}. If you are taking a class, ask the teacher if you want any class videos to display captioning. In addition, the commissary sells personal TVs that can show captioning. If you need assistance getting captioning turned on, ask the ADA Coordinator.
G. Written materials
If you are unable to understand something that a staff member tells you verbally, you can ask the staff to write it down. If you are given written materials that you have questions about, and you communicate using sign language, you can ask for a meeting with the appropriate staff member to be interpreted using the VRI or, if needed, an in-person sign language interpreter.
Page 14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 17 of 22 - Page ID#: 2154

H. Non-auditory alerts
{FACILITY} has several devices available for inmates unable to hear announcements. These include:

Bed Shaker

• Strobe-light cells. In these
cells, fire alarms trigger a
very bright flashing light.

• Bed shakers/flashing light
alerts. This device sits under a bed and vibrates/buzzes when the housing unit’s fire alarm or other announcements go off. It can be set to alert for count and chow.

• At your own expense, you can buy a vibrating alarm clock or other
adaptive equipment you may find useful, via the commissary or by making a request to the ADA coordinator. In addition, staff are trained to post written versions of announcements made over the loudspeaker.

I. Assistive Listening Systems

If you are hard of hearing and have trouble hearing in some other situation, it may be possible to provide you an assistive listening system. For example, in church, programming, or a class, the teacher or other students could use a wireless microphone that sends the signal to an earbud that you wear. If you think a system like this would help you hear in a particular situation, submit a Request for Communications Assistance form to the ADA Coordinator.

Page 15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 18 of 22 - Page ID#: 2155
IV. FOR MORE INFORMATION
{Facility’s} obligations for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates are controlled by the Americans with Disabilities Act and by a settlement entered in the federal district court in a lawsuit. The Settlement Agreement and a summary of it are available in the law library. If you have a problem related to your hearing, discuss it with the ADA Coordinator. If necessary, you can file a grievance. The court monitor appointed by the federal court to track KYDOC’s compliance with the Agreement will receive a summary of the grievance and, if you give your permission, the grievance itself and the KYDOC response to it.
Page 16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 19 of 22 - Page ID#: 2156
Communications assistance for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates (RECOMMENDED MEMO FOR STAFF)
{ADD ORDINARY MEMO HEADING HERE}
This memo tells you about the various devices available to provide communications assistance to deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. You may find it useful to also review the Informational Pamphlet for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates, which is attached; it includes pictures of many of the devices described here. Inmates can use the Request for Communications Assistance form and the Request for Qualified Interpreter Services form to seek access to the items described here.
1) ID and notice cards. Unless the inmate has signed a waiver, {FACILITY} lists hearing impairments on inmate ID card and on a notice outside their cells. These notices inform you that the inmate has a hearing impairment, so that you can take steps to make your communication with the inmate effective.
2) Hearing aids and amplifiers. Hearing aids and amplifiers are available if medical staff finds that they are appropriate. If an inmate tells you that he needs a hearing aid or amplifier, notify the ADA Coordinator and tell the inmate to submit a Healthcare Request form and a Request for Communications Assistance form. For batteries {DESCRIBE HERE HOW INMATES ARE SUPPOSED TO GET BATTERIES}
3) Video captioning. Turn on TV/movie captioning at an inmate’s request.
4) Communications strategies. When you are speaking with an inmate with a hearing impairment, use the best practices from the attached “tip card.” Write simple things down. If these strategies are not working for an inmate who signs to communicate, and the communication is important, you should use Video Remote Interpreting (VRI); see item 7.
5) Non-auditory alerts This facility has several devices for inmates unable to hear announcements. a. Strobe-light cells. In these cells, fire alarms automatically trigger a very bright flashing light. You don’t need to do anything for this. b. Bed shakers/flashing light alerts. This device sits under a bed pillow and vibrates/buzzes automatically when the housing unit’s fire alarm goes off. There is also what looks like a light switch installed in the control center of the dorm; when count or chow is announced, the on-duty officer is assigned to flip that switch, to notify the inmate of count/chow. This should be logged {HOW?}
6) Telecommunications devices. a. For inmates who communicate via sign language, {Facility} has a videophone, which also has access to Video Relay Service (VRS); it can be used to talk to someone who is also using a videophone, or to someone who is using a regular telephone. • The videophone is {WHERE}.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 20 of 22 - Page ID#: 2157
• It is available during the same hours non-Deaf inmates have access to the regular phone: {WHAT ARE THOSE HOURS?} {E.g.: during the day, nights until 11:30 pm, weekends, and holidays.}
• If inmates wish to use the videophone, with or without VRS, they can simply request access when they need it. No scheduling in advance should be required. They are allowed 30 minutes per call.
b. {FACILITY} owns {one? two} TTY (TeleTYpewriter) machine(s). • {WHERE ARE THEY? WHAT PHONE ARE THEY SUPPOSED TO BE HOOKED UP TO?} TTYs must be logged out and logged back in after use. • Inmates are allowed 45 minutes per TTY call. • Training for inmates is available if they don’t know how to use the TTY: they should ask the ADA Coordinator.
7) Qualified Interpreter Services. For deaf inmates who communicate using sign language, qualified interpreter services are provided for significant communications, either using Video Remote Interpretation (VRI) or an in-person qualified interpreter.
For inmates who need it, interpretation is provided for: • Auxiliary aid/service assessment and other accommodation assistance • On-site medical, mental health and dental evaluations/care/appointments • Classification and transfer hearings and related meetings • Grievance hearings • Adjustment committee and court call • All meetings related to discipline • Parole hearings • Rehabilitative and educational classes and clubs • Transitional programs • Conversations with post-release supervisors • Other significant communications, on request
Inmates who use sign language to communicate are not required to specially request interpretation for auxiliary aid/service assessment, emergency health care on-site, classification and transfer hearings and related meetings, grievance meetings and hearings, disciplinary hearings and all related processes, parole meetings and hearings. In those situations, VRI should be used for these inmates without their special request, unless the inmate has requested and the ADA Coordinator has approved in-person interpretation. If you are arranging one of those events for an inmate who uses sign language, you need to obtain the VRI.
Inmates must have their hands unrestrained in order to communicate via sign language. If an inmate’s status requires that his hands be cuffed or otherwise restrained, alternative methods are available during the interpreted communication. Consult with the ADA Coordinator.
a. {FACILTY} has {one? two? } VRI laptops; {List here where they are}.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 21 of 22 - Page ID#: 2158
• Use of the laptops should be scheduled 48 hours in advance if possible, but VRI laptops can be used if available even if not scheduled in advance.{HOW?}
• Log out the laptop each time you use it, and log it back in after use. • After a VRI laptop has been used, have the inmate fill out the bottom of the
Request for Qualified Interpreter Services form; return that form to the ADA Coordinator. b. Inmates can request an in-person qualified interpreter by filling out the top of the Request for Qualified Interpreter Services form; that form should be sent to the ADA Coordinator at least 48 hours prior to the scheduled event if possible. c. The inmate has the right to waive interpreter services. If an inmate waives his right to an interpreter, a waiver form shall be completed, signed, and placed into KOMS for documentation. You must ensure that the inmate understands what he is waiving.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-5 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 22 of 22 - Page ID#: 2159
Tips for Communicating with Inmates Who are Hard-of-Hearing
Simple language, normal speech • Speak at a normal pace, enunciating clearly; speak clearly and loudly, but do not shout or exaggerate mouth movements. • Use simple, direct words.
Visual cues • Use gestures and facial expressions to reinforce what you are saying. • Use visual aids when possible, such as pointing to printed information on a document.
Environmental adjustment • Find a quiet, well-lit place to talk; avoid backlighting. • Avoid fans, washing machines, other ambient noise. • Face the inmate directly; don’t move your head too much. • Don’t chew gum.
Check on understanding • Only about 1/3 of spoken words can be understood by speech (lip) reading. • Check on understanding: ask the hard-of-hearing person to repeat back to you, so you can be sure he or she understood. Be conscious of “bluffing”—when the person you are speaking to tries not to let on that he or she doesn’t understand. • For anything but the most simple communication, written notes can be a problem. Keep in mind that many people—especially those who use sign language—may lack good English reading and writing skills.
Special considerations because this is a prison • Prisons are noisy: To minimize noise from other inmates, fans, televisions, etc., you may want to step into an office or another quieter area. • Prisons require situational awareness. To effectively communicate with deaf or hard-ofhearing inmates, an officer must face them directly and not move his or her head too much. This may make it difficult to monitor the surroundings. So you may want to have the conversation in a place that is out of the way, like a corner or an office, where situational awareness is easier. • Restrictive Housing Units are especially challenging locations for effective communication, particularly if the cells have solid doors, because when you talk to an inmate “through the crack” in the door important visual cues are absent. Communications strategies include: o Pull the inmate out of cell. o Talk through the meal slot. o If the inmate can read, pass written notes through the door (but remember low literacy).

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 1 of 20 - Page ID#: 2160
Third Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor (May 31, 2017) Appendix VI
April 2017 quarterly reporting request

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 2 of 20 - Page ID#: 2161
Adams v. KDOC, Semi-Annual Compliance Reporting (2017-04)
April 2017. I am beginning, this quarter, to ask for substantially more information, including information about all inmates in the process of getting audiology services (e.g., hearing aids). Here's what I am doing: 1) In April and October, I will do full information requests, like this one--although future requests will only cover the most recent six months. 2) In January and July, I will do an abbreviated information request. This quarter, I am circulating this request on April 12, and asking for information by COB Friday April 28, 2017. Thank you.
Your Identifying Information
Your Name *
Your Institution *
Your Email *
Your Phone Number *
Are you the current ADA Coordinator? If not, please list the name, phone number, and email of the current ADA Coordinator. *
Is the ADA Coordinator information on this page correct? http://corrections.ky.gov/depts/AI/Pages/ADA.aspx
-1-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 3 of 20 - Page ID#: 2162
If not, please certify to me that you are arranging for its correction by the beginning of next month.
Is the webpage correct? * Yes No, but I am arranging for its correction by the beginning of next month.
Information about Deaf Inmates
Please note: previous reports have sometimes failed to include hard-of-hearing inmates. Under the agreement, "Deaf" means unable to hear well enough to rely on hearing as a means of processing information. It includes deaf, hard of hearing, or hearing impaired. If your institution does not currently have any Deaf inmates - USING THIS DEFINITION and has not had any Deaf inmates this past quarter (that is, since Jan. 1, 2017), you will find that most of the rest of this form is inapplicable. But please still go through it, because a few questions do apply.
"No" means "My institution does not have any current Deaf (including hard-ofhearing) inmates, and has not had any since Jan. 1, 2017.
Any deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates over the last quarter? * Yes No
If you have had any Deaf inmates since January 1, 2017, (using that same definition, so including hard-of-hearing), please upload an excel chart listing each inmate and including the following information. 1. Name 2. DOC # 3. Housing assignment 4. Date of arrival at this institution. 5. Immediate prior institution 6. Degree of hearing impairment 7. All auxiliary aids/services (hearing aids, various devices, interpreters, TDDs,
videophone, non-auditory alert system in cell, etc.) or accommodations s/he has requested. 8. All auxiliary aids/services or accommodations s/he has used. 9. The reasons and dates for any denials of auxiliary aids/services. 10. Preferred method of communication (e.g., sign, lip reading, writing, can hear with hearing aid, amplifier)
-2-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 4 of 20 - Page ID#: 2163
11. Limited English proficiency, if applicable, and preferred language 12. Literacy level and how you know 13. Date of last hearing assessment 14. Date of last auxiliary aids/services assessment 15. Date of last classification review 16. Whether last classification review was delayed in order to provide effective
communication 17. Date of last parole hearing. 18. Date of next parole hearing. 19. Whether s/he has been charged with any disciplinary infractions or had any
disciplinary hearings since Jan. 2016 (note the long time frame). 20. Whether s/he has spent any time in restrictive housing since Jan. 2016 21. Whether s/he has been a witness in a disciplinary hearing since Jan. 2016 22. Any communications assistance offered or provided at any of the items just listed
(hearing assessment, auxiliary aids/services assessment, classification review, parole hearing, disciplinary process) 23. Whether s/he has signed a waiver described in III.C.2 or III.D.4 of the Agreement 24. Whether s/he has participated or sought to participate in any programming— educational, rehabilitative, substance abuse, religious, transitional, etc.—since Jan. 2016; which programs; and with what result/accommodations. 25. Whether s/he has participated or sought to participate in any work assignment since Jan. 2016, which work assignments; and with what result/accommodations 26. Whether s/he has received any on-site medical care since Jan. 2016, and with what accommodations. 27. Whether s/he has received any off-site medical care since Jan. 2016, and with what accommodations. 28. For any inmate who uses sign language to communicate, whether s/he has been subject to hand-restraints since Jan. 2016, and the date and reason. 29. Whether s/he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016.
Upload list of deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates with the above information here. Choose File
-3-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 5 of 20 - Page ID#: 2164
Grievances and Discipline
In the most recent quarter, did any Deaf Inmate file any grievance? (reminder: "Deaf" includes hard-of-hearing inmates.) Please note: I am asking about ALL grievances by Deaf inmates, regardless of the topic. *
Yes No If yes, number of grievances:
If yes, please upload a summary that describes, for each grievance: • the name of the inmate • the datethe issue raised • how your institution ensured effective communication during the grievance process
Upload summary of grievances here. Choose File No file chosen
For any grievances that addressed hearing or hearing accommodation issues, please provide full documentation.
Upload File(s)
Since January 1, 2016 (**note the longer time frame of this question**), were there any disciplinary proceedings involving an inmate who signs to communicate? (This includes any such inmate who was at your institution but is no longer.) *
Yes No If yes, please upload full documentation.
Upload File(s)
Since January 1, 2016 (**note the longer time frame of this question**), were there any disciplinary proceedings involving a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate's failure to obey an order (or to stand for count) or other potential communications difficulty? *
Yes No If yes, please upload full documentation.
Upload File(s)
-4-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 6 of 20 - Page ID#: 2165
Medical Processes
Are all inmates who arrive at your institution receiving a hearing screening? Please describe the screening, including when it is done, who does it, and whether the inmate is given a form to fill out or asked questions. *
Please upload the hearing questionnaire. * Choose File No file chosen
Please upload the health systems screening form, including any question about hearing.* Choose File No file chosen
Are inmates who receive a routine physical (annually or every two or three years) receiving a hearing screening? If yes, please describe it, including who performs it and whether the inmate is given a form to fill out or asked questions. *
Audiology Progress Chart
For each Deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate in your institution during the most recent quarter, please provide the following medical/audiology information. Ideally, this would be in an excel chart, but if you find another format easier, that's fine too. 1. Date of initial hearing screening. 2. Date of most recent hearing screening. 3. Results of most recent hearing screening. 4. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC. 5. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC. 6. Hearing aid status: List which one applies:
(a) Has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) In process of obtaining hearing aid(s) (c) In process of determining whether hearing aid(s) are needed (d) No hearing aid is needed 7. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing aid issue was finally addressed (by
-5-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 7 of 20 - Page ID#: 2166
providing a hearing aid or determining that no hearing aid is needed): (a) Date (b) Description of encounter (c) Outcome of encounter
8. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid is needed), please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid. 9. For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.) Upload file here. Choose File No file chosen When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Please describe. *
Telecommunications
Telephones
Please list phone locations available for inmates to use ordinary (Securus) telephones. *
For each such location, is there at least one phone with a volume adjustment? * Yes No
If not, which locations are lacking any phone with a volume adjustment?
-6-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 8 of 20 - Page ID#: 2167
Videophones
How many (kiosk or other non-laptop) videophones at your institution? * Where are they located?
Are videophones available during the same hours as phones? * Yes No
How many days has each one been inoperative during the last quarter? * Has any inmate requested access to the videophones since Jan. 1, 2016 (**note longer time frame**) and been denied? *
Yes No If so, please explain the circumstances, including the inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.
TTYs
How many TTY machines does your institution have? * Where are they kept? *
-7-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 9 of 20 - Page ID#: 2168
How does an inmate get access?
Are TTYs available during the same hours as phones? * Yes No
Please describe the available hours for both phones and TTYs.
Are there printed instructions kept with the TTYs? * Yes No
Please upload instructions for the use of the TTY. Choose File No file chosen
Has any inmate requested TTY access since Jan. 1, 2016 (**note longer time frame**) and been denied? *
Yes No If so, please explain the circumstances, including the inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.
Additional Time for Telephonic Communication:
The Settlement Agreement states (IX.C), “The KDOC will implement a policy that allows Deaf Inmates at least twice as many minutes to complete a Videophone call, and at least three times as many minutes to complete a TTY call, as the number of minutes afforded to other non-Deaf Inmates to make calls using traditional telecommunication devices such as telephones. In the event the KDOC determines this usage arrangement results
-8-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 10 of 20 - Page ID#: 2169
in less than equitable access to telephones and Videophones for non-Deaf Inmates and Deaf Inmates, after considering the needs and abilities of Deaf and non-Deaf Inmates, the KDOC may adjust the ratio of time provided for Videophone calls and TTY calls. The KDOC will document this determination, including the evidence and reasons in support thereof. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made, and will explain the reasoning in support of such determination.” How much time are non-Deaf inmates allowed to use for phone calls? *
Time per call, and per day or week
How much time are Deaf inmates allowed to use for Videophone calls? * Should be 2x the time allow
Time per call, and per day or week
How much time are Deaf inmates allowed to use for TTY calls? * Should be 3x the time allow
Time per call, and per day or week
Since January 1, 2017, have you made any determination that the usage arrangements are inequitable? *
Yes No If you have made such a determination, please provide documentation of the reasoning. Choose File No file chosen
Devices to assist with effective communication
VRI Laptops
How many VRI laptops do you have? *
Where are they kept? *
-9-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 11 of 20 - Page ID#: 2170
Please provide VRI log showing use for each one since January 1, 2016. (**note the longer time frame for this question**)
Choose File No file chosen Has any inmate requested VRI services and been denied since January 1, 2016? (**note the longer time frame for this question**) *
Yes No If so, please explain the circumstances, including identifying the inmate, the date, and the reason for the denial.
Can a VRI be used in restrictive housing? * Yes No
How?
Can a VRI be used in the education area? * Yes No
If no, why not?
Does the VRI laptop bag include instructions? * Yes No
-10-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 12 of 20 - Page ID#: 2171
Does the VRI laptop bag include a cord splitter? * Yes No
Does the VRI laptop bag include a long computer cord? * Yes No
Does the VRI laptop bag include anything else? *
Have you had occasion to use your VRI laptop as a videophone (or for video relay services/VRS)? *
Yes No If so, describe the circumstances. If not, please explain if this option is available to you, and how you have tested it. *
Has training on VRI use been provided to staff? * Yes No
Please explain to whom, when, and how the training has been provided.
-11-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 13 of 20 - Page ID#: 2172
Televisions
Are all your institution's shared-space TVs capable of turning captioning on? * Does your institution use radio or another method to send shared-space TV sound to inmates' earphones? *
Yes No If yes, please describe the method.
How do you deal with captioning for recreational movies? *
Please list all orientation videos. (e.g., institutional orientation, PREA, etc.) *
Which ones are captioned? *
Are the captions displaying when the videos are played for inmates during orientation? * Yes No
How did you check on whether the captions are displaying? *
-12-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 14 of 20 - Page ID#: 2173
Do you have earphones for the video system used for parole hearings? * Yes No
If you have such earphones, what kind of earphones are they? If you do not, is there a way to plug in earphones to the parole video system? *
Non-auditory Alerts
The Settlement Agreement states (VIII.B.3; VIII.C), "The KDOC will promptly advise the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH of all non-auditory alert systems that the KDOC is considering, and will consult with the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH in determining whether such devices are acceptable for the stated purpose." Please describe all current non-auditory alert systems or devices. This includes, e.g., bed shakers, strobelights, and pagers. For each, please include:
manufacturer model link to website if available how many you have where they are in use who has used them Also explain if you have any that are not in use.
Use the text box below or upload a document.
Upload File(s)
Upload information about non-auditory alert systems or devices here if not described in the text box above.
A. Over the last quarter, have you considered any new non-auditory alert systems? (If no, skip questions B, C, and D.) *
Yes No
-13-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 15 of 20 - Page ID#: 2174
For Questions B-D, use the text boxes below or upload a document. B. What systems have been under consideration?
C. Did you consult with the Settlement Monitor and KCDHH to determine whether the devices were acceptable? How and when?
D. Please provide full information on any devices under consideration, including who and what they are for.
Choose File No file chosen
Upload information about new non-auditory alert systems under consideration here if not described in the text boxes above.
Other Devices
Please list all other devices or systems currently in use to assist with effective communication with Deaf (including hard-of- hearing) inmates. E.g.: phone amplifier, captioned telephone, induction loop system, radio transmission, speech-to-text system, etc. For each such device, please include:
manufacturer model approximate cost link to website if available how many you have where they are in use who has used them. Also explain if you have any that are not in use. If there was any difficulty related to use that needed to be solved, please explain that, too.
-14-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 16 of 20 - Page ID#: 2175
Use the text box below or upload a document.
Upload File(s)
Upload information about other devices or systems in use here if not described in the text box above.
The Settlement Agreement states (XII), "Where devices such as vibrating clocks and inline amplifiers are not deemed medically necessary, the KDOC agrees to consider on a case by case basis whether it will allow a particular Deaf Inmate the opportunity to purchase these devices at his or her own expense. The KDOC’s decision in this regard will consider, among other issues, whether these devices pose a security risk. The KDOC will have the discretion to make the determination whether any of these devices, and the type of device, is permissible. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination."
A. Since January 1, 2017, have you made any determinations allowing or disallowing devices? *
Yes No B. If you have considered a device - whether you granted or refused permission - please upload documentation of: (1) the device(s); (2) the reasoning; (3) the names of affected inmates; and (4) when you notified the Settlement Monitor of your determination(s).
Upload File(s)
In-person Interpretation
Do you have an arrangement for in-person qualified interpretation services? * Yes No
If yes, with who?
-15-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 17 of 20 - Page ID#: 2176
Please describe each time an in-person interpreter has been used since January 1, 2016 (**note long time frame**), including the name of the inmate, the date, and the occasion.
Has any inmate requested an in-person interpreter and been denied? * Yes No
If yes, please describe each denial, including the inmate who made the request, what the request was for, and why the request was denied.
Training and Information
Is there a KOMS alert noted for Deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates at your institution? * Yes No
Is the KOMS alert present for each Deaf and hard-of-hearing inmate? (Please check before you answer). If it's not available, note why.
If yes, please upload a screenshot. Choose File No file chosen
What training is being provided to your institution's employees and/or contractors relating to Deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates? *
Who (if anyone) is tracking training completion? *
-16-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 18 of 20 - Page ID#: 2177
What categories of staff are receiving the training? (New, existing, custody, program, medical/mental health, etc.) *
If any such training is not the KDOC computer-based training, please provide any written materials/slides and outlines of any orally-presented training.
Upload File(s) Does your institution's inmate handbook refer to the ADA, the settlement, the ADA coordinator, etc.? *
Yes No Please upload any page of the institution's inmate handbook that includes reference to the ADA, the settlement, the ADA coordinator, etc.
Upload File(s)
Please upload any form or document given inmates relating to hearing issues/accommodations:
Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services Form (III.C.3) Request for Deaf Inmate ID Card Form (III.D.4) Medical request form (with space to request Auxiliary Aids and Services) (VI.C.3) Request for interpretive services Brochure relating to available accommodations Other
Upload File(s)
Please upload any institutional policies and procedures (or memos explaining current practices) relating to deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates, including about:
Telephone, TTY, or videophone use Hearing aids Interpretive services Other
Upload File(s)
-17-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 19 of 20 - Page ID#: 2178
Have any changes been made since January 2016 (**note the longer time frame of this question**) in any of the above documents or policies? *
Yes No If yes, what changes have been made?
Are the settlement summary, settlement, and brochure all in the inmate law library? * Yes No
When did you last check to make sure they are really there? *
Direct threat reporting under the Agreement
The Settlement Agreement states (II.A), "The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain activities present a Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates and therefore may not be able to provide such Deaf Inmates full and equal enjoyment of some of its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination."
(reminder: "Deaf" includes hard-of-hearing inmates.)
Over the past quarter, have you at any point determined that any activities present a Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf inmates and were therefore unable to provide those inmates full and equal enjoyment of any facility services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations? *
Yes No If so, please upload documentation of: (1) the service, privilege, facility, advantage or accommodation; (2) the risk presented; (3) a list of the inmate(s) affected; and (4) when you notified the Settlement Monitor of your determination(s).
Upload File(s)
-18-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-6 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 20 of 20 - Page ID#: 2179
The Settlement Agreement states (VI.F), "The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain work assignments present a Direct Threat of injury or death to a Deaf Inmate or others and may therefore choose not to provide the Deaf Inmate a substantially equal opportunity to those work assignments. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination." (reminder: "Deaf" includes hard-of- hearing inmates.) Since January 1, 2017, have you at any point determined that a work assignment presented a Direct Threat of injury or death to a Deaf inmate or others and therefore chosen not to provide the Deaf inmate a substantially equal opportunity to that work assignment? *
Yes No If so, please upload documentation of: (1) the work assignment(s); (2) the risk(s) presented; (3) the names of inmate(s) affected; and, (4) when you notified the Settlement Monitor of your determination(s).
Upload File(s) Is there anything else you'd like to let me know?
Thanks very much for your continued work on complying with the Settlement Agreement.
-19-

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 20 of 47 - Page ID#: 2110
&YIJCJU#$POTPMJEBUFE3FDPNNFOEBUJPOT

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 21 of 47 - Page ID#: 2111
Adams & Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky.)
Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor
CONSOLIDATED RECOMMENDATIONS
AS OF APRIL 19, 2017
I present, the recommendations I have made in three groups: First, those from April 2016; second, those from December 2016; third, those from April 2017. The numbering is continuous from one group to the next.
Group 1 (April 21, 2016)
Note: These are edited from their original wording; they are phrased more generally, in order eliminate the references to KSR.
I. IDENTIFICATION OF INMATES COVERED BY THE AGREEMENT
Recommendation 1: Each facility should identify all inmates who meet the Agreement’s definition of “Deaf.” This is necessary both in order to report names to me and to ensure that appropriate services are provided to hard-of-hearing inmates. (Settlement Agreement I.3; III.A; III.B; XV.B.1.d)
Recommendation 2: Include additional questions in the screening questionnaire, along the lines of:
• Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? • Have you ever been diagnosed with hearing loss? • Have you ever used a hearing aid that you no longer use? (If yes, Why don’t you use
it anymore?) A “yes” answer to any of the these three questions should be followed up by a provider visit, unless the inmate explains that he no longer uses the hearing aid because his hearing has improved so that it is no longer necessary.
• If you currently have a hearing aid, is it working ok? A “no” answer to this question should be followed up by a provider visit.
• Note to tester: If the inmate seems unable to understand these questions due to a hearing impairment, provider follow-up is indicated.
(Settlement Agreement I.3; III.A; III.B)
Recommendation 3: Staff administering the questionnaire should be alert to (and trained on) the possibility of low literacy, and should ask questions orally when appropriate. Among illiterate inmates, a hearing impairment sufficient to undermine their ability to answer these questions ought to itself trigger referral to the appropriate provider. (Settlement Agreement I.5; III.A; III.B)
Recommendation 4: Further assessment of the inmate should include not just the medical decision
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 1 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 22 of 47 - Page ID#: 2112
whether to send the inmate to an audiologist, but a separate, explicit, charted and electronicallytracked decision whether he is deaf or hard-of-hearing. (Settlement Agreement III.B; III.D [identification cards]; III.C [auxiliary aids and services assessment]; XV.B [reporting])
Recommendation 5: The KDOC Electronic Medical Record system should include a single electronic code that flags inmates who are deaf, hard-of-hearing, or hearing-impaired (hereinafter Deaf, in this report), to facilitate provision of services to them. (Settlement Agreement III.B)
II. PROVISION OF AUDIOLOGY SERVICES
Recommendation 6: Inmates in need of a hearing aid—both initially or because the device they have is no longer working for them—should wait no longer than two months to obtain the necessary device. That time period should begin the day the potential need is indicated by the inmate’s request for evaluation, answers on the questionnaire, etc. Each KYDOC facility should track the time from request/questionnaire to provider visit to audiology visit to hearing aid provision, and ensure that inmates do not have a longer wait. (In future quarterly reporting periods, I will request this tracking data from all facilities.) One way to accomplish less expensive and more comprehensive assessment for any backlog might be to bring in an audiologist to each applicable facility for two or three days. (Settlement Agreement V.B; VIII.B.2)
III. AUXILIARY AIDS/SERVICES
A. Personal hearing devices: Hearing aids and amplifiers
Recommendation 7: Full information about hearing aids and hearing evaluations, including the availability of batteries without charge, should be provided to inmates. See Exhibit D-2. (III.F)
Recommendation 8: Inmates waiting for an audiologist evaluation or for hearing aid service should be offered an amplifier while they wait. (Settlement Agreement V.B)
B. Qualified Interpretation
Recommendation 9: For inmates who use sign language to communicate, some kind of qualified interpretive services should be readily available for any communication between an inmate and staff when the inmate requests interpretation. The availability of interpretation should not be limited to only certain types of encounters, communications, or settings. (Settlement Agreement III; VI)
Recommendation 10: For inmates who use sign language to communicate, no special request should be needed to obtain VRI services for auxiliary aid/service assessment, emergency health care on-site, classification and transfer hearings and related meetings, grievance meetings and hearings, disciplinary hearings and all related processes, parole meetings and hearings. (Settlement Agreement VI.A; III.C [auxiliary aids and services assessment]; VI.C.4 [emergency on-site medical]; VI.H [transfer and classification]; V.A.2 [grievance hearings]; VII.A [disciplinary hearings]; VI.A.3 [parole hearings])
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 2 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 23 of 47 - Page ID#: 2113
Recommendation 11: Interpretation services should be offered without special request to any inmate (known to prison staff to use sign language to communicate) during initial classification and orientation. These encounters are vital to the terms of each inmate’s living situation, and inmates are unlikely to know, during these early stages, that they need to request interpretation and how to do so. (Settlement Agreement III.A.1)
Recommendation 12: Both the existing VRI contract and the standing arrangement with a provider of in-person qualified interpretive services are crucial and should remain in place. Inperson interpretation should be provided to inmates who communicate by signing when it is necessary for effective communication. This includes during group classes in which student participation is key, and in parole hearings. For other situations, an in-person interpreter should be provided if remote interpretation is unlikely to be, or has not been, effective. (Settlement Agreement VI.A; VI.E. VI.A.3)
Recommendation 13: More generally, more clarity and a better process for picking a qualified interpretation method—VRI or in-person—are needed. The various memos, forms, and training should be modified to support that process. The facility should give “primary consideration” to the affected inmate’s view on this question. Revised versions of all the relevant forms and memos are attached as Exhibit D. The information in Exhibit D-5—in particular, the preferred communication method—should be made available to all KYDOC staff who need it, including both medical and custody staff, including electronically. (Settlement Agreement VI.A; I.5)
Recommendation 14: Each facility should track the effectiveness of communication via VRI in other situations, in order to decide whether there are any situations in which in-person interpretation should be the first recourse. As part of this assessment process, each time a VRI is used, the inmate should be asked how effective the resulting communication was. This can be done by a scaled question:
Please check the box that best indicates your views.
The Video Remote Interpretation I just used provided fully effective communication:
 Strongly agree  Weakly agree  Weakly disagree  Strongly disagree
If there was any problem with the communication, please explain:
These responses can be collected and analyzed. This recommendation is reflected in Exhibit D. (Settlement Agreement VI.A)
Recommendation 15: Inmates who communicate via sign language should not have their hands restrained when there is a need for effective communication, absent an individualized finding of security threat even with use of substitute security procedures (if necessary). If avoiding restraint of inmates’ hands requires substitute security procedures, those should be written up and included in the documentation of the necessary processes for both VRI and in-person interpretation, and any appropriate equipment should be obtained and installed wherever it might be needed. (Settlement Agreement XI.A)
Recommendation 16 [Applies to KSR only]: For situations since June 2015 in which KSR’s procedures did not allow an inmate to communicate during a disciplinary
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 3 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 24 of 47 - Page ID#: 2114
hearing—most importantly, in Inmate C’s October 2015 hearing—the inmate should be given an opportunity to redo the hearing. This opportunity must be effectively communicated to the inmate, which itself should be done using interpretive services. (Settlement Agreement VII)
Recommendation 17 [Applies to KSR only]: Inmate D’s 2016 Parole hearing should be redone, with an in-person Qualified Interpreter. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2)
Recommendation 18: When a Deaf inmate is seeking/receiving off-site medical care, staff at each facility should, as early as practicable, inform the relevant medical provider(s) that a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service will be seeking medical care from those off-site medical providers at a particular date and time; in the case of an emergency, staff should provide such information as soon as possible, and should include the Deaf inmate’s estimated time of arrival. There should be policies and procedures in place, implemented by appropriate training, to ensure that these notifications occur. (Settlement Agreement VI.D)
Recommendation 19: The process/forms for inmates to request interpretive services and other auxiliary aids and services should clearly encompass religious and any other volunteer-provided programming. (Settlement Agreement VI.A.3; VI.G.1)
Recommendation 20: Significant communications by the chaplains are covered by the requirement of effective communication. Therefore the chaplains, like other staff, should be trained in the requirements of this Agreement, and should ensure that if they have occasion to minister to a Deaf inmate—or simply inform him that a family member has died—they do so effectively, including using interpreter services if the inmate communicates using sign language. (Settlement Agreement VI.J)
Recommendation 21: The process for obtaining and using the VRI laptop should be communicated to each staff member who might have occasion to need it, and also to each inmate who communicates using sign language. Each such staff member should actually do a practice run using the machine—to figure out how/where internet access and power will be obtained, and how to use the program. The laptops themselves should be checked each time they are returned to their resting area, to ensure that they have sufficient battery power. Training should ensure that staff understand that the person communicating with the Deaf inmate should sit within easy reach of the laptop’s microphone, and that the inmate must not have his hands handcuffed. (It would be useful to include a diagram or instructions on a piece of paper taped to the laptop’s cover.) (Settlement Agreement VI [qualified interpreters]; IX.E [training and technology]; XI [hand restraints])
Recommendation 22: There should be some flexibility in the timing of VRI requests and usage; where a need arises that does not allow for 48 hours notice, VRI should nonetheless be made available if possible. Each facility should work out a process for VRI availability after hours and on weekends, as well as in emergencies. (Settlement Agreement VI.J)
C. Videos
Recommendation 23: Check each existing video used to determine whether it has captioning
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 4 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 25 of 47 - Page ID#: 2115
and obtain replacements with captioning if available. Provide captions for all orientation videos, for newly acquired entertainment and educational videos, and other videos when captioning is available. For television captioning to be a real option, training for staff about how to turn it on and periodic testing are required. This should be done on a schedule, perhaps quarterly or twice a year, and it should be logged. (Settlement Agreement X.1)
Recommendation 24: For Deaf inmates who cannot hear crucial informative videos, and whose literacy level is insufficient to allow them to readily read captions, an alternative method of effective communication is necessary. For those who communicate using sign language, the prison should provide either a sign language inset, or an in-person Qualified Interpreter. (Settlement Agreement I.5; III.E; VI.J)
D. Speech-to-text
Recommendation 25 [KSR only, for right now]: KSR should continue to investigate the possibility of speech-to-text software for use in classroom and other appropriate settings. I will ask for a report on this issue six months. (Settlement Agreement V.A. 2; VI.E)
E. Assistive listening systems
Recommendation 26 [KSR only, for right now]: Investigate assistive listening systems for use in classroom and other appropriate settings. I will ask for a report on this issue in six months. (Settlement Agreement V.A. 2; VI.E)
Recommendation 27: Each facility should inform Deaf inmates of the various ways in which educational programming can be made more accessible to them; the school should put in place a process to facilitate requests for such accommodations and assess the need for them. (Settlement Agreement III.F; V.A. 2; VI.E)
F. Written communication
Recommendation 28: Written communication should be relied upon only for simple communication with literate inmates. For complex communications or less literate inmates, alternative methods are required. Staff should make best efforts to communicate with each deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate using that inmate’s preferred communication method (which is assessed and recorded by Exhibit D-5). (Settlement Agreement I.5)
G. Non-auditory alerts
Recommendation 29: Each facility should expand the availability of non-auditory alert systems, providing them to inmates who cannot hear the fire alarm and/or the alert for count. To maximize the communication effectiveness of each non-auditory alert, it should be programmed to signal, in different ways, the several predictable alerts: fire/emergency; count, chow, “report to office.” Staff must also be trained to use the office switch. Whether this is occurring will need monitoring; perhaps by using a daily log or checking in periodically with affected inmates. The monitoring system should be made formal. I will ask for a description of it, and perhaps relevant records, in the next quarterly reporting period. (Settlement Agreement VIII)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 5 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 26 of 47 - Page ID#: 2116
Recommendation 30 [KSR only, for right now]: Investigate the costs and benefits of a TV-based visual paging system. I will ask for a report on this issue in six months. (Settlement Agreement VIII)
Recommendation 31: Each facility should train staff to be alert to the possibility that a Deaf inmate may miss the alert for count, chow, or pill call—and to ensure nondiscrimination in that event. (Settlement Agreement VIII; II.A)
H. Miscellaneous devices
Recommendation 32: Each facility’s commissary list should include various alerting devices that inmates might wish to purchase: caption-capable TVs, vibrating alarm clocks, and the like. Inmates should be informed that if they seek to purchase adaptive equipment that is not available via the commissary, they should request assistance from the ADA Coordinator; the ADA Coordinator should then facilitate the inmate’s purchase unless the requested device presents an articulable and documented security risk. (Settlement Agreement XII)
I. Other communications aids
Recommendation 33: Investigate all the available topics for medical EZ Boards—both word and picture versions—and buy those that are useful, making them available for use by Deaf inmates. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2; VI.C; XII)
J. Methods of communicating with Deaf inmates
Recommendation 34: Staff should be trained on, and should use, best practices for communicating with hard-of-hearing inmates. (Settlement Agreement XIII.B)
Recommendation 35: Each facility should continue to provide Deaf inmates with ID cards that identify them as Deaf, and to post similar identification outside their cells. The notices required by the Agreement outside each housing unit and at the entrance to the institution should also be posted. (Settlement Agreement III.D.1)
K. Teaching sign-language
Recommendation 36: Each facility should try to offer classes in sign language, and should give Deaf inmates who would like to learn to sign both affirmative notice and preference for these classes. (Settlement Agreement II.A)
L. Telecommunications equipment and rules
Recommendation 37: Videophones should be located in areas as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. The videophone should be available during the same days and hours as conventional telephones and should require permission for use only if the facility requires inmates to seek permission to use conventional telephones. If an escort is required to use the videophone at night, on weekends, or in other circumstances, such an escort should be routinely provided. (Settlement Agreement IX.A)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 6 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 27 of 47 - Page ID#: 2117
Recommendation 38: Even if an escort is required, there should be no requirement that inmates seeking to use the videophone, including with VRS, schedule such use in advance. Non-Deaf inmates are not required to schedule their phone calls, and that should be true for Deaf inmates, as well. (Settlement Agreement IX.A)
Recommendation 39: Ensure all staff are trained on videophone rules, so that they know that videophone access is to be provided during the same hours as conventional phone access, without pre-scheduling, and that time in transit doesn’t count. (Settlement Agreement IX.A; XIII.B)
Recommendation 40 (Edited): Deaf inmates in segregated housing must be allowed access to telecommunications services equal to that of non-Deaf inmates in the same disciplinary or administrative status. The best solution would be to work out a method for such inmates— including those on “max assault status”—to use the videophone, with VRS when needed. This could be done by escorting the prisoner to the videophone or by enabling videophone capabilities on the VRI laptop. If there are individualized reasons that an inmate cannot have his hands unshackled consistent with security, he, and others in his situation, should be allowed access to the TTY. I will request each facility to report on what method for telecommunications access is developed for Deaf inmates in segregation, and why. (Settlement Agreement IX.A)
Recommendation 41: Ensure that disciplinary oversight of videophone is no more intense than oversight of conventional phone calls. The disciplinary committee should explicitly consider and rule on this issue when it is deciding a disciplinary matter involving the videophone or TTY. (Settlement Agreement IX.B)
Recommendation 42 [New recommendation 74 substitutes for this recommendation]: KSR should review auxiliary aids that would allow hard-of-hearing inmates effective access to telecommunications, and should implement improvements— perhaps involving TTY, captioned telephones, and/or handset amplification. Asking inmates what does and doesn’t work is a necessary part of this process. I will request a report on this review—both how it was conducted and the results—in six months. (Settlement Agreement IX; I.5)
IV. PROCESSES FOR ASSESSING AND REQUESTING AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
A. Intake/Orientation
Recommendation 43: Each facility should develop a process by which inmates whose hearing impairment substantially impedes communication are noted and assessed right away on arrival at the institution, immediate steps taken to ensure effective communication, including immediate interpretative services if necessary. (Settlement Agreement III.A; III.C)
B. Literacy assessment
Recommendation 44: Staff at each facility should assess each Deaf inmate’s literacy prior to conducting additional assessment of necessary auxiliary aids and services. Educational staff should be able to propose and implement one of several quick assessment tools. For example, the
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 7 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 28 of 47 - Page ID#: 2118
Slosson Oral Reading Test - Revised (SORT-R) might be suitable. If an inmate is not literate at at least the 8th grade level, reliance on written communication is unlikely to succeed in providing effective communication, and alternative methods should be used. (Settlement Agreement III.C; I.5)
C. Individual assessment meetings
Recommendation 45: For each Deaf inmate, the ADA Coordinator should conduct an individual services assessment meeting, at which the inmate’s available methods of communication are expressly ascertained and recorded, and the inmate is informed about the available auxiliary aids and services. For an inmate who can hear (with or without an amplifier or hearing aid) well enough to understand the coordinator, information should be conveyed orally as well as in writing. If the inmate uses sign language, VRI would be the appropriate way to communicate for a meeting of this nature. The greatest challenge is presented if the inmate is not literate, does not hear well enough to understand spoken communication, and does not sign. In that case, visual demonstrations of the various auxiliary aids and services may be required. The assessment should be updated annually, ideally at the inmate’s annual classification meeting. (Settlement Agreement III.C; I.5)
D. Form and options
Recommendation 46: The various forms related to requesting and using Auxiliary Aids and Services form should be changed in a number of ways:
• To list available aids and services more comprehensively • To more clearly explain what the various services and aids are, in what circumstances
they are available, and how to request them. • To explain how to use the various devices. • To ask inmates, expressly, about their preferred modes of communication or needed
services, and why those are useful. To explain which items are free of charge, and which are available only at the inmate’s expense. (Settlement Agreement III.C; III.F)
Recommendation 47: I recommend replacement of the existing forms with several different ones, explaining the various options available, allowing requests for various types of communications assistance, and obtaining feedback from inmates (see Recommendation 14, above). These recommended forms are attached as Exhibit D, which also includes a recommended staff memo about the various available devices and accommodations, and an assessment form. These forms should be explained/filled out during the individual assessment meetings. (Settlement Agreement III.C; III.F)
E. Additional methods for inmates to seek auxiliary aids and services
Recommendation 48: The Healthcare Request form should include boxes to check if auxiliary aids or services, including remote or in-person interpretation, are needed. My recommended additions to this form are attached as Exhibit E-2. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2; VI.C)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 8 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 29 of 47 - Page ID#: 2119
Recommendation 49: All the forms by which inmates apply for jobs, educational programming, etc., should have language similar to that in the recommended Healthcare Request form. So should classification and disciplinary forms that notify inmates of impending hearings or meetings. I have not provided recommended versions of these forms, but will in a future reporting period ask to see them all. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2; VI.F; VI.E; VI.H; VII.A)
Recommendation 50: When Deaf inmates and staff discuss enrollment or application for a particular activity or program, communication should be effective—which means an interpreter may be required for the discussion—and should cover potential accommodations, auxiliary aids/services that could provide equal access to the activity/program. (Settlement Agreement V.A; VI)
V. TRAINING
A. ADA Coordinator Training
Recommendation 51: KYDOC should develop training on the Settlement Agreement and make it available to ADA Coordinators. For training on the ADA, the ADA National Network training is appropriate. (Settlement Agreement XIII.B)
B. Staff Training
Recommendation 52 [Training slides have now been provided and comments offered]: Training should be developed on all topics listed in the Settlement Agreement as requiring training. Once drafted, materials should be shared with me and with the Kentucky Commission on the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, for our input. This training is already long overdue; it should be provided to me for my input no later than July 1, finalized within 30 days after my comments are returned, and delivered to staff as soon as possible thereafter. (Settlement Agreement XIII)
VI. REPORTING
Recommendation 53: Ensure that all relevant staff know about the Agreement’s reporting obligations, so that I am appropriately notified when any of the reporting-triggering events takes place. (Settlement Agreement II.A; VI.F; VIII.B.1; VIII.B.3; VIII.C; IX.C; XII)
Group 2 (December 2016)
I. IDENTIFICATION OF INMATES COVERED BY THE AGREEMENT.
Recommendation 54: Identification processes (Settlement Agreement III.A.1 [initial classification]; III.B [hearing assessment]; III.D.1 [identification cards])
a) Each facility should ask each inmate about any hearing difficulties during his or her initial medical screening, in their first day or two in the facility. Questions about hearing should be at the start of that screening, to allow accommodations, if needed, during the rest of the process.
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 9 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 30 of 47 - Page ID#: 2120
b) All inmates should also fill out, in writing or orally, the multiple-question hearing screening. Exhibit B-2 is the recommended form. (See also prior recommendation 2.) This form should be administered by medical staff, to facilitate necessary medical followup.
c) If an inmate answers “yes” or “sometimes” in response to three or more of the screening questions, he should be seen in the next several days by a medical provider—a physician or nurse practitioner—for further evaluation, including a “whisper test” or other examination to assess whether there is a functional hearing problem.
d) If an inmate fails the “whisper test” or other hearing evaluation, the following should occur: • The inmate should receive an identification card to carry on his person, which states that the inmate is deaf or hard-of-hearing. • The inmate’s name should be shared with the facility’s ADA coordinator. • Two different alerts should be placed in his record, one in KOMS (the Kentucky Offender Management System), to alert correctional staff to the issue whenever they retrieve his computerized file, and the other in the EMR (Electronic Medical Record), to do the same for medical staff. Both alerts should be immediately obvious when the electronic file is opened. (See Figures A and B, above).
e) All inmates so identified should be included in the facility’s semi-annual reports to me; if a particular inmate turns out not to be deaf or hard-of-hearing, because, for example, a medical problem that was obstructing his or her hearing is solved, that can be explained. (Note: the decision to send an inmate to an audiologist for evaluation or treatment is not the same as the decision to flag the inmate as deaf or hard-ofhearing.)
Recommendation 55: In order to ensure appropriate identification of deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates, all inmates’ annual or other routine physicals should include the hearing questionnaire (Exhibit B-2). (Settlement Agreement III.B)
Recommendation 56: Each facility should ensure that the ID cards used to identify inmates as deaf or hard-of-hearing are clear, and should avoid abbreviations or other language that may not be clear. Each facility should ensure that every deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate is able to carry such a card at all times. If an inmate misplaces the card, a replacement should be promptly provided. (Settlement Agreement III.D.1)
II. ENSURING EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION DURING INTAKE
Recommendation 57: Interpretation services should be offered without special request to any inmate (known by prison staff to use sign language to communicate) during initial medical screening or other intake medical encounters. Inmates are unlikely to know, during these early stages, that they need to request interpretation and how to do so. Medical staff should ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if they use sign language to communicate, rather than waiting for the ADA Coordinator’s assessment. (Settlement Agreement III.A.1)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 10 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 31 of 47 - Page ID#: 2121
Recommendation 58: Each facility’s medical office should keep pocket amplifiers on hand for all intake staff—medical, mental health, and custody—to use when the need arises. (Settlement Agreement III.A.1)
III. PROVISION OF AUDIOLOGY SERVICES
Recommendation 59: The ADA Coordinator for each KYDOC facility should maintain a document that tracks each deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate’s progress through the process of obtaining any needed hearing aid, including the dates and outcomes of:
• the initial request/questionnaire • each relevant medical visit • any audiology visit • hearing aid provision. In order to ensure that inmates do not wait longer than two months for a necessary hearing aid, the ADA coordinator should check for progress for each affected inmate every week or two, updating the tracking document and working with medical staff to solve any procedural hurdles that arise. A recommended sample tracking document is provided as Exhibit F. (Settlement Agreement V.B; VIII.B.2)
IV. AUXILIARY AIDS/SERVICES
Recommendation 60: I commend KYDOC for developing a user-friendly pamphlet to cover the information needed by deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates; I recommend facilities use the edited version in Exhibit D-2; each facility should fill in the items marked with curly brackets ({ and }). (Settlement Agreement III.F)
A. Personal hearing devices: Hearing aids and amplifiers
Recommendation 61: Inmates with hearing aids should be able to obtain replacement batteries seven days a week, without difficulty or charge, regardless of their housing or programming assignment. (Settlement Agreement V.B)
Recommendation 62: Each facility should inform staff responsible for property moves that it is important for inmates to keep their hearing aids with them, even when they are moved into segregation or transferred. When an inmate is accidentally separated from his or her hearing aids, policy should allow the inmate to promptly obtain the hearing aids from storage or medical, or to get replacements. (Settlement Agreement V.B)
B. Qualified Interpretation
1. Video Relay Interpretation (VRI): Use and Procedures
Recommendation 63: Absent an emergency in which time is of the essence and VRI services are unavailable, no facility should rely on an inmate to interpret a communication that would ordinarily be private for another inmate. (Settlement Agreement VI; I.18)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 11 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 32 of 47 - Page ID#: 2122
Recommendation 64: Each facility should obtain and test a “splitter” for each VRI laptop, so that the laptop can be used alongside a computer. (Settlement Agreement IX.E.1)
Recommendation 65: Each facility should ensure that the VRI laptop routinely receives necessary software updates. (Settlement Agreement IX.E.1)
2. Religious and Volunteer-provided programming
Recommendation 66: For any religious programming—worship services, counseling, bible study, etc.—that is provided directly by the chaplain, each facility should provide qualified interpretation when requested by an inmate who needs it.
Prior Recommendation 20: Significant communications by the chaplains are covered by the requirement of effective communication. Therefore the chaplains, like other KSR staff, should be trained in the requirements of this Agreement, and should ensure that if they have occasion to minister to a Deaf inmate—or simply inform him that a family member has died—they do so effectively, including using interpreter services if the inmate communicates using sign language.
C. Video captioning
D. Speech-to-text
E. Assistive listening systems
(Settlement Agreement VI.G.3)
Recommendation 67: Each religious, educational, and programming area should have available a device to allow wireless amplification for individual hard-of-hearing inmates. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2)
Recommendation 68: KSR should inform deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates of the various ways in which religious, educational, rehabilitative, and recreational programming can be made more accessible to them; all programming providers (educational, rehabilitative, and recreational) should put in place a process to facilitate requests for such accommodations and assess the need for them. (Settlement Agreement V.A; III.F)
F. Written communication
G. Non-auditory alerts
Recommendation 69: In any unit where there are deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates, each facility should implement (and ensure use of) written announcement boards. That is, all general announcements should also be promptly displayed on a written announcement board (e.g.: “X class is cancelled this evening,” or “all inmates in X category are allowed an X privilege this afternoon”). Staff use of this announcement board must be monitored and audited. (Settlement Agreement VIII.B.1)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 12 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 33 of 47 - Page ID#: 2123
Recommendation 70: In order to provide effective and equal communications to deaf and hardof-hearing inmates who are being individually paged, staff should check KOMS to see if that inmate has a deaf/hard-of-hearing alert; if a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate does not answer the auditory page in a minute or two, he or she should be individually alerted to the page by a staff member. This could be done by in-person notification or by provision of a personal paging system. (Settlement Agreement VIII.A)
Recommendation 71: Each facility should train staff to be alert to the possibility that a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate may be unable to hear an order or instruction issued verbally; training should cover strategies to avoid bad results. (Settlement Agreement XIII.B; II.A)
H. Miscellaneous devices
I. Speech
Recommendation 71: In each facility’s settings in which staff ordinarily talk to a group of inmates—orientation, education, etc.—consideration should be given to talking to any hard-ofhearing inmate one-on-one, instead. For example, for someone who is having difficulty hearing a teacher in a group setting, even with assistive listening devices (see IV.E, above), a tutor might be a better option than a congregate GED class. (Settlement Agreement XIII.B)
J. Teaching sign-language
Recommendation 72: Deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates who do not have their GED should be among those allowed to enroll in any classes in sign language. Each facility should obtain resources relating to sign language—books or computer-based instruction—and make those available to deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. (Settlement Agreement II.A)
K. Telecommunications equipment and rules
1. Videophone and VRS
2. TTY
Recommendation 73: Each facility should maintain its TTY and develop a facility protocol for how to make it available to inmates, covering who the inmate should request it from, where it should be connected, etc. In addition, each facility should annually test its TTY and the protocol by calling me at an agreed upon time using direct TTY and the relay service. TTY instructions should be left with the TTY at all times. (Settlement Agreement IX.D.1)
3. Hard-of-hearing inmates
Recommendation 74 (substitutes for prior recommendation 42): Each facility should improve access of hard-of-hearing inmates to telecommunications, by:
(a) Allowing them access to TTYs. (b) Informing them that amplified phones are available, and ensuring that at least one such phone, whose amplification is compatible with a hearing aid but does not require one, is
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 13 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 34 of 47 - Page ID#: 2124
available in every group of phones used by any hard-of-hearing inmate. (c) Providing access to captioned telephones, unless on investigation such telephones are not available in the institutional setting.
I will request a report on implementation each aspect of this recommendation.
(Settlement Agreement IX.A)
V. THE INTERACTION OF COMMUNICATION NEEDS AND HOUSING ASSIGNMENT
A. Segregated housing
B. Other housing needs
Recommendation 75: Each facility should develop a method for considering how communications difficulties with deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates can be minimized by particular housing assignments, and shall make such assignments when appropriate. (Settlement Agreement II.A)
VI. PROCESSES FOR ASSESSING AND REQUESTING AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
VII. FORM AND OPTIONS
Recommendation 76: Each facility should include notice in its Inmate Handbook of the facility’s basic obligation to avoid discrimination and provide effective communication, and inform inmates to contact the ADA Coordinator if needed. Something like the following would be appropriate:
Americans with Disabilities Act and Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates
An inmate with a verified disability will have the opportunity to participate in services, privileges, and programs similar to other inmates at this institution. If you are deaf or hard-of-hearing, you should contact the designated institutional ADA Coordinator; each living unit and inmate public areas has contact information posted. All {name facility here}-provided services will provide effective communication and make available qualified interpreters when needed. Qualified Interpreters and Auxiliary Aids and Services are available for an inmate with a verified disability upon request. It is the inmate’s responsibility to request an interpreter from volunteer organizations or individuals that are providing activities and services. An inmate who meets criteria to be accommodated under the ADA will be provided identification to facilitate effective communication. If at any time an inmate chooses to not wear the identification, he/she shall sign a waiver document to be placed in the institutional file.
(Settlement Agreement II.A)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 14 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 35 of 47 - Page ID#: 2125
VIII. TRAINING
A. ADA Coordinator Training
B. Staff Training
Recommendation 77: In addition to the computer-based KYDOC training, live, in-service training should cover, at least:
a) For all staff: • The identity and role of the ADA Coordinator • Existence of KOMS and EMR alerts for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates, and the obligation to check for the alerts. • The occasions and process for obtaining access to the VRI laptop, and how to use the laptop, including where different people should sit to maximize communication effectiveness. (For medical, educational, and housing staff, this training should be done on-site, so each affected staff member can see where and how the laptop can be set up.) • The occasions and process for obtaining an in-person qualified interpreter.
b) For housing area staff: • The use of cell/bed notices that an inmate is deaf or hard-of-hearing • The use of the bed shaker switch. • Telecommunications issues, including how to obtain and use a TTY, and the policies and procedures governing TTY and videophone usage. • The obligation to notify deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates of alerts, including emergency alerts and non-emergency pages.
c) For all corrections staff: • The requirements to accommodate inmates who use sign language to communicate by using restraints that allow them to sign, and how to implement those requirements. • Strategies for dealing with inmates who may not hear directions or orders, especially when given from behind or above them.
d) For medical staff: • The responsibility of running a process to provide medically necessary hearing aids within two months, and what that actually entails, in terms of adjusting ordinary processes and timing. • The obligation to notify off-site medical provider(s) that a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service will be seeking medical care, and how this obligation is being assigned.
(Settlement Agreement XIII; IX.E.2; III.D.2)
IX. REPORTING
Recommendation 78: The ADA Coordinator should obtain monthly reports based on both KOMS and medical records of each inmate in the facility who is deaf or hard-of-hearing, and
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 15 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 86-4 Filed: 05/31/17 Page: 36 of 47 - Page ID#: 2126
should check those reports too add to the Coordinator’s tracking list. (Settlement Agreement XV.B.1) Recommendation 79: Each facility’s quarterly written summary of grievances by deaf and hardof-hearing inmates should include all such grievances, not only the ones that are deemed related to effective communication, auxiliary aids and services, or other issues raised in the Settlement Agreement. (Settlement Agreement XIV.3)
Group 3 (April 2017) Recommendation 80: At each institution, the ADA Coordinator should be one of the staff members who receives each routine transfer memo listing arriving inmates. The ADA Coordinator should check, in advance, to see if any arriving inmate has a disability that may need accommodation in order to provide effective communication and full information during the intake/orientation process, and should make arrangements for that accommodation to be provided. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2) Recommendation 81: Medical staff should ensure that inmates with a need for audiology services are not charged inappropriately, and should avoid repeated charges for ongoing efforts to obtain hearing aids or other services. (Settlement Agreement V.B) Recommendation 82: Each VRI should be the subject of a log sheet that tracks its usage, including staff member, date and purpose. In any institution that houses one or more inmates who use sign language to communicate, the ADA Coordinator should check the VRI log sheet at least once each week, and should ensure that the VRI is being used on appropriate occasions, not just for classification and disciplinary meetings, but for other important conversations between the inmate and staff. (Settlement Agreement VI.A, III.C; VI.C.4; VI.H; V.A.2; VII.A; VI.J)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 16 of 16 (April 19, 2017)

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 1 of 27 - Page ID#: 2211

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT FRANKFORT

OSCAR ADAMS and MICHAEL KNIGHTS

Plaintiffs

v.

Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, et al.

Defendants.

Fourth Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor CORRECTED VERSION

November 27, 2017
Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 625 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 2 of 27 - Page ID#: 2212
I. INTRODUCTION
Pursuant to the Court’s order dated June 24, 2015, this is my fourth semi-annual report to the Court and the parties concerning the status of compliance with this case’s Settlement Agreement, which comprehensively governs how the Kentucky Department of Corrections (“Department” or KyDOC) deals with inmates who are deaf or hard-of-hearing.
As in my prior reports, I thank the Department’s personnel, both at headquarters and at the dozen correctional institutions, for their work on implementing the improvements that are required by the Settlement Agreement, and their professionalism and accommodation of my requests for information. KyDOC has continued to make progress towards compliance.
In my last report, I explained that I intended to move my monitoring work into a new phase, sharing a compliance checklist and then conducting site visits to evaluate the items listed. After further thought, I modified this plan. Instead, I focused this past reporting period on the very challenging issue of hearing aids (discussed below in Part IV), and did not do any site visits. I will move now to the prior-announced plan, piloting and refining the checklist during the next several site visits.
This report has one Appendix: October 2017 quarterly self-reporting request
Note: On November 13, 2017, I submitted a version of this report, but then discovered some omissions from it. In the time since, I have also been able to incorporate information from recent self-reports, which I had not processed before the last submission. Therefore, this version is substantially corrected/updated.
II. IDENTIFICATION AND TRACKING OF DEAF/HARD-OF-HEARING PRISONERS
I am more confident than I have been in the past that facilities are both identifying and reporting to me all or nearly all their deaf and hard-of-hearing prisoners. The current tally is set out in Table 1; as can be seen, the number is higher than in previous reports. However, there do remain some issues with identification, particularly when inmates are transferred. Looking at the institutions’ most recent quarterly self-report, I was able to identify over a dozen additional inmates from prior lists who should have been on institutional lists. Most are falling off when they are transferred. As I have commented previously, these kinds of tracking problems are concerning not only because they interfere with monitoring but because it is only inmates on the institutions’ lists who can receive required services and accommodations.
The ADA Coordinators are supposed to receive the routine transfer memos that list incoming inmates for each institution; I’m not sure if this is happening or why this problem remains, albeit affecting more limited numbers of inmates. I previously noted that the Department is implementing a system-wide KOMS improvement that will allow cross-institution tracking of deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates (and of inmates with other disabilities). This is now entering the testing phase. I will work on this issue further with Department personnel. I
-1-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 3 of 27 - Page ID#: 2213

remain hopeful that over the next several months the issue will be fully resolved. It really is crucial.

Table 1: Distribution of Kentucky Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates

Institution
Bell County Forestry Camp (BCFC) Blackburn Correctional Complex (BCC) Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (EKCC) Green River Correctional Complex (GRCC) Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women (KCIW) Kentucky State Penitentiary (KSP) Kentucky State Reformatory (KSR) Little Sandy Correctional Complex (LSCC) Luther Luckett Correctional Complex (LLCC) Northpoint Training Center (NTC) Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC) Western Kentucky Correctional Complex (WKCC) Ross-Cash Center (Ross-Cash)
TOTAL

# of Deaf/HOH Inmates

~Nov. Apr.

Nov.

2016

2017

2017

0

5

8

5

4

15

9

11

30

26

35

36

13

13

10

6

11

13

64

75

98

18

8

12

6

26

39

15

28

38

10

16

16

5

10

31

1

2

4

178

244

350

Currently KyDOC has 11 inmates who sign to communicate; they are housed at BCC (1), EKCC (1), GRCC (2), KCIW (2), KSP (1), KSR (3), NTC (1).

III. SELF-REPORTS
In April 2017, I initiated a new and more comprehensive semi-annual self-reporting tool; it was included as Appendix VI in my May 2107 Semi-Annual Report. Many of the individual institutions have struggled with keeping and sharing the records needed to comply with the agreement and to check on that compliance. It is my hope that the more comprehensive reporting requests will improve not only my monitoring but also institutional capacity, by helping ADA Coordinators and administrators better understand what information can help them improve their own compliance. I used a substantially similar reporting request for October 2017, attached as Appendix B. This time, a number of institutions seemed to have a somewhat easier time responding; my assistant and I are spending less time going back and forth with institutions, getting additional information that had been requested. There remain some issues but I am hopeful that by the next round of self-reporting, in April 2018, the ADA coordinators will all understand what information the reporting form seeks and will provide it with less difficulty.
I will follow up during my site visits on what the self-reporting revealed. While it is clear that institutions are in compliance with many settlement agreement requirements, there are remaining areas to work on. I am still working with the KyDOC institutions to complete the

-2-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 4 of 27 - Page ID#: 2214
reporting requested in November, and therefore have not fully analyzed that round of selfreports, but based on the April self-report, areas of particular concern include:
• Identification/tracking of deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates: o As already mentioned, inmates are falling off the tracking lists when they are transferred from one prison to another. o In April, KCIW and NTC reported that routine annual physicals did not include a hearing screening. (KCIW undertook to begin such screenings after being asked about this gap.) These screenings are important to reach prisoners who were not screened because they entered the prison prior to current protocols. In November, NTC again reported that routine physicals do not include hearing screening; GRCC said the same, and LSCC’s ADA coordinator reported that she was “unsure.” o In April, KSR reported that KOMS (Kentucky Offender Management System) did not have an alert noted for each deaf or hard-of-hearing prisoner. As already noted, this is an area in which KyDOC as a whole is working on improved systems. The issue is particularly important at KSR because it has such a large portion of the Department’s deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. By November, the problem had been solved at KSR. However, I am not confident that every facility has implemented a KOMS alert for every deaf or hard-of-hearing prisoner. It seems that newly identified prisoners are not being flagged in KOMS.
• Amplification for hard-of-hearing prisoners: o In April, not all institutions had phones capable of being used by hard-of-hearing prisoners. Volume adjustment and amplification is necessary, but not always provided. (BCC, EKCC, KSR). By October, it seems KSR and BCC had upgraded and EKCC was in the process of upgrading. o Only a few of the institutions report earphones available for prisoners using the parole hearing video system. This is an area where progress can be made easily. o I have not been told of any further progress on amplification more generally, although I highlighted amplification as a key need in prior reports. Inmates who need amplification to hear teachers, program leaders, and the like are not getting the required equal access to programs, services, and activities without that amplification. More work on auxiliary aids is vital; amplification should be available for rehabilitative programming, school, and church.
• Possible underuse of in-person interpretation: o At facilities that house inmates who use sign language to facilitate, it seems possible that remote interpretation (via a laptop) is being used in situations where in-person interpretation is necessary for effective communication. I will be paying particular attention to this issue this year. o Three facilities—BCC, BCFC, and LSCC—reported in April that that they did not have any standing arrangements for in-person interpretation. If a prisoner who uses sign language to communicate is transferred to any of these facilities, they will have a difficult time accommodating him. It is better practice to make
-3-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 5 of 27 - Page ID#: 2215

these sorts of contingent arrangements in advance. In October, BCC reported having made such arrangements.

IV. HEARING AID PROVISION

I decided to focus this past reporting period on hearing aid provision, pressing institutions to do the tracking necessary for effective case management and to report the results to me. It is clear that this remains a major challenge.

Including all the information on hearing aid provision since the settlement was entered, KyDOC institutions have completed providing audiology services to 310 inmates. As Table 2 shows, nearly 60% of these inmates have received hearing aids; the rest are split between declining services and medical providers determining that no hearing aid is necessary. Timeliness has been a major problem; as can be seen in the table, the average time to resolution of a need for audiology services is nearly 7 months.

Progress is being made, however. The second set of columns in the table shows just a subset of the cases—those where the institution was alerted to the need for audiology services in January 2017 or later. For these 168 cases, resolution has taken an average of under two months. My recommendation, made in December 2016, was for a two-month or less turn-around. So on average, the 2017 cases have achieved that goal (though of course since this is an average, many have taken longer).

Table 2: Audiology Services Overall

Outcome type (a) Received hearing aid(s) (b) Nothing or only amplifier needed (c) Refused (d) Already had hearing aid (e) Discharged (f) Unknown
TOTAL resolved (a) and (b) only * Sums to 101% due to rounding

All resolved since 7/1/2015

Avg. days to
N %* resolution

179 58% 225

80 26% 171

30 10% 147

15 5%

0

3 1%

84

3 1% 192

310

192

259

209

Prison alerted to need
in 2017

Avg. days to
N %* resolution

87 52%

60

41 24%

28

21 13%

28

15 9%

0

3 2%

36

1 0% Unk.

168

46

129

49

Table 2, however, somewhat overstates the progress, because there are 72 as-yet-unresolved requests for hearing aids (several additional requests not included in this tally are paused while other health issues resolve—for example, pending surgery or resolution of an ear infection, or the

-4-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 6 of 27 - Page ID#: 2216

like). While 20 have been in process for two months or less, the oldest has been in process for over a year. The distribution is set out in Table 3.
Table 3: Ongoing Audiology Needs

Month prison alerted to the need (N = 72)

Oct. 2016 (1) Dec. 2016 (1) Jan. 2016 (4)

Apr. 2017 (3)

May 2017 (3) Jun. 2017 (3)

Jul. 2017 (8)

Aug. 2017 (8)

Sept. 2017 (9) Oct. 2017 (11)

If each of these were resolved by the end of November 2017 (which they will not be), they would have taken an average of 135 days—nearly four-and-a-half months—for resolution.
Even so, the progress is significant. Looking just at the two principal outcomes (rows a and b in Table 2), and the ongoing matters, Table 4 compares the audiology needs brought to institutions’ attention in the first 11 months of 2017 to the analogous needs from the first 11 months of 2016. Table 4 demonstrates that audiology needs are being resolved notably faster in 2017 than in the prior year. The cases resolved by November of each year took close to 78 days on average in 2016, but about a month less on average in 2017. And where over half the cases brought to institutional attention in 2016 were still unresolved as of November 2016, the corresponding proportion in 2017 is about a third. While problems remain, KyDOC is to be commended for the progress made in 2017 towards timely provision of audiology services.

Table 4: Comparison of 2016 and 2017 Audiology Progress

Outcome type (a) Received hearing aid (b) No hearing aid needed Ongoing as of Nov.
Pending > 60 days TOTAL

Prison alerted to need in 2016 (before 11/1)

Avg. days to N % resolution

26 29%

95

13 14%

43

49 54%

NA

32

90

78

Prison alerted to need in 2017 (before 11/1)

Avg. days to

N

% resolution

87

44%

60

41

21%

28

70

35%

NA

53

198

49

These summary statistics mask considerable variation among facilities. For example, looking at the four institutions with the most activity in 2017, KSR has resolved 38 and has 13 outstanding; LLCC has resolved 39 and has 4 outstanding; WKCC resolved 13 and has 20 outstanding; and RCC has resolved 26 and has none outstanding. Not only does RCC have no outstanding cases, but it managed its cases in an average 35 days each, complying with my recommendation. KSR’s average is 51 days on the resolved matters, but many of the quarter that are unresolved are quite old. GRCC’s matters are over half unresolved, and even the resolved matters have taken over 4 months on average.

-5-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 7 of 27 - Page ID#: 2217
Table 5 examines the issue in detail, facility by facility. The Table highlights two different measures of timeliness/delay: days to resolution for resolved cases, and percentage of total cases not yet resolved. Each institution should be aiming for an average resolution time well under 60 days, and for an unresolved percentage of under 25% at any given time. Standing out for timely processing is RCC. Raising particular concern for untimely processing are EKCC, GRCC, and WKCC.
As far as the reasons for delay, I don’t yet have systematic explanations. Sometimes, delays are medically unavoidable—inmates have other or related medical issues that need to be addressed prior to an audiology visit. But I have actually left the small number of cases that fit this description out of the tally. It’s evident in others that appointments are occasionally simply not promptly booked, and sometimes they are booked but cancelled, with rescheduling taking many weeks. I will be making more detailed inquiries on this year’s site visits and other contacts with the particular institutions.
-6-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 8 of 27 - Page ID#: 2218

Table 5: Audiology Services by KyDOC Institution

Total Resolved N Average Days

BCC BCFC EKCC GRCC KCIW KSP KSR LLCC LSCC NTC RCC Ross WKCC Total

13

5

20

11

3 6 51 39

6 15 26 3

13 238

7

5

9

5

3 3 38 35

6 15 26 3

49

62

26 143

38 76 51

31 66 42 35 99

13 168 51 46

Ongoing N Average Days

5

11

6

3 13

4

8

146

169

99

191 112 90

248

20 70 72 128

Resolved, in detail

N:

(a) Received hearing aid(s)

2

5

1 2 31

7

4 8 23

(b) Nothing/amplifier only needed

2

4

1 1 23

3

1

(c) Refused

5

1

4

2

2

1 2 1 2

(d) Already had hearing aid

1

2

4

2

1 2 2

(e) Discharged

2

(f) Unknown

1

4 87

6 41

1 21

1 15

1

3

1

N:

(a) Received hearing aid(s)

72

143 114 111 58 65 41 57 38

(b) Nothing/amplifier only needed

84

27

41

20

37

76

84 60 26 28

(c) Refused

39

11

31

47 48 206 13 47 111 176 57

(d) Already had hearing aid

0

0

0

0

0 0 0

0

0

(e) Discharged

69

2 36

(f) Unknown

Unk.

Unk.

-7-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 9 of 27 - Page ID#: 2219
V. CONCLUSION The Kentucky Department of Corrections continues to progress towards compliance with
the Settlement Agreement, but implementation challenges remain. I will turn this next reporting period to assessing compliance institution-by-institution using itemized checklists, which I will include in future Court reports. Dated: November 27, 2017 Respectfully submitted,
____________________________________ Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 610 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109 (202) 277-2506 Margo.schlanger@gmail.com Adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com
-8-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 10 of 27 - Page ID#: 2220
Fourth Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor (Nov. 27, 2017) Appendix
October 2017 quarterly reporting request

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 11 of 27 - Page ID#: 2221
Adams v. KDOC, Semi-Annual Compliance Reporting (2017-10)
October 2017. Here is your semi-annual information request: I am circulating this request on September 29, 2017, and asking for information by COB Friday Oct. 13, 2017. Thank you.
Your Identifying Information
Your Name *
Your Institution *
Your Email *
Your Phone Number *
Are you the current ADA Coordinator? If not, please list the name, phone number, and email of the current ADA Coordinator. *
Is the ADA Coordinator information on this page correct? http://corrections.ky.gov/depts/AI/Pages/ADA.aspx If not, please certify to me that you are arranging for its correction by the beginning of next month. Is the webpage correct? *
Yes No, but I am arranging for its correction by the beginning of next month.
App. - 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 12 of 27 - Page ID#: 2222
Information about Deaf Inmates
Please note: previous reports have sometimes failed to include hard-of-hearing inmates. Under the agreement, "Deaf" means unable to hear well enough to rely on hearing as a means of processing information. It includes deaf, hard of hearing, or hearing impaired. If your institution does not currently have any Deaf inmates - USING THIS DEFINITION - and has not had any Deaf inmates the past two quarters (that is, since April 1, 2017), you will find that most of the rest of this form is inapplicable. But please still go through it, because a few questions do apply. Please include any inmates who were initially identified as deaf or hard of hearing, even if they were taken off the list -- and just explain why they were taken off.
"No" means "My institution does not have any current Deaf (including hard-of-hearing) inmates, and has not had any since April 1, 2017."
Any deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates over the last two quarters? *
Yes No If you have had any Deaf inmates since April 1, 2017, (using that same definition, so including hard-of-hearing), please upload an excel chart listing each inmate and including the following information.
1. First Name 2. Last Name 3. DOC # 4. Housing assignment 5. Date of arrival at this institution. 6. Immediate prior institution 7. Degree of hearing impairment 8. All auxiliary aids/services (hearing aids, various devices, interpreters, TDDs, videophone,
non-auditory alert system in cell, etc.) or accommodations s/he has requested. 9. All auxiliary aids/services or accommodations s/he has used. 10. The reasons and dates for any denials of auxiliary aids/services. 11. Preferred method of communication (e.g., sign, lip reading, writing, can hear with hearing
aid, amplifier) 12. Limited English proficiency, if applicable, and preferred language 13. Literacy level and how you know 14. Date of last hearing assessment 15. Date of last auxiliary aids/services assessment 16. Date of last classification review 17. Whether last classification review was delayed in order to provide effective
communication 18. Date of last parole hearing. 19. Date of next parole hearing. 20. Whether s/he has been charged with any disciplinary infractions or had any disciplinary
hearings since April 1, 2017. 21. Whether s/he has spent any time in restrictive housing since April 1, 2017. 22. Whether s/he has been a witness in a disciplinary hearing since April 1, 2017. 23. Any communications assistance offered or provided at any of the items just listed
(hearing assessment, auxiliary aids/services assessment, classification review, parole hearing, disciplinary process) 24. Whether s/he has signed a waiver described in III.C.2 or III.D.4 of the Agreement 25. Whether s/he has participated or sought to participate in any programming—educational, rehabilitative, substance abuse, religious, transitional, etc.—since April 1, 2017 AND:
App. - 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 13 of 27 - Page ID#: 2223
25a. which programs 25b. with what accommodations 25c. with what result 26. Whether s/he has participated or sought to participate in any work assignment since April 1, 2017 AND: 26a. which work assignments 26b. with what accommodations 26c. with what result 27. Whether s/he has received any on-site medical care since April 1, 2017 AND: 27a. with what accommodations 28. Whether s/he has received any off-site medical care since April 1, 2017, AND: 28a. with what accommodations. 29. For any inmate who uses sign language to communicate, whether s/he has been subject to hand-restraints since April 1, 2017, AND: 29a. the date 29c. the reason 30. Whether s/he has filed any grievances since April 1, 2017.
Click here to access a template excel spreadsheet for this information. The name of the file is "2017-10 Information on Deaf Inmates - Template." You should be able to download the file, input the data, and then upload the document with the required information below. You're not required to use the template, but it may make things easier for you. Upload list of deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates with the above information here.
Grievances and Discipline
In the last two quarters, did any Deaf Inmate file any grievance? (reminder: "Deaf" includes hardof-hearing inmates.) Please note: I am asking about ALL grievances by Deaf inmates, regardless of the topic. Please include all grievances, formal or informal, whether or not eventually withdrawn. *
Yes No
If yes, number of grievances:
If yes, please upload a summary that describes, for each grievance: o the name of the inmate o the date o the issue raised o how your institution ensured effective communication during the grievance process
Upload summary of grievances here. For any grievances that addressed hearing or hearing accommodation issues, please provide full documentation.
Drop files here to uploadUpload File(s)
Since April 1, 2017, were there any disciplinary proceedings involving an inmate who signs to communicate? (This includes any such inmate who was at your institution but is no longer.) *
Yes No
App. - 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 14 of 27 - Page ID#: 2224
If yes, please upload full documentation.
Drop files here to uploadUpload File(s)
Since April 1, 2017, were there any disciplinary proceedings involving a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate's failure to obey an order (or to stand for count) or other potential communications difficulty? *
Yes No If yes, please upload full documentation.
Drop files here to uploadUpload File(s)
Medical Processes
Are all inmates who arrive at your institution receiving a hearing screening? Please describe the screening, including when it is done, who does it, and whether the inmate is given a form to fill out or asked questions. *
Please upload the hearing questionnaire. * Please upload the health systems screening form, including any question about hearing. * Are inmates who receive a routine physical (annually or every two or three years) receiving a hearing screening? If yes, please describe it, including who performs it and whether the inmate is given a form to fill out or asked questions. *
Audiology Progress Chart
For each Deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate in your institution during the most recent two quarters, please provide the following medical/audiology information. Ideally, this would be in an excel chart, but if you find another format easier, that's fine too.
1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC. 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC. 3. Date of initial hearing screening. 4. Date of most recent hearing screening. 5. Results of most recent hearing screening. 6. Hearing aid status: List which one applies:
a. Has hearing aid(s) in working order b. In process of determining whether hearing aid(s) are needed
App. - 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 15 of 27 - Page ID#: 2225
c. In process of obtaining or repairing hearing aid(s) d. No hearing aid is needed 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid is needed), please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid. 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.) 9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing aid issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that no hearing aid is needed): a. Date b. Description of encounter c. Outcome of encounter Click here to access a template excel spreadsheet for this information. The name of the file is "2017-10 Audiology Progress Chart - Template." You should be able to download the file, input the data, and then upload the document with the required information below. You're not required to use the template, but it may make things easier for you. Upload file here.
When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Please describe. *
Telecommunications
Telephones
Please list phone locations available for inmates to use ordinary (Securus) telephones. *
For each such location, is there at least one phone with a volume adjustment? * Yes No
App. - 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 16 of 27 - Page ID#: 2226
If not, which locations are lacking any phone with a volume adjustment?
Videophones
How many (kiosk or other non-laptop) videophones at your institution? * Where are they located?
Are videophones available during the same hours as phones? * Yes No
How many days has each one been inoperative during the last two quarters? * Has any inmate requested access to the videophones since April 1, 2017, and been denied? *
Yes No If so, please explain the circumstances, including the inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.
App. - 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 17 of 27 - Page ID#: 2227
TTYs
How many TTY machines does your institution have? * Where are they kept? *
How does an inmate get access?
Are TTYs available during the same hours as phones? * Yes No
Please describe the available hours for both phones and TTYs.
Are there printed instructions kept with the TTYs? * Yes No
Please upload instructions for the use of the TTY. Has any inmate requested TTY access since April 1, 2017, and been denied? *
Yes No If so, please explain the circumstances, including the inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.
App. - 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 18 of 27 - Page ID#: 2228
Note: We will be conducting mandatory testing of the TTY this month. Please be on the lookout for an email to schedule testing within the next couple weeks.
Additional Time for Telephonic Communication:
The Settlement Agreement states (IX.C), “The KDOC will implement a policy that allows Deaf Inmates at least twice as many minutes to complete a Videophone call, and at least three times as many minutes to complete a TTY call, as the number of minutes afforded to other non-Deaf Inmates to make calls using traditional telecommunication devices such as telephones. In the event the KDOC determines this usage arrangement results in less than equitable access to telephones and Videophones for non-Deaf Inmates and Deaf Inmates, after considering the needs and abilities of Deaf and non-Deaf Inmates, the KDOC may adjust the ratio of time provided for Videophone calls and TTY calls. The KDOC will document this determination, including the evidence and reasons in support thereof. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made, and will explain the reasoning in support of such determination.”
How much time are non-Deaf inmates allowed to use for phone calls? * Time per call, and per day or week
How much time are Deaf inmates allowed to use for Videophone calls? * Time per call, and per day or week
How much time are Deaf inmates allowed to use for TTY calls? * Time per call, and per day or week
Since April 1, 2017, have you made any determination that the usage arrangements are inequitable? *
Yes No
If you have made such a determination, please provide documentation of the reasoning.
Devices to assist with effective communication
VRI Laptops
How many VRI laptops do you have? *
Where are they kept? *

Please provide VRI log showing use for each one since April 1, 2017.

App. - 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 19 of 27 - Page ID#: 2229
Has any inmate requested VRI services and been denied since April 1, 2017? * Yes No
If so, please explain the circumstances, including identifying the inmate, the date, and the reason for the denial.
Can a VRI be used in restrictive housing? * Yes No
How?
Can a VRI be used in the education area? * Yes No
If no, why not?
Does the VRI laptop bag include instructions? * Yes No
Does the VRI laptop bag include a cord splitter? * Yes No
Does the VRI laptop bag include a long computer cord? * Yes No
App. - 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 20 of 27 - Page ID#: 2230
Does the VRI laptop bag include anything else? *
Have you had occasion to use your VRI laptop as a videophone (or for video relay services/VRS)? *
Yes No If so, describe the circumstances. If not, please explain if this option is available to you, and how you have tested it. *
Has training on VRI use been provided to staff? * Yes No
Please explain to whom, when, and how the training has been provided.
Televisions
Are all your institution's shared-space TVs capable of turning captioning on? * Yes No
Does your institution use radio or another method to send shared-space TV sound to inmates' earphones? *
Yes No If yes, please describe the method.
App. - 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 21 of 27 - Page ID#: 2231
How do you deal with captioning for recreational movies? *
Please list all orientation videos. (e.g., institutional orientation, PREA, etc.) *
Which ones are captioned? *
Are the captions displaying when the videos are played for inmates during orientation? * Yes No
How did you check on whether the captions are displaying? *
Do you have earphones for the video system used for parole hearings? * Yes No
If you have such earphones, what kind of earphones are they? If you do not, is there a way to plug in earphones to the parole video system? *
App. - 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 22 of 27 - Page ID#: 2232
Non-auditory Alerts
The Settlement Agreement states (VIII.B.3; VIII.C), "The KDOC will promptly advise the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH of all non-auditory alert systems that the KDOC is considering, and will consult with the Settlement Monitor and the KCDHH in determining whether such devices are acceptable for the stated purpose." Please describe all current non-auditory alert systems or devices. This includes, e.g., bed shakers, strobelights, and pagers. For each, please include:
 manufacturer  model  link to website if available  how many you have  where they are in use  who has used them Also explain if you have any that are not in use. Use the text box below or upload a document.
Drop files here to uploadUpload File(s)
Upload information about non-auditory alert systems or devices here if not described in the text box above.
A. Over the last two quarters, have you considered any new non-auditory alert systems? (If no, skip questions B, C, and D.) *
Yes No For Questions B-D, use the text boxes below or upload a document. B. What systems have been under consideration?
C. Did you consult with the Settlement Monitor and KCDHH to determine whether the devices were acceptable? How and when?
App. - 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 23 of 27 - Page ID#: 2233
D. Please provide full information on any devices under consideration, including who and what they are for.
Upload information about new non-auditory alert systems under consideration here if not described in the text boxes above.
Other Devices
Please list all other devices or systems currently in use to assist with effective communication with Deaf (including hard-of- hearing) inmates. E.g.: phone amplifier, captioned telephone, induction loop system, radio transmission, speech-to-text system, etc. For each such device, please include:
 manufacturer  model  approximate cost  link to website if available  how many you have  where they are in use  who has used them. Also explain if you have any that are not in use. If there was any difficulty related to use that needed to be solved, please explain that, too. Use the text box below or upload a document.
Drop files here to uploadUpload File(s)
Upload information about other devices or systems in use here if not described in the text box above.
The Settlement Agreement states (XII), "Where devices such as vibrating clocks and in-line amplifiers are not deemed medically necessary, the KDOC agrees to consider on a case by case basis whether it will allow a particular Deaf Inmate the opportunity to purchase these devices at his or her own expense. The KDOC’s decision in this regard will consider, among other issues, whether these devices pose a security risk. The KDOC will have the discretion to make the determination whether any of these devices, and the type of device, is permissible. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination."
App. - 13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 24 of 27 - Page ID#: 2234
A. Since April 1, 2017, have you made any determinations allowing or disallowing devices? * Yes No
B. If you have considered a device - whether you granted or refused permission - please upload documentation of: (1) the device(s); (2) the reasoning; (3) the names of affected inmates; and (4) when you notified the Settlement Monitor of your determination(s).
Drop files here to uploadUpload File(s)
In-person Interpretation
Do you have an arrangement for in-person qualified interpretation services? * Yes No
If yes, with who?
Please describe each time an in-person interpreter has been used since April 1, 2017, including the name of the inmate, the date, and the occasion.
Has any inmate requested an in-person interpreter and been denied? * Yes No
If yes, please describe each denial, including the inmate who made the request, what the request was for, and why the request was denied.
Training and Information
Is there a KOMS alert noted for Deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates at your institution? * Yes No
Is the KOMS alert present for each Deaf and hard-of-hearing inmate? (Please check before you answer). If it's not available, note why.
App. - 14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 25 of 27 - Page ID#: 2235
If yes, please upload a screenshot. Which of these trainings have you completed as ADA Coordinator (check all that apply)
ADA Coordinator Training ("CREATE" Compliance) Settlement Agreement Training Online Training from DOJ Other option What training is being provided to your institution's employees and/or contractors relating to Deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates? *
Who (if anyone) is tracking training completion? *
What categories of staff are receiving the training? (New, existing, custody, program, medical/mental health, etc.) *
If any such training is not the KDOC computer-based training, please provide any written materials/slides and outlines of any orally-presented training.
Drop files here to uploadUpload File(s)
Does your institution's inmate handbook refer to the ADA, the settlement, the ADA coordinator, etc.? *
Yes No Please upload any page of the institution's inmate handbook that includes reference to the ADA, the settlement, the ADA coordinator, etc.
Drop files here to uploadUpload File(s)
Please upload any form or document given inmates relating to hearing issues/accommodations:
 Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services Form (III.C.3)  Request for Deaf Inmate ID Card Form (III.D.4)  Medical request form (with space to request Auxiliary Aids and Services) (VI.C.3)  Request for interpretive services  Brochure relating to available accommodations  Other
Drop files here to uploadUpload File(s)
App. - 15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 26 of 27 - Page ID#: 2236
Please upload any institutional policies and procedures (or memos explaining current practices) relating to deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates, including about:
 Telephone, TTY, or videophone use  Hearing aids  Interpretive services  Other
Drop files here to uploadUpload File(s)
Have any changes been made since April 1, 2017, in any of the above documents or policies? * Yes No
If yes, what changes have been made?
Are the settlement summary, settlement, and brochure all in the inmate law library? * Yes No
When did you last check to make sure they are really there? *
Direct threat reporting under the Agreement
The Settlement Agreement states (II.A), "The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain activities present a Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf Inmates and therefore may not be able to provide such Deaf Inmates full and equal enjoyment of some of its services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination." (reminder: "Deaf" includes hard-of-hearing inmates.) Over the past two quarters, have you at any point determined that any activities present a Direct Threat of injury or death to Deaf inmates and were therefore unable to provide those inmates full and equal enjoyment of any facility services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations? *
Yes No If so, please upload documentation of: (1) the service, privilege, facility, advantage or accommodation; (2) the risk presented; (3) a list of the inmate(s) affected; and (4) when you notified the Settlement Monitor of your determination(s).
Drop files here to uploadUpload File(s)
App. - 16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 90 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 27 of 27 - Page ID#: 2237
The Settlement Agreement states (VI.F), "The KDOC retains the discretion to determine that certain work assignments present a Direct Threat of injury or death to a Deaf Inmate or others and may therefore choose not to provide the Deaf Inmate a substantially equal opportunity to those work assignments. The KDOC will promptly notify the Settlement Monitor whenever any such determination is made and explain the reasoning in support of such determination." (reminder: "Deaf" includes hard-of- hearing inmates.) Since April 1, 2017, have you at any point determined that a work assignment presented a Direct Threat of injury or death to a Deaf inmate or others and therefore chosen not to provide the Deaf inmate a substantially equal opportunity to that work assignment? *
Yes No If so, please upload documentation of: (1) the work assignment(s); (2) the risk(s) presented; (3) the names of inmate(s) affected; and, (4) when you notified the Settlement Monitor of your determination(s).
Drop files here to uploadUpload File(s)
Is there anything else you'd like to let me know?
Thanks very much for your continued work on complying with the Settlement Agreement. CLICK Submit
App. - 17

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT FRANKFORT

OSCAR ADAMS and MICHAEL KNIGHTS

Plaintiffs

v.

Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, et al.

Defendants.

Fifth Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor

December 4, 2018
Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 625 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109

-1-

I. INTRODUCTION Pursuant to the Court’s order dated June 24, 2015, this is my fifth report to the Court and
the parties concerning the status of compliance with this case’s Settlement Agreement, which comprehensively governs how the Kentucky Department of Corrections (“Department” or KyDOC) deals with inmates who are deaf or hard-of-hearing. This report covers a full year—the last report was dated November 2017. The Settlement Agreement requires semi-annual court reports; I am instead filing this single report for 2018, covering two sets of site-visits, a self-audit pilot, and substantial work on audiology. Following a semi-annual self-reporting cycle, the various KyDOC institutions did a self-report in late October 2018, and I had hoped to be able to report in full on that in this document. However, because some institutions provided incomplete information, and for others I have substantial follow-up informational requests, I am unable to make that full report: my plan is to do another court report in two to three months.
As in my prior reports, I thank the Department’s personnel, both at headquarters and at the various affected institutions, for their work on implementing the improvements that are required by the Settlement Agreement, and their professionalism and accommodation of my requests for information. KyDOC has continued to make progress towards compliance.
Since the last report, dated November 2017, I have focused on three things: • Hearing aid provision • Compliance checklist and site visits • Initiation of self-audits This report has four Appendices; the first two themselves have important exhibits. Appendix A: Self-Audit Report, including as an exhibit new Self-Audit Worksheets Appendix B: Site Visit Reports, including exhibit collating all extant recommendations Appendix C: October 2018 Self-Reporting Questionnaire Appendix D: New KyDOC Policy on Audiology
-2-

II. DEAF/HARD-OF-HEARING INMATES
As in previous reports, improved screening and tracking has led to an increase in the number of reported inmates who are deaf or hard-of-hearing. These are tallied in Table 1:

Table 1: Distribution of Kentucky Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates

Institution
Bell County Forestry Camp (BCFC) Blackburn Correctional Complex (BCC) Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (EKCC) Green River Correctional Complex (GRCC) Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women (KCIW) Kentucky State Penitentiary (KSP) Kentucky State Reformatory (KSR) Lee Adjustment Center (LAC) Little Sandy Correctional Complex (LSCC) Luther Luckett Correctional Complex (LLCC) Northpoint Training Center (NTC) Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC) Western Kentucky Correctional Complex (WKCC) Ross-Cash Center (Ross-Cash)
TOTAL

# of Deaf/HOH Inmates

~Nov. Apr. Nov. Apr.

2016 2017 2017 2018

0

5

8

6

5

4 15 21

9

11 30 44

26 35 36 55

13 13 10 11

6

11 13 19

64 75 98 176

-

-

- 16

18

8 12 36

6

26 39 96

15 28 38 54

10 16 16 24

5

10 31 47

1

2

4

7

178 244 350 612

Nov. 2018
6 26 51 57 11 28 189 20 74 94 68 20 45 6 695

Currently KyDOC has 9 inmates who sign to communicate; they are housed at GRCC (1), KCIW (2), KSP (2), KSR (2), LLCC (1), and LSCC (1). The reported individuals have highly varying degrees of hearing impairment; the November 2018 column includes inmates who range from being nearly or entirely deaf in both ears to having a mild impairment in one ear. Several dozen inmates included are not yet fully assessed; some of these may not prove to have have any hearing impairment.

III. SITE VISITS AND SELF AUDITS
The Settlement Agreement became effective June 28, 2015 and runs for five years. It allows me to visit each Kentucky Department of Corrections (KYDOC) adult institution each calendar year. Over the three-and-a-half years so far, I have visited each facility except the new Lee Adjustment Center, on the schedule set out in Table 2, below. In lieu of a second visit to Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women (KCIW), Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC), Blackburn Correctional Complex (BCC), and Luther Luckett Correctional Complex (LLCC), I asked them to pilot a self-audit process, which they did in August 2018. My thinking was based on the fact that there were fewer than two years left in the agreement’s term. Once the agreement is complete, obviously my role will be over. Yet the Department will continue to have

-3-

deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates and they will continue to need effective communication, auxiliary aides, and appropriate accommodations. In addition to monitoring compliance, my role has been to assist the Department in building its own capacity to meet these legal requirements. As part of my monitoring, I have constructed an inspection checklist, that canvasses all the issues subject to the settlement agreement. I refined that checklist during the site visits I conducted in November 2017, and used it in the site visits I conducted in June 2018. When I asked KYDOC officials if they would be willing to pilot use of the checklist as a self-audit instrument, they agreed. I have written a report on the results, both substantively and presenting a substantially improved Self-Audit Workbook. See Appendix A. Appendix B presents the reports from the 2017 and 2018 site visits, including as one of its exhibits a document that collates all the recommendations I have made in the course of this case.

Table 2: Site Visits and Self-Audits

Institution

Site Visit Date

Visit 1

Visit 2 Self-Audit

Bell County Forestry Camp (BCFC)

6/19/2018

Blackburn Correctional Complex (BCC)

12/12/2016

8/2018

Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (EKCC)

12/13/2016

6/21/2018

Green River Correctional Complex (GRCC)

6/28/2016

11/16/2017

Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women (KCIW)

6/23/2016

8/2018

Kentucky State Reformatory (KSR)

2/24/2016, 2/25/2016 2/27/2017

Kentucky State Penitentiary (KSP)

6/26/2016, 6/27/2016 11/15/2017

Little Sandy Correctional Complex (LSCC)

12/13/2016

6/20/2018

Luther Luckett Correctional Complex (LLCC)

6/24/2016

8/2018

Northpoint Training Center (NTC)

12/14/2016

6/18/2018

Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC)

6/22/2016

8/2018

Western Kentucky Correctional Complex (WKCC) Including Ross-Cash Center (Ross)

6/26/2016

11/14/2017

Lee Adjustment Center (New, private facility)

IV. SELF-REPORTS
I have also continued to use a semi-annual self-reporting tool; the most recent version, from October 2018, is attached as Appendix C. Some institutions continue to struggle with keeping and sharing the records needed to comply with the agreement and to check on that compliance. As a result, I continue to have substantial followup requests. I am working through these, and will report in the next two months or so on the results. In particular, I had hoped to be able to report on audiology results, and whether inmates in need of audiology services are obtaining those services timely. But I have not yet received full enough information to make that assessment. In addition, my next report will identify the other strengths and challenges revealed by both the April and October 2018 self-reports.

-4-

V. KNOWN PROBLEM TOPICS
Using the information from the site visits (and related preparatory inmate interviews), selfaudits, preliminary review of the October 2018 self-report, and the many communications I have had with inmates and staff in the past year, I can identify five areas with ongoing compliance problems:
A. Identification and Tracking of Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing Prisoners
There remain some issues with identification and tracking of deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates, particularly when inmates are transferred. It continues to be the case that the institutions’ selfreports are omitting inmates from prior lists, particularly after transfers. As I have commented previously, these kinds of tracking problems are concerning not only because they interfere with monitoring but because it is only inmates on the institutions’ lists who can receive required services and accommodations. I had hoped this problem would have been solved by KyDOC’s implementation of a uniform “KOMS” (Kentucky Offender Management System) alert—an entry in each affected inmate’s online file that is supposed to allow the system-wide tracking of deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. The ADA Coordinators are supposed to receive routine automated transfer memos listing incoming inmates for each institution with an annotation if they are deaf/hard-of-hearing. I am continuing to investigate why the problem persists.
B. Telecommunications Services
Videophones. One of the areas in which KyDOC made the speediest progress in Settlement Agreement compliance was provision of videophones (and the ancillary interpretive services) to inmates who sign to communicate. With the exception of the Lee Adjustment Center, KyDOC’s new (private) institution, each institution has, long-since, installed a videophone kiosk. Lee recently got a videophone as well. During this past year, however, there were significant technical difficulties with the videophones, which are obtained from Purple Communications. There were weeks of system-wide outages, and some institutions have had ongoing difficulties. Only KSR, which has a Sorenson as well as the Purple kiosk, has escaped these problems. It will be important for KyDOC to monitor the issue going forward; if significant outages recur, it may be that an alternative or backup is necessary. In addition, once I heard about the outages, I worked with each institution that has inmates who use the videophone to ensure that a temporary alternative was made available to them, using the VRI laptop. This alternative should not await my intervention; it should be routinely used as the stop-gap when the videophones are out-ofservice.
Amplified telephones. Phones pose a particular problem for hard-of-hearing inmates. They are, of course, very hard-used in prisons, which can degrade sound quality. And sometimes they are located close to noisy areas like showers or dayrooms. Securus, KYDOC’s phone contractor, offers volume controls on some phones, which are helpful—people with hearing impairments can turn the volume up. I have previously recommended that each institution should ensure that it has volume-adjusted phones in all the areas where they are needed by hard-of-hearing
-5-

inmates.1 This recommendation seems to have been largely (though not completely) implemented. It turns out, however, that for some inmates, the volume adjustment offers insufficient amplification. I have therefore also recommended that each KyDOC institution have several portable phone amplifiers available for check-out by hard-of-hearing inmates.2 Until this is implemented, telephonic services will remain unequal.
Captioned Telephones. For inmates whose hearing does not allow even amplified access to telephones, but who do not sign to communicate, captioned telephones are often an appropriate technology: these combine an audible signal with computer-aided transcription of the incoming side of the conversation. Several KyDOC institutions are piloting their use.3
TTY. TTY technology is old and cumbersome, and very few inmates wish to use it. But for those who do, I continue to work with the KyDOC institutions to ensure that TTYs are available and their instructions plain and usable.
C. Interpretive Services
Remote interpretation. Another area in which KyDOC institutions made early progress in settlement compliance was making Video Relay Interpretation (VRI) available to inmates who sign to communicate. Each institution has a working VRI laptop. But getting staff to use those laptops remains a problem. There are still institutions where the VRI laptop is used only in the most formal situations: classification, disciplinary hearings. It should be used for any significant conversation with an inmate who signs to communicate. This requires staff training and persistent followup by the ADA coordinator, who should notice when the laptop is not checked out and investigate why it is going underused.
In-person interpretation. In addition, some situations—particularly those involving multiple speakers—are not appropriate for VRI.4 But at some institutions, in-person interpretation has not been made available.
D. Audiology services
This past year has seen important developments in hearing aid provision. As previously reported, two problems had been apparent: inconsistency and delay.
1 “Recommendation 74: Each facility should improve access of hard-of-hearing inmates to telecommunications, by . . . (b) Informing them that amplified phones are available, and ensuring that at least one such phone, whose amplification is compatible with a hearing aid but does not require one, is available in every group of phones used by any hard-of-hearing inmate.”).
2 “Recommendation 85: Portable phone amplifiers should be made available at every institution.” 3 “Recommendation 74: Each facility should improve access of hard-of-hearing inmates to telecommunications, by: . . . (c) Providing access to captioned telephones, unless on investigation such telephones are not available in the institutional setting.” 4 See Settlement Agreement VI; Recommendation 12 (“In-person interpretation should be provided to inmates who communicate by signing when it is necessary for effective communication. This includes during group classes in which student participation is key, and in parole hearings. For other situations, an in-person interpreter should be provided if remote interpretation is unlikely to be, or has not been, effective.”).
-6-

Development of a constistent standard. On the inconsistency problem, I worked with KyDOC to develop an objective standard for provision of a hearing aid. The Settlement Agreement provides: “[T]he KDOC will provide all medically necessary hearing aids.” Settlement Agreement VIII.B.2. After review of Medicaid coverage and other comparison policies, the Department has adopted the following standard (see Appendix D), using benchmark hearing testing frequencies of 500 Hz, 1,000 Hz, 2,000 Hz, and 4,000 Hz.:
1) Inmates who have a threshold of 25 dB or higher in one ear at two or more of the benchmark frequencies shall be assessed to determine the need for an assistive device.
2) The PCP shall interpret the quantitative hearing test and assess the degree of hearing impairment at the benchmark frequencies separately in each ear. • If the degree of impairment in the better is <35 dB at two or more of the benchmark frequencies the patient may be provided with an over-the-counter amplification device (“pocket talker”) if the PCP deems it appropriate. • If the degree of impairment in the better ear is 35 dB or higher at two or more of the benchmark frequencies, the PCP shall refer the case to the CCS regional medical director for a hearing aid.
3) The ear with the lower threshold (i.e., the better ear) shall determine the intervention offered. Two hearing aids shall be provided to a patient who meets the criterion for a hearing aid in both ears and meets at least one of the following requirements: • Legally blind • A compelling occupational, educational, or safety need for binaural hearing
This standard was finalized, with my sign-off, on May 31, 2018. Unfortunately, until October 2018, a misunderstanding of the standard led to erroneous implementation and denial of hearing aids that are appropriate under the standard. Quite a few retests were necessary. They seem now to have been done.
Delay. In its effort to solve the audiology delays reported in my last filing, KyDOC has begun to use a vendor, Audicus, that offers on-line hearing tests and then ships hearing aids to the institutions. See https://www.audicus.com/. Eliminating the multiple off-site visits previously needed is a major advantage of this approach, if the resulting services are sufficiently high-quality. There were certainly some transition issues—the misunderstanding with respect to the standard referenced above, and some delay as the system was being set up. I do not know yet if those transitional delays are solved. I will include this in my next report, in a couple of months.
E. Effective Communication/Equal Access to Services for Hard-of-Hearing Inmates
The complaint I hear the most frequently in my monitoring is that hard-of-hearing inmates cannot hear announcements, programming, and staff orders, leading to allegations of misconduct, discipline, and denial of equal access to services. It is clear to me that this is a major problem. Each institution needs to develop a way that hard-of-hearing inmates can get access to the relatively simple announcements of pill-call, chow, count, and other institutional events. And
-7-

each needs a way to amplify more complex communications like those in educational and rehabilitative programming and the like.
More work is needed to develop solutions across KYDOC; each religious, educational, and rehabilitative programming area needs access to such systems.5 Once systems are developed and available, hard-of-hearing inmates should be informed about them, so that they can request them when helpful. I have been working with several of the institutions to work on solutions: nonauditory alerts, communications aids, and amplification. A number of institutions are piloting different amplification equipment. I will report on the results in a subsequent report.
VI. CONCLUSION The Kentucky Department of Corrections continues to progress towards compliance with
the Settlement Agreement, but implementation challenges remain. Dated: December 4, 2018 Respectfully submitted,
____________________________________ Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 610 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109 (202) 277-2506 Margo.schlanger@gmail.com Adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com
5 See Settlement Agreement V.A.2 (“Appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, including Qualified Interpreters, will be made available so that Deaf Inmates may have an equal opportunity to participate in all services, privileges, and programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC’s custody.”); I.2 (defining “Auxiliary Aids and Services” to include “assistive listening systems”); Recommendation 67 (“Each religious, educational, and programming area should have available a device to allow wireless amplification for individual hard-of-hearing inmates.”).
-8-

Fifth Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor December 4, 2018 Appendices
A: Self-Audit Report, including exhibit of new Self-Audit Worksheets B: Site Visit Reports, including exhibit that collates all extant recommendations C: October 2018 Self-Reporting Questionnaire D: New KyDOC Policy on Audiology
-9-

APPENDIX A

Self-Audit Pilot Report of Settlement Monitor
Adams & Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky.)

Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor

August 2018 Self-Audits

Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women (KCIW) Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC) Blackburn Correctional Complex (BCC)
Luther Luckett Correctional Complex (LLCC)

Draft (without Exhibit A) circulated to parties for comment: October 15, 2018 Final: November 30, 2018

INTRODUCTION

The Settlement Agreement in this case addressing conditions for deaf and hard-ofhearing inmates in Kentucky became effective June 28, 2015 and runs for five years. It allows me to visit each Kentucky Department of Corrections (KYDOC) adult institution each calendar year. Over the three-plus years so far, I have visited each institution except the new Lee Adjustment Center, on the schedule set out in Table A, below.

Table A: Site Visits and Self-Audits

Institution

Site Visit Date

Visit 1

Visit 2 Self-Audit

Bell County Forestry Camp (BCFC)

6/19/2018

Blackburn Correctional Complex (BCC)

12/12/2016

8/2018

Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (EKCC)

12/13/2016

6/21/2018

Green River Correctional Complex (GRCC)

6/28/2016

11/16/2017

Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women (KCIW)

6/23/2016

8/2018

Kentucky State Reformatory (KSR)

2/24/2016, 2/25/2016 2/27/2017

Kentucky State Penitentiary (KSP)

6/26/2016, 6/27/2016 11/15/2017

Lee Adjustment Center (New, private facility)

Little Sandy Correctional Complex (LSCC)

12/13/2016

6/20/2018

Luther Luckett Correctional Complex (LLCC)

6/24/2016

8/2018

Northpoint Training Center (NTC)

12/14/2016

6/18/2018

Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC)

6/22/2016

8/2018

Western Kentucky Correctional Complex (WKCC) Including Ross-Cash Center (Ross)

6/26/2016

11/14/2017

In lieu of a second visit to Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women (KCIW), Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC), Blackburn Correctional Complex (BCC), and Luther Luckett Correctional Complex (LLCC), I asked them to pilot a self-audit process, which they did

Monitor’s Report, Self-Audit Pilot (August 2018), p. 1 of 6

in August 2018. My thinking was: there is less than two years left in the agreement’s term. Once the agreement is complete, obviously my role will be over. Yet the Department will continue to have deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates and they will continue to need effective communication, auxiliary aides, and appropriate accommodations. In addition to monitoring compliance, my role has been to assist the Department in building its own capacity to meet these needs. As part of my monitoring, I have constructed an inspection checklist, that canvasses all the issues subject to the settlement agreement. I refined that checklist during the site visits I conducted in November 2017, and used it in the site vists I conducted in June 2018. When I asked KYDOC officials if they would be willing to pilot use of the checklist as a self-audit instrument, they agreed.
I received the checklist back from the ADA coordinators of the four listed facilities in mid-August, and conducted several conversations with the ADA coordinators and headquarters officials about them, during September 2018. Followup after those conversations took another week or two. This report summarizes the results, and attaches the checklist itself, refined in light of the pilot, as Exhibit A. In particular, the pilot revealed a number of unclear questions; I have worked to clarify each in Exhibit A. In addition, the checklist did not cover audiology results sufficiently to allow evaluation of compliance or non-compliance with the settlement; my thinking had been that I check on audiology results twice a year through a different self-report. Since once I am no longer monitoring that semi-annual report will be gone, on consideration, it seems advisable to include it here, as well. Likewise, I decided to cover more thoroughly in the self-audit checklist some additional questions I have been asking in the semi-annual self-report, so that it can entirely substitute for that report. Finally, the checklist is also slightly augmented to reflect the three recommendations I made in my most recent site-visit report.
I. PROCESS, AS REFINED
Having been through a partial process with the pilot facilities, the process going forward for self-audits is this:
A. The ADA coordinator takes 1-2 weeks to do the audit. This requires checking each deaf/HOH inmate’s audiology records and accommodations; interviewing a sample of the inmates; and a site inspection of many areas of the prison.
B. As the ADA coordinator talks to staff and inmates, each such contact should be recorded and made a part of the audit record. (There is now a tab in the audit worksheet for recording these contacts.)
C. Along the way, if the audit reveals compliance issues, the ADA coordinator solves them. For example, if certain inmates do not have a deaf/HOH ID, they should receive one. Although I did not create a space to note these kind of fixes for this pilot round, there is such a space going forward.
D. Whatever compliance issues remain are noted. E. In addition to filling out the checklist, the ADA coordinator should prepare a list
itemizing all issues that needed solving during the audit, with a plan for each such item about how to keep it on track and all issues that remain, with a plan for solution of each. Again, the audit worksheet includes a space for this list.
Monitor’s Report, Self-Audit Pilot (August 2018), p. 2 of 6

F. While I am still monitoring, the full audit worksheet, with all its tabs are shared with me. Once my monitoring role is ended, these should be shared with a supervisor—a deputy warden or the warden—and with whoever is managing ADA matters at KYDOC headquarters.
G. At regular intervals (every 30 days seems sensible) the ADA coordinator should check the list and assess whether appropriate progress is being made, until they are solved.

I did not follow precisely this process for this pilot. A, D, and E (in part) were done, but I did not ask the ADA coordinators to do B or C. I did, however, work through F on the phone with each ADA coordinator, rather than in writing, and got reports back. On further consideration, it seems clear that a written record as described above will greatly facilitate compliance and self-monitoring. This is now included in Exhibit A.

II. FACILITY BY FACILITY

A. Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women (KCIW). Conducted by Deputy Warden/ADA Coordinator Vanessa Kennedy

Observed Compliance Issues

Issue

Next steps

Not sure if they are tied into the automatic Check with HQ to make sure that ADA

notification re. deaf/HOH inmates when they Coordinator is on the automatic email list.

are transferred.

Not getting word from jails when deaf/HOH No obvious solution.

inmates arrive

Orientation video is not able to be amplified Investigate amplification possibilities—blue

tooth?

Provider visit for audiology screening takes

up to 14 days.

Inmate handbook does not mention the

Revise handbook for next printing.

obligation of non-discrimination and

availability of ADA accommodations/services

Various state-wide forms do not include

Hand off to monitor for discussion with HQ

requests for accommodations:

• Job application form

• Classification form

• Discipline form

• SAP and other programming form

• NA/AA form

Notice not posted outside housing units

Discuss with monitor

Pager not available

Pager range was insufficient. Will need to

use personal notification instead, unless

another pager has better success.

No separate phone amplifier is used.

Purchase and make available.

Monitor’s Report, Self-Audit Pilot (August 2018), p. 3 of 6

Issue Videophone is not reliable Bed shaker/non-auditory alerts not available for HOH inmates (only deaf) Bed shaker not set up for anything other than fire alarm.
TTY stored in Captain’s office and available only by request

Next steps Hand off to monitor for discussion with HQ. Review whether any HOH inmates have a need. Review configuration, and either make available or set up alternative approaches as appropriate. If an inmate arrives who uses the TTY, need to make available more readily.

Notable strengths: • Availability of in-person interpreter when appropriate.

B. Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC) Conducted by ADA Coordinator Amy Robey

Observed Compliance Issues

Issue

Next steps

Pager not available

Will need to use personal notification instead.

No CapTel available

Consider use.

No separate phone amplifier is used.

Purchase and make available. (Done)

No amplification system used in any space.

No other non-auditory alerts used

Various state-wide forms do not include

Hand off to monitor for discussion with HQ

requests for accommodations:

• Job application form

• Classification form

• Discipline form

• SAP and other programming form

• NA/AA form

Notable strengths: • Use of bed shaker for various alerts.

C. Blackburn Correctional Complex (BCC) Conducted by ADA Coordinator Christy Peach

Observed Compliance Issues

Issue

Next steps

ADA Coordinator does not run periodic

Run such a list monthly

reports to ensure inmate list is complete

No non-auditory alerts used: no pagers or

Consider use. Also sent memo reminding

buzzers

staff to flash light for standing count.

(10/15/2018 memo)

Monitor’s Report, Self-Audit Pilot (August 2018), p. 4 of 6

Issue Volume control not available for phones in all spaces. Separate phone amplifier not yet available, though purchase order has been submitted for approval. Amplification needed for in-process recording of inmate handbook Annual/routine physicals do not include hearing screening ADA coordinator not always notified when inmates are found to be deaf/HOH Not sure if sick call slip includes request for accommodations Various state-wide forms do not include requests for accommodations:
• Job application form • Classification form • Discipline form • SAP and other programming form • NA/AA form Email alerts for transferred inmates who are deaf/HOH are not always coming through Bed shaker not set up for anything other than fire alarm.
No amplification system used in any space.

Next steps Purchase and make available.
Make earphones available. Need to get participation by provider to do this for all routine physicals. Discuss with medical and run KOMS list. Check and fix if need be. Hand off to monitor for discussion with HQ
Discuss with HQ how to solve. Review configuration, and either make available or set up alternative approaches as appropriate. Get amplification for education, for starters.

Notable strengths: • Easy availability of TTY

D. Luther Luckett Correctional Complex (LLCC) Conducted by ADA Coordinator Sherri Grissinger

Observed Compliance Issues

Issue

Next steps

ADA Coordinator would like more training Monitor to supply some options

No non-auditory alerts used: no pagers or

Consider use. (LLCC reports that this would

buzzers

require purchase of a transmitter/repeater. For

now, they will continue to use in-person

notifications.

Email alerts for transferred inmates who are Discuss with HQ how to solve.

deaf/HOH are not always coming through

Amplification not available for orientation Have purchased earphones and a Peavey

video.

amplification system.

Monitor’s Report, Self-Audit Pilot (August 2018), p. 5 of 6

Issue Accommodation needed for low-literacy deaf/HOH in orientation Audiology services are slow. In particular, several inmates seem to need hearing aids and have been waiting for months. Various state-wide forms do not include requests for accommodations:
• Job application form • Classification form • Discipline form • SAP and other programming form NA/AA form No bed shakers, currently.
Bed shaker not set up for anything other than fire alarm.
No amplification system used in any space. Communications issues reported by inmates:
• Difficulty understanding announcements (mentioned by 8+ inmates)
• Buzzer watch • Amplification in church • Pager or shaker watch

Next steps Orientation staff will meet 1 on 1 with inmates, if appropriate with an interpreter. Have switched vendors to Audicus; will monitor.
Hand off to monitor for discussion with HQ
Should have one available, for use when needed. Review configuration, and either make available or set up alternative approaches as appropriate. ADA announcers are under consideration; perhaps this will meet the need. Consider amplification for one or two spaces. In person notification system has been put into place. Will offer Timex expedition watch for sale as personal purchase (not to count against quarterly purchase limits). Conducting wrist alarm clock testing with 3 new inmates. Chaplain to meet with volunteers regarding increased utilization of service bulletins, increased usage of PowerPoint.

Areas of strength: • Telephone amplifiers in place • TV is broadcast on FM channel • Headphones provided for parole

III. CONCLUSION

This pilot was quite successful, assisting in refining the self-audit methodology, and in solving ongoing compliance issues at each institution. The new checklist should be ready for the rest of KYDOC institutions to use. My plan is to ask each institution to do that, in place of the April 2019 semi-annual self-report and also to visit each institution one more time, to allow a final report to the Court before the close of the monitoring period.

Monitor’s Report, Self-Audit Pilot (August 2018), p. 6 of 6

Exhibit A: Self-Audit Workbook

Monitoring Checklists/Worksheets, Table of Contents Main
A ADA coordinator B Reporting obligations C Intake/Orientation - Corrections D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services E Information provided inmates F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided I Interpretation in general J Hand Restraints K Non-auditory Alerts L Telecommunications M Miscellaneous Devices N Disciplinary O Grievances P Training Q Monitor Access Audiology Technology Documentation Effective Communication, by Unit Inmate Auxiliary Aid Tracker Housing Unit Tracker Audit Contacts Followup Lists

# Issue/Question
A ADA coordinator
1 Is an ADA coordinator designated? Has there been a time (since last audit) when there
2 was no ADA coordinator appointed? 3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates?

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with 5 inmates in a timely and appropriate manner? How?

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? 6 (THIS REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

Describe method used to ascertain:

Is the information prominently posted in any housing 7 unit where deaf/HOH inmates are held? 8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training? 9 Describe training
Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately 10 cover information?

Describe:

NA

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training) 12 Adequate w/r/t state law?
Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's 13 powerpoint)
Does ADA coordinator demontrate familiarity with 14 agreement?

Does ADA coordinator retrieve at least monthly 15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?
Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's 16 tracking list?
Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in 17 implementing the settlement?
Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf 18 inmates?
Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on 19 deaf inmates?
Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the 20 inmates in those situations?
Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective 21 way with the monitor?
Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the 22 monitor when necessary?

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

B Reporting obligations
If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was 1 monitor notified?
Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf 2 and HOH inmates? 3 Is the list complete? 4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?
Quarterly summary of all grievances by deaf or HOH 5 inmates shared with monitor?
Was there a direct threat determination made for 6 jobs, activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe) 7 Was it reported to the monitor? 8 Was the report complete? 9 Was the report timely?

Description/Notes Describe:

10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert? 11 If yes, was the monitor notified?
Did the institution consult with the monitor about the 12 non-auditory alert?

13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA NA

# Issue/Question
C Intake/Orientation - Corrections
1 Hard of hearing inmates Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is
2 arriving? Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive
3 automatic notifications.) Effective communications planned/provided?
4 (Describe) Deaf inmates Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is
5 arriving? 6 Describe 7 Effective communications planning? 8 Effective communication provided? 9 Describe 10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed? 11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?
Orientation videos 12 Captioned? 13 Shown in a quiet space? 14 Amplification if needed?
Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not 15 literate? (Describe)

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes
Describe: Describe: Describe: Describe:
Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA NA NA NA NA

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Description/Notes

Effective Communication during general medical intake, and during medical care more generally: 1 Is there effective communications planning? Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty 2 hearing if interpretation is needed?

3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office? Are staff aware of, and use, effective
4 communications techniques? Notice to medical staff:

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How? Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on
6 cover and within the file? Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate
7 accommodations. Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site
8 providers of need for interpretation? 9 Procedure in place to ensure notification? 10 Has there ever been a notification to provider? 11 Adequate notice?
Outside providers offering effective communication 12 to inmates who sign? 13 How?
Hearing screening/medical intake: 14 Performed for all new inmates? 15 Within first 3 days at institution? 16 Approved screening form? (need to review) 17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

Describe: Describe:

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake? How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it
19 administered by staff?

Describe:

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

Describe:

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy? 22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe. 23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA
NA NA NA NA

NA NA

# Issue/Question
Other methods of access: Do annual/routine physicals include hearing 24 screening?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening? 26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?
If screening indicated problem (3+ "yes" answers), is 27 there further assessment?
Adequate determination of need for designation/ 28 audiology services? How?

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or 30 HOH, apart from audiology services decision?
After assessment, does medical: 31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file? 33 Notify ADA coordinator? 34 Is notification prompt?
Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist) 35 Audiology services offered when needed? 36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles) 37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid? 38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate? Adequate progress tracking? Should include:
40 initial request/questionnaire? 41 each relevant medical visit? 42 any audiology visit? 43 hearing aid provision?

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks? 45 Shared with ADA Coordinator? 46 Shared with monitor when requested
Summary When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing 47 aid? Describe.
In the past year, how many individuals have had to 48 wait more than sixty days to receive a hearing aid? 49 What is the cause of the delay?

Describe:
Describe: Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA NA NA
NA NA NA

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) 50 to improve this process?
Co-pay and availability issues: 47 Charged only once -- not again for followups
Hearing aid batteries 48 Available for free? 49 In sufficient numbers? 50 7 days/week? 51 regardless of housing?

Description/Notes Describe:
?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA NA
NA

# Issue/Question
E Information provided inmates
1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe) Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-
2 discrimination and ADA services? Brochure? Items to include:
3 Non-discrimination obligation 4 Effective communication obligation 5 Auxiliary aids and services available

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Describe:

?

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services

6 (including hearing aids, and batteries)

Communication equipment available, and how to

7 use

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

Other items:

?

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

Request for Accommodations/ Communications

10 Assistance

Medical Request form includes request for

11 accommodations

Job application form includes request for

12 accommodations

13 Waiver forms

Classification form includes request for

14 accommodations

15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations SAP and other programming form includes request
16 for accommodation

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation
Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure 18 available in law library? (Need to check)
Do request forms: 19 list available services comprehensively?
clearly explain services and aids (what they are 20 and when they are available? 21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?
expressly ask about preferred mode of communication/needed services and why they are 22 useful? 23 explain which items are free? encompass religious and volunteer-provided 24 programming? Effective communication of these resources: Are the materials in language accessible to each 25 inmate?

Describe date checked:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA

NA NA

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered

# Issue/Question

during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Is this information provided with effective 26 communication?
Can inmates request and receive a meaningful

opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member

and interpreter to ask questions about the 27 materials?
Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment

in/application for a program with staff, is effective 28 communication provided?
are potential accommodations covered in the

29 discussion? Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application in education with staff, is effective

30 communication provided? are potential accommodations covered in the

31 discussion?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA NA

# Issue/Question
F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates
1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator? 3 Notice posted outside housing units?

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator? 5 Cell/bed cards 6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert? 7 Clear process to obtain? Describe 8 Each inmate has one if not waived? 9 Provided timely? 10 Replacements provided when needed?
KOMS alert? 11 Staff aware of use of KOMS
Working process to get new inmate alerts added? 12 (Describe)

Describe: Describe:

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check) 14 Appropriately obvious 15 Updated timely
Individual ID cards 16 Staff aware of meaning? 17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?) 18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived? 19 Provided timely? 20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times? 21 Prompt replacements provided? 22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose? 23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator? 24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver? 25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?
Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested 26 ID? 27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Describe: Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA NA
NA NA NA

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment
Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification 1 upon intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?
Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification 2 of other deaf/hoh inmates?
Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment with every arriving or 3 newly identified deaf/hoh inmate? At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of communication expressly ascertained and 4 documented? At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate about available auxiliary aids and 5 services? Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms 6 explained? Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral and written; VRI; or visual 7 descriptions ) Other assessments For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an 8 assessment on intake, has one been done?

9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided
1 On-person ID cards 2 Cell cards 3 Bed shaker 4 In-person alerts 5 Pager
Phone volume adjust setting (available in each 6 location where phones are available?) 7 Amplifier for phone
Consideration of specific housing assignment to 8 minimize communication difficulties? 9 Other amplification 10 Other (describe)
General issues Special housing area: Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH 11 inmates? (Describe) If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? 12 (Describe) If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed there? (such a requirement is non13 compliant).

Description/Notes
Describe: Describe: Describe:

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live there, are accommodations etc. still fully 14 available to the inmate? Describe any restrictions.

Describe:

In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is 15 primary consideration given to inmate request?

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or not requesting aids/services, 16 were accommodations provided? Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services 17 documented in inmate institutional files? Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary 18 aids/services shared appropriately with staff? 19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained? 20 Have any been out of comission? 21 Describe -- which and for how long? Inmates moving housing or transferred: not 22 separated from hearing aid? 23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided? 24 Promptly? 25 Has there been a direct threat determination? 26 Describe

Describe: Describe:
Describe: Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA NA NA
NA
NA

NA NA
NA NA

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific 27 degree of impairment and specific dangers posed) 28 Appropriately reported? 29 Was it the appropriate decision? 30 Are classes in sign language provided? 31 deaf inmates given notice? 32 priority given to deaf inmates?

Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

I Interpretation in general
Qualified interpretation services available: Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation 1 communicated to inmates? covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 2 encounters/communications/settings)

Description/Notes

Does the request form clearly encompass religious 3 and other volunteer-provided programming?
Effective process for choosing qualified 4 interpretation method?

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences? Standing arrangement with providers?
6 In-person? 7 VRI?
Is VRI availability: 8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?
after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours 9 of notice)?
on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours 10 of notice)?

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) 11 when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?
Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? 12 Describe
VRI laptop functional? 13 In general 14 Always checked for sufficient battery power? 15 Routine software updates?
VRI laptop has necessary items with it? 16 Splitter? 17 Instructions? 18 Long power cord? 19 Usable as VRS? 20 VRI effectiveness tracked? 21 How?
Information used to determine when in-person 22 interpretation should be first recourse?
Is in-person interpretation available: 23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical 24 Parole?
Describe each time in-person interpretation has been 25 offered

Describe: Describe:
Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA NA
NA NA

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered

# Issue/Question

during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Describe each time in-person interpretation has been 26 denied.
Parole board notified of need for interpretation at

27 least 7 days before?

Description/Notes

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? 28 (Reliance in non-emergency is non-compliant) 29 Describe
in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence 30 and VRI was unavailable)
Communication with inmates uses inmate's 31 preferred method?
Written communication is limited to only simple 32 matters.
Written communication is not needed when inmate 33 has low literacy
Qualified interpretation services available:

Describe:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious 34 and other volunteer-provided programming?
for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 35 encounters/communications/settings) Is the process for using VRI communicated to 36 inmates?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA

# Issue/Question
J Hand Restraints

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

Describe:

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? 2 Individualized finding of a security threat?

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who 3 might ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.) 4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed? 5 Staff aware of the issue
Off-site medical care: 6 two-point hand restraint system used?
restraints removed when necessary for medical 7 communication?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA

# Issue/Question
K Non-auditory Alerts

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe) 2 provided to all inmates who need it? 3 can and does it give alerts in real time? 4 sufficient to signal fire alarm? 5 sufficient to signal count alert? 6 programmed to signal different alerts? 7 used to notify of prison-wide events?
used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific 8 to them?
Have any requests for medically necessary non9 auditory alerts been denied?
Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are 10 working? 11 frequently enough? 12 monitored/recorded formally? 13 Announcement boards 14 used to notify of schedule changes? 15 used consistently? 16 in all dormitories? 17 in gym? 18 in library? 19 audited and monitored?
In-person or personal system notification when an 20 inmate misses a page?

Describe:

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ 21 info only because of disability?
Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in 22 the future? 23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?
Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in 24 emergency?
Does the plan account for how effective 25 communication will be provided?

Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA NA

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

L Telecommunications
Videophones: 1 Installed? 2 Allow voice carry-over features? 3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)
Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to 4 solve them.
When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe 5 other alternative offered
Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, 6 when videophone is out of service. 7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates? 8 Appropriate location?
Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, 9 weekends, emergency) if necessary? 10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates? 11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?
No more permission needed than that for hearing 12 inmates using ordinary phones? 13 Advance request unnecessary? 14 Free?
Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular 15 phone calls?
Has any inmate requested access to the videophones 16 and been denied?
Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the inmate's name, the date, and the 17 reason for the denial. TTY: 18 Installed? Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and 19 staff? Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions 20 made available WITH TTY? 21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify) 22 Access -- appropriate hours, days? location substantially as accessible as conventional 23 telephones for non-deaf inmates? 24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access? 25 Permission needed? Has any request to use the TTY been denied? 26 (Describe) 27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates? 28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe) 29 annually tested? (List when most recently) Can access publicly available relay service phone 30 numbers?

Description/Notes Describe: Describe: Describe: Describe:
Describe: Describe:
Describe:
Describe: Describe: Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA NA

NA

NA NA
NA
NA NA

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions 31 for videophones and TTY is less than equitable? 32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?
If yes, was determination (including reasoning, 33 evidence, etc.) documented? 34 Was monitor notified? 35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?
VRS via laptop 36 Available? 37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU) 38 Used when appropriate?
Phones 39 Amplification in every group of phones?
Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need 40 them?
CapTel 41 Appropriate for any particular inmate? 42 If so, installed and working? 43 Request by any inmate denied?
TV/Movies 44 Is captioning available? 45 Is captioning used? 46 Is the captioning checked regularly? 47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?
Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly 48 (Describe)
49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning? 50 Amplification method? (Describe)
If inmate-purchased tv w/ captioning malfunctioned, did staff assist to same extent as w/other inmates 51 regarding malfunctioning personal property? All technology/ equipment in good working order? 52 (Describe problems) Access to communication services for deaf inmates in segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf 53 inmates of same status? Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates only to the same extent and with the same 54 discretion as non-deaf inmates?

Describe:
Describe: Describe: Describe:
Describe: Describe: Describe any problems:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA
NA
NA NA NA NA NA

NA

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

M Miscellaneous Devices
1 Devices available? (Describe) 2 devices in commissary list?
possibility to request other devices from ADA 3 coordinator? 4 facilitation of purchase?
Purchase of any non-medically necessary device 5 denied? (Describe) 6 determined on case-by-case basis? 7 because security threat? 8 monitor notified? 9 reasoning explained?
ADA coordinator maintains records 10 of requests? 11 of denials?
N Disciplinary
Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate 1 has been punished? 2 Was a re-hearing granted?
O Grievances
Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA 1 coordinator?
If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator forward copy of grievance to ADA 2 coordinator? Records of all grievances filed by deaf/HOH 3 inmates? (not just those related to settlement) 4 Adequate summaries provided in report? Including all deaf or HOH inmate grievances, not just 5 those in settlement? 6 Includes issues raised by inmate in grievance?

Description/Notes Describe:
Describe:

7 Includes institution in which grievance was filed? 8 Includes summary of KDOC response? 9 Includes grievance resolution (or lack thereof)?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA NA

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

P Training
Types available 1 CBT? (Using approved training?) 2 Who received? (Describe) 3 All appropriate staff? 4 Live training? (Information only) 5 Who received? (Describe) 6 All appropriate staff?
Targeted training on specific needs 7 training on best communication practices? 8 training on unique needs/problems?
training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may 9 miss alert?
training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may not hear verbal commands and strategies to handle that 10 problem?

Description/Notes
Describe: Describe: Describe:

11 training on identification of communication needs? consideration given to talking one-on-one with deaf
12 or HOH inmates, instead of in a group? Training on communication
13 training on use and role of interpreters? 14 training on process for obtaining interpreters?
training on importance of not separating imate from 15 hearing aid? 16 training on communication technology? 17 training on VRI?

18 training on how to turn on and check for captioning? 19 training on non-auditory alert office switch? 20 training on videophone rules?
Training on Policies 21 training on the Settlement?

22 training on identity and role of ADA coordinator? 23 training on KDOC anti-discrimination policy? 24 training on existence of KOMS/EMR alerts? 25 training on meaning of ID cards?
training on equipment/services/ accommodation 26 available? 27 training on hand restraint policy? 28 training on two-point hand restraint system? 29 training on disciplinary and grievance practies?
Do all relevant staff know about reporting 30 obligations? How do you know?
Training specifically for housing area staff

Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA

NA

# Issue/Question
training on the use of cell/bed notices that indicate 31 an inmate is deaf/HOH 32 training on bed shaker switches 33 training on telecommunications
training on obligations to notify deaf and HOH 34 inmates of alerts
Training specifically for all corrections staff training on accommodations for inmates who sign 35 (esp. restraint policies) training on strategies for inmates who may not hear 36 directions/orders Training specifically for medical staff training on process to obtain hearing aid within two 37 months training on obligation to notify off-site providers of 38 needs 39 Training provided for review by Monitor?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-
Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA NA

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
1 Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

2

3

1 Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

2

3

1 Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

2

3

Prison:

Name of person filling out form:

Date:

4

5

6

7

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

4

5

6

7

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does

it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of

receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an

induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

4

5

6

7

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today -

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Technology

How many Where

FM radio transmitters, usable as an

amplifier system?

Phone amplifiers (not volume

control: portable amplifiers)

Captioned Telephone

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like?

Bed shakers Vibrating watches? Vibrating alarm clocks? Pagers? Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration not mentioned above. Earphones for parole hearings

Earphones for orientation videos

When obtained Specifications (URL) How do inmates obtain access? How well do they work Other comments

Documentation to review KOMS alerts for each deaf/HOH inmate Grievances:

Date reviewed Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

Provide/Review summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Provide/Review full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Solve any problems revealed. Discipline

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving an inmate who signs. Ensure that VRI or other effective communication was provided at each stage of each such proceedings.

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Ensure that no such inmate is being penalized for inability to hear. VRI Log (review to ensure it's being used in appropriate circumstances.

VRS or other videophone alternative (review to ensure that when videophone is inoperative, alternative is in fact available/used) TTY instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.) VRI instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.)

Questions regarding effective communications in particular activities or locations. For each, mark compliance (Y, partial, N, no basis) and explain. Goal:

In-person interpretation

Ever used? Intake/ Orientation -- Non-medical Intake, Medical Auxiliary Aid Assessment Units Restrictive Housing Medical/MH care Programs Education Recreation Communications with Chaplain Prison-provided religious programming Volunteer -led programming (note: Only volunteer interpretation is required) Parole hearings Classification/ Transfer Legal Aid Grievance process Work assignments Court call and ALL parts of disciplinary process
Staff investigations Investigative interviews Preparation of report Shift supervisor's review of disciplinary report Investigator's review of disciplinary report Miranda warnings

Used whenever appropriate?

Availability of VRI: Appropriate equipment available (computer line,
Staff trained? outlet, space)

Ever used? How many times?

Used whenever appropriate? (without special request)

When advising inmate of right to consult with legal aide

Questions regarding effective commeach deaf or HOH inmate has an equal opportunity to participate Amplification: (Not just hearing aid -- space-specific amplification)

Adequate? Describe efforts, issues

Intake/

Orientation -- Non-medical

Intake, Medical

Auxiliary Aid Assessment

s

Units

Restrictive Housing

Medical/MH care

Programs

Education

Recreation

Communications with Chaplain

Prison-provided religious

programming

Volunteer -led programming (note:

Only volunteer interpretation is

required)

Parole hearings

Classification/

Transfer

Legal Aid

Grievance process

Work assignments

Court call and ALL parts of

disciplinary process

Staff investigations

Investigative interviews

Preparation of report

Shift supervisor's review of

disciplinary report

Investigator's review of

disciplinary report

Miranda warnings

When advising inmate of right to consult with legal aide

Audit item issues/ concerns

Notification of date, time, and place of hearing Hearing or re-hearing

In-person interpretation

Ever used?

Used whenever appropriate?

Availability of VRI: Appropriate equipment available (computer line,
Staff trained? outlet, space)

Ever used? How many times?

Used whenever appropriate? (without special request)

If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to attend a religious service without effective communication to receive any religious meal, diet, or other accommodation? No Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have witnessed or been suspected of violation) provided with an inmate or staff advisor on same terms as non-deaf inmates? Yes inmates can have a staff council upon request. It is reviewed and denied or appoved based on the same process as a non deaf inmate.

Amplification: (Not just hearing aid -- space-specific amplification)

Notification of date, time, and place of hearing Hearing or re-hearing

Adequate?

Describe efforts, issues

If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to atte No Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have? Yes inmates can have a staff council

Audit item issues/ concerns

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Name

Listed Signs Low literacy?

If signs to

Other Alert

with

to (So that

communicat

Bed Shaker? Device

KOMS comm written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

ADA

unicat communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested;

Precautio e

n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied;

ID

n?

(Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted)

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING

Name

TTY Access

(Not

requested;

denied;

ID

granted)

Personal Phone Amplifier (Not requested; denied; granted)

Shake & Wake (Not requested; denied; granted)

Any other auxiliary aid requested? Outome? Audit item issues/concerns

Fill this out for EACH location where there are any deaf/HOH inmates

Dorm

Walk

If there are

How many Volume

Bed

any inmates

How inmates adjustable

shakers set Staff use If there are any

who sign:

many who sign phone available How up for use bed

inmates who If there are Ready

Deaf/ to

to inmates

many for

shakers for sign: Location any inmates access to

HOH communic without special bed

multiple multiple available for who sign: Staff videophone

inmates? ate

request?

shakers? purposes? purposes? VRI?

trained for VRI ?

Audit item issues/concerns

Date

Name

Inmate or staff? Inmate number Staff title

Topics

LIST ALL ISSUES THAT YOU SOLVED DURING THE AUDIT, OR THAT REMAIN TO BE SOLVED.

Problem

Solution

LIST ALL ISSUES THAT YOU SOLVED DRecheck 1 Notes

Problem

[Date here]

Recheck 2 Notes [Date here]

Recheck 3 Notes [Date here]

LIST ALL ISSUES THAT YOU SOLVED DRecheck 4 Notes

Problem

[Date here]

Recheck 5 Notes [Date here]

Recheck 6 Notes [Date here]

APPENDIX B
Site Visit Report of Settlement Monitor
Adams & Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky.)
Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor
November 2017 and June 2018 Site Visits
Western Kentucky Correctional Center (WKCC)—Nov. 14, 2017 Kentucky State Penitentiary (KSP)—Nov. 15, 2017
Green River Correctional Center (GRCC)—Nov. 16, 2017
Northpoint Training Center (NTC)—June 18, 2018 Bell County Forestry Camp (BCFC)—June 19, 2018 Little Sandy Correctional Complex (LSCC)—June 20, 2018 Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (EKCC)—June 21, 2018
Draft circulated to parties for comment: October 1, 2018 Final: November 30, 2018
INTRODUCTION
The Settlement Agreement in this case addressing conditions for deaf and hard-ofhearing inmates in Kentucky became effective June 28, 2015 and runs for five years. It allows me to visit each of the twelve Kentucky Department of Corrections (KYDOC) facilities each calendar year. In November 2017 and June 2018, I returned to six facilities for the second time, and made my first visit to the Bell County Forestry Camp (BCFC), which has had only a very small (and shifting) number of deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates.
This report covers all seven visits. As with my previous site visit reports, this report is intended to be helpful not just to a particular prison, but to all of KYDOC’s facilities, as they continue to move towards compliance with the Agreement in this case.
The visits were each facilitated by the institutions’ ADA coordinators, who, like the other staff I spoke to, conducted themselves with professionalism throughout the tours. Prior to the visits, a law student working as my assistant conducted numerous phone interviews of KYDOC inmates, and I reviewed their interview notes and numerous other documents provided by each institution. During the visits, I was able to see every thing and every place I requested and to review all requested records, which were voluminous. I spoke freely and confidentially with inmates and with custody and non-custody staff. Exhibit A lists the name and title of each staff member I spoke with, by institution. Between the pre-tour phone inmate interviews (many of which I followed up with in-person interviews), and in-person inmate interviews conducted during my visit, this report incorporates information learned from conversations with 80 inmates, out of the 239 inmates identified to me from those facilities as deaf or hard-of-hearing (several of whom had been transferred or been released). See Table A.
Monitor’s Report, November 2017 & June 2018 Site Visits, p. 1 of 17

Table A: Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing Inmates

All

WKCC

49

KSP

18

GRCC

47

NTC

50

BCFC

6

LSCC

34

EKCC

35

TOTAL 239

Either
16 7 10 14 6 13 14 80

Interviewed

In person Pre-Visit Phone

12

9

7

2

7

3

10

11

4

4

6

10

7

9

53

48

At each institution, I talked via in-person sign language interpretation to each inmate who uses sign language to communicate. I also made sure to talk to other hard-of-hearing inmates in a variety of housing and programming situations. To maximize confidentiality, I do not list the inmates we spoke to or use their names in this report.

On October 1, 2018, I provided this report in draft to the Warden and ADA coordinator at each referenced institution; KYDOC Director of Operations Chris Kleymeyer and Branch Manager Debbie Kays; KYDOC counsel Angela Dunham; and plaintiffs’ counsel, giving each one week for comments or corrections. I received some requested information, which is incorporated throughout. I also provided the same draft to plaintiffs’ counsel, and received several helpful writing suggestions (now incorporated), but no substantive proposed edits.

Each Warden welcomed the visits and my earlier oral feedback, which I shared at exit meetings at each institution (for EKCC, I did that exit meeting a couple of days later, by conference call). I found each of the visits extremely productive. KYDOC continues to make very significant progress towards compliance with the Settlement Agreement. Not all processes are yet working smoothly, but the situation for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates continues to improve.

As previously discussed in my court reports, I am focusing visits not on additional recommendations, but on compliance with the agreement and implementation of prior recommendations. This report identifies and describes the areas in which there seem to be ongoing problems, and explains what is needed, citing the Settlement Agreement provisions and relevant prior recommendations that cover that topic. For ease of reference, Exhibit B includes the prior recommendations and the several new ones.

I. IDENTIFICATION OF INMATES COVERED BY THE AGREEMENT

KYDOC has made significant progress in identifying and tracking deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. The innovation that is moving this forward is a new Kentucky Offender Management System (“KOMS”) “precaution” labeled “ADA.” That is, in each inmate’s digital file, there is a notation, easily noticeable on the opening screen, that flags his or her disability. When an inmate

Monitor’s Report, November 2017 & June 2018 Site Visits, p. 2 of 17

is transferred from one institution to another, this KOMS precaution now triggers an automatic email to the ADA coordinator at the receiving institution, to allow preparation for the inmate’s arrival. This is a great step forward.
There are a few issues, however.
• Not every institution has gone through every one of their deaf/hard-of-hearing (HOH) inmates’ records and ensured that the new precaution is being used. This needs to happen, at each and every institution, or the new automated system will fail (as it has done in a number of occasions already).
• When an inmate is newly identified as deaf/HOH, that, too, needs to be promptly reflected with a KOMS alert. There has been some confusion about when this entry should occur. The answer is: once a medical provider finds a hearing impairment. The screening methodology currently being used is a questionnaire; 3 or more “yes” answers to the screening questions leads to a medical-provider (MD or APRN) hearing evaluation. The questionnaire is a screening method, not itself an evaluation. So answering “yes” to the questions should not lead to a KOMS alert. It is however, crucial that when the provider finds that someone has a hearing impairment, the KOMS alert be triggered. Audiologist evaluation should not be required; the standard is not the same as for a hearing aid. For example, an inmate who is deaf in one ear but has excellent hearing in the other will not qualify for a hearing aid, but does have a hearing impairment that needs tracking and documentation in KOMS.
• In rare circumstances, the KOMS precaution should be turned off—for example, if an inmate receives surgery that corrects his hearing. This is sometimes not happening.
• Each institution needs to ensure that the automatic emails sent on transfers are actually getting to the ADA coordinator. This is not yet consistent.
• Each ADA coordinator should be able to run a report of every inmate with the KOMS precaution at the coordinator’s institution, to use for tracking purposes. This is not the case.
I alerted Ms. Kays to these issues on July 9, 2018, and believe that each institution has now gone through its deaf/HOH caseload and ensured that each inmate has the appropriate KOMS alert. In addition, ADA coordinators should now be able to run the appropriate reports. I will check on these issues again using the next semi-annual self-report.
Although I have examined the issue less systematically, I believe Electronic Medical Record (EMR) precautions are also not used consistently; that is, while there are encounter notes in individual patients’ records, there is often no “deaf/hard-of-hearing” flag at the top of the record.1
1 See Settlement Agreement VI.C.2 (“For each Deaf Inmate, the medical staff will note, in bold marking, the Deaf Inmate’s disability on the medical file cover and in the Deaf Inmate’s medical file.”)
Monitor’s Report, November 2017 & June 2018 Site Visits, p. 3 of 17

II. PROVISION OF AUDIOLOGY SERVICES
The issue on which I have continued to spend the most time at each of the visited institutions is prompt and appropriate provision of audiology services. Medical care at all KYDOC institutions is provided by Correct Care Solutions (CCS). At each institution, medical staff have worked to facilitate inmate access to audiology services. Each institution sends inmates who fail the whisper test to an audiologist (or, if indicated, an Ear, Nose & Throat doctor), for hearing testing, hearing aid evaluation, and hearing aid fitting. Staff have made significant progress in creating and managing a smooth and timely process. Many (though not all) inmates are now receiving timely audiology services. Some but not all ADA coordinators and medical staff are using the recommended tracking system to ensure that every deaf and hardof-hearing inmate is appropriately and promptly assessed and provided with necessary audiology services.2 Still, I have had to ask for frequent follow-ups, and at each institution I visited, there were individuals who had fallen off the track. This issue is improving but needs continued focus. In May, KYDOC announced a new, more objective and clearer standard for when hearing aids should be provided. It should help considerably going forward, but the tracking issue remains crucial.
It is my understanding that in recent weeks, KYDOC has shifted to a system where hearing aids, once prescribed, are received without an additional visit to an audiologist. This has the potential to speed things up considerably, though it may also lead to follow-up issues. I will inquiry further in future visits and reports.
III. INMATE ORIENTATION
I have previously noted the need for a routine “auxiliary aids and services assessment” process.3 As I have previously explained, the best way to assess the need for aids/services necessary for effective communication and to avoid discrimination is an individual meeting between an ADA coordinator, or deputy ADA coordinator, and each deaf/HOH inmate. (This approach is similar to the “interactive process” required by the ADA under Title I, which deals with employment.) The idea of the meeting is for staff to understand the communications needs
2 Settlement Agreement V.B requires that “All Auxiliary Aids and Services required by this Agreement, the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws, which are deemed medically necessary, will be provided promptly upon request, free of charge, to Deaf Inmates subject to” appropriate co-payments. Auxiliary Aids and Services include hearing aids. Settlement Agreement I.2. See Recommendation 6 (“Inmates in need of a hearing aid—both initially or because the device they have is no longer working for them—should wait no longer than two months to obtain the necessary device. That time period should begin the day the potential need is indicated by the inmate’s request for evaluation, answers on the questionnaire, etc. Each KYDOC facility should track the time from request/questionnaire to provider visit to audiology visit to hearing aid provision, and ensure that inmates do not have a longer wait.”).
3 Settlement Agreement III.C (“Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment”). See Recommendation 45 (“For each Deaf inmate, the ADA Coordinator should conduct an individual services assessment meeting, at which the inmate’s available methods of communication are expressly ascertained and recorded, and the inmate is informed about the available auxiliary aids and services. . . . The assessment should be updated annually, ideally at the inmate’s annual classification meeting.”).
Monitor’s Report, November 2017 & June 2018 Site Visits, p. 4 of 17

of the inmate. At the meeting, the ADA coordinator or deputy ADA coordinator can inform the inmate about available aids and the inmate can discuss his communication needs. The inmate’s request is entitled, both under the Agreement and the operative regulation, to “primary consideration.”4
It still seems to be the case that these meetings for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates are happening in some institutions only when prompted by my impending site visit, rather than routinely on entry into the institution or at the annual classification review.5 In addition, at some institutions—notably NTC—they are done by unit staff, who are ill-equipped to actually explain the various services and devices covered. Unit administrators and case workers are less likely than the ADA coordinator to know about available auxiliary aids and services and potential accommodations. Unless they are appropriately trained and informed about these matters, they cannot conduct an adequate auxiliary aid assessment. I have previously made that point, but it is clear to me based on this most recent site visit that the ADA coordinator, deputy ADA coordinator, or someone else who is particularly involved in ADA matters should conduct the auxiliary aid assessment. That is my strong recommendation, because I am now convinced that unless the ADA coordinator conducts these assessments, in person, institutions will not be able to comply with the settlement agreement.
A particular issue is that at each institution, inmates identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing receive a special ID card.6 In addition, those who want one are supposed to receive a notice to post on their bed or cell door that alert others to their hearing impairment. (Some inmates do not want this card, because they worry it makes them more vulnerable to other inmates.) It continues to be the case at a number of institutions that these cards are not being issued to inmates on arrival. In fact, many inmates received their cards the day or two before I arrived. These cards must be provided on or close to arrival. This is an issue I have raised a number of times before, and appropriate progress has not been made. The solution is not complex: Recommendation: The ADA coordinator or his or her deputy should track each and every inmate classified as deaf and hard-of-hearing, personally conduct an accommodations assessment, and ensure that each promptly receives an HOH card and, if desired, a bed/cell card.
IV. SPECIAL HOUSING UNITS FOR DEAF/HARD-OF-HEARING INMATES
In several institutions—Green River and EKCC among them—officials have decided to concentrate deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates in one housing area. The ADA’s “integration mandate” requires that states “shall administer services, programs, and activities in the most
4 Settlement Agreement I.5 (“In determining what form of Auxiliary Aids and Services is necessary, primary consideration shall be given to the request of the Deaf Inmate for such Auxiliary Aids and Services (see 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2)).” 28 C.F.R. § 160(b)(2) includes essentially the same language..
5 Settlement Agreement III.B (“Any Deaf Inmate who was not assessed at the initial intake, assessment, and classification will be assessed at the annual classification review.”).
6 Settlement III.D.1 (“Upon identifying an Inmate as Deaf during initial intake, assessment, and classification, the Deaf Inmate will receive a distinct identification (ID) card that clearly identifies him or her as a Deaf Inmate. The ID card will signify to the KDOC personnel that the Inmate is Deaf, may not respond to verbal commands, and may require Auxiliary Aids and Services.”).
Monitor’s Report, November 2017 & June 2018 Site Visits, p. 5 of 17

integrated setting appropriate to the needs of qualified individuals with disabilities.”7 The regulation that deals specially with program access in prisons and jails adds some detail to this general mandate. It provides, in pertinent part:
(b)(2) Public entities shall ensure that inmates or detainees with disabilities are housed in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of the individuals. Unless it is appropriate to make an exception, a public entity–
(i) Shall not place inmates or detainees with disabilities in inappropriate security classifications because no accessible cells or beds are available; (ii) Shall not place inmates or detainees with disabilities in designated medical areas unless they are actually receiving medical care or treatment; [and] (iii) Shall not place inmates or detainees with disabilities in facilities that do not offer the same programs as the facilities where they would otherwise be housed.8
Thus any “clustering” of inmates because of their hearing impairments must be done with care to ensure that the integration mandate is also observed.
That said, clustering deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates might well be helpful: clustered inmates could have better access to the videophone and TTY, bedshakers, and other built-in equipment. Inmates who sign could also benefit greatly from having others to talk to. These efficiencies and benefits are not inconsistent with the integration mandate. Recommendation: In order to comply with the ADA’s integration mandate, inmates may be offered the chance to be housed in any hard-of-hearing cluster, but may not be compelled to do so in order to receive the accommodations to which they are entitled. At the facilities that have these clusters, there was some—inappropriate—degree of compulsion being exerted. At Green River, inmates were told that they could not have any accommodations if they opted not to live in the HOH area—including something so simple as a door card identifying them as hard-of-hearing. Several inmates did not want to move to Dorm 1, where the cluster was, because it would force them to give up their job or other arrangements that were working well for them. At EKCC, I spoke to one inmate near tears who didn’t want any accommodations for his hearing impairment, at all—but was nonetheless under the impression that because of that impairment, he was going to be forced to move from a housing area where he was managing safely and into a highersecurity, tougher unit where he was afraid for his safety.
V. EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION WITH HARD-OF-HEARING INMATES
A. Assistive listening systems and amplifiers
As I have explained in prior reports, an assistive listening system captures sound close to its source via a microphone and transmits that sound directly to the earphones or hearing aids of people with assistive listening devices. Such systems can be extremely helpful to people who are hard-of-hearing, because they allow the listener to amplify the sound without distortion and without amplifying the ambient noise.
7 28 C.F.R. §35.130(d) 8 28 C.F.R. § 35.152.
Monitor’s Report, November 2017 & June 2018 Site Visits, p. 6 of 17

Again, I have noted previously that several KYDOC facilities already use what is in effect an assistive listening system for their common-space televisions; they broadcast the institutionally available channels on a radio frequency, and then require inmates listening to the common televisions to use radio receivers, with earbuds, rather than playing the sound out loud. The purpose of this has been to keep the sound level down in common spaces—but there is a major benefit for hard-of-hearing inmates, who report that they can hear TVs that use that set up. Not every institution uses this approach, and even in facilities that do, some dorms are not set up with the necessary equipment. At the least, this is a good system to use in any dorm where hardof-hearing inmates are housed.
But more broadly, there is a significant need for assistive listening in other communications venues. It is simply impossible for there to be effective communication or equal access to programs without amplification for hard-of-hearing inmates in education/rehabilitative programming. Several of the institutions I visited agreed to test various approaches for providing assistive listening. One of my priorities for the upcoming reporting period is for there to be 3-5 such tests and then, within the next year, for each institution to implement some kind of assistive listening system in the appropriate settings. SAP (Substance Abuse Program) is a particularly important setting for effective assistive listening systems: this program takes place in a living unit, with many groups meeting at once. I have heard from many hard-of-hearing inmates at many institutions that they simply cannot understand what goes on during SAP. This is inconsistent with the ADA and the settlement agreement.9 But each institution needs to implement appropriate amplification in several settings: school, programming, chapel, SAP, and perhaps more. (It may be that a portable system could be used, and used in several locations.)
9 See Settlement Agreement V.A.2 (“Appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, including Qualified Interpreters, will be made available so that Deaf Inmates may have an equal opportunity to participate in all services, privileges, and programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC’s custody.”); I.2 (defining “Auxiliary Aids and Services” to include “assistive listening systems”); Recommendation 67 (“Each religious, educational, and programming area should have available a device to allow wireless amplification for individual hard-of-hearing inmates.”).
Monitor’s Report, November 2017 & June 2018 Site Visits, p. 7 of 17

SAP programming takes place in the “core” of a living unit, with many groups meeting at once. https://corrections.ky.gov/depts/SAP/Pages/default.aspx.
After my most recent site visits, a number of institutions agreed to test amplification: • LSCC agreed to test amplifiers that linked earphones to a speaker’s microphone by either FM radio or blue-tooth, for use in SAP • WKCC has already implemented FM transmittal/amplification in its chapel.10 • GRCC agreed to test radio amplifiers in SAP and classes, as well as to try out nonauditory alarm clocks. • NTC agreed to pilot an amplification system in the SAP program and in the academic building, and four FM transmitters for use in academic classrooms and other locations as needed.11 • BCFC purchased two telephone amplifiers.
B. Phone amplifiers
Phones pose a particular problem for hard-of-hearing inmates. Prison phones are, of course, subject to very hard use, which can degrade sound quality. And sometimes they are located close to noisy areas like showers or dayrooms. Securus, KYDOC’s current phone contractor, offers volume controls on phones, which are helpful—people with hearing
10 For full information, see https://www.ccrane.com/item/acc_trans_trans2/100106/ digital_fm_transmitter_2_for_sending_near_broadcast_quality. These devices were apparently purchased in January 2017.
11 Specifically, NTC has ordered two Electro-Voice ZLX-12 12” 2-Way Passive Loudspeakers, Shure SM58 S Mic and Switches, and Rapco Horizon Standard Lo-Z Microphone XLR cables, and four C. Crane FM transmitters.
Monitor’s Report, November 2017 & June 2018 Site Visits, p. 8 of 17

impairments can turn the volume up. But apparently the Securus contract is under negotiation, which has meant that new volume adjustment phones have not been available in recent months. Each institution needs to ensure that it has at least one volume-adjusted phones in each areas used by a hard-of-hearing inmate.12 In addition, the degree of amplification may be insufficient for some inmates. On my recommendation, several facilities have tested a portable phone amplifier. This testing has demonstrated that these devices work very well for some hard-ofhearing inmates. Recommendation: Portable phone amplifiers should be made available at every institution. The need is even more acute if Securus is not installing volume adjustable phones while the contract is under negotiation.
This Telephone Amplifier (cost, approximately $20) has been tested at several institutions and is proving very useful for some inmates.
See, e.g., https://www.harriscomm.com/portabletelephone-amplifier.html.
C. Captioned Telephones
Captioned telephone technology allows individuals who are hard-of-hearing (who do not use sign language) to use telephones. The hard-of-hearing individual (call him A) speaks into the phone; the individual on the other end (call her B) also speaks, and A both hears what B says and can simultaneously read a computer-assisted transcription. Captioned telephones can be installed in prison—there is one at KSP. Inmates can be charged for the calls, as with noncaptioned calls. The devices themselves cost only $75, and the captioning service is free.
This is an excellent technology. For inmates whose hearing impairment is significant enough to make phones unusable, but who do not sign, captioned telephones make the difference between access and non-access. Every institution that has such an inmate should install a captioned telephone: the experience at KSP can be a guide. Several of the institutions whose visits are described here would benefit from a captioned telephone; LSCC, EKCC, and NTC agreed to try to install one and share what they learn.
D. TTY
For inmates who cannot hear a phone but do not sign, a TTY may be the most appropriate technology. Every KYDOC prison has the necessary equipment—but for each, that equipment
12 Recommendation 74 “Each facility should improve access of hard-of-hearing inmates to telecommunications, by . . . (b) Informing them that amplified phones are available, and ensuring that at least one such phone, whose amplification is compatible with a hearing aid but does not require one, is available in every group of phones used by any hard-of-hearing inmate.”).
Monitor’s Report, November 2017 & June 2018 Site Visits, p. 9 of 17

needs to be known and accessible to inmates. When a TTY is stored in a far-away office and available only with an in-advance request, it is likely not appropriately accessible. In facilities where any inmate wishes to use this equipment, it needs to be available with ease. This is being done at some facilities, but not others. In addition, at WKCC, staff believed that one inmate might be using the TTY inappropriately because (unlike voice phones) it was not monitored. This should be a fairly easy problem to solve: TTYs have a print function where every word is printed onto a roll of paper. If that function is set on, monitoring should be simple.
VI. COMMUNICATION SERVICES FOR SIGN-LANGUAGE USERS
Four facilities covered by this report—WKCC-Ross, BCFC, EKCC, and NTC—were not at the time of my visit housing any inmates who use sign language to communicate, and therefore did not need interpretive services. Between them, the other three—GRCC, KSP, and LSCC—housed four inmates who communicate using sign language. The availability of sign language interpretation at those facilities has improved but is not yet sufficiently robust or routine.
A. Video Relay Interpretation (VRI): Use and Procedures
In each of the institutions covered here, a VRI laptop was available during my visit and staff seemed to know that it existed. I tested each laptop and they all worked. This is a good base on which to build. Some problems remain, however. Most important, it remains the case that VRI services are not being used in many situations when they should. The VRI laptops are being used in certain formal communication settings—classification and disciplinary hearings, for example. (Even in these situations, usage is inconsistent—at KSP, for example, staff several times neglected to obtain the laptop, and the inmate was asked to waive its use or wait for a long time while it was set up.) But even if VRIs were used for all such formal meetings, there are many other situations where effective communication is necessary but obstacles to VRI usage remain. These include medical appointments, investigation meetings to prepare for disciplinary hearings, meetings with grievance or other legal aides (inmates who assist other inmates with grievances or disciplinary hearings), and other conversations between staff and inmates who sign to communicate. Each institution needs to set up an easy process by which staff obtain and use the VRI laptop for interpretation of conversations with deaf inmates, without needing to cancel and reschedule meetings or the like. In order to make this work, staff must be trained that the VRI is available, and that its use is not a big deal or special, but is simply the most effective way for them to communicate with inmates who sign.13
13 The Settlement Agreement requires effective communication, including interpretation, in many different kinds of situations: VI.A, III.C (auxiliary aids and services assessment); VI.C.4 (emergency on-site medical); VI.H (transfer and classification); V.A.2 (grievance hearings); VII.A (disciplinary hearings and related meetings); VI.J (“for any significant communications between Deaf Inmates and KDOC staff that is not specifically discussed in this Agreement.”). See especially Recommendation 10 (“For inmates who use sign language to communicate, no special request should be needed to obtain VRI services for auxiliary aid/service assessment, emergency health care on-site, classification and transfer hearings and related meetings, grievance meetings and hearings, disciplinary hearings and all related processes, parole meetings and hearings.”).
Monitor’s Report, November 2017 & June 2018 Site Visits, p. 10 of 17

It is particularly important that the VRI laptops be used routinely in segregated (or “restrictive”) housing, because various features of segregation obstruct many of the coping mechanisms deaf inmates might use to understand what someone is telling them—the ambient noise is extreme, visual cues are scarce, etc. That means that staff need to plan in advance for such usage, figuring out for each restrictive housing area where an internet signal will be tapped and how to appropriately restrain an inmate who needs to use his hands to sign.
One obstacle to more prevalent use of the VRI laptop is that not all staff know how to operate it. In addition, the technical preparation to facilitate usage has not been done universally. The VRI laptops do not all have in their bags long computer cords, signal splitters (See Figure C), and instructions.14
Figure C: Splitter
B. In-person interpretation
Some facilities make in-person interpreters available when needed—for classes or programming that involves multiple speakers, for example. At others, it was apparent that the facility was very reluctant to provide in-person interpretation, and staff had not thought through when such interpretation would be necessary for effective communication. Both VRI and inperson interpretation need to be available; they are complementary.
C. Interpretation for education and programming
As I have discussed in prior reports, it may be that an in-person interpreter is necessary to provide effective communication and equal access to educational/programming services. Institutions can, however, try out VRI as an alternative. In order to do that, they will need to plan in advance for internet access in each applicable space, and, depending on the need, perhaps get a more suitable microphone, capable of picking up speech from the teacher and/or other inmates. What’s clear is that somehow, interpretive services must be available. Institutions need to plan systematically how to meet this need for academic education, groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous, and evidence-based programs like Moral Reconation Therapy.
14 Settlement Agreement IX.E.1 (“The KDOC will ensure that all equipment under the KDOC’s control that is used to accommodate Deaf Inmates is kept in good working order.”); IX.E.2 (“The KDOC will ensure that KDOC employees are adequately trained in the operation of the technology.”); Recommendation 64 (“Each facility should obtain and test a “splitter” for each VRI laptop, so that the laptop can be used alongside a computer.”).
Monitor’s Report, November 2017 & June 2018 Site Visits, p. 11 of 17

VII. FACILITY BY FACILITY
For the three institutions I visited in November 2017, I both reviewed compliance and sought to improve a site-visit checklist I have developed, so that it can be used by ADA coordinators to self-audit. For the four institutions I visited in June 2018, I was able to use the revised checklist more completely. For all seven institutions, observations follow:
A. Western Kentucky Correctional Center (WKCC) (including Ross-Cash)—Nov. 14, 2017
Observed Compliance Issues • Deaf/HOH inmates not tracked appropriately: o Not everyone has a KOMS alert o Spreadsheets shared with me were incomplete. • HOH IDs not being provided promptly. • Access to TTY limited because of security considerations; could be solved with printer function • Amplification needed in several areas: Phone amplifiers; SAP; other programming • Difficulty with loudspeaker announcements—inmates with significant impairments are not receiving effective communication of announcements. This could be solved with bed shakers, “shake and wake” watches, assistants, or personal notifications. • Audiology issues: o Routine physicals don’t include hearing screen o Pocket-talker used (inappropriately) as a screening device. o Insufficient tracking of audiology services leading to long delays o Timeliness problems in hearing aid prescription/provision. (Note: Switched outside providers, which may have solved the issue.)
Promising Practices • Institutional TV broadcast on radios, so amplification is available. • Agreed to pilot room amplification in the chapel
B. Kentucky State Penitentiary (KSP)—Nov. 15, 2017
Observed Compliance Issues: • Tracking is insufficient: o My tracking requests needed to be made multiple times o Medical tracking is disorganized, sometimes incorrect. o Arrivals are not known; HOH inmates arrive without notice to ADA coordinator. • Underuse of VRI • Amplification needed: School, church, programming, parole. • Inmates apparently not familiar with the ADA coordinator
Monitor’s Report, November 2017 & June 2018 Site Visits, p. 12 of 17

• Inmates complain that staff are not well informed about how to communicate with deaf/hard-of-hearing people. Should share communications tip-sheet more broadly.
Promising practices • Use of Sorensen videophone • Use of pager • Two channels for movies implemented, so one can be captioned at all times • Installation of a captel (see picture, below) • New microphone for VRI solving an echo problem

Captel Cabinet

Captel, inside cabinet

C. Green River Correctional Center (GRCC)—Nov. 16, 2017
Observed Compliance Issues • Tracking o No notifications on arrival of deaf/HOH inmates. • Issues with auxiliary aids: o Bed shaker/vibrating watch process is unclear. It seems likely some inmates who need these auxiliary aids are not getting them. o Inmates were told that if they didn’t agree to be in an HOH housing cluster, they couldn’t get any accommodations. o HOH ID cards not provided promptly. o HOH door/bed cards not provided for all inmates who wanted them. o TTY is not accessible off-hours. • Amplification: o Amplification is needed for education, programming (especially SAP), chapel.

Monitor’s Report, November 2017 & June 2018 Site Visits, p. 13 of 17

o If a deaf/HOH inmate is enrolled, classes should not be held in noisy environments (like the kitchen).
o When the PA system was not working, staff have not notified HOH inmates of announcements that affected them.
o Uncertain if every dorm with HOH inmates has at least one phone with volume control.
• Interpretation: o Medical staff didn’t know how to obtain the VRI laptop. o VRI is not being used for all appropriate situations, e.g., medical, legal aide and investigation meetings, ordinary conversations with inmates. VRI should be easily available from the unit, not locked up elsewhere, and should be offered to inmates who sign. (Note: inmates tried to solve this problem by using the videophone, instead, but if the VRI is easily available, that would stop.) o Interpretation needed for classes/programming: VRI may work adequately, but if not, in-person interpretation will be needed.
• Medical: o Inmates not receiving a hearing screening at their routine physicals. o Using pocket talkers as a screening device, which is an obstacle to appropriate care. o Problem with decision-making process about who gets sent for audiology visit, who gets a hearing aid. (New policy should solve.)
Promising Practice: • Distribution of “communication tip sheet”
D. Northpoint Training Center (NTC)—June 18, 2018
Observed Compliance Issues • Tracking difficulties o Deaf/HOH inmates not being appropriately tracked: ADA coordinator’s list is incomplete. o ADA coordinator cannot run a KOMS report. o Inmate use of sign language is not noted in KOMS. o Not every deaf/HOH inmate who gets transferred triggers a transfer email to the ADA coordinator, including some who are in KOMS. o No documentation of denial of accommodations requests; need to go through each request, make a decision, tell the inmate, document the reason. • Auxiliary Aids o Inappropriate policy against bed shakers for anyone who doesn’t sign to communicate. (This has now been changed; assessment will be based on the severity of the need.) o Unit staff is completing the assessment packet, which is therefore more a paperwork exercise rather than an actual assessment. This assessment should be done by the ADA coordinator, with the inmate present.
Monitor’s Report, November 2017 & June 2018 Site Visits, p. 14 of 17

o TTY is not useable without hearing person’s intervention. o Consider captel for appropriate inmates. o Hearing aids likely to get lost when inmate goes to RHU. When property
is being gathered, need to find, give to inmate. • Amplification needed in several spaces:
o SAP, chapel, classrooms. o Volume control on phones, generally and on RHU phone. o Classroom fan noise interfered with HOH communication (solved during
visit). • Interpretation
o VRI not being used when needed. o VRI needs a splitter and a coupler.
Promising Practice: • Audioscope (objective instrument for audiology screening)
E. Bell County Forestry Camp (BCFC)—June 19, 2018
Observed Compliance Issues • Medical documentation is sparse.
F. Little Sandy Correctional Complex (LSCC)—June 20, 2018
Observed Compliance Issues • Tracking: o Not every deaf/HOH inmate is in KOMS. o Not every deaf/HOH inmate has a HOH card. • Amplification: o Needed in chapel. o Needed for SAP (particularly given the fans, laundry, ice machine in the “core”). o Need volume adjustments for phones. • Auxiliary aids o Several inmates have a need for a bed shaker or vibrating watch. o One inmate has requested a pager; need to assess and respond. o Hearing aids can be lost when inmates are moved to RHU. o Need a system for movie captioning, at least sometimes.
Promising practices • Have ordered a captel. • Considering piloting an amplification system for SAP
G. Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (EKCC)—June 21, 2018
Observed Compliance Issues • Tracking issues:
Monitor’s Report, November 2017 & June 2018 Site Visits, p. 15 of 17

o Not all deaf/HOH inmates are noted in KOMS. o Some inmates are noted as deaf/HOH who are not. o Transfer notices are not arriving for deaf/HOH inmates, including some
who have appropriate KOMS precautions. • Auxiliary aids:
o Many deaf/HOH inmates do not (or did not, until a few days prior to my visit) have deaf/HOH ID cards.
o Some deaf/HOH inmates did not have deaf/HOH door tags. o Deaf/HOH inmates are not getting bed shakers. o TTY is too high for easy use, and is missing instructions. o Deaf/HOH inmates are not aware of how to obtain ADA services. • Audiology: o Tracking of audiology services is insufficient: need to note when
people are “in process” so process problems are solved. o Medical is not issuing pocket talkers (while hearing aid process is
ongoing). o Have not conducted any retrospective review of inmates denied hearing
aids, to ensure compliance with current standards. o Inmate “declinations” are being too-sharply enforced; for example, if
an inmate declines an audiology visit because he is sick that day, that should not mean he never gets audiology services. • Amplification: o Volume adjustment is not available on at least one phone accessible to each deaf/HOH inmate. o Inmates need amplification in numerous situations: programming; chapel, parole. • Interpretation: o Staff seem not to fully understand/buy-in to need for VRI use. • Apparently not all staff have received ADA/settlement training.
Promising practices • Use of “shake and wake” watches: These are non-auditory alarm watches available to hard-of-hearing inmates to help alert them to pill call, chow, etc. • TTY availability in housing unit. • Excellent knowledge of hospital cuffs—a restraint method that allows inmates who sign to continue to communicate even when cuffed. • Implementing two institutional movie channels—one with captions at all times. • Agreement to install a captioned telephone. • Dry erase boards in intake. • In-person mental health appointment with inmate who signs, because couldn’t make the VRI work.
Monitor’s Report, November 2017 & June 2018 Site Visits, p. 16 of 17

VIII. CONCLUSION Implementation of the Settlement Agreement continues to progress. I am attaching my
prior recommendations, adding the three new recommendations from this report, as Exhibit B to this report. Those three new recommendations are: Recommendation 83: The ADA coordinator or his or her deputy should track each and every inmate classified as deaf and hard-of-hearing, personally conduct an accommodations assessment, and ensure that each promptly receives an HOH card and, if desired, a bed/cell card. Recommendation 84: In order to comply with the ADA’s integration mandate, inmates may be offered the chance to be housed in any hard-of-hearing cluster, but may not be compelled to do so in order to receive the accommodations to which they are entitled. Recommendation 85: Portable phone amplifiers should be made available at every institution.
This full list should assist KYDOC staff with their ongoing compliance efforts. In addition, in light of the experiences detailed above, and an additional self-audit pilot (described in its own report) I am modifying the compliance checklist, to share it with KYDOC. Much progress has been made.
Monitor’s Report, November 2017 & June 2018 Site Visits, p. 17 of 17

Exhibit A: Staff interviews and meetings
Western Kentucky Correctional Center (WKCC)—Nov. 14, 2017 Timothy Lane, Warden Deborah Grimes, ADA coordinator Jacob Bruce, UAI Jill Croft, APRN Christina Hatton, Deputy Warden Monique Jones, HSA Rebecca Smith, Administrative Assistant Jon Tangerose, UA II Frida Wallace, ADA coordinator Earl Williams, Officer
Kentucky State Penitentiary (KSP)—Nov. 15, 2017 Dan Smith, Program Director / ADA coordinator Skyla Grief, Deputy Warden - Programs Dione Hardin, Recreational Department Supervisor D. Menser, Correctional Officer Nancy Raines, Health Services Administrator Brian Starnes, Front Gate Officer (intake) Bruce VonDwingelo, Deputy Warden - Operations
Green River Correctional Center (GRCC)—Nov. 16, 2017 DeEdra Hart, Warden Mark Jackson, Unit Administrator II / ADA coordinator Chuck Bastings, Lieutenant (Adjustments) Klayton Burden, Program Administrator (SAP) Ron Cary, Nurse Service Administrator Lessye Crafton, Nurse Practitioner Darime Ellis, Unit Administrator II (RHU) Grant Penrod, CTO Seg. Mike Robinson, Deputy Warden Darrell Wheeler, Unit Administrator II Steven Wright, Caseworker CTO / Caseworker for intake Dorm and Classification

Northpoint Training Center (NTC)—June 18, 2018 Don Bottom, Warden Brandon Lynch, ADA coordinator Kenneth Armstrong, Chaplain Henry Brewer, CTO - Orientation Heather Caldwell, Director of Nursing Susan Dye, MRT Timothy Gray, Teacher Stefany Hughes, UA, RHU Tim Metz, Caseworker Daniel Napier, UA Unit A Keith Schneider, Fire & Safety Forrest Sexton, GED Instructor Brandon Spires, SAP Stephanie Thompson, HSA Earl Westerfield, R&D Supervision
Bell County Forestry Camp (BCFC)—June 19, 2018 Keith Helton, Warden Derek Miracle, ADA coordinator Brandy Harn, Back-up ADA coordinator Josh Hart, CTO II Robbie Landrom, CO R&D Susan Partin, Medical
Little Sandy Correctional Complex (LSCC)—June 20, 2018 David Green, Warden Lorie Conley, ADA coordinator Heather Bossio, CTO David Cary, Chaplain Michael Cepeda, Sergeant - Intake Vanessa Gollihue, SAP administrator Rhonda May, CTO Patricia Shepherd, LPN Christy Smith, Teacher Malcolm Smith, Deputy Warden
Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (EKCC)—June 21, 2018 Kathy Litteral, Warden Michael Prater, Major (former ADA coordinator) Chris King, ADA coordinator Todd Boyce, Chaplain Amanda Carter, Administrative Assistant, Medical Cody Duchnowski, CO RHU Travis Evans, Deputy Warden Aberhorn Felton, Lieutenant

Jamie Frisbey, Rec. Sherry Johnson, Interim HSA Whitley Jones, Classification and Treatment Officer Holli Litteral GED instructor Michael McKinney, Deputy Warden Steve Meadows, Correctional Ed., Regional Admin. Shelva Rowe, Pre-release Corordinator Kim Short, Nurse Practitioner Michael Smith, Lieutenant Carla Sparks, Unit Administrator Susan Thompson, Unit Administrator Barbara Turner, Nurse

Exhibit B
Adams & Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky.)
Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor
CONSOLIDATED RECOMMENDATIONS
AS OF December 1, 2018
I group the recommendations I have made by when I made them. The numbering is continuous from one group to the next.
Group 1 (April 21, 2016)
Note: These are edited from their original wording; they are phrased more generally, in order eliminate the references to KSR.
I. IDENTIFICATION OF INMATES COVERED BY THE AGREEMENT
Recommendation 1: Each facility should identify all inmates who meet the Agreement’s definition of “Deaf.” This is necessary both in order to report names to me and to ensure that appropriate services are provided to hard-of-hearing inmates. (Settlement Agreement I.3; III.A; III.B; XV.B.1.d)
Recommendation 2: Include additional questions in the screening questionnaire, along the lines of:
• Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? • Have you ever been diagnosed with hearing loss? • Have you ever used a hearing aid that you no longer use? (If yes, Why don’t you use
it anymore?) A “yes” answer to any of the these three questions should be followed up by a provider visit, unless the inmate explains that he no longer uses the hearing aid because his hearing has improved so that it is no longer necessary.
• If you currently have a hearing aid, is it working ok? A “no” answer to this question should be followed up by a provider visit.
• Note to tester: If the inmate seems unable to understand these questions due to a hearing impairment, provider follow-up is indicated.
(Settlement Agreement I.3; III.A; III.B)
Recommendation 3: Staff administering the questionnaire should be alert to (and trained on) the possibility of low literacy, and should ask questions orally when appropriate. Among illiterate inmates, a hearing impairment sufficient to undermine their ability to answer these questions ought to itself trigger referral to the appropriate provider. (Settlement Agreement I.5; III.A; III.B)
Recommendation 4: Further assessment of the inmate should include not just the medical decision whether to send the inmate to an audiologist, but a separate, explicit, charted and electronically-
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 1 of 16 (December 1, 2018)

tracked decision whether he is deaf or hard-of-hearing. (Settlement Agreement III.B; III.D [identification cards]; III.C [auxiliary aids and services assessment]; XV.B [reporting])
Recommendation 5: The KDOC Electronic Medical Record system should include a single electronic code that flags inmates who are deaf, hard-of-hearing, or hearing-impaired (hereinafter Deaf, in this report), to facilitate provision of services to them. (Settlement Agreement III.B)
II. PROVISION OF AUDIOLOGY SERVICES
Recommendation 6: Inmates in need of a hearing aid—both initially or because the device they have is no longer working for them—should wait no longer than two months to obtain the necessary device. That time period should begin the day the potential need is indicated by the inmate’s request for evaluation, answers on the questionnaire, etc. Each KYDOC facility should track the time from request/questionnaire to provider visit to audiology visit to hearing aid provision, and ensure that inmates do not have a longer wait. (In future quarterly reporting periods, I will request this tracking data from all facilities.) One way to accomplish less expensive and more comprehensive assessment for any backlog might be to bring in an audiologist to each applicable facility for two or three days. (Settlement Agreement V.B; VIII.B.2)
III. AUXILIARY AIDS/SERVICES
A. Personal hearing devices: Hearing aids and amplifiers
Recommendation 7: Full information about hearing aids and hearing evaluations, including the availability of batteries without charge, should be provided to inmates. See Exhibit D-2. (III.F)
Recommendation 8: Inmates waiting for an audiologist evaluation or for hearing aid service should be offered an amplifier while they wait. (Settlement Agreement V.B)
B. Qualified Interpretation
Recommendation 9: For inmates who use sign language to communicate, some kind of qualified interpretive services should be readily available for any communication between an inmate and staff when the inmate requests interpretation. The availability of interpretation should not be limited to only certain types of encounters, communications, or settings. (Settlement Agreement III; VI)
Recommendation 10: For inmates who use sign language to communicate, no special request should be needed to obtain VRI services for auxiliary aid/service assessment, emergency health care on-site, classification and transfer hearings and related meetings, grievance meetings and hearings, disciplinary hearings and all related processes, parole meetings and hearings. (Settlement Agreement VI.A; III.C [auxiliary aids and services assessment]; VI.C.4 [emergency on-site medical]; VI.H [transfer and classification]; V.A.2 [grievance hearings]; VII.A [disciplinary hearings]; VI.A.3 [parole hearings])
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 2 of 16 (December 1, 2018)

Recommendation 11: Interpretation services should be offered without special request to any inmate (known to prison staff to use sign language to communicate) during initial classification and orientation. These encounters are vital to the terms of each inmate’s living situation, and inmates are unlikely to know, during these early stages, that they need to request interpretation and how to do so. (Settlement Agreement III.A.1)
Recommendation 12: Both the existing VRI contract and the standing arrangement with a provider of in-person qualified interpretive services are crucial and should remain in place. Inperson interpretation should be provided to inmates who communicate by signing when it is necessary for effective communication. This includes during group classes in which student participation is key, and in parole hearings. For other situations, an in-person interpreter should be provided if remote interpretation is unlikely to be, or has not been, effective. (Settlement Agreement VI.A; VI.E. VI.A.3)
Recommendation 13: More generally, more clarity and a better process for picking a qualified interpretation method—VRI or in-person—are needed. The various memos, forms, and training should be modified to support that process. The facility should give “primary consideration” to the affected inmate’s view on this question. Revised versions of all the relevant forms and memos are attached as Exhibit D. The information in Exhibit D-5—in particular, the preferred communication method—should be made available to all KYDOC staff who need it, including both medical and custody staff, including electronically. (Settlement Agreement VI.A; I.5)
Recommendation 14: Each facility should track the effectiveness of communication via VRI in other situations, in order to decide whether there are any situations in which in-person interpretation should be the first recourse. As part of this assessment process, each time a VRI is used, the inmate should be asked how effective the resulting communication was. This can be done by a scaled question:
Please check the box that best indicates your views.
The Video Remote Interpretation I just used provided fully effective communication:
 Strongly agree  Weakly agree  Weakly disagree  Strongly disagree
If there was any problem with the communication, please explain:
These responses can be collected and analyzed. This recommendation is reflected in Exhibit D. (Settlement Agreement VI.A)
Recommendation 15: Inmates who communicate via sign language should not have their hands restrained when there is a need for effective communication, absent an individualized finding of security threat even with use of substitute security procedures (if necessary). If avoiding restraint of inmates’ hands requires substitute security procedures, those should be written up and included in the documentation of the necessary processes for both VRI and in-person interpretation, and any appropriate equipment should be obtained and installed wherever it might be needed. (Settlement Agreement XI.A)
Recommendation 16 [Applies to KSR only]: For situations since June 2015 in which KSR’s procedures did not allow an inmate to communicate during a disciplinary
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 3 of 16 (December 1, 2018)

hearing—most importantly, in Inmate C’s October 2015 hearing—the inmate should be given an opportunity to redo the hearing. This opportunity must be effectively communicated to the inmate, which itself should be done using interpretive services. (Settlement Agreement VII)
Recommendation 17 [Applies to KSR only]: Inmate D’s 2016 Parole hearing should be redone, with an in-person Qualified Interpreter. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2)
Recommendation 18: When a Deaf inmate is seeking/receiving off-site medical care, staff at each facility should, as early as practicable, inform the relevant medical provider(s) that a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service will be seeking medical care from those off-site medical providers at a particular date and time; in the case of an emergency, staff should provide such information as soon as possible, and should include the Deaf inmate’s estimated time of arrival. There should be policies and procedures in place, implemented by appropriate training, to ensure that these notifications occur. (Settlement Agreement VI.D)
Recommendation 19: The process/forms for inmates to request interpretive services and other auxiliary aids and services should clearly encompass religious and any other volunteer-provided programming. (Settlement Agreement VI.A.3; VI.G.1)
Recommendation 20: Significant communications by the chaplains are covered by the requirement of effective communication. Therefore the chaplains, like other staff, should be trained in the requirements of this Agreement, and should ensure that if they have occasion to minister to a Deaf inmate—or simply inform him that a family member has died—they do so effectively, including using interpreter services if the inmate communicates using sign language. (Settlement Agreement VI.J)
Recommendation 21: The process for obtaining and using the VRI laptop should be communicated to each staff member who might have occasion to need it, and also to each inmate who communicates using sign language. Each such staff member should actually do a practice run using the machine—to figure out how/where internet access and power will be obtained, and how to use the program. The laptops themselves should be checked each time they are returned to their resting area, to ensure that they have sufficient battery power. Training should ensure that staff understand that the person communicating with the Deaf inmate should sit within easy reach of the laptop’s microphone, and that the inmate must not have his hands handcuffed. (It would be useful to include a diagram or instructions on a piece of paper taped to the laptop’s cover.) (Settlement Agreement VI [qualified interpreters]; IX.E [training and technology]; XI [hand restraints])
Recommendation 22: There should be some flexibility in the timing of VRI requests and usage; where a need arises that does not allow for 48 hours notice, VRI should nonetheless be made available if possible. Each facility should work out a process for VRI availability after hours and on weekends, as well as in emergencies. (Settlement Agreement VI.J)
C. Videos
Recommendation 23: Check each existing video used to determine whether it has captioning
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 4 of 16 (December 1, 2018)

and obtain replacements with captioning if available. Provide captions for all orientation videos, for newly acquired entertainment and educational videos, and other videos when captioning is available. For television captioning to be a real option, training for staff about how to turn it on and periodic testing are required. This should be done on a schedule, perhaps quarterly or twice a year, and it should be logged. (Settlement Agreement X.1)
Recommendation 24: For Deaf inmates who cannot hear crucial informative videos, and whose literacy level is insufficient to allow them to readily read captions, an alternative method of effective communication is necessary. For those who communicate using sign language, the prison should provide either a sign language inset, or an in-person Qualified Interpreter. (Settlement Agreement I.5; III.E; VI.J)
D. Speech-to-text
Recommendation 25 [KSR only, for right now]: KSR should continue to investigate the possibility of speech-to-text software for use in classroom and other appropriate settings. I will ask for a report on this issue six months. (Settlement Agreement V.A. 2; VI.E)
E. Assistive listening systems
Recommendation 26 [KSR only, for right now]: Investigate assistive listening systems for use in classroom and other appropriate settings. I will ask for a report on this issue in six months. (Settlement Agreement V.A. 2; VI.E)
Recommendation 27: Each facility should inform Deaf inmates of the various ways in which educational programming can be made more accessible to them; the school should put in place a process to facilitate requests for such accommodations and assess the need for them. (Settlement Agreement III.F; V.A. 2; VI.E)
F. Written communication
Recommendation 28: Written communication should be relied upon only for simple communication with literate inmates. For complex communications or less literate inmates, alternative methods are required. Staff should make best efforts to communicate with each deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate using that inmate’s preferred communication method (which is assessed and recorded by Exhibit D-5). (Settlement Agreement I.5)
G. Non-auditory alerts
Recommendation 29: Each facility should expand the availability of non-auditory alert systems, providing them to inmates who cannot hear the fire alarm and/or the alert for count. To maximize the communication effectiveness of each non-auditory alert, it should be programmed to signal, in different ways, the several predictable alerts: fire/emergency; count, chow, “report to office.” Staff must also be trained to use the office switch. Whether this is occurring will need monitoring; perhaps by using a daily log or checking in periodically with affected inmates. The monitoring system should be made formal. I will ask for a description of it, and perhaps relevant records, in the next quarterly reporting period. (Settlement Agreement VIII)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 5 of 16 (December 1, 2018)

Recommendation 30 [KSR only, for right now]: Investigate the costs and benefits of a TV-based visual paging system. I will ask for a report on this issue in six months. (Settlement Agreement VIII)
Recommendation 31: Each facility should train staff to be alert to the possibility that a Deaf inmate may miss the alert for count, chow, or pill call—and to ensure nondiscrimination in that event. (Settlement Agreement VIII; II.A)
H. Miscellaneous devices
Recommendation 32: Each facility’s commissary list should include various alerting devices that inmates might wish to purchase: caption-capable TVs, vibrating alarm clocks, and the like. Inmates should be informed that if they seek to purchase adaptive equipment that is not available via the commissary, they should request assistance from the ADA Coordinator; the ADA Coordinator should then facilitate the inmate’s purchase unless the requested device presents an articulable and documented security risk. (Settlement Agreement XII)
I. Other communications aids
Recommendation 33: Investigate all the available topics for medical EZ Boards—both word and picture versions—and buy those that are useful, making them available for use by Deaf inmates. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2; VI.C; XII)
J. Methods of communicating with Deaf inmates
Recommendation 34: Staff should be trained on, and should use, best practices for communicating with hard-of-hearing inmates. (Settlement Agreement XIII.B)
Recommendation 35: Each facility should continue to provide Deaf inmates with ID cards that identify them as Deaf, and to post similar identification outside their cells. The notices required by the Agreement outside each housing unit and at the entrance to the institution should also be posted. (Settlement Agreement III.D.1)
K. Teaching sign-language
Recommendation 36: Each facility should try to offer classes in sign language, and should give Deaf inmates who would like to learn to sign both affirmative notice and preference for these classes. (Settlement Agreement II.A)
L. Telecommunications equipment and rules
Recommendation 37: Videophones should be located in areas as accessible to Deaf Inmates as conventional telephones are accessible to non-Deaf Inmates. The videophone should be available during the same days and hours as conventional telephones and should require permission for use only if the facility requires inmates to seek permission to use conventional telephones. If an escort is required to use the videophone at night, on weekends, or in other circumstances, such an escort should be routinely provided. (Settlement Agreement IX.A)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 6 of 16 (December 1, 2018)

Recommendation 38: Even if an escort is required, there should be no requirement that inmates seeking to use the videophone, including with VRS, schedule such use in advance. Non-Deaf inmates are not required to schedule their phone calls, and that should be true for Deaf inmates, as well. (Settlement Agreement IX.A)
Recommendation 39: Ensure all staff are trained on videophone rules, so that they know that videophone access is to be provided during the same hours as conventional phone access, without pre-scheduling, and that time in transit doesn’t count. (Settlement Agreement IX.A; XIII.B)
Recommendation 40 (Edited): Deaf inmates in segregated housing must be allowed access to telecommunications services equal to that of non-Deaf inmates in the same disciplinary or administrative status. The best solution would be to work out a method for such inmates— including those on “max assault status”—to use the videophone, with VRS when needed. This could be done by escorting the prisoner to the videophone or by enabling videophone capabilities on the VRI laptop. If there are individualized reasons that an inmate cannot have his hands unshackled consistent with security, he, and others in his situation, should be allowed access to the TTY. I will request each facility to report on what method for telecommunications access is developed for Deaf inmates in segregation, and why. (Settlement Agreement IX.A)
Recommendation 41: Ensure that disciplinary oversight of videophone is no more intense than oversight of conventional phone calls. The disciplinary committee should explicitly consider and rule on this issue when it is deciding a disciplinary matter involving the videophone or TTY. (Settlement Agreement IX.B)
Recommendation 42 [New recommendation 74 substitutes for this recommendation]: KSR should review auxiliary aids that would allow hard-of-hearing inmates effective access to telecommunications, and should implement improvements— perhaps involving TTY, captioned telephones, and/or handset amplification. Asking inmates what does and doesn’t work is a necessary part of this process. I will request a report on this review—both how it was conducted and the results—in six months. (Settlement Agreement IX; I.5)
IV. PROCESSES FOR ASSESSING AND REQUESTING AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
A. Intake/Orientation
Recommendation 43: Each facility should develop a process by which inmates whose hearing impairment substantially impedes communication are noted and assessed right away on arrival at the institution, immediate steps taken to ensure effective communication, including immediate interpretative services if necessary. (Settlement Agreement III.A; III.C)
B. Literacy assessment
Recommendation 44: Staff at each facility should assess each Deaf inmate’s literacy prior to conducting additional assessment of necessary auxiliary aids and services. Educational staff should be able to propose and implement one of several quick assessment tools. For example, the
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 7 of 16 (December 1, 2018)

Slosson Oral Reading Test - Revised (SORT-R) might be suitable. If an inmate is not literate at at least the 8th grade level, reliance on written communication is unlikely to succeed in providing effective communication, and alternative methods should be used. (Settlement Agreement III.C; I.5)
C. Individual assessment meetings
Recommendation 45: For each Deaf inmate, the ADA Coordinator should conduct an individual services assessment meeting, at which the inmate’s available methods of communication are expressly ascertained and recorded, and the inmate is informed about the available auxiliary aids and services. For an inmate who can hear (with or without an amplifier or hearing aid) well enough to understand the coordinator, information should be conveyed orally as well as in writing. If the inmate uses sign language, VRI would be the appropriate way to communicate for a meeting of this nature. The greatest challenge is presented if the inmate is not literate, does not hear well enough to understand spoken communication, and does not sign. In that case, visual demonstrations of the various auxiliary aids and services may be required. The assessment should be updated annually, ideally at the inmate’s annual classification meeting. (Settlement Agreement III.C; I.5)
D. Form and options
Recommendation 46: The various forms related to requesting and using Auxiliary Aids and Services form should be changed in a number of ways:
• To list available aids and services more comprehensively • To more clearly explain what the various services and aids are, in what circumstances
they are available, and how to request them. • To explain how to use the various devices. • To ask inmates, expressly, about their preferred modes of communication or needed
services, and why those are useful. To explain which items are free of charge, and which are available only at the inmate’s expense. (Settlement Agreement III.C; III.F)
Recommendation 47: I recommend replacement of the existing forms with several different ones, explaining the various options available, allowing requests for various types of communications assistance, and obtaining feedback from inmates (see Recommendation 14, above). These recommended forms are attached as Exhibit D, which also includes a recommended staff memo about the various available devices and accommodations, and an assessment form. These forms should be explained/filled out during the individual assessment meetings. (Settlement Agreement III.C; III.F)
E. Additional methods for inmates to seek auxiliary aids and services
Recommendation 48: The Healthcare Request form should include boxes to check if auxiliary aids or services, including remote or in-person interpretation, are needed. My recommended additions to this form are attached as Exhibit E-2. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2; VI.C)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 8 of 16 (December 1, 2018)

Recommendation 49: All the forms by which inmates apply for jobs, educational programming, etc., should have language similar to that in the recommended Healthcare Request form. So should classification and disciplinary forms that notify inmates of impending hearings or meetings. I have not provided recommended versions of these forms, but will in a future reporting period ask to see them all. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2; VI.F; VI.E; VI.H; VII.A)
Recommendation 50: When Deaf inmates and staff discuss enrollment or application for a particular activity or program, communication should be effective—which means an interpreter may be required for the discussion—and should cover potential accommodations, auxiliary aids/services that could provide equal access to the activity/program. (Settlement Agreement V.A; VI)
V. TRAINING
A. ADA Coordinator Training
Recommendation 51: KYDOC should develop training on the Settlement Agreement and make it available to ADA Coordinators. For training on the ADA, the ADA National Network training is appropriate. (Settlement Agreement XIII.B)
B. Staff Training
Recommendation 52 [Training slides have now been provided and comments offered]: Training should be developed on all topics listed in the Settlement Agreement as requiring training. Once drafted, materials should be shared with me and with the Kentucky Commission on the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, for our input. This training is already long overdue; it should be provided to me for my input no later than July 1, finalized within 30 days after my comments are returned, and delivered to staff as soon as possible thereafter. (Settlement Agreement XIII)
VI. REPORTING
Recommendation 53: Ensure that all relevant staff know about the Agreement’s reporting obligations, so that I am appropriately notified when any of the reporting-triggering events takes place. (Settlement Agreement II.A; VI.F; VIII.B.1; VIII.B.3; VIII.C; IX.C; XII)
Group 2 (December 2016)
I. IDENTIFICATION OF INMATES COVERED BY THE AGREEMENT.
Recommendation 54: Identification processes (Settlement Agreement III.A.1 [initial classification]; III.B [hearing assessment]; III.D.1 [identification cards])
a) Each facility should ask each inmate about any hearing difficulties during his or her initial medical screening, in their first day or two in the facility. Questions about hearing should be at the start of that screening, to allow accommodations, if needed, during the rest of the process.
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 9 of 16 (December 1, 2018)

b) All inmates should also fill out, in writing or orally, the multiple-question hearing screening. Exhibit B-2 is the recommended form. (See also prior recommendation 2.) This form should be administered by medical staff, to facilitate necessary medical followup.
c) If an inmate answers “yes” or “sometimes” in response to three or more of the screening questions, he should be seen in the next several days by a medical provider—a physician or nurse practitioner—for further evaluation, including a “whisper test” or other examination to assess whether there is a functional hearing problem.
d) If an inmate fails the “whisper test” or other hearing evaluation, the following should occur: • The inmate should receive an identification card to carry on his person, which states that the inmate is deaf or hard-of-hearing. • The inmate’s name should be shared with the facility’s ADA coordinator. • Two different alerts should be placed in his record, one in KOMS (the Kentucky Offender Management System), to alert correctional staff to the issue whenever they retrieve his computerized file, and the other in the EMR (Electronic Medical Record), to do the same for medical staff. Both alerts should be immediately obvious when the electronic file is opened. (See Figures A and B, above).
e) All inmates so identified should be included in the facility’s semi-annual reports to me; if a particular inmate turns out not to be deaf or hard-of-hearing, because, for example, a medical problem that was obstructing his or her hearing is solved, that can be explained. (Note: the decision to send an inmate to an audiologist for evaluation or treatment is not the same as the decision to flag the inmate as deaf or hard-ofhearing.)
Recommendation 55: In order to ensure appropriate identification of deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates, all inmates’ annual or other routine physicals should include the hearing questionnaire (Exhibit B-2). (Settlement Agreement III.B)
Recommendation 56: Each facility should ensure that the ID cards used to identify inmates as deaf or hard-of-hearing are clear, and should avoid abbreviations or other language that may not be clear. Each facility should ensure that every deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate is able to carry such a card at all times. If an inmate misplaces the card, a replacement should be promptly provided. (Settlement Agreement III.D.1)
II. ENSURING EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION DURING INTAKE
Recommendation 57: Interpretation services should be offered without special request to any inmate (known by prison staff to use sign language to communicate) during initial medical screening or other intake medical encounters. Inmates are unlikely to know, during these early stages, that they need to request interpretation and how to do so. Medical staff should ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if they use sign language to communicate, rather than waiting for the ADA Coordinator’s assessment. (Settlement Agreement III.A.1)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 10 of 16 (December 1, 2018)

Recommendation 58: Each facility’s medical office should keep pocket amplifiers on hand for all intake staff—medical, mental health, and custody—to use when the need arises. (Settlement Agreement III.A.1)
III. PROVISION OF AUDIOLOGY SERVICES
Recommendation 59: The ADA Coordinator for each KYDOC facility should maintain a document that tracks each deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate’s progress through the process of obtaining any needed hearing aid, including the dates and outcomes of:
• the initial request/questionnaire • each relevant medical visit • any audiology visit • hearing aid provision. In order to ensure that inmates do not wait longer than two months for a necessary hearing aid, the ADA coordinator should check for progress for each affected inmate every week or two, updating the tracking document and working with medical staff to solve any procedural hurdles that arise. A recommended sample tracking document is provided as Exhibit F. (Settlement Agreement V.B; VIII.B.2)
IV. AUXILIARY AIDS/SERVICES
Recommendation 60: I commend KYDOC for developing a user-friendly pamphlet to cover the information needed by deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates; I recommend facilities use the edited version in Exhibit D-2; each facility should fill in the items marked with curly brackets ({ and }). (Settlement Agreement III.F)
A. Personal hearing devices: Hearing aids and amplifiers
Recommendation 61: Inmates with hearing aids should be able to obtain replacement batteries seven days a week, without difficulty or charge, regardless of their housing or programming assignment. (Settlement Agreement V.B)
Recommendation 62: Each facility should inform staff responsible for property moves that it is important for inmates to keep their hearing aids with them, even when they are moved into segregation or transferred. When an inmate is accidentally separated from his or her hearing aids, policy should allow the inmate to promptly obtain the hearing aids from storage or medical, or to get replacements. (Settlement Agreement V.B)
B. Qualified Interpretation
1. Video Relay Interpretation (VRI): Use and Procedures
Recommendation 63: Absent an emergency in which time is of the essence and VRI services are unavailable, no facility should rely on an inmate to interpret a communication that would ordinarily be private for another inmate. (Settlement Agreement VI; I.18)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 11 of 16 (December 1, 2018)

Recommendation 64: Each facility should obtain and test a “splitter” for each VRI laptop, so that the laptop can be used alongside a computer. (Settlement Agreement IX.E.1)
Recommendation 65: Each facility should ensure that the VRI laptop routinely receives necessary software updates. (Settlement Agreement IX.E.1)
2. Religious and Volunteer-provided programming
Recommendation 66: For any religious programming—worship services, counseling, bible study, etc.—that is provided directly by the chaplain, each facility should provide qualified interpretation when requested by an inmate who needs it.
Prior Recommendation 20: Significant communications by the chaplains are covered by the requirement of effective communication. Therefore the chaplains, like other KSR staff, should be trained in the requirements of this Agreement, and should ensure that if they have occasion to minister to a Deaf inmate—or simply inform him that a family member has died—they do so effectively, including using interpreter services if the inmate communicates using sign language.
C. Video captioning
D. Speech-to-text
E. Assistive listening systems
(Settlement Agreement VI.G.3)
Recommendation 67: Each religious, educational, and programming area should have available a device to allow wireless amplification for individual hard-of-hearing inmates. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2)
Recommendation 68: KSR should inform deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates of the various ways in which religious, educational, rehabilitative, and recreational programming can be made more accessible to them; all programming providers (educational, rehabilitative, and recreational) should put in place a process to facilitate requests for such accommodations and assess the need for them. (Settlement Agreement V.A; III.F)
F. Written communication
G. Non-auditory alerts
Recommendation 69: In any unit where there are deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates, each facility should implement (and ensure use of) written announcement boards. That is, all general announcements should also be promptly displayed on a written announcement board (e.g.: “X class is cancelled this evening,” or “all inmates in X category are allowed an X privilege this afternoon”). Staff use of this announcement board must be monitored and audited. (Settlement Agreement VIII.B.1)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 12 of 16 (December 1, 2018)

Recommendation 70: In order to provide effective and equal communications to deaf and hardof-hearing inmates who are being individually paged, staff should check KOMS to see if that inmate has a deaf/hard-of-hearing alert; if a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate does not answer the auditory page in a minute or two, he or she should be individually alerted to the page by a staff member. This could be done by in-person notification or by provision of a personal paging system. (Settlement Agreement VIII.A)
Recommendation 71: Each facility should train staff to be alert to the possibility that a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate may be unable to hear an order or instruction issued verbally; training should cover strategies to avoid bad results. (Settlement Agreement XIII.B; II.A)
H. Miscellaneous devices
I. Speech
Recommendation 71: In each facility’s settings in which staff ordinarily talk to a group of inmates—orientation, education, etc.—consideration should be given to talking to any hard-ofhearing inmate one-on-one, instead. For example, for someone who is having difficulty hearing a teacher in a group setting, even with assistive listening devices (see IV.E, above), a tutor might be a better option than a congregate GED class. (Settlement Agreement XIII.B)
J. Teaching sign-language
Recommendation 72: Deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates who do not have their GED should be among those allowed to enroll in any classes in sign language. Each facility should obtain resources relating to sign language—books or computer-based instruction—and make those available to deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. (Settlement Agreement II.A)
K. Telecommunications equipment and rules
1. Videophone and VRS
2. TTY
Recommendation 73: Each facility should maintain its TTY and develop a facility protocol for how to make it available to inmates, covering who the inmate should request it from, where it should be connected, etc. In addition, each facility should annually test its TTY and the protocol by calling me at an agreed upon time using direct TTY and the relay service. TTY instructions should be left with the TTY at all times. (Settlement Agreement IX.D.1)
3. Hard-of-hearing inmates
Recommendation 74 (substitutes for prior recommendation 42): Each facility should improve access of hard-of-hearing inmates to telecommunications, by:
(a) Allowing them access to TTYs. (b) Informing them that amplified phones are available, and ensuring that at least one such phone, whose amplification is compatible with a hearing aid but does not require one, is
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 13 of 16 (December 1, 2018)

available in every group of phones used by any hard-of-hearing inmate. (c) Providing access to captioned telephones, unless on investigation such telephones are not available in the institutional setting.
I will request a report on implementation each aspect of this recommendation.
(Settlement Agreement IX.A)
V. THE INTERACTION OF COMMUNICATION NEEDS AND HOUSING ASSIGNMENT
A. Segregated housing
B. Other housing needs
Recommendation 75: Each facility should develop a method for considering how communications difficulties with deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates can be minimized by particular housing assignments, and shall make such assignments when appropriate. (Settlement Agreement II.A)
VI. PROCESSES FOR ASSESSING AND REQUESTING AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES
VII. FORM AND OPTIONS
Recommendation 76: Each facility should include notice in its Inmate Handbook of the facility’s basic obligation to avoid discrimination and provide effective communication, and inform inmates to contact the ADA Coordinator if needed. Something like the following would be appropriate:
Americans with Disabilities Act and Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates
An inmate with a verified disability will have the opportunity to participate in services, privileges, and programs similar to other inmates at this institution. If you are deaf or hard-of-hearing, you should contact the designated institutional ADA Coordinator; each living unit and inmate public areas has contact information posted. All {name facility here}-provided services will provide effective communication and make available qualified interpreters when needed. Qualified Interpreters and Auxiliary Aids and Services are available for an inmate with a verified disability upon request. It is the inmate’s responsibility to request an interpreter from volunteer organizations or individuals that are providing activities and services. An inmate who meets criteria to be accommodated under the ADA will be provided identification to facilitate effective communication. If at any time an inmate chooses to not wear the identification, he/she shall sign a waiver document to be placed in the institutional file.
(Settlement Agreement II.A)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 14 of 16 (December 1, 2018)

VIII. TRAINING
A. ADA Coordinator Training
B. Staff Training
Recommendation 77: In addition to the computer-based KYDOC training, live, in-service training should cover, at least:
a) For all staff: • The identity and role of the ADA Coordinator • Existence of KOMS and EMR alerts for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates, and the obligation to check for the alerts. • The occasions and process for obtaining access to the VRI laptop, and how to use the laptop, including where different people should sit to maximize communication effectiveness. (For medical, educational, and housing staff, this training should be done on-site, so each affected staff member can see where and how the laptop can be set up.) • The occasions and process for obtaining an in-person qualified interpreter.
b) For housing area staff: • The use of cell/bed notices that an inmate is deaf or hard-of-hearing • The use of the bed shaker switch. • Telecommunications issues, including how to obtain and use a TTY, and the policies and procedures governing TTY and videophone usage. • The obligation to notify deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates of alerts, including emergency alerts and non-emergency pages.
c) For all corrections staff: • The requirements to accommodate inmates who use sign language to communicate by using restraints that allow them to sign, and how to implement those requirements. • Strategies for dealing with inmates who may not hear directions or orders, especially when given from behind or above them.
d) For medical staff: • The responsibility of running a process to provide medically necessary hearing aids within two months, and what that actually entails, in terms of adjusting ordinary processes and timing. • The obligation to notify off-site medical provider(s) that a Deaf Inmate requiring a Qualified Interpreter or other Auxiliary Aid or Service will be seeking medical care, and how this obligation is being assigned.
(Settlement Agreement XIII; IX.E.2; III.D.2)
IX. REPORTING
Recommendation 78: The ADA Coordinator should obtain monthly reports based on both KOMS and medical records of each inmate in the facility who is deaf or hard-of-hearing, and
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 15 of 16 (December 1, 2018)

should check those reports too add to the Coordinator’s tracking list. (Settlement Agreement XV.B.1)
Recommendation 79: Each facility’s quarterly written summary of grievances by deaf and hardof-hearing inmates should include all such grievances, not only the ones that are deemed related to effective communication, auxiliary aids and services, or other issues raised in the Settlement Agreement. (Settlement Agreement XIV.3)
Group 3 (April 2017)
Recommendation 80: At each institution, the ADA Coordinator should be one of the staff members who receives each routine transfer memo listing arriving inmates. The ADA Coordinator should check, in advance, to see if any arriving inmate has a disability that may need accommodation in order to provide effective communication and full information during the intake/orientation process, and should make arrangements for that accommodation to be provided. (Settlement Agreement V.A.2)
Recommendation 81: Medical staff should ensure that inmates with a need for audiology services are not charged inappropriately, and should avoid repeated charges for ongoing efforts to obtain hearing aids or other services. (Settlement Agreement V.B)
Recommendation 82: Each VRI should be the subject of a log sheet that tracks its usage, including staff member, date and purpose. In any institution that houses one or more inmates who use sign language to communicate, the ADA Coordinator should check the VRI log sheet at least once each week, and should ensure that the VRI is being used on appropriate occasions, not just for classification and disciplinary meetings, but for other important conversations between the inmate and staff. (Settlement Agreement VI.A, III.C; VI.C.4; VI.H; V.A.2; VII.A; VI.J)
Group 4 (October 1, 2018)
Recommendation 83: The ADA coordinator or his or her deputy should track each and every inmate classified as deaf and hard-of-hearing, personally conduct an accommodations assessment, and ensure that each promptly receives an HOH card and, if desired, a bed/cell card. (Settlement Agreement II.B.3; III.C; III.D.1)
Recommendation 84: In order to comply with the ADA’s integration mandate, inmates may be offered the chance to be housed in any hard-of-hearing cluster, but may not be compelled to do so in order to receive the accommodations to which they are entitled.
Recommendation 85: Portable phone amplifiers should be made available at every institution. (Settlement Agreement I.2; V.A.2)
Consolidated Recommendations, p. 16 of 16 (December 1, 2018)

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

APPEND+IX,C-./ÿ12ÿ34567ÿ89.:;+<<=->ÿ6?.@>:-<A9ÿB9@?CD:<E FGHIJ;IHK

Pÿ1405
ÿQÿ
ÿRÿ
988ÿ%98ÿS
$ T5ÿ8A9D?ÿV9CÿI8Y
 ÿ#
ÿS
ÿÿPÿ0ÿ1405ÿ87ÿ-/U:<EÿN?Cÿ:<N?C.-D:?<ÿVOÿ65WÿX?<,-O7 Z#8[ÿR
L?=CÿM,9<D:NO:<EÿM<N?C.-D:?<
L?=Cÿ\-.9ÿ]
L?=CÿM</D:D=D:?<ÿ]
L?=Cÿ^.-:>ÿ]
L?=Cÿ_`?<9ÿ\=.V9Cÿ]
+?NCÿ9D`ÿO9?ÿA==ÿDC`C99ÿ<AD=ÿ+CC49+<ÿD6ÿ+?4?+C,ÿ6:<?-?D?C,C2:ÿ<]-D?CaÿMNÿ<?D7ÿ@>9-/9ÿ>:/DÿD`9ÿ<-.97ÿ@`?<9ÿ<=.V9C7ÿ-<,ÿ9.-:>

bcÿefgÿhihÿjkklmnopeklÿnoqklrpenkoÿkoÿefncÿsptgÿukllguev

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

02*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

#
$22

+,
 2-8
26.2/8 
26678

8
0

E12:ÿ4D5?4647ÿ?849D:;ÿ5<2:ÿ4ÿ=::F>66ÿ?A2@5ÿ6456ÿBAG:ÿ6B;6ÿ@5Cÿ;>:ÿ;>>;4D?4Dÿ25>ÿ?6<ÿ=5>>:=6?54ÿE@ÿ6B:

HIÿKLMÿNMOPQRMÿSTUUMSKVÿW ÿX
 ÿYÿZÿ.ÿ89ÿ88  ÿ%ÿ
ÿÿZ,ÿ#ÿZ  ÿ%ÿ0ÿ9#

[T\]^_`aKTUbÿ^cMUKIÿdÿ^IIaIKaeMÿfMeaSMI

gj8#87
ÿ#
ÿ8
ÿ
9Zÿ88
+
ÿ
ÿ8,ÿ8
Z899ÿ
8ÿÿ!ÿ
%ÿ+,
7ÿÿ88
ÿÿ78ÿ
ÿ889
%
h
ÿÿ
,
897"ÿ,#ÿ8ÿ89
ÿ8%7ÿ
#ÿZÿ78ÿ


#
8+
ÿ7ÿZ8
$ÿ-i ^kÿfTMIÿbT_Uÿa\IKaK_KaT\ÿLQeMÿQ\bÿlmÿUQ`aTÿKUQ\InaKKMUIoÿ_IQOcMÿQIÿQ\ÿQnPcapaMUÿIbIKMnVÿW ÿX
 ÿY qQScMSQMIIMIÿÿ`KTMÿIKSLUManOMVÿbÿtTT_NUÿÿaN\IMKcacKÿ`_TKaÿTKL\MrIbÿMÿNsTPUMuUVaMÿ\^S\MbÿÿNTaKKLLMÿKULÿSMTInMÿn`MMe\aKSIMVIkÿtTNÿ`Tÿa\nQKMIÿTOKQa\

tTNÿnQ\boÿQ\`ÿNLMUMÿQUMÿKLMbÿ_IM`V

HpÿbMIoÿNLM\ÿ`a`ÿbT_Uÿa\IKaK_KaT\ÿRMKÿKLMIMÿ`MeaSMIV

PH_pUÿPbTcMT`IQ_o`SÿPÿKQrcIMÿ`ÿQITIPSMM_ÿPSnaUpTMaSe\QaK`KÿaOMTMÿ\McTIaKÿNLTMk\UÿÿKQLÿM`ÿMnIQS\Ua_PpKQaTS\K_ÿTUMpÿUKrLIMÿNÿPMUOTI`a_KMSkKÿrvITÿI_PÿSMQS\apÿaPSQUTKaeTa\`IMÿÿTaKUÿaÿ\QÿÿcKaL\auIÿÿKKTMÿsKKLÿOMTsÿTU

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

12*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

%8
ÿ%ÿ+,ÿ87ÿ8
9

ÿ
7ÿ8
ÿ89%ÿ
-
9
./
ÿ+

8
ÿ89%8%ÿ

-ÿ
%ÿ+9,ÿ87ÿ8
9

ÿ
7
01ÿ3456ÿ7489ÿ:;6<:<8<:4;ÿ=>?5ÿ>;7ÿ4<=59ÿ>@AB:C:596Dÿ>@AB:C:E><:4;ÿ676<5@6Dÿ49ÿ<=5ÿB:F5GÿH ÿI
 ÿJ K>EB5E>56656ÿÿL<45ÿ6<E=95:@M5Gÿ7ÿQ448P9ÿÿ:P;65<B:B<ÿL84<:ÿ4<=;5N67ÿ5ÿPO4A95F9G:5ÿ;RE;57ÿÿP4:<<==5ÿ<9=ÿE546@5ÿ@L55?;:<E65G61ÿQ4PÿL4ÿ:;@><56ÿ4M<>:;

Q4Pÿ@>;7Dÿ>;LÿP=595ÿ>95ÿ<=57ÿ865LG SCÿ756DÿP=5;ÿL:Lÿ7489ÿ:;6<:<8<:4;ÿT5<ÿ<=565ÿL5?:E56G SA8Cÿ9A74B54L6>8DLEÿAÿ<>NB65ÿLÿ>646AE558ÿAE@:9C45:E?;>:<L<ÿ:M545ÿ;5B46:<ÿP=451;9ÿÿ<>=ÿ5Lÿ5@6>E;9:8AC<>:4E;<8ÿ495Cÿ9<N=65ÿPÿA59M46L:8<5E1<ÿNU64ÿ68AÿE5>E;:Cÿ:AE>94<:?4:;L65ÿÿ4:<9ÿ:ÿ;>ÿÿB<:=;:F6ÿÿ<<45ÿO<<=ÿM54Oÿ49

%8
ÿ%ÿ#ÿ89%


./
ÿ+


#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

*2*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

%8
ÿ%ÿ#ÿ89%


+,ÿ./01ÿ2/34ÿ561757375/6ÿ89:0ÿ;0<ÿ189=041>ÿ? ÿ@
 ÿA

B9DC0D901101ÿÿ<7/0ÿ17D8405J;0>ÿ2ÿI//3H4ÿÿ5H6107C5C7ÿ<3/75ÿ/7860E12ÿ0ÿHF/G40=4>50ÿ6KD602ÿÿH/577880ÿ748ÿD0/1J0ÿJ<00:657D10>1,ÿI/Hÿ</ÿ56J9701ÿ/;7956

I/HÿJ962Lÿ96<ÿH8040ÿ940ÿ7802ÿ310<> MNÿ201LÿH806ÿ<5<ÿ2/34ÿ561757375/6ÿO07ÿ78010ÿ<0:5D01> 3MGNGÿ42/C0/<193L<DÿGÿ79EC10ÿ<ÿ91/1GD003ÿGDJ54N/05D:6957<7ÿ5;0/0ÿ60C/157ÿH8/0,64ÿÿ798ÿ0<ÿ0J19D6453GN795/D673ÿ/40Nÿ47E810ÿHÿG04;/1<5370D,7ÿEP1/ÿ13GÿD09D65Nÿ5GD94/75:/56<10ÿÿ/574ÿ5ÿ69ÿÿC75865=1ÿÿ77/0ÿF778ÿ;0/Fÿ/4

%8
ÿ%ÿQ7ÿ
#8R

ST
ÿU

%8
ÿ%ÿQ7ÿ
#8R

.,ÿ./01ÿ2/34ÿ561757375/6ÿ89:0ÿ:5;49756OÿH97D801>ÿ? ÿ@
 ÿA

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

32*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

.+2,-2.-//-/ÿÿ1:7-ÿ/:?23-4C5-Dÿÿ6B778>3ÿÿ4>9/-:,4,:ÿ187:4ÿ7:?9-;/6ÿ-ÿ><7=3-E3D4-ÿ9F29-6ÿÿ>74::??-ÿ:3?ÿ2-7/C-ÿC1--@94:2/-D/AÿB7>ÿ17ÿ49C.:-/ÿ75:.49

B7>ÿC.96Gÿ.91ÿ>?-3-ÿ.3-ÿ:?-6ÿ8/-1D HIÿ6-/Gÿ>?-9ÿ141ÿ6783ÿ49/:4:8:479ÿJ-:ÿ:?-/-ÿ1-@42-/D 8H=I=ÿ367,-71/.8G12ÿ=ÿ:.;,/-ÿ1ÿ./7/=2--8ÿ=2C43I7-42@9.4:1:ÿ45-7-ÿ9-,7/4:ÿ>?7-A93ÿÿ:.?ÿ-1ÿ-C/.29348=I:.4729:8ÿ73-Iÿ3:;?/-ÿ>ÿ=-357/148:-2A:ÿ;K/7ÿ/8=ÿ2-.294Iÿ4=2.37:4@7491/-ÿÿ74:3ÿ4ÿ9.ÿÿ,:4?94E/ÿÿ::7-ÿ<::?ÿ5-7<ÿ73
%8
ÿ%ÿL8 ÿM8#

NM
ÿO

%8
ÿ%ÿL8 ÿM8#

PAÿQ7-/ÿ6783ÿ49/:4:8:479ÿ?.@-ÿ@453.:49Jÿ.,.3Cÿ2,72E/DÿR ÿS
 ÿT +.2,-2.-//-/ÿÿ1:7-ÿ/:2?3-4C5-Dÿ6ÿB778>3ÿÿ4>9/-:,4,:ÿ187:4ÿ7:?9-;/6ÿ-ÿ><7=3-E3D4-ÿ9F29-6ÿÿ>74::??-ÿ:3?ÿ2-7/C-ÿC1--@94:2/-D/AÿB7>ÿ17ÿ49C.:-/ÿ75:.49

B7>ÿC.96Gÿ.91ÿ>?-3-ÿ.3-ÿ:?-6ÿ8/-1D

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

'2*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

+,ÿ./01ÿ23/4ÿ565ÿ.789ÿ640:6:8:674ÿ;/:ÿ:3/0/ÿ5/<6=/0>

+?8,ÿ9?.7@/750A815=ÿ?ÿ:AB@0/ÿ5ÿA070?=//8ÿ?=D69,7/6=<4A6:5:ÿ6E/7/ÿ4/@706:ÿ237/F49ÿÿ:A3ÿ/5ÿ/D0A=4968?,:A67=4:8ÿ79/,ÿ9:B30/ÿ2ÿ?/9E70568:/=F:ÿBG07ÿ08?ÿ=/A=46,ÿ6?=A97:6<76450/ÿÿ76:9ÿ6ÿ4Aÿÿ@:6346C0ÿÿ::7/ÿH::3ÿE/7Hÿ79

%8
ÿ%ÿI8 ÿ889ÿJ

KL
ÿM

%8
ÿ%ÿI8 ÿ889ÿJ

NFÿO7/0ÿ.789ÿ640:6:8:674ÿ3A</ÿ?A;/90>ÿP ÿQ
 ÿR SA=@/=A/00/0ÿÿ5:7/ÿ0:=39/6DE/>ÿ.ÿT77829ÿÿ6240/:@6@:ÿ587:6ÿ7:34/B0.ÿ/ÿ2H7?9/C9>6/ÿ4U=4/.ÿÿ276::33/ÿ:93ÿ=/70D/ÿD5//<46:=0/>0FÿT72ÿ57ÿ64DA:/0ÿ7E:A64

T72ÿDA4.1ÿA45ÿ23/9/ÿA9/ÿ:3/.ÿ80/5>

+,ÿ./01ÿ23/4ÿ565ÿ.789ÿ640:6:8:674ÿ;/:ÿ:3/0/ÿ5/<6=/0>

?+8,9ÿ?.7@/750A815=ÿ?ÿ:AB@0/ÿ5ÿA070?=//8ÿ?=D69,7/6=<4A6:5:ÿ6E/7/ÿ4/@706:ÿ237/F49ÿÿ:A3ÿ/5ÿ/D0A=4968?,:A67=4:8ÿ79/,ÿ9:B30/ÿ2ÿ?/9E70568:/=F:ÿBG07ÿ08?ÿ=/A=46,ÿ6?=A97:6<76450/ÿÿ76:9ÿ6ÿ4Aÿÿ@:6346C0ÿÿ::7/ÿH::3ÿE/7Hÿ79

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

)2*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

%8
ÿ%ÿ8 

+,
ÿ-

%8
ÿ%ÿ8 

-
ÿ
.8
ÿÿ7,#
#ÿ/8ÿ8ÿ601ÿ21ÿ92345ÿ78ÿ87/0
ÿÿ8-ÿ
ÿ8#ÿ8ÿ


8
ÿÿ77
$ÿ0ÿÿ
ÿ8ÿ0 998#,,##88,7ÿÿÿ9#%7ÿ8ÿ8,8
#9ÿ08/0ÿ

0ÿ8ÿ7ÿÿÿÿ##%
ÿ88ÿ98
8/
6
ÿ78ÿ%ÿ0ÿ#8ÿ80ÿ#8ÿ8ÿÿÿ

 9:;ÿ=>;ÿ=;?=ÿ@A?ÿ@;BACÿADÿEFBAGHÿGÿHAIEJ;K=L

M87ÿ-!
"
M
#0
ÿ8977
ÿÿ/ÿ%7ÿ7ÿ98/8

ÿÿ8#/ÿÿ%ÿÿ877
/0ÿ78ÿ
N88374ÿÿ8ÿ,P942ÿ2Q48Rÿb
/46ÿÿ2%,ÿSÿT#ÿ#85ÿ4#ÿ47
Rÿÿ8#46ÿ72ÿÿU92V2c4cU
ÿÿbÿWX
%`ÿY8YYZ[ÿZÿ\8]ÿX87YÿYY7#Z^ÿ_ÿ0`ÿa8#cÿcÿ
ÿ0
ÿ79ÿ,
9ÿÿ#8ÿ9#ÿ,ÿ#0ÿ8#7
ÿÿ

ÿÿ##ÿ7
7


#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

(2*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

>+8,ÿ;.ÿ6/G0?H1ÿÿ293:00ÿ46526?82ÿ>276ÿ8Iÿ9;ÿ:E;ÿ551>20@1ÿ6J;,ÿK3ÿ5L/0ÿ<8:ÿ=8>6?@010@ÿ5><ÿ>07ÿ>8>A5:@?281<ÿ54012ÿ6<620B6CÿDEF ÿM
 ÿN

OPQÿSTUVWXPYVÿZ[\]ÿTVUÿW^UÿWU_Wÿ`P_UVÿ`UaPbÿPQÿTcaPdeÿdÿePfTgUYWh I,ÿi352ÿ6<620B6ÿ35/0ÿj00>ÿ:>@01ÿ=8>6?@0152?8>C

E7,ÿ0k1?0@ÿÿ5<=8=:0ÿ=H825>j64:04C2ÿÿ7I8?273ÿÿ253>0@ÿlÿ70322040>BC0>2ÿm8>?281ÿ5>@ÿnokIIÿ28ÿ@0201B?>0ÿ7302301ÿ230ÿ@0/?=06

J7,3ÿp5420ÿ253600<ÿHÿ51180/ÿF?8@10,ÿF:44ÿ?>F81B52?8>ÿ8>ÿ5><ÿ@0/?=06ÿ:>@01ÿ=8>6?@0152?8>;ÿ?>=4:@?>qÿ738ÿ5>@

#
ÿr Nÿ%ÿ#

s87ÿ%98ÿ8tÿuÿ87vÿ8ÿ
v
9
ÿ7ÿ
78ÿ#ÿ%ÿÿ7
t7ÿÿ#ÿwÿtw
ÿ8t

x87ut983#8ÿ
#09
ÿ
l#9ÿ%ÿu02#vuÿ2
ÿ84#0ÿÿ8#ÿB
ÿw0%
vÿÿÿ>ÿuÿ72ÿ##ÿuyÿ
7qÿ#ÿ1
8ÿÿ0
90ÿ%#ÿ8ÿBu
97ÿ0ÿv
8ÿ>ÿ9ÿ#2ÿÿ%ÿ887ÿ6ÿ7ÿ#2
52
8
0ÿ9768vÿÿ7ÿDÿzv8ÿÿ
EuEK
#8}ÿ
%{ÿ
ÿ
|
~ÿ{8ÿ8#9ÿ#v#87ÿÿ
ÿÿ#8ÿÿ#ÿ7#ÿvÿÿ8
vÿÿ7uÿ
#uÿÿÿ
ÿÿ78#%ÿÿ87#ÿ89ÿ
v

#ÿ7ÿÿ8ÿÿÿt7ÿ
ÿÿ
889ÿ
#
987ÿÿ9

8
ÿÿÿÿ7t##}ÿÿÿ
988

ÿÿÿ88ÿÿ7
}8#77ÿ

ÿÿÿw#ÿt
v8ÿ
ÿ88ÿ
ÿ#uÿ#


#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

52*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

,J-ÿ/0123ÿ45607ÿ89ÿ:;8<9ÿ=>?3ÿ@ABÿC>D3ÿ>1@ÿD3E36C01>E0A1Fÿ>77AG01HÿA6ÿD0F>77AG01HÿD3?023FI ÿK
 ÿL

MB01-5ÿCN7OAÿ>@>EAD3BFÿDTÿ=ÿA>>21?BD3CÿÿR2V3AS1ÿ1GE>F=E00D3A3116ÿÿ@3AADOQBÿÿ>Rÿÿ18DSA3ÿEE?=0O03023ÿ3DDÿ3ÿPEÿ?=G032=ÿ3/3RE3F=ES3ET7ÿ63Rÿ:C@SAÿ3EB=1ÿ3EHÿÿW66>3A1>1EF30AEDA1ÿ6A0ÿ1A6HÿO6ÿT3@ÿROAUBBSFÿ6E3ÿ=DD33ÿ5ÿE133>66CCC3001FFF>ÿA0EA0OAÿ1>1ÿOPROÿF35S27-3E>3FD3 X87ÿY!
"

N1OA6C>E0A1ÿ>ZABEÿ[3>OÿN1C>E3F

8\8#8%97ÿ88ÿ9&
89
8

ÿ`8ÿÿÿ_ÿ^_#i#8
ÿÿ$
]ÿaÿÿÿ8fg_ÿÿ88ÿ8_ÿ%`]#ÿÿÿ79`
8ÿ
ÿ

#!ÿ888ÿ#%7ÿÿ`8`

ÿÿ8ÿ_ÿ97%
ÿ8
ÿ#8ÿÿ
#8^ÿÿ
8%8#7ÿÿhÿÿ7Xÿÿÿ%
6ÿ8ÿ##ÿ
a9#Lÿ%878ÿ%b
ÿ0ÿ8_ÿÿc9^ÿ%1ÿd4ÿa
ÿ08ÿÿ#5%ÿÿ88#"
eÿ7`8ÿYÿ78#aÿÿ%L%ÿÿÿ#_aÿ_cÿÿ9a8ÿfÿ%L`87ÿÿ7
ÿÿÿ8ÿ##ÿ7#88
7ÿ
aÿÿ87%9ÿ#ÿ7ÿ`8%
ÿ%
ÿÿ8##ÿÿ8ÿ`
%8ÿÿÿÿ
`#_8#
8ÿÿ9\7ÿÿÿ8ÿ88
98
`ÿÿh
87ÿÿÿ%ÿ%ÿ
#ÿ8

%ÿÿ
%ÿX%ÿÿ7%#97ÿ98
8ÿ
ÿÿ
`

#ÿ j01kCA>jÿEC3F39>ÿ>11FDÿjÿ=W>@Fÿÿ011AFEE0ÿE=B>ED0Aÿ>11ÿD@AÿF30F1ÿ213AÿE4ÿ=5>60?7ÿ38ÿ9>ÿ:1;@8ÿ2<B-j6631Eÿ[3>OÿR0127BD01Hÿ=>6DPAOP=3>601HS
41@ÿD3>OÿA6ÿ=>6DPAOP=3>601Hÿ01C>E3FÿA?36ÿE=3ÿ7>FEÿEGAÿlB>6E36FIÿJ ÿK
 ÿL
>0lm1ZB7O07A323F6nÿCEEÿA0=A>ÿ3D1E60A-3AÿpGÿ1E=A1ÿZ3ÿ7>A3ÿ127>A>2DGC3ÿEF-=3F3ÿÿA>ÿOOÿ0ÿE7E33=C93ÿ0ÿ15O0577>3BEÿ3E0ÿFÿE3ÿ=jo3N21ÿD3OA>7ÿ6EFC>59ÿ6>>3E10>ADD1ÿFEÿ==A33113ÿ[EÿBÿ3O5A>76OAÿÿEN>1=DC3ÿÿE0>=1E3O3AÿFD6ÿCAPÿ2p>B3E0CCA1531ÿ7>>EFEÿ3Gn-30jEÿD=qÿÿAOEA=B63ÿÿFÿ061=3ÿAEl=BB370Dÿ613ÿZ3D3oE

a#%ÿ8%`79ÿ#8%8#8ÿ
#87ÿ"8ÿ`ÿ8
8ÿ%ÿ9887ÿ8
ÿ
ÿiÿ6ÿ#8ÿ0ÿÿ1
405ÿÿ!8
#ÿÿ9#88ÿ
ÿ8897ÿÿ7%7ÿ#ÿ
ÿ%ÿ_7

0
ÿY
ÿL89

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

*2+0

012321405
1
ÿ+8
ÿ,89

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

*
ÿÿ3
ÿ.
ÿ8

9 '
ÿ8ÿ%ÿ88ÿ8ÿ#
ÿ

 )
ÿ/9978ÿÿ
 (
ÿ ÿ%ÿ#8 ÿ989 58
ÿ67ÿ81ÿ0881ÿ
ÿ81
7
29
ÿÿ
ÿÿ!#
8"ÿÿ8ÿ87
9ÿ9878
ÿ7
ÿ
2#
ÿ#ÿ8
ÿ3

ÿ72

ÿ7#ÿ 4
ÿ6ÿ8081ÿ87
2

ÿÿ89978
ÿ
2#ÿ#8
ÿ
7
 04
ÿ2#ÿ8

ÿ87ÿ78
ÿ%ÿ81ÿ78
ÿ%ÿ8081ÿ87
2



0809
ÿ5%%"7ÿ9#7ÿ%ÿ998ÿ!

ÿ
ÿÿ87ÿ6ÿ8ÿ#8ÿ6#ÿ#8ÿ87 01
ÿ+97ÿ7 
#ÿ%1ÿ%ÿ888ÿ87ÿ%7ÿ8 8  0*
ÿ+81ÿÿ87ÿ#6ÿ1ÿ96 03
ÿ8ÿ%ÿ8
ÿ#8 ÿ8



9 0'
ÿ8ÿ%ÿ8
ÿ8081ÿ87
2

ÿ8



9 0)
ÿ8ÿ%ÿ8
ÿ8

%8ÿ6 0(
ÿ:##ÿ8
ÿ8

%8ÿ6ÿ68
ÿ7817ÿÿ7ÿÿ7ÿ%%ÿ998 05
ÿ8ÿ%ÿ8
ÿ8ÿ#8 

04
ÿ8ÿ%ÿ0ÿ8ÿ#8 
 1#4
8ÿ:#
ÿ#
ÿ
2ÿ#6ÿ#8ÿ
0ÿ8ÿ1405ÿ
#87ÿ6#ÿ81ÿ7
81ÿ%8
ÿÿ#87ÿ81ÿ7
81 10
ÿ:##ÿ
2#ÿ#8
ÿ
ÿ81ÿ9ÿÿ
ÿ#
 ÿ
ÿ6ÿ0ÿ1405
 11
ÿ:##ÿ
2#ÿ#8
ÿ8ÿ8ÿ6

ÿÿ8ÿ7
81ÿ#8 ÿ
ÿ6ÿ0ÿ1405
 18*


ÿ6


1
9ÿ"99ÿ80881ÿ8
7ÿ8
2



8
ÿ8ÿ
%
%

79ÿÿÿ87

7%ÿ88ÿ81ÿÿ%ÿ#6ÿÿ98
ÿ&ÿ
#ÿ8
7ÿ!ÿ#7
881 13
ÿ:##ÿ
2#ÿ#8
ÿ
7ÿ8ÿ68ÿ7
87ÿÿ///

1ÿÿ///

3ÿ%ÿ#ÿ6 9 1'#
ÿ8:8#8#ÿ
ÿ
2#8ÿ
#88
ÿ8ÿ88
8ÿ7ÿÿ

ÿ#8ÿ
ÿ88ÿ8
ÿ;ÿ
81ÿÿ68ÿ09ÿ91405;ÿ6,7$88
1'8
ÿ6##ÿ 89


1'8
ÿ6#ÿ6#8ÿ89978
 1'
ÿ6#ÿ6#8ÿ
 114)0
ÿ:5ÿ6#,#$ÿ
2#ÿ#8
ÿ887ÿÿ
#ÿÿ88ÿÿ81ÿ69ÿ8

9ÿ
ÿ6ÿ0 1)8
ÿ6##ÿ69ÿ8

9


#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

042*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

1)+
ÿ,#ÿ,#8ÿ89978


1)
ÿ,#ÿ,#8ÿ


1(
ÿ-##ÿ
2#ÿ#8
ÿ7ÿ8.ÿ
ÿ978ÿ8ÿ
ÿ6ÿ0ÿ1405ÿ6/$

1(8
ÿ,#ÿ,#8ÿ89978


15
ÿ-##ÿ
2#ÿ#8
ÿ7ÿ8.ÿ%%
ÿ978ÿ8ÿ
ÿ6ÿ0ÿ1405ÿ6/$

158
ÿ,#ÿ,#8ÿ89978


1#08
ÿ17ÿ8
.8ÿ9
ÿ8
ÿ,ÿ#6ÿ
ÿ0
ÿÿ1
405ÿ8ÿ6/8$ÿÿ998ÿ,##ÿ
2#ÿ#8
ÿ+ÿ
+&ÿ

108
ÿ#ÿ78

10
ÿ#ÿ8


*4
ÿ-##ÿ
2#ÿ#8
ÿ%7ÿ8.ÿ8
ÿ
ÿ6ÿ0ÿ1405

234567ÿ49:;ÿ5<ÿ7=6<ÿ6>7ÿ?6@7A5<A?=6@9>Bÿ9>C6;=:ÿD9;?ÿ;?=ÿ6E5F=ÿ9><5@C6;95>ÿ?=@=G
#
ÿ1 /ÿ%ÿ#

H@9=F6>I=:ÿ6>7ÿJ9:I9349>=

K@=?>=F6ÿB=;@?67>=@A;57Mÿ4<466=A:?4:4;O=:ÿÿ;6ÿDD5@99<5>;ÿ?;ÿB?L7ÿ=M9@>ÿ66;C5@D;3=6>9@;GI=:ÿG:NÿYÿUG7T4ÿ9=U76ÿ46=:>6=:Oÿ9=ÿ>JÿI>=45M6;7<=ÿ=KR>ÿÿ6KCÿ6446ÿCB;=@ÿ69ÿ=<:9F4V=69ÿ>>6BI>ÿ=O6:ÿEBN5ÿ@<9M5=;@FÿCW6>6X4IXÿ5=ÿBP@ÿ@ÿ99Q>=@<=F5C6@>C9>I6=74:=Nÿÿ@DERÿO?Sÿ=JJ;=?=66=<<@Sÿÿ9ÿ5>9>@CÿI>465M;;7=:=N: ÿZ
 ÿ/

BK<@ÿO9==F:6Nÿ>>IM=C:ER=@ÿ5<

K<ÿO=:Nÿ34=6:=ÿM34567ÿ6ÿ:MCC6@Oÿ;?6;ÿ7=:I@9E=:Nÿ<5@ÿ=6I?ÿB@9=F6>I=R ####,ÿÿÿ7ÿ
.88
9ÿÿÿ8%
ÿ
#7ÿ9ÿ8
7ÿ%%ÿ998ÿ7ÿ#ÿ8ÿ



234567ÿ:MCC6@Oÿ5<ÿB@9=F6>I=:ÿ?=@=G
#
ÿ1 /ÿ%ÿ#


#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

002*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

+>,-,-ÿ5/30:14ÿÿ2@<-?3?4ÿ:5,/06<64;74ÿ8098//88ÿ3/,:0:A-4774:ÿ94/-302ÿ,-ÿ94/-302ÿ/66,;;,:/83,0ÿ377<47=ÿ>?4/74

B87ÿC!
"

D?8,,300ÿ626,44;-ÿEA;Oÿ><P-30?ÿ3F6=/ÿG84HKFIÿL=MÿJ9347-ÿ430ÿ869?4<-:44ÿ/70ÿ/10ÿ:1ÿ377<636>9?3ÿ030/;-1/ÿ8>4-ÿ,J694,4ÿ:J30/72ÿ7/ÿ83ÿ015,,<?-5ÿ330027ÿ8/380<ÿ8330,;0ÿ/N8<48ÿJÿ379ÿ,0ÿ,73207 ÿQ
 ÿR
S@ÿ147=ÿ>?4/74ÿ<>?,/:ÿ@<??ÿ:,6<;408/83,0A B87ÿC!
"

D96,430/;6-;430ÿE<20ÿ>303-63;?/ÿF8/3=,8ÿ4G0UH77Fÿÿ@:I/3=3@ÿ?J@<364-<4-4ÿ?88ÿ,189Kÿ,4ÿN-P44ÿ1/ÿ0/10ÿÿ:,3-7:643->ÿ?L3,0-/ÿ8-,1ÿÿ7>8-/,06:4ÿ4@,:-30ÿ62,7<ÿ30085Oÿ,,?-5ÿ,30829ÿ4/-ÿÿ:>4,/84@ÿ0,8-3ÿ/9?/-:T,@T ÿQ
 ÿR
S@ÿ147=ÿ>?4/74ÿ<>?,/:ÿ@<??ÿ:,6<;408/83,0A B87ÿC!
"

V4:36/?ÿW-,647747
E889,-4ÿ4@ÿ3ÿ7?/?6ÿ?,?-ÿ<43048ÿ;0,3-/0ÿ8/247=7ÿX3ÿ0J46:9?ÿ<,Y:ÿ</34-0-72385ÿ3J,4ÿ09/748ÿA01ÿÿ,P38<ÿ3-7ÿ3ÿ0:7,80384<=ÿ8J3,90,ÿ-ÿ4:6,44375ÿ3308=2ÿ/ÿ/0ÿ:9ÿ4J/9-340829ÿ47-6ÿ8-9444ÿ03030;2/K8ÿ4Wÿ3?74ÿ/27345ÿ4:04ÿ7/6ÿ@-,3N-;4

W?4/74ÿ<>?,/:ÿ894ÿ94/-302ÿY<4783,00/3-4A
#
ÿC Rÿ%ÿ#


#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

012*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

+,-./-ÿ12,3.4ÿ56-ÿ6-.,56ÿ/7/5-8/ÿ/9:--;<;=ÿ>3:8?ÿ<;9,14<;=ÿ.;7ÿ@1-/5<3;ÿ.A315ÿ6-.:<;=B
#
ÿD Cÿ%ÿ#


E<6;-:8-.ÿ:.<<;5;-8=ÿ<ÿ.//5ÿ9=-:/<-Gÿ-F-;;6<ÿ;3.=ÿÿ:>J3-ÿ9:K8>-ÿ<7ÿG5-3-/ÿÿ.>?ÿ<ÿ2,:,ÿ,33-1.15/5<ÿ;-3-ÿ:4ÿÿ2.-6//L79-/:<4<A9ÿ-.@ÿ,1<ÿ5H-?.ÿ/<;;5;<931,;1./4,,B<7ÿ;ÿM=3ÿ:Fÿ-6G3-ÿ:27-ÿ5:F>33:ÿ83:/ÿÿ5<65ÿ:.-;-4ÿ7ÿF-.6:-/5I6ÿ:--:9ÿ5-6<-G<;=ÿ.

N5>6<,,--<9ÿÿ<4L/.ÿÿ6Q5.-E?:1ÿ-.4ÿ;5<334ÿ,ÿ.3569=-97;-ÿ+/ÿ1/:23ÿ.,=3ÿ5:.--48/ÿ/526ÿN,-.6ÿ54-.3ÿ:-59Oÿ1R9ÿ8P--,-ÿ8/;225ÿ:,F-.<.55-46B/Qÿ5ÿ66S--3-ÿ1:5-ÿÿ/>@361:3ÿ<5:16-,-44ÿÿÿ;<A;-->Oÿ3.5:ÿA8@,1-.-ÿ55</335ÿ;<43ÿ3A;F-Bÿ,P;36,F3-.Bÿ;4.ÿ586--ÿÿ>3<,>-ÿ5?ÿ6<;-215

E14<3,3=7ÿ+:3=:-//ÿN6.:5
DX8ÿÿ%
ÿ8Tÿ#ÿÿ%778ÿ%8ÿÿ#ÿ##ÿ8%7ÿ%U%9#8ÿ89ÿ87
ÿ89ÿ288#87ÿZ
ÿ%ÿTTÿÿÿ%
98ÿ
7ÿW78ÿT#ÿ#ÿ9
ÿU
ÿ7ÿXÿÿUÿ8ÿVÿY8ÿ
#8 0
ÿ8ÿ#8 ÿX9ÿ%
ÿ
7ÿÿ
 1
ÿ[Uÿ#8 ÿX9ÿU8
ÿ%
ÿ
7ÿÿ
 *
ÿ8ÿ%ÿ8ÿ#8 ÿ
 
 3
ÿ8ÿ%ÿ9
ÿÿ#8 ÿ
 
 '
ÿ

ÿ%ÿ9
ÿÿ#8 ÿ
 
 )
ÿ[8 ÿ87ÿ
8
$ÿ\
ÿU##ÿÿ8
$
!8"ÿ[8
ÿ#8 ÿ87!
"ÿÿU] ÿ7 !X"ÿWÿ

ÿ%ÿ79 ÿU##ÿ#8 ÿ87!
"ÿ8ÿ77 !"ÿWÿ

ÿ%ÿX8 ÿÿ8 ÿ#8 ÿ87!
" !7"ÿCÿ#8 ÿ87ÿ
ÿ77 (
%ÿÿD#ÿÿ78#
ÿ9ÿ888ÿ
ÿ
ÿ8
ÿ7!7"ÿ!ÿ8ÿ#ÿ#88ÿ8ÿ877
ÿ
ÿ77"ÿ8
ÿ7ÿ978ÿ798 5
ÿDÿ8ÿ9#8ÿ]9
ÿ8#ÿÿU##8ÿ#8
ÿÿ88ÿ7#ÿ898ÿ8X7ÿÿ7U#
ÿÿ8ÿ#ÿ87ÿ8ÿÿÿ!ÿ
T
"9ÿ
"^ÿ!_#
ÿTÿ% 8`

7ÿaÿÿÿ8U7
8
ÿÿ9
7ÿÿ##78ÿÿ%ÿÿU#ÿU#8ÿ#ÿÿ%#ÿ8987ÿ8
ÿÿ8ÿ877Xÿ
7
"$ÿ8ÿU8#
ÿ9ÿ%78T8ÿ8ÿ77

7ÿÿ!%XT9ÿÿU#7ÿ#ÿ8ÿÿ##88

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

0*2*0

012321405
!8"ÿ8

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

!+"ÿ
ÿ%ÿ

!"ÿ9ÿ%ÿ

,-./01ÿ34.5ÿ65758
#
ÿ: 9ÿ%ÿ#

;0ÿ66550<7ÿ4<</>=ÿ6044<1>Iÿÿ?J<.5?0@@?50ÿ.1ÿ650@-G7-45K<5@8ÿAÿL6/BÿC0<Dÿ/33E@4=5ÿ=74-@ÿ1/5@ÿ4=ÿ=0F5ÿ3/7ÿ0<ÿ4<C0=5ÿ=/ÿ75G54H5

M7<5ÿG=6545Hÿ5-ÿ00@ÿ6=ÿ5@04N7ÿ4C<>/ÿ<04=16I@ÿAÿ6L/BÿC0<Dÿ4<14H41?0.@ÿ60H5ÿ601ÿ=/ÿB04=ÿC/75ÿ=60<ÿ@4N=Dÿ10D@ÿ=/ ;60=ÿ4@ÿ=65ÿG0?@5ÿ/3ÿ=65ÿ15.0DIÿL

;60=ÿ@=5-@ÿ4@ÿD/?7ÿ4<@=4=?=4/<ÿ=0F4<>ÿ=/ÿ4C-7/H5ÿ=64@ÿ-7/G5@@IÿL

O5.5G/CC?<4G0=4/<@

P-6//5<@5ÿDÿ0/C?7-ÿ4.<43@45=47=@?R=I4/ÿ<Lÿ60H5ÿ0<Dÿ-6/<5ÿ0C-.43457@ÿQ</=ÿC575.DÿH/.?C5ÿG/<=7/.AÿK?=ÿ-/7=0K.5

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

032*0

012321405
ÿ+
 ÿ,

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

0-4./40/11/1ÿÿ3<9/ÿ1<4A5/6E7/Fÿ8ÿD99:@5ÿÿ6@;1/<.6.<ÿ3:9<6ÿ9<A;/=18ÿ/ÿ@>9?5/G5F6/ÿ;H4;/8ÿÿ@96<<AA/ÿ<5Aÿ4/91E/ÿE3//B;6<41/F1CÿD9@ÿ39ÿ6;E0</1ÿ97<06;

D9@ÿE0;8ÿ?A9;/ÿ0E?.6I6/51F JIÿ8/1Kÿ@A/;ÿ363ÿ89:5ÿ6;1<6<:<69;ÿL/<ÿ<A/1/ÿ3/B64/1F :J?I?ÿ589./9310:K34ÿ?ÿ<0=.1/ÿ3ÿ0191?4//:ÿ?4E65I9/64B;06<3<ÿ67/9/ÿ;/.916<ÿ@A9/C;5ÿÿ<0Aÿ/3ÿ/E104;56:?I<0694;<:ÿ95/Iÿ5<=A1/ÿ@ÿ?/579136:</4C<ÿ=M19ÿ1:?ÿ4/04;6Iÿ6?4059<6B96;31/ÿÿ96<5ÿ6ÿ;0ÿÿ.<6A;6G1ÿÿ<<9/ÿ><<Aÿ7/9>ÿ95

%8
ÿ%ÿ#ÿ89%

NO
ÿP

%8
ÿ%ÿ#ÿ89%

Q9/1ÿ89:5ÿ6;1<6<:<69;ÿA0B/ÿ0ÿ40?<69;/3ÿ</./?A9;/FÿR ÿ+
 ÿ, -04./40/11/1ÿÿ3<9/ÿ1<4A5/6E7/Fÿ8ÿD99:@5ÿÿ6@;1/<.6.<ÿ3:9<6ÿ9<A;/=18ÿ/ÿ@>9?5/G5F6/ÿ;H4;/8ÿÿ@96<<AA/ÿ<5Aÿ4/91E/ÿE3//B;6<41/F1CÿD9@ÿ39ÿ6;E0</1ÿ97<06;

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

0'2*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

+,-ÿ/0123ÿ014ÿ-5676ÿ076ÿ8562ÿ9:64; <=ÿ26:3ÿ-561ÿ4>4ÿ2,97ÿ>1:8>898>,1ÿ?68ÿ856:6ÿ46@>A6:; 9<B=Bÿ72,C6,4:0934AÿBÿ80DC:6ÿ4ÿ0:,:BA669ÿBA/>7=,6>A@10>848ÿ>F6,6ÿ16C,:>8ÿ-5,6G17ÿÿ805ÿ64ÿ6/:0A17>9B=80>,A189ÿ,76=ÿ78D5:6ÿ-ÿB67F,:4>986AG8ÿDH:,ÿ:9BÿA60A1>=ÿ>BA07,8>@,>14:6ÿÿ,>87ÿ>ÿ10ÿÿC8>51>E:ÿÿ88,6ÿI885ÿF6,Iÿ,7
%8
ÿ%ÿ8J
KL
ÿM

%8
ÿ%ÿ8J
NOPOQRSTOU
VC60:6ÿC>:8ÿB5,16ÿC,A08>,1:ÿ0@0>C0FC6ÿ=,7ÿ>1/086:ÿ8,ÿ9:6ÿ,74>1072ÿWX6A979:Yÿ86C6B5,16:GÿZ

[,7ÿ60A5ÿ:9A5ÿC,A08>,13ÿ>:ÿ85676ÿ08ÿC60:8ÿ,16ÿB5,16ÿ->85ÿ0ÿ@,C9/6ÿ04\9:8/618;ÿZ ÿ]
 ÿ^

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

0)2*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

+,ÿ./01ÿ23453ÿ6/5704/.8ÿ79:ÿ675;4.<ÿ7.=ÿ>3/.:ÿ2403ÿ7ÿ?/6@A:ÿ7BC@80A:.0D

EFGHIJKILHM
N3/ÿ48ÿ03:ÿ?4B:/>3/.:ÿ>9/?4B:9DÿO P/2ÿA7.=ÿQ;4/8;ÿ/9ÿ/03:9ÿ./.R67>0/>Sÿ?4B:/>3/.:8ÿ70ÿ=/@9ÿ4.8040@04/.DÿO N3:9:ÿ79:ÿ03:=ÿ6/570:BD

T9:ÿ?4B:/>3/.:8ÿ7?7467U6:ÿB@94.<ÿ03:ÿ87A:ÿ3/@98ÿ78ÿ>3/.:8DÿO ÿV
 ÿW PO78ÿ7.=ÿ4.A70:ÿ9:X@:80:Bÿ755:88ÿ0/ÿ03:ÿ?4B:/>3/.:8ÿ84.5:ÿT>946ÿY1ÿZ[Y\1ÿ7.BÿU::.ÿB:.4:BD ÿV
 ÿW 9+,:ÿ87/81/ÿ>.6ÿ:,/798ÿ:03ÿ::]ÿB>:67.44.7ÿ60_3:ÿ5495@A807.5:81ÿ4.56@B4.<ÿ03:ÿ4.A70:^8ÿ.7A:1ÿ03:ÿB70:1ÿ7.Bÿ03:

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

0(2*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

+,-ÿ/012ÿ3024ÿ504ÿ6075ÿ,16ÿ8661ÿ91,:6;0<9=6ÿ3>;91?ÿ<56ÿ@04<ÿ<-,ÿA>0;<6;4BÿC

D9146<ÿE9<1>,<9-,1ÿ<ÿ540<0<ÿ1<536ÿ,ÿF1>ÿ4;,:@@=69ÿ1=9?3ÿ6<5,,:456,ÿ<166745ÿ51097=06@ÿÿ5309G3G9ÿ7<6>7@<5961497B0ÿ@Cÿ39GG97>@<964HÿD56;6ÿ3,64ÿ2,>;

D-55601<ÿÿ9<45ÿ62ÿ,=>93;ÿ6:,@0:15ÿ,G,1;6ÿ:ÿ94;,ÿ9=19,3:916?;0ÿ6<9A=>60B@ÿÿ0C77644ÿ<,ÿ<6@6:5,16ÿ46;=9764ÿG,;ÿ91/0<64ÿ-5,ÿ49?1

+:,1915;0,<ÿ/,65-;166ÿ:56;K;ÿÿ0H<6<[55=ÿ<6066Cÿ<ÿÿ6329,I,01:<>K6@ÿÿ006ÿ211I,0:3><@ÿ906ÿ,?9I110:H6=ÿ@L306M9ÿÿ1<5H5?69/0H3N<ÿÿÿÿO<,0ÿ,/;@<ÿÿ5665;<96/ÿ1-;0ÿÿ<9-<5<95=56ÿ6ÿ6O6Pÿ;Q<I6,:ÿÿÿR06@0,10153701ÿ55<ÿÿ9S,9,1/-1/Kÿ9ÿ<<00,5<1ÿ6ÿ093ÿ170ÿÿ<7G:5G666647;ÿ44/<6ÿ,<6351<B6ÿ5,ÿÿ,F@103@ÿ:6Tÿ8<0:,24;:ÿ69-@ÿÿÿ<@U5,94K9ÿÿ7><Vÿ546Wÿ60U2ÿ7X,9<5K>ÿÿ0ÿ-ÿ9?419<ÿ0/05=ÿ06Y<ÿ6Z5JO94/

F>4@66034ÿ96<ÿÿ:01;,3=ÿ-93566ÿ01ÿH@,?ÿ,Gÿ<56ÿ>46ÿ,Gÿ<56ÿ=936,:5,16ÿ0@<6;10<9=6ÿ<50<ÿ45,-4ÿ-5975ÿ91/0<6ÿ504
#
ÿ] \ÿ%ÿ#

^87ÿ#ÿ ÿ#
__`a
+,-ÿ/012ÿbbcÿ/0759164ÿ3,64ÿ2,>;ÿ914<9<><9,1ÿ50=6BÿC

D56;6ÿ0;6ÿ<562ÿE6:<BÿC

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

052*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

,-.ÿ0-12ÿ34ÿ546371ÿ817ÿ399122:

;<1ÿ==>2ÿ3?35@3A@1ÿ0B<548ÿ7C1ÿ2361ÿC-B<2ÿ32ÿDC-412:ÿE ÿF
 ÿG H@1321ÿ0129<5A1ÿ7C1ÿ3?35@3A@1ÿC-B<2ÿI-<ÿA-7CÿDC-412ÿ340ÿ==>2J

;<1ÿ7C1<1ÿD<54710ÿ5427<B975-42ÿK1D7ÿ.57Cÿ7C1ÿ==>2:ÿE ÿF
 ÿG H@1321ÿBD@-30ÿ5427<B975-42ÿI-<ÿ7C1ÿB21ÿ-Iÿ7C1ÿ==>J
#
ÿL Gÿ%ÿ#

,32ÿ34Mÿ546371ÿ<1NB12710ÿ==>ÿ399122ÿ25491ÿ;D<5@ÿOPÿQROSPÿ340ÿA114ÿ014510:ÿE ÿF
 ÿG T<I1ÿ23-2P-ÿD4@ÿ1I-3<2ÿ17Cÿ11Uÿ0D1@345543ÿ@7JC1ÿ95<9B62734912Pÿ549@B0548ÿ7C1ÿ546371V2ÿ4361Pÿ7C1ÿ0371Pÿ340ÿ7C1

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

0*2+0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

6778ÿ+9ÿ%ÿ+#ÿ998$
C9,C7AD8-#98977.788ÿÿB80#9ÿÿF.9#

#1ÿÿ1882ÿÿ.8ÿ
8ÿÿ3
ÿ98ÿÿ7.8
B8ÿ
8%4ÿÿ
7GKÿ
1ÿÿ
8Dÿÿÿÿ57ÿA
887#68%ÿ97ÿ778.

ÿÿÿ.ÿ+987#3+

ÿÿÿE
.99ÿÿ48
81ÿ
8ÿÿÿ+8ÿ8#B%8+
1ÿ79
9
Eÿ8ÿÿ1ÿ+ÿ.%ÿ#ÿ#
8C8
8ÿÿ:899ÿ;<ÿ
ÿ888ÿ=ÿ
%87>
8ÿÿ?+
%ÿ#ÿ8#ÿÿCÿ8@ÿ+Aÿ#999ÿ#789ÿÿ9ÿ9Aÿ7F
ÿÿ8ÿ8ÿÿÿ8J9Aÿ7Dÿ%9
ÿÿÿ89A7ÿ8ÿBÿ7
ÿ8ÿÿ#8ÿ#%99ÿ7
#Cÿÿ&ÿ
79ÿ
8B

988ÿ%
ÿÿÿ%

ÿ#89#
78ÿ%ÿ#ÿB88ÿ8ÿ87ÿ8ÿ%8ÿÿ#ÿ
H7ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ8
%ÿÿB8#ÿÿF9
##88ÿ7
ÿ9ÿ87ÿÿ8ÿ#
%
ÿÿÿÿ
A
CÿI7#

#ÿ8ÿÿÿ7%##9ÿÿ%8
%ÿ78



LMNÿ3OP-ÿ1Q3.ÿ97.ÿ4M4RS.9TÿQ4391.8ÿ922MN.Uÿ1MÿO8.ÿTM7ÿV-M4.ÿP9228WÿX
+9ÿÿ8ÿ87ÿÿ78BÿÿAG
LMNÿ3OP-ÿ1Q3.ÿ97.ÿS.9TÿQ4391.8ÿ922MN.Uÿ1MÿO8.ÿTM7ÿYQU.MV-M4.ÿP9228WÿX #7ÿFÿ1Jÿ#ÿ9ÿ8A
+9ÿÿ8ÿ87ÿÿ78BÿÿAG
LMNÿ3OP-ÿ1Q3.ÿ97.ÿS.9TÿQ4391.8ÿ922MN.Uÿ1MÿO8.ÿTM7ÿ,,ZÿP9228WÿX #7ÿFÿ*Jÿ#ÿ9ÿ8A
+9ÿÿ8ÿ87ÿÿ78BÿÿAG
0Q4Q.4bPO.Qÿ159Vc72Q.2ÿW[ÿ\ÿX]^[_\ÿ-9`.ÿaMOÿ39U.ÿ94aÿU.1.73Q491QM4ÿ1-91ÿ1-.ÿO896.ÿ977946.3.418ÿ97. ÿE
 ÿd
;TÿaMOÿ-9`.ÿ39U.ÿ8OP-ÿ9ÿU.1.73Q491QM4\ÿV2.98.ÿV7M`QU.ÿUMPO3.4191QM4ÿMTÿ1-.ÿ7.98M4Q46=
#
ÿe dÿ%ÿ#


S.`QP.8ÿ1Mÿ988Q81ÿNQ1-ÿ.TT.P1Q`.ÿPM33O4QP91QM4

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

142*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

+,-ÿ/012314
567ÿ9:;<ÿ=>?ÿ@:AB6ACÿD6ÿ<6EÿF:GHIÿJ

KFHLHÿ:LHÿBFH<ÿMHABIÿJ

N@H:CHÿAL6GODHÿ=>?ÿ@6PÿCF67O;PÿECHÿQ6LÿH:RFÿ6;HÿCO;RHÿSALO@ÿTUÿVWTXY
#
ÿ[ Zÿ%ÿ#

5:Cÿ:;<ÿO;9:BHÿLH\EHCBHDÿ=>?ÿCHLGORHCÿ:;Dÿ]HH;ÿDH;OHDÿCO;RHÿSALO@ÿTUÿVWTXIÿJ ÿ^
 ÿZ
?LQHÿC:6CU6ÿA;@ÿHQ6:LCÿHBFÿHH_ÿDAH@:;OO;:ÿ@BYFHÿROLRE9CB:;RHCUÿO;R@EDO;PÿODH;BOQ<O;PÿBFHÿO;9:BHUÿBFHÿD:BHUÿ:;DÿBFH

`:;ÿ:ÿ=>?ÿ]HÿECHDÿO;ÿLHCBLORBOGHÿF6ECO;PIÿJ ÿ^
 ÿZ 567I

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

102*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

+,-ÿ,ÿ/01ÿ23ÿ4536ÿ7-ÿ893ÿ364:,87;-ÿ,<3,=ÿ> ÿ?
 ÿ@

1Aÿ-;BÿC9Dÿ-;8=

E;35ÿ893ÿ/01ÿF,G8;Gÿ2,Hÿ7-:F463ÿ7-58<4:87;-5=ÿ> ÿ?
 ÿ@ E;35ÿ893ÿ/01ÿF,G8;Gÿ2,Hÿ7-:F463ÿ,ÿ:;<6ÿ5GF7883<=ÿ> ÿ?
 ÿ@ E;35ÿ893ÿ/01ÿF,G8;Gÿ2,Hÿ7-:F463ÿ,ÿF;-Hÿ:;IG483<ÿ:;<6=ÿ> ÿ?
 ÿ@ E;35ÿ893ÿ/01ÿF,G8;Gÿ2,Hÿ7-:F463ÿ,-D897-Hÿ3F53=ÿ>

J53,<KK37:ÿD3;54M/ÿ90,N6Oÿ=;ÿ:>:,57;-ÿ8;ÿ453ÿD;4<ÿ/01ÿF,G8;Gÿ,5ÿ,ÿK763;G9;-3ÿL;<ÿA;<ÿK763;ÿ<3F,D ÿ?
 ÿ@

91A;ÿ5C;ÿBDÿ6;345ÿ9:<,7K233ÿÿ8839538ÿ3:67<ÿ:784PÿI>58,-:35Pÿ1Aÿ-;8BÿGF3,53ÿ3QGF,7-ÿ7Aÿ8975ÿ;G87;-ÿ75ÿ,K,7F,2F3ÿ8;ÿD;4Bÿ,-6

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

112*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

+,-ÿ/0,12123ÿ42ÿ567ÿ8-9ÿ:992ÿ;04<1=9=ÿ/4ÿ-/,>>?ÿ@ ÿA
 ÿB CD9,-9ÿ9E;D,12ÿ/4ÿFG4HIÿFG92Iÿ,2=ÿG4Fÿ/G9ÿ/0,12123ÿG,-ÿ:992ÿ;04<1=9=J

KLMLNOPOQRP
S09ÿ,DDÿT480ÿ12-/1/8/142U-ÿ-G,09=V-;,W9ÿX5-ÿW,;,:D9ÿ4>ÿ/802123ÿW,;/142123ÿ42?ÿ@ ÿA
 ÿB 1Y24H9,-/ÿ9T-4U8ÿ90,ÿ102;-G/14/82/914-?2ÿÿ8@-9ÿ0,=14ÿ40ÿ,24/G90ÿH9/G4=ÿ/4ÿ-92=ÿ-G,09=V-;,W9ÿX5ÿ-482=ÿ/4 ÿA
 ÿB 7>ÿT9-Iÿ;D9,-9ÿ=9-W01:9ÿ/G9ÿH9/G4=J

+4Fÿ=4ÿT48ÿ=9,DÿF1/GÿW,;/142123ÿ>40ÿ09W09,/142,DÿH4<19-?ÿ@

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

1*2*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

+,-./-ÿ,1/2ÿ.,,ÿ341-52.2135ÿ617-3/8ÿ9-8:8;ÿ15/212<2135.,ÿ341-52.2135;ÿ+=>?;ÿ-2@8AÿB

CD1@Dÿ35-/ÿ.4-ÿ@.E2135-7FÿB

?4-ÿ2D-ÿ@.E2135/ÿ71/E,.G15:ÿHD-5ÿ2D-ÿ617-3/ÿ.4-ÿE,.G-7ÿI34ÿ15J.2-/ÿ7<415:ÿ341-52.2135FÿB ÿK
 ÿL M3Hÿ717ÿG3<ÿ@D-@Nÿ35ÿHD-2D-4ÿ2D-ÿ@.E2135/ÿ.4-ÿ71/E,.G15:FÿB

O3-/ÿG3<4ÿ15/212<2135ÿD.6-ÿ-.4ED35-/ÿI34ÿE.43,-ÿD-.415:/FÿB ÿK
 ÿL P2I3ÿGÿE3,<<ÿ:Dÿ.156ÿ--ÿ./4<E@DD3ÿ5-.-4/Eÿ2D33ÿ25D--/ÿE;ÿ.H4D3.,-2ÿÿN611577-ÿ33ÿI/ÿG-/.24-EJD3F5ÿ-B/ÿ.4-ÿ2D-GFÿPIÿG3<ÿ73ÿ532;ÿ1/ÿ2D-4-ÿ.ÿH.G

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

132*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

.+2,-2.-//-/ÿÿ1:7-ÿ/:?23-4C5-Dÿÿ6B778>3ÿÿ4>9/-:,4,:ÿ187:4ÿ7:?9-;/6ÿ-ÿ><7=3-E3D4-ÿ9F29-6ÿÿ>74::??-ÿ:3?ÿ2-7/C-ÿC1--@94:2/-D/AÿB7>ÿ17ÿ49C.:-/ÿ75:.49

B7>ÿC.96ÿ.3-ÿ:?-3-Gÿ.91ÿ>?-3-ÿ.3-ÿ:?-6ÿ8/-1D H?-9ÿ141ÿ6783ÿ49/:4:8:479ÿI-:ÿ:?-/-ÿ1-@42-/D +1/=7,--2.28/4CJ-42ÿ-=.93::74ÿ75@94-1/,7-ÿ7ÿ>-9A4ÿ::??--3ÿÿC.ÿ.19-8/J2.324=:8:437-93ÿ;7/ÿJ>ÿ:?--5ÿ/=43:-7A1ÿK8728:;ÿ/2ÿ./9=ÿ-=2347J4@24.1:-47ÿ49:ÿ/49ÿ7ÿ:3?ÿ.4/ÿ,ÿ4:9-E<ÿ::ÿ75ÿ7:?<-ÿ7ÿ=3ÿ387=1,872.:1;/ÿ.
%8
ÿ%ÿ8#
ÿ%ÿ8ÿ#8 

LM
ÿN

#8%
8
ÿ%ÿ8#
ÿ%ÿ8
O7-/ÿ6783ÿ49/:4:8:479ÿ?.@-ÿ-.3=?79-/ÿJ73ÿ734-9:.:479DÿP ÿQ
 ÿR +.2,-2.-//-/ÿÿ1:7-ÿ/:2?3-4C5-Dÿ6ÿB778>3ÿÿ4>9/-:,4,:ÿ187:4ÿ7:?9-;/6ÿ-ÿ><7=3-E3D4-ÿ9F29-6ÿÿ>74::??-ÿ:3?ÿ2-7/C-ÿC1--@94:2/-D/AÿB7>ÿ17ÿ49C.:-/ÿ75:.49

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

1'2*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

+,-ÿ/0123ÿ014ÿ-5676ÿ076ÿ8562ÿ9:64;

<=ÿ26:3ÿ-561ÿ4>4ÿ2,97ÿ>1:8>898>,1ÿ?68ÿ856:6ÿ46@>A6:;

<B9=ÿ7B2,C6,4:0934AÿBÿ80DC:6ÿ4ÿ0:,:BA669ÿBA/>7=,6>A@10>848ÿ>F6,6ÿ16C,:>8ÿ-5,6G17ÿÿ805ÿ64ÿ6/:0A17>9B=80>,A189ÿ,76=ÿ78D5:6ÿ-ÿB67F,:4>986AG8ÿDH:,ÿ:9BÿA60A1>=ÿ>BA07,8>@,>14:6ÿÿ,>87ÿ>ÿ10ÿÿC8>51>E:ÿÿ88,6ÿI885ÿF6,Iÿ,7

%8
ÿ%ÿ8#
ÿ%ÿ8
JK
ÿL

%8
ÿ%ÿ8#
ÿ%ÿ8
MNOPQRSTNÿMNVQRPRQVWVXTN
Y,ÿ2,9ÿ50@6ÿ01ÿ07701?6/618ÿ=,7ÿ>1ZB67:,1ÿ[90C>=>64ÿ>1867B76808>,1ÿ:67@>A6:;ÿ\ ÿ]
 ÿ^ <=ÿ26:3ÿ->85ÿ-5,;
_>1CA6C09:46>ÿ14?6ÿ:85A67>ÿF160ÿ/606Aÿ,5=ÿÿ88>5/66ÿ>ÿ10/1ÿ0>186ZB3ÿ6857:6,ÿ410ÿ>816836ÿ071B476ÿ885667ÿÿ5,0A:Aÿ0F:6>6,11ÿG9:64ÿ:>1A6ÿ`B7>Cÿa3ÿbcad

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

1)2*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

+,-ÿ,/0ÿ1/2,34ÿ54674-348ÿ,/ÿ1/9:45-;/ÿ1/345:54345ÿ,/8ÿ<44/ÿ84/148=ÿ> ÿ?
 ÿ@

A5B4ÿ0647-4C-ÿ:3ÿDH4,,--4ÿBÿ;854Cÿ-,E/581<ÿH4ÿF40,ÿE3FF4ÿ8ÿ544/61,7D4Cÿ-1/3ÿEHD7,-8ÿ18/4G/ÿ31F448ÿI1/2,34ÿHF;ÿ2,84ÿ3F4ÿ54674-3CÿHF,3ÿ3F4

J5,1/1/Gÿ,/8ÿA/B;52,31;/
A-ÿ3F454ÿ,ÿKLMNÿ,D453ÿ/;348ÿB;5ÿO4,Bÿ,/8ÿF,589;B9F4,51/Gÿ1/2,34-ÿ,3ÿ0;75ÿ1/-313731;/=ÿ> ÿ?
 ÿ@ A0-;ÿ37Fÿ4,ÿ/K-LHM45NSIÿÿ,ABDÿ4135T3-ÿ:ÿ/54;-3ÿ4,/U3,ÿB1D;,5<ÿ4D4,CEÿ/F;ÿO344ÿ,HBFÿ,0/I8ÿF,589;B9F4,51/Gÿ1/2,34=ÿPQD4,-4ÿEF4ERÿ<4B;54

ABÿ04-Cÿ:D4,-4ÿ7:D;,8ÿ,ÿ-E544/-F;3I
#
ÿV @ÿ%ÿ#


WF1EFÿ;Bÿ3F4-4ÿ35,1/1/G-ÿF,U4ÿ0;7ÿE;2:D4348ÿ,-ÿXOXÿY;;581/,3;5ÿPEF4ERÿ,DDÿ3F,3ÿ,::D0S

ÿ66ÿ78ÿZ8 ÿ![\6Z\[ÿ98"

ÿ9ÿ6 9ÿZ8

ÿÿZ8 ÿ%9ÿ]

ÿÿ#

ÿÿ

W3;FÿO,43ÿ,35Bÿ,,1//81/ÿFG,ÿ15-8ÿ<9;4B19/FG4ÿ,:551;/UG1ÿ81/428ÿ,3;34ÿ0-;=7ÿ5>ÿ1/-313731;/T-ÿ42:D;044-ÿ,/8^;5ÿE;/35,E3;5-ÿ54D,31/G

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

1(2*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

+,-ÿ/01ÿ234-356ÿ07ÿ892:;03<ÿ8920303<ÿ:-=>?580-3@ÿA +=5,H208:ÿ:22?I8=5<5-398025?7ÿ,ÿ-512ÿ7?88,2E1ÿ51ÿ82:9J56ÿÿ9A5:50B03<ÿ8,5ÿ8920303<@ÿ/C5DEÿ5F07803<Eÿ:G78-H4Eÿ>9-<92=E

K=1ÿ2238549ÿ072G?7:I,7ÿ?80H925073ÿ0233<Hÿ0ÿ7-ÿG38-?083ÿ85,75ÿÿ-L1Mÿ2N34Oÿÿ-:9-2=??4>PG>895597PQ5327855HHÿÿ88992200330033<<JEÿ>?5275ÿ>9-B0H5ÿ234ÿD908853 R87ÿS!
"
M:---597Hÿ403-2G89-ÿ903Eÿ75880:8JG@8ÿ0-A3T7ÿ03=285ÿ,23HQ--;ÿ95159ÿ8-ÿ8,5ÿUMUEÿ8,5ÿ7588?5=538Eÿ8,5ÿUMU ÿV
 ÿW
XU?M5U27Eÿ58,ÿG5>ÿ7?-5288H?5ÿ2=3543ÿ>8E2ÿ8<,55ÿÿ-U1ÿM8,U5ÿ:ÿ0-3-7890H8G03802-83-T97Eÿÿ5038:=J285ÿ,23HQ--;ÿ8,28ÿ03:?GH57ÿ9515953:5ÿ8-ÿ8,5 R87ÿS!
"

X07?75G25775Iÿ2G:>:?--2=H=ÿ2-3H42ÿ18-0-9=37ÿ-Y9ÿH-:G=538ÿ<0B53ÿ03=2857ÿ95?2803<ÿ8-ÿ,52903< ^a#ZZZ7#8


ÿÿÿÿ%%%ÿZÿÿÿ68
[8ÿ%%ÿÿ8]99\ÿ8ÿÿ68!_87ÿ
ÿ
8]#ÿb8ÿ
ÿ7ÿ888ÿ
7ÿÿS9ÿ99Z
ÿ!ÿ7S]]8]

9ÿ
63ÿ
!"][]]
8
*\"ÿ67
ÿ87ÿ
"ÿ!`]

*"

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

152*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"
,87ÿ-!
"

.5=/011<2;:0<ÿ0425B/ÿ6=01/71ÿ;1:88A9ÿÿ;:68ÿ27;0:;14C;ÿ:66=8ÿD11/ÿ=576E/6:<CE:D020ÿ11=8:87Aÿ5ÿ:=86?<017;042=F0ÿ:28ÿ<>6/4=ÿ7?:80A?ÿ16G26ÿ04@;H5/1:8:8Aÿ<4==08; IKL#8#ÿ87ÿÿ
I
IJÿÿ
7#ÿ

,87ÿ-!
"
M561/N:<0:ÿ0128T9ÿÿ<UD18A02ÿG008ÿ?170ÿ2:8<0ÿO5=:/ÿPFÿQRPSFÿ:8ÿ189ÿ6Cÿ;D0ÿ1G6N0ÿ76<4?08;2ÿ6= ÿJ
 ÿV WCÿ902FÿXD1;ÿ<D18A02ÿD1N0ÿG008ÿ?170T

O=0ÿ;D0ÿ20;;/0?08;ÿ24??1=9Fÿ20;;/0?08;Fÿ187ÿG=6<D4=0ÿ1//ÿ:8ÿ;D0ÿ:8?1;0ÿ/1Xÿ/:G=1=9TÿU ÿJ
 ÿV YD08ÿ7:7ÿ964ÿ/12;ÿ<D0<Zÿ;6ÿ?1Z0ÿ24=0ÿ;D09ÿ1=0ÿ=01//9ÿ;D0=0TÿU

[:=0<;ÿ;D=01;ÿ=056=;:8Aÿ4870=ÿ;D0ÿOA=00?08;

\aDÿ088ÿa]0ÿ;8ÿ;/0ÿ?08
;7ÿÿOÿA
=
00#?ÿÿ80ÿ88;%ÿÿ2L;19;ÿ80I2#ÿ
>WÿW8%^OÿBÿ8%ÿÿ_I7&#ÿ`bÿÿ8ÿÿ78ÿ&#`ÿ98ÿ
ÿÿ#8%%ÿÿ
ÿL799
8ÿ
%ÿÿ8
ÿÿ7
ÿÿ7#%9
ÿÿ9ÿ8#`8ÿ


#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

1*2+0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

7,%8#9
ÿ88ÿ878-
ÿ0
8#ÿ
7ÿ879ÿ8899ÿ
ÿ79887ÿ
8
ÿ+7#ÿ/ÿ8ÿ#ÿ,ÿÿ8
9-ÿÿÿ
%-ÿ#ÿÿ%ÿ
9#ÿ.

!97$ÿ08%0ÿ7
ÿ#87%#8 ÿ98

"

FB91AAB2D4C339ÿ4E9ÿ666E3ÿ7GE:37<ÿÿH48D>39KDK9:ÿ966<ÿAÿ<6CC;H9ÿÿB<36ABÿ=<I=>>A>49:@9KMÿ4ÿ<36ÿ34ANÿ4CI:<3?@ÿ97D69732ÿA63<6ÿÿ@ÿ<F<H3>ÿ99ÿA9Hÿ6@BÿAÿ9HDA9E@9Bÿ6K83B6<:@BÿÿA9:6A3ÿCC423ÿ;B6E33344D:3?ÿÿB68A7433BC24ÿ3B6K3H7<L94363ÿ:9ÿ>?AÿAH@99ÿE9JBEKK3B66BÿB263<B:6ÿB?83ÿ94:<Cÿ8224B9C3A3:6ÿ396A7L6<3ÿ9::3? ÿO
 ÿP
Q9AHEÿ<:E6<B<H?BDÿ38CDK3ÿ69<7:C339ÿ[ÿ6>B3<86A6K<KV3ÿ9SDWCUÿ3ÿC6A7<63Eÿ\ÿ>4<DB:AX3Bÿ6A8<64493ÿ6<:B<H3ÿA@Aÿ<6<3>HCR4ÿÿVSCÿTS3YUÿ6U63ÿ7943ÿDKÿB::BA36ÿ94<26HBBÿ<E67A33S?ÿ:ÿ8BUA4]BD2B9K363LS3:?UÿHÿ99HEHB3KBE6@63?ÿC9VCÿ92A9CAÿ6S9ZLUÿ3;ÿ<743Aÿ@<> ^87ÿ_!
"

G79,783-c8ÿÿ[ÿ98#3
ÿ6,
68K3%Dc9ÿ38ÿÿA


6#ÿÿ9`

L8ÿ+9
743#ÿ3ÿ8Dÿ
37ÿÿAÿ6ÿ/ÿ:
ÿ6,98637ÿÿ8ÿ:ÿ#ÿÿSa#9ÿQ]bÿ8Uÿ
-+ÿ0ÿ8#+%ÿ#d8%9ÿ-ÿÿÿ8#%ÿÿ
ÿÿ8&ÿÿ
-ÿe8
ÿ9ÿ87%
ÿ
ÿ8#8ÿ.##ÿÿ-7ÿÿ7
ÿf8ÿ8ÿ9,ÿ8#%ÿ8ÿd9ÿ78
0ÿ8ÿ-9ÿ-ÿÿ
ÿ##ÿ##
8
ÿ87 !97$ÿ08%0ÿ7
ÿ#87%ÿ#8 ÿ98

"
[8F4BBA<43E2E3BC6ÿÿ`3Gÿ876744B33Kÿ9ÿTF6?ÿÿ3<W9HgÿHBTÿABhAI>?Dÿ74@99ÿ62<334ÿ9ÿÿC@ÿ:<3>9>J6ÿ79:6ÿ66ÿ99<AAÿ96@Bÿ9ÿF8K3K<@9BÿAH3ÿ6B=ÿAC>D3969K3ÿ6<43D8ÿ<8B4A<ÿ34<6C6>7ÿA637B469:@6ÿÿÿ969<Aÿÿ;C67ÿ<69746X3ÿÿ;493<:H:4<XB4Lÿ39Aÿ:ED:7B3<LA:A63Dÿ8A34ÿA3A:<6M36ÿAÿ6<6N3Cÿ9 ÿO
 ÿP
Q@SHY<ÿ:U>ÿ<647?ÿÿC38ÿ3KA36939D4:D33ÿB:>Aÿ89<K6H<Bÿ<B9AACDSÿ:C9U<]63ES>:DUÿ93HAH369E66B3<CAVÿÿ<9HARÿCST?ÿUSÿZ6U7ÿ;3ÿ7;3<A4ÿX@ÿ<9>::ÿABL<A6BDHB33CAÿ66S7:3UVÿ[ÿSW3U6ÿ66K73D3ÿ43BA:6XÿS\:<UÿA8B463<:43ÿ<AH63CV ^87ÿ_!
"
Q:ÿ67343ÿ9A@67BALÿ3K:3ÿ@<>iCÿKBX3ÿ6<ÿK36ÿD3ÿXA<;M

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

*42*0

012321405

6789
ÿ
ÿÿ968ÿ98ÿ ÿ!140504"

+#8,
ÿ-ÿ9#ÿ%ÿ-ÿ7ÿ.,ÿÿ9- ÿ.#ÿ#ÿ9ÿ6 9
 /9

#
$22%9
&%9
9251'5(1335530)5

*02*0

APPENDIX D
The Categorization and Nonoperative Management of Impaired Hearing
Measurement of Hearing Loss
Sound levels are measured in decibels (dB). Decibels are measured on a logarithmic rather than a linear scale. What that means is that when the decibel level increases by ten, a sound is twice as loud— whether the increase is, for example, from 10 to 20 dB or 40 to 50 dB. To give you an idea of how loud certain decibel levels are, here are a few examples. According to the Centers for Disease Control1:
• A soft whisper is around 30 dB • The hum of a refrigerator is around 40 dB (which, for example, is 2x louder to our ears than a
soft whisper) • A normal conversation is around 60 dB • A dishwasher is around 70 dB
Hearing loss is also measured in decibels. If someone has a hearing loss of 40 dB, for example, they are functionally unable to hear a noise that is any softer than 40 dB.
Hearing varies depending on the pitch—technically, the frequency—of the noise in question. Different kinds of sounds occur at different pitches, so impairments at particular pitches may matter more than impairments at others. Pitch/frequency is measured in hertz (Hz), the vibrations per second. A person who has hearing within the normal range can hear sounds that have frequencies between 20 and 20,000 Hz. The most important sounds we hear every day are in the 250 to 6,000 Hz range.
Evaluation of Hearing Loss
The evaluation of hearing loss requires consideration of both volume (measured in dB) and frequency (measured in Hz). Both are included in the quantitative hearing test that an audiologist uses to record hearing testing.
The figure that follows is a blank quantitative hearing test2.

Revised May 8, 2018

Page |1

When a quantitative hearing test is filled in, it shows—for each ear—the lowest (“threshold”) dB level at which the patient can hear, at several spread-out frequencies:

The quantitative hearing test3 above shows a person with normal hearing in the lower frequencies, but increasing severity of hearing loss, in both ears, as the frequencies increase (as the pitch being tested gets higher).
Determining the Need for Intervention
Medicaid regulations for hearing aids were reviewed, as these were thought to be relatively objective criteria for determining the indication for intervention (i.e., provision of a hearing aid) for Medicaid beneficiaries with hearing loss. Kentucky does not cover hearing aids under Medicaid; however, coverage is provided in 28 of the 50 states. The procedure for determining the indication for intervention varies from state to state. Some states require that an average of the threshold at several frequencies exceed a specified decibel level; others require that the threshold at one or two frequencies exceed a specified level. Most states provide a single hearing aid; some prescribe additional criteria for coverage of two hearing aids.
Kentucky DOC Hearing Benchmark
Benchmark frequencies under this policy shall be 500 Hz, 1,000 Hz, 2,000 Hz, and 4,000 Hz. Kentucky Department of Corrections patients (inmates) who have a threshold of 25 dB or higher in one ear at two or more of the benchmark frequencies shall be assessed to determine the need for an assistive device. The ear with the lower threshold (i.e., the better ear) shall determine the intervention offered. Two hearing aids shall be provided to a patient who meets the criterion for a hearing aid in both ears and meets at least one of the following requirements:

Revised May 8, 2018

Page |2

• Legally blind • A compelling occupational, educational, or safety need for binaural hearing
Diagnosis and Intervention Protocols
1. Screening
The purpose of screening is to identify patients with impaired hearing in a proactive manner. Screening shall be done at the following times:
• Upon intake to the Kentucky Department of Corrections • At each periodic physical examination • During a sick call encounter where the patient reports hearing difficulty
Screening shall completed using the Hearing Screening Questionnaire in the electronic medical record only if one of the above criteria are met. The questionnaire may be administered by a nurse (LPN or RN), a nurse practitioner, a physician’s assistant, or a physician. If any question on the Hearing Screening Questionnaire is answered “Yes,” the patient will be referred to a primary care provider (PCP) for evaluation.
2. Provider Evaluation
A PCP (ARNP, PA, MD or DO) shall evaluate and document the patient’s hearing with the following:
• Inspection of the external auditory canals and tympanic membranes to assure that the external canals are not occluded with cerumen or other foreign objects, the tympanic membranes are intact (no perforations), and the middle ear is not filled with fluid. Any abnormalities identified shall be corrected, if possible, before proceeding with the provider screening.
• The provider shall perform an Audioscope hearing screen. The provider shall record the patient’s response in each ear to a 25 dB tone at each of the benchmark frequencies and shall record whether the patient is able to hear the tone at each of the benchmark frequencies.
• A patient shall be referred for a quantitative hearing test if he/she is unable to hear the Audioscope tone at two or more of the benchmark frequencies in at least one ear.

Revised May 8, 2018

Page |3

Obtaining and Interpreting the Quantitative Hearing Test
A scheduler will arrange for a quantitative hearing test to be performed by one of the following means:
• Performance of a quantitative hearing test on-site at those facilities which have an audiology booth
• Scheduling and assisting with an online quantitative hearing test • Scheduling an off-site hearing test
When a quantitative hearing test has been completed and a printed report has been received, the scheduler will scan the quantitative hearing test report into the medical record and assign the report to the ordering PCP. The PCP shall interpret the quantitative hearing test and assess the degree of hearing impairment at the benchmark frequencies separately in each ear.
• If the degree of impairment in the better is <35 dB at two or more of the benchmark frequencies the patient may be provided with an over-the-counter amplification device (“pocket talker”) if the PCP deems it appropriate.
• If the degree of impairment in the better ear is 35 dB or higher at two or more of the benchmark frequencies, the PCP shall refer the case to the CCS regional medical director for a hearing aid.
The PCP shall meet with the hearing-impaired patient within 30 business days after provision of a hearing aid or amplification device to assess the patient’s functional improvement (or lack thereof) with the device in use.
Patients with special circumstances will be referred for review and treatment planning by the KY DOC Therapeutic Level of Care Committee.
1. https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/hearing_loss/what_noises_cause_hearing_loss.html 2. http://www.nationalhearingtest.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/audiogram.png. 3. http://www.nationalhearingtest.org/wordpress/?p=786#prettyPhoto/1/

Revised May 8, 2018

Page |4

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 1 of 37 - Page ID#: 2366

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT FRANKFORT

OSCAR ADAMS and MICHAEL KNIGHTS

Plaintiffs v.

Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, et al.

Defendants.

Sixth Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor

April 23, 2019
Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 625 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 2 of 37 - Page ID#: 2367
I. INTRODUCTION
Pursuant to the Court’s order dated June 24, 2015, this is my sixth report to the Court and the parties concerning the status of compliance with this case’s Settlement Agreement, which comprehensively governs how the Kentucky Department of Corrections (“Department” or KyDOC) deals with inmates who are deaf or hard-of-hearing. In my last report, filed December 2018, I explained that in this one, I would cover the results of the October 2018 round of selfreporting, and an assessment of audiology delays.1
As I described in my prior report, I have continued to use a semi-annual self-reporting tool; the most recent version, from October 2018, is attached as Appendix A. (This same document was also Appendix C to my December 2018 report). Responses to this questionnaire demonstrate that KyDOC has continued to make progress towards compliance. Some institutions have implemented a timely and effective audiology process, managed interpretive services effectively, and even worked on improving communication with hard-of-hearing inmates by providing new amplification devices. That said, the most recent self-reporting cycle reveals the widespread continuation of two different kinds of problems. Procedurally, some institutions continue to struggle with keeping and sharing the records needed to comply with the agreement and to check on that compliance, including when I make requests for follow-up. And substantively, self-reporting and follow-ups reveal crucial areas of compliance weakness—areas that I have seen and described consistently in several prior reports, as many as three years ago. These include:
• Identification, tracking, and reporting of inmates who are deaf/hard-of-hearing • Ensuring prompt and accurate provision of audiology services • Providing interpretation, both in-person and remote • Providing videophone services.
I had hoped that by this report, institutions would have solved these matters and been able to move forward on issues that have emerged more recently, such as amplification and improvements like captioned telephones. But, unfortunately, the results of this most recent selfreporting cycle show that the earlier issues remain.
As in my prior reports, I thank the Department’s personnel, both at headquarters and at the various affected institutions, for their work on implementing the improvements that are required by the Settlement Agreement, and their professionalism and accommodation of my requests for information. There has been significant turnover both in the ADA coordinator assignments. This has posed real challenges, but the new personnel have been working to learn about the ADA, deaf/hard-of-hearing prisoners, and the settlement requirements, and to manage their reporting and compliance obligations. (More recently, there has also been significant turnover at KyDOC headquarters, but I have not yet had much interaction with the new/acting Director of Operations or other headquarters leadership.) I thank the ADA coordinators, as well, for their corrections to a draft of this report that was shared with them on April 9, 2019.
1 See Fifth Semi-Annual Report (Dec. 4, 2018), ECF 91, Pg.ID# 2241, 2244.
-1-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 3 of 37 - Page ID#: 2368
I am providing KyDOC a version of this report without redactions; for submission to the Court, I have redacted inmate names and ID numbers, to protect privacy.
This report has three Appendices:
Appendix A: October 2018 Self-Reporting Questionnaire Appendix B: Memo from me to KyDOC headquarters, setting out all information missing from
October 2018 self-reports as of January 25, 2018 Appendix C: Compiled recommendations
II. DEAF/HARD-OF-HEARING INMATES
As in prior reports, Table 1 tallies reported inmates who are deaf or hard-of-hearing (deaf/HOH). Deciding whom to include—both in the table and for purposes of tracking/reporting under the Settlement Agreement—requires some judgment. KyDOC’s current process for identification of deaf/HOH inmates has two screening phases and then a fuller assessment phase. Inmates are given 10 written or verbal screening questions to identify any need for a hearing evaluation.2 Those who answer “yes” or “sometimes” to one or more of those questions are then supposed to be further evaluated3; they are given either a whisper test4 or examined with an audioscope.5 If they fail the whisper test, or if they cannot hear at two or more
2 See Exhibit B-2 to Site Visit Report, Kentucky State Reformatory (April 21, 2016), Second Semi-Annual Report, Appendix II, ECF 84-2, Pg.ID #1639; Appendix C, Recommendation 54 (“All inmates should also fill out, in writing or orally, the multiple-question hearing screening [in Exhibit B-2].”). The questions currently used are those I recommended: “1. I feel frustrated when talking to others. 2. I hear but I don't always understand what others are saying. 3. I hear but have trouble hearing when people speak softly. 4. I have trouble hearing others speak when they are not facing me. 5. People tell me to turn down the TV/radio. 6. I find it hard to hear when I am in a group setting. 7. I have trouble hearing on the telephone. 8. I need to ask people to repeat themselves when talking. 9. I have trouble hearing with noise in the background. 10. I have trouble hearing others when I am at a restaurant /chow hall.”
3 The documentation provided this cycle demonstrates that KyDOC’s institutions are not consistent as to how many “yes” or “sometimes” responses are leading to further evaluation.
4 The administrator of the “whisper test” stands at arms’ length behind the patient (so he cannot read lips), and after instructing the patient to place one finger on the tragus of one ear to obscure sound, whispers three or four words towards the patient’s other ear, and asks the patient to repeat the word back. The test is then repeated for the other ear. For KyDOC, if an inmate fails the test for either ear, he is referred to an audiologist. See Site Visit Report, Kentucky State Reformatory (April 21, 2016), Second Semi-Annual Report, Appendix II, ECF 84-2, Pg.ID #1601.
5 An audioscope is a portable device for screening hearing; KyDOC policy states that it should be used at the 25 dB level at four benchmark frequencies (500 Hz, 1000 Hz, 2000 Hz, and
-2-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 4 of 37 - Page ID#: 2369
frequencies at the 25 dB level with the audioscope, their need for a hearing aid or other services is then assessed.6
Appropriately, KyDOC generally does not mark as deaf/HOH individuals who pass the whisper test or the audioscope test. Likewise, I do not tally them below (although they are included in Tables 4 through 6, in Part III.E’s description of audiology processing). The criteria for inclusion in Table 1, and in the services covered by the Settlement Agreement, might be whether an inmate’s impairment is significant enough to justify a hearing aid. I think this criterion is, however, inappropriate. Hearing aids are not useful for some individuals who have very significant hearing impairments; for example, several of the KyDOC inmates who are entirely deaf and sign to communicate do not use hearing aids. In addition, under KyDOC’s current policy, a hearing aid is provided only if there’s an impairment in both ears, even though a person who is deaf in one ear may require non-audiology accommodations under the Settlement Agreement. In addition, KyDOC’s policy does not authorize a hearing aid for someone who can hear at the 30 dB level at all frequencies, even though that does constitute a (mild) impairment.
Accordingly, inmates who fail the whisper test or audioscope screening are considered to be at least mildly hard-of-hearing unless subsequent testing or treatment establish that there is no hearing impairment, even if they don’t qualify for a hearing aid. Table 1 includes all such inmates in the Jan. 2019 column labeled “all.” This includes 52 inmates who failed the whisper test or audioscope screening but declined further assessment. Those who do qualify for a hearing aid, or who are deaf but don’t have a hearing aid because it would not assist them, are also tallied as “more severe” in Table 1’s last column.
There are additional, timing-related complications affecting the tally in Table 1, which is a snapshot of a moving subject. The November 2018 count includes inmates who had left by November 2018, but who had been in custody at some point during the prior six months. The February 2019 count, by contrast, reflects data provided by KyDOC in the 2018-10 Report and partial updates since then. The February 2019 count is probably too low, because I have received more up-to-date information about individuals who have left KyDOC custody than about new additions to the tally. On the other hand, the February 2019 “all” category includes 61 inmates who failed initial screening but are not yet fully assessed; some of these will likely eventually be included in the “more severe” category, and some may prove not to have any hearing impairment at all.
Currently KyDOC has 9 inmates who sign to communicate; as of March 2019, they are housed at KCIW (2), KSP (2), KSR (2), LSCC (1), and LLCC (2). During the reporting period, one of the current KSP inmates was housed at NTC, and one of the current LLCC inmates at GRCC. See Table 2 for details.
4000 Hz). See KyDOC policy (May 8, 2018), Fifth Semi-Annual Report, Appendix D, ECF 914, PgID# 2363-64.
6 Id.
-3-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 5 of 37 - Page ID#: 2370

Table 1: Distribution of Kentucky Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates

Institution

~Nov. 2016

Bell County Forestry Camp (BCFC)

0

Blackburn Correctional Complex (BCC)

5

Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (EKCC) 9

Green River Correctional Complex (GRCC)

26

Kentucky Correctional Inst. for Women (KCIW) 13

Kentucky State Penitentiary (KSP)

6

Kentucky State Reformatory (KSR)

64

Lee Adjustment Center (LAC)

-

Little Sandy Correctional Complex (LSCC)

18

Luther Luckett Correctional Complex (LLCC)

6

Northpoint Training Center (NTC)

15

Roederer Correctional Complex (RCC)

10

Western Ky. Correctional Complex (WKCC)

5

Ross-Cash Center (Ross-Cash)

1

TOTAL 178

# of Deaf/HOH Inmates

Apr. 2017

Nov. 2017

Apr. 2018

Nov. 2018

Feb. 2019

All

More severe

5 8 6 64 2

4 15 21 26 14 10

11 30 44 51 46 22

35 36 55 57 51 35

13 10 11 11 14 11

11 13 19 28 26 15

75 98 176 189 204 136

-

- 16 20 21 9

8 12 36 74 56 27

26 39 96 94 75 52

28 38 54 68 57 29

16 16 24 20 11 7

10 31 47 45 42 18

2 4 7 65 3

244 350 612 695 626 376

III. KNOWN PROBLEM TOPICS
My last report identified five areas with ongoing substantive compliance problems; this report includes the same five, and adds the procedural problem of poor reporting, discussed first.
A. Reporting Issues
The Settlement Agreement grants me “unlimited access to all records, files, and papers maintained by the KDOC that relate to the terms of this Agreement,” Agreement XV.B.1.a, and authorizes me to “request . . . written responses to any questions . . . related to the implementation of the Agreement or issues in this litigation, so long as the request does not interfere with security obligations of KDOC staff members and employees.” Agreement XV.B.1.e.7 My requests have been comprehensive, both to allow adequate monitoring of compliance and also to assist KyDOC staff in understanding the documentation they need to maintain and themselves review, to facilitate compliance. I have, as previously reported, hoped in the final year of the Agreement’s term to shift my compliance monitoring to oversight of selfaudits, and my reporting requests have been aimed to move in that direction. Unfortunately, the vast majority of reports this most recent cycle were missing requested information. It frequently took many attempts and requests to receive the right information. This does not bode well for
7 The Settlement Agreement is numbered in the version that is Exhibit B to my First SemiAnnual Report, ECF 83-1 (Feb. 4, 2016), Page ID# 1532-1555.

-4-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 6 of 37 - Page ID#: 2371
the transition to self-audits.
The most important categories of missing information were:
(1) Individuals not being tracked as deaf/hard-of-hearing at a given institution. In reporting to me the names and situations of their deaf/HOH inmates, 11 of the 13 institutions omitted at least one—for some, a dozen or more—of the inmates they should have been tracking and sharing information about. For many, the problem was that the inmate had been transferred to a new prison, and because no KOMS (Kentucky Offender Management System) alert had been entered, the ADA coordinator at the transferred-to prison did not receive a notification email on the transfer. For others, no transfer email seems to have been received notwithstanding the presence of a KOMS alert. In addition, two institutions—LLCC and LSCC—may have significantly overreported, including inmates whose hearing assessment demonstrates that they have no hearing impairment. This kind of overreporting can make it difficult for the ADA coordinator to focus his or her attention on the population that actually needs services or accommodations under the Settlement Agreement. See part III.B, below. (I say “may have” overreported because the documentation provided by LSCC is inconclusive on the appropriate status of some individuals.)
(2) Documentation of audiology results. For nearly all of the 13 institutions, I had to ask more than once—and for some of them, many times—for documentation that particular inmates did not qualify for a hearing aid. I have been asking for this information semi-annually since April 2017,8 as well as during every site visit I have done. So I had hoped that now that the audiology process is governed by an objective standard,9 the reporting would be smoother. In the event, however, obtaining the necessary documentation proved very difficult. For example, BCC initially provided written summaries instead of medical records containing the test results. Other institutions— EKCC, LAC, LLCC, and KSP—provided medical records that did not contain the audiogram results requested. As well, some institutions—KSP, LLCC, and NTC—informed me that the inmates had moved to different institutions, which does not obviate the need for documentation of determinations made prior to transfer. And one, EKCC, at first declined to provide documentation without getting releases from inmates—even though under the Settlement Agreement, no such releases are required.10
8 See Semi-Annual Compliance Reporting questionnaire (April 2017), Third Semi-Annual Report, Appendix VI, ECF 86-6, Pg.ID #2166.
9 For a discussion of the development of KyDOC’s current audiology standard, see Fifth Semi-Annual Report (Dec. 4, 2018), ECF 91, Pg.ID# 2244. The standard allows a single hearing aid for an inmate who can hear at 35 dB or louder in the better (that is, less impaired) ear, at two or more of four benchmark frequencies.
10 See Settlement Agreement XV.B.1.a (“The Settlement Monitor will have unlimited access to all records, files, and papers maintained by the KDOC that relate to the terms of this Agreement.”); HIPAA privacy rule, 45 C.F.R. § 164.512(d)(allowing disclosures for “health oversight activities” including “appropriate oversight of . . . entities subject to civil rights laws for which health information is necessary for determining compliance”); id. at (e)(1)(i) (allowing disclosures “in response to an order of a court or administrative tribunal”).
-5-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 7 of 37 - Page ID#: 2372
After more than four months of back-and-forth, I have at this point received nearly (but not quite) all the requested documentation for inmates deemed ineligible for hearing aids. As described below in Part III.E, this documentation proved very important, because it demonstrated that in numerous instances, KyDOC providers were misapplying KyDOC’s own audiology standard, applying too high a prerequisite both for full audiology testing and for hearing aid approval.
(3) Programming/jobs and accommodations. I asked each institution’s ADA coordinator to report the following information (inter alia) for each inmate:
• Whether s/he has participated or sought to participate in any programming (educational, rehabilitative, substance abuse, religious, transitional, etc.—since April 1, 2018), what programs, what accommodations were provided, and with what result.
• Whether /she has participated or sought to participate in any work assignment since April 1, 2018, what assignment, what accommodations were provided, and with what result.
Seven of the thirteen institutions—EKCC, GRCC, KSP, LAC, LLCC, LSCC, and NTC—did not initially provide adequate information about the result of each individual’s participation in programming or a work assignment. It took numerous individual follow-up messages and explanations to receive this information. And even after three emailed explanations to LLCC, I still did not receive the information, and just had to give up and get this report filed.
(4) Delays in audiology results. I asked each ADA coordinator to tell me how many inmates had experienced a delay in the audiology process, so that evaluation for/provision of hearing aids took more than 60 days.11 Nearly every institution’s answer tallied fewer late resolutions than actually occurred. The total admitted late audiology resolutions was 39; the actual number, as of October, was several multiples of that.
To demonstrate the general difficulties, I attach as Appendix B to this report a memo to KyDOC headquarters, which set out all the information missing as of January 25, 2018—that is, after three months of back-and-forth on various missing answers and documentation with individual ADA coordinators. The memo demonstrates the issues with this cycle of selfreporting. And to give even a fuller sense, consider LSCC (the institution that has had the most difficulty meeting its self-reporting obligations). My assistant and I have, between us, sent at least ten emails and made at least three phone calls to LSCC’s ADA coordinator between November 25, 2018 and March 15, 2019. More precisely, here is the history of contacts:
11 Appendix C, Recommendation 6: “Inmates in need of a hearing aid—both initially or because the device they have is no longer working for them—should wait no longer than two months to obtain the necessary device. That time period should begin the day the potential need is indicated by the inmate’s request for evaluation, answers on the questionnaire, etc. Each KYDOC facility should track the time from request/questionnaire to provider visit to audiology visit to hearing aid provision, and ensure that inmates do not have a longer wait. (In future quarterly reporting periods, I will request this tracking data from all facilities.)”
-6-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 8 of 37 - Page ID#: 2373
• 11/25/2018: Email follow-up questions sent • 12/10/2018: Check-in email sent • 12/13/2018: Email received saying the answers would be provided on 12/14/2018 • 12/28/2018: Check-in email sent • 1/11/2019: Check-in email sent • 1/16/2019: Left phone message • 1/24/2019: Check-in email sent • 1/24/2019: Email received saying the answers would be provided that day • 1/25/2019: Memo with questions emailed to headquarters and passed along • 1/31/2019: Some answers received • 2/2/2019: Follow-up questions sent by email • 2/7/2019: Request for clarification received • 2/10/2019: Clarification provided by email • 2/13/2019: Left phone message • 2/22/2019: Left phone message • 2/27/2019: Some answers received • 3/6/2019: Follow-up questions sent by email • 3/14/2019: Check-in email sent • 3/15/2019: Some answers received
Even after all this, many issues remained open at LSCC. I had no real expectation of getting answers to most of the questions, but LSCC finally sent answers after receiving this report in a draft that detailed for the Court the still-missing information. (Because LSCC finally did provide the information, I have cut the detailed description from this final version of the report.)
B. Identification and Tracking of Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing Prisoners
As I noted in my last report, problems remain with respect to identification and tracking of deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates, particularly when inmates are transferred. I had hoped this problem would have been solved by KyDOC’s implementation of a uniform “KOMS” (Kentucky Offender Management System) alert—an entry in each affected inmate’s online file that is supposed to allow the system-wide tracking of deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. The ADA Coordinators are supposed to receive routine automated transfer memos listing incoming inmates for each institution with an annotation if they are deaf/hard-of-hearing.12 But this selfreporting cycle makes clear that this is not happening reliably. First, KOMS alerts are not always present for each deaf/HOH individual. And even when a KOMS alert is present, institutions are
12 See Appendix C, Recommendation 80: “At each institution, the ADA Coordinator should be one of the staff members who receives each routine transfer memo listing arriving inmates. The ADA Coordinator should check, in advance, to see if any arriving inmate has a disability that may need accommodation in order to provide effective communication and full information during the intake/orientation process, and should make arrangements for that accommodation to be provided.” For my prior discussion of the KOMS alert system, see Site Visit Reports (Nov. 30, 2018), Exhibit B to Fifth Semi-Annual Report, ECF 91-2, Pg.ID# 2296.
-7-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 9 of 37 - Page ID#: 2374
not always receiving notice of transfers. As a result, individuals who are transferred sometimes are not tracked.
In addition, as described above, it has emerged that there is some confusion among the prisons about which inmates to track. For example, some institutions have improperly stopped tracking individuals who are not eligible for a hearing aid (but are still hard-of-hearing) or individuals who have refused further audiology services. Other institutions are continuing to track inmates who are not, in fact, hard-of-hearing. It’s important for the KOMS alert to be attached to the right individuals, to ensure that necessary accommodations and services are provided. KOMS alerts for inmates who are not deaf/HOH make the tracking system less useful and distract attention from where it is needed.
What is needed at this point is a system-wide check of three things, with prompt solutions of any problems revealed: (1) Is a KOMS deaf/HOH alert present for each inmate who should have one? (2) Is a KOMS deaf/HOH alert present for any inmate who should not have one? (3) Why are transfer emails sometimes failing to issue (or failing to issue to an appropriate person)?
C. Telecommunications Services
Videophones. One of the areas in which KyDOC made the speediest progress in Settlement Agreement compliance was provision of videophones (and the ancillary remote interpretive services for relay phone services) to inmates who sign to communicate.13 But nearly four years into the five-year settlement term, this round of self-reporting reveals two important problems. First, LAC, KyDOC’s newest (private) institution, does not yet have a videophone installed either using a kiosk or a laptop program. Second and more generally, technical difficulties that seem to relate to prison firewalls continue to undermine the availability of videophone services systemwide. Outages have been common at all the institutions at which inmates rely on videophones whose telecom provider is the company Purple; I was alerted to such a problem most recently in late March, at KSR. As I have mentioned before,14 if significant outages continue, an alternative or backup will be necessary. KyDOC headquarters officials need either to work with Purple to solve the problem or to switch to or add contracts with Sorenson, an alternative provider that seems to have fewer problems. Currently only KSP has contracts with both Purple and Sorenson, and it is the only prison where videophone access has not been interrupted by sustained outages.
Amplified telephones. I have recommended that each prison ensure that every group of phones for inmates include at least one volume-adjusted phone.15 Progress towards compliance
13 Settlement Agreement IX.D.3.a required that deaf inmates at all KyDOC institutions have access to videophones by the end of August 2015. This was accomplished by the time of my first court report. See First Semi-Annual Report (February 2, 2016), ECF 83, Pg.ID #1510.
14 See Fifth Semi-Annual Report (Dec. 4, 2018), ECF 91, Pg.ID #2242. 15 Appendix C, Recommendation 74: “Each facility should improve access of hard-ofhearing inmates to telecommunications, by . . . (b) Informing them that amplified phones are available, and ensuring that at least one such phone, whose amplification is compatible with a
-8-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 10 of 37 - Page ID#: 2375
has been real, but it remains true that at least one institution—WKCC/Ross—still does not have volume-adjusted phones available in all the areas where they are needed by hard-of-hearing inmates. (BCC just recently installed such phones.) In addition, I have also recommended that more powerful portable amplifiers be made available for check-out by hard-of-hearing inmates.16 But numerous institutions— BCRC, GRCC, KCIW, KSR, KSP, LAC, WKCC/Ross—do not yet have these. (However, KSR is considering getting these amplifiers.) Both these issues need to be solved.
Captioned Telephones. I have recommended that captioned telephones be made available, to allow access to telecommunications services by very hard-of-hearing inmates who cannot sign. At this point, several KyDOC institutions—LSCC, NTC, KSP, and KSR—are piloting the use of captioned telephones.17 If their experience is positive, the rest should follow suit.
TTYs. TTY technology is old and cumbersome, and very few inmates wish to use it. Still, for those who do—usually inmates who do not know sign language, but who have a significant hearing impairment—it may be the only option for telecommunications. (Outside of prison, captioned telephones have often been a far more effective substitute for TTYs.) But there continue to be problems with the availability of TTYs and their instructions. As part of the October reporting cycle, I asked each ADA coordinator to provide me with the TTY instructions in use in his or her prison. For half the institutions— BCC, BCFC, GRCC, KSR, LAC, LSCC, and NTC18—the resulting documentation was inadequate. For all of these except GRCC, I received generic TTY instructions that come with the device, rather than institution-specific instructions explaining to inmates where to obtain the TTY, where to plug it in, how to get access to an outside line, and the other issues that make TTY use difficult in prison. This is particularly disappointing because in 2016, I provided all the ADA coordinators with sample instructions, leaving bracketed blanks to be filled in.19 (At GRCC, the recommended instructions are used, but the blanks have not been filled in.) I will plan to do a round of TTY testing in April or May, and ask again for the instructions then.
D. Interpretive Services
Interpretive services are needed by inmates who sign to communicate; there are currently 9 such inmates in KyDOC custody. As Table 2 shows, they have moved around, demonstrating
hearing aid but does not require one, is available in every group of phones used by any hard-ofhearing inmate.”
16 Appendix C, Recommendation 85: “Portable phone amplifiers should be made available at every institution.”
17 Appendix C, Recommendation 74: “Each facility should improve access of hard-ofhearing inmates to telecommunications, by: . . . (c) Providing access to captioned telephones, unless on investigation such telephones are not available in the institutional setting.”
18 EKCC provided an internal memo, not instructions. 19 See Informational Pamphlet for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Inmates, Exhibit D-2 to Site Visit Report, Kentucky State Reformatory (April 21, 2016), Second Semi-Annual Report, Appendix II, ECF 84-2, Pg.ID #1763-66.
-9-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 11 of 37 - Page ID#: 2376

that each prison must be prepared to accommodate such an inmate if the need arises. That said, I am obviously more concerned about services that have been called up than those where the need is more hypothetical. The prisons and cells in Table 2 that are in bold are those where there was a need for interpretive services during 2018.

Table 2: KyDOC Inmates Who Sign

Inmate

O A

( 676)

R B

( 457)

E B

( 628)

J

C

( 848)

K C

( 285)

Ri H

( 622)

M

K

(233021)

J

M

( 961)

J M

( 566)

EKCC GRCC KCIW KSP KSR LLCC LSCC NTC RCC

2015 -

present

2016

mid 2018 2015-

2017-

- present 2016

2018

2017 2016-

2018

mid 2018-

2016 2016

2017

present

2015 -

present

2015 -

present

2015 -

present

2015 -

present

2017-

2015- 2019

2018

2017

2015-

2016-

mid 2018

2016

2018

- present

Remote interpretation. As with videophone access, an area in which KyDOC institutions made early progress in settlement compliance was Video Relay Interpretation (VRI). I previously reported that each institution has a working VRI laptop. But this round of selfreporting reveals that LAC has not yet set up the laptop—and at KSP, where two inmates need access to it, the VRI laptop appears not to work. LAC does not have any inmates who sign to communicate, so this is a failure of preparation rather than a current problem. But at KSP, the issue is a matter of real urgency; access to interpretation is a core element of the ADA and the Settlement Agreement. At other institutions, however, there has been real progress. The other institutions that housed at least one inmate who signs during the reporting period were: GRCC, KCIW, KSR, LSCC, LLCC, and NTC. Table 3 shows what the VRI log for each of them reveals.

In-person interpretation. As I have emphasized in prior reports, for some situations—
particularly those involving multiple speakers—in-person rather than remote interpretation is appropriate.20 At this point, the seven relevant institutions have used in-person interpretation

20 See Settlement Agreement VI; Appendix C, Recommendation 12 (“In-person interpretation should be provided to inmates who communicate by signing when it is necessary for effective communication. This includes during group classes in which student participation is

-10-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 12 of 37 - Page ID#: 2377

only in very limited situations. That said, at KCIW, in particular, it seems that the option is being appropriately considered, and it has been used both for repeat/routine and special situations— respectively, programming and misconduct investigation. Table 3 also shows the situation at the relevant institutions.

Table 3: Interpretation at Institutions with Inmates Who Sign

Institution VRI log observations

Use of in-person interpretation from April

2018 to October 2018

GRCC Log shows frequent use, but does not Used for programming: Substance Abuse

specify purpose—may be as a

Program (SAP) and Moral Reconation

videophone substitute.

Therapy (MRT)

KCIW Log shows frequent use by several Used for internal affairs investigation, when

staff members for one inmate.

VRI was not effective.

KSP

Log demonstrates that VRI has been None

inoperative over an extended period of

time.

KSR

Used for different types of encounters Used for Narcotics Anonymous/ Alcoholics

and several inmates.

Anonymous, and for a parole hearing. Note:

O A ( 676) has complained that

other requests for in-person interpretation

have been inappropriately rejected.

LLCC Regular training and software checks; None

very infrequent use for inmates.

LSCC Appears to be used for several types of None, except for during my site visit

encounters, and several inmates, but

mostly classification.

NTC

Cannot determine what the VRI is used None

for or whether it is working.

E. Audiology services

As previously reported, two problems with audiology services had been apparent: inconsistency and delay. Based on the self-reports and accompanying documentation, I can now conclude that these have not yet been solved.

Development of a consistent process and standard

As explained above, the first step of the KyDOC audiology process is that inmates are screened using a 10-question screening questionnaire; those whose responses indicate a hearing issue then receive further physical screening. See supra part III.B. My understanding/ recommendation had been that individuals would be rescreened whenever they transferred institutions, and also during their routine physicals (which occur annually for some and more

key, and in parole hearings. For other situations, an in-person interpreter should be provided if remote interpretation is unlikely to be, or has not been, effective.”).

-11-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 13 of 37 - Page ID#: 2378

rarely for others, based on history and age). It has recently come to my attention, however, that

at some institutions (including, at least, LSCC and NTC, and perhaps others), a new policy has

been implemented, under which no screening is done during intake; the institution is relying,

instead, on physicals and sick-call. This is not concerning for inmates who completed the intake

process not very long before their transfer. But for inmates for whom the initial screening/intake

process was ongoing at the time of transfer, the predictable result—which does in fact appear to

be occurring—is a screening failure. This is particularly likely for speedy transfers out of RCC.

For example, D

F ( 634) arrived at RCC in July 2018 and answered “yes” or

“sometimes” to 9 out of 10 questions about hearing difficulties. The next step should have been

a provider visit with a whisper test or audioscope. He was, however, transferred to LSCC in

August 2018, prior to that next step’s occurrence. LSCC reports that he is not being followed up

because he “has never placed any sick call r/t to any hearing issues while housed here at LSCC.”

No sick call request should be required in these circumstances; an inmate cannot be expected to

know that his prior screening is being disregarded because of a facility transfer. LSCC has also

provided to me some documentation where a single question (do you have hearing issues) is

substituting for the 10-question screening questionnaire. This is inappropriate. KyDOC can solve

this problem in one of two ways: Everyone can receive the full 10-question screening during

intakes to new facilities, as is occurring at many of the institutions. Or—more limited but more

difficult, administratively, for everyone for whom an intake screening/process is incomplete at

the time of transfer, the new facility can rescreen or continue the process.

A second process issue that I have described before relates to provision of hearing aids. The Settlement Agreement provides: “[T]he KDOC will provide all medically necessary hearing aids.” Settlement Agreement VIII.B.2. As I previously reported,21 to address inconsistent outcomes with respect to hearing aid provision, I worked with KyDOC to develop an objective standard for provision of a hearing aid. After review of Medicaid coverage and other comparison policies, the Department adopted the following standard, using benchmark hearing testing frequencies of 500 Hz, 1,000 Hz, 2,000 Hz, and 4,000 Hz.:

1) Inmates who have a threshold of 25 dB or higher in one ear at two or more of the benchmark frequencies shall be assessed to determine the need for an assistive device.
2) The PCP shall interpret the quantitative hearing test and assess the degree of hearing impairment at the benchmark frequencies separately in each ear. • If the degree of impairment in the better is <35 dB at two or more of the benchmark frequencies the patient may be provided with an over-the-counter amplification device (“pocket talker”) if the PCP deems it appropriate. • If the degree of impairment in the better ear is 35 dB or higher at two or more of the benchmark frequencies, the PCP shall refer the case to the CCS regional medical director for a hearing aid.
3) The ear with the lower threshold (i.e., the better ear) shall determine the intervention offered. Two hearing aids shall be provided to a patient who meets the criterion for a hearing aid in both ears and meets at least one of the following requirements: • Legally blind

21 Fifth Semi-Annual Report (Dec. 4, 2018), ECF 91, Pg.ID #2244.

-12-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 14 of 37 - Page ID#: 2379

• A compelling occupational, educational, or safety need for binaural hearing

This standard was finalized, with my sign-off, on May 31, 2018. I had previously reported22 that until October 2018, a misunderstanding of the standard led to erroneous implementation and denial of hearing aids that are appropriate under the standard: the audiology testing was being done only down to the 40 dB level, even though the policy threshold is 35 dB. Quite a few retests were necessary. I had hoped that that previously reported misunderstanding would be the only one needing correcting. Unfortunately, it has turned out that there have been several other misunderstandings/misapplications of the policy. These have appeared in two situations, screening and evaluation:

For screening, some KyDOC institutions are using the “whisper test”—a provider stands out of sight behind the patient, who covers one ear; the provider whispers and if the patient cannot hear the whisper, he proceeds to audiological evaluation. Other KyDOC institutions are using an audioscope. More fully described in note 5, above, the audioscope allows less subjective testing, at 25 dB, as stated in the standard quoted above. Unfortunately, my review of medical records uncovered that in two institutions, KSR and WKCC, the audioscope was at least sometimes being set to 40 dB. This was too high a screening level under the policy. These individuals had to be rescreened, and when they were, several of them turned out to need further audiological evaluation.

Another process problem is that WKCC used pocket talkers (a non-prescription

amplification device) as a screening tool in 2017 and early 2018: medical staff provided a pocket

talker and proceeded to evaluate the need for a hearing aid only if the inmate continued to

complain.23 The result was significant delays in the audiology process; audiology evaluation is

still in progress for at least two affected individuals whose hearing impairment was noted to

KyDOC in 2017 or 2018—R

C

( 900) (still at WKCC), and T G

( 357) (now at KSR).

For the evaluations themselves, when I was finally able to obtain audiogram results,24 my

review of those audiograms revealed that at least six inmates— H H

(NTC 445),

M L (EKCC 650), D S

(LLCC 937), R V

(LLCC

784), B V

(KCIW 716), D Y

(LLCC 60)—who qualify for

hearing aids under KyDOC’s policy had erroneously been denied. I referred these individuals to

KyDOC medical staff who confirmed that the prior denials were erroneous, and put the hearing

aid orders in process. The problem here was simple misreading of the audiogram. Some kind of

quality control/review would solve the problem.

Finally, it seems that KyDOC providers are not aware of the provision in the policy that allows binaural (that is, two) hearing aids where there is “a compelling occupational,

22 Id.
23 Site Visit Report (Nov. 30, 2018), Fifth Semi-Annual Report, Appendix B, ECF 91-2, Pg.ID #2306, 2308.
24 See supra pp. 5.

-13-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 15 of 37 - Page ID#: 2380

educational, or safety need for binaural hearing.” Since finalization of the policy, I am not aware of any inmate being given two hearing aids. In addition, W D (KSR 856) provided me with documentation that the provider at KSR told him that KyDOC’s policy simply did not allow two hearing aids, without evaluating his “occupational, educational, or safety” needs. Only after my intervention did the ADA coordinator undertake, in early March, to ensure that such an evaluation would occur. I have not yet been told the result.

Delay

Delay in meeting audiological needs remains a very serious problem. Including all the information on hearing aid provision since the settlement was entered, KyDOC institutions have evaluated over 1000 inmates for hearing impairments (that is, have conducted a screening examination, not merely administered the screening questionnaire). About 700 inmates who failed this screening then qualified for further audiology evaluation/services. As Table 4 shows, 440 inmates have received hearing aids; the rest are split between declining services, leaving KyDOC custody prior to the completion of audiology evaluation, and medical providers determining that no hearing aid is necessary. (Table 4 omits two inmates for whom I do not know the resolution.) Timeliness in all this processing remains a major problem. My recommendation, made in December 2016, was for a two-month or less turn-around.25 This has not been achieved; for inmates whose audiology needs were brought to the attention of medical staff in 2018, it took on average between 3 and 4 months for KyDOC to evaluate/meet those needs. That’s just an average; resolution times of far longer were not uncommon in 2018.

Table 4: Audiology Services Overall

Outcome type (a) Already had hearing aid
(b) Refused screening (c) Passed screening: no impairment
(d) No hearing aid needed (e) Refused further audiology services after failing screening (f) Discharged prior to resolution (g) Received hearing aid(s)
TOTAL resolved * Sums to 101% because of rounding

All resolved since 7/1/2015

Avg. days to
N %* resolution

24 2% NA

18 2%

57

313 28%

59

175 16% 149

75 7% 156

57 5% 177

450 41% 190

1,111

138

Prison alerted to need in 2018

Avg. days to
N % resolution

24 5% NA

7 1%

12

169 34%

32

88 18% 101

25 5%

63

26 5% 136

160 32% 112

499

79

25 See Appendix C, Recommendation 6 (“Inmates in need of a hearing aid—both initially or because the device they have is no longer working for them—should wait no longer than two months to obtain the necessary device.”).

-14-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 16 of 37 - Page ID#: 2381

Moreover, Table 4 somewhat overstates the speed of resolution, because there are 58 inmates whose audiology evaluation were still in process, as of the last report I received. I cannot specify a date, because it varies by the institution—and for some, I have gotten updates of both resolutions and new needs since October; for others, only of resolutions. (One additional inmate whose audiology issues are incomplete is not included because evaluation is paused while other health issues resolve). While 18 of the inmates tallied in Table 5 have been in process for three months or less, the oldest has been in process for over two years. The distribution is set out in the table.
Table 5: Ongoing Audiology Needs

Month prison alerted to the need (N = 58)

Aug. 2017 (1) Sept. 2017 (3) Oct. 2017 (2)

Nov. 2017 (1)

Dec. 2017 (4) Jan. 2018 (3) Feb. 2018 (4)

Mar. 2018 (3)

May 2018 (2) Jun. 2018 (3)

Jul. 2018 (5)

Aug. 2018 (2)

Sep. 2018 (2) Oct. 2018 (2) Nov. 2018 (3)

Dec. 2018 (4)

Jan. 2019 (6) Feb. 2019 (7) Mar. 2019 (1)

If each of these had been resolved by mid-March 2019, they would have taken an average of 252 days—over 8 months—for resolution. Obviously by the time they are resolved, the average will be higher.
These summary statistics mask considerable variation among facilities. For example, looking at the four institutions with the most activity in 2018, KSR has resolved 205 and has 20 outstanding; LLCC has resolved 87 and has just 3 outstanding; LSCC has resolved 29 and has 12 outstanding, and RCC has resolved 43 and has 1 outstanding. Not only does RCC have just one in-process case, but it managed its cases in an average 47 days each, complying with my recommendation. KSR’s average is 80 days on the resolved matters, and many of the 10% that are unresolved are quite old. LLCC’s unresolved matters are very old, but very few in number. LSCC is the least successful: even though it has managed to process less than three quarters of its docket, the resolution time for them averages over 3 months, and those that are left average over 9 months in age. To summarize, standing out for timely processing is RCC (LLCC does very speedy screening, but is not timely for those inmates who fail screening). Raising particular concern for untimely processing are EKCC, LSCC, and NTC.
Table 6 examines the issue in detail, facility by facility.26 The Table highlights several different measures of timeliness/delay: days to resolution for resolved cases, and percentage of total cases not yet resolved. Each institution should be aiming for an average resolution time well under 60 days both in general and even for those inmates who receive hearing aids, and for an unresolved percentage of under 15% at any given time. (I previously said the goal should be 25% unresolved at any given time, but on further consideration, I conclude that 15% is a more

26 Table 6 and Table 4’s figures do not match precisely, because Table 4 does not include inmates still in progress but Table 6 does include them—if their hearing need came to the attention of KyDOC in 2018.

-15-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 17 of 37 - Page ID#: 2382
appropriate goal, because 15% is two months of intakes—and resolution should take two months or less.)
My prior report on audiology statistics demonstrated more progress than this. Perhaps resolution times lengthened this past year because it took KyDOC time to work out the new audiology standard. Hopefully, the processes will now be smoother. Speedier resolutions should be greatly facilitated by the recent elimination of some or all of the trips to outside providers that had been needed for provision of hearing aids. It is my understanding that RCC now has a hearing booth, allowing audiology testing without transporting inmates to an outside provider. In addition, a number of institutions are using an online hearing testing service called Audicus, https://www.audicus.com/. Hearing aids are then shipped to the prison. The result is that no transportation is needed at any point in the process.
I have not heard complaints about the quality of the hearing aids provided, so it may be that this new efficiency is not creating any decrease in the quality of services provided. However, there is one significant down-side to the Audicus process: without an experienced professional administering the test, prison officials are less equipped to detect and respond to malingering. The ADA coordinator for KSP has shared with me suspicions that inmates are lying about their hearing impairments in order to get hearing aids they don’t really need. It is not clear to me whether this is truly occurring—or why an inmate would want a hearing aid he does not need. (There should not be any kind of black market, because other inmates should also be able to get hearing aids they need.) But in any event, the provided audiologists’ reports demonstrate that audiologists can and do occasionally observe that their audiology testing is unreliable because an inmates’ responses are inconsistent or non-credible. One response KyDOC might adopt when malingering is suspected is to refer the inmate for testing by an audiologist rather than using the online Audicus test.
-16-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 18 of 37 - Page ID#: 2383

Table 6: Audiology Services by KyDOC Institution

Total Resolved N Average Days Ongoing N Average Days

BCC BCFC EKCC GRCC KCIW KSP KSR LAC LLCC LSCC NTC RCC Ross WKCC Total

17

2

15

20

11 13 227 6 90 41 22 44 3

36 547

17

2

12

19

11 11 207 5 87 29 20 43 2

35 499

51

48 125

90

74 175 80 168

42 133 122 47 40 102 79

0

0

3

1

0 2 20 1

3 12 2 1 1

1 47

271

13

251 103 365 321 285 228 20 386

21 192

Resolved, in detail

N:

(a) Already had hearing aid

1

0

1

1

21 6 0

4

1 3 3 0

(b) Refused screening

0

0

0

0

00 6 0

1

0 0 0 0

(c) Passed screening: no

impairment

2

0

3

0

0 3 89 0 58

6 3 0 0

(d) No hearing aid needed

4

1

4

3

2 4 28 2

8

6 4 8 0

(e) Refused further audiology

services after failing screening

2

0

1

3

00 6 0

4

1 2 3 0

(f) Discharged prior to resolution 4

0

0

0

0 0 12 0

3

3 1 2 0

(g) Received hearing aid(s)

4

1

3

12

7 3 60 3

9 12 7 27 2

Average Days

(a) Already had hearing aid

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

(b) Refused screening

.

.

.

.

.

. 12

. 13

.

.

.

.

(c) Passed screening: no

impairment

68

. 130

.

. 68 39

.

9 74 152

.

.

(d) No hearing aid needed

17

20 141 222

32 240 111 168

78

48 132 39

.

(e) Refused further audiology

services after failing screening

25

.

88

8

. . 76

. 65 38 29 12

.

(f) Discharged prior to resolution 62

.

.

.

. . 92

. 158 234 201 187

.

(g) Received hearing aid(s)

65

76 114

76

86 151 128 168 177

85 122 43 40

-17-

1 24

0

7

5 169 15 88

3 25 1 26 10 160

NA NA . 12
28 33 85 100
189 63 225 129 127 107

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 19 of 37 - Page ID#: 2384
F. Effective Communication/Equal Access to Services for Hard-of-Hearing Inmates
As I noted in my last report, the complaint I continue to hear the most frequently in my monitoring is that hard-of-hearing inmates cannot hear announcements, programming, and staff orders. This leads to a denial of equal access to services, and also, on occasion, to disciplinary consequences. I said in that report that each institution needs to develop a way that hard-ofhearing inmates can get access to the relatively simple announcements of pill-call, chow, count, and other institutional events. And each needs a way to amplify more complex communications like those in educational and rehabilitative programming and the like.27 The need extends to each religious, educational, and rehabilitative programming area.28 This self-reporting cycle, I collected information on systems in place, which is tallied in Table 7.
Table 7: Amplification and Other Devices by Institution

WKCC / Ross
RCC NTC
LSCC
LLCC LAC KSR KSP KCIW GRCC EKCC BCFC BCC

FM radio as amplifier system Bed shakers Vibrating watches Vibrating alarm clocks Pagers Portable phone amplifiers Captioned telephone Earphones for parole hearings (some provide only a way for inmates to plug in their own earphones)

C Y

C

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y

C

YY YYYC

Y Y Y

Y YC

Y C

YY YYYY

Y Y Y

Y

Y Y YY

Y

CY Y

Y Y YY Y Y

Y

YY Y

KEY: Y: Yes (or on order as of 10/15/2018); Blank: No ; C: No, but under consideration

Although I asked for information on how these various devices are working, I did not receive sufficiently detailed answers to offer any systemic evaluation.

27 See Fifth Semi-Annual Report (Dec. 4, 2018), ECF 91, Pg.ID #2244-2245.
28 See Settlement Agreement V.A.2 (“Appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services, including Qualified Interpreters, will be made available so that Deaf Inmates may have an equal opportunity to participate in all services, privileges, and programs offered to other similarly situated Inmates in the KDOC’s custody.”); I.2 (defining “Auxiliary Aids and Services” to include “assistive listening systems”); Appendix C, Recommendation 67 (“Each religious, educational, and programming area should have available a device to allow wireless amplification for individual hard-of-hearing inmates.”).
-18-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 20 of 37 - Page ID#: 2385

IV. PRISON-BY PRISON COMPLIANCE OBSERVATIONS

Using both self-reports and inmate-provided information, this Part presents observations on each KyDOC institution.

BCC

Observed compliance issues • The TTY instructions are generic, not particular; they do not provide sufficient guidance to actually instruct someone how to use the TTY at this prison. (Where should it be plugged in? How do you get an outside line? Etc.)

• BCC provided an outdated hearing screening questionnaire, not the one that should be in use. That said, from looking at the medical records, it appears that the correct version may be being used, at least sometimes.

• Although BCC reported that none of its inmates had to wait longer than sixty days to

receive a hearing aid or to be deemed ineligible, in fact there were such delays for at least

6 (of 13) BCC inmates whose hearing impairment presented within the reporting period.

These are: A

C

(225 ) (65 days); S D

( 075) (117 days);

R G

( 925) (92 days); C

H ( 472) (101 days, ultimately

paroled prior to resolution); J

M l ( 718) (noticed on 8/24/18, later

transferred to RCC and discharged prior to resolution); H S ( 878) (68 days).

• I have not received documentation that D M

( 375) is not eligible to

receive a hearing aid. (Note, however, that I neglected to remind BCC that I needed this

information.)

• When asked for documentation of ineligibility for a hearing aid, BCC initially provided written summaries instead of medical records containing the test results.

• At least one individual, C aids/services assessment.

H ( 472), did not receive an auxiliary

• The method stated for interpretation for inmates in restricted housing cells is to use the VRI through the RHU cell door. Given low visibility and the absence of a suitable surface, this probably won’t work. BCC’s ADA coordinator reports that this issue is currently under reassessment.

• W

B

( 894) filed a grievance in February 2018 about not being placed in

what he called an “honor dorm,” and instead being housed in Dorm 2, where deaf/hard-

of-hearing inmates at BCC are housed. He stated that he does not use any special

equipment, and therefore should be allowed to live in the more advantageous housing

unit. His grievance was rejected: the Warden explained that inmates diagnosed as

deaf/hard-of-hearing are limited to Dorm 2. I explained to prison officials that such a

-19-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 21 of 37 - Page ID#: 2386

blanket rule is inappropriate under the ADA.29 I do not know if the particular decision in this case was correct or incorrect—it may be that Mr. B requires services that cannot be practicably provided elsewhere. The particular dorm Mr. B was concerned with has since been shut down; I do not know if the more general problem has been solved, so that hard of hearing inmates are not constrained to live in Dorm 2 without individualized consideration.

• The same inmate, W

B

( 894), contacted me and filed a grievance in

November of 2018 regarding a general rule excluding deaf or hard-of-hearing individuals

from certain jobs. The ADA Coordinator, Christy Peach, confirmed that the policy was a

general rule, not an individual-specific determination of direct threat, as the ADA and the

Settlement Agreement require. The prison changed this rule and Mr. B was

reevaluated and ultimately placed on the Governmental Services Program (GSP) job

assignment waitlist.

Observed positive practices • Dorm 2 Officer flashes lights for count and pill call; this is an appropriate nonauditory alert.
• VRI log demonstrates that it is being tested and training is being done.

BCFC

Observed compliance issues

• Overall, 2 individuals who completed the audiology process at BCFC during the

reporting period, or who are in progress at BCFC, waited for over sixty days to receive a

hearing aid or to be deemed ineligible. (The self-report stated that nobody had

experienced a delay.) Affected inmates were: B H ( 965) (417 days); J

J

( 656) (76 days).

• TTY instructions were generic, not particular; this was fixed in response to this report in draft.

Observed positive practices • VRI Log shows it is being tested • An inmate was given the job of ADA Aid, to assist with communications needs.

29 Appendix C, Recommendation 84: “In order to comply with the ADA’s integration mandate, inmates may be offered the chance to be housed in any hard-of-hearing cluster, but may not be compelled to do so in order to receive the accommodations to which they are entitled.” Site Visit Reports (Nov. 30, 2018), Exhibit B to Fifth Semi-Annual Report, ECF 91-2, Pg.ID# 2299-2300.
-20-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 22 of 37 - Page ID#: 2387

EKCC (Reporting still incomplete)

Observed compliance issues

• Six of the 8 EKCC inmates whose hearing impairment presented within the 2018-10

reporting period (Apr. 1 – Oct. 1) had to wait longer than sixty days to receive a hearing

aid or to be deemed ineligible. This includes: B

B

( 937) (alerted 7/2/18,

transferred to LSCC about February 2019, still ongoing); C

C ( 659)

(219 days); F

D (254 days); C

H

( 295) (88 days, ultimately

refused accommodations); D J

( 990) (92 days); J T ( 038)

(114 days). The self-report said that just 1-2 inmates had experienced a delay.

• As the ADA coordinator reported to me in October, the KyDOC ADA Coordinators webpage, https://corrections.ky.gov/Facilities/AI/Pages/ADA-Coordinators.aspx, did not have up-to-date information for EKCC. The ADA coordinator stated then that “I am arranging for its correction by the beginning of next month.” Several months later, this update still has not taken place.

• Inmates do not receive a hearing screening upon arrival at EKCC. This is appropriate only if they have gotten a screening within the past several years. But there does not seem to be a process that checks for that.

• The stated plan for videophone outages is: “Contact[ing] someone who can sign for them.” This is not an adequate plan.

• For several individuals, the date of last hearing assessment and date of last auxiliary aids/services assessment was reported as “not listed” or “not needed.”

• There is not a KOMS alert present for each deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate, and the ADA Coordinator doesn’t have access to the system to create a KOMS alert, so cannot solve the problem.

• At first, EKCC declined to provide necessary documentation without releases from inmates. This was then sorted out and documentation provided.

• When asked for documentation of ineligibility for a hearing aid, EKCC initially provided medical records that did not contain the audiogram results requested.

• At least one inmate, M L ( 650), was assessed as ineligible for a hearing aid, even though his audiogram showed that he fit the KyDOC policy criteria, and that the audiologist recommended one. I was able to correct the mistake only because I received the requested documentation.

• This institution did not initially provide adequate information about the result of each individual’s participation in programming or a work assignment. It took numerous individual follow-up messages and explanations to receive this information.

• As at other institutions, EKCC hosts long-distance parole hearings. In the event someone who is hard-of-hearing has a parole hearing, earphones would be necessary for effective
-21-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 23 of 37 - Page ID#: 2388

communication. But EKCC does not have such earphones.
• The audiology records show fairly frequent conclusions by consulting audiologists of malingering. It would be useful for prison staff to try to figure out what is causing this issue and address it. That is, what gain do prisoners think they will obtain if they get a hearing aid they do not need?
Observed positive practices • Good summary of available resources in Inmate Handbook. • The appointment of a “Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing liaison” seems to be providing good information to inmates and more responsive accommodations.

GRCC

Observed compliance issues

• Four of the 10 GRCC inmates whose hearing impairment presented to KyDOC within the

2018-10 reporting period (Apr. 1 – Oct. 1) had to wait longer than sixty days to receive a

hearing aid or to be deemed ineligible. This includes: D C ( 943) (76 days);

B

S

722) (83 days); D S

( 937) (143 days); B S

( 014) (294 days). GRCC’s self-report was that there were no such delays.

• This institution did not initially provide adequate information about the result of each individual’s participation in programming or a work assignment. It took numerous follow-up messages and explanations to receive this information.

• GRCC has evidently had some issues with effective communication of announcements;

these need to be solved.

o Inmate K

L ( 525) filed a grievance on 5/17/18 asking to be

moved to the lower walk to hear announcements. Full documentation has not been

provided, but GRCC reported that he was moved. In addition, the response to his

grievance about staff failure to use the PA system explained that investigation had

revealed that on some of the units, the PA system was not working. The prison

substituted (electric, I think) bull horns; these need to be tested for their

effectiveness for hard-of-hearing inmates.

oC

N

( 631) reports that some of the staff at GRCC does not use the

PA system to notify individuals about what is going on. He says that they just yell

and sometimes say the PA system is broken, even though it works for certain

COs. Because of that, he says, he cannot hear announcements.

o R T ( 210) reports that he is unable to hear announcements because the

announcements are made by COs yelling instead of over the intercom system. In

one related incident, Mr. T was threatened with a write-up.

• The TTY instructions provided to me are the precise file I gave to the prison—with several areas still awaiting prison-specific information:

-22-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 24 of 37 - Page ID#: 2389

• E B ( 628), who signs to communicate, received a write-up on 8/29/18. The documentation of the write-up does not indicate that a VRI or interpreter was used to communicate with Mr. B .

• The videophone was inoperative for at least two months during the 2018-10 reporting period. But the ADA coordinator worked out a substitute, using the laptop VRS.

•D W

( 064) reported that when he was transferred from GRCC to KSR,

his hearing aid was not transferred with him.

Observed positive practices • Hearing aids are provided on-site. • In-person interpreter provided for SAP and MRT

KCIW

Observed compliance issues

• Two of the 7 individuals whose hearing impairment presented to KyDOC within the

2018-10 reporting period (Apr. 1 – Oct. 1) had to wait longer than sixty days to receive a

hearing aid or to be deemed ineligible: M

H

( 192) (63 days); T

R

( 805) (110 days).

• KCIW incorrectly deemed B V

( 716) ineligible for a hearing aid. Later,

after I noted the error, she was issued a hearing aid. Ultimately, 156 days passed between

the date KyDOC was alerted and the issuance of a hearing aid.

• Inmates seem not to be receiving receive regular or annual auxiliary aids/services

assessment. Four individuals have not received an assessment since 2016: D

H

( 729), K C ( 285) (signs to communicate), J

C

( 848) (signs

to communicate), A R

( 483). Two individuals have not received an

assessment since 2017: M D

( 290) and R R

( 756).

•K C

285), a deaf inmate, filed a grievance on 5/22/18 reporting that on several

different occasions, she had been paged. Because she is deaf, she did not hear the page

and had to rely on other inmates notifying her. In response, the Unit Administrator Sarah

Moore sent out a memo on 5/29/18 instructing staff to notify K C or J

C

in person of any pages.

• KCIW has had substantial difficulty using the VRI in all appropriate circumstances.

-23-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 25 of 37 - Page ID#: 2390

J

C

( 848) filed multiple grievances about the availability of the VRI:

o 6/7/18 – reported that the VRI is difficult to get because there is only one and

because staff don’t know what she is talking about when she requests it

o 6/7/18 – reported that after another inmate cut her, she requested the VRI over

and over, and it was not retrieved until after she had been cuffed and taken to

medical and continued to request it. Even in medical, it was not brought promptly.

The result was that she was unable to explain what had happened, either to

custody or medical staff.

o Response: rejected the idea of keeping it in the unit, but agreed it needed to be

obtained promptly, and to provide training during in-service.

More generally, I have discussed this issue repeatedly with KCIW’s ADA coordinator,

and it seems that staff intentions are good, but execution has been very challenging.

•A R

( 483) reported that when her hearing device was available, she was

paged to come get it. However, she did not hear the page and, as a result, did not receive

the device for weeks.

• Handbook does not provide info about ADA coordinator, accommodations, etc.

Observed positive practices • No deaf or hard-of-hearing individuals were missing from KCIW’s 2018-10 Report. • Hearing aids are provided on-site. • In-person interpretation provided for education.

KSP (Reporting still incomplete)

Observed compliance issues

• All of the KSP inmates whose hearing impairment presented to KyDOC within the

reporting period—5 individuals—had to wait longer than sixty days to receive a hearing

aid or to be deemed ineligible. This includes: R

A

( 980) (alerted

approximately 8/1/18, still ongoing as of 3/15/19); D C

( 509) (180 days);

D H ( 499) (79 days); T

P ( 242) (alerted 6/13/18, still ongoing

as of 3/15/19); J P

( 236) (131 days). KSP’s self-reporting failed to

acknowledge any of these.

• I have not received documentation that 2 individuals are not eligible to receive a hearing aid. This includes: R D ( 468) and R H ( 648).

• When asked for documentation of ineligibility for a hearing aid, KSP initially provided medical records that did not contain the audiogram results requested.

• When asked for documentation of ineligibility for a hearing aid for some individuals, KSP first informed me that the inmates had moved to different institutions, which does not obviate the need for documentation of determinations made prior to transfer.

-24-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 26 of 37 - Page ID#: 2391

• This institution did not initially provide adequate information about the result of each individual’s participation in programming or a work assignment. It took numerous individual follow-up messages and explanations to receive this information.

• The VRI laptop is not working. This needs urgently to be solved.

• The KyDOC ADA Coordinators webpage does not have up-to-date information for KSP.

• Provision of auxiliary aids/services assessments is inadequate:

oL E

( 749) has not received an assessment.

o F F ’s ( 518) last assessment was years ago.

o Three individuals’ last assessment was in 2017: J C

T

( 207), S

H ( 444).

( 850), J

•M

K

( 021) filed a grievance on 4/5/18 reporting that staff continues to

turn off captions/subtitles for institutional channel 40 on the television. Staff response

was a reminder. Institutional channel 40 is intended to always have captioning on, so

individual reminders should not be necessary.

• TTYs are not available during the same hours as phones; arrangements have not been made to routinize access.

Observed positive practices • When inmates who don’t need captioning complained that captions blocked their view of movies, KSP instituted a new institutional channel to be captioned at all times. This was an excellent solution, if the implementation glitches described above can be solved. • The availability of a Sorenson videophone has protected KSP from the frequent outages experienced by other institutions.

KSR

Observed compliance issues

• About half of the 101 individuals whose hearing impairment presented to KyDOC from

the beginning of the 2018-10 reporting period (Apr. 1, 2018) through the end of 2018 had

to wait longer than sixty days to receive a hearing aid or to be deemed ineligible. (We

have data going beyond the 2018-10 Report for KSR because KSR provides regular

audiology updates.) KSR had what their ADA coordinator described as a “huge backlog”

caused by transportation issues. That backlog is not yet entirely solved. Inmates

experiencing delays include:

J A ( 334) (113 days)

L A ( 265) (97 days)

A

B ( 693) (92 days)

J B ( 781) (alerted 11/13/18, still ongoing as of 4/15/2019; behavior

-25-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 27 of 37 - Page ID#: 2392

prevents testing)

E

B ( 740) (63 days)

T

B

( 164) (97 days)

W

C r ( 519) (148 days)

T

C ( 414) (96 days)

J C

( 943) (150 days)

C C ( 616) (127 days)

B D

( 943) (91 days)

B D

( 507) (112 days)

D

F

( 576) (129 days)

L G ( 138) (126 days)

D H

( 796) (62 days)

B H

( 083) (alerted 7/9/18, still ongoing as of 4/15/2019; other health

conditions prevent resolution)

Ja H ( 889) (117 days)

D J ( 651) (73 days)

K J

( 232) (alerted 11/7/18, still ongoing as of 4/15/2019)

F

J ( 313) (135 days)

C

K ( 505) (91 days)

D L ( 400) (87 days)

D L ( 628) (79 days)

R L ( 918) (106 days)

C M

( 249) (181 days)

J M ( 717) (155 days)

C

M

( 250) (76 days)

R M

032) (141 days)

R N ( 824) (alerted 9/16/18, still ongoing as of 4/15/2019; other health

conditions prevent resolution)

J O

911) (92 days)

D R

( 258) (84 days)

G R ( 005) (98 days)

S

R

( 420) (102 days)

L R

( 524) (129 days)

M

R

406) (100 days)

R

R ( 297) (106 days)

C

R ( 747) (119 days)

J S ( 919) (147 days)

H S

( 924) (116 days)

C S

( 007) (124 days)

R S

( 068) (86 days)

D T ( 732) (70 days)

A

T

( 394) (102 days)

V T

( 347) (176 days, ultimately paroled prior to resolution)

J

T ( 967) (63 days)

F

W ( 697) (295 days; KSR reports inmate was uncooperative)

J

W

( 309) (63 days)

-26-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 28 of 37 - Page ID#: 2393

M

W ( 583) (148 days)

• One of KSR’s medical providers was conducting audioscope screening at 40 dB instead of 25 dB. As a result, some inmates were improperly taken out of the audiology process.

• KSR offers some inmates pagers. But it denies this auxiliary aid to any inmate with less than 75 or 80 dB loss in one ear. For example, C P ( 176) (65 dB in right ear, 75 dB in left ear) requested a pager because he could not hear PA announcements (Grievance #18-0793) and was denied. The document offered in support of this policy is (a) out of date (it was replaced by the audiology memo), and (b) doesn’t mention pagers. In addition, the response to Mr. P states that the cutoff is 70 dB. But—unlike KSR’s bed-shaker threshold (50 dB), which was set based on consultation with an audiologist— there is no evidence that the pager cutoff is evidence-based. Two things are necessary for such a cutoff: someone needs to measure the volume of the announcements that the pagers substitute for, and an audiologist should be consulted. After reading this report in draft, KSR reported that this policy will be reevaluated.

• Other inmates, including D V ( 842) (Grievance #18-0983), have reported that they cannot hear PA announcements. This was solved for him with a commitment to make personal notifications.

• Even though the ADA coordinator approved R W

498) for the TTY and has

issued him a card saying he can use the TTY, Mr. W reports that other staff still will

not let him use it. KSR reports this issue has been resolved.

• There was a disciplinary incident involving J M ( 566) dated 3/27/2018: he shoved a table into Dr. Amos, who was his health care provider. The table was the one that the VRI was resting on, during their encounter. For that reason, prison staff decided to proceed without the VRI at the hearing (The documentation stated: “NOTE: The VRI wasn't used during this Adjustment Hearing due to the nature of the disciplinary that the VRI was used to allegedly assault staff. and Inmate M waived the VRI for this Hearing. Inmate used pen a paper to communicate and read his disciplinary also had a copy prior to Hearing.”) It’s unclear to me whether M truly waived use of the VRI, or whether it was not offered to him. If the latter, that was inappropriate: if staff were concerned about safety, they could have used restraints, and placed Mr. M far enough from the VRI that there was no safety risk.

• Disciplinary report against R H

( 622), dated 5/8/2018 states “Inmate

H

is deaf and does not sign[.] all questions to him were submitted in writing I find

him guilty of the cat 3-11 based on the fact that he admitted to being in a fight with

Inmate T .” But—as has come up in this case repeatedly30—Mr. H

does sign,

and is functionally illiterate. An interpreter must be used for effective communication

30 See Second Semi-Annual Report (Nov. 13, 2016), ECF 84-1, Pg.ID #1578; Site Visit Report, Kentucky State Reformatory (April 21, 2016), Second Semi-Annual Report, Appendix II, ECF 84-2, Pg.ID #1612-13.

-27-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 29 of 37 - Page ID#: 2394
with him. If a VRI interpreter cannot understand his somewhat unorthodox sign language, then an in-person interpreter should be used.
• KSR’s TTY instructions are generic and don’t really explain how to get the device, set it up, etc.
• W D r ( 856) filed a grievance explaining that with just one hearing aid, he was experiencing vertigo and also was worried about cars behind him. He had requested a second hearing aid, but health care staff told him that the policy allows just one; they referred him to the ADA coordinator. But in fact, the policy allows two where there is sufficient need. Thus the appropriate determination had not been made. I asked the ADA coordinator to explain this to health care staff and let me know what happened; she agreed. KSR staff report that they are awaiting a response from the KyDOC’s regional medical director, Dr. Frederick Kemen.
Observed positive practices • Generally, KSR efficiently tracks the audiology progress of a large number of individuals. • KSR provides auxiliary aids/services assessments to a large number of deaf and hard-ofhearing inmates. • Apparently, hearing aids are provided on-site. • KSR successfully facilitates in-person interpretation for O A ( 676) for AA and NA meetings • Great training on KOMS, VRI Laptop; step-by-step instructions inside the VRI laptop. • Aircard for laptop. • Very good notice on ADA for inmate handbook. • Use of pagers. • Really excellent HOH/Deaf ID:
• Excellent customization of staff training to include KSR-specific resources, address recent issues and solutions.
• Special training for “New ADA Features in KOMS” • Training on VRI • VRI Log shows that it is actually being used.
-28-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 30 of 37 - Page ID#: 2395
LAC
Observed compliance issues • LAC is way behind the other KyDOC institutions with respect to ADA/Settlement Agreement compliance. It has no policies, no training, no forms, no working system for managing audiology or communications needs. It has no videophone and no VRI laptop (although this has not yet actually affected anyone, because it has no prisoners who sign to communicate).
• When asked for documentation of ineligibility for a hearing aid, LAC initially provided medical records that did not contain the audiogram results requested.
• LAC has experienced problems tracking audiology progress and ensuring that a proper and timely determination is made for each individual.
• LAC has no procedure to ensure individuals receive an auxiliary aids/services assessment.
• There was no hearing screening during a routine physical, though (after intervention based on self-report, this has reportedly now been fixed)
• This institution did not initially provide adequate information about the result of each individual’s participation in programming or a work assignment. It took numerous individual follow-up messages and explanations to receive this information.
• LAC’s ADA Coordinator has not completed settlement-related training.
• Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure are not in the inmate law library.
• Videophone not yet installed; VRI laptop not yet available.
• LAC is apparently not using any of the various forms previously recommended.
LLCC
Observed compliance issues • Twelve of the 37 LLCC inmates whose hearing impairment presented to KyDOC within the 2018-10 reporting period (Apr. 1 – Oct. 1) had to wait longer than sixty days to receive a hearing aid or to be deemed ineligible. (The self-report was that there were 4 such delays.) This includes: J L ( 912) (89 days, ultimately discharged prior to resolution) P M ( 384) (123 days) C M ( 866) (122 days)
-29-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 31 of 37 - Page ID#: 2396

R P ( 080) (185 days)

T R ( 246) (91 days)

E

S

( 424) (125 days)

H T

( 929) (183 days, ultimately refused)

D T ( 130) (204 days)

R V

( 784) (noticed 4/27/18, received an incorrect eligibility

determination at LLCC, finally received a hearing aid on 2/15/19 at KSR after 294 total

days)

M

V

( 878) (alerted 5/3/18, still ongoing as of 2/18/19)

T W ( 147) (196 days)

R

W ( 638) (107 days).

• I have not received documentation that D T hearing aid.

( 130) is not eligible for a

• Three individuals, D S

(103 ), D Y

( 160), and R

V

( 784), were incorrectly determined to be ineligible for a hearing aid at

LLCC.

• When asked for documentation of ineligibility for a hearing aid, LLCC initially provided medical records that did not contain the audiogram results requested.

• The preferred method of communication listed for two individuals in LLCC’s 2018-10 Report was “can hear with hearing aid,” even though they were not yet issued hearing aids.

• LLCC significantly overreported deaf/HOH inmates—including inmates who apparently have no hearing impairment.

• LLCC did not initially provide adequate information about the result of each individual’s participation in programming or a work assignment. It took numerous individual followup messages and explanations to receive this information. After three emailed explanations to LLCC, I still did not receive the information and gave up to get the court report filed.

• LLCC has no method or plan to track whether deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates are witnesses in disciplinary hearings.

• LLCC does not provide hearing screenings when individuals arrive at the institution.

• When hearing aids belonging to P M ( 242) were sent out to be fixed, they were not returned in a timely manner (Grievances #18-761, #18-771).

Observed positive practices • Hearing aids are provided on-site. • Provision of shake-n-wake watches.
-30-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 32 of 37 - Page ID#: 2397

LSCC

Observed compliance issues • As described above, it has been extremely challenging to obtain information from LSCC.

• Most of the 29 LSCC inmates whose hearing impairment presented to KyDOC within the 2018-10 reporting period (Apr. 1 – Oct. 1) had to wait longer than sixty days to receive a hearing aid or to be deemed ineligible.:

L B ( 299) (239 days)

F C ( 440) (256 days)

T

C

( 371) (133 days)

D

F

634) (alerted 7/2/18, still ongoing)

R G

( 190) (228 days)

B H ( 190) (alerted 8/7/18, still ongoing)

D H ( 789) (274 days)

J H

( 435) (alerted 7/24/18, was still ongoing when transferred to LLCC)

J M ( 453) (305 days)

J M ( 423) (124 days)

T M ( 826) (153 days, then discharged from KyDOC custody)

M M

( 789) (183 days, then discharged from KyDOC custody)

J

O

( 981) (alerted 5/29/18, still ongoing)

O R (183 ) (alerted7/24/18, still ongoing)

C S

( 877) (196 days)

L

T

( 860) (7/13/18, still ongoing)

G U ( 143) (306 days)

R

W ( 569) (198 days)

R W

( 024) (alerted 6/21/18, still ongoing).

•D P

( 748) waited 756 days to receive a hearing aid, from December 2016

until January 2019.

• There is a particular problem with individuals whose screening questionnaire indicates

hearing issues not getting appropriate services after a transfer. LSCC seems to use an

additional one-question screen (have you experienced hearing issues) and/or to wait for

such inmates to request services via sick-call, which is inappropriate, and apparently not

explained to the inmates. Affected inmates include:

o D F ( 634) (screened at RCC; no evaluation provided after transfer

to LSCC)

oJ H

( 435) (screened at EKCC; no evaluation provided at LSCC—

he’s since been transferred to LLCC)

oJ

O ( 981) (screened at RCC; no evaluation provided after transfer

to LSCC)

oL

T

( 860) (no evaluation provided after screening)

-31-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 33 of 37 - Page ID#: 2398

oR W

( 024) (screened at RCC; received medical care for ear

infection causing hearing difficulty but no additional evaluation/treatment after

transfer to LSCC)

• Only after many many requests was I finally given documentation of ineligibility for hearing aids for appropriate inmates.

• When L M

( 925) was transferred to LSCC, his hearing aid was lost. Mr.

M

reported that it took several requests to get LSCC to take steps to replace the

hearing aid.

• Four individuals at LSCC did not have auxiliary aids/services assessments completed:

J H

( 435), F S

( 473), P W

052), and J

W ( 201). Mr. S

’s assessment has now been completed; the other three

are no longer housed at LSCC.

• LSCC did not initially provide adequate information about the result of each individual’s participation in programming or a work assignment. It took numerous individual followup messages and explanations to receive this information.

• At LSCC, a hard-of-hearing individual, D P

( 748), was written up for not

standing for count; he was told that he was responsible for standing up even if he could

not hear the alert, and was found guilty of the misconduct. Note: That finding was

promptly and appropriately dismissed on supervisory review.

• TTY instructions are generic and therefore inadequate.

• Wrong sick-call slip: doesn’t include request for auxiliary aid/interpretation.

Observed positive practices • In response to a grievance (18-603) about not hearing announcements, agreed on 7/13/2018 to create an inmate job for someone who would make announcements, wingto-wing (not cell-to-cell). This might work, but I have not been given any additional information.

NTC

Observed compliance issues

• Six of the 10 individuals whose hearing impairment presented to KyDOC within the

2018-10 reporting period (Apr. 1 – Oct. 1) had to wait longer than sixty days to receive a

hearing aid or to be deemed ineligible. This includes: T A ( 625) (alerted

6/13/18 because hearing aid broke, still ongoing as of 11/5/18); R C ( 842)

(80 days); F

H

( 831) (338 days); P

H ( 732) (73 days); U

P ( 028) (195 days); C

S

210) (185 days).

-32-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 34 of 37 - Page ID#: 2399

• When I reviewed an audiogram, I discovered that NTC had incorrectly deemed H

H

( 445) ineligible for a hearing aid. I passed this along to KyDOC; Dr. Keman

reviewed the documentation and agreed that a hearing aid was appropriate under the

policy. One has been ordered. The resulting delay was significant: his audiogram was

done on May 9, 2018; it was months before the error was discovered and corrected.

• I have not received documentation for D S ( 693) demonstrating that he is ineligible to receive a hearing aid.

• NTC does not do hearing screenings for its arriving inmates.

• NTC did not initially provide adequate information about the result of each individual’s participation in programming or a work assignment. It took numerous individual followup messages and explanations to receive this information.

•G E

( 447) was unable to hear announcements, such as those for count or

chow. NTC offered him only the option of purchasing a vibrating watch. I informed NTC

that it is the prison's obligation to communicate effectively with him. Therefore, if the

method for communicating effectively is a watch, the prison needs to supply one to Mr.

E

without a fee. The prison agreed.

• TTY instructions are generic and therefore inadequate.

Observed positive practices • NTC effectively transitioned from one ADA Coordinator to another. • Hearing aids are provided on-site.

RCC

Observed compliance issues

• Four of the 17 individuals whose hearing impairment presented to KyDOC within the

2018-10 reporting period (Apr. 1 – Oct. 1) had to wait longer than sixty days to receive a

hearing aid or to be deemed ineligible. This includes: J B ( 020) (69 days);

D

D ( 194) (185 days); J

M ( 718) (alerted 8/24/18; later

transferred to RCC and then discharged); E N ( 599) (63 days).

• Only after M B

039) filed a grievance (#18-870) was he appropriately

assessed for a hearing aid, and given one.

Observed positive practices RRC has one of the very hardest jobs of KyDOC prisons—as the intake facility, it is where most inmates begin their prison term, and therefore need full screening. After some difficulties at the beginning of the Settlement Agreement implementation term, RRC is now managing the audiology processes efficiently.

-33-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 35 of 37 - Page ID#: 2400

• RCC provided complete information in the 2018-10 Report. • Hearing aids are provided on-site. RCC does this efficiently. • RRC informs inmates that earphones are available for parole hearings. • Moved TTY to unit where an inmate uses it.

WKCC/Ross

Observed compliance issues • In 2017 and early 2018, WKCC improperly issued some hard-of-hearing individuals pocket talkers without determining whether or not they were eligible for a hearing aid. I had raised this issue during a site visit, it was not solved until after I sought additional information in response to this most recent self-report, at which point WKCC agreed to retest the affected inmates who were still at the institution.

• R

C

( 000) was originally screened at the wrong threshold. Later, the

ADA Coordinator caught the mistake and ordered its correction. She is one of the

individuals who had earlier been given a pocket talker, rather than fully evaluated for a

hearing aid; after several months, at a routine physical, she reported that the pocket talker

was not effective for her. So she’s been waiting for appropriate audiology services for

over a year.

• At WKCC, there was a period where the videophone was inoperative. This is reflected in R B ’s grievance #8698. While efforts to solve the problem began immediately, this outage, like others at other institutions, persisted for several weeks.

Observed positive practices

• WKCC/Ross has established a pattern of regularly sending biweekly audiology reports.

• Only 2 of the 22 individuals whose hearing impairment presented to KyDOC within the

2018-10 reporting period (Apr. 1 – Oct. 1) had to wait longer than sixty days to receive a

hearing aid or to be deemed ineligible, and both were within two weeks of the 60 day

target: A

B

( 404) (73 days); J C

( 326) (68 days).

• Hearing aids are provided on-site. WKCC does this efficiently.

• TTY instructions are complete and specific.

• VRI is actually being used.

-34-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 36 of 37 - Page ID#: 2401
V. CONCLUSION The Kentucky Department of Corrections continues to progress towards compliance with
the Settlement Agreement, but implementation challenges remain. My next step is to ask each institution to conduct a self-audit by mid-June 2019, and follow up with several site-visits. Dated: April 23, 2019 Respectfully submitted, ____________________________________ Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 610 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109 (202) 277-2506 Margo.schlanger@gmail.com Adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com
-35-

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 92 Filed: 04/23/19 Page: 37 of 37 - Page ID#: 2402
Sixth Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor April 23, 2019 Appendices
Appendix A: October 2018 Self-Reporting Questionnaire Appendix B: Memo from me to KyDOC headquarters, setting out all information missing from
October 2018 self-reports as of January 25, 2018 Appendix C: Compiled recommendations

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 1 of 25 - Page ID#: 2471

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT FRANKFORT

OSCAR ADAMS and MICHAEL KNIGHTS

Plaintiffs v.

Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, et al.

Defendants.

Seventh Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor

December 24, 2019
Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 625 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109

1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 2 of 25 - Page ID#: 2472

I. INTRODUCTION

The Settlement Agreement in this matter was approved by the Court on June 24, 2015, and was set to remain in effect for five years from that effective date. Therefore, it is scheduled to expire on June 23, 2020. As this report explains, there has been much progress on compliance, particularly at some institutions. But there remain very significant areas of non-compliance. I am not confident that KDOC will be in substantial compliance by June 2020.

This report is based on two basic sources of information—the self-audit process I have described in prior reports, and site visits undertaken in the summer of 2019. With respect to the self-audits, I shared a self-audit checklist with each KDOC ADA Coordinator and Warden in mid-June 2019, requesting that each institution complete and return it to me one month later. I did not receive most of the self-audits timely (receipt dates are in Table 1, below); two of them were not provided until mid-September 2019, which pushed back the date of this report. The self-audits themselves are attached as Exhibit 4. (I have redacted inmate names and id numbers.) Based on the number of deaf/hard-of-hearing (hereinafter “deaf/HOH”) inmates at each institution according to April data, and my prior encounters with each institution, I chose seven institutions for this most recent round of site visits (and pressed them hard to return the self-audits prior to those visits). Then I conducted site visits between July 29 and August 2. As previously, all staff provided me access to everything I asked for, and were entirely professional.

Table 1 tallies deaf/HOH inmates at each institution, and sets out dates each institution provided me with the self-audit and supporting documentation, and dates of my site visits. The number of deaf/HOH inmates listed at each institution is not their self-reported number; instead, I took a master list of deaf/HOH inmates that I maintain based on all the institutions’ reporting, updated it up to April 2019, and then updated locations using KDOC’s online inmate lookup page.

Table 1: KDOC Institutions

# HOH Inmates Self-audit received

Apr. 2019 master (Supporting

Site visit

list, locations as of documentation date, if

Institution

Sept. 2019

received)

applicable

Blackburn Corr. Complex (BCC)

12 (0 deaf)

July 26 (same)

Bell County Forestry Camp (BCFC)

3 (0 deaf)

Sept. 12 (Sept. 13)

Eastern Ky. Corr. Complex (EKCC)

59 (0 deaf)

Sept. 12 (same)

Green River Corr. Complex (GRCC)

49 (0 deaf)

July 25 (same)

July 30

Ky. Corr. Inst. For Women (KCIW)

17 (2 deaf)

July 12 (July 16)

Ky. State Penitentiary (KSP)

32 (1 deaf)

Aug. 5 (same)

July 29

Ky. State Reformatory (KSR)

217 (2 deaf)

July 18 (same)

July 31

Lee Adjustment Center (LAC)

32 (0 deaf)

July 26 (same)

Aug. 2

Luther Luckett Corr. Complex (LLCC)

155 (2 deaf)

July 22 (July 26) July 31

Little Sandy Corr. Complex (LSCC)

92 (1 deaf)

July 26 (same)

Aug. 1

Northpoint Training Center (NTC)

76 (1 deaf)

Aug. 20 (Aug. 27)

Roederer Corr. Complex (RCC)

26 (0 deaf)

Aug. 5 (Aug. 8)

Western Ky. Corr. Complex/Ross-Cash (WKCC) 55 (0 deaf)

July 26 (July 29)

TOTAL

825 (9 deaf)

2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 3 of 25 - Page ID#: 2473
In what follows, I begin with systemwide issues raised by the self-audits and visits. Given that we are over four years into the compliance period, I have concluded that systemwide intervention/direction is needed for some widespread problems. I put systemwide action items in bold text. For ease of reference, I have repeated these recommendations in Exhibit 1. In a draft of this report, circulated in mid-October, I asked KDOC to respond to these items with either (a) agreement to undertake the listed action, a time frame for it, and a list of the particular personnel who will be responsible to complete it, or (b) a declination of the action item, with an explanation. The response is included in Exhibit 2 to this report. (Unfortunately, I inadvertently omitted two of the report’s recommendations from the summary, and so they were not included in the initial response. I brought my oversight to the attention of KDOC and received a second response on December 17. It is the second part of Exhibit 2.)
Similarly, where I identified areas of concern for individual institutions, I requested that the institution’s warden send me a similar memo, either (a) agreeing to solve the problem and explaining how, the time frame, and a list of the particular personnel who will be responsible, or (b) declining to solve the issue, with an explanation. The resulting response memos are compiled and attached as Exhibit 3.
II. SYSTEMWIDE ISSUES
1. New ADA Coordinators. At this point, nearly every facility has had more than one ADA Coordinator since the settlement agreement became effective. But there is no system in place for training/transition. For example, in February 2017, I provided live training to all the ADA Coordinators. The two PowerPoint slide decks I used for that training (Settlement Agreement training and CREATE Compliance) are posted by KDOC on a shared drive. This drive also contains a library of useful materials, including the Settlement Agreement itself, the Department’s approved staff training, my various court reports, sample forms, and the like. But new ADA Coordinators are often not told about this training, and have not read the materials. Transitional assistance is often not provided to them. (Ideally, they would shadow their predecessor for some period of time, or have an experienced ADA Coordinator visit with them to provide guidance and advice.) In addition, KDOC has not implemented a system that updates the website listing of ADA Coordinators, at https://corrections.ky.gov/ Facilities/AI/Pages/ADA-Coordinators.aspx. Currently, EKCC, LSCC, and RCC all have out-of-date ADA Coordinator listings. KDOC should develop and implement an ADA Coordinator transition process, which should include processes for at least the following:  informing new ADA Coordinators about available resources,  linking them to other facilities’ ADA Coordinators,  walking them through auxiliary aid, reporting, and tracking processes,  updating the recipients of ADA related emails (for example, automated transfer emails),  updating the KDOC website list of ADA Coordinators.
2. Inmate tracking, transfer alerts, etc. a. Although some progress has been made, it remains the case that not all deaf/HOH prisoners are noted as such in the Kentucky Offender Management System (KOMS).
3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 4 of 25 - Page ID#: 2474
What is needed is for someone at KDOC headquarters to check each and every inmate for whom there is a record of a hearing impairment, and ensure that each of them is being appropriately tracked in KOMS. I can provide my master list to facilitate this effort. See the rest of this item for a discussion of what “appropriately tracked” means. b. For those inmates who are noted in KOMS, there seem to be two different methods. Some are noted with a general precaution; others are noted with an ADA alert. See figures A & B.
Figure A: General Precaution
Figure B: ADA Alert
KDOC has implemented an automatic email alert to notify ADA Coordinators of transfers of individuals with ADA alerts. But it appears that individuals with the other, more general precaution, are not the subject of such alerts. Any such individuals need an ADA alert. In addition, it seems that the alerts are not always getting to the appropriate people at the transferred-to institution. Perhaps when the ADA Coordinator
4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 5 of 25 - Page ID#: 2475
switches, no updates are being made? Or perhaps the transfers are not being entered in the system appropriately? I notified Adult Institutions Branch Manager Debbie Kays of the issue on September 19, 2019, but I believe it remains unresolved. The transfer notification system needs to be tested and problems solved, from KDOC headquarters.
c. Even when the transfer notice works as planned, it goes to the ADA Coordinator, not medical staff. Whether the information comes automatically to medical or is relayed by the ADA Coordinator, medical staff responsible for intake should be informed that a deaf/HOH inmate is incoming, so that they can ensure that audiology processes are not interrupted, deal with lost hearing aids, etc.
d. ADA Coordinators agreed that the ADA precaution would be far more useful if it included more information: whether the individual needs interpretation services, other accommodations, hearing aid status, etc. The ADA Coordinators should be polled to find out what information would be most useful, and the KOMS record of each individual with an alert should then be completed accordingly.
e. One of the major advantages of having the KOMS alert is that it enables generation of institutional-level reports of the deaf/HOH inmates. But only a few of the ADA Coordinators know how to run such a report. KDOC Headquarters should develop and promulgate a memo about how to run an ADA report from KOMS, sharing it with each ADA Coordinator—and ensuring that it is shared with new ADA Coordinators as well.
3. Audiology standards. a. In May 2018, KDOC’s medical providers set a systemwide standard for receipt of a hearing aid: after audiology testing, a hearing aid would be provided if the hearing threshold for the inmate’s better ear was 35 dB or higher at two or more of the benchmark frequencies of 500 Hz, 1,000 Hz, 2,000 Hz, and 4,000 Hz. The policy also provides that “Two hearing aids shall be provided to a patient who meets the criterion for a hearing aid in both ears and meets at least one of the following requirements: Legally blind [or having] a compelling occupational, educational, or safety need for binaural hearing.” In subsequent months, Dr. Frederick Kemen, the regional medical director for KDOC’s health care provider (currently WellpathCare) informed me that he was amending that standard to include an additional benchmark frequency of 8000 Hz—in my view an appropriate change. However, in administering this standard, numerous inconsistencies remain.  Not all the institutions are using the correct standard. I have reviewed a slide deck used to train institutional medical providers on the current policy, and it correctly states the policy. However, at least one institution is using the prior iteration, which set the threshold dB level higher. To solve this problem, providers at each institution should receive a new memo with the correct standard, and the update should be emphasized in some kind of training or other communications.
5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 6 of 25 - Page ID#: 2476
 My interviews and several separate complaints from inmates suggest that some providers are not aware of the criteria for binaural hearing aids. I have seen several requests for binaural hearing aids rejected without evaluation of the correct standard. I have also been told that inmates who want two hearing aids need to file a medical grievance making the request. Providers at each institution should be trained about how to evaluate the need for binaural hearing aids, and should review recent requests for two hearing aids and evaluate them against the policy, with oversight from the regional medical director. In addition, inmates who have hearing deficits in both ears should have the policy explained to them when they are denied binaural amplification, so that they can make an informed decision whether to grieve the denial.
4. Audiology services delays. Timely delivery of audiology services remains a significant problem. a. It continues to be the case that tracking fails for numerous inmates, so that they can go extra weeks or months without moving to the next step of the audiology process. The systems already in place should solve this problem—if they are implemented correctly. But it seems clear that additional oversight/supervision is necessary. Barring unusual medical issues, the process can comfortably be accomplished in two months or less, the current recommendation. KDOC’s medical provider should centralize a reporting system so that if any inmate has not completed audiology processing in three months—from the first report of a hearing problem to provision of a hearing aid or other resolution—that is reported centrally and headquarters staff take a role in immediately solving the problem.
b. This is a particular issue when audiology processes are ongoing at the moment of an inmate transfer. KDOC has decided not to rescreen transferees, instead reserving hearing screening for their routine physicals (which they get every one, two, or three years, depending on age and health status). This is not itself a problem—but if transferees are not going to be rescreened, it is important that pending audiology services be continued. Currently, continuity is unreliable. It is unlikely to be sufficient to direct the transferring institution to notify the new institution of the ongoing need—this is the kind of handoff instruction highly likely to get lost. There needs to be an instruction to both the transferring and the new institution; the transferring institution should send a progress note for all inmates whose audiology evaluation/provision is in-process, and the new institution should do a thorough chart review for each inmate who might be HOH, to check for inprocess audiology needs. Note that among the difficulties here is that until audiology screening is completed, the ADA tab is typically not checked in KOMS. I am not sure of the best way for medical staff to know who is in-process; someone with familiarity with the electronic medical record system should figure this out. What is clear is that the current system is not working.
5. Request forms. In November 2016, I recommended that various printed request forms be edited to include a request for communication services. See my prior Recommendation 48
6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 7 of 25 - Page ID#: 2477
(“The Healthcare Request form should include boxes to check if auxiliary aids or services, including remote or in-person interpretation, are needed.”); Recommendation 49 (“All the forms by which inmates apply for jobs, educational programming, etc., should have language similar to that in the recommended Healthcare Request form. So should classification and disciplinary forms that notify inmates of impending hearings or meetings.”). I provided the following recommended language, to be added to the forms:
If you are deaf or hard-of-hearing, do you need any communication assistance for this healthcare visit?
No Yes: Video Remote Interpreter (VRI) (via “purple” laptop) Yes: in-person qualified interpreter Please explain why you need an in-person interpreter rather than VRI Yes: other: (please specify) Language along these lines was duly added to the centrally-printed medical request form— but generally not to other forms. ADA Coordinators have reported to me that they are powerless to solve this problem; they say it must be handled centrally. Even for the medical request form, while I saw compliant versions of the printed forms at various points over the past several years, it now seems that the form in use at most or all institutions is the original version, without the pre-printed language that responded to Recommendation 48. KDOC headquarters staff should review all forms by which inmates make requests that lead to in-person meetings, and ensure that each one includes notice that communication assistance is available at such meetings. For medical forms in particular, whatever issue has caused the reversion to the prior form should be corrected. In addition, interpretation services forms should clearly encompass religious and other volunteerprovided programming, and all inmate-staff communications.
6. Hearing aid loss on intra-prison moves and inter-prison transfers. It seems to frequently happen that hearing aids are lost when inmates are moved from one prison to another or from one cell to another (particularly when this is an involuntary move, and the pack-up is done not by the inmate himself but by staff—for example, when someone is put into disciplinary segregation). This is an extremely expensive loss, and can take months to resolve, subverting access and communication rights. I recommend that “adaptive equipment” be added to the printed property list used to track property during moves, and staff receive training that they must affirmatively locate such equipment and manage it appropriately. For inter-prison transfers, the best policy would be to instruct inmates to wear their hearing aids during the transfer.
7. Auxiliary aids a. Particular devices. Here I list devices currently in use at KDOC institutions, with notes on each one.  Videophones: All of the KDOC institutions have a videophone kiosk. At all but KSP, those kiosks are provided by the telecommunications company Purple. At KSP, there is also a Sorenson videophone. The systemwide experience with the Purple phones is not good; the Purple videophones are prone to frequent outages, caused by faulty updates, conflicts with firewalls, and the like. KSP’s experience with its Sorenson videophone is much better.
7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 8 of 25 - Page ID#: 2478
At this point, KDOC headquarters needs to solve the Purple videophone outage problem so that outages are both rare and brief, or make a systemwide switch to a more reliable videophone provider.
In addition, in a number of institutions, the videophone lacks any privacy from other inmates. Deaf inmates who use videophones in these circumstances report that other inmates frequently watch their calls, making comments about the individuals who appear on the screen. While some restrictions on privacy serve security purposes and avoid misconduct, it would be appropriate to provide a curtain that obstructs the television screen from casual observation by other inmates, without shielding the signing inmate from the waist down. Each institution in which the videophone is widely visible to other inmates should install such a curtain unless there’s a significant security obstacle.
 Portable phone amplifiers: These are now in use at a number of facilities, and working well. They should be available everywhere. See, e.g., : http://www.harriscomm.com/portable-telephone-amplifier.html.
Figure C: Portable Phone Amplifier.
 Phone volume control. These are available nearly, but not quite, everywhere. There should be at least one volume-control phone in every grouping of phones in every institution, including the phones used in restrictive housing. In fact, I’ve been told repeatedly that even inmates who have no hearing issues prefer the volume control phones—so it might make sense to have the feature universally installed.
 Captioned telephones (or “captels”). Several institutions agreed to pilot captioned telephones. There are some technical hurdles to installation— getting an outside line, linking the phones to the inmate pay-system, dealing with voice recognition. These need to be overcome, but KSP’s experience demonstrates this is possible. Captioned telephones should be made available in every institution, available at the same hours as a regular phone.
8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 9 of 25 - Page ID#: 2479
Figure D: Captioned Telephone
 Amplified phones. None of KDOC’s institutions have an amplified phone, but these too would be worth looking into, centrally. The features needed would be: amplification to 50 dB, with control over the amplification range (that is, whether amplification is at the high or low frequencies). See, e.g., https://www.hearingdirect.com/us/clarity-jv35-talking-desk-amplifiedphone.html; https://www.harriscomm.com/clarity-alto-white-amplifiedphone.html. Once captels are provided, these devices could be provided in the same place, using the same installation setup.
 TTYs. Every KDOC prison has at least one TTY. But not every prison has staff who know how to use the device, and inmates who might need them are not reliably told that they are available. I’ve explained previously that the instructions need to be detailed and user-friendly. Each institution needs to work out and test a protocol by which TTYs can be used—and then write that protocol into full instructions capable of being followed by someone who has never used a TTY before. I will test these by asking that such a person place a call to me at times arranged in the coming month or two.
 Assistive listening systems. Assistive listening systems using FM transmission are low-cost and can really help hard-of-hearing inmates in aurally challenging environments. At every institution, assistive listening devices should be made readily available for such environments: religious, educational, and rehabilitative programming. The need is particularly urgent for Substance Abuse Programming, which many institutions conduct in extremely noisy and difficult locations. Currently, only a few institutions have the systems, and even some that have equipment have not actually started to use it. Systems currently in use include:  GRCC: Whole House FM Transmitter 3.0, https://www.amazon.com/Whole-House-FMTransmitterMicrophone/dp/B0742MMRKW/
9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 10 of 25 - Page ID#: 2480
 LLCC: Peavey Assisted Listening System - 72.1 Mhz, https://www.amazon.com/Assisted-Listening-System-72-1Peavey/dp/B007Q2O2F4
 LSCC: System from www.kingdom.com
 Earphones for video communication. KDOC and the state of Kentucky communicate via video for several purposes. Some institutions use orientation videos to explain rights and responsibilities under the Prison Rape Elimination Act or (less often) institutional rules more generally. The Parole Board conducts many of its hearings via video. For inmates who are hard of hearing, it can be very helpful to provide earphones; these allow the inmate to turn the volume way up. KDOC should ensure that earphones for video communication are available in each prison, and also anywhere parole hearings are held—that is, in county jails. In addition, individuals who might need this equipment should be informed that it is available. (Figure E is a sign to this effect from WKCC.) I have discussed this issue with Kirstie Williard, a KDOC official who I understand to be responsible for KDOC interactions with jails. While she did not object to the recommendation, I have not been able to reach a resolution with her.
Figure E: Earphone Availability Sign
HEADPHONES AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
 Non-auditory alerts. Many institutions now have non-auditory “bed shaker” alerts available to notify deaf/HOH inmates of fires and the like. These are fine—but they do not meet the need for non-auditory announcements. They are mostly triggered only by fire alarms (not intercom announcements for chow, pill-call, count, and the like). And they work only for the small number of inmates who have them, and only when those inmates are in their beds. Other options are crucial. In any housing unit where it is practicable, KDOC should direct staff to flash the overhead lights to signal chow and pill-call. In addition, KDOC should direct implementation of some kind
10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 11 of 25 - Page ID#: 2481
of personal notification to deaf/HOH inmates, so that they do not miss personal announcements (e.g., “John Smith, report to the Unit Administrator.” See also subsection (b), below, for additional needed equipment.
b. Inmate purchases of non-auditory alarm devices. Several institutions have made it possible for deaf/HOH inmates to purchase non-auditory alarm clocks and/or watches. Many inmates have told me that these are extremely helpful devices, which facilitate deaf/HOH inmates’ participation in prison programs, services, and activities. But, currently, decisions about availability of these devices are made separately for each institution. KDOC headquarters should check with the institutions that have already piloted the devices about models and methods, and then should make them available for purchase by deaf/HOH inmates at all the institutions. (When inmates transfer from one institution to another, they should be authorized to bring these devices with them.) Indigent inmates could use loaners, or could have the cost placed on their accounts as a lien.
c. Bulletin boards. At some institutions, all non-routine announcements are written up and placed on a bulletin board in day-spaces. This includes, for example, pages of particular inmates, announcements about scheduling, rule changes, and the like. Anything non-routine that might be communicated via intercom also is posted on an accessible bulletin board. (The boards may need to be locked, to minimize interference by other inmates.) Bulletin boards posting non-routine announcements should be provided in every housing area at each institution.
d. Auxiliary aid processes. Many of the KDOC institutions conduct an auxiliary aid process, by which an ADA Coordinator meets with each deaf/HOH inmate upon his or her transfer to the institution or evaluation as deaf/HOH. At this meeting, the inmate is informed of available resources and decisions made about access to certain auxiliary aids and accommodations. Other institutions are far less consistent and formal about getting this done. At this point, it is clear to me that this more casual approach does not lead to Settlement Agreement compliance. Experience has established that an auxiliary aid evaluation/process is an essential part of Settlement Agreement compliance. KDOC should direct all institutions to implement this approach, and the auxiliary aid process should have the following characteristics:
 An auxiliary aid evaluation should be conducted within 2 weeks—and ideally substantially sooner—of each deaf/HOH inmate’s arrival at an institution or identification as deaf/HOH.
 The evaluation/process should be performed at a meeting between the inmate and the ADA Coordinator, so that the inmate learns who the ADA Coordinator is, and so that the inmate is given appropriate information about resources and services.
 Effective communication should be provided at the meeting—meaning that an interpreter is necessary for any inmate who signs to communicate,
11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 12 of 25 - Page ID#: 2482
and that for inmates who do not read, any documents should be fully explained using accessible language.  At the meeting, the inmate should be informed about all services/resources available—hearing aids, telephonic assistance, interpretation, captioning, etc. The brochure that has been developed for this should be kept on hand, and distributed at the meeting. It should be updated whenever necessary, as new devices or new procedures come online.  Inmates should receive easy-to-provide resources no later than the meeting. For example, that is when they can get bed cards, hard-ofhearing IDs, etc. Criteria and a clear process should be developed for access to any limited resources (bed shakers, telephone amplifiers, etc.), and explained to the inmates.  Inmates should be informed at the meeting about a clear process for getting any additional auxiliary aids/assistance they need.
8. Inmate handbook. Every institution has an Inmate Handbook. At this point, most provide some notice about ADA issues. But the notices are often difficult to understand and leave out crucial issues. KDOC should standardize this notice, using text along the lines of what follows:
{Institution} is required to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A disability is a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity such as seeing, hearing, walking, bathing or breathing. (Temporary conditions, like a broken leg, are not considered a disability.) Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, {Institution} will ensure that inmates with disabilities have access to all services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations that is substantially equivalent to access provided similarly situated non-disabled inmates.
{Institution} will communicate effectively with inmates who are deaf and/or blind, ensuring that they can receive information from and provide information to staff. When needed for effective communication, {Institution} will provide “auxiliary aids and services.” This means devices or services that assist in communication, such as interpretation, hearing aids, captioning, videophones, amplifiers, etc.
HOWEVER, if something a disabled inmate seeks—a particular job, for example— would be dangerous, posing a direct threat of injury or death to the inmate or others, {Institution} can bar the inmate’s access to that job after individualized consideration and consultation with appropriate medical experts.
{Institution} has an assigned ADA Coordinator who is responsible for training and advising staff in ADA matters and monitoring ADA concerns such as accessibility requirements and accommodations. The ADA Coordinator also reviews requests for adaptive equipment and accommodations as well as ADA complaints. To contact the ADA Coordinator, you may {HOW TO GET IN TOUCH} {e.g., send written correspondence via Institutional Mail or, in the event you are unable to submit a written request, you may contact your Classification and Treatment Officer who shall document and forward your request.}
12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 13 of 25 - Page ID#: 2483
There is a federal court Settlement Agreement that governs services for deaf and hard-ofhearing inmates. It is available, along with additional information about such services, for all inmates to read on request, in the Inmate Legal Library.
Again, I have summarized each of the above recommendations in Exhibit 2, and KDOC’s response is included in Exhibit 3. That response demonstrates very helpful engagement with the open issues, but additional inquiry/reporting will be necessary.
III. INSTITUTION-SPECIFIC ISSUES
Moving from systemwide issues to institution-specific ones, I now present information from the self-audits and my July/August 2019 site visits. The institutions are in alphabetical order. For several of the institutions, the circulated draft of this report also included some follow-up questions. Because those have now been answered, I omit them here (but some of the Warden’s memos in Exhibit 3 include answers to them, redacted to protect prisoner privacy).
BCC (self-audit only) Warden: Amy Robey ADA Coordinator: Christy Peach
Areas of concern  Deaf/HOH inmates live in Dorm 2C. This may be depriving some of opportunities only
available elsewhere. The self-audit form states that inmates are allowed to request a different housing assignment. But one inmate requested to be housed elsewhere and was refused— even though his only accommodations are an HOH ID and bed card. See my prior reports for a discussion of the considerations raised by dedicated HOH housing.  Devices: o BCC does not have portable phone amplifiers: one retailer declined to accept a Purchase
Order for them. An alternative supplier should be located. o No assistive listening systems are in place. o Inmates are not offered the opportunity to purchase vibrating watches (but they are
offered non-auditory alarm clocks). o No earphones are available for parole or other similar needs. o No captel.
Good practices  To provide a non-auditory alert for count and pill call, dorm officers flash the bay lights.  A TTY is available to inmates who use it, in a locked cabinet in a housing area; inmates are
given the combination, so that they do not have to make a special request each time they wish to make a call.
13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 14 of 25 - Page ID#: 2484
BCFC (self-audit only) Warden: Brandy Harm ADA Coordinator: Derek Miracle
Areas of concern  No assistive listening devices or captioned telephone.
Good practices  BCFC has designated two “ADA inmates” whose job is to assist inmates with disabilities
with reading, writing, and comprehension when necessary. Any HOH inmate can ask them for assistance, or can ask the ADA Coordinator and back-up. If an HOH inmate is paged and does not appear in response, an ADA inmate is asked to find and alert the HOH inmate.
EKCC (self-audit only) Warden: David Green ADA Coordinator: Kristopher King
Areas of concern  The ADA Coordinator listed on https://corrections.ky.gov/Facilities/AI/Pages/ADA-
Coordinators.aspx has been incorrect for months.  It seems that the new ADA Coordinator has done only the computer-based training that is
provided all staff, rather than the ADA Coordinator training.  Audiology assessments are not always timely.  Audiology progress tracking is only sometimes shared with ADA Coordinator.  Devices:
o No portable phone amplifiers. o No assistive listening. o No bed shakers. o No earphones for parole hearings or other uses.
Good practices  ADA Coordinator walks the dorms each week, to facilitate access for deaf/HOH inmates.  Dorm 3 has a non-auditory alert—a green light—to indicate inmate movement times.  There is a working captel.
GRCC (July 30 site visit) Warden: Kevin Mazza ADA Coordinator: Mark Jackson
Areas of concern:  The ADA Coordinator rarely receives automated email notices of transfers of deaf/HOH
inmates to GRCC.  Prior to my visit, the ADA Coordinator and medical staff were not routinely sharing
information; there was insufficient communication regarding the identity of deaf/HOH inmates and of their progress through audiology processes. During the visit, a system was discussed that hopefully will solve the problem.
14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 15 of 25 - Page ID#: 2485
 It seems that there are delays and other issues for inmates who need hearing aid parts—e.g., filters. Medical needs to work out (a) how to obtain these parts, and (b) how to make them easily available to inmates.
 The ADA Coordinator was not conducting auxiliary aid assessments, and not using the developed documentation explaining available services and resources. As a result, inmates are not getting items they need, such as deaf/HOH cell cards, IDs, and auxiliary aids.
 It is unclear how GRCC will accommodate deaf inmates if there is a “whistle alarm”—a drill or actual incident in which inmates on the yard are instructed by a whistle to lie down on the ground.
 Equipment/Devices: o GRCC was not making phone amplifiers available to inmates. o GRCC had a PA system in the housing units, but often used bullhorns instead. These are very difficult for HOH inmates; the PA system is better, so it should be used. o Inmates reported that they were not authorized to bring their own headphones or earbuds into the school building. That means that use of a pocket talker is unavailable. o The SAP program has an FM assistive listening system, but had not yet used it. o There was no captel. o The TTY lacked instructions and I could not get it to work; directions need to be developed and then a test done where someone who has never used it before follows the directions and calls me, TTY to TTY and using a relay service to a regular phone. o A test should be performed of the VRI and the videophone. o Inmates were not authorized to purchase non-auditory watches/alarm clocks o Data provided on the self-audit did not always seem to be accurate. For example, not even one inmate was listed as having low literacy, which is implausible.
 Audiology services: o There seemed to be some confusion about the screening criteria for a medical provider audiology assessment. The written documentation stated that a “Yes” or “Sometimes” answer to one screening question requires follow-up; interviews of medical staff elicited a different answer. o Inmates reported that obtaining necessary audiology equipment (e.g., hearing aid batteries, filters, and service) was time-consuming and sometimes impossible.
Good practices:  GRCC has used an in-person interpreter in a situation where the VRI would not be effective.  GRCC has an FM transmitter microphone, which is used as an assistive listening device for
educational programming. See https://www.amazon.com/Whole-House-FMTransmitterMicrophone/dp/B0742MMRKW/  GRCC offers an 8-hour sign language class for inmates.
15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 16 of 25 - Page ID#: 2486
KCIW (self-audit only) Warden: Vanessa Kennedy ADA Coordinator: Lori Holderman
Areas of concern:  The ADA Coordinator reports only partial compliance with regularly communicating with
deaf inmates and ensuring effective communication for deaf inmates. No details are provided on the deficits.  Orientation videos are not captioned, not always shown in a quiet space, and not always amplified when needed.  The videophone has experienced long outages. The VRI has also gone down—and was restored to operation only when a software update was reversed.  Devices: o No personal phone amplifiers have been made available. o No assistive listening. o HOH inmates are not routinely allowed to purchase vibrating watches/alarm clocks. o No captel.  Non-auditory alerts not sufficient to signal count alert, not programmed to signal different alerts, not used to notify prison-wide events, and not used to notify Deaf / HoH inmates of events specific to them.
Good practices:  When inmates have missed announcements / alarms because they didn’t hear pages, in-
person notification is used.  An in-person interpreter has been used in situations in which the VRI is ineffective.  The ADA Coordinator monitors disciplinary reports to ensure that nobody is disciplined for
failing to follow an order she could not hear.
KSP (July 29 Site Visit) Warden: DeEdra Hart ADA Coordinator: Roger Mitchell
Areas of concern:  The audiology case list used by medical providers was incomplete. And audiology timeliness
was poor—the “order sheet” moving people along in the process would get lost. This problem was solved by Health Services Administrator Nancy Raines, who set up a tasking protocol using a function known as “L Jellybean.” Ms. Raines is retiring, though, and it is unclear whether the problem will stay solved once she is gone.  The ADA Coordinator had not received ADA Coordinator/Settlement Agreement training.  No auxiliary aid assessments/meetings were being performed. In their absence, there were several problems: o Inmates did not know who the ADA Coordinator is. o Inmates did not know what services etc. were available. (KSP has a brochure that
explains what resources are available, but that brochure was not routinely shared with deaf/HOH inmates.) o Inmates didn’t have bed cards, HOH IDs, and the like.
16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 17 of 25 - Page ID#: 2487
 There seemed not to be an adequate process for considering requests for reasonable modifications to existing policies, housing assignments, etc. For example, when inmates requested a cell move to a quieter housing area, that request seemed not to trigger consideration of the disability-related need.
 MRT (Moral Reconation Therapy), a group class, took place in a space with significant hearing challenges, including a loud fan. Accommodations were scarce. Although it seems implausible, inmates report they aren’t aware of the possibility of moving up front. Consideration should be given to fixes: can the fan be moved? Can inmates be notified that they can move up front? Etc.
 Auxiliary aids: o There was no assistive listening/amplification system available, although HOH inmates expressed interest in using one, for example for MRT. o Inmates were not aware of the possibility of using a pager on the yard—and it was not a great notification system, in any event. Some alternative process for notifying inmates of individual pages and the like was needed—in-person notifications, bulletin board postings, or something else. o There were no portable phone amplifiers available. o Inmates were not given the opportunity to get vibrating watches or vibrating alarm clocks. o Not all phone banks had a phone with a volume control. o As is true systemwide, the Purple videophone had not worked consistently.
 Inmate transfers into restrictive housing separated inmates from their hearing aids, with long delays for their restoration.
 There continued to be an issue with the availability/utilization of the laptop-provided video remote interpretation (VRI). During my visit, the VRI was not operational. A VRI test is needed, in several locations of the prison, including from restrictive housing.
 It was not clear how KSP will accommodate deaf inmates if there is a “whistle alarm”—a drill or actual incident in which inmates on the yard are instructed by a whistle to lie down on the ground.
 It seemed that intercom announcements are not very accessible, because intercoms were difficult for HOH inmates to understand. There are announcements made via institutional tv channel, but of course this is no solution for inmates who don’t have televisions. Use of a bulletin board might ameliorate this problem.
 It is not clear that hand-restraint protocols for inmates who sign are compliant with the Settlement Agreement.
 It was challenging to schedule confidential interviews between my assistant and inmates.
Good practices:  For inmates undergoing audiology testing who struggle to use a computer, appropriate
assistance was made available.  The availability of a Sorenson videophone meant that difficulties with the Purple videophone
mattered less (or not at all).  KSP has implemented a good Special Needs Referral Form.
17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 18 of 25 - Page ID#: 2488
KSR (July 31 site visit) Warden: Anna Valentine ADA Coordinator: Cynthia Wathan
Areas of concern:  As with other facilities, KSR’s ADA Coordinator is not getting email alerts for transfers. To
fill in the missing information, she has been checking the KOMS record for each inmate transferred to KSR. This is admirable but very inefficient.  Devices: o KSR had several portable phone amplifiers, but they are now missing; more should be
ordered and tracked. o There is no captel available, and there are several inmates for whom this would be a
useful technology. o KSR owns FM transmitters for use in the chapel and in the Sexual Offender Treatment
Program (SOTP) but has not actually used them yet.  Audiology/Hearing Aids
o As with other facilities, hearing aids have several times been lost during the transfer process.
o For new hearing aids, it has been taking the provider, Audicus, up to 45 days to ship them. This is way too long.
o A couple of times recently, Audicus has shipped hearing aids to the wrong prison.
Good practices:  KSR has implemented an excellent process for auxiliary aid assessment. The ADA
Coordinator meets with each incoming deaf/HOH inmate, promptly after arrival at the institution, to discuss available services and to assess what he needs. Needed equipment/services are then provided, and the meetings are memorialized. The ADA Coordinator meets with each inmate again after a year, to check in/update accommodations.  KSR’s ADA Coordinator memorializes requests for services and the response by scanning the kits she receives and their answers, and entering both into KOMS.  Two helpful non-auditory methods of communicating announcements are being used: bulletin boards in housing areas, and institutional channel 17.  To help avoid loss of hearing aids and other devices on cell moves/transfers, a checkbox for assistive equipment is being added to property forms.  Inmates are allowed to purchase non-auditory alarm watches; group orders are placed each quarter.  A useful HOH ID has been implemented. The regular ID card hangs horizontally; the HOH ID hangs behind it, vertically, so that both can be seen at once.  Dorm signs are well designed.  Hearing rescreening is done not during the annual physical, but at the same time as annual TB skin tests. This is an excellent method, because it’s more likely to occur, and because it facilitates follow-up.  An in-person interpreter has been used with success for a deaf inmate enrolled in sex offender treatment.  The information brochure for deaf/HOH services has been appropriately adapted with helpful institution-specific info.
18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 19 of 25 - Page ID#: 2489
 There is a DVD available to inmates providing instruction in American Sign Language.  Temporary door signs are used to mark the cell of HOH inmates when CPTU does not allow
inmates to have their IDs due to the potential for self-harm.
LAC (August 2 site visit) Warden: Daniel Akers Assistant Warden: Troy G. Pollock ADA Coordinator: Mitchell Brandenberg
Areas of concern: LAC is run by CoreCivic, on a contract with KDOC. It is quite recently opened, so has had a shorter period of Settlement Agreement implementation. As of the time of my visit, there was essentially no Settlement Agreement compliance system in place. The ADA Coordinator reported that he simply had insufficient time to learn about the Settlement Agreement and carry out its terms.  ADA Coordinator had not been trained.  No training had been provided to staff.  No auxiliary aid process was being implemented, and there had been little to no
communication with deaf/HOH prisoners about how to access services or what services were available.  No forms for requesting/waiving services were available.  Devices: o No videophone or VRI was available. o TTY instructions were insufficient, and 711 didn’t work (but 800-648-6056 did). o No assistive listening, including in difficult hearing environments like SAP. o No portable phone amplifiers. o No earphones for parole etc. o No captel.  TV captioning was inconsistent.  Basic communication was highly inaccessible: o No intercom systems were in use. o Timing of meals and yard changed frequently, augmenting the need for communication. o Inmate aids were appointed (and designated as “town criers”) but it was clear that they
did not know all the deaf/HOH inmates, and the deaf/HOH inmates did not know them.  Audiology:
o Medical did not send any documentation to the ADA Coordinator on HOH inmates other than what the ADA Coordinator requests following a Monitor inquiry. Medical often had a long (30 days+) delay in responding to inquiries.
o It seemed that there were numerous inmates who had sought a hearing aid, but had not been provided audiology testing.
In response, I have had several follow-up conference calls with the ADA Coordinator and others. As of the end of September, it seemed that there had been progress. An auxiliary aid process was put into place and auxiliary aid meetings held; various forms were incorporated into that process. Videophones were installed (but the VRI remains inoperable). Information has gone out to
19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 20 of 25 - Page ID#: 2490
inmates and staff about services. I believe, however, that the other items identified above remain unsolved.
LLCC (July 31 site visit) Warden: Scott Jordan ADA Coordinator: Sherri Grissinger
Areas of concern:  As in other facilities, the Purple videophone often fails. When outages occur, the VRS laptop
is used as a substitute—but it is made available only during the workday, leaving deaf inmates unable to make calls during the most useful hours after work and on the weekend.  Even when the videophone is working, it seems that there are access issues. Deaf inmates not housed in the unit where it is located must get permission to go to that unit; this should be easy and routine, but is apparently not.  Audiology: o Hearing aid testing is being performed on-site, but insufficient assistance was being given
to inmates whose computer literacy is low. After discussion during the site visit, this should be solved going forward. o Post-testing approval of hearing aids has been slow.  Medical staff have not implemented an easy method for using VRI interpretation.
Good practices:  The ADA Coordinator performed a survey of all the deaf/HOH inmates, asking about their
experiences and needs.  Devices:
o For HOH inmates who are learning to read, educational staff introduced a home-made device they call a Tubeloo, which amplifies their voices so they can hear themselves as they read out loud.
o A Peavey assistive listening system is available for HOH inmates in the chapel and the academic building.
o Deaf/HOH inmates are provided a quarterly opportunity to purchase vibrating alarm clocks and watches.
o TTY access is limited. o Portable phone amplifiers are in use. o Staff in the restrictive housing unit have set up a way to allow use of VRI/VRS when
needed.  There has been both preparation and training related to transport of inmates who sign to
communicate; an “ADA bag” includes special restraints that allow them to move their hands while being transported.
LSCC (August 1 site visit) Warden: Keith Helton ADA Coordinator: Rhonda May
Areas of concern  The new ADA Coordinator has not done ADA Coordinator training.
20

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 21 of 25 - Page ID#: 2491
 The KDOC website listing of the ADA Coordinator is out of date.  The self-audit information is incomplete.  Devices:
o Intercoms were not in use. o No captel was available. o No assistive listening system was in place outside of the chapel—it is particularly needed
in SAP (see below). o Inmates are not allowed to buy vibrating watches. o As elsewhere, Purple phones have long and numerous outages. o VRI: It was not clear how the VRI laptop would be used in the academic building, given
the configuration of power and internet access. Also, staff familiarity with VRI seemed low, particularly in medical. There seemed to be no routine software updates to the VRI laptop. o There were no TTY instructions, even though I pointed out this absence during a prior site visit.  The auxiliary aid process is not adequate: o Not everyone was in KOMS. o When audiology testing found an inmate who is deaf or HOH, no notice was provided to the ADA Coordinator, and therefore no non-audiology services were being provided. o Not all inmates had HOH card. o There was no consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize communication difficulties.  SAP was incredibly noisy; besides assistive listening, other quieting techniques should be considered. o The ice machine was extremely loud. Can it be moved or dampened? o On my last visit, over a year ago, SAP personnel agreed to try an assistive listening device, but they did not follow through, and on this last visit, they did not agree. This is urgently needed. o There was no volume adjustment button on any telephone in the SAP area. o Other measures should be considered as well.  Hearing aids were frequently lost on transfer into RHU.  Audiology: o As in other facilities, when an inmate is transferred to LSCC while still in-process for audiology services, there was no working system to ensure that the process continues. There was no hearing screening on transfer, and chart reviews have been insufficient to catch such inmates. o KDOC policy provides for hearing screening that leads to a medical provider visit, if one or more of the screening questions leads to an answer of “yes” or “sometimes.” But at LSCC, only three or more such answers are leading to the next stage of the process. o Medical staff tracking of audiology services has not been appropriate; the tracking methodology was not working. During my visit, we discussed alternative approaches to solve this. The audiology tracker needs to be updated frequently, not only after hearing aids are provided.
21

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 22 of 25 - Page ID#: 2492
Good practices  The chapel uses an FM assistive listening system, obtained from the church technology
catalog www.kingdom.com.  Used VRI for a program (note: ADA Coordinator should have but did not evaluate whether
this was effective, and if not, should have consider a live interpreter)  The Warden and ADA Coordinator conducted appropriately individualized review of
possibility of direct threat in a job placement.
NTC (self-audit only) Warden: Brad Abrams ADA Coordinator: Jennifer Baker
Areas of concern  ADA Coordinator has not received training. She also reports only partial compliance with
Settlement Agreement familiarity.  The self-audit is incomplete.  KOMS notifications are not occurring when deaf/HOH inmates arrive.  The notices outside of the housing units do not include a picture of the ID card.  Only partial compliance with instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services being
shared with staff.  Many of the training requirements are marked as only “partially compliant,” though no
details are provided.  Devices:
o Videophone does not allow for voice carry-over features. o Some issues using VRS when the videophone is out of service. o TTY stored in office, rather than made accessible to inmates. o No captel is available. o Apparently the VRI laptop was non-functional at some point.  No VRI log is available.  VRS is not being used to substitute for the videophone when the videophone is out.
Good practices  Vibrating watches made available to HOH inmates.  Classes in American Sign Language are provided and preference is given to HOH inmates
for enrollment.
RCC (self-audit only) Warden: Jessie Ferguson ADA Coordinator: Jessica Durrett
Areas of concern  The new ADA Coordinator has done only ADA basic training, not the Settlement Agreement
and other training.  The KDOC website lists the wrong ADA Coordinator.
22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 23 of 25 - Page ID#: 2493
 No confirmation that settlement summary, settlement, and brochure are available in the library.
 KOMS alerts are inconsistent.
Good practices  Sign language class is offered, and HOH inmates are given preference.
WKCC/Ross-Cash (July 29 Site Visit) Warden: Tim Lane ADA Coordinator: Jacob Bruce
Areas of concern:  Audiology:
o As with other institutions, there was a hand-off problem when inmates in the middle of the audiology process arrived at WKCC (including Ross-Cash).
o WKCC’s medical provider had been using an outdated policy for decision-making about hearing aid prescriptions, and therefore not all inmates who should receive a hearing aid are getting one.
 Auxiliary aid assessments are not yet regularized, and are not being consistently performed in a timely manner.
 Coordination between the ADA Coordinator and medical staff is not yet smooth; a shared folder might solve this problem.
 Devices: o The Substance Abuse Program (SAP) should try an assistive listening device, and was willing to do so—but no devices had been bought for them. o WKCC had purchased portable phone amplifiers, but had not actually used them. o One TTY may be missing.
Good practices:  The “Jelly-bean” task management system has been in use for several months for audiology
processing in medical, and seems to be solving delays and hand-off problems within the institution.  A cordless telephone handset is available in restrictive housing for HOH inmates, facilitating their access to telephones.  The KOMS-generated transfer emails are frequently coming through.  A sign on the parole board video monitor makes clear that assistance is available for HOH inmates. (See Figure E, above)
Conclusion
As has been true throughout the Settlement Agreement period, KDOC staff have been professional in their efforts to implement the agreement, and helpful to me as I ask them monitoring questions. And as usual, there are both successes and challenges to report. The next self-reporting deadline will be in early February.
23

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 24 of 25 - Page ID#: 2494
Respectfully submitted, December 24, 2019 Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 625 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109 adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com
24

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 25 of 25 - Page ID#: 2495

Exhibit 1: Exhibit 2: Exhibit 3: Exhibit 4:

LIST OF EXHIBITS
Requested Action Item List for KDOC KDOC Responses, Nov. 14, 2019 & Dec. 17, 2019 KDOC Institution Responses (various dates) KDOC Self-Audit Spreadsheets

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-1 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 1 of 4 - Page ID#: 2496
EXHIBIT 1: REQUESTED ACTION ITEM LIST FOR KDOC
I requested that KDOC respond to the system-wide recommendations in this report, in a memo from Acting Commissioner Kathleen Kenney or Deputy Commissioner Randy White, as they are the officials with appropriate authority. For each recommendation below, I asked that KDOC either (a) state its agreement to undertake the listed action, provide a time frame for it, and a list of the particular personnel who will be responsible to complete it, or (b) explicitly decline the action item, with an explanation. The response memos are attached as Exhibit 2.
1. New ADA Coordinators. KDOC should develop and implement an ADA Coordinator transition process, which should include processes for at least the following:  informing new ADA Coordinators about available resources,  linking them to other facilities’ ADA Coordinators,  walking them through auxiliary aid, reporting, and tracking processes  updating the recipients of ADA related emails (for example, automated transfer emails),  updating the KDOC website list of ADA Coordinators.
2. Tracking, alerts, etc. a. Someone at KDOC headquarters should check each and every inmate for whom there is a record of a hearing impairment, and ensure that each of them is being appropriately tracked in KOMS. b. Each HOH inmate must have an ADA alert, not (or not just) a general precaution. The transfer notification system needs to be tested and fixed, from KDOC headquarters. c. Whether the information comes automatically to medical or is relayed by the ADA Coordinator, medical staff responsible for intake should be informed that a deaf/HOH inmate is incoming, so that they can ensure that audiology processes are not interrupted, deal with lost hearing aids, etc. d. The ADA Coordinators should be polled to find out what information would be most useful in the ADA tab, and the KOMS record of each individual with an alert should then be completed accordingly. e. KDOC Headquarters should develop and promulgate a memo about how to run an ADA report, sharing it with each ADA Coordinator—and ensuring that it is shared with new ADA Coordinators as well.
3. Audiology standards. Providers at each institution should all receive a new memo with the correct standard, and the update should be emphasized in some kind of training or other communications. Providers at each institution should be trained about how to evaluate the need for binaural hearing aids, and should review recent requests for two hearing aids and evaluate them against the policy, with oversight from the regional medical director. Inmates who have hearing deficits in both ears should have the policy explained to them when they are denied binaural amplification, so that they can make an informed decision whether to grieve the denial.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-1 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 2 of 4 - Page ID#: 2497
4. Audiology services delays. a. KDOC’s medical provider should centralize a reporting system so that if any inmate has not completed audiology processing in three months—from the first report of a hearing problem to provision of a hearing aid or other resolution—that is reported centrally and headquarters staff take a role in immediately solving the problem. b. When inmates are transferred, there needs to be an instruction to both the transferring and the new institution; the transferring institution should send a progress note for all inmates whose audiology evaluation/provision is in-process, and the new institution should do a thorough chart review for each inmate who might be HOH, to check for in-process audiology needs.
5. Request forms. KDOC headquarters staff should review all forms by which inmates make requests that lead to in-person meetings, and ensure that each one includes notice that communication assistance is available at such meetings. For medical forms in particular, whatever issue caused the reversion to the prior form that has taken place should be corrected. The interpretation services form should clearly encompass religious and other volunteer-provided programming, as well as all inmate-staff communications.
6. Hearing aid loss on intra-prison moves and inter-prison transfers. “Adaptive equipment” should be added to the printed property list used to track property during moves, and staff should receive training that they must affirmatively locate such equipment and manage it appropriately. For inter-prison transfers, the best policy would be to instruct inmates to wear their hearing aids during the transfer.
7. Auxiliary aids a. Particular devices.  KDOC headquarters needs to solve the Purple phone outage problem so that videophone outages are both rare and short, or make a systemwide switch to a more reliable videophone provider. Each institution in which the videophone is widely visible to other inmates should install a curtain unless there’s a significant security obstacle.  Portable phone amplifiers should be available at each institution: See, e.g., http://www.harriscomm.com/portable-telephone-amplifier.html.  There should be a volume control phone in every grouping of phones in every institution, including the phones used in restrictive housing.  Captioned telephones should be made available in every institution, available at the same hours as a regular phone.  KDOC should look into acquiring specialized amplified phones.  Each institution needs to work out and test a protocol by which TTYs can be used—and then write that protocol into full instructions capable of being followed by someone who has never used a TTY before.  At every institution, assistive listening devices should be made readily available for religious, educational, and rehabilitative programming. The need is particularly urgent for Substance Abuse Programming, which many institutions conduct in extremely noisy and difficult locations.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-1 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 3 of 4 - Page ID#: 2498
 KDOC should ensure that earphones for video communication are available in each prison, and also anywhere parole hearings are held—that is, in county jails. In addition, individuals who might need this equipment should be informed that it is available.
 Many institutions now have non-auditory alerts available, to notify deaf/HOH inmates who are in their beds of fires and the like. These are fine— but they do not meet the need for non-auditory announcements. They are mostly triggered only by fire alarms (not intercom announcements for chow, pill-call, count, and the like). And they work only for the small number of inmates who have them, and only when those inmates are in their beds. See 7.b, below, for additional needed equipment. In any housing unit where it is practicable, KDOC should direct staff to flash the overhead lights to signal chow and pill-call. In addition, KDOC should direct implementation of some kind of personal notification to deaf/HOH inmates, so that they do not miss personal announcements.
b. Inmate purchases of non-auditory alarm devices (vibrating watches and alarm clocks). KDOC headquarters should check with the institutions that have already piloted the devices about models and methods, and then should make them available for purchase by deaf/HOH inmates at every institution. (When inmates transfer from one institution to another, they should be authorized to bring these devices with them.)
c. Bulletin boards. For each housing area at every institution, all non-routine announcements should be written up and placed on a bulletin board in day-spaces.
d. Auxiliary aid processes. KDOC should instruct each institution to implement an auxiliary aid evaluation/process, with the following characteristics:  An auxiliary aid evaluation should be conducted within 2 weeks—and ideally substantially sooner—of each deaf/HOH inmate’s arrival at an institution or identification as deaf/HOH.  The evaluation/process should be performed at a meeting between the inmate and the ADA Coordinator, so that the inmate learns who the ADA Coordinator is, and so that the inmate is given appropriate information about resources and services.  Effective communication should be provided at the meeting—meaning that an interpreter is necessary for any inmate who signs to communicate, and that for inmates who do not read, any documents should be fully explained using accessible language.  At the meeting, the inmate should be informed about all services/resources available—hearing aids, telephonic assistance, interpretation, captioning, etc. The brochure that has been developed for this should be kept on hand and distributed at the meeting. It should be updated whenever necessary, as new devices or new procedures come online.  Inmates should receive easy-to-provide resources no later than the meeting. For example, that’s when they can get bed cards, hard-of-hearing IDs, etc.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-1 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 4 of 4 - Page ID#: 2499
Criteria and a clear process should be developed for access to any limited resources (bed shakers, telephone amplifiers, etc.), and explained to the inmates.  Inmates should be informed at the meeting about a clear process for getting any additional auxiliary aids/assistance they need.
8. Inmate Handbook. KDOC should standardize the ADA notice in inmate handbooks, using text along the lines set out in the report this exhibit accompanies.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-2 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 1 of 13 - Page ID#: 2500
Exhibit 2: KDOC Responses, Nov. 14, 2019 & Dec. 17, 2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-2 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 2 of 13 - Page ID#: 2501

Matthew G. Bevin Governor
John C. Tilley Secretary

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Adult Institutions P.O. Box 2400
Frankfort, Kentucky 40602-2400 Phone: 502-564-2220 Fax: 502-564-3520

Kathleen M. Kenney Interim Commissioner
Randy White Deputy Commissioner

MEMORANDUM

To: From:

Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor-- Adams & Knights v. KDOC
Randy White ,K' ~ ~ /vJ'1-
Deputy Commissioner, Adult Institutions

Thru:

Kathleen M. Kenney Interim Commissioner

Date: November 14, 2019

Re :

Responses: Exhibit 1: Requested Action Item Report from KY DOC

The following are KY DOC responses to the system-wide recommendations made in your report:
1-New ADA coordinators-KY DOC should develop and implement an ADA Coordinator transition process, which should include processes for at least the following: Informing new ADA Coordinators about available resources Linking them to other facilities' ADA Coordinators Walking them through auxiliary aid, reporting and tracking processes Updating the recipients ofADA related emails (for example, automated transfer emails) Updating the KY DOC website list ofADA Coordinators

While the Kentucky Department of Corrections has established a primary ADA Coordinator and published the information to the inmate population, we will have each Warden establish a back-up ADA Coordinator at each facility by December 1, 2019. Each Warden will be instructed to advise Central Office, specifically the KY DOC Central office ADA Coordinator and the Director of Operations, of any changes of these two staff members. Having a primary and a backup will help alleviate a lapse in services to the inmate population who are deaf/hard of hearing.

Kentucky U nbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-2 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 3 of 13 - Page ID#: 2502
The ADA Coordinators, backup ADA coordinator and Wardens will be made aware of a folder on the Gdrive, labeled "ADA Coordinators". This folder will contain an updated list of all ADA Coordinators and backups, available resources, forms, etc. Until training materials can be updated into a Computer Based Training module, previous training that was conducted via power point, will also be available on the Gdrive.
The KY DOC website was updated on November 6, 2019 to reflect current ADA coordinators at each facility. The website will continue to list only the Primary ADA Coordinators.
2- Tracking, alerts, etc.
a) Someone at KY DOC Headquarters should check each and every inmate for whom there is a record of a hearing impairment and ensure that each of them is being appropriately tracked in KOMS.
A KOMS report run on November 7, 20f9, revealed that there are 886 inmates who have an ADA flag for deaf/hard of hearing. It would be labor intensive for one individual to check each and every inmate to ensure they are being appropriately tracked in KOMS . Therefore, the KY DOC Central office will have each facility's list sent to them to review the inmates housed in their facility . The review will be completed within 30 days.

b) Each HOH inmate must have an ADA alert, not (or not just) a general precaution. The transfer notification system needs to be tested and fixed.from KY DOC headquarters.

During the review noted above in 2 (a), the ADA coordinators will be advised to check that the ADA alert is shown in the KOMS header. In addition, the transfer notification system mentioned is already in place and is operational. However, it has been discovered that all of the Transfer Coordinators are not being consistent in scheduling transfers between institutions in the correct manner. To address the issue, all Transfer Coordinators and back-ups will be sent the instructions again on the proper way to schedule an inmate transfer in KOMS that will generate the notification. ADA Coordinators and backups will also be sent an example of what an ADA alert should look like when a transfer of an inmate occurs between facilities. The Director of Operations will work with the Classification Branch to have them provide additional training on this issue with the appropriate staff. It is noted that in exigent circumstances, an inmate may be transferred using the External Movement feature in KOMS, meaning that an ADA alert would not be generated. However, the Director of Operations is currently working with the Administrative Coordinator in the Office of Support services to prioritize a request that has already been submitted to Marquis to also generate the ADA alert for transfers completed with an External Movement.

c) Whether the information comes automatically to medical or is relayed by the ADA Coordinator, medical staff responsible for intake should be informed that a deaf/HOH inmate is incoming, so that they can ensure that audiology processes are not interrupted, deal with lost hearing aids, etc.

The institutional transfer coordinator should see the ADA alert in the KOMS header when they review incoming inmates transferring to their facility and then notify the institutional ADA coordinator and medical staff that the inmate will be arriving. In addition, our medical intake process covers asking the inmate upon initial assessment if they need assistance with any particular device. Should they need one,

Kentucky UnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/[

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-2 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 4 of 13 - Page ID#: 2503
an alert is placed in the electronic health record (ECW) of the inmate. It is also documented when the person has a hearing aid or other devices.
d) The ADA Coordinators should be polled to find out what information would be most useful in the ADA tab, and the KOMS record of each individual with an alert should then be completed accordingly.

The KY DOC Central office ADA Coordinator is polling the institutional ADA Coordinators to see what

additional information would be useful to them to have in the ADA tab. Once compiled, a review will be

conducted to determine what can be added and if there is a cost associated with making these changes in

the KOMS system. ·

·

·

·

e) KY DOC Headquarters should develop and promulgate a memo about how to run an ADA report, sharing it with each ADA Coordinator-and ensuring that it is shared with new ADA Coordinators as well.

The KY Department of Corrections KOMS team can automatically generate a report to be sent to each ADA Coordinator and backup coordinator that pertains to their respective facility . Due to the complexity of the process to extract data from KOMS to generate the report, we believe an instructional memorandum would not be productive. Accordingly, the KY DOC Central office will automatically generate an ADA report to all ADA coordinators and backups on a weekly basis.
3-Audiology standards. Providers at each institution should all receive a new memo with the correct standard, and the update should be emphasized in some kind of training or other communications. Providers at each institution should be trained about how to evaluate the need for binaural hearing aids, and should review recent requests for two hearing aids and evaluate them against the policy, with oversight from the regional medical director. Inmates who have hearing deficits in both ears should have the policy explained to them when they are denied binaural amplification, so that they can make an informed decision whether to grieve the denial.

All providers were trained in March 2019 on the KY DOC Hearing Loss Protocol, Evaluation and Management of Hearing Loss, Interpretation of Audiograms-Practice. In addition, providers have been instructed that any denials of a hearing aid are to be presented before the Therapeutic Level of Care committee (TLOC) for review and final determination. After the TLOC decision has been made, the inmate can grieve the decision if they do not agree, in accordance with CPP15.6.
4- Audiology services delays
a) KY DOC's medical provider should centralize a reporting system so that ifany inmate has not completed audiology processing in three months- from the first report ofa hearing problem to provision ofa hearing aid or other resolution- that is reported centrally and headquarters staff take a role in immediately solving the problem.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/[

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-2 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 5 of 13 - Page ID#: 2504
The Health Services Division reviewed 353 inmates from 1-4-2019 through 10-29-2029 with the findings as follows:
221 inmates were seen by medical providers and issues were resolved in 30 days or less. 118 inmates were seen by medical providers and issues were resolved 31-90 days. 14 inmates were seen by medical providers and issues were resolved anywhere from 98 -211 days. These are currently being reviewed further to determine the reasons it took longer than 90 days to resolve the issues. The Director of Operations will follow up with the Health Services Division within 30 days.
The Health Services Division is committed to have inmates seen and have issues resolved in 30 days or less. Anything that exceeds 30 days will be documented with explanation.
b) When inmates are transferred, there needs to be an instruction to BOTH the transferring and the new institution; the transferring institution should send a progress note for all inmates whose audiology evaluation/provision is in-process, and the new institution should do a thorough chart review for each inmates who might be HOH, to check for in-process audiology needs.

Each inmate who is transferred has a complete chart review by the medical staff to see if there are any outstanding issues that need to be resolved. Again, as stated above, the Health Services Division has reviewed those 221 inmate cases to ensure services are provided and issues resolved within the timeframes.
5) Request Forms-KY DOC headquarters staff should review all forms by which inmates make requests that lead to in-person meetings, and ensure that each one includes notice that communication assistance is available at such meetings. For medical forms in particular, whatever issue caused the reversion to the prior form that has taken place should be corrected. The interpretation services form should clearly encompass religious and other volunteer-provided programming, as well as all inmate-staff communications.

The KY DOC state ADA Coordinator is currently gathering all forms from each institutional ADA Coordinator by which inmates make requests that lead to in-person meetings. Once received, a meeting will be held to review all forms and ensure each one includes notice that communication assistance is available at such meetings, to include interpretation services for religious and other volunteer-provided programming. Once standardized forms are finalized, they will be placed on the G-drive and distributed to all ADA Coordinators, back-ups, and Wardens . The Health Services Division has indicated that medical forms are standardized in the Electronic Health Record.

6) Hearing aid loss on intra-prison moves and inter-prison transfers. "Adaptive equipment" should be added to the printed property list used to track property during moves, and staff should receive training that they must affirmatively Locate such equipment and manage it appropriately. For inter-prison transfers, the best policy would be to instruct inmates to wear their hearing aids during the transfer.

The KY DOC will add "adaptive equipment" to the printed property list outlined in Corrections Policy

and Procedure 17.1. This policy is currently under review and should be ready to implement any changes

to the property form within 90 days. Plans are also in place to move towards an electronic property forms

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

n~.etl,,WtLEOu111"1,rrr'~ Y

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/[

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-2 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 6 of 13 - Page ID#: 2505
process in KOMS in 2020. In addition, a memorandum can be distributed to advise how to properly handle inmate hearing aids and to practice the best policy of instructing the inmates to wear their hearing aids during the transfer instead of packing them in their property.
7) Auxiliary aids-
a) Particular devices:
KY DOC headquarters needs to solve the Purple phone outage problem so that videophone outages are both rare and short, or make a system wide switch to a more reliable phone provider. Each institution in which the videophone is widely visible to other inmates should install a curtain unless there is a significant security obstacle..

KY DOC polled the ADA Coordinators on November 4, -2019 to see if there were any Purple phone outage problems ongoing. All facilities reported no issues, except for the Kentucky State Reformatory and Lee Adjustment Center as of November 7, 2019.
The Kentucky State Reformatory's issue is not directly related to Purple, but is a sporadic issue with slight pixilation happening during the call. The Warden had the new switch installed on November 8, 2019. However, the new circuit installation could take up to 90 days, as we have to wait until AT&T fulfills the work order.
While the Lee Adjustment Center has three operational Purple kiosks, they have been having issues making the laptop operational. The issue surrounds the laptop not being a Core Civic device that cannot be connected to or used on the company computer network. However, they have been working with our contractor with Praeses to overcome this barrier. The estimated time of completion is no later than December 15, 2019 . The Director of Operations will follow up to ensure this issue is resolved.
Institutions will be asked to be mindful of placement of the videophones away from populated areas or provide a curtain, depending on the physical plant.

Portable phone amplifiers should be available at each institution: see, e-g. , http://ww11·.harriscom111.com/portable-telephone-amplifier.html

After consulting the institutional ADA coordinators, the following institutions have portable phone amplifiers available to the Deaf/HOH population: BCFC, EKCC, KSP, KSR (ordering additional to accommodate population), LLCC, NTC, RCC, KCIW, LSCC and WKCC.
The following institutions have ordered portable phone amplifiers and are awaiting receipt of items: GRCC, BCC. The Director of Operations will follow up with these facilities within 30 days to ensure the items were received.
The Lee Adjustment Center currently does not have any portable phone amplifiers and has had no requests from their HOH inmates. The Director of Operations will follow up with the facility within 30 days to ensure the items were ordered and received.
There should be a volume control phone in every grouping ofphones in every institution, including the phones used in restrictive housing.

Kentucky U nbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/[

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-2 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 7 of 13 - Page ID#: 2506
All prisons report having volume control phones available in all areas.
The following KY DOC prisons do not have restrictive housing-BCC, BCFC, and RCC.
The Kentucky State Reformatory recently moved their RHU and are currently modifying having a portable amplifier available. The Director of Operations will follow up with the Warden in 30 days to ensure this issue has been addressed.
Western Kentucky Correctional Complex's RHU has wall mounted speakerphones. Therefore, inmates who are Deaf/HOH, are allowed access to a phone in the interview room when phone calls are scheduled.
All other pris0ns have a volume control phone in RHU.

Captioned telephones should be made available in every institution, available at the same hours as a regular phone.
There are currently four institutions that are utilizing the captioned phones in their facilities -- EKCC, LSCC, KSP, and NTC. While the KY Department of Corrections believes that inmates who are deaf/HOH are having their needs met with volume-controlled phones, portable amplifiers, TTY, videophones-YR! and YRS, we will compile and share the information on how the other facilities can purchase and provide if needed.
KY DOC should look into acquiring specialized amplified phones

At this time, the KY Department of Corrections believes that inmates who are deaf/HOH are having their needs met with volume-controlled phones, portable amplifiers, TTY, videophones-YR! and YRS. No institutions have indicated that the population's needs are not being met via any of these methods.
It is noted that the RFP for the Inmate Telephone Contract is currently out for bid. The following language has been incorporated into the Inmate Telephone Contract to the awarded company to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements including, but not limited to, providing telephones which are accessible to: persons in wheelchairs, Telephone Devices for the Deaf (TDD), Video Relay Services, Video Relay Interpreter services, etc.
i. Vendor shall provide the number of TDDs and ports at the Facilities specified in
Attachment G - Facility Specifications.
ii. TDDs should be able to work with any inmate telephone at the Facilities. iii. Vendor shall record and monitor TDD calls via the ITS. iv. TDD calls shall not be charged by the Vendor.
At no cost to KYDOC, Vendor shall work with KYDOC' s assigned ADA Coordinator at each Facility to provide Video Relay Service (YRS) and Video Relay Interpreter (VRI) services. Any cost, including but not limited to the Federal Cost, associated with the VRS and VRI services shall be the responsibility of Vendor. Vendor shall contract with KYDOC' s preferred YRS and VRI provider to ensure complete compliance with Attachment H - ADA Settlement Agreement. KYDOC currently utilizes Purple Communications. All VRS and VRI sessions are to be recorded and provided to KYDOC upon request.

Kentucky U nbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/[

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-2 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 8 of 13 - Page ID#: 2507
v. Vendor shall supply KYDOC with the number of laptops specified in Attachment G-
Facility Specifications for the purpose of conducting YRS and VRI sessions. The laptops shall each include a 13" screen . All laptops provided by the Vendor shall comply with the Commonwealth IT and security standards and shall become the property of KYDOC upon expiration and/or termination of the Contract. vi. Vendor shall supply a wireless connection to allow for portability in which to conduct the YRS and VRI services.
At no cost to KYDOC, Vendor shall provide the number of YRS and VRI units detailed in Attachment G - Facility specifications. These units shall be dedicated to YRS and VRI services and accessible to the applicable inmates at any time.
In addition, a video visitation system is also a requirement in the Inmate Telephone contract and once the contract is awarded and implemented, this will give Deaf/HOH inmates more access to visually see their friends and family.
Each institution needs to work out and test a protocol by which 1TYs can be used-and then write that protocol into full instructions capable of being followed by someone show has never used a 1TY before.

All institutions report having a TTY available with the instructions placed with the device. Therefore, the KY DOC does not believe it is necessary to write out a separate protocol on how to use the TTY.

At every institution, assistive listening devices should be made readily available for religious, educational, and rehabilitative programming. The need is particularly urgent for Substance Abuse Programming, which many institutions conduct in extremely noisy and difficult locations.

The KY Department of Corrections is currently gathering information from GRCC, KCIW, KSP, KSR, LSCC, LLCC, NTC and WKCC who have some type of amplification units for programming, education, and religious services. Once the information is gathered, the information will be disseminated to the institutional ADA coordinators and Wardens. Once this has been accomplished the Director of Operations will follow up with each Warden to ensure assistive listening devices have been purchased and provided for these areas.

Many institutions now have non-auditory alerts available to notify deaf/HOH inmates who are in their beds, offires and the like. These are fine-but they do not meet the need for non-auditory announcements. They are mostly triggered only by fire alarms (not intercom announcements for chow, pill-call, count and the like.) And they work only for the small number of inmates who have them, and only when those inmates are in their beds. See 7.b, below, for additional need equipment.

b) Inmate purchases ofnon-auditory alarm devices (vibrating watches and alarm clocks). KY DOC headquarters should check with the institutions that have already piloted the devices about models and methods, and then should make them available for purchase by deaf/HOH inmates at every institution. (When inmates transfer from one institution to another, they should be authorized to bring these devices with them.)

KentuckyU nbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/[

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-2 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 9 of 13 - Page ID#: 2508

The KY DOC Central Office ADA Coordinator is currently obtaining a list of non-auditory alarms and gathering information of where these items were purchased. Once the list is compiled and reviewed, the information will be placed on the G-drive folder for ADA Coordinators to be able to review.

c) Bulletin boards: for each housing area at every institution, all non-routine announcements should be written up and placed on a bulletin board in day-spaces.

Institutions routinely post changes via memo on inmate bulletin boards within units. Several institutions also notify deaf/hard of hearing inmates by using inmate "runners" to notify them of necessary information. Those facilities that have the capability of having an institutional television channel use this to post memos or changes in schedule. One institution sends out information utilizing the JPAY kiosk system. The KY DOC Central office ADA coordinator will place a summary of this information on the G-drive to share additional ways to convey non-routine announcements in addition to posting on bulletin boards.

d) Auxiliary aid processes. KY DOC should instruct each institution to implement an auxiliary aid evaluation/process, with the following characteristics:
* An auxiliary aid evaluation should be conducted within 2 weeks- and ideally substantially sooner- of each deaf/HOH inmate's arrival at an institution or identification as deaf/HOH.
* The evaluation/process should be performed at a meeting between the inmate and the ADA coordinator, so that the inmate learns who the ADA Coordinator is, and so that the inmate is given appropriate information about resources and services.
* Effective communication should be provided at the meeting-meaning that an interpreter is necessary for any inmate who signs to communicate, and that for inmates who do not read, any documents should be fully explained using accessible language.
*At the meeting, the inmate should be informed about all services/resources available-hearing aids, telephonic assistance, interpretation, captioning, etc. The brochures that has been developed for this should be kept on hand and distributed at the meeting. It should be updated whenever necessary, as new devices or new procedures come online.
* Inmates should receive easy-to-provide resources no later than the meeting. For example, that's when they can get bed cards, hard-of-hearing IDs, etc. Criteria and a clear process should be developed for access to any limited resources (bed shakers, telephone amplifiers, etc.), and explained to the inmates.
* Inmates should be informed at the meeting about a clear process for getting any additional
auxiliary aids/assistance they need.

All KY DOC prisons currently hold Treatment Team meetings with key staff to review a variety of treatment plans for inmates. This could be a function of the weekly treatment team that includes the ADA coordinator. When an inmate who is deaf/HOH comes into the prison, the Health Service

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/C

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-2 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 10 of 13 - Page ID#: 2509
Administrator will notify the ADA coordinator. The treatment team can meet with inmate, introduce the ADA coordinator and provides information/interaction to discuss needs, access to resources, etc.
8) Inmate Handbook- KY DOC should standardize the ADA notice in inmate handbooks, using text along the lines set out in the report this exhibit accompanies.
The KY DOC Central Office ADA Coordinator is gathering information from the institutional ADA coordinators to see what language is currently being used in the inmate handbooks. Once the information is gathered, a meeting will be "held to standardize the ADA notice in the inmate handbooks. After the standardized language is determined, there will be a deadline of 60 days to have the institutional inmate handbook revisions completed and the Director of Operations will follow up will all facilities within 30 days to ensure updates were completed.

Kentucky UnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/[

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-2 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 11 of 13 - Page ID#: 2510

Andy Beshear Governor

JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY CABINET
Department of Corrections
P.O. Box 2400 Frankfort, Kentucky 40602
Phone(502)564-4726 Fax (502) 564-5037 www.kentucky.gov

Kathleen M. Kenney Commissioner

MEMORANDUM

To: Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor-Adams & Knights v. KDOC

From: RandyWhite ~ ~ u f ) ~

Thru:

Deputy Commissioner,~ t Institutions

~ µ ·~0 Kathleen M. Kenney

1

Interim Commissioner

-

Date: December 17, 2019

Re: Additional Responses: Exhibit 1: Requested Action Item Report from KY DOC

The following are KY DOC responses to your follow up items for the system-wide recommendations that were added by you on December 2nd and December 3rd.

Item 7-- "In any housing unit where it is practicable, KDOC should direct staff to flash the overhead lights to signal chow and pill-call.
It is important to note that all KY DOC facilities are not the same regarding construction and layout. Therefore, the Wardens must maintain the ability to put into practice a mechanism to communicate meal times and pill-call to the Deaf/HOH that work for their respective facilities.
Blackburn Correctional Complex, which is open dormitories, is the only KY DOC facility that flashes overhead lights to signal count times and pill call.
Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex operates on controlled movement and has a green light that is turned on from the control cab in the HOH Walks of Dorm 3 C-Lower and A-Lower to signal for any movement, including meal times and pill call.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-2 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 12 of 13 - Page ID#: The Kentucky State Penitentiary is the maxim25u1m1security prison. They do not flash overhead lights for any reason. Pill call is conducted immediately following population let-out for GP and PC, and does not require an announcement. In RHU, pill call is conducted at the inmate's cell door, on a schedule. Meals are conducted on a published schedule for GP and PC. In the Restrictive Housing Unit, each tray slot is unlocked prior to serving meals, which serves as an indicator.
The Kentucky State Reformatory has areas where lighting is controlled from a circuit box, making this suggested practice a safety issue. However, they have assigned inmate runners who will alert a Deaf/HOH inmate of schedules. They also have pagers for the deaf/HOH inmates, however, they do not always alert inside the dormitories, due to the construction of those buildings.
The Bell County Forestry Camp is open dormitory and they hire ADA support inmates to advise Deaf/HOH inmates. In addition they recently began flashing the lights for meals and pill call.
The Green River Correctional Complex have the security staff go and advise Deaf/HOH inmates personally. In addition, the Warden is also having maintenance install flashing lights to communicate to deaf/HOH inmates.
The Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women issues a personal memo on when the inmate may to go to the dining room to eat and when to go to pill call. Any changes to any of the schedules are given to the Deaf/HOH by a staff member.
The Lee Adjustment Center has inmates assigned to assist the Deaf/HOH inmates by making sure they are aware of announcements made in the housing units for meal times, pill call, etc.
The Luther Luckett Correctional Complex has inmate aides that notify Deaf/HOH inmates in person or make notifications via messages on dry erase boards.
The Little Sandy Correctional Complex have "resident helpers" who are assigned to the Deaf/HOH inmates, who communicate announcements to them.
Northpoint Training Center is open dormitory and they have assigned inmate runners to notify inmates. Staff also go down the wings to ensure that Deaf/HOH inmates are aware of these times.
The Roederer Correctional Complex have ADA aides to notify Deaf/HOH inmates in the units if they are having a difficult time hearing announcements. Also, Units 1, 2, 4 and 5 are open dormitory so they can observe other inmates leaving in large groups for recreation, pill call, and meal times.
The Western Kentucky Correctional Complex is open dormitory. Recently, the Warden implemented the procedure where the Dorm Officer in each dorm will flash the lights on and off briefly three times at each announcement for that dorm's meal time and pillcall, as well as the five-minute warning for count and count time announcements over the PA system.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-2 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 13 of 13 - Page ID#: In addition, KDOC should direct implementatio2n5o1f2some kind ofpersonal notification to deaf/HOH inmates, so that they do not miss personal announcements (e.g., "John Smith, report to the Unit Administrator. ").
All institutions have mechanisms in place to address personal notification to Deaf/HOH inmates so they do not miss personal announcements.
The following KY DOC institutions utilize staff to notify Deaf/HOH inmates of personal announcements: EKCC, KCIW, KSP, KSR, LAC, RCC, WKCC, GRCC and BCC.
The following KY DOC institutions utilize other assigned inmates to notify Deaf/HOH inmates of personal announcements: LLCC, LSCC, NTC, BCFC,
On TTY access, I am nearly certain that not every institution has working TTY instructions. They have device instructions -- but those do not include how to set it up, get an outside line, etc. To ensure access, I will run a test, in January -- I will ask that a staff member who has never used a TTY before be handed the TTY and its instructions and (without assistance) use it call me at an arranged time. The instructions should be adequate to facilitate this.
On December 5, 2019, all KY DOC Wardens were advised, via email communication, that the settlement monitor would be contacting them sometime in January 2020 to run a test and that they should review the written instructions and run their own test in advance.
"KDOC should ensure that earphones are available in each prison, and also anywhere parole hearings are held-that is, in county jails. In addition, individuals who might need this equipment should be informed that it is available. "
The KY DOC will make earphones available in each prison. The KDOC, however, has no authority over the jails, and therefore no authority to mandate that jails provide earphones.
The DOC is a regulatory agency charged with enforcing the provisions of KRS 441.055 to 441.075, which includes compliance with KY Jail Standards outlined in 501 KAR Chapters 2, 3 7 and 13, the Department has no real enforcement mechanism available to compel compliance, other than removal of state inmates or closure of the entire facility, as outlined in KRS 441.075.
The KY DOC is happy to explain to our 76 full service jails the importance of providing the recommended headphones to any inmate who may need/request them. But, there really is no legal authority to compel compliance. The accommodation of inmates with disabilities is not included in KY Jail Standards, therefore not subject to the actions outlined in KRS 441.075. The KY DOC will propose adding language to the standards at the next Commission on Corrections.
If the Parole Board is conducting a hearing where the offender has a hearing deficit, the Parole Board would not proceed without appropriate accommodations. The Parole Board would advise KY DOC that services would need to be arranged for the offender to accommodate his/her hearing deficit. The arrangements would be made by DOC and the Board would proceed after verification that appropriate services are in place.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 1 of 52 - Page ID#: 2513
Exhibit 3: KDOC Institution Responses

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 2 of 52 - Page ID#: 2514

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 3 of 52 - Page ID#: 2515

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 4 of 52 - Page ID#: 2516
Exhibit: BCFC
Report
Response

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 5 of 52 - Page ID#: 2517

Kathleen Kenney
COMMISSIONER

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex 200 Road to Justice
West Liberty Kentucky 41472 (606) 743-2800
Fax (606) 743-2811

David Green
WARDEN

To: Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor
kw"' From: David Green, Warden 13#4,4
Date: October 22nd, 2019
Re: ADA Self-Audit Follow Up Responses
Areas of Concern: 1.)Update to the ADA Coordinator listing on the KY DOC Website has been requested. 2.)Mr. King has completed the computer based training and has inspected the documentation on the ADA
Google Drive. Please let us know if there is any training in addition to these. 3.)We are currently working with Medical to better facilitate audiology assessments. 4.) Audiology progress tracking is shared with Mr. King from Medical when new hearing aids are received.
Further updates are in progress. 5.) Devices:
a. Portable Phone Amplifiers — These are provided to any Inmate who requests them. Currently have 6 portable amplifiers issued out for inmates that requested them during auxiliary aid assessments.
b. Assistive listening is currently in the research stage to find a system that will work with our current equipment. Your recommendations on devices would be appreciated on this item.
c. Bed Shakers — EKCC currently has Bed Shakers in the ADA equipment inventory but no Inmates are currently issued one.
d. Earphones for Parole — We are going to order two sets of earphones within the next week for use during Parole Board hearings.
e. Volume Control phones — All Phones in use in the Inmate housing areas have volume control. Securus installed these after your last site visit.
Good Practices: 1.)Mr. King continues to walk the dorms each week to facilitate access for Deaf/HOH Inmates. 2.)The Non-Auditory alerts in Dorm 3, in the form of a green light, have been working well and are installed
on A-Lower wing and C-Lower wing.
Follow-ups: 1.) Inmate David Nichols does have a Pocket Talker issued to him from EKCC's Medical Department.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 6 of 52 - Page ID#: 2518
2.) Inmate Michael Simpson was issued a portable phone amplifier while he was housed at EKCC. Inmate Simpson was transferred to Lee Adjustment Center on 08/02/2019. Please note that while Inmate Simpson was housed at EKCC he primarily used the TTY device for his communications.
3.)EKCC has a CapTel model 840 installed in Dorm 3 where the Deaf/HOH walks are located. Robert Sneed used the CapTel while he was housed at EKCC and said it was a great tool for communication. Inmate Sneed was transferred to Western Kentucky Correctional Complex on 09/12/2019. The CapTel is located in the Core area of Dorm 3 next to the Videophone. We are still working with Securus to integrate the CapTel into their systems. I will attach a photo of the CapTel and location at the end of this document. Regarding Inmate Justice, I have no record of an Inmate Justice currently at EKCC that is considered HOH. Please provide additional information and we will investigate.
Devices currently in use at EKCC: 1.)Shake and Wake Watches — 25 issued currently 2.)Portable Phone Amplifiers — 6 issued currently 3.)Volume Control phones in all housing areas 4.)TTY device 5.)Videophone and VRI Laptop 6.)CapTel model 840
If you have any further questions, feel free to contact us.
Regards,

David Green, Warden

er mg, afety Coord.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 7 of 52 - Page ID#: 2519

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Kathleen M. Kenney Commissioner

Green River Correctional Complex 1200 River Road P.O. Box 9300
Central City, KY 42330-9300 www.corrections.ky.gov

To: Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor From: Bobbi Jo Butts, Deputy Warden ~ ~ ~ Re: ADA Draft Court Report Date: October 25, 2019

Kevin R. Mazza Warden

Green River Correctional Complex Specific Reply: Site Visit: July 30, 2019

Area of Concern: 1. The ADA Coordinator rarely receives automated email notices of transfer of deaf/HOH inmates to GRCC
o The ADA Coordinator does receive automated email when an ADA inmate is transferred to a different institution and when they arrive at GRCC from another institution.
2. Prior to my visit, the ADA Coordinator and medical staff were not routinely sharing information; there was insufficient communication regarding the identity of deaf/HOH inmates and of their progress through audiology processes. During the visit, a system was discussed that hopefully will solve the problem.
o Medical staff had not been receiving notification when an ADA Inmate was arriving from another institution. They are now receiving that information, communicate, and share information with the ADA Coordinator.
3. It seems that there are delays and other issues for inmates who need hearing aid parts - e.g., filters. Medical needs to work out (a) how to obtain these parts, and (b) how to make them easily available to inmates. n o Delays do occur for many various reasons; some out of the institutions control. Inmates notify the ADA Coordinator when they need parts ordered. The ADA Coordinator notifies medical by either phone or email of the need. Delays occur when inmates wait until they are completely out of supplies to notify ADA Coordinator, the medical department is out of stock and waiting on orders to arrive; just to list a few. Other delays may occur as with any ordering process. Inmates have been advised that if they are getting low to let Medical and/or the ADA coordinator know. Medical has been advised that supplies should be ordered immediately upon notification from the ADA or inmate.
4. The ADA Coordinator was not conducting auxiliary aid assessments, and not using the developed documentation explaining available services and resources. As a result, inmate are not getting items they need, such as deaf/HOH cell cards, IDs, and auxiliary aids.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirilcom

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/0

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 8 of 52 - Page ID#: 2520
o Upon arrival to GRCC, their assigned unit staff and the medical department see all inmates. During this orientation, both the unit staff and medical department advise inmates who the ADA Coordinator is. Since your visit, the ADA Coordinator now meets with the inmates and has them complete an intake form. The intake form will also be scanned into KOMS effective immediately.
5. It is unclear how GRCC will accommodate deaf inmates if there is a "whistle alarm" - a drill or actual incident in which inmates on the yard are instructed by a whistle to lie down on the ground. o If there is a whistle alarm and the inmates cannot hear it, somebody will let them know or they will see everyone getting on the ground. In addition, the inmates have their HOH ID that staff will see to let them know they need to assume compliance position.
Equipment/Devices: 1. GRCC was not making phone amplifiers available to inmates. o ADA Coordinator has been actively trying to locate phone amplifiers to place in each dorm. No ETA of purchasing equipment is available at this time. 2. GRCC had a PA system in the housing units, but often used bullhorns instead. These are very difficult for HOH inmates; the PA system is better, so it should be used. o All intercoms are in working order as of the typing of this report. Staff have been advised to utilize the PA system and that the bullhorns should only be utilized when the PA system is not functioning properly. Staff have also been advised that HOH inmates should be notified when the PA is not working. All HOH inmates have signs on their cell doors. 3. Inmates reported that they were not authorized to bring their own headphones or earbuds into the school building. That means that use of a pocket talker is unavailable. o HOH inmates may bring their headphones/earbuds to class. They must present their HOH ID in order for this to be allowed. 4. The SAP program has an FM assistive listening system, but had not yet used it. o The system still has not been used as of this report. 5. There was no captel. o Unsure of what this is referencing. 6. The TTY lacked instructions and I could not get it to work; directions need to be developed and then a test done where someone who has never used it before follows the directions and calls me. TTY to TTY and using a relay service to a regular phone. o There is a phone in Building D that can be utilized if needed. ADA Coordinator has placed step-by-step instructions to the TTY with it. A test will be conducted with you by COB 11 /01 /19. **Note** No one has asked to use the TTY since current ADA Coordinator has been the Coordinator 7. A test should be performed of the VRI and the videophone. o Either the ADA or Assistant ADA Coordinator completes tests each week. They will create a checklist to sign off on weekly. 8. Inmates were not authorized to purchase non-auditory watches/alarm clocks.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/0

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 9 of 52 - Page ID#: 2521

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Kathleen M. Kenney Commissioner

Green River Correctional Complex 1200 River Road P.O. Box 9300
Central City, KY 42330-9300 www.corrections.ky.gov

Kevin R. Mazza Warden

o ADA Coordinator has been actively searching for non-auditory watches/alarm clocks for the inmates to purchase.
9. Data provided on the self-audit did not always seem to be accurate. For example, not even one inmate was listed as having low literacy, which is implausible. o ADA Coordinator reports that the self-audit has been updated.
Audiology Services: 1. There seemed to be some confusion about the screening criteria for a medical provider audiology assessment. The written documentation stated that a "Yes" or "Sometimes" answer to one screening question requires follow-up; interviews of medical staff elicited a different answer. o GRCC provider is using the current standard for determining if an inmate requires further testing or hearing aids. o Medical staff assessments have been corrected. Refresher training has been provided to the medical staff to remind them if the answer is "yes" or "sometimes", the inmate is referred to the provider for further evaluation. 2. Inmates reported that obtaining necessary audiology equipment (e.g., hearing aid batteries, filters, and service) was time-consuming and sometimes impossible. o Typically, supplies are kept in stock. However, sometimes items are on back-order. The items are distributed as quickly as possible.

Follow-ups needed: ADA Coordinator responded via email on 10/24/1 9 to these follow-ups. 1. What happened with respect to Lester Cook and Mark Yarmey, and the hearing aid filters and other equipment they requested? o Both inmates received their filters for their hearing aids on 7/8/19. Mark Yarmey has hearing aids ordered. They will be sent to LLCC once they arrive. 2. Did William Poynter get an HOH ID? o Yes, he has a HOH ID 3. What's the name of the inmate in Dorm 3 who uses the videophone? o Nicholas Justice 284350 3BL19L 4. Does Jamiah Mayberry have a bed shaker? If not, why not? o He had one while he was at GRCC, but transferred to LLCC in November 2018. 5. Can you provide a filled-in VRI Log? o Last used 9/5/1 8 6. Can you check the volume control buttons on the phones work? o ADA Coordinator checked and confirmed that all volume control buttons are working.

Not noted on report:

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 10 of 52 - Page ID#: 2522
GRCC currently offers American Sign Language classes weekly to the inmate population. The classes are 1 hour each week and the program lasts 8 weeks.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 11 of 52 - Page ID#: 2523

Kathleen M. Kenney Commissioner

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
KENTUCKY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION FOR WOMEN P.O. Box 337
Pewee Valley, Kentucky 40056 Telephone: (502) 241-8454

TO:

Margo Schlanger

Vanessa Kennedy Warden

FROM: Vanessa Kennedy, Warden Vanessa Kennedy

DATE: October 31, 2019

RE:

Reply to ADA Concerns

• The ADA Coordinator reports only partial compliance with regularly communicating with deaf inmates and ensuring effective communication for deaf inmates. No details are provided on the deficits. – The ADA coordinator will either meet or Jpay all the deaf/Hard of hearing inmates on a monthly basis to ensure all their needs and concerns are being met. • The videophone has experienced long outages. The VRI has also gone down—and was restored to operation only when a software update was reversed. The inmates have no concerns about the Purple phone they stated it works much better than the old one. • Devices:
o Phone amplifiers have been made available and are in each unit o No assistive listening. KCIW has pocket talkers. o KCIW does not have captel and does not plan getting one due to having the VRI, VRS, TTY, and the purple phone. • Non-auditory alerts not sufficient to signal count alert, not programmed to signal different alerts, not used to notify prison-wide events, and not used to notify Deaf / HoH inmates of events specific to them. At this time there are no plans to get any non auditory alert system. We have bed shakers, strobe lights for the fire alarms, and yard alarm for emergencies

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 12 of 52 - Page ID#: 2524
Exhibit: KSP

KSP (July 29 Site Visit) Warden: DeEdra Hart ADA Coordinator: Roger Mitchell

Report Response October 28, 2019

Areas of concern: • The audiology case list used by medical providers was incomplete. And audiology timeliness
was poor—the “order sheet” moving people along in the process would get lost. This problem was solved by Health Services Administrator Nancy Raines, who set up a tasking protocol using a function known as “L Jellybean.” Ms. Raines is retiring, though, and it is unclear whether the problem will stay solved once she is gone.
Ms. Raines replacement, Kristy Ponzetti, has immediately demonstrated proficiency and timeliness in the performance of all H.S.A. duties in regards to the protocol established by her predecessor, Raines.
• The ADA Coordinator had not received ADA Coordinator/Settlement Agreement training.
ADA Coordinator was not informed of subject training until receipt of your 10/23/19 report; ‘ADA Basic Building Blocks Course’ was completed, as it was noted in previous assessments and referenced in ADA Coordinator turnover. The Deputy Warden of Programs was aware of the training and protocols covered in the establishment of the ADA Coordinator billet, but not the ongoing subject training. All established protocols and actions implemented since establishment of the initial KSP ADA are maintained in a file location and a hard copy manual was available for review at the time of the onsite meeting.
• No auxiliary aid assessments/meetings were being performed. In their absence, there were several problems: o Inmates did not know who the ADA Coordinator is.
Memos are posted in Institutional bulletin boards (cell houses and common areas) that identify the ADA Coordinator. Made know to inmates during initial classification orientation as well.
o Inmates did not know what services etc. were available. (KSP has a brochure that explains what resources are available, but that brochure was not routinely shared with deaf/HOH inmates.)
Memos are posted on institutional bulletin boards (cell houses and common areas) that identify the available aids and services. The brochure is provided to all HOH inmates and additional copies are available in the Legal Office. Classification staff discuss services available upon institutional intake and upon request of the inmate.
o Inmates didn’t have bed cards, HOH IDs, and the like.
Bed cards are available and provided to all identified HoH inmates. Unit Administrators who oversee housing units check frequently upon making rounds that the cards are in use and visible. HoH inmates are offered ID cards and sign a form if they chose to waive the use of an ID card. No complaints regarding these issues have been noted by staff.
• There seemed not to be an adequate process for considering requests for reasonable modifications to existing policies, housing assignments, etc. For example, when inmates requested a cell move to a quieter housing area, that request seemed not to trigger consideration of the disability-related need.
No requests for modifications to existing policies have been received. Medical or Mental Health staff provide input to the classification staff is accepted if it relates to a disability. Upon intake to KSP, all

1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 13 of 52 - Page ID#: 2525
inmates are reviewed and screened as required by CPP 18 and IPP 10-04-01 to identify special needs inmates. Housing determinations are made based upon an inmate special needs such as lower level floor or a bottom bunk. HoH inmate are considered to be housed closer to officer stations. Twice a year, according to policy, inmates are reviewed to address programming plans, current job, and housing assignments. Prior to each bi-annual meeting, inmates may make requests at any time via case management staff that are available every business day. All requests for housing assignment change are given fair and equal consideration.
MRT (Moral Reconation Therapy), a group class, took place in a space with significant hearing challenges, including a loud fan. Accommodations were scarce. Although it seems implausible, inmates report they aren’t aware of the possibility of moving up front. Consideration should be given to fixes: can the fan be moved? Can inmates be notified that they can move up front? Etc.
- The AC unit has been addressed by KSP Maintenance, alleviating any future use of a fan. - NOA Counseling has updated their Operations Facilitator Manual and Program Policies Manual
which directs MRT instructors to verbally and visually inform inmates to notify the instructor of any needs that they have that may impact their ability to hear, see or understand course material.
Auxiliary aids: o There was no assistive listening/amplification system available, although HOH inmates
expressed interest in using one, for example for MRT.
Pocket talkers (amplifiers) have been available, and portable amplifiers have been purchased. The KSP brochure lists aids available upon the inmate’s request. Staff are not aware of any HoH inmate requesting assistance with any classroom programs.
o Inmates were not aware of the possibility of using a pager on the yard—and it was not a great notification system, in any event. Some alternative process for notifying inmates of individual pages and the like was needed—in-person notifications, bulletin board postings, or something else.
Pagers have been in use by both GP and PC inmates for an extended period of time. In-person notifications are made as necessary, initiated by the Yard Office. Inmates at KSP are not allowed to “not report”; staff will contact the inmate paged in person as has been a longstanding security practice to account for location of inmates. Bulletin boards in all housing areas and common areas and the institutional TV also post update information.
o There were no portable phone amplifiers available.
This aid was not indicated as needed during previous reviews. Volume-assisted telephones are available. Four (4) of the portable phone amplifiers have been purchased and the HoH Orientation Brochure will be updated with this aid availability.
o Inmates were not given the opportunity to get vibrating watches or vibrating alarm clocks.
Inmates at KSP have been allowed these items for some time. Non-auditory alerts are covered in the Deaf/HOH brochure. There is no standing denial, as these devices present no security concern and may be ordered routinely by any inmate.
o Not all phone banks had a phone with a volume control.
There is at least one in each area of SSU, yard, 3 Cell House (CH), 4CH, 7CH, OSD, and 5CH 4th Floor transition walk. The HoH Brochure covers the availability of these phones.
2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 14 of 52 - Page ID#: 2526
o As is true systemwide, the Purple videophone had not worked consistently.
The Purple videophone has been updated and is VRI capable.
• Inmate transfers into restrictive housing separated inmates from their hearing aids, with long delays for their restoration.
RHU staff have been reminded not to separate an inmate from their hearing devices, as these present no security concern. There has never been a directive since 2015 to remove any ADA aid upon entry into RHU. This will be reiterated at various monthly meetings. An inmate who does something destructive with a device such as self-harm with a pocket talker, will have the item removed until the behavior improves.
• There continued to be an issue with the availability/utilization of the laptop-provided video remote interpretation (VRI). During my visit, the VRI was not operational. A VRI test is needed, in several locations of the prison, including from restrictive housing.
The Purple videophone has been updated and is VRI capable.
• It was not clear how KSP will accommodate deaf inmates if there is a “whistle alarm”—a drill or actual incident in which inmates on the yard are instructed by a whistle to lie down on the ground.
Inmates will have a visual que by noticing the inmates around them lowering to the ground and are informed during orientation of this protocol. Staff will identify HOH inmates via HOH ID, and no penalty will occur. Any other medically documented physically barrier to this action will not result in a penalty against the inmate either. The purpose of this action is to improve sight assessment of a situation, so a few inmates hesitating will not delay or disrupt a response.
• It seemed that intercom announcements are not very accessible, because intercoms were difficult for HOH inmates to understand. There are announcements made via institutional tv channel, but of course this is no solution for inmates who don’t have televisions. Use of a bulletin board might ameliorate this problem.
There are bulletin boards in every cell house for posting of updated information and have always been used to convey information.
• It is not clear that hand-restraint protocols for inmates who sign are compliant with the Settlement Agreement.
Our staff receive annual training on communication with Deaf/HOH inmates (see attached PowerPoint – a “Read only” document). This class contains instruction on hand-restraint protocols. Additionally, our mandatory online training addresses hand-restraints for Deaf/HOH inmates.
• It was challenging to schedule confidential interviews between my assistant and inmates.
The contacts did not stipulate that interviews were to be confidential, otherwise, appropriate arrangements would have been made. Due to the custody level of this facility, security staff are present when non-DOC individuals interact with inmates. If a request had been made for privacy, there is a designated meeting area with windows, monitored externally by security staff that can safely meet the needs of the interviewer having a one-on-one interview.
3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 15 of 52 - Page ID#: 2527
Good practices: • For inmates undergoing audiology testing who struggle to use a computer, appropriate
assistance was made available. • The availability of a Sorenson videophone meant that difficulties with the Purple videophone
mattered less (or not at all). • KSP has implemented a good Special Needs Referral Form.
Followups: • Billy Greer, DOC 262879: Mr. Greer encountered issues with being told he could not replace
the battery for the special headphones he got to use with his TV. Can you explain this to me?
I am not certain who he discussed replacing the battery for his headphones with, but there are no sick calls or medical correspondence in his chart for this issue that I can find. I will be happy to call him down to medical to have the batteries replaced in his headphones.
• David Hollon, DOC 122648: Mr. Hollon said he was persuaded to sign a refusal for hearing aids in return for the promise of additional hearing testing, which he never received. He believes that he is hearing impaired but does not have a hearing aid, sticker, ID, or any other accommodations. Can you send me his hearing records? When was he most recently tested?
Patient had been seen by ENT and diagnosed with Tinnitus, follow up hearing evaluation on 1/31/2018 resulted in the need for hearing aids, but the patient refused the hearing aids at that time. On 10/2018 Mr. Hollon again refused his hearing evaluation. This is not one, but two refusals for further testing and hearing aids. I have attached both signed refusals so that you can see exactly what he himself wrote on the forms as to why he refuses.
• Charles Hitzeman, DOC 186295: Can you send me his hearing testing records? Mr. Hitzeman also alleges he was denied a work assignment in the gym due to his hearing impairment. Is this accurate?
He was scheduled for a hearing evaluation on July 18th after his intake and he refused and then refused his hearing test on July 19, 2019. He has not had his hearing tested as he continues to refuse. Hitzeman was not denied a work assignment in the gym; hearing is not relevant to job duty or task for that area.
In RHU, how are inmates informed that it’s mealtime? If they get an announcement they need to hear, how are deaf/HOH inmates notified?
Tray slots are unlocked prior to the delivery of meal trays and occur at designated times. There are no unit/walk announcements outside of count time, CTO rounds, daily pill pass, and medical rounds. Each of the listed actions uses the HoH identity placard and staff take time to visually cue the offender to include opening the tray slot if need be. Pagers and shakers can be used if needed.
4

Exhibit: KSR Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 16 of 52 - Page ID#: 2528
Report Response October 28, 2019
KDOC should ensure that earphones are available in each prison, and also anywhere parole hearings are held—that is, in county jails. In addition, individuals who might need this equipment should be informed that it is available. We have had the volume-controlled headphones in place for a while now. They are located in the Control Center, which is right next to the Parole Board Room. (See attachment “Headphones”)The Control Center is open 24/7 so they are always accessible, and the Re-entry team, who is in charge of running the Parole Board hearings, has been trained on their appropriate use. A sign has been posted outside the Parole Board Room to notify inmates of availability, and the Re-entry team screens inmates going up for parole to see if they have hearing issues.
In any housing unit where it is practicable, KDOC should direct staff to flash the overhead lights to signal chow and pill-call. I conferenced with Major St. Clair, and he said that we could flash the lights in the dorms, but the lights would only blink in the hall. If someone is in their cell, they would not necessarily see the lights blink. In some areas, it would involve shutting the lights off at a breaker panel- obviously this would be a safety issue, as it would have to be an inmate job. At our facility, both events are at set times every day, so I feel like we that covered with the vibrating alarm watches/bed shakers and in-person alerts. (Attached is an example of a log sheet from our inmate ADA helper in one of the dorms- “In-Person Alert Log Sheet”. As you can see, the inmates let the helper know what event they are having an issue with, and he notifies them at that time.) Since the implementation of the in-person alerts and the watches, I have not received any complaints.
As with other facilities, KSR’s ADA Coordinator is not getting email alerts for transfers. To fill in the missing information, she has been checking the KOMS record for each inmate transferred to KSR. This is admirable but very inefficient. Hoping necessary adjustments are made to KOMS alert. I still contact the ADA Coordinator when an identified HOH/Deaf inmate transfers to their facility. I also let them know if an inmate who is in the process, but not yet identified, is coming their way. It would be helpful if we shared tracking information on transfers. For example, if I get an inmate who was identified 2 years ago, my medical contact has to dig for all that information that should be readily available on the sending institution’s bi-weekly report.
KSR had several portable phone amplifiers, but they are now missing; more should be ordered and tracked. I purchased one for RHU and it is now available to HOH inmates housed there. It is in a locked box for which the officer has a key (See attachment “Amplifier”). I have a sign by the phone that lets them know what options for are available (TTY, VRI, amplifier) and how access each accommodation (See attachment “RHU Phone Sign”). I have more on the way for CPTU and Nursing care. I want to make sure we have a system in place so that they do not go missing again- staff awareness, a central location and easy process for checkout. Once I see how well they are received, I can order more.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 17 of 52 - Page ID#: 2529
There is no Captel available, and there are several inmates for whom this would be a useful technology. I discussed this several months ago with our Warden and she approved the technology, but we did not move forward because there is confusion about the installation. When I contacted our IT supervisor again regarding the Captel, she reached out to our phone provider and this was the response:
“The response we received from Lamar our inmate phone provider “ Securus” said “ It does not work thru the Inmate Phone system. At Northpoint the Phones are being used as a better volume control phone but the captioning has to be turned off to make calls. The institutions that are getting them to work over Securus are using phones that have to be registered to an individual inmate and can’t be used by just anyone. The Captel phones that don’t have to be registered need to go thru a regular phone line to work. Lamar is still trying to find a system that does what we need and uses Securus to make the calls. He has more sites coming to him about this issue and he is trying to find an answer that will work for all of us.”
KSR owns FM transmitters for use in the chapel and in the Sexual Offender Treatment Program (SOTP) but has not actually used them yet. Stacy McClure in our SOTP Program used it with IM Hollern for class several times. She reported it worked very well and he was thankful it was there for him to use. I am ordering another transmitter for the classes over in CTPU.
As with other facilities, hearing aids have several times been lost during the transfer process. Our Property Sheet has included Hearing Aids for quite a while. Our Property officer is going to add pocket talker as well. (See attached “Property Form”) I think the key is training security staff to be aware of inmates who are HOH and ask. The inmates are listed in KOMS, they wear IDs and they have door signs. It would be great if officers took note of this and asked the offender:
• If he has a hearing aid/pocket talker (if it is obvious it is not with the offender). • Where it is, if it is not on their person. • Marked the Property Sheet appropriately.
By documenting, we clearly establish if the hearing aid was or was not present at the time of pack up.
For new hearing aids, it has been taking the provider, Audicus, up to 45 days to ship them. This is way too long. A couple of times recently, Audicus has shipped hearing aids to the wrong prison. I spoke with our HSA, Dawn Patterson, regarding this. The Hard of Hearing nurse contacted Audicus and it has not been an issue since. We have started sending all of the inmates who fail the hearing screen at their annual directly to the hearing booth which is run by the same team. Since we are bypassing the whisper test, it takes a load of appointment times off the providers, and has been allowing us to complete the process faster.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 18 of 52 - Page ID#: 2530
There was going to be a trial of the FM transmitter in some program (SOTP?) for Mr. Blevins. Please report back. Mr. Blevins received his hearing aid the day before he was to try out the system. He was excited that he could hear so well with his hearing aid and did not want to try the transmitter.
Please provide a photo of the HOH ID hanging behind a regular id, as described above. (See attachment “HOH ID”) The ID for those who use sign to communicate says so in the yellow on the front. On the back of the ID is the inmate’s name, DOC # and info on how to appropriately communicate with someone who is HOH or deaf. It also has my name so they can remember my name for contact purposes.
Please provide a photo of a dorm sign.
(See attachment “Dorm Sign”)
Please provide a photo of the temporary door sign used for HOH inmates when CPTU disallows ID.
(See attachment “Temporary HOH Door Sign”)- These can be used in CPTU or RHU. They have a plastic sleeve that stays on the door, and the sign itself slides in.
We also note HOH on the bed board. (See attachment-“CPTU Bed Board”). It is post orders to review the bed board when an officer takes over shift.

Please provide a PDF of the information brochure for deaf/HOH services.

(See

attachment “Deaf-HOH Brochure 2.0”)

Travis Lee 291278 (on your spreadsheet as over 3 months)- Most of his process was at LLCC. According to my records, he came to KSR on 6/7/19 and was issued an Audicus Clara hearing aid for his right ear on 6/18/19. IM Lee was discharged shortly after he got to KSR (7/10/19).
Arthur Canter 273016 (on your spreadsheet as over 3 months- IM Canter was in process when he transferred to us. His initial Audicus test that resulted in him being diagnosed with hearing loss was on 7/19/19 at WKCC. He was evaluated on 8/5/19 by the provider and Dr. Kemen approved a hearing aid on 8/26/19. He transferred to us on 9/11/19 and was issued the hearing aid on 10/1/19. I noticed his transfer and notified medical who called and had his hearing aid routed to us instead of WKCC.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 19 of 52 - Page ID#: 2531

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 20 of 52 - Page ID#: 2532

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 21 of 52 - Page ID#: 2533

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 22 of 52 - Page ID#: 2534

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 23 of 52 - Page ID#: 2535

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 24 of 52 - Page ID#: 2536

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 25 of 52 - Page ID#: 2537

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 26 of 52 - Page ID#: 2538

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 27 of 52 - Page ID#: 2539

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 28 of 52 - Page ID#: 2540

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 29 of 52 - Page ID#: 2541

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 30 of 52 - Page ID#: 2542

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 31 of 52 - Page ID#: 2543

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 32 of 52 - Page ID#: 2544

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 33 of 52 - Page ID#: 2545

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 34 of 52 - Page ID#: 2546

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 35 of 52 - Page ID#: 2547

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 36 of 52 - Page ID#: 2548

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 37 of 52 - Page ID#: 2549

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 38 of 52 - Page ID#: 2550

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 39 of 52 - Page ID#: 2551

Exhibit: LSCC Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 40 of 52 - Page ID#: 2552

Report Response

LSCC (August 1 site visit)

October 25, 2019

Warden: Keith Helton

ADA Coordinator: Rhonda May (At the time of site visit I was training as ADA Coordinator)

Areas of concern

• The new ADA Coordinator has not done ADA Coordinator training. This has been completed.
• The KDOC website listing of the ADA Coordinator is out of date. An email was sent on Thursday 9/12/19 at 3:11 p.m. for update request (See attached email).
• The self-audit information is incomplete. Could you provide me with information how you would like this completed?

Devices:

• Intercoms were not in use. Officers use the intercom for individual cells, allcall for the yard & buildings on a daily basis.
• No captel was available. CapTel is now installed and available to HOH inmates.
• No assistive listening system was in place outside of the chapel—it is particularly needed in SAP (see below). SAP classes will now be in classrooms starting Monday, 10/28/19. All HOH inmates will be in 1 classroom with an amplifier.
• Inmates are not allowed to buy vibrating watches. Any inmate who wishes to purchase a vibrating watch must submit a request in writing to the Warden and ADA Coordinator and it is approved on an individual basis.
• As elsewhere, Purple phones have long and numerous outages. Anytime the purple phone is not working our IT department is notified about the issue.
• VRI: It was not clear how the VRI laptop would be used in the academic building, given the configuration of power and internet access. Also, staff familiarity with VRI seemed low, particularly in medical. There seemed to be no routine software updates to the VRI laptop. The classrooms in academics are set up for power and internet access. The Director of Nursing is in the process of getting all nurses trained on the VRI. All computer OS updates are performed by Commonwealth of Technology.
• There were no TTY instructions, even though I pointed out this absence during a prior site visit. TTY instructions are with the phone. Memo issued about usage (See attached memo).

The auxiliary aid process is not adequate:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 41 of 52 - Page ID#: 2553
• Not everyone was in KOMS. This has been corrected. • When audiology testing found an inmate who is deaf or HOH, no
notice was provided to the ADA Coordinator, and therefore no nonaudiology services were being provided. Medical sends an updated Audicus/Hearing aid list to ADA Coordinator. • Not all inmates had HOH card. Inmates are not required to have the HOH card. All inmates who have requested a HOH card have been given one. • There was no consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize communication difficulties. All of our General Population dorms are the same. Inmates can request to be moved closer to the officer’s cab for accommodation. • SAP was incredibly noisy; besides assistive listening, other quieting techniques should be considered. Anyone who is HOH will now be in the unit classroom. Additionally another classroom in Academics has been allocated for SAP use. There will be an amplifier system in use. • The ice machine was extremely loud. Can it be moved or dampened? Due to the design of the institution when it was constructed, there is no other location to move the ice machine where it will have access to the drain, electric, and proper ventilation. • On my last visit, over a year ago, SAP personnel agreed to try an assistive listening device, but they did not follow through, and on this last visit, they did not agree. This is urgently needed. Please see SAP information above. • There was no volume adjustment button on any telephone in the SAP area. Maintenance is currently working on the phones in SAP to fix this issue. • Other measures should be considered as well. More explanation for this concern is needed. • Hearing aids were frequently lost on transfer into RHU. The procedure for handling hearing aids upon entrance to RHU is reviewed on a regular basis and is handled immediately when an issue is found.
Audiology:
• As in other facilities, when an inmate is transferred to LSCC while still in-process for audiology services, there was no working system to ensure that the process continues. There was no hearing screening on transfer, and chart reviews have been insufficient to catch such inmates. The Health Service Administrator is in the process of trying to review all transfers to check their hearing screenings.
• KDOC policy provides for hearing screening that leads to a medical provider visit, if one or more of the screening questions leads to an answer of “yes” or “sometimes.” But at LSCC, only three or more such answers are leading to the next stage of the process. The medical department has been going by the one “yes” or “sometimes” since it was changed.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 42 of 52 - Page ID#: 2554
• Medical staff tracking of audiology services has not been appropriate; the tracking methodology was not working. During my visit, we discussed alternative approaches to solve this. The audiology tracker needs to be updated frequently, not only after hearing aids are provided. Medical now has a spreadsheet to track audiology that they keep updated (See attached spreadsheet).
Good practices
• The chapel uses an FM assistive listening system, obtained from the church technology catalog www.kingdom.com.
• Used VRI for a program (note: ADA Coordinator should have but did not evaluate whether this was effective, and if not, should have consider a live interpreter)
• The Warden and ADA Coordinator conducted appropriately individualized review of possibility of direct threat in a job placement.
Follow-ups:
• Does I/M Jeston Murray have or need a pager? If Inmate Murray would like to request a pager it will be reviewed but to date he has made no request.
• Is there consideration of a captel for I/M Justice? Inmate Justice no longer resides at LSCC. The CapTel phone is now installed and available.
• Are non-auditory alarm clocks available for HOH inmates? If so, how do they get access? Yes, they are available. They can request one at any time with the ADA Coordinator.
• Has Kevin Dye been provided access? Yes Inmate Dye has received an alarm clock.
• Can you provide the specs for the assistive listening system? No purchase has been made for an assistive listening system to date.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 43 of 52 - Page ID#: 2555

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 44 of 52 - Page ID#: 2556

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 45 of 52 - Page ID#: 2557

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 46 of 52 - Page ID#: 2558

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 47 of 52 - Page ID#: 2559

Kathleen M. Kenney Commissioner

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Northpoint Training Center P.O. Box 479
Burgin, Kentucky 40310 Telephone: (859) 239-7012

Brad Adams Warden

To: From: Subject: Date:

Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor Brad Adams, Warden Response to Areas of Concern October 28, 2019

1) The self-audit is incomplete.
ADA Coordinator Jennifer Baker updated the self-audit tool and filled in all missing areas. ADA Coordinator will submit the self-audit tool to Settlement Monitor Margo Schlanger by close of business on October 28, 2019.
2) KOMS notifications are not occurring when deaf/HOH inmates arrive.
Central Office updated ADA Coordinator Jennifer Baker and Administrative Section Supervisor Jessica Payton’s KOMS profiles on October 23, 2019 to allow correct ADA access and to receive notifications of deaf/HOH inmates arriving.
3) The notices outside of the housing units do not include a picture of the ID card.
ADA Coordinator Jennifer Baker created the signs to hang with the picture of the ID card. She is working with Maintenance Branch Manager Kelvin Hundley to get them hung up in each housing area. Mr. Hundley ordered the materials needed to complete the project. The projected completion date is November 15, 2019.
4) Only partial compliance with instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services being shared with staff.
ADA Coordinator Jennifer Baker ensured all instructions for use of all auxiliary aids/services are posted with the aids/services. In addition, the PowerPoint training material will be sent out quarterly for staff to review. The PowerPoint is also available on the NTC share drive.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 48 of 52 - Page ID#: 2560
5) Many of the training requirements are marked as only “partially compliant” though no details are provided. ADA Coordinator Jennifer Baker updated the self-audit tool to reflect compliance with training requirements accurately and to provide any missing details. Ms. Baker will submit the self-audit tool to Settlement Monitor Margo Schlanger by close of business on October 28, 2019.

6) Devices: x x x x

Some issues using VRS when the videophone is out of service. TTY stored in office, rather than made accessible to inmates. No captel is available. Apparently the VRI laptop was non-functional at some point.

IT moved the VRS from the Legal Library to the ADA Coordinator’s office so that it can be utilized when the videophone is out of service. There are two Captel phones available at NTC, one on Dorm 2 and one on Dorm 6. The VRI laptop is functional and the ADA Coordinator is unaware of when it was non-functional. However, all staff at NTC were notified on 10/21/19 to make ADA Coordinator Jennifer Baker, Administrative Section Supervisor Jessica Payton, and Deputy Warden Shea Carlson aware when any ADA equipment is out of order.

The TTY phone is currently stored in the Unit Administrator’s office and inmates must ask to use it. At this time, there is not a secure area for the phone to be placed that is accessible to inmates without them asking for it. The phone must be plugged into a phone line, which allows them to call areas throughout the institution.

7) No VRI Log is available.

ADA Coordinator Jennifer Baker located the VRI log. New sheets were put into the folder and staff were notified to have it completed each the VRI was utilized by a Hard of Hearing inmate.

8) VRS is not being used to substitute for the videophone when the videophone is out.

IT moved the VRS from the Legal Library to the ADA Coordinator’s office. It is now being used as a substitute for when the videophone is out.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 49 of 52 - Page ID#: 2561

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 50 of 52 - Page ID#: 2562

Kathleen M. Kenney Commissioner

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Western Kentucky Correctional Complex 374 New Bethel Road
Fredonia, Kentucky 42411 Phone: 270-388-9781

TO:

Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor

FROM:

UAI Jacob Bruce, ADA Coordinator

THRU:

Timothy W. Lane, Warden

SUBJ:

ADA Court Draft Response

DATE:

October 25, 2019

Timothy W. Lane Warden

Western Kentucky Correctional Complex/Ross-Cash Specific Reply: Site Visit: July 29, 2019

Area of Concern: • Audiology – 1. Continuality of Services upon transfer – Process continues to improve as KOMS alerts are properly utilized. Communication with medical department continues to improve. 2. Verified that the provider is using the correct standards for determining if an inmate is eligible for hearing aids • Auxiliary aid assessments – since site visit each inmate is seen within two weeks of arrival or notice from medical that the inmate is HOH. • A shared folder on H drive for ADA needs is being utilized and has streamlined the process. • WKCC was tasked with piloting the assistive FM transmitter with the SAP program. We are currently using a transmitter that we currently possess in the classroom before purchasing another transmitter for this area. Responsible party is ADA Coordinator Jacob Bruce. Purchase order has been submitted for new equipment. New equipment should be in use no later than November 30, 2019. • Amplifiers have yet to be checked out by HOH inmates, but they are aware that they exist. Notice concerning this device remains posted in the dorms on the bulletin boards and in the phone areas. • The misplaced TTY device was stored in a filing cabinet in the Ross-Cash unit supervisor’s office; it remains stored in that location, with instructions in the box with the device. The location has been added to the ADA handout for future reference.
Follow-up Requested: • TTY Instructions were resent to monitor. • Arthur Canter’s hearing aid status – inmate had been shipped to KSR on 9/11/19 for medical treatment, his hearing aids were shipped to KSR when they came in. Update on inmate status sent to monitor on 10/15/19.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 51 of 52 - Page ID#: 2563
Systemwide Issue Notes:
1. New ADA Coordinators – Current ADA Coordinator has been the ADA Coordinator since Feb 2017; back up coordinator was the previously assigned ADA Coordinator. The DOC website correctly displays the correct ADA Coordinator information. ADA Coordinators and Deputy Warden has access to the ADA materials provided in the ADA folder and the information that has been provided there.
2. Inmate tracking, transfer alerts, etc. a) KOMS has gotten better about sending the notice like it should, and have not noted any recent deficiencies in this area. b) When an inmate is identified as HOH WKCC, the ADA Coordinator places the ADA alert using method B. c) Medical staff are doing well in notifying the ADA Coordinator with new HOH inmate in a timely manner. d) The alert is manually updated to include information about what accommodations have been provided to each inmate. e) Reports – Information on KOMS function would be helpful.
3. Audiology Standards – • WKCC provider is using the current standard for determining if an inmate requires hearing aids. • WKCC provider is aware that two hearing aides are to be ordered if indicated.
4. Audiology Service Delays – During the site visit, the monitor complimented us on our timely dealings about audiology, with only a few exceptions. At that time, we only had two during the review period that had exceeded the 60-day window and that was by only two weeks. Of the four that WKCC/Ross-Cash has in process, NONE has exceeded sixty days.
5. Request forms – The forms noted in this section are mostly generated through KOMS and cannot be changed locally. A review of any internal notices or forms is being repeated in an attempt to identify any that may be edited.
6. Hearing aid loss on moves/transfers – WKCC has no documented occurrences of separation of inmate from hearing aid.
7. Auxiliary Aids • Videophones – Our videophones are operational. We currently do not have any inmate who is deaf and signs to communicate. • Portable phone amplifiers – these are available for inmates to check out from Operations (compound) or their dorm officer (Ross-Cash) • Captel device –Being considered. • Amplified phones – unsure at present if these devices would be necessary, with the current volume-adjusted phones and portable amplifiers. • Phone volume control – WKCC has ensured that all phone banks at the institution contain at least one volume-controlled phone for inmate use. • TTYs – Currently have one TTY device on compound in the Yard Office, and one device in the Ross-Cash Unit Supervisor’s office. • Assistive listening systems – WKCC currently assistive listening systems in the dorms for dayroom televisions. The chaplain uses the system for religious services. A current project is to pilot the assistive listening system in SAP. • Earphones- WKCC was noted as compliant. • Non-auditory alerts – Reviewing Current Processes.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-3 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 52 of 52 - Page ID#: 2564
• Purchase of non-auditory devices – WKCC has a catalog for inmate review to purchase approved
items. • Bulletin Boards- WKCC utilizes locked bulletin in every general population housing area and many
common areas for inmate communication. • Aux. aid process – Since site visit, each new arrival at WKCC is seen within two weeks of arrival or
notice from medical that the inmate is HOH. • Inmate Handbook – WKCC language is very similar which is compliant; however, the text
provided will be placed in the inmate handbook upon the next revision.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 1 of 661 - Page ID#: 2565
Exbibit 4: KDOC Self-Audit Spreadsheets

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 2 of 661 - Page ID#: 2566
Blackburn Correctional Complex

Deaf /HO H or both ?#

Issue/Question

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 3 of 661 - Page ID#:

Audit item questions/concerns (note

2567

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

A ADA coordinator
Both 1 Is an ADA coordinator designated? Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA coordinator
Both 2 appointed? Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC
Both 3 website? Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected
Both 4 inmates?

Christy Peach

C

C No

C

Yes

C

Yes

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates in a timely and Both 5 appropriate manner? How?

upon arrival they are medically evaluated

to include hearing - the assessed by the

C

coordinator within 24-72 hours (allowing

for weekends/holidays)

Yes

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? (THIS REQUIRES ASKING A Both 6 SAMPLE) Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit where deaf/HOH inmates Both 7 are held?
Both 8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?
Both 9 Describe training Is training's length/method sufficient to
Both 10 adequately cover information? Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA
Both 11 training) Both 12 Adequate w/r/t state law?
Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement Both 13 monitor's powerpoint)
Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity Both 14 with settlement agreement?
Does ADA coordinator retrieve at least monthly reports on KOMS/medical records Both 15 of deaf inmates?
Are additional inmates added to the Both 16 coordinator's tracking list?
Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in implementing the Both 17 settlement? Is (s)he available to assist in Both 18 accommodating deaf inmates?

Describe method used to

ascertain:Inmate

was asked if he

knew the ADA Coordinator and if he had

C

been assesed by the Coordinator. He

replied to both yes, Christy Peach and yes

C Yes-Outside of the Dorm and the Bay

Training at KSR 2016

C

Describe: very informative. The ADA

Coordinator there shared all of

information and forms complete with

examples

NA

Yes

C

C C C

C

inmates are added to the list upon

arrival at the institution or upon

C

diagnosis of HOH/Deaf

Yes,

C Yes

C

Yes

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or Both 19 check on deaf inmates?

I frequently visit the Dorm and talk with

the Deaf / HOH inmates to see how they

C

are doing (giving them an opportunity to

express any issues they may have)

Deaf /HO H or both ?#

Issue/Question

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 4 of 661 - Page ID#:

Audit item questions/concerns (note

2568

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication Both 20 for the inmates in those situations?
Does (s)he communicate in a timely and Both 21 effective way with the monitor?

Yes, there has only been one event that it

was needed. It was during an adjustment

hearing. The inmate was offered an

interpreter even though he does not sign.

He refused, signed a waiver and asked

that the ADA Coordinator sit in on the

adjustment hearing. I agreed and he

continued to say that he could not hear.

The ADA Coordinator offered to type

every word being said and show it to him.

He agreed and I did so. The inmate was

C

satisfied and effective communication

was accomplished. **several people

wispered to him and he answered. It was

deteremined by the ADA Coordinator and

all involved that the inmate was

attempting to manipulate the situation

by pretending to not understand slow

clear presice communication by all

involved. This inmate was transferred to

another facilty and has not had any more

communication issues since.**

C

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication Both 22 with the monitor when necessary?
Both B Reporting obligations
If there was any change in ADA Both 1 coordinator, was monitor notified?
Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of Both 2 deaf and HOH inmates? Both 3 Is the list complete? Both 4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

C

C

No Change

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes

Quarterly summary of all grievances by Both 5 deaf or HOH inmates shared with monitor?

Grievances are being sent to the ADA

C

Coordinator Qtrly.

Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs, activities, etc.? Both 6 (Y/N/describe) Both 7 Was it reported to the monitor? Both 8 Was the report complete? Both 9 Was the report timely? Did the institution consider any nonBoth 10 auditory alert? Both 11 If yes, was the monitor notified?

Describe:Only one determined in 2016

which included heavy traffic details. Each

inmate is assessed individually to ensure

proper determination.

NA

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes

NA

No

C

N/A

Did the institution consult with the monitor Both 12 about the non-auditory alert?

Yes - Dorm Officers are flashing the bay

C

lights to signify count time and pill call.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 5 of 661 - Page ID#:

Deaf

Audit item questions/concerns (note

2569

/HO H or both

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Adjustment in timing for phones: Both 13 Communicated?

During assesment - if determined by the

ADA Coordinator to be able to use the

phones - yes it is communicated and

C

explained

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH 1 Hard of hearing inmates Adequate process for knowing if someone
HOH 2 HOH is arriving?
Describe (The ADA Coordinator should HOH 3 receive automatic notifications.)

NA

C

Yes

Describe:There is an automatic email

generated by KOMs sent to the ADA

Coordinator

NA

Effective communications

HOH 4 planned/provided? (Describe)

Deaf

Deaf inmates

Adequate process for knowing if someone Deaf 5 deaf is arriving?

Deaf 6 Describe Deaf 7 Effective communications planning?

Describe:The automatic email contains

the inmates name and DOC number.

NA

Yes

Email is generated as soon as the transfer

is scheduled. Which is within 24 hours of

C

arrival

Describe:Medical notifies the ADA

Coordinator by email and phone call

upon diagnosis. All incoming inmates are

assessed by medical upon arrival.

NA

All medical staff have been notified and

are aware they need to contact the ADA

C

Coordinator.

Deaf 8 Effective communication provided?

Yes medical staff have been emailing /

calling. BCC has only had 2 deaf inmates

one could sign and one could not but

both their chosen method of

C

communication was spoken. Both of

them have either paroled or transferred

to a halfway house.

Deaf 9 Describe

Describe: Medical staff have been

emailing and calling the ADA

Coordinator. However BCC does not have

any Deaf inmates - BCC has only had 2

deaf inmates one could sign and one

could not but both their chosen method

of communication was spoken. Both of

them have either paroled or transferred

to a halfway house.

NA

Deaf 10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed? Deaf 11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

The VRI interpreter has not been needed.

(None of BCC inamates are Deaf. None of

C

BCC inmates know sign language.)

The in person interpreter has not been

needed. (None of BCC inamates are Deaf.

None of BCC inmates know sign

C

language.)

No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 6 of 661 - Page ID#:

Deaf

Audit item questions/concerns (note

2570

/HO H or both

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Both

Orientation videos

Both 12 Captioned?

Both 13 Shown in a quiet space? Both 14 Amplification if needed?

The orientation for BCC is both a staff member talking with a powerpoint presentation. Yes Orientation is held either in the multipurpose room of the chapel or in the UA's office one on one. No amplification has been needed. Describe: yes Orientation/ handbook/

NA C
C C

Yes No basis for evaluation

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who Both 15 are not literate? (Describe)

rules and anything else is being read to

the inmate in a office setting where all

background noise has been held to a

C

minimum by staff members or education

staff.

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general

medical intake, and during medical care

NA

Both

more generally:

Both 1 Is there effective communications planning?

Does medical staff ask inmates who have

difficulty hearing if interpretation is

Both 2 needed?

Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical

Both 3 office?

Are staff aware of, and use, effective

Both 4 communications techniques?

Both

Notice to medical staff:

Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status?

Both 5 How?

Medical file identifies individuals as

Both 6 deaf/HOH on cover and within the file?

Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate

Deaf 7 accommodations.

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

NA

C

YES

C

YES

NA

Knowledegable about obligation to alert offDeaf 8 site providers of need for interpretation? Deaf 9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

Has there ever been a notification to provider?
Deaf 10 Deaf 11 Adequate notice?
Outside providers offering effective Deaf 12 communication to inmates who sign?

How?

Deaf 13

Both

Hearing screening/medical intake:

Both 14 Performed for all new inmates?

Both 15 Within first 3 days at institution?

C

YES

C

YES

Describe: Provider reviews audiology

report and order hearing aids if qualified.

Once ordered, the scheduler is cosigned

NA

to order to assure they will be arriving

onsite.

C

YES

C

YES

Describe: Given ample time of notice

prior to the appointment a translator will NA

be attend the appointment.

NA

C

YES

C

YES

Both 16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

C

YES

Deaf /HO H or both ?#

Issue/Question

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 7 of 661 - Page ID#:

Audit item questions/concerns (note

2571

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Asks about functionality of current hearing Both 17 aid?
Hearing questions come at start of medical Both 18 intake?
How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it Both 19 administered by staff?
Which staff is responsible? (best practice is Both 20 medical)
Conducted with awareness of possible low Both 21 literacy?
Accommodations for low literacy? Describe. Both 22

C

YES

C

YES

Describe: Form is administered by staff, asks patient the questions

NA

Describe: Medical

NA

C

YES

Describe: Staff can assist with reading or

writing, and also refer to education for

C

YES

assistance

Both 23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Both

Other methods of access:

Do annual/routine physicals include hearing

Both 24 screening?

Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for

Both 25 screening?

Both 26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

If screening indicated problem (3+ "yes"

Both 27 answers), is there further assessment?

Adequate determination of need for

Both 28 designation/ audiology services? How?

Is further assessment timely (within several

Both 29 days)?

Separate determination of whether inmate

is deaf or HOH, apart from audiology

Both 30 services decision?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both 31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Is the notice immediately obvious in

Both 32 electronic file?

Both 33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Both 34 Is notification prompt?

Audiology services/processes (See also

HOH

Audiology Checklist)

HOH 35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH 36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing

HOH 37 aid?

Adequate addressing of obstacles to

HOH 38 services

Hearing aid provided when medically

HOH 39 appropriate?

Adequate progress tracking? Should

HOH

include:

HOH 40 initial request/questionnaire?

HOH 41 each relevant medical visit?

HOH 42 any audiology visit?

HOH 43 hearing aid provision?

Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2

HOH 44 weeks?

HOH 45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

C

YES

NA

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

NA

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

NA

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

NA

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

Deaf /HO H or both ?#

Issue/Question

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 8 of 661 - Page ID#:

Audit item questions/concerns (note

2572

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

HOH 46 Shared with monitor when requested Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Describe.
47 In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait more than sixty days to receive
48 a hearing aid?

49 What is the cause of the delay?

What steps is your institution taking (or has

50 it taken) to improve this process?

HOH

Co-pay and availability issues:

Charged only once -- not again for

HOH 47 followups

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH 48 Available for free?

HOH 49 In sufficient numbers?

HOH 50 7 days/week?

HOH 51 regardless of housing?

C

YES

Describe: Audiology testing is now done

onsite in 4 visits. Sick call, refer to

provider, take onsite audiology test, follow up with provider to see if the

NA

patient qualifies, and orders hearing

device.

Describe: 1

NA

Describe: Repeated Audiology exams results inconsistant.

NA

Describe: institution orders the hearing

aids and they arrive from audicus

NA

typically in 2 weeks.

NA

C

YES

?

NA

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

C

YES

Both E Information provided inmates
Both 1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe) Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-
Both 2 discrimination and ADA services?

Both

Brochure? Items to include:

Both 3 Non-discrimination obligation
Both 4 Effective communication obligation Both 5 Auxiliary aids and services available
How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services (including hearing aids, and Both 6 batteries)

Describe: Information is handed out

during assessment after the medical

C

exam within 24-72 hours of arrival

C

Yes

Yes there is a brochure that was provived

to us by the settlement monitor and has

only been motified to include the name

of the institution and a picture of the

purple id card

NA

Yes there is a brochure that was provived

to us by the settlement monitor and has

only been motified to include the name

C

of the institution and a picture of the

purple id card

Yes The inmates are told during

assessment about the ADA and effective

C

communication

Yes

C

Hearing aides and batteries are aquired

C

thru medical

Deaf /HO H or both ?#

Issue/Question

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 9 of 661 - Page ID#:

Audit item questions/concerns (note

2573

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Communication equipment available, and Both 7 how to use

Both 8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

Both

Other items:

Both 9 Institution schedule of interpreters

Request for Accommodations/ Both 10 Communications Assistance
Medical Request form includes request for Both 11 accommodations

Job application form includes request for Both 12 accommodations Both 13 Waiver forms
Classification form includes request for Both 14 accommodations
Discipline form includes request for Both 15 accomodations

SAP and other programming form includes Both 16 request for accommodation

NA/AA form includes request for

Both 17 accommocation

brochure available in law library? (Need to

18 check)

Both

Do request forms:

Both 19 list available services comprehensively?
clearly explain services and aids (what Both 20 they are and when they are available?
clearly explain how to request Both 21 services/aids?

The brochure contain information on

equipment that is available. When given

a pocket talker (provided by medical)

Medical staff show the inmate how to

C

work it. When issued a bedshaker the

inmates are told how to use it by the ADA

Coordinator and the instructions are

posted on the wall of the bay

There is a memo posted on the bulliten

board of all dorms stating who is the ADA

Coordinator and how she can be

C

reached.

?

NA

C

CTO's and UA's are trained by the ADA

Coordinator to call the ADA coordinator

C

immediately if an inmate request

accomodations or assistance

C

There is only one job application and that

is GSP Outside Detail. And it does contain

a request for accomodations however,

C

jobs are given and mostly applied for in

person.

C

C

C

AA/NA applications are done by the

CTO/UA in person and they are offered

C

accommodations.

SAP applications are done by the CTO/UA

in person and they are offered

C

accommodations.

ADA Coordinator asked one of the inmates if they had seen it in the library.

C

NA Yes. The request form is the same

request form provided by the settlement

monitor - only modified to include

C

institution name and ADA Coordinator's

name.

Yes. The request form is the same

request form provided by the settlement

monitor - only modified to include

C

institution name and ADA Coordinator's

name.

C

No basis for evaluation yes No Basis for Evaluationl Yes Yes yes
yes

Deaf /HO H or both ? # Issue/Question
expressly ask about preferred mode of communication/needed services and why Both 22 they are useful?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 10 of 661 - Page

Audit item questions/concerns (note

ID#: 2574

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Yes however this is conveyed orally

C

during assessment

Both 23 explain which items are free?

encompass religious and volunteer-

Both 24 provided programming?

Effective communication of these

Both

resources:

Are the materials in language accessible

Both 25 to each inmate?

Is this information provided with effective

Both 26 communication?

Can inmates request and receive a

meaningful opportunity to meet with a

KDOC staff member and interpreter to ask

Both 27 questions about the materials?

All items offered (Bedshaker) are free to

C

use and returned upon parole or transfer

The Chaplain has included captioning and

braile to the blind

C

NA C

C

C

yes Yes
No Basis for evaluation - never been ne

Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application for a program with staff, is effective communication
Both 28 provided? are potential accommodations covered in
Both 29 the discussion?

NA

All staff have been trained in effective

C

communication

Yes

C

Yes

Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application in education with staff, is effective communication
Both 30 provided? are potential accommodations covered in
Both 31 the discussion?
Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates
Both 1 Notice posted at entrance to institution? Include picture of ID card and other official
Both 2 indicator?
Both 3 Notice posted outside housing units? Include picture of ID card and other official
Both 4 indicator? Both 5 Cell/bed cards
Both 6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?
Both 7 Clear process to obtain? Describe
Both 8 Each inmate has one if not waived?
Both 9 Provided timely?

NA

all education staff are trained in effective

C

communication

C

The Blue Ear sign is posted at the

enstrance

C

This will be worked on by the ADA

Coordinator.

The Blue Ear sign is posted at the

enstrance to the Dorm

C

This will be worked on by the ADA

Coordinator.

NA

Yes, a memo is posted in the officer

station of Dorm 2 of what alerts and how C

to do them.

Describe: The memo also states to

contact the ADA Coordinator and the

C

extension to dial

Yes a sign is taped the end of their bed

(we are an open bay living style)

C

The sign is provided within 24 hours of

assessment

C

Yes Yes
NC NC

Deaf /HO H or both ?#

Issue/Question

Both 10 Replacements provided when needed?

Both

KOMS alert?

Both 11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Working process to get new inmate alerts

Both 12 added? (Describe)

Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need

Both 13 to check)

Both 14 Appropriately obvious

Both 15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both 16 Staff aware of meaning? Clear? (avoids unclear
Both 17 laguage/abbreviations?) Both 18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived? Both 19 Provided timely? Both 20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 11 of 661 - Page

Audit item questions/concerns (note

ID#: 2575

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

When the ADA Coordinator visits the

dorm signs are replaced or placed as

C

needed

Yes CTO's and UA's are aware and use them when communicating about the inmate

NA C

Describe: The ADA Coordinator and UA's

check for the alert on KOMs upon arrival

and checked qtrly to ensure they have

C

not been removed

Yes was checked in the month of June

2019

C

C

yes

C

yes

NA

all staff during training are told and

shown the purple ID card

C

C

yes

C

Yes

Upon arrival at the institution

C

yes

C

yes

Both 21 Prompt replacements provided?

replacement are provided free of charge

if more than an year old / otherwise

C

provided for a small fee $3

Can ID card be taken away for some Both 22 purpose?
If yes, what is the substitute official Both 23 indicator?

Both 24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver?

Both 25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?

Has any inmate who signed a waiver later

Both 26 requested ID?

Both 27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon intake of each deaf/hoh Both 1 inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely Both 2 notification of other deaf/hoh inmates?

Describe: yes if determined by medical staff that there is no evidence of hearing loss which has been properly documented. (has only happened once the inmate passed all tests and requested to have it removed however he is still being tracked by the ADA Coordinator. NA

KOMs alert was not removed.

C

Describe: only one - he preferred to have

his veteran (American Flag) ID card

NA

Waiver was uploaded to KOMs

C

C

No

-

N/A

NA

An Email and phone call is provided from

medical staff to the ADA Coordinator

C

upon medical intake and diagnosis

An Email and phone call is provided from

medical staff to the ADA Coordinator

C

upon medical diagnosis

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 12 of 661 - Page

Deaf

Audit item questions/concerns (note

ID#: 2576

/HO H or both

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified Both 3 deaf/hoh inmate? At this meeting, are each inmate's available

C Yes

methods of communication expressly Both 4 ascertained and documented?
At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator

C

Services/Aides are discussed

yes

inform each inmate about available Both 5 auxiliary aids and services?
Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms Both 6 explained?
Is appropriate communication used during

C Services/Aides are discussed

C

Yes

this meeting? (oral and written; VRI; or

Both 7 visual descriptions )

Both

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive

Oral and written if needed

C NA

an assessment on intake, has one been Both 8 done?
Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated Both 9 every year?

C yes

C

yes

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both 1 On-person ID cards
Both 2 Cell cards Both 3 Bed shaker
Both 4 In-person alerts Both 5 Pager

All Deaf/HOH inmates have the purple ID

card except one who wanted to keep his

C

veteran american flag ID

BCC is an open bay living arrangement

(no cells)

C

C

Flashing bay lights at count time and pill

call times

C

We do not have pagers

C

yes
No basis for evaluation Yes
Yes No basis for evaluation

Phone volume adjust setting (available in HOH 6 each location where phones are available?)
HOH 7 Amplifier for phone
Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize communication Both 8 difficulties? Both 9 Other amplification Both 10 Other (describe)

BCC has installed volume control phones

C

at every phone bank and both dorms

Amplifiers have been ordered and not

received due to the company Maxi Aids

not accepting a Purchase Order to be

PC

paid

All Deaf/HOH inmates and Blind inmates

live in Dorm 2 C bay to ensure safety

during extreme events and effective

C

communication

C

Describe:

NA

yes No basis for evaluation

Deaf /HO H or both ?#
Both

Issue/Question General issues

Special housing area:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 13 of 661 - Page

Audit item questions/concerns (note

ID#: 2577

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

NA

Dorm 2 C Bay has been designated as the

ADA Bay

NA

Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH Both 11 inmates? (Describe)

Describe: Dorm 2 C bay is the closest to

the medical building and has fire alarm

system that the Bed Shakers are hard

wired into - to ensure all bedshakers will

alert during a fire alarm

NA

If there is such an area, what is the benefit Both 12 from it? (Describe)
If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed there? (such a Both 13 requirement is non-compliant).

Describe:Dorm 2 C bay is the closest to

the medical building and has fire alarm

system that the Bed Shakers are hard

wired into - to ensure all bedshakers will

alert during a fire alarm

NA

Not required to be housed there - if

needed or requested they can be moved

C

to any other wing in the dorm

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to Both 14 the inmate? Describe any restrictions. In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is primary consideration given to Both 15 inmate request?
If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or not requesting aids/services, were Both 16 accommodations provided? Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services Both 17 documented in inmate institutional files? Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services shared appropriately with Both 18 staff? Both 19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Describe: The only restriction is living in

Dorm 2 (instead of Dorm 1 - we only have

two living units) This is because Dorm 1

C

does not have the fire alarm system that

Dorm 2 does and it is farthest away from

the medical building.

C

yes

The ADA coordinator was notified and

the inmate was immediately seen by

medical staff to determine diagnosis. The

few that have done that were

C

determined to have no hearing loss or

issues

Uploaded to KOMs

C

All staff are trained once a year to refresh C

their knowledge of all services and aides

All equipment is checked qtrly

C

Both 20 Have any been out of comission? Both 21 Describe -- which and for how long?
Inmates moving housing or transferred: not Both 22 separated from hearing aid?
Both 23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided? Both 24 Promptly?

Describe: one bedshaker was reported

broken, brought to the ADA Coordinator

and determined to be in working order. NA

Describe: None

NA

No hearing aides have been removed

from any inmates

C

Hearing aides are replaced if damaged

C

C

yes

Deaf /HO H or both ? # Issue/Question
Has there been a direct threat Both 25 determination?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 14 of 661 - Page

Audit item questions/concerns (note

ID#: 2578

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Describe: yes in 2016

NA

Both 26 Describe Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of impairment and specific
27 dangers posed) Both 28 Appropriately reported? Both 29 Was it the appropriate decision? Both 30 Are classes in sign language provided? Both 31 deaf inmates given notice? Both 32 priority given to deaf inmates?
Both I Interpretation in general

Describe: GSP Outside Detail requiring inmates to be in heavy traffic (which is only 2 of the 4 details available) Describe: Each inmate is assessed and medical staff consulted to determine on an individual basis.

NA
c C C

C C

yes yes NC No No determination for evaluation No determination for evaluation

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

NA

Is the process for using VRI/in-person

Deaf 1 interpretation communicated to inmates?

covers all inmate-staff communication when

requested by inmate? (not limited to only

certain

Deaf 2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass

religious and other volunteer-provided

Deaf 3 programming?

Effective process for choosing qualified

Deaf 4 interpretation method?

primary consideration given inmates'

Deaf 5 preferences?

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf 6 In-person?

Deaf 7 VRI?

Deaf

Is VRI availability:

Deaf 8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

after hours when needed (not allowing for

Deaf 9 48 hours of notice)?

on weekends when needed (not allowing for

Deaf 10 48 hours of notice)?

during emergencies (including medical

emergencies) when needed (not allowing

Deaf 11 for 48 hours of notice)?

Appropriate preparations made for use in 12 RHU? Describe

C

C

C

C
C NA
C C NA C C
C

C

VRI laptop is available 24/7/365

Describe: BCC does not have RHU

however we do have holding cells for

disciplinary reason (only if being

transferred out for disciplinary reasons)

C

The VRI laptop can be used while in those

cells.

yes
No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Deaf /HO H or both ?#

Issue/Question

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Deaf 13 In general

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 15 of 661 - Page

Audit item questions/concerns (note

ID#: 2579

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Describe: VRI laptop is tested during each

and every inservice class which is held

almost weekly all year.

NA

C

Always checked for sufficient battery Deaf 14 power?
Deaf 15 Routine software updates?

VRI laptop is always charged daily and

C

charging cord is provided in the bag

VRI laptop is always in sleep mode so

that the state can "push update" when

updates are available (which is how they

C

do it for every computer)

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Deaf 16 Splitter?

Deaf 17 Instructions?

Deaf 18 Long power cord?

Deaf 19 Usable as VRS?

Deaf 20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Deaf 21 How?

Information used to determine when in-

person interpretation should be first

Deaf 22 recourse?

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

When VRI insufficient in programming,

Deaf 23 medical

Deaf 24 Parole?

Describe each time in-person interpretation 25 has been offered
Describe each time in-person interpretation 26 has been denied.
Parole board notified of need for Deaf 27 interpretation at least 7 days before?
Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in non-emergency is Deaf 28 non-compliant)
Deaf 29 Describe in an emergency? (in which time was of the
Deaf 30 essence and VRI was unavailable) Communication with inmates uses inmate's
Deaf 31 preferred method? Written communication is limited to only
Deaf 32 simple matters. Written communication is not needed when
Deaf 33 inmate has low literacy

Describe: The VRI laptop bag includes

laptop, charging cord, long ethernet cord,

spliter and folder (which contains

instructions on how to use the VRI laptop

and a log to record usage)

NA

C

C

C

C

VRI laptop has only been used for

training of staff - no inmate has

C

requested or needed it

C

C

C

C

C

Not needed - no inmates at the

institution have used sign language

except for one that made parole several

C

years ago

None

C

Not ever been needed

C

Never / nor has it been needed or

C

requested

Describe: Never been done / never been

needed

NA

C

C

Written communication was only used

one time - see notes above

C

C

No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation Yes Yes Yes
No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation

Deaf /HO H or both ?#

Issue/Question

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 16 of 661 - Page

Audit item questions/concerns (note

ID#: 2580

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass

religious and other volunteer-provided

Deaf 34 programming?

for all inmate-staff communication when

requested by inmate? (not limited to only

certain

Deaf 35 encounters/communications/settings)

Is the process for using VRI communicated

Deaf 36 to inmates?

Deaf J Hand Restraints

Hand restraints ever used on inmate who

Deaf 1 signs?

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized finding Deaf 2 of a security threat? Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might ordinarily be restrained Deaf 3 (in RHU, e.g.)

Necessary equipment purchased and

Deaf 4 installed?

Deaf 5 Staff aware of the issue

Deaf

Off-site medical care:

Deaf 6 two-point hand restraint system used?

restraints removed when necessary for

Deaf 7 medical communication?

Both K Non-auditory Alerts

Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? Both 1 (Describe) Both 2 provided to all inmates who need it?

Both 3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

Both 4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?
Both 5 sufficient to signal count alert? Both 6 programmed to signal different alerts? Both 7 used to notify of prison-wide events?
used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of Both 8 events specific to them?
Have any requests for medically necessary Both 9 non-auditory alerts been denied?

Yes

NA

C

No "sign language as primary language"

or inmates that know sign language at

C

BCC

Yes during assessment is explained to

them

C

Describe:

NA C

C

We do not have RHU - we only have a few holding cells only used if the inmate is being transferred for disciplinary reasons

c
C NA
C

C

Describe: Yes in Dorm 2 C Bay - the Dorm

Officer flashes the lights to signify count

times and pill call

NA

C

Yes given every count time and pill call by

the officer

C

Fire alarm will automatic flash lights and

C

signal the bedshakers to flash and vibrate

Officer flashes bay lights to signify count

C

C

C

No - open bay living arrangement will not C allow for personal non auditory alerts

C No

yes No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation
Yes
N/A - done by a human No basis for evaluation

Deaf /HO H or both ?#

Issue/Question

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 17 of 661 - Page

Audit item questions/concerns (note

ID#: 2581

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure Both 10 they are working? Both 11 frequently enough?
Both 12 monitored/recorded formally?

Both 13 Announcement boards Both 14 used to notify of schedule changes? Both 15 used consistently? Both 16 in all dormitories? Both 17 in gym? Both 18 in library? Both 19 audited and monitored?
In-person or personal system notification Both 20 when an inmate misses a page?
Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only because Both 21 of disability? Were corrective steps taken to solve the Both 22 problem in the future? Sufficient to notify inmates in Both 23 emergencies?

Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in

Both 24 emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective

Both 25 communication will be provided?

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf 1 Installed?

Deaf 2 Allow voice carry-over features?

Deaf 3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)
Describe any technical difficulties, and 4 efforts to solve them.
When out of service, VRS used instead? Or Deaf 5 describe other alternative offered
Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when videophone is out of 6 service.

Deaf 7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Yes, frequently asking inmates if officers

are flashing the lights during every shift

C

to signify count and pill call

C

ADA Coordinator has made surprise visits

to ensure they are doing ti

C

Inmate TV Channel 40 continually plays a

power point with no sound conveying

information about the prison / rules /

changes etc.

NA

Updated daily

C

Updated daily

C

Updated daily

C

Updated daily

C

Updated daily

C

Updated daily

C

Describe: No - inmates are told of

changes in person , on the tv, on the

bulliten board and sometimes Jpay

message

NA

-------

C

updated daily

C

Officers are trained to evacuate Dorm 2 C

Bay with extreme caution to ensure

Deaf/HOH/Blind inmates are evacuated

C

in a timely manner

All BCC inmates are HOH and do not

know sign language

C

Describe: unknown. Equipment has not been used other than being tested to ensure it works. Describe: unknown. Equipment has not been used other than being tested to ensure it works. Describe: unknown. Equipment has not been used other than being tested to ensure it works.

NA C C
NA
NA c

Describe:

NA

yes, cabinet that contains videophones

have been locked with a combination

lock. Combination will be given to

C

inmates that can use them (if they know

sign language/Deaf)

yes
no basis for evaluation
yes No basis for evaluation no basis for evaluation no basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation

Deaf /HO H or both ?#

Issue/Question

Deaf 8 Appropriate location?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 18 of 661 - Page

Audit item questions/concerns (note

ID#: 2582

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Centrally located in Dorm 2 Ice Room for

use of all ADA inmates

C

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, Deaf 9 weekends, emergency) if necessary? Deaf 10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates?

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones? No more permission needed than that for
Deaf 12 hearing inmates using ordinary phones? Deaf 13 Advance request unnecessary? Deaf 14 Free?
Disciplinary oversight no more intense than Deaf 15 regular phone calls?

Has any inmate requested access to the 16 videophones and been denied?

Denial appropriate? Explain the

circumstances, including the inmate's name,

17 the date, and the reason for the denial.

Both

TTY:

Both 18 Installed?

Escort has never been needed.
Describe: all Deaf/HOH inmates are offered video phone and all have declined use None have requested

C C C C C C C
NA

Describe: No denials have been made

C
NA C

No Basis for evaluation yes yes yes yes yes yes
No basis for evaluation yes

Protocol for how to access TTY known to Both 19 inmates and staff?
Easy-to-understand, institution specific 20 instructions made available WITH TTY?

During the Services/Aid Assessment - use

of the TTY is discussed and offered. If the

inmate chooses to use it, they then sign

C

the ADA phone rules and is given the

combination to the lock on the cabinet

that contains the TTY phone

Instructions are posted inside the cabinet

beside the TTY phone

C

Both 21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify) Both 22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?
location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones for non-deaf Both 23 inmates?

Describe: Unknown if any, every time the

quipment has been tested it worked

however no inmates have used the TTY NA

Same as regular phones

C

C Easy access in Dorm 2 Ice Room

unknown / no basis for evaluation

Both 24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?
Both 25 Permission needed? Has any request to use the TTY been
Both 26 denied? (Describe) Both 27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates?

Any of the Deaf/HOH inmates here can

request 1st initial access - all of them

have declined use of the TTY. If an inmate C

were to change their mind and want

access to use it, it would be immediate

(Day/Night/Weekend or holiday)

Once access has been granted - no

permission is needed to use the TTY

C

Describe: No requests have been made to

use the TTY phone

NA

C

No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation yes

Both 28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Describe: Unknown, no one has used it. NA

Unknown

Deaf /HO H or both ?#

Issue/Question

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 19 of 661 - Page

Audit item questions/concerns (note

ID#: 2583

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Both 29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Can access publicly available relay service

Both 30 phone numbers?

Has KDOC determined that time usage

permissions for videophones and TTY is less

Both 31 than equitable?

Both 32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

If yes, was determination (including

Both 33 reasoning, evidence, etc.) documented?

Both 34 Was monitor notified?

Both 35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

Deaf

VRS via laptop

Deaf 36 Available?

Deaf 37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

Deaf 38 Used when appropriate?

Both

Phones

Both 39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Portable amplifiers available to inmates

Both 40 who need them?

Both

CapTel

Both 41 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

Both 42 If so, installed and working?

43 Request by any inmate denied?

Both

TV/Movies

Both 44 Is captioning available?

Both 45 Is captioning used?
Both 46 Is the captioning checked regularly?
Both 47 Are the checks of the captioning logged? Recreational movies: Captioning turned on
Both 48 regularly (Describe) Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/
Both 49 captioning? Both 50 Amplification method? (Describe)
If inmate-purchased tv w/ captioning malfunctioned, did staff assist to same extent as w/other inmates regarding Both 51 malfunctioning personal property? All technology/ equipment in good working Both 52 order? (Describe problems)

Describe: Annual test ok 1/9/19

C

phone numbers are posted inside the

cabinet next to the TTY phone

C

Describe: No, we use the standard 3x longer than a regular phone call Ratio was not adjusted

NA C

C

Never been used or requested
amplifiers were approved and ordered however MaxiAids will not accept a Purchase Order to send them. We are working on this
Describe: Describe: Describe:
All inmates TV have captioning if they choose to use it. Captions are turned on in the Day Room TV's Yes I have spoken to one inmate whom was not Deaf/HOH but used the captioning yes , once a month the movies are inspected for captioning No they have not been logged, This can be added Describe: yes , once a month the movies are inspected for captioning All TVs have captioning capabilites they can buy them or rent them Describe:

C C NA C C C NA C
NA NA NA NA NA
C
C
C
C
C NA

Receiving and Discharge would switch the C TV out for one that works.

Describe any problems:

C

No Basis for evaluation No Basis for evaluation No Basis for evaluation No Basis for evaluation yes yes yes PC
No Basis for Evaluation No Basis for Evaluation No Basis for Evaluation
NC

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in segregated housing equivalent

C

Both 53 to non-deaf inmates of same status?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 20 of 661 - Page

Deaf

Audit item questions/concerns (note

ID#: 2584

/HO H or both

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Does KDOC monitor communications of

deaf or HOH inmates only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

C

Both 54 deaf inmates?

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Both 1 Devices available? (Describe) Both 2 devices in commissary list?
possibility to request other devices from

Describe:

NA

Both 3 ADA coordinator?

Both 4 facilitation of purchase?

Purchase of any non-medically necessary

Both 5 device denied? (Describe)

Both 6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Both 7 because security threat?

Both 8 monitor notified?

Both 9 reasoning explained?

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both 10 of requests?

Both 11 of denials?

Describe:

NA

Yes Everything is either scanned to KOMs or kept in their folder in the ADA Coordinators office Everything is either scanned to KOMs or kept in their folder in the ADA Coordinators office

NA C
C

Both N Disciplinary

Have any discipline occurred without an

interpreter and without an inmate waiver,

Deaf 1 for which an inmate has been punished?

Deaf 2 Was a re-hearing granted?

Both O Grievances

Inmates told they can share grievances

Both 1 with ADA coordinator?

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance

coordinator forward copy of grievance to

Both 2 ADA coordinator?

Records of all grievances filed by deaf/HOH

inmates? (not just those related to

Both 3 settlement)

Both 4 Adequate summaries provided in report?

Including all deaf or HOH inmate

Both 5 grievances, not just those in settlement?

Includes issues raised by inmate in

Both 6 grievance?

Includes institution in which grievance was

Both 7 filed?

Both 8 Includes summary of KDOC response?

Includes grievance resolution (or lack

Both 9 thereof)?

Both P Training

Both

Types available

Both 1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

Both 2 Who received? (Describe) Both 3 All appropriate staff?

C C C C

C

List is maintained as needed

List is maintained as needed

C

List is maintained as needed

C

C

C C C

required CBT Describe: All staff including P&P staff receiving training at BCC All staff

NA C
NA C

No Basis for evaluation No Basis for evaluation yes No Basis for evaluation
yes

Deaf /HO H or both ?#

Issue/Question

Both 4 Live training? (Information only) Both 5 Who received? (Describe) Both 6 All appropriate staff?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 21 of 661 - Page

Audit item questions/concerns (note

ID#: 2585

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Describe: All staff including P&P staff

receiving training at BCC in person called

"In-Service"

NA

Describe:All Staff

NA

All staff

C

Both

Targeted training on specific needs

Both 7 training on best communication practices?

Both 8 training on unique needs/problems?

training on possibility that deaf/HOH

Both 9 inmate may miss alert?

training on possibility that deaf/HOH

inmate may not hear verbal commands and

Both 10 strategies to handle that problem?

training on identification of communication

Both 11 needs?

consideration given to talking one-on-one

with deaf or HOH inmates, instead of in a

Both 12 group?

Both

Training on communication

Deaf 13 training on use and role of interpreters?

training on process for obtaining

Deaf 14 interpreters?

training on importance of not separating

Both 15 imate from hearing aid?

Both 16 training on communication technology?

Deaf 17 training on VRI?

training on how to turn on and check for

Both 18 captioning?

Both 19 training on non-auditory alert office switch?

Deaf 20 training on videophone rules?

Both

Training on Policies

Both 21 training on the Settlement?

training on identity and role of ADA

Both 22 coordinator?

Both 23 training on KDOC anti-discrimination policy?

Both 24 training on existence of KOMS/EMR alerts? Both 25 training on meaning of ID cards?
training on equipment/services/ Both 26 accommodation available?

Both 27 training on hand restraint policy? training on two-point hand restraint
Deaf 28 system? training on disciplinary and grievance
Both 29 practies?

Inmates currently at BCC with any special

needs are discussed. Any inmates

previously at BCC with any special needs

are discussed during training so that staff

can recognize and report needs not

requested by inmate

NA

All staff

C

All staff

C

All staff

C

C All staff

All staff

C

All staff are directed during training to do C

this

NA

All staff

C

All staff

C

All staff

C

All staff

C

All staff

C

All staff

C

All Staff All Staff
All staff

C
C NA
c

All staff

c

All staff

C

All staff

C

All staff

C

All staff

C

All staff even though it has not been

needed.

C

All staff even though it has not been

needed.

C

All stall as part of inservice

C

Deaf /HO H or both ?#

Issue/Question

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 22 of 661 - Page

Audit item questions/concerns (note

ID#: 2586

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Do all relevant staff know about reporting Both 30 obligations? How do you know?

Both

Training specifically for housing area staff

training on the use of cell/bed notices that

Both 31 indicate an inmate is deaf/HOH

Both 32 training on bed shaker switches

Both 33 training on telecommunications

training on obligations to notify deaf and

Both 34 HOH inmates of alerts

Both

Training specifically for all corrections staff

training on accommodations for inmates

Both 35 who sign (esp. restraint policies)

training on strategies for inmates who may

Both 36 not hear directions/orders

Both

Training specifically for medical staff

training on process to obtain hearing aid

Both 37 within two months

training on obligation to notify off-site

Both 38 providers of needs

Both 39 Training provided for review by Monitor?
Both Q Monitor Access
Has the monitor been granted access to requested KDOC records, files, and papers Both 1 that pertain to the agreement? If no, was an explanation provided for the Both 2 refusal? Has the monitor been granted access to Both 3 KDOC staff members and employees? Both 4 Were staff/employees cooperative? Has KDOC responded to reasonable written Both 5 questions?

Describe: All staff have been directed to report any communication issues with the ADA coordinator immediately - so inmate can be assessed by medical to determine if HOH/Deaf/Blind All staff are required this training every year

C NA

All staff

C

All staff

C

All staff

C

All staff All staff are required this training every year

C NA

All staff

C

All staff All staff are required this training every year

C NA

All staff

C

All staff - especially medical

C

Powerpoint provided by the monitor is

what is being taught

C

C yes

---

C

N/A

C

yes

C

yes

C

yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 23 of 661 - Page ID#: 2587

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening

Blackburn Correctional Complex

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

3/29/2018

12/1/2017

9/11/2018

7/26/2018

7/2/2015

intake screen

On Intake at RCC

Intake Screen

Hearing screen on intake On intake into DOC

to BCC

pocket talker issued

Intake screen

9/8/2017

4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

3/29/2018

12/6/2017

9/11/2018

6/25/2018

7/19/2016

9/8/2017

12/5/2018 Refered for further eval Hearing Aid Received

9/11/2018

7/26/2018

1/5/2018

12/5/2018

Answered yes to 3 or

more hearing screen

Referred to provider for

Referred for futher eval questions

Hearing aids ordered further evaluation.

a

A

c

a

d.

N/A

n/a

No hearing aid recomme

by provider.

N/A

The patient had refused hearing aids on 9/16/2018

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Yes

Yes

received hearing aids on

1/17/18

12/5/2018

12/11/2017

11/14/2018

7/26/2018

7/19/2016

9/8/2017

Patient complted

Referred to provider for

Intake screening

intake exam

audicus hearing test hearing eval

audiology consult

Hearing screen

audiology consult ordered

referred for review of no hearing aid

hearing test

recommended

mixed results with no refer to provider for hearing aids needed further eval

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome DOC # ...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 24 of 661 - Page ID#: 2588

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

12/12/2018

1/8/2018

11/30/2019

8/14/2018

8/17/2017

9/16/2017

Patient wants to have

pocket talker back that

Provider follow up with

he turned back in

Audicus exam

Audiology Consult

audicus

hearing eval

because he said he

Follow up with provider

Ear wax removal, return patient given another

Patient signed refusal

as needed if hearing pocket talker so he

stating his hearing had Provider approved

worsens or has not

would be able to hear in The patient refused

referred to Dr. Kemen improved

hearing aid for right ear. improved.

class

hearing aids

1/14/2019

2/2/2018

12/13/2018

3/11/2019

12/15/2017

Follow Up visit/patient

Follow up with Heather noted to have difficulty

Hearing aids issued

Transfer to BCC

issue of Heaaring aid Downs ARNP

even with pocket talker

patient answered yes to

multiple questions on Patient received hearing patient referred for

audiology consult

hearing aids picked up hearing screening

aid

Audicus testing

requested

2/14/2017 provider referral

3/14/2019

1/5/2018

Audicus test performed. audiology consult

audiology consult placed

hearing aids ordered

3/2/2018 Audiology consult aids

1/17/2018 audiology hearing aids received

289166

3/23/2018 pick up hearing aid Right hearing Aid received at this time 297039
3/30/2018 Follow Up after receiving hearing aid, states the right hearing aid is helpful and no

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 25 of 661 - Page ID#: 2589

. . .

10/25/2018

7/20/2018

8/28/2018

11/19/2018

9/19/2018

4/9/2018

Intake screen

Outside medical trip hearing screen

follow up with provider Intake screen

aInntsawkeerteodRyCeCs to more

than 3 questions on

11/9/2018

5/10/2018

8/28/2018

5/8/2018

9/19/2018 hearing screening

11/9/2018

5/10/2018

8/28/2018

5/8/2018

9/19/2018

11/9/2018 normal

refer for further eval refer to audicus

refer for further eval

a.

a

a

b

d

d

n/a

n/a

does not meet criteria

Returned from audiologist on 8/10/2018 no need for hearing aids

yes

10/24/2018

8/6/2018

10/5/2018

11/19/2018

9/25/2018

5/2/2018

11/9/2018 referred to audicus

Audicus hearing test Audicus hearing test hearing eval by provider Intake to BCC

Patient received hearing

aid on 11/27/2018

received hearing aid

Referred to Dr. Kemen

audicus

answered yes to more than 3 questions on hearing screening

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome DOC # ...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 26 of 661 - Page ID#: 2590
. . .

10/17/2018
Review by Dr. Kemen The patient received hearing aid on 11/21/2018

11/27/2018

5/4/2018

audicus follow up
does not meet criteria for hearing aid.

provider referral Otology, Laryngology, Rhinology referral placed, appt scheduled for 7/10/18 (first

8/10/2018 hearing evaluated no need for hearing aids

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 27 of 661 - Page ID#: 2591

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening

6/18/2018

9/20/2017

8/10/2018

10/25/2018

1/24/2017

patient placed a sick call

Hearing screen on intake request in regards to Hearing screen on intake

to BCC

hearing

to BCC

Intake screen

On intake screening sick call

6/1/2018

9/20/2017

8/10/2018

10/25/2018

1/24/2017

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

6/18/20198

1/31/2018

8/10/2018

10/25/2018

11/14/2017

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Answered yes to 3 or more hearing screen

Answered yes to 3 or more hearing screen

questions

hearing aid received questions

11/8/2018 hearing aid received

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

a.

a

d

d

a

a

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and

Does not meet criteria per Dr. Kemen for

ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Hearing aids not

patient to have hearing

n/a

N/A

recommended.

aid

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does

it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of

receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an

induction loop system.

12/20/2018

7/19/2018

sick call 12/24/2018 12/24/2018

7/19/2018 7/19/2018

2/1/2019 Refer for futher eval

a

yes

yes

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing

issue was presented to when the hearing issue

was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid

or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

hearing aid received

hearing aid received provided hearing aid

6/21/2018

9/20/2017

8/16/2018

11/8/2018

1/24/2017

12/20/2018

10/30/2018

Provider recommended patient placed a sick call The patient was seen be

intake process at the

10/30/2018 provider

hearing aid.

request in regards to the provider

follow up with provider intake center

referred to audicus follow up

It was not recommended

that the patient needs

hearing aids, however

The patient did receive

the patient was given an

failed hearing

hearing aid.

referral to provider

amplifier.

Referred for hearing test questionaire

refered to provider Referred to audicus.

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome DOC # ...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 28 of 661 - Page ID#: 2592

9/27/2017

8/20/2018

12/6/2018

6/1/2017

1/11/2019

1/15/2019

provider to evaluate hearing

Patient given a pocket

talker.

Hearing exam completed transfer to BCC

provider follow up Audicus results

audiology consult

referral to provider for

referred to Dr. Kemen hearing eval

audicus results

Hearing aid issued

1/12/2018 audiology consult appointment
hearing aid ordered 1/31/2018
follow up audiology hearing aid received

2/28/2019

6/6/2017

2/1/2019

audicus review Per Dr. Kemen, the patient does not meet criteria for hearing aid

provider to assess hearing
ENT consult ordered

hearing aids issued

6/27/2017 ENT Consult recommend different audiologist consult

10/24/2017 audiology consult testing inconclusive

11/14/2017 consult bilateral hearing aids ordered

12/7/2018

follow up audiology

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 29 of 661 - Page ID#: 2593

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

11/21/2018

6/22/2017

10/16/2017

9/17/2018

sick call

hearing screening form provider visit

provider visit

sick call

patient refused testing

6/9/2017 6/26/2017

10/25/2017 10/25/2018

9/25/2018 8/9/208 9/25/2018

8/2/2018
sick call 8/9/208 8/9/2018

8/2/2018

12/6/2017

intake 8/9/2018

12/6/2017 1/9/2018

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

normal hearing

severe bilateral

L ear moderate

amplifier

amplifier

passed whisper test

D

a

a

d

d

d

Passed whisper test

The patient does not The patient does not meet criteria 8/9/2018 meet criteria 8/9/2018 the patient does not me

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

na

provided hearing aid provided hearing aid

10/16/2017

9/17/2018

provider visit

provider visit

referred for audiology t referred audiology test

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome DOC # ...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 30 of 661 - Page ID#: 2594

10/25/2017

9/25/2018

hearing test

hearing test

audiology results

audiology results

11/15/2017

10/31/2018

hearing aid issued hearing aid issued

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 31 of 661 - Page ID#: 2595

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening

10/25/2019

provider viist

intake

9/28/2018

4/7/2017

8/11/2017

12/5/2018

Hearing screen

patient had hearing aids

on arrival to BCC

intake screen

sick call

1/24/2019

8/10/2018

Hearing screen on intake to BCC

1/4/2019

10/11/2018

4/7/2017

8/11/2017

12/5/2018

8/10/2018

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

1/4/2019

10/11/2018

7/13/2018

8/11/2017

12/5/2018

2/15/2019

8/10/2018

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

answered 3 or more yes

referred to provider for

Answered yes to 3 or more hearing screen

R ear severe-hearing aidamplifier

to hearing screen.

hearing aid in place

further eval.

R ear mild hearing loss questions

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

a

d

a.

a

a

d

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of

the decision against providing a hearing aid, and

ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Patient does not meet

eet criteria 1/9/18

passed audioscope n/a

N/A

criteria for hearing aid

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does

it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of

receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an

induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

provided hearing aid 4/23/19 10/25/2018

provider visit

intake

yes

yes

9/28/2018

hearing aid in place 7/13/2018

hearing screen

12/11/2018 Hearing screen follow up sick call

1/24/2019

10/3/2018

hearing screen

referred for audicus refer to provider

Patient has working hearing aid

ear irrigation

referred to provider refer to provider

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome DOC # ...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 32 of 661 - Page ID#: 2596

1/4/2019

9/28/2018

10/9/2018

hearing test

passed audioscope Patient signed refusal

auduiology results issued amplifier

The patient signed refusal for HOH pass

4/5/2019 hearing aid issued

12/14/2018

2/15/2019

10/5/2018

audicus hearing exam audiology hearing test jgoff

referred to Dr Kemen for

eval

referred to Dr Kemen forefer to provider

1/25/2019

2/15/2019

10/17/2018

Audicus follow up

provider f/u

provider follow up

hearing aid to right ear

Does not meet criteria

issued

hearing aid right ear issufor hearing aid.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 33 of 661 - Page ID#: 2597

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

8/13/2018

4/20/2018

12/21/2017

7/12/2017

4/5/2017

1/15/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

KDOC

3. Date of initial hearing screening

provider follow up

intake hearing screen On intake to DOC

IanntsawkeerteodByCeCs to more I4n/t5a/k2e01to7,RwCCas issued intake to RCC than 3 questions on pocket talker on 4/17/17

7/5/2018

4/20/2018

12/21/2017 hearing screening

and audiology consult

1/18/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

1/21/2019

2/8/2017

5/23/2018

1/18/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

hearing aids working

refer for further eval

hearing aid received

well

left ear moderate

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

a

d

a

a.

a

a

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of

the decision against providing a hearing aid, and

Received pocket talker,

ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

no indication for hearing

aids.

N/A

N/A

n/a

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does

it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of

receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an

induction loop system.

na

yes

yes

yes

9. Please provide the following information about

patient refused to stay at

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

BCC for follow up appt. at audiology, stated he would sign a refusal so he could go to LSCC for PT. Patient signed a

hearing aid received refusal for hearing aids

Medical Visit 1 - Date

8/13/2018

4/27/2018

1/5/2018

7/27/2017

4/19/2017

1/15/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

provider assessment

Passed whisper test

follow up with provider referral

Provider Referral

audiology consult

intake to RCC

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Follow if hearing worsens

refer for audiogram

referral to audiology

failed whisper test, ENT

consult placed

hearing aids ordered

referred for audiology te

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome DOC # ...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 34 of 661 - Page ID#: 2598

1/21/2019

6/28/2018

1/22/2018

9/15/2017

5/11/2017

1/18/2019

Heearing screen

sign IOP

audiology consult

ENT Consult

follow up audiology audiology test

Patient received pocket Failed hearing screen talker. issued pocket talker and set up appoitnemnt for audioscope
2/4/2019

hearing aid ordered

cleared for hearing aid use, Hearing Aid recommended

received bilateral hearing aids

hearing aid ordered

2/8/2018

10/19/2017

5/23/2018

2/8/2019

audioscope
referred for audicus 2/5/2019
Completed audicus referred to Dr. Kemen

follow up audiology hearing aid received

Audiology Consult hearing aid ordered

Intake to BCC

hearing aid isssued

answered sometimes to

some of the questions

on hearing screening

Received hearing aids

5/23/2018 physical stated hearing aids are working well

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 35 of 661 - Page ID#: 2599

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system? Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers)

How many Where

0

N/A

0

N/A

Captioned Telephone

1

Other amplifiers, amplification

systems, or the like?

0

Bed shakers

5

Vibrating watches?

0

Vibrating alarm clocks?

5

Pagers?

0

Other non-auditory alerts or

assistive devices currently in use

or under consideration not

mentioned above.

0

Earphones for parole hearings Yes

Earphones for orientation videos 0

In Dorm 2 Ice Room N/A
Dorm 2 C bay N/A
Dorm 2 C bay N/A
N/A N/A

How well do they When obtained Specifications (URL) How do inmates obtain access? work?

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2016

N/A

N/A

Once they have been assessed

upon arrival and the

determination has been made

that they want / can use the

TDD/TTY phone - An agreement

is signed and they are given the

comination to the lock, on the

cabinet that contains the phone.

N/A
2016 N/A
2016 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

During assesment each

Deaf/HOH inmate is asked if he

wants one or does he think it

https://www.silentcall.cwill help him in any way.

N/A

N/A

N/A

During assesment each

Deaf/HOH inmate is asked if he

wants one or does he think it

https://www.silentcall.cwill help him in any way.

N/A

N/A

N/A

Other comments N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 36 of 661 - Page ID#: 2600

Documentation to review KOMS alerts for each deaf/HOH inmate Grievances:
Provide/Review summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc.

Date reviewed 6/25/2019
7/17/2019

Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.) None
See attached.

Provide/Review full documentation of all grievances that address

7/17/2019

hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Solve any problems revealed.

Discipline

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving an inmate who signs.

Ensure that VRI or other effective communication was provided at each N/A

stage of each such proceedings.

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving failure to obey an order, or

failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Ensure that no such inmate is being penalized for

7/11/2019

inability to hear.

VRI Log (review to ensure it's being used in appropriate circumstances. VRS or other videophone alternative (review to ensure that when videophone is inoperative, alternative is in fact available/used)

7/10/2019 7/10/2019

TTY instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.) 7/10/2019

VRI instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.) 7/10/2019

See attached.
We do not have any inmates that signs at this time
Captain Carter and I have reviewed any and all disciplinary reports. No inmates is being penalized for the inability to hear. The VRI has only been used for training staff members. None of our Deaf/HOH inmates sign VRS locked in cabinet in Dorm 2 Ice Room / Combination lock on the cabinet VRS locked in cabinet in Dorm 2 Ice Room / Combination lock on the cabinet VRS locked in cabinet in Dorm 2 Ice Room / Combination lock on the cabinet

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 37 of 661 - Page ID#: 2601

Questions regarding effective communications in particular activities or locations. For each, mark compliance (Y, partial, N, no basis) and explain. Goal: each deaf or HOH inmate has an equal

Amplification: (Not just hearing aid --

In-person interpretation

Availability of VRI:

space-specific amplification)

Appropriate

equipment

Used

available

Ever used? Used whenever

whenever

(computer line, How many appropriate? (without

Ever used?

appropriate? Staff trained? outlet, space) times?

special request)

Adequate? Describe efforts, issues

Intake/

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Orientation -- Non-medical

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Intake, Medical

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Auxiliary Aid Assessment

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Units

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Restrictive Housing

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Medical/MH care

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Programs

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Education

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Recreation

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Communications with Chaplain

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Prison-provided religious

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

programming

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Volunteer -led programming

(note: Only volunteer

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

interpretation is required)

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Parole hearings

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Classification/

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Transfer

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Legal Aid

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Grievance process

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Work assignments

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Court call and ALL parts of

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

disciplinary process

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Staff investigations

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Investigative interviews

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

Preparation of report

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Shift supervisor's review of

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

disciplinary report

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Investigator's review of

Not Needed / None know

Always available / Never

disciplinary report

sign language

Yes

Yes

0

used / no basis

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 38 of 661 - Page ID#: 2602

In-person interpretation

Ever used?

Not Needed / None know

Miranda warnings

sign language

When advising inmate of right Not Needed / None know

to consult with legal aide

sign language

Notification of date, time, and Not Needed / None know

place of hearing

sign language

Not Needed / None know

Hearing or re-hearing

sign language

Not Needed / None know

If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

sign language

Used whenever appropriate?

Availability of VRI: Appropriate equipment available (computer line,
Staff trained? outlet, space)

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Ever used? How many times?
0
0
0
0
0

Amplification: (Not just hearing aid -space-specific amplification)

Used whenever appropriate? (without special request)
Always available / Never used / no basis
Always available / Never used / no basis
Always available / Never used / no basis
Always available / Never used / no basis
Always available / Never used / no basis

Adequate? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Describe efforts, issues N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to attend a religious service without effective communication to receive any religious meal, diet, or other accommodation? No Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have witnessed or been suspected of violation) provided with an inmate or staff advisor on same terms as non-deaf inmates? Yes inmates can have a staff council upon request. It is reviewed and denied or appoved based on the same process as a non deaf inmate.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 39 of 661 - Page ID#: 2603

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Low literacy?

Other Alert

(So that

If signs to

Bed Shaker? Device

Signs to written

Has

Has

communicate, Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

Personal Phone

Listed with commu communicatio Deaf/HOH Bed/Door noted in KOMS Assessment requested; requested; TTY Access (Not Amplifier (Not

KOMS ADA nicate n is not

ID Card? (Y Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied;

denied; requested;

requested;

Name

ID

Precaution? (Y/N) effective)

or waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted)

granted) denied; granted) denied; granted)

Y

N

Y

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

Y

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

Y

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

Y

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

Y

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

Y

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

Y

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

Y

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

N

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Y

N

Y

Yes

Yes

Does not sign Yes

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 40 of 661 - Page ID#: 2604

Name

Shake & Wake

(Not

requested; Any other

denied;

auxiliary aid

Audit item

ID

granted)

requested?

Outome? issues/concerns

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 41 of 661 - Page ID#: 2605

Fill this out for EACH location where there are any deaf/HOH inmates

How many Volume

Bed

If there are

How inmates adjustable

shakers set Staff use If there are any

any inmates

many who sign phone available How up for use bed

inmates who

who sign:

Deaf/ to

to inmates

many for

shakers for sign: Location

Ready

HOH communic without special bed

multiple multiple available for If there are any inmates who access to

Dorm/unit

Walk

inmates? ate

request?

shakers? purposes? purposes? VRI?

sign: Staff trained for VRI videophone

Dorm 2

N/A

None

4

5 No

No

None Sign

None Sign all staff trained None Sign

Dorm 1

N/A

None None

2

0 No

No

None Sign

None Sign all staff trained None Sign

Date

Name

7/11/2019 Captain Kevin Carter

June - July Kristy Gamble

June - July David Penix

7/23/2019

7/23/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 42 of 661 - Page ID#: 2606

Inmate or staff? Inmate number Staff title

Topics

Staff

Captain

Disciplinary Reports

Staff

Medical Staff

Medical Reports

Staff

Policy & Procedures

Grievances

Inmate

ADA Coordinator

Inmate

ADA Coordinator

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 43 of 661 - Page ID#: 2607

Prison
General General General General General General General BCC BCC BCC
BCC

LIST ALL ISSUES FROM PRIOR AUDIT TO RECORD THEIR SOLUTION. Any that are not solved report progress Where problem is

and place on "New Followup List"

documented

Untimely audiology processes

April 2019 Court Report

List of Deaf/HOH prisoners not complete

April 2019 Court Report

Not all Deaf/HOH prisoners in KOMS

April 2019 Court Report

Videophone outages are prevalent

April 2019 Court Report

VRI possibly underused

April 2019 Court Report

In-person interpretation possibly underused

April 2019 Court Report

Appropriate audiology standards used

April 2019 Court Report

Generic TTY instructions

April 2019 Court Report

Need appropriate method for VRI usage in RHU

April 2019 Court Report

Inmates should not be restricted to Dorm 2 without appropriate (individualized) reason

April 2019 Court Report

Inmates should not be barred from particular employment without individualized direct threat analysis

April 2019 Court Report

Solution: Notes

BCFC EKCC

Generic TTY instructions Incorrect ADA Coordinator info on https://corrections.ky.gov/Facilities/AI/Pages/ADA-Coordinators.aspx

April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report

EKCC
EKCC EKCC EKCC EKCC EKCC GRCC GRCC GRCC GRCC KCIW KCIW KCIW KCIW KSP KSP KSP KSP KSR KSR

Inmates who have not been screened in recent years do not receive a hearing screening upon arrival at EKCC. Need plan for videophone outages Auxiliary aids/services assessment not complete for all inmates ADA Coordinator needs access to KOMS to fix unlisted inmates Parole hearing earphones needed Need to address possibility of malingering. Ineffective announcements; PA system issues Incomplete TTY instructions Use of VRI or in-person interpreter at all disciplinary hearings for those who sign Denver Williams hearing aid Auxiliary aids/services assessment not complete for all inmates Inappropriate use of paging for deaf inmates Using VRI when appropriate? Handbook needs to provide ADA information VRI laptop working? Auxiliary aids/services assessment not complete for all inmates Institutional channel 40 has captions at all times? Routine availability of TTY New pager policy -- needs evidence base Ineffective announcements; PA system issues (are personal notifications being made, e.g. to

April 2019 Court Report
April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report ?) April 2019 Court Report

KSR

Appropriate use of interpretation, e.g. for

KSR

Generic TTY instructions.

LAC

Policy/form/training/etc development

LAC

Videophone/VRI available?

LAC

Auxiliary aids/services assessment not being done

LAC

Hearing screening during routine physicals?

LAC

ADA coordinator received training?

LAC

ADA documents in law library

LLCC

Need method to track whether deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates are witnesses in disciplinary hearings

LLCC

Hearing screening needed for new inmates who haven't received one in several years

LSCC

Auxiliary aids/services assessment not complete for all inmates

LSCC

Generic TTY instructions.

LSCC

Correct sick call slip

NTC

Hearing screening needed for new inmates who haven't received one in several years

NTC

Need to implement appropriate policy for non-auditory alerts (e.g., provide vibrating watches)

NTC

Generic TTY instructions.

WKCC/ ROSS Videophone outages

April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report

Solution: Date

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 44 of 661 - Page ID#: 2608
Bell County Forestry Camp

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 45 of 661 - Page ID#: 2609

Issue/Question #

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

A ADA coordinator
1 Is an ADA coordinator designated? Has there been a time (since last audit) when there
2 was no ADA coordinator appointed? 3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website? 4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected
Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates in a timely and appropriate manner? How?

5 Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information?
6 (THIS REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE) Is the information prominently posted in any
7 housing unit where deaf/HOH inmates are held? 8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training? 9 Describe training
Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately 10 cover information? 11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training) 12 Adequate w/r/t state law?
Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's 13 powerpoint)
Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with 14 settlement agreement?
Does ADA coordinator retrieve at least monthly 15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?
Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's 16 tracking list?
Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in 17 implementing the settlement?
Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf 18 inmates?
Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on 19 deaf inmates?
Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the 20 inmates in those situations?
Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective 21 way with the monitor?
Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the 22 monitor when necessary?
B Reporting obligations
If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was 1 monitor notified?
Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf 2 and HOH inmates? 3 Is the list complete? 4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?
Quarterly summary of all grievances by deaf or 5 HOH inmates shared with monitor?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

X

X

X

X

Inmates are told during orientation,

it is listed in the handbook, there are memo's posted, and when they

X

come to me for job assignments.

Describe method used to ascertain: T X

Powerpoint/Online Training

X
X NA
X
X X
X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

N/A X X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 46 of 661 - Page ID#: 2610

Issue/Question #

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Was there a direct threat determination made for 6 jobs, activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe) 7 Was it reported to the monitor? 8 Was the report complete? 9 Was the report timely? 10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert? 11 If yes, was the monitor notified?
Did the institution consult with the monitor about 12 the non-auditory alert? 13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

C Intake/Orientation - Corrections
1 Hard of hearing inmates Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is
2 arriving? Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive
3 automatic notifications.) Effective communications planned/provided?
4 (Describe) Deaf inmates Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is
5 arriving? 6 Describe 7 Effective communications planning? 8 Effective communication provided? 9 Describe 10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed? 11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?
Orientation videos 12 Captioned? 13 Shown in a quiet space? 14 Amplification if needed?
Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not 15 literate? (Describe)

D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services
Effective Communication during general medical intake, and during medical care more generally: 1 Is there effective communications planning? Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty 2 hearing if interpretation is needed? 3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office? Are staff aware of, and use, effective 4 communications techniques? Notice to medical staff: 5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How? Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on 6 cover and within the file?

Description/Notes Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA

NA

X

Describe: Email/Medical NA
Describe: Inmate is asked which servi X

NA

X

Describe: Email/Medical

NA

Methods of communication are in pla X

X

Describe: In-person interpretter if reqNA

X

X

NA

X

X

X

Describe: We have two ADA inmates X

NA X X X X
NA It is listed in the inmates medical file. X
X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 47 of 661 - Page ID#: 2611

Issue/Question #

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate 7 accommodations.
Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site 8 providers of need for interpretation? 9 Procedure in place to ensure notification? 10 Has there ever been a notification to provider? 11 Adequate notice?
Outside providers offering effective communication 12 to inmates who sign? 13 How?
Hearing screening/medical intake: 14 Performed for all new inmates? 15 Within first 3 days at institution? 16 Approved screening form? (need to review) 17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid? 18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?
How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it 19 administered by staff? 20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical) 21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy? 22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe. 23 Medical history includes hearing questions?
Other methods of access: Do annual/routine physicals include hearing 24 screening? 25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening? 26 Inmate can obtain screening on request? If screening indicated problem (3+ "yes" answers), 27 is there further assessment? Adequate determination of need for designation/ 28 audiology services? How? 29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)? Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf 30 or HOH, apart from audiology services decision? After assessment, does medical: 31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert? 32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file? 33 Notify ADA coordinator? 34 Is notification prompt? Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist) 35 Audiology services offered when needed? 36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles) 37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid? 38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services 39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

X

Describe: Not here at BCFC

X NA
X

X

Describe: KY-DOC has a contract with NA NA X X X X X
Describe: Administered by staff NA
Describe: H.S.A and/or intake nurse NA X
Describe: The form is read by the staff member and completed by the staff member. X
NA

X

X X

X

Inmates are referred to outside care. X

X

X

NA X X X X

NA X X X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 48 of 661 - Page ID#: 2612

Issue/Question #

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Adequate progress tracking? Should include: 40 initial request/questionnaire? 41 each relevant medical visit? 42 any audiology visit? 43 hearing aid provision? 44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks? 45 Shared with ADA Coordinator? 46 Shared with monitor when requested
Summary When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing 47 aid? Describe. In the past year, how many individuals have had to 48 wait more than sixty days to receive a hearing aid? 49 What is the cause of the delay? What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) 50 to improve this process? Co-pay and availability issues: 47 Charged only once -- not again for followups Hearing aid batteries 48 Available for free? 49 In sufficient numbers? 50 7 days/week? 51 regardless of housing?

E Information provided inmates
1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe) Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-
2 discrimination and ADA services? Brochure? Items to include:
3 Non-discrimination obligation 4 Effective communication obligation 5 Auxiliary aids and services available
How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services 6 (including hearing aids, and batteries) 7 Communication equipment available, and how to 8 ADA coordinator and how to reach
Other items: 9 Institution schedule of interpreters
Request for Accommodations/ Communications 10 Assistance
Medical Request form includes request for 11 accommodations
Job application form includes request for 12 accommodations 13 Waiver forms
Classification form includes request for 14 accommodations 15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations
SAP and other programming form includes request 16 for accommodation 17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

Description/Notes
Describe: Describe: Describe: Describe: ? Describe: ?
?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA X X X X X X X X

NA
NA NA
NA NA
X NA
X X X X
X X NA X X X X X X NA X X
X
X X X X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 49 of 661 - Page ID#: 2613

Issue/Question #

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure 18 available in law library? (Need to check)
Do request forms: 19 list available services comprehensively?
clearly explain services and aids (what they are and 20 when they are available? 21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?
expressly ask about preferred mode of communication/needed services and why they are 22 useful? 23 explain which items are free? encompass religious and volunteer-provided 24 programming? Effective communication of these resources: Are the materials in language accessible to each 25 inmate? Is this information provided with effective 26 communication? Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member and 27 interpreter to ask questions about the materials? Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application for a program with staff, is effective 28 communication provided? are potential accommodations covered in the 29 discussion? Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application in education with staff, is effective 30 communication provided? are potential accommodations covered in the 31 discussion?

F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates
1 Notice posted at entrance to institution? 2 Include picture of ID card and other official 3 Notice posted outside housing units? 4 Include picture of ID card and other official 5 Cell/bed cards 6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert? 7 Clear process to obtain? Describe 8 Each inmate has one if not waived? 9 Provided timely? 10 Replacements provided when needed?
KOMS alert? 11 Staff aware of use of KOMS
Working process to get new inmate alerts added? 12 (Describe) 13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check) 14 Appropriately obvious 15 Updated timely

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

Describe date checked: 08/27/2019 a X

NA X

X

X

X

X X NA X

X

X NA
X

X NA
X

X

Describe: Describe:

X X X X NA X X X X X NA X
X
X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 50 of 661 - Page ID#: 2614

Issue/Question #

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Individual ID cards 16 Staff aware of meaning? 17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?) 18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived? 19 Provided timely? 20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times? 21 Prompt replacements provided? 22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose? 23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator? 24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver? 25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?
Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested 26 ID? 27 If yes, was an ID provided?

G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment
Identification to ADA Coordinator Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification 1 upon intake of each deaf/hoh inmate? Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification 2 of other deaf/hoh inmates? Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment with every arriving or 3 newly identified deaf/hoh inmate? At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of communication expressly ascertained 4 and documented? At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate about available auxiliary aids and 5 services? Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms 6 explained? Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral and written; VRI; or visual 7 descriptions ) Other assessments For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an 8 assessment on intake, has one been done? 9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided
1 On-person ID cards 2 Cell cards 3 Bed shaker 4 In-person alerts 5 Pager
Phone volume adjust setting (available in each 6 location where phones are available?) 7 Amplifier for phone
Consideration of specific housing assignment to 8 minimize communication difficulties? 9 Other amplification 10 Other (describe)

Description/Notes Describe: Describe:
Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA X X X X X X
NA X
NA X

X

X

NA X X

X

X

X
X
X
NA X X
X X X X
X X X X
NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 51 of 661 - Page ID#: 2615

Issue/Question #

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

General issues Special housing area: Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH 11 inmates? (Describe) If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? 12 (Describe) If there is such an area, are inmates required to be 13 housed there? (such a requirement is nonIf there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live there, are accommodations etc. still fully 14 available to the inmate? Describe any restrictions. In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is 15 primary consideration given to inmate request? If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or not requesting 16 aids/services, were accommodations provided? Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services 17 documented in inmate institutional files? Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary 18 aids/services shared appropriately with staff? 19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained? 20 Have any been out of comission? 21 Describe -- which and for how long? Inmates moving housing or transferred: not 22 separated from hearing aid? 23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided? 24 Promptly? 25 Has there been a direct threat determination? 26 Describe Appropriately individuated (must consider specific 27 degree of impairment and specific dangers posed) 28 Appropriately reported? 29 Was it the appropriate decision? 30 Are classes in sign language provided? 31 deaf inmates given notice? 32 priority given to deaf inmates?

I Interpretation in general
Qualified interpretation services available: Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation 1 communicated to inmates? covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 2 encounters/communications/settings) Does the request form clearly encompass religious 3 and other volunteer-provided programming? Effective process for choosing qualified 4 interpretation method? 5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Description/Notes
Describe: Describe: Describe:
Describe: Describe: Describe: Describe: Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA NA

NA

NA X

X

X

X

X
X X NA NA X X X NA NA
X X X X X X
NA X
X
X
X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 52 of 661 - Page ID#: 2616

Issue/Question #

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Standing arrangement with providers? 6 In-person? 7 VRI?
Is VRI availability: 8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?
after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours 9 of notice)?
on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 10 hours of notice)?
during emergencies (including medical emergencies) 11 when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?
Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? 12 Describe
VRI laptop functional? 13 In general 14 Always checked for sufficient battery power? 15 Routine software updates?
VRI laptop has necessary items with it? 16 Splitter? 17 Instructions? 18 Long power cord? 19 Usable as VRS? 20 VRI effectiveness tracked? 21 How?
Information used to determine when in-person 22 interpretation should be first recourse?
Is in-person interpretation available: 23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical 24 Parole?
Describe each time in-person interpretation has 25 been offered
Describe each time in-person interpretation has 26 been denied.
Parole board notified of need for interpretation at 27 least 7 days before?
Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? 28 (Reliance in non-emergency is non-compliant) 29 Describe
in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence 30 and VRI was unavailable)
Communication with inmates uses inmate's 31 preferred method?
Written communication is limited to only simple 32 matters.
Written communication is not needed when inmate 33 has low literacy

Description/Notes
Describe: Describe: Describe:
Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA X X
NA X

X

X

X

X
NA X X X
NA X X X X X X
X
X X X
X

X

X

X NA
X

X

X

X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 53 of 661 - Page ID#: 2617

Issue/Question #

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Qualified interpretation services available: Does the request form clearly encompass religious 34 and other volunteer-provided programming? for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 35 encounters/communications/settings) Is the process for using VRI communicated to 36 inmates?

J Hand Restraints
1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs? Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing?
2 Individualized finding of a security threat? Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who
3 might ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.) 4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed? 5 Staff aware of the issue
Off-site medical care: 6 two-point hand restraint system used?
restraints removed when necessary for medical 7 communication?

K Non-auditory Alerts
Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe) 1 provided to all inmates who need it? 2 3 can and does it give alerts in real time? 4 sufficient to signal fire alarm? 5 sufficient to signal count alert? 6 programmed to signal different alerts? 7 used to notify of prison-wide events? used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events 8 specific to them? Have any requests for medically necessary non9 auditory alerts been denied? Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are 10 working? 11 frequently enough? 12 monitored/recorded formally? 13 Announcement boards 14 used to notify of schedule changes? 15 used consistently? 16 in all dormitories? 17 in gym? 18 in library? 19 audited and monitored?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

X

X

X

Describe: BCFC does not have any inmNA

X
X X NA

Describe: The prison has bed

shakers and flashing strobe lights for

any type of emergencies.

NA

X

X X X X X

X

X
X X NA X X X X X X

BCFC has never used.
BCFC has never used. Yes, but must be approved by Warden.
BCFC currently has no inmates with equipment.
No requests have been made at this time.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 54 of 661 - Page ID#: 2618

Issue/Question #

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

In-person or personal system notification when an 20 inmate misses a page?
Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only because of disability?

21 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in
22 the future? 23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?
Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in 24 emergency?
Does the plan account for how effective 25 communication will be provided?
L Telecommunications
Videophones: 1 Installed? 2 Allow voice carry-over features? 3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)
Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to 4 solve them.
When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe 5 other alternative offered
Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when videophone is out of service.

6 7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates? 8 Appropriate location?
Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, 9 weekends, emergency) if necessary? 10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates? 11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?
No more permission needed than that for hearing 12 inmates using ordinary phones? 13 Advance request unnecessary? 14 Free?
Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular 15 phone calls?
Has any inmate requested access to the 16 videophones and been denied?
Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the inmate's name, the date, and the 17 reason for the denial. TTY: 18 Installed? Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates 19 and staff? Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions 20 made available WITH TTY? 21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify) 22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

X

Describe: No, if an inmate does not

show up after announcements, we

have ADA support inmates who will

go and inform them.

NA

N/A

X X

X

Describe: Describe:
Describe: If system is down VRS would be used. Describe: When the ADA coordinator/back-up meets with them individually or by the ADA handbook.

NA X X
NA
NA X
NA X X

X

X X

X

X X

X

Describe: Never. NA
Describe: No inmate has ever been denied.

NA X
X

Describe:

X
NA X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 55 of 661 - Page ID#: 2619

Issue/Question #

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

location substantially as accessible as conventional 23 telephones for non-deaf inmates? 24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?
Permission needed? 25
Has any request to use the TTY been denied? 26 (Describe) 27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates? 28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe) 29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)
Can access publicly available relay service phone 30 numbers?
Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions 31 for videophones and TTY is less than equitable? 32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?
If yes, was determination (including reasoning, 33 evidence, etc.) documented? 34 Was monitor notified? 35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?
VRS via laptop 36 Available? 37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU) 38 Used when appropriate?
Phones 39 Amplification in every group of phones?
Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need 40 them?
CapTel 41 Appropriate for any particular inmate? 42 If so, installed and working? 43 Request by any inmate denied?
TV/Movies 44 Is captioning available? 45 Is captioning used? 46 Is the captioning checked regularly? 47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?
Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly 48 (Describe) 49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning? 50 Amplification method? (Describe)
If inmate-purchased tv w/ captioning malfunctioned, did staff assist to same extent as w/other inmates 51 regarding malfunctioning personal property? All technology/ equipment in good working order? 52 (Describe problems) Access to communication services for deaf inmates in segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf 53 inmates of same status? Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates only to the same extent and with the 54 same discretion as non-deaf inmates?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

X

X

No permission required if ADA, just have to request the equipment.

X

Describe:

NA

X

Describe:

NA

Describe:

X

X

Describe: NA

Describe: Describe: Describe:
By request.
Describe:
Describe:

NA X X X
NA X
X
NA NA NA NA NA
X X X X
X
X NA

N/A

Describe any problems:

X

X

X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 56 of 661 - Page ID#: 2620

Issue/Question #

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

M Miscellaneous Devices
1 Devices available? (Describe) 2 devices in commissary list?
possibility to request other devices from ADA 3 coordinator? 4 facilitation of purchase?
Purchase of any non-medically necessary device 5 denied? (Describe) 6 determined on case-by-case basis? 7 because security threat? 8 monitor notified? 9 reasoning explained?
ADA coordinator maintains records 10 of requests? 11 of denials?
N Disciplinary
Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate 1 has been punished? 2 Was a re-hearing granted?
O Grievances
Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA 1 coordinator?
If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator forward copy of grievance to ADA 2 coordinator? Records of all grievances filed by deaf/HOH 3 inmates? (not just those related to settlement) 4 Adequate summaries provided in report? Including all deaf or HOH inmate grievances, not just 5 those in settlement? 6 Includes issues raised by inmate in grievance? 7 Includes institution in which grievance was filed? 8 Includes summary of KDOC response? 9 Includes grievance resolution (or lack thereof)?
P Training
Types available 1 CBT? (Using approved training?)
Who received? (Describe) 2 3 All appropriate staff? 4 Live training? (Information only) 5 Who received? (Describe) 6 All appropriate staff?
Targeted training on specific needs 7 training on best communication practices? 8 training on unique needs/problems?
training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may 9 miss alert?

Description/Notes Describe: Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA X X X
NA

X X

X Not necessary.

No grievances have been requested to be shared at this point in time.

X

X

X X

Describe: All staff during annual training.
Describe: Describe:

NA X
NA X
NA NA
X NA
X X
X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 57 of 661 - Page ID#: 2621

Issue/Question #

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may not hear verbal commands and strategies to handle 10 that problem? 11 training on identification of communication needs? consideration given to talking one-on-one with deaf 12 or HOH inmates, instead of in a group? Training on communication 13 training on use and role of interpreters? 14 training on process for obtaining interpreters? training on importance of not separating imate from 15 hearing aid? 16 training on communication technology? 17 training on VRI? 18 training on how to turn on and check for 19 training on non-auditory alert office switch? 20 training on videophone rules? Training on Policies 21 training on the Settlement? 22 training on identity and role of ADA coordinator? 23 training on KDOC anti-discrimination policy? 24 training on existence of KOMS/EMR alerts? 25 training on meaning of ID cards? training on equipment/services/ accommodation 26 available? 27 training on hand restraint policy? 28 training on two-point hand restraint system? 29 training on disciplinary and grievance practies? Do all relevant staff know about reporting obligations? How do you know?

30 Training specifically for housing area staff training on the use of cell/bed notices that indicate
31 an inmate is deaf/HOH 32 training on bed shaker switches 33 training on telecommunications
training on obligations to notify deaf and HOH 34 inmates of alerts
Training specifically for all corrections staff training on accommodations for inmates who sign 35 (esp. restraint policies) training on strategies for inmates who may not hear 36 directions/orders Training specifically for medical staff training on process to obtain hearing aid within two 37 months training on obligation to notify off-site providers of 38 needs 39 Training provided for review by Monitor?

Description/Notes
Describe: Every relevant staff member is contacted by the ADA coordinator and/or back-up personally.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

X
X
X
NA X X
X
X X X X X NA X X X X X
X
X X X

X

NA X X X X
NA X
X NA
X
X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 58 of 661 - Page ID#: 2622

Prison: Bell County Forestry Camp

Name of person filling out form: Susan Partin

Date: 09/09/2019

1

2

3

4

5

6

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

8/10/2016

7/13/2017

4/22/2019

10/14/2018

12/21/2016 N/A

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

KDOC

sick call

Intake

provider appt.

Intake H&P

H&P

3. Date of initial hearing screening

4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

8/17/2016 9/8/2016

8/31/2017 9/26/2017

5/6/2019 5/7/2019

10/16/2018 1/7/2019

2/20/2017 2/20/2017

Hearing imparied

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

A

D

A

A

D

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

N/A

A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 59 of 661 - Page ID#: 2623

1

2

3

4

5

6

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does

it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of

receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an

induction loop system.

Yes

N/A

Yes

Yes

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing

issue was presented to when the hearing issue was

finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or

determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

8/17/2016

8/31/2017

4/22/2019

Hearing imparied

trouble with hearing hearing screen

hearing test and hearin ENT

schedule audicus test

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

9/8/2016

9/26/2017

5/1/2019

Audiology consult seen in clinic

audicus hearing test

Hearing Aids x2 orderedrefused hearing aids HOH bilateral

aids.

10/13/2016

1/7/2019

5/7/2019

picked up hearing aid check hearingaid

evaluated

picked up hearing aid doing well with device hearing aid oredered

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

N/A

10/14/2018

2/20/2017

audiology

2/20/2017

SNHL , tinnitus

3/19/2019

clinic visit

no further appt.

...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 60 of 661 - Page ID#: 2624

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system? Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers)
Captioned Telephone
Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like? Bed shakers Vibrating watches? Vibrating alarm clocks? Pagers? Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration not mentioned above. Earphones for parole hearings Earphones for orientation videos

How many
0
As many as requested
1
1
1 0 0 ?

Where N/A
Medical
Dormitory
Medical Procedures Inmate Canteen Inmate Canteen

When obtained N/A
Upon Request During normal
telephone Upon Request Upon Request By Purchase By Purchase

2 Two ADA Support inmates

2

ADA Coordinator

As needed

2

ADA Coordinator

As needed

Specifications (URL) N/A

How do inmates obtain access? N/A
Healthcare Request Form to see medical and obtain.
Located in the dorm for inmate use during telephone hours
Healthcare Request Form to see medical and obtain.
ADA Coordinator/Back-Up Order via the canteen Order via the canteen
Request Request

How well do they work? N/A
Normal
Normal
Normal Normal Normal Normal Normal
Normal
Normal Normal

Other comments N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 61 of 661 - Page ID#: 2625

Documentation to review KOMS alerts for each deaf/HOH inmate Grievances: Provide/Review summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc.

Date reviewed Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.) 9/9/2019 All known ADA inmates are current.
9/9/2019 As of this date no ADA inmates have filed a grievance.

Provide/Review full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Solve any problems revealed. Discipline Review all disciplinary proceedings involving an inmate who signs. Ensure that VRI or other effective communication was provided at each stage of each such proceedings.

9/9/2019

BCFC has no inmates that communicate via sign language.

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Ensure that no such inmate is being penalized for inability to hear.
VRI Log (review to ensure it's being used in appropriate circumstances. VRS or other videophone alternative (review to ensure that when videophone is inoperative, alternative is in fact available/used)
TTY instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.)
VRI instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.)

9/9/2019
9/9/2019 9/9/2019 9/9/2019 9/9/2019

No deaf/H-o-H inmate has received disciplinary action due to one of these issues.
Log is up-to-date and verified monthly. Equipment is operative. If unoperative, VRI will be used to facilitate until repaired. No issues.
No issues.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 62 of 661 - Page ID#: 2626

Questions regarding effective communications in particular activities or locations. For each, mark compliance (Y, partial, N, no basis) and explain. Goal: each deaf or HOH inmate has an equal opportunity to

In-person interpretation

Availability of VRI: Appropriate equipment

Amplification: (Not just hearing aid -space-specific amplification)

available

Ever used? Used whenever

Intake/ Orientation -- Non-medical Intake, Medical Auxiliary Aid Assessment Units Restrictive Housing Medical/MH care Programs Education Recreation Communications with Chaplain Prison-provided religious programming

Ever used? No No No No No No No No No No No

Used whenever appropriate?
Has not been needed.
Has not been needed.
Has not been needed.
Has not been needed.
Has not been needed.
Has not been needed.
Has not been needed.
Has not been needed.
Has not been needed.
Has not been needed.
Has not been needed.

(computer line, Staff trained? outlet, space)

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

How many times?
No No No No No No No No No No No

appropriate? (without

special request)

Adequate? Describe efforts, issues

Has not been needed.

Yes

Has not been needed.

Yes

Has not been needed.

Yes

Has not been needed.

Yes

Has not been needed.

Yes

Has not been needed.

Yes

Has not been needed.

Yes

Has not been needed.

Yes

Has not been needed.

Yes

Has not been needed.

Yes

Has not been needed.

Yes

Audit item issues/ concerns

Volunteer -led programming (note: Only volunteer

Has not been

interpretation is required)

No

needed.

Yes

Yes

No

Has not been needed.

Yes

Has not been

Parole hearings

No

needed.

Yes

Yes

No

Has not been needed.

Yes

Classification/

Has not been

Transfer

No

needed.

Yes

Yes

No

Has not been needed.

Yes

Has not been

Legal Aid

No

needed.

Yes

Yes

No

Has not been needed.

Yes

Has not been

Grievance process

No

needed.

Yes

Yes

No

Has not been needed.

Yes

Has not been

Work assignments

No

needed.

Yes

Yes

No

Has not been needed.

Yes

Has not been

Court call and ALL parts of disciplinary process

No

needed.

Yes

Yes

No

Has not been needed.

Yes

Staff investigations

Investigative interviews

Preparation of report

Shift supervisor's review of disciplinary report

Investigator's review of disciplinary report

Miranda warnings

aide

Notification of date, time, and place of hearing

Hearing or re-hearing

If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to attend a religious service without effective communication to receive any religious meal, diet, or other accommodation? NO Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have witnessed or been suspected of violation) provided with an inmate or staff advisor on same terms as non-deaf inmates? YES Inmates can have a staff council upon request. It is reviewed and denied or appoved based on the same process as a non deaf inmate. YES

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 63 of 661 - Page ID#: 2627

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Listed

Low literacy?

with Signs (So that

If signs to communicat

Bed Shaker?

Other Alert Device TTY Access

Personal Phone
Amplifier

Shake &

KOMS to

written

Has

Has e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not Wake (Not Any other

ADA commu communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; auxiliary

Precautio nicate

n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting

denied; denied; denied;

denied;

denied;

aid Outome Audit item

ID

n?

(Y/N) effective)

waived)

waived)

notes? took place? granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) requested? ?

issues/concerns

Not

Not

Not

Not

Y

N Associates

Y

Waived

N/A

Requested Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

Not

Not Not at this

Y

N

Seventh

Y

Waived

N/A

Requested Requested Requested Requested Requested time

N/A

Not

Not

Not

Not

Not Not at this

Y

N Year of College

Y

Waived

N/A

Requested Requested Requested Requested Requested time

N/A

Not

Not

Not

Not

Not Not at this

Y

N

GED

Y

Waived

N/A

Requested Requested Requested Requested Requested time

N/A

Not

Not

Not

Not

Not Not at this

Y

N

Eighth

Y

Waived

N/A

Requested Requested Requested Requested Requested time

N/A

Not

Not

Not

Not Not at this

Y

N

GED

Y

Waived

N/A

Requested Requested Requested Granted Requested time

N/A

Not

Not

Not

Not

Not Not at this

Y

N

GED

Y

Waived

N/A

Requested Requested Requested Requested Requested time

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 64 of 661 - Page ID#: 2628

Fill this out for EACH location where there are any deaf/HOH inmates

Dorm/unit

Walk

How many Deaf/ HOH inmates?

How many inmates who sign to communic ate

Volume

Bed

adjustable phone available
to inmates without special

How many bed shakers?

shakers set up for use
for multiple

request?

purposes?

Staff use bed
shakers for multiple purposes?

If there are any inmates who sign: Location available for
VRI?

If there are any inmates who
sign: Staff trained for VRI

If there are any inmates
who sign: Ready
access to videophone

No bed No bed

Wing 4

Wing 4

3

0

Yes

0 shakers in shakers in

N/A

N/A

N/A

use.

use.

No bed No bed

Wing 5

Wing 5

3

0

Yes

0 shakers in shakers in

N/A

N/A

N/A

use.

use.

Audit item issues/concerns

Date 9/9/2019 9/9/2019 9/9/2019 9/9/2019 9/9/2019 9/9/2019 9/9/2019 9/9/2019 9/9/2019 9/9/2019 9/9/2019

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 65 of 661 - Page ID#: 2629

Inmate or staff? Inmate number Staff

Staff title CTO/ADA Coordinator

Staff

Recreation Leader/Back-Up ADA Coordinator

Staff

Warden

Staff

Health Services Administrator

Inmate

Inmate

Inmate

Inmate

Inmate

Inmate

Inmate

Topics
H-o-H H-o-H H-o-H H-o-H H-o-H H-o-H Legally Blind

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 66 of 661 - Page ID#: 2630
Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 67 of 661 - Page ID#: 2631

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

A ADA coordinator

1 Is an ADA coordinator designated?

Kristopher King, Safety Coord.

X

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there 2 was no ADA coordinator appointed?

No

X

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Change requested from Frankfort

X

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected

Yes

X

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with

5 inmates in a timely and appropriate manner? How? Yes. Information is shared weekly during Inmate Orientation.

X

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? 6 (THIS REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

TV's in Cores of Dorms provide this

information

X

Is the information prominently posted in any 7 housing unit where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

Yes: See above response

X

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

X

9 Describe training

Online Training

Online

Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately 10 cover information?

Yes

X

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training)

Yes

X

12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

Yes

X

Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's 13 powerpoint)

Yes

X

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with 14 settlement agreement?

Yes

X

Does ADA coordinator retrieve at least monthly 15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Yes

X

Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's 16 tracking list?

Inmates are added to the list as they

are identified or transferred here

X

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in 17 implementing the settlement?

Yes

X

Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf 18 inmates?

Yes. Caseworkers call regularly to

assist inmates

X

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on 19 deaf inmates?

Walk the dorms each week

X

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the 20 inmates in those situations?

Yes

X

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective 21 way with the monitor?

As time permits with other duties

X

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the 22 monitor when necessary?

Yes. Whenever requested.

X

B Reporting obligations

If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was 1 monitor notified?

No Change

X

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf 2 and HOH inmates?

Yes

X

Should be complete unless there

are any without ADA notification on

X

3 Is the list complete?

KOMS

4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

Yes

X

Quarterly summary of all grievances by deaf or 5 HOH inmates shared with monitor?

In Process

X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 68 of 661 - Page ID#: 2632

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Was there a direct threat determination made for

6 jobs, activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe)

Yes.

7 Was it reported to the monitor?

8 Was the report complete?

9 Was the report timely?

10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert? 11 If yes, was the monitor notified?
Did the institution consult with the monitor about 12 the non-auditory alert? 13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?
C Intake/Orientation - Corrections
1 Hard of hearing inmates Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is
2 arriving? Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive
3 automatic notifications.) Effective communications planned/provided?
4 (Describe) Deaf inmates Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is
5 arriving? 6 Describe 7 Effective communications planning? 8 Effective communication provided? 9 Describe 10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed? 11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?
Orientation videos 12 Captioned? 13 Shown in a quiet space? 14 Amplification if needed?
Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not 15 literate? (Describe)
D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services
Effective Communication during general medical intake, and during medical care more generally: 1 Is there effective communications planning? Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty 2 hearing if interpretation is needed? 3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office? Are staff aware of, and use, effective 4 communications techniques? Notice to medical staff: 5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How? Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on 6 cover and within the file?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

Job apps looked at by Jobs Coord. NA

X

X

X

Yes. Green light to indicate

movement on HOH walks in Dorm 3. NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes. Auto Notifications

NA X

Describe: Auto Notifications

NA

Yes

X

NA

Auto Notifications

X

NA

X

X

Describe:

NA

Yes. Has not been needed recently

X

Yes. Has not been needed recently

X

NA

X

X

Headphones provided as needed.

X

Speak with the inmate and explain

rules and regulations

X

Yes Yes Yes Yes. They review Inmates medical Yes

NA X X X X
NA X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 69 of 661 - Page ID#: 2633

# Issue/Question
Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate 7 accommodations.
Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site 8 providers of need for interpretation? 9 Procedure in place to ensure notification? 10 Has there ever been a notification to provider? 11 Adequate notice?
Outside providers offering effective communication 12 to inmates who sign? 13 How?
Hearing screening/medical intake:

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

14 Performed for all new inmates? 15 Within first 3 days at institution? 16 Approved screening form? (need to review) 17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid? 18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?
How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it 19 administered by staff? 20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical) 21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy? 22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe. 23 Medical history includes hearing questions?
Other methods of access: Do annual/routine physicals include hearing 24 screening? 25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening? 26 Inmate can obtain screening on request? If screening indicated problem (3+ "yes" answers), 27 is there further assessment? Adequate determination of need for designation/ 28 audiology services? How? 29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)? Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf 30 or HOH, apart from audiology services decision? After assessment, does medical: 31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert? 32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file?

33 Notify ADA coordinator? 34 Is notification prompt?
Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist) 35 Audiology services offered when needed? 36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles) 37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid? 38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services 39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

Yes Yes Describe: Yes

NA
X
X NA
X

N/A

N/A

N/A

NA

NA

Done by Medical at RCC on intake

and at EKCC as needed

X

Yes

X

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Administered by Staff

NA

Medical Staff

NA

Yes

X

Explanation of questions as needed

X

Yes

X

NA

Should. Refer to Wellpath Medical

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Determined by Medical Staff

X

Depends on Provider accessability

X

Yes. Medical provider

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Notification on arrival of Hearing

aids.

X

Yes

X

Yes Yes Yes. Pocket Talker Yes Yes

NA X X X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 70 of 661 - Page ID#: 2634

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Adequate progress tracking? Should include: 40 initial request/questionnaire? 41 each relevant medical visit? 42 any audiology visit? 43 hearing aid provision? 44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks? 45 Shared with ADA Coordinator? 46 Shared with monitor when requested
Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site

trips does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing 47 aid? Describe.

In the past year, how many individuals have had to 48 wait more than sixty days to receive a hearing aid? 49 What is the cause of the delay?

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) 50 to improve this process?
Co-pay and availability issues: 47 Charged only once -- not again for followups
Hearing aid batteries 48 Available for free? 49 In sufficient numbers? 50 7 days/week? 51 regardless of housing?

E Information provided inmates

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe) Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-

2 discrimination and ADA services? Brochure? Items to include:

3 Non-discrimination obligation 4 Effective communication obligation 5 Auxiliary aids and services available
How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services

6 (including hearing aids, and batteries) Communication equipment available, and how to

7 use 8 ADA coordinator and how to reach
Other items:

9 Institution schedule of interpreters Request for Accommodations/ Communications

10 Assistance Medical Request form includes request for

11 accommodations Job application form includes request for

12 accommodations 13 Waiver forms
Classification form includes request for

14 accommodations 15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations
SAP and other programming form includes request

16 for accommodation

Description/Notes
Y Y Y Y Y Sometimes Y
1 to 3 trips
2 Provider Scheduling Expedite process as much as possible with scheduling visits.
Yes. Only once
Yes Yes Yes Yes
Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA X X X X X X X

NA
NA NA
NA NA
X NA
X X X X
X X NA X X X X
X X NA X X
X
X X X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 71 of 661 - Page ID#: 2635

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure 18 available in law library? (Need to check)
Do request forms: 19 list available services comprehensively?
clearly explain services and aids (what they are

20 and when they are available? 21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?
expressly ask about preferred mode of

communication/needed services and why they are

22 useful? 23 explain which items are free?
encompass religious and volunteer-provided

24 programming? Effective communication of these resources: Are the materials in language accessible to each

25 inmate? Is this information provided with effective

26 communication? Can inmates request and receive a meaningful

opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member

27 and interpreter to ask questions about the Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment

in/application for a program with staff, is effective

28 communication provided? are potential accommodations covered in the

29 discussion? Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment

in/application in education with staff, is effective

30 communication provided? are potential accommodations covered in the

31 discussion?

F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution? 2 Include picture of ID card and other official 3 Notice posted outside housing units? 4 Include picture of ID card and other official 5 Cell/bed cards 6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert? 7 Clear process to obtain? Describe 8 Each inmate has one if not waived? 9 Provided timely? 10 Replacements provided when needed?

Description/Notes
Outside of Dorm 3 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

X

X

NA X

X

X

X

X X NA X

X

X NA
X

X NA
X

X

X X X
X NA
X X X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 72 of 661 - Page ID#: 2636

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

KOMS alert? 11 Staff aware of use of KOMS
Working process to get new inmate alerts added?

12 (Describe) 13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check) 14 Appropriately obvious

15 Updated timely Individual ID cards
16 Staff aware of meaning? 17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?) 18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived? 19 Provided timely? 20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times? 21 Prompt replacements provided?

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose? 23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator? 24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver? 25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?
Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested 26 ID? 27 If yes, was an ID provided?
G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment
Identification to ADA Coordinator Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification 1 upon intake of each deaf/hoh inmate? Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification 2 of other deaf/hoh inmates? Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment with every arriving or 3 newly identified deaf/hoh inmate? At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of communication expressly ascertained 4 and documented? At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate about available auxiliary aids and 5 services? Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms 6 explained? Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral and written; VRI; or visual 7 descriptions ) Other assessments For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an 8 assessment on intake, has one been done? 9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

Yes

X

I add the alerts as discovered to be

needed

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes. I update whenever a new alert

is needed.

X

NA

Y

X

Y

X

Y

X

Y

X

Y

X

Y

X

To write down inmate name and

number for disciplinary reasons.

Then promptly returned.

NA

N/A

NA

Y

X

Y

X

Y

X

NA

Y

X

Y

X

X Y

X Y

X Y

Y

X

X Y
NA

X

Y

X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 73 of 661 - Page ID#: 2637

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided
1 On-person ID cards 2 Cell cards 3 Bed shaker 4 In-person alerts 5 Pager
Phone volume adjust setting (available in each 6 location where phones are available?) 7 Amplifier for phone
Consideration of specific housing assignment to 8 minimize communication difficulties? 9 Other amplification 10 Other (describe)
General issues Special housing area: Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH 11 inmates? (Describe)

If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? 12 (Describe)
If there is such an area, are inmates required to be 13 housed there? (such a requirement is non-
If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live there, are accommodations etc. still fully 14 available to the inmate? Describe any restrictions. In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is 15 primary consideration given to inmate request? If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or not requesting 16 aids/services, were accommodations provided? Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services 17 documented in inmate institutional files? Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary 18 aids/services shared appropriately with staff? 19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained? 20 Have any been out of comission? 21 Describe -- which and for how long? Inmates moving housing or transferred: not 22 separated from hearing aid? 23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided? 24 Promptly? 25 Has there been a direct threat determination? 26 Describe Appropriately individuated (must consider specific 27 degree of impairment and specific dangers posed) 28 Appropriately reported? 29 Was it the appropriate decision? 30 Are classes in sign language provided? 31 deaf inmates given notice? 32 priority given to deaf inmates?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

Y

X

Y

X

N

X

Y

X

N

X

Yes. Every phone has volume

control.

X

Yes. Issued when requested.

X

Yes. Dorm 3 has two walks

considered HOH walks.

X

X

NA

NA

NA

Yes. Dorm 3. Not required to live

there.

NA

Has Green lights that activate for

movements etc. in addition to the

audio announcement.

NA

No requirement

X

X No Shake and wake watch in RHU.

Yes

X

X

X

X

X

NA

NA

Inmates keep hearing aid with them

at all times.

X

N/A

X

N/A

X

NA

NA

X

X

X

X

N/A

X

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 74 of 661 - Page ID#: 2638

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

I Interpretation in general
Qualified interpretation services available: Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation 1 communicated to inmates? covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 2 encounters/communications/settings) Does the request form clearly encompass religious 3 and other volunteer-provided programming? Effective process for choosing qualified 4 interpretation method? 5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences? Standing arrangement with providers? 6 In-person? 7 VRI? Is VRI availability: 8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)? after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours 9 of notice)? on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 10 hours of notice)? during emergencies (including medical emergencies) 11 when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)? Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? 12 Describe VRI laptop functional? 13 In general 14 Always checked for sufficient battery power? 15 Routine software updates? VRI laptop has necessary items with it? 16 Splitter? 17 Instructions? 18 Long power cord? 19 Usable as VRS? 20 VRI effectiveness tracked? 21 How? Information used to determine when in-person 22 interpretation should be first recourse? Is in-person interpretation available: 23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical 24 Parole? Describe each time in-person interpretation has 25 been offered Describe each time in-person interpretation has 26 been denied. Parole board notified of need for interpretation at 27 least 7 days before?

Description/Notes
Not used. Not used. N/A N/A N/A

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA X

X

X
X
X NA
X X NA X
X
X
X
X NA
X X X NA X X X X
N/A N/A
X
X X X
N/A
N/A
N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 75 of 661 - Page ID#: 2639

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? 28 (Reliance in non-emergency is non-compliant) 29 Describe
in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence

30 and VRI was unavailable) Communication with inmates uses inmate's
31 preferred method? Written communication is limited to only simple

32 matters. Written communication is not needed when inmate

33 has low literacy Qualified interpretation services available: Does the request form clearly encompass religious

34 and other volunteer-provided programming? for all inmate-staff communication when requested

by inmate? (not limited to only certain

35 encounters/communications/settings) Is the process for using VRI communicated to
36 inmates?

J Hand Restraints

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs? Used for an appropriate reason? transportation

to/from prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing?

2 Individualized finding of a security threat? Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who
3 might ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.) 4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed? 5 Staff aware of the issue
Off-site medical care: 6 two-point hand restraint system used?
restraints removed when necessary for medical

7 communication?

K Non-auditory Alerts

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? 2 provided to all inmates who need it? 3 can and does it give alerts in real time? 4 sufficient to signal fire alarm? 5 sufficient to signal count alert? 6 programmed to signal different alerts? 7 used to notify of prison-wide events?
used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events

8 specific to them? Have any requests for medically necessary non-

9 auditory alerts been denied? Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are

10 working? 11 frequently enough? 12 monitored/recorded formally?

Description/Notes No. No inmates are used for interpretation. Describe: N/A Yes Yes
N/A
Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes. Movement Times No No Yes Yes No

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

X NA
X

X

X

X NA
X

X

X

NA

N/A

X

X
X X NA X
X

NA X X X X X X
X
X
X
X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 76 of 661 - Page ID#: 2640

# Issue/Question
13 Announcement boards 14 used to notify of schedule changes? 15 used consistently? 16 in all dormitories? 17 in gym? 18 in library? 19 audited and monitored?
In-person or personal system notification when an 20 inmate misses a page?
Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ 21 info only because of disability?
Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in 22 the future? 23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?
Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in 24 emergency?
Does the plan account for how effective 25 communication will be provided?
L Telecommunications
Videophones: 1 Installed? 2 Allow voice carry-over features? 3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)
Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to 4 solve them.
When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe 5 other alternative offered
Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, 6 when videophone is out of service. 7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates? 8 Appropriate location?
Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, 9 weekends, emergency) if necessary? 10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates? 11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?
No more permission needed than that for hearing 12 inmates using ordinary phones? 13 Advance request unnecessary? 14 Free?
Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular 15 phone calls?
Has any inmate requested access to the 16 videophones and been denied?
Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the inmate's name, the date, and the 17 reason for the denial.

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes
NO
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes Yes Yes None
No Issues. System works fine
Yes No Inmates currently use videophone Yes Yes
Yes Yes. Or Longer as needed Yes
Same as other inmates No advance request required Yes
Same as other inmates
No
N/A

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA X X X X X X

X

NA
N/A X X
X

NA X X
NA
NA

NA X X X X X X X X X
NA
X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 77 of 661 - Page ID#: 2641

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

TTY: 18 Installed?
Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates

19 and staff? Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions

20 made available WITH TTY? 21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify) 22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?
location substantially as accessible as conventional

23 telephones for non-deaf inmates? 24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access? 25 Permission needed?
Has any request to use the TTY been denied?

26 (Describe) 27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates? 28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe) 29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)
Can access publicly available relay service phone

30 numbers? Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions
31 for videophones and TTY is less than equitable? 32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?
If yes, was determination (including reasoning,

33 evidence, etc.) documented? 34 Was monitor notified? 35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?
VRS via laptop 36 Available? 37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU) 38 Used when appropriate?
Phones 39 Amplification in every group of phones?
Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need

40 them? CapTel
41 Appropriate for any particular inmate? 42 If so, installed and working? 43 Request by any inmate denied?
TV/Movies 44 Is captioning available?

45 Is captioning used? 46 Is the captioning checked regularly? 47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?
Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly 48 (Describe) 49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning? 50 Amplification method? (Describe)

Description/Notes
Yes
Yes
Yes Zero Yes
Yes Yes No

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA X

X

X
NA X
X
X X

No Yes Yes. Same as regular calls Yes
Yes

NA X
NA X
X

No N/A
N/A Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
All phones have volume controls
Yes. Pocket amplifiers

NA X
X
X X NA X X X NA X
X

Yes

X

Yes

X

No

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes. Additional Movie Channel with

captioning as well as TVs with

X

captioning

Yes

X

No

X

Yes. Additional Movie Channel with

captioning as well as TVs with

X

captioning

Yes

X

Describe:

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 78 of 661 - Page ID#: 2642

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

If inmate-purchased tv w/ captioning malfunctioned,

did staff assist to same extent as w/other inmates

51 regarding malfunctioning personal property? All technology/ equipment in good working order?
52 (Describe problems) Access to communication services for deaf inmates in segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf
53 inmates of same status? Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates only to the same extent and with the
54 same discretion as non-deaf inmates?

M Miscellaneous Devices

1 Devices available? (Describe) 2 devices in commissary list?
possibility to request other devices from ADA

3 coordinator? 4 facilitation of purchase?
Purchase of any non-medically necessary device 5 denied? (Describe) 6 determined on case-by-case basis? 7 because security threat? 8 monitor notified? 9 reasoning explained?
ADA coordinator maintains records 10 of requests? 11 of denials?

N Disciplinary

Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter

and without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate

1 has been punished? 2 Was a re-hearing granted?

O Grievances

Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA 1 coordinator?
If inmates choose to do that, does grievance

coordinator forward copy of grievance to ADA

2 coordinator? Records of all grievances filed by deaf/HOH
3 inmates? (not just those related to settlement) 4 Adequate summaries provided in report?
Including all deaf or HOH inmate grievances, not just

5 those in settlement? 6 Includes issues raised by inmate in grievance? 7 Includes institution in which grievance was filed? 8 Includes summary of KDOC response? 9 Includes grievance resolution (or lack thereof)?

Description/Notes
Yes No issues
Yes
Yes
Describe: Some Yes Yes No. No denials Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
No N/A
Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

X

X

X

X

NA X
X
X
NA X X X X
NA X X

X
X
X
X
X X X X X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 79 of 661 - Page ID#: 2643

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

P Training
Types available 1 CBT? (Using approved training?) 2 Who received? (Describe) 3 All appropriate staff? 4 Live training? (Information only) 5 Who received? (Describe) 6 All appropriate staff?
Targeted training on specific needs 7 training on best communication practices? 8 training on unique needs/problems?
training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may 9 miss alert?
training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may not hear verbal commands and strategies to handle 10 that problem? 11 training on identification of communication needs? consideration given to talking one-on-one with deaf 12 or HOH inmates, instead of in a group? Training on communication 13 training on use and role of interpreters? 14 training on process for obtaining interpreters? training on importance of not separating imate from 15 hearing aid? 16 training on communication technology? 17 training on VRI? 18 training on how to turn on and check for 19 training on non-auditory alert office switch? 20 training on videophone rules? Training on Policies 21 training on the Settlement? 22 training on identity and role of ADA coordinator? 23 training on KDOC anti-discrimination policy? 24 training on existence of KOMS/EMR alerts? 25 training on meaning of ID cards? training on equipment/services/ accommodation 26 available? 27 training on hand restraint policy? 28 training on two-point hand restraint system? 29 training on disciplinary and grievance practies? Do all relevant staff know about reporting 30 obligations? How do you know? Training specifically for housing area staff training on the use of cell/bed notices that indicate 31 an inmate is deaf/HOH 32 training on bed shaker switches 33 training on telecommunications training on obligations to notify deaf and HOH 34 inmates of alerts

Description/Notes
Yes Describe: Yes Yes All Annual In-service classes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes
Yes Yes
Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes. I teach portions of every inservice and new hire class
Yes Yes Yes
Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA X
NA X
NA NA
X NA
X X
X

X
X
X
NA X X
X
X X X X X NA
X X X X X
X
X X X
X
NA
X
X X
X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 80 of 661 - Page ID#: 2644

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Training specifically for all corrections staff training on accommodations for inmates who sign

35 (esp. restraint policies) training on strategies for inmates who may not hear

36 directions/orders Training specifically for medical staff training on process to obtain hearing aid within two

37 months training on obligation to notify off-site providers of

38 needs 39 Training provided for review by Monitor?

Q Monitor Access

Has the monitor been granted access to requested KDOC records, files, and papers that pertain to the 1 agreement? 2 If no, was an explanation provided for the refusal? Has the monitor been granted access to KDOC staff 3 members and employees? 4 Were staff/employees cooperative? Has KDOC responded to reasonable written 5 questions?

Description/Notes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

X

X NA
X

X X

X
X X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 81 of 661 - Page ID#: 2645

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 82 of 661 - Page ID#: 2646

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 83 of 661 - Page ID#: 2647

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 84 of 661 - Page ID#: 2648

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 85 of 661 - Page ID#: 2649

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 86 of 661 - Page ID#: 2650

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 87 of 661 - Page ID#: 2651

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 88 of 661 - Page ID#: 2652

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 89 of 661 - Page ID#: 2653

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 90 of 661 - Page ID#: 2654

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 91 of 661 - Page ID#: 2655

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 92 of 661 - Page ID#: 2656

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 93 of 661 - Page ID#: 2657

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 94 of 661 - Page ID#: 2658

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 95 of 661 - Page ID#: 2659

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 96 of 661 - Page ID#: 2660

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 97 of 661 - Page ID#: 2661

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 98 of 661 - Page ID#: 2662

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 99 of 661 - Page ID#: 2663

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 100 of 661 - Page ID#: 2664

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 101 of 661 - Page ID#: 2665

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 102 of 661 - Page ID#: 2666

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 103 of 661 - Page ID#: 2667

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 104 of 661 - Page ID#: 2668

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 105 of 661 - Page ID#: 2669

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 106 of 661 - Page ID#: 2670

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 107 of 661 - Page ID#: 2671

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 108 of 661 - Page ID#: 2672

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 109 of 661 - Page ID#: 2673

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 110 of 661 - Page ID#: 2674

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 111 of 661 - Page ID#: 2675

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 112 of 661 - Page ID#: 2676

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 113 of 661 - Page ID#: 2677

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 114 of 661 - Page ID#: 2678

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 115 of 661 - Page ID#: 2679

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 116 of 661 - Page ID#: 2680

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 117 of 661 - Page ID#: 2681

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 118 of 661 - Page ID#: 2682

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 119 of 661 - Page ID#: 2683

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 120 of 661 - Page ID#: 2684

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 121 of 661 - Page ID#: 2685

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 122 of 661 - Page ID#: 2686

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 123 of 661 - Page ID#: 2687

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 124 of 661 - Page ID#: 2688

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 125 of 661 - Page ID#: 2689

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 126 of 661 - Page ID#: 2690

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 127 of 661 - Page ID#: 2691

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 128 of 661 - Page ID#: 2692

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 129 of 661 - Page ID#: 2693

Technology

How many Where

When obtained Specifications (URL)

FM radio transmitters, usable as

an amplifier system?

0

Phone amplifiers (not volume

control: portable amplifiers)

Captioned Telephone

1

Dorm 5

Other amplifiers, amplification

systems, or the like?

1

Chapel

Bed shakers

0

Vibrating watches?

Vibrating alarm clocks?

0

Pagers?

0

Other non-auditory alerts or

assistive devices currently in use

or under consideration not

mentioned above.

2

Dorm 3. Green Lights durin 3/1/2019

Earphones for parole hearings 0

Earphones for orientation videos 0

How well do they How do inmates obtain access? work?
Works well

N/A

Works very well.

Other comments

Inmate

uses this device.

PA System used for services

Activated during movements in addition to audible announcements.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 130 of 661 - Page ID#: 2694

Documentation to review KOMS alerts for each deaf/HOH inmate Grievances:
Provide/Review summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc.

Date reviewed 8/7/2019

Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.) All have HOH alerts as of 8/7/2019

8/21/2019

Summary sheets will be attached.

Provide/Review full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Solve any problems revealed. Discipline Review all disciplinary proceedings involving an inmate who signs. Ensure that VRI or other effective communication was provided at each stage of each such proceedings.

8/21/2019

Grievances regarding HOH issues will be attached.

07/01/19 08/01/19

09/03/19

N/A - No Inmates who sign are housed at EKCC.

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Ensure that no such inmate is being penalized for inability to hear.
VRI Log (review to ensure it's being used in appropriate circumstances. VRS or other videophone alternative (review to ensure that when videophone is inoperative, alternative is in fact available/used)
TTY instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.)
VRI instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.)

Only 1 disciplinary report found to have any bearing on being deaf/HOH. Inmate

received a disciplinary report of 2-02 Disruptive Behavior on 1/3/19 at GRCC when he

refused to stand for count and stated he didn't have to stand up for count due to him being hard

07/01/19 08/01/19 of hearing. Being Hard of Hearing does not exempt him from following institutional protocols for

09/03/19

count. The following text is the body of the disciplinary report: On 01/03/2019 at approximately

7:00 a.m., I, Officer Tina Flannagan, was assigned dorm 1 officer. I announced that it was count

time and began my round. When I reached 1AL05, neither Inmate

or

were standing for count. I knocked on their cell door once, and

then knocked a second time louder. Inmate gets up and alerts Inmate

that it is

count time. Inmate

looks at me and gives me a thumbs up. I ask for their IDs to

issue a warning card. When the yard opened, Inmate

rushed up to me and yelled in

front of approximately 15 inmates that he was getting sick and tired of me knocking on his

door. He informed me, "I don't have to stand for count. I'm hard of hearing."

07/01/19 08/01/19

09/03/19

N/A - No usage

07/01/19 08/01/19

09/03/19

N/A - No usage

07/01/19 08/01/19

09/03/19

Yes. Instructions are included.

07/01/19 08/01/19

09/03/19

Yes. Instructions are included.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 131 of 661 - Page ID#: 2695

Questions regarding effective communications in particular activities or locations. For each, mark compliance (Y, partial, N, no basis) and explain. Goa

Intake/ Orientation -- Non-medical Intake, Medical Auxiliary Aid Assessment Units Restrictive Housing Medical/MH care Programs

In-person interpretation

Ever used?

Used whenever appropriate?

Availability of VRI: Appropriate equipment available (computer line,
Staff trained? outlet, space)

Ever used? How many times?

Used whenever appropriate? (without special request)

N Partial
Yes Partial Partial
Yes Partial

Used when needed.

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Education

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Recreation Communications with Chaplain Prison-provided religious programming Volunteer -led programming (note: Only volunteer interpretation is required) Parole hearings Classification/ Transfer Legal Aid Grievance process

Partial Yes
Yes
Partial Yes
Yes Yes Yes

Used when needed. Used when needed.
Used when needed.

Partial Yes
Yes

Used when needed. Used when needed.
Used when needed. Used when needed. Used when needed.

Partial Yes
Yes Yes Yes

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Work assignments Court call and ALL parts of disciplinary process
Staff investigations Investigative interviews Preparation of report Shift supervisor's review of disciplinary report Investigator's review of disciplinary report Miranda warnings When advising inmate of right to consult with legal aide Notification of date, time, and place of hearing Hearing or re-hearing If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

Partial
Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes
Yes Yes
Yes
Yes Yes Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Used when needed.

Yes

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Special questions:

Has any inmate been required to atNo

No

Are deaf or HOH inmates (who haveYes

Yes

Yes

Not used. Will be as needed.

Yes inmates can have a staff council upon request. It is reviewed and denied or appoved based on the same process as a non deaf inmate.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 132 of 661 - Page ID#: 2696
Questions regarding effective comaml: each deaf or HOH inmate has an equal Amplification: (Not just hearing aid -- spacespecific amplification)

Intake/ Orientation -- Non-medical Intake, Medical Auxiliary Aid Assessment Units Restrictive Housing Medical/MH care Programs

Adequate?
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Education

Partial

Recreation Communications with Chaplain Prison-provided religious programming Volunteer -led programming (note: Only volunteer interpretation is required) Parole hearings Classification/ Transfer Legal Aid Grievance process

Partial Yes
Partial
Partial Yes
Yes Yes Yes

Work assignments Court call and ALL parts of disciplinary process
Staff investigations Investigative interviews Preparation of report Shift supervisor's review of disciplinary report Investigator's review of disciplinary report Miranda warnings When advising inmate of right to consult with legal aide Notification of date, time, and place of hearing Hearing or re-hearing If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

Partial
Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes
Yes Yes
Yes
Yes Yes Yes

Describe efforts, issues

Audit item issues/concerns

Pocket Talkers use when needed Pocket Talkers use when needed
Pocket Talkers use when needed Pocket Talkers use when needed
Looking into amplification resources
Looking into amplification resources PA Systems
PA Systems

PA Systems

Looking into amplification resources

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to atN/A

Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have

Yes inmates can have a staff counci

Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 133 of 661 - Page ID#: 2697

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Low literacy?

(So that

Listed with

written

Has

Has

KOMS ADA Signs to communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door

Precaution communicat n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or

Name

ID

?

e (Y/N)

effective)

waived) waived)

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

No.

Suspected

hearing loss

from

Medical.

Waiting on

additional

testing. N

N

Y

Y

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

No. No

documenta

tion of

hearing loss

from

Medical. N

N

Y

Y

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

If signs to

communicat

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid

KOMS

Assessment Bed Shaker? (Not

precaution meeting requested;

notes?

took place? denied; granted)

N/A

Y

Not requested

N/A

Y

Not requested

N/A

Y

Not requested

N/A

Y

Not requested

N/A

Y

Not requested

N/A

Y

Not requested

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested

Other Alert Device TTY Access (Not (Not requested; requested; denied; granted) denied; granted) Not Requested Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not Requested Not requested

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Not requested Not requested Not requested

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Not requested Not requested Not requested

Personal Phone Amplifier (Not requested; denied; granted) Granted Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Shake & Wake (Not requested; denied; granted) Granted Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted Not requested

Not requested Not requested Not requested

Granted Not requested Not requested

Not requested Not requested Not requested

Not requested Granted Not requested

Yes

N

N

Yes

N

N

Yes

N

N

Yes

N

N

Yes

N

N

Yes

N

N

Yes

N

N

Yes

N

N

Yes

N

N

Yes

N

N

Yes

N

N

No. Waiting

on Provider

review. N

N

Yes

N

N

Yes

N

N

Yes

N

N

Yes

N

N

Yes

N

N

Yes

N

N

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Granted

Granted

Granted

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Granted

Granted

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Granted

Granted

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Granted

Granted

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Granted

Granted

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Granted

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 134 of 661 - Page ID#: 2698

Name

Any other

auxiliary aid

Audit item

ID

requested? Outome?

issues/concerns

CapTel Phone

Provided. Uses in place of TTY Device.

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 135 of 661 - Page ID#: 2699

Low literacy?

If signs to

(So that

communicat

Listed with

written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid

Personal Phone

KOMS ADA Signs to communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment Bed Shaker? (Not Other Alert Device TTY Access (Not Amplifier (Not Shake & Wake

Precaution communicat n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting requested;

(Not requested; requested;

requested;

(Not requested;

ID

?

e (Y/N)

effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? denied; granted) denied; granted) denied; granted) denied; granted) denied; granted)

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

No.

Refused all

hearing

tests from N

N

Waived

Waived N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 136 of 661 - Page ID#: 2700

Any other

auxiliary aid

Audit item

ID

requested? Outome?

issues/concerns

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 137 of 661 - Page ID#: 2701

Fill this out for EACH location where there are any deaf/HOH inmates

How many Volume

Bed

If there are

How inmates adjustable

shakers set Staff use If there are any

any inmates

many who sign phone available How up for use bed

inmates who If there are who sign:

Deaf/ to

to inmates

many for

shakers for sign: Location any inmates Ready

HOH communic without special bed

multiple multiple available for who sign: Staff access to Audit item

Dorm/unit

Walk

inmates? ate

request?

shakers? purposes? purposes? VRI?

trained for VRI videophone issues/concerns

Dorm 2

BU

1 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 2

AL

1 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 3

BL

3 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 3

CL

6 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 3

DL

1 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 3

CU

1 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 4

BU

1 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 4

CU

1 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 5

AL

3 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 5

BU

1 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 5

CL

1 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 6

CL

2 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 6

CU

4 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 6

DU

2 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 6

DL

1 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 6

BL

1 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 7

DL

1 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 7

CL

1 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 7

BL

2 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 7

CU

3 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 7

DU

1 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 7

AU

2 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 8

CU

3 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 8

BL

2 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 8

DL

1 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 8

BU

2 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 8

AU

1 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Dorm 9

AL

1 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

MSU

A WING

2 None

Yes

None None

None

Yes

Yes

Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 138 of 661 - Page ID#: 2702
Green River Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 139 of 661 - Page ID#: 2703

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

A ADA coordinator
1 Is an ADA coordinator designated? Has there been a time (since last audit) when there
2 was no ADA coordinator appointed? 3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website? 4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected
Was the ADA coordinator information shared with 5 inmates in a timely and appropriate manner? How?
Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? 6 (THIS REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)
Is the information prominently posted in any 7 housing unit where deaf/HOH inmates are held? 8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training? 9 Describe training
Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately 10 cover information? 11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training) 12 Adequate w/r/t state law?
Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's 13 powerpoint)
Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with 14 settlement agreement?
Does ADA coordinator retrieve at least monthly 15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?
Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's 16 tracking list?
Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in 17 implementing the settlement?
Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf 18 inmates?
Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on 19 deaf inmates?
Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the 20 inmates in those situations?
Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective 21 way with the monitor?
Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the 22 monitor when necessary?

Describe:

Description/Notes Describe method used to ascertain:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

C no C c c
c
c c NA c c c c
c
no
c
c
c
c
c
c

All Inmates have oriantation when arri VRI

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 140 of 661 - Page ID#: 2704

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

B Reporting obligations
If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was 1 monitor notified?
Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf 2 and HOH inmates? 3 Is the list complete? 4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?
Quarterly summary of all grievances by deaf or 5 HOH inmates shared with monitor?
Was there a direct threat determination made for 6 jobs, activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe) 7 Was it reported to the monitor? 8 Was the report complete? 9 Was the report timely? 10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert? 11 If yes, was the monitor notified?
Did the institution consult with the monitor about 12 the non-auditory alert? 13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Describe:

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

c
c c c c
NA N/a N/A N/A
NA N/A N/A C

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 141 of 661 - Page ID#: 2705

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

C Intake/Orientation - Corrections
1 Hard of hearing inmates Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is
2 arriving? Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive
3 automatic notifications.) Effective communications planned/provided?
4 (Describe) Deaf inmates Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is
5 arriving? 6 Describe 7 Effective communications planning? 8 Effective communication provided? 9 Describe 10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed? 11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?
Orientation videos 12 Captioned? 13 Shown in a quiet space? 14 Amplification if needed?
Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not 15 literate? (Describe)

Description/Notes
Percaution s sent on koms Percautions sent on Koms Koms peracustions
Koms percautions sent to ADA coordinator of arrival Percautions alerts sent Describe:
Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA C

NA
C
NA
C
NA C C
NA C C
NA NA NA NA
NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 142 of 661 - Page ID#: 2706

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services
Effective Communication during general medical intake, and during medical care more generally: 1 Is there effective communications planning? Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty 2 hearing if interpretation is needed? 3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office? Are staff aware of, and use, effective 4 communications techniques? Notice to medical staff: 5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How? Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on 6 cover and within the file? Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate 7 accommodations. Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site 8 providers of need for interpretation? 9 Procedure in place to ensure notification? 10 Has there ever been a notification to provider? 11 Adequate notice? Outside providers offering effective communication 12 to inmates who sign? 13 How? Hearing screening/medical intake: 14 Performed for all new inmates? 15 Within first 3 days at institution? 16 Approved screening form? (need to review) 17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid? 18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake? How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it 19 administered by staff? 20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical) 21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy? 22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe. 23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Description/Notes

Compliant

All inmates are medically checked upon arrival

NA C

C

C

All medical staff have beeen advised where to locate VRI

C

NA

AUDIOLOGY CHART/Koms

C

C

All off site medical staff are advised KOMS Alert
Describe:

Describe:

Yes upon arrival at RCC Yes

Describe: Describe:
Describe:

NA
C
C NA
C
C
NA NA
C C C C C
NA NA
c c c

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 143 of 661 - Page ID#: 2707

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Other methods of access: Do annual/routine physicals include hearing

24 screening? 25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening? 26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?
If screening indicated problem (3+ "yes" answers), 27 is there further assessment?
Adequate determination of need for designation/

28 audiology services? How? 29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?
Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf

30 or HOH, apart from audiology services decision? After assessment, does medical:
31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert? 32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file? 33 Notify ADA coordinator? 34 Is notification prompt?
Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist) 35 Audiology services offered when needed? 36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles) 37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid? 38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services 39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate? Adequate progress tracking? Should include: 40 initial request/questionnaire? 41 each relevant medical visit? 42 any audiology visit? 43 hearing aid provision? 44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks? 45 Shared with ADA Coordinator? 46 Shared with monitor when requested Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site

trips does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing 47 aid? Describe.

In the past year, how many individuals have had to 48 wait more than sixty days to receive a hearing aid? 49 What is the cause of the delay?

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) 50 to improve this process?
Co-pay and availability issues: 47 Charged only once -- not again for followups
Hearing aid batteries 48 Available for free? 49 In sufficient numbers? 50 7 days/week? 51 regardless of housing?

Description/Notes Inmates put in a sick call slip Inmates are screened for hearing
Inmates receive hearing aides at Instiyution Describe: Describe: Describe:
?

Compliant
NA

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

C

YES YES

YES

YES
YES
YES
NA YES YES YES YES

NA YES YES YES

YES NA
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES

NA
NA NA
NA NA
yes NA
yes yes yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 144 of 661 - Page ID#: 2708

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

E Information provided inmates
1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe) Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-
2 discrimination and ADA services? Brochure? Items to include:
3 Non-discrimination obligation 4 Effective communication obligation 5 Auxiliary aids and services available
How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services 6 (including hearing aids, and batteries)
Communication equipment available, and how to 7 use 8 ADA coordinator and how to reach
Other items: 9 Institution schedule of interpreters
Request for Accommodations/ Communications 10 Assistance
Medical Request form includes request for 11 accommodations
Job application form includes request for 12 accommodations 13 Waiver forms
Classification form includes request for 14 accommodations 15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations
SAP and other programming form includes request 16 for accommodation 17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure 18 available in law library? (Need to check)
Do request forms: 19 list available services comprehensively?
clearly explain services and aids (what they are 20 and when they are available? 21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?
expressly ask about preferred mode of communication/needed services and why they are 22 useful? 23 explain which items are free? encompass religious and volunteer-provided 24 programming? Effective communication of these resources: Are the materials in language accessible to each 25 inmate? Is this information provided with effective 26 communication? Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member 27 and interpreter to ask questions about the Effective communication re. programming

Description/Notes Inmates have orientation when arriving at institution
? In all areas of the institution
Yes Medical appointment or contact ADA coordinator
VRI/Direction attached to Device TTY Yes posted in all Dorms and advised at orientation
? requst when needed
Describe date checked:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

c c NA c c c c
c

NA c C
C
NC C C C C c

NA unknown unkown unkown
unkown
unkown c
NA C
C
C NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 145 of 661 - Page ID#: 2709

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment

in/application for a program with staff, is effective

28 communication provided? are potential accommodations covered in the

29 discussion? Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment

in/application in education with staff, is effective

30 communication provided? are potential accommodations covered in the

31 discussion?

Description/Notes VRI can be used if requested
VRI if requested

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

C

C NA
C

C

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 146 of 661 - Page ID#: 2710

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates
1 Notice posted at entrance to institution? 2 Include picture of ID card and other official 3 Notice posted outside housing units? 4 Include picture of ID card and other official 5 Cell/bed cards 6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert? 7 Clear process to obtain? Describe 8 Each inmate has one if not waived? 9 Provided timely? 10 Replacements provided when needed?
KOMS alert? 11 Staff aware of use of KOMS
Working process to get new inmate alerts added? 12 (Describe) 13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check) 14 Appropriately obvious 15 Updated timely
Individual ID cards 16 Staff aware of meaning? 17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?) 18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived? 19 Provided timely? 20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times? 21 Prompt replacements provided? 22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose? 23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator? 24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver? 25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?
Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested 26 ID? 27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Describe: Describe:
Describe: Describe:

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

C C c C NA C unknown C C C NA C
C
C Unkown
C NA
C C C C Yes NO NA No NA Scanned into Koms
No
yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 147 of 661 - Page ID#: 2711

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment
Identification to ADA Coordinator Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification 1 upon intake of each deaf/hoh inmate? Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification 2 of other deaf/hoh inmates? Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment with every arriving or 3 newly identified deaf/hoh inmate? At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of communication expressly ascertained 4 and documented? At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate about available auxiliary aids and 5 services? Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms 6 explained? Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral and written; VRI; or visual 7 descriptions ) Other assessments For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an 8 assessment on intake, has one been done? 9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA yes yes

NO

Unknown

C
No
C NA
C C

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 148 of 661 - Page ID#: 2712

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided
1 On-person ID cards 2 Cell cards 3 Bed shaker 4 In-person alerts 5 Pager
Phone volume adjust setting (available in each 6 location where phones are available?) 7 Amplifier for phone
Consideration of specific housing assignment to 8 minimize communication difficulties? 9 Other amplification 10 Other (describe)
General issues Special housing area: Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH 11 inmates? (Describe) If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? 12 (Describe) If there is such an area, are inmates required to be 13 housed there? (such a requirement is nonIf there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live there, are accommodations etc. still fully 14 available to the inmate? Describe any restrictions. In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is 15 primary consideration given to inmate request? If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or not requesting 16 aids/services, were accommodations provided? Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services 17 documented in inmate institutional files? Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary 18 aids/services shared appropriately with staff? 19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained? 20 Have any been out of comission? 21 Describe -- which and for how long? Inmates moving housing or transferred: not 22 separated from hearing aid? 23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided? 24 Promptly? 25 Has there been a direct threat determination? 26 Describe Appropriately individuated (must consider specific 27 degree of impairment and specific dangers posed) 28 Appropriately reported? 29 Was it the appropriate decision? 30 Are classes in sign language provided? 31 deaf inmates given notice? 32 priority given to deaf inmates?

C C c N N
Y
N
Y

Describe:

NA

NA

NA

Describe:

NA

Describe:

NA

If we have a Deaf inmate or inmate HOH and can sign they are housed Yes

No Describe:
Yes

No

Waivers scanned into Koms

yes

Durring Annual Trainning and All Surpervisors are trained

Yes

C

Describe:

NA

Describe:

NA

No hearing aides assigned to them
C Describe: Describe:

C
C C NA NA

Describe:
There is one hour classes conducted every 8 weeks yes

y Unknown
Yes yes yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 149 of 661 - Page ID#: 2713

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

I Interpretation in general

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

1 communicated to inmates?

covers all inmate-staff communication when

requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious

3 and other volunteer-provided programming?

Effective process for choosing qualified

4 interpretation method?

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Standing arrangement with providers?

6 In-person?

7 VRI?

Is VRI availability:

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours

9 of notice)?

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48

10 hours of notice)?

during emergencies (including medical emergencies)

11 when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU?

12 Describe

VRI laptop functional?

13 In general

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

15 Routine software updates?

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

16 Splitter?

17 Instructions?

18 Long power cord?

19 Usable as VRS?

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

21 How?

Information used to determine when in-person

22 interpretation should be first recourse?

Is in-person interpretation available:

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

24 Parole?

Describe each time in-person interpretation has

25 been offered

In service was offered for SAP, MRT

Describe each time in-person interpretation has

26 been denied.

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at

27 least 7 days before?

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret?

28 (Reliance in non-emergency is non-compliant)

29 Describe

Description/Notes
VRI If needed available any time needed any time needed any time needed any time needed
Describe: Describe:
Checked to make sure it is operational Always and power is with it at all times
Purple is in charge of updates Describe:
VRI is checked live about every 3 weelks when not Inmate is asked if they would like Interepreter yes when requested If needed In-person was offw
Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA yes

C

C
C C NA yes yes NA C C
C
C

NA C C
Unknown NA
C C C C C c
C
C C C
C
Unknown
C
No
NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 150 of 661 - Page ID#: 2714

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence

30 and VRI was unavailable) Communication with inmates uses inmate's
31 preferred method? Written communication is limited to only simple

32 matters. Written communication is not needed when inmate

33 has low literacy Qualified interpretation services available: Does the request form clearly encompass religious

34 and other volunteer-provided programming? for all inmate-staff communication when requested

by inmate? (not limited to only certain

35 encounters/communications/settings) Is the process for using VRI communicated to
36 inmates?

Description/Notes English

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Unknown

C

C

NO NA
no

c

c

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 151 of 661 - Page ID#: 2715

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

J Hand Restraints
1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs? Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing?
2 Individualized finding of a security threat? Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who
3 might ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.) 4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed? 5 Staff aware of the issue
Off-site medical care: 6 two-point hand restraint system used?
restraints removed when necessary for medical 7 communication?

Describe:

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA c

c

NA Yes
Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 152 of 661 - Page ID#: 2716

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

K Non-auditory Alerts
1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? 2 provided to all inmates who need it? 3 can and does it give alerts in real time? 4 sufficient to signal fire alarm? 5 sufficient to signal count alert? 6 programmed to signal different alerts? 7 used to notify of prison-wide events?
used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events 8 specific to them?
Have any requests for medically necessary non9 auditory alerts been denied?
Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are 10 working? 11 frequently enough? 12 monitored/recorded formally? 13 Announcement boards 14 used to notify of schedule changes? 15 used consistently? 16 in all dormitories? 17 in gym? 18 in library? 19 audited and monitored?
In-person or personal system notification when an 20 inmate misses a page?
Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ 21 info only because of disability?
Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in 22 the future? 23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?
Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in 24 emergency?
Does the plan account for how effective 25 communication will be provided?

Describe: Describe:

Description/Notes We do not haave this system

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA No No No No No No
No
No
No
no no no no no no no no no
no

NA no yes yes
yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 153 of 661 - Page ID#: 2717

# Issue/Question
L Telecommunications
Videophones: 1 Installed? 2 Allow voice carry-over features? 3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)
Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to 4 solve them.
When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe 5 other alternative offered
Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, 6 when videophone is out of service. 7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates? 8 Appropriate location?
Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, 9 weekends, emergency) if necessary? 10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates? 11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?
No more permission needed than that for hearing 12 inmates using ordinary phones? 13 Advance request unnecessary? 14 Free?
Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular 15 phone calls?
Has any inmate requested access to the 16 videophones and been denied?
Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the inmate's name, the date, and the 17 reason for the denial. TTY: 18 Installed? Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates 19 and staff? Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions 20 made available WITH TTY? 21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify) 22 Access -- appropriate hours, days? location substantially as accessible as conventional 23 telephones for non-deaf inmates? 24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access? 25 Permission needed? Has any request to use the TTY been denied? 26 (Describe) 27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates? 28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe) 29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently) 30 x

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)
yes

Description/Notes

Compliant

Describe: Describe: Describe: we can use the VRS if needed Describe: memos
Anytime needed If needed

NA yes yes
NA
NA yes
NA yes no C C C No No YES c

Describe:

NA

c Describe: If inmate abuses the system they can be suspende
NA C
C

Describe:

E
Located in Building D Office If needed Yes

C
NA C
C
C C

Describe:
Describe: Describe:

All test completed

NA Yes
NA Unknown
Yes

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 154 of 661 - Page ID#: 2718

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions 31 for videophones and TTY is less than equitable? 32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?
If yes, was determination (including reasoning,

33 evidence, etc.) documented? 34 Was monitor notified? 35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?
VRS via laptop 36 Available? 37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU) 38 Used when appropriate?
Phones 39 Amplification in every group of phones?
Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need

40 them? CapTel
41 Appropriate for any particular inmate? 42 If so, installed and working? 43 Request by any inmate denied?
TV/Movies 44 Is captioning available? 45 Is captioning used? 46 Is the captioning checked regularly? 47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?
Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly

48 (Describe) 49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning? 50 Amplification method? (Describe)
If inmate-purchased tv w/ captioning malfunctioned,

did staff assist to same extent as w/other inmates

51 regarding malfunctioning personal property? All technology/ equipment in good working order?
52 (Describe problems) Access to communication services for deaf inmates in segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf
53 inmates of same status? Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates only to the same extent and with the
54 same discretion as non-deaf inmates?

Describe:

Description/Notes

FM Transmitters Amplifiers are connected to all TVS we do not have portable Amplifiers
Describe: Describe: Describe:
Captionining is always on
Describe: Describe:
All Checked 7/24/19 The VRS Lap Top can be used in RHU if needed

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA Unkown
Unknown
Unknown Unknown NA
Yes Yes Yes NA yes
no
NA NA NA NA NA
Yes Yes yes no
yes
yes NA
Unknown

Yes

yes

NO

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 155 of 661 - Page ID#: 2719

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

M Miscellaneous Devices
1 Devices available? (Describe) 2 devices in commissary list?
possibility to request other devices from ADA 3 coordinator? 4 facilitation of purchase?
Purchase of any non-medically necessary device 5 denied? (Describe) 6 determined on case-by-case basis? 7 because security threat? 8 monitor notified? 9 reasoning explained?
ADA coordinator maintains records 10 of requests? 11 of denials?
N Disciplinary
Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate 1 has been punished? 2 Was a re-hearing granted?
O Grievances
Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA 1 coordinator?
If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator forward copy of grievance to ADA 2 coordinator? Records of all grievances filed by deaf/HOH 3 inmates? (not just those related to settlement) 4 Adequate summaries provided in report? Including all deaf or HOH inmate grievances, not just 5 those in settlement? 6 Includes issues raised by inmate in grievance? 7 Includes institution in which grievance was filed? 8 Includes summary of KDOC response? 9 Includes grievance resolution (or lack thereof)?

Describe: Describe:

Description/Notes
Scanned into Koms Scanned into Koms

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA NO
yes

NA Unknown Unknown Unkown Unknown NA
C C
C

C
C
C unknown
C no C C C

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 156 of 661 - Page ID#: 2720

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

P Training
Types available 1 CBT? (Using approved training?) 2 Who received? (Describe) 3 All appropriate staff? 4 Live training? (Information only) 5 Who received? (Describe) 6 All appropriate staff?
Targeted training on specific needs 7 training on best communication practices? 8 training on unique needs/problems?
training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may 9 miss alert?
training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may not hear verbal commands and strategies to handle 10 that problem? 11 training on identification of communication needs? consideration given to talking one-on-one with deaf 12 or HOH inmates, instead of in a group? Training on communication 13 training on use and role of interpreters? 14 training on process for obtaining interpreters? training on importance of not separating imate from 15 hearing aid? 16 training on communication technology? 17 training on VRI? 18 training on how to turn on and check for 19 training on non-auditory alert office switch? 20 training on videophone rules? Training on Policies 21 training on the Settlement? 22 training on identity and role of ADA coordinator? 23 training on KDOC anti-discrimination policy? 24 training on existence of KOMS/EMR alerts? 25 training on meaning of ID cards? training on equipment/services/ accommodation 26 available? 27 training on hand restraint policy? 28 training on two-point hand restraint system? 29 training on disciplinary and grievance practies? Do all relevant staff know about reporting 30 obligations? How do you know? Training specifically for housing area staff training on the use of cell/bed notices that indicate 31 an inmate is deaf/HOH 32 training on bed shaker switches 33 training on telecommunications training on obligations to notify deaf and HOH 34 inmates of alerts Training specifically for all corrections staff

Describe: Describe: Describe:
Describe:

Description/Notes VRI Used or Interpreter this is in the Annual Trainning

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA C
NA C
NA NA
C NA
no unkown
unkown

C
C
C
NA no no
no
no yes no unkown C NA no C C C no
no
C C C
no
NA
C
C C
C
NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 157 of 661 - Page ID#: 2721

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

training on accommodations for inmates who sign

35 (esp. restraint policies) training on strategies for inmates who may not hear

36 directions/orders Training specifically for medical staff training on process to obtain hearing aid within two

37 months training on obligation to notify off-site providers of

38 needs 39 Training provided for review by Monitor?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

no

no NA
Unkown

Unkown

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 158 of 661 - Page ID#: 2722

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

GRCC Mark Jackson Grievance coordinator

1

2

6/19/2012

4/22/2016

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

had hearing aids upon arrival

Inmate was at another facility when hearing loss
was documented

3. Date of initial hearing screening

3
5/7/2016 Inmate was at another facility when hearing loss
was documented

4
8/21/2016 During intake/failed
whisper test

5
6/8/2016 Inmate was at another facility when hearing
became a problem

8/10/2012

8/4/2016

6/13/2016

10/17/2016

6/8/2016

6 8/26/2016
N/A
10/19/2016

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

8/15/2016

3/27/2017

2/3/2017

10/30/2017

7/25/2016

2/1/2017

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Received new hearing aids

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Has hearing aids

Bilateral hearing loss/Received aids

Bilateral Hearing loss/Hearing aids ordered

Bilateral hearing loss

Confirmed bilateral hearing loss; not a canidate for hearing aids/return if worsens

Bilateral hearing loss

Has hearing aids

Has hearing aids

Has hearing aids

No hearing aid is needed

Has hearing aids

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Documentation provided in Documentation provided in Documentation provided in Documentation provided in Documentation provided in Documentation provided in

binder

binder

binder

binder

binder

binder

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

This hearing device doesn’t This hearing device doesn’t This hearing device doesn’t This hearing device doesn’t This hearing device doesn’t This hearing device doesn’t

requir a T-coil receptor

requir a T-coil receptor requir a T-coil receptor requir a T-coil receptor requir a T-coil receptor requir a T-coil receptor

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date

8/10/2012

9/27/2016

6/13/2016

10/17/2016

7/25/2016

2/1/2017

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date
Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 159 of 661 - Page ID#: 2723

1

2

3

4

5

6

Hearing test preformed

Hearing test

Hearing test preformed

profound hearing loss in L ear, mild/moderate hearing los in
R ear

approved for L hearing aid only due to

bilateral hearing loss/hearing aids issued

Preformed hearing test
Confirmed hearing loss; molding for hearing aids
were made

Preformed hearing test
Mild bilateral hearing loss/was told to see Audiologist if hearng
worsens

Preformed hearing test Hearing aids were ordered

5/12/2016

3/27/2017

9/28/2016

3/3/2017

N/A

Hearing test preformed

Hearing test preformed

Molding for new aids were Molding for new aids were

made

made

N/A

Hearing aids received Received new hearing aids

N/A

Non functional L ear, high

frequency SNHL on R ear, will

order bicro hearing aids

Picked up new hearing aids

8/15/2016

N/A

New hearing test preformed

N/A

New hearing aids received

N/A

2/3/2017

10/30/2017

N/A

New hearing test

Hearing test preformed preformed/new aids were

N/A

ordered

New hearing aids were received

Picked up new hearing aids

N/A

8/22/2017

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Audiology to calibrate hearing aids

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Contine daily use of hearing aides

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

2/13/2017
Picking up hearing aides
Received hearing devices
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 160 of 661 - Page ID#: 2724

7

8

99

10

4/1/2015
Inmate was at another facility when hearing became problematic

10/7/2015
Inmate was at another facilty when hearing
became an issue

7/19/2017
When inmate was transferred to GRCC

11/15/2017 Upon intake to GRCC

2/10/2016 Upon intake to GRCC

7/23/2017 Upon intake to GRCC

2/6/2017

10/20/2015

9/5/2017

11/15/2017

1/29/2017

8/1/2017

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

2/6/2017

11/23/2015

10/24/2017

1/4/2018

6/16/2017

8/23/2017

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Bilateral hearing loss in L ear/deaf in R ear

Sensorineural hearing loss, asymmetrical

Bilat high frequency sensory neuronal hearing loss

Sensorineural hearing loss

Unspecified sensorineural hearing loss

Bilateral hearing loss

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Has hearing aids

Has hearing aids

Has hearing aids

Has hearing aids

Has hearing aids

Has hearing aids

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Documentation provided in Documentation provided in Documentation provided in Documentation provided in Documentation provided in Documentation provided in

binder

binder

binder

binder

binder

binder

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

This hearing device doesn’t This hearing device doesn’t This hearing device doesn’t This hearing device doesn’t This hearing device doesn’t This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor requir a T-coil receptor requir a T-coil receptor requir a T-coil receptor requir a T-coil receptor requir a T-coil receptor

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date

8/1/2016

10/20/2015

9/5/2017

12/6/2018

3/28/2017

7/28/2017

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date
Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 161 of 661 - Page ID#: 2725

7

8

99

10

Preformed hearing test Preformed hearing test Preformed hearing test Preformed hearing test Preformed hearing screen Preformed hearing test

Appointment was made for a second hearing test

Hearing aids were ordered

Pocket talker was given patient stated

Hearing aids received

Hearing aids were recommended

Hearing aids were recommended

8/23/2016

11/23/2015

10/24/2017

1/4/2018

6/16/2017

8/23/2017

more reliable hearing test was preformed

Picked up hearing aids

Hearing evaluation

Audiology test

Received hearing aids

Picked up hearing aids

Hearing aids were ordered Received hearing aids

Preformed hearing aids

Hearing aids ordered

Received hearing aids

Received hearing aids

2/6/2017

N/A

11/2/2017

N/A

N/A

N/A

Hearing aid pick up

N/A

Hearing aid pick up

N/A

N/A

N/A

Received hearing aids

N/A

received hearing aids

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 162 of 661 - Page ID#: 2726

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date: Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

3/1/2017 Upon intake to GRCC
4/13/2017
6/2/2017 Unspecified bilateral
hearing loss

4/14/2017 1/22/2018 4/2/2018

1/4/2018
inmate refused on 1/4/2018 any further testing or
treatment stated he has adapted to the hearing loss inmate refused on 1/4/2018
any further testing or treatment stated he has adapted to the hearing loss/called over and spoke with Mr, Wheeleron 6/14 he does want hearing test and will have consultation
as soon as possible inmate refused on 1/4/2018
any further testing or treatment stated he has adapted to the hearing loss

1/3/2018 Upon intake to GRCC
1/25/2018
3/6/2018

1/16/2018

1/9/2018

Upton intake to GRCC Upon intake to GRCC

Awaiting appointment with audiology

1/9/2018

Inmate refused on 1/16/18

1/31/2018

Mixed conductive and sensorneural hearing loss

Sensorineural hearing loss Sensorineural Hearing loss

Inmate refused

Sensorineural hearing loss/bilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Has hearing aids

Has hearing aids

inmate refused on 1/4/2018 any further testing or
treatment stated he has adapted to the hearing loss

Has hearing aids

Inmate refused

Has hearing aids

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Documentation provided in Documentation provided in Documentation provided in Documentation provided in Documentation

binder

binder

binder

binder

provided in binder

Documentation provided in binder

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

This hearing device doesn’t This hearing device doesn’t This hearing device doesn’t This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor requir a T-coil receptor requir a T-coil receptor requir a T-coil receptor

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil
receptor

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil
receptor

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date

4/13/2017

4/2/2018

N/A

1/25/2018

Inmate refused

1/9/2018

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date
Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 163 of 661 - Page ID#: 2727

Preformed hearing test Hearing screen preformed

N/A

Hearing screen preformed

Inmate refused

Preformed hearing test

Hearing aids were recommended

Hearing aids recommended

N/A

Hearing aids recommended Inmate refused

Hearing aids recommended

6/2/2017

4/24/2018

N/A

3/6/2018

Inmate refused

1/31/2018

Picked up hearing aids

Picked up hearing aids

N/A

Picked up hearing aids

Inmate refused

Picked up hearing aids

Received hearing device Received hearing device

N/A

Received hearing device

Inmate refused

Received hearing aids

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Inmate refused

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Inmate refused

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Inmate refused

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Inmate refused

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Inmate refused

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Inmate refused

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Inmate refused

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Inmate refused

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Inmate refused

N/A

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 164 of 661 - Page ID#: 2728

4/24/2018 Failed whisper test

4/5/2018
Failed hearing assessment

4/19/2018 Upon intake

11

12/112017 Failed assessment

1/26/2018
Failed hearing assessment

5/22/2018
Failed Hearing assessment upon arrival
to Green River

1-Jun

5/21/2018

5/21/2018

1/30/2018

2/15/2018

5/22/2018

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

1-Jun

5/21/2018

5/21/2018

1/30/2018

2/15/2018

5/22/2018

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Bilateral SNHL

Questionably low frequency hearing loss will retest in 6 months

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

has hearing aids in working order

Has hearing aids

Bilateral hearing loss Has hearing aids

Hearing impaired

Sensorineural hearing loss

Bilateral Hearing loss

Has hearing aids in working Has hearing aids in

order

working order

Has hearing aids in working order

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Documentation provided in Documentation provided Documentation provided in Documentation provided in Documentation

binder

in binder

binder

binder

provided in binder

Documentation provided in binder

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil
receptor

This hearing device doesn’t This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor requir a T-coil receptor

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil
receptor

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil
receptor

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date

6/1/2018

5/21/2018

5/21/2018

1/30/2018

2/15/2018

6/22/2018

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date
Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 165 of 661 - Page ID#: 2729
11

Audiogram
Hearing aids were recommended

Audiology Consultation Audiology Consultation Audiology Consultation Audiology Consultation Audiology Consultation

Hearing aids recommended

Hearing aids were issued Hearing aids were issued

Hearing aids were issued

Hearing aids were recommended

Sent the audiogram results

for approval to Dr Kemen.

Once approved the hearing Received hearing device

device is shipped from

from Audicus

Audicus and then given to

the patient.

6/4/2018

Received hearing aids on Received hearing device

6/20/2018

from Audicus

Hearing aid pick up

Received hearing aids on 6/20/2018

F/U with provider on new hearing aids on 6/20/18 Patient stated everythign was working
properly

Received hearing device

6/20/2018

N/A

N/A

Hearing aid pick up

N/A

N/A

Patient was givin hearing devices

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Received hearing aids

N/A

3/6/2018

from Audicus on

7/19/18

N/A

Hearing aid pick up

N/A

Received hearing aids

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 166 of 661 - Page ID#: 2730

5/8/2018
Failed hearing assesment

6/29/2018

Upon intake to GRCC

Was told by patient he

Failed

Hearing assesment

had received hearing test at KSR but never received

aids

4/3/2018 Upon intake

12/1/2017 Intial screen

5/8/2018

6/29/2018

3/3/2017

4/10/2018

12/1/2017

12/1/2017 Intial screen
12/1/2017

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

7/17/2018

Appointment with Audiologsit on 8/7/18

3/3/2017

4/10/2018

5/14/2018

5/14/2018

5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Mild to moderate loss left ear consistant with
his history of head trauma
No hearing aid is needed/ did not qualify

Sensorineural Hearing loss bilateral
In process of obtaining hearing aids

Sensorineural hearing loss bilateral

Sensorineural hearing loss

Impacted cerumen right Impacted cerumen right

ear/ ear wax removed from ear/ ear wax removed from

right ear inmate reports no right ear inmate reports no

hearing loss

hearing loss

Has hearing aids in working order

has hearing aids in working order

no hearing aids needed

no hearing aids needed

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Documentation Documentation provided Documentation provided Documentation provided in Documentation provided in Documentation provided in

provided in binder

in binder

in binder

binder

binder

binder

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil
receptor

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date

7/17/18/18

8/7/2018

3/3/2017

Audicus Audiogram onsite on 4/10/2018

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date
Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 167 of 661 - Page ID#: 2731

Audiology consultation Audiology consultation Audiology consultation

Sent to Dr, Kemen on 6/2/2018

Did not qualify for hearing aids PER KEMEN

Hearing aids were recommended

Hearing aids were recommended

Received hearing aids on 7/23/18 for right ear

Received hearing aids on 9/20/18 from Audicus

Audiology consultation was sent to Dr Kemen and hearing aid was ordered on 7/18/2018

Patient received hearing aids on 8/9/2018

Patient received hearing aids on 8/9/2018

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 168 of 661 - Page ID#: 2732

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

6/22/2016

9/14/2017

During hearing questionarre

Inmate reported to medical with hearing difficulties

3. Date of initial hearing screening

9/28/2018
Complaints made by offender to medcial
department

4/9/2018
Failed whisper test in medical

11/19/2018 Failed Whisper Test

2/19/2019 Failed whisper test

7/7/2016

9/14/2017

9/28/2018

4/9/2018

11/8/2018

3/19/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

1/29/2018

11/19/2018

9/28/2018

4/9/2018

11/19/2018

Patient awaiting another appointment

Bilateral hearing loss

Unspecified hearing loss, unspecified hearing loss

bilateral

bilateral

Unspecified hearing loss/right ear

Unspecified hearing loss bilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Has hearing aids in working order

Has hearing in working order

no hearing aids needed no hearing aid is needed right ear was impacted with
wax

Hearing aids needed

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

This hearing device doesn’t This hearing device doesn’t require a T-Coil receptor require a T-Coil receptor

N/A

This hearing device doesn’t require a T-Coil receptor

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date

7/7/2016

11/19/2018

9/28/2018

11/19/2018

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date
Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 169 of 661 - Page ID#: 2733

Joe Wyatt 224910
Audiology consult

Jimmy Owens 192238
Audiology Consult

Hearing aids were obtained
Inmate has refused any further treatment at this time. Documentation in
binder

Hearing aids were reccomended

Danny Sizemore 103937 Audicus hearing test
hear aides were recommended

Hershel McKay 250406

Larry Carroll 127876 Audicus hearing test
Received hearing aids on 11/29/2018

Received hearing aide from Audicus on 2/18/2019

Michael Sams 243906

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 170 of 661 - Page ID#: 2734

1/7/2019 Upon intake

12/7/2018 Failed whisper test

4/11/2019

5/23/2019

Complaints of ringing in ears

Complaints of hard of hearing

1/7/2019 Failed whisper test

1/31/2017 Failed whisper test

1/7/2019

12/13/2018

5/21/2019

5/23/2019

1/30/2019

2/21/2017

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

1/30/2019

12/13/2018

5/21/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Unspecified hearing loss

Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Has hearing aids in working Has hearing aids in working Has hearing aids in working

order

order

order

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

This hearing device doesn’t require a T-Coil receptor

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date

1/30/2019

12/13/2018

5/21/2019

5/23/2019

1/30/2019

2/21/2017

Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

sensorineural hearing loss/bilateral

Has hearing aids in working Has hearing aids in working

order

order

1/30/2019

2/21/2019

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date
Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 171 of 661 - Page ID#: 2735

Audicus Audiogram Hearing aids needed

Audicus Audiogram Hearing Aids needed

Audicus Audiogram Hearing Aids needed

Audicus Audiogram Hearing Aids needed

Hearing Screen Hearing aids needed

2/1/2019

12/21/2019

Hearing aides received

Hearing aids received

2/29/2019

3/23/2019

Hearing aids received

Fitted for aids

Hearing device ordered

4/28/2017 Hearing aid pick up

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 172 of 661 - Page ID#: 2736

3/13/2019 Failed whisper test

3/4/2019 Upon intake RCC

8/16/2017 Failed whisper test

6/26/2018 Failed whisper test

4/18/2019

3/20/2019

9/27/2017

7/17/2018

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

4/18/2019

3/20/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Conductive hearing loss

unspecified hearling loss,bilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

Pending review

Has hearing aid-left ear

9/27/2017 bilateral sensorineural
hearing loss
Has hearing aids

7/17/2018 Sensorinueral Bilateral
has hearing aids

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date

3/20/2019

9/27/2017

7/17/2018

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date
Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 173 of 661 - Page ID#: 2737

Audicus Audiogram Hearing Aids needed

Audiogram Has hearing aids

Audicus Has hearing aid

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 174 of 661 - Page ID#: 2738

Technology

How many Where

When obtained Specifications (URL)

FM radio transmitters, usable as

an amplifier system?

21

School,

2017

Used on tv in Dorms

Phone amplifiers (not volume

control: portable amplifiers)

16

All dorms 1-8 School,

Captioned Telephone

2

Dorm 1 Building D Office 2016

Purple Phone ,

Other amplifiers, amplification

systems, or the like?

3

Sap Program , School Building D

Bed shakers

6

Dorm 1 Building D Office 1/1/2016

Vibrating watches?

0

no

Vibrating alarm clocks?

4

Dorm 1 Building D Office

Pagers?

0

Other non-auditory alerts or

assistive devices currently in use

or under consideration not

mentioned above.

0

N/A

Earphones for parole hearings 1

Visitation Parole Board

Earphones for orientation videos 1

Buildin D Confrence Room

How well do they How do inmates obtain access? work? Always available using FM Radio very Well Purple phone and Available at anytime in Dorm 1 good
Inmate can request bedshakers and they are assigned

Other comments all Reciever are located in Dorms

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 175 of 661 - Page ID#: 2739

Documentation to review KOMS alerts for each deaf/HOH inmate Grievances:
Provide/Review summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc.

Date reviewed Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

7/22/2019

Koms alerts need to be sent to medical

7/18/2019

07/17,18,19

No grievance filed on hearing

Provide/Review full documentation of all grievances that address

7/17/2019

hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Solve any problems revealed.

Discipline

7/22/2019

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving an inmate who signs.

Ensure that VRI or other effective communication was provided at 7/22/2019

each stage of each such proceedings.

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving failure to obey an order,

or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Ensure that no such inmate is being penalized for 7/15/2019

inability to hear.

VRI Log (review to ensure it's being used in appropriate circumstances. VRS or other videophone alternative (review to ensure that when videophone is inoperative, alternative is in fact available/used)

7/22/2019 7/22/2019

TTY instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.) 7/3/2019

VRI instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.) 0719/19

No Grievance involving hearing
there are no inmates that sign at this institution
All disciplinary proceedingsfollowed yes only when there is a Medical, Disciplinary hearing , or when needed for institutional use there are no Deaf inmates at this facility at this time ALL directions are with the TTY in D Building Office VRI is already connected and easy to sign in

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 176 of 661 - Page ID#: 2740

Questions regarding effective communications in particular activities or locations. For each, mark compliance (Y, partial, N, no basis) and explain. Goal: each deaf or HOH inmate has an equal opportunity to participate in programs/ services / activities

In-person interpretation

Intake/ Orientation -- Non-medical Intake, Medical Auxiliary Aid Assessment Units Restrictive Housing Medical/MH care Programs Education Recreation Communications with Chaplain Prison-provided religious programming Volunteer -led programming (note: Only volunteer interpretation is required) Parole hearings Classification/ Transfer Legal Aid Grievance process Work assignments Court call and ALL parts of disciplinary process
Staff investigations Investigative interviews Preparation of report Shift supervisor's review of disciplinary report Investigator's review of disciplinary report Miranda warnings When advising inmate of right to consult with legal aide Notification of date, time, and place of hearing Hearing or re-hearing If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

Ever used?
N N y y Y
Y Y N N
N
N Y
N N N
n n n n
n
n n
n
n n n

Used whenever appropriate?
Y Y y y Y
Y Y N Y
Y
N Y
Y N Y
y y y y
y
y y
y
y y y

Availability of VRI: Appropriate equipment available (computer line,
Staff trained? outlet, space)

Y

Y

y

Y

y

y

y

y

Y

Y

y

Y

Y

Y

y

N

y

Y

N

Y

y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

Ever used? How many times?
3 3 3 3 3
2 1 N 0
0
0 2
3 N N
6 0 0 0
0
0 0
0
0 6 n

Used whenever appropriate? (without special request)
Y Y y y Y
Y Y y Y
y
y Y
y Y Y
y y y y
y
y y
y
y y y

Amplification: (Not just hearing aid -- space-specific amplification)

Adequate? Describe efforts, issues

Y

used for Deaf inmates

Y

used for Deaf inmates

y

medical staff

y

used for deaf inmates/VRI

Y

VRI USED/and VRS

Y

VRI USED/

Y

used FM amp /VRI

y

not needed

Y

y

y

Y

Used VRI at Parole Hearing

y

Used VRI for leagal aides

Y

never requested

Y

never requested

y

Used VRI for deaf Inmates

y

VRI Available

y

VRI Available/FM Amplifier

y

N

y

VRI Used

y

VRI Used

y

VRI Available

y

VRI Available

y

yes memos sent if needed

y

yes VRI used

y

VRI available if needed /FM Amplifers

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to attend a religious service without effective communication to receive any religious meal, diet, or other accommodation? No Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have witnessed or been suspected of violation) provided with an inmate or staff advisor on same terms as non-deaf inmates? Yes inmates can have a staff council upon request. It is reviewed and denied or appoved based on the same process as a non deaf inmate.

Audit item issues/ concerns
n

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 177 of 661 - Page ID#: 2741

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Personal

Listed Signs Low literacy?

If signs to

Bed

Other Alert

Phone

with

to (So that

communicat

Shaker? Device TTY Access Amplifier Shake &

KOMS comm written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not

Wake (Not

ADA

unicat communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested;

Precautio e

n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied; denied; denied;

Name

ID

n?

(Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted) granted) granted)

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

h

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

yy

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

yy

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

yy

NR

NR

NRE

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

yy

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

HNR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

nn

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

y

n nh

y

y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 178 of 661 - Page ID#: 2742

Fill this out for EACH location where there are any deaf/HOH inmates

How many Volume

Bed

How inmates adjustable

shakers set Staff use

many who sign phone available How up for use bed

If there are any If there are any If there are any

Deaf/ to

to inmates

many for

shakers for inmates who sign: inmates who inmates who sign:

HOH communic without special bed

multiple multiple Location available sign: Staff trained Ready access to

Dorm/unit

Walk

inmates? ate

request?

shakers? purposes? purposes? for VRI?

for VRI

videophone?

Dorm1

AL

2

0

1

6

4n

Anywhere RequestedAll Supervisors

2

Dorm1

AU

0

0

Dorm1

BL

5

0

Dorm1

BU

8

0

0

Dorm 2

AL

4

0

1

Dorm2

AU

2

0

Dorm 3

AL

1

0

1

Dorm 3

AU

1

0

Dorm 3

BL

1

0

Dorm3

BU

2

0

Dorm 4

AL

0

0

1

Dorm 4

AU

0

0

Dorm 4

BL

0

0

Dorm 4

BU

0

0

Dorm 4

CL

0

0

Dorm 4

CU

0

0

Dorm5 Dorm5 Dorm5 Dorm5 Dorm5 Dorm5

AL

0

0

1

AU

0

0

BL

0

0

BU

0

0

CL

0

0

CU

0

0

Dorm 6

AL

Dorm 6

AU

Dorm 6

BL

Dorm 6

BU

1

0

1

3

0

2

0

5

0

Dorm 7

AL

0

0

1

Dorm 7

AU

1

0

Dorm 7

BL

1

0

Dorm 7

BU

0

0

Dorm 8

AL

0

0

Dorm 8

AU

0

0

Dorm 9

3

0

1

RHU

AL

0

0

1

AU

0

0

BL

0

0

BU

0

0

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 179 of 661 - Page ID#: 2743
Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 180 of 661 - Page ID#: 2744

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

A ADA coordinator

1 Is an ADA coordinator designated?

Lori Holderman

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there

2 was no ADA coordinator appointed?

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with

5 inmates in a timely and appropriate manner? How?

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information?

6 (THIS REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

Randomly asked 10 inmates

Is the information prominently posted in any

7 housing unit where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

9 Describe training

Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately

10 cover information?

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training)

12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's

13 powerpoint)

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with

14 settlement agreement?

Does ADA coordinator retrieve at least monthly

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's

16 tracking list?

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in

17 implementing the settlement?

Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf

18 inmates?

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on

19 deaf inmates?

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the

20 inmates in those situations?

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective

21 way with the monitor?

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the

22 monitor when necessary?

B Reporting obligations

If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was

1 monitor notified?

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf

2 and HOH inmates?

3 Is the list complete?

4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

Quarterly summary of all grievances by deaf or

5 HOH inmates shared with monitor?

Sent a message to be posted on all units and posted on institional television Describe method used to ascertain: Describe:
Medical Inform ADA Cord.
Emailed

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

X X X X X

X
X NA
X
X X
X

Its posted in the Library

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X
X X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 181 of 661 - Page ID#: 2745

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

# Issue/Question

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Was there a direct threat determination made for 6 jobs, activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe) 7 Was it reported to the monitor? 8 Was the report complete? 9 Was the report timely? 10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert? 11 If yes, was the monitor notified?
Did the institution consult with the monitor about

Describe:

12 the non-auditory alert? 13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

1 Hard of hearing inmates Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is

2 arriving? Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive

3 automatic notifications.) Effective communications planned/provided?

Describe:

4 (Describe) Deaf inmates Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is

Describe:

5 arriving? 6 Describe 7 Effective communications planning? 8 Effective communication provided? 9 Describe 10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed? 11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?
Orientation videos 12 Captioned? 13 Shown in a quiet space? 14 Amplification if needed?
Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not

Describe: Describe:

15 literate? (Describe)

We do orientation in Person

Describe:

D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general medical

intake, and during medical care more generally:

1 Is there effective communications planning? Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty

2 hearing if interpretation is needed? 3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?
Are staff aware of, and use, effective

4 communications techniques? Notice to medical staff:

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How? Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on

MEDICAL CARD/ EMARS

6 cover and within the file?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA X X X
NA n/a
n/a
n/a

NA X

NA
X
NA
X
NA X X
NA X X
NA X
X X
X

NA X X X X
NA X X

WE HAVE 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 182 of 661 - Page ID#: 2746

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

# Issue/Question

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate 7 accommodations.
Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site

8 providers of need for interpretation? 9 Procedure in place to ensure notification? 10 Has there ever been a notification to provider? 11 Adequate notice?
Outside providers offering effective communication

Describe:

12 to inmates who sign? 13 How?
Hearing screening/medical intake: 14 Performed for all new inmates? 15 Within first 3 days at institution? 16 Approved screening form? (need to review) 17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid? 18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?
How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it

Describe: Provide Interpreter yes and provide batteries if needed

19 administered by staff? 20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical) 21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy? 22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe. 23 Medical history includes hearing questions?
Other methods of access: Do annual/routine physicals include hearing

Describe: BOTH Describe: MEDICAL INTAKE NURSE MEDICAL STAFF WILL READ TO THEM Describe: READ TO THEM

24 screening? 25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening? 26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?
If screening indicated problem (3+ "yes" answers), 27 is there further assessment?
Adequate determination of need for designation/

When provider sees them Yes must go to sick call referred to provider

28 audiology services? How? 29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?
Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf

fail question, fail whisper, refer to audiologist

30 or HOH, apart from audiology services decision? After assessment, does medical:
31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert? 32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file? 33 Notify ADA coordinator? 34 Is notification prompt?
Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist) 35 Audiology services offered when needed? 36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles) 37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid? 38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services 39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

If prior medical records are obtained IF THE INMATE REQUESTS ONE

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA
X
X NA
X
X
NA NA
X X X X X
NA NA
X X X NA
X
x x
x
x

x
NA X X X X
NA X X X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 183 of 661 - Page ID#: 2747

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

# Issue/Question

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Adequate progress tracking? Should include: 40 initial request/questionnaire? 41 each relevant medical visit? 42 any audiology visit? 43 hearing aid provision? 44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks? 45 Shared with ADA Coordinator? 46 Shared with monitor when requested
Summary

ADA KEEPS SPREADSHEET

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site

trips does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing 47 aid? Describe.

Describe:

In the past year, how many individuals have had to 48 wait more than sixty days to receive a hearing aid? 49 What is the cause of the delay?

Describe: Describe:

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) 50 to improve this process?
Co-pay and availability issues: 47 Charged only once -- not again for followups
Hearing aid batteries 48 Available for free? 49 In sufficient numbers? 50 7 days/week? 51 regardless of housing?

Describe:
ONLY IF INMATE BREAKS TE HEARING AIDE ?

E Information provided inmates

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe) Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-

Describe:

2 discrimination and ADA services?

Brochure? Items to include:

?

3 Non-discrimination obligation 4 Effective communication obligation 5 Auxiliary aids and services available
How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services

IN BROCHURE IN BROCHURE IN BROCHURE

6 (including hearing aids, and batteries) Communication equipment available, and how to

IN BROCHURE

7 use 8 ADA coordinator and how to reach
Other items:

IN BROCHURE IS POSTED ON UNIT

9 Institution schedule of interpreters Request for Accommodations/ Communications

ADA WILL SCHEDULE INTERPRETER

10 Assistance Medical Request form includes request for

11 accommodations Job application form includes request for

12 accommodations 13 Waiver forms
Classification form includes request for

We have them

14 accommodations 15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations
SAP and other programming form includes request

16 for accommodation

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA X X X X X X X

NA
NA NA
NA NA
X NA
X X X X
X X NA X X X X
X X NA
X

USUALLY USE THE VRI

X doesn’t have request X
X X Standard DOC form X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 184 of 661 - Page ID#: 2748

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

# Issue/Question

if the problem remains)

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure 18 available in law library? (Need to check)
Do request forms: 19 list available services comprehensively?
clearly explain services and aids (what they are

20 and when they are available? 21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?
expressly ask about preferred mode of

communication/needed services and why they are

22 useful? 23 explain which items are free?
encompass religious and volunteer-provided

24 programming? Effective communication of these resources: Are the materials in language accessible to each

25 inmate? Is this information provided with effective

26 communication? Can inmates request and receive a meaningful

opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member

27 and interpreter to ask questions about the Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment

in/application for a program with staff, is effective

28 communication provided? are potential accommodations covered in the

29 discussion? Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment

in/application in education with staff, is effective

30 communication provided? are potential accommodations covered in the

31 discussion?

F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution? 2 Include picture of ID card and other official 3 Notice posted outside housing units? 4 Include picture of ID card and other official 5 Cell/bed cards 6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert? 7 Clear process to obtain? Describe 8 Each inmate has one if not waived? 9 Provided timely? 10 Replacements provided when needed?

Description/Notes Describe date checked:7/10/2019
IN THE BROCHURE Signs on door Describe: they are asked if they want accomadations

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

X

X

NA X

X

X

X

X XX NA X

X

X NA
X

X NA
X

X

x
NA X X X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 185 of 661 - Page ID#: 2749

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

# Issue/Question

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

KOMS alert? 11 Staff aware of use of KOMS
Working process to get new inmate alerts added?

12 (Describe) 13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check) 14 Appropriately obvious 15 Updated timely
Individual ID cards 16 Staff aware of meaning? 17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?) 18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived? 19 Provided timely? 20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times? 21 Prompt replacements provided? 22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose? 23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator? 24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver? 25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?
Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested

Describe: I add the alerts ADA in header of KOMS As soon as we are aware SAYS HOH OR DEAF
Describe: Describe:

26 ID?

NO

27 If yes, was an ID provided?

G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Identification to ADA Coordinator Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification

1 upon intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

YES

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification

2 of other deaf/hoh inmates?

YES

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids

and Services Assessment with every arriving or

3 newly identified deaf/hoh inmate?

YES

At this meeting, are each inmate's available

methods of communication expressly ascertained

4 and documented? At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform

YES ON THE FORMS AND SCANNED INTO KOMS

each inmate about available auxiliary aids and

5 services? Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms

YES INFORMATION IS PROVODED

6 explained?

YES

Is appropriate communication used during this

meeting? (oral and written; VRI; or visual

7 descriptions )

YES

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an

8 assessment on intake, has one been done? 9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

ALL HAVE BEEN ASSESED NO-INMATES WRITE TO ADA IF NEW NEEDS

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA X

X

X X X NA X X X X X X NA X NA X

THEY WILL BE TAKEN IF BEING WROTE U

NA x X X
X
X X X NA X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 186 of 661 - Page ID#: 2750

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided
1 On-person ID cards 2 Cell cards 3 Bed shaker 4 In-person alerts 5 Pager
Phone volume adjust setting (available in each 6 location where phones are available?) 7 Amplifier for phone
Consideration of specific housing assignment to 8 minimize communication difficulties? 9 Other amplification 10 Other (describe)
General issues Special housing area: Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH 11 inmates? (Describe) If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? 12 (Describe) If there is such an area, are inmates required to be 13 housed there? (such a requirement is nonIf there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live there, are accommodations etc. still fully 14 available to the inmate? Describe any restrictions. In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is 15 primary consideration given to inmate request? If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or not requesting 16 aids/services, were accommodations provided? Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services 17 documented in inmate institutional files? Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary 18 aids/services shared appropriately with staff? 19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained? 20 Have any been out of comission? 21 Describe -- which and for how long? Inmates moving housing or transferred: not 22 separated from hearing aid? 23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided? 24 Promptly? 25 Has there been a direct threat determination? 26 Describe Appropriately individuated (must consider specific 27 degree of impairment and specific dangers posed) 28 Appropriately reported? 29 Was it the appropriate decision?
30 Are classes in sign language provided? 31 deaf inmates given notice? 32 priority given to deaf inmates?

ALL DEAF INMATES ARE HOUSED IN THE SAME UNIT Describe:
Describe: deaf inmates are housed in Pine Bluff Describe:purple phones ar located in there no
Describe: yes
no one has asked yes yes Describe:yes Describe: no they would be Describe: Describe: Describe:
Depends on the situation vri and interpretor have been used ?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

X X X X
WE TRIED IT WONT WORK

going to buy them after july 1

NA NA NA
NA
NA

NA NA
NA NA
x

purple phone has been puit for some ti COT is aware a pending lawsuit might b
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 187 of 661 - Page ID#: 2751

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

I Interpretation in general
Qualified interpretation services available: Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation 1 communicated to inmates? covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 2 encounters/communications/settings) Does the request form clearly encompass religious 3 and other volunteer-provided programming? Effective process for choosing qualified 4 interpretation method? 5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences? Standing arrangement with providers? 6 In-person? 7 VRI? Is VRI availability: 8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)? after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours 9 of notice)? on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 10 hours of notice)? during emergencies (including medical emergencies) 11 when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)? Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? 12 Describe VRI laptop functional? 13 In general 14 Always checked for sufficient battery power? 15 Routine software updates? VRI laptop has necessary items with it? 16 Splitter? 17 Instructions? 18 Long power cord? 19 Usable as VRS? 20 VRI effectiveness tracked? 21 How? Information used to determine when in-person 22 interpretation should be first recourse? Is in-person interpretation available: 23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical 24 Parole? Describe each time in-person interpretation has 25 been offered Describe each time in-person interpretation has 26 been denied. Parole board notified of need for interpretation at 27 least 7 days before?

yes
yes
no
signed contract yes
yes yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
Describe:just have to sign it out Describe: yes has cord yes by Kenneth Clark Describe: no yes yes yes yes sign out and log on H drive
use the VRI Have used interpretors when needed
have not had this issue have not had any parole hearings
BMOD, SOTP (in future)
n/a
n/a

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA x

x

NA
NA x x x x x
NA
NA

VRI can be obtained from operations

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 188 of 661 - Page ID#: 2752

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

# Issue/Question

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? 28 (Reliance in non-emergency is non-compliant) 29 Describe
in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence 30 and VRI was unavailable)
Communication with inmates uses inmate's 31 preferred method?
Written communication is limited to only simple

no Describe: Vri was doen they put an old software verson and it works
yes

32 matters.

yes

Written communication is not needed when inmate

33 has low literacy Qualified interpretation services available: Does the request form clearly encompass religious

simple conversations

34 and other volunteer-provided programming?

no

for all inmate-staff communication when requested

by inmate? (not limited to only certain

35 encounters/communications/settings) Is the process for using VRI communicated to
36 inmates?

use the VRI yes

J Hand Restraints

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs? Used for an appropriate reason? transportation

Describe: escorted to RHU or trips

to/from prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing?

2 Individualized finding of a security threat?

yes

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who

3 might ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

5 Staff aware of the issue

Off-site medical care:

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

restraints removed when necessary for medical

7 communication?

K Non-auditory Alerts

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? 2 provided to all inmates who need it? 3 can and does it give alerts in real time? 4 sufficient to signal fire alarm? 5 sufficient to signal count alert? 6 programmed to signal different alerts? 7 used to notify of prison-wide events?
used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events

Describe:bed shakers strobe lights all deaf inmates yes yes no no no

8 specific to them?

no

Have any requests for medically necessary non-

9 auditory alerts been denied?

no

Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are

10 working? 11 frequently enough? 12 monitored/recorded formally?

Yes Safety Coordinator monthly monthly report

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

x NA

X
NA
X X X NA x x
NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 189 of 661 - Page ID#: 2753

# Issue/Question
13 Announcement boards 14 used to notify of schedule changes? 15 used consistently? 16 in all dormitories? 17 in gym? 18 in library? 19 audited and monitored?
In-person or personal system notification when an 20 inmate misses a page?
Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ 21 info only because of disability?
Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in 22 the future? 23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?
Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in 24 emergency?
Does the plan account for how effective 25 communication will be provided?
L Telecommunications
Videophones: 1 Installed? 2 Allow voice carry-over features? 3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)
Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to 4 solve them.
When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe 5 other alternative offered
Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, 6 when videophone is out of service. 7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates? 8 Appropriate location?
Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, 9 weekends, emergency) if necessary? 10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates? 11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?
No more permission needed than that for hearing 12 inmates using ordinary phones? 13 Advance request unnecessary? 14 Free?
Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular 15 phone calls?
Has any inmate requested access to the 16 videophones and been denied?
Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the inmate's name, the date, and the 17 reason for the denial.

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes yes yes yes but RHU yes yes Proggram staff keep it up to date Staff will go find and tell the inmate Describe: did/don’t hear pages Staff will go find and tell the inmate bed shakers and staff identify staff physically check the building durin an emergency we just get them out
no about 90 days Describe: COT has been working on this, it’s a purple phone issue Describe: yes it is in operations Describe: program staff informs them when they inquire they get 30 minutes up to 3x a day
Describe:
Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA

NA X
NA NA
NA X X x x X X X
NA

not working at this time unless it’s the VRI

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 190 of 661 - Page ID#: 2754

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

# Issue/Question

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

TTY: 18 Installed?
Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates

Located in operations

19 and staff? Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions

20 made available WITH TTY? 21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify) 22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?
location substantially as accessible as conventional

Describe:

23 telephones for non-deaf inmates? 24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access? 25 Permission needed?
Has any request to use the TTY been denied?

If needed but they ususally use VRI yes its in operations

26 (Describe) 27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates? 28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe) 29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)
Can access publicly available relay service phone

Describe:
Describe: Describe: Electronic Tech does this

30 numbers? Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions
31 for videophones and TTY is less than equitable? 32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?
If yes, was determination (including reasoning,

Describe:

33 evidence, etc.) documented? 34 Was monitor notified? 35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?
VRS via laptop 36 Available? 37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU) 38 Used when appropriate?
Phones 39 Amplification in every group of phones?
Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need

40 them? CapTel
41 Appropriate for any particular inmate? 42 If so, installed and working? 43 Request by any inmate denied?
TV/Movies 44 Is captioning available? 45 Is captioning used? 46 Is the captioning checked regularly? 47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?
Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly

no but plan on ordeing this year Describe: Describe: Describe:
Checked by recreation no

48 (Describe) 49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning? 50 Amplification method? (Describe)
If inmate-purchased tv w/ captioning malfunctioned,

Describe: Describe:

did staff assist to same extent as w/other inmates

51 regarding malfunctioning personal property?

We don not work on the tvs.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA x

x

x
NA x
x
x x

NA X
NA X
X

NA

NA x x x
NA x
NA NA NA NA NA
x x x
X
X NA
x

they couldsend back to the company

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 191 of 661 - Page ID#: 2755

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

# Issue/Question

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

All technology/ equipment in good working order? 52 (Describe problems)
Access to communication services for deaf inmates in segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf 53 inmates of same status? Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates only to the same extent and with the 54 same discretion as non-deaf inmates?

Describe any problems: Purple phones don’t record but regular phones do

M Miscellaneous Devices

1 Devices available? (Describe) 2 devices in commissary list?
possibility to request other devices from ADA

Describe:

3 coordinator? 4 facilitation of purchase?
Purchase of any non-medically necessary device 5 denied? (Describe) 6 determined on case-by-case basis? 7 because security threat? 8 monitor notified? 9 reasoning explained?
ADA coordinator maintains records 10 of requests? 11 of denials?

they can contact ADA coordinator up to Warden Describe: it would be
Havent received any Havent received any

N Disciplinary

Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter

and without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate

1 has been punished? 2 Was a re-hearing granted?

no it would be if this happened

O Grievances

Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA

1 coordinator?

Yes

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance

coordinator forward copy of grievance to ADA

2 coordinator?

Records of all grievances filed by deaf/HOH

3 inmates? (not just those related to settlement)

yes

4 Adequate summaries provided in report?

yes

Including all deaf or HOH inmate grievances, not just

5 those in settlement?

yes

6 Includes issues raised by inmate in grievance?

yes

7 Includes institution in which grievance was filed?

yes

8 Includes summary of KDOC response?

yes

9 Includes grievance resolution (or lack thereof)?

yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

x

x use VRI

NA

NA
NA x x

x x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 192 of 661 - Page ID#: 2756

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

P Training
Types available 1 CBT? (Using approved training?) 2 Who received? (Describe) 3 All appropriate staff? 4 Live training? (Information only) 5 Who received? (Describe) 6 All appropriate staff?
Targeted training on specific needs 7 training on best communication practices? 8 training on unique needs/problems?
training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may 9 miss alert?
training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may not hear verbal commands and strategies to handle 10 that problem? 11 training on identification of communication needs? consideration given to talking one-on-one with deaf 12 or HOH inmates, instead of in a group? Training on communication 13 training on use and role of interpreters? 14 training on process for obtaining interpreters? training on importance of not separating imate from 15 hearing aid? 16 training on communication technology? 17 training on VRI? 18 training on how to turn on and check for 19 training on non-auditory alert office switch? 20 training on videophone rules? Training on Policies 21 training on the Settlement? 22 training on identity and role of ADA coordinator? 23 training on KDOC anti-discrimination policy? 24 training on existence of KOMS/EMR alerts? 25 training on meaning of ID cards? training on equipment/services/ accommodation 26 available? 27 training on hand restraint policy? 28 training on two-point hand restraint system? 29 training on disciplinary and grievance practies? Do all relevant staff know about reporting 30 obligations? How do you know? Training specifically for housing area staff training on the use of cell/bed notices that indicate 31 an inmate is deaf/HOH 32 training on bed shaker switches 33 training on telecommunications training on obligations to notify deaf and HOH 34 inmates of alerts

yes Describe: everyone Describe: Describe:
ADA coordinator or Warden will schedule ? ? Yes its in our library Its in the CBT
Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA
NA X
NA NA
x NA
x x
x

x
x x NA x x x x x

NA X x x x x
x
x x x
NA

training hasn’t occurred for this year ye

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 193 of 661 - Page ID#: 2757

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

# Issue/Question

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Training specifically for all corrections staff training on accommodations for inmates who sign

35 (esp. restraint policies) training on strategies for inmates who may not hear

yes its in the policy

36 directions/orders Training specifically for medical staff training on process to obtain hearing aid within two

I monitor disciplinary reports for this

37 months training on obligation to notify off-site providers of

yes if needed

38 needs 39 Training provided for review by Monitor?

medical calls them in advance yes you reviewed the trainign by DOC

Q Monitor Access

Has the monitor been granted access to requested

KDOC records, files, and papers that pertain to the

1 agreement?

yes

2 If no, was an explanation provided for the refusal?

Has the monitor been granted access to KDOC staff

3 members and employees?

yes

4 Were staff/employees cooperative?

yes

Has KDOC responded to reasonable written

5 questions?

yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA

X
X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 194 of 661 - Page

KCIW

ID#: 2758

Prison: Name of person filling out form:
Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order
(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed
(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the d8. Fi oi r eachi inmate iwdiho hahs a iheariidng adid , does
it have a t‐coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an
induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

KCIW Lori Holderman
6/24/2019 1
11/21/2014 11/21/2014 11/21/2014
2/1/2019 2/6/2019
A
Yes

2

3

4

Jail report inmate was deaf (12/03/2015)
Jail report inmate was deaf

Jail report inmate was deaf (03/11/2013)
Jail report inmate was deaf

42476 Inmate already had hearing aides when she
arrived

N/A

N/A

01/23/2017

N/A

N/A

01/23/2017

N/A

N/A

01/23/2017

Does not have hearing Does not have hearing

aides

aides

3

N

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 195 of 661 - Page

KCIW

ID#: 2759

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 ‐ Date Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description
Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

1

2

3

4

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Date Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

No

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date ‐ start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today ‐

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

no

no

no

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 196 of 661 - Page

KCIW

ID#: 2760

Prison: Name of person filling out form:
Date: 8
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order
(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed
(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the d8. Fi oi r eachi inmate iwdiho hahs a iheariidng adid , does
it have a t‐coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an
induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Inmate reported 5/3/2017
12/10/2018 12/14/2018
A
Yes

Inmate report failing

screening

During intake paperwork during intake paperwork

4/27/2017 4/27/2017

10/5/2018 10/5/2018

10/9/2018 10/9/2018

4/27/2017

10/9/2018

10/12/2018

Missing at this time‐‐ give

C‐‐Give her a pocket talker her a pocket talker

A

Yes

Yes

Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 197 of 661 - Page

KCIW

ID#: 2761

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 ‐ Date Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description
Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

5

6

7

8

5/18/2018

n/a

10/1/2018

9/25/2018

Audiology booth Had to resend Audiology
results over

Failed Hearing Screening Failed Hearing Screening

Scheduled for hearing Scheduled for hearing

booth

booth

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Date Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

no

no

no

no

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date ‐ start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today ‐

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 198 of 661 - Page

KCIW

ID#: 2762

Prison:

Name of person filling out form:

Date:

9

10

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order
(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed
(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Inmate failed screening 10/9/2018 10/9/2018 10/12/2018

Inmate failed screening 10/15/2018 10/15/2018 10/18/2018

A

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

d8. Fi oi r eachi inmate iwdiho hahs a iheariidng adid , does

it have a t‐coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of

receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an

induction loop system.

Yes

Yes

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing

issue was presented to when the hearing issue was

finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or

determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

11
Intake told staff 10/31/2018 10/31/2018 11/9/2018
A
Yes

12
10/18/2018 10/18/2018 10/31/2018 10/31/2018 11/9/2018
A
Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 199 of 661 - Page

KCIW

ID#: 2763

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 ‐ Date Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description
Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

9

10

11

12

8/30/2019

10/16/2018

n/a

10/18/2018

Sickcall‐‐ Hearing Problem

intake

Intake

Referred to provider Referred to hearing booth

Referred to hearing booth

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Date Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

10/4/2018 Hearing issue follow up Refered for hearing test

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

no

no

no

no

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date ‐ start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today ‐

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 200 of 661 - Page

KCIW

ID#: 2764

Prison:

Name of person filling out form:

Date:

13

14

15

16

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order
(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed
(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Inmate failed screening 12/5/2018 12/5/2018 12/6/2018

Inmate failed screening 4/12/2019 4/12/2019 4/15/2019

Inmate failed screening 4/12/2019 4/12/2019 4/15/2019

Inmate failed screening 5/21/2019 5/21/2019 5/21/2019

A

A

A

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

d8. Fi oi r eachi inmate iwdiho hahs a iheariidng adid , does

it have a t‐coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of

receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an

induction loop system.

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing

issue was presented to when the hearing issue was

finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or

determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 201 of 661 - Page

KCIW

ID#: 2765

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 ‐ Date Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description
Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

13

14

15

16

11/2/2018

4/10/2019

2/5/2019

5/10/2019

Annual appointment

Annual appointment

New intake

New Intake

Referred to hearing booth Reffered to Hearing booth Referred to hearing booth Referred to hearing booth

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Date Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

no

no

no

no

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date ‐ start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today ‐

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 202 of 661 - Page

KCIW

ID#: 2766

Prison: Name of person filling out form:
Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order
(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed
(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Inmate failed screening 5/21/2019 5/21/2019 5/21/2019

Inmate failed screening 5/21/2019 5/21/2019 5/21/2019

A

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

d8. Fi oi r eachi inmate iwdiho hahs a iheariidng adid , does

it have a t‐coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of

receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an

induction loop system.

Yes

Yes

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing

issue was presented to when the hearing issue was

finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or

determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 203 of 661 - Page

KCIW

ID#: 2767

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 ‐ Date Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description
Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 2 ‐ Date Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome Any part of audiology process occurred during
covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date
(c) Days for resolution (End date ‐ start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today ‐
start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

17

18

4/17/2019

2/20/2019

Annual Appointment Refferred to hearing
booth

Sickcall‐‐hearing issue Referred to hearing booth

no

no

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 204 of 661 - Page ID#: 2768

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system? Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers) Captioned Telephone Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like? Bed shakers Vibrating watches? Vibrating alarm clocks? Pagers? Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration not mentioned above. Earphones for parole hearings Earphones for orientation videos

How many 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 3
0

Where

When obtained

Pine Bluff Pine Bluff Not in use/no signal

Specifications

(URL)

How do inmates obtain access? How well do they work?

Other comments

On the wall

Going to order in July Not currently working / COT aware

is going to order one thru her inmate account

Ask records

Havent had the need for them

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 205 of 661 - Page ID#: 2769

Documentation to review KOMS alerts for each deaf/HOH inmate Grievances:
Provide/Review summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc.

Date reviewed 7/1/2019

Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.) complete

7/1/2019

see attached

Provide/Review full documentation of all grievances that address

7/1/2019

hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Solve any problems revealed.

Discipline

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving an inmate who signs. Ensure

that VRI or other effective communication was provided at each stage of 7/1/2019

each such proceedings.

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving failure to obey an order, or

failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Ensure that no such inmate is being penalized for

7/1/2019

inability to hear.

VRI Log (review to ensure it's being used in appropriate circumstances. VRS or other videophone alternative (review to ensure that when videophone is inoperative, alternative is in fact available/used)

6/28/2019 6/28/2019

TTY instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.) 6/28/209

VRI instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.) 6/28/2019

see attached
see attached
not applicable yes CTO is also testing this to make sure it is working properly since the purple phone is down yes yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 206 of 661 - Page ID#: 2770

Questions regarding effective communications in particular activities or locations. For each, mark compliance (Y, partial, N, no basis) and explain. Goal: each d

Intake/ Orientation -- Non-medical Intake, Medical Auxiliary Aid Assessment Units Restrictive Housing Medical/MH care Programs Education Recreation Communications with Chaplain Prison-provided religious programming Volunteer -led programming (note: Only volunteer interpretation is required) Parole hearings Classification/ Transfer Legal Aid Grievance process Work assignments Court call and ALL parts of disciplinary process
Staff investigations Investigative interviews Preparation of report Shift supervisor's review of disciplinary report Investigator's review of disciplinary report Miranda warnings

In-person interpretation

Ever used?
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a yes n/a n/a n/a
n/a
n/a n/a
n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a

Used whenever appropriate?
yes yes

Availability of VRI: Appropriate equipment available (computer line,
Staff trained? outlet, space)

yes

n/a

yes

n/a

yes

n/a

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

n/a

yes yes yes yes

yes yes yes yes

yes

yes yes

Ever used? How many times?

Used whenever appropriate? (without special request)

0

0

bi annually

When advising inmate of right to consult with legal aide Notification of date, time, and place of hearing Hearing or re-hearing If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

VRI was used a total of 28 times

yes

sine october 2018

yes yes n/a

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to attend a religious service without effective communication to receive any religious meal, diet, or other accommodation? No Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have witnessed or been suspected of violation) provided with an inmate or staff advisor on same terms as non-deaf inmates? Yes inmates can have a staff council upon request. It is reviewed and denied or appoved based on the same process as a non deaf inmate.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 207 of 661 - Page ID#: 2771
Questions regarding effective commdueaf or HOH inmate has an equal opportunity to Amplification: (Not just hearing aid -- spacespecific amplification)

Intake/ Orientation -- Non-medical Intake, Medical Auxiliary Aid Assessment Units Restrictive Housing Medical/MH care Programs Education Recreation Communications with Chaplain Prison-provided religious programming Volunteer -led programming (note: Only volunteer interpretation is required) Parole hearings Classification/ Transfer Legal Aid Grievance process Work assignments Court call and ALL parts of disciplinary process
Staff investigations Investigative interviews Preparation of report Shift supervisor's review of disciplinary report Investigator's review of disciplinary report Miranda warnings

Adequate?
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a
n/a n/a
n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a
n/a n/a

Describe efforts, issues

When advising inmate of right to

consult with legal aide

n/a

Notification of date, time, and

place of hearing

n/a

Hearing or re-hearing

n/a

If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

n/a

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to atte No Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have w Yes inmates can have a staff council u

Audit item issues/ concerns

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 208 of 661 - Page ID#: 2772

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Name

Low literacy?

If signs to

Bed

(So that

communicate

Shaker?

Listed with Signs to written

Has

Has

, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

KOMS ADA commu communicatio Deaf/HOH Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested;

Precaution nicate n is not

ID Card? (Y Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied;

ID

?

(Y/N) effective)

or waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted)

yes

n

n/a

yes

no

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

n

n/a

yes

no

yes

n

n/a

yes

no

yes

n

n/a

yes

no

yes

n

n/a

yes

no

yes

n

n/a

yes

no

yes

n

n/a

yes

no

yes

n

n/a

yes

no

yes

n

n/a

yes

no

yes

n

n/a

yes

no

yes

n

n/a

yes

no

yes

n

n/a

yes

no

yes

n

n/a

yes

no

yes

n

n/a

yes

no

yes

n

n/a

yes

no

yes

n

n/a

yes

no

Other Alert

Device TTY Access

(Not

(Not

requested; requested;

denied; denied;

granted) granted)

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

Personal Phone Amplifier (Not requested; denied; granted) nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr

Shake & Wake (Not requested; denied; granted) nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr nr

Any other

auxiliary

aid

Outome

requested? ?

nr

watch

pending

watch

pending

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

Audit item issues/concerns

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 209 of 661 - Page ID#: 2773

Fill this out for EACH location where there are any deaf/HOH inmates

Dorm/unit Pine Bluff MSU Mainbuilding Ridgeview Lonnie watson Rhu

Walk

How

many How many Volume adjustable How

Deaf/ inmates who phone available to many

HOH sign to

inmates without

bed Bed shakers set up for use for

inmates? communicate special request?

shakers? multiple purposes?

6

2 the phones have volume

2 callahan is set up for alarm aclock

1

the phones have volume

0

2

the phones have volume

0

5

the phones have volume

0

3

the phones have volume

0

1

the phones have volume

0

If there are

Staff use

any inmates

bed

If there are any If there are who sign:

shakers for inmates who any inmates Ready

multiple sign: Location who sign: Staff access to Audit item

purposes? available for VRI? trained for VRI videophone issues/concerns

alarm

operations, schoolyes

yes

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Date

Name

7/10/2019 Lori Holderman

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 210 of 661 - Page ID#: 2774

Inmate or staff? Inmate number Staff title

Staff

CTO/ADA Coordinator

Topics

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 211 of 661 - Page ID#: 2775
Kentucky State Penitentiary

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 212 of 661 - Page ID#: 2776

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Compliant

NonComplian
t

NA,

unknown,

or

no

basis

for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

A ADA coordinator

1 Is an ADA coordinator designated?

Y

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there

2 was no ADA coordinator appointed?

Y

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Y

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected

Y

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with

5 inmates in a timely and appropriate manner? How?

Y

Describe method used to ascertain:

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information?

Posted memo and knowledge of

Y

6 (THIS REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

Classification Staff

Is the information prominently posted in any

7 housing unit where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

Y

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

Y

Describe: ADA Basis Building Blocks

9 Describe training

Course

NA

Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately

10 cover information?

Y

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training)

Y

12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

Y

Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's

13 powerpoint)

Y

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with 14 settlement agreement?

Y

Does ADA coordinator retrieve at least monthly 15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Y

Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's

16 tracking list?

Y

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in 17 implementing the settlement?

Y

Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf

18 inmates?

Y

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on

19 deaf inmates?

Y

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the

20 inmates in those situations?

Y

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective

21 way with the monitor?

Y

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the

22 monitor when necessary?

Y

B Reporting obligations

If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was 1 monitor notified?

Y

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf 2 and HOH inmates?

Y

3 Is the list complete?

Y

4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

Y

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 213 of 661 - Page ID#: 2777

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Compliant

NonComplian
t

NA,

unknown,

or

no

basis

for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Quarterly summary of all grievances by deaf or HOH

5 inmates shared with monitor?

Y

Was there a direct threat determination made for

Describe: Threat determinations are

6 jobs, activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe)

considered for all inmates.

NA

7 Was it reported to the monitor?

NA

8 Was the report complete?

NA

9 Was the report timely?

NA

10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert?

NA

11 If yes, was the monitor notified?

NA - auditory alerts are used.

Did the institution consult with the monitor about

12 the non-auditory alert?

NA

13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Y

C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

1 Hard of hearing inmates

NA

Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is

2 arriving?

Y

Describe: Receives KOMS

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive

notifications as well as emails from

3 automatic notifications.)

Medical

NA

Effective communications planned/provided? 4 (Describe)

Describe: arrivals are known.

Y

Deaf inmates

NA

Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is

5 arriving?

Y

Describe: Receives KOMS

notifications as well as emails from

6 Describe

Medical

NA

7 Effective communications planning?

Y

8 Effective communication provided?

Y

9 Describe

Describe: arrivals are known.

NA

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Y

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Y

Orientation videos

NA

12 Captioned?

No orientation video at KSP

13 Shown in a quiet space?

NA

14 Amplification if needed?

NA

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not 15 literate? (Describe)

VRI and TTY available

Y

D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general medical

intake, and during medical care more generally:

NA

1 Is there effective communications planning?

Y

Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty

2 hearing if interpretation is needed?

Y

3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?

Y

Are staff aware of, and use, effective

4 communications techniques?

Y

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 214 of 661 - Page ID#: 2778

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Compliant

NonComplian
t

NA,

unknown,

or

no

basis

for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Notice to medical staff:

NA

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How?

Y

Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on

6 cover and within the file?

Y

Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate

7 accommodations.

NA

Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site

8 providers of need for interpretation?

Y

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

Y

Describe:Yes. When

has

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

appointment other than audiology. NA

11 Adequate notice?

Y

Outside providers offering effective communication

12 to inmates who sign?

Y

Describe: Provider-specific

accomodations for HOH inmates.

We have not sent a deaf inmate to

13 How?

an appointment.

NA

Hearing screening/medical intake:

NA

14 Performed for all new inmates?

Y

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

Screened at time of physical exam.

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

Y

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

Y

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?

Y

How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it

Describe: Administered by Medical

19 administered by staff?

Staff

NA

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

Describe: Medical Staff

NA

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?

Y

22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe.

Describe: Communication is made at

different education level.

Y

23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Y

Other methods of access:

NA

Do annual/routine physicals include hearing

24 screening?

Y

25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening?

Y

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

Y

If screening indicated problem (3+ "yes" answers), 27 is there further assessment?

Y

Adequate determination of need for designation/

28 audiology services? How?

Y

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Y

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or

30 HOH, apart from audiology services decision?

Y

After assessment, does medical:

NA

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Y

32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file?

Y

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Y

34 Is notification prompt?

Y

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 215 of 661 - Page ID#: 2779

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Compliant

NonComplian
t

NA,

unknown,

or

no

basis

for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology

Checklist)

NA

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

Y

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

Y

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

Y

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

Y

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

Y

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

NA

40 initial request/questionnaire?

Y

41 each relevant medical visit?

Y

42 any audiology visit?

Y

43 hearing aid provision?

Y

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks?

Y

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

Y

46 Shared with monitor when requested

Y

Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site

Describe: 3 total. (1) initial visit for

trips does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing

audiogram (2) Mold made (3) Fit &

47 aid? Describe.

receive hearing aide

NA

In the past year, how many individuals have had to

Describe: 6 patients have waited

48 wait more than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?

more than 60 days.

NA

Describe:The cause of the delay

varies. 1) There was a system

communication issue resulting in

scheduling delays. Through process

inprovement, that issue has been

resolved. 2) Patients who refused to

What is the cause of the delay?

pay the $10 prosthetic fee and than later chaged his mind. 3) Patients

whose test results are inconclusive

and require retesting. 4) Patients

who are not cooperative and

require rescheduling. 5) Patients

wiht infections requiring resolution

49

prior to testing.

NA

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken)

50 to improve this process?

Describe: Process analysis resulting inNA

Co-pay and availability issues:

NA

47 Charged only once -- not again for followups

Y

Hearing aid batteries

?

NA

48 Available for free?

Y

49 In sufficient numbers?

Y

50 7 days/week?

Y

51 regardless of housing?

Y

E Information provided inmates

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe)

Describe: Handbook provided

Y

Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-

2 discrimination and ADA services?

Y

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 216 of 661 - Page ID#: 2780

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Brochure? Items to include:

?

3 Non-discrimination obligation

4 Effective communication obligation

5 Auxiliary aids and services available

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services

6 (including hearing aids, and batteries)

Communication equipment available, and how to

7 use

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

Other items:

?

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

Request for Accommodations/ Communications

10 Assistance

Medical Request form includes request for

11 accommodations

Job application form includes request for

12 accommodations

13 Waiver forms

Classification form includes request for

14 accommodations

15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations

SAP and other programming form includes request

16 for accommodation

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure

18 available in law library? (Need to check)

Describe date checked: 7/22/19

Do request forms:

19 list available services comprehensively?

clearly explain services and aids (what they are

20 and when they are available?

21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?

expressly ask about preferred mode of

communication/needed services and why they are

22 useful?

23 explain which items are free?

encompass religious and volunteer-provided

24 programming?

Effective communication of these resources:

Are the materials in language accessible to each

25 inmate?

Is this information provided with effective

26 communication?

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful

opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member

27 and interpreter to ask questions about the

Complian t

Partially Compliant

NonComplian
t

NA,

unknown,

or

no

basis

for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y
Y NA
NA
Y

Y

Y Y Y Y

Y NA
Y Y Y

NA - We use KYDOC forms NA

Y

Y Y NA Y

Y

Y

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 217 of 661 - Page ID#: 2781

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment

in/application for a program with staff, is effective

28 communication provided?

are potential accommodations covered in the

29 discussion?

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment

in/application in education with staff, is effective

30 communication provided?

are potential accommodations covered in the

31 discussion?

F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

Count Office

2 Include picture of ID card and other official

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

4 Include picture of ID card and other official

5 Cell/bed cards

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Describe: available from ADA

7 Clear process to obtain? Describe

coordinator

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

9 Provided timely?

10 Replacements provided when needed?

KOMS alert?

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Working process to get new inmate alerts added?

Describe: Medical notifies ADA

12 (Describe)

coordinator

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

14 Appropriately obvious

15 Updated timely

Individual ID cards

16 Staff aware of meaning?

17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?)

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

19 Provided timely?

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Unless in Restrictive Housing

21 Prompt replacements provided?

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?

Describe: Restrictive Housing

23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator?

24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver?

Describe: No

25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?

Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested

26 ID?

NO

27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Complian t

Partially Compliant

NonComplian
t

NA,

unknown,

or

no

basis

for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

Y

Y NA
Y

Y

Y Y Y Y NA Y
Y
Y Y Y NA Y
Y
Y Y Y NA Y Y Y Y Y Y NA
NA Y
NA
NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 218 of 661 - Page ID#: 2782

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification

1 upon intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification

2 of other deaf/hoh inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids

and Services Assessment with every arriving or

3 newly identified deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available

methods of communication expressly ascertained

4 and documented?

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform

each inmate about available auxiliary aids and

5 services?

Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms

6 explained?

Is appropriate communication used during this

meeting? (oral and written; VRI; or visual

7 descriptions )

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an

8 assessment on intake, has one been done?

9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

1 On-person ID cards

2 Cell cards

3 Bed shaker

4 In-person alerts

5 Pager

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each

6 location where phones are available?)

7 Amplifier for phone

Consideration of specific housing assignment to

8 minimize communication difficulties?

9 Other amplification

10 Other (describe)

Describe: Pocket talkers

General issues

Special housing area:

Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH

11 inmates? (Describe)

Describe:

If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it?

12 (Describe)

Describe:

If there is such an area, are inmates required to be

13 housed there? (such a requirement is non-

No

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not

to live there, are accommodations etc. still fully

14 available to the inmate? Describe any restrictions.

Describe:

Complian t

Partially Compliant

NonComplian
t

NA,

unknown,

or

no

basis

for

evaluation (Explain)

NA Y

Y

Y

Y

Y
Y
Y
NA Y Y
Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y NA NA NA
NA
NA Y
NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 219 of 661 - Page ID#: 2783

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Compliant

NonComplian
t

NA,

unknown,

or

no

basis

for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is

15 primary consideration given to inmate request?

Y

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids

and Services form after not being found deaf or

HOH, signing a waiver, or not requesting

NA

16 aids/services, were accommodations provided?

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services

17 documented in inmate institutional files?

Y

Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary

18 aids/services shared appropriately with staff?

Y

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Y

Describe: Purple has been our to

20 Have any been out of comission?

comission due firewall issues.

NA

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

Describe: Purple; approx. 6 months NA

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not

22 separated from hearing aid?

Y

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

Y

24 Promptly?

Y

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Describe:

NA

26 Describe

Describe:

NA

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific

27 degree of impairment and specific dangers posed)

Describe:

28 Appropriately reported?

29 Was it the appropriate decision?

30 Are classes in sign language provided?

N

31 deaf inmates given notice?

NA

32 priority given to deaf inmates?

NA

I Interpretation in general

Qualified interpretation services available:

NA

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

1 communicated to inmates?

Y

covers all inmate-staff communication when

requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain

Y

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious

3 and other volunteer-provided programming?

Y

Effective process for choosing qualified 4 interpretation method?

Y

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Y

Standing arrangement with providers?

NA

6 In-person?

Y

7 VRI?

Y

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 220 of 661 - Page ID#: 2784

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Compliant

NonComplian
t

NA,

unknown,

or

no

basis

for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Is VRI availability:

NA

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Y

after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours

9 of notice)?

Y

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48

10 hours of notice)?

Y

during emergencies (including medical emergencies)

11 when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

Y

Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? 12 Describe

Describe: will be made available

whenever requested.

Y

VRI laptop functional?

Describe:

NA

13 In general

Currently being reconfugured due to a software update.

Y

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Y

15 Routine software updates?

Y

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Describe:

NA

16 Splitter?

N

17 Instructions?

Y

18 Long power cord?

Y

19 Usable as VRS?

Y

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

N

21 How?

NA

Information used to determine when in-person

22 interpretation should be first recourse?

NA

Is in-person interpretation available:

Y

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

Question is unclear

24 Parole?

Question is unclear

Describe each time in-person interpretation has

Upon necessary request by inmate

25 been offered

or request by authorized visitor.

Describe each time in-person interpretation has 26 been denied.

Situation has not occurred.

NA

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at 27 least 7 days before?

Situation has not occurred.

NA

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret?

In one instance when specifically

28 (Reliance in non-emergency is non-compliant)

requested by HOH inmate.

Describe:

specifically

requested

for

29 Describe

adjustment procedures.

NA

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence

30 and VRI was unavailable)

NA

Communication with inmates uses inmate's 31 preferred method?

Y

Written communication is limited to only simple

32 matters.

Y

Written communication is not needed when inmate

33 has low literacy

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 221 of 661 - Page ID#: 2785

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Compliant

NonComplian
t

NA,

unknown,

or

no

basis

for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Qualified interpretation services available:

NA

Does the request form clearly encompass religious

34 and other volunteer-provided programming?

Y

for all inmate-staff communication when requested

by inmate? (not limited to only certain

Y

35 encounters/communications/settings)

Is the process for using VRI communicated to 36 inmates?

Y

J Hand Restraints

Describe: Controlled movement and

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

in restrictive housing.

NA

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation

to/from prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing?

Y

2 Individualized finding of a security threat?

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who

3 might ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

Y

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

Y

5 Staff aware of the issue

Y

Off-site medical care:

NA

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

Y

restraints removed when necessary for medical

7 communication?

Y

K Non-auditory Alerts

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts?

Describe: PAGER

NA

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

Y

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

Y

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

Y

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

Y

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

Y

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Y

used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific

8 to them?

Y

Have any requests for medically necessary non-

9 auditory alerts been denied?

Y

Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are

10 working?

Y

11 frequently enough?

Y

12 monitored/recorded formally?

Y

13 Announcement boards

NA

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Y

15 used consistently?

Y

16 in all dormitories?

Y

17 in gym?

Y

18 in library?

Y

19 audited and monitored?

Y

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 222 of 661 - Page ID#: 2786

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

In-person or personal system notification when an

20 inmate misses a page?

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/

21 info only because of disability?

Describe: no

Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in

22 the future?

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in

24 emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective

25 communication will be provided?

L Telecommunications

Videophones:

1 Installed?

2 Allow voice carry-over features?

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

Describe: not for

Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to

4 solve them.

Describe: NA

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe

5 other alternative offered

Describe:

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives,

6 when videophone is out of service.

Describe: On site staff notifies.

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

8 Appropriate location?

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours,

9 weekends, emergency) if necessary?

10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates?

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

No more permission needed than that for hearing

12 inmates using ordinary phones?

13 Advance request unnecessary?

14 Free?

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular

15 phone calls?

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones

16 and been denied?

Describe: None

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances,

including the inmate's name, the date, and the

17 reason for the denial.

Describe: NA

TTY:

18 Installed?

Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates

19 and staff?

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions

20 made available WITH TTY?

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

Describe: Mon - Fri

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

Complian t

Partially Compliant

NonComplian
t

NA,

unknown,

or

no

basis

for

evaluation (Explain)

Y

NA NA Y Y
Y

NA Y Y
NA
NA
Y

NA Y Y
Y
Y Y
Y
Y Y
Y

NA
NA
NA Y Y
Y NA
Y

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 223 of 661 - Page ID#: 2787

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

location substantially as accessible as conventional

23 telephones for non-deaf inmates?

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

25 Permission needed?

Has any request to use the TTY been denied?

26 (Describe)

Describe: No

27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates?

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Describe: NO CHARGE

29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Describe:

Can access publicly available relay service phone

30 numbers?

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions

31 for videophones and TTY is less than equitable?

Describe: NO

32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

If yes, was determination (including reasoning,

33 evidence, etc.) documented?

34 Was monitor notified?

35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

VRS via laptop

36 Available?

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

38 Used when appropriate?

Phones

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need

40 them?

CapTel

41 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

Describe: In SSU

42 If so, installed and working?

Describe: yes

43 Request by any inmate denied?

Describe: no

TV/Movies

44 Is captioning available?

45 Is captioning used?

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly

48 (Describe)

Describe:

49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

50 Amplification method? (Describe)

Describe:

If inmate-purchased tv w/ captioning malfunctioned,

did staff assist to same extent as w/other inmates

51 regarding malfunctioning personal property?

All technology/ equipment in good working order?

52 (Describe problems)

Describe any problems:

Access to communication services for deaf inmates

in segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf

53 inmates of same status?

Complian t

Partially Compliant

NonComplian
t

NA,

unknown,

or

no

basis

for

evaluation (Explain)

Y

Y Y

NA Y
NA Y
Y

NA NA
NA
NA NA NA Y Y Y NA Y
N
NA NA NA NA NA
Y Y Y Y
Y
Y NA
Y

Y

N

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 224 of 661 - Page ID#: 2788

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or

HOH inmates only to the same extent and with the

54 same discretion as non-deaf inmates?

M Miscellaneous Devices

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Describe:

2 devices in commissary list?

possibility to request other devices from ADA

3 coordinator?

4 facilitation of purchase?

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device

5 denied? (Describe)

Describe: NO

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

7 because security threat?

8 monitor notified?

9 reasoning explained?

ADA coordinator maintains records

10 of requests?

11 of denials?

N Disciplinary

Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter

and without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate

1 has been punished?

None

2 Was a re-hearing granted?

NA

O Grievances

Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA

1 coordinator?

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance

coordinator forward copy of grievance to ADA

2 coordinator?

Records of all grievances filed by deaf/HOH

3 inmates? (not just those related to settlement)

4 Adequate summaries provided in report?

Including all deaf or HOH inmate grievances, not just

5 those in settlement?

6 Includes issues raised by inmate in grievance?

7 Includes institution in which grievance was filed?

8 Includes summary of KDOC response?

9 Includes grievance resolution (or lack thereof)?

P Training

Types available

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

2 Who received? (Describe)

Describe: CBT required for all staff

3 All appropriate staff?

4 Live training? (Information only)

Describe: Computer based

5 Who received? (Describe)

Describe: all staff

6 All appropriate staff?

Targeted training on specific needs

7 training on best communication practices?

Complian t

Partially Compliant

NonComplian
t

NA,

unknown,

or

no

basis

for

evaluation (Explain)

Y

NA Y
Y
Y
NA Y NA NA NA
NA N NA

Y
Y
Y
Y
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
NA Y
NA Y
NA NA
Y NA
Y

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 225 of 661 - Page ID#: 2789

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

8 training on unique needs/problems?

training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may

9 miss alert?

training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may

not hear verbal commands and strategies to handle

10 that problem?

11 training on identification of communication needs?

consideration given to talking one-on-one with deaf

12 or HOH inmates, instead of in a group?

Training on communication

13 training on use and role of interpreters?

14 training on process for obtaining interpreters?

training on importance of not separating imate from

15 hearing aid?

16 training on communication technology?

17 training on VRI?

18 training on how to turn on and check for captioning?

19 training on non-auditory alert office switch?

20 training on videophone rules?

Training on Policies

21 training on the Settlement?

22 training on identity and role of ADA coordinator?

23 training on KDOC anti-discrimination policy?

24 training on existence of KOMS/EMR alerts?

25 training on meaning of ID cards?

training on equipment/services/ accommodation

26 available?

27 training on hand restraint policy?

28 training on two-point hand restraint system?

29 training on disciplinary and grievance practies?

Do all relevant staff know about reporting

30 obligations? How do you know?

Describe: Covered in CBT

Training specifically for housing area staff

training on the use of cell/bed notices that indicate

31 an inmate is deaf/HOH

32 training on bed shaker switches

33 training on telecommunications

training on obligations to notify deaf and HOH

34 inmates of alerts

Training specifically for all corrections staff

training on accommodations for inmates who sign

35 (esp. restraint policies)

training on strategies for inmates who may not hear

36 directions/orders

Complian t

Partially Compliant

NonComplian
t

NA,

unknown,

or

no

basis

for

evaluation (Explain)

Y

Y

Y
Y
Y
NA Y Y
Y
Y Y Y Y Y NA Y Y Y Y Y
Y
Y Y Y
Y
NA
Y
Y Y
Y
NA
Y
Y

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 226 of 661 - Page ID#: 2790

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Training specifically for medical staff

training on process to obtain hearing aid within two

37 months

training on obligation to notify off-site providers of

38 needs

39 Training provided for review by Monitor?

Q Monitor Access

Has the monitor been granted access to requested

KDOC records, files, and papers that pertain to the

1 agreement?

2 If no, was an explanation provided for the refusal?

Has the monitor been granted access to KDOC staff

3 members and employees?

4 Were staff/employees cooperative?

Has KDOC responded to reasonable written

5 questions?

Description/Notes

Complian t

Partially Compliant

NonComplian
t

NA,

unknown,

or

no

basis

for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

Y

Y

na

No new procedures this period.

Y
NA Y Y Y

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 227 of 661 - Page ID#: 2791

Prison:

Name of person filling out form:

Date:

1

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

archived-on intake

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

KDOC

archived-on intake

3. Date of initial hearing screening

10/6/2012

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5/20/2016

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

hearing aids cleaned,

serviced and tubing

replaced

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing

aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of

the decision against providing a hearing aid, and

ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

NA

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid ,

does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type

of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with

an induction loop system.

No

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing

issue was presented to when the hearing issue

was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid

or determining that a hearing aid was not

needed)

5/16/2016-current

Medical Visit 1 - Date

6/27/2016

Medical Visit 1 - Description

Refer to Audiology

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Audiologic

assessment/may

consider left ear

amplification

2

3

7/1/2014
intake Aug-13 10/26/2016
normal hearing

4/24/2007
sick call request 6/1/2007 6/1/2007
mixed hearing loss

B

A

tried hearing aid no

success

NA

NA

No

7/1/2014-10/26/2016 7/1/2014 intake

4/30/2007-11/9/2007 4/30/2007 Refer to ENT

stated on intake deaf in

rt ear

request ENT consult

4
9/1/2008 VA records unknown Jul-15 hearing aids
A
NA
No
4/29/2015-7/7/2015 4/29/2015 ENT consult hearing aid right ear recommended

5
11/3/2016 sick call request 11/3/2016 4/4/2017 hearing normal with bilateral aids
A
NA
No
11/3/2016-4/4/2017 11/3/2016 sick call request Audiology consult

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

10/19/2017

10/26/2016

sick call discussed Audiology results- no additional device required

Physical normal hearing

5/29/2007

7/7/2015

12/5/2017

hearing eval

fitting for hearing aids Audiology consult

needs hearing aid for

left ear

fitting complete

otologic evaluation consult

6
Jan-18 ENT consult Jan-18 Jan-18 tinnitus
C
N/A
N/A
1/31/2018 hearing evaluation refused hearing aid 5/2/2019 refused hearing evaluation

7
5/5/2017 intake 5/9/2017 6/7/2017 heaing aids received
A
n/a
Yes
05/05/201706/07/2017 5/9/2017 referral to provider noted difficulty hearing & referred to audiology 5/23/2017 Audiology consult needs hearing aids

1 Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 228 of 661 - Page ID#: 2792

2

3

4

5

6

11/25/2017 whisper test

11/9/2007 hearing aid fitting

whisper test normal hearing aid issued

19-Mar screening hearing eval pending

18-Dec chronic care return in 6 months

2/16/2017 F/u with results inmate declined further testing
4/4/2017 hearing aids hearing aids issued
Jan-19

7
6/7/2017 received hearing aids

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 229 of 661 - Page ID#: 2793

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

. . .
5/10/2017 H&P 6/6/2017 8/14/2017

3/2/2018
questionnaire 10/29/2018 10/29/2018

7/31/2017
intake 8/18/2017 9/13/2017

hearing aids received

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing

aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of

the decision against providing a hearing aid, and

ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

n/a

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid ,

does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type

of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with

an induction loop system.

No

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing

issue was presented to when the hearing issue

was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid

or determining that a hearing aid was not

needed)

5/10/2017-8/14/2017

Medical Visit 1 - Date

5/10/2017

Medical Visit 1 - Description

H&P

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

refusal signed
B n/a n/a
5/16/2018 H&P

recommended hearing aids
A n/a No
7/31/2017 intake questionnaire

refer to audiology

approved for kitchen referred to provider pocket

duty

talker issued

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

6/2/2017 Audiology consult

10/29/2018 refused hearing test

8/18/2017 H&P

needs hearing aids

audiology referral

9/27/2017 sick call 3/8/2018 3/8/2018 profound bilateral hearing loss
A
n/a
3/8/2018 ENT visit audiology referral recommended 5/3/2018 Follow up ENT/audiology hearing aid recommended

3/8/2018

May-18

failed wisper test KSR

intake

screening

3/12/2018

May-18

3/12/2018

May-18

infection requiring whisper test negative treatment

Apr-18
Apr-18
Apr-18 passed Weber& Rinne test; failed whisper test; will retest

B

A

A

3/29/2019 CC

6/2018 continue antibiotics 9/2018 test for hearing loss

May-18

12/18/201

refused hearing eval

screening Jun-18 Hearing

treat infection

test nonconclusive 6/18/2019 audiology test
hearing aid indicated

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 230 of 661 - Page ID#: 2794

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

. . .

6/16/2017 Audilogy
hearing aid fitting

pending evaluation

10/12/2017 Audiology consult
Hearing aids recommended

7/31/2018 hearing aid
received hearing aid

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

8/14/2017 hearing aids issued

10/13/2017 audiology hearing aide impressions

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

10/20/2017 intake bilateral hearing aids in place. Amplifier and hearing aide case returned from properties. New alert card issued

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

18-Dec Chronic Care return in 6 months

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Jun-18 sick call continue antibiotics Jun-18 follow up improving continue gtts Sep-18 H&P
change antibiotics

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 231 of 661 - Page ID#: 2795

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

15-Oct
intake prior to incarceration Aug-18

Feb-18
physical prior to incarceration Sep-18

9/6/2018
screening 9/17/2018 9/17/2018

Apr-18
screening 9/5/2017 7/22/2019

19-Jan
screening 19-Jan 19-Feb

18-Dec
screening 19-Feb 19-Apr

wears hearing aides

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing

aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of

the decision against providing a hearing aid, and

ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
unknown
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed) Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

failed whisper test

hearing aid indicated no hearing aid indicated hearing aid indicated needs hearing aid

D

A

congenital malformation R ear- no hearing aid indicated L ear

D

A

A

per audiologist at 7/22/19 visit

No

No

Feb-18 physical exam

9/6/2018 routine screeing

1/4/2019 CC

18-Dec H&P

18-Dec screening 19-Jan 19-May needs hearing aid
A
No
18-Dec H&P

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

no treatment indicated needs hearing eval

Sep-18

9/17/2018

sick call

hearing eval

treatment plan in process

hearing aid indicated

questionnaire 1/8/2019 hearing test
pending results

hearing eval indicated hearing eval indicated

19-Feb

19-Feb

hearing eval

hearing eval

inconclusive

hearing aid indicated

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 232 of 661 - Page ID#: 2796

10/29/2018 hearing eval
no hearing aid needed

5/3/2019 discuss results

19-Apr hearing eval

7/22/2019 hearing aid

patient selected L ear hearing aid indicated Hearing aid received

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

18-Dec
screening 18-Dec 19-Jul

inconclusive

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing

aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

C

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of

the decision against providing a hearing aid, and

ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing

issue was presented to when the hearing issue

was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid

or determining that a hearing aid was not

needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

18-Dec

Medical Visit 1 - Description

CC

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 233 of 661 - Page ID#: 2797

18-Aug
screening 18-Dec 18-Dec
inconclusive

18-Jan

19-Jan

screening 19-Jul 19-Jul

screening 19-Jan 19-May

inconclusive

19-Apr
screening 19-Jul 19-Jul hearing aid indicated

18-Dec

18-Mar

chronic care

19-May

18-Dec

18-Mar

19-May

18-Dec

18-Mar

no hearing aid inconclusive due to

indicated

discrepancies

hearing aid needed

B

B

B

A

D

B

A

18-Aug intake

19-Jan screening

19-Apr CC

19-Jan

screening

CC

18-Dec

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Failed whisper test 19-Apr hearing test

needs hearing test 18-Dec hearing test

inconclusive

Inconclusive

failed whisper test 19-Apr hearing test

F/U 3 months 19-Jul CC

failed test

failed whisper test

19-Feb

18-Dec

hearing test hearing test

inconclusive

Needs hearing test refused test inconclusive

19-Jul CC
19-Jul
B

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 234 of 661 - Page ID#: 2798

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

6/24/2019 hearing test

19-Mar hearing test

inconclusive

inconclusive

7/10/2019 hearing test hearing aid indicated

19-Apr check for cerumen none noted

19-Apr hearing test

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

inconclusive
19-Jun hearing test inconclusive
19-Jun hearing test
not completed

19-May hearing test
inconclusive

19-Jul hearing test hearing aid indicated

19-May

19-Jan

hearing test ears draining

no hearing aid

indicated

culture

19-Feb continuing drainage repear culture

19-Feb culture results

medication change
19-Apr ear draining increased antibiotic
19-May ear draining
repeat culture
19-May F/U culture
cont protocol

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 235 of 661 - Page ID#: 2799

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system? Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers) Captioned Telephone Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like? Bed shakers Vibrating watches? Vibrating alarm clocks? Pagers? Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration not mentioned above. Earphones for parole hearings Earphones for orientation videos

How many Where

0

0

1

Special Security Unit

0

3

1 in 5-4C-01, 2 as backup

0

0

1

Yard Office

0

1

Reentry Office

2

Legal office

How well do they When obtained Specifications (URL) How do inmates obtain access? work?

8/30/2016

CAP-tel 840

Must be assigned to unit

In working order

2nd & 3rd in Jan VIB-PJ / FA4-SS / SK2-SS Installed based upon need

In working order

Pick up upon let-out

In working order

On request On request

In working order In working order

Other comments
Inmate property; not tracked Inmate property; not tracked

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 236 of 661 - Page ID#: 2800

Documentation to review KOMS alerts for each deaf/HOH inmate Grievances:
Provide/Review summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc.

Date reviewed 7/25/2019

Provide/Review full documentation of all grievances that address

7/25/2019

hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Solve any problems revealed.

Discipline

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving an inmate who signs.

5/22/2019

Ensure that VRI or other effective communication was provided at each

stage of each such proceedings.

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving failure to obey an order, or 7/25/2019

failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a

deaf/HOH inmate. Ensure that no such inmate is being penalized for

inability to hear.

VRI Log (review to ensure it's being used in appropriate circumstances. VRS or other videophone alternative (review to ensure that when videophone is inoperative, alternative is in fact available/used)
TTY instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.)
VRI instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.)

7/24/2019 7/24/2019 7/22/2019 7/22/2019

Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)
Copies made of all grievance logs and hearing related grievances. Copies made of all grievance logs and hearing related grievances.
, in violation of previous instruction, was found attempting to alter the settings on the video phone. Reviewed. Communication difficulty has not been a contributor in these disciplinary reports.

Instructions are clear and I/M

(only inmate requesting

to use TTY) is familiar with use of the TTY.

Instructions are clear.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 237 of 661 - Page ID#: 2801

Questions regarding effective communications in particular activities or locations. For each, mark compliance (Y, partial, N, no basis) and explain. Goal: e

In-person interpretation

Availability of VRI:

Appropriate

equipment

available

Used whenever

(computer line,

Ever used?

appropriate? Staff trained? outlet, space)

Intake/

Orientation -- Non-medical

N

Y

Y

Y

Intake, Medical

N

Y

Y

Y

Auxiliary Aid Assessment

Units

Restrictive Housing

N

Y

Y

Y

Medical/MH care

N

Y

Y

Y

Programs

N

Y

Y

Y

Education

N

Y

Y

Y

Recreation

N

Y

Y

Y

Communications with Chaplain

N

Y

Y

Y

Prison-provided religious

programming

Y

Y

Y

Y

Volunteer -led programming

(note: Only volunteer

interpretation is required)

N

Y

NA

Y

Parole hearings

N

Y

Y

Y

Classification/

Transfer

N

Y

Y

Y

Legal Aid

N

Y

NA

Y

Grievance process

N

Y

Y

Y

Work assignments

N

Y

NA

NA

Court call and ALL parts of

disciplinary process

Y

Y

Y

Y

Staff investigations

N

Y

Y

Y

Investigative interviews

N

Y

Y

Y

Preparation of report

N

Y

Y

Y

Shift supervisor's review of

disciplinary report

N

Y

Y

Y

Investigator's review of

disciplinary report

N

Y

Y

Y

Miranda warnings

N

Y

Y

Y

When advising inmate of right

to consult with legal aide

N

Y

Y

Y

Notification of date, time, and

place of hearing

N

Y

Y

Y

Hearing or re-hearing

Y

Y

Y

Y

If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

NA

Y

Y

Y

Ever used? How many times?
N N
N N Y N N N
N
N N
Y N N N
N N N N
N
N N
N
N N N

Used whenever appropriate? (without special request)

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to attend a religious service without effective communication to receive any religious meal, diet, or other accommodation? N No Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have witnessed or been suspected of violation) provided with an inmate or staff advisor on same terms as non-deaf inmates Yes inmates can have a staff council upon request. It is reviewed and denied or appoved based on the same process as a non deaf inmate. YES

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 238 of 661 - Page ID#: 2802
Questions regarding effective comemach deaf or HOH inmate has an equal opportunity to Amplification: (Not just hearing aid -- space-specific amplification)

Adequate? Intake/ Orientation -- Non-medical Intake, Medical Auxiliary Aid Assessment Units Restrictive Housing Medical/MH care Programs Education Recreation Communications with Chaplain Prison-provided religious programming Volunteer -led programming (note: Only volunteer interpretation is required) Parole hearings Classification/ Transfer Legal Aid Grievance process Work assignments Court call and ALL parts of disciplinary process
Staff investigations Investigative interviews Preparation of report Shift supervisor's review of disciplinary report Investigator's review of disciplinary report Miranda warnings When advising inmate of right to consult with legal aide Notification of date, time, and place of hearing Hearing or re-hearing If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

Describe efforts, issues We have no space-specific amplifiers

Audit item issues/ concerns

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to aNtO No Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have? YES Yes inmates can have a staff counci

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 239 of 661 - Page ID#: 2803

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Personal

Low literacy?

If signs to

Bed

Other Alert

Phone

(So that

communicat

Shaker? Device TTY Access Amplifier Shake &

Signs to written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not

Wake (Not Any other

Listed with commu communicatio Deaf/HOH Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; auxiliary

KOMS ADA nicate n is not

ID Card? (Y Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied; denied; denied; aid

Outome Audit item

Name

ID

Precaution? (Y/N) effective)

or waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) requested? ?

issues/concerns

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

Y

NA

NA

NA

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 240 of 661 - Page ID#: 2804

Fill this out for EACH location where there are any deaf/HOH inmates

How many Volume

Bed

If there are

How inmates adjustable

shakers set Staff use If there are any

any inmates

many who sign phone available

up for use bed

inmates who If there are any who sign:

Deaf/ to

to inmates

How for

shakers for sign: Location inmates who Ready

HOH communic without special many bed multiple multiple available for sign: Staff

access to

Dorm/unit

Walk

inmates? ate

request?

shakers? purposes? purposes? VRI?

trained for VRI videophone Audit item issues/concerns

3CH

11,12,13,14

5

0Y

0

0N

NA

NA

NA

4CH

16,17,18

5

0Y

0

0N

NA

NA

NA

5CH

1,2,3,4

11

0Y

0

0N

NA

NA

NA

6CH

G,H,J

3

0Y

0

0N

NA

NA

NA

7CH

OBS

1

0Y

0

0N

NA

NA

NA

OSQ

2

0Y

0

0N

NA

NA

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 241 of 661 - Page ID#: 2805
Kentucky State Reformatory

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 242 of 661 - Page ID#: 2806

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

A ADA coordinator

1 Is an ADA coordinator designated?

yes

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there

2 was no ADA coordinator appointed?

no

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

yes

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected

yes

A memo was posted in Inmate Living areas

originally, and updated memos are posted with

any changes. Unit Staff are notified so they

could address IMs who cannot see. ADA

services and info are in the inmate hadbook,

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with

and in the brochure given to new HOH intakes

5 inmates in a timely and appropriate manner? How?

and newly identified HOH.

*Paul Hales 254735- yes

*Charlie McClure 108249- yes

*Walter Driever 235856- yes

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? *Orlando Saxton 214920- yes

Describe method used to ascertain: Saw IM

6 (THIS REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

*Robert Wager 098498

wearing HOH ID on walk through and asked.

Is the information prominently posted in any 7 housing unit where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

Memos are posted in all living areas and read to blind/visually impaired inmates by Blind Aides.

Compliant
x x x x
x
x
x

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?
9 Describe training Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately
10 cover information? 11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training) 12 Adequate w/r/t state law?
Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's 13 powerpoint)
Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with 14 settlement agreement?
Does ADA coordinator retrieve at least monthly 15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?
Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's 16 tracking list?

x

yes

Describe: I have the manuals and original

binders that were given out when the first

round of ADA Coordinators were assigned.

Since then I continue training by completing

online courses through New England ADA

Learning and the ADA National Network. We

aslo receive annual training provided by the

KYDOC.

NA

yes

x

yes

x

Yes

x

Yes

x

Yes

x

We continuously add inmates to our list.

Previously identified inmates who transfer in

and any inmate who answers yes to a question

x

on the Hearing Screen.

Partially NonCompliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
I have the manuals and original binders that were given out when the first round of ADA Coordinators were assigned. Since then I continue training by completing online courses through New England ADA Learning and the ADA National Network.
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 243 of 661 - Page ID#: 2807

# Issue/Question Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in
17 implementing the settlement? Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf
18 inmates?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

yes

yes

Compliant
x x

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on 19 deaf inmates?

Yes. Many HOH/deaf inmates write to me with

questions, concerns, or requests. I respond in a

timely manner. (All correspondence and my

response are entered into KOMS). Many others

will stop me on the yard and we have a face to

x

face convo. Others who are not comfortable

with writting have the dorm officer, UA or CTO

call me. Staff readily contact me by email with

their concerns as well. I also hold annual

interviews with them.

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the 20 inmates in those situations?
Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective 21 way with the monitor?
Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the 22 monitor when necessary? B Reporting obligations
If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was 1 monitor notified?
Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf 2 and HOH inmates? 3 Is the list complete? 4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?
Quarterly summary of all grievances by deaf or 5 HOH inmates shared with monitor?
Was there a direct threat determination made for 6 jobs, activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe) 7 Was it reported to the monitor? 8 Was the report complete? 9 Was the report timely?
10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert? 11 If yes, was the monitor notified?
Did the institution consult with the monitor about 12 the non-auditory alert?

Yes. VRI is used for meetings with inmates who

sign to communicate. Most others have hearing

x

aids or pocket talkers. I always use best practice

when communicating with them.

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes. We notified the monitor when ADA

Hillebrandt retired.

x

Yes. The list is updated almost daily and sent bi-

weekly.

x

Yes

x

Yes

x

Yes

x

Describe: No

NA

Vibrating watches and personal alarm clocks

with bed shaker for IM's to purchase.

NA

Yes

x

Yes.

x

13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Yes. Videophone has 40 minutes (2x the norm)

X

and the TTY has 60 minutes (3x the norm)

Partially NonCompliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA NA NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 244 of 661 - Page ID#: 2808

# Issue/Question C Intake/Orientation - Corrections
1 Hard of hearing inmates

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant NA

Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is 2 arriving?
Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive 3 automatic notifications.)

Identified inmates are in KOMS. Every incoming

inmate is screened during intake. However we

rarely get notifications through KOMS.

Describe: KOMS notices are still not showing up

all the time. I have to scan all the transfers and

check every inmate to see if they are in KOMS

as HOH/deaf. Any time I have an identified

inmate, I send an email to the ADA Coordinator

of that institution.

NA

Effective communications planned/provided? 4 (Describe)
Deaf inmates

Describe: Inmates who use sign language to

communicate are given the option to use the

VRI services. Staff is trained to use best practice

X

when communicating with HOH inmates.

(Speak clearly, face inmate when speaking, use

pen/paper if IM requests, be patient)

NA

Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is 5 arriving?

Identified inmates are in KOMS. Every incoming inmate is screened during intake. However we rarely get notifications through KOMS.

6 Describe 7 Effective communications planning? 8 Effective communication provided?

Describe: Identified inmates are in KOMS. Every

incoming inmate is screened during intake. NA

Yes

x

Yes.

x

9 Describe 10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Describe: Inmates who use sign language to

communicate are given the option to use the

VRI services. Staff is trained to use best practice

when communicating with HOH inmates.

(Speak clearly, face inmate when speaking, use

pen/paper if IM requests, be patient)

NA

Yes. Staff are trained to use the VRI in every

meeting, doctor's appointment, any type of

investigation or disciplinary hearing. All

x

significant encounters.

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed? Orientation videos
12 Captioned? 13 Shown in a quiet space?
14 Amplification if needed?

Yes. We use in-person interpreters for parole

board hearings as well as classroom situations.

x

Anytime the VRI is not appropriate.

NA

Yes-Checked with each Unit.

x

Yes-Checked with each Unit.

x

Yes. We have volume controlled headphones

available upon request.

x

Partially NonCompliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) x
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 245 of 661 - Page ID#: 2809

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Describe: The CTO asks if there are any

questions. The orientation is done on TV and

Written. If an IM knows sign, the VRI

interpreter is utilized. If they don't know sign,

are illierate and deaf, we would use a team

approach, utilize Modeling Behavior to

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not

represent and express rules and regulations.

15 literate? (Describe)

Per Unit Administrator II Kim Thompson.

D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

All Medical questions answered by our

Effective Communication during general medical Health Services Administrator Dawn

intake, and during medical care more generally: Patterson.

Yes- patient comes with the assistive device or

1 Is there effective communications planning?

we use the VRI.

Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty

2 hearing if interpretation is needed?

Yes

3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?

Yes

Are staff aware of, and use, effective

4 communications techniques?

Yes

Notice to medical staff:

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How?

Yes- noted in EHR and on ID card.

Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on

6 cover and within the file?

Yes

Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate

7 accommodations.

Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site

8 providers of need for interpretation?

Yes

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

Yes

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

Describe: No

11 Adequate notice?

NA

Outside providers offering effective communication

12 to inmates who sign?

NA

Compliant
x
NA x x x x
NA x x
NA x x
NA

13 How? Hearing screening/medical intake:
14 Performed for all new inmates? 15 Within first 3 days at institution?
16 Approved screening form? (need to review) 17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid? 18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?
How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it 19 administered by staff? 20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical) 21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy? 22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe. 23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Describe: NA
Yes Yes

NA NA
x x

Yes- it is the same used in all KYDOC facilities.

x

Yes

x

Yes

x

Describe: Verbal and written Describe: Admitting Nurse Yes Describe: Questions asked of inmates. Yes

NA NA
x x x

Partially NonCompliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
Note from ADA Coordinator: If we have an inmate who uses sign going out for any reason, we send the VRI with them.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 246 of 661 - Page ID#: 2810

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the

Compliant

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Other methods of access:

NA

Do annual/routine physicals include hearing

24 screening?

Yes

x

25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening?

Yes

x

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

Yes

x

If screening indicated problem (3+ "yes" answers),

27 is there further assessment?

Yes

x

Adequate determination of need for designation/ 28 audiology services? How?

Yes- Providers assess patient to determine

need.

x

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Yes- 7 days

x

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf 30 or HOH, apart from audiology services decision?

Yes- Provider does whisper test, patient report.

x

After assessment, does medical:

NA

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Yes

x

32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file?

Yes

x

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Yes

x

34 Is notification prompt?

Yes

x

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology

Checklist)

NA

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

Yes- referred by provider.

x

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

Yes

x

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

Yes

x

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

Yes

x

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

Yes- through Audicus

x

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

NA

40 initial request/questionnaire?

Yes

x

41 each relevant medical visit?

Yes

x

42 any audiology visit?

Yes

x

43 hearing aid provision?

Yes

x

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks?

Yes

x

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

Yes

x

46 Shared with monitor when requested

Yes

x

Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site

None- onsite testing through Audicus.

trips does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing

Approved and evaluated by provider, signed off

47 aid? Describe.

on and hearing aid ordered by Dr. Kemen.

NA

In the past year, how many individuals have had to

48 wait more than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?

Describe: Complete list on Audiology Tab.

NA

Describe: Inmate inability to complete onsite

What is the cause of the delay?

hearing screening, other medical issues,

49

transprotation.

NA

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken)

Describe: Working with Deputy Warden on

50 to improve this process?

transportation issues.

NA

Co-pay and availability issues:

NA

47 Charged only once -- not again for followups

Yes

x

Partially Non-
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation
(Explain)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 247 of 661 - Page ID#: 2811

# Issue/Question Hearing aid batteries
48 Available for free?
49 In sufficient numbers?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the

Compliant

audit, and what has been done about it,

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

NA

Yes

x

Yes. IM's are given a full pack. They must turn in

the used batteries to get new ones.

x

50 7 days/week? 51 regardless of housing? E Information provided inmates
1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe) Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-
2 discrimination and ADA services?
Brochure? Items to include: 3 Non-discrimination obligation 4 Effective communication obligation 5 Auxiliary aids and services available
How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services 6 (including hearing aids, and batteries)
Communication equipment available, and how to 7 use 8 ADA coordinator and how to reach
Other items:
9 Institution schedule of interpreters
Request for Accommodations/ Communications 10 Assistance
Medical Request form includes request for 11 accommodations
Job application form includes request for 12 accommodations 13 Waiver forms

Yes. IM's are aware that battery hand out is on

Friday's in Dorm 12 where they get enough to

last more than a week. If something happens

x

and they cannot get there, they contact

medical. Nursing Care, CPTU and Dorm 10

contact medical for replacements.

Yes

x

Describe: The Inmate Handbook has

information regarding ADA, the ADA

Coordinator, how to contact the coordinator

x

and the settlement.

Yes. Given to all incoming inmates.

x

Yes. The brochure is given out to every

HOH/Deaf intake and to all newly identified

HOH/Deaf inmates. In our initial meeting I go

over all the details in the brochure to ensure

they understand. Updated as needed.

NA

Yes

x

Yes

x

Yes

x

Yes

x

Yes

x

Yes

x

NA

There is not a "schedule", however the VRI is

available 24/7 and staff is trained on where it is

located and when to use it. In-person

x

interpreters are scheduled for meetings/classes

as needed.

Yes.There is a form, however I encourage them

to just contact me via a letter to describe their

needs or to have the CTO or Dorm officer to

x

contact me if they are unable to communicate

by writing.

Yes

x

KCI is the only one with an application and it

does. The CTO assists with other job

x

applications.

Yes

x

Partially NonCompliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
VRI available 24/7. We schedule live interpreters for classes and parole hearings.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 248 of 661 - Page ID#: 2812

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the

Compliant

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

There is no form for them to fill out. CTO's go

by number and are very aware of who is HOH

Classification form includes request for

or deaf in their dorm. VRI is brought in for

14 accommodations

inmates requiring ASL interpreter.

15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations

There is no form for them to fill out.

CTO and Program coordinators fill out the

SAP and other programming form includes request

forms. They are aware of HOH/Deaf inmate

16 for accommodation

needs.

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

Yes

x

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure 18 available in law library? (Need to check)

Describe date checked: 6/19/19

x

Do request forms:

NA

19 list available services comprehensively?

Yes

x

clearly explain services and aids (what they are

20 and when they are available?

Yes

x

21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?

Yes

x

expressly ask about preferred mode of

communication/needed services and why they are

x

22 useful?

Yes

23 explain which items are free?

yes

x

Yes. In the event an iterpreter is requested for

Religious Programming provided by our

institution, we will arrange for that to happen.

Volunteers are welcome to have an interpreter

x

encompass religious and volunteer-provided

come in, however they must pass a security

24 programming?

screening.

Effective communication of these resources:

Yes

NA

Are the materials in language accessible to each

25 inmate?

Yes

x

Is this information provided with effective

26 communication?

Yes

x

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful

opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member

x

27 and interpreter to ask questions about the

Yes

Effective communication re. programming

NA

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment

in/application for a program with staff, is effective

x

28 communication provided?

Yes

are potential accommodations covered in the

29 discussion?

Yes

x

Effective communication re. programming

NA

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment

in/application in education with staff, is effective

30 communication provided?

Yes

are potential accommodations covered in the

31 discussion?

Yes

F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Yes

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

Yes

x

2 Include picture of ID card and other official

Yes

x

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Yes

x

4 Include picture of ID card and other official

Yes

x

Partially NonCompliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA NA
NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 249 of 661 - Page ID#: 2813

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the

Compliant

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

5 Cell/bed cards

Yes

NA

Yes. All existing staff and incoming staff are

trained about the significance of the HOH door

x

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

sign.

Describe: I meet with all inmcoming and newly

identified HOH/Deaf inmates. They are issued

door signs at that time and I tell them to

contact me via institutional mail or ask their

CTO to contact me if a replacement is needed.

x

This info is also in the HOH brochure, on the

update sheet I give them at the annual

interview, and the memo that is posted in living

7 Clear process to obtain? Describe

areas.

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Yes

x

9 Provided timely?

Yes

x

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Yes

x

KOMS alert?

Yes

NA

Yes. Existing staff were trained during in-service

last year and all incoming staff are trained

x

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

before they go to their posts.

Describe: As soon medical alerts me that an

inmate is Deaf or HOH in any degree, I enter

them into KOMS. I include the degree of

Working process to get new inmate alerts added?

impairment and any accommodations they are

12 (Describe)

receiving here at KSR.

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

(Need To Check): 6/19/19

x

14 Appropriately obvious

Yes

x

15 Updated timely

Yes

x

Individual ID cards

Yes.

NA

Yes. IDs hang below normal ID and a yellow

HOH or Uses Sign alert is visible to Officers and

other staff. All existing and new staff are

trained to recognize the IDs. ID also has inmates

x

name and DOC # on the back along with tips on

16 Staff aware of meaning?

effective communication.

17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?)

Abbreviations?: No abbreviations are used on

the ID)

x

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Yes

x

19 Provided timely?

Yes

x

Yes- the exception is CPTU or if it is determined

the ID would be a risk to their health. (Self

x

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Harm)

21 Prompt replacements provided?

Yes

x

Describe: Yes. if they are taken to CPTU C wing

for mental health or Temporary Holding for

behavior. This is for security reasons and the

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?

possibility of self harm.

NA

In CPTU C we have devised temporary door

UA is adding HOH/Deaf to the bed boards cards (since they do not stay there long as a

x

23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator?

for further Identification.

general rule.)

Partially Non-
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation
(Explain)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 250 of 661 - Page ID#: 2814

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver?

Describe: Yes

25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?

Yes

Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested

26 ID?

No

27 If yes, was an ID provided?

G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Yes. Orientation covers the ADA and ADA

Coordinator. Also, a meeting is scheduled with

Identification to ADA Coordinator

each new deaf/HOH intake.

Compliant NA
x x
NA

Medical is quick to notify me, but KOMS still

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification I have reached out to our contact about does not send notices consistantly. I scour the

1 upon intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

this and they are aware.

transfers to make sure I don't miss anyone.

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification 2 of other deaf/hoh inmates?

Medical notifies me as soon as an inmate is

decided to be HOH/Deaf.

x

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids

and Services Assessment with every arriving or

x

3 newly identified deaf/hoh inmate?

Yes

At this meeting, are each inmate's available

methods of communication expressly ascertained

x

4 and documented?

Yes

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform

each inmate about available auxiliary aids and

x

5 services?

Yes

We have forms, and the inmates are aware, but

they are told they can just write to me or have

the CTO or dorm officer contact me. I have a

x

Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms

form I then fill out to document the request

6 explained?

and track the progress.

Descriptions : Yes. The VRI is used if the Inmate

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral and written; VRI; or visual

uses sign to communicate. Many have hearing

aids/pocket talkers and hear fine. I use best

x

7 descriptions )

practice with all.

Other assessments

NA

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an

8 assessment on intake, has one been done?

Yes

x

Yes. I meet with all incoming HOH/Deaf

inmates, newly identified HOH/Deaf and meet

x

9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

with ALL annually thereafter.

Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

1 On-person ID cards

Yes

x

2 Cell cards

Yes

x

3 Bed shaker

Yes

x

4 In-person alerts

Yes

x

5 Pager

Yes

x

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each 6 location where phones are available?)

Yes. There is a volume controlled phone in each

area where a normal phone is located.

x

7 Amplifier for phone

We had some amplifiers available when other ADA Coordinator was here. He said they were never used and eventually "walked off".

Partially NonCompliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 251 of 661 - Page ID#: 2815

# Issue/Question
Consideration of specific housing assignment to 8 minimize communication difficulties? 9 Other amplification
10 Other (describe) General issues Special housing area:

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the

Compliant

audit, and what has been done about it,

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

We have a significant number of HOH/Deaf

Inmates in all dorms. It would be impossible for

them to all be in one due to PREA, gang

affiliation, conflicts and medical issues. We do

try to house those needing to use the

Videophone in the dorm it is located in.

Yes.

x

Describe: We have just started using FM

Transmitters for the Chapel and classrooms. We

have volume controlled headphones available

for orientation and parole hearings.

NA

NA

NA

Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH 11 inmates? (Describe)
If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? 12 (Describe)
If there is such an area, are inmates required to be 13 housed there? (such a requirement is non-
If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live there, are accommodations etc. still fully 14 available to the inmate? Describe any restrictions. In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is 15 primary consideration given to inmate request?
If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or not requesting 16 aids/services, were accommodations provided?

Describe: No. We have a significant number of HOH/Deaf Inmates in all dorms. It would be impossible for them to all be in one due to PREA, gang affiliation, conflicts and medical issues. We do try to house those needing to use the Videophone in the dorm it is located in. NA
NA
Describe:

Inmate request is considered, but may be

modified for security reasons.

x

We have not had a situation like that. If that

were to occur, I would have medical reevaluate.

Accomodations would not be given to an

individual who was not medically determined

to need them.

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services 17 documented in inmate institutional files?
Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary 18 aids/services shared appropriately with staff? 19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained? 20 Have any been out of comission?
21 Describe -- which and for how long?

In KOMS under ADA Documentation in Scanned

x

Docs/Photos. Medical also charts refusals.

Yes. Existing staff receive training during in-

service and new employees during New

Employee Orientation. I have a good rapport

x

with KSR staff and they freely contact me if they

have any questions or concerns.

Yes

x

Describe: Yes

NA

Describe: The video phone was having issues

from 3/11/19 to 5/31/19.

NA

Partially NonCompliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA NA NA
No basis for evaluation

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 252 of 661 - Page ID#: 2816

# Issue/Question
Inmates moving housing or transferred: not 22 separated from hearing aid?
23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided? 24 Promptly? 25 Has there been a direct threat determination? 26 Describe
Appropriately individuated (must consider specific 27 degree of impairment and specific dangers posed) 28 Appropriately reported? 29 Was it the appropriate decision? 30 Are classes in sign language provided? 31 deaf inmates given notice? 32 priority given to deaf inmates? I Interpretation in general
Qualified interpretation services available:

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the

Compliant

audit, and what has been done about it,

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

If an inmate is not wearing the device

given him at the time of lock-up, it tends In most cases inmates pack their own property

to end up in his property. We are going to for housing moves and transferrs. Hearing aids

add a checkbox to the temporary holding and pocket talkers stay with the inmate for

form that askes the IM if he has any type transports and moves. The only exception is if a

of assistive device. We are hoping this provider deems there to be a reason to take it

solve the issue.

from them.

Issued a pocket talker if they want one until

their property is returned.

x

Yes

x

No

NA

Describe:

NA

Describe: Describe:

no

Yes

NA

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation 1 communicated to inmates?

All staff who communicate with our deaf

inmates know to have the VRI ready for

meetings, disciplinaries etc. If it is a planned

meeting, the inmate does not even have to

request. Staff are very aware of who our

x

inmates who sign are and contact me readily if

they are involved in classes or programs.

Inmates are informed upon our initial meeting

and then reminded at annual assessments.

Partially NonCompliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
x
NA NA NA NA NA NA

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 2 encounters/communications/settings)
Does the request form clearly encompass religious 3 and other volunteer-provided programming?

Settings: The VRI is used for all important

meetings, including but not limited to

x

classification, important conversations,

adjustment hearings and medical visits. An in-

person interpreter is called in when we deem

the VRI Is not effective- classroom setting,

parole board hearings or a medical visit where

patient is required to be moving around.

Any volunteer provided programming will be

allowed to provide an interpreter to inmates

who sign to communicate, however they must

pass a security check beforehand. (In the event

one is needed, an interpreter would be

provided for religious services run by the

institution)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 253 of 661 - Page ID#: 2817

# Issue/Question Effective process for choosing qualified
4 interpretation method?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Yes

Compliant

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences? Standing arrangement with providers?
6 In-person?
7 VRI? Is VRI availability:
8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)? after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours
9 of notice)? on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48
10 hours of notice)? during emergencies (including medical emergencies)
11 when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?
Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? 12 Describe
VRI laptop functional? 13 In general 14 Always checked for sufficient battery power? 15 Routine software updates?

If the inmate requests an interpreter, we base

our decision on the effectiveness of the VRI in

any given situation. We use the VRI in settings

where there is one on one communication and

the entire discussion takes place in one spot. It

is very effective for classification meetings,

adjustment hearings, most medical visits and

interviews/assessments. An in-person

interpreter is used when there are more that

one speaker- the classroom and parole board

hearing to name a couple.

NA

Not typically unless the provider thinks it would

be necessary due to the exam involving the

patient to move around, therefore making the

x

VRI inefective..

Yes. In most instances the Qualified Interpreter

provided by VRI works nicely.

x

NA

Yes.

x

VRI is available 24/7 and there is no notice

needed.

x

VRI is available 24/7 and there is no notice

needed.

x

VRI is available 24/7 and there is no notice

needed.

x

Describe: We no longer have RHU, but if an

inmate who is deaf were to go to our

temporary housing, staff would use the VRI for

any important communications. VRI is located

x

in the Control Center and security is aware it is

available 24/7 and how to check it out when

needed.

Describe: yes

NA

Yes

x

Yes, but has a cord for backup.

x

Yes

x

VRI laptop has necessary items with it? 16 Splitter? 17 Instructions? 18 Long power cord? 19 Usable as VRS?

Describe: Our VRI laptop bag has a wireless USB

card, splitter, power cord, instructions, log

sheet, external microphone, external speakers. NA

Yes

x

Yes

x

Yes

x

Yes

x

Partially NonCompliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA ( no longer have RHU)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 254 of 661 - Page ID#: 2818

# Issue/Question 20 VRI effectiveness tracked?
21 How?
Information used to determine when in-person 22 interpretation should be first recourse?
Is in-person interpretation available: 23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical 24 Parole?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

The VRI log lets me know who uses it. If there are issues, the person who uses it contacts me. For the most part, it is the same people using it most of the time. We have learned over the years what works and what does not. The VRI is not effective in a classroom situation or for parole board hearings, for example, so we would not use it there. Yes

Yes. In-person always used for group settings. Yes. In-person is always used for parole.

Compliant
x x

Describe each time in-person interpretation has 25 been offered
Describe each time in-person interpretation has 26 been denied.
Parole board notified of need for interpretation at 27 least 7 days before?
Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? 28 (Reliance in non-emergency is non-compliant) 29 Describe
in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence 30 and VRI was unavailable)
Communication with inmates uses inmate's 31 preferred method?
Written communication is limited to only simple 32 matters.
Written communication is not needed when inmate 33 has low literacy
Qualified interpretation services available:
Does the request form clearly encompass religious 34 and other volunteer-provided programming?
for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 35 encounters/communications/settings) Is the process for using VRI communicated to 36 inmates? J Hand Restraints 1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs? Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? 2 Individualized finding of a security threat?

All NA, AA and SOTP meetings for

.

6/12/18 Parole Board for

.

Yes. The Parole Board is aware of the identity of

inmates who use sign to communicate.

x

Compliant: We do not rely on another inmate

for interpretation.

x

Describe: NA

NA

No

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes. In the event an iterpreter is requested for

Religious Programming provided by our

institution, we will arrange for that to happen.

Volunteers are welcome to have an interpreter

x

come in, however they must pass a security

screening.

X yes

Yes

X

Not recently.

NA

Describe: Restraints are only used for security

purposes and removed when necessary/safe for

x

communication.

Partially NonCompliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) x
NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 255 of 661 - Page ID#: 2819

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who 3 might ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.) 4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?
5 Staff aware of the issue Off-site medical care:
6 two-point hand restraint system used? restraints removed when necessary for medical
7 communication? K Non-auditory Alerts

Unless their behavior indicates there would be

X

a risk of endagering staff or other inmates.

Yes

x

We do train staff in hand/wrist restraints, two

point hand/wrist restraints, disciplinary and

grievance practices and also how to

communicate with inmates that require the use

x

of sign language during transportation trips. Per

Major St. Clair

NA

For security purposes, all inmates are

transported the same way in the vehicle. The

restraints are removed when necessary for

x

medical communication.

The restraints are removed when necessary for

medical communication. Of course security is

x

always taken into consideration.

Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? 1 (Describe)
2 provided to all inmates who need it? 3 can and does it give alerts in real time? 4 sufficient to signal fire alarm? 5 sufficient to signal count alert? 6 programmed to signal different alerts? 7 used to notify of prison-wide events?
used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events 8 specific to them?
Have any requests for medically necessary non9 auditory alerts been denied?
Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are 10 working? 11 frequently enough? 12 monitored/recorded formally? 13 Announcement boards 14 used to notify of schedule changes? 15 used consistently? 16 in all dormitories?
17 in gym?

Describe: Pagers, bedshakers, in-person alerts

HOH inmates are allowed to purchase vibrating

alarm watches and bed shaker alarms.

NA

Yes/Watches and alarms are purchased by IM.

In-person alerts, pagers and assigned bed

X

shakers are free.

yes

x

yes

X

Yes

x

Yes

x

yes

x

yes

x

No

x

Inmates are encouraged to contact me if

equipment is not working. I meet with them

annually and this is one of the questions I ask as

well.

So far, time has not permitted.

No

Yes

NA

Yes- all dorms reported compliance.

x

Yes- all dorms reported compliance.

Yes- all dorms reported compliance.

Yes-The Rec. supervisor reported that he uses

the announment boards consistently and

updates often.

Partially NonCompliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
x x
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 256 of 661 - Page ID#: 2820

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the

Compliant

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

The librarian reported that he sends all

notifications to the Unit Living areas to be

posted there. We have a new librarian who will

take over after she is trained. I noticed that

there is a board available and will encourage

18 in library?

her to use it.

19 audited and monitored?

Yes- all dorms reported compliance.

In-person or personal system notification when an

20 inmate misses a page?

Yes

x

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/

21 info only because of disability?

Describe: Yes. In Nursing Care.

NA

Aides were assigned with the task of making

sure anyone who wanted an in-person alert at

pill call, chow etc would get one. Several of the

guys over there are struggling with dementia

x

Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in

and do not understand how to use assistive

22 the future?

devices.

Yes. But in the case of an emergency, post

orders dictate that every room is checked and

all inmates accounted for by staff members.

x

There are also flashing lights set off when there

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

is an emergency.

Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in 24 emergency?
Does the plan account for how effective 25 communication will be provided? L Telecommunications
Videophones: 1 Installed? 2 Allow voice carry-over features? 3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)
Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to 4 solve them.

In the event of an emergency it is in the post

orders and policy for Dorm staff to go room to

room and make sure EVERYONE is out

x

regardless if they hear the alarm or not. Regular

drills ensure that inmates are aware of

procedure in the event of a true emergency.

Flashing lights and bedshakers should

communicate that there is an emergency to

those who are severely HOH and might not

x

hear an alarm. The routine drills ensure

inmates who sign know what to do.

NA

Yes

x

Yes

x

Describe: 3/11/19- 5/29/19

NA

Describe: It was discovered that all

videophones in KYDOC intitutions (at least in

our area) were not working. KSR IT,Purple and

COT in Frankfort worked to solve the issue

which seems to be with our firewall.

NA

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe 5 other alternative offered

Describe: Anytime the videophone is

unavailble, we set up the VRI laptop to use VRS.

x

Inmates who sign also have access to the TTY.

The TTY has been operational at all times.

Partially NonCompliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 257 of 661 - Page ID#: 2821

# Issue/Question
Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, 6 when videophone is out of service. 7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?
8 Appropriate location?
Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, 9 weekends, emergency) if necessary? 10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates? 11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?
No more permission needed than that for hearing 12 inmates using ordinary phones?
13 Advance request unnecessary? 14 Free?
Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular 15 phone calls?
Has any inmate requested access to the 16 videophones and been denied?
Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the inmate's name, the date, and the 17 reason for the denial. TTY: 18 Installed? Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates 19 and staff? Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions 20 made available WITH TTY? 21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify) 22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?
location substantially as accessible as conventional 23 telephones for non-deaf inmates? 24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?
25 Permission needed? Has any request to use the TTY been denied?
26 (Describe) 27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates? 28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe) 29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the

Compliant

audit, and what has been done about it,

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Describe: in this case, the ADA Assistant went

to the dorm to let them know. Previously, I

called them up and we used the VRI to discuss

arrangements.

NA

Yes

x

Yes, the videophone is located in the same

dorm as the individuals who sign to

x

communicate.

Both inmates who use the Videophone live in

the dorm it is in. The only exception is when it

is out of order. Again, unless it is a security risk

x

due to being short staffed they can access it

freely.

Yes

x

Yes

x

No

x

Yes- upon initial request, they are issued a key

so they can access it at anytime w/o waiting for

x

officer to unlock booth.

Yes

x

Yes

x

Describe:

no

NA

Describe: Yes

NA x

Yes

x

Yes

x

Describe: none

NA

Yes

x

Yes. Upon request, they are issued a key to the

booth where is stays hooked up at all times.

Those not living in Dorm3 must get permission

x

to go to that dorm, but only after the yard

closes for security reasons.

Yes

x

They request the ADA Coordinator. Once

approved a key is issued to them for access

x

during regular phone hours.

Describe: no Yes Describe: free Describe: 1/7/19

NA x
NA x

Partially NonCompliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 258 of 661 - Page ID#: 2822

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Can access publicly available relay service phone

30 numbers?

Yes

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions

31 for videophones and TTY is less than equitable?

Describe: no

32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

If yes, was determination (including reasoning,

33 evidence, etc.) documented?

34 Was monitor notified?

35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

VRS via laptop

36 Available?

Yes

Rhu: We no longer have RHU. Inmates are

taken to LLCC. The VRI is available in case the

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

need arises.

38 Used when appropriate?

yes

Phones

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Yes

We had them-not used. Inmates reported

Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need

during the annual meetings that the volume

40 them?

control on the phones is very helpful.

No. We have discussed getting one, but the

CapTel

waiting on phone contract to be settled.

41 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

Describe:

42 If so, installed and working?

Describe:

43 Request by any inmate denied?

Describe:

TV/Movies

44 Is captioning available?

Yes

45 Is captioning used?

Yes

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Yes

Compliant
x
NA
NA X X
NA X
NA NA NA NA NA
x x x

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?
Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly 48 (Describe) 49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning? 50 Amplification method? (Describe)
If inmate-purchased tv w/ captioning malfunctioned, did staff assist to same extent as w/other inmates 51 regarding malfunctioning personal property?

No. The Warden mandated that the captioning

be left on for TVs in common areas at all times.

Since the mandate, I question IMs during

interviews as to whether or not it works in their

area and have yet to get a negative response.

They are also told to contact me if it is not on

and I will address the issue with Unit Staff. We

are so short staffed, it would not be possible to

add this on.

Describe: A schedule is put out by the

Recreation Supervisor. There are equal number

of days to see the same movie with or without

x

captioning.

Yes

x

Describe: Some use headphones

NA

We would only facilitate the return of

equipment (at their own expense) as we do for

any inmate.

Partially NonCompliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA NA NA NA
NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 259 of 661 - Page ID#: 2823

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Describe any problems: With the exception of

the Purple Videophone, all was in good working

order for the period of this report. The

All technology/ equipment in good working order?

Videophone was an issue with the firewall and

52 (Describe problems)

has since been addressed.

Compliant

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf 53 inmates of same status? Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates only to the same extent and with the 54 same discretion as non-deaf inmates? M Miscellaneous Devices
1 Devices available? (Describe)
2 devices in commissary list? possibility to request other devices from ADA
3 coordinator? 4 facilitation of purchase?
Purchase of any non-medically necessary device 5 denied? (Describe) 6 determined on case-by-case basis? 7 because security threat? 8 monitor notified? 9 reasoning explained?
ADA coordinator maintains records 10 of requests? 11 of denials? N Disciplinary
Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate 1 has been punished? 2 Was a re-hearing granted? O Grievances
Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA 1 coordinator?
If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator forward copy of grievance to ADA 2 coordinator?

KSR no longer has an RHU. We do have

Temporary Housing where Ims are held for no

more than 24 hours (72 on a weekend) before

they are transferred to LLCC. The VRI is

x

available should we need it to communicate

with a deaf inmate, however, under normal

circumstances, NO inmate is allowed calls until

they are officially in RHU at LLCC.

At this time we are unable to monitor their

phone calls other than a log to see who they

x

called and how long they were on.

Describe: Available for inmate purchase: vibrating alarm watches, bed shaker alarms. Working on volume controlled headphones. NA Not aware of any devices specifically for HOH available in commissary.

Yes

x

Yes

x

Describe: No Yes

NA x

Yes Yes
No
Any grievance determined to be an ADA concern is directed to me to review and respond.
yes

NA x x x
x x

Records of all grievances filed by deaf/HOH 3 inmates? (not just those related to settlement)

The Grievance Coordinator keeps records of ALL

x

grievances. I obtain what is needed from her.

Partially NonCompliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA NA NA
NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 260 of 661 - Page ID#: 2824

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

4 Adequate summaries provided in report?

Yes

Including all deaf or HOH inmate grievances, not just

5 those in settlement?

yes

6 Includes issues raised by inmate in grievance?

Yes

7 Includes institution in which grievance was filed?

Yes

8 Includes summary of KDOC response?

Yes

9 Includes grievance resolution (or lack thereof)?

yes

P Training

Types available

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

yes

Describe: All staff on site- including contract

2 Who received? (Describe)

staff (medical, Food Service, Commissary etc)

3 All appropriate staff?

Yes

Compliant
x x x x x x
NA x
NA x

4 Live training? (Information only)
5 Who received? (Describe) 6 All appropriate staff?
Targeted training on specific needs 7 training on best communication practices? 8 training on unique needs/problems?
training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may 9 miss alert?
training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may not hear verbal commands and strategies to handle 10 that problem? 11 training on identification of communication needs? consideration given to talking one-on-one with deaf 12 or HOH inmates, instead of in a group? Training on communication 13 training on use and role of interpreters? 14 training on process for obtaining interpreters? training on importance of not separating imate from 15 hearing aid? 16 training on communication technology? 17 training on VRI?

Describe: Yes. As ADA Coordinator, I trained

staff on ADA matters during In-service last year

and currently address every incoming staff

member in our New Employee Orientation. I

will cycle back to In-service again next year for

review and maintain NEO classes.

NA

Describe: All staff on site- including contract

staff (medical, Food Service, Commissary etc) NA

Yes

x

NA

Yes

x

Yes

x

Yes

x

x

Yes

Yes

x

Yes

x

NA

Yes

x

Yes

x

Yes

x

Yes

x

Yes

x

Partially Non-
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation
(Explain)

training on how to turn on and check for 18 captioning? 19 training on non-auditory alert office switch?
20 training on videophone rules?

x Captioning stays on in the dorms as mandated

by the Warden.

New Employee training.

x

Yes- these are also posted with the

Videophone and a brief summary is on the back

of the ID card carried by our inmates who use

x

sign.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 261 of 661 - Page ID#: 2825

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the

Compliant

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Training on Policies

NA

21 training on the Settlement?

Yes

x

22 training on identity and role of ADA coordinator?

Yes

x

23 training on KDOC anti-discrimination policy?

Yes

x

24 training on existence of KOMS/EMR alerts?

Yes- Wellpath no longer uses EMR. ECW is the

replacement.

x

25 training on meaning of ID cards?

Yes

x

training on equipment/services/ accommodation 26 available?

Yes- Staff is trained, but they also readily call

me to ask if they are unsure.

x

27 training on hand restraint policy?

Yes

x

28 training on two-point hand restraint system?

Yes

x

29 training on disciplinary and grievance practies?

Yes

x

Describe: I contact all relevant staff often with

ADA questions/concerns and solutions. I feel

communication has come a long way. I always

stress the importance of compliance with this

x

settlement and I think there is improved

Do all relevant staff know about reporting

understanding. ADA is also a topic in

30 obligations? How do you know?

Department Head Meetings.

Training specifically for housing area staff

NA

training on the use of cell/bed notices that indicate

31 an inmate is deaf/HOH

Yes

x

32 training on bed shaker switches

Yes- Addressed in NEO Training.

33 training on telecommunications

Yes

x

training on obligations to notify deaf and HOH

34 inmates of alerts

Yes

x

Training specifically for all corrections staff

NA

training on accommodations for inmates who sign

35 (esp. restraint policies)

Yes

x

training on strategies for inmates who may not hear

36 directions/orders

Yes

x

All Medical questions answered by our

Health Services Administrator Dawn

Training specifically for medical staff

Patterson.

NA

training on process to obtain hearing aid within two

37 months

x

training on obligation to notify off-site providers of

38 needs

x

This process has been in place for a long time,

we have one person who manages the ordering

of the hearing aids. This training was completed

prior to my arrival.

x

The schedulers have been made aware that if a

deaf inmate is going on a medical trip, they will

need to notify to office where they are going

39 Training provided for review by Monitor?

when they schedule the appointment.

Partially Non-
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation
(Explain)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 262 of 661 - Page ID#: 2826

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Q Monitor Access

Yes

Has the monitor been granted access to requested

KDOC records, files, and papers that pertain to the

1 agreement?

Yes

2 If no, was an explanation provided for the refusal?

As far as I know, the monitor has not requested

Has the monitor been granted access to KDOC staff

to speak with staff members, but we would

3 members and employees?

certainly comply if needed.

4 Were staff/employees cooperative?

Has KDOC responded to reasonable written

KSR has provided any information upon

5 questions?

request.

Compliant x x

Partially NonCompliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA
NA

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 263 of 661 - Page ID#: 2827

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

. . .

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

(a) Start date

10/4/2018

(b) End date

10/10/2018

(c) Days for resolution (End

date - start date)

6

(d) If in process, how many

days so far? (Today - start

date)

NA

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60

days, why?

10/15/2018 10/22/2018 10/22/2018 10/22/2018 11/7/2018 11/12/2018 10/31/2018 10/29/2018 11/1/2018 10/25/2018 11/14/2018 11/13/2018

16

7

10

3

7

1

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

1/1/2019 3/5/2019
63
NA

4/23/2019 NA NA
0

NA Solution to problems revealed in (e)?
NA

Scheduling. Stated on

2/20/19 he is happy

with the pocket talker

and he does not wish

to have hearing aid at

this time. One was

actually ordered, and

he returned it d/t Provider entered

preferring the pocket hearing aid order

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

talker.

incorrectly

Medical is working to

streamline the

process. It does not

help with the current

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

turnover rate.

Educated

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 264 of 661 - Page ID#: 2828

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

(a) Start date

3/5/2019

3/6/2018

4/9/2019 3/3/2019

12/10/2018

2/25/2019

(b) End date

6/6/2019

6/7/2019

6/12/19

4/26/2019

NA

4/29/2019

(c) Days for resolution (End

date - start date)

94

458

64

47

NA

63

(d) If in process, how many

days so far? (Today - start

date)

NA

NA

NA

NA

230

NA

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60

days, why?

HA ordered at another facility. He

transferred here, and previous facility

was never able to verify/find that his

HA was shipped to them. He also Inmate had to retake

Was at another

passed questionnaire when he

Audicus exam d/t

institution when DOC

transferred here. Then HOH nurse discrepancies

first notified. Then

attempted to just reorder his HA, but between ears. Was a

housed in CPTU

Also, hearing aid

order never went through or was sent. no show for his

which prevented the order approved

Had to send out to be tested per

scheduled appt, so

hearing booth

5/7/19. Took until

provider. Scheduling issues. Cerumen had to reschedule.

testing. Scheduling 6/12/19 to arrive and

impaction when he was sent out. Will HA took 1 month to

Scheduling

issues.

be issued to inmate. NA

send out again to re-examine.

arrive after approval.

Solution to problems

Audicus took a long

Inmate did not show

revealed in (e)?

time to send Hearing

We are working on communication up for several

Working to We have to wait for Aid once ordered.

between the institutions. Now have appointements- in

streamline the IM behavior to allow Voiced concern to

some contacts who help in cases like this case we can only

process.

for treatment.

company

NA

this.

reschedule.

Prisoner First Name
Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 265 of 661 - Page ID#: 2829

11/12/2018 10/8/2018

2/15/2019

11/9/2018

95

32

1/2/2019 4/29/2019
117

2/1/2019 5/7/2019 2/5/2019 lost

3/22/2019

NA

6/6/19 replaced

48

NA

121

NA

NA

NA

NA

55

NA

6/2/2018 NA NA
369

Scheduling

NA

Inmate was in CPTU. NA

NA

Solution to problems

revealed in (e)?

Working to

We have to wait for

streamline the

IM behavior to allow

process.

NA

for treatment.

NA

NA

Had to be retested.

Was in locked down units. Some medical issues.
Had to deal with serious medical issues first.

Prisoner First Name
Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 266 of 661 - Page ID#: 2830

10/9/2018 4/2/2019 10/24/2018 10/1/2018

2/15/2019

5/20/2019 12/10/2018 3/13/2019

129

48

47

163

NA

NA

NA

NA

3/13/2019 NA NA
104

3/5/2019 NA NA
118

10/9/2018 5/22/2019

NA

NA

NA

NA

265

40

Spent 10 days in SEG

(behavior issues).

Inmate has been Had to retest

advised multiple

w/Audicus then is

times of the process, being sent out for

and that he needs to outside testing.

Out to HTY for

HA took 29 days

file a lost/theft

Transportation issues -outside audiogram

from approval to

report. He has not keep having to

due to failed tests

arrival & issue

NA

NA

Scheduling filed one as of yet. reschedule

here

NA

Solution to problems

revealed in (e)?

Working to

Working to Inmate educated We have to wait for Takes longer when

streamline the

streamline the multiple times on the IM behavior to allow they have to go out.

process.

NA

NA

process.

process.

for treatment.

Transportation issues. NA

Prisoner First Name
Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 267 of 661 - Page ID#: 2831

2/20/2019 10/9/2018

5/21/2019

12/21/2018

90

73

NA

NA

3/5/2019 6/6/2019
93

11/7/2018 4/27/2019
171

1/9/2019 3/22/2019
72

NA

NA

NA

3/6/2019

2/5/2019

NA

6/18/2019

NA

136

117

NA

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

patient has dementia

and wasunable to

complete testing first

time

Ears impacted;

Unable to complete in-house Audicus exam, had to send out. . HA approved 5/16. Arrived and was issued 6/6/19.

patient has dementia

and wasunable to

complete testing first

time

Scheduling.

Debrox then reschedule

Sending out takes more time. Getting HA in is also taking longer.

Working to streamline the process.

NEEDS to file another

lost/stolen report Inmate was at

then take to sick call. LLCC until

Medical issues.

6/7/19.

Inmate educated NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 268 of 661 - Page ID#: 2832

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

1/24/2019 3/13/2019
48
NA

12/3/2018 2/28/2019
87
NA

12/7/2018 3/21/2019
104
NA

12/5/2018 2/8/2019

2/8/2019

3/26/2019

65

46

11/19/2018 1/25/2019
67

NA

NA

NA

11/9/2018 3/22/2019
133
NA

NA Solution to problems revealed in (e)?
NA

Hearing aid was

returned after repair,

but not

documented.In

Inmate was at RCC

Scheduling- major middle of HOH nurse during this time

health concerns change

period.

NA

Working to

streamline the

process.

NA

NA

NA

Inmate went back &

forth between RCC & SInmate unable to

KSR a few times

complete in house

during this

Audicus, had to be sent

timeframe.

out.

Communication.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 269 of 661 - Page ID#: 2833

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

1/2/2019 3/1/2019
58
NA

5/1/2019 6/20/2019 2/13/2019 1/17/2019

5/14/2019

NA

3/26/2019 3/1/2019

13

NA

41

43

NA

12

NA

NA

5/8/2019 3/13/2019 2/20/2019

NA

4/26/2019 3/8/2019

NA

44

13

54

NA

NA

10/22/2018

11/5/2018

2/15/2019

2/15/2019

116

102

NA

NA

Scheduling;

Scheduling;Aprro

Aprroval took a val took a

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

month.

month.

Solution to problems

revealed in (e)?

Working to

Working to

streamline the streamline the

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

process.

process.

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

4/3/2019 5/9/2019
36
NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 270 of 661 - Page ID#: 2834

4/15/2019 5/6/2019

NA

6/6/2019

NA

31

12/3/2018 11/20/2018

3/13/2019

3/1/2019

100

101

4/3/2019 12/3/2018

6/6/2019

3/22/2019

64

109

11/5/2018 2/15/2019
102

77

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

In CPTU & LLCC RHU

Order originally

Could not

from 12/15/18 -

entered incorrectly

took approx 1 complete Audicus

1/3/19. Took almost

by provider. Has

inmate in and out month for HA on site testing.

1 month from

been approved &

of CPTU several to arrive after Had to be sent out

approval to arrival of

NA awaiting delivery.

NA times

approval

for exam.

Scheduling HA

Educated provider on how to enter NA order.

Inmate's behavior Working to

prevented timely streamline the

NA testing.

process.

Working to Inmate's behavior

streamline the prevented timely

process.

testing.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 271 of 661 - Page ID#: 2835

Prisoner First Name
Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

2/25/2019 6/12/2019
107
NA

2/12/2019

10/19/2018

11/12/2018

4/1/2019 12/21/2018

3/15/2019

48

63

144

NA

NA

NA

2/20/2019 5/7/2019

NA

NA

NA

NA

131

55

4/29/2019 5/7/2019 5/7/2019

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

63

55

55

waiting on records

from VA to see if

personal HA were

Initially declined

under warranty.

Took approx 3

to be tested, then

Took over 1 month

weeks from

changed his mind.

Scheduling.

from approval to

approval to

Has ongoing,

Waiting for medical

arrival & issue of

arrival & issue of

extenuating

director to review

new HA.

NA

HA

Scheduling

medical issues. NA

results.

NA

NA

Solution to problems

HOH nurse

revealed in (e)?

contacted them but

when paperwork

Working to

Working to

Working to

came in, it went to

streamline the streamline the

streamline the

the wrong person. NA

process.

process.

NA

process.

NA

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 272 of 661 - Page ID#: 2836

Prisoner First Name
Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

5/8/2019 5/8/2019

NA

NA

NA

NA

54

54

2/1/2019 6/6/2019

NA

NA

NA

NA

150

25

5/8/2019 5/22/2019 5/14/2019 5/14/2019 5/5/2019 6/4/2019

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

6/26/2019

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

54

40

48

48

57

22

(UNABLE TO

COMPLETE

Cerumen impaction.

AUDICUS)

Was in CPTU (behavior

referral to send

NA

NA

issues)

NA

to HTY

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Solution to problems

revealed in (e)?

NA

NA

Debrox

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Prisoner First Name
Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

6/4/2019 NA NA
28

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 273 of 661 - Page ID#: 2837

3/6/2019 6/20/2019 6/24/2019 6/4/2019 2/5/2019 6/20/2019 5/7/2019

NA

NA

NA

6/24/2019 6/5/2019

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

20

120

NA

NA

118

12

8

NA

NA

12

55

12/1/2018 6/24/2019

NA

NA

NA

NA

212

8

ADA not notified of

initial failed

ADA not notified of

screening.

initial failed screening.

NA

Scheduling.

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Scheduling.

NA

Solution to problems

revealed in (e)?

Working to

streamline the

Working to streamline

NA

process.

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

the process.

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 274 of 661 - Page ID#: 2838

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

(a) Start date

6/9/2019

5/8/2019 5/8/2019 5/22/2019 6/1/2019 6/5/2019 6/19/2019 5/14/2019

11/13/2018

(b) End date

NA

NA

NA

6/5/2019

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

(c) Days for resolution (End

date - start date)

NA

NA

NA

14

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

(d) If in process, how many

days so far? (Today - start

date)

22

54

54

NA

30

26

12

48

245

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60

institution when he

days, why?

answered 3+ on the

questionaire. When

he came here they

Did not arrive at failed to give him a

Sched 5/30. (ears

KSR until 11/13/18. regular hearing

impacted. Debrox

PASSED LAST

questionaire and

then flush ears then

QUESTIONNAIRE? then at his regular

reschedule whisper)

(failed one, then PPD he answered

(6/18) whisper

passed one, then no to all the

scheduled 6/24EAR

failed another, questions. We have

FLUSH 7/2; WHISPER

then passed

scheduled for a

NA

7/12

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

another

Whisper.

Solution to problems

revealed in (e)?

The nurse who

missed giving him

the questionaire is

NA

Debrox

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

no longer here.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 275 of 661 - Page ID#: 2839

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

6/11/2019 5/14/2019 5/14/2019 6/11/2019 6/12/2019 6/11/2019

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

20

48

48

20

19

20

3/5/2019 3/27/2019
22
NA

10/9/2018 1/17/2019
90
NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Solution to problems

revealed in (e)?

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Couldn't complete Audicus on-site exam. Had to be sent to outside provider for exam.

Prisoner First Name
Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 276 of 661 - Page ID#: 2840

10/4/2018 11/30/2018
58
NA

10/10/2018 3/19/2019

2/8/2019 2/4/2019 10/31/2018 3/12/2019 2/14/2019 1/9/2019

2/15/2019

3/27/2019 4/19/2019 2/19/2019 11/29/2018 4/17/2019 2/14/2019 1/22/2019

57

8

70

15

29

36

0

13

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA Solution to problems revealed in (e)?
NA

NA

NA

Scheduling

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Working to

streamline the

NA

NA

process.

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 277 of 661 - Page ID#: 2841

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

2/6/2019 1/2/2019 12/3/2018 10/10/2018 4/5/2019 1/29/2019 12/6/2018 11/2/18

58

27

3

23

NA

NA

NA

NA

11/14/2018 11/14/2018 1/2/2019 11/14/2018 10/22/2018 2/5/2019

1/17/2019

11/20/18 1/31/2019 12/31/18 11/21/2018 2/6/2019

64

6

29

47

30

1

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Scheduling

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Solution to problems

revealed in (e)?

Working to

streamline the

NA

NA

NA

NA

process.

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 278 of 661 - Page ID#: 2842

Prisoner First Name
Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

11/30/2018 3/12/2019
213

12/4/2018 1/15/19

1/11/2018 4/15/2019 12/3/2018

2/7/2019 11/14/2018 3/13/2019 3/18/2019

10/23/2018 4/15/2019 12/28/2018 2/11/2019 1/7/2019 3/27/2019 3/27/2019

42

285

0

25

4

54

14

9

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Scheduling plus was sent to LLCC RHU for a couple weeks. NA

Working to

streamline the

process. Inmate

behavior.

NA

Scheduling

NA

NA

NA

Working to

streamline the

process.

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 279 of 661 - Page ID#: 2843

Prisoner First Name
Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

1/11/2019 1/21/2019
11
NA

2/12/2019 1/2/2019

2/27/19

3/5/2019

15

15

NA

NA

2/6/2019 3/6/2019
28
NA

10/29/2018 3/5/2019 2/11/2019 2/19/2019 2/2/2019

1/17/2019

4/16/19 3/27/2019 4/15/2019 3/6/2019

285

42

44

55

32

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

ongoing medical issues-

NA

NA

NA

NA

chemo.

NA

NA

NA

NA

Solution to problems

revealed in (e)?

Serious medical issues.

NA

NA

NA

NA

Later passed away. NA

NA

NA

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 280 of 661 - Page ID#: 2844

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

3/19/2019 5/16/2019
58
NA

12/10/2018 3/6/2019 3/6/2019 3/26/2019

86

20

NA

NA

11/5/2018 2/5/2019 5/7/2019 4/2/2019 2/6/2019 4/3/2019 5/8/2019

3/26/2019

4/5/2019 5/14/19 5/15/2019 2/13/2019 4/9/19 5/15/2019

141

59

7

43

7

6

7

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Ear impactions.

Inmate no show for

appt to flush. Inmate

did not use Debrox as

directed. Had to be

given the Audicus

NA

Scheduling

NA

test twice.

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Solution to problems

revealed in (e)?

Working to

streamline the

NA

process.

NA

Debrox

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 281 of 661 - Page ID#: 2845

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

3/29/2019 4/5/2019 5/17/2019 5/29/2019

49

54

NA

NA

2/5/2019 4/2/2019 5/1/2019 4/2/2019 9/7/2018 4/2/2019 5/14/2019 7/11/2018 5/29/2019 5/29/2019 6/3/2019 5/29/2019 9/14/2018 5/29/2019 5/28/19 10/16/2018

113

57

33

57

0

57

14

98

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Scheduling; ear

NA

NA

impaction

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Scheduling

Solution to problems

revealed in (e)?

Working to

streamline

NA

NA

Debrox

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

the process.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 282 of 661 - Page ID#: 2846

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

7/11/2018 9/14/2018 10/11/2018 10/24/2019

93

40

NA

NA

9/5/2018 11/30/2018
86
NA

9/18/2018 7/10/2018 7/6/2018 7/17/2018 2/15/2019 10/5/2018 8/10/2018 8/14/2018

150

87

35

28

NA

NA

NA

NA

9/5/2018 9/28/2018 4/1/2019 11/13/2018

157

46

NA

NA

Ear

impaction; NA

Scheduling Scheduling NA

NA

NA

Scheduling

NA

Solution to problems

revealed in (e)?

Working to Working to

Working to

streamline the streamline

streamline the

debrox

NA

process.

the process. NA

NA

NA

process.

NA

Prisoner First Name
Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 283 of 661 - Page ID#: 2847

9/17/2018 7/3/2018 12/17/2018 9/20/2018

91

80

7/3/2018 8/20/2018 9/12/2018 8/21/2018 10/11/2018 10/16/2018 4/27/2019 3/22/2019

101

57

227

233

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

7/11/2018 9/24/2018 9/19/2018 12/7/2018 10/26/2018 11/14/2018

149

32

46

NA

NA

NA

Couldn't complete

on-site Audicus

exam. Had to be

sent for outside

testing.

Scheduling Scheduling

NA

NA

NA

Scheduling

NA

NA

Solution to problems

revealed in (e)?

Working to

streamline Working to

Working to

the

streamline the

streamline the

process. process.

NA

NA

NA

process.

NA

NA

Prisoner First Name
Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 284 of 661 - Page ID#: 2848

7/11/2018 10/16/2018
86

7/27/2018 11/30/2018
126

9/10/2018 9/6/2018 11/11/2018 10/15/2018

62

39

NA

NA

NA

NA

8/3/2018 10/16/2018
74

7/11/2018 10/23/2018
105

9/5/2018 7/30/2018 11/7/2018 9/10/2018

64

43

NA

NA

NA

NA

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Scheduling

Scheduling

Scheduling

NA

Working to streamline the process.

Working to streamline the process.

Working to

streamline the

process.

NA

Scheduling

Spent 2 weeks in

SEG at LLCC.

Scheduling

NA

Working to streamline the process.

Working to

streamline the

process.

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 285 of 661 - Page ID#: 2849

Prisoner First Name
Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

8/3/2018 9/14/2018 9/5/2018 9/6/2018 9/25/2018 10/22/2018

35

11

48

NA

NA

NA

9/17/2018 9/24/2018 9/19/2018 7/11/2018 8/15/2018 8/2/2018 8/2/2018 12/5/2018 11/7/2018 11/5/2018 9/4/2018 9/11/2018 9/7/2018 9/7/2018

80

45

48

56

28

37

37

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Scheduling

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Solution to problems

revealed in (e)?

Working to

streamline the

NA

NA

NA

process.

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 286 of 661 - Page ID#: 2850

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC # (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

9/4/2018 9/5/2018 8/22/2018 9/18/2018 7/17/2018 9/28/2018 8/24/2018 9/20/2018 9/11/2018 10/5/2018 9/9/2018 9/24/2018 7/17/2018 10/25/2018 8/29/2018 10/1/2018

8

31

18

6

0

27

5

11

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 287 of 661 - Page ID#: 2851

Technology

How many

Where

When obtained

FM radio transmitters, usable

as an amplifier system?

2 Transmitters and

mics. 12 Receivers.

Phone amplifiers (not volume

control: portable amplifiers) 0

Trying out in SOTP & Chapel.
NA

5/21/2019 NA

How do inmates obtain How well do they

Specifications (URL)

access?

work?

Other comments

New- we have only

had one inmate

Whole House

SOTP Teacher and request, but then his

https://wholehousefmtransmi Chaplain have them hearing aid arrived

tter.com/

readily available

and he declined. Still working out logistics.

NA

NA

NA

NA

Captioned Telephone

0

Volume Controlled

Other amplifiers,

Phones- multiple. In

amplification systems, or the every Dorm where

like?

there is a regular

NA Every living area

Bed shakers Vibrating watches?

Issued 34. 26 purchased

Inmate cells individuals

NA

NA

NA

During regular call

6/27/2017

Securus is vendor

times

We started using these

before I became ADA

Coordinator in Aug. of https://www.harriscomm.com Request ADA

2017.

/equipment

Coordinator

Request ADA

Apr-19

amazon.com

Coordinator

Vibrating alarm clocks?

Pagers?

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

We started using these

before I became ADA

Coordinator in Aug. of https://www.harriscomm.com Request ADA

5

Worn by inmates

2017.

/

Coordinator

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration notpmentionedpabove. hearings

*Alarm with bed-

For individuals to

shaker. *Volume

purchase using their own

controlled headphones. funds.

1

ADA Coordinator's office

Will place first order

around the last week in

July 2019.

To be determined

Nov-17

http://inlandproduct.com

Request ADA Coordinator
Staff Request

Earphones for orientation

videos

1

ADA Coordinator's office Nov-17

http://inlandproduct.com Staff Request

NA

NA

Inmates report these

work very well and

that they use them a

lot.

Work well as an alarm.

Used mostly as alarm clock by inmates. Very expensive.

IM report they help.

Working on making

vibrating alarm clock

available for HOH inmates

NA

to purchase.

Will not pick up

inside the thick walls

of Dorms. Work fine

on the yard.

To be determined Good
Good

Nursing Care is getting a set to keep as they have several HOH individuals.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 288 of 661 - Page ID#: 2852

Documentation to review

Date reviewed

KOMS alerts for each deaf/HOH inmate

Grievances:

Provide/Review summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH

inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc.

7/8/2019

Provide/Review full documentation of all grievances that

address hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Solve any 7/8/2019 problems revealed.

Discipline

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving an inmate who

signs. Ensure that VRI or other effective communication was provided at each stage of each such proceedings.

7/8/2019

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving failure to obey

an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Ensure 7/8/2019

that no such inmate is being penalized for inability to hear.

VRI Log (review to ensure it's being used in appropriate circumstances.

7/8/2019

VRS or other videophone alternative (review to ensure that

when videophone is inoperative, alternative is in fact available/used)

7/8/2019

TTY instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-

up, use, etc.)

7/8/2019

VRI instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set- 7/8/2019 up, use, etc.)

Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.) I have not received but a couple of alerts over the last several months.
Full review attached "Grievances"
There were no hearing related grievances during this period.
We have two inmates who use sign language to communicate. Neither of them have been involved in disciplinary action for more than a year.
Full review attached "Disciplinary Actions" VRI is being checked out by CTO's for meetings on a regular basis and by medical.
Videophone operational and VRI laptop working and VRS capable. Instructions posted with TTY which is permanently set up in Dorm 3 booth. Detailed instructions are included in the bag as well as on the HDrive for easy access. Instructions include pictures and are specific to our institution.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 289 of 661 - Page ID#: 2853
Questions regarding effective communications in particular activities or locations. For each, mark compliance (Y, partial, N, no basis) and explain. Goal: each deaf or HOH inma activities

Intake/ Orientation -- Non-medical Intake, Medical Auxiliary Aid Assessment Units
Restrictive Housing Medical/MH care
Programs

In-person interpretation Ever used?

Availability of VRI: Appropriate equipment available (computer line,
Used whenever appropriate? Staff trained? outlet, space)

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not that anyone is aware If the VRI was not

of. Our entire medical staff appropriate, an in person

has changed a lot.

interpreter would be called in Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

If the VRI was not

appropriate, an in person

No

interpreter would be called in Yes

Yes

If the VRI was not

appropriate, an in person

No

interpreter would be called in Yes

Yes

If the VRI was not

appropriate, an in person

No

interpreter would be called in Yes

Yes

Yes- for example we bring in

an interpreter for the AA and

NA programs for

Yes

Yes

Yes

Ever used? How many times? Yes but not recently. Used with all incoming inmates who sign. Yes but not recently. Used with all incoming inmates who sign. Yes. Annually with inmates who use sign.

Used whenever appropriate? (without special request)
Yes
Yes Yes.

Yes- every meeting with

inmates who sign.

Yes

Have not had any

recent instances of a

sign-using inmate in

THU.But used in past. Yes

Yes- medical

visits/check-ups for

. Yes

Yes-only for interview

not for class.

Yes

Education

Yes

Recreation

No

Communications with Chaplain No

Yes- used most recently for

in SOTP

Yes

Yes

Yes- if the need arose.

Yes

Yes

Yes-if need arose. We are

going to have a volunteer

group with an ASL Translator. Yes

Yes

Yes-interviews and

meetings only

Yes

Recreation has never

had the need to use the

VRI

Yes

No

Yes-if need arose.

Prison-provided religious

programming

No- need has not arisen Yes-if need arose.

Yes

Yes

No

Yes-if need arose.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 290 of 661 - Page ID#: 2854
Questions regarding effective coamte has an equal opportunity to participate in programs/ services / activities
Amplification: (Not just hearing aid -- space-specific amplification)

Intake/ Orientation -- Non-medical

Adequate? Partial

Intake, Medical

Yes

Auxiliary Aid Assessment

Yes

Units

Partial

Describe efforts, issues
Volume controlled headphones for orientation. Quiet area.

Audit item issues/ concerns

Quiet area.
Quiet area.
Phones are volume controlled. Working on in-person annnouncements.

Restrictive Housing

Yes

Medical/MH care

Yes

Initiated FM

Transmitter in Chapel

and

Programs

Programs/Classrooms.

Initiated FM

Transmitter in Chapel

and

Education

Programs/Classrooms.

Speakers in the Gym are

exceptionally loud and

Recreation

clear.

Initiated FM

Transmitter in Chapel

and

Communications with Chaplain Programs/Classrooms.

Initiated FM

Transmitter in Chapel

Prison-provided religious

and

programming

Programs/Classrooms.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 291 of 661 - Page ID#: 2855

In-person interpretation Ever used?

Availability of VRI: Appropriate equipment available (computer line,
Used whenever appropriate? Staff trained? outlet, space)

Ever used? How many times?

Used whenever appropriate? (without special request)

Volunteer -led programming (note: Only volunteer interpretation is required)

A group is suppose to start

soon that has a person who

signs

Volunteer basis

Yes

Yes

Parole hearings

Yes

Classification/

Transfer

No

Legal Aid

No

Grievance process

No

Work assignments

No

Court call and ALL parts of

disciplinary process

No

Yes- any hearing for an

inmate who signs.

Yes

Yes

Yes-if need arose.

Yes

Yes

Yes-if need arose.

Yes

Yes

Yes-if need arose.

Yes

Yes

Yes-if need arose.

Yes

Yes

Yes-if need arose.

Yes

Yes

No

Yes-if need arose.

No- we use an In-

Person interpreter

because the VRI is not

ideal in that situation. Yes

Yes- All for ASL using

inmates

Yes

Not to my knowledge Yes-if need arose.

Not to my knowledge Yes-if need arose.

Not to my knowledge Yes-if need arose.

Yes- used any time a

Deaf inmate who useds

sign is involved

Yes

Staff investigations

NA

Investigative interviews

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes-if need arose.

Yes

Yes

NA

NA

Yes- used any time a

Deaf inmate who useds

sign is involved

Yes

Preparation of report

NA

NA

Shift supervisor's review of

disciplinary report

NA

NA

Investigator's review of

disciplinary report

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Miranda warnings

NA

When advising inmate of

right to consult with legal

aide

No

Notification of date, time,

and place of hearing

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes-if need arose.

Yes

Yes

Yes-if need arose.

Yes

Yes

NA

NA

Yes- used any time a

Deaf inmate who useds

sign is involved

Yes

Yes- used any time a

Deaf inmate who useds

sign is involved

Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 292 of 661 - Page ID#: 2856
Amplification: (Not just hearing aid -- space-specific amplification)

Volunteer -led programming (note: Only volunteer interpretation is required)

Adequate? Initiated FM Transmitter in Chapel and Programs/Classrooms.

Describe efforts, issues

Audit item issues/ concerns

Parole hearings Classification/ Transfer Legal Aid Grievance process Work assignments

Volume controlled headphones available. Quiet area
Yes Yes Yes Yes

Court call and ALL parts of

disciplinary process

Yes

Staff investigations

NA

Inmates are not present during staff investigation

Investigative interviews

Yes

Preparation of report

NA

Shift supervisor's review of

disciplinary report

NA

Investigator's review of

disciplinary report

NA

Miranda warnings

NA

When advising inmate of

right to consult with legal

aide

Yes

VRI is used when needed for sign using inmates. Inmates are not present during the preparation for a report. Inmates are not present when the shift supervisor reviews the report.
Inmates are not present Officers do not read Miranda Warnings for an "in-house" write up. Only if the State Police become in volved are they read. In that case, we would make sure to accommodate any Deaf/HOH inmate accordingly.

Notification of date, time,

and place of hearing

Yes

Hearing or re-hearing

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 293 of 661 - Page ID#: 2857

In-person interpretation
Ever used? No

Availability of VRI: Appropriate equipment available (computer line,
Used whenever appropriate? Staff trained? outlet, space)

Yes-if need arose.

Yes

Yes

Used whenever

Ever used? How many appropriate? (without

times?

special request)

Yes- used any time a

Deaf inmate who useds

sign is involved

Yes

If deaf/hoh inmate is witness No

Yes-if need arose.

Yes

Yes

No

Yes- if the need arose

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to attend a religious service without effective communication to receive any religious meal, diet, or other accommodation?

Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have witnessed or been suspected of violation) provided with an inmate or staff advisor on same terms as non-deaf inmates? Yes inmates can have a staff council upon request. It is reviewed and denied or appoved based on the same process as a non deaf inmate.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 294 of 661 - Page ID#: 2858
Amplification: (Not just hearing aid -- space-specific amplification)

Hearing or re-hearing

Adequate? Yes

If deaf/hoh inmate is witness Yes
Special questions: Has any inmate been required to
Are deaf or HOH inmates (who ha Yes inmates can have a staff coun

Describe efforts, issues

Audit item issues/ concerns

For the most part, witnesses do not appear at the hearing. They submit a written report. There are legal aides to help with those who would struggle with writing.
no

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 295 of 661 - Page ID#: 2859

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Name

Low literacy? (So

Listed with

that written

Has Deaf/HOH ID

KOMS ADA Signs to communicate communication is Card? (Y or

Has Bed/Door Card?

ID

Precaution? (Y/N)

not effective) waived)

(Y or waived)

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

If signs to communicate, noted in KOMS precaution notes?
NA
NA

Auxiliary Aid Assessment meeting took place?
Yes
Yes

Yes

Y

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURIN

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 296 of 661 - Page ID#: 2860

Name

Personal Phone

Any other

Bed Shaker? (Not Other Alert Device (Not TTY Access (Not

Amplifier (Not Shake & Wake (Not auxiliary

requested; denied; requested NR; denied requested; denied; requested; denied; requested; denied; aid

Audit item

ID

granted)

D; granted G)

granted)

granted)

granted)

requested? Outome? issues/concerns

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

G *Vibrating Watch

Granted

G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Denied

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Pager-G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

*Pocket talker G

Granted

*Pager G

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 297 of 661 - Page ID#: 2861

If signs to

Low literacy? (So

communicate, Auxiliary Aid

Listed with

that written

Has Deaf/HOH ID

noted in KOMS Assessment

KOMS ADA Signs to communicate communication is Card? (Y or

Has Bed/Door Card? precaution

meeting took

ID

Precaution? (Y/N)

not effective) waived)

(Y or waived)

notes?

place?

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Waived

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

Yes

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

little."

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

Dementia

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

Yes

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Knows sign but speaks

to communicate on a

normal basis. An

interpreter comes in

for his parole board.

Have offered

VRI/Interpreter

services for other

purposes, but he said

Yes

he would rather speak. No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 298 of 661 - Page ID#: 2862

Personal Phone

Any other

Bed Shaker? (Not Other Alert Device (Not TTY Access (Not

Amplifier (Not Shake & Wake (Not auxiliary

requested; denied; requested NR; denied requested; denied; requested; denied; requested; denied; aid

Audit item

ID

granted)

D; granted G)

granted)

granted)

granted)

requested? Outome? issues/concerns

Granted

Not Requested

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Sound amplifier G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Denied

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Pocket talker

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Pocket talker G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Pocket talker G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 299 of 661 - Page ID#: 2863

If signs to

Low literacy? (So

communicate, Auxiliary Aid

Listed with

that written

Has Deaf/HOH ID

noted in KOMS Assessment

KOMS ADA Signs to communicate communication is Card? (Y or

Has Bed/Door Card? precaution

meeting took

ID

Precaution? (Y/N)

not effective) waived)

(Y or waived)

notes?

place?

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Waived

Waived

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

Yes

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

Y

Yes

Yes

Yes

YES

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 300 of 661 - Page ID#: 2864

Personal Phone

Any other

Bed Shaker? (Not Other Alert Device (Not TTY Access (Not

Amplifier (Not Shake & Wake (Not auxiliary

requested; denied; requested NR; denied requested; denied; requested; denied; requested; denied; aid

Audit item

ID

granted)

D; granted G)

granted)

granted)

granted)

requested? Outome? issues/concerns

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested Granted

Not Requested Pager G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 301 of 661 - Page ID#: 2865

If signs to

Low literacy? (So

communicate, Auxiliary Aid

Listed with

that written

Has Deaf/HOH ID

noted in KOMS Assessment

KOMS ADA Signs to communicate communication is Card? (Y or

Has Bed/Door Card? precaution

meeting took

ID

Precaution? (Y/N)

not effective) waived)

(Y or waived)

notes?

place?

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Waived

Waived

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

Dementia

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

little."

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

Visually Impaired Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Waived

Waived

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

little."

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

Dementia

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 302 of 661 - Page ID#: 2866

Personal Phone

Any other

Bed Shaker? (Not Other Alert Device (Not TTY Access (Not

Amplifier (Not Shake & Wake (Not auxiliary

requested; denied; requested NR; denied requested; denied; requested; denied; requested; denied; aid

Audit item

ID

granted)

D; granted G)

granted)

granted)

granted)

requested? Outome? issues/concerns

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker- G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested Granted

Not Requested Pager-G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker-G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Pocket talker- G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 303 of 661 - Page ID#: 2867

If signs to

Low literacy? (So

communicate, Auxiliary Aid

Listed with

that written

Has Deaf/HOH ID

noted in KOMS Assessment

KOMS ADA Signs to communicate communication is Card? (Y or

Has Bed/Door Card? precaution

meeting took

ID

Precaution? (Y/N)

not effective) waived)

(Y or waived)

notes?

place?

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

Yes

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

Yes

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

little."

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

Yes

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Waived

Waived

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

Can read, but not

write d/t

Parkinsons

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

Yes

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 304 of 661 - Page ID#: 2868

Personal Phone

Any other

Bed Shaker? (Not Other Alert Device (Not TTY Access (Not

Amplifier (Not Shake & Wake (Not auxiliary

requested; denied; requested NR; denied requested; denied; requested; denied; requested; denied; aid

Audit item

ID

granted)

D; granted G)

granted)

granted)

granted)

requested? Outome? issues/concerns

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker- G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker-G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Denied

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 305 of 661 - Page ID#: 2869

If signs to

Low literacy? (So

communicate, Auxiliary Aid

Listed with

that written

Has Deaf/HOH ID

noted in KOMS Assessment

KOMS ADA Signs to communicate communication is Card? (Y or

Has Bed/Door Card? precaution

meeting took

ID

Precaution? (Y/N)

not effective) waived)

(Y or waived)

notes?

place?

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Waived

Waived

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

Dementia

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Waived

Waived

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 306 of 661 - Page ID#: 2870

Personal Phone

Any other

Bed Shaker? (Not Other Alert Device (Not TTY Access (Not

Amplifier (Not Shake & Wake (Not auxiliary

requested; denied; requested NR; denied requested; denied; requested; denied; requested; denied; aid

Audit item

ID

granted)

D; granted G)

granted)

granted)

granted)

requested? Outome? issues/concerns

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Denied

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 307 of 661 - Page ID#: 2871

If signs to

Low literacy? (So

communicate, Auxiliary Aid

Listed with

that written

Has Deaf/HOH ID

noted in KOMS Assessment

KOMS ADA Signs to communicate communication is Card? (Y or

Has Bed/Door Card? precaution

meeting took

ID

Precaution? (Y/N)

not effective) waived)

(Y or waived)

notes?

place?

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Waived

Waived

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Waived

Waived

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Yes

N

Can read. Cannot

write we d/t stiff

hands

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Dementia

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

NA

Yes

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 308 of 661 - Page ID#: 2872

Personal Phone

Any other

Bed Shaker? (Not Other Alert Device (Not TTY Access (Not

Amplifier (Not Shake & Wake (Not auxiliary

requested; denied; requested NR; denied requested; denied; requested; denied; requested; denied; aid

Audit item

ID

granted)

D; granted G)

granted)

granted)

granted)

requested? Outome? issues/concerns

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Vibrating Watch G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested Granted Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 309 of 661 - Page ID#: 2873

If signs to

Low literacy? (So

communicate, Auxiliary Aid

Listed with

that written

Has Deaf/HOH ID

noted in KOMS Assessment

KOMS ADA Signs to communicate communication is Card? (Y or

Has Bed/Door Card? precaution

meeting took

ID

Precaution? (Y/N)

not effective) waived)

(Y or waived)

notes?

place?

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 310 of 661 - Page ID#: 2874

Personal Phone

Any other

Bed Shaker? (Not Other Alert Device (Not TTY Access (Not

Amplifier (Not Shake & Wake (Not auxiliary

requested; denied; requested NR; denied requested; denied; requested; denied; requested; denied; aid

Audit item

ID

granted)

D; granted G)

granted)

granted)

granted)

requested? Outome? issues/concerns

Not Requested

Pocket talker

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Pocket talker

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Vibrating Watchv

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Granted

Pocket talker G

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested No

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 311 of 661 - Page ID#: 2875

Fill this out for EACH location where there are any deaf/HOH inmates

Volume

If there are

How How many adjustable

If there are any

any inmates

many inmates who phone available

Staff use bed inmates who If there are any who sign:

Deaf/ sign to to inmates

How

shakers for sign: Location inmates who Ready access

HOH communicat without special many bed Bed shakers set up for use multiple

available for sign: Staff

to

Dorm/unit Walk

inmates?

e

request?

shakers? for multiple purposes? purposes? VRI?

trained for VRI videophone?

Due to shortage of staff, and rotation of

staff (sometimes from other institutions or

Probation and Parole) we are not able to

use the bed shakers to personally alert IM's

of announcements with ANY kind of

regularity. It would also only be effective if

they were in their beds at the time. We are

trying other approaches. We now facilitate

the purchase of vibrating watches, and I am

in the process of getting bed shaker alarms

that they can also purchase themselves. We

also offer in-person alerts.

Audit item issues/concerns

Dorm 1

A Wing

4

0

yes

Dorm 1

B Wing

14

0

yes

Dorm 1

C Wing

2

0

yes

Dorm 1

D Wing

4

0

yes

Dorm 3

A Wing

19

0

yes

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

1 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

3 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

0 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

1 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

0 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 312 of 661 - Page ID#: 2876

Dorm/unit Walk

Dorm 3

B Wing

Dorm 3

C Wing

Dorm 3

D Wing

Dorm 7

A Wing

Dorm 7

B Wing

Dorm 7

C Wing

Dorm 7

D Wing

Dorm 9

A Wing

Dorm 9

B Wing

Volume

If there are

How How many adjustable

If there are any

any inmates

many inmates who phone available

Staff use bed inmates who If there are any who sign:

Deaf/ sign to to inmates

How

shakers for sign: Location inmates who Ready access

HOH communicat without special many bed Bed shakers set up for use multiple

available for sign: Staff

to

Audit item

inmates?

e

request?

shakers? for multiple purposes? purposes? VRI?

trained for VRI videophone? issues/concerns

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

26

1

yes

8 to manage it.

emergency Yes

Yes

Yes

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

14

0

yes

0 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

19

1

yes

2 to manage it.

emergency Yes

Yes

Yes

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

4

0

yes

2 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

4

0

yes

0 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

6

0

yes

2 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

6

0

yes

1 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

9

0

yes

4 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

3

0

yes

1 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 313 of 661 - Page ID#: 2877

Dorm/unit Walk

Dorm 9

C Wing

Dorm 9

D Wing

Dorm 10

A Wing

Dorm 10

B Wing

Dorm 10

C Wing

Dorm 12

A Wing

CPTU

A Wing

CPTU

B Wing

CPTU

C Wing

Volume

If there are

How How many adjustable

If there are any

any inmates

many inmates who phone available

Staff use bed inmates who If there are any who sign:

Deaf/ sign to to inmates

How

shakers for sign: Location inmates who Ready access

HOH communicat without special many bed Bed shakers set up for use multiple

available for sign: Staff

to

Audit item

inmates?

e

request?

shakers? for multiple purposes? purposes? VRI?

trained for VRI videophone? issues/concerns

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

7

0

yes

1 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

2

0

yes

0 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

10

0

yes

1 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

8

0

yes

1 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

15

0

yes

2 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

6

0

yes

0 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

4

0

yes

1 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

5

0

yes

1 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

4

0

yes

2 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 314 of 661 - Page ID#: 2878

Dorm/unit Walk

DAL

A Wing

DAL

B Wing

DAL

C Wing

DAL

D Wing

NC

A Wing

NC

B Wing

RHU

LLCC

Volume

If there are

How How many adjustable

If there are any

any inmates

many inmates who phone available

Staff use bed inmates who If there are any who sign:

Deaf/ sign to to inmates

How

shakers for sign: Location inmates who Ready access

HOH communicat without special many bed Bed shakers set up for use multiple

available for sign: Staff

to

Audit item

inmates?

e

request?

shakers? for multiple purposes? purposes? VRI?

trained for VRI videophone? issues/concerns

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

10

0

yes

1 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

2

0

yes

0 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

1

0

yes

0 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

2

0

yes

0 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

8

0

yes

1 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

4

0

yes

1 to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

Rarely used for

Set up to use for sending notifications.

1-held in alerts, but not enough staff Used for

NA-No inmates NA-No inmates NA-No inmates

5

0

yes

property to manage it.

emergency who sign.

who sign.

who sign.

LIST ALL ISSUES THAT YOU SOLVED DURING THE AUDIT, OR THAT REMAIN TO BE SOLVED. Problem

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 315 of 661 - Page ID#: 2879

Solution

Recheck 1 Notes [Date here]

Recheck 2 Notes Recheck 3 Notes Recheck 4 Notes

[Date here]

[Date here]

[Date here]

Non-Auditory Alerts CPTU does not allow some inmates to have IDs on their person due to potential for self harm.
KOMS alerts.

Experimenting with in-person alerts. Started facilitating the Creating temporary door signs that we can use to mark any cell with an HOH inmate.
Contacted Debbie Kays.

9/17/18 Notified

Debbie Kays of issue.

She said ticket was put 7/16/19 Still an

in to get if fixed.

issue

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 316 of 661 - Page ID#: 2880
Lee Adjustment Center

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 317 of 661 - Page ID#: 2881

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

A ADA coordinator

1 Is an ADA coordinator designated?

Yes

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no

2 ADA coordinator appointed?

No

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Yes

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates?

Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates in

5 a timely and appropriate manner? How?

Yes

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? (THIS

6 REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

Yes

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit

7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

No

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

No

9 Describe training

Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately cover

10 information?

N/A

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training)

N/A

12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

N/A

13 Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's

N/A

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with settlement

14 agreement?

Yes

Information is included in the Inmate Handbook that all inmates receive upon arrival. An orientation is also conducted during which the information in the Inmate Handbook of verbally communicated with the inmates and they have the opportunity to ask questions if they choose to do so. Describe method used to ascertain: Random inmates ask during facility walkthroughs. Not posted, however every inmate receives the Inmate Book which has this information on Page 1.

Describe:

NA

Does ADA coordinator retrieve at least monthly reports on

15 KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

No

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking N/A

Receives no reports from KOMS or medical on a regular basis. Requested reports from Settlement Monitor, Medical and from KOMS to do this self audit. List from Settlement Administrator had 42 inmates; medical list had 29 inmates and KOMS list had 18 inmates. Several inmates on S/M list were no longer at facility and other lists show inmates not on S/M's list. Of the three lists combined, there appears to be 37 different individuals.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 318 of 661 - Page ID#: 2882

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in

To the best of ability, however other work

17 implementing the settlement?

Yes

duties require most the my work time.

Will assist and respond as requests for

18 Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf inmates? Yes

assistance are received.

Does not make routine visits to check on

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on deaf

inmates, but communicates promptly when

19 inmates?

No

inquires are made by the inmates.

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the inmates

20 in those situations?

Yes

Problems getting information from the

medical department results in delays in

getting back to the S/M. The amount of

other job duties that must be taken care of

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective way with

also contributes to delays as well from time

21 the monitor?

Most of the time.

to time.

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the monitor

22 when necessary?

Yes

B Reporting obligations

If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was monitor

1 notified?

N/A

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

2 inmates?

Yes

The list is not accurate at times due to not

getting regular updates on HOH inmate

3 Is the list complete?

No

movements.

4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

No

Grievances are reviewed in conjunction

Quarterly summary of all grievances by deaf or HOH

with semi-annual reporting, not sent to the

5 inmates shared with monitor?

No

S/M on a quarterly basis.

Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs,

6 activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe)

No

Describe:

NA

7 Was it reported to the monitor?

N/A

8 Was the report complete?

N/A

9 Was the report timely?

N/A

10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert?

No

Not to my knowledge

NA

11 If yes, was the monitor notified?

N/A

Did the institution consult with the monitor about the non-

12 auditory alert?

N/A

13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 319 of 661 - Page ID#: 2883

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

1 Hard of hearing inmates

NA

Lists of HOH inmates from various sources

always differ. This indicates there's a

breakdown in the process somewhere

contributing to confusion as to who is or

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving? No

isn't hard-of-hearing.

No automatic notifications are received by

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

the ADA Coordinator when inmates are

3 notifications.)

No

received.

NA

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

No

Describe:

Deaf inmates

NA

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving? No

6 Describe

7 Effective communications planning?

No

8 Effective communication provided?

No

9 Describe

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

N/A

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

N/A

Orientation videos

12 Captioned?

No

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Yes

14 Amplification if needed?

Yes

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

15 (Describe)

N/A

D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general medical intake,

and during medical care more generally:

1 Is there effective communications planning?

Yes

Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if

2 interpretation is needed?

Yes

3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?

Yes

Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications

4 techniques?

Yes

Notice to medical staff:

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How?

Yes

Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover and

6 within the file?

Yes

7 Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate accommodations. yes

Knowledgeable about obligation to alert off-site providers of

8 need for interpretation?

Yes

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

Yes

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

No

11 Adequate notice?

N/A

Facility has not received any deaf inmates

Describe:

NA

No planning for communication occurred.

The facility does not have any completely

deaf inmates.

NA

No need for such so far.

No need for such so far.

NA

Only video uses is PREA

Describe: Not needed to date. NA

NA ECW
Inmate files are electronic. NA

Describe:

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 320 of 661 - Page ID#: 2884

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

Outside providers offering effective communication to

12 inmates who sign?

N/A

13 How?

N/A

Describe:

Hearing screening/medical intake:

This is done when an Inmate comes into

14 Performed for all new inmates?

the system at the Assessment Center.

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

Yes

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

Yes

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

Yes

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?

Yes

19 How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by Verbally administered by staff

Describe:

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

Nurse

Describe:

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?

Yes

22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe.

Yes

Describe: Questions ask in lay terms

23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Yes

Other methods of access:

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

Yes

25 Staff/ADA Coordinator can refer for screening?

Yes

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

Yes

If screening indicated problem (3+ "yes" answers), is there

27 further assessment?

Yes

Adequate determination of need for designation/ audiology

28 services? How?

Audacious hearing test done

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Yes

Done in 7 - 14 days

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or HOH,

30 apart from audiology services decision?

Yes

Off-site referral

After assessment, does medical:

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Yes

32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file?

Yes

ADA Coordinator does not recall being

notified or receiving any documentation

from medical on HOH inmates other than

what is requested of them following an

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Yes (according to medical)

inquiry by the S/M.

34 Is notification prompt?

Yes (according to medical)

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

Yes

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

Yes

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

Yes

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

Yes

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

Yes

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

40 initial request/questionnaire?

Yes

41 each relevant medical visit?

Yes

42 any audiology visit?

Yes

43 hearing aid provision?

Yes

Updated with every intake group and

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks?

Yes

weekly.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA NA

NA NA
NA

NA NA NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 321 of 661 - Page ID#: 2885

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

ADA usually does not get information

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

Not Always

unless requested

ADA usually has to request information

from medical before responding to S/M

inquires. At times there has been a long

(30 days +/- ) delay in receiving the

46 Shared with monitor when requested

Yes

information requested.

Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does

47 it take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Describe.

N/A unless Audacious test is inconclusiveDescribe:

NA

In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait more

48 than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?

Describe:

NA

49 What is the cause of the delay?

Describe:

NA

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) to

50 improve this process?

Describe:

NA

Co-pay and availability issues:

NA

47 Charged only once -- not again for follow-ups

Hearing aid batteries

?

NA

48 Available for free?

Yes

49 In sufficient numbers?

Yes

50 7 days/week?

Yes

51 regardless of housing?

Yes

E Information provided inmates

Describe: Information included in the

Inmate Handbook and covered during

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe)

Yes

orientation.

Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-discrimination

2 and ADA services?

Yes

Brochure? Items to include:

?

NA

3 Non-discrimination obligation

No

No brochure that I am aware of.

4 Effective communication obligation

NO

5 Auxiliary aids and services available

No

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services (including

6 hearing aids, and batteries)

No

7 Communication equipment available, and how to use

No

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

No

Other items:

?

NA

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

Yes

Sign Language Network of KY

ADA was contacted by Case Manager with

I/M wanting to use TTY. Equipment to

taken to C/M Office for use, but inmate

decided that he didn't want to make the

10 Request for Accommodations/ Communications Assistance Yes (but later declined)

call (Hessing - 2/2019)

11 Medical Request form includes request for

No

12 Job application form includes request for accommodations No

13 Waiver forms

No

14 Classification form includes request for accommodations No

15 Discipline form includes request for accommodations

No

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 322 of 661 - Page ID#: 2886

# Issue/Question SAP and other programming form includes request for
16 accommodation 17 NA/AA form includes request for accommodation

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

No N/A

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in

18 law library? (Need to check)

Settlement only.

Do request forms:

19 list available services comprehensively?

clearly explain services and aids (what they are and when

20 they are available?

21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?

expressly ask about preferred mode of

22 communication/needed services and why they are useful?

23 explain which items are free?

24 encompass religious and volunteer-provided

Effective communication of these resources:

25 Are the materials in language accessible to each inmate?

26 Is this information provided with effective communication?

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity

to meet with a KDOC staff member and interpreter to ask

27 questions about the materials?

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment

28 in/application for a program with staff, is effective

29 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment

30 in/application in education with staff, is effective

31 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

No

2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

No

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

No

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

No

5 Cell/bed cards

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Yes

7 Clear process to obtain? Describe

Yes

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Yes

9 Provided timely?

Yes

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Yes

KOMS alert?

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Yes

12 Working process to get new inmate alerts added? (Describe) Yes

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Yes

14 Appropriately obvious

Yes

15 Updated timely

Yes

Individual ID cards

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Yes

Describe date checked: 7/26/19 NA
NA
NA NA
NA Describe: Issued through medical
NA Describe: Added by ADA when notified of a new HOH inmate
NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 323 of 661 - Page ID#: 2887

# Issue/Question 17 Clear? (avoids unclear language/abbreviations?) 18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived? 19 Provided timely?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) No Yes Yes

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Yes

21 Prompt replacements provided?

Yes

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?

No

23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator?

24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver?

No (to my knowledge)

25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?

N/A

26 Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested ID? No (to my knowledge)

27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Unknown

G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

No

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

No

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

No

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

N/A

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each

5 inmate about available auxiliary aids and services?

N/A

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

N/A

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting?

7 (oral and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

N/A

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment

8 on intake, has one been done?

No

9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

No

H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

1 On-person ID cards

Yes

2 Cell cards

Yes

3 Bed shaker

No

4 In-person alerts

Yes

5 Pager

No

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location

6 where phones are available?)

Yes

Description/Notes Card remains outside door for RHU inmates. Describe: Describe:
Using Town Cryer Inmates

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA NA
NA

NA

7 Amplifier for phone

Yes

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

8 communication difficulties?

No

9 Other amplification

N/A

10 Other (describe)

Pocket talker provided to inmates pending receipt of hearing aid when needed

Describe:

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 324 of 661 - Page ID#: 2888

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

General issues

NA

Special housing area:

NA

11 Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH inmates?

No

Describe:

NA

12 If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it?

N/A

Describe:

NA

If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed

13 there? (such a requirement is non-compliant).

N/A

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live

there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to the

14 inmate? Describe any restrictions.

N/A

Describe:

In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is primary

Request must of supported by an actual

15 consideration given to inmate request?

Yes

medical need for aid

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and

Services form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a

16 waiver, or not requesting aids/services, were

N/A

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services documented in

17 inmate institutional files?

Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services

18 shared appropriately with staff?

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

20 Have any been out of commission?

No

Describe:

NA

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

N/A

Describe:

NA

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

22 hearing aid?

No

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

N/A

24 Promptly?

N/A

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

No

Describe:

NA

26 Describe

Describe:

NA

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

N/A

Describe:

28 Appropriately reported?

N/A

29 Was it the appropriate decision?

N/A

30 Are classes in sign language provided?

No

31 deaf inmates given notice?

N/A

32 priority given to deaf inmates?

N/A

I

Interpretation in general

Qualified interpretation services available:

NA

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

HOH inmates not deaf and have not needed

1 communicated to inmates?

No

service to date

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Yes

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

3 volunteer-provided programming?

No

4 Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Yes

Standing arrangement with providers?

NA

6 In-person?

Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 325 of 661 - Page ID#: 2889

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

7 VRI?

Yes

Is VRI availability:

NA

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Yes

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Yes

10 on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Yes

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

Yes

Describe: Inmate would be brought out of

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe Yes

cell into an office

VRI laptop functional?

Describe:

NA

13 In general

Yes

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Yes

15 Routine software updates?

N/A

None that aware of

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Describe:

NA

16 Splitter?

17 Instructions?

18 Long power cord?

19 Usable as VRS?

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

N/A

Has not been used to date

21 How?

N/A

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

22 should be first recourse?

N/A

Is in-person interpretation available:

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

Yes

24 Parole?

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered N/A

Not needed to date

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied. N/A

Not requested to date

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7

27 days before?

N/A

Not required to date

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance

28 in non-emergency is non-compliant)

No

29 Describe

N/A

Describe:

NA

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

30 was unavailable)

N/A

31 Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

Yes

No deaf inmates to date

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters. N/A

No deaf inmates to date

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

33 literacy

N/A

No deaf inmates to date

Qualified interpretation services available:

Yes

NA

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

34 volunteer-provided programming?

N/A

No deaf inmates to date

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

35 encounters/communications/settings)

N/A

No deaf inmates to date

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates? N/A

No deaf inmates to date

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 326 of 661 - Page ID#: 2890

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

J

Hand Restraints

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

N/A

Facility does not have inmates who sign

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

2 finding of a security threat?

N/A

Facility does not have inmates who sign

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

N/A

Facility does not have inmates who sign

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

N/A

Facility does not have inmates who sign

5 Staff aware of the issue

N/A

Facility does not have inmates who sign

Off-site medical care:

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

Yes

7 restraints removed when necessary for medical

N/A

Facility does not have inmates who sign

K Non-auditory Alerts

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

No

Describe:

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

N/A

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

N/A

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

N/A

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

N/A

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

N/A

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

N/A

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to

N/A

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory

No requests have been received to my

9 alerts been denied?

N/A

knowledge

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working? N/A

11 frequently enough?

N/A

12 monitored/recorded formally?

N/A

13 Announcement boards

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Yes

Inmates tend to remove postings from

15 used consistently?

Yes

bulletin boards regularly

16 in all dormitories?

Yes

17 in gym?

Yes

18 in library?

No

19 audited and monitored?

No

No formal audit/monitoring process

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

20 misses a page?

N/A

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

21 because of disability?

No

Not that I have been made aware of

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the

N/A

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Yes

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Yes

Does the plan account for how effective communication will

25 be provided?

No

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA NA

NA NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 327 of 661 - Page ID#: 2891

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

L Telecommunications

Videophones:

NA

Facility does not have deaf inmates, nor are

1 Installed?

Yes

the installed units functional yet.

2 Allow voice carry-over features?

N/A

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

Not functioning yet at all

Describe:

NA

Securus is still working on issues to get

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them. units operable.

Describe:

NA

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Describe: Not needed yet due to not

5 alternative offered

N/A

having deaf inmates

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

Describe: Not needed yet due to not

6 videophone is out of service.

N/A

having deaf inmates

NA

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

8 Appropriate location?

Yes

One each in South, North & West Dorm

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

Not needed yet due to not having deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

N/A

inmates

Not needed yet due to not having deaf

10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates?

N/A

inmates

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

Yes

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

12 using ordinary phones?

Yes

13 Advance request unnecessary?

No

14 Free?

????????

15 Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone Yes

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and

16 been denied?

No

Describe:

NA

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

N/A

Describe:

TTY:

NA

18 Installed?

Yes

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff? Yes

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

Yes

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

None

Describe:

NA

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

As requested

location substantially as accessible as conventional

23 telephones for non-deaf inmates?

Yes

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Yes

25 Permission needed?

No

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

No

Describe:

NA

27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates?

Yes

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

No charges determined - free for now Describe:

NA

29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Describe:

30 Can access publicly available relay service phone numbers?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 328 of 661 - Page ID#: 2892

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions for

31 videophones and TTY is less than equitable?

Not that I am aware of

32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

N/A

If yes, was determination (including reasoning, evidence,

33 etc.) documented?

N/A

34 Was monitor notified?

N/A

35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

N/A

VRS via laptop

36 Available?

Yes

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

N/A

38 Used when appropriate?

N/A

Phones

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Yes

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them? Yes

CapTel

41 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

?

42 If so, installed and working?

?

43 Request by any inmate denied?

No requests to date

TV/Movies

44 Is captioning available?

Yes

45 Is captioning used?

Yes

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Random checks

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

No

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly

Yes

49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

Yes

50 Amplification method? (Describe)

If inmate-purchased tv w/ captioning malfunctioned, did staff

assist to same extent as w/other inmates regarding

51 malfunctioning personal property?

N/A

All technology/ equipment in good working order?

52 (Describe problems)

No

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of

53 same status?

Yes

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH

inmates only to the same extent and with the same

54 discretion as non-deaf inmates?

Yes

M Miscellaneous Devices

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Yes

2 devices in commissary list?

No

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator? Yes

4 facilitation of purchase?

N/A

Description/Notes Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA

No deaf inmates to date No deaf inmates to date
NA All phones have volume control

NA

Describe:

NA

Describe:

NA

Describe:

NA

NA

Describe:

Describe:

NA

No incidents to my knowledge Describe any problems: VRS not on-line yet

Describe:

NA

No requests to date. One inmate did receive a watch after being transferred to LAC which he had ordered through the ADA at another facility. No requests to date.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 329 of 661 - Page ID#: 2893

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

5 (Describe)

No

Describe: No requests received

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Yes

7 because security threat?

N/A

8 monitor notified?

N/A

9 reasoning explained?

N/A

ADA coordinator maintains records

Yes

No requests received to date

10 of requests?

N/A

11 of denials?

N/A

N Disciplinary

Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and

1 without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been No

Facility does not have any deaf inmates

2 Was a re-hearing granted?

N/A

O Grievances

1 Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA

Not to my knowledge

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator

2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator?

None received to date

ADA reviewed all grievances of HOH

inmates that were provided by the

Records of all grievances filed by deaf/HOH inmates? (not grievance coordinator. None of these

3 just those related to settlement)

were related to the HOH settlement.

4 Adequate summaries provided in report?

Grievance numbers reviewed provided

Including all deaf or HOH inmate grievances, not just those in

5 settlement?

Yes

6 Includes issues raised by inmate in grievance?

None HOH related

7 Includes institution in which grievance was filed?

Filed while at LAC only

8 Includes summary of KDOC response?

No

9 Includes grievance resolution (or lack thereof)?

No

P Training

Types available

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

Yes

All staff receive HOH training during

2 Who received? (Describe)

annual in-service.

Describe:

3 All appropriate staff?

Yes

All new staff received HOH training

4 Live training? (Information only)

during pre-service using the KDOC's Describe:

5 Who received? (Describe)

All staff doing in-service training

Describe:

6 All appropriate staff?

Yes

Targeted training on specific needs

7 training on best communication practices?

8 training on unique needs/problems?

9 training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may miss alert?

training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may not hear

10 verbal commands and strategies to handle that problem?

11 training on identification of communication needs?

consideration given to talking one-on-one with deaf or HOH

12 inmates, instead of in a group?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA

NA
NA
NA NA NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 330 of 661 - Page ID#: 2894

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Training on communication

13 training on use and role of interpreters?

14 training on process for obtaining interpreters?

training on importance of not separating inmate from

15 hearing aid?

16 training on communication technology?

17 training on VRI?

18 training on how to turn on and check for captioning?

19 training on non-auditory alert office switch?

20 training on videophone rules?

Training on Policies

21 training on the Settlement?

22 training on identity and role of ADA coordinator?

23 training on KDOC anti-discrimination policy?

24 training on existence of KOMS/EMR alerts?

25 training on meaning of ID cards?

26 training on equipment/services/ accommodation available?

27 training on hand restraint policy?

28 training on two-point hand restraint system?

29 training on disciplinary and grievance practices?

Do all relevant staff know about reporting obligations? How

30 do you know?

Training specifically for housing area staff

training on the use of cell/bed notices that indicate an inmate

31 is deaf/HOH

Yes

32 training on bed shaker switches

N/A

33 training on telecommunications

Yes

34 training on obligations to notify deaf and HOH inmates of Yes

Training specifically for all corrections staff

training on accommodations for inmates who sign (esp.

35 restraint policies)

Yes

training on strategies for inmates who may not hear

36 directions/orders

Yes

Training specifically for medical staff

37 training on process to obtain hearing aid within two months Yes

38 training on obligation to notify off-site providers of needs Yes

39 Training provided for review by Monitor?

Q Monitor Access

Has the monitor been granted access to requested KDOC

1 records, files, and papers that pertain to the agreement?

2 If no, was an explanation provided for the refusal?

Has the monitor been granted access to KDOC staff

3 members and employees?

4 Were staff/employees cooperative?

5 Has KDOC responded to reasonable written questions?

Description/Notes
Describe: No inmates sign

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA

NA NA NA

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 331 of 661 - Page ID#: 2895

Lee Adjustment Center

Chasity Combs

7/25/19

1

2

3

4

5

11/15/2016

10/2/2018

8/29/2017

7/31/2018

4/25/2018

6 5/24/2018

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC Provider S/C

3. Date of initial hearing screening

11/15/2016

CC/H&P Visit 11/26/2018

CC Appt. 10/13/2017

Nurse S/C 7/31/2018

Nurse S/C 4/26/2018

Intake Hearing Screen 5/24/2018

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

1/18/2019

11/26/2018

5/24/2018

7/31/2018

9/20/2018

5/24/2018

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

(a) Isued hearing aid 3/7/2019

Uspecified hearing loss, bilateral
(d) no hearing aid needed

No hearing deficit d) No hearing aid needed

Sensorineural hearing loss, Sensorineural hearing loss, No hearing deficit

bilateral

bilateral

(a) has hearing aid

(a) has hearing aid

d) No hearing aid needed

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

N/A

11/26/18: Patient does not 10/13/17 Passed whisper N/A

N/A

5/24/18 No deficit on

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

meet criteria for hearing test

hearing screen

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

aid.

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 332 of 661 - Page ID#: 2896

1 Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it Yes have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

2 N/A

3 N/A

4 Yes

5 Yes

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

11/15/2016 Provider S/C

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Refer to ENT

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

1/11/2017 ENT Appointment Hearing Aids ordered

10/2/2018 CC/H&P Visit
Refer for audiogram
11/26/2018 Audiogram No hearing aid needed

8/29/2017 CC Appt
Cerumen Impaction Removal
10/13/2017 F/U Appt Passed whisper test

7/31/2018 Nurse S/C

4/25/2018 Nurse S/C

Audiogram refer to provider Refer to provider

8/3/2018 Provider Consult Hearing Aid ordered

4/26/2018 Provider Consult Pocket talker issued

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

2/7/2017 ENT Appointment Received Bilateral Hearing Aids

5/25/2018 Nurse S/C Refer to Provider
8/1/2018 Provider Consult Aduiology Referral

6 N/A
5/24/2018 Intake Hearing Screen No defiict noted

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

9/20/2018 Audiology Appointment Hearing Aid ordered
10/2/2018 Provider F/U Hearing Aid issued

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 333 of 661 - Page ID#: 2897

1

2

3

4

5

6

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered

time period?

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 334 of 661 - Page ID#: 2898

7 5/12/2017

. . . 1/11/2018

1/31/2018

5/18/2018

2/2/2017

12/4/2018

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC Nurse S/C

3. Date of initial hearing screening

5/12/2017

Hearing Screen 9/19/2018

Hearing Screen 4/4/2018

Provider F/U 5/18/2018

Hearing Screen 2/2/2017

Hearing Screen 12/4/2018

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5/22/2018

9/28/2018

4/4/2018

3/8/2019

9/25/2017

3/15/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Dx: Sensorineural hearing loss

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

a) has hearing aids

Dx: Sensorineural Hearing Loss, Bilateral
C) Hearing Aids approved 10/5/18

Passed whisper test d) No hearing aid needed

Passed hearing test

Rinne and Weber test ok No hearing impairment

(b) in process of

b) in process of determining (d) no hearing aid is needed

determining if hearing aid is whether hearing aids are

needed

needed

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

N/A

N/A

4/4/18: passed whisper test N/A

N/A

3/29/19: Does not meet

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

criteria.

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 335 of 661 - Page ID#: 2899

7

. . .

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it Yes

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

5/12/2017

1/11/2018

Nurse S/C hearing screen Hearing Screen

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Refer to Provider

Refer to Provider

1/31/2018 Hearing Screen
Refer to provider

5/18/2018 Hearing Screen
Refer to Audiology

2/2/2017 Hearing Screen
Refer to Provider

N/A
12/4/2018 Hearing Screen Refer to provider

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

5/16/2017 Provider hearing screen Refer to Audiology

4/16/2018 Hearing Screen Amplifier provided

10/6/2017

9/19/2018

Audiology Appt

Hearing Screen

Sensorineural hearing loss Refer to Audicus

2/26/2018 Hearing Screen f/u Refer to Audicus
4/4/2018 Hearing Screen Passed Whisper Test

7/12/2018 Audiology Appointment Cerumen removal
3/8/2019 Hearing Screen Passed hearing screen

9/25/2017 Hearing Screen Rinne and Weber test ok. Send for hearing test.

12/13/2018 Provider consult Cerumen impaction

3/15/2019 Hearing Screen Passed hearing screen

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

10/16/2017 Audiology Appt Hearing aid fitting

9/28/2018 Audicus Eval Dx: Sensorineual Hearing Loss, Bilateral

11/9/2017 Audiology Appt Received hearing aids

10/5/2018 Hearing Aids Approved Hearing Aids ordered
10/18/2018 Received hearing aid

3/29/2019 Provider consult No hearing impairment. Does not meet DOC criteria for hearing aid.

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 336 of 661 - Page ID#: 2900

7

. . .

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 337 of 661 - Page ID#: 2901

9/12/2017

5/29/2018

7/23/2018

7/26/2018

12/14/2017

3/6/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC Hearing Screen

3. Date of initial hearing screening

9/12/2017

Provider H&P 5/29/2018

Intake Hearing Screen 7/23/2018

Intake Hearing Screen 7/26/2018

Hearing Screen 12/14/2017

Provider CC 3/6/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

10/3/2017

5/29/2018

8/2/2018

8/9/2018

2/2/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Mild Bilateral Hearing loss d) No hearing aid needed

Sensorineural hearing loss, Perforation of tympanic

bilateral

membrane

(a) has hearing aid in working order

(d) No hearing aid needed

Sensorineural hearing loss Failed Audiometer Test (d) no hearing aid is needed (a) has hearing aids

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

10/3/18: Not candidate for N/A hearing aids

8/2/18: Issued a pocket 8/9/18: Does not meet

N/A

talker

criteria.

3/6/2019 Sensorineural hearing loss c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids
N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 338 of 661 - Page ID#: 2902

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it N/A have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

9/12/2017 CC Hearing Screen

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Refer for hearing test.

Yes
5/29/2018 Provider H&P Refer to Audiology

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

10/3/2017 Hearing test No hearing aid needed.

8/14/2018 Audiology Referral Hearing Aid ordered

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

7/23/2018 Intake Hearing Screen
Refer to provider

7/26/2018 Intake Hearing Screen
Refer to provider

12/14/2017 Screen/Audiometer test
Pocket Talker

3/6/2019 CC
Refer for Audicus Test

8/2/2018 Provider consult Pocket Talker

8/6/2018 Provider CC/H&P Refer for Audiogram
8/9/2018 Audiogram No hearing aid needed

2/2/2019 Audicus hearing test Bilateral unspecified hearing loss
2/22/2019 Hearing aids ordered

3/21/2019 Audicus Test Sensorineural hearing loss
3/29/2019 Provider Consult Hearing aid approved

8/14/2018 Provider F/U Patient refused pocket talker. Stated he did not need it at this time.

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 339 of 661 - Page ID#: 2903

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 340 of 661 - Page ID#: 2904

7/23/2018

12/26/2017

11/8/2017

9/7/2017

No hearing deficit noted 10/31/2018

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC Provider CC Hearing Screen Annual H&P

3. Date of initial hearing screening

7/23/2018

12/26/2017

Provider F/U 11/8/2017

S/C Hearing Screen 9/7/2017

No hearing deficit noted Intake Hearing Screen

10/19/2017

10/31/2018

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

9/11/2018

5/8/2018

5/17/2018

2/19/2019

2/15/2019

1/7/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Sensorineural hearing loss No hearing deficit

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

(a) has hearing aid in working order

d) No hearing aid needed

Passed hearing screen with Dx: Conductive hearing loss Unspecified hearing loss,

hearing aid

bilateral

a) Has hearing aid in working order

d) No hearing aid needed (a) has hearing aids

Bilateral unsepcified hearing loss
(a) has hearing aid in working order

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

N/A

12/26/17 Rinne and Weber N/A

2/22/19: Does not meet N/A

N/A

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

negative

criteria.

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 341 of 661 - Page ID#: 2905

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it Yes have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

7/23/2018 CC

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Refer to Audiology

N/A

Yes

N/A

12/26/2017 Annual H&P
Rinne and Weber negative

11/8/2017 Provider F/U hearing loss after Otitis Media Referral

9/7/2017 S/C Hearing Screen
Refer to Provider

N/A

Yes

10/19/2017 Provider hearing screen

10/31/2018 Intake Hearing Screen

No hearing deficit noted Refer to Audiology

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

9/11/2018 Audiology Appointment Sensorineural hearing loss
10/17/2018 Provider Consult Hearing aid approved

9/12/2017 Provider Appointment Pocket Talker
7/6/2018 Audicus Testing Unknown

2/15/2019 Audicus hearing test bilateral unspecified hearing loss
2/22/2019 Hearing aids ordered

1/7/2019 Audiology Appointment Bilateral unspecified hearing loss
2/22/2019 Provider consult Hearing aid approved

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 342 of 661 - Page ID#: 2906

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 343 of 661 - Page ID#: 2907

12/5/2018

10/9/2018

2/8/2017

No hearing deficit noted 2/14/2018

11/13/2018

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC Intake Hearing Screen

3. Date of initial hearing screening

12/5/2018

Hearing Screen 10/9/2019

Hearing Screen 2/8/2017

No hearing deficit noted Intake Hearing Screen

10/16/2018

2/14/2018

Hearing Screen 11/13/2018

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

2/15/2019

11/1/2019

2/8/2017

10/16/2018

3/1/2018

4/2/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

(a) has hearing aid in working order

Sensorineural hearing loss
(a) has hearing aid in working order

Mixed Conductive and Sensorineural hearing loss
Refused to go to appt for hearing aid

No hearing deficit d) No hearing aid needed

Sensorineural hearing loss, Passed hearing screen right
(d) no hearing aid needed

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

N/A

N/A

N/A

10/16/18 Passed intake 3/1/18: Does not meet

N/A

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

hearing screen

criteria.

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 344 of 661 - Page ID#: 2908

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it Yes have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

12/5/2018 Intake Hearing Screen

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Refer for Audicus test

Yes
10/9/2018 Hearing Screen Refer for Audicus testing

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

2/15/2019 Audicus Test Unsepcified hearing loss, bilateral

11/1/2018 Audicus hearing test Sensorineural hearing loss

3/5/2019 Provider Consult Hearing aid issued

11/9/2018 Provider F/U Hearing aid approved

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

11/20/2019 Nurse Tx Hearing aid issued

N/A

N/A

10/16/2018 Intake hearing screen
No hearing deficit

2/14/2018 Intake hearing screen
Refer to provider
3/1/2018 Provider H&P No hearing aid needed

11/13/2018 Hearing Screen
Failed question hearing screen
4/2/2019 Provider CC Passed hearing screen

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 345 of 661 - Page ID#: 2909

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

7/4/2018

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 346 of 661 - Page ID#: 2910

2/20/2018

11/29/2016

4/23/2018

7/3/2018

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC Nurse S/C

3. Date of initial hearing screening

7/4/2018

Aduiology 2/20/2018

4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

8/8/2018

4/13/2018

2/19/2019

Unsepcified hearing loss Conductive hearing loss Passed hearing screen

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

(d) no hearing aid is needed (d) no hearing aid is needed (a) has hearing aid in working order

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

8/23/18: Issued Pocket

4/13/18: Issued pocket

N/A

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the talker.

talker

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Not Documented Not Documented

Nurse S/C 4/23/2018

Hearing Screen 7/3/2018

4/19/2018

12/12/2018

10/8/2018

Dx: Bilateral Sensorineural Inconclusive hearing loss

Sensorineural hearing loss, bilateral

a) Has hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed (a) has hearing aid in working order

N/A

12/12/18: Test inconclusive. N/A

Recommned to send

patient to audiology.

Patient refused. Requested

pocket talker.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 347 of 661 - Page ID#: 2911

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

7/4/2018 Nurse S/C

2/20/2018 Audiology

4/23/2018 Nurse S/C

7/3/2018 Hearing Screen

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Refer to provider

Conductive hearing loss

Impacted Cerumen

Refer for audicus test

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

7/9/2018 Provider S/C Refer to audiology

4/13/2018 Provider F/U Pocket talker issued

5/8/2018 Nurse S/C Allergies

7/12/2018 Audicus Test Refer for audiogram

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

7/26/2018 Audicus Test Refer to Audiogram
8/8/2018 Audiogram Recommend pocket talker

12/12/2018 Audicus test Inconclusive. Patient request pocket talker.

10/8/2018 Audiogram Hearing aid recommneded
10/12/2018 Provider consult hearing aid approved

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

8/23/2018 Provider F/U Pocket talker issued

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 348 of 661 - Page ID#: 2912

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 349 of 661 - Page ID#: 2913

None Noted

1/13/2017

7/20/2018

2/14/2018

11/9/2018

LAC Chasity Combs RN, DON 7/25/2019
2/14/2017

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC No hearing deficit noted S/C Hearing Screen

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Not Documented

1/13/2017

4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

5/1/2018 N/A

1/13/2017 Refer to Audiology

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

N/A

N/A

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

N/A

N/A

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Intake Assessment 7/20/2018

Hearing Screening 2/14/2018

Audicus Hearing Test 11/9/2018

3/29/2018

7/10/2019

3/13/2019

Failed Oral hearing screen No Hearing Aid Required Continue hearing aid

b) in process of determining (d) no hearing aid is needed (a) has hearing aid in

whether hearing aids are

working order

needed

Whisper Test 2/14/2017
7/12/2018 Continue hearing aid (a) has hearing aid in working order

Provider Note 7/23/2019 N/A

N/A

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it N/A have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 350 of 661 - Page ID#: 2914

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

1/13/2017 S/C Hearing Screen
Refer to Audiology

7/20/2018

2/14/2018

Nurse Inake hearing screen Hearing screening

11/9/2018 Audiometer test

2/14/2017 Whisper Test

Failed

Pocket Talker

Conductive hearing loss, bilateral

Passed

8/2/2018 Provider Appt. No hearing deficit noted

2/28/2018 F/U Continue pocket talker

12/28/2018 Audicus hearing test Conductive hearing loss, bilateral

8/1/2017 Whisper Test Failed. Refer to Audiologist

3/28/2019

4/5/2019

Nurse Intake hearing screen Chronic Care appointment

Failed

Passed without pocket

talker

1/16/2019 Provider appointment Hearing aid approved

9/8/2017 Audiology consult Hearing aid ordered

7/10/2019 Audicus Hearing Test Passed

2/15/2019 Provider F/U Hearing aid issued

9/21/2017 Provider F/U Hearing aid issued

7/23/2019 Provider Review No hearing aid required

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 351 of 661 - Page ID#: 2915

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 352 of 661 - Page ID#: 2916

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

11/14/2017

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC Hearing Screening

11/21/2018 Intake Hearing Screen

3/8/2019 Intkae Hearing Screen

3/7/2019 Intake Hearing Screen

DON Note - Mr.

DON Note -Mr.

his chart is a mess.

has never failed a

He failed a hearing test on hearing test but he showed

12/13/17 at another facility up on the list and we tested

but it was never followed him. He does not require a

up on. I am going to have hearing aid. Not sure if he

him tested this week and go should be on the report.

from there.

3. Date of initial hearing screening

11/14/2017

11/21/2017

3/8/2019

3/7/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5/17/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Continue hearing aid

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

(a) has hearing aid in working order

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

N/A

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

12/14/2018

7/11/2019

3/7/2019

Does not meet criteria for Hearing aid recommended Hearing aid recommended hearing aid

(d) no hearing aid is needed © in process of obtaining (a) has hearing aid in

hearing aid

working order

Provider note 12/14/18 N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 353 of 661 - Page ID#: 2917

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it Yes

N/A

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

11/14/2017 Whisper Test

11/21/2018 Intake hearing screen

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Failed. Audiology referral Audiology referral

N/A
3/8/2019 Intake Hearing Screen Failed

Yes
3/7/2019 Intake Hearing Screen Failed

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

5/12/2018

12/6/2018

Audiology appointment Audiogram

Hearing aid recommended No hearing aid needed

3/22/2019 Provider appointment Ceremun impaction

3/23/2019 Audiogram Hearing aid recommended

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

7/18/2018 Provider F/U Hearing aid ordered
8/6/2018 Nurse Tx Hearing aid issued

12/14/2018 Provider F/U No hearing aid needed per DOC policy.

4/15/2019 Provider F/U Refer for audiogram

4/8/2019 Provider F/U Hearing aid issued

6/11/2019 Whisper Test Refer for audicus hearing test

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

7/11/2019 Audicus hearing test Hearing aid recommended

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 354 of 661 - Page ID#: 2918

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 355 of 661 - Page ID#: 2919

Technology

How many Where

When obtained Specifications (URL)

FM radio transmitters, usable as 0

N/A

N/A

N/A

an amplifier system?

Phone amplifiers (not volume ?

(POCKET TALKERS) Use 2018

N/A

control: portable amplifiers)

anywhere needed

Captioned Telephone

1

TTY Unit (portable)

2018

N/A

Other amplifiers, amplification 0

N/A

N/A

N/A

systems, or the like?

Bed shakers

0

None

N/A

N/A

Vibrating watches?

0

None

N/A

N/A

Vibrating alarm clocks?

0

None

N/A

N/A

Pagers?

0

None

N/A

N/A

N/A

South & North Dorms N/A

N/A

have inmates assigned as

Town Cryers whose job is

to make sure HOH

Other non-auditory alerts or

inmates who have

assistive devices currently in use

requested assistance

or under consideration not

know about

mentioned above.

announcements made in

their housing units and

make it to services such as

pill call and meals when

movement for their units

Earphones for parole hearings 0

None

N/A

N/A

Earphones for orientation videos 0

None

N/A

N/A

How well do they

How do inmates obtain access? work?

N/A

N/A

Other comments

Issued by Medical as needed
Request to ADA or Unit Staff N/A

No problems reported
Unknown N/A

Issued to inmates pending receipt of their hearing aids Should work well, but not used yet

N/A N/A N/A N/A Inmates can request the assistance of a Town Cryer through their Unit Manager or and ADA Coordinator

N/A N/A N/A N/A No problems reported

Town Cryers assigned as of 7/22/19 are (Lower North); (South);

Additional inmates may be assigned as needed.

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 356 of 661 - Page ID#: 2920

Documentation to review

Date reviewed

Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.) (List supplied by Settlement Monitor) No KOMS alerts for

7/18/2019

KOMS alerts for each deaf/HOH inmate Grievances:

7/18/2019

Provide/Review summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Provide/Review full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Solve any problems revealed. Discipline Review all disciplinary proceedings involving an inmate who signs. Ensure that VRI or other effective communication was provided at each stage of each such proceedings.

7/18/2019 7/18/2019

The list of inmates provided by facility Medical Department indicates the following additional HOH inmates who are not on the Settlement Monitor's list for which there are no KOMS alerts:
The following inmate not on the Settlement Monitor's list was on the facility medical department list and did have an alert in KOMS. On 7/25/19 an alert was added into KOMS for these inmates, however it is shown one of two places depending on the inmate. For inmates that already had another alert of some type in KOMS, the system allowed the entry of a new alert for HOH. Where no existing alert existed, a HOH alert was added under Inmate Precautions where it now shows under the ADA tab. Alerts already in KOMS from other facilities were found to be in one of the two aforementioned places as well.
The following grievances were reviewed, but none were found to be related to the inmate's HOH status is any way:
No grievances related to hearing related matters.
No inmates communicate by sign language.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 357 of 661 - Page ID#: 2921

7/25/2019

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving failure to obey an

order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications

difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Ensure that no such inmate is

being penalized for inability to hear.

VRI Log (review to ensure it's being used in appropriate circumstances.

7/18/2019

VRS or other videophone alternative (review to ensure that when

videophone is inoperative, alternative is in fact available/used)

7/18/2019

TTY instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use,

etc.)

7/25/2019

7/25/2019 VRI instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.)

All disciplinary reports of HOH inmates between 10/1/18 and 3/31/19 were reviewed regardless of location that they occurred. No indication was found that any DR might have occurred as the result of the inmate not being able to hear, nor was there any mention of an inmate HOH status being a factor in the incidents during either the investigation or hearing stages of the reports reviewed. The HOH inmates who received DRs and the number of DRs each received during this reporting period are as follows:
No requests to use VRI received during reporting period.
No requests to use VRI received during reporting period.
Still not on-line. Contacted them last about this on 7/22/19 after making earlier inquiries about getting sometime of log information that would let me test the units so that I would know how they worked prior to trying to show inmates how to use them. Was told that they were still working to resolve some issues with the units.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 358 of 661 - Page ID#: 2922

Questions regarding effective communications in particular activities or locations. For each, mark compliance (Y, partial, N, no basis) and explain. Goal: each deaf or HOH inmate has an equal opportunity to

Amplification: (Not just hearing aid -- space-specific

In-person interpretation

Availability of VRI:

amplification)

Appropriate

equipment

available

Ever used? Used whenever

Used whenever

(computer line, How many appropriate? (without

Ever used?

appropriate? Staff trained? outlet, space) times?

special request)

Adequate? Describe efforts, issues

Intake/

Orientation -- Non-medical

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

Intake, Medical

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

Auxiliary Aid Assessment

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

s

Units

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

Restrictive Housing

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

Medical/MH care

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

Programs

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

Education

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

Recreation

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

Communications with Chaplain

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

Prison-provided religious

programming

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

Volunteer -led programming

(note: Only volunteer

interpretation is required)

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

Parole hearings

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

Classification/

Transfer

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

Legal Aid

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

Grievance process

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

Work assignments

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

Court call and ALL parts of

disciplinary process

no basis

no basis

No

Yes

no basis

no basis

Yes

Staff investigations

Investigative interviews

Preparation of report

Shift supervisor's review of

disciplinary report

Investigator's review of

disciplinary report

Miranda warnings

When advising inmate of right

to consult with legal aide

Notification of date, time, and

place of hearing

Hearing or re-hearing

If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to attend a religious service without effective communication to receive any religious meal, diet, or other accommodation? No Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have witnessed or been suspected of violation) provided with an inmate or staff advisor on same terms as non-deaf inmates? Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 359 of 661 - Page ID#: 2923

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Name

Low literacy?

If signs to

(So that

communicat

Bed Shaker? Other Alert TTY Access

written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

Device (Not (Not

Listed with Signs to

communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested;

KOMS ADA communicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied;

ID

Precaution? (Y/N)

effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted)

Not to ADA's

Yes

Not

Not

Not

Yes

No

Knowledge TBD

(7/25/19) N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Not to ADA's

Not

Not

Not

Yes

No

Knowledge TBD

N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Added

Not to ADA's

Yes

Not

Not

Not

7/25/19 No

Knowledge TBD

(7/25/19) N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Not to ADA's

Not

Not

Not

Yes

No

Knowledge TBD

Yes

N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Not to ADA's

Not

Not

Not

Yes

No

Knowledge TBD

Yes

N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Not to ADA's

Not

Not

Not

Yes

No

Knowledge TBD

Yes

N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Not to ADA's

Not

Not

Not

Yes (ADA) No

Knowledge TBD

Yes

N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Not to ADA's

Not

Not

Not

Yes (ADA) No

Knowledge TBD

Yes

N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Not to ADA's

Not

Not

Not

Yes (ADA) No

Knowledge TBD

Yes

N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Not to ADA's

Not

Not

Not

Yes

No

Knowledge TBD

Waived N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Added

Not to ADA's

Yes

Not

Not

Not

7/25/19 No

Knowledge TBD

(7/25/19) N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Added

Not to ADA's

Yes

Not

Not

Not

7/25/19 No

Knowledge TBD

(7/25/19) N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Not to ADA's

Not

Not

Not

Yes

No

Knowledge TBD

N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Not to ADA's

Yes

Not

Not

Not

Yes

No

Knowledge TBD

(7/25/19) N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Added

7/25/19

Not to ADA's

Not

Not

Not

(ADA)

No

Knowledge TBD

Waived N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Added

Not to ADA's

Yes

Not

Not

Not

7/25/19 No

Knowledge TBD

(7/25/19) N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Not to ADA's

Not

Not

Not

Yes

No

Knowledge TBD

Yes

N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Added

Not to ADA's

Yes

Not

Not

Not

7/25/19 No

Knowledge TBD

(7/25/19) N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Added

Not to ADA's

Yes

Not

Not

Not

7/25/19 No

Knowledge TBD

(7/25/19) N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Added

Not to ADA's

Yes

Not

Not

Not

7/25/19 No

Knowledge TBD

(7/25/19) N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Not to ADA's

Not

Not

Not

Yes (ADA) No

Knowledge TBD

Yes

N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Not to ADA's

Yes

Not

Not

Not

Yes

No

Knowledge TBD

(7/25/19) N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Added

Not to ADA's

Not

Not

Not

7/25/19 No

Knowledge TBD

No

N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Added

Not to ADA's

Yes

Not

Not

Not

7/25/19 No

Knowledge TBD

(7/25/19) N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Added

Not to ADA's

Not

Not

Not

7/25/19 No

Knowledge TBD

Waived N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Not to ADA's

Not

Not

Not

Yes

No

Knowledge TBD

Yes

N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Personal Phone Amplifier (Not requested; denied; granted) Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested
Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Shake & Wake (Not requested; denied; granted) Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested
Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Any other auxiliary aid requested? Outome? Audit item issues/concerns

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

Town Cryer

Access Granted

Town Cryer

Access Granted

No further problems have been reported No further problems have been reported

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

On list to receive door card

No

N/A

when order arrives

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 360 of 661 - Page ID#: 2924

Low literacy?

If signs to

(So that

communicat

Bed Shaker? Other Alert TTY Access

written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

Device (Not (Not

Listed with Signs to

communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested;

KOMS ADA communicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied;

ID

Precaution? (Y/N)

effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted)

Added

Not to ADA's

Yes

Not

Not

Not

252458 7/25/19 No

Knowledge TBD

(7/25/19) N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Added

Not to ADA's

Yes

Not

Not

Not

300589 7/25/19 No

Knowledge TBD

(7/25/19) N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

Not to ADA's

Not

Not

Not

203023 Yes

No

Knowledge TBD

Waived N/A

No

Requested Requested Requested

279560 Yes

No

Added

7/25/19

178493 (ADA)

No

Added

245382 7/25/19 No

Added

7/25/19

187194 (ADA)

No

151216 Yes

No

Added

173205 7/25/19 No

Added

288727 7/25/19 No

302798 Yes (ADA) No

Not to ADA's Knowledge Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Not to ADA's

Yes

Knowledge TBD

(7/25/19) N/A

No

Not to ADA's

Knowledge TBD

N/A

No

Not to ADA's

Knowledge TBD

Yes

N/A

No

Not to ADA's

Yes

Knowledge TBD

(7/25/19) N/A

No

Not to ADA's

Knowledge TBD

N/A

No

Not to ADA's

Yes

Knowledge TBD

(7/25/19) N/A

No

Not to ADA's

Knowledge Yes

No

N/A

No

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Personal Phone Amplifier (Not requested; denied; granted) Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested
Not Requested
Not Requested Not Requested
Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Shake & Wake (Not requested; denied; granted) Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested
Not Requested
Not Requested Not Requested
Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Any other auxiliary aid requested? Outome? Audit item issues/concerns

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

Has door card from previous

facility, but will be provided

No

N/A

magnet when order arrives

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

No

N/A

On list to receive door card

No

N/A

when order arrives

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 361 of 661 - Page ID#: 2925

Fill this out for EACH location where there are any deaf/HOH inmates

How many Volume

Bed

If there are

How inmates adjustable

shakers set Staff use If there are any

any inmates

many who sign phone available

up for use bed

inmates who If there are any who sign:

Deaf/ to

to inmates

How for

shakers for sign: Location inmates who Ready

HOH communic without special many bed multiple multiple available for sign: Staff

access to

Dorm/unit

Walk

inmates? ate

request?

shakers? purposes? purposes? VRI?

trained for VRI videophone Audit item issues/concerns

Based on housing assigments

South Dorm

A

4

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

on July 18, 2019

South Dorm

B

4

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

South Dorm

C

4

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

South Dorm

D

5

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

North Dorm

E

2

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

North Dorm

F

1

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

North Dorm

G

1

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

North Dorm

H

3

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

North Dorm

I

1

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

North Dorm

J

2

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

West Dorm

K

0

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

West Dorm

L

2

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

West Dorm

M

0

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

West Dorm

N

2

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

West Dorm

O

2

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

RHU

A-100

1

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

RHU

A-200

0

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

RHU

B-100

2

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

RHU

B-200

1

0 Yes

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 362 of 661 - Page ID#: 2926

Date

Name

Inmate or staff? Inmate number Staff title

Topics

Persons listed are those of which contact with occurred one of more times over the past few weeks during this project, however the actual date(s) of the contact was not documented. It is based on memory and some of these staff also made contact with the HOH inmates on my behalf to obtain information.

I/M

Phone Calls to S/M from RHU; General HOH matters

I/M

Interview with HOH S/M; General HOH matters

I/M

Interview with HOH S/M; General HOH matters

I/M

Interview with HOH S/M; General HOH matters

I/M

Interview with HOH S/M; General HOH matters

I/M

Interview with HOH S/M; General HOH matters

I/M

Interview with HOH S/M; General HOH matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

I/M

General HOH Matters

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 363 of 661 - Page ID#: 2927

Daniel Akers Troy Pollock Judy Tuttle Patricia Stacy Franklin Mathews Marcia Fugate Nikkie Beckstrom James Briggs Lynn Childers
Troy Wilson Ashley Howard
Kelsey Moore
Mary Henson
Cecil Horn Various other staff around the facility

Warden Asst. Warden Manager, Learning and Development Business Manager Safety Manager Secretary KDOC Monitor Chief of Unit Management
Unit Manager
Unit Manager
Case Manager
Case Manager
Case Manager
Case Manager

Discussion of ADA Coordinator duties and responsibilities related to HOH settlement monitoring General HOH Matters
HOH related training Ordering HOH signs General HOH Matters Grievances filed by HOH inmates General HOH Matters General HOH Matters; Audit; Processes for HOH Inmates General HOH Matters; Audit; Processes for HOH Inmates; S/M interviews of HOH inmates General HOH Matters; Audit; Processes for HOH Inmates; S/M interviews of HOH inmates General HOH Matters; Audit; Processes for HOH Inmates; S/M interviews of HOH inmates General HOH Matters; Audit; Processes for HOH Inmates; S/M interviews of HOH inmates General HOH Matters; Audit; Processes for HOH Inmates; S/M interviews of HOH inmates General HOH Matters; Audit; Processes for HOH Inmates; S/M interviews of HOH inmates
General HOH Matters

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 364 of 661 - Page ID#: 2928
Luther Luckett Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 365 of 661 - Page ID#: 2929

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

A ADA coordinator

yes; signage in units, general

population areas, in reception area

x

1 Is an ADA coordinator designated?

and in visitation

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no 2 ADA coordinator appointed?

no

x

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

yes

x

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates?

Posted in units; Meet w/ inmates

face to face

X

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates 5 in a timely and appropriate manner? How?

Posted in units; Meet w/ inmates

face to face

x

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? (THIS 6 REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

Survey given in June 2019 w/

Coordinator question asked

x

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit 7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

on housing unit bulletin board

x

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

yes

x

Describe: online training through

ADAta.org and through KY state

training site: My Purpose/Cyber

9 Describe training

University

NA

Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately cover 10 information?

require more training opportunities

specific to correctional environment

x

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training)

x

12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

x

Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's

13 powerpoint)

x

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with settlement

14 agreement?

x

Does ADA coordinator retrieve at least monthly reports on

15 KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

x

As information is received through

Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking

Medical or on transfer through

x

16 list?

KOMS alerts

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in

17 implementing the settlement?

x

18 Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf inmates?

x

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on deaf

19 inmates?

x

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the inmates

20 in those situations?

x

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective way with

21 the monitor?

x

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the monitor

22 when necessary?

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 366 of 661 - Page ID#: 2930

# Issue/Question B Reporting obligations
If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was monitor 1 notified?
Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH 2 inmates?
3 Is the list complete? 4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?
Quarterly summary of all grievances by deaf or HOH 5 inmates shared with monitor?
Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs, 6 activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe) 7 Was it reported to the monitor? 8 Was the report complete? 9 Was the report timely? 10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert? 11 If yes, was the monitor notified?
Did the institution consult with the monitor about the non12 auditory alert? 13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Coordinator has not changed yes; issued weekly to the Unit Administrators for posting in Control Centers, & Captain's Office yes; issued weekly to the Unit Administrators for posting in Control Centers, & Captain's Office yes, weekly

Describe: No

No

30 minutes - VRS; TTY - 45 minutes

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

x

x

x
x x
NA x x x
NA x x x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 367 of 661 - Page ID#: 2931

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

1 Hard of hearing inmates

NA

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

x

Describe: Receive KOMS auto

notification if entered into inmate

management system properly as an

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

ADA notification not an inmate

3 notifications.)

precaution. Medical will also alert. NA

Describe: yes, if accommodations

necessary, VRS/VRI laptop utilized

x

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

or in person interpreter scheduled.

Deaf inmates

NA

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

x

Describe: Auto KOMS alert. LLCC

emails receiving site's ADA

6 Describe

Coordinator.

NA

Available VRS/VRI laptops; in person

interpreter scheduling; dry erase

x

7 Effective communications planning?

boards; notifications & alerts to

Available VRS/VRI laptops; in person

interpreter scheduling offered; dry

erase boards; posting of

x

8 Effective communication provided?

notifications & alerts to staff made

Describe:Available VRS/VRI laptops;

in person interpreter scheduling

offered; dry erase boards; posting of

9 Describe

notifications & alerts to staff made NA

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

x

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

x

Orientation videos

NA

12 Captioned?

x

13 Shown in a quiet space?

x

14 Amplification if needed?

x

Describe: In person interpreter can

be scheduled; VRI/VRS services

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

utilized; face to face orientation can

15 (Describe)

be completed.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 368 of 661 - Page ID#: 2932

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

D Medical care re: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general medical intake,

and during medical care more generally:

1 Is there effective communications planning?

Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if

2 interpretation is needed?

3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?

Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications

4 techniques?

Notice to medical staff:

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How?

KOMS alert; ECW Global Alert

Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover and

6 within the file?

KOMS alert; ECW Global Alert

7 Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate accommodations.

Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site providers of

8 need for interpretation?

yes, notification occurs during

scheduling with outside providers

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

office.

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

Describe: No

11 Adequate notice?

Outside providers offering effective communication to

12 inmates who sign?

yes, through ASL Vendor

Describe: UNK. Never sent Deaf

13 How?

inmate to outside provider

Hearing screening/medical intake:

Audiology testing completed at

intake @ RCC; Medical @ LLCC

assesses at transfer intake H& P, at

14 Performed for all new inmates?

annual and if requested.

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

yes

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?

yes

How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by

19 staff?

Describe: Administered by Staff

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

Describe: Medical staff on intake

yes, medical confirms

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?

comprehension of material

Describe: read to the inmate;

22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe.

mirroring bahavior or

23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA x x x x
NA x x
NA x
x
NA x

NA NA
x
x x x x
NA NA
x
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 369 of 661 - Page ID#: 2933

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Other methods of access:

NA

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

x

25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening?

x

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

x

If screening indicated problem (3+ "yes" answers), is there

27 further assessment?

x

Adequate determination of need for designation/ audiology 28 services? How?

audicus testing completed on site

x

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

x

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or HOH, 30 apart from audiology services decision?

yes, Health Services Director

x

After assessment, does medical:

NA

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

x

32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file?

x

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

x

34 Is notification prompt?

x

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

NA

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

x

Utilization of audicus audiology

resulted in a drop in order

turnaround time however, the

approval of health care authority

increases the timeline due to the

process being bogged down with

only 1 person approving hearing aid

requests for all institutions. No ones

X

fault just the result of the duality of

the system. Sending bi monthly

updates has helped all involved to

finalize results in a more timely

manner but still not meeting every

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

individual within 60 days.

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

x

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

x

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

x

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

NA

40 initial request/questionnaire?

x

41 each relevant medical visit?

x

42 any audiology visit?

x

43 hearing aid provision?

x

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks?

x

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

x

46 Shared with monitor when requested

x

Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips 47 does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Describe.

Describe: No offsite trips necessary.

On site testing completed through

Audicus.

NA

In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait

48 more than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?

Describe:

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 370 of 661 - Page ID#: 2934

# Issue/Question
What is the cause of the delay? 49
What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) to 50 improve this process?
Co-pay and availability issues: 47 Charged only once -- not again for followups
Hearing aid batteries
48 Available for free? 49 In sufficient numbers? 50 7 days/week? 51 regardless of housing?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Describe: medical issues of higher

priority determined by Health

Authority or human error oversight. NA

Describe: Weekly updates of

ongoing HoH listing and new cases. NA

NA

x

NA

Packs handed out every Friday also

available on a one on one exchange x

through sick call

x

x

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 371 of 661 - Page ID#: 2935

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

E Information provided inmates

Describe: Provided through

orientation, handbook and through

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe)

meeting with ADA Coordinator

Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-discrimination

2 and ADA services?

x

Brochure? Items to include:

NA

3 Non-discrimination obligation

x

4 Effective communication obligation

x

5 Auxiliary aids and services available

x

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services (including

6 hearing aids, and batteries)

x

7 Communication equipment available, and how to use

x

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

x

Other items:

NA

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

as needed

x

10 Request for Accommodations/ Communications Assistance

x

Medical Request form includes request for 11 accommodations

Generate by ECW inmates are asked

if accommodations are needed.

x

12 Job application form includes request for accommodations

x

13 Waiver forms

x

It does not as generated by KOMS

but inmates are asked if

accommodations are needed and

x

14 Classification form includes request for accommodations

documented on form.

It does not as generated by KOMS

but inmates are asked if

accommodations are needed and

x

15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations

documented on form.

SAP and other programming form includes request for

16 accommodation

x

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

x

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in 18 law library? (Need to check)

Describe date checked: 7/8/2019

x

Do request forms:

NA

inmates complete form submit to

How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by

staff or ADA Coordinator by

x

19 staff?

institutional mail

clearly explain services and aids (what they are and when

20 they are available?

x

21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?

x

expressly ask about preferred mode of

22 communication/needed services and why they are useful?

x

23 explain which items are free?

x

encompass religious and volunteer-provided

24 programming?

x

Effective communication of these resources:

NA

25 Are the materials in language accessible to each inmate?

x

26 Is this information provided with effective communication?

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 372 of 661 - Page ID#: 2936

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity

to meet with a KDOC staff member and interpreter to ask

27 questions about the materials?

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment

in/application for a program with staff, is effective

28 communication provided?

29 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment

in/application in education with staff, is effective

30 communication provided?

31 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

x

NA

x

x NA

x

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 373 of 661 - Page ID#: 2937

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

x

2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

x

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

x

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

x

5 Cell/bed cards

NA

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

x

Describe: Inmates may obtain from

ADA Coordinator, Unit

7 Clear process to obtain? Describe

Administrators or Case Workers.

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

It is their choice to chose to display

X

9 Provided timely?

upon intake or when medical alerts

that inmate is HoH

x

10 Replacements provided when needed?

replacement when made aware by

staff or inmate

x

KOMS alert?

NA

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

x

Describe: inmate is deemed HoH

/Deaf by medical, notifies ADA

Coordinator and alert is placed in

KOMS. Notification is also placed in

x

KOMS regarding when received

12 Working process to get new inmate alerts added? (Describe)

hearing aid.

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

x

14 Appropriately obvious

X

15 Updated timely

X

Individual ID cards

NA

16 Staff aware of meaning?

X

17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?)

X

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Waived notification is placed as

alert in KOMS for staff.

X

19 Provided timely?

X

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

x

21 Prompt replacements provided?

x

Describe: only if placed in

Restrictive Housing. ID is then

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?

posted on door with ADA

NA

23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator?

x

24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver?

Describe:

NA

25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?

yes, scanned into KOMS

26 Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested ID?

No

x

waivers do not impede inmate from

ID or alert card. Waiver can be

x

27 If yes, was an ID provided?

voided at anytime.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 374 of 661 - Page ID#: 2938

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Identification to ADA Coordinator

NA

if entered into KOMS, 100%. If by

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

LLCC medical, 100% ; if transferred

x

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

in during process 40% of time.

if entered into KOMS correctly,

100%. If by LLCC medical, 100% ; if

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

transferred in during audiology

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

process 10% of time.

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

x

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

x

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each

5 inmate about available auxiliary aids and services?

x

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

x

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting?

7 (oral and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

x

Other assessments

NA

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment 8 on intake, has one been done?

at annual H& P

x

9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

only at inmate request

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 375 of 661 - Page ID#: 2939

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

1 On-person ID cards

x

2 Cell cards

x

only if unable to hear fire alarm is a

bed shaker used; shaker alarm

x

3 Bed shaker

clocks available for purchase.

4 In-person alerts

HoH aides avaialble in all units

X

5 Pager

X

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location

6 where phones are available?)

X

7 Amplifier for phone

portable phone amplifier in each

control center for check out

X

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize 8 communication difficulties?

considered, but will remain as

inclusive in housing

x

toobaloo utilized in education

department to aid in auditory

X

9 Other amplification

feedback

10 Other (describe)

Describe:

NA

General issues

NA

Special housing area:

NA

Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH inmates?

Describe: No. remain inclusive in

11 (Describe)

housing

NA

12 If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it?

Describe: inclusinve housing

NA

If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed 13 there? (such a requirement is non-compliant).

inclusive housing

X

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live

there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to the

x

14 inmate? Describe any restrictions.

Describe: inclusive housing

N/A

In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is primary 15 consideration given to inmate request?

when possible and according to

request being made.

x

yes.

was permitted to

purchase shaker alarm watch due to

his file review not being back from Dr.

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and

Kemen when order taken. He was X considered borderline HoH. Our

Services form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a

mistake in not finalizing authority

waiver, or not requesting aids/services, were

review prior to purchase being

16 accommodations provided?

granted and monies taken from

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services documented in 17 inmate institutional files?

scanned into inmate KOMS file

x

Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services

18 shared appropriately with staff?

x

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

20 Have any been out of comission?

Describe: Yes. Purple Phone

NA

Describe: Software upgrade caused

issues with firewalls. Unknown. We

were notified and within in 7 days

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

fixed.

NA

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

22 hearing aid?

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 376 of 661 - Page ID#: 2940

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

when notified of hearing aid being

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

lost on transfer.

24 Promptly?

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

NONE

26 Describe

Describe:

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

Describe:

28 Appropriately reported?

29 Was it the appropriate decision?

30 Are classes in sign language provided?

No

31 deaf inmates given notice?

32 priority given to deaf inmates?

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

x

x NA NA

NA

x x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 377 of 661 - Page ID#: 2941

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

I Interpretation in general

Qualified interpretation services available:

NA

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

1 communicated to inmates?

x

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

x

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

3 volunteer-provided programming?

X

Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation

4 method?

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

X

Standing arrangement with providers?

NA

6 In-person?

ASL Interpreter Services

X

7 VRI?

Purple Communications

X

Is VRI availability:

NA

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

after initial request received and

approved by ADA Coordinator

X

after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

9 notice)?

X

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

10 notice)?

X

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

X

Describe: Inmate is placed in

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

holding cell and VRI is on cart

VRI laptop functional?

Describe:

NA

13 In general

yes

x

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

yes, has powercord available with

laptop

x

15 Routine software updates?

once per month

x

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Describe:

NA

16 Splitter?

yes

x

17 Instructions?

yes

x

18 Long power cord?

yes

x

19 Usable as VRS?

yes

x

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

21 How?

inmate completes auxilliary aids

assessement form

x

at request of inmate; or what the

Information used to determine when in-person

activity is (e.g one on one activity

22 interpretation should be first recourse?

such as classification or a program)

Is in-person interpretation available:

yes through ASL Interpreter Services X

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

x

24 Parole?

x

available to anyone who utilizes ASL

as an effective form of

x

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

communication

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

never

x

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 27 days before?

never requested

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 378 of 661 - Page ID#: 2942

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance

28 in non-emergency is non-compliant)

Describe: 12/16/2018: Inmate

disciplinary #

LLCC 2018-04732 was being

investigated and inmate was used

as interpreter. Investigator

corrected and disciplinary

reinvestigated utilizing the VRI.

29 Describe

Adjustment hearing was completed NA

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI 30 was unavailable)

never

x

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

31 method?

X

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

yes

X

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low 33 literacy

VRI and in person interpreters are

available

X

Qualified interpretation services available:

NA

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

34 volunteer-provided programming?

X

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

X

35 encounters/communications/settings)

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 379 of 661 - Page ID#: 2943

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

J Hand Restraints

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

NA

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

X

2 finding of a security threat?

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might 3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

inmate placed in holding cell; VRI on

cart.

x

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

x

5 Staff aware of the issue

x

Off-site medical care:

NA

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

x

restraints removed when necessary for medical 7 communication?

no, hospital restraints used.

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 380 of 661 - Page ID#: 2944

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

K Non-auditory Alerts

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Describe:

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to

8 them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory

9 alerts been denied?

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

11 frequently enough?

12 monitored/recorded formally?

13 Announcement boards

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

15 used consistently?

16 in all dormitories?

17 in gym?

18 in library?

19 audited and monitored?

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

20 misses a page?

HoH Aide notifies in- person

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

21 because of disability?

Describe:

Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the

22 future?

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication will

25 be provided?

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA X x x x x x
x

x
x x x NA x x x x x x
x

NA x x x x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 381 of 661 - Page ID#: 2945

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

L Telecommunications

Videophones:

NA

1 Installed?

x

2 Allow voice carry-over features?

x

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

Describe: 7 days

NA

Describe: Purple Communications

software upgrade caused firewall

issues. COT uninstalled update and

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

system returned to normal.

NA

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other 5 alternative offered

VRS on Laptop , if service available

X

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

Describe: HoH handbook references

6 videophone is out of service.

all communication equipment

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

x

8 Appropriate location?

x

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

9 emergency) if necessary?

x

10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates?

x

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

x

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

12 using ordinary phones?

x

13 Advance request unnecessary?

x

14 Free?

x

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone

15 calls?

x

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and

16 been denied?

Describe: Disciplinary penalty

NA

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

Describe:

TTY:

NA

18 Installed?

x

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

x

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

x

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

Describe: none

NA

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

same as regular inmate phones

x

location substantially as accessible as conventional

23 telephones for non-deaf inmates?

X

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

x

25 Permission needed?

x

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

Describe: never, unless short of staff NA

27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates?

X

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Describe:

NA

29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Describe:

X

30 Can access publicly available relay service phone numbers?

X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 382 of 661 - Page ID#: 2946

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it,

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions for

31 videophones and TTY is less than equitable?

Describe:

NA

32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

X

If yes, was determination (including reasoning, evidence,

33 etc.) documented?

X

34 Was monitor notified?

X

35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

X

VRS via laptop

NA

36 Available?

X

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

X

38 Used when appropriate?

X

Phones

NA

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

X

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

X

CapTel

NA

41 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

Describe:

NA

42 If so, installed and working?

Describe:

NA

43 Request by any inmate denied?

Describe:

NA

TV/Movies

NA

44 Is captioning available?

X

45 Is captioning used?

X

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

X

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

x

Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly 48 (Describe)

Describe:

X

49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

X

50 Amplification method? (Describe)

Describe:

NA

If inmate-purchased tv w/ captioning malfunctioned, did

staff assist to same extent as w/other inmates regarding

x

51 malfunctioning personal property?

Describe any problems: Purple

All technology/ equipment in good working order?

Communications software update and KYDOC Firewall not compatible. X

52 (Describe problems)

Fixed within 10 days

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

X

53 status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH

inmates only to the same extent and with the same

X

54 discretion as non-deaf inmates?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 383 of 661 - Page ID#: 2947

# Issue/Question M Miscellaneous Devices
1 Devices available? (Describe) 2 devices in commissary list? 3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator? 4 facilitation of purchase?
Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied? 5 (Describe) 6 determined on case-by-case basis? 7 because security threat? 8 monitor notified? 9 reasoning explained?
ADA coordinator maintains records 10 of requests? 11 of denials? N Disciplinary
Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been 1 punished? 2 Was a re-hearing granted? O Grievances Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA 1 coordinator? If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator 2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator? Records of all grievances filed by deaf/HOH inmates? (not 3 just those related to settlement) 4 Adequate summaries provided in report? Including all deaf or HOH inmate grievances, not just those 5 in settlement? 6 Includes issues raised by inmate in grievance? 7 Includes institution in which grievance was filed? 8 Includes summary of KDOC response? 9 Includes grievance resolution (or lack thereof)?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Describe:

Describe:

no, VRI utilized

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA X
X X

NA x x x x
NA x x

x
x
x
x
X X X X X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 384 of 661 - Page ID#: 2948

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

P Training

Types available

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

2 Who received? (Describe)

Describe:

3 All appropriate staff?

4 Live training? (Information only)

Describe:

5 Who received? (Describe)

Describe:

6 All appropriate staff?

Targeted training on specific needs

7 training on best communication practices?

8 training on unique needs/problems?

9 training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may miss alert?

training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may not hear

10 verbal commands and strategies to handle that problem?

11 training on identification of communication needs?

consideration given to talking one-on-one with deaf or HOH

12 inmates, instead of in a group?

Training on communication

13 training on use and role of interpreters?

14 training on process for obtaining interpreters?

training on importance of not separating imate from hearing

15 aid?

16 training on communication technology?

17 training on VRI?

18 training on how to turn on and check for captioning?

19 training on non-auditory alert office switch?

20 training on videophone rules?

Training on Policies

21 training on the Settlement?

22 training on identity and role of ADA coordinator?

23 training on KDOC anti-discrimination policy?

24 training on existence of KOMS/EMR alerts?

25 training on meaning of ID cards?

26 training on equipment/services/ accommodation available?

27 training on hand restraint policy?

28 training on two-point hand restraint system?

29 training on disciplinary and grievance practies?

Do all relevant staff know about reporting obligations? How

Describe: CBT explains ; annual

30 do you know?

training report

Training specifically for housing area staff

training on the use of cell/bed notices that indicate an

31 inmate is deaf/HOH

32 training on bed shaker switches

33 training on telecommunications

training on obligations to notify deaf and HOH inmates of

34 alerts

Training specifically for all corrections staff

training on accommodations for inmates who sign (esp.

35 restraint policies)

training on strategies for inmates who may not hear

36 directions/orders

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA X
NA X
NA NA
X NA
x x x
x
x
x
NA x x
x
x x x
x x NA x x x x x x x x x
x
NA
x
x x
x
NA
x

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 385 of 661 - Page ID#: 2949

Audit item questions/concerns (note here

if a problem was discovered during the

audit, and what has been done about it,

# Issue/Question

or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Training specifically for medical staff

37 training on process to obtain hearing aid within two months

38 training on obligation to notify off-site providers of needs

39 Training provided for review by Monitor?

Q Monitor Access

Has the monitor been granted access to requested KDOC

1 records, files, and papers that pertain to the agreement?

2 If no, was an explanation provided for the refusal?

Has the monitor been granted access to KDOC staff

3 members and employees?

4 Were staff/employees cooperative?

5 Has KDOC responded to reasonable written questions?

Complian t

Partially Complian
t

NonComplian
t

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

x

x

x

x x x x x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 386 of 661 - Page ID#: 2950

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

9/21/2018 9/21/2018 9/21/2018 9/20/2018 9/25/2018 9/28/2018 9/30/2018 10/2/2018 10/8/2018

8/1/2018

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

KDOC

Transfer

Transfer

Transfer

Transfer

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

transfer

transfer

3. Date of initial hearing screening

9/25/2018 9/28/2018 9/30/2018 10/2/2018 10/8/2018

8/1/2018

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

10/16/2018

5/2/2018

11/26/2018 Annual H&P Annual H&P

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Tx with hearing

aid R Ear

Tx. Deaf

9/25/2018 11/13/2018

11/13/2018

2/9/2019

Tx. does not

meet criteria tx. with hearing Cerumen in

for hearing aids R Ear

ears

schedule for audiogram

cerumen in ears, debrox schedule for and reevaluate ausiogram

tx. With bilat bilat hearing hearing aids aids

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

a, L hearing aid

a, R hearing aid

a

d

d

a

d

d

1/30/19

d

a

a

b

1/30/19.

b

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed), please provide medical documentation

of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Refused

Audicus testing Provider

Audicus testing

provider visit

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 387 of 661 - Page ID#: 2951
referred for audiogram

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 388 of 661 - Page ID#: 2952

11/26/2018 12/6/2018 11/26/2018

Patient

underwent

Audicus testing

shows severe

hearing

impairment in

the 4000Hz

range in both

ears but No to

mild hearing

impairment

across

remaining

fields. Disability

coordinator for

site informed of

patient's

hearing deficit.

Patient

informed does

not meet

criteria for

hearing aid at

this time but

will be

reevaluated

annually for

changes in his hearing.

audiogram does not qualify

done

for hearing aids

       Right Ear: 30, 25, 35, 80, 80

       Left Ear: 30, 25, 35, 75, 70.

1/14/2019

Audicus Clara

for L ear

1/14/2019
Audicus Clara for ear of patient's choice.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 389 of 661 - Page ID#: 2953

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
5/2/2018 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
Annual H&P Annual H&P 3. Date of initial hearing screening

10/26/2018

9/7/2018

9/7/2018

9/9/2018 10/19/2018 9/14/2018 9/21/2018 9/24/2018 10/11/2018 10/15/2018 10/16/2018

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P

4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

10/26/2018 10/26/2018 11/6/2018 11/6/2018 11/13/2018 11/15/2018 11/15/2018 11/15/2018 11/15/2018

10/30/2018

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

schedule for audiogram

b 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed), please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

schedule for audiogram
d

schedule for schedule for schedule for audiogram audiogram audiogram

a, R hearing aid a, R hearing aid

12/13/18

12/13/18

d

schedule for schedule for schedule for audiogram audiogram audiogram

a, R hearing aid a, L hearing aid

1/2/19

3/4/19

d

audiogram performed

schedule for schedule for audiogram audiogram

a, L hearing aid

1/2/19

b

schedule for schedule for schedule for audiogram audiogram audiogram

a, 01/24/19

a, L hearing aid hearing aid L

1/30/19

ear

d

Hearing aid for L ear

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 390 of 661 - Page ID#: 2954

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 391 of 661 - Page ID#: 2955
1/18/2019

1/14/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description

no DB levels on results will be rescheduled.

Audicus Clara for left ear.  Per Dr. Kemen

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 392 of 661 - Page ID#: 2956

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

10/26/2018 10/26/2018 11/7/2018 11/12/2018 11/9/2018 11/5/2018 11/6/2018 11/13/2018 3/21/2018 11/27/2018 11/27/2018 12/3/2018 12/3/2018

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

KDOC

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P H&P at KSR H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

3. Date of initial hearing screening

4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

11/20/2018 11/20/2018 11/20/2018 11/20/2018

12/3/2018 12/3/2018

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed), please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

d, issued pocket

talker

d

audiogram performed

schedule for audiogram
d audiogram performed

schedule for schedule for schedule for schedule for schedule for schedule for audiogram audiogram audiogram audiogram audiogram audiogram

Refused hearing

a, R hearing aid aid, did not a, R hearing aid a, L hearng aid a, L hearing aid

2/27/19

want to pay $10 2/7/19

1/2/19

1/30/19

b

audiogram performed

audiogram performed

audiogram performed

audiogram performed

audiogram performed

schedule for audiogram
d

schedule for audiogram
d audiogram performed

schedule for schedule for audiogram audiogram

refused hearing aid, did not want to pay $10 b

audiology

audiogram performed

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 393 of 661 - Page ID#: 2957

needs pocket talker

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 394 of 661 - Page ID#: 2958

1/18/2019

1/14/2018 1/14/2019 1/11/2019

01/11/199

1/22/2019

1/18/2019

1/18/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description

Communicate d to patient he did not qualify for hearing aid based on audiology test results. Patient offered pocket talker and he accepted, patient instructed on use of pocket talker.

Kemen,Freder

ick 1/14/2019

Kemen,Freder

10:04:47 AM

ick 1/11/2019

> Audicus

11:42:18 AM >

Clara for ear

Audicus Clara

of patient's

for ear of

choice,

patient's

patient chose

choice, order

R ear

Kemen,Frederi for right ear

Kemen,Freder

ick 1/11/2019

11:47:30 AM >

Audicus Clara

for ear of

patient's

choice,

does not meet

patient chose criteria for

L ear

hearing aids

Communicate d to patient he did not qualify for hearing aid based on audiology test results. Patient told if his hearing worsened to place sick call for issue and his hearing would be reevaluated.

Communicate d to patient he did not qualify for hearing aid based on audiology test results. Patient stated he would not want one even if he qualified. Patient told if his hearing worsened to place sick call for issue and his hearing would be reevaluated.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 395 of 661 - Page ID#: 2959

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

11/26/2018 11/26/2018 12/11/2018

1/3/2019

1/3/2019

1/2/2019 12/11/2018 12/10/2018 1/11/2019 1/11/2019 1/22/2019 1/22/2019 1/25/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

arrived with

Scheduled at

KDOC

working hearing

another facility

H&P

H&P

aids

Annual H&P and transferred Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Transfer

transfer

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P

3. Date of initial hearing screening

1/22/2019 1/25/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

11/26/2018 11/26/2018

1/22/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed), please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

d
audiogram performed

a, R hearing aid 3a
audiogram performed

schedule for schedule for schedule for schedule for schedule for audiogram audiogram audiogram audiogram audiogram

passed whisper schedule for schedule for

test

audiogram audiogram

audiogram performed

d
audiogram performed

a, L hearing aid a, L hearing aid a, L hearing aid

a, left hearing

2/19/19

1/30/19

1/30/19

d

aid from RCC d

Dr. Kemen

determined

does not meet

audiogram

criteria while at

performed

RCC

b, Dr. Kemen approved hearing aid for R ear on 5/20/2019

c, Hearing aid ordered on 5/27/2019, pending Dr. Kemen approval

results to Dr. Kemen

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 396 of 661 - Page ID#: 2960

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 397 of 661 - Page ID#: 2961

1/18/2009 1/18/2019

1/18/2019

1/18/2019

1/17/2019 1/14/2019

1/11/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description

patient seen

and told

qualified for

hearing aid but

declined at this

time, has a questionable

pocket talker results for

that is working audiogram, will

for him.

reschedule

Kemen,Freder

ick 1/14/2019

Communicate d to patient he Communicate did not qualify d to patient he for hearing did not qualify

10:30:53 AM > Audicus Clara for left ear

aid based on for hearing

audiology test aid based on

results.

audiology test

Patient told if results.

Kemen,Freder

hearing

Patient told if

ick 1/11/2019

declines and his hearing

11:52:45 AM >

he would like worsened to

Audicus Clara

to be tested place sick call Kemen,Freder

for ear of

again to place for issue and ick 1/17/2019

patient's

sick call and his hearing 10:51:18 AM >

choice,

he would be would be

Audicus Clara

patient chose

evaluated reevaluated. for left ear

L ear

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 398 of 661 - Page ID#: 2962

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening

1/29/2019 1/29/2019 1/29/2019 1/30/2019

2/1/2019

2/5/2019

2/5/2019

2/5/2019

2/5/2019

2/5/2019

2/6/2019 2/11/2019

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Transfer

1/29/2019 1/29/2019 1/29/2019 1/30/2019

2/1/2019

2/5/2019

2/5/2019

2/5/2019

2/5/2019

2/5/2019

2/6/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed), please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Audicus test

complete,

awaiting

schedule for

provider review audiogram

schedule for audiogram

Pocket talker

given on

4/23/2019

during follow

up with APRN

as patient does a, Hearing aid

a, R hearing aid not want

delivered on

2/18/18

hearing aids 5/3/2019

d

audiogram performed

Approved for R ear Hearing Aid

Patient refused

follow up on schedule for

4/11/19

audiogram

d

d

Patient refused follow up

schedule for audiogram
d

schedule for audiogram
b

Audicus test

complete,

awaiting

schedule for

provider review audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

11/9/2018

b, Dr. Kemen

approved

a, Hearing aid hearing aid for a, Hearing aid

delivered on R ear on

delivered on

d

5/3/2019

5/20/2019 5/17/2019 d

Approved for R referred to Dr. referred to Dr.

Hearing Aid Kemen

Kemen

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 399 of 661 - Page ID#: 2963

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 400 of 661 - Page ID#: 2964

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 401 of 661 - Page ID#: 2965

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

1/24/2019

2/5/2019

2/7/2019

2/7/2019

2/8/2019 2/11/2019 2/11/2019 2/12/2019 2/14/2019 2/25/2019 2/25/2019 2/15/2019 2/22/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

KDOC

transfer

transfer

transfer

annual

annual

annual

annual

annual

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P transfer

Transfer

3. Date of initial hearing screening

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed), please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

a, tx. with one hearing aid

a, tx. with R hearing aid

a, Tx. with L hearing aid

schedule for audiogram

Audicus test Audicus test Audicus test

complete,

complete,

complete,

awaiting

awaiting

awaiting

schedule for

provider review provider review provider review audiogram

Audicus test complete, awaiting provider review

c. APRN review a, Dr. Kemen

on 4/30/2019, L approved

Hearing aid hearing aid on

ordered on 4/22/2019, c, Dr. Kemen

a, Hearing aid 5/27/2019, received

approved order

delivered on pending

hearing aid on on 4/8/2019 for

d

d

d

5/17/2019 approval

5/17/2019 L Hearing Aid d

positive hearing Patient

screen, refused released from

audicus

KYDOC

positive hearing screen, declined Audicus

Approved for L ear hearing aid

8/27/18 issued hearing aid, 9/20/19 lost hearing aid, 1/31/19 issued a, right hearing pocket talker aid

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 402 of 661 - Page ID#: 2966

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 403 of 661 - Page ID#: 2967

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 404 of 661 - Page ID#: 2968

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2/19/2019 2/12/2019 2/12/2019 2/12/2019 2/11/2019

3/5/2019

3/5/2019 3/11/2019 3/14/2019 3/21/2019 3/22/2019 3/22/2019 3/22/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

KDOC

Follow Up from

transfer

transfer

transfer

tranfer

transfer

transfer

transfer

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P H&P

Follow Up

3. Date of initial hearing screening

3/11/2019 3/14/2019 3/21/2019 3/22/2019 3/22/2019 1/21/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed), please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

b, APRN

ordered hearing L hearing aid

aid on

issued but

6/12/2019, didn't like it

awaiting Dr. given pocket

Kemen

talker on

approval

1/24/19

Audicus test

complete,

Pt refused

awaiting

audiology

provider review testing

d, does not meet criteria d, normal a, L heraing iad for hearing aids hearing R ear

a, Hearing Aid d, DNQ per Dr. d, DNQ per Dr. delivered on Kemen 6/8/18. Kemen 12/6/18 5/30/2019

b, Patient awaiting to have results reviewed by APRN

4/22/2019
schedule for Send to Kemen schedule for audiogram for Review audiogram

c, Hearing aid R

ordered on c, APRN placed

5/31/2019, request on

awaiting Dr. 5/30/2019, c, Hearing aid

Pt given pocket Kemen

Awaiting Dr. ordered on

talker on

approval at this Kemen

5/14/2019 for R

3/21/2019 time

approval

ear.

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 405 of 661 - Page ID#: 2969

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 406 of 661 - Page ID#: 2970

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 407 of 661 - Page ID#: 2971

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

3/26/2019 3/26/2019 3/27/2019 3/29/2019

4/1/2019

4/2/2019 4/17/2019 4/18/2019 4/19/2019 4/26/2019 4/29/2019

5/2/2019

5/7/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

KDOC

Requesting

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Follow Up

Follow Up

Hearing Screen Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Follow Up

Annual H&P Annual H&P

3. Date of initial hearing screening

3/26/2019 3/26/2019 3/27/2019 3/29/2019 12/18/2019 1/28/2019 4/17/2019 4/18/2019 4/19/2019 4/26/2019 4/29/2019

5/2/2019

5/7/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed), please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Audicus test

complete,

awaiting

schedule for

provider review audiogram

schedule for audiogram

c, APRN

d. Pt does not ordered hearing

qualify for

aid on

hearing aid 6/7/2019,

based on follow awaiting Dr. d, Pt refused

up from

Kemen

audiology

5/6/2019

approval

testing

4/5/2019

Audicus test

complete,

Awaiting

schedule for awaiting

Outside ENT

audiogram provider review Appointment

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

d, Debrox,

a, Hearing aid

repeat hearing delivered on

screening

5/17/2019

b, Waiting for

dicated notes

to be sent from d. Patient does

ENT off site for not qualify for a

review. Will be hearing aid d, Pt signed

seen by APRN based on follow refusal for not d, Pt passed

again once up from

wanting

bilateral

notes arrive 5/7/2019.

Audicus testing whisper test

schedule for schedule for schedule for schedule for audiogram audiogram audiogram audiogram

d, Pt passed bilateral whisper test and stated he did not want hearing aids during 4/26/2019 HP

Patient

received pocket c, Hearing aid

talker on

ordered on

6/5/2019

5/27/2019

c, APRN placed order for hearing aid on 5/30/2019, awaiting Dr. Kemen approval at this time

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 408 of 661 - Page ID#: 2972

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 409 of 661 - Page ID#: 2973

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 410 of 661 - Page ID#: 2974

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

5/7/2019

5/8/2019

5/8/2019 5/13/2019 5/13/2019 5/17/2019 5/17/2019 5/27/2019 5/27/2019 5/27/2019 5/31/2019 5/31/2019

6/5/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

KDOC

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Follow Up

Follow Up

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P

3. Date of initial hearing screening

5/7/2019

5/8/2019

5/8/2019 5/13/2019 5/13/2019 5/17/2019

4/5/2019 5/27/2019 5/27/2019 5/27/2019 5/31/2019 5/31/2019

6/5/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed), please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

schedule for schedule for schedule for schedule for audiogram audiogram audiogram audiogram

c, APRN

ordered hearing

aid on

c, R Hearing Aid

6/4/2019,

ordered and

awaiting Dr.

pending

d, Patient

Kemen

d, Pt refused

approval on signed refusal approval at this audiology

5/28/2019 for hearing test time

testing

schedule for audiogram
d, Pt refused audiology testing

schedule for audiogram
c, Hearing aid ordered on 5/17/2019

schedule for audiogram
c, Pt received hearing aid on 5/17/2019

schedule for schedule for schedule for

audiogram audiogram audiogram

Patient

assessed by

APRN on

5/31/2019, c, APRN

decided patient ordered hearing

needs pocket aid on

talker.

5/31/2019, d, Patient

Scheduled to awaiting Dr. signed refusal

receive on

Kemen

for hearing aid

6/6/2019

approval

on 5/31/2019

schedule for schedule for audiogram audiogram

d, Paitnet signed refusal for hearing aid on 7/8/2019.

c, APRN Hearing aid ordered on 7/8/2019 for L ear.

schedule for audiogram
d, Patient signed refusal for Audicus testing.

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 411 of 661 - Page ID#: 2975

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 412 of 661 - Page ID#: 2976

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 413 of 661 - Page ID#: 2977

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

6/6/2019

6/7/2019 6/10/2019 6/11/2019 6/13/2019 6/13/2019 6/14/2019 6/18/2019 6/25/2019 6/27/2019 6/27/2019 6/27/2019

7/1/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

KDOC

Follow Up

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Follow Up

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P

3. Date of initial hearing screening

6/6/2019

6/7/2019 6/10/2019 6/11/2019 6/13/2019 6/13/2019 6/14/2019 6/18/2019 6/25/2019 6/27/2019 6/27/2019 6/27/2019

7/1/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed), please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Audicus test schedule for schedule for schedule for schedule for schedule for schedule for schedule for schedule for

complete

audiogram audiogram audiogram audiogram audiogram audiogram audiogram audiogram

c, APRN ordered left hearing aid on 6/6/2019

b, Audicus test completed. Scheduled for APRN review.

b, Audicus

b, Audicus

c, APRN

c, APRN

testing

testing

ordered hearing ordered hearing completed. Will completed. Will d, Patient

aid on 7/8/2019 aid on 7/9/2019 schedule with schedule with transferred to

for L ear.

for L ear.

APRN.

APRN.

NTC.

b, Audicus

testing

b, Awaiting

completed. Will Ausicus test

schedule with results at this

APRN.

time.

Follow Up

schedule for schedule for audiogram audiogram

b, Audicus

b, Audicus

testing

testing

b, Awaiting

completed. Will completed. Will Ausicus test

schedule with schedule with results at this

APRN.

APRN.

time.

schedule for audiogram
b, Audicus testing completed. Will schedule with APRN.

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 414 of 661 - Page ID#: 2978

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 415 of 661 - Page ID#: 2979

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 416 of 661 - Page ID#: 2980

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

7/2/2019

7/2/2019 7/10/2019 7/11/2019 7/12/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

KDOC

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P

3. Date of initial hearing screening

7/2/2019

7/2/2019 7/10/2019 7/11/2019 7/12/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed), please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

schedule for schedule for Whisper Test schedule for

audiogram audiogram Passed

audiogram

b, Testing did not populate reults. Will be scheduked for repeat testing.

b, Audicus

testing

d, Patient

completed. Will passed whipser

schedule with test on

APRN.

7/10/2019 b

schedule for audiogram
d, Patient refused Hearing screen/ Audicus

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 417 of 661 - Page ID#: 2981

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 418 of 661 - Page ID#: 2982

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 419 of 661 - Page ID#: 2983

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system?
Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers) Captioned Telephone Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like?
Bed shakers
Vibrating watches?
Vibrating alarm clocks? Pagers? Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration not mentioned above.
Earphones for parole hearings
Earphones for orientation videos

How many Where

When obtained Specifications (URL)

Gymnasium

prior to 2016

6

living unit control centers 2016

0

n/a

n/a

2

Chapel and Academic School 2017

n/a
Peavey amplification system

beginning in

2016, and as

2

assigned to specific inmates needed.

multiple inmates purchase

2018 and on going

multiple inmates purchase

0

n/a

2018 and

ongoing

n/a

n/a

3

Academic School

with Parole Board video set;

additional headphones can

be requested through ADA

2 headsets Coordinator

with Orientation video set;

additional headphones can

be requested through ADA

2 headsets Coordinator

Jun-19

Tubealoo for Auditory Feedback- LLCC built units.

How well do they

How do inmates obtain access? work?

Other comments

No complaints from

inmates that have

tune into a specific FM channel utilized.

No complaints from

Check out from Control Center inmates that have

Officer with inmate ID

utilized.

n/a

n/a

No feedback or critique

from inmates that have

used.

Inmates prefer the units

hardwired into cells

ADA Coordinator & Safety

because they can be

Coordinator notified.Stand alone used as alarm clocks What about inclusiveness for HoH in

unit is issued and synced to fire and for other

general population? If we hard wire into

system

notifications

cells, we limit where house.

Inmates like the ability

Quarterly purchase through ADA to purchase. Many want

Coordinator

sale every month.

Inmates like the ability

Quarterly purchase through ADA to purchase. Many want

Coordinator

sale every month.

n/a

n/a

through Academic School instructor

Very well according to instructor.

request through ADA Coordinator, Unit staff or ReEntry Staff.

Request through ADA Coordinator or Orientation Unit staff.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 420 of 661 - Page ID#: 2984

Documentation to review

Date reviewed Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

KOMS alerts for each deaf/HOH inmate

7/15/2019

HQ needs directive for all staff entering ADA info to be more descriptive in ADA comments regarding issuance of hearing aids; if lost, etc.

Grievances:

Provide/Review summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH 7/1/2019 thru 10/1/2018 through 7/9/2019: grievances are heard by committee and mediated according to

inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc.

7/9/2019

policy and within a resonable time.

Provide/Review full documentation of all grievances that

10/1/2018 through 7/9/2019: grievances are heard by committee and mediated according to

address hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Solve any 7/10/2019 policy and within a resonable time. Find that inmates are not following policy regarding

problems revealed.

notification of lost or stolen property within the time frame.

Discipline

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving an inmate who

LLCC had 2 inmates that sign-

.

was released

signs. Ensure that VRI or other effective communication was 7/5/2019

4/18/2019. All disciplinary actions (investigation and hearing) were conducted with the VRI.

provided at each stage of each such proceedings.

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving failure to obey

no deaf/HOH inmate has been penalized due to inability to hear.

an order, or failure to stand for count, or other

7/1/2019 thru

communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Ensure that 7/15/2019

no such inmate is being penalized for inability to hear.

VRI Log (review to ensure it's being used in appropriate circumstances.

7/9/2019

monthly software update checks completed.

VRS or other videophone alternative (review to ensure that

alternate VRI laptop held in IT area.

when videophone is inoperative, alternative is in fact

7/9/2019

available/used)

TTY instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up,

use, etc.)

7/9/2019

lost 1 TTY unit to age in 5/2019; review under way to confirm still require second as a backup.

VRI instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up,

use, etc.)

7/9/2019

need to discuss that splitter under COT language is considered a "ROGUE" unit and is to be confiscated.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 421 of 661 - Page ID#: 2985

Questions regarding effective communications in particular activities or locations. For each, mark compliance (Y, partial, N, no basis) and explain. Goal: each deaf or programs/ services / activities

In-person interpretation Ever used?

Availability of VRI: Appropriate equipment available (computer line,
Staff trained? outlet, space)

Ever used? How many times?

Used whenever appropriate? (without special request)

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

Intake/

yes ** See audit yes, used with

for portability. Unit is located in

Orientation -- Non-medical

No

yes

yes

item issues

. log in VRI bag. Captains Office.

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit yes, used with

for portability. Unit is located in

Intake, Medical

No

yes

yes

item issues

log in VRI bag. Captains Office.

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit yes, used with

for portability. Unit is located in

Auxiliary Aid Assessment

No

yes

yes

item issues

log in VRI bag. Captains Office.

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit yes, used with

for portability. Unit is located in

Units

No

yes

yes

item issues

log in VRI bag. Captains Office.

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit yes, used with

for portability. Unit is located in

Restrictive Housing

No

yes

yes

item issues

. log in VRI bag. Captains Office.

attempted but MH has

specific IP address that

would not permit VRI the staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit first time. COT has since for portability. Unit is located in

Medical/MH care

No

yes

yes

item issues repaired.

Captains Office.

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit yes, used with

for portability. Unit is located in

Programs

No

yes

yes

item issues

log in VRI bag. Captains Office.

Made attempt with

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit to have him sign up for GED, for portability. Unit is located in

Education

No

yes

yes

item issues he wasn’t interested

Captains Office.

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit

for portability. Unit is located in

Recreation

No

yes

yes

item issues no

Captains Office.

Communications with

yes ** See audit

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

Chaplain

No

yes

yes

item issues no

for portability in Captains Office.

Prison-provided religious

yes ** See audit

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

programming

No

yes

yes

item issues no

for portability in Captains Office.

staff and volunteers have access 24/7

to VRI on laptop for portability in

Volunteer -led programming

Captains Office. Chapel staff would

(note: Only volunteer

yes ** See audit

notify Captain's office of need of

interpretation is required)

No

yes

yes

item issues no

volunteer group for VRI utilization

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit

for portability. Unit is located in

Parole hearings

No

yes

yes

item issues no

Captains Office.

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

Classification/

yes ** See audit

for portability. Unit is located in

Transfer

No

yes

yes

item issues yes

Captains Office.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 422 of 661 - Page ID#: 2986
Questions regarding effectiver HOH inmate has an equal opportunity to participate in programs/ services / activities
Amplification: (Not just hearing aid -- space-specific amplification)

Adequate?

Describe efforts, issues

Intake/ Orientation -- Non-medical
Intake, Medical

yes yes, Medical does good job of inquiry regarding hearing prior to history during and after.

Audit item issues/ concerns
COT state personnel indicate that the splitters are against COT policy and are deemed as renegade equipment to be seized if found. Currently utilizing phone lines as data port for laptops.

Auxiliary Aid Assessment yes

Units

yes

HoH Aides utilized for face to face notification

Restrictive Housing

yes

HoH/Deaf inmates utilized as watchers

Medical/MH care

yes, confirms with inmate prior to appointment or session beginning.

Programs

yes

Education

yes

Recreation

yes

Communications with

Chaplain

yes

Prison-provided religious

programming

yes

Peavey amplification unit utilized in school and Chapel

Volunteer -led programming (note: Only volunteer interpretation is required) yes

Peavey amplification unit utilized in school and Chapel

Parole hearings

yes

Classification/

Transfer

yes

Headphones available also

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 423 of 661 - Page ID#: 2987

In-person interpretation

Ever used?

Legal Aid

No

yes

Grievance process

No

yes

Work assignments

No

yes

Court call and ALL parts of

disciplinary process

No

yes

Staff investigations

No

yes

Investigative interviews

No

yes

Preparation of report

No

yes

Shift supervisor's review

of disciplinary report

No

yes

Investigator's review of

disciplinary report

No

yes

Miranda warnings

No

yes

When advising inmate of

right to consult with legal

aide

No

yes

Notification of date, time,

and place of hearing

NA

yes

Hearing or re-hearing

NA

yes

If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

NA

yes

Availability of VRI:

Appropriate

equipment

available

(computer line, Ever used? How many

Used whenever appropriate? (without

Staff trained? outlet, space) times?

special request)

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit

for portability. Unit is located in

yes

item issues yes

Captains Office.

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit made avialable but not

for portability. Unit is located in

yes

item issues utilized

Captains Office.

yes ** See audit

yes

item issues no

no

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit

for portability. Unit is located in

yes

item issues yes

Captains Office.

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit

for portability. Unit is located in

yes

item issues no

Captains Office.

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit

for portability. Unit is located in

yes

item issues yes

Captains Office.

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit

for portability. Unit is located in

yes

item issues yes

Captains Office.

yes ** See audit

yes

item issues no

no

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit

for portability. Unit is located in

yes

item issues yes

Captains Office.

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit

for portability. Unit is located in

yes

item issues yes

Captains Office.

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit

for portability. Unit is located in

yes

item issues yes

Captains Office.

yes, notification of

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit hearingdate and time is also for portability. Unit is located in

yes

item issues posted in dorms

Captains Office.

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit

for portability. Unit is located in

yes

item issues yes

Captains Office.

staff have access 24/7 to VRI on laptop

yes ** See audit never requested for use by for portability. Unit is located in

yes

item issues witness.

Captains Office.

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to attend a religious service without effective communication to receive any religious meal, diet, or other accommodation? No Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have witnessed or been suspected of violation) provided with an inmate or staff advisor on same terms as non-deaf inmates? Yes inmates can have a staff council upon request. It is reviewed and denied or appoved based on the same process as a non deaf inmate.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 424 of 661 - Page ID#: 2988
Amplification: (Not just hearing aid -- space-specific amplification)

Adequate?

Legal Aid

yes

Grievance process

yes

Work assignments

yes

Court call and ALL parts of

disciplinary process

yes

Staff investigations

yes

Investigative interviews

yes

Preparation of report yes Shift supervisor's review of disciplinary report yes

Investigator's review of

disciplinary report

yes

Miranda warnings

yes

When advising inmate of

right to consult with legal

aide

yes

Notification of date, time,

and place of hearing

yes

Hearing or re-hearing yes

If deaf/hoh inmate is witness yes
Special questions: Has any inmate been required No Are deaf or HOH inmates (who Yes inmates can have a staff co

Describe efforts, issues

Audit item issues/ concerns

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 425 of 661 - Page ID#: 2989

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAF/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE: CURRENT LISTING AS OF 7/1/2019

If signs to

communic

Low literacy?

Has

ate, noted

Listed with Signs to

(So that written Has Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door in KOMS

KOMS ADA communicate

communication Card? (Y or

Card? (Y or precaution

Name

ID

Precaution? (Y/N)

is not effective) waived)

waived)

notes?

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 426 of 661 - Page ID#: 2990

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EAC

Name

Other Alert TTY Access Personal Phone Shake & Wake

Auxiliary Aid

Device (Not (Not

Amplifier (Not (Not

Assessment Bed Shaker? (Not

requested; requested; requested; requested;

mtng took requested; denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

Any other auxiliary aid

ID

place?

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

requested?

Outome? Audit item issues/concerns

Bed Shakers are granted

to inmates who are Deaf

or profoundly hard of

hearing. We explain this

at the auxilliary aids

assessment and advise of

the opportunity for in

person notification,

vibrating watch and

alarm clock .

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

YES

NA

Vibrating Watches &

Vibrating Alarm Clocks

Do not have

have been quite

personal

successful. Timex

phone amps. Shake -n-

Expedition Vibrating

Have available Wakes are not Watch and Sonic Boom

in Control

as requested volume control alarm

Blanket

Centers for as they once clocks with shaker units

approval to all, check out.

were due to are the most popular.

they just

Phones also availability of Offer two watches and

request to use have volume Vibrating

2 vibrating alarm clocks

the device. control.

Watches.

at quarterly sales.

Timex watch

Timex watch
Timex watch Timex watch Timex watch and alarm GRANTED
Alarm

inmates are requesting the shaker beds as alarms and notification options not as a life saving measure. Having to continue to clarify the difference at aids assessment meeting.
Would like to review the Captel Phone /VIOP Phone system

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 427 of 661 - Page ID#: 2991

If signs to

communic

Low literacy?

Has

ate, noted

Listed with Signs to

(So that written Has Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door in KOMS

KOMS ADA communicate

communication Card? (Y or

Card? (Y or precaution

ID

Precaution? (Y/N)

is not effective) waived)

waived)

notes?

YES

NO

N/A

YES

YES

YES

NO

N/A

YES

YES

YES

NO

N/A

YES

YES

YES

NO

N/A

YES

YES

YES

NO

N/A

YES

YES

YES

NO

N/A

YES

YES

YES

NO

N/A

YES

YES

YES

NO

N/A

YES

YES

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

YES

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 428 of 661 - Page ID#: 2992

Auxiliary Aid

Assessment Bed Shaker? (Not

mtng took requested; denied;

place?

granted)

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

GRANTED

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

GRANTED

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES

Other Alert Device (Not requested; denied; granted) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

TTY Access (Not requested; denied; granted)
GRANTED

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

GRANTED

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Personal Phone Shake & Wake

Amplifier (Not (Not

requested; requested;

denied;

denied;

Any other auxiliary aid

granted)

granted)

requested?

Outome?

Audit item issues/concerns

Timex Watch
Timex watch
Timex watch and alarm clock Alarm

Alarm
Timex watch
Timex watch x2- lost one ordered in 2018. Reported via theft/lost form
Alarm

Timex Watch Timex Watch Timex Watch Timex Watch
Timex watch and alarm

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 429 of 661 - Page ID#: 2993

Listed with KOMS ADA Precaution? YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES

Signs to communicate (Y/N) NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

Low literacy?

(So that written Has Deaf/HOH ID

communication Card? (Y or

is not effective) waived)

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

N/A

YES

Has Bed/Door Card? (Y or waived) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES

If signs to communic ate, noted in KOMS precaution notes?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 430 of 661 - Page ID#: 2994

Auxiliary Aid

Assessment Bed Shaker? (Not

mtng took requested; denied;

place?

granted)

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

Other Alert Device (Not requested; denied; granted) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

TTY Access (Not requested; denied; granted)

Personal Phone Shake & Wake

Amplifier (Not (Not

requested; requested;

denied;

denied;

Any other auxiliary aid

granted)

granted)

requested?

Outome?

Audit item issues/concerns

GRANTED

GRANTED

Timex watch

Timex
Timex and Alarm Timex and Alarm

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 431 of 661 - Page ID#: 2995

Fill this out for EACH location where there are any deaf/HOH inmates : AS OF 7/1/2019

Volume

Bed

How

adjustable

shakers set Staff use If there are any

many How many

phone available

up for use bed

inmates who If there are any If there are any

Deaf/ inmates who to inmates

for

shakers for sign: Location inmates who inmates who sign:

HOH sign to

without special How many bed multiple multiple available for sign: Staff

Ready access to

Dorm/unit

Walk

inmates? communicate request?

shakers?

purposes? purposes? VRI?

trained for VRI videophone?

yes through

Restrictive Housing Unit

3

0 yes

0 no

no

staff- laptop yes

VRS through laptop

yes through

7A Living Unit

A-D

41

0 yes

1 no

no

staff- laptop yes

VRS located in 7D

yes through

7B Living Unit

A-D

18

1 yes

1 no

no

staff- laptop yes

VRS located in 7D

yes through

7C Living Unit

A-D

17

0 yes

0 no

no

staff- laptop yes

VRS located in 7D

yes through

7D Living Unit

A-D

18

0 yes

0 no

no

staff- laptop yes

VRS located in 7D

yes through

7E Living Unit

A-D

16

0 yes

0 no

no

staff- laptop yes

VRS located in 7D

Audit item issues/concerns

Prison
General General General General General General General BCC BCC BCC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 432 of 661 - Page

LIST ALL ISSUES FROM PRIOR AUDIT TO RECORD THEIR SOLUTION. Any that are not solved report pIrDo#gr:e2ss9a9n6d place Where problem is

Solution: Notes

on "New Followup List"

documented

Untimely audiology processes

April 2019 Court Report

List of Deaf/HOH prisoners not complete

April 2019 Court Report

Not all Deaf/HOH prisoners in KOMS

April 2019 Court Report

Videophone outages are prevalent

April 2019 Court Report

VRI possibly underused

April 2019 Court Report

In-person interpretation possibly underused

April 2019 Court Report

Appropriate audiology standards used

April 2019 Court Report

Generic TTY instructions

April 2019 Court Report

Need appropriate method for VRI usage in RHU

April 2019 Court Report

Inmates should not be restricted to Dorm 2 without appropriate (individualized) reason

April 2019 Court Report

Solution: Date

BCC BCFC EKCC EKCC EKCC EKCC EKCC EKCC EKCC GRCC GRCC GRCC GRCC KCIW KCIW KCIW KCIW KSP KSP KSP KSP KSR KSR KSR KSR LAC LAC LAC LAC LAC LAC LLCC
LLCC

Inmates should not be barred from particular employment without individualized direct threat analysis Generic TTY instructions Incorrect ADA Coordinator info on https://corrections.ky.gov/Facilities/AI/Pages/ADA-Coordinators.aspx Inmates who have not been screened in recent years do not receive a hearing screening upon arrival at EKCC. Need plan for videophone outages Auxiliary aids/services assessment not complete for all inmates ADA Coordinator needs access to KOMS to fix unlisted inmates Parole hearing earphones needed Need to address possibility of malingering. Ineffective announcements; PA system issues Incomplete TTY instructions Use of VRI or in-person interpreter at all disciplinary hearings for those who sign Denver Williams hearing aid Auxiliary aids/services assessment not complete for all inmates Inappropriate use of paging for deaf inmates Using VRI when appropriate? Handbook needs to provide ADA information VRI laptop working? Auxiliary aids/services assessment not complete for all inmates Institutional channel 40 has captions at all times? Routine availability of TTY New pager policy -- needs evidence base Ineffective announcements; PA system issues (are personal notifications being made, e.g. to Appropriate use of interpretation, e.g. for Generic TTY instructions. Policy/form/training/etc development Videophone/VRI available? Auxiliary aids/services assessment not being done Hearing screening during routine physicals? ADA coordinator received training? ADA documents in law library Need method to track whether deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates are witnesses in disciplinary hearings
Hearing screening needed for new inmates who haven't received one in several years

LSCC

Auxiliary aids/services assessment not complete for all inmates

LSCC

Generic TTY instructions.

LSCC

Correct sick call slip

NTC

Hearing screening needed for new inmates who haven't received one in several years

NTC

Need to implement appropriate policy for non-auditory alerts (e.g., provide vibrating watches)

NTC

Generic TTY instructions.

WKCC/ ROSS Videophone outages

April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report
April 2019 Court Report
April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report

List of Deaf /HoH inmates and living units is sent to Adjustments Officer and Captain's office weekly Screening is completed annually for 55 and older and every three years for those under 55. Also, inmates can request audio screening at any time through sick call.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 433 of 661 - Page ID#: 2997
Little Sandy Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 434 of 661 - Page ID#: 2998

# Issue/Question A ADA coordinator
1 Is an ADA coordinator designated? Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no
2 ADA coordinator appointed? 3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website? 4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates?
Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates in 5 a timely and appropriate manner? How?
Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? (THIS 6 REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)
Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit 7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held? 8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?
9 Describe training Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately cover
10 information? 11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training) 12 Adequate w/r/t state law?
Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's 13 powerpoint)
Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with settlement 14 agreement?
Does ADA coordinator retrieve at least monthly reports on 15 KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?
Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking 16 list?
Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in 17 implementing the settlement? 18 Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf inmates?
Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on deaf 19 inmates?
Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the inmates in 20 those situations?
Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective way with 21 the monitor?
Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the monitor 22 when necessary? B Reporting obligations

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

The ADA coordinator is CUA II Lorie Conley

X

There has not been a time when there was

no ADA coorditor.

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

ADA coordinator information is included in

the inmate handbook, which inmate's

receive when they arrive at LSCC.

Describe method used to ascertain: The ADA coordinator list is posted on all bulletin boards in both general population housing units and the minimum security Yes 2018 Annual In-Service, National PREA Resource Center:PREA standard in focus 115.16 Inmates with Disablities (online training), Mental Illness in Older Adults (online training), Disability Awarewess and Etiquette (online training), Effective Communication and the ADA (online training), 2010 ADA Standards (online training) (training verification available upon request)

X NA

X

X X

X

X

X

Additional inmates are added to the HOH

list as they arrive at the institution or as the

X

ADA coordinator is notified of the hearing

X

X

X

X

X

X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 435 of 661 - Page ID#: 2999

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was monitor 1 notified?

No changes.

X

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

2 inmates?

X

3 Is the list complete?

X

4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

X

Quarterly summary of all grievances by deaf or HOH inmates

5 shared with monitor?

X

Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs,

6 activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe)

No

NA

7 Was it reported to the monitor?

N/A

8 Was the report complete?

N/A

9 Was the report timely?

N/A

10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert?

No

NA

11 If yes, was the monitor notified?

N/A

Did the institution consult with the monitor about the non-

12 auditory alert?

N/A

13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Yes

X

C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

1 Hard of hearing inmates

NA

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

X

The ADA Coordinator only receives

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

notifications if the information is listed in

3 notifications.)

KOMS.

NA

If the arriving inmate's hearing situation is

known, the ADA coordinator will notify

property room staff and provide effective

X

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

communication for the inmate.

Deaf inmates

NA

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Yes, if the information is correctly listed in

KOMS.

X

6 Describe

Describe:

NA

7 Effective communications planning?

X

8 Effective communication provided?

X

The VRI laptop is available to be utitilized by

9 Describe

staff as needed.

NA

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Yes

X

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

As needed.

X

Orientation videos

NA

12 Captioned?

Yes

X

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Yes

X

14 Amplification if needed?

Yes

X

Provisions have been made that the

assigned CTO will read the captions for HOH

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

inmates who are not literate and the VRI

15 (Describe)

will be used for deaf inmates who sign.

D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general medical intake, and

during medical care more generally:

NA

1 Is there effective communications planning?

X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 436 of 661 - Page ID#: 3000

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if

2 interpretation is needed?

X

3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?

Yes

X

Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications

4 techniques?

X

Notice to medical staff:

NA

Yes. Problem list is reviewed upon transfer

to facility. Also patient is asked if they have

any hearing problems during intake

X

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How?

assessment.

Yes. If the problem is not already listed the

Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover and

problem will be listed by the provider after

X

6 within the file?

being examined.

7 Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate accommodations.

NA

Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site providers of 8 need for interpretation?

Yes, a problem list with listed issues is also

sent with patient.

X

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

Administrative assistant notifies off site

provider during scheduling.

X

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

Yes

NA

11 Adequate notice?

Yes

Outside providers offering effective communication to inmates

12 who sign?

Unknown

13 How?

Describe:

NA

Hearing screening/medical intake:

NA

All inmates receive a hearing screening

during admisstion to RCC only. Hearing

screening forms are only completed at

intake if there is a complaint of

X

hearing.Then they are referred to the

14 Performed for all new inmates?

provider as needed according to answers

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

Yes

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?

Yes, hearing questions are asked with all

intakes.

X

Forms are only completed by staff unless

How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by

the inmate has to complet themselves due

19 staff?

to communitcation barriers.

NA

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

Nursing staff and providers.

NA

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?

Yes

22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe.

Describe:

Yes. If any complaints of hearing problems,

the provider completes hearing form and

assessment and refers for Audicus onsite

X

23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

testing as needed.

Other methods of access:

NA

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

Yes, all routine physicals are asked about

hearing problems.

X

25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening?

Yes

X

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

Yes

X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 437 of 661 - Page ID#: 3001

# Issue/Question
If screening indicated problem (3+ "yes" answers), is there 27 further assessment?
Adequate determination of need for designation/ audiology 28 services? How? 29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?
Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or HOH, 30 apart from audiology services decision?
After assessment, does medical: 31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert? 32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file? 33 Notify ADA coordinator? 34 Is notification prompt?
Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)
35 Audiology services offered when needed? 36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)
37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid? 38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services 39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?
Adequate progress tracking? Should include: 40 initial request/questionnaire? 41 each relevant medical visit? 42 any audiology visit? 43 hearing aid provision?
44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks? 45 Shared with ADA Coordinator? 46 Shared with monitor when requested

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Yes. 3+ answers and then they are referred

to the provider. If the provider is examining

and gets 3+ yes answers, then an Audicus

X

testing will be ordered.

Yes, all hearing problems are assessed by

the provider and audicus testing is ordered

X

accordingly.

Yes

X

Yes. Audicus testing performed on site with

results given to provider.

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

No

X

No

X

NA

Yes. Offered within 30 days of being

ordered by provider.

X

Yes

X

Yes. Pocket talkers are given to all inmates

awaiting hearing aids.

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Follow up conducted 30 days after hearing

aid issued.

X

No

X

Yes

X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 438 of 661 - Page ID#: 3002

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Summary

No outside trips are required. Audicus

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Describe.

testing is performed on site per nursing staff. Results are provided to provider and audicus hearing aid is ordered as indicated

47

per results.

NA

In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait more

48 than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?

None

NA

49 What is the cause of the delay?

N/A

NA

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) to

50 improve this process?

N/A

NA

Co-pay and availability issues:

NA

47 Charged only once -- not again for followups

Patients are only charged for initial sick call

copay. No other charges are applied.

X

Hearing aid batteries

?

NA

48 Available for free?

Yes

X

49 In sufficient numbers?

Yes

X

50 7 days/week?

Yes

X

51 regardless of housing?

Yes

X

E Information provided inmates

During initial classification, all inmates are

asked if they are HOH. If they self-report

that they are HOH and no notification is

listed in KOMS, inmates are informed that

they need to put in a sick call to see medical X

and get a hearing test. Then an email

notification is sent to medical to let them

know that the inmate has self-reported and

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe)

has been referred to medical.

Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-discrimination and

2 ADA services?

X

Brochure? Items to include:

?

NA

3 Non-discrimination obligation

4 Effective communication obligation

5 Auxiliary aids and services available

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services (including

6 hearing aids, and batteries)

7 Communication equipment available, and how to use

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

Other items:

?

NA

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

No

X

10 Request for Accommodations/ Communications Assistance

Yes

X

11 Medical Request form includes request for accommodations

No

X

12 Job application form includes request for accommodations

No

X

13 Waiver forms

Yes

X

14 Classification form includes request for accommodations

No

X

15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations

No, however this form is in KOMS and

cannot be changed by the institution.

X

SAP and other programming form includes request for

16 accommodation

No

X

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

No

X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 439 of 661 - Page ID#: 3003

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in 18 law library? (Need to check)

7/24/2019

X

Do request forms:

NA

Which request forms?

19 list available services comprehensively?

clearly explain services and aids (what they are and when

20 they are available?

21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?

expressly ask about preferred mode of

22 communication/needed services and why they are useful?

23 explain which items are free?

24 encompass religious and volunteer-provided programming?

Effective communication of these resources:

NA

25 Are the materials in language accessible to each inmate?

Yes

X

26 Is this information provided with effective communication?

Yes

X

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity

to meet with a KDOC staff member and interpreter to ask

X

27 questions about the materials?

Yes

Effective communication re. programming

NA

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

for a program with staff, is effective communication 28 provided?

X Yes

29 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion? Effective communication re. programming

Yes

X

NA

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

30 in education with staff, is effective communication

Yes

X

31 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Yes

X

F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates 1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

HOH signs are posted at the entrances of

each living area.

X

2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

3 Notice posted outside housing units? 4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Yes

X

5 Cell/bed cards

NA

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Yes

X

Inmates are offered an HOH ID and door

sign when they self-report or within a

7 Clear process to obtain? Describe

couple of days of arrival to the institution.

8 Each inmate has one if not waived? 9 Provided timely? 10 Replacements provided when needed?
KOMS alert?

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS 12 Working process to get new inmate alerts added? (Describe)

Yes

X

KOMS alerts are added as inmates self-

report.

X

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check) 14 Appropriately obvious 15 Updated timely
Individual ID cards

Yes

X

X

Yes

X

NA

16 Staff aware of meaning? 17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?)

Yes

X

Yes, no language/abbreviations are on the

card.

X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 440 of 661 - Page ID#: 3004

# Issue/Question 18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived? 19 Provided timely? 20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times? 21 Prompt replacements provided?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes
Yes Yes Yes Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

X

X

X

X

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?

HOH ID cards are not pemitted to be in the

inmate's possession while housed in RHU.

They are returned to the inmate upon

release from RHU.

X

23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator? 24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver? 25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file? 26 Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested ID? 27 If yes, was an ID provided? G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment
Identification to ADA Coordinator
Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon 1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?
Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other 2 deaf/hoh inmates?
Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified 3 deaf/hoh inmate? At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of 4 communication expressly ascertained and documented? At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate 5 about available auxiliary aids and services? 6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained? Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral 7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions ) Other assessments For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on 8 intake, has one been done?
9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year? H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided
1 On-person ID cards 2 Cell cards 3 Bed shaker 4 In-person alerts 5 Pager
Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location 6 where phones are available?) 7 Amplifier for phone
Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize 8 communication difficulties? 9 Other amplification

HOH ID cards are kept with the inmate ID

card on the ID board in RHU and are visible

X

to all RHU staff.

Yes

NA

Yes

X

Yes, but not in this reporting period.

X

Yes, but not in this reporting period.

X

NA

If the inmate's information is properly

documented in KOMS, the ADA coordinator

receives timely notification of arriving

X

HOH/deaf inmates.

Only if the inmate self-reports.

X

X

X

X

X

X

NA

Yes

X

No, I was not aware that the auxiliary aids

assessments were required to be updated

X

every year.

X X X X N/A

X

Upon request

X

No

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 441 of 661 - Page ID#: 3005

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

10 Other (describe)

Describe:

General issues

Special housing area:

Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH inmates?

11 (Describe)

No

12 If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? (Describe)

N/A

If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed

13 there? (such a requirement is non-compliant).

N/A

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live

there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to the

14 inmate? Describe any restrictions.

N/A

In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is primary

15 consideration given to inmate request?

Yes

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and

Services form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a

waiver, or not requesting aids/services, were accommodations

If an inmate is found not to be HOH/deaf,

16 provided?

no auxiliary aids are provided.

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services documented in

17 inmate institutional files?

Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services shared

18 appropriately with staff?

Yes

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Yes

20 Have any been out of comission?

Have received no reports.

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

N/A

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

22 hearing aid?

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

N/A

24 Promptly?

N/A

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

No

26 Describe

N/A

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

N/A

28 Appropriately reported?

N/A

29 Was it the appropriate decision?

N/A

30 Are classes in sign language provided?

No

31 deaf inmates given notice?

N/A

32 priority given to deaf inmates?

N/A

I Interpretation in general

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

1 communicated to inmates?

Yes

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Yes

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

3 volunteer-provided programming?

No

Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation

4 method?

Yes

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Yes

Standing arrangement with providers?

Yes

6 In-person?

Sign Language Network of KY

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA

NA

NA NA

X X
X X NA NA X
NA NA
NA X X
X X NA X

X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 442 of 661 - Page ID#: 3006

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

7 VRI?

Yes

X

Is VRI availability:

NA

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Yes

X

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Yes

X

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of 10 notice)?

Yes

X

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

Yes

X

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

The VRI laptop can be utilized in RHU.

X

VRI laptop functional?

Describe:

NA

13 In general

Yes

X

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Checked on a quarterly basis and an

electrical cord is also provided.

X

15 Routine software updates?

X

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Describe:

NA

16 Splitter?

No

X

17 Instructions?

Yes

X

18 Long power cord?

Yes

X

19 Usable as VRS?

Yes

X

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

X

21 How?

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

22 should be first recourse?

Is in-person interpretation available:

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

Yes

X

24 Parole?

Yes

X

LSCC only has one inmate who signs and he

has been notified that he can request in-

X

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

person interpretation at any time.

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

None

X

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days 27 before?

Yes. Parole board hearings are scheduled

approximately 2 months in advance.

X

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance

28 in non-emergency is non-compliant)

No

X

29 Describe

N/A

NA

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

30 was unavailable)

N/A

X

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred 31 method?

Yes

X

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Yes

X

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

33 literacy

Yes

X

Qualified interpretation services available:

NA

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

34 volunteer-provided programming?

No

X

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by

The request form lists particular encounters,

inmate? (not limited to only certain

but also states that the request is a general

X

35 encounters/communications/settings)

one.

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

Yes

X

J Hand Restraints

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

Not during this reporting period.

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 443 of 661 - Page ID#: 3007

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

2 finding of a security threat?

Not during this reporting period.

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

Yes

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

Yes

5 Staff aware of the issue

Yes

Off-site medical care:

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

restraints removed when necessary for medical

7 communication?

K Non-auditory Alerts

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Describe:

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

Yes

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

Yes

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

Yes

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

No

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

No

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

No

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

No

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

9 been denied?

No

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Yes

11 frequently enough?

Quarterly

12 monitored/recorded formally?

No

13 Announcement boards

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Yes (bulletin boards)

15 used consistently?

Yes

16 in all dormitories?

Yes (except RHU)

17 in gym?

Yes

18 in library?

Yes

19 audited and monitored?

Yes

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

20 misses a page?

Yes

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

21 because of disability?

No

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the

N/A

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Yes

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Yes

Does the plan account for how effective communication will

25 be provided?

Yes

L Telecommunications

Videophones:

1 Installed?

Yes

2 Allow voice carry-over features?

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

None reported

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

None reported

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

If the videophone were out of service, the

5 alternative offered

VRI laptop can be used for VRS.

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

6 videophone is out of service.

Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

X

X
X X NA

NA X X X X X X X
X
X X
X NA
X X X X X X
X
NA X X X
X
NA X
NA NA
NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 444 of 661 - Page ID#: 3008

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Videophones are available during the same

times as other phones.

X

8 Appropriate location?

Yes

X

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends, 9 emergency) if necessary?

Escort is not necessary for use of the

videophone.

X

10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates?

Yes

X

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

Yes

X

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates 12 using ordinary phones?

No more permission needed. Only

additional staff notification.

X

13 Advance request unnecessary?

Yes

X

14 Free?

Yes

X

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone 15 calls?

Same as regular calls

X

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and

16 been denied?

No

NA

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

N/A

X

TTY:

NA

18 Installed?

Portable

X

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Yes

X

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made 20 available WITH TTY?

Yes

X

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

None

NA

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

Yes

X

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

23 for non-deaf inmates?

Yes

X

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Yes

X

25 Permission needed?

No

X

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

No

NA

27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates?

Yes

X

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

None

X

29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Describe:

30 Can access publicly available relay service phone numbers?

Yes

X

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions for

31 videophones and TTY is less than equitable?

No

NA

32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

N/A

If yes, was determination (including reasoning, evidence, etc.)

33 documented?

N/A

34 Was monitor notified?

N/A

35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

N/A

VRS via laptop

NA

36 Available?

Yes

X

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

Yes

X

38 Used when appropriate?

Yes

X

Phones

NA

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Yes

X

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

Yes, available as requested

X

CapTel

NA

41 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

Yes

NA

The CapTel phone is in process of being

42 If so, installed and working?

installed.

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 445 of 661 - Page ID#: 3009

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

43 Request by any inmate denied?

No

NA

TV/Movies

NA

44 Is captioning available?

Yes

X

45 Is captioning used?

Yes

X

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Yes

X

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

No

X

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly

Yes

X

49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

Yes

X

50 Amplification method? (Describe)

Describe:

NA

If inmate-purchased tv w/ captioning malfunctioned, did staff

assist to same extent as w/other inmates regarding

Staff do not provide maintenance to any

X

51 malfunctioning personal property?

malfunctioning TV.

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

52 problems)

Yes

X

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

X

53 status?

Yes

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

X

54 deaf inmates?

Yes

M Miscellaneous Devices

1 Devices available? (Describe)

vibrating alarm clock

NA

2 devices in commissary list?

No

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Yes

X

4 facilitation of purchase?

Through the ADA coordinator

X

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

5 (Describe)

No

NA

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

N/A

7 because security threat?

N/A

8 monitor notified?

N/A

9 reasoning explained?

N/A

ADA coordinator maintains records

NA

10 of requests?

Yes

11 of denials?

Yes

N Disciplinary

Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and

without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been

X

1 punished?

No

2 Was a re-hearing granted?

N/A

O Grievances

Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA 1 coordinator?

ADA-related grievances are answered by the

ADA coordinator.

X

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator 2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator?

Yes

X

Records of all grievances filed by deaf/HOH inmates? (not

3 just those related to settlement)

Yes

X

4 Adequate summaries provided in report?

Yes

X

Including all deaf or HOH inmate grievances, not just those in

5 settlement?

Yes

X

6 Includes issues raised by inmate in grievance?

Yes

X

7 Includes institution in which grievance was filed?

Yes

X

# Issue/Question 8 Includes summary of KDOC response? 9 Includes grievance resolution (or lack thereof)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 446 of 661 - Page ID#: 3010

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes
Yes Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

X

X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 447 of 661 - Page ID#: 3011

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

P Training

Types available

NA

Yes, in-service training was provided to all

staff in 2018. All new staff members receive X

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

training during pre-service academy.

2 Who received? (Describe)

All institutional staff

NA

3 All appropriate staff?

Yes

4 Live training? (Information only)

Describe:

NA

5 Who received? (Describe)

Describe:

NA

6 All appropriate staff?

Targeted training on specific needs

NA

7 training on best communication practices?

8 training on unique needs/problems?

9 training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may miss alert?

training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may not hear

10 verbal commands and strategies to handle that problem?

11 training on identification of communication needs?

consideration given to talking one-on-one with deaf or HOH

12 inmates, instead of in a group?

Training on communication

NA

13 training on use and role of interpreters?

14 training on process for obtaining interpreters?

training on importance of not separating imate from hearing

15 aid?

16 training on communication technology?

17 training on VRI?

18 training on how to turn on and check for captioning?

19 training on non-auditory alert office switch?

20 training on videophone rules?

Training on Policies

NA

21 training on the Settlement?

22 training on identity and role of ADA coordinator?

23 training on KDOC anti-discrimination policy?

24 training on existence of KOMS/EMR alerts?

25 training on meaning of ID cards?

26 training on equipment/services/ accommodation available?

27 training on hand restraint policy?

28 training on two-point hand restraint system?

29 training on disciplinary and grievance practies?

Do all relevant staff know about reporting obligations? How

30 do you know?

Describe:

Training specifically for housing area staff

NA

training on the use of cell/bed notices that indicate an inmate

31 is deaf/HOH

32 training on bed shaker switches

33 training on telecommunications

training on obligations to notify deaf and HOH inmates of

34 alerts

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 448 of 661 - Page ID#: 3012

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Training specifically for all corrections staff

training on accommodations for inmates who sign (esp.

35 restraint policies)

training on strategies for inmates who may not hear

36 directions/orders

Training specifically for medical staff

37 training on process to obtain hearing aid within two months

38 training on obligation to notify off-site providers of needs

39 Training provided for review by Monitor?

Q Monitor Access

Has the monitor been granted access to requested KDOC

1 records, files, and papers that pertain to the agreement?

Yes

2 If no, was an explanation provided for the refusal?

N/A

Has the monitor been granted access to KDOC staff members

3 and employees?

Yes

4 Were staff/employees cooperative?

Yes

5 Has KDOC responded to reasonable written questions?

Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

NA

NA

X
X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 449 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3013

p. 1

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

MMC 24 5/2/2019

Degree of hearing impairment

Mild hearing loss

All auxiliary aids he has requested

Hearing aids

All auxiliary aids he has used

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

NONE

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

Date of last auxiliary assessment

NONE

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

MM D08 8/15/2018
Moderate Hearing aids Hearing aids
No Denials

F 103 L 8/22/2018
Moderate None None
No Denials

7/17/2018

1/30/2018

7/17/2018

1/30/2018

06/19/18,06/21/18,07/06/18,07/13/18,

07/20/18,09/22/18,10/11/18

C 106L 7/12/2018 Moderate Hearing Aid None
6/14/2018 N/A

Whether he has received any off‐site care since April 2018
For inmates that use sign language, has he been subjected to hand restraints N/A Whether he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016
Audiology Progress Chart
Date of initial hearing screening
Date of most recent hearing screening

No off site trips N/A
4/21/2014 7/13/2018

N/A 2/1/2018

06/01/18,06/11/18,06/18/18,06/21/18, 07/04/18,07/14/18,07/20/18,09/14/18, 09/20/18,09/22/17,10/07/18 No off site trips. N/A
6/14/2018

Results of most recent hearing screening Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

R ‐ 65,80,75,85 L ‐ 70,70,90,100 4/21/2013

2/1/2018

6/14/2018

How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Consult

Annual Visit

6/11/2018

Hearing aid Status:

A. Has working hearing aid. Received Hearing aid issued on 08/02/18 for R B. In process of determining if hearing

07/08/2019

ear.

aid is needed.

Intake

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 450 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3014

p. 2

NAME DOC #
Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 05/17/2019 B. Audicus Test C. Hearing aid ordered

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

N/A

A. 07/06/18 B. Failed Whisper test C. Refer to Audiology
A. 07/17/18 B. Audicus C. Meets criteria for hearing aids

A. 02/01/2018 B. Hearing Screening Questionnaire C. Responded positive to more than 3 questions
A. 02/002/2018 B. Whisper Test C. Refer to audiologist

C. Hearing aid ordered for right ear 01/23/2019; A. Has hearing aid in working order. Received hearing aid 02/02/2019 A. 06/14/18 B. Audiogram C. Pending

A. 07/17/18 B. Audicus C. Meets criteria for hearing aids
A. 07/13/18 B. Audicus C. Ordered hearing aid for r. ear

A. 01/18/2019 B. Sick Call C. Requesting hearing test
A. 01/30/2019 B. Audicus hearing test ordered C. Pending results

A. Has hearing aid in working order. Received hearing aid 02/02/2019 A. 12/28/18 B. Audicus C. Hearing aid for R. Ear

A. 02/01/2019 B. Audicus Test C. Pending Results
A. 3/04/2019 B. L. hearing aid approved C. Hearing Aid ordered

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 451 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3015

p. 3

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

GAA 126L 11/14/2018

Degree of hearing impairment

Moderate

All auxiliary aids he has requested

Hearing Aids

All auxiliary aids he has used

None

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

NONE

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

Date of last auxiliary assessment

NONE

SMF 12 10/19/2018 Mild hearing loss Hearing aids
NONE

G 219U 4/24/2019
Mild to severe hearing loss Hearing aids Pocket talker
N/A
7/11/2018 NONE

F 108 L 7/6/2018
Hearing Impaired Hearing Aids Hearing Aids
No Denials
N/A N/A

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

Whether he has received any off‐site care since April 2018
For inmates that use sign language, has he been subjected to hand restraints Whether he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016
Audiology Progress Chart
Date of initial hearing screening
Date of most recent hearing screening
Results of most recent hearing screening Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
Hearing aid Status:

4/12/18,5/7/18,5/31/18,7/6/18

N/A

N/A

No off‐site trips

B. In process of determining whether hearing aid is needed. Repeat test ordered on 06/05/2019

C. Has working hearing aid

6/2/2017 6/15/2017 Sensorineural Hearing Loss, Unilateral right ear 6/2/2017
Sick Call
Has a working hearing aid

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 452 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3016

p. 4

NAME DOC #
Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 09/05/2018 B. Audicus hearing test C. Results Pending

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. Has hearing aid. Received 10/16/2018 A. 10/03/2018 B. Hearing aid approved C. Hearing aid ordered

Provide medical documentation when no hearing aid is needed. Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil receptor?

A. 05/30/2019 B. Audicus Test C. Test results inconclusive
N/A N/A

A. 7/11/2018 B. Audiogram C. Hearing aid ordered
N/A N/A

A. 6/15/17 B. Audiology C. Order hearing aid
A. 7/16/17 B. Audiology C. Picked up hearing aid. A. 07/06/2018 B. Hearing Screening C. Still has hearing aids
N/A N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 453 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3017

p. 5

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

9/26/2018

Degree of hearing impairment

Moderate

All auxiliary aids he has requested

Hearing aid

All auxiliary aids he has used

Hearing aid

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

No denials

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

1/13/2018

Date of last auxiliary assessment

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

Whether he has received any off‐site care

since April 2018

No off site trips.

For inmates that use sign language, has he been subjected to hand restraints N/A Whether he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016

Audiology Progress Chart

Date of initial hearing screening

1/3/2018

Date of most recent hearing screening 1/3/2018

2/4/2019 No diagnosis None None NONE NONE
10/4/2017 11/14/2017

6/15/2018 No diagnosis on file None None No Denials
6/15/2018 6/15/2018 09/12/18,09/28/18, 06/25/18,06/27/18,09/13/18
No off site visits N/A

6/14/2017 GRCC Mild Hearing Aids None
No Denials Can hear with hearing aid
3/27/2017 3/27/2017
No accommodations needed. 5/1/18, 10/15/18
No Off‐Site trips
N/A

6/15/2018 6/15/2018

3/27/2017 3/27/2017

Results of most recent hearing screening

Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

7/31/2017

How hearing problem was first presented

to KDOC

Intake

Answered yes to 3 or more questions N/A
N/A

6/15/2018 Sensorineural hearing loss
2/17/2017
Sick Call was placed requesting hearing assessment

Hearing aid Status:

L hearing aid

D. No hearing aid is needed

D. No hearing aid needed

A. Has hearing aid in working order

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 454 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3018

p. 6

NAME DOC #
Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 01/03/18 B. Aud Hearing Aid C. Hearing aid issued for L. ear

A. 11/14/2017 B. Whisper Test C. Passed

A. 06/15/2018 B. Hearing Screening C. No hearing issues reported

A. 3/27/17 B. Audiologist C. Sensorineural hearing loss

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A.04/24/2019

B. Audicus

Test

C. Test Resulted

04/29/2019. Does not meet DOC

criteria.

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

N/A

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 455 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3019

p. 7

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

E 223U 4/17/2019

Degree of hearing impairment

Mild to borderline hearing loss

All auxiliary aids he has requested

Hearing Aids

All auxiliary aids he has used

Pocket talker

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary 1/24/2018. Hearing aids not

aids/services

recommended

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

Date of last auxiliary assessment

D 121L 6/20/2018
Mild None None
No Denials
8/23/2018 N/A

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

GBE 108L 12/4/2018 HOH Pocket Talker Pocket Talker NONE
NONE

C 108L 10/3/2018
Moderate None None
No Denials
11/26/2018 n/a 10/08/15,10/15/18

Whether he has received any off‐site care since April 2018
For inmates that use sign language, has he been subjected to hand restraints N/A Whether he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016
Audiology Progress Chart
Date of initial hearing screening
Date of most recent hearing screening

Results of most recent hearing screening Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Hearing aid Status:

D. No hearing aid is needed

No off site visits
N/A
6/15/2018 8/23/2018
Audiogram ordered 6/15/2018
Through a chronic care visit A.Has working hearing aid. Received aid 02/26/2019
Has pocket talker

No off visit sites
10/3/2018 11/26/2018 R. Hearing aid ordered 10/3/2018 Intake A. Has working hearing aid. Received 02/13/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 456 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3020

p. 8

NAME DOC #
Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 01/24/2018

A. 08/23/2018

B. Audiologist

B. Audicus test ordered

C. Hearing aids not recommended. C. Pending

A. 11/20/2017 B. Audiobooth C. Results reviewed 12/19/2017

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

Pocket talker issued 5/18/2019

A. 01/30/2019 B. Audicus test re‐ordered C. Pending Results

A. 02/13/2019 approved ordered

B. Hearing Aid C. R. Hearing Aid

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

N/A

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

N/A

N/A

N/A

A. 11/26/2018 B.Audicus Testing C. Results Pending

A. 01/29/2019 Audicus test reviewed aid ordered for right ear.

B. c. Hearing

N/A N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 457 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3021

p. 9

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

MMB 08 8/21/2018

Degree of hearing impairment

N/A

All auxiliary aids he has requested

N/A

All auxiliary aids he has used

N/A

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

N/A

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

Date of last auxiliary assessment

SMD 05 6/25/2019
Mild Pocket Talker, hearing aids Pocket Talker, hearing aids
No Denials

A 206L 4/16/2019
Mild Hearing aids Hearing aids
No Denials
1/21/2019 N/A

A 122L 11/20/2018 Mild hearing loss Hearing aids
None

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

Whether he has received any off‐site care since April 2018

For inmates that use sign language, has he been subjected to hand restraints N/A Whether he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016

Audiology Progress Chart

Date of initial hearing screening

6/2/2018

Date of most recent hearing screening 4/23/2019

Results of most recent hearing screening No hearing issues reported

Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

N/a

How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Hearing aid Status:

N/A

4/9/2019

12/5/2018 1/21/2019

Hearing loss in both ears 2/15/2019

Mild to moderate hearing loss 12/5/2018

Intake

Intake

A. Has working hearing aid. Received

5/9/2019

A. Has working hearing aid.

A. Has hearing aid. Received 7/08/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 458 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3022

p. 10

NAME DOC #
Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 3/20/2019 B. Audiogram C . Cerumen in both ears. Recommend ear flush

A.1/21/2019 B. Audiogram C . Hearing aid ordered

A. 02/01/2019 B. Audicus Test C. Hearing aid ordered

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 04/09/2019 B. Audiogram C . Pocket talker issued, Hearing aid ordered.

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 459 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3023

p. 11

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

7/2/2019

Degree of hearing impairment

Mild hearing loss

All auxiliary aids he has requested

Hearing aids

All auxiliary aids he has used

Hearing aids

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

None

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

Date of last auxiliary assessment

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

6/7/2019
Severe hearing loss Hearing aids Hearing aids
None
5/8/2019 N/A

3/27/2018
Mild Issued pocket talker Pocket talker
No Denials

8/9/2018 Moderate Hearing aids N/A No denials
09/14/18,09/28/18

Whether he has received any off‐site care since April 2018

For inmates that use sign language, has he been subjected to hand restraints Whether he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016

Audiology Progress Chart

Date of initial hearing screening

4/13/2017

Date of most recent hearing screening 10/10/2017

Results of most recent hearing screening Hearing aids ordered

Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

4/28/2017

How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Hearing aid Status:

A. Has hearing aid.

No off site visits N/A

4/1/2019 4/5/2019 Left ear deaf, Right ear profound loss to deaf 4/1/2019

8/28/2018 8/28/2018
Pending 8/9/2018

Intake A. Has hearing aid.

Intake

A. Has working hearing aid. Received A. Has working hearing aid. Received

2/05/2019

5/9/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 460 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3024

p. 12

NAME DOC #
Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 10/10/2017 B. Audiology C. Hearing aid ordered

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

N/A

A. 04/08/2019 B. Audiogram C. Refer to ENT & Audiologist

A. 01/11/2019 B. Audicus Test C. Results Pending

A. 08/20/2018 B. Hearing Screening C. Audiogram ordered

A. 01/23/2019 B. Audicus Test REviewed C. hearing aid approved and ordered

A. 01/30/2019 B. Reschedule Audicus Testing C. Pending A. 04/20/2019 B. Audicus Test C. Results Pending

A. 4/23/2019 B. Hearing aid approved. C. Hearing Aid ordered.

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 461 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3025

p. 13

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

C 215L 6/14/2018

Degree of hearing impairment

Mild

All auxiliary aids he has requested

sound amplifier

All auxiliary aids he has used

sound amplifier

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

No denials

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

N/A

Date of last auxiliary assessment

N/A

07/08/18, 09/24/18

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

MM A12 8/21/2018
No diagnosis N/A N/A
No denials
N/A N/A

A 106L 5/4/2018
No diagnosis None None
No denials

A 22 10/3/2018
Moderate None Hearing aids
No denials

9/22/2017 9/22/2017 05/2018,06/06/18,06/26/18,07/06/18,0 10/8/2018 8/10/18,09/11/18,09/14/18,09/16/18,0 8/30/18,08/15/18,09/25/18

Whether he has received any off‐site care

since April 2018

No off site visits

09/26/18,10/04/18

For inmates that use sign language, has he been subjected to hand restraints N/A Whether he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016

Audiology Progress Chart

Date of initial hearing screening Date of most recent hearing screening

3/14/2017

Refused audiology appt. on 05/26/16 &

05/25/17

7/2/2018

No off site visits N/A
7/13/2018 7/13/2018

No off site visits
4/10/2017 9/22/2017

Results of most recent hearing screening

Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

4/16/2016

How hearing problem was first presented

to KDOC

Intake History

Hearing aid Status:

N/A

7/2/2018 No further action taken 7/2/2018 D. No hearing aid is needed.

No aids at this time, F/U in 3‐6 months Issued (2) hearing aids 05/04/18, stated in note on 05/31/18 3/3/2017

Intake

Sick Call assessment

Consult for ENT placed Appointment

scheduled for 7/1/2019.

No hearing aids at present time

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 462 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3026

p. 14

NAME DOC #
N/A Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

07/02/18 ‐ hearing screening

A.07/25/18

questionnaire at Roederer Correctional B. Audiology

Complex. Patient answered negative to C. f/u in 3‐6 months.

all screening questions.

A. 10/08/18 B. Requesting hearing aids C. Pending

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

Medical encounter 3

A. 04/23/2019

A. Date

B. Hearing Screening Questionnaire

B. Description of Encounter

C. Audicus hearing test ordered

C. Outcome of encounter

Medical encounter 4

A. 05/01/2019

A. Date

B. Refused to take the hearing test.

B. Description of Encounter

Signed refusal on file.

C. Outcome of encounter

Medical encounter 5

A. Date

B. Description of Encounter

C. Outcome of encounter

Medical encounter 6

A. Date

B. Description of Encounter

C. Outcome of encounter

N/A

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

N/A

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 463 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3027

p. 15

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

GAC 226U 10/18/2018

Degree of hearing impairment

Moderate

All auxiliary aids he has requested

Hearing Aid

All auxiliary aids he has used

None

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

NONE

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

Date of last auxiliary assessment

NONE

SMD 12 5/24/2019
Moderate haring loss Pocket talker/Hearing Aid Pocket talker/Hearing Aid
None

GAB 122L 12/6/2018 mild Hearing aid Pocket talker NONE
NONE

D 214L 5/31/2019
Moderate haring loss Hearing aid Hearing aid
None

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

Whether he has received any off‐site care since April 2018
For inmates that use sign language, has he been subjected to hand restraints Whether he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016
Audiology Progress Chart
Date of initial hearing screening
Date of most recent hearing screening

12/14/2017 2/19/2019

Results of most recent hearing screening Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

Hearing aid ordered 12/14/2017

How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Sick Call

Hearing aid Status:

A. Has working hearing aid. Received

1/11/2019

A. Has working hearing aid.

N/A

D. Hearing aid is not needed.

3/25/2019 3/25/2019 Hearing aid ordered 3/7/2019 Intake A. Has working hearing aid.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 464 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3028

p. 16

NAME DOC #
Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 12/14/2018 B. Audicus Test C. Results Pending

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 12/20/2018 Hearing aid approved. Hearing Aid ordered.

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

N/A

A. 2/19/2019 B. Audicus Test C. Hearing aid ordered B. C.
N/A N/A

A. 9/14/2018 B. Audicus test C. Results Pending

A. 3/25/2019 B. Audicus Test C. Hearing aid ordered

A. 09/17/2018 B. Audicus test reviewed C. DOC hearing aid criteria not met.

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 465 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3029

p. 17

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

SMD 08 6/5/2019

Degree of hearing impairment

Mild hearing loss

All auxiliary aids he has requested

Hearing aid

All auxiliary aids he has used

Hearing aid

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

None

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

Date of last auxiliary assessment

GBE 222U 1/17/2019 No diagnosis None None NONE
NONE

C 123L 9/26/2018
Mild None None
No denials
N/A N/A

GAC 221L 11/5/2018 Moderate Hearing aids Hearing aids NONE
NONE

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

Whether he has received any off‐site care since April 2018

For inmates that use sign language, has he been subjected to hand restraints N/A Whether he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016

Audiology Progress Chart

Date of initial hearing screening

9/25/2018

Date of most recent hearing screening 10/10/2018

8/13/2018

10/4/2018 No off site visits N/A
6/21/2018 12/20/2018

Results of most recent hearing screening Hearing aid ordered

Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

8/2/2018

How hearing problem was first presented

to KDOC

Intake

Hearing aid Status:

A. Has working hearing aid.

Answered no to all questions N/A

Hearing aid ordered 6/21/2018

No hearing issues reported to KDOC N/A

Intake, states hearing loss

A. Has working hearing aid. Received

02/06/2019

A. Has working hearing aids.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 466 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3030

p. 18

NAME

DOC #

A. 10/10/2018

N/A

Provide information of any medical

B. Audicus Test

encounter regarding hearing.

C. Hearing aid ordered

A. Date

B. Description of Encounter

C. Outcome of encounter

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

N/A

N/A

A. 12/20/2018 B. Audicus hearing test C. Left hearing aid ordered/Pending Pickup

A. 6/22/2017 B. Audiology C. Hearing aid ordered

A. 7/06/2017 B. Audiology C. Hearing aids delivered

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 467 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3031

p. 19

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

D 112L 6/2/2016 EKCC

A 104L 2/16/2012

Degree of hearing impairment

Hard of Hearing

Mild

All auxiliary aids he has requested

Hearing Aids

None

All auxiliary aids he has used

Hearing Aids

None

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

No Denials

Preferred method of communication Can hear with hearing aids

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

3/20/2017

Date of last auxiliary assessment

3/20/2017

No Accommodations

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

needed for any appointments. 4/19/18.4/21/18.6/16/18.

No denials
N/A Audiogram ordered N/A

A 113L 5/30/2018
Moderate None None
No denials
1/30/2019 N/A 6/5/2017

GAB 102L 2/4/2019 Moderate Hearing aids Hearing aids NONE
NONE

No Off Site Trips Whether he has received any off‐site care since April 2018

For inmates that use sign language, has he been subjected to hand restraints Whether he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016

Audiology Progress Chart

Date of initial hearing screening

11/21/2016

Date of most recent hearing screening 3/20/2017

8/7/2018 8/7/2018

No off site visits N/A
8/1/2018 1/30/2019

Results of most recent hearing screening Patient received hearing aids R ear 25 dB 1500Hz ‐‐ L ear failed

Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

6/6/2012

8/7/2018

R ear failed, L ear 25/1000 5/30/2018

How hearing problem was first presented Patient reported that he had

to KDOC

hearing aids during intake. sick call

Hearing aid Status:

A. Has hearing aid in working A. Has working hearing aid. Received

order.

5/9/2019

Intake A. Has working hearing aid. Received 2/28/2019

A. Has working hearig aid. Received 2/01/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 468 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3032

p. 20

NAME DOC #
Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 11/21/16 B. ENT C. Profound Sensorineural hearing loss/ F/U with PCP

A. 08/03/2018 B. Audiogram Ordered C. Pending

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 11/21/16 B. Audiologist C. Fitted for hearing aids

A. 01/30/2019 B. Audicus Test Reordered C. Pending

A. 3/20/17 B. Audiologist C. Hearing Aids Issued

A. 04/16/2019 B. Audicus Hearing Test C. Results Pending

A. 5/30/17 B. Audiologist C. A. 04/23/2019

Hearing Aid Adjustment

B. Hearing aids approved.

C. R. Hearing aid ordered.

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

No

N/A

A. 08/01/18 B. Whisper Test C. Failed. Audiogram Ordered

A. 12/24/2018 B. Audicus hearing test C. Results Pending

A. 08/07/2018 B. Audiogram C. R. Ear failed, Left ear 25/1000
A.01/30/2019 B. Audicus hearing test C. Pending Results A. 02/13/2019 B. Hearing aid approved. C. Hearing aid ordered.

A. 01/04/2019 B. Audicus hearing test reviewed C. Hearing aid approved and ordered

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 469 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3033

p. 21

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

GAD 104L 1/11/2019

Degree of hearing impairment

Severe

All auxiliary aids he has requested

Hearing aids

All auxiliary aids he has used

Hearing aids

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

NONE

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

Date of last auxiliary assessment

NONE

GBE 119L 11/16/2018 Moderate Hearing aids hearing aids NONE
NONE

C 223U 2/7/2018

GBE 212L 12/5/2018

Mild hearing impairment Hearing aid None

HOH Hearing aid None

3/19/2018 Hearing aid not recommendedNONE

3/19/2018 N/A

NONE

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

Whether he has received any off‐site care since April 2018
For inmates that use sign language, has he been subjected to hand restraints Whether he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016
Audiology Progress Chart
Date of initial hearing screening
Date of most recent hearing screening

Results of most recent hearing screening Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Hearing aid Status:

A. Has working hearig aid.

11/29/2017 3/19/2018

No hearing aid needed 11/29/2017

A. Has working hearing aid. Received 2/05/2019

Intake D. No hearing aid is needed

D. No hearing aid needed.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 470 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3034

p. 22

NAME DOC #
Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 01/26/2017 B. Audiology Hearing aids ordered

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 04/27/2017 B. Audiology C. Hearing aid delivered

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

N/A

A. 01/09/2019 C. B.Audicus hearing test
C.Results Pending

A. 3/19/2018 B. Audiology C. Hearing aids not recommended

A. 4/03/2019 B. Audicus Hearing test C. Results pending

A. 1/23/2019 B.Audicus hearing test reviewed C.Hearing aid approved and ordered

A. 3/29/2019 B. Hearing test reviewed C. DOC hearing aid criteria not met

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 471 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3035

p. 23

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

GBF 104L 9/21/2018

Degree of hearing impairment

Mild

All auxiliary aids he has requested

Hearing aids

All auxiliary aids he has used

hearing aids

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

NONE

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

Date of last auxiliary assessment

NONE

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

D 216L 5/4/2018
Mild None None
No denials

GBH 202L 10/3/2017
Mild to moderate Hearing aids Hearing aids
NONE

5/28/2018

5/28/2018

NONE

05/11/18,07/23/18,08/10/18,09/17/18,

09/25/18,10/08/18

GBE 121U 10/23/2018 N/A None NONE NONE
NONE

Whether he has received any off‐site care since April 2018
For inmates that use sign language, has he been subjected to hand restraints Whether he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016
Audiology Progress Chart
Date of initial hearing screening
Date of most recent hearing screening

Results of most recent hearing screening Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Hearing aid Status:

A. Has working hearing aid.

No off site visits N/A

5/4/2018 5/4/2018

9/26/2018 9/26/2018

Slight hearing loss bilaterally 5/4/2018

NO hearing issues reported NO hearing issues reported

Intake

N/A

A. Has working hearing aid. Received

No hearing aids required at this time. 1/11/2019

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 472 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3036

p. 24

NAME DOC #
Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 12/21/2018 B.Audicus hearing test C.Results Pending

A. 05/28/18 B. Audiology C. Slight hearing loss bilaterally

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 1/23/2019 B.Audicus hearing test reviewed C.Hearing aid approved and ordered

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

N/A

N/A

A. 12/17/2018

N/A

B.Audicus hearing test

C.Results Pending

A. 12/20/2018 B.Audicus hearing test reviewed C.Hearing aid approved and ordered

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 473 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3037

p. 25

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

G 218L 5/31/2019

Degree of hearing impairment

Mild to Moderate hearing loss

All auxiliary aids he has requested

Hearing aid

All auxiliary aids he has used

Hearing aid

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

None

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

3/20/2019

Date of last auxiliary assessment

N/A

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

GAB 215L 12/12/2018 No diagnosis Hearing aids None NONE
NONE

D 219L 1/24/2018 GRCC Severe Pocket Talker Pocket Talker
No denials

E 109L 8/21/2018
Mild None None
No Denials

5/19/2016

N/A

5/19/2016

N/A

No accommodations needed. 8/22/2018

5/4/18,5/29/18,6/13/18,6/25

/18,7/20/18,7/26/18,8/28/18

,9/12/18,9/18/18,9/25/18

Whether he has received any off‐site care since April 2018

For inmates that use sign language, has he been subjected to hand restraints Whether he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016

Audiology Progress Chart

Date of initial hearing screening

3/4/2019

Date of most recent hearing screening 3/20/2019

Results of most recent hearing screening Hearing aid ordered

Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

3/4/2019

How hearing problem was first presented

to KDOC

Intake

Hearing aid Status:

A. Has working hearing aid

D. No hearing is needed

No accommodations needed. 5/29/18, 6/25/18
No off site visits

N/A

N/A

4/19/2016 4/19/2016
Moderate to severe SNHL 8/31/2012

8/8/2010 8/19/2018 Answered NO to all except (1) on questionnaire.
N/A

Annual Physical

N/A

A. Has hearing aid in working C. Does not meet requirements for

order.

hearing aid, will offer pocket talker.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 474 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3038

p. 26

NAME DOC #
Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 3/20/2019 B. Audicus hearing test C. Hearing aid ordered

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

N/A

A. 1/11/2019 B. Audicus hearing test C. Results pending

A. 4/19/16

A. 4/24/2019

B. Audiology

C. B. Audicus hearing test

Hearing Aids Recommended C. results pending

A. 01/23/2019

B. Hearing

test reviewed

c. DOC

hearing aid criteria not met

A. 5/19/16

B. Audiology

C. Fitted and ordered hearing

aids

A. 04/30/2019‐‐Results reviewed by T.

Hughes APRN

A. 8/16/16

B.

Audiology

C.

Hearing Aids Received

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 475 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3039

p. 27

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

A 207L 5/4/2018

Degree of hearing impairment

Deaf

All auxiliary aids he has requested

Cochlear Implant

All auxiliary aids he has used

N/A

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

No Denials

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

5/23/2018

Date of last auxiliary assessment

5/23/2018

5/23/2018

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

GAB 112L 1/3/2019 Mild to Moderate Hearing aids Hearing aids
N/A N/A

GAA 114L 1/11/2019 No diagnosis None None NONE
NONE

GAA 205U 10/19/2018 No diagnosis None None NONE
NONE

Whether he has received any off‐site care

since April 2018

No off site visits

For inmates that use sign language, has

he been subjected to hand restraints Yes

N/A

Whether he has filed any grievances

since Jan. 2016

Audiology Progress Chart

Date of initial hearing screening

Date of most recent hearing screening 5/23/2018

N/A 12/19/2018

3/1/2019

Results of most recent hearing screening Deaf ‐ Cochlear Implant

Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

Pt. been deaf since 1yr of age

How hearing problem was first presented

to KDOC

Enrollment

Hearing aid Status:

Pt not interested in getting hearing aids A. Has working hearing aid.

Answered yes to two questions.

Answered no to all questions.

B. Hearing aid ordered for right ear,

Hearing issued on 6/6/2019.

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 476 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3040

p. 28

NAME DOC #
Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

Date. 02/01/17 B. Audio Test C. Bilateral cochlear Implants, shows a profound lost

A. 10/09/2018 B. Audicus hearing test results pending

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 03/09/18 B. Audiologist visit C. Implants not working, ordered new ones

A. 10/12/2018 B. Hearing aids approved C. Hearing aid ordered

A. 05/23/18

B. Audiologist

C. Pt not interested in getting hearing

aids

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

N/A

N/A C.
A. 5/9/2019 B. Audicus test done 5/9/19 C. Test reviewed by T. Hughes APRN on 5/15/2019

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 477 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3041

p. 29

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

GAB 116L 10/3/2018

Degree of hearing impairment

No diagnosis

All auxiliary aids he has requested

None

All auxiliary aids he has used

None

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

NONE

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

Date of last auxiliary assessment

NONE

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

GAB 225L 1/11/2019
Mild Hearing aids None
No Denials
6/8/2017 6/8/2017

A 105L 7/24/2018
Moderate None None
No Denials
N/A N/A No sick calls after intake

C 115L 1/31/2018 RCC Mild Pocket Talker Pocket Talker
No Denials

C 226L 1/9/2012
Moderate hearing loss both ears

11/20/2017 11/20/2017 No accomodations needed. 5/15/18,5/23/18,6/25/18,7/3 /18,7/10/18,8/10/18,9/29/18 ,10/03/18

Whether he has received any off‐site care since April 2018

For inmates that use sign language, has he been subjected to hand restraints Whether he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016

Audiology Progress Chart

Date of initial hearing screening

7/12/2018

Date of most recent hearing screening 10/18/2018

Results of most recent hearing screening Answered no to all questions

Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

N/A

How hearing problem was first presented

to KDOC

N/A

Hearing aid Status:

N/A

No off site visits

No off site trips.

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

11/9/2018 11/9/2018

7/24/2018 7/24/2018
Pt states he has problems hearing. 7/24/2018

11/20/2017
11/20/2017 Conductive hearing loss‐ minimal hearing loss no hearing aids required
11/15/2017

Intake

Intake

D. No hearing aid is needed. C. Received hearing aid 5/22/2019.

Intake
A. Has working hearing aid. D. No hearing aid is needed. Received 7/8/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 478 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3042

p. 30

NAME DOC #
N/A Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

N/A

A. 11/20/2018 B. Audicus hearing test C. Results Pending

A. 01/30/2019 B. Audicus testing ordered Results Pending

A. 4/24/2019

A. 5/23/2019

C. B. Audicus hearing test

B. Audicus hearing test

C. Criteria not met for hearing C. Hearing aid ordered

aid.

5/30/2019

A. 11/29/2018

A. 05/01/2019

B. Audicus hearing test results B. Audicus test

reviewed

Pending

C. DOC hearing aid criteria

not met.

A. 05/03/2019

B. Hearing aid approved

C. Hearing aid ordered

C. Results

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 479 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3043

p. 31

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

D 104L 6/15/2018

A 107L 7/6/2018

Degree of hearing impairment

Moderate to Severe

Mild

All auxiliary aids he has requested

None

None

All auxiliary aids he has used

None

None

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

No denials

No Denials

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

6/15/2018

N/A

Date of last auxiliary assessment

6/15/2018

N/A

06/16/18,06/30/18,09/12/18,09/15/18 07/07/18,08/13/18

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

A 102L 7/24/2018
Severe Hearing Aids Hearing Aids
No denials
3/3/2018 3/3/2018 08/02/18,10/19/18,10/10/18

H 11L 6/26/2013
Moderate hearing loss l. ear/deaf in r. ear

Whether he has received any off‐site care

since April 2018

No off site visits

No off site visits

For inmates that use sign language, has

he been subjected to hand restraints N/A

N/A

Whether he has filed any grievances

since Jan. 2016

Audiology Progress Chart Date of initial hearing screening

1/11/2018

07/06/18 Hearing screening questionnaire

Date of most recent hearing screening 6/15/2018

7/6/2018

Results of most recent hearing screening Audiology test done on site. Pending

Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

1/11/2018

Answered YES to more than (3) questions
7/6/2018

How hearing problem was first presented

to KDOC

Hearing Screening

Intake

Hearing aid Status:

A. Has working hearing aid. Received

5/9/2019

C. Received hearing aid 5/28/2019.

No off site visits

N/A

N/A

2/5/2018 07/24/18 on intake at LSCC

Pt has hearing aids 2/5/2018

Sick Call, decrease hearing

A. Has working hearing aid. Received A. Has working hearing aid.

9/11/2018

Received 7/8/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 480 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3044

p. 32

NAME DOC #
Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 01/11/18 B. Hearing Screening Refer to Audiologists

A. 07/06/18 B.Hearing screening C. questionnarie C. Answered YES to
more than (3) questions.

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A.06/14/18 B. Audiology test completed on site. C. Pending A. 09/10/18 B. Audiogram ordered C. Pending
A. 04/20/2019 B. Audicust hearing test C.Results Pending
A. 04/22/2019 B. Hearing aid approved C.Hearing aid ordered

A. 08/08/2018 B. Chronic Care Visit C. No hearing issues reported
A. 04/24/2019 B. Audicus hearing test C. Results pending
A. 05/01/2019 B. Hearing aid approved C. hearing aid ordered

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

N/A

N/A

A, 03/03/18 B. Audiogram C. Pt has no hearing in left ear and a very severe hearing loss in right.

A. 5/23/2019 B. Audicus hearing test C. Hearing aid ordered

A. 06/28/18 B. Audiogram review C. Hearing aid ordered

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 481 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3045

p. 33

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

C 108L 3/15/2018

GAB 213L 11/27/2018

Degree of hearing impairment

Mild

Mild to moderate

All auxiliary aids he has requested All auxiliary aids he has used

Sound Amplifier/Hearing Aids Hearing aids

Sound Amplifier/Hearing

Impaired

Hearing aids

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

No Denials

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

7/28/2017

Date of last auxiliary assessment

7/28/2017

No accomodations needed.

NONE NONE

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

GBF 208U 2/26/2019 Moderte to severe Hearing aid Hearing aid NONE
NONE

C 122L 4/5/2018
Moderate N/A N/A

D 218L 7/12/2018
N/A N/A 4/25/2019 Does not meet criteria for hearing aid

4/5/18,6/2/18,6/6/18,6/11/1 8,6/18/18,6/26/18

Whether he has received any off‐site care

since April 2018

No off site trips.

For inmates that use sign language, has he been subjected to hand restraints N/A Whether he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016

Audiology Progress Chart

Date of initial hearing screening

7/17/2017

3/29/2017

Date of most recent hearing screening 7/28/2017

Bilateral sensorineural

Results of most recent hearing screening Hearing Loss

Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

7/12/2017

How hearing problem was first presented

to KDOC

Sick Call

Hearing aid Status:

A. Has hearing aid in working

order.

A. Has working hearing aids.

5/1/2018 Has hearing aid 5/6/2015 Intake A. Has working hearing aid

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

4/5/2018 12/27/2018 Ordered R. Hearing Aid 01/23/2019 4/5/2018

Intake
A. Received hearing aid 02/05/2019

D. No hearing aid is needed

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 482 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3046

p. 34

NAME DOC #
Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 7/28/2017 B. Audiology C. Hearing Aids ordered

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

N/A

A. 04/20/2017 B. Audiology Hearing aids ordered A. 5/11/2017 B. Audiology Hearing aids Delivered
N/A N/A

A. 08/30/2017 C. B. Audiogram
C. Hearing aid ordered A. 10/09/2017 C. B. Audiogram C. Hearing aid delivered
N/A N/A

A. 12/27/2018 B. Audicus hearing test C. Bilateral hearing loss

A. 04/25/2019

B. Audicus hearing test

N/A

C. Does not meet criteria

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 483 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3047

p. 35

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

MMD 18 7/12/2018

GAB 223L 10/26/2018

Degree of hearing impairment

Severe

Moderate to Severe

All auxiliary aids he has requested

Hearing aids

Hearing aid

All auxiliary aids he has used

N/A

Hearing aid

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

No denials

NONE

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

Date of last auxiliary assessment

NONE

4/9/18,4/11/18,4/23/18,4/30

/18,5/09/18,5/21/18,5/31/18

Whether he has received any on‐site ,7/12/18

medical care since April 2018

F 112L 4/11/2018
Undocumented None None
No denials

C 105 L 9/26/2018
Undetermined N/A N/A
No denieals

7/7/2018 7/7/2018 No accomodations needed. 4/30/18,6/25/18,6/30/18,7/2 0/18,7/24/18,7/28/18,8/01/1 8,8/07/18

GAC 115L 3/7/2019 Mild Hearing aids None NONE
NONE

Whether he has received any off‐site care No accomodations needed.

since April 2018

4/02/18

For inmates that use sign language, has he been subjected to hand restraints N/A Whether he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016

Audiology Progress Chart

Date of initial hearing screening

2/5/2018

Date of most recent hearing screening 2/28/2018

9/26/2018

Results of most recent hearing screening Bilateral SHL

Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

1/31/2018

How hearing problem was first presented

to KDOC

Intake

9/26/2018 Hearing loss
9/26/2018

Hearing aid Status:

D. no hearing aid is needed Intake

N/A

No offsite appointments

N/A

N/A

8/22/2018 1/30/2019

6/21/2018 7/7/2018

8/22/2018

8/22/2018 No hearing aid needed 6/21/2018

9/6/2018 Answered yest and sometimes to two or more questions.

Intake D. No hearing aid is needed

Intake
C. Received hearing aid on 5/23/2019.

Intake D. No hearing aids are needed.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 484 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3048

p. 36

NAME DOC #
Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 2/28/18 B. Audiology C. Refer to ENT

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 4/2/18 B. ENT C. Medication prescribed

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

N/A

A. has working hearing aid.
A. 10/08/2018 B. Audicus hearing test C. Hearing aid ordered N/A

A. 08/22/2018 B. Hearing test ordered C. Pending
A. 01/30/2019 B.Audicus hearing test C. Results pending

A. 7/07/2018

A. 1/20/2018

B. Intake H & P

B. Audiogram

C. Treated for ear infection, C. Hearing aids are not recommeded.

bulging TMS in both ears. No

further complaints of hearing

issues.

A.04/24/2019 B.Audicus hearing test C. Results pending

A. 03/08/2019

B.Audicus hearing test

reviewed

C. Criteria

not met

A.04/30/2019 B.Hearing aid approved C. Hearing aid ordered

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 485 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3049

p. 37

NAME DOC # Cell Assignment Date of arrival at this institution Immediate prior institution

GAC 208 L 5/19/2017

Degree of hearing impairment

Moderate to Severe

All auxiliary aids he has requested

Hearing aids

All auxiliary aids he has used

Hearing aids

Reasons and dates for denials of auxiliary

aids/services

NONE

Preferred method of communication

Limited English Proficiency

Literacy level

Date of last hearing assessment

Date of last auxiliary assessment

NONE

Whether he has received any on‐site medical care since April 2018

Whether he has received any off‐site care since April 2018
For inmates that use sign language, has he been subjected to hand restraints Whether he has filed any grievances since Jan. 2016
Audiology Progress Chart
Date of initial hearing screening
Date of most recent hearing screening

Results of most recent hearing screening Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Hearing aid Status:

A. Has working hearing aid. Received 11/08/2018

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 486 of 661 - Page

LSCC as of 7/25/2019,

ID#: 3050

p. 38

NAME DOC #
Provide information of any medical encounter regarding hearing. A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

A. 10/22/2018 B. Audicus hearing test C. Hearing aid ordered

Medical encounter 2 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter
Medical encounter 3 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 4 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 5 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter Medical encounter 6 A. Date B. Description of Encounter C. Outcome of encounter

Provide medical documentation when no

hearing aid is needed.

N/A

Does inmates hearing aids have a t‐coil

receptor?

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 487 of 661 - Page ID#: 3051

Technology
FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system? Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers)

How many Where When obtained Specifications (URL)

How do inmates obtain access?

2005 2017

Request from the ADA https://www.harriscomm.com/portable-telephone-amplifier.html coordinator.

Captioned Telephone Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like?
Bed shakers
Vibrating watches? Vibrating alarm clocks? Pagers? Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration not mentioned above. Earphones for parole hearings Earphones for orientation videos

2019
2018 2018

https://www.captel.com/captel/phones/captel-840/

https://www.silentcall.com/collections/signature-series-418-mhz-

receivers/products/signature-series-sidekick-ii-418-mhz-receiver- Request from the ADA

with-strobe-light-sk2-ss

coordinator

https://www.amazon.com/iLuv-TimeShaker-Wow-VibratingSleepers/dp/B079J1X3SL

Request from the ADA coordinator

How well do they work?

Other comments

Inmates report that they work well.

This phone is still in the process of being installed.

Inmates report that they work well.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 488 of 661 - Page

ID#: 3052

Documentation to review

Date reviewed Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

KOMS alerts for each deaf/HOH inmate

7/26/2019

Grievances:

Provide/Review summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates.

Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc.

7/26/2019

7/26/2019

Provide/Review full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Solve any problems revealed. Discipline Review all disciplinary proceedings involving an inmate who signs. Ensure that VRI or other effective communication was provided at each stage of each such proceedings.

7/24/2019

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving failure to obey an order, or 7/26/2019

failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a

deaf/HOH inmate. Ensure that no such inmate is being penalized for

inability to hear.

VRI Log (review to ensure it's being used in appropriate circumstances. 7/24/2019

VRS or other videophone alternative (review to ensure that when videophone is inoperative, alternative is in fact available/used)

7/24/2019

TTY instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.) 7/24/2019

VRI instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.) 7/24/2019

I/M

filed a grievance regarding hearing aids that were lost when he was

transferred. Informal resolution stated that hearing aids were awaiting approval and I/M

was satisfied. I/M

filed a grievance regarding closed captioning on

the TV in the minimum security unit. I/M stated that he could not read the

captioning because it went too fast and he needed the sound on loud because he is hard

of hearing. Informal resolution stated that medical would prescribe glasses for I/M

following his cataract surgery. At the warden's review, the warden recommended I/M

put in a sick call request and see medical regarding vision issues.

There have been no disciplinary proceedings for an inmate who signs.

I/M

was convicted of a Category 3-1 disciplinary report because he did

not come out for count at the time it was announced. During the investigation, I/M

stated that he was helping his cellmate get up and that's why he did not come

out for count on time. I/M

was convicted of a Category 3-1 disciplinary

report because he did not come out for count at the time it was announced. I/M

provided a written statement to the adjustment officer in which he waived his presence

at the hearing and waived having a legal aide or witnesses present.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 489 of 661 - Page ID#: 3053

Questions regarding effective communications in particular activities or locations. For each, mark compliance (Y, partial, N, no basis) and explain. Goal: each deaf o

In-person interpretation

Intake/ Orientation -- Non-medical Intake, Medical Auxiliary Aid Assessment Units Restrictive Housing Medical/MH care Programs Education Recreation Communications with Chaplain Prison-provided religious programming Volunteer -led programming (note: Only volunteer interpretation is required) Parole hearings Classification/ Transfer Legal Aid Grievance process Work assignments Court call and ALL parts of disciplinary process
Staff investigations Investigative interviews Preparation of report Shift supervisor's review of disciplinary report Investigator's review of disciplinary report Miranda warnings When advising inmate of right to consult with legal aide Notification of date, time, and place of hearing Hearing or re-hearing If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

Ever used?
N N N Y N N N N N N
N
N
N N N N
N

Used whenever appropriate?
Y

Availability of VRI: Appropriate equipment available (computer line,
Staff trained? outlet, space)

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Ever used? How many times?

Used whenever appropriate? (without special request)

Y (1 time) Y
Y (1 time) Y
Y (2 times) Y Y

N N

N
Y N N N
N N N N
N
N N
N
N N N

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to attend a religious service without effective communication to receive any religious meal, diet, or other accommodation? No Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have witnessed or been suspected of violation) provided with an inmate or staff advisor on same terms as non-deaf inmates? Yes inmates can have a staff council upon request. It is reviewed and denied or appoved based on the same process as a non deaf inmate.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 490 of 661 - Page ID#: 3054
Questions regarding effective commuonr HOH inmate has an equal opportunity to participate in programs/ Amplification: (Not just hearing aid -- space-specific amplification)

Adequate? Describe efforts, issues

Intake/

Orientation -- Non-medical

Intake, Medical

Auxiliary Aid Assessment

s

Units

Restrictive Housing

Medical/MH care

Programs

Education

Recreation

Communications with Chaplain

Prison-provided religious

programming

Volunteer -led programming (note:

Only volunteer interpretation is

required)

Parole hearings

Classification/

Transfer

Legal Aid

Grievance process

Work assignments

Court call and ALL parts of

disciplinary process

Staff investigations

Investigative interviews

Preparation of report

Shift supervisor's review of

disciplinary report

Investigator's review of

disciplinary report

Miranda warnings

When advising inmate of right to

consult with legal aide

Notification of date, time, and

place of hearing

Hearing or re-hearing

If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to attend No Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have wit Yes inmates can have a staff council upo

Audit item issues/ concerns

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 491 of 661 - Page ID#: 3055

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Personal

Low literacy?

If signs to

Bed

Other Alert

Phone

(So that

communicat

Shaker? Device TTY Access Amplifier Shake &

Listed with Signs to written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not

Wake (Not Any other

KOMS ADA commu communicatio Deaf/HOH Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; auxiliary

Precaution nicate n is not

ID Card? (Y Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied; denied; denied; aid

Outome Audit item

Name

ID

?

(Y/N) effective)

or waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) requested? ?

issues/concerns

Y

N

Y

N

7.2 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

Y

Y

doesn not sig Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

9.4 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

Y

N

7.2 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

6Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestegranted not requesteNone

Y

N

12.9 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

8.5 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

2.3 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

9Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requestepocket talker

Y

N

3.6 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

0.7 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

6Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

10.9 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

9.4 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

12.9 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

Y

N

Y

N

8Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

8Y

Y

does not sign Y

granted, awanot requestenot requestenot requesterequest to orNone

Y

N

5.3 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

6.4 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

8.1 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requestepocket talker

Y

N

7.7 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

11.8 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

2Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

3.4 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

5.6 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

6.4 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

6.2 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requestepocket talker

Y

N

10.5 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

10.5 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

Y

N

9Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

3.2 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

5.7 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

9.4 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

2 waived

waived does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

5.2 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

10.5 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

10.8 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

12.9 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

12.9 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 492 of 661 - Page ID#: 3056

Personal

Low literacy?

If signs to

Bed

Other Alert

Phone

(So that

communicat

Shaker? Device TTY Access Amplifier Shake &

Listed with Signs to written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not

Wake (Not Any other

KOMS ADA commu communicatio Deaf/HOH Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; auxiliary

Precaution nicate n is not

ID Card? (Y Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied; denied; denied; aid

Outome Audit item

ID

?

(Y/N) effective)

or waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) requested? ?

issues/concerns

Y

N

8.1 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

12.9 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

8.2 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

9.4 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

Y

10.9 Y

Y

Yes

Y

granted not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestevideophone

Y

N

2.9 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

Y

N

Y

N

5.7 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

6.3 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

5.8 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

9.2 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

2.9 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

Y

N

Y

N

refused TABE teY

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

5.4 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requesterequested vi None

Y

N

3.3 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

6.2 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requestepocket talker

Y

N

10.8 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requestepocket talker

Y

N

8.1 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

4.4 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

12.9 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

5.2 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Y

N

11.3 Y

Y

does not sign Y

not requestenot requestenot requestenot requestenot requesteNone

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 493 of 661 - Page ID#: 3057

Fill this out for EACH location where there are any deaf/HOH inmates

Volume

Bed

If there are

How

adjustable

shakers set Staff use If there are any

any inmates

many How many phone available

up for use bed

inmates who If there are any who sign:

Deaf/ inmates who to inmates

How

for

shakers for sign: Location inmates who Ready

HOH sign to

without special many bed multiple multiple available for sign: Staff

access to

Dorm/unit

Walk

inmates? communicate request?

shakers? purposes? purposes? VRI?

trained for VRI videophone Audit item issues/concerns

GA-A Dorm

15

1Y

1N

N

Y

Y

Y

GA-B Dorm

6

0Y

0N

N

None sign

None sign

None sign

GA-C Dorm

7

0Y

0N

N

None sign

None sign

None sign

GA-D Dorm

11

0Y

0N

N

None sign

None sign

None sign

GB-E Dorm

6

0Y

0N

N

None sign

None sign

None sign

GB-F Dorm

4

0Y

0N

N

None sign

None sign

None sign

GB-G Dorm

7

0Y

0N

N

None sign

None sign

None sign

GB-H Dorm

7

0Y

0N

N

None sign

None sign

None sign

MSU

10

0Y

0N

N

None sign

None sign

None sign

RHU

4

0Y

0N

N

None sign

None sign

None sign

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 494 of 661 - Page ID#: 3058

Prison
General General General General General General General BCC BCC BCC
BCC BCFC EKCC EKCC EKCC EKCC EKCC EKCC EKCC GRCC GRCC GRCC GRCC KCIW KCIW KCIW KCIW KSP KSP KSP KSP KSR KSR KSR KSR LAC LAC LAC LAC LAC LAC LLCC LLCC LSCC LSCC
LSCC
NTC NTC NTC WKCC/ ROSS

LIST ALL ISSUES FROM PRIOR AUDIT TO RECORD THEIR SOLUTION. Any that are not solved report progress and place on "New Followup List" Untimely audiology processes List of Deaf/HOH prisoners not complete Not all Deaf/HOH prisoners in KOMS Videophone outages are prevalent VRI possibly underused In-person interpretation possibly underused Appropriate audiology standards used Generic TTY instructions Need appropriate method for VRI usage in RHU Inmates should not be restricted to Dorm 2 without appropriate (individualized) reason

Where problem is documented
April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report

Solution: Notes

Solution: Date

Inmates should not be barred from particular employment without individualized direct threat analysis Generic TTY instructions Incorrect ADA Coordinator info on https://corrections.ky.gov/Facilities/AI/Pages/ADA-Coordinators.aspx Inmates who have not been screened in recent years do not receive a hearing screening upon arrival at EKCC. Need plan for videophone outages Auxiliary aids/services assessment not complete for all inmates ADA Coordinator needs access to KOMS to fix unlisted inmates Parole hearing earphones needed Need to address possibility of malingering. Ineffective announcements; PA system issues Incomplete TTY instructions Use of VRI or in-person interpreter at all disciplinary hearings for those who sign Denver Williams hearing aid Auxiliary aids/services assessment not complete for all inmates Inappropriate use of paging for deaf inmates Using VRI when appropriate? Handbook needs to provide ADA information VRI laptop working? Auxiliary aids/services assessment not complete for all inmates Institutional channel 40 has captions at all times? Routine availability of TTY New pager policy -- needs evidence base Ineffective announcements; PA system issues (are personal notifications being made, e.g. to Appropriate use of interpretation, e.g. for Generic TTY instructions. Policy/form/training/etc development Videophone/VRI available? Auxiliary aids/services assessment not being done Hearing screening during routine physicals? ADA coordinator received training? ADA documents in law library Need method to track whether deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates are witnesses in disciplinary hearings Hearing screening needed for new inmates who haven't received one in several years Auxiliary aids/services assessment not complete for all inmates Generic TTY instructions.

April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report

Correct sick call slip

April 2019 Court Report

Hearing screening needed for new inmates who haven't received one in several years Need to implement appropriate policy for non-auditory alerts (e.g., provide vibrating watches) Generic TTY instructions. Videophone outages

April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report April 2019 Court Report

Completed Instructions for use have been updated. Medical dept. advised they do not have a sick call slip with a place to request accommodation.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 495 of 661 - Page ID#: 3059
Northpoint

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 496 of 661 - Page ID#: 3060

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

A ADA coordinator
1 Is an ADA coordinator designated? Has there been a time (since last audit) when there
2 was no ADA coordinator appointed? 3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website? 4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected
Was the ADA coordinator information shared with 5 inmates in a timely and appropriate manner? How?
Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? 6 (THIS REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)
Is the information prominently posted in any 7 housing unit where deaf/HOH inmates are held? 8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training? 9 Describe training
Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately 10 cover information? 11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training) 12 Adequate w/r/t state law?
Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's 13 powerpoint)
Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with 14 settlement agreement?
Does ADA coordinator retrieve at least monthly 15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?
Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's 16 tracking list?
Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in 17 implementing the settlement?
Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf 18 inmates?
Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on 19 deaf inmates?
Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the 20 inmates in those situations?
Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective 21 way with the monitor?
Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the 22 monitor when necessary?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

X X X X X

Describe method used to ascertain:

X

X

Describe:

X NA

X

X X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 497 of 661 - Page ID#: 3061

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

B Reporting obligations
If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was 1 monitor notified?
Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf 2 and HOH inmates? 3 Is the list complete? 4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?
Quarterly summary of all grievances by deaf or 5 HOH inmates shared with monitor?
Was there a direct threat determination made for 6 jobs, activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe) 7 Was it reported to the monitor? 8 Was the report complete? 9 Was the report timely? 10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert? 11 If yes, was the monitor notified?
Did the institution consult with the monitor about 12 the non-auditory alert? 13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Description/Notes
Describe: Assessed during classification Bed Shakers and vibrating watches no timing for calls

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

X
X X X X
NA X X X
NA x x x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 498 of 661 - Page ID#: 3062

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

C Intake/Orientation - Corrections
1 Hard of hearing inmates Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is
2 arriving? Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive
3 automatic notifications.) Effective communications planned/provided?
4 (Describe) Deaf inmates Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is
5 arriving? 6 Describe 7 Effective communications planning? 8 Effective communication provided? 9 Describe 10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed? 11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?
Orientation videos 12 Captioned? 13 Shown in a quiet space? 14 Amplification if needed?
Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not 15 literate? (Describe)

Description/Notes
Describe: Do not receive Describe: Describe: process needs updated Describe:
Describe: ASL class

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

NA x

NA
x
NA
x
NA x x
NA x x
NA x x x
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 499 of 661 - Page ID#: 3063

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services
Effective Communication during general medical intake, and during medical care more generally: 1 Is there effective communications planning? Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty 2 hearing if interpretation is needed? 3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office? Are staff aware of, and use, effective 4 communications techniques? Notice to medical staff: 5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How? Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on 6 cover and within the file? Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate 7 accommodations. Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site 8 providers of need for interpretation? 9 Procedure in place to ensure notification? 10 Has there ever been a notification to provider? 11 Adequate notice? Outside providers offering effective communication 12 to inmates who sign? 13 How? Hearing screening/medical intake: 14 Performed for all new inmates? 15 Within first 3 days at institution? 16 Approved screening form? (need to review) 17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid? 18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake? How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it 19 administered by staff? 20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical) 21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy? 22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe. 23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Description/Notes
From RCC
Describe: Describe:
Describe: Describe: Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

NA x
x
x
x
NA x
x
NA
x
x NA
na
na
NA NA
na na x x x
NA NA
x x x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 500 of 661 - Page ID#: 3064

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Other methods of access: Do annual/routine physicals include hearing

24 screening? 25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening? 26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?
If screening indicated problem (3+ "yes" answers), 27 is there further assessment?
Adequate determination of need for designation/

28 audiology services? How? 29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?
Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf

30 or HOH, apart from audiology services decision? After assessment, does medical:
31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert? 32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file? 33 Notify ADA coordinator? 34 Is notification prompt?
Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist) 35 Audiology services offered when needed? 36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles) 37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid? 38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services 39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate? Adequate progress tracking? Should include: 40 initial request/questionnaire? 41 each relevant medical visit? 42 any audiology visit? 43 hearing aid provision? 44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks? 45 Shared with ADA Coordinator? 46 Shared with monitor when requested Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site

trips does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing

47 aid? Describe.

In the past year, how many individuals have had to

48 wait more than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?

49 What is the cause of the delay?

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken)

50 to improve this process? Co-pay and availability issues:
47 Charged only once -- not again for followups Hearing aid batteries
48 Available for free? 49 In sufficient numbers? 50 7 days/week? 51 regardless of housing?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

NA

x

x x

x

x
x
x
NA x x x x

NA x x x x x
NA x x x x x x x x

Describe: Provider on site

NA

Describe: None

NA

Describe: NA

NA

Describe: one person manages data

base

NA

NA

x

?

NA

x

x

x

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 501 of 661 - Page ID#: 3065

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

E Information provided inmates
1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe) Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-
2 discrimination and ADA services? Brochure? Items to include:
3 Non-discrimination obligation 4 Effective communication obligation 5 Auxiliary aids and services available
How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services 6 (including hearing aids, and batteries)
Communication equipment available, and how to 7 use 8 ADA coordinator and how to reach
Other items: 9 Institution schedule of interpreters
Request for Accommodations/ Communications 10 Assistance
Medical Request form includes request for 11 accommodations
Job application form includes request for 12 accommodations 13 Waiver forms
Classification form includes request for 14 accommodations 15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations
SAP and other programming form includes request 16 for accommodation 17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure 18 available in law library? (Need to check)
Do request forms: 19 list available services comprehensively?
clearly explain services and aids (what they are 20 and when they are available? 21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?
expressly ask about preferred mode of communication/needed services and why they are 22 useful? 23 explain which items are free? encompass religious and volunteer-provided 24 programming?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

Describe: ?

x
x
NA x x x
x

x

x

?

NA

x

x

x

Forms need updating

x

Forms need updating

x

Forms need updating

x

Forms need updating

x

Forms need updating No forms for AA/NA

x x

x Describe date checked: 08/06/2019

NA

HOH pkt

x

HOH pkt

x

HOH pkt

x

HOH pkt Needs updating
HOH pkt

x x
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 502 of 661 - Page ID#: 3066

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Effective communication of these resources: Are the materials in language accessible to each

25 inmate? Is this information provided with effective

26 communication? Can inmates request and receive a meaningful

opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member

27 and interpreter to ask questions about the Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment

in/application for a program with staff, is effective

28 communication provided? are potential accommodations covered in the

29 discussion? Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment

in/application in education with staff, is effective

30 communication provided? are potential accommodations covered in the

31 discussion?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

NA

x

x

x NA
x

x NA
x

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 503 of 661 - Page ID#: 3067

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates
1 Notice posted at entrance to institution? 2 Include picture of ID card and other official 3 Notice posted outside housing units? 4 Include picture of ID card and other official 5 Cell/bed cards 6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert? 7 Clear process to obtain? Describe 8 Each inmate has one if not waived? 9 Provided timely? 10 Replacements provided when needed?
KOMS alert? 11 Staff aware of use of KOMS
Working process to get new inmate alerts added? 12 (Describe) 13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check) 14 Appropriately obvious 15 Updated timely
Individual ID cards 16 Staff aware of meaning? 17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?) 18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived? 19 Provided timely? 20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times? 21 Prompt replacements provided?

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose? 23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator? 24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver? 25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?
Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested 26 ID? 27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Description/Notes wing and bed entrances no pictures of id cards Describe:
Describe: process needs updated
Describe: Yes, security reasons in RHU HOH Sign posted outside of cell Describe: none known

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

x x x
x NA
x x x x x NA x
x
x x x NA x x x x x x
NA x
NA x
x
na

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 504 of 661 - Page ID#: 3068

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment
Identification to ADA Coordinator Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification 1 upon intake of each deaf/hoh inmate? Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification 2 of other deaf/hoh inmates? Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment with every arriving or 3 newly identified deaf/hoh inmate? At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of communication expressly ascertained 4 and documented? At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate about available auxiliary aids and 5 services? Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms 6 explained? Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral and written; VRI; or visual 7 descriptions ) Other assessments For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an 8 assessment on intake, has one been done? 9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

process needs updated process needs updated
annual and as needed

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

NA x

x
x
x x x NA na x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 505 of 661 - Page ID#: 3069

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided
1 On-person ID cards 2 Cell cards 3 Bed shaker 4 In-person alerts 5 Pager
Phone volume adjust setting (available in each 6 location where phones are available?) 7 Amplifier for phone
Consideration of specific housing assignment to 8 minimize communication difficulties? 9 Other amplification 10 Other (describe)
General issues Special housing area: Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH 11 inmates? (Describe) If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? 12 (Describe) If there is such an area, are inmates required to be 13 housed there? (such a requirement is nonIf there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live there, are accommodations etc. still fully 14 available to the inmate? Describe any restrictions. In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is 15 primary consideration given to inmate request? If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or not requesting 16 aids/services, were accommodations provided? Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services 17 documented in inmate institutional files? Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary 18 aids/services shared appropriately with staff? 19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained? 20 Have any been out of comission? 21 Describe -- which and for how long? Inmates moving housing or transferred: not 22 separated from hearing aid? 23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided? 24 Promptly? 25 Has there been a direct threat determination? 26 Describe Appropriately individuated (must consider specific 27 degree of impairment and specific dangers posed) 28 Appropriately reported? 29 Was it the appropriate decision?

Description/Notes
bed shakers and strobe lights amplifiers bed shakers on dorm 2 Describe: vibrating watches
Describe: Describe:
Describe: medically assessed
Describe: Describe: not separated Describe: Describe: Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

x x x x x
x
x
x
x NA NA NA
NA
NA
NA

NA

x

x

x
x
NA NA
x na na NA NA x x x

# Issue/Question 30 Are classes in sign language provided? 31 deaf inmates given notice?
32 priority given to deaf inmates?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 506 of 661 - Page ID#: 3070

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

x

x

all HOH IM's requested for ASL class

before the rest of GP

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 507 of 661 - Page ID#: 3071

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

I Interpretation in general
Qualified interpretation services available: Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation 1 communicated to inmates? covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 2 encounters/communications/settings) Does the request form clearly encompass religious 3 and other volunteer-provided programming? Effective process for choosing qualified 4 interpretation method? 5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences? Standing arrangement with providers? 6 In-person? 7 VRI? Is VRI availability: 8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)? after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours 9 of notice)? on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 10 hours of notice)? during emergencies (including medical emergencies) 11 when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)? Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? 12 Describe VRI laptop functional? 13 In general 14 Always checked for sufficient battery power? 15 Routine software updates? VRI laptop has necessary items with it? 16 Splitter? 17 Instructions? 18 Long power cord? 19 Usable as VRS? 20 VRI effectiveness tracked? 21 How? Information used to determine when in-person 22 interpretation should be first recourse? Is in-person interpretation available: 23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical 24 Parole? Describe each time in-person interpretation has 25 been offered Describe each time in-person interpretation has 26 been denied. Parole board notified of need for interpretation at 27 least 7 days before?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

NA x

x VRI interpretation services

needs updated

x

x

HOH pkt. And med assessment

x NA
x x NA x

x

x

x

Describe: Describe:

x
NA x

Describe:

NA x x x x

x

x

x

each time HOH IM's fill out request

forms for services

x

none for HOH IM's

x

process needs updated

x x x
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 508 of 661 - Page ID#: 3072

# Issue/Question
Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? 28 (Reliance in non-emergency is non-compliant)

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

29 Describe in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence
30 and VRI was unavailable) Communication with inmates uses inmate's
31 preferred method? Written communication is limited to only simple
32 matters. Written communication is not needed when inmate
33 has low literacy Qualified interpretation services available: Does the request form clearly encompass religious
34 and other volunteer-provided programming? for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain
35 encounters/communications/settings) Is the process for using VRI communicated to
36 inmates?

Description/Notes yes Describe: IM used IM interpreter when videophone was non functional no known times, but use bed shakers and strobe lights during lockdowns and practices
needs updating

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

x

NA x x x x
NA x
x
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 509 of 661 - Page ID#: 3073

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

J Hand Restraints
1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs? Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing?
2 Individualized finding of a security threat? Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who
3 might ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.) 4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed? 5 Staff aware of the issue
Off-site medical care: 6 two-point hand restraint system used?
restraints removed when necessary for medical 7 communication?

Describe: HOH IM's cuffed in front

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

NA x

x
x x NA x
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 510 of 661 - Page ID#: 3074

# Issue/Question
K Non-auditory Alerts
1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? 2 provided to all inmates who need it? 3 can and does it give alerts in real time? 4 sufficient to signal fire alarm? 5 sufficient to signal count alert? 6 programmed to signal different alerts? 7 used to notify of prison-wide events?
used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events 8 specific to them?
Have any requests for medically necessary non9 auditory alerts been denied?
Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are 10 working? 11 frequently enough?
12 monitored/recorded formally? 13 Announcement boards 14 used to notify of schedule changes? 15 used consistently? 16 in all dormitories? 17 in gym? 18 in library? 19 audited and monitored?
In-person or personal system notification when an 20 inmate misses a page?
Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ 21 info only because of disability?
Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in 22 the future? 23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?
Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in 24 emergency?
Does the plan account for how effective 25 communication will be provided?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes Describe:
once per quarter process needs updated to document formally
Describe: none known

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

NA x x x x x x
x
x
x
x
x
NA x x x x x x
x

NA na x x
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 511 of 661 - Page ID#: 3075

# Issue/Question
L Telecommunications
Videophones: 1 Installed? 2 Allow voice carry-over features? 3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)
Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to 4 solve them.
When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe 5 other alternative offered
Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, 6 when videophone is out of service. 7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates? 8 Appropriate location?
Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, 9 weekends, emergency) if necessary? 10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates? 11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?
No more permission needed than that for hearing 12 inmates using ordinary phones? 13 Advance request unnecessary? 14 Free?
Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular 15 phone calls?
Has any inmate requested access to the 16 videophones and been denied?
Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the inmate's name, the date, and the 17 reason for the denial. TTY: 18 Installed? Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates 19 and staff? Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions 20 made available WITH TTY? 21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify) 22 Access -- appropriate hours, days? location substantially as accessible as conventional 23 telephones for non-deaf inmates? 24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access? 25 Permission needed? Has any request to use the TTY been denied? 26 (Describe) 27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates? 28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe) 29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently) Can access publicly available relay service phone 30 numbers?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

Describe:

NA x x
NA

Describe:

NA

Describe:

x

Describe:

NA x x

x

no timing

x

x

only request to use, not permission

x

x

x

x

Describe: none known Describe:
Describe: stored in office yes Describe: Describe: Describe:

NA
na
NA x x
x NA
x
x x
x
NA x
NA x x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 512 of 661 - Page ID#: 3076

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions 31 for videophones and TTY is less than equitable? 32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?
If yes, was determination (including reasoning,

33 evidence, etc.) documented? 34 Was monitor notified? 35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?
VRS via laptop 36 Available? 37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU) 38 Used when appropriate?
Phones 39 Amplification in every group of phones?
Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need

40 them? CapTel
41 Appropriate for any particular inmate? 42 If so, installed and working? 43 Request by any inmate denied?
TV/Movies 44 Is captioning available? 45 Is captioning used? 46 Is the captioning checked regularly? 47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?
Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly

48 (Describe) 49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning? 50 Amplification method? (Describe)
If inmate-purchased tv w/ captioning malfunctioned,

did staff assist to same extent as w/other inmates

51 regarding malfunctioning personal property? All technology/ equipment in good working order?
52 (Describe problems) Access to communication services for deaf inmates in segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf
53 inmates of same status? Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates only to the same extent and with the
54 same discretion as non-deaf inmates?

Description/Notes Describe:
Describe: Describe: Describe:
Describe: Describe: unknown incident, however IM's have access to RnD window to request repairs daily Describe any problems: laptop retrieved as needed

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

NA

NA x x x
NA x x
NA NA NA NA NA
x x x x x x NA
x
x
x
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 513 of 661 - Page ID#: 3077

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

M Miscellaneous Devices
1 Devices available? (Describe) 2 devices in commissary list?
possibility to request other devices from ADA 3 coordinator? 4 facilitation of purchase?
Purchase of any non-medically necessary device 5 denied? (Describe) 6 determined on case-by-case basis? 7 because security threat? 8 monitor notified? 9 reasoning explained?
ADA coordinator maintains records 10 of requests? 11 of denials?
N Disciplinary
Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate 1 has been punished? 2 Was a re-hearing granted?
O Grievances
Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA 1 coordinator?
If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator forward copy of grievance to ADA 2 coordinator? Records of all grievances filed by deaf/HOH 3 inmates? (not just those related to settlement) 4 Adequate summaries provided in report? Including all deaf or HOH inmate grievances, not just 5 those in settlement? 6 Includes issues raised by inmate in grievance? 7 Includes institution in which grievance was filed? 8 Includes summary of KDOC response? 9 Includes grievance resolution (or lack thereof)?

Description/Notes Describe: via Access orders Ex: vibrating watches Describe:
none known

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

NA x x x
NA

NA x x
x na

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 514 of 661 - Page ID#: 3078

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

P Training
Types available 1 CBT? (Using approved training?) 2 Who received? (Describe) 3 All appropriate staff? 4 Live training? (Information only) 5 Who received? (Describe) 6 All appropriate staff?
Targeted training on specific needs 7 training on best communication practices? 8 training on unique needs/problems?
training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may 9 miss alert?
training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may not hear verbal commands and strategies to handle 10 that problem? 11 training on identification of communication needs? consideration given to talking one-on-one with deaf 12 or HOH inmates, instead of in a group? Training on communication 13 training on use and role of interpreters? 14 training on process for obtaining interpreters? training on importance of not separating imate from 15 hearing aid? 16 training on communication technology? 17 training on VRI? 18 training on how to turn on and check for 19 training on non-auditory alert office switch? 20 training on videophone rules? Training on Policies 21 training on the Settlement? 22 training on identity and role of ADA coordinator? 23 training on KDOC anti-discrimination policy? 24 training on existence of KOMS/EMR alerts? 25 training on meaning of ID cards? training on equipment/services/ accommodation 26 available? 27 training on hand restraint policy? 28 training on two-point hand restraint system? 29 training on disciplinary and grievance practies?

Description/Notes
Describe: all staff via CBT's Describe: Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

NA x
NA x
NA NA
NA x x
x

x
x
x
NA x x
x
x x
x x x NA
x x x x x
x
x x x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 515 of 661 - Page ID#: 3079

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Do all relevant staff know about reporting 30 obligations? How do you know?
Training specifically for housing area staff training on the use of cell/bed notices that indicate

31 an inmate is deaf/HOH 32 training on bed shaker switches 33 training on telecommunications
training on obligations to notify deaf and HOH

34 inmates of alerts Training specifically for all corrections staff training on accommodations for inmates who sign

35 (esp. restraint policies) training on strategies for inmates who may not hear

36 directions/orders Training specifically for medical staff training on process to obtain hearing aid within two

37 months training on obligation to notify off-site providers of

38 needs 39 Training provided for review by Monitor?

Q Monitor Access

Has the monitor been granted access to requested

KDOC records, files, and papers that pertain to the

1 agreement?

2 If no, was an explanation provided for the refusal?

Has the monitor been granted access to KDOC staff

3 members and employees?

4 Were staff/employees cooperative?

Has KDOC responded to reasonable written

5 questions?

Description/Notes Describe:
protocols in medical in place

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

(Explain)

x NA
x x x x
NA x

x NA
x

x x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 516 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3080

p. 1

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

NTC Kelly Buckley 7/26/2019
1
9/6/2017
upon Intake 9/15/2017 10/5/2017

6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Issued Hearing aids
A N/A

2

3

1/6/2017

7/8/2015

Arrived at NTC with hearing aids

Upon intake

N/A

7/22/2016

N/A

6/24/2016

No other device needed

other then a hearing

N/A

Amplifier

A

D

N/A

See Attachment

4
3/11/2017 Sick call was placed for
hearing Assessment 3/11/2017 6/7/2017
Issued Hearing aids
A
N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 517 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3081

p. 2

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t‐coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by Medical Visit 1 ‐ Date Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description
Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Yes
9/15/2017 Provider Encounter

yes 5/3/2018

N/A

yes

7/22/2015 Evaluation for hearing
loss

5/16/2019 Chronic Care Visti/ PE

3/11/2017 Place a sick call for hearing assessment

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Date Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 3 ‐ Date Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Referred to audiology Hearing aids Issued

Audiology consult submitted

Answer No to all the hearing screening questionaire.

10/5/2017

8/7/2016

seen by Audiology Hearing test and fitting completed. Hearing aids were
order.

Provider Encounter hearing tests discussed

11/9/2017

8/10/2016 APRN discussed with MD
plan of care

Refered to provider 5/22/2017
Seen by provider
Refered to Audiology 6/7/2017
seen by Audiology

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 518 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3082

p. 3

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 5 ‐ Date Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 6 ‐ Date Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Hearing aids Issued

8/24/2016
Hearing amplifier issued 5/16/2016
Replacement sound amplifier 6/24/2016
Hearing screening/questionnaire
completed

Hearing evaluation done and hearing aids order
6/22/2017
Hearing aids Issued 4/25/2018
Hearing aid batteries issued (2) 5/18/208
Hearing aid batteries issued

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 519 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3083

p. 4

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

2nd Column

3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

6
11/16/2015 Sick call was placed
3/14/2016 1/13/2017

2nd Column

7 2nd Column
7/10/2017
Sick call placed for hearing test 8/17/2017 10/12/2017

6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Issued hearing aids
A N/A

Issued hearing Aids
A N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 520 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3084

p. 5

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t‐coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

2nd Column

2nd Column

2nd Column

9. Please provide the following information

about each medical encounter from when

the hearing issue was presented to when

the hearing issue was finally addressed (by

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Date

19/2018, 7/4/2018, 2/6/20

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Yes
11/14/2015 Placed sick call

7/25/2016 ENT Consult

yes
7/10/2017 Sick call

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Date Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 3 ‐ Date Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Hearing aid batteries issued

Referred to Provider

recommend hearing aids based on audiogram

2/16/2017, 3/17/2017, 3/30/2017, 4/9/2017,
4/26/2017, issued batteries

requesting hearing test

5/15/2019 Chronic Care visti/ PE

3/2/2016 Sick call and Provider
Encounter

8/30/2015 ENT consult

2/3, 3/12, 5/5, 6/18 Issued batteries

8/17/2017 Provider Evaluated

Hearing aid effective at

ENT confirms hearing

this time.

Hearing Amplifier order

aids

6/28/2019

3/9/2016

9/8/2016

Sick call

1/27/2019 Issued batteries

Referred to audiology 9/13/2017
Audiology appointment

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 521 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3085

p. 6

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

2nd Column

2nd Column

2nd Column

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 5 ‐ Date Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 6 ‐ Date Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Requesting new hearing

hearing aid consult

aids

Hearing Amplifier Issued

submitted

request hearing aids

7/8/2019

3/14/2016

12/12/2016

2/14/2019

10/12/2017

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

ENT appointment

Issued batteries

Amplifier is helping and Requesting a audioscope return as needed

Hearing aid fitting

Received hearing aids

7/23/2019

6/24/2016

Provider Encounter/

Audioscope

provider Encounter

Hearing screening/questionnaire completed and audiology

Requesting a audiogram consult submitted

1/13/2017 ENT Appointment
hearing aids Issued

5/24/2019 Sick call
Issued with hearing aid coming in and out.

2/5/2018 Batteries
New hearing aids batteries Issued.

7/12/2016

2/3/2017

7/11/2019

Audiology Appointment

Provider Encounter

Signed refusal for further

evaluation &

hearing aids taken to replacement on hearing

Recommend hearing aids ENT to be fix and return

aid

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 522 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3086

p. 7

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

8
3/7/2017 Arrived at NTC with
hearing aids N/A N/A

9
11/7/2017 upon intake 11/9/2017 12/5/2017

6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

N/A

Issued hearing aids

A

A

N/A

N/A

10 1/23/2015 upon Intake 6/24/2016 No device needed
D See Attachment

11

12

6/28/2016

7/26/2017

Sick call 6/28/2016 8/2/2016

upon intake 3/21/2018 3/21/2018

No device needed

Has hearing aid in right ear

D

A

See Attachment

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 523 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3087

p. 8

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t‐coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by Medical Visit 1 ‐ Date Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description
Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

yes 9/7/2017

Yes

N/A

N/A

N/A

11/9/2017 Provider Encounter

6/24/2016 Provider Encounter

2/13/2016 Sick call

7/26/2017 Provider Encounter

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Date Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 3 ‐ Date Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Issued Batteries
9/30/2017 Issued Batteries
6/12/2019 Issued Batteries

Hearing screening/Questionnaire Referred to audiology No Devide needed

Requested ears to be Flushed

Refer to audiology, Hearing amplifier issued

12/5/2017

6/28/2016

8/9/2017

Audiology Appointment Hearing aids order

Provider Encounter IM does have hearing problems related to long hx of working around
loud equipment.

Patient refused audiology appt.

1/3/2019

8/2/2016

3/16/2018

Heaing aid issued

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 524 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3088

p. 9

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 5 ‐ Date Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 6 ‐ Date Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Cyro: Exam reveals a 5‐8 mm thinly scabbed lesion
auricle Right ear. No associated mass.

Referred to audiology

5/21/2019

3/21/2018

Provider Encounter Request an audiogram

Seen by Audiology 1 hearing aid approved Returns on 4/6 for pick
up

7/26/2019

4/6/2018

Provider Encounter

Audiology appt

Review hearing test

Hearing aid pick up 15‐May
1 battery issued ‐ #13

NTC, as of 7/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 525 of 661 - Page ID#: 3089

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

13 5/2/2017

14

15

1/2/2018

11/7/2017

3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

upon intake 5/11/2017 5/23/2017

Upon Intake 9/18/2017 @ RCC 9/18/2017 @ RCC

Upon Intake 11/13/2017 11/13/2017

6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

No heaing aids needed at

Issued hearing aids

this time

Hearing aids Issued

A

D

A

N/A

See Attachment

N/A

16

17

12/14/2017

1/28/2018

Upon Intake 12/14/2017 12/14/2017

Sick call 2/20/2018 2/20/2018

Hearing aids Issued Has a right hearing aid

A

A

N/A

N/A

p. 10

NTC, as of 7/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 526 of 661 - Page ID#: 3090

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t‐coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

yes

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

9. Please provide the following information

about each medical encounter from when

the hearing issue was presented to when

the hearing issue was finally addressed (by Medical Visit 1 ‐ Date

5/11/2017

11/13/2018

1/2/2018

1/28/2018

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

Sick call

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

p. 11

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Date Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 3 ‐ Date Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Referred to audiology 5/23/2017
Audiology Appointment
Hearing aids ordered 6/7/2017

Referred to audiology Referred to audiology

1/3/2018

1/16/2018

Audiology Appt

Audiology Appt

Refer to provider 1/31/2018
Provider Encounter

Hearing aids order 1/25/2018
Audiology appt.

Hearing aids order 2/6/2018
Audiology appt.

Referred to audiology 2/20/2018
Audiology appt

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 527 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3091

p. 12

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 5 ‐ Date Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 6 ‐ Date Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Hearing aids received 5/1/2019
Issued Batteries

Hearing aids Received Hearing aids Received 6/13/2018
Hearing aid broken

Hearing aids order 3/7/2018
Audiology appt.

Sent for repair 6/19/18 8/28/2018

Hearing aids received 4/19/2018

Issued hearing aids 10/23/2018. 2/6/2019

Issued Batteries

Issued batteries

NTC, as of 7/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 528 of 661 - Page ID#: 3092

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

18
2/6/2018 Came to NTC with
hearing aids 11/29/2017 @ RCC 8/22/2018 @ NTC

19
2/28/2018 Has hearing aids at home
but not here on site. Noted HOH upon intake
11/26/2017 @ RCC 11/26/2017

20
10/6/2017 Upon Intake
4/2/2018 4/2/2018

21
4/4/2018 Upon Intake 9/28/2018 9/28/2018

22
8/9/2017 Physical 10/4/2018 10/4/2018

6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Has hearing aids

Has Lt hearing aid

Has hearing aid

No hearing aid needed

Has hearing aids

A

A

A

D

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

See attachment

N/A

p. 13

NTC, as of 7/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 529 of 661 - Page ID#: 3093

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t‐coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

N/A

N/A

Yes

N/A

9. Please provide the following information

about each medical encounter from when

the hearing issue was presented to when

the hearing issue was finally addressed (by Medical Visit 1 ‐ Date

2/6/2019

3/20/2018

4/2/2018

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Issued batteries

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Yes
9/15/2017 Sick Call

p. 14

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Date Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 3 ‐ Date Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Referred to audiology for a hearing test only
4/6/2018
Audiology appt

Hearing Eval 5/15/2018 Audiology Appt

Hearing aids were given hearing aids were order

4/25/2018

6/26/2018

Audiology appt.

1 battery issued ‐ #13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 530 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3094

p. 15

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 5 ‐ Date Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 6 ‐ Date Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Hearing aids received 5/9/2018, 5/18, 5/21, 5/22, 6/5, 9/20
Issued Batteries 6/12/2019
Issued batteries

NTC, as of 7/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 531 of 661 - Page ID#: 3095

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

23 1/22/2018

3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Upon Intake 10/11/2017 @ RCC
1/22/2018

6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Has hearing aids
A N/A

24

25

26

27

28

2/1/2018

2/2/2018

4/2/2018

6/1/2018 6/14/2018

Upon Intake 10/23/2017
2/1/2018

4/24/2018 5/1/2018

Sick Call 4/4/2018 4/4/2018

Upon Intake Upon Intake 6/1/2018 5/7/2018 6/1/2018 5/7/2018

Has hearing aids

Has hearing Amplifier

Has hearing Has hearing

Has hearing aids aid

aids

A

D

A

A

A

N/A

See attachment

N/A

N/A

N/A

p. 16

NTC, as of 7/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 532 of 661 - Page ID#: 3096

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t‐coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by Medical Visit 1 ‐ Date Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description
Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Yes
4/3/2018 Sick Call

Yes

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

25‐Jun

5/1/2018 Provider Encounter

4/4/2018 6/1/2018 6/14/2018

Arrived to Arrived to

Provider encounter

NTC

NTC

p. 17

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Date Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 3 ‐ Date Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

2 batteries issued

Hearing aid batteries

given.

Sound amplifier issued

Audiology consult placed

With Lt. Hearing binaural
aid hearing aids

2/18/2019 Issued batteries

4‐May Sick Call

4/25/2018 Outside audiology
encounter

5/15/219 Provider Encounter

Battery issued

Hearing aid recommended and
ordered

Request a hearing aid replacement

5/16/2018

5/15/2018

7/2/2019

Sick Call

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 533 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3097

p. 18

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 5 ‐ Date Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 6 ‐ Date Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Battery issued 5/31/2018
Battery issued

Received hearing aid 7/3/2018
Issued Batteries

7/16/2018

Issued Batteries
2/23/2019 Issued Batteries

hearing aid replaced
7/26/2019 Provider Encounter Sign a refusal for hearing aid

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 534 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3098

p. 19

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

29 7/27/2018

30 6/6/2018

31

32

7/5/2018 6/15/2018

33

34

6/6/2018 12/4/2013

35 5/2/2018

NTC

Kelly Buckley

7/26/2019

36

37

38

2/6/2018 8/22/2018 8/29/2018

3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Upon Intake Upon Intake Upon Intake Upon Intake Upon Intake Sick call

3/13/2018 11/9/2018 5/20/2017

8/17/2017 5/2/2018 @ RCC

@ WKCC @ KSR

12/30/2018

4/14/2018 5/2/2018 3/13/2018 6/15/2018 5/20/2017 6/27/2018

Sick call Physical Physical 10/9/2018 9/18/2018 8/22/2018 8/29/2018 10/9/2018 9/21/2018 8/22/2018 8/29/2018

6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

has hearing Has hearing Has Hearing Sound

Has Hearing Sound

No device at Has hearing Has hearing Has hearing

aids

aids

aids

Amplifier aids

Amplifier this time aid

aid

aid

A

A

A

D

A

DB

N/A

N/A

See

See

N/A attachment N/A attachment

A

A

A

N/A

N/A N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 535 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3099

p. 20

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t‐coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by Medical Visit 1 ‐ Date Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description
Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Yes

Yes

7/27/2018 6/6/2018

Arrived to Arrived to

NTC

NTC

Yes
7/5/2018 Arrived to
NTC

N/A
6/15/2018 Arrived to
NTC

Yes
6/6/2018 Arrived to
NTC

N/A

yes

5/20/2018 10/9/2018 9/18/2018

Seen by

Sick call Provider

Sick call

yes yes
8/22/2018 8/29/2018 seen by Seen by provider provider

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Date Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 3 ‐ Date Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

With

With

With

binaural

With

binaural with hearing binaural

hearing aids hearing aids hearing aids amplifier hearing aids

Refer to provider

Audioscope done and requested a Request Audiogram hearing test

Annual physical

physical

10/9/2018 Provider Encounter

10/3/2018

6/27/2018 11/6/2018 9/21/2018 8/31/2018 9/24/2018 Audiogram Seen by
Seen by MD completed. Provider

Audioscope

Replaced hearing amplifer

Replaced hearing amplifer

Hearing Eval‐ In house audioscope Audioscope Audioscope

2/15/2019 Audioscope on‐site

10/4/2018 2/13/2018 11/10/2018 10/5/2018 10/5/2018

On‐site

Audiogram

Audioscope review

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 536 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3100

p. 21

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 5 ‐ Date Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 6 ‐ Date Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Failed audioscope. Audiogram ordered.
3/25/2019 Audiogram completed.
4/8/2019 Provider encounter
Right hearing aid ordered.
5/16/2019 Provider Encounter Review Hearing assessment/ hearing aid issued

meet

criteria for

hearing aid

per DOC

Failed

policy.

audioscope. Pocket

Audiogram talker

ordered. issued.

Hearing aid was giving

Audiogram

Audiogram

11/6/2018 Audiogram completed

11/27/2018 11/10/2018 11/10/2018 Provider Encounter

F/u on

Hearing aid Hearing aid

hearing aid was giving was giving

11/21/2018 review of audiogram
meet criteria for hearing aids per DOC.

11/27/2018 11/26/2018 Provider Provider Encounter Encounter

F/u on

F/u hearing

hearing aid aid

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 537 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3101

p. 22

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

8/6/2018 8/29/2018 9/14/2018 9/21/2018 9/18/2018 10/5/2018 1/9/2019 2/15/2019

Physical

Physical Physical

8/6/2018 8/29/20018 9/14/2018

8/6/2018 8/29/2018 9/14/2018

Upon intake Upon intake

Upon Intake to NTC

to NTC

1/9/2019

5/30/2019

1/9/2019

6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

No device at No device at

Sound

Sound Amplifier this time this time No Device Amplifer

D

D

D

D

See attachment

See

See

attachment attachment

has Hearing Patient has

aid

hearing aid

A N/A

NTC, as of 7/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 538 of 661 - Page ID#: 3102

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t‐coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by Medical Visit 1 ‐ Date Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description
Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

N/A

N/A

N/A

8/6/2018 8/29/2018 9/14/2018

Seen by Seen by

Seen By MD

Provider provider

Physical/ Patient asked

for a pocket talker, will

re‐check hearing in Physical

1yr. Received pocket Request a

talker.

audioscope

Physical Request a audioscope

3/19/2018
Hearing Screening

yes
1/29/2018 12/4/2018 1/9/2019 Seen by Seen by Arrived to Provider Provider NTC
Hearing Audiogram With Evaluation order hearing aid

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Date Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description
Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

9/17/2018 10/5/2018 10/5/2018 Replacement of pocket talker.

5/9/2018 11/9/2018 Seen by Provider

1/9/2019

Sign Refusal Sign Refusal

for

for

Audioloogy Hearing

audioscope audioscope report

screening

Audiogram

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Date Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

2/27/2019 PE

1/23/2019 Provider Encounter

p. 23

NTC, as of 7/2019
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 539 of 661 - Page ID#: 3103

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 5 ‐ Date Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 6 ‐ Date Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Hearing screening Questionair
3/6/2019 Hearing aid Evaluation
Hearing aid approved
3/18/2019

No significant hearing loss at this time

Hearing aid issued

p. 24

NTC, as of 7/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 540 of 661 - Page ID#: 3104

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

48
11/30/2016 upon Intake 12/6/2016
2/7/2017

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

1/25/2018

1/15/2019 4/24/2019 6/3/2019 4/19/2019 4/10/2019 4/5/2019

Upon Intake 2/20/2018 2/20/2018

Physical Upon intake Physical Physical Physical Physical 1/15/2019 5/2/2019 6/3/2019 4/19/2019 4/10/2019 4/5/2019 5/16/2019 5/23/2019 6/12/2019 4/30/2019 4/22/2019 4/24/2019

p. 25

Issued hearing aids Has a Left hearing aid

6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one

applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether

hearing aids are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing

hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

A

A

B

B

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no

hearing aid needed) , please provide

medical documentation of the decision

against providing a hearing aid

N/A

N/A

Hearing aid

A

A

NTC, as of 7/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 541 of 661 - Page ID#: 3105

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t‐coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by Medical Visit 1 ‐ Date Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description
Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

yes
12/6/2016 Provider Encounter

N/A

1/30/2018 Provider Encounter

1/15/2019 4/24/2019 6/3/2019 4/19/2019 4/10/2019 4/5/2019

Provider Arrived at Provider Provider Provider Provider

Encounter NTC

Encounter Encounter Encounter Encounter

p. 26

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Date Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 3 ‐ Date Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Hearing Assessment

complete and

Request a

pending Audiology Referred to audiology Audioscope

Physical/ Physical/ Physical/ Physical/ Audioscope Audioscope Audioscope Audioscope

2/7/2017
Seen by Audiology Hearing test and fitting completed. Hearing aids were
order.

2/20/2018 Audiology appt

2/14/2019 5/2/2019 6/12/2019 4/30/2019 4/22/2019 4/24/2019

Provider Chart

Encounter Review

Hearing test hearing test Hearing test Hearing test

Audioscope hearing aids were order Exam

2/22/2017

3/7/2018 Audiology appt.

5/1/2019 5/23/2019 7/26/2019 6/3/209

Provider

Provider Provider

Encounter Hearing test Encounter Encounter

6/3/2019 6/3/2019 Provider Provider Encounter Encounter

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 542 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3106

p. 27

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 5 ‐ Date Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 6 ‐ Date Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Request Hearing aids Issued Hearing aids Received audiogram

Review Audicus testing

6/19/2019 Back to NTC

5/17/2018

5/16/2019 6/20/2019 Provider Encounter

Issued Batteries
5/21/2019 Back at NTC

Follow up Hearing test hearing test

Review

Follow up Follow up

hearing test hearing test hearing test

7/2/2019 7/2/2019 Hearing aid Issued

Heairng aid

NTC, as of 7/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 543 of 661 - Page ID#: 3107

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

56

57

4/12/2019 4/16/2019

58

59

4/10/2019 4/16/2019

60

61

3/15/2019 2/13/2019

62 2/5/2019

63 12/10/2018

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Physical Physical Physical Physical Physical Sick call Sick call Physical

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

4/12/2019 4/16/2019 4/10/2019 4/16/2019 3/15/2019 2/13/2019 2/6/2019

4/22/2019 4/22/2019 4/19/2019 4/18/2019 3/26/2019 3/25/2019 3/25/2019 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

12/12/2019 3/25/2019

6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Hearing aid A

Hearing aid Hearing aid

A

A

Sound Amplifer

Sound Amplifier

D

D

p. 28

NTC, as of 7/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 544 of 661 - Page ID#: 3108

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t‐coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information

about each medical encounter from when

the hearing issue was presented to when

the hearing issue was finally addressed (by

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Date

4/12/2019 4/16/2019 4/10/2019 4/16/2019 3/15/2019 2/13/2019 2/5/2019

12/10/2018

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Provider Provider Provider Provider Provider Provider

Encounter Encounter Encounter Encounter Encounter Encounter Sick call Provider Encounter

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Physical/Au dioscope Physical

Physical/ Physical/ Physical/ Audioscope Audioscope Audioscope Sick call

place sick call for hearing issues

Physical

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Date Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description
Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

4/22/2019 4/22/2019 4/19/2019 4/18/2019 3/26/2019 3/25/2019 2/6/2019

12/12/2018

Provider

Hearing test Hearing test Hearing test Hearing Test Hearing test Hearing test Encounter Provider Encounter

Audioscope

done and

request a Audioscope done and

audiogram request a audiogram

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Date Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

6/20/2019 5/31/2019 5/14/2019 5/15/2019 3/27/2019 3/26/2019 Provider Provider Provider Provider Encounter Encounter Encounter Encounter

25‐Mar

3/25/2019

p. 29

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 545 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3109

p. 30

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 5 ‐ Date Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 6 ‐ Date Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Follow up

Issued

Follow up from

Follow up Follow up Hearing

hearing aid hearing test hearing test hearing test Amplifer

Issued Hearing Amplifier

Audiogram

done

Audiogram completed

7/24/2019 Hearing aid issued

6/5/2019 5/15/2019 4/8/2019 4/8/2019 3/26/2019

3/26/2019

Provider Provider Provider

Encounter Encounter Encounter

Review Signed

Hearing

Issued

hearing Refusal for F/u hearing amplifer

hearing aid assesment follow up test

order

Order sound amplifier

6/5/2019

4/8/2019

4/8/2019

Provider

Encounter Provider Encounter

Follow up hearing test Follow up

NTC, as of 7/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 546 of 661 - Page ID#: 3110

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

3/12/2019 11/13/2019 11/12/2018 3/6/2019 12/10/2018 2/19/2019 10/22/2019 10/5/2018 3/11/209

2. How hearing problem was first presented

to KDOC

Provider

appt.

Physical Physical

Sick call Physical

Physical Sick call

Physical

Physical

3. Date of initial hearing screening

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

3/12/2019 11/13/2018 1/9/2019 3/8/2019 12/10/2018 2/19/2019

10/5/2019 3/11/2019

3/20/2019 1/9/2019 11/29/2019 3/26/2019 3/25/2019 3/20/2019 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

1/9/2019 3/20/2019

6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Sound Amplifier
D

hearing aid hearing aid Hearing aid

A

A

A

Hearing aid A

p. 31

NTC, as of 7/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 547 of 661 - Page ID#: 3111

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t‐coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information

about each medical encounter from when

the hearing issue was presented to when

the hearing issue was finally addressed (by

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Date

3/12/2019 11/13/2019 11/12/2018 3/6/2019 12/10/2018 2/19/2019 10/22/2019 12/5/2018 3/11/2019

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Provider Provider Provider

Provider

Provider

Provider Provider

Encounter Encounter Encounter Sick call Encounter Encounter Sick call

Encounter Encounter

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Audioscope,

Patient

Patients Audioscope

reports

reports he Completed.

hearing

used to have Request a

Refer to Physical/ Physical/ loss.Refer to request Physical/

hearing aids audiogram Physical

provider Audioscope Audioscope provider

audioscope Audioscope

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Date Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description
Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

3/20/2019 1/23/2019 Provider Encounter

11/29/2019 3/8/2019 Provider Encounter

3/25/2019 3/20/2019 10/23/2019 provider Encounter

1/9/2019 3/20/2019

Follow up Audioscope Audioscope Audiogram Audiogram Request

Audiogram Audiogram

Audiogram audiogram completed completed Completed Completed audioscope Completed Completed

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Date Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

3/26/2019 Provider Encounter

1/9/2019 3/26/2019 4/8/2019 4/8/2019

Provider

Provider

Encounter Encounter

1/9/2019 1/25/2019 4/8/2019 Provider Provider Encouter Ecounter

p. 32

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 548 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3112

p. 33

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 5 ‐ Date Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 6 ‐ Date Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Hearing Amplifer order
4/8/2019 Provider Encounter
Follow up hearing test

Audioscope Audiogram completed Completed Follow up

Audiogram F/u

Follow up

Completed audiogram hearing test

1/23/2019 4/8/2019 5/16/2019 5/16/2019

Provider

Provider Provider

Encounter Encounter Encounter

Follow up Follow up Review for Review for audiogram Hearing test hearing aid hearing aid

6/7/2019
Issued hearing amplifer

5/16/2019 Provider Encounter

6/5/2019

7/2/2019

Placed order

for hearing Issued

aid

hearing aid

Issued hearing aid

6/6/2019

Hearing aid issue

NTC, as of 7/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 549 of 661 - Page ID#: 3113

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

74 10/23/2018

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Physical

4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

10/23/2018 3/262019

6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Hearing aid A

p. 34

NTC, as of 7/2019

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 550 of 661 - Page ID#: 3114

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t‐coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information

about each medical encounter from when

the hearing issue was presented to when

the hearing issue was finally addressed (by

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Date

10/23/2018

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Provider

Encounter

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Date Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 3 ‐ Date Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Physical/ Audioscope
3/26/2019
Audiogram Completed
4/8/2019 Provider Encounter

p. 35

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 551 of 661 - Page

NTC, as of 7/2019

ID#: 3115

p. 36

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 5 ‐ Date Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome
Medical Visit 6 ‐ Date Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Follow up hearing test
5/15/2019
hearing aid order
6/5/2019
issued heaing a

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 552 of 661 - Page ID#: 3116

Documentation to review

Date reviewed

KOMS alerts for each deaf/HOH inmate

8/5/2019

Grievances:

Provide/Review summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates.

Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc.

Provide/Review full documentation of all grievances that address

hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Solve any problems revealed.

Discipline

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving an inmate who signs.

Ensure that VRI or other effective communication was provided at each 8/6/2019

stage of each such proceedings.

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving failure to obey an order, or

failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Ensure that no such inmate is being penalized for

8/6/2019

inability to hear.

VRI Log (review to ensure it's being used in appropriate circumstances. 8/8/2019

VRS or other videophone alternative (review to ensure that when videophone is inoperative, alternative is in fact available/used)

8/7/2019

TTY instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.) 8/5/2019

VRI instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.) 8/5/2019

Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.) Emailed list of missing tabs needed to add
No IM's have requested assistance for disciplinary No log- Non compliant No substitute- Non compliant

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 553 of 661 - Page ID#: 3117

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Personal

Listed Signs Low literacy?

If signs to

Bed

Other Alert

Phone

with

to (So that

communicat

Shaker? Device TTY Access Amplifier

KOMS comm written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not

ADA

unicat communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested;

Precautio e

n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied; denied;

Name

ID

n?

(Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted) granted)

Y

N 8th

Y

N HSD

Y

N 8th

Y

N Some College

Y

N 4th

Y

N Graduate Deg

Needs ASL

Y

N HSD

Y

N GED

Y

N HSD

Y

N GED

Y

N GED

Y

N 9TH

Y

N ASSOCIATES

Y

N GED

Y

N GED

Y

N 10TH

Y

N GED

Y

N GED

Y

N 10TH

Y

N GED

Y

N UNKOWN

N

N GED

Y

N GED

Y

N 8TH

Y

N 8TH

Needs ASL

Y

N Some College

Y

N UNKOWN

Y

N HSD

Y

N Some College

Y

N GED

Y

N UNKOWN

Y

N UNKOWN

Y

N GED

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 554 of 661 - Page ID#: 3118

Name

Shake &

Wake (Not Any other

requested; auxiliary

denied; aid

ID

granted) requested? Outome? Audit item issues/concerns

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 555 of 661 - Page ID#: 3119

Personal

Listed Signs Low literacy?

If signs to

Bed

Other Alert

Phone

with

to (So that

communicat

Shaker? Device TTY Access Amplifier

KOMS comm written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not

ADA

unicat communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested;

Precautio e

n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied; denied;

ID

n?

(Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted) granted)

Y

N GRED

N

N GED

Y

N GED

Y

N 8TH

Y

N GED

N

N HSD

Y

N 11TH

Y

N Some College

Y

N UNKOWN

Needs ASL

Y

Y

Some College y

y

Y

y

y

Vib Watch y

y

Y

N HSD

N

N GED

N

N GED

N

N UNKOWN

N

N 10TH

N

N HSD

N

N GED

N

N GED

N

N GED

Y

N 9TH

N

N Some College

N

N GED

N

N GED

N

N GED

N

N GED

N

N HSD

N

N GED

N

N HSD

N

N GED

N

N GED

N

N 10TH

N

N 10TH

N

N GED

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 556 of 661 - Page ID#: 3120

Shake &

Wake (Not Any other

requested; auxiliary

denied; aid

ID

granted) requested? Outome? Audit item issues/concerns

y

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 557 of 661 - Page ID#: 3121

Fill this out for EACH location where there are any deaf/HOH inmates

How many Volume

Bed

If there are

How inmates adjustable

shakers set Staff use If there are any

any inmates

many who sign phone available How up for use bed

inmates who If there are any who sign:

Deaf/ to

to inmates

many for

shakers for sign: Location inmates who Ready

HOH communic without special bed

multiple multiple available for sign: Staff

access to

Dorm/unit

Walk

inmates? ate

request?

shakers? purposes? purposes? VRI?

trained for VRI videophone Audit item issues/concerns

One

LL

1

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

LR

2

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

UL

6

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

UR

2

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Two

LL

4

1Y

Y

CO Office

Y

Y

LR

2

1Y

Y

CO Office

Y

Y

UL

8

1Y

Y

CO Office

Y

Y

UR

2

1Y

Y

CO Office

Y

Y

Three

LL

3

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

LR

1

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

UL

1

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

UR

1

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Four

LL

3

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

LR

8

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

UL

3

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

UR

3

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Five

LL

1

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

LR

0

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

UL

3

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

UR

0

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Six

LL

7

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

LR

1

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

UL

2

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

UR

0

0 NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 558 of 661 - Page ID#: 3122
Roederer Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 559 of 661 - Page ID#: 3123

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

(Explain)

A ADA coordinator

1 Is an ADA coordinator designated?

Jessica Durrett

X

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no 2 ADA coordinator appointed?

Jessica Durrett took over as ADA coordinator

on May 24, 2019

X

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Not yet working on getting it updated

x

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates?

Memos are posted in housing units

X

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates 5 in a timely and appropriate manner? How?

Memos are posted in housing units

X

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? (THIS

6 REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

X

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit

7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

X

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

X

9 Describe training

ADA Basic Training

X

Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately cover

10 information?

Yes

X

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training)

X

12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

X

Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's

13 powerpoint)

X

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with

14 settlement agreement?

X

Does ADA coordinator retrieve at least monthly reports

15 on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

X

Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking

16 list?

X

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in

17 implementing the settlement?

X

Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf

18 inmates?

X

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on deaf

19 inmates?

X

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the

20 inmates in those situations?

X

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective way with

21 the monitor?

X

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the

22 monitor when necessary?

X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 560 of 661 - Page ID#: 3124

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

B Reporting obligations

If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was monitor

1 notified?

May 24 change occurred

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and

2 HOH inmates?

3 Is the list complete?

4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

Quarterly summary of all grievances by deaf or HOH

5 inmates shared with monitor?

Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs,

6 activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe)

none

7 Was it reported to the monitor?

8 Was the report complete?

9 Was the report timely?

10 Did the institution consider any non‐auditory alert?

11 If yes, was the monitor notified?

Did the institution consult with the monitor about the non‐

12 auditory alert?

13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

45 min. TTY and 30 min. Videophone

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
X
X X X X
X NA NA NA X X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 561 of 661 - Page ID#: 3125

# Issue/Question C Intake/Orientation ‐ Corrections
1 Hard of hearing inmates

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
X

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic 3 notifications.)
4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe) Deaf inmates
5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving? 6 Describe 7 Effective communications planning? 8 Effective communication provided?
9 Describe 10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed? 11 Use of in‐person interpreter when needed?
Orientation videos 12 Captioned? 13 Shown in a quiet space? 14 Amplification if needed?
Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not 15 literate? (Describe)

New intake into system ‐ medical notifies

ADA coordinator. Transfers into facility ‐

X

notified via email by automatic alert by

KOMS.

Yes, the ADA precaution in KOMS notifies the

staff that the offender is HOH/DEAF and will

meet with the inmate prior to scheduled

X

meeting to determine what is needed to

effectively communicate.

Yes, the ADA precaution in KOMS notifies the

staff that the offender is HOH/DEAF and will

meet with the inmate prior to scheduled

X

meeting to determine what is needed to

effectively communicate.

KOMS email sent to ADA coordinator

x

X

X

a VRI laptop on site for use or contract with

Interpreter if needed. TTY and Videophones

are provided upon request.

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 562 of 661 - Page ID#: 3126

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

(Explain)

D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general medical intake, and during medical care more generally:

VRI, Interpreter, amplifier

X

1 Is there effective communications planning?

provider works with ADA Cor. to have needed

services.

X

Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing

2 if interpretation is needed?

X

3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?

X

Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications

4 techniques?

X

Notice to medical staff:

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How?

ECW HOH alert

X

Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover 6 and within the file?

Listed as diagnosis and ECW Alert

X

Off‐site medical: Provision of appropriate

7 accommodations.

Knowledegable about obligation to alert off‐site providers 8 of need for interpretation?

Schedulers understands procedure

X

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

Scheduler works with ADA cor.

X

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

no

NA

11 Adequate notice?

NA

Outside providers offering effective communication to

12 inmates who sign?

NA

13 How?

NA

Hearing screening/medical intake:

14 Performed for all new inmates?

X

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

X

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

X

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

X

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?

Question #4

X

How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by 19 staff?

Describe: By staff

x

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

Describe: Medical

x

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?

x

22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe.

Describe: Based on literacy, medical will

rephrase the questions

x

23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 563 of 661 - Page ID#: 3127

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

(Explain)

Other methods of access:

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

x

25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening?

x

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

x

Yes, referred to provider for assessment.

If screening indicated problem (3+ "yes" answers), is

Provider makes referral to hearing booth.

Then, issued nothing, sound amp or hearing

x

27 there further assessment?

aids.

Adequate determination of need for designation/ 28 audiology services? How?

Questionaire, Provider assessment, hearing

booth test

x

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

x

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or HOH,

30 apart from audiology services decision?

x

After assessment, does medical:

NA

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

x

32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file?

x

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

x

34 Is notification prompt?

x

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology

Checklist)

NA

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

x

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

x

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

x

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

x

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

x

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

NA

40 initial request/questionnaire?

x

41 each relevant medical visit?

X

42 any audiology visit?

X

43 hearing aid provision?

X

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1‐2 weeks?

X

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

X

46 Shared with monitor when requested

X

Summary

X

When nothing unusual happens, how many off‐site trips

does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid?

N/A

47 Describe.

Describe: no offsite appointments

In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait

48 more than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?

Describe: 2

NA

49 What is the cause of the delay?

Describe: Provider Follow up was delayed NA

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) to

50 improve this process?

Describe: to move to provider working

NA

Co‐pay and availability issues:

NA

47 Charged only once ‐‐ not again for followups

x

Hearing aid batteries

?

NA

48 Available for free?

x

49 In sufficient numbers?

x

50 7 days/week?

x

51 regardless of housing?

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 564 of 661 - Page ID#: 3128

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

E Information provided inmates

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe)

Describe:

Inmate handbook adequately refers to non‐discrimination

2 and ADA services?

Brochure? Items to include:

?

3 Non‐discrimination obligation

4 Effective communication obligation

5 Auxiliary aids and services available

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services

6 (including hearing aids, and batteries)

7 Communication equipment available, and how to use

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

Other items:

?

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

Request for Accommodations/ Communications

10 Assistance

Medical Request form includes request for

11 accommodations

Job application form includes request for

12 accommodations

13 Waiver forms

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
x x NA x x x x x x NA x x
x
x x

14 Classification form includes request for accommodations 15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations
SAP and other programming form includes request for 16 accommodation 17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation
Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available 18 in law library? (Need to check)
Do request forms: 19 list available services comprehensively?
clearly explain services and aids (what they are and 20 when they are available? 21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?
expressly ask about preferred mode of communication/needed services and why they are 22 useful? 23 explain which items are free? encompass religious and volunteer‐provided 24 programming? Effective communication of these resources:

x

x

x

Describe date checked: I haven t checked this

x

since getting this position in May not sure if

the previous coordinator did

NA

x

x

x

x

x x NA

25 Are the materials in language accessible to each inmate?

x

Is this information provided with effective

26 communication?

x

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful

opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member and

x

27 interpreter to ask questions about the materials?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 565 of 661 - Page ID#: 3129

# Issue/Question Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application for a program with staff, is effective
28 communication provided? are potential accommodations covered in the
29 discussion? Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application in education with staff, is effective
30 communication provided? are potential accommodations covered in the
31 discussion?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA
x
x NA
x
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 566 of 661 - Page ID#: 3130

# Issue/Question F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates
1 Notice posted at entrance to institution? 2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator? 3 Notice posted outside housing units? 4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator? 5 Cell/bed cards 6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?
7 Clear process to obtain? Describe 8 Each inmate has one if not waived? 9 Provided timely? 10 Replacements provided when needed?
KOMS alert? 11 Staff aware of use of KOMS
Working process to get new inmate alerts added? 12 (Describe) 13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check) 14 Appropriately obvious 15 Updated timely
Individual ID cards 16 Staff aware of meaning? 17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?) 18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived? 19 Provided timely? 20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times? 21 Prompt replacements provided? 22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose? 23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator? 24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver? 25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file? 26 Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested ID? 27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

x

x

x

x

NA

x

Describe: Each inmate is given a cell/bed card

to place at the end of their bed. This provides x

awarness to staff

x

x

x

NA

x

Describe: Medial places the alerts in KOMS at

the initial meeting listing what time of

x

equipment the inmate has been issued

all but one

x

x

x

NA

x

x

x

x

x

x

Describe: No

NA

NA

Describe: No

NA

NA

NA

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 567 of 661 - Page ID#: 3131

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of

2 other deaf/hoh inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly

3 identified deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each

5 inmate about available auxiliary aids and services?

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting?

7 (oral and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment

8 on intake, has one been done?

9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA x
x
x
x
x x x NA x x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 568 of 661 - Page ID#: 3132

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

(Explain)

H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

1 On‐person ID cards

x

2 Cell cards

x

3 Bed shaker

x

4 In‐person alerts

x

5 Pager

No pagers are provided

x

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location

6 where phones are available?)

x

7 Amplifier for phone

x

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

8 communication difficulties?

x

9 Other amplification

NA

10 Other (describe)

Describe:

NA

General issues

NA

Special housing area:

NA

Describe: Inmates requirin the use of the bed

Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH inmates?

shaker will be placed in Unit 1 A wing in the

11 (Describe)

first 2 beds

NA

Describe: There is only one wing the the

If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it?

officer in the control center has to monitor

12 (Describe)

and the first 2 beds are close to the officer NA

If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed

only if they have requested the use of the bed

13 there? (such a requirement is non‐compliant).

shaker

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live

there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to the

Describe: due to logostics of the other units

14 inmate? Describe any restrictions.

the bed shaker is unable to be set up

In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is

15 primary consideration given to inmate request?

x

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and

Services form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a

waiver, or not requesting aids/services, were

x

16 accommodations provided?

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services documented in 17 inmate institutional files?

scanned into KOMS

x

Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services

18 shared appropriately with staff?

x

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

all are checked by ADA cor.

x

20 Have any been out of comission?

Describe: videophone

NA

Describe: March 11 first timereproted not

working would work occasionally‐May 29

21 Describe ‐‐ which and for how long?

determined issue with softwared

NA

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated

22 from hearing aid?

x

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

NA

24 Promptly?

NA

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Describe: None

NA

26 Describe

Describe:

NA

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree

27 of impairment and specific dangers posed)

Describe:

NA

28 Appropriately reported?

NA

29 Was it the appropriate decision?

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 569 of 661 - Page ID#: 3133

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

(Explain)

I

Interpretation in general

Qualified interpretation services available:

NA

Is the process for using VRI/in‐person interpretation

1 communicated to inmates?

x

covers all inmate‐staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

x

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and

3 other volunteer‐provided programming?

x

Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation

4 method?

x

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

x

Standing arrangement with providers?

NA

6 In‐person?

Contract

x

7 VRI?

x

Is VRI availability:

NA

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

available anytime stored in Captain's office

x

after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

9 notice)?

x

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

10 notice)?

x

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

x

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

Describe: RCC doesn't have an RHU housing

unit onsite

NA

VRI laptop functional?

Describe: Yes checks are done

NA

13 In general

x

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

x

15 Routine software updates?

x

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Describe:

NA

16 Splitter?

17 Instructions?

x

18 Long power cord?

x

19 Usable as VRS?

x

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

x

21 How?

log sheet

x

Information used to determine when in‐person

22 interpretation should be first recourse?

x

Is in‐person interpretation available:

x

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

x

24 Parole?

x

Describe each time in‐person interpretation has been

25 offered

NA

Describe each time in‐person interpretation has been

26 denied.

NA

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7

27 days before?

NA

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret?

28 (Reliance in non‐emergency is non‐compliant)

no inmates interpret

29 Describe

Describe:

NA

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and

30 VRI was unavailable)

NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 570 of 661 - Page ID#: 3134

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

31 method?

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Written communication is not needed when inmate has

33 low literacy

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and

34 other volunteer‐provided programming?

for all inmate‐staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

35 encounters/communications/settings)

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA x x NA x
x
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 571 of 661 - Page ID#: 3135

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

(Explain)

J Hand Restraints

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

Describe: Would be used on initial transport NA

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

x

2 finding of a security threat?

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who

3 might ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

x

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

x

5 Staff aware of the issue

x

Off‐site medical care:

NA

6 two‐point hand restraint system used?

x

restraints removed when necessary for medical

7 communication?

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 572 of 661 - Page ID#: 3136

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

K Non‐auditory Alerts

1 Does the prison have non‐auditory alerts? (Describe)

Describe:

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

7 used to notify of prison‐wide events?

used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to

8 them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non‐auditory

9 alerts been denied?

No request have been denied

Non‐auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are

10 working?

11 frequently enough?

Every quarter checked if not in use

12 monitored/recorded formally?

13 Announcement boards

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

15 used consistently?

16 in all dormitories?

17 in gym?

18 in library?

19 audited and monitored?

In‐person or personal system notification when an

20 inmate misses a page?

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

21 because of disability?

Describe: No

Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the

22 future?

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication

25 will be provided?

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
x x x x x x x
x
x
x
x x NA x x x x x x
x
NA
NA
x x
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 573 of 661 - Page ID#: 3137

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

(Explain)

L Telecommunications

Videophones:

NA

1 Installed?

1 videophone

x

2 Allow voice carry‐over features?

x

Describe: March 11 first time reported not

working would occasionally‐May 29

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

determinded issue with software

NA

Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve

Describe: Issue with softabll v9 downgraded

4 them.

to v8

NA

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

5 alternative offered

Describe: If needed it is available

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

Describe: Information is posted by video

6 videophone is out of service.

phone and ADA Cor talks with the inmates NA

7 Same times of access as non‐deaf inmates?

x

8 Appropriate location?

Outside of unit door

x

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends, 9 emergency) if necessary?

no escort needed due to close location

x

10 Time: 2x that for non‐deaf inmates?

30 minute time limit

x

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

x

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

12 using ordinary phones?

x

13 Advance request unnecessary?

no advanced notice needed

x

14 Free?

x

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone 15 calls?

No disciplinary report has been issued

x

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and

16 been denied?

Describe: No

NA

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including 17 the inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.
TTY: 18 Installed?
Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and 19 staff?
Easy‐to‐understand, institution specific instructions made 20 available WITH TTY? 21 Function ‐‐ days out of service? (Specify) 22 Access ‐‐ appropriate hours, days?
location substantially as accessible as conventional 23 telephones for non‐deaf inmates? 24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access? 25 Permission needed? 26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe) 27 Time: 3x that for non‐deaf inmates?
28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe) 29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Describe: 2 TTY phones

NA x

In handbook and ADA covers with them

x

x

Describe: none

NA

7 days a week, availbale 12 hours a day

x

x

No permission, have to ask Officer for tty

x

Describe: none denied

NA

45 minutes

x

Describe: Charged for phone call, but not for

tty service. Same rate as conventional

phones

NA

Describe:

30 Can access publicly available relay service phone numbers?

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 574 of 661 - Page ID#: 3138

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions for

31 videophones and TTY is less than equitable?

Describe:

32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

If yes, was determination (including reasoning, evidence,

33 etc.) documented?

34 Was monitor notified?

35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

VRS via laptop

36 Available?

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

38 Used when appropriate?

Phones

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

CapTel

41 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

Describe:

42 If so, installed and working?

Describe:

43 Request by any inmate denied?

Describe:

TV/Movies

44 Is captioning available?

45 Is captioning used?

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly

48 (Describe)

Describe:

49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

50 Amplification method? (Describe)

Describe:

If inmate‐purchased tv w/ captioning malfunctioned, did

staff assist to same extent as w/other inmates regarding

51 malfunctioning personal property?

All technology/ equipment in good working order?

52 (Describe problems)

Describe any problems:

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non‐deaf inmates of

53 same status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH

inmates only to the same extent and with the same

54 discretion as non‐deaf inmates?

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA NA
NA
NA NA NA x x x NA x x NA NA NA NA NA x x x
x
x NA

x x

NA

x

x

x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 575 of 661 - Page ID#: 3139

# Issue/Question M Miscellaneous Devices
1 Devices available? (Describe) 2 devices in commissary list?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Describe:

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator? 4 facilitation of purchase?
Purchase of any non‐medically necessary device denied? 5 (Describe) 6 determined on case‐by‐case basis? 7 because security threat? 8 monitor notified? 9 reasoning explained?
ADA coordinator maintains records 10 of requests? 11 of denials? N Disciplinary
Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been 1 punished? 2 Was a re‐hearing granted? O Grievances Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA 1 coordinator? If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator 2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator? Records of all grievances filed by deaf/HOH inmates? (not 3 just those related to settlement) 4 Adequate summaries provided in report? Including all deaf or HOH inmate grievances, not just those 5 in settlement? 6 Includes issues raised by inmate in grievance? 7 Includes institution in which grievance was filed? 8 Includes summary of KDOC response? 9 Includes grievance resolution (or lack thereof)?

Describe: None requested

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA
x x
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
NA
NA
x
x
x x x x x x x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 576 of 661 - Page ID#: 3140

# Issue/Question P Training
Types available 1 CBT? (Using approved training?) 2 Who received? (Describe) 3 All appropriate staff? 4 Live training? (Information only) 5 Who received? (Describe) 6 All appropriate staff?
Targeted training on specific needs 7 training on best communication practices? 8 training on unique needs/problems?
training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may miss 9 alert?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Describe: All staff receive training annually
Describe: By Training Instructor Describe: All staff receive training annually

NA x
NA x
NA NA
x NA
x x
x

training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may not hear 10 verbal commands and strategies to handle that problem? 11 training on identification of communication needs?
consideration given to talking one‐on‐one with deaf or 12 HOH inmates, instead of in a group?
Training on communication 13 training on use and role of interpreters? 14 training on process for obtaining interpreters?
training on importance of not separating imate from 15 hearing aid? 16 training on communication technology? 17 training on VRI? 18 training on how to turn on and check for captioning? 19 training on non‐auditory alert office switch? 20 training on videophone rules?
Training on Policies 21 training on the Settlement? 22 training on identity and role of ADA coordinator? 23 training on KDOC anti‐discrimination policy? 24 training on existence of KOMS/EMR alerts? 25 training on meaning of ID cards?
training on equipment/services/ accommodation 26 available? 27 training on hand restraint policy? 28 training on two‐point hand restraint system? 29 training on disciplinary and grievance practies?
Do all relevant staff know about reporting obligations? 30 How do you know?
Training specifically for housing area staff training on the use of cell/bed notices that indicate an 31 inmate is deaf/HOH 32 training on bed shaker switches 33 training on telecommunications training on obligations to notify deaf and HOH inmates of 34 alerts

Describe:

x
x
x
NA x x
x
x x x x x NA x x x x x
x
x x x
x
NA
x
x x
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 577 of 661 - Page ID#: 3141

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

Training specifically for all corrections staff

training on accommodations for inmates who sign (esp.

35 restraint policies)

training on strategies for inmates who may not hear

36 directions/orders

Training specifically for medical staff

training on process to obtain hearing aid within two

37 months

38 training on obligation to notify off‐site providers of needs

39 Training provided for review by Monitor?

Q Monitor Access

Has the monitor been granted access to requested KDOC

1 records, files, and papers that pertain to the agreement?

2 If no, was an explanation provided for the refusal?

Has the monitor been granted access to KDOC staff

3 members and employees?

4 Were staff/employees cooperative?

5 Has KDOC responded to reasonable written questions?

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA x
x NA
x x x
x NA NA NA NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 578 of 661 - Page ID#: 3142

Prison:

Name of person filling out form:

Date:

1

2

3

4

5

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

10/17/2018

10/18/2018

12/18/2018

1/2/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Intake

Intake

Intake

Intake

Inatke

3. Date of initial hearing screening

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

10/30/2018

12/8/2018

12/20/2018

1/14/2018

12/5/2018

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

12/6/2018

12/12/2018

1/14/2019

1/21/2019

12/20/2018

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Rt. 35,35,35,40 Left 45,45,40,40 Rt 45,40,25,60,55, Lt 45,35,30,40Rt. 20,20,10,30 Lt. 30,40,60,60 Rt.10,40,40,50 Lt. 60,60,60,65

a

a

d

c

Rt 30,30,30,70 Lt 25,25,50,80 c

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 579 of 661 - Page ID#: 3143

1

2

3

4

5

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

10/30/2018

12/8/2018

1/2/2019

1/8/2019

12/20/2018

H&P with Provider

H&P with Provider

H&P with Provider

H&P with Provider

H&P

Failed Whispher Test

Failed Whispher Test

Failed Whispher Test

Failed Whispher Test

Failed Whisper Test

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Audiogram Rt. Mild Left Mild

12/6/2018

12/12/2018

1/14/2019

1/14/2019

12/20/2018

Audiogram

Audiogram

Audiogram

Audiogran

Rt Moderate, Lt Mild to ModeratRt. Normal Lt. Moderate

Rt. Mild Lt. Moderate

Not Charted approiatley

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Dr. Kemen Patient Choice

12/14/2018 Dr. Kemen Lt Ear

12/14/2018

1/21/2019

Dr. Kemen

Dr. Kemen

Nothing needed at this time Right Order

1/21/2019

1/14/2019

Re charted

Right Sever High Freq. Lt. Mod. T

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Recievd

12/26/2018 Received

12/26/2018

Dr. Kemen Lt. Ear

1/21/2019

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

1/26/2019

1/26/2019

1 month Check up

1 month Check up

2/8/2019

2/8/2019

Hearing Aid Issued

Hearing Aid Issued

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

One Month f/U

3/8/2019 One Month f/U

3/8/2019

...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 580 of 661 - Page ID#: 3144

1

2

3

4

5

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered

time period?

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 581 of 661 - Page ID#: 3145

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC Intake
3. Date of initial hearing screening

6
12/5/2018 Intake

7

. . .

12/10/2018 Intake

12/6/2018 Intake

1/7/2019 Intake

12/11/2018

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

12/5/2018

12/19/2018

12/17/2018

1/22/2019

12/24/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

12/20/2018

12/20/2018

1/14/2018

1/30/2019

12/27/2018

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Rt. 35,30,40,50, Lt. 40,25,35,45 Rt. 25,55,45,45 Lt. Ear50,60,70,8Rt. 40,50,30,40 Lt.50,30,25,50

c

a

c

Moderate to Sever Bilateral a

Rt. 35,35,35,40 Lt. 40,40,40,45 a

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 582 of 661 - Page ID#: 3146

6 Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

7

. . .

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

12/20/2018

12/19/2018

12/17/2019

1/22/2019

12/24/2019

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

12/20/2018

12/20/2018

12/20/2018

1/30/2019

12/27/2018

Audiogran

Audiogran

Audiogran

Audiogram

Audiogram

Not Charted approiatley

Not Charted approiatley

Not Charted approiatley

Moderate to Sever

Mild hearing loss both ears

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Re charted To sever

1/14/2019 Re charted

1/14/2019 Re charted

1/14/2019 Kemen Right

2/1/2019 Kemen Right Ear

1/11/2019

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Dr. Kemen Left Ear

1/21/2019 Dr. Kemen Right Ear

1/21/2019 Dr. Kemen Right Ear

1/21/2019

2/15/2019

1/30/2019

Received hearing Aid

Received Hearing Aid

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

2/8/2019

2/8/2019 At Simpson County Jial

Hearing Aid Issued

Hearing Aid Issued

F/U

7/23/2019 One Month F/u

2/28/2019

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

One Month f/U

3/8/2019 One Month f/U

3/8/2019

...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 583 of 661 - Page ID#: 3147

6 Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

7

. . .

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 584 of 661 - Page ID#: 3148

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC Intake
3. Date of initial hearing screening

12/7/2018 Intake

12/7/2018 Intake

12/7/2018 Intake

12/7/2018 Intake

1/7/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

12/21/2018

12/20/2018

12/20/2018

12/20/2018

1/22/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

12/27/2018

12/27/2018

12/27/2018

12/27/2018

1/30/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Rt. 55,60,60,60 Lt. 15,20,25,50 a

Rt. 40,40,40,80 Lt. 35,40,30,80 a

Rt. 15,20,60,65 Lt. 15,20,55,55 a

Rt. 15,15,25,65 Lt. 15,15,25,80 a

Rt. 25,45,75, NR, NR Lt. 35,45,70 a

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 585 of 661 - Page ID#: 3149

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

12/21/2018

12/20/2018

12/20/2018

12/20/2018

1/22/2019

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Audiogram Rt. Mod. Lt. Mild

12/27/2018 Audiogram Sever both ears

12/27/2018

12/27/2018

12/27/2018

1/30/2019

Audiogram

Audiogram

Audiogram

Moderate bilateral

Mod. To severe bilateral

Rt. Severe Lt. Severe

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Kemen Lt. Ear

1/11/2019 Kemen Lt. Ear

1/11/2019 Kemen Lt. Ear

1/11/2019 Kemen Right

1/11/2019 Kemen Right

2/1/2019

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

1/30/2019

1/30/2019

1/30/2019

1/30/2019

2/15/2019

Received Hearing Aid

Received Hearing Aid

Received Hearing Aid

Received Hearing Aid

Received Hearing Aid

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

One Month F/u

2/28/2019 One Month F/u

2/28/2019 One Month F/u

2/28/2019 One Month F/u

2/28/2019 One Month f/u

3/15/2019

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 586 of 661 - Page ID#: 3150
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 587 of 661 - Page ID#: 3151

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC Intake
3. Date of initial hearing screening

1/7/2019 Intake

1/14/2019 Chronic Care

1/23/2019 Intake

1/11/2019 Intake

1/3/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

1/22/2019

1/25/2019

1/23/2019

1/24/2019

1/14/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

1/30/2019

1/30/2019

1/30/2019

1/30/2019

1/30/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Rt. 60,65,70 NR, Lt. 55,65,70, NRR.t 35,35,55,75,50, Rt 40,40,45,5Rt,55,55,45,65,65 Lt. 50,55,55,50Rt. 15,0,45,45,30 Lt. 10,5,40,45,2Rt. 25,20,20,50,50 Lt. 25,15,15,4

a

a

a

a

a

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 588 of 661 - Page ID#: 3152

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

1/22/2019

1/25/2019

1/23/2019

1/24/2019

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper

1/14/2019

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

1/30/2019

1/30/2019

1/30/2019

Audiogram

Audiogram

Audiogram

Audiogram

Rt. Severe Lt. Severe

Rt. Mod. To Severe Lt. Mild Moderate in both ears

Mild Bilateral

1/30/2019

1/30/2019

Audiogram

Rt. Modert High freq. Lt. severe

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Kemen Lelft

2/1/2019 Kemen Lelft

2/1/2019 Kemen Lelft

2/1/2019 Kemen Lelft

2/1/2019 Kemen Lelft

2/1/2019

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

2/15/2019

2/15/2019

2/15/2019

2/15/2019

2/15/2019

Received Hearing Aid

Received Hearing Aid

Received Hearing Aid

Received Hearing Aid

Received Hearing Aid

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

One Month f/u

3/15/2019 One Month f/u

3/15/2019 One Month f/u

3/15/2019 One Month f/u

3/15/2019 One Month f/u

3/15/2019

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 589 of 661 - Page ID#: 3153
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during cove time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 590 of 661 - Page ID#: 3154

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC Intake
3. Date of initial hearing screening

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

45,55

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

a

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

2/12/2019 Intake

2/5/2019 Intake

2/14/2019 2/19/2019 Right 50,50,30,70 Left ear 50,50,40,70

a

c

1/25/2019 Intake

2/28/2019 Intake

2/8/2019

2/8/2019

3/7/2019

2/20/2019

3/7/2019

3/8/2019

2/21/2019

Rt 70,70,70,80 Lt. 70,60,70,80 Rt 60,70,70,50 lt 80,80,80,80,

a

a

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 591 of 661 - Page ID#: 3155

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does i have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

2/25/2019

H&P

H&P

Patient has personal Hearing aid Failed Whisper

2/14/2019

2/8/2019

H&P

H&P

Failed Whisper/ Ear Meds with F Failed Whisper

3/7/2019 H&P Failed Whisper

2/20/2019

Medical Visit 2 - Date

Medical Visit 2 - Description

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

High

2/26/2019

3/1/2019

3/8/2019

2/21/2019

Audiogram

F/U with provider over ear tx Audiogram

Audiogram

Rt. & Lt. Moderate

need for Audiogram

Sever Hearing loss bilateral Sever Hearing loss bilateral

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Kemen right Ear

2/26/2019 Audiogram

3/7/2019

3/15/2019

2/26/2019

Kemen

Kemen

Left Hear Hearing aid

Left Hear Hearing aid

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

3/6/2019

3/29/2019

4/20/2019

Received Hearing Aid

Office visit with Providdr

Received Hearing aid

Hearing aid received

Need for Hearing aids

Mar-19

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

One month f/u

4/6/2019

One month f/u

5/20/2019 one Month f/u

4/23/2019

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 592 of 661 - Page ID#: 3156
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during cove time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 593 of 661 - Page ID#: 3157

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC Intake
3. Date of initial hearing screening

3/7/2019 Intake

3/7/2019 3/12/20199 F/U appointment with provider Intake

3/4/2019 Sick Call

3/1/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

3/23/2019

3/23/2019

3/17/2019

3/13/2019

3/19/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

3/25/2019

3/25/2019

4/8/2019

3/17/2019

3/22/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Rt. 60,30,20,40 Lt. 40,30,30,40, Rt 80,70,80,100,90 Lt. 60,80,90, Rt. 40,50,40,50 Lt. 70,70,90,90,9Rt. 50,,40,40,60 Lt. 50,40,60,60 Rt. 55,60,60,65 Lt 75,50,60,60

a

c

C

c

a

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 594 of 661 - Page ID#: 3158

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

H&P Failed Whisper

3/23/2019 H&P Failed Whisper

3/23/2019 H&P Failed Whisper

3/17/2019 H&P Failed Whisper

3/13/2019 H&P Failed Whisper

3/19/2019

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

3/25/2019

3/25/2019

4/8/2019

4/8/2019

Audiogram

Audiogram

Audiogram

Audiogram

Audiogram

Sever Hearing loss bilateral Sever Hearing loss bilateral Rt. Moderate Lt. severe

Rt. Moderate Lt. severe

Moderat Bilateral

4/9/2019

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

4/22/2019

5/9/2019

5/9/2019

5/9/2019 5/8/25019

Hearing Aids Received

hearing Aids Received

Hearing Aids Received

Hearing Aids Received

Hearing Aids Recievd

shipped to NTC

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

One Month f/u

6/11/2019

One Month F/U

6/10/2019 One Month F/U

6/11/2019

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

One month f/u

5/22/2019

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 595 of 661 - Page ID#: 3159
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during covere time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 596 of 661 - Page ID#: 3160

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC Intake
3. Date of initial hearing screening

1/11/2019 Intake

2/12/2019 Intake

3/15/2019 Intake

3/15/2019 Intake

3/1/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

1/23/2019 2/25/2019 came in with hearing

3/26/2019

3/26/2019

3/15/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

4/13/2019 Audiogram was not c

4/18/2019

4/8/2019

3/8/2019

3/17/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

R.50,40,70,80,80 L. 40,50,70,100R 50,70,70,80 L50,60,70,70, Rt 90,100,100,100 Lt. 90,100,100Rt. 35,30,30,30 lt. 40,35,35,40

c

a) His did work then broke from c

d) Pocket talker only

Rt 50,40,30,50, Lt. 90 all a

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 597 of 661 - Page ID#: 3161

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

H&P Failed Whisper

1/11/2019 H&P Failed Whisper

2/25/2019 H&P Failed Whisper

3/26/2019 H&P Failed Whisper

3/26/2019 H&P Failed Whisper

3/15/2019

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

4/13/2019

4/8/2019

Audiogram

Aidogram

Audiogram

Mod. To Sever Bilateral

Bilateral hearing aids

Sever Hearing Loss

4/19/2019 Provider Hearing aids ordered

4/8/2019

4/8/2019

3/17/2019

Audiogram

Audiotgram

Rt. Mild to Mod. Lt. Mild

Rt. Severe Lt. Mild to Mod

Pocket talker only

3/22/2019

Appointment with ENT

Patient Refused.

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

5/8/2019

5/21/2019

Hearing Aid Received

Hearing Aid Received

One Month F/U

6/11/2019

5/21/2019 Hearing Aid Received

1 Month f/U

6/21/2019

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 598 of 661 - Page ID#: 3162
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during cover time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 599 of 661 - Page ID#: 3163

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC Intake
3. Date of initial hearing screening

3/6/2019 Intake

2/15/2019 Intake

4/1/2019 Intake

3/4/2019 Intake

3/4/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

3/20/2019

2/27/2019

4/5/2019

3/19/2019

3/19/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

3/20/2019

3/20/2019

4/8/2019

3/20/2019

3/20/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Sever Loss bilateral ears c

Mild to Moderate Bilateral Sever Loss Bilateral

d Sound amplifier only

a

Moderate loss bilateral

Moderate to Sever

a

a

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 600 of 661 - Page ID#: 3164

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does i have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

3/20/2019

2/27/2019

4/5/2019

3/19/2019

3/19/2019

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

3/20/2019

3/20/2019

Audiogram

Audiogram

Audiogram

Sever Hearing Loss

Mild to Moderate Loss

Sever Loss Bilateral

4/8/2019 Audiogram

3/20/2019 Audiogram

3/20/2019

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

4/29/2019

4/9/2019 Patient has hearing aids

Appointment with ENT

Provider

? Working

Issued Sound Amplifier

5/9/2019

5/9/2019

Hearing Aids Received

Hearing Aids Received

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

5/9/2019

Hearing Aids Received

Provider Eval

5/7/2019 One month f/u

6/10/2019 One month f/u

6/10/2019

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

One month f/u

6/10/2019

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 601 of 661 - Page ID#: 3165
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during cover time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 602 of 661 - Page ID#: 3166

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC Intake
3. Date of initial hearing screening

2/15/2019 Intake

2/15/2019 CC Visit

4/2/2019 Intake

4/17/2019 Intake

5/7/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

2/27/2019

2/27/2019

4/2/2019

4/30/2019

5/17/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

4/16/2019

3/11/2019

5/1/2019

5/3/2019

5/21/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Mild to Moderate a

Moderate to Sever

Mild To Sever bilateral Ears Mild To Sever bilateral Ears Moderat hearing loss

a

a

a

c

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 603 of 661 - Page ID#: 3167

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

2/27/2019

2/27/2019

H&P

H&P

CC Visit

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

failed Whisper

4/2/2019 H&P Failed Whisper

4/30/2019 H&P Failed Whisper

5/17/2019

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Audiogram

4/16/2019 Audiogram

3/11/2019 Audiogram

5/1/2019 Audiogram

5/3/2019 Audiogram

5/21/2019

Pt. In Seg unable to do Eval

5/9/2019

5/9/2019

5/7/2019

5/8/2019

6/18/2019

Hearing Aids Received

Hearing Aids Received

Sound Amplifier Issued

Sound Amplifier Issued

Sound Amplifier Issued

Provider recommendation HA Provider recommendation HA Provider Recom Hearing aid

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

One month f/u

6/11/2019 One month f/u

6/11/2019

5/21/2019

Hearing Aid Issued

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

6/19/2019

Patient signed Refusal

1 month f/u

Says they do not help

6/21/2019

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 604 of 661 - Page ID#: 3168
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during cover time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 605 of 661 - Page ID#: 3169

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC Intake
3. Date of initial hearing screening

4/23/2019 Intake

4/3/2019 Intake

4/15/2019 Intake

4/29/2019 Intake

5/2/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5/7/2019

4/5/2019

4/25/2019

5/10/2019

5/3/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

5/7/2019

4/8/2019

4/26/2019

5/14/2019

5/17/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Sever Bilateral Ears a

Moderate bilateral Ears

Sever Hearing Loss Bilateral Moderate Loss both ears

Moderate hearing loss bilateral

a

A

a

a

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 606 of 661 - Page ID#: 3170

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

5/7/2019

4/5/2019

4/25/2019

5/10/2019

5/3/2019

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Audiogram

5/7/2019 Audiogram

4/8/2019 Audiogram

4/26/2019 Audiogram

5/14/2019 Audiogram

5/21/2019

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

5/15/2019

5/2/2019

5/24/2019

5/23/2019

5/20/2019

Sound Amplifier Issued

Hearing Aid ordered

sound amplifier Issues

sound amplifier Issues

sound amplifier Issues

Provider recommendation HA

Hearing Aid Ordered

Hearing Aid Ordered

Hearing Aid Ordered

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

6/18/2019

5/21/2019

7/2/2019

7/2/2019

7/2/2019

Hearing Aid Issued

Hearing Aid Issued

Hearig Aids Received

Hearig Aids Received

Hearig Aids Received

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

1 month F/U

7/18/2019 1 Month F/U

6/21/2019 1 month F/u

8/2/2019 1 month F/u

8/2/2019 1 month F/u

8/2/2019

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 607 of 661 - Page ID#: 3171
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 608 of 661 - Page ID#: 3172

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC Annual
3. Date of initial hearing screening

5/20/2019

5/7/2019

4/12/2019

5/9/2019

5/16/2019

5/29/2019

6/3/2019

5/16/2019

Intake

Intake

Intake

intake

intake

Intake

Intake

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5/20/2019

5/20/2019

4/15/2019

5/22/2019

5/30/2019

6/12/2019

6/19/2019

6/3/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

5/21/2019

5/21/2019

5/23/2019

5/23/2019

6/8/2019

6/13/2019

6/27/2019

6/7/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Moderate loss bilateral a

Moderate to sev Moderate to sev mild to moderatemild to moderatemild to moderateModerate to Sev Mild to Severe bo

a

a

a

a Refused/ Has S Audiogram a

c

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 609 of 661 - Page ID#: 3173

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Annual Failed Whisper
Audiogram

5/20/2019

5/20/2019

4/15/2019

5/22/2019

5/30/2019

6/12/2019

6/13/2019

6/3/2019

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

Failed Whisper Failed Whisper Failed Whisper Failed Whisper Failed Whisper T Failed Whisper T Failed Whisper T

Patient went to KSR (Extended)

5/21/2019

5/21/2019

5/23/2019

5/23/2019

6/8/2019

6/13/2019

6/19/2019

6/7/2019

Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

5/28/2019

5/29/2019

5/30/2019

5/30/2019

6/11/2019

6/24/2019

6/20/2019

6/18/2019

sound amplifier Issues

Sound Amplifier Sound Amplifier Sound Amplifier Sound Amplifier Sound amplifier sound Amplifier Sound Amplifier

Hearing Aid Ordered

hearing aid Orde hearing aid Orde hearing aid Orde hearing aid Orde Hearing Aid Ordered

Hearing Aid orde

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

7/2/2019

7/2/2019

7/2/2019

7/2/2019

7/2/2019

7/23/2019

7/22/2019

7/22/2019

Hearig Aids Received

Hearig Aids Rece Hearig Aids Rece Hearig Aids Rece Hearig Aids Rece Hearing Aid ReceHearing Aid ReceHearing Aid Rece

Transferred to LSCC

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

1 month F/u

8/2/2019

8/2/2019

8/2/2019

8/2/2019

8/2/2019

1 month F/u 1 month F/u 1 month F/u 1 month F/u

7/3/2019 Patient Seen by provider Refused hearing Aid

8/23/2019

8/23/2019

1 month f/u 1 month f/U

...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 610 of 661 - Page ID#: 3174
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 611 of 661 - Page ID#: 3175

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening

5/3/2019

6/3/2019

6/3/2019

Intake

Intake

Intake

CC

6/4/2019

6/3/2019

6/3/2019

5/28/2019

4/26/2019

6/3/2019

Intake

Intake

Intake

Intake

Intake

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5/17/2019

6/13/2019

6/17/2019

6/4/2019

6/17/2019

6/14/2019

6/10/2019 6/5/10/2019

6/18/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

6/12/2019

6/14/2019

6/18/2019

6/6/2019

6/18/2019

6/18/2019

7/11/2019

6/25/2019

7/12/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Mild to Severe boModerate to Sev Moderate Both EModerate to Sev Severe Loss Bilat Mild to Moderat L. Ear Moderate/Bilateral Mod. LoBilateral Mod. Lo

c

a

c

a

a

a

c

c

c

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 612 of 661 - Page ID#: 3176

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

5/17/2019

6/13/2019

6/17/2019

6/4/2019

6/17/2019

6/14/2019

6/10/2019

6/5/2019

6/18/2019

H&P

H&P

H&P

CC

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

Failed Whisper T Failed Whisper T Failed Whisper T Failed Whispter Failed Whisper Failed Whisper Failed Whisper Failed Whisper Failed Whisper/T

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

6/12/2019

6/14/2019

6/18/2019

6/6/2019

6/18/2019

6/18/2019

7/11/2019

6/25/2019

7/12/2019

Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

6/19/2019

6/24/2019

7/2/2019

6/19/2019

6/26/2019

6/26/2019

7/11/2019

7/11/2019

7/25/2019

Sound Amplifier Sound Amplifier Sound Amplifier sound Amplifier sound Amplifier sound Amplifier Sound amplifier ISound amplifer isSound amplifer is

Hearing Aid orde Hearing Aid orde Hearing Aid OrdeHearing Aid OrdeHearing Aid OrdeHearing Aid OrdeHearing Aid OrdeHearing Aid Hearing Aid

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

7/22/2019

7/22/2019

7/22/2019

7/22/2019

7/22/2019

7/22/2019

Hearing Aid recivHearing Aid recivHearing Aid Recehearing Aid RecieHearing Aid Recehearing Aid Received

Mailed to LAC 7/23

Mailed to BCC 7/23

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

8/22/2019 1 month f/u

8/22/2019

8/22/2019

8/23/2019

1 month f/u 1 month f/u 1 month f/u

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 613 of 661 - Page ID#: 3177
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during cove time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 614 of 661 - Page ID#: 3178

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC CC visit
3. Date of initial hearing screening

5/15/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

2/13/2019 2/13/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Bilateral Mild Loss c

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 615 of 661 - Page ID#: 3179

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

2/13/2019 H&P Failed Whisper

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Audiogram

2/13/2019

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

7/24/2019 Sound amplifer issued Hearing Aid

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 616 of 661 - Page ID#: 3180
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 617 of 661 - Page ID#: 3181

Technology

How many

FM radio transmitters, usable as an

amplifier system?

0

Phone amplifiers (not volume

control: portable amplifiers)

4

Captioned Telephone

0

Other amplifiers, amplification

systems, or the like?

0

Bed shakers

2

Vibrating watches?

0

Vibrating alarm clocks?

2

Pagers?

0

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive

devices currently in use or under

consideration not mentioned above.

Earphones for parole hearings

2

Earphones for orientation videos 2

Where
Located in the Deputy Warden's office
Located in the Deputy Warden's office Located in the Deputy Warden's office
Located in Program Admin office in AC Located in Program Admin office in AC

When obtained Specifications (URL) How do inmates obtain access?
Upon the inmates request or during the initial assessment
Upon the inmates request or during the initial assessment Upon the inmates request or during the initial assessment
Inmates request Inmates request

How well do they

work?

Other comments

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 618 of 661 - Page ID#: 3182

Documentation to review KOMS alerts for each deaf/HOH inmate Grievances:
Provide/Review summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc.

Date reviewed 4/1/2019

Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

Provide/Review full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Solve any problems revealed. Discipline Review all disciplinary proceedings involving an inmate who signs. Ensure that VRI or other effective communication was provided at each none stage of each such proceedings. Review all disciplinary proceedings involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Ensure that no such inmate is being penalized for inability to hear.
hasn't been used during this review VRI Log (review to ensure it's being used in appropriate circumstances. period VRS or other videophone alternative (review to ensure that when videophone is inoperative, alternative is in fact available/used)

TTY instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.)

VRI instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 619 of 661 - Page ID#: 3183
Questions regarding effective communications in particular activities or locations. For each, mark compliance (Y, partial, N, no basis) and explain. Goal: each deaf

Intake/ Orientation -- Non-medical Intake, Medical Auxiliary Aid Assessment Units Restrictive Housing Medical/MH care Programs Education Recreation Communications with Chaplain

In-person interpretation

Ever used?

Used whenever appropriate?

Availability of VRI: Appropriate equipment available (computer line,
Staff trained? outlet, space)

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

N

Y

NA

NA

NA

NA

N

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

N

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Ever used? How many times?
N N N N NA N N N N N

Used whenever appropriate? (without special request)
Y Y Y Y NA Y Y Y Y Y

Prison-provided religious programming

N

Volunteer -led programming (note:

Only volunteer interpretation is

required)

N

Parole hearings

Y

Classification/

Transfer

N

Legal Aid

N

Grievance process

N

Work assignments

N

Court call and ALL parts of disciplinary

process

Staff investigations

N

Investigative interviews

N

Preparation of report

N

Shift supervisor's review of

disciplinary report

N

Investigator's review of disciplinary

report

N

Miranda warnings

N

When advising inmate of right to

consult with legal aide

N

Notification of date, time, and place

of hearing

N

Hearing or re-hearing

N

If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

N

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

N - video

Y

Y

conference

N

N- use in person

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

N

Y

N

Y

N

Y

N

Y

N

Y

N

Y

N

Y

N

Y

N

Y

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to attend a religious service without effective communication to receive any religious meal, diet, or other accommodation? N - This has not taken place at RCC. Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have witnessed or been suspected of violation) provided with an inmate or staff advisor on same terms as non-deaf inmates? N- this situtation has never taken place at RCC. They would be provided they same access to legal advisors.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 620 of 661 - Page ID#: 3184
Questions regarding effective communifcor HOH inmate has an equal opportunity to participate in Amplification: (Not just hearing aid -- space-specific amplification)

Intake/ Orientation -- Non-medical Intake, Medical Auxiliary Aid Assessment Units Restrictive Housing Medical/MH care Programs Education Recreation Communications with Chaplain

Adequate? Describe efforts, issues

Y

Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids

Y

Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids

Y

Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids

Y

Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids

NA

NA

Y

Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids

Y

Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids

Y

Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids

Y

Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids

Y

Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids

Audit item issues/ concerns

Prison-provided religious programming Y

Volunteer -led programming (note:

Only volunteer interpretation is

required)

Y

Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids

Parole hearings

Y

Classification/

Transfer

Y

Legal Aid

Y

Grievance process

Y

Work assignments

Y

Court call and ALL parts of disciplinary

process

Staff investigations

Y

Investigative interviews

Y

Preparation of report

Y

Shift supervisor's review of

disciplinary report

Y

Investigator's review of disciplinary

report

Y

Miranda warnings

Y

When advising inmate of right to

consult with legal aide

Y

Notification of date, time, and place

of hearing

Y

Hearing or re-hearing

Y

If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

Y

Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids/Headphones
Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids
Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids
Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids
Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids
Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids
Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids Pocket Talkers/ Hearing Aids

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to attend N - This has not taken place at RCC. Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have witn N- this situtation has never taken place a

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 621 of 661 - Page ID#: 3185

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Name

Listed Signs Low literacy?

If signs to

with

to (So that

communicat

Bed Shaker?

KOMS comm written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

ADA

unicat communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested;

Precautio e

n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting took denied;

ID

n?

(Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

place?

granted)

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

WAIVED Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

N

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

N

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Y

NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

not requeste

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 622 of 661 - Page ID#: 3186

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT

Personal

Phone

Other Alert TTY Access Amplifier Shake &

Device (Not (Not

(Not

Wake (Not Any other

requested; requested; requested; requested; auxiliary

denied; denied; denied; denied; aid

Name

ID

granted) granted) granted) granted) requested? Outome? Audit item issues/concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requesteGranted not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

not requestenot requeste not requeste not requeste none

n/a

no issues or concerns

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 623 of 661 - Page ID#: 3187

Fill this out for EACH location where there are any deaf/HOH inmates

How many Volume

Bed

If there are

How inmates adjustable

shakers set Staff use If there are any

any inmates

many who sign phone available

up for use bed

inmates who If there are any who sign:

Deaf/ to

to inmates

How for

shakers for sign: Location inmates who Ready

HOH communic without special many bed multiple multiple available for sign: Staff

access to

Dorm/unit

Walk

inmates? ate

request?

shakers? purposes? purposes? VRI?

trained for VRI videophone Audit item issues/concerns

3O

2

0 yes

0

0

0

No i/ms sign: stano i/ms sign no issues

3P

2

0 yes

0

0

0

No i/ms sign: stano i/ms sign no issues

3Q

3

0 yes

0

0

0

No i/ms sign: stano i/ms sign no issues

5B

3

0 yes

0

0

0

No i/ms sign: stano i/ms sign no issues

1A

3

0 yes

1

1

1

No i/ms sign: stano i/ms sign no issues

2E

1

0 yes

0

0

0

No i/ms sign: stano i/ms sign no issues

2D

3

0 yes

0

0

0

No i/ms sign: stano i/ms sign no issues

2F

3

0 yes

0

0

0

No i/ms sign: stano i/ms sign no issues

2G

2

0 yes

0

0

0

No i/ms sign: stano i/ms sign no issues

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 624 of 661 - Page ID#: 3188
Western Kentucky Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 625 of 661 - Page ID#: 3189

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

A ADA coordinator
1 Is an ADA coordinator designated? Has there been a time (since last audit) when there
2 was no ADA coordinator appointed? 3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website? 4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected
Was the ADA coordinator information shared with 5 inmates in a timely and appropriate manner? How?
Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? 6 (THIS REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)
Is the information prominently posted in any 7 housing unit where deaf/HOH inmates are held? 8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?
9 Describe training Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately
10 cover information? 11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training) 12 Adequate w/r/t state law?
Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's 13 powerpoint)
Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with 14 settlement agreement?
Does ADA coordinator retrieve at least monthly 15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?
Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's 16 tracking list?
Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in 17 implementing the settlement?
Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf 18 inmates?
Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on 19 deaf inmates?
Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the 20 inmates in those situations?
Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective 21 way with the monitor?
Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the 22 monitor when necessary?

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Shared at intake/orientation for all

inmates, within 72hrs of reception.

Yes

Spoke to inmates in dorms during

week of 7/22/19

Yes

Yes

Yes

Describe: In‐person and online at

beginning of assignment, and annual

online CBT training.

NA

Yes

Yes Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 626 of 661 - Page ID#: 3190

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

B Reporting obligations
If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was 1 monitor notified?
Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf 2 and HOH inmates? 3 Is the list complete? 4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?
Quarterly summary of all grievances by deaf or 5 HOH inmates shared with monitor?
Was there a direct threat determination made for 6 jobs, activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe) 7 Was it reported to the monitor? 8 Was the report complete? 9 Was the report timely? 10 Did the institution consider any non‐auditory alert? 11 If yes, was the monitor notified?
Did the institution consult with the monitor about 12 the non‐auditory alert? 13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Describe:

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

No change
Yes Yes Yes Yes

NA

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

NA

N/A

N/A

N/A Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 627 of 661 - Page ID#: 3191

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

C Intake/Orientation ‐ Corrections
1 Hard of hearing inmates Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is
2 arriving? Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive
3 automatic notifications.) Effective communications planned/provided?
4 (Describe) Deaf inmates Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is
5 arriving? 6 Describe 7 Effective communications planning? 8 Effective communication provided? 9 Describe 10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed? 11 Use of in‐person interpreter when needed?
Orientation videos 12 Captioned? 13 Shown in a quiet space? 14 Amplification if needed?
Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not 15 literate? (Describe)

NA Yes

Describe: KOMS alerts Describe: review of needs after alert, act accordingly

NA Yes
NA

Koms alerts

Yes

Describe:

NA

None who are deaf/sign

N/A

N/A

Describe:

NA

Yes

N/A

NA

Yes

Yes

headphones available

Yes

read aloud/quiet place/interpreter

Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 628 of 661 - Page ID#: 3192

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services
Effective Communication during general medical intake, and during medical care more generally: 1 Is there effective communications planning? Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty 2 hearing if interpretation is needed? 3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office? Are staff aware of, and use, effective 4 communications techniques? Notice to medical staff: 5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How? Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on 6 cover and within the file? Off‐site medical: Provision of appropriate 7 accommodations. Knowledegable about obligation to alert off‐site 8 providers of need for interpretation? 9 Procedure in place to ensure notification? 10 Has there ever been a notification to provider? 11 Adequate notice? Outside providers offering effective communication 12 to inmates who sign? 13 How? Hearing screening/medical intake: 14 Performed for all new inmates? 15 Within first 3 days at institution? 16 Approved screening form? (need to review) 17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid? 18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake? How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it 19 administered by staff? 20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical) 21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy? 22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe. 23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Alert on med file, pink med ID Alert, problems list in file
Describe: Describe:
Administered by staff Medical staff Administered by staff

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA Yes Yes Yes Yes
NA Yes Yes
NA Yes Yes
NA N/A
N/A NA NA
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
NA NA
Yes Yes Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 629 of 661 - Page ID#: 3193

# Issue/Question
Other methods of access: Do annual/routine physicals include hearing 24 screening? 25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening? 26 Inmate can obtain screening on request? If screening indicated problem (3+ "yes" answers), 27 is there further assessment? Adequate determination of need for designation/ 28 audiology services? How? 29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or 30 HOH, apart from audiology services decision?
After assessment, does medical: 31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert? 32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file? 33 Notify ADA coordinator? 34 Is notification prompt?
Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist) 35 Audiology services offered when needed? 36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles) 37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid? 38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services 39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate? Adequate progress tracking? Should include: 40 initial request/questionnaire? 41 each relevant medical visit? 42 any audiology visit? 43 hearing aid provision? 44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1‐2 weeks? 45 Shared with ADA Coordinator? 46 Shared with monitor when requested Summary When nothing unusual happens, how many off‐site trips does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing 47 aid? Describe. In the past year, how many individuals have had to 48 wait more than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?
49 What is the cause of the delay? What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken)
50 to improve this process? Co‐pay and availability issues:
47 Charged only once ‐‐ not again for followups Hearing aid batteries
48 Available for free? 49 In sufficient numbers? 50 7 days/week? 51 regardless of housing?

Description/Notes
Audioscope with provider If inmate fails audioscope, and has deficiency @ audiology, is HOH regardless of need for services
None (Audicus testing on site) 2 ‐
‐ other medical issues; initially denied, retested and Describe: Available daily from medical staff

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) NA
Yes
Yes Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
NA Yes Yes Yes Yes
NA Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
NA Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
NA
NA ‐ NA
NA NA
Yes NA
Yes Yes Yes Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 630 of 661 - Page ID#: 3194

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

E Information provided inmates
1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe) Inmate handbook adequately refers to non‐
2 discrimination and ADA services? Brochure? Items to include:
3 Non‐discrimination obligation 4 Effective communication obligation 5 Auxiliary aids and services available
How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services 6 (including hearing aids, and batteries)
Communication equipment available, and how to 7 use 8 ADA coordinator and how to reach
Other items: 9 Institution schedule of interpreters
Request for Accommodations/ Communications 10 Assistance
Medical Request form includes request for 11 accommodations
Job application form includes request for 12 accommodations 13 Waiver forms
Classification form includes request for 14 accommodations 15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations
SAP and other programming form includes request 16 for accommodation
17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

ADA coordinator discussed at orientation within first 3 days of arrival Yes
Yes NA
Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes
Yes NA

Open‐ended request

Yes
Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Not available Not available
Not included

Blank area on page sufficient to write in needs

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure 18 available in law library? (Need to check)
Do request forms: 19 list available services comprehensively?
clearly explain services and aids (what they are and 20 when they are available? 21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?
expressly ask about preferred mode of communication/needed services and why they are 22 useful? 23 explain which items are free? encompass religious and volunteer‐provided 24 programming? Effective communication of these resources: Are the materials in language accessible to each 25 inmate? Is this information provided with effective 26 communication? Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member 27 and interpreter to ask questions about the Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application for a program with staff, is effective 28 communication provided? are potential accommodations covered in the 29 discussion? Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application in education with staff, is effective 30 communication provided? are potential accommodations covered in the 31 discussion?

Most recent check 7/25/19

Yes NA
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes NA Yes Yes
Yes NA
Yes
Yes NA
Yes
Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 631 of 661 - Page ID#: 3195

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates
1 Notice posted at entrance to institution? 2 Include picture of ID card and other official 3 Notice posted outside housing units? 4 Include picture of ID card and other official 5 Cell/bed cards 6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?
7 Clear process to obtain? Describe 8 Each inmate has one if not waived? 9 Provided timely? 10 Replacements provided when needed?
KOMS alert? 11 Staff aware of use of KOMS
Working process to get new inmate alerts added? 12 (Describe) 13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check) 14 Appropriately obvious 15 Updated timely
Individual ID cards 16 Staff aware of meaning? 17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?) 18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived? 19 Provided timely? 20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times? 21 Prompt replacements provided? 22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose? 23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator? 24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver? 25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?
Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested 26 ID? 27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Obtain from ADA Coordinator upon first

meeting, and by request

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

ADA Coordinator review biweekly Describe:

Yes
Yes Yes Yes NA Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes NA

Describe: In file in ADA coordinator office

NA Yes No N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 632 of 661 - Page ID#: 3196

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment
Identification to ADA Coordinator Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification 1 upon intake of each deaf/hoh inmate? Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification 2 of other deaf/hoh inmates?
Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment with every arriving or 3 newly identified deaf/hoh inmate? At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of communication expressly ascertained 4 and documented? At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate about available auxiliary aids and 5 services? Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms 6 explained? Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral and written; VRI; or visual 7 descriptions ) Other assessments
For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an 8 assessment on intake, has one been done? 9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

NA Yes

Yes

Due to other duties, this coordinator

has recently not always been able to

meet with transfers/new HOH inmates

Yes

in a timely fashion. However, inmates

have all been assessed who are on the

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NA

Some have been done as recently as

the last few days; please see the

Yes

note above.

Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 633 of 661 - Page ID#: 3197

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided
1 On‐person ID cards 2 Cell cards 3 Bed shaker 4 In‐person alerts 5 Pager
Phone volume adjust setting (available in each 6 location where phones are available?) 7 Amplifier for phone
Consideration of specific housing assignment to 8 minimize communication difficulties? 9 Other amplification 10 Other (describe)
General issues Special housing area: Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH 11 inmates? (Describe) If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? 12 (Describe) If there is such an area, are inmates required to be 13 housed there? (such a requirement is non‐ If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live there, are accommodations etc. still fully 14 available to the inmate? Describe any restrictions. In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is 15 primary consideration given to inmate request? If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or not requesting 16 aids/services, were accommodations provided?

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services 17 documented in inmate institutional files?
Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary 18 aids/services shared appropriately with staff? 19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained? 20 Have any been out of comission? 21 Describe ‐‐ which and for how long?
Inmates moving housing or transferred: not 22 separated from hearing aid? 23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided? 24 Promptly? 25 Has there been a direct threat determination? 26 Describe
Appropriately individuated (must consider specific 27 degree of impairment and specific dangers posed) 28 Appropriately reported? 29 Was it the appropriate decision? 30 Are classes in sign language provided? 31 deaf inmates given notice? 32 priority given to deaf inmates?

Description/Notes
Describe: Describe: Describe: Describe:
Memo periodically redistributed with information Describe: Describe: Describe: Describe: Describe:

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
Yes Yes
N/A Yes
N/A Yes Yes Yes Yes NA NA NA
NA
NA NO

Yes
No
No
Yes Yes NA NA Not separated N/A N/A NA NA N/A N/A N/A No N/A N/A

N/A
Medical information not placed into KOMS; kept in separate file with ADA coordinator

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 634 of 661 - Page ID#: 3198

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

I Interpretation in general
Qualified interpretation services available: Is the process for using VRI/in‐person interpretation 1 communicated to inmates? covers all inmate‐staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 2 encounters/communications/settings) Does the request form clearly encompass religious 3 and other volunteer‐provided programming? Effective process for choosing qualified 4 interpretation method? 5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences? Standing arrangement with providers? 6 In‐person? 7 VRI? Is VRI availability: 8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)? after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours 9 of notice)? on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 10 hours of notice)? during emergencies (including medical emergencies) 11 when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)? Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? 12 Describe VRI laptop functional? 13 In general 14 Always checked for sufficient battery power? 15 Routine software updates? VRI laptop has necessary items with it? 16 Splitter? 17 Instructions? 18 Long power cord? 19 Usable as VRS? 20 VRI effectiveness tracked? 21 How? Information used to determine when in‐person 22 interpretation should be first recourse? Is in‐person interpretation available: 23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical 24 Parole? Describe each time in‐person interpretation has 25 been offered Describe each time in‐person interpretation has 26 been denied. Parole board notified of need for interpretation at 27 least 7 days before? Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? 28 (Reliance in non‐emergency is non‐compliant) 29 Describe in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence 30 and VRI was unavailable) Communication with inmates uses inmate's 31 preferred method? Written communication is limited to only simple 32 matters. Written communication is not needed when inmate 33 has low literacy Qualified interpretation services available: Does the request form clearly encompass religious 34 and other volunteer‐provided programming? for all inmate‐staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 35 encounters/communications/settings) Is the process for using VRI communicated to 36 inmates?

NA

*we currently have none who sign

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes
Yes NA
Yes Yes NA Yes
Yes

Yes

Yes

VRI laptop is portable with access to

network in SMU.

Yes

Describe:

NA

Yes

Yes

Yes

Describe:

NA

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes Yes Yes

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

NO

Describe:

NA

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes NA
Yes

Yes

Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 635 of 661 - Page ID#: 3199

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

J Hand Restraints
1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs? Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing?
2 Individualized finding of a security threat? Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who
3 might ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.) 4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed? 5 Staff aware of the issue
Off‐site medical care: 6 two‐point hand restraint system used?
restraints removed when necessary for medical 7 communication?

Describe: *We have not had an inmate who signs placed into restraints other than for transfer.

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA
NA Yes Yes Yes
NA N/A N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 636 of 661 - Page ID#: 3200

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

K Non‐auditory Alerts
Does the prison have non‐auditory alerts? 1 (Describe) 2 provided to all inmates who need it? 3 can and does it give alerts in real time? 4 sufficient to signal fire alarm? 5 sufficient to signal count alert? 6 programmed to signal different alerts? 7 used to notify of prison‐wide events?
used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific 8 to them?
Have any requests for medically necessary non‐ 9 auditory alerts been denied?
Non‐auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are 10 working? 11 frequently enough? 12 monitored/recorded formally? 13 Announcement boards 14 used to notify of schedule changes? 15 used consistently? 16 in all dormitories? 17 in gym? 18 in library? 19 audited and monitored?
In‐person or personal system notification when an 20 inmate misses a page?
Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ 21 info only because of disability?
Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in 22 the future? 23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?
Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in 24 emergency?
Does the plan account for how effective 25 communication will be provided?

Fire alarm, in‐person alerts when needed, bulletin boards, open dorm setting
Describe:

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes
N/A
Yes
Yes Yes NA Yes Yes Yes See> See> Yes
Yes
NA
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes

Board located outdoors in courtyard Board located outdoors in courtyard

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 637 of 661 - Page ID#: 3201

# Issue/Question
L Telecommunications
Videophones: 1 Installed? 2 Allow voice carry‐over features?
3 Number of days out of service? (Specify) Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to
4 solve them. When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe
5 other alternative offered Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives,
6 when videophone is out of service. 7 Same times of access as non‐deaf inmates? 8 Appropriate location?
Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, 9 weekends, emergency) if necessary? 10 Time: 2x that for non‐deaf inmates? 11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?
No more permission needed than that for hearing 12 inmates using ordinary phones? 13 Advance request unnecessary? 14 Free?
Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular 15 phone calls?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA
Yes
Yes
Lengthy outage (>one month) due to problems with Purple software compatibility with Win10. WKCC had no inmates who sign during the outage
Both min/med units were affected. Has been NA

Describe: Describe:

NA N/A

Describe:

NA Yes Yes
Yes
Yes Yes
Yes
Yes Yes
Yes

Inmate

had requested access to the videophone after disciplinary issues due to abuse.

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones

was denied access for the abuse of interpreters, and due to the fact that interpreters

and been denied?

doubted

ability to utilize sign language.

had hearing aids, and could speak to

communicate (well), with hearing aids.

access to TTY was unaffected and he continued to

16

use that accomodation until his transfer from WKCC.

Yes

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances,

including the inmate's name, the date, and the

See above. Denial was

,

Yes

17 reason for the denial.

issued on 12/28/18, until transfer.

Describe:

TTY:

NA

18 Installed?

Yes

Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates

19 and staff?

Yes

Easy‐to‐understand, institution specific instructions

20 made available WITH TTY?

Yes

21 Function ‐‐ days out of service? (Specify)

Describe:

NA

22 Access ‐‐ appropriate hours, days?

Yes

location substantially as accessible as conventional

23 telephones for non‐deaf inmates?

Yes

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access? 25 Permission needed?

Yes

Accomodation is made for inmate use as TTY is

not compatible with Securus phones, and staff

Yes

phone line must be utilized.

Has any request to use the TTY been denied?

26 (Describe)

Describe:

NA

27 Time: 3x that for non‐deaf inmates?

Yes

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Describe:

NA

29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Describe:

Yes

Can access publicly available relay service phone

30 numbers?

Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 638 of 661 - Page ID#: 3202

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions

31 for videophones and TTY is less than equitable? 32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?
If yes, was determination (including reasoning,

33 evidence, etc.) documented? 34 Was monitor notified? 35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?
VRS via laptop

36 Available? 37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU) 38 Used when appropriate?
Phones

39 Amplification in every group of phones? Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need

40 them? CapTel

41 Appropriate for any particular inmate? 42 If so, installed and working? 43 Request by any inmate denied?
TV/Movies

44 Is captioning available? 45 Is captioning used? 46 Is the captioning checked regularly? 47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly 48 (Describe) 49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

50 Amplification method? (Describe) If inmate‐purchased tv w/ captioning malfunctioned, did staff assist to same extent as w/other inmates
51 regarding malfunctioning personal property? All technology/ equipment in good working order?
52 (Describe problems) Access to communication services for deaf inmates in segregated housing equivalent to non‐deaf
53 inmates of same status? Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates only to the same extent and with the
54 same discretion as non‐deaf inmates?

Description/Notes Describe:
Describe: Describe: Describe:
Movies displayed on instutional channel. Captioning can be turned on any TV that displays movies. FM transmitters for inmate TVs in dayrooms to transmit audio to radios with headphones
Describe any problems:

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA N/A

N/A N/A N/A NA Yes Yes N/A NA Yes

Yes

NA NA NA NA NA
Yes Yes Yes

Not logged

Yes

Yes Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 639 of 661 - Page ID#: 3203

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

M Miscellaneous Devices
1 Devices available? (Describe) 2 devices in commissary list?
possibility to request other devices from ADA 3 coordinator? 4 facilitation of purchase?
Purchase of any non‐medically necessary device 5 denied? (Describe) 6 determined on case‐by‐case basis? 7 because security threat? 8 monitor notified? 9 reasoning explained?
ADA coordinator maintains records 10 of requests? 11 of denials?

N Disciplinary
Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate 1 has been punished? 2 Was a re‐hearing granted?
O Grievances
Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA 1 coordinator?
If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator forward copy of grievance to ADA 2 coordinator?

Records of all grievances filed by deaf/HOH 3 inmates? (not just those related to settlement) 4 Adequate summaries provided in report?
Including all deaf or HOH inmate grievances, not just 5 those in settlement? 6 Includes issues raised by inmate in grievance? 7 Includes institution in which grievance was filed? 8 Includes summary of KDOC response? 9 Includes grievance resolution (or lack thereof)?

Description/Notes Describe: None requested None requested
*2 greivances filed within last few days, and no disposition is available at this time. Grievances concern legal issues unrelated to ADA. (filed by

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA No Yes Yes
NA NA NA NA NA
NA Yes Yes
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Yes Only two.
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 640 of 661 - Page ID#: 3204

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

P Training
Types available 1 CBT? (Using approved training?) 2 Who received? (Describe) 3 All appropriate staff? 4 Live training? (Information only) 5 Who received? (Describe) 6 All appropriate staff?
Targeted training on specific needs 7 training on best communication practices? 8 training on unique needs/problems?
training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may 9 miss alert?
training on possibility that deaf/HOH inmate may not hear verbal commands and strategies to handle 10 that problem? 11 training on identification of communication needs? consideration given to talking one‐on‐one with deaf 12 or HOH inmates, instead of in a group? Training on communication 13 training on use and role of interpreters? 14 training on process for obtaining interpreters? training on importance of not separating imate from 15 hearing aid? 16 training on communication technology? 17 training on VRI? 18 training on how to turn on and check for captioning? 19 training on non‐auditory alert office switch? 20 training on videophone rules? Training on Policies 21 training on the Settlement? 22 training on identity and role of ADA coordinator? 23 training on KDOC anti‐discrimination policy? 24 training on existence of KOMS/EMR alerts? 25 training on meaning of ID cards? training on equipment/services/ accommodation 26 available? 27 training on hand restraint policy? 28 training on two‐point hand restraint system? 29 training on disciplinary and grievance practies? Do all relevant staff know about reporting 30 obligations? How do you know? Training specifically for housing area staff training on the use of cell/bed notices that indicate 31 an inmate is deaf/HOH 32 training on bed shaker switches
33 training on telecommunications training on obligations to notify deaf and HOH
34 inmates of alerts Training specifically for all corrections staff training on accommodations for inmates who sign
35 (esp. restraint policies) training on strategies for inmates who may not hear
36 directions/orders Training specifically for medical staff training on process to obtain hearing aid within two
37 months training on obligation to notify off‐site providers of
38 needs 39 Training provided for review by Monitor?

All staff (entry/annual CBT) Describe: Describe: *all items covered in CBT training
staff memo
Asked sample of staff Housing area staff don't handle telecomm issues

Q Monitor Access
Has the monitor been granted access to requested KDOC records, files, and papers that pertain to the 1 agreement? 2 If no, was an explanation provided for the refusal? Has the monitor been granted access to KDOC staff 3 members and employees? 4 Were staff/employees cooperative? Has KDOC responded to reasonable written 5 questions?

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA Yes
NA Yes
NA NA
N/A NA
Yes Yes Yes
Yes
Yes Yes NA Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes N/A Yes NA Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes NA Yes
N/A
N/A Yes NA Yes
Yes NA
Yes
Yes Yes
Yes
N/A Yes yes Yes

WKCC/ ROSS HarCdasoef: 3H:1e4a-crvi-n0g00P01r-oGgFrVeTs-EsBCAhaDrotc #I:D9#I3n:-34P20rF5oilgedr:e1s2s/24/19 Page: 641 of 661 - Page

Inmate Name

DOC number

Birth Month

6/27/1976

9/1/1944

9/3/1960

Pink Card

yes

yes

yes

Alert !

yes

yes

yes

Arrival at Institution Date of initial hearing screening

2/22/2018

5/16/2018 9/1/2018

6/20/2019 6/20/2019

Date if most recent hearing screening

Screening results

When was hearing problem first

presented to KYDOC?

How hearing problem was first presented

to KYDOC?

Intake

Hearing aid status

will retest Audicus

For each inmate in status no hearing aid needed, please provide medical documentation of the decision.

10/11/2018 Test Completed. Waiting on results

7/11/2019

3/1/2018

9/1/2018

6/20/2019

physical

Intake tested in audicus

Days to provide hearing aid

Days so far, if not provided yet For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t‐coil receptor?

Medical visit/step 1, Date Description of Encounter
Medical visit/step 1, outcome Medical visit/step 2, date Description of Encounter

3/1/2018

9/1/2018

6/24/2019

Audiometry with provider

physical

Intake Physical

questinaire failed will call back when

Issued pocket talker

audiometer working.

refer for audicus

3/15/2018

9/19/2018

7/11/2019

follow up with pockent talker

hearing screening by provider

Audicus Test

Medical visit/step 2 outcome Medical visit/step 3, date
Description of Encounter

Feels pocket talker helps continue

screening failed will refer for Audicus Testing Sent to provider for review.

6/7/2018

10/11/2018

7/11/2019

Hearing screening with provider 40 DBL Audicus Test Completed

hearing aid evaluation

Medical visit/step 3, outcome

Passed screening.

Awaiting Results

patient did not meet criteria for a perscription hearing aid.

WKCC/ ROSS HarCdasoef: 3H:1e4a-crvi-n0g00P01r-oGgFrVeTs-EsBCAhaDrotc #I:D9#I3n:-34P20rF6oilgedr:e1s2s/24/19 Page: 642 of 661 - Page

Inmate Name Medical visit/Step 4 date

2/25/2019

10/19/2018

5/17/2019

Description of Encounter

Audiometry with provider

audicus results

email sent to kemen to review audicus testing

Medical visit/step 4 outcome Medical visit/Step 5 date
Description of Encounter Medical visit/step 5 outcome
Medical visit/Step 6 date

patient did not meet

criteria for a

perscription hearing

failed will refer to Audicus

does not meet criteria for hearing aid.

aid.

3/25/2019

10/26/2018

7/19/2019

Audicus hearing descrepancies retest

Issued hearing amplification with ear buds. Audicus Re‐Test
Pocket Talker

Scheduled for retest

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 643 of 661 - Page ID#: 3207

WKCC/ ROSS Hard of Hearing Progress Chart: Hearing Aids issued

Inmate Name DOC number Birth Month Pink Card Alert ! Arrival at Institution

9/3/1970 yes yes

Date of initial hearing screening

5/9/2017

Date if most recent hearing screening 3/23/2017

2/7/1965 yes yes 7/25/2017
7/25/2017
2/20/2018

1/2/1900 yes yes 2/14/2018
2/14/2018
2/21/2018

8/7/1962
yes yes
7/3/2018
8/1/2018
10/3/2018

Screening results

Hearing aid recommended

When was hearing problem first

presented to KYDOC?

2/23/2017

How hearing problem was first presented

to KYDOC?

Sick Call

Consider binaural amplification

based on the hearing loss present

and the communication difficulties 25 db HL Right Ear 500 (Hz) No,

expressed. Mild Moderate

Right Ear 1000 (Hz) No, Right Ear

Sensorineural Sloping hearing Loss 2000 (Hz) No, Right Ear 4000 (Hz)

in right and left ear. Word

No, Left Ear 500 (Hz) No, Left Ear

Recognition Right ear 65dbhl Left 1000 (Hz) No, Left Ear 2000 (Hz) No,

ear 65 DBhl. Invoice has been send Left Ear 4000 (Hz) No.

for approval.

Could only hear the pretest.

Left ear issued

7/25/2017

2/14/2018

8/1/2018

Transfer

Transfer from Roederer

Physical

Hearing aid status

Amplification has been issued.

Consider binaural amplification

based on the hearing loss present

and the communication difficulties

expressed. Mild Moderate

Sensorineural Sloping hearing Loss

in right and left ear. Word

Has hearing aids in working condition; Recognition Right ear 65dbhl Left

Pocket talker issued on 2/23/2017 ear 65 DBhl. Invoice has been send

Pocket talker returned when hearing for approval. Amplification issued

aids were issued.

on 9/12/2017

Patient is happy with amplification. Left ear issued

For each inmate in status no hearing aid needed, please provide medical documentation of the decision. Days to provide hearing aid Days so far, if not provided yet

For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t‐coil receptor? Medical visit/step 1, Date

2/23/2017

7/26/2017

2/21/2018

8/1/2018

Description of Encounter Medical visit/step 1, outcome

SickCall and referred to APRN for whisper test
Whisper test failed Refer to ENT Audiology

Whisper test failed

Hearing screening on site

Will follow up when Audioscope personal amplification

availiable

recommended

Physical
Failed hearing screening

9/14/1976 yes yes
9/10/2018 9/28/2018

9/4/1960 yes yes
9/5/2018 9/28/2018

7/21/1955 yes yes 12/7/2017
12/7/2017
12/18/2017

10/17/1957 yes yes 10/3/2016
10/3/2018
10/3/2018

10/20/1976 yes yes 3/31/2016
10/3/2018
10/3/2018

sensorineural Hearing loss, bilateral

9/10/2018

9/5/2018

Physical

physical

failed audiometer test on 12/18/2017
12/7/2017
Intake

refer to Audicus Test 10/3/2018 physical

refer to Audicus Test 10/3/2018 physical

right ear ordered

Patient currently has personal amplification.

9/10/2018
Physical/hearing screenign
failed screening

9/5/2018

12/18/2017

10/3/2018

10/3/2018

hearing screening/physical
failed hearing screening audicus ordered

Patient seen for Intake physical and

audioscope test was failed.

physical

physical

Personal amplifier was issued and Hearing test failed refer to Hearing test failed refer

provider will follow up.

Audicus for testing

to Audicus for testing

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 644 of 661 - Page ID#: 3208

WKCC/ ROSS Hard of Hearing Progress Chart: Hearing Aids issued

Inmate Name Medical visit/step 2, date

3/23/2017

9/12/2017

2/26/2018

8/8/2018

9/28/2018

9/28/2018

1/22/2018

10/11/2018

10/11/2018

Description of Encounter
Medical visit/step 2 outcome Medical visit/step 3, date Description of Encounter
Medical visit/step 3, outcome Medical visit/Step 4 date Description of Encounter
Medical visit/step 4 outcome Medical visit/Step 5 date Description of Encounter

ENT Audiology Consult

Failed both ears

Issued amplification

Audicus Online test

Recommended hearing aids for both ears 4/28/2017

Will need futher evaluation of hearing. Amplification issued. 9/26/2017

Will follow up in 2 weeks 3/8/2018

Test Completed 8/21/2018

Audiologist Received bilateral Hearing Aids

Recheck of hearing

Follow up with amplification

encounter from Kemen

Patient not wearing amplification while at work. He says ampllification helps when it is quiet. Encouraged to wear at all times.
2/7/2018

he has been wearing the

device some. He does feel it

is helping him hear well

enough. He says that it

almost helps enhance it too

much and it echos. He does

feel it is functional for prison

life. Some things he would

like not to hear. Will follow

up yearly at physical.

Approved for left ear

1/21/2019

9/11/2018

HOH Follow up at H&P

Audicus Testing

Issue of hearing device

Audicus Testing

audicus testing

sensorineural Hearing

loss, bilateral Audicus

Dia II for right ear

ordered

Completed

10/5/2018

Dr. Kemen

Scheduled to see provider for follow

Audicus hearing

up with amplification.

Audicus Hearing Screening screening

She said she loves the pocket talker. She can hear so much better especially out of the right ear. She reports it makes her day so much better. Will follow up as needed or yearly on birthmonth.

Awaiting Results

8/27/2019

10/19/2018

awating results 10/19/2018

audiology audicus screening

approved for hearing divice for right ear

approved for hearing device for L ear

Audicus ORO for left ear

odered

10/22/2018

10/31/2018

Issued hearing aid Issued Hearing aid for the left

for right ear

ear.

10/05/2019 approved ro hearing aid

for right ear.

waiting delivery

10/8/2019

11/9/2018

audicus hearing re‐test

hearing aid

waiting delivery
11/9/2018
Hearing aid for left ear issued.

Does not feel that the pocke

talker is helpful or functional

in the prison. Will refer out approved for hearing aid left

for audiology screening. ear and issued on 3/11/2019 Left hearing device issued

2/20/2018

10/3/2018

Offsite Audiology Consult

follow up hearing device

Will follow up in 3‐

4 weeks

will follow up in 2‐3 weeks

11/15/2019

follow up with

hearing aid

hearing aid for right ear 10/24/2019 Patient received hearing aid for right ear.

hearing aid for Right ear issued.

Left hearing aid.

Medical visit/step 5 outcome Medical visit/Step 6 date
Description of Encounter
Medical visit/step 6 outcome

Consider binaural amplification based on the hearing loss present and the communication difficulties expressed. Mild Moderate Sensorineural Sloping hearing Loss in right and left ear. Word Recognition Right ear 65dbhl Left ear 65 DBhl. Invoice has been send for approval. 3/14/2018 Audiologist to receive hearing device Received biltateral hearing aids batteries 312

no problems

Says hearing aid helps and denies any problems with it. Patient does not have hearing aid on. Says he just woke up.

Hearing aid issued for right ear.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 645 of 661 - Page ID#: 3209

WKCC/ ROSS Hard of Hearing Progress Chart: Hearing Aids issued

Inmate Name DOC number Birth Month Pink Card Alert ! Arrival at Institution

7/10/1987
yes yes
3/20/2019

Date of initial hearing screening Date if most recent hearing screening

11/30/1968
yes yes
3/7/2019

4/4/1979
yes yes
10/24/2018

8/4/1958
yes yes
1/8/2019

1/19/1691
yes yes
7/16/2018

12/22/1974
yes yes
4/18/2019

11/9/1960
yes yes
2/22/2019

1/18/2019@ RCC 4/13/2019@RCC

8/30/1979
yes yes
5/21/2019
5/21/2019

1/13/1969
yes yes
6/18/2019

Screening results When was hearing problem first presented to KYDOC? How hearing problem was first presented to KYDOC?

Left ear approved for aid on 4/16/19
Intake at RCC
Intake at RCC

Hearing aid status

Has hearing aid for right ear.

For each inmate in status no hearing aid needed, please provide medical documentation of the decision. Days to provide hearing aid Days so far, if not provided yet

For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t‐coil receptor? Medical visit/step 1, Date

Description of Encounter Medical visit/step 1, outcome

Issued 2 hearing aids 8/15/16 at GRCC

bilateral hearing aids issued at KSR 4/26/2017

Patient arrived with hearing aid for right ear issued at GRCC on 8/17/18.

Arrived with hearing aid.

Patient received aid for left ear on 5/20/2019

3/22/2019 Issue of hearing aid ordered at KCIW

5/21/2019 intake screening

Understands how

works.

refer to provider

Patient received hearing aids from Hears to you on 11/2017

WKCC/ ROSS Hard of Hearing Progress Chart: Hearing Aids issued
Inmate Name Medical visit/step 2, date
Description of Encounter
Medical visit/step 2 outcome Medical visit/step 3, date
Description of Encounter

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 646 of 661 - Page ID#: 3210
5/22/2019 Intake physical/audioscope screening
Refer for audiology 6/6/2019 Audicus Testing

Medical visit/step 3, outcome Medical visit/Step 4 date Description of Encounter
Medical visit/step 4 outcome Medical visit/Step 5 date Description of Encounter

waiting results 6/19/2019 failed Audicus
Audicus Clara ordered for left ear. 7/16/2019 Issued hearing aid

Medical visit/step 5 outcome Medical visit/Step 6 date
Description of Encounter
Medical visit/step 6 outcome

has hearing aid for left ear.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 647 of 661 - Page ID#: 3211

WKCC/ ROSS Hard of Hearing Progress Chart : Do not qualify
Inmate Name DOC number Birth Month Pink Card Alert ! Arrival at Institution Date of initial hearing screening
Date if most recent hearing screening

10/31/1969 YES YES
10/4/2017 10/4/2017
10/9/2017

7/26/1996 YES YES

1/25/2018 1/25/2018
1/29/2018

2/13/1970 YES YES

1/25/2018 1/25/2018
2/2/2018

Screening results When was hearing problem first presented to KYDOC? How hearing problem was first presented to KYDOC?

Whisper/Audiometer Testing performed. 10/9/2017 Transfer

He feels that pocke talker is effective and it is apporpriate for prison use. Will forllow up as needed or one year.

failed audiometer screening onsite. Amplifier has been issued.

1/25/2018

1/25/2018

Transfer

Transfer

9/22/1976
YES YES
7/16/2019

10/15/1945
YES YES
10/2/2018

10/21/1969
YES YES
10/22/2018

10/14/1968
YES YES
10/2/2018

8/1/1978
YES YES
5/16/2018 5/16/2018

11/16/2018 Patient did not meet criteria for hearing aid. Pocket talker issued on 12/03/2018.

10/26/2018
Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

10/2/2018

10/22/2018

10/2/2018

5/16/2018

Physical

Physical

Physical

Transfer

Hearing aid status
For each inmate in status no hearing aid needed, please provide medical documentation of the decision. Days to provide hearing aid Days so far, if not provided yet
For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t‐coil receptor? Medical visit/step 1, Date

Amplification issued

He feels that pocket talker is effective and it is apporpriate for prison use. Will forllow up as needed or one year.

Patient was issued a pocket talker on 2/9/2018. Will follow up on 2/22/2018

per note from ouside visit on 1/8/2018. Not a candidate for hearing aid use. did not qualify

did not qualify

did not qualify

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

10/9/2017

1/25/2018

2/5/2018

10/2/2018

10/22/2018

10/25/2018

5/16/2018

Description of Encounter

Seen by onsite provider. Whisper/Audiometer Testing performed. Patient states that he has difficulty hearing soft spoken people, and in a crowded room. He can usuallly hear the intercom and the TV. Failed audioscope testing both ears. failed hearing screening upon transfer.

Audiometry Screening: 25 db HL Right Ear 2000 (Hz) Yes, Right
Ear 500 (Hz) No, Right Ear 1000 (Hz) No, Right Ear 4000 (Hz) No, Left Ear 500 (Hz) No, Left Ear 1000 (Hz) No, Left Ear 2000 (Hz) No, Left Ear 4000 (Hz) No.
audiometer completed and deficits noted..

physical/hearing screening

physical hearing test hearing screening

transfer screening

Medical visit/step 1, outcome

Amplification recommended will follow up in one

month from issue of amplification.

Referred to provider

Amplification was issued 2/9/2018 will follow up on 2/22/2018.

refer for futher testing failed audiometer

failed audiometer

refer to provider due to questionnaire

WKCC/ ROSS Hard of Hearing Progress Chart : Do not qualify
Inmate Name Medical visit/step 2, date

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 648 of 661 - Page ID#: 3212

10/12/2017

1/29/2018

2/21/2018

10/25/2018

11/9/2018

11/9/2018

5/31/2018

Description of Encounter

amplification issued

Seen on site provider. Audiometer screening failed Follow up on Amplification

Hearing screening Audicus testing

Audicus testing

Hearing audiometer test

Medical visit/step 2 outcome Medical visit/step 3, date
Description of Encounter

Will follow up 11/9/2017
Follow up with amplification

Will continue use of pocket talker. Patient

feels it is effective and useful for prison life.

Hearing amplification issued and will follow up in 2 Follow up if symptoms don't improve or if

weeks.

they worsen. Follow up on Birthmonth.

2/9/2018

2/6/2019

Follow up with amplification.

HOH

Medical visit/step 3, outcome Medical visit/Step 4 date
Description of Encounter

Does not wear all of the time. Patient is not

wearing it today. Rates the device a 10 out of 10 in He feels that pocke talker is effective and it is

improving hearing. Patient pleased with the apporpriate for prison use. Will follow up as

device.

needed or one year.

patient signed refusal for hearing test.

10/2/2018

2/26/2018

Yearly H&P

Pocket talker making a clicking noise

Medical visit/step 4 outcome Medical visit/Step 5 date
Description of Encounter Medical visit/step 5 outcome

Refused Hearing screening pocket talker. New pocket talker issued. 11/16/2018
Audicus Test Patient did not meet qualifications for perscription hearing aid.

refer for audicus

testing

will wait for results Have to retest

no defecits noted

11/16/2018

11/29/2018

11/16/2018

10/8/2019

Audicus testing

results for audicus

Audicus retest

Audicus Testing

did not qualify for Patient did not qualify Patient did not qualify

hearing aid. May for hearing aid. May for hearing aid. May

order pocket talker. order Pocket talker order Pocket talker

12/3/2018

12/3/2018 12/032018

No hearing impairments
10/26/2019

Pocket talker

Patient offered pocket Patient offered pocket

talker.

talker.

Audicus Re test

Patient satisfied with

pocket talker.

Refused

4/2/2019
Pocket talker

amplifies thins to

much

Returned Pocket Talker.

Refused

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid
10/26/2019
hearing amplification
Issued pocket talker.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 649 of 661 - Page ID#: 3213

WKCC/ ROSS Hard of Hearing Progress Chart : Do not qualify
Inmate Name DOC number Birth Month Pink Card Alert ! Arrival at Institution Date of initial hearing screening
Date if most recent hearing screening

7/9/1964
YES YES
5/16/2018 7/16/2018
10/8/2018

12/25/1996
YES YES
7/3/2018 12/5/2018
12/5/2018

8/20/1979
YES YES
1/11/2018 8/1/2018
8/8/2018

7/9/1972
YES YES
4/3/2019 9/12/2017

5/26/1972
YES YES
10/4/2017

11/8/1976
YES YES
3/10/2017 11/6/2018

10/3/2017 1/2/2018 12/7/2018

5/19/1974
YES YES
2/9/2018 2/9/2018
3/29/2018

1/25/1980
YES YES
3/23/2018 1/2/2019

5/11/1984
YES YES
8/30/2018

10/11/1972
YES YES
4/13/2018 5/17/2018

6/12/1967
YES YES
9/14/2017 9/14/2018

10/3/2018 2/15/2018

4/13/1978
YES YES
5/16/2019 5/16/2019
5/22/2019

failed audiometry screening with provider. Refused audicus testing. "I

failed hearing test with provider. Audicus test no hearing impairments.

No Not a candadate recemmenda Did not meet Did not meet for hearing aids tions for criteria for requirements for

Hearing questionnaire on HP. Passed

Screening results

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid don’t need it."

Retest ‐ refused.

at this time. hearing aids. hearing aid hearing aids

on 1/2/2019

When was hearing problem first

presented to KYDOC?

7/16/2018

12/5/2018

8/1/2018

9/12/2017

11/6/2018

2/9/2018

3/23/2018

How hearing problem was first presented

to KYDOC?

HP

HP

HP

Intake

HP

Transfer

Transfer

failed

Did not

questionnaire and meet

refused further requiremen

testing.

ts

5/17/2018 9/14/2017

transfer

Transfer

Hearing aid status

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Refused testing. Refused testing.

Not a candadate for hearing aids at this time.

For each inmate in status no hearing aid needed, please provide medical documentation of the decision. Days to provide hearing aid Days so far, if not provided yet

For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t‐coil receptor? Medical visit/step 1, Date

7/16/2018

12/5/2018

8/1/2018

9/12/2017

Description of Encounter Medical visit/step 1, outcome

HP hearing screening

HP

HP Hearing screening

hearing screening

failed referred to audicus

failed audiometry from proveder refer to audicus failed hearing screening.

refer to audiolgy

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid. Did not meet Pocket talker requirements for refused on hearing aids

Did not meet criteria

Patient tested at Bell County and had mild hearing loss. Patient did not wish to get aids refused further at this time. testing

Did not qualify for hearing device.

2/14/2019

3/26/2018

hearing screening

hearing evaluation by provider.

referred to Refer to audiologist audiologist.

5/17/2018 9/18/2018 5/16/2019

failed hearing screening and referred to audiologist. Patient refused and signed refusal.
refused

failed

audiometry

from

intake

provider screening

failed

questionaire

refer to

give pocket provider for

talker

testing

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 650 of 661 - Page ID#: 3214

WKCC/ ROSS Hard of Hearing Progress Chart : Do not qualify
Inmate Name Medical visit/step 2, date

7/26/2018

1/21/2019

8/8/2018

10/3/2017

Description of Encounter

Audicus testing

audicus testing audicus testing

Audiologist testing

3/29/2018

5/20/2018

Audiologist Testing Audiologist

10/3/2018 10/18/2018 5/22/2016

HP/HOH questionnaire

follow up

from pocket inkake

talker.

physical

Medical visit/step 2 outcome Medical visit/step 3, date
Description of Encounter

No hearing impairment

Patient signed refusal.

10/8/2018

Audicus retest

Not a candatate No hearing impairments for hearing aids.
10/9/2018
audicus retest

Medical visit/step 3, outcome Medical visit/Step 4 date
Description of Encounter

did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Medical visit/step 4 outcome Medical visit/Step 5 date
Description of Encounter Medical visit/step 5 outcome

Refused testing.

Did not meet requirements

Did not meet requirements
1/2/2019
hp

passed screening.

Patient refused further testing.

give

headphones

instead of

ear buds.

Patient failed

having

audioscope.

trouble Refer to

with them. Audicus

1/10/2018 6/6/2019

Audicus

audiologist Testing

repeat

audiologic

assessment

to establish

accurate

hearing wait for

levels.

results

2/15/2018 7/11/2019

Audicus

audiologist evaluation

Amplificatio Patient did

n is not not meet

recommend criteria for a

ed at this perscription

time.

hearing aid.

WKCC/ ROSS Hard of Hearing Progress Chart : Do not qualify
Inmate Name DOC number Birth Month Pink Card Alert ! Arrival at Institution Date of initial hearing screening
Date if most recent hearing screening

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 651 of 661 - Page ID#: 3215

2/27/1978
YES YES
5/29/2019 5/29/2019
6/7/2019

9/14/1976 YES YES 3/29/2019 5/16/2019
5/24/2019

Screening results When was hearing problem first presented to KYDOC? How hearing problem was first presented to KYDOC?

Hearing aid status
For each inmate in status no hearing aid needed, please provide medical documentation of the decision. Days to provide hearing aid Days so far, if not provided yet
For each inmate who has a hearing aid, does it have a t‐coil receptor? Medical visit/step 1, Date

5/29/2019

5/16/2019

Description of Encounter

earache f/u with
intake screening ear

Medical visit/step 1, outcome

failed refer to provider

failed audiogram

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 652 of 661 - Page ID#: 3216

WKCC/ ROSS Hard of Hearing Progress Chart : Do not qualify
Inmate Name Medical visit/step 2, date

6/7/2019

5/24/2019

Description of Encounter

intake

physical/Audioscop

e test

Audicus Testing

Medical visit/step 2 outcome Medical visit/step 3, date
Description of Encounter

Refer to audicus awaiting results 7/11/2019
Audicus Testing

Medical visit/step 3, outcome Medical visit/Step 4 date
Description of Encounter

Refusal for Audicus Test signed.

Medical visit/step 4 outcome Medical visit/Step 5 date
Description of Encounter Medical visit/step 5 outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 653 of 661 - Page ID#: 3217

Technology

How many Where

When obtained Specifications (URL)

FM radio transmitters, usable as

an amplifier system?

8

Dorm TVs, gym sound systeprior to 2017

Phone amplifiers (not volume

control: portable amplifiers)

5

Ross-Cash dorms, Operatio July 2019

Captioned Telephone

0

Other amplifiers, amplification

systems, or the like?

0

Bed shakers

0

Vibrating watches?

0

Vibrating alarm clocks?

0

Pagers?

0

Other non-auditory alerts or

assistive devices currently in use

or under consideration not

mentioned above.

0

Earphones for parole hearings 2

Operations/Collins Dorm

Earphones for orientation videos 2

Operations/Collins Dorm (same ones referenced above)

How well do they How do inmates obtain access? work?

Other comments

tune in radio to frequency

great

sign out from Officer

new; similar model as other facilities

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 654 of 661 - Page ID#: 3218

Documentation to review KOMS alerts for each deaf/HOH inmate Grievances:

Date reviewed 7/24/2019

Provide/Review summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. 7/25/2019 Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Provide/Review full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Solve any problems revealed. 7/25/2019 Discipline Review all disciplinary proceedings involving an inmate who signs. Ensure that VRI or other effective communication was provided at 7/26/2019 each stage of each such proceedings.

Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.) Good 2 greivances filed concerning legal mail/copies
Grievances were filed days ago, detailed summary unavailable at this time. NONE
No issues noted in disciplinary reports.

Review all disciplinary proceedings involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Ensure that no such inmate is being penalized for inability to hear. VRI Log (review to ensure it's being used in appropriate circumstances. VRS or other videophone alternative (review to ensure that when videophone is inoperative, alternative is in fact available/used)

7/26/2019
7/25/2019 7/25/2019

TTY instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.) 7/25/2019 VRI instructions (must be easy to follow instructions on set-up, use, etc.) 7/25/2019

There was one disciplinary report:

persuing relationship with staff 12/24/18 (inapropriate actions

toward Purple interpreters) This report caused

to receive

a permanent ban from the Purple device at WKCC, as he had

other accommodations to effectively communicate.

Good

Good

Good Good

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 655 of 661 - Page ID#: 3219
Questions regarding effective communications in particular activities or locations. For each, mark compliance (Y, partial, N, no basis) and explain. Goal: each d

Intake/ Orientation -- Non-medical

In-person interpretation

Ever used?

Used whenever appropriate?

Availability of VRI: Appropriate equipment available (computer line,
Staff trained? outlet, space)

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

Ever used? How many times?
N/A

Used whenever appropriate? (without special request)
N/A

Intake, Medical

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Auxiliary Aid Assessment Units

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Restrictive Housing Medical/MH care Programs

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Education Recreation

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Communications with Chaplain

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Prison-provided religious

programming

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Volunteer -led programming (note:

Only volunteer interpretation is

required)

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Parole hearings

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Classification/

Transfer

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Legal Aid

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Grievance process

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Work assignments

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Court call and ALL parts of

disciplinary process

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Staff investigations

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Investigative interviews

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Preparation of report

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Shift supervisor's review of

disciplinary report

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Investigator's review of

disciplinary report

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Miranda warnings

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

When advising inmate of right to

consult with legal aide

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Notification of date, time, and

place of hearing

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Hearing or re-hearing

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

N/A

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to attend a religious service without effective communication to receive any religious meal, diet, or other accommodation? No Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have witnessed or been suspected of violation) provided with an inmate or staff advisor on same terms as non-deaf inmates? Yes inmates can have a staff council upon request. It is reviewed and denied or appoved based on the same process as a non deaf inmate.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 656 of 661 - Page ID#: 3220
Questions regarding effective commundeaf or HOH inmate has an equal opportunity to participate in Amplification: (Not just hearing aid -- space-specific amplification)

Intake/ Orientation -- Non-medical

Adequate? N/A

Intake, Medical

N/A

Auxiliary Aid Assessment

N/A

Units

N/A

Restrictive Housing

N/A

Medical/MH care

yes

Programs

N/A

Education

Yes

Recreation

Yes

Communications with Chaplain

Yes

Prison-provided religious

programming

Yes

Volunteer -led programming (note:

Only volunteer interpretation is

required)

yes

Parole hearings

Yes

Classification/

Transfer

N/A

Legal Aid

N/A

Grievance process

N/A

Work assignments

N/A

Court call and ALL parts of

disciplinary process

Staff investigations

N/A

Investigative interviews

N/A

Preparation of report

N/A

Shift supervisor's review of

disciplinary report

N/A

Investigator's review of

disciplinary report

N/A

Miranda warnings

N/A

When advising inmate of right to

consult with legal aide

N/A

Notification of date, time, and

place of hearing

N/A

Hearing or re-hearing

N/A

If deaf/hoh inmate is witness

N/A

Describe efforts, issues

Audit item issues/ concerns

small groups, can be oriented one-on-one, area

amplification not necessary.

medical interactions are one-on-one, accomodated

case-by-case

Assessment is conducted first asking needs for

accomodation, one-on-one.

all interactions are one-on-one or very small groups. Accomodations are case-by-case. headphones available for tele-med services

Sound system for religious/recreation can utilize FM transmitter TVs have FM transmitters for programs Sound system for religious/recreation can utilize FM transmitter Sound system for religious/recreation can utilize FM transmitter

Sound system for religious/recreation can utilize FM transmitter Headphones available for parole board hearings

One-on-one meetings accomodated case-by-case One-on-one meetings accomodated case-by-case One-on-one meetings accomodated case-by-case

One-on-one meetings accomodated case-by-case One-on-one meetings accomodated case-by-case Inmate not involved in report preparation
Inmate not involved in review
Inmate not involved in review of report N/A
One-on-one meetings accomodated case-by-case
One-on-one meetings accomodated case-by-case Quiet location, small group (Adj. Officer, legal aide, inmate) accomodated case-by-case One-on-one meetings accomodated case-by-case

Special questions: Has any inmate been required to attend No Are deaf or HOH inmates (who have wit Yes inmates can have a staff council upo

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 657 of 661 - Page ID#: 3221

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Signs Low literacy?

If signs to

Bed

to (So that

communicat

Shaker?

Listed with comm written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

KOMS ADA unicat communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested;

Precaution e

n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y precaution meeting denied;

?

(Y/N) effective)

waived) or waived) notes?

took place? granted)

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO Y

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO Y

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO Y

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

Other Alert

Device TTY Access

(Not

(Not

requested; requested;

denied; denied;

granted) granted)

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

N/A

No Req

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 658 of 661 - Page ID#: 3222

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURIN

Personal

Phone

Amplifier

(Not

requested;

denied;

Name

ID

granted)

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Available

Shake & Wake (Not requested; denied; granted) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Any other

auxiliary

aid

requeste

Audit item

d?

Outome? issues/concerns

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 659 of 661 - Page ID#: 3223

Signs Low literacy?

If signs to

Bed

Other Alert

to (So that

communicat

Shaker? Device TTY Access

Listed with comm written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

(Not

KOMS ADA unicat communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested;

Precaution e

n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y precaution meeting denied; denied; denied;

ID

?

(Y/N) effective)

waived) or waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted)

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

N/A

No Req

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

N/A

No Req

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

N/A

No Req

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

N/A

No Req

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

N/A

No Req

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

N/A

No Req

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

N/A

No Req

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

N/A

No Req

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

N/A

No Req

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

N/A

No Req

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

N/A

No Req

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

N/A

No Req

Y

NO N

Y

Y

N/A

Yes

N/A

N/A

No Req

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 660 of 661 - Page ID#: 3224

Personal

Phone

Amplifier Shake & Any other

(Not

Wake (Not auxiliary

requested; requested; aid

denied; denied; requeste

Audit item

ID

granted) granted) d?

Outome? issues/concerns

Available N/A

N/A

Available N/A

N/A

Available N/A

N/A

Available N/A

N/A

Available N/A

N/A

Available N/A

N/A

Available N/A

N/A

Available N/A

N/A

Available N/A

N/A

Available N/A

N/A

Available N/A

N/A

Available N/A

N/A

Available N/A

N/A

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 93-4 Filed: 12/24/19 Page: 661 of 661 - Page ID#: 3225

Fill this out for EACH location where there are any deaf/HOH inmates

How many Volume

Bed

If there are

How inmates adjustable

shakers set Staff use If there are any

any inmates

many who sign phone available

up for use bed

inmates who If there are any who sign:

Deaf/ to

to inmates

How for

shakers for sign: Location inmates who Ready

HOH communic without special many bed multiple multiple available for sign: Staff

access to

Dorm/unit

Walk

inmates? ate

request?

shakers? purposes? purposes? VRI?

trained for VRI videophone Audit item issues/concerns

A

14 None

YES

None None

None

None

None

None

B

3 None

YES

None None

None

None

None

None

C

16 None

YES

None None

None

None

None

None

CLARKE

3 None

YES

None None

None

None

None

None

COLLINS

4 None

YES

None None

None

None

None

None

SMU

3 None

NO (see note) None None

None

None

None

None

SMU NOTE:

Any Deaf/HOH inmate is accomodated on a case-by-case basis using staff phones, TTY, VRS/VRI, etc.

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 1 of 44 - Page ID#: 3226

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT FRANKFORT

OSCAR ADAMS and MICHAEL KNIGHTS

Plaintiffs v.

Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, et al.

Defendants.

Eighth Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor May 27, 2020
Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 625 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109

1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 2 of 44 - Page ID#: 3227
I. INTRODUCTION
The Settlement Agreement in this matter became effective on June 29, 2015, and was set to remain in effect for five years from that effective date. Therefore, it is scheduled to expire on June 28, 2020. I filed my last report in December 2019, five months ago. As this report explains, Ky DOC headquarters and facility staff have devoted real effort and attention to correcting the deficits highlighted previously. The result is significant compliance progress. While areas of non-compliance are shrinking, I remain concerned about a couple of institutions generally, and a couple of issues across institutions.
This report is based on several sources of information:
• A more limited version of the self-audit process I have described in prior reports, with information provided as of February 2020. I shared a limited version of the self-audit checklist with each Ky DOC ADA Coordinator and Warden on February 12, 2019, along with a request for other information. (The memo I sent is attached as Exhibit 1.) I asked that each institution complete and return it to me two weeks later. The resulting spreadsheet responses are attached as Exhibit 2. (I have redacted inmate names and id numbers, both in the spreadsheets and in this report; Ky DOC has unredacted versions.)
• Followups with each institution and Ky DOC headquarters about the areas of concern identified in the last report, and also responses to the draft of this report, circulated May 14, 2020.
• Several (but not a full round of) inmate interviews. • Telecommunications testing of TTYs, captioned telephones, and videophones (using a
video relay service).
Note: The information reported here largely predates the COVID-19 pandemic. I do not know how the pandemic is affecting deaf/HOH inmates and their accommodation.
Table 1, below, tallies deaf/HOH inmates at each institution. The number of deaf/HOH inmates listed at each institution is not their self-reported number; instead, I took a master list of deaf/HOH inmates that I maintain based on all the institutions’ reporting, and then updated locations using Ky DOC’s online inmate lookup page. The most recent full report was in March 2020, but some institutions have updated things in subsequent months.
2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 3 of 44 - Page ID#: 3228

Table 1: Ky DOC Institutions

# HOH Inmates

Apr. 2019 master

list, locations as of

Institution

Sept. 2019

Blackburn Corr. Complex (BCC)

12 (0 deaf)

Bell County Forestry Camp (BCFC)

3 (0 deaf)

Eastern Ky. Corr. Complex (EKCC)

59 (0 deaf)

Green River Corr. Complex (GRCC)

49 (0 deaf)

Ky. Corr. Inst. For Women (KCIW)

17 (2 deaf)

Ky. State Penitentiary (KSP)

32 (1 deaf)

Ky. State Reformatory (KSR)

217 (2 deaf)

Lee Adjustment Center (LAC)

32 (0 deaf)

Luther Luckett Corr. Complex (LLCC)

155 (2 deaf)

Little Sandy Corr. Complex (LSCC)

92 (1 deaf)

Northpoint Training Center (NTC)

76 (1 deaf)

Roederer Corr. Complex (RCC)

26 (0 deaf)

Western Ky. Corr. Complex/Ross-Cash (WKCC) 55 (0 deaf)

TOTAL 825 (9 deaf)

# HOH Inmates
March 2020 26 (0 deaf) 6 (0 deaf) 94 (0 deaf) 63 (1 deaf) 32 (2 deaf) 69 (1 deaf) 283 (1 deaf) 42 (0 deaf) 211 (1 deaf) 148 (1 deaf) 94 (1 deaf) 86 (0 deaf) 52 (0 deaf) 1206 (8 deaf)

To begin, I raise one issue that I have not previously identified—Settlement Agreement coverage of state inmates in county jail custody. In Kentucky, state-sentenced inmates can do their time in county jails; the state pays the counties for this incarceration. The Settlement Agreement does not directly address such inmates. Some of its provisions are general. For example, it defines “inmate” as “any person in the custody of the KDOC.” And its central provision states:

The KDOC will ensure that Deaf Inmates have full and equal access to and enjoyment of all services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations available to similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates. The KDOC shall provide Deaf Inmates with access to services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations substantially equivalent to those offered to similarly situated non-Deaf Inmates.

But many other provisions are limited to “Adult Institutions,” which does not encompass county jails—even though about half of Kentucky’s state-sentenced inmates are housed in county jails.

The issue whether the Settlement Agreement covers state inmates housed in county jails became

more salient over the past week, when a hard-of-hearing inmate, Bradley Hicks (

)

filed a pro se lawsuit, Hicks v. Williams, 5:20-cv-00081-TBR (W.D. Ky.), seeking to be moved

from the Fulton County Jail to a jail or prison that complies with the Settlement Agreement in

this case. Mr. Hicks complains that he has been unable to get access to parole-required

programming because of his hearing impairment. I have asked both plaintiffs’ and defendants’

counsel to share their thoughts about his case’s appropriate connection to this litigation.

In what follows, I begin with systemwide issues previously discussed. In this report, I repeat the prior identified action items in bold text, followed where useful by Ky DOC’s response in italics, and then describe what I know about the progress on each.

3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 4 of 44 - Page ID#: 3229
II. PRIOR-IDENTIFIED SYSTEMWIDE ISSUES
1. New ADA Coordinators
Prior recommendation: Ky DOC should develop and implement an ADA Coordinator transition process, which should include processes for at least the following:
 informing new ADA Coordinators about available resources,  linking them to other facilities’ ADA Coordinators,  walking them through auxiliary aid, reporting, and tracking processes,  updating the recipients of ADA related emails (for example, automated transfer
emails),  updating the Ky DOC website list of ADA Coordinators.
Response: In its memo dated Nov. 14, 2009, which was Exhibit 2 to my December 2019 report, Ky DOC committed to designating primary and backup ADA Coordinators, to “help alleviate a lapse in services” caused by transitions, and to ensuring that ADA Coordinators, backup ADA Coordinators and Wardens were made aware of a shared resource folder. The Department stated, “[u]ntil training materials can be updated into a Computer Based Training module, previous training that was conducted via power point, will also be available on the G drive.” It also updated the Ky DOC website list of ADA Coordinators, and it seems that this is currently up-to-date.
Progress: Ky DOC has largely but not completely carried out the recommendation related to ADA transition. By the February reporting, most but not all of the ADA Coordinators had done the training and gotten access to the shared resource folder. Specifically:
 GRCC’s ADA Coordinator initially did not report that he has read the several training slide decks, instead reporting his completion of other (and insufficient) online ADA training; in subsequent reporting (in mid-May) he did report that he had completed the correct training.
 KSP’s ADA Coordinator reported in February that he has taken an “ADA Basic Building Blocks” online course, which is, similarly, not the special training developed for ADA Coordinators in this case. He also reported that he still lacked access to the G-Drive, where the appropriate training and many other resources are kept. In May, KSP reported that on March 5, 2020, the ADA Coordinator had been provided access to the G-Drive, with its appropriate training and other resources.
At this point, then, all the ADA Coordinators have (finally) gotten G-Drive access and done the training. But the process was slow and required repeated nudges. So while progress has been made, I remain concerned about process robustness, both now and going forward. The Computer Based Training (CBT) module referenced in Ky DOC’s November memo has been created and is currently with me for review. Conversion of the existing ADA Coordinator and staff powerpoint trainings to CBT modules should help ensure that everyone gets access into the future.
4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 5 of 44 - Page ID#: 3230
2. Inmate tracking, transfer alerts, etc.
Prior recommendation: Someone at Ky DOC headquarters should check each and every inmate for whom there is a record of a hearing impairment, and ensure that each of them is being appropriately tracked in KOMS.
Individuals whose records have only a general alert, in Kentucky Offender Management System (KOMS) need an ADA alert. The transfer notification system needs to be tested and problems solved, from Ky DOC headquarters.
Whether the information comes automatically to medical or is relayed by the ADA Coordinator, medical staff responsible for intake should be informed that a deaf/HOH inmate is incoming, so that they can ensure that audiology processes are not interrupted, deal with lost hearing aids, etc.
Response: Ky DOC carried out the first of these recommendations by delegating name checking to facility ADA Coordinators. On the second recommendation, it identified several process problems, reported them to me, and solved them.
Progress: There has been substantial progress with respect to these related recommendations. At this point, all the prisons—even Lee Adjustment Center—are getting transfer notices. More generally, it seems that identification issues have largely been solved, retrospectively. However, I have been unable to check whether newly identified deaf/HOH inmates are being flagged appropriately. (To be clear, I don’t have a reason to think they are not—I am just not sure one way or the other.)
Prior recommendation: The ADA Coordinators should be polled to find out what information would be most useful, and the KOMS record of each individual with an alert should then be completed accordingly.
Response: The polling took place as recommended. Results included:  Accommodations/auxiliary aids needed (and date issued)  Degree of hearing impairment  Communications method  Other disabilities  Date of provider follow up or audicus hearing test.  Any information regarding the use of an outside agency (e.g, KY Talking Book Program).
Ky DOC headquarters’ response to these suggestions was a memo to ADA Coordinators urging them to include more complete information in the comment areas of the KOMS ADA alert.
Progress: The information gathered from ADA Coordinators was excellent, and the new ADA Coordinators’ training module, in development, also provides good guidance on identification and KOMS use. That said, for most institutions I have not been informed that any retrospective effort has been made to get fuller information into existing records. (BCC did report a retrospective review; other institutions may have done one as well, but I do not know.) I also do
5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 6 of 44 - Page ID#: 3231
not know whether this memo/effort is proving effective at improving the comprehensiveness of the KOMS records going forward.
Prior recommendation: Ky DOC Headquarters should develop and promulgate a memo about how to run an ADA report from KOMS, sharing it with each ADA Coordinator— and ensuring that it is shared with new ADA Coordinators as well.
Response: “Due to the complexity of the process to extract data from KOMS to generate the report, we believe an instructional memorandum would not be productive. Accordingly, the KY DOC Central office will automatically generate an ADA report to all ADA Coordinators and backups on a weekly basis.”
Progress: Solved. The self-audit reports indicate that lists are circulated on Mondays.
3. Audiology standards
Prior recommendation: Providers at each institution should receive a new memo with the correct audiology standard, and the update should be emphasized in some kind of training or other communications.
Providers at each institution should be trained about how to evaluate the need for binaural hearing aids, and should review recent requests for two hearing aids and evaluate them against the policy, with oversight from the regional medical director. In addition, inmates who have hearing deficits in both ears should have the policy explained to them when they are denied binaural amplification, so that they can make an informed decision whether to grieve the denial.
Response: On Nov. 5, 2019, Ky DOC headquarters sent an updated audiology standard to healthcare staff at each institution. It included the correct audiology standard, and the following new instructions on processes for requested binaural amplification:
Dual Hearing Aids A patient who requests two hearing aids must submit a sick call slip describing his/her reason or reasons for requesting two hearing aids. The patient is then referred to his/her primary care provider (PCP) who reviews the most recent audiogram (on-site audiogram, Audicus online hearing test, or outside audiogram) to determine whether the hearing in each ear (separately) meets the DOC requirement for a prescription hearing aid. If both ears meet the DOC requirement for a hearing aid, the PCP will determine whether either of the two additional criteria for two hearing aids (see above) are met. The PCP will then either order a second hearing aid or deny the request for two hearing aids. Any request for two hearing aids is to be referred to the Therapeutic Level of Care Committee for review.
Institutional health services administrators (HSAs) were trained on the standards and processes at a quarterly HSA meeting in December 2019.
6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 7 of 44 - Page ID#: 3232

Ky DOC also reports that inmates who request binaural hearing aids are receiving an explanation of the policy when they are denied such amplification, so that they can make an informed decision whether to grieve the denial.

Progress: I remain somewhat concerned about this issue. In recent months, the issue of binaural

amplification has come to my attention several times. It seemed that in none of these cases were

binaural hearing aids authorized, even though some of the inmates asserted a safety and/or

vocational need. I am not in a position to evaluate the medical issues, but it is important that the

policy exception be a real one, not posing an unattainable hurdle. That said, when I alerted Ky

DOC to my concern, I was informed of five individuals for whom binaural amplification is being

provided (

;

(blind);

;

.) In a draft of this report, I identified seven

additional individuals who had brought this issue to my attention. Ky DOC’s medical contractor

conducted reviews, and reported that one of them had not expressly requested two hearing aids.

His case was therefore being reviewed. The issue bears close attention, to ensure that binaural

amplification remain available when appropriate.

4. Audiology services delays

a. Prior recommendation: Ky DOC’s medical provider should centralize a reporting system so that if any inmate has not completed audiology processing in three months— from the first report of a hearing problem to provision of a hearing aid or other resolution—that is reported centrally and headquarters staff take a role in immediately solving the problem.

Response: Retrospectively, the healthcare contractor, Wellpath, identified 14 inmates whose audiology services took over 90 days. Review of the source of delay revealed:
 Erroneous application of criteria/procedures (10)
 Changed criteria cause delay (2)  Hearing aids lost during transfer (1)  In one case there was some confusion about whether the inmate was waiving access to a
hearing aid.

Prospectively, Ky DOC stated, “WellPath’s internal goal is from the time of (Referral/Hearing test) we should be able to deliver a hearing test within 30 days. If 30 days pass, Wellpath begins to determine the disruption of service. A number of reasons could delay service including retesting, other medical issues, and patient refusals. The delivery of hearing aids taking longer than 60 days are noted” on a spreadsheet initiated December 2019.

Progress: I do not yet have enough information to tell whether these new initiatives will fix the problem. I am hopeful. I can note that there certainly was, as of December 2019, a problem remaining to be fixed: In the most recent information request, I asked each facility to provide a list of every inmate whose audiology process began in 2019 or 2020 and had taken over 60 days, and why. I also myself tallied such inmates. Among inmates whose hearing issues came to the attention of Ky DOC in 2019 or 2020, and who have since received hearing aids, about half took

7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 8 of 44 - Page ID#: 3233
over 60 days (see Table 4), and about a quarter took over 90 days. (This was before the COVID19 pandemic, which no doubt has substantially slowed audiology processing.)
Some of these delays were for entirely unobjectionable reasons: some inmates had other more urgent medical needs, or their hearing aid evaluation had to wait on resolution of a confounding issue. But that left many inmates whose processing in 2019 or 2020 took over 90 days without such a justification. So while audiology processing times have greatly improved, there is still some work to be done.
b. Prior recommendation: There needs to be an instruction to both the transferring and the new institution; the transferring institution should send a progress note for all inmates whose audiology evaluation/provision is in-process, and the new institution should do a thorough chart review for each inmate who might be HOH, to check for in-process audiology needs.
Response: Ky DOC shared with me a new “Workflow for Auxiliary Aid upon transfer,” which provides:
 Upon arrival at each institution, there will be a chart review completed by the institutional Provider to determine if a patient has been diagnosed or is being worked up as HOH.
 The ADA Coordinator will also review KOMS for the HOH alert.  The ADA Coordinator and Health Services Administrator will meet within 14 days of the
patient’s arrival (but sooner if possible) regarding incoming patients identified as HOH or in the process of being evaluated as HOH. The patient should be included in the first meeting. During this meeting, the available resources, assistive devices and methods for obtaining these services shall be explained.  The patient will be discussed weekly in the treatment team meeting until the patient has received the auxiliary aid or is determined not to need the aid.  The patient will be reviewed at treatment team the week following his/her one month follow-up regarding the effectiveness of the auxiliary aid. (This step was added on May 18, 2020 to offer an additional opportunity to discuss that the patient’s needs had been met).  The patient will only be followed in treatment team as needed after the effectiveness review.
All Health Services Administrators were instructed at their December 4, 2019 H.S.A. Quarterly meeting that the sending and receiving institutions both held responsibility in ensuring the continuity of care for patients in the audiology evaluation process. The sending H.S.A. should notify the receiving H.S.A. that a patient transferring was in the process of being evaluated for audiology issues. The receiving institution H.S.A. was also notified that she was responsible for ensuring that the chart review had been completed on the arriving patient and that care was picked up at the point left at the last facility.
Progress: My prior finding was that although Ky DOC policy requires a chart review of incoming inmates, on transfer, that review was not taking place in practice, at least not in enough
8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 9 of 44 - Page ID#: 3234
detail to detect ongoing audiology needs. If followed, the workflow quoted above should solve that problem. In addition, the more consistent use of the ADA alert in KOMS should also be contributing to a solution for this problem; if an inmate is flagged in KOMS, the ADA Coordinator and health staff will know about it and be able to look for pending audiology issues.
5. Request forms
Prior recommendation: Ky DOC headquarters staff should review all forms by which inmates make requests that lead to in-person meetings, and ensure that each one includes notice that communication assistance is available at such meetings. For medical forms in particular, whatever issue has caused the reversion to the prior form should be corrected. In addition, interpretation services forms should clearly encompass religious and other volunteer-provided programming, and all inmate-staff communications.
Response: The headquarters ADA Coordinator led an effort to modify all forms by which inmates make requests that lead to in-person meetings, to include notice that communication assistance is available at such meetings. (Mostly the phrase “ADA Accommodations Request?” is included, with a spot to indicate “Yes.”) Ky DOC reported: “Once standardized forms are finalized, they will be placed on the G-drive and distributed to all ADA Coordinators, back-ups, and Wardens. The Health Services Division has indicated that medical forms are standardized in the Electronic Health Record.”
Progress: On the medical form in particular, I did, in February, ask each institution for a copy of its medical form, and the results demonstrate that notwithstanding the Ky DOC response just quoted, the medical form available to inmates varies across Ky DOC facilities. One version includes communications accommodation language. But the form in use at, for example, LAC (and perhaps others) does not. (On my circulation of this report in draft, some institutions corrected the form.) See Exhibit 3 for both the compliant and noncompliant form.
Other forms covered by this recommendation—that is, forms that precede in-person meetings— include, for example, forms relating to:
 Education  Jobs (see, e.g., GRCC Job Action Request form, which has the necessary language,
attached as Exhibit 4)  CTO meetings (See, e.g., WKCC CTO request form)  Operations appointment slip  Request for transfer
At some institutions, I am told that these forms are not used to request meetings—in which case this recommendation has no application. For the others, dozens of forms have now been modified and shared with me, though not yet been placed on the G-Drive. Assuming these forms are all that exist, it seems that this issue is solved. (I am told that classification and disciplinary meetings are recorded in KOMS, not with a separate form—and that officers are instructed to check for ADA precautions and provide effective communication without a special request.)
9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 10 of 44 - Page ID#: 3235
6. Hearing aid loss on intra-prison moves and inter-prison transfers
Prior recommendation: “Adaptive equipment” should be added to the printed property list used to track property during moves, and staff receive training that they must affirmatively locate such equipment and manage it appropriately. For inter-prison transfers, the best policy would be to instruct inmates to wear their hearing aids during the transfer.
Response: Corrections Policy & Procedure (CPP) 17.1 Inmate Personal Property revisions were recently finalized, updated and was issued to be effective May 26, 2020, to give proper notice to staff and the inmate population. Language has been added in section E (1) of the policy to address prior hearing aid loss due to transfers, which is highlighted below.
Excerpt from CPP 17.1—
E. Inmate Transfer Between Institutions 1. If an inmate is transferred by Corrections from one institution to another, all personal effects, personal and state issued clothing and property, including legal material, shall be inventoried and transferred with the inmate. An inmate who has been issued hearing aids shall be instructed to wear their hearing aids throughout the transfer process unless they pose a threat or danger to themselves or others. Prior to transfer, the inmate’s clothing shall be examined by staff for any deficiency, alteration or shortage, and to determine proper ownership. A property release receipt listing the inmate's possessions shall be signed by the inmate indicating that he has not left any personal property at the facility from which he is transferred. In an emergency transfer between institutions the inmate's personal effects and property shall be inventoried and transferred within five (5) working days. An inmate who is on a hold ticket from another institution shall only have access to those personal effects and property that are permitted in his temporary living assignment. (Emphasis added.)
In addition, Ky DOC reported that it would add adaptive equipment to the in-development electronic version of the property transfer form, when such a change is practicable.
Progress: These are very helpful changes. In addition, some work has been done in individual prisons. E.g., at KSR, a memo dated April 2019 went out:
A lot of our inmate population now have hearing aids that are being misplaced when they are packed up for transfer/ THU /CPTU. Hearing aids, or pocket talkers should never be taken from an Inmate unless it is ordered by medical or mental health personnel. If you encounter hearing aids when packing up an inmate’s property please ensure you write it down on the property form so that the property room staff can retrieve, and secure it. In addition to this there are quite a few “Bed Shakers” on the yard. These must also be noted on the property form as they are retrieved from the inmate’s property and returned to the ADA Coordinator to be re-issued to another inmate.
Hearing aids are expensive and it is in Ky DOC’s interest to take steps to avoid loss.
10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 11 of 44 - Page ID#: 3236
7. Auxiliary aids a. Devices Table 2 itemizes auxiliary aids I’m aware each institution has, based on their reporting.
Table 2: Auxiliary Aids Available.

WKCC/ Ross RCC NTC LSCC LLCC LAC KSR KSP KCIW GRCC
EKCC
BCFC BCC

Telecommunication devices/amplification

Captioned telephone* IP Y

Y

Portable phone amplifiers*

Y Y

Y

TTY

Y Y

Y

Videophone kiosk*

Y Y

Y

IP IP Y Y

IP Y IP

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Non-telecommunication amplification

Assistive listening (FM radio transmitters)*

Y

IP

Y

Earphones for orientation videos*

Y Y

Y

Earphones for parole hearings*

Y Y

Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y IP Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y? Y Y

Non-auditory alerts

ADA support inmates

Y

Y

Y (dorm runners)

Y?

Y Y Y Y Y Y IP

Bed shakers

Y Y

Y

Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y

Lights flash for count etc.**

Y

Y

Y (HOH walks)

IP

Y

Pagers

Y

Y Y Y

Vibrating watches*

Y Y

Y

IPǂ Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Vibrating alarm clocks* Y Y

Y?

Y Yǂǂ Y Y Y Y Y Y Y IP

Interpretation

VRI/VRS laptop*

Y Y

Y

IP = In Progress

* = Recommended for every facility

** = Recommended wherever possible

ǂ Y for Deaf inmates; IP for HOH inmates ǂǂ Y for Deaf inmates not HOH inmates

Y? = inconsistent reporting

Blank = No

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 12 of 44 - Page ID#: 3237
On my recommendation, Ky DOC headquarters collected information about the vendors and models for these devices, to facilitate information sharing. The information is attached as Exhibit 5. Next I canvass types of devices currently in use at Ky DOC institutions, with notes on each one.
i. Videophones:
Prior recommendation: Ky DOC headquarters needs to solve the Purple videophone outage problem so that outages are both rare and brief, or make a systemwide switch to a more reliable videophone provider.
Response: Ky DOC polled its institutions, and reported issues only at KSR: “The Kentucky State Reformatory's issue is not directly related to Purple, but is a sporadic issue with slight pixilation happening during the call. The Warden had the new switch installed on November 8, 2019. However, the new circuit installation could take up to 90 days, as we have to wait until AT&T fulfills the work order.”
Progress: The Ky DOC progress report was sufficiently out-of-sync with the information I had gotten from inmates that I decided to have my law student assistants conduct videophone interviews of an inmate who use the videophone at each institution where such an inmate lives. There are seven such institutions. I’ve attached my interview questions as Exhibit 6, to assist Ky DOC if it wishes to self-audit the operation of the videophone in the future.
For LSCC, my test was delayed: the videophone kiosk was down for several weeks in April and May. Eventually, we scheduled a call using the videophone setting on the Purple laptop instead. For the other six institutions—GRCC, KCIW, KSP, KSR, LLCC, NTC—my assistants were able to talk with one inmate per institution, all in April 2020.
Even apart from the LSCC issue, several of the inmates we spoke with reported that videophones often suffer from connectivity issues—glitchy or poor connections making use difficult (recall, these are videophones; if you can’t see, that’s like not being able to hear on a regular phone), with connections frequently dropped. In fact, my assistants experienced this issue. During one of the calls, the interpreter explained that it was difficult to see the inmate at the other end, because of the glitchiness of the connection; on a second try, the visibility was better. In addition, inmates currently or previously at KSP stated again that the Sorenson videophone works far better than the Purple videophone. (I am unclear on whether NTC’s videophone is a Purple or Sorenson device.) Several inmates also reported that videophone software is not updated, leading to some kinds of issues.
In sum, based on my testing, I am not at all convinced that the identified problem is as limited as Ky DOC’s response suggests. Ky DOC should evaluate further, and more deeply. If there are frequent glitches and outages, Ky DOC should consider substituting Sorenson devices for its current Purple kiosks.
In addition, we were told about a few access issues:
12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 13 of 44 - Page ID#: 3238
 NTC: Inmates can get access to the room with the videophone only until 11 pm, even though regular phones are available several hours later. In addition, we have been told that videophone access is unavailable during lockdowns, even though ordinary phone access remains available.
 LLCC: For inmates who do not live in the dorm with the videophone, it continues to be the case that officers sometimes refuse access, particularly in the evening.
 KSR: One inmate reported that when the videophone is down and he needs to use the VRI laptop as a phone, instead, sometimes staff are reluctant to bring him the laptop. (KSR reports that this incident occurred on a weekend, with staff who had not run into the issue before. They have been trained and the inmate given a card to show staff that explains the proper procedure.)
Prior recommendation: Each institution in which the videophone is widely visible to other inmates should install such a curtain unless there is a significant security obstacle.
Response: Institutions will be asked to be mindful of placement of the videophones away from populated areas or provide a curtain, depending on the physical plant.
Progress: From inmate reports, the situation is fine at some institution. But at others, both inmates and Ky DOC reported that privacy issues remained and needed solution. In a draft of this report, I recommended that Ky DOC headquarters ask each facility what it has done to safeguard privacy for videophone users, and manage the process to completion. This was done— with the minor exception that EKCC simply reported that it had received no complaints, but would switch to use of the VRI laptop as a videophone if a problem developed. Permanent use of a laptop instead of the videophone kiosk is not appropriate, because it renders telecommunications for deaf prisoners available only with a special request, not (as with hearing prisoners) whenever an inmate wishes to make a call. EKCC’s ADA Coordinator should assess whether inmates not using the videophone can observe the videophone screen—if they can, EKCC should solve the problem.
ii. Portable phone amplifiers:
Prior recommendation: Portable phone amplifiers should be available at each institution.
Response: Ky DOC agreed to ensure these were ordered and received.
Progress: Reporting indicates that these are now available at each institution. They are far more likely to be used if the ADA Coordinator shows them to inmates at auxiliary aid assessments or other meetings and explains their operation and how to get them. This is done at some institutions.
iii. Phone volume control.
Prior recommendation: There should be at least one volume-control phone in every grouping of phones in every institution, including the phones used in restrictive housing.
13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 14 of 44 - Page ID#: 3239
Response: All prisons report having volume control phones available in all areas. KSR recently moved their RHU and are currently modifying having a portable amplifier available. The Director of Operations will follow up with the Warden in 30 days to ensure this issue has been addressed. Western Kentucky Correctional Complex's RHU has wall mounted speakerphones. Therefore, inmates who are deaf/HOH are allowed access to a phone in the interview room when phone calls are scheduled. All other prisons have a volume control phone in RHU.
Progress: I stated in a draft of this report that I was not convinced that the self-reports about volume controls are entirely comprehensive, since prior similar assurances turned out not to be completely accurate (when I checked in person). I recommended that ADA Coordinators be asked if they looked at each and every bank of phones in their prison, to check. Ky DOC now reports that this has been done.
iv. Captioned telephones (or “captels”).
Prior recommendation: Captioned telephones should be made available in every institution, available at the same hours as a regular phone.
Response (February): There are currently four institutions that are utilizing the captioned phones in their facilities—EKCC, LSCC, KSP, and NTC. While the KY Department of Corrections believes that inmates who are deaf/HOH are having their needs met with volumecontrolled phones, portable amplifiers, TTY, videophones, we will compile and share the information on how the other facilities can purchase and provide if needed.
By the time I had my assistants conduct testing of all the captels, they were installed and reported to us in BCFC, EKCC, GRCC, KSP, LSCC. All checked out in testing without difficulty. (In some institutions, the installation is not yet linked to a Securus line, but will be soon. In that situation, inmates must ask for access each time they need it; once full installation is complete, inmates should be able to use the phone simply by entering an id number or using Securus’s voice recognition function. This will, however, need to be retested.) In addition, just after we completed testing, the new captel at KSR started operation. Ky DOC reported (above) that NTC has a captel, but that facility told us more recently that its captioning was not working. Similarly, BCC and LLCC are having difficulty with installation. So this recommendation is in progress.
v. Amplified phones.
Prior recommendation: None of Ky DOC’s institutions have an amplified phone, but these too would be worth looking into, centrally.
Response: Ky DOC declined: “No institutions have indicated that the population's needs are not being met via” other telecommunications methods.
Progress: It is worth noting that captioned telephones also have amplification features—which inmates in at least one facility have been using. Other ADA Coordinators should consider whether these features might be useful for their inmate populations.
14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 15 of 44 - Page ID#: 3240
vi. TTYs.
Recommendation: Each institution needs to work out and test a protocol by which TTYs can be used—and then write that protocol into full instructions capable of being followed by someone who has never used a TTY before.
Response: All institutions report having a TTY available with the instructions placed with the device. Therefore, the KY DOC does not believe it is necessary to write out a separate protocol on how to use the TTY.
Progress: In several prior court reports, I have noted that a number of Ky DOC facilities have only what seem to me to be inadequate TTY instructions—instructions that are generic, and fail to include guidance about (1) how to get an outside line, and (2) what number to use to place a relay call.
I decided to conduct testing of the instructions as well as the TTYs. I asked for each facility to use its TTY to call my TTY number at a scheduled time, and also to call a non-TTY phone number using the Kentucky Relay Service. I also asked that the test be carried out by someone who had not previously used the equipment—that is, by someone who was simply following the directions kept with the TTY, not someone with expertise.
Several problems emerged.
First, at EKCC and KSR, TTY calls could not be placed through the relay because of an account billing issue. It is possible to bill the calls collect, but this is an insufficient solution, because (a) collect calls are very expensive, (b) inmates using other telecommunications devices are not limited to collect calls. I have been told that without intervention the same problem will likely soon occur at other institutions as well.
Ky DOC headquarters staff have been trying to solve this issue. Several weeks ago, a conference call involving several contracting companies led to a decision to configure the TTY calls at all prisons to remove billing restrictions. However, this led to a different issue: when TTY calls were placed via the inmate telephone system, testers were able to reach the relay service, and able to read what the operator said on their side, but the relay operator reported that the outgoing text was garbled, probably because TTY machines require an analog phone line but Ky DOC’s inmate telephone system is digital. It seems that the next step is to configure certain phones within each facility to have an “analog filter.” Ky DOC is working to get the selected phones configured.
Third, when I asked for TTY instructions, I continued to receive instructions that do not include how to get an outside line or dial the relay. E.g.:
 EKCC: Instructions to inmates: “The TIY will be connected and prepared for use.” No instructions to staff provided. The instructions do include how to dial the relay.
15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 16 of 44 - Page ID#: 3241
 KCIW: No instructions on getting an outside line—but perhaps not needed, because it is staff who apparently take care of this part.
 LSCC: No instructions on getting an outside line  NTC: No instructions on how to access the relay.
And fourth, now that I have reviewed a number of instructions that do cover the outside line issue, it has become clear that in some facilities, anyone using the TTY needs to first talk on the phone to a staff member to obtain an outside line. That means that the TTY is not, in fact, accessible to a person who is too deaf to hear through a telephone handset. For example, for KSP, the directions instruct: “Obtain an outside line by either calling KSP Main Control (ext. 200), or by using your phone code.” These are evidently instructions for staff.
So, this issue remains in progress. Every facility needs: a) A working TTY that b) can place non-collect calls, relay or non-relay, and c) has instructions that direct not just how to use any TTY but how to use a TTY at the particular prison in question: where the TTY is stored, where it gets plugged in, how to get an outside line, etc. d) Ideally, a person who cannot hear or speak on the phone should be able to successfully follow the instructions and operate the TTY, without further assistance. In the alternative, the instructions should state clearly that a (hearing) staff member first gets the outside line and then attaches the TTY. The point is not to disregard security needs but to make the directions clear. (KSP, for example, reports that for security reasons, inmates cannot be provided unmediated access to a TTY. This is fine, so long as the instructions are clear.)
I could do another round of testing, once Ky DOC headquarters believes that all four of these goals have been met for every facility. It would also be possible for headquarters staff to themselves do the testing; they could (as I have) get access to an online TTY which would allow TTY-to-TTY calls to a person at headquarters, and of course testing the relay can be done with any phone. Online TTY access is available for very little money from http://www.nextalk.com/.
viii. Assistive listening systems.
Prior recommendation: At every institution, assistive listening devices should be made readily available for such environments: religious, educational, and rehabilitative programming. The need is particularly urgent for Substance Abuse Programming, which many institutions conduct in extremely noisy and difficult locations.
Response: Ky DOC headquarters staff worked with ADA Coordinators and Wardens on carrying out this recommendation.
Progress: Each facility has at this point ordered or obtained FM transmitter devices to use for assistive listening. In some, these are going largely unused; in others, they seem to be quite successful. Which is which seems to depend mostly on whether staff—and particularly the ADA Coordinator—demonstrates their usage to inmates who might benefit.
16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 17 of 44 - Page ID#: 3242
ix: Earphones for video communication.
Prior recommendation: Ky DOC should ensure that earphones for video communication are available in each prison, and also anywhere parole hearings are held—that is, in county jails. In addition, individuals who might need this equipment should be informed that it is available.
Response from Ky DOC: The KY DOC will make earphones available in each prison. The KY DOC, however, has no authority over the jails, and therefore no authority to mandate that jails provide earphones. . . . The KY DOC is happy to explain to our 76 full service jails the importance of providing the recommended headphones to any inmate who may need/request them. But, there really is no legal authority to compel compliance. The accommodation of inmates with disabilities is not included in KY Jail Standards, therefore not subject to the actions outlined in KRS 441.075. The KY DOC will propose adding language to the standards at the next Commission on Corrections.
If the Parole Board is conducting a hearing where the offender has a hearing deficit, the Parole Board would not proceed without appropriate accommodations. The Parole Board would advise KY DOC that services would need to be arranged for the offender to accommodate his/her hearing deficit. The arrangements would be made by DOC and the Board would proceed after verification that appropriate services are in place.
On Feb. 13, 2020, Kirstie R. Willard, Ky DOC’s Director, Division of Local Facilities, emailed jailers and their staff to provide information about the obligations of effective communication during parole hearings, and asking that individuals needing amplification be informed “of the availability of headphones that may be used during the videoconference process at the jail, which would allow the conversations to be amplified enough for the inmate to be able to adequately understand and participate in the hearing.” She asked “that your facility please help accommodate a request for headphones from any state inmate who may need/request them during the parole hearing.”
Response from Parole Board (Lee Vanhoose, Parole Board Chair): “During this past six months, the Parole Board has had no instances requiring accommodations for deaf/hard of hearing offenders housed in Kentucky jails. The need for appropriate accommodations for all offenders before the Parole Board, institution or jail, has been reviewed, discussed and reinforced to and by the Parole Board. If the Parole Board is conducting a hearing where the offender has a hearing deficit, the Parole Board would not proceed without appropriate accommodations. The Parole Board would advise the Department of Corrections that services would need to be arranged for the offender to accommodate his/her hearing deficit. The arrangements would be made by the Department of Corrections and the Parole Board would proceed after verification that the appropriate services are in place. These services would include either a certified interpreter, ear phones or another type of amplification system which would appropriately serve the offenders' needs. This is the standard for any offender held in any facility coming before the Parole Board. Further, appropriate accommodations would be provided in a timely manner.”
17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 18 of 44 - Page ID#: 3243
Progress: I do not have any information, one way or the other, on whether in practice parole hearings are sufficiently amplified for hard-of-hearing parole applicants. As far as the proposed standards change, it has not yet occurred.
At Ky DOC’s own facilities, reporting first suggested that earphones were unavailable at LSCC and NTC, as well as at the private prison, LAC. However, Ky DOC now reports that it has now made earphones available at each institution.
Earphones are only useful if people use them—which may require a bit of prompting. At KSR, for example, staff “have been instructed to ask inmates if they are having difficulty hearing the orientation video. If they are, they will be taken to the CPTU orientation room to use the headphones there. IT supervisor is ordering 5 more to be able to have a set in each unit.”
x. Non-auditory alerts.
Prior recommendation: In any housing unit where it is practicable, Ky DOC should direct staff to flash the overhead lights to signal chow and pill-call. In addition, Ky DOC should direct implementation of some kind of personal notification to deaf/HOH inmates, so that they do not miss personal announcements (e.g., “John Smith, report to the Unit Administrator”).
Response: “It is important to note that all KY DOC facilities are not the same regarding construction and layout. Therefore, the Wardens must maintain the ability to put into practice a mechanism to communicate meal times and pill-call to the deaf/HOH that work for their respective facilities.”
Ky DOC reported that four facilities were already using flashing lights; as reflected in Table 2, these are: BCC, BCFC, EKCC (HOH Walks only), and WKCC. In addition, it reported that GRCC would soon be installing strobe lights.
In addition, again as reflected in Table 2, Ky DOC reported that several institutions have assigned inmates (as their prison job assignment) to notify deaf/HOH inmates of personal announcements. In other facilities, staff are instructed to alert deaf/HOH inmates when needed.
Progress: Unequal access to alerts—alerts signally various routine moments every day (count, chow, pill-call, yard), and alerts for personal announcements—is a major source of difficulty for deaf/HOH inmates. The issue is not so much that they don’t know what time various activities take place as that—unlike inmates without a hearing impairment—they are not given daily reminders. So for example, KCIW reports that it meets the needs of its deaf/HOH inmates by telling them the schedule in advance:
The Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women issues a personal memo on when the inmate may to go to the dining room to eat and when to go to pill call. Any changes to any of the schedules are given to the deaf/HOH by a staff member.
18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 19 of 44 - Page ID#: 3244
But that means that where non-HOH inmates get the benefit of an announcement to remind them about meal times and pill call, HOH inmates do not.
In practice, assigning staff to alert HOH inmates individually is fine for individual announcements but is unlikely to work, consistently, for the many-times-per-day events like count, meals, and pill-call. That is why I had suggested flashing lights. Another helpful measure is allowing inmates to buy non-auditory watches/alarm clock. (See 7.b, below).
It is clear that at several institutions, not enough is yet being done on this front. GRCC, for example, reported that it uses a PA system. But of course, this is an auditory system—which does not assist deaf/HOH inmates. At both GRCC and KCIW, it seems that HOH inmates have just started to be allowed to purchase non-auditory watches. LAC assigns inmates to be “town criers,” but at least at the time of my last visit, this system was not working in practice.
I continue to recommend that at every prison, (1) flashing lights be used for routine alerts where practicable, (2) deaf/HOH (not just deaf) inmates be provided a method by which they can obtain non-auditory alarm watches or clocks, and (3) in-person notifications be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates.
b. Inmate purchases of non-auditory alarm devices.
Prior recommendation: Ky DOC headquarters should check with the institutions that have already piloted the devices about models and methods, and then should make them available for purchase by deaf/HOH inmates at all the institutions. (When inmates transfer from one institution to another, they should be authorized to bring these devices with them.)
Response: The KY DOC Central Office ADA Coordinator is currently obtaining a list of nonauditory alarms and gathering information of where these items were purchased. Once the list is compiled and reviewed, the information will be placed on the G-drive folder for ADA Coordinators to be able to review.
Progress: The institutions where deaf/HOH inmates have been allowed to purchase non-auditory watches or clocks have had great success with them. To quote KSR’s ADA Coordinator:
Awesome! Since I brought these in I have had 0 complaints about missing chow etc. The inmates like the fact that they own them and can take them with when they leave. They are able to set multiple alarms that alert them to things that happen on a daily basis at the same time. . . . I had guys turn in the state issued bed shaker [which cost several hundred dollars] and purchase one—they prefer the large print numbers, and they were only interested in an alarm clock with a shaker to wake them.
Inmates who are not indigent pay for these items themselves; they cost $25-35. Inmates who are indigent (or if not formally indigent, have insufficient money to pay for the device) need access too: this can be arranged by loaning them a device or by forwarding them the money, to recover
19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 20 of 44 - Page ID#: 3245
when money comes into their account. (The process for inmates who cannot afford a device is not yet working smoothly.)
Yet until the past week or so, not every institution was allowing purchase of non-auditory watches or clocks. The change should be publicized, promptly, to deaf/HOH inmates, with an appropriate access method for those who lack funds to buy a device themselves. (Because nonauditory watches/alarm clocks are being used to meet the ADA obligation of effective communication, it would be inappropriate for them to be unavailable for indigent inmates.)
c. Bulletin boards.
Prior recommendation: Bulletin boards posting non-routine announcements should be provided in every housing area at each institution.
Response: Institutions routinely post changes via memo on inmate bulletin boards within units. Several institutions also notify deaf/hard of hearing inmates by using inmate "runners" to notify them of necessary information. Those facilities that have the capability of having an institutional television channel use this to post memos or changes in schedule. One institution sends out information utilizing the JPAY kiosk system. The KY DOC Central office ADA Coordinator will place a summary of this information on the G-drive to share additional ways to convey nonroutine announcements in addition to posting on bulletin boards.
d. Auxiliary aid processes.
Prior recommendation: Ky DOC should direct all institutions to implement auxiliary aid evaluations/reviews, and the process should have the following characteristics:
 An auxiliary aid evaluation should be conducted within 2 weeks—and ideally substantially sooner—of each deaf/HOH inmate’s arrival at an institution or identification as deaf/HOH.
 The evaluation/process should be performed at a meeting between the inmate and the ADA Coordinator, so that the inmate learns who the ADA Coordinator is, and so that the inmate is given appropriate information about resources and services.
 Effective communication should be provided at the meeting—meaning that an interpreter is necessary for any inmate who signs to communicate, and that for inmates who do not read, any documents should be fully explained using accessible language.
 At the meeting, the inmate should be informed about all services/resources available—hearing aids, telephonic assistance, interpretation, captioning, etc. The brochure that has been developed for this should be kept on hand, and distributed at the meeting. It should be updated whenever necessary, as new devices or new procedures come online.
 Inmates should receive easy-to-provide resources no later than the meeting. For example, that is when they can get bed cards, hard-of-hearing IDs, etc. Criteria
20

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 21 of 44 - Page ID#: 3246
and a clear process should be developed for access to any limited resources (bed shakers, telephone amplifiers, etc.), and explained to the inmates.  Inmates should be informed at the meeting about a clear process for getting any additional auxiliary aids/assistance they need.
Response: All KY DOC prisons currently hold Treatment Team meetings with key staff to review a variety of treatment plans for inmates. This could be a function of the weekly treatment team that includes the ADA Coordinator. When an inmate who is deaf/HOH comes into the prison, the Health Service Administrator will notify the ADA Coordinator. The treatment team can meet with inmate, introduce the ADA Coordinator and provides information/interaction to discuss needs, access to resources, etc.
Progress: Folding the auxiliary aid process into the Treatment Team process is one way to carry out the necessary auxiliary aid assessments and associated meetings. Several institutions do that. Others have auxiliary aid meetings separately and effectively. However, there seem to still be Ky DOC institutions at which auxiliary aid meetings are not being held. At KCIW, reporting in March stated that it was medical staff who inform inmates of the available devices and services. This was not appropriate: medical staff almost certainly does not have all the relevant information, and cannot keep appropriate records and the like for this non-medical process. It is a useful change that KCIW reported last week that the going forward, the ADA Coordinator would manage the process. More details on this issue are in Part IV below.
8. Inmate handbook
Prior recommendation: Ky DOC should standardize a notice for the Inmate Handbook, using text along the lines of what follows:
{Institution} is required to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A disability is a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity such as seeing, hearing, walking, bathing or breathing. (Temporary conditions, like a broken leg, are not considered a disability.) Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, {Institution} will ensure that inmates with disabilities have access to all services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations that is substantially equivalent to access provided similarly situated non-disabled inmates.
{Institution} will communicate effectively with inmates who are deaf and/or blind, ensuring that they can receive information from and provide information to staff. When needed for effective communication, {Institution} will provide “auxiliary aids and services.” This means devices or services that assist in communication, such as interpretation, hearing aids, captioning, videophones, amplifiers, etc. HOWEVER, if something a disabled inmate seeks—a particular job, for example— would be dangerous, posing a direct threat of injury or death to the inmate or others, {Institution} can bar the inmate’s access to that job after individualized consideration and consultation with appropriate medical experts.
21

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 22 of 44 - Page ID#: 3247
{Institution} has an assigned ADA Coordinator who is responsible for training and advising staff in ADA matters and monitoring ADA concerns such as accessibility requirements and accommodations. The ADA Coordinator also reviews requests for adaptive equipment and accommodations as well as ADA complaints. To contact the ADA Coordinator, you may {HOW TO GET IN TOUCH} {e.g., send written correspondence via Institutional Mail or, in the event you are unable to submit a written request, you may contact your Classification and Treatment Officer who shall document and forward your request.}
There is a federal court Settlement Agreement that governs services for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. It is available, along with additional information about such services, for all inmates to read on request, in the Inmate Legal Library.
Reponse: On Jan. 22, 2020 headquarters sent a memo to institutions instructing that this be done within 60 days.
Progress: It seems that several institutions made this change only after repeated reminders, but apparently, all the inmate handbooks now reflect language along the lines recommended.
III. AUDIOLOGY PROCESSING
Including all the information on hearing aid provision and audiology processing since the settlement was entered, KyDOC institutions have conducted screening examinations of thousands of inmates for hearing impairments, and have provided about 1000 hearing aids. In prior reports I have examined the timing on all processing outcomes, including individuals who arrived to a Ky DOC prison with a hearing aid already, who refused screening, who passed the screening with no impairment, who declined services after failing the screening, and who were discharged from Ky DOC (or died) prior to resolution of their audiology process.
For this report, to simplify the analysis, I focus on the individuals who received hearing aids. This is the slowest group, in terms of processing time, so if these inmates are receiving timely services, that is very good news.
Processing timeliness has shown major improvements. My recommendation, made in December 2016, was for a two-month or less turn-around. This has not quite been achieved, but it’s now quite close. For inmates whose hearing needs came to Ky DOC’s attention in 2019, and who ended up getting hearing aids, it took on average 76 days for Ky DOC to evaluate/meet those needs. Table 3 shows the year-by-year trend:
22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 23 of 44 - Page ID#: 3248

Table 3: Processing Times for Inmates Who Received Hearing Aids

When prison alerted to hearing issue 2016 (includes 11 from 2015) 2017 2018 2019 2020 (through mid-March) All, 2015 to present

N 89 203 298 398 54 1042

Avg. days to resolution
198 150 133 76 35 116

Still ongoing 0 0 3 11 23 37

2020 data are too incomplete to support any conclusion (any slow processing has not yet completed). But looking at 2019, 76 days is a major improvement over prior years.

That said, 76 days is an average; resolution times were occasionally far longer. See Table 4:

Table 4: 2019, distribution of processing time for inmates who received hearing aids.

Resolved in: <= 30 days 30-60 days 60-90 days 90-120 days 120-180 days > 180 days

%

Cumulative %

10%

10%

41%

51%

23%

74%

13%

87%

9%

96%

4%

100%

As Table 4 shows, as of March a quarter of cases were still taking over 3 months. Moreover, both Table 3 and Table 4 somewhat overstate the speed of resolution. There were 37 inmates whose audiology evaluation were still in process, as of the last report I received. (The relevant reporting date varies by the institution.) While over half of the inmates tallied in Table 5 had been in process for three months or less as of the last reported date, the oldest have been in process for over a year. (Note: I omit from this tally two inmates whose audiology processing is paused while other health needs are addressed.) The distribution is set out in Table 5:
Table 5: Ongoing Audiology Needs

Month prison alerted to the need (N = 38)

Oct. 2018 (1) Nov. 2018 (2) Apr. 2019 (1)

Aug. 2019 (2)

Sept. 2019 (1) Oct. 2019 (2) Nov. 2019 (1)

Dec. 2019 (4)

Jan. 2020 (10) Feb. 2020 (10) Mar. 2020 (3)

23

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 24 of 44 - Page ID#: 3249

As of April 1, 2020, the ongoing cases were an average of 129 days old—over four months. Obviously by the time they are resolved, the average resolution time will be higher.

These summary statistics mask considerable variation among facilities. Table 6 examines the issue in detail, facility by facility. It shows days to resolution by prison, setting out both the average and various percentiles (10%ile, 25%ile, 50%ile, 75%ile, and 90%ile). Outliers are highlighted.

Table 6: Days to Resolution by Institution: Cases begun in 2019, and ongoing cases

BCC BCFC EKCC GRCC KCIW KSP KSR LAC LLCC LSCC NTC RCC Ross WKCC
Total

Cases begun in 2019, Hearing Aid Received

N Avg. 10%ile 25%ile 50%ile 75%ile 90%ile

8

72

22

33.5

57

80

216

3

41

35

35

39

49

49

27

74

39

44

61

110 130

14

84

18

39

48.5 113

144

20

63 33.5 44.5 51.5 83.5

95

17

85

24

45

62

104 180

113 77

31

49

65

95

135

9

72

41

48

51

72

157

43

79

27

47

62

97

140

41

88

28

42

81

105 156

24 101 43

49.5

77

104 259

67

60

31

39

52

63

80

2

54 51

51

53.5

56

56

10

62 27.5

41

61.5

84

98

398 76 29

44

58

91

135

Cases currently ongoing

Avg. days old

N

as of Apr. 1

0

0

3

219

4

107

0

2

150

12

113

0

1

511

6

181

4

52

1

76

1

44

3

35

37

129

While the total picture on audiology processing demonstrates further need for attention at some institutions, and continued effort to minimize the number of inmates whose processing time exceeds 3 months, all-in-all, there has been really significant improvement systemwide. The focus on process efficiencies, tracking, and followup is paying off.

IV. INSTITUTION-SPECIFIC ISSUES
This part moves from systemwide issues to institution-specific ones. The institutions are in alphabetical order. For each institution, I begin with the areas of concern identified in my December 2019 court report.

24

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 25 of 44 - Page ID#: 3250

BCC Warden: Amy Robey ADA Coordinator: Christy Peach

Prior Areas of Concern Deaf/HOH inmates live in Dorm 2C. This may be depriving some of opportunities only available elsewhere. The self-audit form states that inmates are allowed to request a different housing assignment. But one inmate requested to be housed elsewhere and was refused—even though his only accommodations are an HOH ID and bed card.
For a discussion of the need to avoid involuntary disability-specific housing, see my site visit report dated Nov. 30, 2018, exhibit, which is an exhibit to my Fifth Court Report (Dec. 4, 2019), ECF 91-2, p. 5. Devices: BCC does not have portable phone amplifiers: one retailer declined to accept a Purchase Order for them. An alternative supplier should be located. No assistive listening systems are in place.
Inmates are not offered the opportunity to purchase vibrating watches (but they are offered non-auditory alarm clocks). No earphones are available for parole or other similar needs. No captel.

Response/Progress Response: “BCC has 2 dorms. Upon intake, deaf/HOH offenders are housed in Dorm 2 Cbay, during the assessment period. The offender may request to move at any time. Any request to be moved will be considered. All BCC's offenders have the same opportunities, regardless of housing assignment.”
Second Response: “Deaf/HOH inmates at BCC can request to live in either dorm. Currently, BCC has HOH inmates living in both Dorms 1 and 2.”
So reported solved.
Reported solved; now available in Dorms 1 and 2.
Reported solved. FM transmitter now available for use in chapel, education, Substance Abuse Programming. Reported solved.
Reported solved.
Response: “Captel phone lines have been installed, waiting for phone to be delivered.” In progress.

BCFC Warden: Brandy Harm ADA Coordinator: Jared Gibson
Prior Areas of Concern No assistive listening devices or captioned telephone.

Response/Progress
BCFC has installed a captioned telephone and has an assistive listening device on order.

25

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 26 of 44 - Page ID#: 3251

EKCC Warden: David Green ADA Coordinator: Kristopher King

Prior Areas of Concern
The ADA Coordinator listed on https://corrections.ky.gov/Facilities/AI/ Pages/ADA-Coordinators.aspx has been incorrect for months.
It seems that the new ADA Coordinator has done only the computer-based training that is provided all staff, rather than the ADA Coordinator training.
Audiology assessments are not always timely.

Response/Progress Solved
Solved. The ADA Coordinator reports that he has read “all the training files on the G:/Drive in the ADA Coordinator section.”
Self report states that timely provider assessments “depend[] on provider access and schedule.” See also Part III. Audiology processing is slow for some people. See Table 6 (for 25% of EKCC inmates whose hearing issues came to Ky DOC attention in 2019, processing time was 110 days or more).

Audiology progress tracking is only sometimes shared with ADA Coordinator.
Devices:

A second response, dated May 18, 2020: “These issues have been discussed with Jill Miller, WellPath HSA for EKCC and she has stated that the majority of the delays here at EKCC were due to the process of hearing and audiology assessments beginning at other institutions and then the inmate transferring to EKCC. At the beginning of March 2020 Wellpath had a conference call that determined that every inmate transferring between institutions will have a chart review conducted on intake to catch potential lapses in testing. During this call it was also determined that any inmate whose process from first complaint of hearing issues to resolution will not take longer than 60 days. If it does last longer than 60 days then that institutions Medical Department will need to report to their corporate office why there is such a delay.”
Reported solved.

26

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 27 of 44 - Page ID#: 3252

Prior Areas of Concern No portable phone amplifiers. No assistive listening.
No bed shakers. No earphones for parole hearings or other uses.

Response/Progress Reported solved. Reported in progress; device is backordered until June. Reported solved. Reported solved.

GRCC Warden: Kevin Mazza ADA Coordinator: Mark Jackson

Prior Areas of Concern
The ADA Coordinator rarely receives automated email notices of transfers of deaf/HOH inmates GRCC.
Prior to my visit, the ADA Coordinator and medical staff were not routinely sharing information; there was insufficient communication regarding the identity of deaf/HOH inmates and of their progress through audiology processes. During the visit, a system was discussed that hopefully will solve the problem.
It seems that there are delays and other issues for inmates who need hearing aid parts—e.g., filters. Medical needs to work out (a) how to obtain these parts, and (b) how to make them easily available to inmates.
The ADA Coordinator was not conducting auxiliary aid assessments, and not using the developed documentation explaining available services and resources. As a result, inmates are not getting items they need, such as deaf/HOH cell cards, IDs, and auxiliary aids.
It is unclear how GRCC will accommodate deaf inmates if there is a “whistle alarm”—a drill or actual incident in which inmates on the yard are instructed by a whistle to lie down on the ground.

Response/Progress Reported solved.
Reported solved.
Reported in progress. Needs follow up with affected inmates to assess.
Reported solved. However, I am not sure how effective/comprehensive auxiliary aid assessments are. For example, one inmate received an alarm clock/bed shaker only after the inmate filed a grievance. This was in January 2020. It’s unclear to me why an auxiliary aid assessment had not previously uncovered the need. Reported solved: “If there is a whistle alarm and the inmates cannot hear it, somebody will let them know or they will see everyone getting on the ground. In addition, the inmates have their HOH ID that staff will see to let them know they need to assume compliance position.”

27

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 28 of 44 - Page ID#: 3253

Prior Areas of Concern Devices: GRCC was not making phone amplifiers available to inmates. GRCC had a PA system in the housing units, but often used bullhorns instead. These are very difficult for HOH inmates; the PA system is better, so it should be used. Inmates reported that they were not authorized to bring their own headphones or earbuds into the school building. That means that use of a pocket talker is unavailable. The SAP program has an FM assistive listening system, but had not yet used it.
There was no captel.
The TTY lacked instructions and I could not get it to work; directions need to be developed and then a test done where someone who has never used it before follows the directions and calls me, TTY to TTY and using a relay service to a regular phone. A test should be performed of the VRI and the videophone. Inmates were not authorized to purchase non-auditory watches/alarm clocks

Response/Progress
Reported solved.
Reported solved but this needs followup with affected to inmates to assess.
Reported solved: “HOH inmates may bring their headphones/earbuds to class. They must present their HOH ID in order for this to be allowed.”
Reported solved: “The SAP program has an Amplified system and they can speak through allowing hard of hearing inmates to hear. This is used at all classes and Meetings.” “The FM Listening device is used in the GED program and classes if needed and work[s] [well].” Reported solved; captel is available. Securus installation in progress. Instructions provided. Test successful.
Tested.
Initial response: “ADA Coordinator has been actively searching for non-auditory watches/alarm clocks for the inmates to purchase.” Subsequent response: now allowing inmates to purchase watches. Reported solved, at least in part. Note that two grievances were brought by inmates who were missing pill-call etc.; both had been told that someone would wake them, but this was not working. I am not clear on the resolution for indigent inmates; they should be allowed to have loaners or a watch purchased for them with a lien on their accounts.

28

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 29 of 44 - Page ID#: 3254

Prior Areas of Concern
Data provided on the self-audit did not always seem to be accurate. For example, not even one inmate was listed as having low literacy, which is implausible.
Audiology services:
There seemed to be some confusion about the screening criteria for a medical provider audiology assessment. The written documentation stated that a “Yes” or “Sometimes” answer to one screening question requires follow-up; interviews of medical staff elicited a different answer.
Inmates reported that obtaining necessary audiology equipment (e.g., hearing aid batteries, filters, and service) was timeconsuming and sometimes impossible.

Response/Progress Solved.
Response: “Medical staff assessments have been corrected. Refresher training has been provided to the medical staff to remind them if the answer is ‘yes’ or ‘sometimes’, the inmate is referred to the provider for further evaluation.”
Response: “Typically, supplies are kept in stock. However, sometimes items are on back-order. The items are distributed as quickly as possible.” This needs followup with affected inmates.

Other concerns:

 The ADA Coordinator first reported that he had taken online courses but not the settlement

training; in subsequent reporting, he said he had done both.

 There seems to be some confusion about auxiliary aid devices. I asked whether a captioned

telephone was available, and was given information about a videophone. I asked about non-

auditory devices, and was given information about intercoms, which are auditory.

 Documentation errrors. I asked for a summary of all grievances involving deaf/HOH

inmates. Instead, the reporting stated that there were two grievances addressing

accommodations. And only one of them was actually provided. After additional inquiry,

several additional grievances were located and documentation provided.

 The general staff training provided seems to be incorrect; it is generic ADA training, rather

than the approved training that focuses on deaf/HOH issues. The Department has a training

module for staff on communicating with deaf/HOH inmates. That is what they should be

getting.

 The VRI is being used only rarely, raising the possibility that it is not being used when

appropriate. Inmate

, is deaf and all-but-illiterate; he signs to

communicate. There would seem to be quite a few occasions when VRI use would be

appropriate for effective communication with him.

 Review of disciplinary reports involving hearing issues reveals an issue the ADA

Coordinator should have addressed: Inmate

was charged in

Sept. 2019 with failing to report for an assignment, when he stopped attending school. He

was asked why he had stopped, and answered, “I tried to tell him I cannot hear that good I

was trying to get my hearing aid fix I have hearing problems.” Mr. Slusher received 30 days

recreation restriction. I am not suggesting that this was inappropriate. However, there should

also have been followup on his hearing aid issue.

29

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 30 of 44 - Page ID#: 3255

 Audiology processing is slow for some people. See Table 6 (for 25% of GRCC inmates whose hearing issues came to Ky DOC attention in 2019, processing time was 113 days or more).

KCIW Warden: Vanessa Kennedy ADA Coordinator: Lori Holderman

Prior Areas of Concern The ADA Coordinator reports only partial compliance with regularly communicating with deaf inmates and ensuring effective communication for deaf inmates. No details are provided on the deficits. Orientation videos are not captioned, not always shown in a quiet space, and not always amplified when needed.
The videophone has experienced long outages. The VRI has also gone down— and was restored to operation only when a software update was reversed. Devices: No personal phone amplifiers have been made available. No assistive listening.
HOH inmates are not routinely allowed to purchase vibrating watches/alarm clocks.
No captel. Non-auditory alerts not sufficient to signal count alert, not programmed to signal different alerts, not used to notify prisonwide events, and not used to notify Deaf / HoH inmates of events specific to them.

Response/Progress Reports compliance now.
In progress. This is reportedly mostly solved, except that KCIW has not yet succeeded in captioning the “cleaning video,” which I assume is a video that informs inmates of their cleaning responsibilities. Reports “accommodations have been made for Warehouse Supervisor Paul Osbourne to conduct in person sanitation classes with the use of the VRI if needed,” and that orientation is now conducted in a space that is quite and allows amplification if necessary. Reported solved: KCIW bought a new videophone, and reports that outages are fewer/none.
Reported solved.
Reported solved. Should let HOH inmates know the devices are available. Reported in progress. Watches/alarm clocks had been made available only to deaf inmates, not HOH inmates. But this has just been changed and KCIW reports “current HOH inmates are being met with next week to let them know they can now order the vibrating watches.” Reported in progress: captel being purchased. Report solved.

30

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 31 of 44 - Page ID#: 3256

New concerns:
 KCIW’s report to me stated that medical staff inform inmates of the auxiliary aids available. This is not an appropriate method for an auxiliary aid assessment. Medical staff do not know about phone amplifiers, non-auditory watches, and the like. If this really is how the auxiliary aids are presented to inmates, that might explain why so few of them are being used. Auxiliary aid assessments and communications should be performed by ADA Coordinators. In response to a draft of this report, KCIW responded: “Once medical notifies the ADA Coordinator of a new HOH inmate, the ADA Coordinator will call them into their office and discuss all accommodations available. The ADA Coordinator will also bring inmates to the Treatment Team to discuss any new accommodations or if anyone has received any new request for accommodations. We will individually meet with all HOH inmates to see if they have any concerns that need to be addressed.”
 It is important that inmates with hearing aids have cases for the devices. But even if they do not, it is inappropriate to throw away the devices kept in non-regulation cases. See grievance.

KSP Warden: DeEdra Hart ADA Coordinator: Roger Mitchell

Prior Areas of Concern The audiology case list used by medical providers was incomplete. And audiology timeliness was poor—the “order sheet” moving people along in the process would get lost. This problem was solved by Health Services Administrator Nancy Raines, who set up a tasking protocol using a function known as “L Jellybean.” Ms. Raines is retiring, though, and it is unclear whether the problem will stay solved once she is gone. The ADA Coordinator had not received ADA Coordinator/Settlement Agreement training.
No auxiliary aid assessments/meetings were being performed. In their absence, there were several problems:

Response/Progress Reported solved: “Ms. Raines’ replacement, Kristy Ponzetti, has immediately demonstrated proficiency and timeliness in the performance of all H.S.A. duties in regards to the protocol established by her predecessor.”
Data confirm the prior major improvement, with a sharp decrease in processing time for cases begun in mid-2019 or later. But data are too preliminary to confirm whether that improvement has lasted. Reported solved: ADA Coordinator first reported that he has taken the online “ADA Basic Building Blocks Course.” This training was not the correct training. In addition, he reported that he did not have access to the GDrive, where the appropriate training and many other resources are kept. This situation was solved in March. Reported solved: “The ADA Coordinator is advised of any new HOH issues in any patients, both transferring here or newly diagnosed, and representatives from the Treatment Team in Medical, Programs and ADA Coordinator meet

31

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 32 of 44 - Page ID#: 3257

Prior Areas of Concern
Inmates did not know who the ADA Coordinator is. Inmates did not know what services etc. were available. (KSP has a brochure that explains what resources are available, but that brochure was not routinely shared with deaf/HOH inmates.)
Inmates didn’t have bed cards, HOH IDs, and the like. There seemed not to be an adequate process for considering requests for reasonable modifications to existing policies, housing assignments, etc. For example, when inmates requested a cell move to a quieter housing area, that request seemed not to trigger consideration of the disabilityrelated need.

Response/Progress with the patient to ensure that they are provided with all of the information needed to obtain help, assistive devices and an ADA Card. All of their information is tracked on the ADA spreadsheet on the shared drive.” Should be solved, in light of meeting described above. Should be solved (“representatives from the Treatment Team in Medical, Programs and ADA Coordinator meet with the patient to ensure that they are provided with all of the information needed to obtain help, assistive devices and an ADA Card.”) Reported solved.
Reported solved: “No requests for modifications to existing policies have been received. Medical or Mental Health staff provide input to the classification staff is accepted if it relates to a disability. Upon intake to KSP, all inmates are reviewed and screened as required by CPP 18 and IPP 10-04-01 to identify special needs inmates. Housing determinations are made based upon an inmate special needs such as lower level floor or a bottom bunk. HoH inmate are considered to be housed closer to officer stations. Twice a year, according to policy, inmates are reviewed to address programming plans, current job, and housing assignments. Prior to each bi-annual meeting, inmates may make requests at any time via case management staff that are available every business day. All requests for housing assignment change are given fair and equal consideration.”

This is not responsive. The prior report included an example of a housing change request, but that request did not apparently trigger consideration of the disability-related need. So unless that was a process glitch—which KSP does not seem to think it was—it appears that housing requests are not leading to disabilityrelated review.

32

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 33 of 44 - Page ID#: 3258

Prior Areas of Concern MRT (Moral Reconation Therapy), a group class, took place in a space with significant hearing challenges, including a loud fan. Accommodations were scarce. Although it seems implausible, inmates report they aren’t aware of the possibility of moving up front. Consideration should be given to fixes: can the fan be moved? Can inmates be notified that they can move up front? Etc. Auxiliary aids: There was no assistive listening/amplification system available, although HOH inmates expressed interest in using one, for example for MRT. Inmates were not aware of the possibility of using a pager on the yard—and it was not a great notification system, in any event. Some alternative process for notifying inmates of individual pages and the like was needed—in-person notifications, bulletin board postings, or something else. There were no portable phone amplifiers available. Inmates were not given the opportunity to get vibrating watches or vibrating alarm clocks. Not all phone banks had a phone with a volume control. As is true systemwide, the Purple videophone had not worked consistently.
Inmate transfers into restrictive housing separated inmates from their hearing aids, with long delays for their restoration.

Response/Progress Reported solved: “The AC unit has been addressed by KSP Maintenance, alleviating any future use of a fan. NOA Counseling has updated their Operations Facilitator Manual and Program Policies Manual which directs MRT instructors to verbally and visually inform inmates to notify the instructor of any needs that they have that may impact their ability to hear, see or understand course material.”
Reported solved.
Reported solved.
Reported solved.
Reported solved.
Reported compliant.
Reported no problem. KSP reported that in fact the Purple phone has worked fine since resolution of some firewall issues. I think this may well be incorrect. However, it is not a real problem, because the prison has another, Sorenson, videophone. Reported solved: “RHU staff have been reminded not to separate an inmate from their hearing devices, as these present no security concern. There has never been a directive since 2015 to remove any ADA aid upon entry into RHU. This will be reiterated at various monthly meetings.”

After June 2019 grievance on this topic, stated, “Post Orders for RHU are updated to include

33

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 34 of 44 - Page ID#: 3259

Prior Areas of Concern
There continued to be an issue with the availability/utilization of the laptopprovided video remote interpretation (VRI). During my visit, the VRI was not operational. A VRI test is needed, in several locations of the prison, including from restrictive housing.
It was not clear how KSP will accommodate deaf inmates if there is a “whistle alarm”—a drill or actual incident in which inmates on the yard are instructed by a whistle to lie down on the ground.
It seemed that intercom announcements are not very accessible, because intercoms were difficult for HOH inmates to understand. There are announcements made via institutional tv channel, but of course this is no solution for inmates who don’t have televisions. Use of a bulletin board might ameliorate this problem. It is not clear that hand-restraint protocols for inmates who sign are compliant with the Settlement Agreement.
It was challenging to schedule confidential interviews between my assistant and inmates.

Response/Progress attention to auxillary devices remaining with the offender such as hearing aids or pocket talkers.” There’s one log for the laptop, and one for the videophone kiosk. The latter is clearly incomplete. The former shows last usage in 2018, which seems like a very long time ago.
KSP reports that no inmate has wanted to use the VRI, and that a new log has now been implemented. Reported solved: “Inmates will have a visual cue by noticing the inmates around them lowering to the ground and are informed during orientation of this protocol. Staff will identify HOH inmates via HOH ID, and no penalty will occur. Any other medically documented physically barrier to this action will not result in a penalty against the inmate either. The purpose of this action is to improve sight assessment of a situation, so a few inmates hesitating will not delay or disrupt a response. “ Reported no problem: “There are bulletin boards in every cell house for posting of updated information and have always been used to convey information.”
Reported no problem: “Our staff receive annual training on communication with Deaf/HOH inmates. This class contains instruction on hand-restraint protocols. Additionally, our mandatory online training addresses handrestraints for Deaf/HOH inmates.” Reported no problem: “The contacts did not stipulate that interviews were to be confidential, otherwise, appropriate arrangements would have been made. Due to the custody level of this facility, security staff are present when nonDOC individuals interact with inmates. If a request had been made for privacy, there is a designated meeting area with windows, monitored externally by security staff that can

34

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 35 of 44 - Page ID#: 3260

Prior Areas of Concern

Response/Progress
safely meet the needs of the interviewer having a one-on-one interview.”

I think there was miscommunication on this, but it’s not an ongoing problem.

Good practice: KSP reports that since Feb 2020, case staff have been given VRI capability on their assigned laptops, to provide more extended and timely access to remote interpretation. This is an excellent innovation and should be examined for wider adoption.

KSR Warden: Anna Valentine ADA Coordinator: Cynthia Wathen

Prior Areas of Concern As with other facilities, KSR’s ADA Coordinator is not getting email alerts for transfers. To fill in the missing information, she has been checking the KOMS record for each inmate transferred to KSR. This is admirable but very inefficient. Devices: KSR had several portable phone amplifiers, but they are now missing; more should be ordered and tracked. There is no captel available, and there are several inmates for whom this would be a useful technology. KSR owns FM transmitters for use in the chapel and in the Sexual Offender Treatment Program (SOTP) but has not actually used them yet.
Audiology/Hearing Aids As with other facilities, hearing aids have several times been lost during the transfer process. For new hearing aids, it has been taking the provider, Audicus, up to 45 days to ship them. This is way too long.

Response/Progress Reported solved.
Reported solved. The ADA Coordinator has demonstrated them to inmates, which is a very good practice. Reported solved and operational.
Reported solved: they bought several more, which have been used: “Our SOTP Program used it . . . for class several times. [The staff member] reported it worked very well and [the inmate] was thankful it was there for him to use. I am ordering another transmitter for the classes over in CTPU.”
Reported improved, with lots of affirmative steps towards solution (memos, reprinting form, etc.).
Reported improved.

35

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 36 of 44 - Page ID#: 3261

Prior Areas of Concern
A couple of times recently, Audicus has shipped hearing aids to the wrong prison.

Response/Progress Reported solved.

Other concerns:
 Seem to be still having issues with prompt audiology scheduling, and reported: “Medical staff educated on importance/requirement of prompt follow up of HOH issues.” It seems the system itself might need some process improvements. On the other hand, one process improvement has been implemented: “inmates who fail the hearing screen do the whisper test at the same visit which has helped cut down the time significantly.”

LAC Warden: Daniel Akers Assistant Warden: Troy G. Pollock ADA Coordinator: Mitchell Brandenberg

Prior Areas of Concern LAC is run by CoreCivic, on a contract with Ky DOC. It is quite recently opened, so has had a shorter period of Settlement Agreement implementation. As of the time of my visit, there was essentially no Settlement Agreement compliance system in place. The ADA Coordinator reported that he simply had insufficient time to learn about the Settlement Agreement and carry out its terms. ADA Coordinator had not been trained.
No training had been provided to staff.
No auxiliary aid process was being implemented, and there had been little to no communication with deaf/HOH prisoners about how to access services or what services were available. No forms for requesting/waiving services were available. Devices: No videophone or VRI was available. TTY instructions were insufficient, and 711 didn’t work (but 800-648-6056 did).

Response/Progress See details below. Quite a bit of reported progress.
Reported solved; the ADA Coordinator has now done the training that was in the G-Drive (which I provided him). Reported solved. But I am not sure that they have access to the computer based training module they need or what training was actually provided. Reported solved: auxiliary aids assessments are now being done. There are some signs of success: e.g., an inmate reported that his hearing aid had not been transferred with him, allowing appropriate efforts to locate/replace. Solved. Forms provided.
Reported solved. Solved.

36

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 37 of 44 - Page ID#: 3262

Prior Areas of Concern No assistive listening, including in difficult hearing environments like SAP. No portable phone amplifiers. No earphones for parole etc. No captel. TV captioning was inconsistent.
Basic communication was highly inaccessible: No intercom systems were in use. Inmate aids were appointed (and designated as “town criers”) but it was clear that they did not know all the deaf/HOH inmates, and the deaf/HOH inmates did not know them. Audiology: Medical did not send any documentation to the ADA Coordinator on HOH inmates other than what the ADA Coordinator requests following a Monitor inquiry. Medical often had a long (30 days+) delay in responding to inquiries. It seemed that there were numerous inmates who had sought a hearing aid, but had not been provided audiology testing.

Response/Progress Purchased, not yet used (as of mid-Feb.)
Purchased, not yet used (as of mid-Feb.) Reported solved. No change. Reports that movies are shown at least once with captioning No reported change
No reported change Reports that information on “town criers” is posted in units. I cannot evaluate whether this is working in practice.
Reported solved.
Reported solved.

LLCC Warden: Scott Jordan ADA Coordinator: Sherri Grissinger

Prior Areas of Concern
As in other facilities, the Purple videophone often fails. When outages occur, the VRS laptop is used as a substitute—but it is made available only during the workday, leaving deaf inmates unable to make calls during the most useful hours after work and on the weekend.
Even when the videophone is working, it seems that there are access issues. Deaf inmates not housed in the unit where it is located must get permission to go to that unit; this should be easy and routine, but is apparently not.

Response/Progress Reported solved: someone checks daily to ensure it is operational. (No information provided on VRS as substitute.)
Reported in progress: “Continue staff orientation and education regarding the VRINRS/TTY usage and utilization during annual in-service training and on the job training week for NEO.”

37

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 38 of 44 - Page ID#: 3263

Prior Areas of Concern Audiology: Hearing aid testing is being performed onsite, but insufficient assistance was being given to inmates whose computer literacy is low. After discussion during the site visit, this should be solved going forward.
Post-testing approval of hearing aids has been slow.

Response/Progress
Reported solved: “Implementation of the use of health services staff to answer for inmate through hand signals during the testing, if computer literacy is low. Educational assistance in a show and tell teaching manner has also been implemented.” Reported solved: “Implementation of better service routing has been instituted where two Health Services staff are available to monitor and oversee the approval process.”

Medical staff have not implemented an easy method for using VRI interpretation.

Data demonstrate slow processing for many LLCC inmates. See Table 6 (25% of LLCC inmates who received hearing aids after their hearing came to Ky DOC’s attention in 2019 took over 97 days to process.) Moreover, at least occasional problems continue: E.g.:
–
 10/2/2019- Reported Right hearing at missing to Medical
 11/25/2019- Audicus testing completed
 12/02/2019- approved but never ordered by provider
 02/19/2020- hearing aid issued. But though data are preliminary, it does seem that processing times have been decreasing in recent months.
Reported solved.

LSCC Warden: Keith Helton ADA Coordinator: Rhonda May
Prior Areas of Concern The new ADA Coordinator has not done ADA Coordinator training. The Ky DOC website listing of the ADA Coordinator is out of date. The self-audit information is incomplete. Devices: Intercoms were not in use.

Response/Progress Reported solved.
Solved.
Solved.
Reported solved.

38

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 39 of 44 - Page ID#: 3264

Prior Areas of Concern No captel was available. No assistive listening system was in place outside of the chapel—it is particularly needed in SAP (see below). Inmates are not allowed to buy vibrating watches. As elsewhere, Purple phones have long and numerous outages. VRI: It was not clear how the VRI laptop would be used in the academic building, given the configuration of power and internet access. Also, staff familiarity with VRI seemed low, particularly in medical. There seemed to be no routine software updates to the VRI laptop.
There were no TTY instructions, even though I pointed out this absence during a prior site visit. The auxiliary aid process is not adequate: Not everyone was in KOMS. When audiology testing found an inmate who is deaf or HOH, no notice was provided to the ADA Coordinator, and therefore no non-audiology services were being provided. Not all inmates had HOH card. There was no consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize communication difficulties. SAP was incredibly noisy; besides assistive listening, other quieting techniques should be considered.
The ice machine was extremely loud. Can it be moved or dampened?

Response/Progress Reported solved. Reported solved.
Reported solved.
No response.
Reported in progress: “The classrooms in academics are set up for power and internet access. The Director of Nursing is in the process of getting all nurses trained on the VRI. All computer OS updates are performed by Commonwealth of Technology.”
Note: The update issue remains. Even if central staff pushes out VRI laptop updates, they will take place only if someone turns on the computer every week or two. Not solved. The TTY instructions remain insufficient. See Part II.7.a.vi, above.
Reported solved. Reported solved.
Reported solved. Reported that inmates can request to be moved closer to front.
Reported solved: Anyone who is HOH will now be in the unit classroom. Additionally another classroom in Academics has been allocated for SAP use. There will be an amplifier system in use. Reported mitigated: “Due to the design of the institution when it was constructed, there is no other location to move the ice machine where it will have access to the drain, electric, and proper ventilation.” However, sound dampening was added.

39

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 40 of 44 - Page ID#: 3265

Prior Areas of Concern On my last visit, over a year ago, SAP personnel agreed to try an assistive listening device, but they did not follow through, and on this last visit, they did not agree. This is urgently needed. There was no volume adjustment button on any telephone in the SAP area. Hearing aids were frequently lost on transfer into RHU.
Audiology: As in other facilities, when an inmate is transferred to LSCC while still in-process for audiology services, there was no working system to ensure that the process continues. There was no hearing screening on transfer, and chart reviews have been insufficient to catch such inmates. Ky DOC policy provides for hearing screening that leads to a medical provider visit, if one or more of the screening questions leads to an answer of “yes” or “sometimes.” But at LSCC, only three or more such answers are leading to the next stage of the process. Medical staff tracking of audiology services has not been appropriate; the tracking methodology was not working. During my visit, we discussed alternative approaches to solve this. The audiology tracker needs to be updated frequently, not only after hearing aids are provided.

Response/Progress Reported solved.
Reported in progress: “Maintenance is currently working on the phones in SAP to fix this issue.” Reported in progress: “The procedure for handling hearing aids upon entrance to RHU is reviewed on a regular basis and is handled immediately when an issue is found.” This response is too general to assuage concern. Reported solved.
Reported solved.
Reported solved: “Medical now has a spreadsheet to track audiology that they keep updated.” LSCC has Ky DOC’s worst median processing time for inmates who received hearing aids after their hearing issues came to Ky DOC attention in 2019—81 days. See Table 6. It also has an unusually higher percentage of ongoing cases, and those ongoing cases average quite old.

40

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 41 of 44 - Page ID#: 3266

NTC Warden: Brad Abrams ADA Coordinator: Jennifer Baker

Prior Areas of Concern ADA Coordinator has not received training. She also reports only partial compliance with Settlement Agreement familiarity. The self-audit is incomplete. KOMS notifications are not occurring when deaf/HOH inmates arrive. The notices outside of the housing units do not include a picture of the ID card. Only partial compliance with instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services being shared with staff. Many of the training requirements are marked as only “partially compliant,” though no details are provided. Devices: Videophone does not allow for voice carryover features. Some issues using VRS when the videophone is out of service.
TTY stored in office, rather than made accessible to inmates.
No captel is available.
Apparently the VRI laptop was nonfunctional at some point. No VRI log is available.

Response/Progress Reported solved.
Complete information received this time. Reported solved.
Reported solved.
Reported solved.
Reported solved.
No further reporting.
Reported solved: “Sorenson [kiosk] phone is used primarily due to reliability and Purple laptop is now back up.” Reported solved: “The TTY phones at NTC have been moved out of the Unit offices. Those that are HOH will be given the combination to the lock on the cabinet they are being stored in on the dorms and will have access to them the same as general population.” Reported in process: The device has been purchased, but captioning does not work. It’s being used as an amplified phone. Reported solved.
Solved

Other concerns:
 Continuing problem with timely audiology processing. Reported: “We had two common reasons the process took longer than 60 days [for inmates in 2019 and 2020). The first issue which has already been corrected was the provider was ordering the hearing aids incorrectly. The second issue was that the scheduler was not scheduling follow-ups and Audicus testing in a timely manner. This process is now being reviewed by myself.” Table 6 confirms that NTC is at the bottom of the Ky DOC institutions in

41

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 42 of 44 - Page ID#: 3267

terms of audiology processing time; the median processing time is 77 days, and the

proportion of ongoing cases is the highest for any prison in the system.

 Inmates are apparently doing sign language interpretation for other inmates, and the

VRI not being used when appropriate. See Disciplinary Report for

, which

reports: “Inmate

and Legal Aide

were present and report was read

by the Committee Chairman. Also, Inmate

is his interpreter due

to Inmate Boyd being hearing Impaired.” In addition, there are written notes between

Mr. Boyd and Officer Hutchinson attached to original Disciplinary Report. The ADA

Coordinator reports that staff were recently reminded that they need to use the VRI

during all parts of disciplinary proceedings. This issue needs to be monitored to ensure

that the substantive requirement—effective communication—is not converted to a mere

documentation requirement.

RCC Warden: Jessie Ferguson ADA Coordinator: Jessica Durrett

Prior Areas of Concern
The new ADA Coordinator has done only ADA basic training, not the Settlement Agreement and other training.
The Ky DOC website lists the wrong ADA Coordinator.
No confirmation that settlement summary, settlement, and brochure are available in the library.
KOMS alerts are inconsistent.

Response/Progress Reported solved.
Solved. Solved.
Reported solved.

WKCC/Ross-Cash Warden: Tim Lane ADA Coordinator: Jacob Bruce

Prior Areas of Concern
Audiology:
As with other institutions, there was a hand-off problem when inmates in the middle of the audiology process arrived at WKCC (including Ross-Cash).
WKCC’s medical provider had been using an outdated policy for decision-making about hearing aid prescriptions, and therefore not all inmates who should receive a hearing aid are getting one.

Response/Progress Reported improvement.
Reported solved.

42

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 43 of 44 - Page ID#: 3268

Prior Areas of Concern Auxiliary aid assessments are not yet regularized, and are not being consistently performed in a timely manner. Coordination between the ADA Coordinator and medical staff is not yet smooth; a shared folder might solve this problem.
Devices: The Substance Abuse Program (SAP) should try an assistive listening device, and was willing to do so—but no devices had been bought for them. WKCC had purchased portable phone amplifiers, but had not actually used them.
One TTY may be missing.

Response/Progress Reported solved.
Reported improved: “Shared network folder includes jointly updated audiology spreadsheets, memos, forms, etc. ADA Coordinator attends weekly Medical Treatment Team meeting to discuss new arriving/newly identified Deaf/HOH inmates and progress with medical staff. Frequent emails/phone calls to discuss progress and notify of new arrival alerts.”
Reported solved.
Reported progress: Inmates are now informed about the availability of the phone amplifiers, in several ways (written and in person). Found and location added to the ADA handout for future reference.

V. CONCLUSION

As has been true throughout the Settlement Agreement period, Ky DOC staff have been professional in their efforts to implement the agreement, and helpful to me as I ask them monitoring questions. In fact, 2020 has seen a significant increase in efforts to improve compliance, led by Ky DOC headquarters; the payoff is apparent in this report.

As usual, there are both successes and challenges to report. At this point, I believe that Ky DOC could, in the next several months, solve the remaining problems and solidify the progress already made, if both headquarters and institution staff focused on the issues. Particularly given the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, full solution prior to the end of June 2020 seems unlikely.

Respectfully submitted,

May 27, 2020

Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 625 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109 adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com
43

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 44 of 44 - Page ID#: 3269

Exhibit 1: Exhibit 2: Exhibit 3: Exhibit 4: Exhibit 5: Exhibit 6:

LIST OF EXHIBITS
Information Request Memo (Feb. 12, 2020) Spreadsheet Responses to Information Request Medical Request Forms, one with and one without accommodations language GRCC Job Request Form Device Vendor Information Videophone and VRI Evaluation Interview Questions (Memo to Ky DOC)

44

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-1 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 1 of 10 - Page ID#: 3270
EXHIBIT 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-1 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 2 of 10 - Page ID#: 3271
Margo Schlanger
Court Appointed Monitor, Adams and Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky
625 So. State Street  Ann Arbor, MI 48109  E-Mail: Adams.Settlement.Monitor@gmail.com 734-615-2618

Memo to:

Janet Conover, Director, Ky DOC Division of Operations Debbie Kays, Branch Manager of Programs, Adult Institutions All ADA Coordinators, Backup ADA Coordinators

Cc: Re: Date:

All Wardens Semi-annual Information Request, Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing inmates February 12, 2020

This memo is a request for information from all ADA Coordinators, and from Ky DOC headquarters. I ask that the requested information be provided in two weeks, by 2/27/2020. My thanks for your hard work implementing the Settlement Agreement in this case.

A. New request for general information.

It’s time for a general update. The settlement agreement is currently scheduled to end June 23, 2020. If this remains the schedule, this will be my last general information request. I am requesting the following, from each institution:

1. Attached, using the same excel format as the summer self-audit, but significantly more limited in scope, is an information request: a. I have added a column A to the “Main” tab; it says “NO” for over half of the selfaudit fields. These do NOT have to be filled out at this time. But I thought it was easier to make the spreadsheet as a whole match the prior version, so those rows have not been deleted. (I have filtered them out, so you won’t see the “No” rows unless you unfilter them.) All questions in this tab address the period since July 2019, unless otherwise specified. b. The spreadsheet includes the same form as in the past for an inmate list and audiology chart. Please note, row 8 in the audiology report requests the date the hearing issue was brought to KDOC’s attention. This is not the date of the Audicus test—this is the first date at which there was any indication of a hearing issue. Often, this will be the date at which an inmate answers yes to one or more hearing screening questions. These tabs should include any inmate who was present in the facility at any point in 2019 or 2020. c. The information under “Documentation” should be provided separately. Where not otherwise specified, it seeks documentation for all of 2019 and 2020 to present. It includes:
 Grievances Provide summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Provide full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing accommodation issues.

1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-1 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 3 of 10 - Page ID#: 3272
 Discipline For all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving an inmate who signs, provide report of inmate name, date, and communication method for each. Provide documentation for all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate.
 VRI Log  TTY instructions  VRI instructions  Any pages of the inmate handbook that address disability, and the date for that
version of the handbook.  The current Deaf/HOH brochure and any other documents provided to deaf or
hard-of-hearing inmates.  The medical request form currently provided to prisoners.  Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2019 or 2020 and addressing
deaf/hard-of-hearing issues.  A list of each use of an in-person sign-language interpreter from July 2019 to
present, and any occasions in which such an interpreter was requested but denied.
In addition, I request the following from each institution: 2. A list of each inmate currently at your institution whose audiology processing began in 2019 or 2020, for whom such processing took or is taking over 60 days, documentation of the explanation for any such delay, and a description of any steps taken to avoid similar problems going forward. 3. Please describe where the videophone is located in your institutions, and describe any steps taken to protect its users’ privacy from other inmates. 4. Please describe, in detail, each and every step in the current process by which a prisoner—whether or not new to the institution—is identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing, and how that information is recorded and tracked, both by medical and by the ADA Coordinator. 5. Please describe, in detail, each step that takes place once a person is identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing, to evaluate/offer any auxiliary aids. Include who is responsible for each step. 6. Please describe, in detail, any situation in 2019 or 2020 in which a deaf/hard-of-hearing inmate has been denied a job or other opportunity (access to a program or the like) because of their disability. Include the inmate’s name, the date, and the circumstances. 7. Please list all training that you have received for your role as ADA Coordinator. 8. Do you have access to the G-Drive ADA folder? 9. We have received many incorrect dates on audiology information sheets. In particular, there are problems with the dates when inmates are first flagged as HOH and when their hearing issues were resolved. In addition, we are missing quite a few dates. A spreadsheet of missing dates is attached; we are asking that each institution fill it in. The spreadsheet is titled “Missing audiology dates and in-progress.” There are two tabs on this, each sorted by which institution should respond.
2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-1 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 4 of 10 - Page ID#: 3273
B. Followup and/or facility-specific requests/issues
Systemwide – for Ky DOC Headquarters 1. TTY issues: relay-calling is not working for many of the prisons; they are being told that the
relay calls cannot be completed without having a payment system set up. I understand that KDOC is communicating with the relay service to resolve issues; it is important that this occur promptly. Please provide an update about where things are now, and then every two weeks until it is solved. 2. November 14 memo from KDOC to me, and February 6 followups.
o Item 2, Tracking, alerts, etc.  Item 2a. You stated that a review has been completed of all deaf/HOH inmates, by institution, and all records corrected. Please provide a KOMSgenerated report of each such inmate’s name, DOC #, and current institution.  Item 2b. You stated in February, “The transfer notification system works when inmate transfers between institutions are scheduled through the appropriate method in KOMS. The instructions on how to properly schedule transfers were sent to the Transfer coordinators and all backups. The next maintenance build that Marquis is working on for KY DOC is the ability for KOMS to generate an ADA alert using the External movement screen. It is currently estimated to go into testing in March 2020.” Please provide a copy of the instructions.  Item 2d. You stated in November, “The KY DOC Central office ADA Coordinator is polling the institutional ADA Coordinators to see what additional information would be useful to them to have in the ADA tab. Once compiled, a review will be conducted to determine what can be added and if there is a cost associated with making these changes in the KOMS system.” Please provide the result of the polling, and of the review.  Item 2e. You stated, “The ADA Coordinators and backups are now receiving a KOMS generated weekly report. Please provide the reports generated for the last week of January 2020.
o Item 4a, Audiology services delays: You provided a review of 14 inmates whose audiology services took over 90 days. Please describe all steps taken or planned in response to that review.
o Item 5, Request Forms: You stated that standardized forms including communication assistance language were being developed. You sent me several forms in draft, and the SAP form in final. Please provide all the forms, in their final version.
o Item 6, Hearing aid loss on intra-prison moves and inter-prison transfers: The November memo stated “The KY DOC will add ‘adaptive equipment’ to the printed property list outlined in Corrections Policy and Procedure 17.1. This policy is currently under review and should be ready to implement any changes to the property form within 90 days (from Nov 14, 2019). Plans are also in place to move towards an electronic property forms process in KOMS in 2020. In addition, a memorandum can be distributed to advise how to properly handle inmate hearing aids and to practice the best policy of instructing the inmates to wear their hearing aids during the transfer instead of packing them in their property.” Then the February memo stated, “Language regarding adaptive equipment/hearing aids will be added to the inmate personal property list during the next revision of CPP 17. 1.” Please provide a
3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-1 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 5 of 10 - Page ID#: 3274
timeline for the property form and the electronic property forms process. Please provide the memorandum described. o Item 7a, Auxiliary aids. You stated in November, “The KY Department of Corrections is currently gathering information from GRCC, KCIW, KSP, KSR, LSCC, LLCC, NTC and WKCC who have some type of amplification units for programming, education, and religious services. Once the information is gathered, the information will be disseminated to the institutional ADA coordinators and Wardens. Once this has been accomplished the Director of Operations will follow up with each Warden to ensure assistive listening devices have been purchased and provided for these areas.” Then in February you provided a list of vendors, but not of makes/models/specifications. Please provide/post a list of all available assistive listening units, including specifications, institution, and location/function (e.g., religion, education, programming), for each KDOC prison. o Item 7b, Inmate purchases of non-auditory alarm devices (vibrating watches and alarm clocks). You stated in November, “The KY DOC Central Office ADA Coordinator is currently obtaining a list of non-auditory alarms and gathering information of where these items were purchased. Once the list is compiled and reviewed, the information will be placed on the G-drive folder for ADA Coordinators to be able to review.” Then in February, you provided a list of vendors, but not of makes/models/specifications. Please provide/post a list that includes full information about the non-auditory alarms. In addition, who is the person identified as the KY DOC Central Office ADA Coordinator? o Item 7b, Bulletin boards. You stated, “The KY DOC Central office ADA coordinator will place a summary of this information on the G-drive to share additional ways to convey non-routine announcements in addition to posting on bulletin boards.” Please provide the summary and (approximately) when it was posted in the G-drive folder.
3. December 17 memo from KDOC to me: o Earphones for jail parole hearings. You stated, “The KY DOC is happy to explain to our 76 full service jails the importance of providing the recommended headphones to any inmate who may need/request them. But, there really is no legal authority to compel compliance. The accommodation of inmates with disabilities is not included in KY Jail Standards, therefore not subject to the actions outlined in KRS 441.075. The KY DOC will propose adding language to the standards at the next Commission on Corrections. If the Parole Board is conducting a hearing where the offender has a hearing deficit, the Parole Board would not proceed without appropriate accommodations. The Parole Board would advise KY DOC that services would need to be arranged for the offender to accommodate his/her hearing deficit. The arrangements would be made by DOC and the Board would proceed after verification that appropriate services are in place.” Please provide an update on whether an explanation such as described in the first sentence has taken place, and how. If it was done in writing, please provide a copy of that written document. Please describe any arrangements made in the past six months relating to parole and hearing.
4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-1 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 6 of 10 - Page ID#: 3275
BCC 1. Devices. For each device listed below, please provide the current status, including
make/model/specifications, past or estimated future date of installation, whether they are operative, and where (within the prison) and how they are available. Also answer other questions in bold, below.
a. Portable amplifiers. Last known status: to be purchased by December 1, 2019. b. Assistive listening devices. Last known status: to be purchased by December 1, 2019.
Please provide a list of inmates who have used these devices. c. Earphones for the parole board room. Last known status: to be purchased by
December 1, 2019. d. Captel phone. Last known status: to be purchased by December 1, 2019. Please
provide a list of inmates authorized to use it. 2. Posted notice: In the summer self-audit, you said that notices posted outside housing units
would be replaced, to include a picture of the HOH id cards. Please provide an update on this issue.
BCFC 1. Devices. For each device listed below, please provide the current status, including
make/model/specifications, past or estimated future date of installation, whether they are operative, and where (within the prison) and how they are available.
a. Assistive listening devices. Last known status: to be purchased. b. Captioned telephone. Last known status: to be purchased. 2. Flashing lights prior to counts/pill call/etc. Is this taking place? If not, please explain.
EKCC 1. Devices: For each device listed below, please provide the current status, including
make/model/specifications, past or estimated future date of installation, whether they are operative, and where (within the prison) and how they are available.
a. Assistive listening. Last known status: researching. b. Earphones. Last known status: planning to purchase. 2. Apparently, Inmate David Nichols (155203) has been seeking additional auxiliary aids. Please provide information on the outcome. 3. In the summer self-audit, you stated that the ADA Coordinator’s list of deaf/HOH inmates is only as complete as the KOMS notification. Please explain what you are doing to ensure that every appropriate inmate is noted in KOMS and on your list. 4. Posted notice: In the summer self-audit, you said that notices posted outside housing units do not include a picture of the HOH id cards. Please provide an update on this issue.
GRCC 1. Devices: For each device listed below, please provide the current status, including
make/model/specifications, past or estimated future date of installation, whether they are operative, and where (within the prison) and how they are available.
a. Phone amplifiers. Last known status: researching. b. FM assistive listening system, in SAP. Last known status: not in use. Has this been
tested? Has it been offered to inmates? Why is it not in use? c. Captel. Last known status: Not clear. d. Non-auditory watches/alarm clocks. Last known status: ADA Coordinator was
researching. What non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for inmate
5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-1 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 7 of 10 - Page ID#: 3276
purchase? And in particular, what is the status of Inmate Justin Justice’s (210656) request for one? (Mr. Justice reports that he has been unable to use a clock because there are no instructions, and that he has not been successful at obtaining assistance.) 2. Audiology: I previously explained that inmates reported that obtaining necessary audiology equipment (e.g., hearing aid batteries, filters, and service) was time-consuming and sometimes impossible. Your response was “Typically, supplies are kept in stock. However, sometimes items are on back-order. The items are distributed as quickly as possible.” Please provide information on whether hearing aid batteries and hearing aid filters are currently available. As of February 10, 2020, is anyone currently waiting for either? Who, and for how long? 3. Settlement information availability. The ADA Coordinator informed me that this has not been available in the library because someone took it, but that it is available from the ADA Coordinator. It should be replaced in the library; please provide an update. In addition, how have inmates been informed that they can get it from the ADA Coordinator? 4. Please provide information on Inmate Ricky Hatfield’s (133622) access to assistance— interpretation, or an inmate assistant, or whatever other assistance he is receiving. In addition, please provide information on Inmate Hatfield’s access to a job, in light of his communications issues. Does he have a job? Has he sought one? Was he denied? If so, why? 5. It’s my understanding that Inmate Bobby Ray (175421) has been charged personally for outpatient audiology services he received while incarcerated. He has apparently spoken to ADA Coordinator Jackson about this, but the bill remains in active collection. Please provide assurance that he and other inmates are not being charged for such services, and documentation that this issue has been resolved. 6. I have reviewed Inmate Justin Justice’s (210656) grievance relating to being woken up. I understand that the resolution was that someone would wake him. Is that correct? What is the current status? 7. In the summer self-audit you reported several areas of noncompliance or “unknown.” Please provide updates on each. a. Is there a clear process to obtain cell/bed cards? b. Prompt replacements of individual ID cards available? c. Does the ADA coordinator conduct an auxiliary aids and services assessment with every arriving or newly identified deaf/HOH inmate? At this meeting, are each inmate’s available methods of communication expressly ascertained and documented? d. Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained? e. Are announcement boards used? f. In-person or personal system notification when an inmate misses a page? g. Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-deaf inmates? h. Training on use and role of interpreters, process for obtaining interpreters, training on importance of not separating inmate from hearing aid, and training on communication technology? i. Training on the Settlement? Meaning of ID card? Equipment/ services/ accommodation available? j. Do all relevant staff know about reporting obligations? How do you know?
6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-1 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 8 of 10 - Page ID#: 3277
k. Training on accommodations for inmates who sign and on strategies for inmates who may not hear directions/orders?
l. Training for medical staff?
KCIW 1. In the summer self-audit, you reported only partial compliance with a number of
requirements. Please provide an update on each of these. a. Does the ADA coordinator regularly communicate with or check on deaf inmates? b. Does the ADA coordinator ensure effective communication for the inmates in those situations? c. Orientation videos captioned? d. Orientation videos shown in a quiet space? e. Orientation videos amplified if needed?
KSP 1. Devices. I understand the captel is not working. Please provide a description of the
problem, and an estimated time for resolution. 2. In the summer self-audit, you reported noncompliance on several issues. Please provide an
update on these: a. Access to communication services for deaf inmates in segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same status? b. ADA coordinator maintains records of requests?
KSR 1. Devices. For each listed device, please provide the current status, including
make/model/specifications, past or estimated future date of installation, whether they are operative, and where (within the prison) and how they are available.
a. Portable phone amplifiers. Last known status: check-out system under development. Please provide an update, both generally and also on RHU phone amplifiers in particular.
b. Captel. Last known status: being researched. Please provide an update. I don’t understand why this is more difficult for KSR than the several institutions that have installed working captels.
c. Purple videophone. Please provide an update on the new circuit installation; when was it ordered? When is it going to be complete?
LAC 1. Devices. Last known status: “Purchases of additional aids, such as those listed in your
concern, will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.” This is not acceptable. At the very least, earphones and phone amplifiers are needed. Other devices are probably also necessary. Please provide an update. 2. Please provide an update on the videophone and Purple laptop’s functionality. Do they work? When did they become operational? If they do not work, what is the plan to make them work? 3. Access to basic communication. You stated, “a list of inmates assigned to the position of town crier will be established and sent to facility staff and all identified HOH inmates.” Please provide this list, the date it was circulated, and its recipients.
7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-1 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 9 of 10 - Page ID#: 3278
LSCC 1. Devices.
a. Please provide the specifications or a description of any assistive listening system. Most recent information: “No purchase has been made for an assistive listening system to date.” But I believe this may be incorrect: I was previously informed that there was a system purchased from www.kingdom.com, for use in the chapel.
b. VRI: Staff familiarity with VRI seemed low, particularly in medical. There seemed to be no routine software updates to the VRI laptop. Most recent information: “The Director of Nursing is in the process of getting all nurses trained on the VRI. All computer OS updates are performed by Commonwealth of Technology.” Please provide a description of the nurse training, when it occurred, and whether all current nurses/providers were included. In addition, please provide the status of VRI laptop updates.
c. There was no volume adjustment button on any telephone in the SAP area. Most recent information: “Maintenance is currently working on the phones in SAP to fix this issue.” Please provide the date on which this problem was solved, or if it has not been solved, the timeline for solution.
2. As in other facilities, when an inmate is transferred to LSCC while still in-process for audiology services, there was no working system to ensure that the process continues. There was no hearing screening on transfer, and chart reviews have been insufficient to catch such inmates. Most recent information: “The Health Service Administrator is in the process of trying to review all transfers to check their hearing screenings.” Please provide the status of this review. If it is not complete, when will it be complete?
LLCC 1. Medical staff have not implemented an easy method for using VRI interpretation. Most
recent information: “reviewing potential of providing a VRI/VRS laptop assigned to the Health Services area.” Please provide an update.
NTC 1. The notices outside of the housing units do not include a picture of the ID card. Most recent
information: “ADA Coordinator Jennifer Baker created the signs to hang with the picture of the ID card. She is working with Maintenance Branch Manager Kelvin Hundley to get them hung up in each housing area. Mr. Hundley ordered the materials needed to complete the project.” Please provide the date this project was completed. 2. TTY stored in office, rather than made accessible to inmates. Most recent information: “At this time, there is not a secure area for the phone to be placed that is accessible to inmates without them asking for it. The phone must be plugged into a phone line, which allows them to call areas throughout the institution.” If any inmate uses the TTY, this will need to be solved, as it has been at other institutions. 3. Has the ADA coordinator and back-up ADA coordinator received access to the G-drive and to ADA and settlement agreement training?
RCC 1. No confirmation that settlement summary, settlement, and brochure are available in the
library. Most recent information: “The settlement summary, settlement, and brochure are
8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-1 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 10 of 10 - Page ID#: 3279
available in the Inmate Law Library and we are currently putting together a binder to be placed in regular Library as well.” Please provide current status. WKCC 1. Assistive listening device for SAP. Most recent information: “WKCC was tasked with piloting the assistive FM transmitter with the SAP program. We are currently using a transmitter that we currently possess in the classroom before purchasing another transmitter for this area. Responsible party is ADA Coordinator Jacob Bruce. Purchase order has been submitted for new equipment. New equipment should be in use no later than November 30, 2019.” Please provide current status. Thank you for your responses. Both my assistants and I stand ready to help if you need it.
9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 1 of 195 - Page ID#: 3280
EXHIBIT 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 2 of 195 - Page ID#: 3281
Blackburn Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 3 of 195 - Page ID#: 3282

# Issue/Question

Description/Notes

A ADA coordinator

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Christy Peach / Back up: Cathi Johnson

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

2 coordinator appointed?

NO

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Yes

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit where

7 deaf/HOH inmates are held?

Yes

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

C C C C C

9 Describe training Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly
15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

2019 - Inservice training on Deaf/HOH and powerpoint provided by Settlement Monitor. NA

Yes. I receive a report from KOMs via email.

C

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list? No additions have been needed.

C

B Reporting obligations

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

2 inmates?

Yes.

C

3 Is the list complete?

Yes. It is checked with the report from KOMs

to ensure it is complete.

C

C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

1 Hard of hearing inmates

NA

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving? Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic
3 notifications.)
4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe) Deaf inmates
5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving? 6 Describe
7 Effective communications planning? 8 Effective communication provided? 9 Describe

There is an automatic email generated by KOMs sent to the ADA Coordinator. Also
Medical upon intake, emails the ADA Coordinator.
All medical staff have been notified and are aware they need to contact the ADA Coordinator.
There is an automatic email generated by KOMs sent to the ADA Coordinator. Also
Medical upon intake, emails the ADA Coordinator.

C
NA C
NA C
NA

All medical staff have been notified and are

C

aware they need to contact the ADA

Coordinator.

C

NA

BCC (March 2020), p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 4 of 195 - Page ID#: 3283

# Issue/Question
10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?
11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed? Orientation videos
12 Captioned?
13 Shown in a quiet space? 14 Amplification if needed?
Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate? 15 (Describe) D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services
Notice to medical staff: Other methods of access: 24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

The VRI interpreter has not been needed.

(None of BCC inmates are Deaf. None of BCC

HOH inmates know sign language.) The

C

equipment is installed and in working order.

No basis for evalaution

The in person interpreter has not been

needed. (None of BCC inmates are Deaf.

None of BCC inmates know sign language.) In

C

person interpreter service agreement has

been established.

No basis for evalaution

NA

The orientation for BCC is done by a staff

member talking with a powerpoint

C

presentation to include text and pictures.

Yes Orientation is held either in the

multipurpose room of the chapel or in the

C

UA's office for "one on one".

No amplification has been needed.

C

No Basis for evaluation.

Yes Orientation/ handbook/ rules and

anything else is being read to the inmate in a

office setting where all background noise has

C

been held to a minimum by staff members or

education staff.

All annual Health Physicals include hearing screens

NA NA
C

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there 27 further assessment? 29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?
After assessment, does medical: 31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert? 33 Notify ADA coordinator? 34 Is notification prompt?

If the patient answers yes to any question in

the hearing screen, then patient will be

C

referred to the provider for futher evaluation.

C

NA

C

C

C

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist) 35 Audiology services offered when needed? 36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles) 37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid? 38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services 39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

NA C C C C C
BCC (March 2020), p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 5 of 195 - Page ID#: 3284

# Issue/Question

Description/Notes

Summary

Hearing aid batteries

48 Available for free?

49 In sufficient numbers? 50 7 days/week? 51 regardless of housing?

E Information provided inmates

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in law settlement can be brought up on the Lexus

18 library? (Need to check)

Nexus Computer. 2/17/2020

F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates 3 Notice posted outside housing units? 4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

See attached. Picture of ID Cards in the memo attached.

5 Cell/bed cards

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Yes

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Yes

9 Provided timely?

Yes

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Yes

KOMS alert?

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Yes

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Yes

15 Updated timely

Yes

Individual ID cards

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Yes

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Yes

19 Provided timely?

Yes

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Yes

21 Prompt replacements provided?

Yes

G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment Identification to ADA Coordinator Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Yes - KOMs email report

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

Yes - emailed report of ADA statewide list

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

Yes

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

Yes

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

Yes

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

C

NA

C

C

C

C

C

C C NA C C C C NA C C C NA C C C C C
NA
C
C

C

C C C

BCC (March 2020), p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 6 of 195 - Page ID#: 3285

# Issue/Question

Description/Notes

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Yes

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

8 intake, has one been done?

Yes

H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

1 On-person ID cards

Yes

2 Cell cards

Yes

3 Bed shaker

Yes

4 In-person alerts

Yes

5 Pager

No

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

6 phones are available?)

Yes

7 Amplifier for phone

Yes

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

8 communication difficulties?

Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

C

NA

C

c c c c c
c
c
c

9 Other amplification
10 Other (describe) General issues
19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained? 20 Have any been out of comission? 21 Describe -- which and for how long?
Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from 22 hearing aid? 23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided? 24 Promptly? 25 Has there been a direct threat determination?
26 Describe Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of
27 impairment and specific dangers posed) 28 Appropriately reported to monitor? I Interpretation in general
Qualified interpretation services available: Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation 1 communicated to inmates? covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 2 encounters/communications/settings)

Whole Room Amplification - FM Transmitter Describe: Wireless microphone worn by the speaker. The inmate wears a headphones to hear the speaker.
Yes No None

c
NA NA
C NA NA

None have been seperated from hearing aid

C

N/A

C

N/A

C

Yes in 2016

NA

GSP Outside Detail requiring inmates to be in

heavy traffic (which is only 2 of the 4 details

available)

NA

Yes

C

Yes

C

NA

Yes

C

C Yes
BCC (March 2020), p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 7 of 195 - Page ID#: 3286

# Issue/Question Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other
3 volunteer-provided programming?

Description/Notes

4 Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation method?

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Standing arrangement with providers?

6 In-person?

Yes

7 VRI?

Yes

Is VRI availability:

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)? on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of
10 notice)? during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when
11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)? 12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe
VRI laptop functional? 13 In general 14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?
15 Routine software updates? VRI laptop has necessary items with it?
16 Splitter? 17 Instructions? 18 Long power cord? 19 Usable as VRS? 20 VRI effectiveness tracked?
21 How? Information used to determine when in-person interpretation
22 should be first recourse? Is in-person interpretation available:
23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical 24 Parole? 25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered 26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.
Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days 27 before?

Describe: Yes - tested weekly Yes - Charged to full compacity at all times Yes - during the weekly test it is updated as needed Describe: Yes Yes Yes Yes
Usage is logged to include a signature to verify operation is functional

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

C

No basis for evaluation

C
C NA
C C NA C

No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation

C

No basis for evaluation

C

No basis for evaluation

C
C NA
C C

No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation

C

NA C C C C C

No basis for evaluation

C

C

No basis for evaluation

C

No basis for evaluation

C

No basis for evaluation

C

No basis for evaluation

C

No basis for evaluation

C

No basis for evaluation

C

No basis for evaluation

BCC (March 2020), p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 8 of 195 - Page ID#: 3287

# Issue/Question

Description/Notes

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

29 Describe

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

30 was unavailable)

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

C NA

No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation

C

No basis for evaluation

31 Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred method?

C

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

C

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

33 literacy

C

Qualified interpretation services available:

NA

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

34 volunteer-provided programming?

C

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

C

35 encounters/communications/settings)

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

C

J Hand Restraints

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

NA

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison?

Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized finding of a

C

2 security threat?

Yes - procedure is in place; however, never

put into practice due to BCC not having any

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might Deaf inmates whose primary languauge is

C

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

sign language.

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

Yes

C

5 Staff aware of the issue

Yes

C

Off-site medical care:

NA

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

C

restraints removed when necessary for medical

7 communication?

C

K Non-auditory Alerts

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Describe:

NA

yes - 1. Lights are flashed to signify count and

pill call. 2. Remotes to the bedshakers are

C

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

available to the dorm officer.

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

Yes

C

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

Yes - Strobe lights flash during fire alarm

C

yes - 1. Lights are flashed to signify count and

pill call. 2. Remotes to the bedshakers are

C

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

available to the dorm officer.

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

Yes

C

BCC (March 2020), p. 6

No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 9 of 195 - Page ID#: 3288

# Issue/Question 7 used to notify of prison-wide events?
8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them? Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts
9 been denied? 10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working? 11 How often? 12 monitored/recorded formally? 13 Announcement boards 14 used to notify of schedule changes? 15 used consistently? 16 in all dormitories? 17 in gym? 18 in library? 19 audited and monitored?
In-person or personal system notification when an inmate 20 misses a page?
Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only 21 because of disability?

Description/Notes Yes - Count time and pill call time Yes, the officer will use the remote to the bedshaker or tell the inmate in person
No - No requests have been made. Yes - via live video Describe: daily
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes
None

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

C

C

C
C C C NA C C C C C C
C

No basis for evaluation

NA

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Yes

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Yes

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

25 provided?

Yes

L Telecommunications

Videophones:

1 Installed?

Yes

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

None

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them. None

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

5 alternative offered

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

6 videophone is out of service.

Describe:

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Yes

8 Appropriate location?

Yes

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

9 emergency) if necessary?

Yes

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

Yes

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates using

12 ordinary phones?

Yes

13 Advance request unnecessary?

Yes

14 Free?

Yes

C C C C
NA C
NA NA
C
NA C C C C C C C
BCC (March 2020), p. 7

No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 10 of 195 - Page ID#: 3289

# Issue/Question

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

15 Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone calls? Yes

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

No

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

N/A

TTY:

18 Installed?

Yes

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff? Yes

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

Yes

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

None

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

23 for non-deaf inmates?

Yes

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Yes

25 Permission needed?

No

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

No

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Yes

VRS via laptop

36 Available?

Yes

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

Yes

38 Used when appropriate?

Yes

Phones

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Yes

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

Yes

C
NA
C
NA C C
C
NA C
C
C C NA C NA C C C NA C C

No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation

CapTel 41 If so, installed and working? 42 Appropriate for any particular inmate? 43 Request by any inmate denied?
TV/Movies 44 Is captioning available? 45 Is captioning used? 46 Is the captioning checked regularly? 47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?
48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe) All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe
52 problems)

We are working with the Securus Technician to be able to bring CapTel to BCC.
List names List names
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes - Captioning is turned on for each during the change of movies.
yes

NA NA NA NA NA
C C C C
C
C

BCC (March 2020), p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 11 of 195 - Page ID#: 3290

# Issue/Question Access to communication services for deaf inmates in segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same
53 status? Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-
54 deaf inmates? M Miscellaneous Devices
1 Devices available? (Describe) 2 devices in commissary list?
3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator? 4 facilitation of purchase?
Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied? 5 (Describe) 6 determined on case-by-case basis? 7 because security threat? 8 monitor notified? 9 reasoning explained?
ADA coordinator maintains records 10 of requests? 11 of denials? N Disciplinary O Grievances P Training
Types available 1 CBT? (Using approved training?) 2 Who received? (Describe) 3 All appropriate staff? 4 Live training? (Information only) 5 Who received? (Describe)
6 All appropriate staff?

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for

evaluation (Explain)

C yes

C yes

Describe in detail
Yes - All ADA Coordinators can be contacted via phone / email. Yes - A Purchase Order is all that is needed.

NA C
C
C

No

NA

N/A

C

No basis for evaluation

N/A

C

No basis for evaluation

N/A

C

No basis for evaluation

N/A

C

No basis for evaluation

NA

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes Everyone Yes Describe: Yes Describe:

NA C
NA C
NA NA

Everyone - during every 2nd day of In-Service

C

Yes

C

BCC (March 2020), p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 12 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3291

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Name

ID

Housing location

Listed with KOMS ADA Precaution?

Low literacy? (So that Signs to communicate (Y/N) written communication is
not effective)

Has Deaf/HOH ID Card? (Y or waived)

Has Bed/Door Card? (Y or waived)

If signs to communicate, noted in KOMS precaution
notes?

M2/D22

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

AROLE

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/C48

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/C34

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/D36

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/C46

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

MAND. REENTRY SUPV Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

SCC

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/C40

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/C38

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

AMPBELL CO JAIL

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/C26

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/C8

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/C22

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/C5

Yes

N

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/D048

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

M2/C41

Yes

N

no

Yes

Yes

N/A

M2/C13

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/D31

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/C24

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

M2/C30

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

ESS. CO JAIL

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/C29

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

ROBATION

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

AROLE

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/C14

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

CRJ

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

M2/C12

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

ISMASS ST.PATRICK Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

MAND. REENTRY SUPV Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/C03

Yes

N

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/C15

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/C50

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/A35

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Auxiliary Aid Assessment meeting took place?
4/2/2019 12/20/2018
8/20/2019 7/24/2019 12/2/2019 12/20/2018 8/20/2019 2/21/2018 11/22/2019 3/27/2018 2/15/2019 1/10/2019 9/10/2019 8/20/2019 8/20/2019
4/4/2019 4/2/2019 12/20/2019 1/14/2020 11/5/2018 7/8/2019 8/12/2019 1/4/2019 1/24/2019 10/12/2018 12/19/2019 5/24/2018 1/3/2020 8/20/2019 8/20/2019 8/20/2019 2/7/2020 12/2/2019 2/7/2020

BCC (March 2020), p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 13 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3292

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING T

Name

ID

Bed Shaker? (Not requested; Other Alert Device (Not TTY Access (Not requested;

denied; granted)

requested; denied; granted)

denied; granted)

Personal Phone Amplifier (Not requested; denied;
granted)

Shake & Wake (Not requested; denied; granted)

Any other auxiliary aid requested?

Outome?

Granted

Room Amplifier Granted Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Room Amplifier Granted Not Requested

Granted

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

None Requested

N/A

Audit item issues/concerns
None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None

BCC (March 2020), p. 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 14 of 195 - Page ID#: 3293

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device.
Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers) Captioned Telephone (CapTel) Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like?
Bed shakers
Vibrating watches
Vibrating alarm clocks
Pagers

How do inmates obtain

How many Where

When obtained

Chapel,

3

Eduction, SAP 2019

Specifications (URL)

access?

https://www.amazon.com/Whole-House-FM-Transmitter-

Microphone/dp/B0742MMRKW/ref=sr_1_3_sspa?keywords=whole+house+fm+tra During assesment each

nsmitter&qid=1582307068&sr=8-3-

Deaf/HOH inmate is asked

spons&psc=1&spLa=ZW5jcnlwdGVkUXVhbGlmaWVyPUFSSkhHV0JITENYNVImZW5jc if he wants one or does he
nlwdGVkSWQ9QTAyMTcwMzM0QVhQRjdKWkdaTDMmZW5jcnlwdGVkQWRJZD1B
MDQ1NDk3MTJURzJUTTNENTY3TTAmd2lkZ2V0TmFtZT1zcF9hdGYmYWN0aW9uPW think it will help him in any

NsaWNrUmVkaXJlY3QmZG9Ob3RMb2dDbGljaz10cnVl

way.

How well do they work? No Complaints

https://www.amazon.com/Serene-Portable-Phone-

During assesment each

Amplifier-

Deaf/HOH inmate is asked

30dB/dp/B001JSV7Z4/ref=sr_1_1?crid=29M9FW18Q2FT0& if he wants one or does he

keywords=serene+portable+phone+amplifier&qid=1582307 think it will help him in any

10

Dorms 1 &2 2019

466&sprefix=serene+porta%2Caps%2C185&sr=8-1

way.

No Complaints

We are working with the Securus Technician to be able to bring CapTel to BCC.

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

During assesment each

Deaf/HOH inmate is asked

https://www.silentcall.com/collections/signature-

if he wants one or does he

series/products/signature-series-sidekick-ii-418-mhz-

think it will help him in any

5

Dorm 2 C bay 2016

receiver-with-strobe-light-sk2-ss

way.

No Complaints

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

During assesment each

Deaf/HOH inmate is asked

https://www.silentcall.com/collections/signature-

if he wants one or does he

series/products/signature-series-sidekick-ii-418-mhz-

think it will help him in any

5

Dorm 2 C bay 2016

receiver-with-strobe-light-sk2-ss

way.

No Complaints

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in

use or under consideration not mentioned above.

N/A

N/A

N/A

Earphones for parole hearings Earphones for orientation videos

Parole Board

2

Room

2019

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

During assesment each

https://www.amazon.com/Dynamic-Headphones-87050- Deaf/HOH inmate is asked

Over-ear-

if he wants one or does he

Miniature/dp/B000E5FQSC/ref=sr_1_17?keywords=87050& think it will help him in any

qid=1582307284&sr=8-17

way.

No Complaints

N/A

N/A

N/A

BCC (March 2020), p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 15 of 195 - Page ID#: 3294
Bell County Forestry Camp

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 16 of 195 - Page ID#: 3295

Audit item

questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was

discovered during the

audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the

# Issue/Question

problem remains)

A ADA coordinator

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

2 coordinator appointed?

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit where

7 deaf/HOH inmates are held?

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

9 Describe training

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Description/Notes Derek Miracle

Compliant

Partially Compliant

X X X X X NA X

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list? B Reporting obligations
Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH 2 inmates? 3 Is the list complete? C Intake/Orientation - Corrections 1 Hard of hearing inmates 2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

X
X X NA X

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic 3 notifications.)

I receive emails every Monday of all

current ADA inmates at BCFC, as

well as across the state. I also

receive notifications anytime an

inmate who is ADA is transferring to

my facility.

NA

BCFC (March 2020), p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 17 of 195 - Page ID#: 3296

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe) Deaf inmates
5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving? 6 Describe 7 Effective communications planning? 8 Effective communication provided? 9 Describe 10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed? 11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?
Orientation videos 12 Captioned? 13 Shown in a quiet space? 14 Amplification if needed?
Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate? 15 (Describe) D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services
Notice to medical staff: Other methods of access: 24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening? If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there 27 further assessment?

Yes, all ADA inmates will receive a

brief orientation allowing the back-

up and I to introduce ourselves. We

then have the inmate complete

X

paperwork in order to determine

what (if-any) accomodations they

request and/or are needed.

NA

X

NA

X

X

NA

X

X

NA

X

X

X

X

NA NA
X
X

BCFC (March 2020), p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 18 of 195 - Page ID#: 3297

# Issue/Question 29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)? After assessment, does medical: 31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert? 33 Notify ADA coordinator? 34 Is notification prompt?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist) 35 Audiology services offered when needed? 36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles) 37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid? 38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services 39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?
Summary Hearing aid batteries 48 Available for free? 49 In sufficient numbers? 50 7 days/week? 51 regardless of housing? E Information provided inmates
Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in law 18 library? (Need to check) F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates
3 Notice posted outside housing units? 4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator? 5 Cell/bed cards 6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert? 8 Each inmate has one if not waived? 9 Provided timely?

BCFC (March 2020), p. 3

Compliant

Partially Compliant

X NA
X X X
NA X X X X X X
NA X X X X
X
X X NA X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 19 of 195 - Page ID#: 3298

# Issue/Question 10 Replacements provided when needed? KOMS alert? 11 Staff aware of use of KOMS 13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check) 15 Updated timely Individual ID cards 16 Staff aware of meaning? 18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived? 19 Provided timely? 20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times? 21 Prompt replacements provided?
G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment Identification to ADA Coordinator Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon
1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate? Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other
2 deaf/hoh inmates? Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified
3 deaf/hoh inmate? At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of
4 communication expressly ascertained and documented? At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate
5 about available auxiliary aids and services? 6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?
Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral 7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

X NA
X X X NA X X X X X
NA X
X
X
X
X X X

BCFC (March 2020), p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 20 of 195 - Page ID#: 3299

Audit item

questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was

discovered during the

audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the

# Issue/Question

problem remains)

Description/Notes

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

8 intake, has one been done?

H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

1 On-person ID cards

2 Cell cards

3 Bed shaker

4 In-person alerts

5 Pager

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

6 phones are available?)

7 Amplifier for phone

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

8 communication difficulties?

9 Other amplification

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NA X
X X X X X X X X X

10 Other (describe) General issues
19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained? 20 Have any been out of comission? 21 Describe -- which and for how long?
Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from 22 hearing aid?
23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

BCFC (March 2020), p. 5

Describe: Headphones are provided

for classes, programs, parole board,

etc. if reguested. We also have

watches available if requested.

NA

NA

X

NA

NA

X

This has never been an issue at BCFC

at this time.

X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 21 of 195 - Page ID#: 3300

# Issue/Question 24 Promptly? 25 Has there been a direct threat determination? 26 Describe Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of 27 impairment and specific dangers posed) 28 Appropriately reported to monitor?
I Interpretation in general Qualified interpretation services available: Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation
1 communicated to inmates? covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain
2 encounters/communications/settings) Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other
3 volunteer-provided programming? Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation
4 method? 5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?
Standing arrangement with providers? 6 In-person? 7 VRI?
Is VRI availability: 8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)? on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of
10 notice)?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

X NA NA
X X
NA X
X
X
X X NA X X NA X X
X

BCFC (March 2020), p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 22 of 195 - Page ID#: 3301

# Issue/Question during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when
11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

X

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

BCFC does not have an RHU, just

X

temporary holding.

VRI laptop functional? 13 In general 14 Always checked for sufficient battery power? 15 Routine software updates?
VRI laptop has necessary items with it? 16 Splitter? 17 Instructions? 18 Long power cord? 19 Usable as VRS? 20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Describe: Yes, it is tested at least monthly to ensure everything is properly functioning.
Describe:

NA X X X
NA X X X X X

21 How? Information used to determine when in-person interpretation
22 should be first recourse? Is in-person interpretation available:
23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical 24 Parole?

If no ADA inmate has requested to

use the VRI the back-up and/or

X

myself tests it at least monthly.

X

X X X

BCFC (March 2020), p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 23 of 195 - Page ID#: 3302

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

We have not had any requests for in- X person interpretation at this time.

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

We have not had any requests for in- X person interpretation at this time.

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days 27 before?
Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in 28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

We have not had any requests for in- X person interpretation at this time.

We have not.

X

29 Describe in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI
30 was unavailable) Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred
31 method? 32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.
Written communication is not needed when inmate has low 33 literacy
Qualified interpretation services available: Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other 34 volunteer-provided programming? for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 35 encounters/communications/settings) 36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

Never been necessary at BCFC. No occurences at this time.

NA X X X X
NA X
X X

BCFC (March 2020), p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 24 of 195 - Page ID#: 3303

# Issue/Question J Hand Restraints

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs? Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized finding of a
2 security threat? Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might
3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.) 4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed? 5 Staff aware of the issue
Off-site medical care: 6 two-point hand restraint system used?
restraints removed when necessary for medical 7 communication? K Non-auditory Alerts

BCFC has never had an inmate that

communicates via sign language up

to this date.

NA

X

X
X X NA X
X

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe) 2 provided to all inmates who need it? 3 can and does it give alerts in real time? 4 sufficient to signal fire alarm? 5 sufficient to signal count alert? 6 programmed to signal different alerts?

BCFC (March 2020), p. 9

Describe: Bed-Shaker, Watches, ADA Support Inmates, Pager, Lights Flash for Counts, Flashing Lights on smoke alarms during fire/emergencies. NA
X X X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 25 of 195 - Page ID#: 3304

# Issue/Question 7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them? Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts
9 been denied? 10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working? 11 How often?

Describe: Twice a month.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

X X
X X X

12 monitored/recorded formally? 13 Announcement boards 14 used to notify of schedule changes? 15 used consistently? 16 in all dormitories? 17 in gym? 18 in library? 19 audited and monitored?
In-person or personal system notification when an inmate 20 misses a page?
Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only 21 because of disability?

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future? 23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies? 24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?
Does the plan account for how effective communication will be 25 provided?

BCFC (March 2020), p. 10

Logs have now been created and are

maintained by the ADA Coordinator

X

and back-up.

NA

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

NA X X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 26 of 195 - Page ID#: 3305

# Issue/Question L Telecommunications
Videophones: 1 Installed? 3 Number of days out of service? (Specify) 4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.
When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other 5 alternative offered

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when 6 videophone is out of service. 7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates? 8 Appropriate location?
Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends, 9 emergency) if necessary? 11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?
No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates using 12 ordinary phones? 13 Advance request unnecessary? 14 Free?

Description/Notes
We now have a functioning CapTel phone. Describe: All ADA inmates are informed of the available alternatives upon arrival. Each ADA inmate can and will be notified of such outings and expected outage times during weekly meetings as well.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NA X
NA NA
X

NA X X
X
X
X
X X

15 Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone calls?

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

No

X NA

BCFC (March 2020), p. 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 27 of 195 - Page ID#: 3306

# Issue/Question Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the
17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial. TTY:
18 Installed? 19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?
Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made 20 available WITH TTY? 21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify) 22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?
location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones 23 for non-deaf inmates? 24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access? 25 Permission needed? 26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe) 28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)
VRS via laptop 36 Available? 37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU) 38 Used when appropriate?
Phones 39 Amplification in every group of phones? 40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?
CapTel 41 If so, installed and working? 42 Appropriate for any particular inmate? 43 Request by any inmate denied?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

No
List names List names

Compliant

Partially Compliant

X
NA X X
X
NA X
X
X X NA X NA X X X NA X X X X NA NA

BCFC (March 2020), p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 28 of 195 - Page ID#: 3307

# Issue/Question TV/Movies
44 Is captioning available? 45 Is captioning used? 46 Is the captioning checked regularly? 47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NA X X X X

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe) All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe
52 problems) Access to communication services for deaf inmates in segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same
53 status? Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-
54 deaf inmates? M Miscellaneous Devices
1 Devices available? (Describe) 2 devices in commissary list? 3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator? 4 facilitation of purchase?
Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied? 5 (Describe) 6 determined on case-by-case basis? 7 because security threat? 8 monitor notified? 9 reasoning explained?

If requests are made for captions to

X

be turned on, we will turn them on.

X

X

X

Describe in detail

NA X X X
NA X X X X

BCFC (March 2020), p. 13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 29 of 195 - Page ID#: 3308

# Issue/Question ADA coordinator maintains records
10 of requests? 11 of denials? N Disciplinary O Grievances P Training
Types available 1 CBT? (Using approved training?)
2 Who received? (Describe) 3 All appropriate staff?
4 Live training? (Information only) 5 Who received? (Describe) 6 All appropriate staff?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NA X X

NA X

All staff that communicate with

inmates at BCFC receive this training

each year.

NA

X

Describe: All staff that communicate

with inmates at BCFC receive this

training each year.

NA

Describe: All staff.

NA

X

BCFC (March 2020), p. 14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 30 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3309

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Personal

If signs to

Phone

communicat

Bed Shaker? Other Alert TTY Access Amplifier Shake &

Listed with

Low literacy? (So Has

Has e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not Device (Not (Not

(Not Wake (Not Any other

KOMS ADA Signs to

that written Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; auxiliary

Housing Precaution communicate communication is Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting took denied; denied; denied; denied; denied;

aid

Name

ID location

?

(Y/N)

not effective) waived) waived) notes?

place?

granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) requested?

1 11

Y

N

N

Y

Y Doesn't sign

Y

No Request No Request No Request No Request No Request No Request

3 05

Y

N

N

Y

Y Doesn't sign

Y

No Request No Request No Request No Request No Request CapTel

3 29A

Y

N

N

Y

Y Doesn't sign

Y

No Request No Request No Request No Request No Request No Request

4 05

Y

N

N

Y

Y Doesn't sign

Y

No Request No Request No Request No Request No Request No Request

4 29A

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Doesn't sign

Y

No Request No Request No Request No Request No Request No Request

5 01

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Doesn't sign

Y

No Request No Request No Request No Request No Request No Request

BCFC (March 2020), p. 15

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING TH

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 31 of 195 - Page ID#: 3310

Name

Audit item

ID Outome? issues/concerns

N/A

None

Granted

None

N/A

None

N/A

None

N/A

None

N/A

None

BCFC (March 2020), p. 16

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier
system, or other assistive listening device. Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable
amplifiers)
Captioned Telephone (CapTel)
Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like?
Bed shakers
Vibrating watches

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

How many

Where

When obtained

Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 ID#: 3311
Specifications (URL)

Page: 32 of 195 - Page
How do inmates obtain access?

How well do they work?

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Request upon arrival during ADA

1

Medical

Upon request https://www.healthykin.com/p-4819-posey-sound-amplifier.aspx meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or Functionable

see the ADA coordinator or back-up

during open door and request.

1

Inmate housing area

Immediately

https://www.amazon.com/Hamilton-CapTel-Real-Time-CaptionedTelephone/dp/B005GQTLJO/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=hamilton+capte

Request upon arrival during ADA meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or

Functionable

l+840i&qid=1581615618&sr=8-3

see the ADA coordinator or back-up during open door and request.

Request upon arrival during ADA

2

Inmate housing area Immediately

Volume control on inmate telephones located within the dormitory.

meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or Functionable see the ADA coordinator or back-up

during open door and request.

Request upon arrival during ADA

1

ADA Coordinators Office

Upon request

https://www.harriscomm.com/silent-call-signature-series-sidekickii-strobe-clock-receiver.html

meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or see the ADA coordinator or back-up

Functionable

during open door and request.

Request upon arrival during ADA

6

ADA Coordinators Office

Upon request

https://assistech.com/store/vibrating-watches/735222

meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or Functionable see the ADA coordinator or back-up

during open door and request.

Other comments
N/A
Medcial will order as needed, we currently have no inmates that
utilize them.

Vibrating alarm clocks

As needed Can be purchased Upon request through Keefe.

Ordered through Keefe Group (inmate canteen).

Request upon arrival during ADA meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or
see the ADA coordinator or back-up during open door and request.

Functionable

Pagers
Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration not
mentioned above.
Earphones for parole hearings

5

ADA Coordinators Office

Upon request

https://shop.lrsus.com/collections/staff-pagers/products/lrs-staffalpha-paging-system?_ga=2.236932097.164881801.1581615338-
1959105477.1581615338

Request upon arrival during ADA meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or
see the ADA coordinator or back-up during open door and request.

Functionable

We have two inmates that can be used if needed as ADA Support. If Request upon arrival during ADA

2

Dorm

As needed.

all other means of reaching an ADA inmate fails, these inmates will be utilized.

meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or see the ADA coordinator or back-up during open door and request.

As needed

https://www.amazon.com/PANASONIC-Headphones-IntegratedController-

Request upon arrival during ADA

2

ADA Coordinators Office

Upon request

Lightweight/dp/B00009RDIF/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=Panasonic+Ster eo+Headphones+with+XBS+Port%2C+Integrated+Volume+Controll
er+and+Foldable+Design&qid=1581615405&sr=8-1

meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or see the ADA coordinator or back-up during open door and request.

Functionable

Earphones for orientation videos

2

ADA Coordinators Office

Upon request

https://www.amazon.com/PANASONIC-Headphones-IntegratedController-
Lightweight/dp/B00009RDIF/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=Panasonic+Ster eo+Headphones+with+XBS+Port%2C+Integrated+Volume+Controll
er+and+Foldable+Design&qid=1581615405&sr=8-1

Request upon arrival during ADA meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or
see the ADA coordinator or back-up during open door and request.

Functionable

BCFC (March 2020), p. 17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 33 of 195 - Page ID#: 3312
Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 34 of 195 - Page ID#: 3313

Audit item

questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

has been done about

it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

A ADA coordinator

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Kristopher King

X

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

2 coordinator appointed?

No

X

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Yes

X

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit 7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

Yes. There is a TV with an informational

slideshow that has a slide about ADA.

X

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

Yes. The training on G Drive.

X

9 Describe training

See Above

NA

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly 15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Yes. Medical notifies me of changes/updates

X

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list? B Reporting obligations
Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH 2 inmates? 3 Is the list complete? C Intake/Orientation - Corrections 1 Hard of hearing inmates 2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?
Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic 3 notifications.) 4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)
Deaf inmates 5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving? 6 Describe 7 Effective communications planning? 8 Effective communication provided? 9 Describe 10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed? 11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Yes. When identified.
Yes. Updated as needed Yes.
Yes. KOMS Tracking Alert e-mail
Yes. In Person. Yes. KOMS Tracking Alert e-mail Yes Yes Have VRI Available if needed. Yes Has not been needed as of yet.

X
X
X
NA X
NA X
NA X
NA X X
NA X X

EKCC (March 2020), p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 35 of 195 - Page ID#: 3314

# Issue/Question Orientation videos
12 Captioned? 13 Shown in a quiet space? 14 Amplification if needed?
Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate? 15 (Describe) D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services
Notice to medical staff: Other methods of access: 24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening? If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there 27 further assessment? 29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)? After assessment, does medical: 31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert? 33 Notify ADA coordinator? 34 Is notification prompt?

Audit item

questions/concerns

(note here if a problem

was discovered during

the audit, and what

has been done about

it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Yes Yes Yes. Headphones available

Can be read to them or explained in detail.

Yes
Yes Depends on Provider Access and Schedule.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X X X
X
NA NA
X
X
X NA
X X X

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist) 35 Audiology services offered when needed? 36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles) 37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid? 38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services 39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?
Summary Hearing aid batteries 48 Available for free? 49 In sufficient numbers? 50 7 days/week? 51 regardless of housing?

NA X X X X X
NA X X X X

EKCC (March 2020), p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 36 of 195 - Page ID#: 3315

# Issue/Question E Information provided inmates
Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in 18 law library? (Need to check) F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates
3 Notice posted outside housing units? 4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator? 5 Cell/bed cards 6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert? 8 Each inmate has one if not waived? 9 Provided timely? 10 Replacements provided when needed?
KOMS alert? 11 Staff aware of use of KOMS 13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check) 15 Updated timely
Individual ID cards 16 Staff aware of meaning? 18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived? 19 Provided timely? 20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times? 21 Prompt replacements provided? G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment
Identification to ADA Coordinator Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon 1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate? Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other 2 deaf/hoh inmates? Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified 3 deaf/hoh inmate?

Audit item

questions/concerns

(note here if a problem

was discovered during

the audit, and what

has been done about

it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

X
X X NA X X X X NA X X X NA X X X X X
NA
X
X
X

EKCC (March 2020), p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 37 of 195 - Page ID#: 3316

# Issue/Question At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of
4 communication expressly ascertained and documented? At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate
5 about available auxiliary aids and services? 6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?
Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral 7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )
Other assessments For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on 8 intake, has one been done? H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided 1 On-person ID cards 2 Cell cards 3 Bed shaker 4 In-person alerts 5 Pager Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where 6 phones are available?) 7 Amplifier for phone Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize 8 communication difficulties? 9 Other amplification 10 Other (describe)

Audit item

questions/concerns

(note here if a problem

was discovered during

the audit, and what

has been done about

it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

No pagers are used at EKCC. Portable Amplifiers available in each dorm

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

X
X X X NA X
X X X X X X X X X NA

EKCC (March 2020), p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 38 of 195 - Page ID#: 3317

# Issue/Question General issues
19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained? 20 Have any been out of comission? 21 Describe -- which and for how long?
Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from 22 hearing aid? 23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided? 24 Promptly? 25 Has there been a direct threat determination? 26 Describe
Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of 27 impairment and specific dangers posed) 28 Appropriately reported to monitor? I Interpretation in general
Qualified interpretation services available: Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation 1 communicated to inmates? covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 2 encounters/communications/settings) Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other 3 volunteer-provided programming? Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation 4 method? 5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences? Standing arrangement with providers? 6 In-person? 7 VRI?

Audit item

questions/concerns

(note here if a problem

was discovered during

the audit, and what

has been done about

it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Conducted by Jobs Coord.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X
NA NA
X X X NA NA X X
NA X
X
X
X X NA X X

EKCC (March 2020), p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 39 of 195 - Page ID#: 3318

# Issue/Question Is VRI availability:
8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Audit item

questions/concerns

(note here if a problem

was discovered during

the audit, and what

has been done about

it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)? on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of
10 notice)? during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when
11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?
12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe VRI laptop functional?
13 In general 14 Always checked for sufficient battery power? 15 Routine software updates?
VRI laptop has necessary items with it? 16 Splitter? 17 Instructions? 18 Long power cord? 19 Usable as VRS? 20 VRI effectiveness tracked? 21 How?
Information used to determine when in-person interpretation 22 should be first recourse?
Is in-person interpretation available: 23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical 24 Parole? 25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered 26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.
Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days 27 before?

Space and cable available to hookup in secure location. Describe:
Describe:
Logged when used
Has not been needed N/A

X
X
X
X
NA X X X
NA X X X X
X
X
X X X

EKCC (March 2020), p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 40 of 195 - Page ID#: 3319

Audit item

questions/concerns

(note here if a problem

was discovered during

the audit, and what

has been done about

it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

No

29 Describe

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

30 was unavailable)

N/A

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

31 method?

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

33 literacy

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

34 volunteer-provided programming?

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

35 encounters/communications/settings)

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

J Hand Restraints

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

No

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

2 finding of a security threat?

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

Yes. Secured in room with VRI.

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

5 Staff aware of the issue

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA
X X X NA X
X X N/A X
X X X

EKCC (March 2020), p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 41 of 195 - Page ID#: 3320

# Issue/Question Off-site medical care:
6 two-point hand restraint system used? restraints removed when necessary for medical
7 communication? K Non-auditory Alerts
1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe) 2 provided to all inmates who need it? 3 can and does it give alerts in real time? 4 sufficient to signal fire alarm? 5 sufficient to signal count alert? 6 programmed to signal different alerts? 7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Audit item

questions/concerns

(note here if a problem

was discovered during

the audit, and what

has been done about

it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X
X

In-Person Alerts & Green light in Dorm 3 AL

and CL.

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them? Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts
9 been denied? 10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working? 11 How often? 12 monitored/recorded formally? 13 Announcement boards 14 used to notify of schedule changes? 15 used consistently? 16 in all dormitories? 17 in gym? 18 in library? 19 audited and monitored?

X

No Yes. Monitored by UA weekly for function. Weekly Yes. Logged by UA

X
X X X NA X X X X X X

EKCC (March 2020), p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 42 of 195 - Page ID#: 3321

# Issue/Question In-person or personal system notification when an inmate
20 misses a page? Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only
21 because of disability?

Audit item

questions/concerns

(note here if a problem

was discovered during

the audit, and what

has been done about

it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

No

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

X NA

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future? 23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies? 24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?
Does the plan account for how effective communication will be 25 provided? L Telecommunications
Videophones: 1 Installed? 3 Number of days out of service? (Specify) 4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.
When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other 5 alternative offered
Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when 6 videophone is out of service. 7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates? 8 Appropriate location?
Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends, 9 emergency) if necessary? 11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?
No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates 12 using ordinary phones? 13 Advance request unnecessary? 14 Free?
Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone 15 calls?

None
In-Person Yes Yes Yes Yes Same as any other phone
Same as any other phone

X X X X
NA X
0 NA NA X
NA X X X X X X X X

EKCC (March 2020), p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 43 of 195 - Page ID#: 3322

Audit item

questions/concerns

(note here if a problem

was discovered during

the audit, and what

has been done about

it, or if the problem

# Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

No

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the 17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.
TTY: 18 Installed? 19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?
Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made 20 available WITH TTY? 21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify) 22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?
location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones 23 for non-deaf inmates? 24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access? 25 Permission needed? 26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)
28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe) VRS via laptop
36 Available? 37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU) 38 Used when appropriate?
Phones 39 Amplification in every group of phones? 40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?
CapTel 41 If so, installed and working? 42 Appropriate for any particular inmate? 43 Request by any inmate denied?

N/A Yes Yes Yes
No No Having issues with billing with Relay. Frankfort is looking into. Waiting on guidance.
Yes No

X
NA X X
X
NA X
X
X X NA
NA X X X
NA X X
NA Yes NA NA

EKCC (March 2020), p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 44 of 195 - Page ID#: 3323

# Issue/Question TV/Movies
44 Is captioning available? 45 Is captioning used? 46 Is the captioning checked regularly? 47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?
48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe) All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe
52 problems) Access to communication services for deaf inmates in segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same
53 status? Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-
54 deaf inmates? M Miscellaneous Devices
1 Devices available? (Describe) 2 devices in commissary list? 3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator? 4 facilitation of purchase?
Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied? 5 (Describe) 6 determined on case-by-case basis? 7 because security threat? 8 monitor notified? 9 reasoning explained?
ADA coordinator maintains records 10 of requests? 11 of denials?

Audit item

questions/concerns

(note here if a problem

was discovered during

the audit, and what

has been done about

it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Additional Movie Channel with Captioning provided.
No issues
Yes
Same as other inmates
Shake and Wake, Portable Amplifiers, Bed Shakers, Vibrating Wristwatches Working with Keefe for more availability Yes Yes. Inmate Purchase Order
No Yes No
Yes Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X X X X X
X
X
X
NA X X X
NA X X X X
NA X X

EKCC (March 2020), p. 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 45 of 195 - Page ID#: 3324

# Issue/Question N Disciplinary O Grievances P Training
Types available 1 CBT? (Using approved training?) 2 Who received? (Describe) 3 All appropriate staff? 4 Live training? (Information only) 5 Who received? (Describe) 6 All appropriate staff?

Audit item

questions/concerns

(note here if a problem

was discovered during

the audit, and what

has been done about

it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Yes All Staff
Yes. In-person at inservice All Staff

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X
NA X
X X
X

EKCC (March 2020), p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 46 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3325

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Low literacy? (So

If signs to

Auxiliary Aid

Listed with

Signs to

that written

Has Deaf/HOH Has Bed/Door communicate, Assessment

Bed Shaker? (Not

Housing

KOMS ADA

communicate communication is ID Card? (Y or Card? (Y or noted in KOMS meeting took requested; denied;

First Name

Last Name ID

location

Precaution?

(Y/N)

not effective)

waived)

waived)

precaution notes? place?

granted)

3 BL-11

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

8 CU-12

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

6 CL-10

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

8 BU-13

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

3 CL-13

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

7 CL-9

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

6 CU-3

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

6 AL-12

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

7 DL-3

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

7 CU-1

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

8 AL-13

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

6 DL-4

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

3 CL-5

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

8 BL-2

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

3 CL-12

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

7 CL-16

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

3 AU-4

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

3 CL-4

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

9 BL-8

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

8 CU-9

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

MSU-35

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

4 CL-6

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

6 CL-15

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

6 DU-7

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

6 BL-4

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

6 CU-6

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

2 BL-7

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

2 AL-9

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

6 DL-15

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

6 CU-3

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

6 DU-13

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

6 AL-16

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

8 AU-16

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

7 AU-13

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

6 CU-11

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

2 BU-7

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

3 CU-10

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

2 CU-12

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

3 AU-5

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

8 DU-14

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

Other Alert Device (Not requested; denied; granted) Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

3 CL-8

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

Not Requested

3 CU-7

Y

7 BL-9

Y

7 CL-7

Y

6 BL-7

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

3 CL-8

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

Not Requested

3 CL-3

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

Not Requested

EKCC (March 2020), p. 13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT

Personal Phone

TTY Access (Not Amplifier (Not

requested; denied; requested; denied;

First Name

Last Name granted)

granted)

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Shake & Wake (Not requested; denied; granted) Granted Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted Not Requested Not Requested Granted Not Requested Not Requested Granted Granted Granted Not Requested Granted Granted Granted Granted Granted Not Requested Granted Granted Granted Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted Not Requested Granted Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted Granted Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested
Granted
Granted Granted Granted Granted
Granted
Not Requested

Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 ID#: 3326

Any other auxiliary aid requested? Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested
Yes. Captel
Yes. Captel Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested
Yes. Captel
Yes. Captel

Outome? Y N N N Y N N Y N N Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y N N N Y N Y N N N N N N Y Y N N N CapTel Telphone CapTel Telphone Y Y Y CapTel Telphone CapTel Telphone

Audit item issues or concerns N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Approved
Approved N/A N/A N/A
Approved
Approved

Page: 47 of 195 - Page

EKCC (March 2020), p. 14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 48 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3327

Low literacy? (So

If signs to

Auxiliary Aid

Listed with

Signs to

that written

Has Deaf/HOH Has Bed/Door communicate, Assessment

Bed Shaker? (Not

Housing

KOMS ADA

communicate communication is ID Card? (Y or Card? (Y or noted in KOMS meeting took requested; denied;

location

Precaution?

(Y/N)

not effective)

waived)

waived)

precaution notes? place?

granted)

4 CL-12

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

6 CU-15

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

3 CL-14

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

1 CU-3

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

3 CL-15

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

6 CU-6

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

1 DU-14

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

8 BU-8

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

7 DL-1

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

2 BU-9

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

3 CL-9

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

3 AU-10

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

3 CL-9

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

7 DU-13

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

3 CL-14

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

3 DL-12

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

8 CU-14

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

2 CU-1

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

3 AL-14

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

3 AU-4

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

3 CU-7

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

1 AU-5

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

4 DL-13

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

5 DL-3

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

8 AL-10

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

9 AU-9

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

8 AU-10

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

5 BL-2

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

6 AU-14

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

7 AL-7

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

2 AL-15

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

8 DU-4

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

1 AL-15

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

5 AL-2

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

9 AU-4

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

MSU-39

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

8 AU-5

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

7 BL-11

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

8 AL-8

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

7 AL-6

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

5 BU-7

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

4 CU-6

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

4 BL-9

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

7 CL-9

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested

Other Alert Device (Not requested; denied; granted) Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

EKCC (March 2020), p. 15

First Name

Last Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Personal Phone

TTY Access (Not Amplifier (Not

requested; denied; requested; denied;

granted)

granted)

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Shake & Wake (Not requested; denied; granted) Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 ID#: 3328

Any other auxiliary aid requested? Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Outome? N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N

Audit item issues or concerns N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Page: 49 of 195 - Page

EKCC (March 2020), p. 16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 50 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3329

How

How do inmates obtain

Technology

many Where

When obtained Specifications (URL)

access?

How well do they work? Other comments

FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device. 1

Academic Wing

Request from Staff conducting classes, Ordering by end of Mhttps://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B018C0TVDG/ref services, etc.

Currently in the process of ordering a system.

Phone amplifiers (not volume control:

Each Dorm and Minimum

Request it from the floor Work very well. Have had no

portable amplifiers)

10

Security

2 Years ago

https://www.harriscomm.com/portable-telephone-amplifierofficer.

complaints

Request to use it. Contact

ADA Coordinator. Once Work very well. HOH

approved, same access as Inmates like it much more

Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

2

Dorm 3 & Dorm 5

1 Year ago

https://www.captel.com/captel/phones/captel-840/

regular phones.

than the TTY.

Captel Model 840

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or

Used during services and

the like?

1

Chapel

5+ Years ago

classes as needed.

Works well.

Work well when tested.

Bed shakers

Have had no requests for Limited Range to cells at

3

Storage

5 Years ago

https://www.amazon.com/Silent-Call-Signature-Sidekick-Recbed shakers.

front of wing.

Vibrating watches 30+

Vibrating alarm clocks 0

Pagers

0

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices

currently in use or under consideration not

mentioned above.

6

Earphones for parole hearings

1

Earphones for orientation videos

1

Issued to HOH Inmates and storage
N/A N/A
Dorm 2,3,4,6,7, & 8 Parole Office Parole Office

Request during auxiliary aid Seem to work well. Clip on

4+ years ago

https://www.amazon.com/Tech-Tools-Vibrating-Personal-Sh assessment.

the back is not very durable.

Bed Shaker mentioned

above works as an alarm

N/A

clock.

EKCC has never had

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Pagers.

This is a green light in the

wing that is activated

during movements, pill call, Work very well. Bright and

2 Years ago

etc. to signal movement. easily visible.

Request use from parole

10/25/2019 https://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-Headphones-RP-HT16 office staff .

Work well.

Request use from parole

10/25/2019 https://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-Headphones-RP-HT16 office staff .

Work well.

assistive listening product links https://www.amazon.com/gp/offerlisting/B018C0TVDG/ref=dp_olp_0?ie=UTF8& condition=all https://www.amazon.com/4-Person-AssistiveListening-Neckloopsincluded/dp/B00XQ7MX9U/ref=olp_product_ details?ie=UTF8&me=

EKCC (March 2020), p. 17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 51 of 195 - Page ID#: 3330
Green River Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 52 of 195 - Page ID#: 3331

Deaf/HO

Include, H or

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

A ADA coordinator

Both

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no

Both

2 ADA coordinator appointed?

Both

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit

Both

7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

Both

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

Both

9 Describe training

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or if

the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Mark Jackson UAII GRCC

no yes

yes yes On line courses

yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) x x

x

x

x

x NA

x

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

Both B Reporting obligations

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

Both

2 inmates?

Both

3 Is the list complete?

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

HOH

3 notifications.)

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

Deaf

Deaf inmates

Deaf

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

m

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Both

Notice to medical staff:

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

we add inmates to the list everydasy

x

yes also receive statewide List each week yes yes

x
x x NA x

NA

NA

Identified inmates are in kom s alert

x

NA

Inmates are provided with VRI and

Interpreter if needed

x

inmates who sign are provided with VRI

x

yes

NA

yes

yes

NA

yes all Dorm and bed area

x

yes all dorms advised

x

yes all tvs have

x

yes we would figure out what the inmates

needs and make sure he has it to assist him.

x

yes
yes all alerts are checked yes

NA NA
x
x
x NA
x x

GRCC (March 2020), p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 53 of 195 - Page ID#: 3332

Deaf/HO

Include, H or

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or if

the problem remains)

Description/Notes

yes

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

Summary

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

HOH

50 7 days/week?

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Both E Information provided inmates

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in

18 law library? (Need to check)

Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

Both

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

yes refered by provider med
yes by provider
yes by provider at institution
ye by med provider yes yes yes
There are two located in the library
yes yes all HOH have HOH IDS or issued one yes yes all staff are advised yes yes yes
yes all staff that have computer excess
yes
yes yes yes yes yes
yes all inmates have koms alert
yes koms alerts are good now
yes
yes
yes GRCC (March 2020), p. 2

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) x

NA x x x x x

NA x x x

x
x x NA x x x x NA x x x NA x x x x x
NA x
x
x
x
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 54 of 195 - Page ID#: 3333

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

Deaf/HO

discovered during the audit, and

Include, H or

what has been done about it, or if

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

yes

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

yes vri if needed

Both

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

yes

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

yes

Both

2 Cell cards

yes

Both

3 Bed shaker

yes

Both

4 In-person alerts

Both

5 Pager

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

yes

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

yes

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

yes

Both

9 Other amplification

yes

Both

10 Other (describe)

I Have Fm Transmitters and Pocket talkers

Both

General issues

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Both

20 Have any been out of comission?

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Hearing aides go to the institution there

Both

22 hearing aid?

going .

each Institution are advised of the

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

replacement or order

Both

24 Promptly?

yes

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Both

26 Describe

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

Both I Interpretation in general

yes

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

yes

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

All staff that communicate wit the a Deaf

Deaf

1 communicated to inmates?

inmates know how to use VRI

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

the VRI is used for meetings rclass and

Deaf

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

disciplinary all voulanteers and Interpreters must

Deaf

3 volunteer-provided programming?

complet back ground check

Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation

Deaf

4 method?

if the inmates canot use the VRI in that atnouphere

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf

6 In-person?

If the Inmate has to move around a lot
Unless the Inmate cant use the VRI GRCC (March 2020), p. 3

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) x

x

NA

x

x x x

x x x x NA NA
NA NA
x
x x NA NA
x x NA x
x
x
x
x NA
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 55 of 195 - Page ID#: 3334

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #
Deaf Deaf Deaf

Issue/Question 7 VRI?
Is VRI availability: 8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or if

the problem remains)

Description/Notes

yes VRI Works Good

yes

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Deaf

13 In general

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Deaf

16 Splitter?

Deaf

17 Instructions?

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Deaf

21 How?

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

Deaf

22 should be first recourse?

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

Deaf

24 Parole?

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

Deaf

27 before?

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

Deaf

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

Deaf

29 Describe

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

Deaf

30 was unavailable)

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

Deaf

31 method?

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

Deaf

35 encounters/communications/settings)

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

VRI available 24/7
VRI available 24/7
VRI available 24/7 the VRI is available in RHU and inmate can use this when evere requsted Describe: yes tested every week yes
Describe: yes located in bag yes step by step yes yes yes vri log book
inmate request purple phone in a loud area or class room yes
Meeting , Medical , school, SAP
yes parole board also recieves alerts we do not relie on inmates for interpretation n/a
no
yes yes
yes
yes institution will arrange if needed
yes yes GRCC (March 2020), p. 4

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

x NA
x

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

x

x

x

NA x x x
NA x x x x x x
x
x x x x x
x
x
NA

x x x NA x
x
x

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 56 of 195 - Page ID#: 3335

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #
Deaf J Deaf
Deaf
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf
Deaf Both K

Issue/Question Hand Restraints 1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs? Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized 2 finding of a security threat? Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might 3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.) 4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed? 5 Staff aware of the issue Off-site medical care: 6 two-point hand restraint system used? restraints removed when necessary for medical 7 communication? Non-auditory Alerts

Both

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Both

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

Both

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

Both

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

Both

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

Both

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

Both

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or if

the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

yes in rhu or trips

NA

x used for security reasons only

yes there is a secured room that can be used

x

yes

x

staff are trained for , trips

NA

all inmates transported the same way

x

restraint removed if nessary

x

yes , bed shakers , alarms intercoms, inperson alerts yes , bed shakers , alarms intercoms, inperson alerts yes , yes yes yes yes

NA
x
x x x x x

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Both

9 been denied?

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Both

11 How often?

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Both

15 used consistently?

Both

16 in all dormitories?

Both

17 in gym?

Both

18 in library?

Both

19 audited and monitored?

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

Both

20 misses a page?

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

Both

21 because of disability?

yes
no yes Describe no yes yes yes yes yes sent to the dorms yes
yes
yes for breakfast wake up

x
x x x NA x x x x x x
NA

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

yes received bed shaker

x

yes

x

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

yes all doors and cells are physically checked

x

yes

x

GRCC (March 2020), p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 57 of 195 - Page ID#: 3336

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

Deaf/HO

discovered during the audit, and

Include, H or

what has been done about it, or if

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

yes

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Deaf

5 alternative offered

yes the VRS is used all who use the puple

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

6 videophone is out of service.

Describe:

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

yes located in same building

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

yes

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

can be used 24/7

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

yes if needed

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

Deaf

12 using ordinary phones?

no

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

yes any officer can receive

Deaf

14 Free?

yes

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone

Deaf

15 calls?

yes

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

no inmates been denied

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

Only if they are suspended or RHU

Both

TTY:

s

yed

Both

18 Installed?

yes

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

yes step by step

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

yes

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

none

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

yes

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

Both

23 for non-deaf inmates?

yes

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

yes if needed

Both

25 Permission needed?

ADA notified

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

no

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

free

Deaf

VRS via laptop

Deaf

36 Available?

yes

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

yes

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

yes

Both

Phones

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

yes Volume Button

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

yes located in every Dorm

Both

CapTel

no

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

no installed

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

List names

43 Request by any inmate denied?

List names

GRCC (March 2020), p. 6

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA x
NA NA
x

NA x x
x
x
x
x x
x

NA

NA x x
x
NA x
x
x x NA
NA x x x
NA x x
NA NA NA NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 58 of 195 - Page ID#: 3337

Deaf/HO

Include, H or

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

Both

TV/Movies

Both

44 Is captioning available?

Both

45 Is captioning used?

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or if

the problem remains)

Description/Notes

yes on all TV yes on all TV yes ap all TV yes ch all TV

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

Both

53 status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

Both

54 deaf inmates?

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

Both

5 (Describe)

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Both

7 because security threat?

Both

8 monitor notified?

Both

9 reasoning explained?

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both

10 of requests?

Both

11 of denials?

Both N Disciplinary

Both O Grievances

Both P Training

Both

Types available

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

Both

3 All appropriate staff?

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

yes on all TV
yes no all TV
yes o all TV
yes C all TV yes ne all TV Describe in detail yes in all TV y+F381:F411es it all TV yes ti all TV
no yes
yes yes yes yes
no yes all staff at Institution Yes Information Only all staff at Institution yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA x x x x

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

x

x

x

x
x NA
x x x
NA

NA x x
NA x
NA x
NA NA
x

GRCC (March 2020), p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 59 of 195 - Page ID#: 3338

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Name

Low literacy?

If signs to

Other Alert

(So that

communicat

Bed Shaker? Device TTY Access

Signs to written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

(Not

Listed with commu communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested;

Housing KOMS ADA nicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted)

Personal Phone Amplifier (Not requested; denied; granted)

Shake & Wake (Not requested; denied; granted)

Any other

auxiliary

aid

Audit item

requested? Outome? issues/concerns

1AL10L y 2AL03L y 2AU02U y 1BU07L y 3BL12l y 3AU01L y 1AU02L y 4AL04L y 6BL06L y 6BL06L y 1BU11L y 1AU08L y 4BL13L y 1BJ15U y 02AL11U y 1BL13L y 3BL09L y 1bl19L y 1AU11L y 1BL20L y 16AU08 y 9A09L y 2AL14U y 1AU01L y 16AL08 y 16BU01 y 02AL04 y 1BU02L y 1bU01 y 6AU10L y 6BL17L y 3BU19 y 16BL03 y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Good

N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD

N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

YY

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

R

NR

R

YR

R

N

GOOD

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

R

NR

NR

NR

R

N

GOOD N/A

Y

YY

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

YY

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

YY

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

3AL10L y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

2AL02 y 3BU16L y 4CU04U y 1BL01L y 1BU13L y 63UBL y 2AU12U y 16AL01 y 6BU13L y 7AL04L y 6BU07U y 2AU13U y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

R

R

NR

NR

R

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

YY

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

GRCC (March 2020), p. 8

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 60 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3339

Personal

Low literacy?

If signs to

Other Alert

Phone

(So that

communicat

Bed Shaker? Device TTY Access Amplifier Shake &

Signs to written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not

Wake (Not Any other

Listed with commu communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; auxiliary

Housing KOMS ADA nicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied; denied; denied; aid

Audit item

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) requested? Outome? issues/concerns

7BU6U y 9A18U y 6AU06U y 1AL09U y 5CU04U y 6AU08U y 16BL10 y 7AU4U y 3AL05L y 6BU13L y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

4BL05L y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

2AU11U y 3AU12L y 4BL1U y 02AL03 yy

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

6BL19 y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

08AU9 y

1BU04 y

3AL04 y

9A11L y

3BU12U y

16BU06 y

2AU06 y

6BL19 y

1BU04U y

5bl10

yy

4BU14 Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

YY

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD NN

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

GOOD N/A

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

R

NR

N

GOOD N

GRCC (March 2020), p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 61 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3340

How

How do inmates obtain

Technology

many Where When obtained

Specifications (URL)

access?

How well do they work? Other comments

FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier

Use FM Radioa and

system, or other assistive listening device.

21

DORMS

2017, 2018

Fm recievers fr all Day room tV

all Inmates if needed

very well

headphones

Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable

amplifiers)

11

Dorms

2019

Used on phnes to amplifie sound

available At Officers Desk

when needed

Good

in all Dorms for use

Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

2

2

2016

purple phone , VRI and VRS

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the

like?

3

3

2018

FM Transmitters with earphone and MIC use with FM Radio

good

Inmates will be advised to bring there Radio with headphnes

Bed shakers

27

D Building

2019, 2020

I LUV Wired Bed Shaker

inmates are assigned these

items if needed

very well

Vibrating watches

no

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

no watches at this time

Vibrating alarm clocks

27

D Building

2019, 2020

I LUV Wired Bed Shaker and Alarm Cock Contact ADA coordinator very well

n/a

Pagers

0

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

no pagers

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices

When interco is not

currently in use or under consideration not

in all dorms

inmates are told when

working maint requst

mentioned above.

intercom dorms

all cells have intercoms

assigned to cell

work good

completed

Earphones for parole hearings

1

parole

2020

sony WH-RF400

always available in Parole very well

used for parole hearing

Earphones for orientation videos

1

d building

2020

Sony WH-RF400

always available when b very well

used for anything needed

GRCC (March 2020), p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 62 of 195 - Page ID#: 3341
Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 63 of 195 - Page ID#: 3342

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

Deaf/HO

discovered during the audit,

Include, H or

and what has been done about

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

A ADA coordinator

Both

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Lori Holderman

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

Both

2 coordinator appointed?

No

Both

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit where

Both

7 deaf/HOH inmates are held?

Both

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

Both

9 Describe training

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Get a list from KOMS ever Monday

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X X X X X NA X

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

Both B Reporting obligations

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

Both

2 inmates?

Both

3 Is the list complete?

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

HOH

3 notifications.)

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

Deaf

Deaf inmates

Deaf

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Both

Notice to medical staff:

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

As soon as medical informs ADA coordinator

X

CC video and a queit area, amplifiers are avalable if needed
ADA tab in KOMS and they see medical

X
X
NA X
NA
X
NA X
NA X X
NA X X
NA X X X
X

When they see the provider

NA NA
X

KCIW (March 2020), p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 64 of 195 - Page ID#: 3343

Deaf/HO

Include, H or

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes
Referred to the Provider Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X

X NA
X X X

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

Summary

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

HOH

50 7 days/week?

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Both E Information provided inmates

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in law 18 library? (Need to check) Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

If the inmate requests one

NA X X X X X
NA X X X X

X

Inmate have a sign on their living unit door and their tag

X NA
X X X X NA X X X NA X X X X X

KCIW (March 2020), p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 65 of 195 - Page ID#: 3344

Deaf/HO

Include, H or

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

Both

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Both

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

Both

2 Cell cards

Both

3 Bed shaker

Both

4 In-person alerts

Both

5 Pager

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

Both

9 Other amplification

Both

10 Other (describe)

Both

General issues

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Both

20 Have any been out of comission?

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Both

22 hearing aid?

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

Both

24 Promptly?

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Both

26 Describe

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes
The medical Department does this Yes and the forms are scanned into KOMS Medical department informs them
All have been assesed

FM transmitters are avaialble

Inmates can be housed in any unit and their needs are accommadated.
Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA X

X

X

X
X X X NA X

X X X X
N/A
X
X

X NA NA
X NA NA
X
X
NA NA

KCIW (March 2020), p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 66 of 195 - Page ID#: 3345

Deaf/HO

Include, H or

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

Both I Interpretation in general

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

Deaf

1 communicated to inmates?

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

Deaf

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

3 volunteer-provided programming?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

n/a n/a

NA X

X

X

Deaf

4 Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation method?

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf

6 In-person?

Deaf

7 VRI?

Deaf

Is VRI availability:

Deaf

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Signed Contract If needed but usually use the VRI Located in Operations. Always avaiable

X
X NA
X X NA X

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Deaf

13 In general

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Deaf

16 Splitter?

Deaf

17 Instructions?

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Deaf

21 How?

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

Deaf

22 should be first recourse?

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

X

X

Just have to sign it out Describe: Works yes also has powere cord Yes by It department Describe: Router not a splitter
its signed out and logged on H drive

X
X NA
X X X NA X X X X X X

use the VRI Have used interpretors when needed

When needed

X

X

KCIW (March 2020), p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 67 of 195 - Page ID#: 3346

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

Deaf/HO

discovered during the audit,

Include, H or

and what has been done about

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Deaf

24 Parole?

Have not had any parole hearings

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

SOTP

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

N/A

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

Deaf

27 before?

N/A

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

Deaf

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

No

Deaf

29 Describe

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI was

Deaf

30 unavailable)

N/A

Deaf

31 Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred method?

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

yes yes
Simple conversations

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

Deaf

35 encounters/communications/settings)

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

Deaf J Hand Restraints

Deaf

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison?

Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized finding of a

Deaf

2 security threat?

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

Deaf

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

Deaf

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

Deaf

5 Staff aware of the issue

Deaf

Off-site medical care:

Deaf

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

restraints removed when necessary for medical

Deaf

7 communication?

Both K Non-auditory Alerts

Both

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Both

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

Both

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

No VRI yes
yes for trips and escorted to RHU
Describe: bed shakers and strobe lights all deaf inmates yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X NA
X X
NA
X X NA
X X X NA X X NA

If the inmate request interpreting services it needs to be approved by the Warden

KCIW (March 2020), p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 68 of 195 - Page ID#: 3347

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #
Both Both Both Both

Issue/Question 4 sufficient to signal fire alarm? 5 sufficient to signal count alert? 6 programmed to signal different alerts? 7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes
yes no no no

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Both

9 been denied?

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Both

11 How often?

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Both

15 used consistently?

Both

16 in all dormitories?

Both

17 in gym?

Both

18 in library?

Both

19 audited and monitored?

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

Both

20 misses a page?

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

Both

21 because of disability?

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Deaf

5 alternative offered

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

6 videophone is out of service.

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

yes
no yes safety coordinator Describe monthly monthly report
yes yes yes but RHU yes yes Program staff keeps it up to date
Staff will go and find the inmate
didn’t hear pages Yes a memo was put up for staff to inform inmate bed shakers and staff identify staff physically checks the building
During an emergency we just get them out
Purple phones have worked well with no issues since getting the new phone
Yes
Describe: Case worker will inform them They get 30 minutes up to 3x a day

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

they can set an alarm on their bed shaker

NA

NA
NA X
NA NA
X NA
X

KCIW (March 2020), p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 69 of 195 - Page ID#: 3348

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

Deaf/HO

discovered during the audit,

Include, H or

and what has been done about

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

don’t need an escort. One lives in unit the

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

other one has permisoon any time the yards

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

are open.

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates using

Deaf

12 ordinary phones?

Callahan needs to be called over by staff

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

Deaf

14 Free?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X

X
X
X X

Deaf

15 Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone calls?

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

Both

TTY:

Both

18 Installed?

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

Both

23 for non-deaf inmates?

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Both

25 Permission needed?

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Deaf

VRS via laptop

Deaf

36 Available?

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

Both

Phones

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

Both

CapTel

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

43 Request by any inmate denied?

Both

TV/Movies

Both

44 Is captioning available?

Both

45 Is captioning used?

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

located in Operations
no requests at this time yes, Just needs to call operations
Yes in each unit List names List names Checked by recreation

X
NA
X
NA X X
X
NA X
X
X X NA
NA
X X NA X X NA NA NA NA NA X X X

KCIW (March 2020), p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 70 of 195 - Page ID#: 3349

Deaf/HO

Include, H or

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes
no

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

Both

53 status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

Both

54 deaf inmates?

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

Both

5 (Describe)

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Both

7 because security threat?

Both

8 monitor notified?

Both

9 reasoning explained?

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both

10 of requests?

Both

11 of denials?

Both N Disciplinary

Both O Grievances

Both P Training

Both

Types available

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

Both

3 All appropriate staff?

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

X X X

Purple phones and VRI do not record but regular phones do.

Describe in detail

NA

They can contact ADA Coordinator Up to the Warden

NA

NA Vibrating watches. They were approved for deaf inmates but no one has requested one none

Everyone Describe: Describe:

NA X
NA X
NA NA
X

KCIW (March 2020), p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 71 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3350

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAF/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Personal

Low literacy?

If signs to

Bed

Other Alert

Phone

(So that

communicat

Shaker? Device TTY Access Amplifier Shake &

Listed with Signs to written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not

Wake (Not Any other

KOMS ADA commu communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; auxiliary

Housing Precaution nicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied; denied; denied; aid

Audit item

Name

ID

location ?

(Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) requested? Outome? issues/concerns

Y

n

GED

Y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

Y

y

GED

Y

y

Yes

yes

nr

nr

nr

nr

watch

approved hasn’t ordered

Y

y

9th

Y

y

Yes

yes

nr

nr

nr

nr

watch

approved hasn’t ordered

Y

n

GED

Y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

Y

n

masters

Y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

Y

n

GED

Y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

Y

n

12

Y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

Y

n

12

Y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

Have a bed shaker

Y

n

GED

Y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

ordered

Y

n

11

Y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

Y

n

14

Y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

Y

n

GED

Y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

Y

n

16

Y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

Y

n

9

Y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

Y

n

12

Y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

Y

n

14

Y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

Y

n

GED

Y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

Y

n

GED

Y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

y

n

12

y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

y

n

10

y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

y

n

GED

y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

y

n

GED

y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

y

n

GED

y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

y

n

14

y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

y

n

11

y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

y

n

12

y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

y

n

14

y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

y

n

15

y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

y

n

14

y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

y

n

11

y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

y

n

14

y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

y

n

GED

y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

y

n

GED

y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

y

n

12

y

y

n/a

yes

no

nr

nr

nr

nr

nr

KCIW (March 2020), p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 72 of 195 - Page ID#: 3351

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device. Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers) Captioned Telephone (CapTel) Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like? Bed shakers

How many Where

3

Ridgeview, Education, Chapel

6

Each living unit

0

0

2

Vibrating watches
Vibrating alarm clocks Pagers

0

1

3

Not in use/no signal

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration not mentioned above.

Earphones for parole hearings

Earphones for orientation videos

0

When obtained Specifications (URL) Nov-19 Aug-19

How do inmates obtain access?
Ask
Ask their unit officers

How well do they work?

Other comments

no one has used them yet

no complaints

Have been approved no one ordered them

Ask records

Havent had the need for them

KCIW (March 2020), p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 73 of 195 - Page ID#: 3352
Kentucky State Penitentiary

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 74 of 195 - Page ID#: 3353

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #
A Both
Both Both
Both Both

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

Issue/Question

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

ADA coordinator

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

2 coordinator appointed?

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit where

7 deaf/HOH inmates are held?

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

Both

9 Describe training

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Y Y Y Y Y
NA Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
ADA Building Blocks Course

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

Both B Reporting obligations

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

Both

2 inmates?

Both

3 Is the list complete?

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

HOH

3 notifications.)

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

Deaf

Deaf inmates

Deaf

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Y

Y Y

NA Y

Information provided upon arrival, followed by meeting with Treatment Team

NA
Y
NA Y

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

ADA Coordinator receives KOMS notification;

additionally checks all transfers for ADA alerts NA

Y

Y

Information provided upon arrival, followed

by meeting with Treatment Team

NA

Y

Y

NA

No orientation video at KSP N/A N/A

KSP (March 2020), p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 75 of 195 - Page ID#: 3354

Deaf/HO

Include, H or

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Both

Notice to medical staff:

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Sorenson and VRI are available. Staff will

assist those not literate.

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

Summary

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

HOH

50 7 days/week?

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Both E Information provided inmates

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in law

18 library? (Need to check)

Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

15 Updated timely

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
Y

NA NA
Y
Y
Y NA
Y Y Y
NA Y Y Y Y Y
NA Y Y Y Y

Y

Y Y NA Y Y Y Y NA Y Y Y

KSP (March 2020), p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 76 of 195 - Page ID#: 3355

Deaf/HO

Include, H or

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

Both

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Both

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

Both

2 Cell cards

Both

3 Bed shaker

Both

4 In-person alerts

Both

5 Pager

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

Both

9 Other amplification

Both

10 Other (describe)

Both

General issues

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Both

20 Have any been out of comission?

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Unless in Restrictive Housing

Describe: pocket talker

KSP (March 2020), p. 3

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA Y Y Y Y Y
NA
Y
Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Y

Y
Y Y Y NA Y

Y Y Y Y Y
Y
Y
Y
Y NA NA
Y NA NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 77 of 195 - Page ID#: 3356

Deaf/HO

Include, H or

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Both

22 hearing aid?

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

Both

24 Promptly?

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Both

26 Describe

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

Both I Interpretation in general

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

Deaf

1 communicated to inmates?

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

Deaf

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

3 volunteer-provided programming?

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Y
Y Y NA NA

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA Y Y Y

Deaf

4 Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation method?

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf

6 In-person?

Deaf

7 VRI?

Deaf

Is VRI availability:

Deaf

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Y
Y NA
Y Y NA Y

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

Y

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

Y

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

Y

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Deaf

13 In general

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Deaf

16 Splitter?

Deaf

17 Instructions?

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

Will be made available whenever requested.

Y

Describe:

NA

Y

Y

Y

Describe:

NA

Requirement for splitter?

Y

Y

KSP (March 2020), p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 78 of 195 - Page ID#: 3357

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #
Deaf Deaf Deaf
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf
Deaf
Deaf Deaf
Deaf

Issue/Question 19 Usable as VRS? 20 VRI effectiveness tracked? 21 How?
Information used to determine when in-person interpretation 22 should be first recourse?
Is in-person interpretation available: 23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical 24 Parole?
25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered 26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.
Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days 27 before?
Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in 28 non-emergency is non-compliant) 29 Describe
in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI 30 was unavailable)

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Configured for VRI only

VRI Log

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Y Y

Y

Y Question is unclear Question is unclear Upon necessary request by inmate or request by authorized visitor. Situation has not occurred.

Situation has not occurred. No
No

Y NA
Y

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Deaf

31 Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred method?

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

Deaf

35 encounters/communications/settings)

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

Deaf J Hand Restraints

Deaf

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison?

Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized finding of a

Deaf

2 security threat?

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

Deaf

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

Deaf

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

Deaf

5 Staff aware of the issue

Y Y Y NA Y
Y Y NA Y
Y Y Y

KSP (March 2020), p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 79 of 195 - Page ID#: 3358

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #
Deaf Deaf
Deaf Both K Both Both Both Both Both Both Both

Issue/Question Off-site medical care: 6 two-point hand restraint system used? restraints removed when necessary for medical 7 communication? Non-auditory Alerts 1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe) 2 provided to all inmates who need it? 3 can and does it give alerts in real time? 4 sufficient to signal fire alarm? 5 sufficient to signal count alert? 6 programmed to signal different alerts? 7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Describe: Bed shaker, Pager

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Both

9 been denied?

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Both

11 How often?

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Both

15 used consistently?

Both

16 in all dormitories?

Both

17 in gym?

Both

18 in library?

Both

19 audited and monitored?

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

Both

20 misses a page?

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

Both

21 because of disability?

No Describe: monthly

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA Y
Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y
Y
Y Y Y NA Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y

NA Y Y Y Y

NA Y
NA NA

KSP (March 2020), p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 80 of 195 - Page ID#: 3359

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

Deaf/HO

discovered during the audit, and

Include, H or

what has been done about it, or

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Sorenson and VRI may substitute for one

Deaf

5 alternative offered

another.

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

6 videophone is out of service.

Describe:

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates using

Deaf

12 ordinary phones?

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

Deaf

14 Free?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
Y

NA Y Y
Y
Y
Y
Y Y

Deaf

15 Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone calls?

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

Both

TTY:

Both

18 Installed?

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

Both

23 for non-deaf inmates?

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Both

25 Permission needed?

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Deaf

VRS via laptop

Deaf

36 Available?

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

Both

Phones

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

Both

CapTel

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

Y

NA

No instances requiring denial have occurred.

Y

NA

Y

Y

Y

NA Y

Y

Y Y NA

VRI is available List names

NA
Y Y NA Y Y NA NA NA

KSP (March 2020), p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 81 of 195 - Page ID#: 3360

Deaf/HO

Include, H or

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

43 Request by any inmate denied?

Both

TV/Movies

Both

44 Is captioning available?

Both

45 Is captioning used?

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

List names

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

Both

53 status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

Both

54 deaf inmates?

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

Both

5 (Describe)

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Both

7 because security threat?

Both

8 monitor notified?

Both

9 reasoning explained?

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both

10 of requests?

Both

11 of denials?

Both N Disciplinary

Both O Grievances

Both P Training

Both

Types available

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

Both

3 All appropriate staff?

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

Daily
TV and Movies are not available to any inmate in RHU at KSP.
Describe in detail
No instances of denial have occurred No instances of denial have occurred No instances of denial have occurred No instances of denial have occurred None
Describe: Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA NA
Y Y Y Y
Y
Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Y

Y

NA Y Y Y
NA

NA Y Y
NA Y
NA Y
NA NA
Y

KSP (March 2020), p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 82 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3361

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Personal

Phone

If signs to

Bed Shaker? Other Alert TTY Access Amplifier

Low literacy? (So Has

Has

communicate, Auxiliary Aid (Not

Device (Not (Not

(Not

Listed with Signs to

that written Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door noted in KOMS Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested;

Housing KOMS ADA communicate communication Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting took denied; denied; denied; denied;

Name

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N)

is not effective) waived)

waived) notes?

place?

granted) granted) granted) granted)

5-2A-8 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

6-D-09 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

12R-17 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

6-C-7 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

5-2A-5 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

4-113 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

4-422 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

7-C-1 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

4-126 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

5-1E-17 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

5-4A-11 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

11L-20 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

4-222 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

6-D-12 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

6-G-14 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

5-3C-15 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

6-J-2

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

6-J-9

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

5-1E-11 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

4-207 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

5-4D-1 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

6-A-9 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

6-I-15 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

6-G-13 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

4-328 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

5-1B-13 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

4-112 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

5-4A-12 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

5-4A-05 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

5-4C-01 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

GRANTED N

N

N

4-213 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

7-D-7 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

5-3A-15 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

6-G-5 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

6-J-4

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

7-D-8 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

11L-5 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

5-3B16 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

4-108 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

5-4D15 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

OSQ-15 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

4-325 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

5-4E-18 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

Shake & Wake (Not requested; denied; granted) N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N

Any other auxiliary aid requested? Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y N Y Y Y

KSP (March 2020), p. 9

Housing location 13R-8 6-H-2 4-206 OSQ-13 5-4A-9 11R-14 6-G-3 5-4D-5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 83 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3362

Personal

Phone

If signs to

Bed Shaker? Other Alert TTY Access Amplifier

Low literacy? (So Has

Has

communicate, Auxiliary Aid (Not

Device (Not (Not

(Not

Listed with Signs to

that written Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door noted in KOMS Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested;

KOMS ADA communicate communication Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting took denied; denied; denied; denied;

Precaution? (Y/N)

is not effective) waived)

waived) notes?

place?

granted) granted) granted) granted)

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

GRANTED N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

Shake & Wake (Not requested; denied; granted) N N N N N N N N

Any other auxiliary aid requested? Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

KSP (March 2020), p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 84 of 195 - Page ID#: 3363

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device.
Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers)

How many 0
10

Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

2

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like?

Bed shakers

3

Vibrating watches

Vibrating alarm clocks

Pagers

1

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices

currently in use or under consideration not

mentioned above.

Earphones for parole hearings

1

Earphones for orientation videos

2

Sorenson

1

Where

When obtained

3CH, 7CH, Transition Walk (5-4E), Yard Office, ADA Office Special Security Unit & General Polulation (pending installation)

8/16/2019 & 1/17/2020
8/30/2016 & 8/16/2019

1 in 5-4C-01 and 2 as

backup

5/24/2016 & 1/15/2019

Yard Office

Reentry Office Legal Office Legal Office

Wireless Microphone and receivers

2 micophones, 10 receivers ADA Office

1/21/2020

Specifications (URL)

How do inmates obtain access?

How well do they work?

Reizen Portable Telephone Amplifier Upon request

CapTel 840

Upon request

In working order In working order

VIB-PJ / FA4-SS / SK2-SS

Installed based upon need In working order

Pick up upon let-out

In working order

Retekess Tour Guide Wireless Microphone

Upon request Upon request Upon request As needed in Program classes and Chapel programs

In working order In working order In working order
In working order

KSP (March 2020), p. 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 85 of 195 - Page ID#: 3364
Kentucky State Reformatory

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #
A

Issue/Question ADA coordinator

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20

ID#: 3365

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Page: 86 of 195 - Page

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

(Explain)

Both

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

Both

2 coordinator appointed?

Both

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit

Both

7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

Both

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

Deputy Warden Jessica Durrett, Unit Administrator Brittany

Puckett, Assistant Unit Administrator Jordan Wright, and

X

Assistant Unit Administrator Craig Lish

NA

X

X

X

Both

9 Describe training

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

Both B Reporting obligations

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

Both

2 inmates?

Both

3 Is the list complete?

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

HOH

3 notifications.)

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

Deaf

Deaf inmates

Deaf

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

ADA Building Blocks, CBTs, Annual In-Service, ADA in Jails &

Prisons Webinar, ADA Coordinator CREATE Compliance

Training (powerpoint), Deaf/HOH Training: Settlement

X

Monitor's Recommended Revision (powerpoint), Federal

Court Deaf/HOH Settlement Agreement (powerpoint), Tips

for Communicating with Inmates are are HOH (word

document), Communicating with Deaf/HOH Offenders

(powerpoint)

X

X

X X

X

New Intake Inmates: Medical notifes ADA Coordinator.

Inmates Transferring from another facility: Emailed

X

notification by KOMS automatic alert.

ADA precaution in KOMS notifies staff that offender is

Deaf/HOH. ADA Coordinators meet with inmate to

X

determine what is needed for effective communication.

X

New Intake Inmates: Medical notifes ADA Coordinator.

Inmates Transferring from another facility: Emailed

X

notification by KOMS automatic alert.

X

X

KSR (March 2020), p. 1

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #

Issue/Question

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20

ID#: 3366

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Page: 87 of 195 - Page

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

(Explain)

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

A VRI Laptop is available and we have a contract with a

Certified Interpreter if needed. TTY and Videophone are

X

available upon ADA Assessment.

X

X

X X X

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Both

Notice to medical staff:

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

A VRI Laptop is available and we have a contract with a

Certified Interpreter if needed. TTY and Videophone are

X

also available.

X X

Further assessment is completed within 5 days.

X

X X X

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

Summary

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

HOH

50 7 days/week?

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Both E Information provided inmates

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in

18 law library? (Need to check)

Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

X X X X X

X

Must turn in a bettery to receive a new one

X

X

X

X

X X
X X X X

KSR (March 2020), p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 88 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3367

Audit item questions/concerns

Deaf/HO Include, H or

(note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

(Explain)

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

X

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

X

Both

15 Updated timely

X

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

X

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

X

Both

19 Provided timely?

X

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

X

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

X

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

X

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

X

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

X

Both

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

X

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

X

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

X

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Oral/Written unless otherwise requested by the inmate

X

Both

Other assessments

All deaf/HOH inmates, whether intake or transfer in from

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

another facility, have an assessment with an ADA

X

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

Coordinator

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

X

Both

2 Cell cards

X

Both

3 Bed shaker

X

Both

4 In-person alerts

X

Both

5 Pager

X

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

X

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

X

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

X

Both

9 Other amplification

NA

Both

10 Other (describe)

Describe:

NA

Both

General issues

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Auxiliary Aids maintained in Medical, Assessment Center,

and Re-Entry

X

Both

20 Have any been out of comission?

NA

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

NA

KSR (March 2020), p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 89 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3368

Audit item questions/concerns

Deaf/HO Include, H or

(note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

(Explain)

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Both

22 hearing aid?

X

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

NA

Both

24 Promptly?

NA

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Have not refused a job due to safety or security issue for a

deaf/HOH inmate

NA

Both

26 Describe

NA

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

NA

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

NA

Both I Interpretation in general

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

Deaf

1 communicated to inmates?

X

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

X

Deaf

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

3 volunteer-provided programming?

X

Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation

Deaf

4 method?

X

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

X

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf

6 In-person?

Contract

X

Deaf

7 VRI?

X

Deaf

Is VRI availability:

Deaf

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Available 24/7. Requested through ADA Coordinator or

through Captain's Office

X

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Deaf

13 In general

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Deaf

16 Splitter?

Deaf

17 Instructions?

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Deaf

21 How?

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

Deaf

22 should be first recourse?

X

X

X X

X X X

X

X

X

X

X

Inmate's information/use of VRI is logged when machine is

used

x

X

KSR (March 2020), p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 90 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3369

Audit item questions/concerns

Deaf/HO Include, H or

(note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

(Explain)

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

Yes, available through a contract

X

Deaf

24 Parole?

Yes, available through a contract

X

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

NA

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

NA

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

Deaf

27 before?

NA

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

Deaf

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

This facility does not use inmates to interpret for deaf/HOH

inmates

NA

Deaf

29 Describe

NA

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

Deaf

30 was unavailable)

NA

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

Deaf

31 method?

X

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

X

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

X

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

X

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

X

Deaf

35 encounters/communications/settings)

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

X

Deaf J Hand Restraints

Deaf

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

Used on initial transport

X

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

X

Deaf

2 finding of a security threat?

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

Deaf

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

X

Deaf

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

X

Deaf

5 Staff aware of the issue

X

Deaf

Off-site medical care:

Deaf

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

X

restraints removed when necessary for medical

Deaf

7 communication?

X

Both K Non-auditory Alerts

Both

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Describe: Bed Shaker

X

Both

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

X

Both

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

X

Both

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

X

Both

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

X

Both

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

X

Both

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

X

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

X

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Both

9 been denied?

NA

KSR (March 2020), p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20

ID#: 3370

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

Deaf/HO

discovered during the audit, and

Include, H or

what has been done about it, or

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Both

11 How often?

Describe: Monthly

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Both

15 used consistently?

Both

16 in all dormitories?

Both

17 in gym?

Both

18 in library?

Both

19 audited and monitored?

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

Both

20 misses a page?

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

Both

21 because of disability?

Page: 91 of 195 - Page

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

(Explain)

X

X

X

X X X X X X
X

NA

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

NA

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

X

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

X

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

X

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

1 Videophone Installed

X

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Deaf

5 alternative offered

No reports of being out of service since 8/2019

NA

No technical difficulties

NA

VRI Laptop is available if Videophone is out of service

X

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

6 videophone is out of service.

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

Deaf

12 using ordinary phones?

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

Deaf

14 Free?

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone

Deaf

15 calls?

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

Describe: Information is posted by Videophone and ADA

X

Coordinator communicates with ADA Inmates

X

Outside unit door

X

No escort required

NA

X

List of approved inmates available for staff/KOMS

precaution also available. Must have approval from ADA

X

Coordinator.

No necessary

X

X

X

Yes, Inmate

X

KSR (March 2020), p. 6

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #

Issue/Question

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20

ID#: 3371

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Page: 92 of 195 - Page

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

(Explain)

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

17

Both

TTY:

Both

18 Installed?

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

Both

23 for non-deaf inmates?

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Both

25 Permission needed?

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Deaf

VRS via laptop

Deaf

36 Available?

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

Both

Phones

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

Both

CapTel

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

43 Request by any inmate denied?

Both

TV/Movies

Both

44 Is captioning available?

Both

45 Is captioning used?

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

Both

53 status?

Received numerous reports from Purple Communications,

Inc of videophone being used by person who did not use

sign language for communication. Video footage was

X

watched and it was determinted to be Inmate

Denied usage of Videophone due to sign language

not being primary mode of communication, but authroized

use of ADA phone outside unit on 10/18/2019.

1 available

X

Addressed in ADA Handbook. Also available through

X

communication with ADA Coordinator

X

Not out of service

NA

Available 7 days per week/12 hours per day

X

Located in Captain's Office, but moved to Unit 1 Control

X

Center where ADA phone is located when needed.

X

Must have approval from ADA Coordinator

X

Has not been denied

N/A

Has not been used

N/A

X

There is not a RHU in this institution

NA

X

X

X

NA

NA

List names

NA

List names

NA

NA

X

X

Checked weekly in all units

X

X

Closed captioning must be turned on the institutional

X

channel by recreation as well as individual TVs in the units

X

NA Institution does not have segregated housing

KSR (March 2020), p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20

ID#: 3372

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

Deaf/HO

discovered during the audit, and

Include, H or

what has been done about it, or

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

Both

54 deaf inmates?

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Page: 93 of 195 - Page

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

(Explain)

X

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

Both

5 (Describe)

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Both

7 because security threat?

Both

8 monitor notified?

Both

9 reasoning explained?

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both

10 of requests?

Both

11 of denials?

Both N Disciplinary

Both O Grievances

Both P Training

Both

Types available

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

Both

3 All appropriate staff?

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

Describe in detail: Sound Amplifiers available through

medical. Phone Amplifiers and Bed Shakers available

X

through ADA Coordinator

No devices available through commisary

N A

Devices available upton request

X

NA

Non requested

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

X X

X

All staff receive annual training

X

X

Describe: Provided by Institutional Training Coordinator

X

Describe: All staff receive annual training

X

X

KSR (March 2020), p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 94 of 195 - Page ID#: 3373
USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Name

Bed Shaker? Other Alert TTY Access

Low literacy? (So Has

Has

Auxiliary Aid (Not

Device (Not (Not

Personal Phone

Listed with Signs to

that written

Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door Assessment requested; requested; requested; Amplifier (Not

Housing KOMS ADA communicate communication is Card? (Y or Card? (Y or meeting denied;

denied;

denied; requested;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N)

not effective) waived) waived) took place? granted) granted) granted) denied; granted)

AC A 09 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC A 07 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC A 26 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC A 36 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC A 40 Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC B 01 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC B 14 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC B 15 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC B 25 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC B 44 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC B 46 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC C 04 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC C 22 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC D 20 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC D 50 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC G 02 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC G 04 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC G 07 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC G 20 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC H 13 Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC H 28 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC H 44 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC I 03 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC I 10 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC J 12L Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC J 15L Y

N

N

Waived

Waived Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC K 19 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC K 21U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC L 23L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC M 01L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC M 06U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC M 06L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC M 21U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B4 04 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B4 23 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B5 17 Y

N

N

Y

Y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B5 23 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B8 14 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC N 08 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC N 25 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

KSR (March 2020), p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 95 of 195 - Page ID#: 3374
USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EA

Name

Shake & Wake

(Not

requested; Any other

denied;

auxiliary aid

Audit item

ID

granted)

requested? Outome?

issues/concerns

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

sound amplifier issued

none

NR

N

sound amplifier issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

NR

N

sound amplifier issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

sound amplifier issued

none

NR

N

Hearing aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

NR

N

waived hearing aids

none

NR

N

Hearing aid issued

none

NR

N

sound amplifier issued

none

NR

N

sound amplifier issued

none

NR

N

sound amplifier issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

none

NR

N

Hearing aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

none

NR

N

Has Hearing aid

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

NR

N

Has Hearing aid

none

NR

N

Refused Hearing Aid

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

KSR (March 2020), p. 10

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 96 of 195 - Page ID#: 3375

Bed Shaker? Other Alert TTY Access

Low literacy? (So Has

Has

Auxiliary Aid (Not

Device (Not (Not

Personal Phone

Listed with Signs to

that written

Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door Assessment requested; requested; requested; Amplifier (Not

Housing KOMS ADA communicate communication is Card? (Y or Card? (Y or meeting denied;

denied;

denied; requested;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N)

not effective) waived) waived) took place? granted) granted) granted) denied; granted)

RC O 19 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC O 24U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P 09U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P 24 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P-07 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P-13U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P-3 U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q 02U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q 15 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q 20U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q 22 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q-16U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC R 09 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC R 29 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC S 27 Y

N

N

Y

Waived Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC S 37 Y

N

N

Y

Waived Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC T 31 Y

N

N

Y

Waived Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

KSR (March 2020), p. 11

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 97 of 195 - Page ID#: 3376

Shake & Wake

(Not

requested; Any other

denied;

auxiliary aid

Audit item

ID

granted)

requested? Outome?

issues/concerns

NR

N

sound amplifier issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing aid ordered

none

NR

N

Hearing aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

Refused Hearing Aid

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid issued

none

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

KSR (March 2020), p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 98 of 195 - Page ID#: 3377

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device. Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers) Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

How many
30
3 NA

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like? NA

Bed shakers

2

Vibrating watches

NA

Vibrating alarm clocks

NA

Pagers

NA

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices

currently in use or under consideration not

mentioned above.

NA

Earphones for parole hearings

1

Earphones for orientation videos

2

Where Medical AC Program Administrators Office
AC Program Administrators Office
Re-Entry AC Program Administrators Office

When obtained NA NA
NA
NA NA

Specifications (URL)

How do inmates obtain access?

How well do they work?

Issued once verified as HOH In working order

Request through ADA

Coordinator

In working order

Request through ADA Coordinator

In working order

Request through Re-Entry Coordinator Request through ADA Coordinator

In working order In working order

KSR (March 2020), p. 13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 99 of 195 - Page ID#: 3378
Lee Adjustment Center

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 100 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3379

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/H Include OH or

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

(Explain)

A ADA coordinator

Both

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Mitchell Brandenburg

C

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

Both

2 coordinator appointed?

No

C

Both

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Yes

C

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit where

Both

7 deaf/HOH inmates are held?

Yes

C

Both

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

Yes

C

Review of materials provided by the

Both

9 Describe training

Settlement Monitor in September 2019.

NA

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Yes

C

KOMS generated reports are received weekly

and are checked against the ADA

Coordinator's list of HOH inmates on a

random basis with any inconsistencies being

promptly investigated and addressed.

Medical staff notifies the ADA Coordinator

when a new HOH inmate is identified and the

C

ADA Coordinator adds this information to

KOMS to generate an ADA Alert. The ADA

alert adds the new HOH inmate to the weekly

KOMS generated lists of inmates with ADA

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

precautions.

Both B Reporting obligations

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

Both

2 inmates?

Yes

C

Yes, this list is updated continuous as inmates

come in; are transferred or released; and as

Both

3 Is the list complete?

new HOH inmates are identified.

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

NA

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

C

LAC (March 2020), p. 1

Deaf/H Include OH or Feb. 2020 both? #
HOH HOH Deaf Deaf

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 101 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3380

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes To date, the ADA Coordinator has received

(Explain)

only a few KOMS generated notifications of an

incoming HOH inmate. This has been

communicated to the KDOC and they have

worked on getting it corrected, but as of now

the matter has not been resolved. The last

information received from the KDOC was that

the email address to which the notifications

was incorrect. I believe this was corrected but

I haven't not receive any notifications as of

now. There is a process in place however to

identify incoming HOH inmates which is done

by the ADA Coordinator personally checking

KOMS for ADA HOH Alerts on each incoming

inmate to the facility. If an inmate does not

have an ADA flag, but does have a red triangle

alert flag, the precautions under the red flag

are checked as well to ensure the inmate does

not have an active HOH alert under that flag

that is not showing under the ADA Flag. There

was one incident of this nature discovered

during this reporting period (

)

which was corrected upon the inmate's arrival

to LAC. The names of any incoming HOH

inmates, along with any other pertinent HOH

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

information noted in KOMS, is emailed to

3 notifications.)

Medical staff once all checks for the

NA

As of 2/18/20, there

have been no incoming

C

inmates for which

special

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

communications were

Deaf inmates

NA

As of 2/18/20, no

C

inmate who is deaf has

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Yes

been received at LAC.

Deaf

6 Describe

The process described in line #42 above

should identity incoming inmates that are

deaf providing the information in KOMS is

accurate and up-to-date.

NA

LAC (March 2020), p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 102 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3381

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/H Include OH or

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes In the event that a deaf inmate is scheduled to

(Explain)

arrive at LAC, provisions will be made to

ensure effective communication methods

have been established and in place upon the

inmates arrival. This may include use of

written communications, sign language

C

interrupters and/or other method(s) for

communication that will be determined based

As of 2/18/20, no

on each individual deaf inmates abilities and

inmate who is deaf has

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

limitations.

been received at LAC.

As of 2/18/20, no

C

inmate who is deaf has

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

See line #47 above.

been received at LAC.

Deaf

9 Describe

See line #47 above.

NA

As of 2/20/20 the VRI is not

connecting to the internet from the

port installed for this purpose. In

conjunction with Prases and Securus,

NC

the facility continues to work daily to

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

get this matter resolved.

As of 2/18/20, no

Sign Language of Kentucky will be utilized to

C

inmate who is deaf has

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

provide in-person interpretation as needed.

been received at LAC.

Both

Orientation videos

NA

Both

12 Captioned?

C

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

C

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

C

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

One-on-one assistance can be provided as

needed.

C

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general medical intake, and

No

Both

during medical care more generally:

NA

No

Both

1 Is there effective communications planning?

Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if

No

Both

2 interpretation is needed?

No

Both

3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?

Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications

No

Both

4 techniques?

Both

Notice to medical staff:

NA

No

Both

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How?

Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover and

No

Both

6 within the file?

No

Deaf

7 Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate accommodations.

NA

Knowledgeable about obligation to alert off-site providers of

No

Deaf

8 need for interpretation?

No

Deaf

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

No

Deaf

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

NA

LAC (March 2020), p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20

ID#: 3382

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

Deaf/H

during the audit, and what has been

Include OH or

done about it, or if the problem

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

No

Deaf

11 Adequate notice?

Outside providers offering effective communication to inmates

No

Deaf

12 who sign?

No

Deaf

13 How?

Describe:

No

Both

Hearing screening/medical intake:

No

Both

14 Performed for all new inmates?

No

Both

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

No

Both

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

No

Both

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

No

Both

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?

Page: 103 of 195 - Page

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

(Explain)

NA NA

No

Both

19 How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by staff?

No

Both

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

No

Both

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?

No

Both

22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe.

No

Both

23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

No

Both

25 Staff/ADA Coordinator can refer for screening?

No

Both

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

Adequate determination of need for designation/ audiology

No

Both

28 services? How?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

Describe: Yes

NA NA
NA C

Yes, patients are scheduled for an Audicus

test.

C

Yes, within seven days.
Yes Yes Yes

C NA
C C C

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

Yes

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

Yes

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

Yes

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

Yes

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

Yes

Summary

NA C C C C C

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

HOH

50 7 days/week?

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Hearing aid batteries are kept in the medical

unit pharmacy and are available to HOH

inmates with hearing aids seven days a week. NA

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

LAC (March 2020), p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 104 of 195 - Page ID#: 3383

Deaf/H Include OH or

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

(Explain)

Both E Information provided inmates

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in law

C

18 library? (Need to check)

Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Signs to be erected outside each

housing unit arrived 2/18/20 and

were provided to the Maintenance

NC

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Supervisor to coordinate installation. Photo of sign will be sent as separately in conjuction with other requested

C NA

Not installed yet as of 2/

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

C Of the active HOH inmates on 2/18/20, LAC

has waivers from three inmates for the

housing sign.

C

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Yes

C

Initial housing sign is provided in person when

the auxiliary aid/services assessment is

conducted. Replacements are provided in-

person or sent by mail usually on the same

date request is received. One inmate (

C

has been provided two

replacement housing signs as of 2/18/20 in

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

addition to his original issue.

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

NA

Yes

C

Alerts were added for a number of inmates in

July 2019 present at LAC and identified as

HOH at that time. Since then, the ADA has

been checking all new inmates for appropriate

alerts and personally adding alerts as notified

C

by Medical for new HOH diagnoses. Random

checks of the ADA Coordinator's list against

the KOMS generated list ensures that LAC

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

remains continuously compliant in this area.

Alerts are entered upon notification of new

Both

15 Updated timely

HOH diagnoses and corrections are made

C

promptly whenever found necessary.

Both

Individual ID cards

NA

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Yes

C

Of the active HOH inmates on 2/18/20, LAC

has a waiver from one inmate for the HOH

identification card

C

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

All other active HOH has been Initial card is provided in person when the

Both

19 Provided timely?

auxiliary aid/services assessment is

LAC (March 2020), p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 105 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3384

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/H Include OH or

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

(Explain)

In RHU, the card remains outside the cell door

along with the inmate's regular institutional ID C

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

card.

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Replacements are provided in-person or sent

by mail usually on the same date request is

C

received.

NA

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

Both

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Both

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

Both

2 Cell cards

Both

3 Bed shaker

The ADA Coordinator personally checks KOMS

for ADA HOH Alerts on each incoming inmate

to the facility. If an inmate does not have an

ADA flag, but does have a red triangle alert

flag, the precautions under the red flag are

checked as well to ensure the inmate does not C

have an active HOH alert under that flag that

is not showing under the ADA Flag. This

process ensures that the ADA Coordinator is

aware of any HOH scheduled to arrived based

on the lists of incoming inmates that he is

being provided by the records department.

REPEAT QUESTION - See response on line #193

above.

This is done either by the ADA Coordinator

himself, or by the designated back-up ADA Coordinator Lynn Childers (Unit Manager) and

C

Case Managers under her supervision.

C

C

C

C

Yes. Completion of assessments are being documented as Case Notes in KOMS for each HOH inmate.

NA C

C

C

These are not provided to inmates by the

facility as of 2/18/20, but inmates are given

the option of purchasing their own alarm

clock w/bed shaker. One of these units has

C

been purchased to date

. There are no deaf inmates at LAC.

LAC (March 2020), p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 106 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3385

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/H Include OH or

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

(Explain)

Both

4 In-person alerts

Town Criers are available to HOH inmates as requested.

C

N/A - Not offered at

Both

5 Pager

LAC as of 2/18/20.

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

All phones have volume control allowing the

inmate to adjust to his liking.

C

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

Phone amplifiers were recently obtained but

as of 2/18/20 have not been used.

C

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

C

An active listening system was recently

purchased, but has not yet been utilized as of

C

Both

9 Other amplification

2/18/20.

Both

10 Other (describe)

Describe:

NA

Both

General issues

NA

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

PC

Both

20 Have any been out of commission?

Yes

NA

The VRI laptop has not been operational as of

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

See notes on line #50.

2/18/20.

NA

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Both

22 hearing aid?

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

Both

24 Promptly?

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Both

26 Describe

ADA Coordinator has not received any

information regarding a hear aid of an inmate

being transferred from LAC not being sent

with him during this reporting period.

However, when doing the auxiliary

aids/services on Inmate

on 2/12/20, the inmate advised that he had a

hearing aid at RCC that did not come with him

C

to LAC. Inmate went from RCC to RHU at LLCC

and was then transferred to LAC. ADA

Coordinator contacted both RCC and LLCC in

an unsuccessful attempt to locate the hearing

aid after which the Medical department at

LAC was notified to start the process of getting

a new hearing aid for this inmate.

See line #227 above for details regarding an incoming inmate.

C

Process of obtaining replacement began as

soon as notification was received from

C

RCC/LLCC that the inmate's hearing aid could

No

NA

NA

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of 27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

LAC (March 2020), p. 7

No direct threat determinations have occurred during this reporting period.

Deaf/H Include OH or Feb. 2020 both? #

Issue/Question

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20

ID#: 3386

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Page: 107 of 195 - Page

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

(Explain)

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

No

Both

32 priority given to deaf inmates?

Both I Interpretation in general

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

Deaf

1 communicated to inmates?

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

Deaf

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

3 volunteer-provided programming?

Deaf

4 Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation method?

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf

6 In-person?

Deaf

7 VRI?

Deaf

Is VRI availability:

Deaf

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

NA

No deaf inmates have been housed at LAC as

of 2/18/20, however this will be done in the

event a deaf inmate is received at LAC.

No deaf inmates have been housed at LAC as

of 2/18/20, however this will be done in the

event a deaf inmate is received at LAC.

No deaf inmates have been housed at LAC as

of 2/18/20, however this will be done in the

event a deaf inmate is received at LAC.

In the event a deaf inmate is received, the

process for effective communication will be

determined individually based on what is best

C

for that inmate.

Will in the event of receipt of a deaf inmate.

C

NA

Sign Language of Kentucky

C

Purple

C

NA

No request for VRI use received as of 2/18/20.

C

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

No request for VRI use received as of 2/18/20.

C

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

No request for VRI use received as of 2/18/20.

C

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

No request for VRI use received as of 2/18/20.

C

RHU inmates will be escorted to appropriate

area for use when no general population

C

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

inmates have access to the area.

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Describe:

NA

The VRI laptop has not been operational as of

Deaf

13 In general

See notes on line #50.

2/18/20.

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

C

The VRI laptop has not been operational as of

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

See notes on line #50.

2/18/20.

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Describe:

NA

Deaf

16 Splitter?

C

Deaf

17 Instructions?

C

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

C

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

C

LAC (March 2020), p. 8

No reporting of direct threat determinations occurred during this reporting period.
N/A as of 2/18/20
N/A as of 2/18/20
N/A as of 2/18/20

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 108 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3387

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/H Include OH or

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

(Explain)

VRI has not been requested or used, nor have

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

any deaf inmates been received at LAC as of

N/A as of 2/18/20

VRI has not been requested or used, nor have

Deaf

21 How?

any deaf inmates been received at LAC as of

N/A as of 2/18/20

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

VRI has not been requested or used, nor have

Deaf

22 should be first recourse?

any deaf inmates been received at LAC as of

N/A as of 2/18/20

VRI has not been requested or used, nor have

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

any deaf inmates been received at LAC as of

N/A as of 2/18/20

VRI has not been requested or used, nor have

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

any deaf inmates been received at LAC as of

N/A as of 2/18/20

VRI has not been requested or used, nor have

Deaf

24 Parole?

any deaf inmates been received at LAC as of

N/A as of 2/18/20

VRI has not been requested or used, nor have

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

any deaf inmates been received at LAC as of

N/A as of 2/18/20

VRI has not been requested or used, nor have

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

any deaf inmates been received at LAC as of

N/A as of 2/18/20

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

VRI has not been requested or used, nor have

Deaf

27 before?

any deaf inmates been received at LAC as of

N/A as of 2/18/20

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

No inmate has provided interpretation at LAC

No basis for

Deaf

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

as of 2/18/20.

evaluation.

Deaf

29 Describe

N/A

NA

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

No deaf inmates have been housed at LAC as

Deaf

30 was unavailable)

of 2/18/20.

N/A as of 2/18/20

Inmate preferred method of communication is

used for HOH, but no deaf inmates have been

C

Deaf

31 Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred method?

housed at LAC as of 2/18/20.

No deaf inmates have been housed at LAC as

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

of 2/18/20.

N/A as of 2/18/20

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

No deaf inmates have been housed at LAC as

Deaf

33 literacy

of 2/18/20.

N/A as of 2/18/20

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

NA

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

No deaf inmates have been housed at LAC as

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

of 2/18/20.

N/A as of 2/18/20

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

No deaf inmates have been housed at LAC as

Deaf

35 encounters/communications/settings)

of 2/18/20.

N/A as of 2/18/20

No deaf inmates have been housed at LAC as

of 2/18/20. A few HOH inmates have wanted

to use the kiosk because they thought it could

be used as a video phone, however they were

C

advised that one of the parties had to

communicate using sign language for them to

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

use the system.

Deaf J Hand Restraints

Deaf

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

NA

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison?

Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized finding of a

No inmate that signs has been housed at LAC

Deaf

2 security threat?

to date.

N/A as of 2/18/20

LAC (March 2020), p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 109 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3388

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/H Include OH or

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

(Explain)

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

No inmate that signs has been housed at LAC

Deaf

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

to date.

N/A as of 2/18/20

No inmate that signs has been housed at LAC

to date, however we have equipment

C

Deaf

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

necessary to provide these services if needed..

No inmate that signs has been housed at LAC

Deaf

5 Staff aware of the issue

to date.

N/A as of 2/18/20

Deaf

Off-site medical care:

NA

Deaf

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

Yes, however no deaf inmate has been housed

at LAC to date.

C

restraints removed when necessary for medical

Deaf

7 communication?

N/A as of 2/18/20

Both K Non-auditory Alerts

Facility does not have any automated or

Both

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

programmable non-auditory alert systems. NA

Facility does not have any automated or

No basis for evaluation

Both

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

programmable non-auditory alert systems.

as of 2/18/20.

Facility does not have any automated or

No basis for evaluation

Both

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

programmable non-auditory alert systems.

as of 2/18/20.

Facility does not have any automated or

No basis for evaluation

Both

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

programmable non-auditory alert systems.

as of 2/18/20.

Facility does not have any automated or

No basis for evaluation

Both

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

programmable non-auditory alert systems.

as of 2/18/20.

Facility does not have any automated or

No basis for evaluation

Both

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

programmable non-auditory alert systems.

as of 2/18/20.

Facility does not have any automated or

No basis for evaluation

Both

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

programmable non-auditory alert systems.

as of 2/18/20.

Facility does not have any automated or

No basis for evaluation

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

programmable non-auditory alert systems.

as of 2/18/20.

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Facility does not have any automated or

No basis for evaluation

Both

9 been denied?

programmable non-auditory alert systems.

as of 2/18/20.

Facility does not have any automated or

No basis for evaluation

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

programmable non-auditory alert systems.

as of 2/18/20.

Facility does not have any automated or

No basis for evaluation

Both

11 How often?

programmable non-auditory alert systems.

as of 2/18/20.

Facility does not have any automated or

No basis for evaluation

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

programmable non-auditory alert systems.

as of 2/18/20.

Both

13 Announcement boards

NA

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Bulletin boards and paper postings are used.

C

Both

15 used consistently?

C

Both

16 in all dormitories?

C

Both

17 in gym?

C

Both

18 in library?

C

Both

19 audited and monitored?

C

LAC (March 2020), p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 110 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3389

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/H Include OH or

here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

(Explain)

Pagers have not been utilized at facility to

date, nor has LAC had any deaf inmates so far.

In the event a deaf inmate is received, the

option of using pagers will be explored further

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

to determine if it is a viable option for

No basis for evaluation

Both

20 misses a page?

effective alerts with our physical plant.

as of 2/18/20.

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

No report of such has been made to the ADA

Both

21 because of disability?

Coordinator as of 2/18/20.

NA

No basis for evaluation

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

as of 2/18/20.

Staff ensure that all inmates in any area, HOH

or otherwise, are evacuated during any

C

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

emergency or drill requiring evacuation

Staff ensure that all inmates in any area, HOH

or otherwise, are evacuated during any

C

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

emergency or drill requiring evacuation

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

C

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

NA

No basis for evaluation

Deaf

1 Installed?

LAC does not have videophones as of 2/18/20.

as of 2/18/20.

No basis for evaluation

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

LAC does not have videophones as of 2/18/20. NA

as of 2/18/20.

No basis for evaluation

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

LAC does not have videophones as of 2/18/20. NA

as of 2/18/20.

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

VRS kiosk are available in three locations at

No basis for evaluation

Deaf

5 alternative offered

LAC.

as of 2/18/20.

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

No basis for evaluation

6 videophone is out of service.

LAC does not have videophones as of 2/18/20. NA

as of 2/18/20.

No basis for evaluation

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

LAC does not have videophones as of 2/18/20.

as of 2/18/20.

No basis for evaluation

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

LAC does not have videophones as of 2/18/20.

as of 2/18/20.

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

No basis for evaluation

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

LAC does not have videophones as of 2/18/20.

as of 2/18/20.

No basis for evaluation

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

LAC does not have videophones as of 2/18/20.

as of 2/18/20.

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates using

No basis for evaluation

Deaf

12 ordinary phones?

LAC does not have videophones as of 2/18/20.

as of 2/18/20.

No basis for evaluation

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

LAC does not have videophones as of 2/18/20.

as of 2/18/20.

No basis for evaluation

Deaf

14 Free?

LAC does not have videophones as of 2/18/20.

as of 2/18/20.

No basis for evaluation

Deaf

15 Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone calls?

LAC does not have videophones as of 2/18/20.

as of 2/18/20.

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

No basis for evaluation

16 denied?

LAC does not have videophones as of 2/18/20. NA

as of 2/18/20.

LAC (March 2020), p. 11

Deaf/H Include OH or Feb. 2020 both? #

Issue/Question

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20

ID#: 3390

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Page: 111 of 195 - Page

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

(Explain)

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial. 17

Both

TTY:

Both

18 Installed?

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

Both

23 for non-deaf inmates?

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Both

25 Permission needed?

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Deaf

VRS via laptop

Deaf

36 Available?

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

Both

Phones

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

Both

CapTel

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

43 Request by any inmate denied?

See notes on line #50. See notes on line #50. See notes on line #50.

LAC does not have videophones as of 2/18/20.

NA

A TTY is available and can be used at any

location were an inmate or staff phone exist.

C

C

C

None known

NA

C

A TTY is available and can be used at any

location were an inmate or staff phone exist.

C

C

No, inmates just request it. TTY can be used

by non HOH inmates as well.

C

No request has been denied. Only one

request to use TTY has been received as of

2/18/20 in which case the requesting inmate

decided that he did not want to use the TTY

after it was taken to his housing unit.

NA

Inmates pay for calls when the TTY is used

with inmate phones at the same rate as

normal calls. We have not charged inmates

for using the TTY with staff phones to date.

NA

The VRI laptop has not been operational as of

2/18/20.

The VRI laptop has not been operational as of

2/18/20.

The VRI laptop has not been operational as of

2/18/20.

NA

All inmate phones at LAC have adjustable volume control.

C

Portable phone amplifiers were recently

purchased but have not been used by any

C

inmate as of 2/18/20.

NA

LAC does not have CapTel phones as of

2/18/20.

NA

LAC does not have CapTel phones as of

2/18/20.

NA

LAC does not have CapTel phones as of

2/18/20.

NA

No basis for evaluation as of 2/18/20.
No basis for evaluation as of 2/18/20. No basis for evaluation as of 2/18/20. No basis for evaluation as of 2/18/20.

LAC (March 2020), p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20

ID#: 3391

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

Deaf/H

during the audit, and what has been

Include OH or

done about it, or if the problem

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

Both

TV/Movies

Both

44 Is captioning available?

Both

45 Is captioning used?

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

No

Page: 112 of 195 - Page

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

(Explain)

NA

C

C

C

C

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

Both

53 status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

Both

54 deaf inmates?

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Instructions were given to ensure that at least

one showing of movie each day will have

C

captions turned on.

C

Have not received any deaf inmates, but equal

access to communication services is provided

C

to all inmates.

No deaf inmates to date, but HOH inmate

communication monitoring is consistent for all C

inmates regardless of their hearing conditions.

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

Both

5 (Describe)

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Both

7 because security threat?

Both

8 monitor notified?

Both

9 reasoning explained?

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both

10 of requests?

Both

11 of denials?

ADA offers HOH inmates the opportunity to

purchase vibrating watches and alarm clocks

with bed shakers at their expense. There is

currently no markup on these items over the

ADA Coordinator's cost.

NA

No, these orders do not go through the

commissary. Requests to purchase are made

C

directly to ACA Coordinator.

No requests for other items have been

received as of 2/18/20. Any request will be

considered when there is a documented

medical need for an item that may assist

C

them, however security considerations must

be considered prior to the approval of any

C

No purchase of a non-medically has been

denied. Some non-HOH inmates have ask

about purchasing the watch that is available

to HOH inmates, but none of those request

were granted.

NA

C

C

C

C

NA

C

C

LAC (March 2020), p. 13

Deaf/H Include OH or Feb. 2020 both? #
Both N

No

Deaf

No

Deaf

Both O

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20

ID#: 3392

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

Disciplinary

Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and

without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been

1 punished?

2 Was a re-hearing granted?

Grievances

Page: 113 of 195 - Page

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non- NA, unknown, or no Compliant basis for evaluation

(Explain)

No

Both

1 Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA coordinator?

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator

No

Both

2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator?

Records of all grievances filed by deaf/HOH inmates? (not just

No

Both

3 those related to settlement)

No

Both

4 Adequate summaries provided in report?

Including all deaf or HOH inmate grievances, not just those in

No

Both

5 settlement?

No

Both

6 Includes issues raised by inmate in grievance?

No

Both

7 Includes institution in which grievance was filed?

No

Both

8 Includes summary of KDOC response?

No

Both

9 Includes grievance resolution (or lack thereof)?

Both P Training

Both

Types available

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

Both

3 All appropriate staff?

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

NA

C

Describe: All staff receive HOH training during

annual in-service.

NA

C

Describe: Instructor led class.

NA

Describe: All staff.

NA

LAC (March 2020), p. 14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 114 of 195 - Page ID#: 3393
USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Name

If signs to

communicat

Bed Shaker? Other Alert TTY Access

Signs to Low literacy? Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

Device (Not (Not

Listed with commu (So that written Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested;

Housing KOMS ADA nicate communication Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting took denied; denied; denied;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N) is not effective) waived)

waived) notes?

place?

granted) granted) granted)

North Yes South Yes South Yes South Yes South Yes West Yes South Yes South Yes South Yes South Yes

South Yes

South Yes

West Yes

SAP

Yes

West Yes

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

No

Possible

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

LAC (March 2020), p. 15

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 115 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3394

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/

Personal

Phone

Amplifier Shake &

(Not

Wake (Not

requested; requested; Any other

denied; denied; auxiliary aid

Name

ID

granted) granted) requested? Outcome? Audit item issues/concerns

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

When this inmate arrived on 1/22/20 he did not have an alert under the ADA tab in KOMS, but did have a HOH precaution under the red triangle. Corrected by LAC ADA Coordinator at that time.
Purchased own clock w/bed shaker through ADA Coordinator on 2/12/20.
Inmate is can read some, but has problems in this area.

LAC (March 2020), p. 16

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 116 of 195 - Page ID#: 3395

If signs to

communicat

Bed Shaker? Other Alert TTY Access

Signs to Low literacy? Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

Device (Not (Not

Listed with commu (So that written Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested;

Housing KOMS ADA nicate communication Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting took denied; denied; denied;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N) is not effective) waived)

waived) notes?

place?

granted) granted) granted)

Not

Not

Not

South Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

West Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

South Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

North Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

South Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

South Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

South Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

South Yes

No

No

Waived

Waived N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

South Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

West Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

West Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

West Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

South Yes

No

No

Yes

Waived N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

West Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

South Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

SAP

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

West Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

North Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

West Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

LAC (March 2020), p. 17

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 117 of 195 - Page ID#: 3396
Personal

Phone

Amplifier Shake &

(Not

Wake (Not

requested; requested; Any other

denied; denied; auxiliary aid

ID

granted) granted) requested? Outcome? Audit item issues/concerns

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

LAC (March 2020), p. 18

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 118 of 195 - Page ID#: 3397

If signs to

communicat

Bed Shaker? Other Alert TTY Access

Signs to Low literacy? Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

Device (Not (Not

Listed with commu (So that written Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested;

Housing KOMS ADA nicate communication Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting took denied; denied; denied;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N) is not effective) waived)

waived) notes?

place?

granted) granted) granted)

Not

Not

Not

South Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

North Yes South Yes North Yes South Yes South Yes South Yes West Yes South Yes South Yes West Yes North Yes

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

Not

Not

Not

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

Yes

Waived N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Inmates in lines above are those present at Lee Adjustment Center on 2/14/20. Inmates in lines below are those that were housed at Lee Adjustment Center at some point in 2019 or 2020, but not housed here as of 2/14/20 with the answers based on information known at the time of their release or transfer.

N/A

Yes

N/A

Yes

No

No

No

No

Not

Not

Not

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

LAC (March 2020), p. 19

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 119 of 195 - Page ID#: 3398
Personal

Phone

Amplifier Shake &

(Not

Wake (Not

requested; requested; Any other

denied; denied; auxiliary aid

ID

granted) granted) requested? Outcome? Audit item issues/concerns

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Inmate cannot read/write but

Not

Not

Not

understands verbal

Requested Requested Requested N/A

communications.

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Inmates in lines above are those present at Lee Adjustment Center on 2/14/20. Inmates in lines below are those that were housed at Lee Adjustment Center at some point in 2019 or 2020, but not housed here as of 2/14/20 with the answers based on information known at the time of their release or transfer.

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested

Granted N/A

T/F to GRCC 1/9/20 T/F to KSP 8/21/19

LAC (March 2020), p. 20

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 120 of 195 - Page ID#: 3399

If signs to

communicat

Bed Shaker? Other Alert TTY Access

Signs to Low literacy? Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

Device (Not (Not

Listed with commu (So that written Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested;

Housing KOMS ADA nicate communication Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting took denied; denied; denied;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N) is not effective) waived)

waived) notes?

place?

granted) granted) granted)

Not

Not

Not

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Waived N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

Not

Not

Not

N/A

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested Requested Requested

LAC (March 2020), p. 21

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 121 of 195 - Page ID#: 3400
Personal

Phone

Amplifier Shake &

(Not

Wake (Not

requested; requested; Any other

denied; denied; auxiliary aid

ID

granted) granted) requested? Outcome? Audit item issues/concerns

Not

Not

Not

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

T/F to St. Patrick House on 11/25

Requested Requested Requested N/A

Not

Not

Not

Released 10/23/19

Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Granted

T/F on 1/4/20 T/F Clark County Jail 1/9/20 T/F LSCC Release 12/4/19 Removed – T/F to RCC on 9/19/19 Shock Probation 12/20/19 T/F to KSR on 12/2/19 Released 10/28/19 Removed – T/F to NTC on 8/6/19 Removed – T/F to GRCC 9/12/19 T/F to KSP on 11/13/19 T/F to GRCC 1/9/20

LAC (March 2020), p. 22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 122 of 195 - Page ID#: 3401

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device.
Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers) Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

How many Where

1

Mobile

ADA

4

Office

0

N/A

When obtained Specifications (URL)

How do inmates obtain access?

How well do they work?

February 18, 2020

To be used in group sessions such as

(Transmitter and six receivers; SAP, religious programs, etc. as

additional receivers can be purchased separately)

needed.

Has not been tested yet as of 2/19/20.

Pending delivery as Universal Portable Phone Amplifier Model UA-30

of 2/19/2020

(purchased from Serene Innovations)

N/A

N/A

Will offer to inmates who indicate that

they have trouble hearing on the phone

during the initial aid/services

assessment. Inmates can also request

them using the aid/services request Has not been tested yet as of

form,

2/19/20.

N/A

N/A

Other comments

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like? Bed shakers

Unknown 0

On-going as additional units are Medical needed N/A N/A

McKesson Pocket Talker N/A

Vibrating watches

0

N/A N/A

N/A

Vibrating alarm clocks Pagers

0

N/A N/A

N/A

0

N/A N/A

N/A

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in

use or under consideration not mentioned above.

0

N/A N/A

N/A

Through medical while waiting for

Varies from inmate to inmate,

hearing aid or when otherwise needed some say it helps them while

for their hearing condition,

others say they don’t.

N/A

N/A

HOH inmates are permitted to

purchase their own through the ADA

Coordinator.

N/A

HOH inmates are permitted to

purchase their own through the ADA

Coordinator.

N/A

N/A

N/A

Twelve inmates are purchased a vibrating watch during this reporting period.
One inmate has purchased a vibrating alarm clock during this audit period.

N/A

N/A

Earphones for parole hearings Earphones for orientation videos

0

N/A N/A

N/A

0

N/A N/A

N/A

At each hearing the board ask

the inmate if he can hear and

see them ok. As of 2/19/20 no

inmate has indicated that he

N/A

N/A

cannot hear them.

Not needed to date, however

the active listening device can

be used here as well when

N/A

N/A

necessary.

LAC (March 2020), p. 23

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 123 of 195 - Page ID#: 3402
Luther Luckett Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 124 of 195 - Page ID#: 3403

# Issue/Question A ADA coordinator
1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator? Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no
2 ADA coordinator appointed? 3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?
Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit 7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held? 8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training? 9 Describe training
Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly 15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?
Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking 16 list? B Reporting obligations
Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH 2 inmates? 3 Is the list complete? C Intake/Orientation ‐ Corrections 1 Hard of hearing inmates 2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?
Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic 3 notifications.) 4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)
Deaf inmates 5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving? 6 Describe 7 Effective communications planning? 8 Effective communication provided? 9 Describe 10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed? 11 Use of in‐person interpreter when needed?
Orientation videos 12 Captioned? 13 Shown in a quiet space? 14 Amplification if needed?
Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate? 15 (Describe)

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X X X X NA X
X

X X

NA

X

Coordinator receives notification throgh

KOMS. Coordinator also confirms through

internal transfer memo.

NA

X

NA

X

NA

X

X

NA

X

X

NA

X

X

X

Orientation conducted one on one via VRI or

in‐person interpreter. Hard of Hearing

would have orientation conducted verbally

with orientation powerpoint.

LLCC (March 2020), p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 125 of 195 - Page ID#: 3404

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit,

and what has been done about

# Issue/Question

it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Notice to medical staff:

Other methods of access:

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

27 further assessment?

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

After assessment, does medical:

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA NA
X
X
X NA
X

33 Notify ADA coordinator? 34 Is notification prompt?
Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist) 35 Audiology services offered when needed? 36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles) 37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid? 38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services 39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?
Summary Hearing aid batteries 48 Available for free? 49 In sufficient numbers? 50 7 days/week? 51 regardless of housing? E Information provided inmates
Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in 18 law library? (Need to check) F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates
3 Notice posted outside housing units? 4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator? 5 Cell/bed cards 6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert? 8 Each inmate has one if not waived? 9 Provided timely? 10 Replacements provided when needed?
KOMS alert? 11 Staff aware of use of KOMS 13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check) 15 Updated timely

Coordinator attends progress meeting when X inmate is notified of audiology test results.
X NA
X X X X X
NA X X X X
X
X X NA X X X X NA X X X

LLCC (March 2020), p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 126 of 195 - Page ID#: 3405

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant

discovered during the audit,

NA, unknown, or no

and what has been done about

basis for evaluation

# Issue/Question

it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

(Explain)

Individual ID cards

NA

16 Staff aware of meaning?

X

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

X

19 Provided timely?

X

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

X

21 Prompt replacements provided?

X

G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Identification to ADA Coordinator

NA

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

X

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

X

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

X

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

X

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

X

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

X

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

X

Other assessments

NA

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

8 intake, has one been done?

X

H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

1 On‐person ID cards

X

2 Cell cards

X

3 Bed shaker

X

4 In‐person alerts

X

Physical Plant design of LLCC does not

permit the use of pagers. In person alerts

5 Pager

are used .

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location

6 where phones are available?)

X

7 Amplifier for phone

X

LLCC does not house deaf or HoH inmates in

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

a specific unit. Housing is determined by

X

8 communication difficulties?

classification and programming guidelines.

tubealoo is utilized in education to aid

inmates who are learning to read, auditory

X

9 Other amplification

feedback.

10 Other (describe)

Describe:

NA

LLCC (March 2020), p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 127 of 195 - Page ID#: 3406

# Issue/Question General issues
19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained? 20 Have any been out of comission? 21 Describe ‐‐ which and for how long?
Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from 22 hearing aid? 23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided? 24 Promptly? 25 Has there been a direct threat determination? 26 Describe
Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of 27 impairment and specific dangers posed) 28 Appropriately reported to monitor? I Interpretation in general
Qualified interpretation services available: Is the process for using VRI/in‐person interpretation 1 communicated to inmates? covers all inmate‐staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 2 encounters/communications/settings) Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other 3 volunteer‐provided programming? Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation 4 method? 5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences? Standing arrangement with providers? 6 In‐person? 7 VRI? Is VRI availability: 8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant

NA X
NA NA

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X

X X NA NA

NA X
X
X
X X NA X X NA X

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)? on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of
10 notice)? during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when
11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?
12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe VRI laptop functional?
13 In general 14 Always checked for sufficient battery power? 15 Routine software updates?

X

X

X

VRI request made by inmate, unit brought to

RHU, inmate moved from cell to holding cell X

to utilize equipment.

Describe:

NA

X

Have power cording in bag with laptop

X

X

LLCC (March 2020), p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 128 of 195 - Page ID#: 3407

# Issue/Question VRI laptop has necessary items with it?
16 Splitter? 17 Instructions? 18 Long power cord? 19 Usable as VRS? 20 VRI effectiveness tracked?
21 How?
Information used to determine when in‐person interpretation 22 should be first recourse?
Is in‐person interpretation available:
23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical 24 Parole?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes
Describe: No longer necessary with VIOP conversion.
feedback offered from staff and inmates that utilize equipment. review notification and any information from previous facility, alerts from medical, and personal information obtained from inmate.
obtain in‐person interpretation; written communication; or pictures

25 Describe each time in‐person interpretation has been offered 26 Describe each time in‐person interpretation has been denied.
Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days 27 before?
Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance 28 in non‐emergency is non‐compliant) 29 Describe
in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI 30 was unavailable)
Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred 31 method? 32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.
Written communication is not needed when inmate has low 33 literacy
Qualified interpretation services available: Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other 34 volunteer‐provided programming? for all inmate‐staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 35 encounters/communications/settings) 36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates? J Hand Restraints 1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

dry erase board available for staff in living units.

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA
X X X X X
X

X X
X
X X X NA X
X X NA X
X X NA

In person interpretation has not been requested by a Deaf or HoH inmate while housed at LLCC. N/A ‐ No Denials
N/A no inmate relied on for interpretation.

LLCC (March 2020), p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 129 of 195 - Page ID#: 3408

# Issue/Question Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized
2 finding of a security threat? Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might
3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.) 4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed? 5 Staff aware of the issue
Off‐site medical care: 6 two‐point hand restraint system used?
restraints removed when necessary for medical 7 communication? K Non‐auditory Alerts
1 Does the prison have non‐auditory alerts? (Describe) 2 provided to all inmates who need it? 3 can and does it give alerts in real time?
4 sufficient to signal fire alarm? 5 sufficient to signal count alert? 6 programmed to signal different alerts? 7 used to notify of prison‐wide events?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
X

X
X X NA X
X

Describe: portable shaker beds; in person

notification; bulletin boards; shake N wake

wrist alarm clocks

NA

X

X

portable shakerbed and in person alerts

used.

X

In person alerts used

X

N/A

In person alerts used

N/A

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them? Have any requests for medically necessary non‐auditory alerts
9 been denied? 10 Non‐auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?
11 How often?

In person alerts used

N/A

No

X

X

Describe: fire drills; Staff requests for

inmates to be notified of program/class time X

change or cancellation

12 monitored/recorded formally? 13 Announcement boards 14 used to notify of schedule changes? 15 used consistently? 16 in all dormitories? 17 in gym? 18 in library? 19 audited and monitored?
In‐person or personal system notification when an inmate 20 misses a page?

staff and inmates notify if in person alerts are not being completed properly or if portable shaker bed requires maintenance.

NA X X X X X X

X

LLCC (March 2020), p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 130 of 195 - Page ID#: 3409

# Issue/Question Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only
21 because of disability? Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the
22 future? 23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies? 24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?
Does the plan account for how effective communication will 25 be provided? L Telecommunications
Videophones: 1 Installed? 3 Number of days out of service? (Specify) 4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.
When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other 5 alternative offered
Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when 6 videophone is out of service. V 7 Same times of access as non‐deaf inmates? 8 Appropriate location?
Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends, 9 emergency) if necessary? 11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?
No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates 12 using ordinary phones? 13 Advance request unnecessary? 14 Free?
Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone 15 calls?
Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and 16 been denied?
Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the 17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.
TTY: 18 Installed? 19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?
Easy‐to‐understand, institution specific instructions made 20 available WITH TTY? 21 Function ‐‐ days out of service? (Specify) 22 Access ‐‐ appropriate hours, days?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA
X X X X

NA X
NA NA

yes, VRS service is provided via laptop.

X

Describe: Videophone is checked daily to

confirm service is available. If not,

announcement is posted in each unit and in

person notification is made to inmates who

utilize VRI.

NA

X

X

yes.

X

X

X

X

no.

X

X

None denied. Portable
same as regular phones.

NA
X
NA X X
X
NA X

LLCC (March 2020), p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 131 of 195 - Page ID#: 3410

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant

discovered during the audit,

NA, unknown, or no

and what has been done about

basis for evaluation

# Issue/Question

it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

(Explain)

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

23 for non‐deaf inmates?

X

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

X

25 Permission needed?

no

X

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

NA

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

no

VRS via laptop

NA

36 Available?

X

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

X

38 Used when appropriate?

X

Phones

NA

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

X

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

units in control center. Id is used to check

out.

X

CapTel

NA

41 If so, installed and working?

NA

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

List names

NA

43 Request by any inmate denied?

List names

NA

TV/Movies

NA

44 Is captioning available?

X

45 Is captioning used?

X

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

X

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Monitor is located in Captain's office that is

manned 24/7

X

Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly

48 (Describe)

X

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

52 problems)

X

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non‐deaf inmates of same

X

53 status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non‐

X

54 deaf inmates?

LLCC (March 2020), p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 132 of 195 - Page ID#: 3411

# Issue/Question M Miscellaneous Devices
1 Devices available? (Describe) 2 devices in commissary list? 3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator? 4 facilitation of purchase?
Purchase of any non‐medically necessary device denied? 5 (Describe) 6 determined on case‐by‐case basis? 7 because security threat? 8 monitor notified? 9 reasoning explained?
ADA coordinator maintains records 10 of requests? 11 of denials? N Disciplinary O Grievances P Training
Types available 1 CBT? (Using approved training?) 2 Who received? (Describe) 3 All appropriate staff?
4 Live training? (Information only)
5 Who received? (Describe) 6 All appropriate staff?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Partially Non‐ Compliant
Compliant Compliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Describe in detail: Vibrating Watches, Shaker Alarm Clocks

NA X X X

NA

X

X

X

X

NA

X

X

X

X

X

NA

X

all staff, contract staff and volunteers

NA

X

Describe: how to on the ADA laptop & TTY

and brought up during communication

section of training.

NA

Describe:provided to all staff, contract staff

and volunteers

NA

X

LLCC (March 2020), p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 133 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3412

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Personal

Low literacy?

If signs to

Other Alert

Phone

(So that

communicat

Device TTY Access Amplifier

Listed with

written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid Bed Shaker? (Not

(Not

(Not

KOMS ADA Signs to communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment (Not requested; requested; requested; requested;

Housing

Precaution communica n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied;

denied; denied;

denied;

Name

ID

location

?

te (Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted)

granted) granted)

granted)

7 A CL 002 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 D A 263L Y

N

N

Y

y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 C D 213L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 E C 221L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

RHU B L 103U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 D C 229U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 A D 208L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

RHU A L 109 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 A B 238U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 A CU 004 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 B CU 002 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 C B 145U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 A B 145U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 D A 257U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 A B 139L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 E D 112L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 E C 229L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

RHU A U 209 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

RHUAA L 101 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 C C 225L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 D A 163L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 A A 161L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 D C 131L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 A A 164L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 D B 136U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 D C 128U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 B C 223U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 A A 162U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 E AL 004 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 E C 121U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

RHU A L 103U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 B D 108U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 D AU 004 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 A A 162L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 D A 154L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 C A 261L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 E D 103L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 A A 159L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 A B 142U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

RHU B L 107 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 C D 107L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 C D 109L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 B B 134U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

7 A C 125U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Shake & Wake (Not requested; denied; granted) Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

LLCC (March 2020), p. 10

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 134 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3413

Personal

Low literacy?

If signs to

Other Alert

Phone

(So that

communicat

Device TTY Access Amplifier Shake & Wake

Listed with

written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid Bed Shaker? (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not

KOMS ADA Signs to communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment (Not requested; requested; requested; requested; requested;

Housing

Precaution communica n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied;

denied; denied;

denied; denied;

ID

location

?

te (Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted)

granted) granted)

granted) granted)

7 A A 261L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A A 153U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A B 248L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A B 244L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

RHU A L 108U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 B CL 002 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A B 139U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E B 144L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 B C 131L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Denied.

Not Requested

7 E AL 001 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E DL 002 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E BU 001 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 B B 139L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A D 113L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 C B 237L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A D 204U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A B 140L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D D 204L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D C 131U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A D 108U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E B 242L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 C D 103L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 C C 127L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D C 127U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A D 202L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E BL 003 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 C BU 003 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A A 163L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A C 121U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A C 122L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A A 155U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A AL 004 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A B 137L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D C 123L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D A 264L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A B 136U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A A 259L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 C D 109U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A C 130L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A D 107L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 C D 105L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E B 244U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 B B 238U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 C D 113L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A DL 002 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

LLCC (March 2020), p. 11

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 135 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3414

Personal

Low literacy?

If signs to

Other Alert

Phone

(So that

communicat

Device TTY Access Amplifier Shake & Wake

Listed with

written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid Bed Shaker? (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not

KOMS ADA Signs to communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment (Not requested; requested; requested; requested; requested;

Housing

Precaution communica n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied;

denied; denied;

denied; denied;

ID

location

?

te (Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted)

granted) granted)

granted) granted)

7 A C 120L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E D 109U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 C B 243U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E C 131L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 C B 244L Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E A 161L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 C C 120U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A C 229L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A B 135U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D AL 004 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D A 164L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A B 134L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A C 127U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Granted

7 D B 247U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D A 261L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E A 265L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 B B 142L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Granted

7 D D 210L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A D 105L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A D 205U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 B A 163L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 C A 259L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D C 121L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 B D 208L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E B 140U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A C 228L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D CU 004 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A D 109L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E A 254U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A DL 004 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 C A 266L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 C D 104L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E B 238L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A C 232U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D BU 001 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 B C 132U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D BL 004 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A D 104L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E B 137U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A C 132U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D A 155L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 B A 262L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 B D 207L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 C A 163U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 C C 227L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

LLCC (March 2020), p. 12

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 136 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3415

Personal

Low literacy?

If signs to

Other Alert

Phone

(So that

communicat

Device TTY Access Amplifier Shake & Wake

Listed with

written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid Bed Shaker? (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not

KOMS ADA Signs to communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment (Not requested; requested; requested; requested; requested;

Housing

Precaution communica n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied;

denied; denied;

denied; denied;

ID

location

?

te (Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted)

granted) granted)

granted) granted)

7 A D 113U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D D 214L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 B D 110L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A D 211U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D C 231L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D D 208L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 B B 144L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

RHUAA L 105 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D CU 002 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D C 230L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 B A 152U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D B 143L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 C A 262U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 B D 202U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D D 112U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A A 153L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E CU 001 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Granted

Not Requested

7 A DL 003 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Granted

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 D C 130L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A D 108L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E D 211L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A D 203L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 B C 225U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 B B 239L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E DU 002 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A D 102L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 C B 239L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 A D 210L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

7 E D 202L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Yes

Not requested

Not Requested

Not Requested

LLCC (March 2020), p. 13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 137 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3416

Technology

How many Where

When obtained Specifications (URL)

How do inmates obtain access? How well do they work?

Chapel (4

FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device.

receivers) Academic School (4

www.kingdom.com/peavey‐assisted‐listening‐system

Request to check out from staff or volunteer group and provide

2 sets

receivers) 2016/2017

own headphones

reasonably well

all living

Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable

units and

Check out from living units

amplifiers)

12

RHU

2016/2017 reizen‐portable‐strap‐on‐telephone‐amplifier

control center

very well

Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

UNK

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like?

Currently in living units Process

www.captel.com for CapTel 840 model

UNK as we are currently in process of purchase and installation as a will check out key to call box Securus work around is being from Living unit's control center. attempted at KSR and EKCC.

Bed shakers Vibrating watches Vibrating alarm clocks

Portable unit

stays with

2

DEAF inmate 2018

100 approx.

available to HoH/ deaf sales occur inmates quarterly

25 apprx

available to HoH/ deaf sales occur inmates quarterly

ADA Coordinator is notified upon lifetone units work great. Permits

transfer to LLCC. Issuance is

freedom of changing living units

Lifetone safety.com

completed upon entry.

for deaf inmate.

Very well. Have had several

Quarterly sale to Deaf and HoH remarks on the quality and ease of

inmates. Inmates are sent order use. Have receied requests from

offer 3 vibrating watches ranging in cost from 25.92 ( Casio ) to forms and notices are placed on hearing inmates wishing to

39.90 ( TICCI vibrating watch). All are purchased through Amazon. bulletin boards in living units. purchase.

Quarterly sale. Deaf and HoH

offer 3 vibrating alarm clocks ranging in cost from 33.02 (Sonic inmates are sent order forms and Very well. Have had several

Bomb) to 38.95 (Sonic Alert Dual alarm). All are purchased

notices are placed on bulletin remarks on the quality and ease of

through Amazon.

boards in living units.

use.

Pagers
N/A Other non‐auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration not mentioned above. 5

Earphones for parole hearings

2

Earphones for orientation videos

2

N/A

N/A

issued to

various

inmates 2016 and 2017

Re Entry /

Parole media purchased in

unit

2018

Orientation purchased in

Classroom 2018

N/A Shake a‐n‐wake‐www.amazon.com/Tech‐Tools‐Vibrating‐ Personal‐Shake‐N‐Wake/dp/B0027A573Q
CDWG.org ‐ COT approved vendor CDWG.org ‐ COT approved vendor

utilize with inmates transferring in or indgent inmates on their request.

Physical Plant does not support the connectivity necessary for the pagers to work inside buildings. LLCC utilizes in person alerts.
reasonably well

request request

very well very well

LLCC (March 2020), p. 51

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 138 of 195 - Page ID#: 3417
Little Sandy Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 139 of 195 - Page ID#: 3418

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #
A Both Both Both
Both Both Both
Both
Both Both B Both Both Both C HOH HOH
HOH
HOH Deaf

Issue/Question ADA coordinator 1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator? Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA 2 coordinator appointed? 3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit where 7 deaf/HOH inmates are held? 8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training? 9 Describe training

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly 15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?
16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list? Reporting obligations Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH
2 inmates?
3 Is the list complete? Intake/Orientation - Corrections
1 Hard of hearing inmates
2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?
Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic 3 notifications.)
4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe) Deaf inmates

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Description/Notes

ADA Coordinator Rhonda May

X

There has not been a time when there was no

ADA Coordinator.

X

Yes

X

Yes. ADA Coordinator list is posted on all

bulletin boards in general population housing X

units and minimum unit.

X

Annual In-Service, CBT's and Webinar's

NA

ADA Coordinator receives all transfer

memo's, ADA Statewide List, prints weekly

Inmates with Functional Needs Report, and

X

HSN emails ADA Coordinator a weekly

Audicus Log List.

Yes as inmates come into the institution who

are HOH. KOMS alert sent to ADA

X

Coordinator.

Yes. List is updated weekly.

X

ADA List is updated every week as HOH inmates transfer in/out of institution.

X

NA

KOMS Alert and ADA Coordinator from other institutions will also send emails.

X

ADA Coordinator receives KOMS Alerts when

an inmate with precautions transfers in or

out of the institution.

X

ADA Coordinator will notify appropriate staff

and provide effective communication for

X

HOH inmate's.

NA

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Deaf

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

KOMS Alert sent to email of ADA Coordinator.

X

KOMS Alert sent to ADA Coordinator.

NA

Yes if communications planning is needed the

appropriate staff and accommodations would X

be made accordingly.

Yes if an inmate needs communication

accommodation then it would be provided

X

(inteperpreter, etc.)

LSCC (March 2020), p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 140 of 195 - Page ID#: 3419

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #

Issue/Question

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Both

Notice to medical staff:

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes VRI laptop is available at all times to be utilized by staff as needed. Yes As needed.

Yes Yes Yes Assigned CTO's will read captions for HOH inmates who are not literate. VRI will be used for deaf inmates who sign.

Yes, notice is given. Medical Staff, Offsite Medical Staff. Yes all routine physicals are asked about hearing problems.

Yes Yes

Yes Yes. Audicus List sent to ADA Coordinator weekly. Yes within the week.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA X X
NA X X X

X

X
X X NA X X X

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

Summary

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

HOH

50 7 days/week?

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Both E Information provided inmates

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in law

18 library? (Need to check)

Yes offered within 30 days of being ordered by provider. Yes Yes pocket talkers are given to all inmates awaiting hearing aids. Yes Yes

NA X X X X X

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

X Checked on 2/18/2020

LSCC (March 2020), p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 141 of 195 - Page ID#: 3420

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #
Both F Both Both

Issue/Question Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates 3 Notice posted outside housing units? 4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Yes Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X X

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

Both

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Both

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

Both

2 Cell cards

Housing signs are issued at initial assessment. X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Within 3 Days of transferring into institution.

X

Yes

X

Yes ADA Coordinator receives KOMS alert.

X

Yes

X

Checked on 2/18/2020

X

Yes

X

Yes issued at initial assessment and replaced

as needed.

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Within 3 days.

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes a KOMS Alert is sent to ADA Coordinator.

HSA sends Audicus Log weekly to ADA

X

Coordinator.

ADA Coordinator receives weekly Audicus Log

from HSA.

X

Yes Yes Brochure provided and explained. Yes Yes
Yes

X
X X X X NA X

Yes

X

Yes

X

LSCC (March 2020), p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 142 of 195 - Page ID#: 3421

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #
Both Both

Issue/Question 3 Bed shaker 4 In-person alerts

Both

5 Pager

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

Both

9 Other amplification

Both

10 Other (describe)

Both

General issues

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Both

20 Have any been out of comission?

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Both

22 hearing aid?

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

Both

24 Promptly?

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Both

26 Describe

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

Both I Interpretation in general

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

Deaf

1 communicated to inmates?

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

Deaf

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

3 volunteer-provided programming?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes Yes Assigned Resident Helpers
N/A

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no

basis for evaluation

(Explain)

X

X

Pagers are not available

NA

at LSCC.

Yes

X

Yes

X

Inmates can request to move closer to officer cab.

X

SAP and Chapel has amplification system.

X

Describe:

NA

NA

Yes

X

No

NA

N/A

NA

Hearing aids always stay with HOH inmates. Yes Yes None this reporting period. N/A

X
X X X NA

N/A

NA

N/A

NA

NA

Yes

X

X Yes

Yes

X

Deaf

4 Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation method?

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf

6 In-person?

Deaf

7 VRI?

Deaf

Is VRI availability:

Deaf

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Yes Yes Yes Yes. Sign Language Network of KY Yes
Yes. Available at same time as GP phones.

X
X X X X NA X

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

Yes

X

LSCC (March 2020), p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 143 of 195 - Page ID#: 3422

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #
Deaf
Deaf
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf
Deaf
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf
Deaf
Deaf
Deaf
Deaf

Issue/Question on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of 10 notice)? during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when 11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?
12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe VRI laptop functional?
13 In general 14 Always checked for sufficient battery power? 15 Routine software updates?
VRI laptop has necessary items with it? 16 Splitter? 17 Instructions? 18 Long power cord? 19 Usable as VRS? 20 VRI effectiveness tracked?
21 How? Information used to determine when in-person interpretation
22 should be first recourse? Is in-person interpretation available:
23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical 24 Parole?
25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered 26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.
Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days 27 before?
Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in 28 non-emergency is non-compliant)
29 Describe in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI
30 was unavailable)

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Description/Notes

Yes

X

Yes

X

Inmate's can request from CTO or RHU

Supervisor.

X

Yes

NA

Yes

X

Checked quarterly.

X

Yes updated by COT.

X

Describe:

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Logbook. Staff also notifies ADA Coordinator

of any issues.

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

LSCC only has one inmate who signs and he

has been notified that he can request

X

None

X

Yes. Parole board hearings scheduled

approximately 2 months in advance.

X

No

X

Inmate has never been relied on to interpret

for facility.

NA

No

X

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Deaf

31 Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred method?

Yes

X

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Yes

X

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

Yes

X

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Yes

X

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

Yes

X

LSCC (March 2020), p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 144 of 195 - Page ID#: 3423

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #
Deaf Deaf Deaf J Deaf
Deaf
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf
Deaf Both K Both Both Both Both Both Both

Audit item questions/concerns

(note here if a problem was

discovered during the audit, and

what has been done about it, or if

Issue/Question

the problem remains)

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

35 encounters/communications/settings)

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

Hand Restraints

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison?

Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized finding of a

2 security threat?

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

5 Staff aware of the issue

Off-site medical care:

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

restraints removed when necessary for medical

7 communication?

Non-auditory Alerts

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

Description/Notes The request form lists particular encounters, but also states that the request is a general one. Yes
Yes for transportation to/from prison.
Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Yes
Yes
Describe: Yes Yes. Vibrating Alarm Clocks Yes. Bedshakers Yes. Vibrating Alarm Clocks Yes. Fire Alarm

Compliant

Partially Compliant

X
X
X
X
X X X NA X X
NA X X X X X

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Both

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Yes. Television/Monitors, Closed-Captioning,

X

Heat Flags, Strobe Lights on Alarms, etc.

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Both

9 been denied?

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Both

11 How often?

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Both

15 used consistently?

Both

16 in all dormitories?

Both

17 in gym?

Both

18 in library?

Both

19 audited and monitored?

Yes. Television/Monitors, Closed-Captioning,

X

Heat Flags, Strobe Lights on Alarms, etc.

No Yes Quarterly Yes
Yes Yes Yes (except RHU) Yes Yes Yes

X
X X X NA X X X X X X

LSCC (March 2020), p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 145 of 195 - Page ID#: 3424

Deaf/HO

Include, H or

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

Both

20 misses a page?

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

Both

21 because of disability?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Yes

No

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X

X

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Deaf

5 alternative offered

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

6 videophone is out of service.

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates using

Deaf

12 ordinary phones?

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

Deaf

14 Free?

Have had no issues at this time.

X

Bed Shakers are used for fire alarms. Staff

also goes door to door.

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes

X

None

NA

N/A

NA

If the videophone were out of service, the VRI

laptop can be used for VRS.

X

Inmates are informed of alternatives during

initial assessment. ADA Coordinator explains

to each inmate that a videophone is also

located in central should the one in ADA

phone room be out of service.

X

Yes

X

Yes located in GA-A Dorm

X

No escort needed for videophone.

X

Yes

X

No more permission is needed. Only additional staff notification.

X

No

X

Yes

X

Deaf

15 Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone calls?

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

No same as regular phone calls. Yes

X NA

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial. 17

Both

TTY:

Both

18 Installed?

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

Inmate signing.
Yes Yes
Yes LSCC (March 2020), p. 7

denied due to not

X

NA X X
X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 146 of 195 - Page ID#: 3425

Deaf/HO

Include, H or

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

Both

23 for non-deaf inmates?

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Both

25 Permission needed?

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Deaf

VRS via laptop

Deaf

36 Available?

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

Both

Phones

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

Both

CapTel

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

43 Request by any inmate denied?

Both

TV/Movies

Both

44 Is captioning available?

Both

45 Is captioning used?

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

Both

53 status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

Both

54 deaf inmates?

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes None Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Yes

X

Yes

X

No

X

No

NA

None

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes available as requested.

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes except for an inmate who can't hear and

has low literacy.

X

No

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes. Inmates can turn on captioning on

personal t.v. and t.v's in the core area.

X

Yes. No issues or problems.

X

X Yes

X Yes

Vibrating Alarm Clock, Bed Shakers, Phone Amplifiers, Pocket Talkers No Yes Yes

NA X X X

LSCC (March 2020), p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 147 of 195 - Page ID#: 3426

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #
Both

Issue/Question Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied? 5 (Describe)

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

None have been denied.

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Both

7 because security threat?

Both

8 monitor notified?

Both

9 reasoning explained?

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both

10 of requests?

Both

11 of denials?

Both N Disciplinary

Both O Grievances

Both P Training

Both

Types available

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

Both

3 All appropriate staff?

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

Yes, if requested. Yes, if requested. Yes, if requested. Yes, if requested.
Yes Yes Attached for your review. Attached for your review. Attached for your review.
Yes All institutional staff (contract & noncontract). Yes all institutional staff. No N/A N/A

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X
X
X X X NA X X

NA, no non-medically necessary device has been denied. NA NA NA

NA X
NA X
NA NA

LSCC (March 2020), p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 148 of 195 - Page ID#: 3427
USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Name

If signs to

Low literacy?

communicat

Other Alert

Personal Phone

Listed with Signs to (So that

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid Bed Shaker? Device (Not TTY Access (Not Amplifier (Not Shake & Wake

KOMS ADA commu written

Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment (Not requested; requested; requested; requested; (Not requested; Any other

Housing Precaution nicate communication Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting took denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

auxiliary aid

ID

location ?

(Y/N) is not effective) waived)

waived) notes?

place?

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

requested?

A 103L Y

N

2.3 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

A 104U Y

N

3.6 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

A 105L Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

A 122L Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

A 102U Y

N

8Y

Y

N/A

Y

Granted

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

N/A

A 106L Y

N

3.4 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

A 214L Y

N

10.5 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

A 203L Y

N

9Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

A 104L Y

N

5.7 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

A 113L Y

N

8Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

A 108U Y

N

0.6 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

A 120L Y

N

8.1 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Pocket Talker

A 209L Y

N

5.2 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

N/A

A 207L Y

Y

10.9 Y

Y

Y

Y

Granted

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Videophone

A 204U Y

N

6.8 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

A 126U Y

N

11.3 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

B 118U Y

N

9Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Pocket Talker

B 103L Y

N

7.6 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

B 222U Y

N

6.4 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

B 224L Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

B 125L Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

B 215U Y

N

10.3 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

B 107L Y

N

6.6 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

C 110U Y

N

2.3 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

C 225U Y

N

6.4 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Granted

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

N/A

C 110L Y

N

7.7 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

C 106U Y

N

3Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

C 119L Y

N

5.6 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Watch

C 226L Y

N

9.2 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

C 106L Y

N

6.2 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

C 107L Y

N

3.8 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

C 104L Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

C 118L Y

N

12.9 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

D 103L Y

N

9.4 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

D 112U Y

N

10.5 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

D 209L Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

D 112L Y

N

4.5 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

D 110U Y

N

2 Waived

Waived N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

D 118U Y

N

2Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

D 105L Y

N

12.9 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

N/A

Watch,

D 108L Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Headphones

D 124L Y

N

5.1 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

LSCC (March 2020), p. 10

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 149 of 195 - Page ID#: 3428

If signs to

Low literacy?

communicat

Other Alert

Personal Phone

Listed with Signs to (So that

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid Bed Shaker? Device (Not TTY Access (Not Amplifier (Not Shake & Wake

KOMS ADA commu written

Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment (Not requested; requested; requested; requested; (Not requested; Any other

Housing Precaution nicate communication Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting took denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

auxiliary aid

ID

location ?

(Y/N) is not effective) waived)

waived) notes?

place?

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

requested?

D 208L Y

N

4.5 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

D 109L Y

N

cannot read (sel Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

E 223U Y

N

8Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

N/A

E 205L Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

E 210U Y

N

7.7 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

E 105U Y

N

12.9 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

E 103L Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

E 218U Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Pocket Talker

E 205U Y

N

10.8 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

N/A

F 104L Y

N

12.9 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

N/A

F 226L Y

N

12.9 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Pocket Talker

F 115L Y

N

8.6 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

F 112L Y

N

5.3 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

F 104U Y

N

2Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

F 119L Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

F 216L Y

N

4.8 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Pocket Talker

F 109L Y

N

2.9 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

F 123L Y

N

4Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Not requested N/A

G 101L Y

N

6Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Not requested N/A

G 103L Y

N

0.7 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

G 201L Y

N

10.9 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

G 207L Y

N

10.8 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

G 102U Y

N

8.1 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

G 209U Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

G 107L Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Granted

N/A

G 112L Y

N

5.4 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

G 111L Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

H 122L Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

H 202L Y

N

12.9 Y

Waived N/A

y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

H 106L Y

N

9.4 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Pocket Talker

H 224L Y

N

5.8 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

H 113U Y

N

6.6 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

H 114U Y

N

10.8 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

MM F03 Y

N

12.9 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

MM C14 Y

N

9.4 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

MM D08 Y

N

6.2 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Pocket Talker

MM A15 Y

N

6.4 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

MM A16 Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

MM D19 Y

N

9Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

MM D04 Y

N

7.7 Waived

Waived N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

MM D07 Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Pocket Talker

MM B02 Y

N

3.2 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

MM B24 Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Not requested N/A

MM E10 Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

LSCC (March 2020), p. 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 150 of 195 - Page ID#: 3429

Housing location MM A18 SM C11 SM F09 SM F11 SM E08 SM B05 SM O01 SM B06 SM F12 SM E11 SM B04 SM F01 SM E13 SM A04

If signs to

Low literacy?

communicat

Other Alert

Listed with Signs to (So that

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid Bed Shaker? Device (Not

KOMS ADA commu written

Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment (Not requested; requested;

Precaution nicate communication Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting took denied;

denied;

?

(Y/N) is not effective) waived)

waived) notes?

place?

granted)

granted)

Y

N

cannot read (sel Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested

Y

N

3.3 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested

Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested

Y

N

12.9 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested

Y

N

2.2 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested

Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested

Y

N

2.6 Waived

Waived N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested

Y

N

11.3 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested

Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested

Y

N

10.3 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested

Y

N

unknown

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested

Y

N

8.6 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested

Y

N

6.2 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested

Y

N

5.2 Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested

Personal Phone

TTY Access (Not Amplifier (Not Shake & Wake

requested; requested; (Not requested; Any other

denied;

denied;

denied;

auxiliary aid

granted)

granted)

granted)

requested?

Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

Not requested Not requested Not requested Pocket Talker

Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

Not requested Not requested Not requested Pocket Talker

Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

Not requested Not requested Not requested N/A

Not requested Not requested Granted

N/A

LSCC (March 2020), p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 151 of 195 - Page ID#: 3430

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device. Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers)

How many
10
4

Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

1

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like? 1

Bed shakers

3

Vibrating watches

2

Vibrating alarm clocks

11

Pagers

0

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices

currently in use or under consideration not

mentioned above.

0

Earphones for parole hearings

0

Earphones for orientation videos

0

Where

When obtained

Medical GA-A Dorm CTO Office

3/1/2018 3/1/2018

GA-A Dorm 3/1/2018

SAP/ Chapel GA-A Dorm CTO Office GA-A Dorm CTO Office GA-A Dorm CTO Office N/A

3/1/2018 3/1/2018 3/1/2018 3/1/2018

N/A N/A N/A

How do inmates obtain How well do

Specifications (URL)

access?

they work?

Request from ADA

https://mms.mckesson.com/product/662816/Posey-8274 coordinator

Good

https://www.harriscomm.com/portable-telephone-

Request from ADA

amplifier.html

coordinator

Good

May use at any time phones

https://www.captel.com/captel/phones/captel-840i/

are available

Good

https://www.behringer.com/Categories/Behringer/Loudspe

aker-Systems/Portable/VS1520/p/P0A4T

Used daily or as needed. Good

Request from ADA

https://www.silentcall.com/collections/medallion

coordinator

Good

Request from ADA

https://www.maxiaids.com/casio-vibration-watch-blackblue coordinator

Good

https://www.maxiaids.com/iluv-timeshaker-boom-jumbo- Request from ADA

led-alarm-clock-with-wireless-bed-shaker

coordinator

Good

LSCC (March 2020), p. 13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 152 of 195 - Page ID#: 3431
Northpoint

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 153 of 195 - Page ID#: 3432

Include Feb. 2020

Deaf/HO H or both? #
A Both

Both Both

Both Both

Audit item

questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was

discovered during the audit,

and what has been done

about it, or if the problem

Issue/Question

remains)

ADA coordinator

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

2 coordinator appointed?

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit

7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

Both

9 Describe training

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Description/Notes
Jessica Payton, James Keltner
no yes
yes yes all training on share drive to include HOH presentations and settlement information
weekly

Compliant
X X X X X NA X

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

Both B Reporting obligations

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

Both

2 inmates?

Both

3 Is the list complete?

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

HOH

3 notifications.)

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

Deaf

Deaf inmates

Deaf

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Both

Notice to medical staff:

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

yes

X

yes

X

yes to best of my knowledge

X

NA

yes

X

Automatic KOMS notifications and

notification by medical department

NA

yes, if interpretations services are needed

then it is arranged.

X

NA

yes

X

NA

X

if interpretation services are needed then

they are provided

X

NA

X

X

NA

X

X

X

orientation provided by staff in quiet space

X

NA NA
X
X
X NA

NTC (March 2020), p. 1

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 154 of 195 - Page ID#: 3433

Include Feb. 2020

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both Both Both

Issue/Question 31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert? 33 Notify ADA coordinator? 34 Is notification prompt?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

Summary

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

HOH

50 7 days/week?

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Both E Information provided inmates

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in

18 law library? (Need to check)

Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

verified present on 2/24/2020

Compliant
X X X
NA X X X X X
NA X X X X

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X

X
NA X X X X
NA X X X
NA X X X X X

NTC (March 2020), p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 155 of 195 - Page ID#: 3434

Include Feb. 2020

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both G Both

Issue/Question Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment Identification to ADA Coordinator

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant NA

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

KOMS notification upon transfer, notification

X

by medical upon intake assessment

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

Both

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Both

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

Both

2 Cell cards

Both

3 Bed shaker

Both

4 In-person alerts

Both

5 Pager

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

Both

9 Other amplification

Both

10 Other (describe)

Both

General issues

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Both

20 Have any been out of comission?

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Both

22 hearing aid?

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

Both

24 Promptly?

KOMS notification upon transfer, notification

X

by medical upon intake assessment

Yes, now completed during treatment team

meetings every Monday in conjuction with

X

medical department

X

X X X NA X

X

open dorm, bunk cards provided

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

FM transmittors in chapel, programs building

X

Describe:

NA

NA

X

NA

NA

X

X X

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NTC (March 2020), p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 156 of 195 - Page ID#: 3435

Include Feb. 2020

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both Both
Both Both I Deaf
Deaf
Deaf
Deaf
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf

Issue/Question 25 Has there been a direct threat determination? 26 Describe
Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of 27 impairment and specific dangers posed) 28 Appropriately reported to monitor?
Interpretation in general Qualified interpretation services available: Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation 1 communicated to inmates? covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 2 encounters/communications/settings) Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other 3 volunteer-provided programming? Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation 4 method? 5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences? Standing arrangement with providers? 6 In-person? 7 VRI? Is VRI availability: 8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant
NA NA
X NA
X
X
X X X NA X X NA X

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Deaf

13 In general

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Deaf

16 Splitter?

Deaf

17 Instructions?

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Deaf

21 How?

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

Deaf

22 should be first recourse?

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

Deaf

24 Parole?

X

X

X

X

Describe:

NA

X

X

X

Describe:

NA

X

X

X

X

X

VRI Log, tested monthly to ensure operating,

follow up with inmate to see if there are any

X

issues with use

X

X X

NTC (March 2020), p. 4

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 157 of 195 - Page ID#: 3436

Deaf/HO Include H or Feb. 2020 both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

Deaf

27 before?

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

Deaf

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

Deaf

29 Describe

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

Deaf

30 was unavailable)

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

Deaf

31 method?

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

Deaf

35 encounters/communications/settings)

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

Deaf J Hand Restraints

Deaf

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

Deaf

2 finding of a security threat?

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

Deaf

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

Deaf

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

Deaf

5 Staff aware of the issue

Deaf

Off-site medical care:

Deaf

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

restraints removed when necessary for medical

Deaf

7 communication?

Both K Non-auditory Alerts

Both

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Both

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

Both

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

Both

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

Both

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

Both

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

Both

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Description/Notes no known instances where intepretation offered no known instances where intepretation denied. no known instances
Describe: bed shaker, vibrating watches

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Both

9 been denied?

NTC (March 2020), p. 5

Compliant
X X X
NA X X X X
NA
X X NA X
X X X NA X X
NA X X X
X

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X

assigned inmate aides assist

X

assigned inmate aides assist

X

assigned inmate aides assist

assigned inmate aides

X

assist/staff assist

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 158 of 195 - Page ID#: 3437

Include Feb. 2020

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both Both Both Both Both Both Both Both Both Both
Both
Both

Issue/Question 10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working? 11 How often? 12 monitored/recorded formally? 13 Announcement boards 14 used to notify of schedule changes? 15 used consistently? 16 in all dormitories? 17 in gym? 18 in library? 19 audited and monitored?
In-person or personal system notification when an inmate 20 misses a page?
Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only 21 because of disability?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes Bed shakers tested monthly by Fire/Safety

Compliant
X X X NA X X X X X X X

NA

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Deaf

5 alternative offered

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

6 videophone is out of service.

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

Deaf

12 using ordinary phones?

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

Deaf

14 Free?

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone

Deaf

15 calls?

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

Both

TTY:

Both

18 Installed?

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

no known instances

X

X

X

X

NA

X

NA

NA

Sorenson phone is used primarly due to

reliability and purple laptop is now back up

X

Describe: notice posted to HOH inmates and

information delivered by staff

NA

X

X

X

X

X

X X

X

No

NA

X

NA X X

NTC (March 2020), p. 6

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 159 of 195 - Page ID#: 3438

Include Feb. 2020

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

Both

23 for non-deaf inmates?

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Both

25 Permission needed?

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Deaf

VRS via laptop

Deaf

36 Available?

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

Both

Phones

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

Both

CapTel

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

43 Request by any inmate denied?

Both

TV/Movies

Both

44 Is captioning available?

Both

45 Is captioning used?

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes
List names List names

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

Both

53 status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

Both

54 deaf inmates?

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

vibrating watches, vibrating alarm clocks

Compliant
X NA
X X NA
NA X X X
NA X X
NA NA NA NA NA
X X X X X
X
X
X
NA

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

Both

5 (Describe)

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Both

7 because security threat?

Both

8 monitor notified?

no denials have occurred NTC (March 2020), p. 7

X X
NA X X X

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X X

Keefe states that they are

X

working to add options for hard

of hearing

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 160 of 195 - Page ID#: 3439

Include Feb. 2020

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

9 reasoning explained?

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both

10 of requests?

Both

11 of denials?

Both N Disciplinary

Both O Grievances

Both P Training

Both

Types available

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

Both

3 All appropriate staff?

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant
X NA
X X

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA

X

all staff and contract staff

NA

X

Describe: although live training has been

removed from in-service, staff are routinely

reminded of hard-of-hearing

accommodations, particularly unit staff

NA

Describe: all staff with extra emphasis on

unit staff

NA

NTC (March 2020), p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 161 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3440

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

If signs to

Signs to

Low literacy? (So that

Has Bed/Door communicate, noted Auxiliary Aid

Bed Shaker? (Not

Listed with KOMS communicate written communication Has Deaf/HOH ID Card? (Y or

in KOMS precaution Assessment meeting requested; denied;

Name

ID

Housing location ADA Precaution? (Y/N)

is not effective)

Card? (Y or waived) waived)

notes?

took place?

granted)

Dorm 4

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 3

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 3

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 2

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 4

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 6

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 4

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 4

Yes

Dorm 2

Yes

Dorm 4

Yes

Dorm 5

Yes

Dorm 1

Yes

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Dorm 5

Yes

Dorm 2

Yes

Dorm 6

Yes

Dorm 2

Yes

Dorm 6

Yes

Dorm 6

Yes

Dorm 4

Yes

Dorm 6

Yes

Dorm 1

Yes

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

requested then waived

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Dorm 4

Yes

Dorm 4

Yes

N

N

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Dorm 4

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

requested then waived

RHU

Yes

Dorm 3

Yes

Dorm 6

Yes

Dorm 3

Yes

Dorm 1

Yes

Dorm 3

Yes

Dorm 2

Yes

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

requested then waived

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Dorm 6

Yes

Dorm 2

Yes

Dorm 6

Yes

Dorm 1

Yes

Dorm 5

Yes

Dorm 2

Yes

Dorm 6

Yes

Dorm 2

Yes

Dorm 6

Yes

Dorm 5

Yes

Dorm 2

Yes

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

N

N

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

granted

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Dorm 4

Yes

Dorm 4

Yes

N

N

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

granted

Y

Not requested

NTC (March 2020), p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 162 of 195 - Page ID#: 3441
USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR

Name

TTY Access (Not

Personal Phone Amplifier Shake & Wake (Not

Other Alert Device (Not

requested; denied;

(Not requested; denied; requested; denied;

ID

requested; denied; granted) granted)

granted)

granted)

Any other auxiliary aid requested? Outome?

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aide granted

not requested

granted

Not requested

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

not requested

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

inmate approved to

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

vibrating watch

purchase

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

not requested

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aide granted

granted

not requested

Not requested

vibrating watch/captel

approved for both

inmate approved to

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

vibrating watch

purchase

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

inmate approved to

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

vibrating watch

purchase

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

inmate approved to

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

vibrating watch

purchase

inmate approved to

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

vibrating watch

purchase

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

not requested

not requested

granted

Not requested

arrived with hearing aide

not requested

not requested

Not requested

refused hearing aides

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aide ordered

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

inmate approved to

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

vibrating watch

purchase

not requested

not requested

granted

Not requested

not requested

not requested

not requested

Not requested

not requested

not requested

granted

Not requested

not requested

not requested

not requested

Not requested

not requested

not requested

not requested

Not requested

not requested

not requested

not requested

Not requested

arrived with hearing aide

not requested

not requested

Not requested

denied by medical, ordered am not requested

granted

Not requested

refused hearing aides

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

inmate approved to

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

vibrating watch

purchase

denied by medical, ordered am not requested

granted

Not requested

NTC (March 2020), p. 10

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 163 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3442

If signs to

Signs to

Low literacy? (So that

Has Bed/Door communicate, noted Auxiliary Aid

Bed Shaker? (Not

Listed with KOMS communicate written communication Has Deaf/HOH ID Card? (Y or

in KOMS precaution Assessment meeting requested; denied;

ID

Housing location ADA Precaution? (Y/N)

is not effective)

Card? (Y or waived) waived)

notes?

took place?

granted)

Dorm 2

Yes

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 6

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

RHU

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 2

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 2

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 2

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 2

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 6

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 4

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 4

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 6

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 2

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 2

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

granted

Dorm 2

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

granted

Dorm 4

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 5

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 4

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Dorm 5

Yes

Dorm 2

Yes

Dorm 4

Yes

Dorm 6

Yes

Dorm 6

Yes

Dorm 2

Yes

Dorm 2

Yes

Dorm 1

Yes

Dorm 2

Yes

Dorm 2

Yes

Dorm 1

Yes

Dorm 2

Yes

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Dorm 2

Yes

Dorm 2

Yes

Dorm 6

Yes

Dorm 6

Yes

Dorm 1

Yes

Dorm 2

Yes

Dorm 6

Yes

Dorm 2

Yes

Dorm 3

Yes

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

granted

Y

Not requested

Y

requested then waived

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Y

Not requested

NTC (March 2020), p. 11

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 164 of 195 - Page ID#: 3443

TTY Access (Not

Personal Phone Amplifier Shake & Wake (Not

Other Alert Device (Not

requested; denied;

(Not requested; denied; requested; denied;

ID

requested; denied; granted) granted)

granted)

granted)

Any other auxiliary aid requested? Outome?

hearing aides granted

granted

not requested

Not requested

VRI and in-person interpreter for Pa approved for both

not requested

not requested

not requested

Not requested

arrived with hearing aide

not requested

not requested

Not requested

arrived with hearing aide

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

not requested

not requested

granted

Not requested

arrived with hearing aide

not requested

not requested

Not requested

arrived with hearing aide

not requested

not requested

Not requested

not requested

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

arrived with hearing aide

not requested

not requested

Not requested

arrived with hearing aide

not requested

not requested

Not requested

not requested

not requested

granted

Not requested

not requested

not requested

granted

Not requested

arrived with hearing aide

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

inmate approved to

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

vibrating watch

purchase

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

arrived with hearing aide

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

arrived with hearing aide

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aide granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

not requested

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

inmate refused

not requested

not requested

Not requested

not requested

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

inmate approved to

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

vibrating watch

purchase

arrived with hearing aide

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

arrived with hearing aide

not requested

not requested

Not requested

arrived with hearing aide

not requested

not requested

Not requested

arrived with hearing aide

not requested

not requested

Not requested

arrived with hearing aide

not requested

not requested

Not requested

hearing aides granted

not requested

not requested

Not requested

arrived with hearing aide

not requested

not requested

Not requested

NTC (March 2020), p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 165 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3444

How do inmates obtain

Technology

How many Where

When obtained Specifications (URL)

access?

How well do they work?

FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier

system, or other assistive listening device.

2

Programs building and chapel

Dec-19

Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable

amplifiers)

9

inmate possession

Unknown

purchased from McKesson request from Medical

having issues with captioning

working. The phone itself

works and inmates state

they prefer to use it because

Oct-18

it is louder and clearer but the captioning is not

operating. Requires second

phone line or internet

located on dorm, officer capability. Reached out to IT

Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

2

Dorm 2 and Dorm 6

will unlock

for help.

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the

like?

0

no known issues, tested

Bed shakers

Unknown

Request from ADA

monthly and in working

4

Dorm 2 (one currently ordered for Dorm 4)

Coordinator

order

Request from ADA

Vibrating watches

unknown

Coordinator to help

2 known inmate possession

facilitate purchase

no known issues

Request from ADA

Vibrating alarm clocks

Unknown

Coordinator to help

unknown inmate possession

facilitate purchase

Pagers

0

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices

currently in use or under consideration not

mentioned above.

0

Earphones for parole hearings

0

Earphones for orientation videos

1

library/orientation CTO office

Dec-20

request from orientation CTO

NTC (March 2020), p. 13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 166 of 195 - Page ID#: 3445
Roederer Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 167 of 195 - Page ID#: 3446

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #
A
Both
Both Both
Both Both

Issue/Question ADA coordinator
1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator? Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA
2 coordinator appointed? 3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?
Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit where 7 deaf/HOH inmates are held? 8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Deputy Warden Jessica Durrett, Unit

Administrator Brittany Puckett, Assistant Unit

Administrator Jordan Wright, and Assistant

X

Unit Administrator Craig Lish

NA

X

X

X

Both

9 Describe training

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

Both B Reporting obligations

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

Both

2 inmates?

Both

3 Is the list complete?

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

HOH

3 notifications.)

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

ADA Building Blocks, CBTs, Annual In-Service,

ADA in Jails & Prisons Webinar, ADA

Coordinator CREATE Compliance Training

(powerpoint), Deaf/HOH Training: Settlement

Monitor's Recommended Revision

X

(powerpoint), Federal Court Deaf/HOH

Settlement Agreement (powerpoint), Tips for

Communicating with Inmates are are HOH

(word document), Communicating with

Deaf/HOH Offenders (powerpoint)

X

X

X X

X

New Intake Inmates: Medical notifes ADA

Coordinator. Inmates Transferring from another facility: Emailed notification by

X

KOMS automatic alert.

ADA precaution in KOMS notifies staff that

offender is Deaf/HOH. ADA Coordinators meet with inmate to determine what is

X

needed for effective communication.

RCC (March 2020), p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 168 of 195 - Page ID#: 3447

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #
Deaf Deaf

Issue/Question Deaf inmates 5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Both

Notice to medical staff:

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

Summary

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X

New Intake Inmates: Medical notifes ADA

Coordinator. Inmates Transferring from

another facility: Emailed notification by

X

KOMS automatic alert.

X

X

A VRI Laptop is available and we have a

contract with a Certified Interpreter if

needed. TTY and Videophone are available

X

upon ADA Assessment.

X

X

X

X

X

A VRI Laptop is available and we have a

contract with a Certified Interpreter if

needed. TTY and Videophone are also

X

available.

X

X

Further assessment is completed within 5

days.

X

X X X

X X X X X

RCC (March 2020), p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 169 of 195 - Page ID#: 3448

Audit item

questions/concerns

(note here if a problem

was discovered during

Deaf/HO

the audit, and what has

Include, H or

been done about it, or if

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

the problem remains) Description/Notes

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

Must turn in a bettery to receive a new one

HOH

50 7 days/week?

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Both E Information provided inmates

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in law

18 library? (Need to check)

Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon intake

Both

1 of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and Services

Assessment with every arriving or newly identified deaf/hoh

Both

3 inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Oral/Written unless otherwise requested by

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

the inmate

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X X X X

X

X X
X X X X
X X X
X X X X X

X X
X
X X X X

RCC (March 2020), p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 170 of 195 - Page ID#: 3449

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #
Both

Issue/Question Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn t receive an assessment on

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

Both

2 Cell cards

Both

3 Bed shaker

Both

4 In-person alerts

Both

5 Pager

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

Both

9 Other amplification

Both

10 Other (describe)

Both

General issues

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Both

20 Have any been out of comission?

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Both

22 hearing aid?

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

Both

24 Promptly?

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Both

26 Describe

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

Both I Interpretation in general

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

Deaf

1 communicated to inmates?

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

Deaf

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

3 volunteer-provided programming?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes
All deaf/HOH inmates, whether intake or transfer in from another facility, have an assessment with an ADA Coordinator
Describe: Auxiliary Aids maintained in Medical, Assessment Center, and Re-Entry
Have not refused a job due to safety or security issue for a deaf/HOH inmate

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X

X X X X X X X X NA NA
X NA NA X NA NA NA NA NA NA

X X X

RCC (March 2020), p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 171 of 195 - Page ID#: 3450

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Deaf

4 Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation method?

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf

6 In-person?

Deaf

7 VRI?

Deaf

Is VRI availability:

Deaf

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

X X

Contract

X

X

Available 24/7. Requested through ADA

Coordinator or through Captain's Office

X

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

X

Deaf

10 on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Deaf

13 In general

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Deaf

16 Splitter?

Deaf

17 Instructions?

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Deaf

21 How?

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

Deaf

22 should be first recourse?

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

Deaf

24 Parole?

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

Deaf

27 before?

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

Deaf

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

Deaf

29 Describe

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI was

Deaf

30 unavailable)

X

X X

X X X

X

X

X

X

X

Inmate's information/use of VRI is logged

when machine is used

x

X

Yes, available through a contract

X

Yes, available through a contract

X

NA

NA

NA

This facility does not use inmates to interpret for deaf/HOH inmates

NA

NA

NA

RCC (March 2020), p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 172 of 195 - Page ID#: 3451

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Deaf

31 Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred method?

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

Deaf

35 (not limited to only certain encounters/communications/settings)

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

Deaf J Hand Restraints

Deaf

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison?

Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized finding of a

Deaf

2 security threat?

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

Deaf

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

Deaf

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

Deaf

5 Staff aware of the issue

Deaf

Off-site medical care:

Deaf

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

Used on initial transport

Deaf

7 restraints removed when necessary for medical communication?

Both K Non-auditory Alerts

Both

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Both

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

Both

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

Both

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

Both

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

Both

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

Both

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Describe: Bed Shaker

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Both

9 been denied?

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Both

11 How often?

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Both

15 used consistently?

Both

16 in all dormitories?

Describe: Monthly RCC (March 2020), p. 6

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X

X

X

X
X
X
X
X
X X X
X X
X X X X X X X X
NA X X X
X X X

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 173 of 195 - Page ID#: 3452

Deaf/HO

Include, H or

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

Both

17 in gym?

Both

18 in library?

Both

19 audited and monitored?

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

Both

20 misses a page?

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

Both

21 because of disability?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) X X X

X

NA

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Deaf

5 alternative offered

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

6 videophone is out of service.

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends, emergency)

Deaf

9 if necessary?

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates using

Deaf

12 ordinary phones?

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

Deaf

14 Free?

NA
X X
X

1 Videophone Installed

X

No reports of being out of service since

8/2019

NA

No technical difficulties

NA

VRI Laptop is available if Videophone is out of

service

X

Describe: Information is posted by

Videophone and ADA Coordinator

X

communicates with ADA Inmates

X

Outside unit door

X

No escort required

NA

X

List of approved inmates available for

staff/KOMS precaution also available. Must

X

have approval from ADA Coordinator.

No necessary

X

X

Deaf

15 Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone calls?

X

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been 16 denied?

Yes, Inmate

X

RCC (March 2020), p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 174 of 195 - Page ID#: 3453

Audit item

questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

the audit, and what has

NA, unknown, or no

Include, H or

been done about it, or if

basis for evaluation

Feb. 2020 both? # Issue/Question

the problem remains) Description/Notes

(Explain)

Received numerous reports from Purple

Communications, Inc of videophone being

used by person who did not use sign

language for communication. Video footage

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

was watched and it was determinted to be

Inmate

. Denied usage

X

of Videophone due to sign language not

being primary mode of communication, but

authroized use of ADA phone outside unit on

17

10/18/2019.

Both

TTY:

Both

18 Installed?

1 available

X

Addressed in ADA Handbook. Also available

through communication with ADA

X

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Coordinator

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

X

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

Not out of service

NA

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

Available 7 days per week/12 hours per day

X

Located in Captain's Office, but moved to

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones for

Unit 1 Control Center where ADA phone is

X

Both

23 non-deaf inmates?

located when needed.

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

X

Both

25 Permission needed?

Must have approval from ADA Coordinator

X

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

Has not been denied

N/A

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Has not been used

N/A

Deaf

VRS via laptop

Deaf

36 Available?

X

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

There is not a RHU in this institution

NA

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

X

Both

Phones

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

X

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

X

Both

CapTel

NA

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

NA

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

List names

NA

43 Request by any inmate denied?

List names

NA

Both

TV/Movies

NA

Both

44 Is captioning available?

X

Both

45 Is captioning used?

X

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Checked weekly in all units

X

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

X

RCC (March 2020), p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 175 of 195 - Page ID#: 3454

Deaf/HO Include, H or Feb. 2020 both? #

Issue/Question

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes
Closed captioning must be turned on the institutional channel by recreation as well as individual TVs in the units

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X

X

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in segregated

Both

53 housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates only

to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-deaf

Both

54 inmates?

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

NA Institution does not have segregated housing
X

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

Both

5 (Describe)

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Both

7 because security threat?

Both

8 monitor notified?

Both

9 reasoning explained?

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both

10 of requests?

Both

11 of denials?

Both N Disciplinary

Both O Grievances

Both P Training

Both

Types available

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

Both

3 All appropriate staff?

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

Describe in detail: Sound Amplifiers available

through medical. Phone Amplifiers and Bed

X

Shakers available through ADA Coordinator

No devices available through commisary

N A

Devices available upton request

X

NA

Non requested

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

X X

X

All staff receive annual training

X

X

Describe: Provided by Institutional Training

Coordinator

X

Describe: All staff receive annual training

X

X

RCC (March 2020), p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 176 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3455

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Personal

If signs to

Phone

communicat

Other Alert TTY Access Amplifier

Listed with

Low literacy? Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid

Device (Not (Not

(Not

KOMS ADA Signs to (So that written Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment Bed Shaker? requested; requested; requested;

Housing Precaution communica communication Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting took (Not requested; denied; denied; denied;

Name

ID

location ?

te (Y/N) is not effective) waived) waived) notes?

place?

denied; granted) granted) granted) granted)

AC A 09 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC A 07 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC A 26 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC A 36 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC A 40 Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC B 01 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC B 14 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC B 15 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC B 25 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC B 44 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC B 46 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC C 04 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC C 22 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC D 20 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC D 50 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC G 02 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC G 04 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC G 07 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC G 20 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC H 13 Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC H 28 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC H 44 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC I 03 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC I 10 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC J 12L Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC J 15L Y

N

N

Waived

Waived

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC K 19 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC K 21U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC L 23L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC M 01L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC M 06U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC M 06L Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC M 21U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B4 04 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B4 23 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B5 17 Y

N

N

Y

Y

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B5 23 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B8 14 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC N 08 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC N 25 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC O 19 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC O 24U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P 09U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P 24 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Shake & Wake (Not requested; denied; granted) NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR

Any other auxiliary aid requested? N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N

RCC (March 2020), p. 10

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 177 of 195 - Page ID#: 3456

Name

Audit item

ID

Outome?

issues/concerns

Hearing Aid issued

none

Hearing Aid issued

none

ound amplifier issued

none

ound amplifier issued

none

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

Hearing Aid issued

none

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

ound amplifier issued

none

Hearing Aid issued

none

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

Hearing Aid issued

none

ound amplifier issued

none

Hearing aid issued

none

Hearing Aid issued

none

Hearing aid issued

none

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

Hearing Aid issued

none

Hearing Aid issued

none

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

waived hearing aids

none

Hearing aid issued

none

ound amplifier issued

none

ound amplifier issued

none

ound amplifier issued

none

Hearing Aid Issued

none

Hearing aid issued

none

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

Hearing Aid Issued

none

Has Hearing aid

Hearing Aid Ordered

none

Has Hearing aid

none

efused Hearing Aid

none

Hearing Aid issued

none

Hearing Aid issued

none

ound amplifier issued

none

Hearing Aid issued

none

Hearing Aid issued

none

Hearing Aid issued

none

RCC (March 2020), p. 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 178 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3457

Personal

If signs to

Phone

communicat

Other Alert TTY Access Amplifier

Listed with

Low literacy? Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid

Device (Not (Not

(Not

KOMS ADA Signs to (So that written Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment Bed Shaker? requested; requested; requested;

Housing Precaution communica communication Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting took (Not requested; denied; denied; denied;

ocation ?

te (Y/N) is not effective) waived) waived) notes?

place?

denied; granted) granted) granted) granted)

RC P-07 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P-13U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P-3 U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q 02U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q 15 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q 20U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q 22 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q-16U Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC R 09 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC R 29 Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC S 27 Y

N

N

Y

Waived

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC S 37 Y

N

N

Y

Waived

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC T 31 Y

N

N

Y

Waived

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Shake & Wake (Not requested; denied; granted) NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR

Any other auxiliary aid requested? N N N N N N N N N N N N N

RCC (March 2020), p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 179 of 195 - Page ID#: 3458

Outome? Hearing Aid issued Hearing Aid issued Hearing Aid issued Hearing aid ordered Hearing aid issued Hearing aid issued Hearing Aid issued Hearing Aid issued Refused Hearing Aid Hearing Aid Issued Hearing Aid issued Hearing Aid issued Hearing Aid Ordered

Audit item issues/concerns none none none none none none none none none none none none none

RCC (March 2020), p. 13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 180 of 195 - Page ID#: 3459

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device. Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers) Captioned Telephone (CapTel) Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like?
Bed shakers
Vibrating watches Vibrating alarm clocks Pagers Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration not mentioned above.
Earphones for parole hearings
Earphones for orientation videos

How many
30
3 NA
NA
2 NA NA NA
NA
1
2

Where Medical AC Program Administrators Office
AC Program Administrators Office
Re-Entry AC Program Administrators Office

When obtained NA NA
NA
NA NA

Specifications (URL)

How do inmates obtain access?

How well do they work?

Issued once verified as HOH In working order

Request through ADA

Coordinator

In working order

Request through ADA Coordinator

In working order

Request through Re-Entry Coordinator Request through ADA Coordinator

In working order In working order

RCC (March 2020), p. 14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 181 of 195 - Page ID#: 3460

Documentation to provide Grievances:

Date reviewed Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

Provide summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc.
1/2/2020 Provide full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Discipline

19-130 Inmate went to pill call to get ibuprofen and nurse said there was no order. He went to nurse at window and requested medicine, blood test , and x-ray. Nurse became verbal and told him he was in restricted area. Ask that nurse would talk to him in professional manner. Withdrew on 8/19/19
19-157 Inmate went to doctor complaining of pain in Hip. Provider wanted to perscibe medication that helps with pain. Inmate stated that the medicine in question is also a psych med and he wasn’t taking med. They asked for him to sign refusal and he did. Requested to be given something for pain. Appealed all the way to heath care director and they concurred with decision.
19-165 Inmate filed grievance that he needed a bottom bunk. Medical responded that he needed to come to sick call and he could be assessed for a bottom bunk. Inmate was satisfied with response on 9/18/19
19-193 Inmate claims that during a routine search and Lieutenant grabbed his private area Outside the kitchen. Camera was reviewed and concluded that search was done properly. Satisfied with response on 11/13/19
19-201 Inmate went to medical to receive hearing aids and was told there was a $10 copay for hearing. Inmate request not to pay for hearing aids and to have hearing aids for both ears. It was appealed all the way through healthcare director.
19-220 Inmate was taken to court and his property was never packed up. When he came back from court some of his property was missing. Requested property to be returned. satisfied with initial response 1/16/20
19-222 Inmate Claims that cane was issued though doctor at RCC. Claims a nurse harassed him betting she could get cane taken from him. The cane was taken and he requested to the cane back. Kim McDonald responded to grievance the cane was needed for long distances and this was discussed with the provider which came to the decision take his cane. Appealed to health care committee and they concurred with decision. Appealed to Healthcare director and still awaiting decision. Transferred On 2/19/20

Problem:

did not want to pay co-payment for Hearing Aids. On 11/11/2019,

Informal Resolution referred to CPP 13.2 regarding co-payment. Appealed to Health Care Grievance

Committee. On 11/22/2019, committee concurred with informal resolution. Appealed for

Administrator Review. On 1/2/2020, medical director concurred with Health Care Grievance

Committee.

For all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving an inmate who signs, provide report of inmate name, date, and communication method for each. Provide documentation for all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. VRI Log (provide).

N/A
8/20/2019, 10/22/2019

RCC has not had any disciplinary proceedings involving an inmate who signs from July 2019-present.

, Category 3-02: Refusing to be housed at RCC;

,

Category 3-02: Refusing to be housed at RCC

RCC (March 2020), p. 15

TTY instructions (provide) VRI instructions (provide)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 182 of 195 - Page ID#: 3461

Any pages of the inmate handbook that address disability, and the date for that version of the handbook.

The current Deaf/HOH brochure and any other documents provided to deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates.
The medical request form currently provided to prisoners. Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2019 or 2020 and addressing deaf/hard-of-hearing issues.
A list of each use of an in-person sign-language interpreter from July 2019 to present, and any occasions in which such an interpreter was requested but denied.

RCC (March 2020), p. 16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 183 of 195 - Page ID#: 3462
Western Kentucky Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 184 of 195 - Page ID#: 3463

Include, Feb. 2020

Deaf/HOH or both? #
A Both
Both Both
Both Both Both
Both

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

ADA coordinator

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Jacob Bruce

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

2 coordinator appointed?

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit where

7 deaf/HOH inmates are held?

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

9 Describe training

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly reports on

15 KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

Both

B Reporting obligations

Both

2 Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH inmates?

Both

3 Is the list complete?

Both

C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

KOMS alert/medical file review

HOH

3 Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic notifications.)

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

Deaf

Deaf inmates

Deaf

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

Both

D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Both

Notice to medical staff:

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there further

Both

27 assessment?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

Hasn't occurred this period Hasn't occurred this period
Headphones available/interp available

WKCC (March 2020), p. 1

Compliant

Partially

Non-

Compliant Compliant

Y Y Y Y Y NA Y
Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Y
Y
NA Y
NA Y
NA Y
NA Y Y
NA Y Y
NA Y Y Y
Y
NA NA
Y
Y
Y NA
Y Y Y

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 185 of 195 - Page ID#: 3464

Include, Feb. 2020

Deaf/HOH or both? # HOH HOH HOH HOH HOH HOH

HOH

HOH

HOH

HOH

HOH

Both

E

Issue/Question Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist) 35 Audiology services offered when needed? 36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles) 37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid? 38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services 39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate? Summary Hearing aid batteries 48 Available for free? 49 In sufficient numbers? 50 7 days/week? 51 regardless of housing? Information provided inmates

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in law

18 library? (Need to check)

Both

F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

Both

G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon intake of

Both

1 each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other deaf/hoh

Both

2 inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and Services

Both

3 Assessment with every arriving or newly identified deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate about

Both

5 available auxiliary aids and services?

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

Compliant

Partially

Non-

Compliant Compliant

NA Y Y Y Y Y
NA Y Y Y Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Y

Y Y NA Y Y Y Y NA Y Y Y NA Y Y Y Y Y
NA
Y
Y

Y

Y Y Y

WKCC (March 2020), p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 186 of 195 - Page ID#: 3465

Include, Feb. 2020

Deaf/HOH or both? #

Both Both

Both

Both

H

Both

Both

Both

Both

Both

HOH HOH

Both Both Both Both Both Both Both

Both Both Both Both Both

Both

Both

I

Deaf

Deaf

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

Issue/Question

the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral and

7 written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on intake,

8 has one been done?

Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided 1 On-person ID cards

2 Cell cards

3 Bed shaker

Not available

4 In-person alerts

5 Pager

Not available

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where phones

6 are available?)

7 Amplifier for phone

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

8 communication difficulties?

9 Other amplification

FM transmitters for various purposes

10 Other (describe)

Describe:

General issues

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

20 Have any been out of comission?

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from hearing

22 aid?

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

24 Promptly?

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

None determined.

26 Describe

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

Interpretation in general

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation communicated to

1 inmates?

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

Deaf

2 (not limited to only certain encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other volunteer-

Deaf

3 provided programming?

Deaf

4 Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation method?

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf

6 In-person?

Deaf

7 VRI?

Deaf

Is VRI availability:

Deaf

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

WKCC (March 2020), p. 3

Compliant

Partially

Non-

Compliant Compliant

Y NA
Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Y Y Y Y Y
Y
Y
Y
Y NA NA
Y NA NA
Y
Y Y NA NA

Y
NA Y
Y
Y Y Y NA Y Y NA Y Y

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 187 of 195 - Page ID#: 3466

Include, Deaf/HOH Feb. 2020 or both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Deaf

10 on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when needed

Deaf

11 (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Deaf

13 In general

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Deaf

16 Splitter?

Deaf

17 Instructions?

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Deaf

21 How?

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation should

Deaf

22 be first recourse?

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

Deaf

24 Parole?

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

Portable Laptop in interview room Describe: Describe:
Short questionnaire after use
None who sign during this period

Deaf

27 Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days before?

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in non-

Deaf

28 emergency is non-compliant)

Deaf

29 Describe

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI was

Deaf

30 unavailable)

No inmates interpret

Deaf

31 Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred method?

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Deaf

33 Written communication is not needed when inmate has low literacy

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other volunteer-

Deaf

34 provided programming?

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not

Deaf

35 limited to only certain encounters/communications/settings)

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

Deaf

J

Hand Restraints

Deaf

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison? Escort

in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized finding of a security

Deaf

2 threat?

None who sign this period

Compliant

Partially

Non-

Compliant Compliant

Y
Y
Y NA
Y Y Y NA Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y
Y Y Y Y Y
Y
Y
NA
Y
Y
Y
Y
NA
Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Y Y NA Y

WKCC (March 2020), p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 188 of 195 - Page ID#: 3467

Include, Deaf/HOH Feb. 2020 or both? #
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might ordinarily

3 be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

5 Staff aware of the issue

Off-site medical care:

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

Compliant
Y Y Y NA

Deaf

7 restraints removed when necessary for medical communication?

Both

K Non-auditory Alerts

Both

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Both

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

Both

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

Both

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

Both

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

Both

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

Both

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts been

Both

9 denied?

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Both

11 How often?

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Both

15 used consistently?

Both

16 in all dormitories?

Both

17 in gym?

Both

18 in library?

Both

19 audited and monitored?

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate misses a

Both

20 page?

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only because of

Both

21 disability?

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

Both

L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other alternative

Deaf

5 offered

Flashing lights for count, 5-min warning, chow,

meds. In-person alerts for personal

pages/emergencies

NA

Y

Y

fire alarms have flashing lights

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

No denials. library located in gym

Y
Y Y Y NA Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y

None reported

NA Y Y Y
Y

NA Y
NA NA
Y

Partially

Non-

Compliant Compliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

WKCC (March 2020), p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 189 of 195 - Page ID#: 3468

Include, Feb. 2020

Deaf/HOH or both? #
Deaf Deaf
Deaf
Deaf Deaf Deaf

Issue/Question
Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when videophone 6 is out of service. 7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates? 8 Appropriate location?
Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends, emergency) if 9 necessary? 11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?
No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates using 12 ordinary phones? 13 Advance request unnecessary? 14 Free?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes
Describe:

Deaf

15 Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone calls?

Compliant

Partially

Non-

Compliant Compliant

NA Y Y
Y
Y
Y
Y Y
Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Inmate

requested use of the videophone after having stated during his needs

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been denied? assessment that he did not know how to sign.

claimed to have previously used the

videophone at NTC. I verified with NTC that he did not have access to the videophone, and

16

denied his request based upon his stated lack of sign language and no prior authorization. NA

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the inmate's See above. Denial was

17 name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

9/21/19.

Both

TTY:

Both

18 Installed?

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made available

20 WITH TTY?

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones for non-

Both

23 deaf inmates?

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Both

25 Permission needed?

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Deaf

VRS via laptop

Deaf

36 Available?

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

Both

Phones

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

Both

CapTel

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

43 Request by any inmate denied?

Y

NA Y Y

Y

NA Y

Y

Y

compatible with Securus phones, and staff phone

line must be utilized. No inmate has been denied

Y

use.

NA

None who sign this period
List names List names

NA Y Y Y
NA Y Y
NA NA NA NA

WKCC (March 2020), p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 190 of 195 - Page ID#: 3469

Include, Feb. 2020

Deaf/HOH or both? # Both Both Both Both Both

Issue/Question TV/Movies 44 Is captioning available? 45 Is captioning used? 46 Is the captioning checked regularly? 47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) Description/Notes
logged in dorm logbooks each shift Movies displayed on instutional channel. Captioning can be turned on any TV that displays movies.

Compliant
NA Y Y Y Y Y

Both

52 All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe problems)

Y

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in segregated

Y

Both

53 housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates only to

Both

54 the same extent and with the same discretion as non-deaf inmates?

Both

M Miscellaneous Devices

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

Describe in detail Catalog available on request Master list dictated by KYDOC

Y
NA Y Y Y

Both

5 Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied? (Describe)

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Both

7 because security threat?

Both

8 monitor notified?

Both

9 reasoning explained?

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both

10 of requests?

Both

11 of denials?

Both

N Disciplinary

Both

O Grievances

Both

P Training

Both

Types available

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

Both

3

All appropriate staff?

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

Both

6

All appropriate staff?

No denials

NA Y Y Y Y
NA Y Y

NA

Y

All staff

NA

Y

Memo sent via email, placed on staff information

boards.

NA

Describe:

NA

Y

Partially

Non-

Compliant Compliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

WKCC (March 2020), p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20

ID#: 3470

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Low literacy? (So

If signs to

Listed with Signs to

that written

Has Deaf/HOH ID Has Bed/Door communicate,

Housing

KOMS ADA communicate communication is Card? (Y or

Card? (Y or

noted in KOMS

Name

ID

location

Precaution? (Y/N)

not effective)

waived)

waived)

precaution notes?

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

HWH

Y

N

N

waived

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

C2-72

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Released Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

NTC

Y

N

N

N

N

N/A

KSP

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Released Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

B1-07

Y

N

N

waived

waived

N/A

Released Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

A2-17

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

A1-08

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

C2-73

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

LLCC

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

KSR

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

C2-39

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

N/A

Released Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Released Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

LSCC

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

C1-24

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

SMU D-6 Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

NTC

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

C1-14

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

C2-76

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

A2-16

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

LSCC

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

MRS

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

C1-26

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

LLCC

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

C3-38

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

C3-40

Y

N

Limited basis

Y

Y

N/A

Released Y

N

Y (illiterate)

Y

waived

N/A

C3-56

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

C2-60

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

EKCC

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

LSCC

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

C3-24

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

A2-43

Y

N

Y (illiterate)

Y

Y

N/A

SMU B-2 Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

C1-23

Y

N

N

waived

waived

N/A

C1-74

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

SMU F-5

Y

N

A2-13

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

B2-40

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Parole

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

GRCC

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

C3-12

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

GRCC

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

GRCC

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

C3-04

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

LSCC

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Page: 191 of 195 - Page

Auxiliary Aid Assessment meeting took place? Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Bed Shaker? (Not requested; denied; granted) Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Other Alert Device TTY Access (Not

(Not requested; requested; denied;

denied; granted) granted)

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Granted

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

WKCC (March 2020), p. 8

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 192 of 195 - Page ID#: 3471

Name

Personal Phone Amplifier Shake & Wake (Not

(Not requested; denied; requested; denied;

ID

granted)

granted)

Any other auxiliary aid requested?

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Outcome? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Audit item issues/concerns N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Inmate was only at WKCC for 12 days. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Available for checkout Available for checkout Available for checkout Available for checkout Available for checkout Available for checkout Available for checkout Available for checkout Available for checkout

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

None None None None None None VRS (until denied in 2018 due to abuse) None None

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

WKCC (March 2020), p. 9

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 193 of 195 - Page

ID#: 3472

Low literacy? (So

If signs to

Auxiliary Aid

Listed with Signs to

that written

Has Deaf/HOH ID Has Bed/Door communicate,

Assessment Bed Shaker? (Not Other Alert Device TTY Access (Not

Housing

KOMS ADA communicate communication is Card? (Y or

Card? (Y or

noted in KOMS meeting took requested; denied; (Not requested; requested; denied;

ID

location

Precaution? (Y/N)

not effective)

waived)

waived)

precaution notes? place?

granted)

denied; granted) granted)

SMU E-4

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

C1-62

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

C1-39

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

KSP

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Jail

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Jail

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

C1-42

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

jail

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

C1-18

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

LLCC

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

A2-07

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

LAC

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

A1-40

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

C1-68

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

C3-46

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

SOCD

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

LSCC

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

C1-36

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

C3-15

Y

N

N

waived

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Parole

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

A2-03

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

A2-24

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

C3-70

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

C3-28

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

MRS

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

A2-44

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Granted

B2-35

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

B2-50

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

C3-76

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

C3-02

Y

N

N

waived

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

A2-48

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

C1-34

Y

N

Limited basis

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Granted

A2-10

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

A2-23

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

HWH

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

CLRKB 06 Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

CLRKA 17 Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Parole

Y

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

KCIW

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

CLNSB 45 Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

CLRKB 36 Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

MRS

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

CLNSA 48 Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

HWH

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

MRS

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

CLRKA 16 Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

CLNSB 28 Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

CLRKB 44 Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

CLRKB 34 Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

CLRKA 11 Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Parole

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

jail

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

WKCC (March 2020), p. 10

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 194 of 195 - Page ID#: 3473

Personal Phone Amplifier Shake & Wake (Not

(Not requested; denied; requested; denied;

ID

granted)

granted)

Any other auxiliary aid requested?

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Granted; transferred None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Available for checkout

Not requested

None

Outcome? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Audit item issues/concerns N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Inmate released prior to assessment N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

WKCC (March 2020), p. 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-2 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 195 of 195 - Page ID#: 3474

Technology

How many

FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device. 10

Phone amplifiers (not volume control:

portable amplifiers)

5

Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

N/A

Where Public TVs

When obtained In use since prior to 2017

Whenever phones are open

Dorms/Operations

N/A

N/A

How do inmates obtain

Specifications (URL)

access?

https://www.ccrane.com/item/acc_trans_trans2/100106/di

gital_fm_transmitter_2_for_sending_near_broadcast_quali Preinstalled/inmates tune

ty

in to FM frequency

ttps://www.amazon.com/Reizen-Portable-Telephone-

Amplifier-30dB/dp/B00I5PV94S/ref=pd_sbs_121_4/134-

6840137-

9359611?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B00I5PV94S&pd_rd_r

=b63f3f96-6691-11e9-af2b-

df456cd2a423&pd_rd_w=Hedu8&pd_rd_wg=4CL1N&pf_rd

_p=588939de-d3f8-42f1-a3d8-

d556eae5797d&pf_rd_r=XABEYJH2C66M6RY0449Q&psc=1

&refRID=XABEYJH2C66M6RY0449Q

Check out from staff

N/A

N/A

How well do they work? Good
Good N/A

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or 2

SAP

the like?

Fall 2019

https://www.amazon.com/Whole-House-FM-Transmitter-3- Staff instructors

0/dp/B00GHWUHD0/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=whole+house+f utilize/inmates tune in to

m+transmitter&qid=1581956281&s=hpc&sr=8-1

FM frequency

Good

Bed shakers

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Vibrating watches

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Vibrating alarm clocks

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Pagers

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices

Each announcement for

currently in use or under consideration not flashing

count, 5-minute count

mentioned above.

dayroom lights Each housing unit warning, chow, and med call. N/A

Earphones for parole hearings

2

Operations/Collins

https://www.sony.com/electronics/headband2018 headphones/mdr-rf995rk#product_details_default

Earphones for orientation videos

2

Operations/Collins

https://www.sony.com/electronics/headband2018 headphones/mdr-rf995rk#product_details_default

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Staff flash lights

Great

Upon request at hearing Upon request at orientation

None requested None requested

WKCC (March 2020), p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-3 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 1 of 3 - Page ID#: 3475
EXHIBIT 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-3 Filed: 05/27/20

RECEIVED FROM KSR

3476

.&iCCS
CORRECT CARE
50.UTIC~S

HEALTHCARE REQUEST
SOLICITUD DE SERVICIO DE SALUD

Page: 2 of 3 - Page ID#:
RECID'ED
Dato: _ _ _ _ _ __ lnltlals: _ _ _ _ _ __ Time: _ _ _ _ _ __

Name (Nombre):_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _10 # (NO de identificaci6n):_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

living Unit I Dorm (Unidad): _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Bed# (cama/cuarto): _ _ _ __

U Medical (Medico) r: Behavioral Health (Salud Mental) C! Medication Refills (Suplemento / recarga de Medlcamento)

r. Dental (Dental)

n Other_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

u Eyo Clinic (ainica para la vision)

Nature of problem or Request (be specific) Naturaleza del problema o solicttud (sea espec:ifico)

I consent 10 be treated by Hoal!h care Staff re, lhe ccncfiHon dasat>ed. 1understand that lhe fadlly may ctmge me ror some or these S8l\1c8s and
may deduct It frm1 my acaiunt during !his ament or fulure stays tn tm faduty. I undels1and lhat I di recelVe heallh r.are reganless of my ability to pay. Day mi ccmentimlenl0 para ser lrat1do per el personal de atllflCioo de sail.Id para las canclciones dascrilas. Entiendo qua la lnstalaci6n ma puede coaar por aJgtms de 8!lfas servlclos y pueden descontaoo de mi cuenta duranlo esra o fuluras astancias. Enllendo qua q a redblr atend6n medica, lndependientemenle de mJ capacidad de pago.
Plltient Signature (Flnna def Padente):._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _oate (Focha): - - - - - - -

fl you 818 deaf or llarHl./leartng, do you need 41IY comrnunJc8!ion asmtance ror this ltealthalre Wli1? /SI es usted sankia o padece de alguna dlsninucion del oldo (sordera pardal, por ejemplo), t,necesita ayooa para axnuntcar sus vcluntades cuando Ilene una vllffa medlca?J D lib D Yes: Video Remote Interpreter (VRI) (via 'purple' laptcp) {lnterprete a dislancia a tr.Ives de 11"1 link de video (IRV) (a lraYes def portalll
morado)
U Yes. ln-persan quabfied lnte,preter. Please explain~ you need an (n.p8rsm lntl!lllf8t8r rather than VRI (.lntwprete cuallflcado en pefSOfl8 (de came
y hueso). Por favor. expllca par que se neceslta un lntetprete presente en persona en vez del Sistema IRV),_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
D Yes: Other (Please Specify) (otro mediO (lcmlf de olqlbcar a continuaci6n) _ _ _ _ _ __

TIiis IS 8 contldettJBI document arrl shoutd any be placed In 8 deslgnBled 81H. medial/ box Of gNell dR!dly to medicaJ stall.

a r e a ~ Este es un documento axrlidetDaJ y sao d&beser coJocado en un

~ medial o erl1er,ala direclamenle al personal mklico.

DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE

ITRIAGE:·

□ Emergent

(TO BE Ca\lPLETED BY TRIAGING STAFF}

□ Urgent

I □ Routine Triage Date:

lnltJals:

Time:

INITIAL:

□ Sick CaD □ Nurse □ HCP D Dentist □ Beha'ttoral Heath □ E)tl Cllnlc

□ Other _ _ _ _ _ _ __

RESPONSE TO PATIENT/ COMMENTS: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

D Patient seen flf aAJ!ialble) D Response sent to patient (If a~lcabJe) O Pa11ent released from custody D Does Patient require au,:llialy aides?

□ Patient retused, Refusal Form completed Yes No

CO-pay Charges: □ No

D Yes

□ $3.00 noo-fonntJary medica!lon - # of presaiptiOns_ _ _ _Tola! Costs._ _ __

D SJ.00 Sick CaD □ 55.00 fer g1as9es O 510 00 fix- appliances

□ other charges S._ _ _ _ _ __

NOTE Treatment infonnaoon should not be noted above but shoufd be documented an the appmpriate llea1ment fonn(s)

Steff Slgnatwe

Date

(Prtnt Patient Name)

Number

Date

Patient Signature

Form Number: SC001UNKYOOCACCBl120117 (KYOOC)

2-Part Form

Page 1 of 1

Form proCvaidseed: b3y:1B4C-cFvC-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-3 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 3 of 3R-EPCaEgIVeEIDD#:

C C 3477
ICCS HEALTHCARE REQUEST

Date: _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Initials: _ _ _ _ _ _ __

Time: _ _ _ _ _ _ __

CORRECT CARE

SOLICITUD DE SERVICIO DE SALUD

SOLUTIONS

Name (Nombre):._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.1D # (N° de identificaci6n):_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

Living Unit/ Dorm (Unidad):_ _ _ _ _ _ _Bed # (cama/cuarto): _ _ __

□ Medical (Medico) □ Behavioral Health (Salud Mental) □ Dental (Dental)

□ Other_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

D Medication Refills (Suplemento / recarga de Medicamento) □ Eye Clinic (Clinica para la vision)

Nature of problem or Request (be specific) Naturaleza del problema o solicitud (sea especifico)

I consent to be treated by Health Care Staff for the condition described. I understand that the facility may charge me for some of these services and may deduct it from my account during this current or future stays in the facility. I understand that I \Nill receive health care regardless of my ability to pay.
Doy mi consenlimiento para ser tratado por el personal de atenci6n de salud para las condiciones descritas. Entiendo que la instalaci6n me puede cobrar por algunos de estos servicios y pueden descontar1o de mi cuenta durante esta o futuras estancias. Entiendo que voy a recibir atenci6n medica, independientemente de ml capacidad de pago. Patient Signature (Flnna del Paclente):_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Date (Fecha): _ _ _ _ _ _ __
This is a confidential document and should only be placed in a designated area, medical box orgiven directly to medical staff. Esta es un documento confidencialy s61o debe ser colocado en un area designsda, caja medics o entregada directamente al personal medico.
DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE

(TO BE COMPLETED BY TRIAGING STAFF)

TRIAGE:

□ Emergent □ Urgent

□ Routine Triage Date:_____lnitials:_ _ _Time: _ _ __

INITIAL: D Sick Call D Nurse D HCP □ Dentist □ Behavioral Health D Eye Clinic D Other _ _ _ _ _ _ __

RESPONSE TO PATIENT/ COMMENTS_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

(TO BE COMPLETED BY HEALTH CARE STAFF - Perforation)

D Patient seen (if applicable)

□ Patient outside of facility (hospital, court, etc.), reschedule upon return

□ Response sent to patient (if applicable)
D Patient released from custody

□ Patient refused, Refusal Form complete

Co-pay Charges: □ No D Yes D $3.00 non-formulary medication - # of prescriptions___Total Cost$._ _ __ D $3.00 Sick Call D $5.00 for glasses D $10.00 for appliances D Other charges$_ _ _ _ _ __
NOTE: Treatment infonnation should not be noted above but should bi, documented on the appropriate treatment fonn(s)

Staff Signature

Date

(Print Patient Name)

Number Date

Form Number: SC001 UNKYDOCACCBI011515 (KYDOC)

Patient Signature 2-Part Form

Page 1 of 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-4 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 1 of 2 - Page ID#: 3478
EXHIBIT 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-4 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 2 of 2 - Page ID#: 3479

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-5 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 1 of 16 - Page ID#: 3480
EXHIBIT 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-5 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 2 of 16 - Page ID#: 3481

ITEM BCC
Silent Call Signature Series
Sidekick II Receiver with backup battery (BedShaker)

VENDOR Amazon

URL/Web Address Where Purchased

Serial and/or Model

https://www.amazon.com/Silent-Call-Signature-Sidekick-

Receiver/dp/B0078848BY/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1ZNZ9HKI6T

SKR&keywords=silent+call+signature+series&qid=15835

21680&sprefix=silent+call%2Caps%2C180&sr=8-1

ASIN: B0078848BY

UPC: 612750921452

Brand Silent Call

https://www.amazon.com/Serene-Portable-Phone-

Amplifier-

30dB/dp/B001JSV7Z4/ref=sr_1_1?crid=29M9FW18Q2FT

Portable Phone

0&keywords=serene+portable+phone+amplifier&qid=15

Amplifiers

Amazon 82307466&sprefix=serene+porta%2Caps%2C185&sr=8-1 ASIN: B001JSV7Z4

https://www.amazon.com/Whole-House-FM-

Transmitter-

Microphone/dp/B0742MMRKW/ref=sr_1_3_sspa?keyw

ords=whole+house+fm+transmitter&qid=1582307068&s

r=8-3-

spons&psc=1&spLa=ZW5jcnlwdGVkUXVhbGlmaWVyPUF

Whole House FM

SSkhHV0JITENYNVImZW5jcnlwdGVkSWQ9QTAyMTcwM

Transmitter 3.0

zM0QVhQRjdKWkdaTDMmZW5jcnlwdGVkQWRJZD1BM

for TV, Home,

DQ1NDk3MTJURzJUTTNENTY3TTAmd2lkZ2V0TmFtZT1zc

Stereo w/Stand

F9hdGYmYWN0aW9uPWNsaWNrUmVkaXJlY3QmZG9Ob

& Microphone

Amazon 3RMb2dDbGljaz10cnVl

B0742MMRKW

https://mms.mckesson.com/sm/catalog.item.mck?id=66

Pocket Talkers

Mckesson 2816&src=OE&add=0

UNSPSC: 42144000

Sound Console Musicians Friend

www.musiciansfriend.com

PA Speakers Musicians Friend

www.musiciansfriend.com

95797776075990100.00

PA Speakers Musicians Friend

www.musiciansfriend.com

55797781817110100.00

PA Speakers Musicians Friend

www.musiciansfriend.com

115283481725334000.00

PA Speakers Musicians Friend

www.musiciansfriend.com

115283476096154000.00

Microphone Musicians Friend

www.musiciansfriend.com

Microphone Musicians Friend

www.musiciansfriend.com

Microphone Musicians Friend

www.musiciansfriend.com

Microphone Musicians Friend

www.musiciansfriend.com

Microphone Musicians Friend

www.musiciansfriend.com

UPC: 612750903014 Serene Innovations

4327117485
Posey Si Expression EV-ELX-12P EV-ELX-12P EV-ELX 200 EV-ELX 200
SM-58 SM-58 SM-58 SM-58 SM-58

Whole House FM Transmitter
8274 Soundcraft Electro Voice Electro Voice Electro Voice Electro Voice Shure Shure Shure Shure Shure

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-5 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 3 of 16 - Page ID#: 3482

ITEM BCFC SOUND AMPLIFIER EARPODS W/ 3.5 MM HEADPHONE PULG CONNECT PAGING & MESSAGING TRANSMITTER

VENDOR MEDLINE

URL/Web Address Where Purchased WWW.MEDLINE.COM

AMAZON

WWW.AMAZON.COM

LONG RANGE SYSTEMS WWW.LRSUS.COM

Serial and/or Model Number PSY8274
MNHF2AM/A
TX-7470

Brand POSEY APPLE LRS

Manufacturer MEDLINE APPLE LRS

4 LINE ALPHANUMERIC STAFF PAGER LONG RANGE SYSTEMS WWW.LRSUS.COM

RX-E467

LRS

LRS

STEREO HEADPHONES W/ XBS PORT AMAZON

MINICOM IV (TTY)

AMAZON

CAPTIONED PHONE

AMAZON

VIBRATING ALARM WATCH

AMAZON

POCKET TALKER

MCKESSON

VIDEO RELAY SERVICE

LENOVO

WWW.AMAZON.COM WWW.AMAZON.COM WWW.AMAZON.COM WWW.AMAZON.COM MMS.MCKESSON.COM WWW.LENOVO.COM

RP-HT227 305-007002 305-018113 CAS109 662816 PD92230BNHU

PANASONIC MINICOMB CAPTEL CASIO POSEY THINKCENTRE

PANASONIC ULTRATEC ULTRATEC CASIO MCKESSON LENOVO

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-5 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 4 of 16 - Page ID#: 3483

ITEM

VENDOR

EKCC

Portable Telephone

Amplifier

Amazon.com

Captioned

Telephone

Captel

Bed Shakers

Amazon.com

Vibrating Watches Amazon.com

Pocket Talkers Headphones (Orientation & Parole)

McKesson Amazon.com

TTY

Harris Comm.

Non-Auditory Alerts Amazon.com

URL/Web Address Where Purchased https://www.harriscomm.com/portable-telephoneamplifier.html

Serial and/or Model Number

Brand

SKU: HC-PA

Harris Comm.

https://www.captel.com/captel/phones/captel-840/

Model 840

Captel

https://www.amazon.com/Silent-Call-Signature-Sidekick-

Receiver/dp/B0078848BY

Sidekick II

Silent Call

https://www.amazon.com/Tech-Tools-Vibrating-Personal-

Shake-N-

Wake/dp/B0027A573Q/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=shake+and+w

ake&qid=1582207386&sr=8-1

DX-H107

ShakeNWake

Medical (Wellpath) orders these through their supply

Personal Sound

manager.

McKesson # 662816 Amplifier Posey

https://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-Headphones-RP-

HT161-K-Lightweight-Long-Corded/dp/B075LT8YLR

RP-HT161-K

https://www.harriscomm.com/ultratec-supercom-4400-

tty.html

Supercom 4400

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07X3JRWGB/ref=twister_B0

7R8KKX4V?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1

90092004-GW

Panasonic Harris Comm. Primelux

Manufacturer
Harris Comm. Captel Silent Call
ThumbsUp! Posey
Panasonic Harris Comm. Primelux

Assisstive listening systems These are the two I am looking at. I would like to know what other institutions are using.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/offerlisting/B018C0TVDG/ref=dp_olp_0?ie=UTF8&condition=all
https://www.amazon.com/4-Person-Assistive-ListeningNeckloopsincluded/dp/B00XQ7MX9U/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF 8&me=

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-5 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 5 of 16 - Page ID#: 3484

GRCC

ITEM

Head Phones Bed Shaker And alarm

VENDOR
Amazone I LUV

Pocket Talker FM Transmitter Pocket telephone Amplifer Bed shaker fire alarm Shake up recieverDed vibrator Fire alarm input transmitter

Posey Whole House west stone hearing Legacy Series/silent call silent call Silent call

URL/Web Address Where Purchased
Amazon Amazon

Serial and/or

Brand

Model Number

Model Number WH-

RF400

Sony

Sn 11C001151

I LUV

Manufacturer
Sony I LUV

Medical Department Model Number

orders them

8274

Amazon

MN XOAWHFM3

Amazon

Pro

Amazon

SK09214

Amazon

SU5001-V

Amazon

FA1004-3

Posey Whole house Primear Silent call Silent call Silent Call

Posey Whole house tranmitters
Legacy Legacy Prime

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-5 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 6 of 16 - Page ID#: 3485

ITEM

VENDOR RL/Web Addre

Serial and/or

KCIW

Where Purchase

Model Number

Pagers

Order Fuffillment 952 906-1108TX-7470

FM Transmitter

Amazon

Amazon MN XOAWHFM3

Pocket Talker

McKesson

RKTsysH3 E19156

Portable Amplifiers Amazon

Amazon UA-30

Strobe Light Bed Shakers Amazon

Amazon Side Kick Receiver II

Vibrating Alarm Clocks Amazon

Amazon Side Kick Receiver II

Vibrating Watches

etailz

Amazon Vibralite8

Brand

Manufacturer

Freedom Whole House William Sounds Serene Silent Call Communication Silent Call Communication Vibralite

LRS whole house transmitters McKesson Serene Innovations Silent Call Communications Silent Call Communications Vibralite

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-5 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 7 of 16 - Page ID#: 3486

ITEM KSP Sorenson CapTel Bed Shaker Ear Phones (Parole Board) Ear Phones (Orientation Videos) Phone amplifiers Pager
Pocket Talker Wireless Microphone

VENDOR

URL/Web Address

Where Purchased

Sorenson Communications www.sorenson.com

Amazon

www.amazon.com

Harris Communications www.harriscomm.com

Amazon

www.amazon.com

Serial and/or Model Number ASD041517 CapTel 840i SC-Vib HT280

Brand
Sorenson CapTel Silent Call Avantree

Amazon Amazon Rapids
McKesson Amazon

www.amazon.com

HP100

www.amazon.com

30dB B00I5PV94S

rapidswholesale.com

SKU# 6C437 / RX-E467

https://mms.mckesson.com/pr

oduct/662816/Posey-8274

www.amazon.com

TR503

Maxwell Reizen LRS
662816 Posey Retekess

Manufacturer
Sorenson Hamilton Silent Call Avantree
Maxwell Hearing Technologies LRS
Posey Retekess

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-5 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 8 of 16 - Page ID#: 3487

KSR ITEM
FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device.
Portable Phone Amplifier
Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

VENDOR
Whole House
Maxiaids Weitbrecht Communications (WCI)

URL/Web Address

Serial and/or model

Brand

*Whole House Transmitter 3.0

*Whole House 3.0 Lavalier

www.wholehousefmtransm Microphone

itter.com/

*Whole House Source FM Radio. Whole House

Serene Portable Phone Amplifier

30db

SKU:

www.maxiaids.com

909010

Serene

www.weitbrecht.com

Item #- 757-000300 CapTel 840

Cap Tel

Pagers Bed Shakers

Long Range Systems LRSUS.com

Harris

Communications www.silentcall.com

and Silent Call

harriscomm.com

Vibrating Watches

Amazon

amazon.com

Bed Shaker Alarm Clocks Amazon

Headphones

Amazon

amazon.com amazon.com

RX-E467

Long Range

no model # SKU: SC-SS/SK2REC

Silentcall Sidekick II (with strobe light)

W-735H-1A2VCF Casio Super Illuminator Watch Casio

LLR010BRUS model #: N11

Lielongren Bedshaker Alarm Clock
ARKARTECH Headset

Cost (in case you need this)
$124.99 per transmitter, $12.99 per reciever, $9.99 for microphone.
$27.00 each
$75.00 each $65.00 for pagers (do not work very well with thick walls) $280 for the Receiver. $100 for Transmitter and $34 for shaker. Average $22-32. Inmates may buy with special permission from ADA Average $33. Inmates may buy with special permission from ADA
$25.99

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-5 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 9 of 16 - Page ID#: 3488

Lee Adjustment Center ITEM
Active Listening Sytem - FM Transmitter and six receivers (additional receivers can be purchased separately)
Portable phone amplifiers Pocket Talker

VENDOR

URL/Web Address Where Purchased

Serial and/or Model Number

Brand

Manufacturer

B&H Photo-Video-Pro Audio www.bhphotovideo.com

Not known by ADA Coordinator,

purchased by our Business

Manager.

www.sereneinnovations.com

McKesson

www.mckesson.com

Model #ALS700
Model UA-30 Model #8274

Hamilton Buhl Hamilton Buhl

Serene Posey

Serene Innovations Unknown

We allow HOH inmates to purchase the following items for what they cost us. The prices will vary from order to order since we purchase them through Amazon, but I try to get them at the lowest possible price.

Vibrating watch Alarm Clock w/bed shaker

Amazon Amazon

www.Amazon.com www.Amazon.com

Model W735H-1AVCCasio

X00210G7Zp

Lielongren

Casio Leilongren

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-5 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 10 of 16 - Page ID#: 3489

ITEM LLCC Pager Systems Pocket Talkers Headphones
Portable Amplifiers
Strobe Light Bed Shakers
Vibrating Alarm Clocks

VENDOR URL/Web Address

Serial and/or Brand

Manufacturer

Where Purchased

Model Number

NONE

Wellpath orders through McKesson

CDWG.org

(https://www.cdwg.com/search/?key=headphones%

CDWG.org- CO7cKOSS%7CUR10i&searchscope=all&sr=1&ln=2) 3261351 UR 10I

KOSS

SKU is 903010 @ maxiaids.com.

(https://www.maxiaids.com/serene-portable-phone-

amplifier-30db) Units can also be found cheaper on

Amazon or through Allegromedical – Allegro ID

Maxiaids-

571631 Item: 0836217-

903010

(https://www.allegromedical.com/daily-living-aids- Allegromedic

Maxiaids/ Am c519/portable-telephone-amplifier-p571631.html al -0836217 Serene @ Maxiaids;

https://www.harriscomm.com/lifetone-hlac151-

Harrris Comm bedside-vibrating-fire-alarm-and-clock.html

SKU: HC-LIFET Lifetone Lifetone

https://www.amazon.com/Sonic-Alert-SBB500SS-

Extra-Loud-

Flashing/dp/B000OOWZUK/ref=pd_di_sccai_1/137-

8995759-

Amazon

9852061?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B000OOWZUK

&pd_rd_r=6247c16f-3823-4923-9c8c-

fadc43a5fc25&pd_rd_w=LwJBB&pd_rd_wg=nXYDh&

Sonic Bomb

pf_rd_p=e532f109-986a-4c2d-85fc-

with pulsing

16555146f6b4&pf_rd_r=BGTXXA4D

SBB500SS alert lights Sonic Alert

Amazon

https://www.amazon.com/Sonic-Alert-Extra-Alarm-

Shaker/dp/B000EX7LNM/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=Soni

c+Alert+Dual+Alarm+with+Shaker&qid=1583357992

&s=electronics&sr=1-1

SBB200SS

Sonic Alert Du Sonic Alert

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-5 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 11 of 16 - Page ID#: 3490

Amazon Amazon

https://www.amazon.com/Sonic-Alert-SB300SS-

Vibrating-

Display/dp/B000EX5HRO/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=soni

c+Bomb+extra+large+dual+alarm&qid=1583358175

&s=electronics&sr=1-3

SBB300SS

https://www.amazon.com/Tech-Tools-Vibrating-

Personal-Shake-N-Wake/dp/B0027A573Q

PI-107

Sonic Bomb Extra Large Dual Alarm Sonic Alert

Vibrating Alarm Watches Amazon

https://www.amazon.com/Timex-T49851-Expedition-

Vibration-Alarm/dp/B004GHLEMQ?th=1

T49851

Expedition Timex

https://www.amazon.com/Casio-W735H-1AVCF-

Super-Illuminator-

Amazon

Watch/dp/B00BS8U88W/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=cASI

O+VIBRATING+WATCH&qid=1583356745&s=apparel

&sr=1-2

W735H-1AVC Super IlluminaCasio

https://www.amazon.com/TICCI-Vibrating-

Amazon

Medication-ReminderWaterproof/dp/B07R6D4BF5/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=

TICCI+watch+men&qid=1583356943&sr=8-1

TOOO3VB 8 Vibrating AlaTICCI

https://www.amazon.com/WobL-Waterproof-

Vibrating-Watch-

Black/dp/B07BMJF971/ref=pd_sbs_121_img_1/137-

8995759-

Amazon

9852061?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B07BMJF971&p d_rd_r=dda721e4-4ecd-42e0-a1fa-

bb2b74e72a0&pd_rd_w=rh67E&pd_rd_wg=ElBY9&p

WobL +

f_rd_p=5cfcfe89-300f-47d2-b1ad-

World's 9

a4e27203a02a&pf_rd_r=XY3EQEG391FK54BMGP09

Alarm

&psc=1&refRID=XY3EQEG391FK54BMGP09  

B07BMJF971 Wristwatch WobL+ World's

ShakeNWake Silent

Amazon or M https://www.amazon.com/Tech-Tools-Vibrating-

Shake-N- Vibrating Alarm

Personal-Shake-N-Wake/dp/B0027A573Q

PI-107

Wake

Clock

FM Transmitters Alarm Devices SVRS
CapTel Phones

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-5 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 12 of 16 - Page ID#: 3491

Kingdom NONE

https://www.kingdom.com/peavey-assisted-listening-

system-4-receivers.html

PVALS4

Peavey Assisted Listening System - 4 receiver

Peavey

NONE

CapTel.com

// We are

currently in

the process

of obtaining

and installing

phones.

https://www.captel.com/captel/phones/captel-840/ MODEL 840

CapTel 840

CapTel 840 Captioned Telephone

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-5 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 13 of 16 - Page ID#: 3492

ITEM LSCC

VENDOR

URL/Web Address Where Purchased

Serial and/or Model Number

Brand

Manufacturer

Pocket Talker
Phone Amplifier Bed Shaker Vibrating Alarm Clock Fire Alarm System

McKesson
Harris Communications Silent Call Communications
Maxi Aids Cerberus Pyrotronics

https://mms.mckesson.com

/product/662816/Posey-

8274

662816 Posey

https://www.harriscomm.co

m/portable-telephone-

amplifier.html

HC-PA

Warner Tech Care

https://www.silentcall.com/ FA3-MC (transmitter), VIB-

collections/medallion

PJ (vibrator)

Medallion Series

https://www.maxiaids.com/

timeshaker-wow

394555 Time Shaker WOW

https://www.cerbpyro.com P/N315-092036-10

Cerberus Pyrotronics

Posey
Warner Tech Care Silent Call iLuv Siemens MXL

VRS CapTel

Purple CapTel

FM Transmitter **

Radio Shack

COT

30900/1/SDPPI/20132558 Lenova All in One

https://www.captel.com/ca

ptel/phones/captel-840i/ 840i

CapTel

https://wholehousefmtrans

mitter.com/tv-fm-

transmitter/

wht3

Stable PLL Technology

Lenova Ultratec
Stable PLL Technology

Speaker System (Chapel) Musician's Friend Speaker System (SAP) Musician's Friend

www.musiciansfriend.com VS-1520 www.musiciansfriend.com BXL900A

Behringer Behringer

Behringer Behringer

**Information regarding our FM transmitters is sparse. The transmitters were

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-5 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 14 of 16 - Page ID#: 3493

ITEM NTC FM Radio Transmitters (2)
Phone Amplifiers Captel Phones (2)
Bed Shakers Headphones TTY SVRS VRS

VENDOR www.ccrane.com

URL/Web Address Where Purchased
www.ccrane.com

Serial and/or Model Number FCC ID: YXEFT-007/ Model: FM Transmitter 2

Brand

Manufacturer C. Crane

McKesson Amazon

medical department orders www.amazon.com

Johnson Controls

Johnson Control 859-294-7233

Amazon

www.amazon.com

unsure-contacted fiscal

Ultratech TTY

department for more information

Sorenson

www.sorensonvrs.com

Purple Communications

Inc.

www.zvrs.com

Item #662816 401I2800063
VQ-VIBPJ X0027K7PJL
30670208262 E1400268180168640
8SSS50G779695A1DG51M007J

Posey Personal Sound

Amplifier Item #662816 Manufacturer #8274

Captel

Hamilton

Johnson

Controls/Simplex

Grinnell

Vogek

Vogek

Ultratech TTY ntouch

TeleTypewriter Sorenson

23" Lenovo

Purple Prison Videophones

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-5 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 15 of 16 - Page ID#: 3494

ITEM

VENDOR

RCC

Fire Transmitter with

Battery

Silent Call Communications

Bed Shaker Bed Vibrator With Pin Jack

Silent Call Communications Silent Call Communications

Phone Amplifiers MaxiAIDS

URL/Web Address

Serial and/or

Brand

Manufacturer

Where Purchased

Model Number

http://www.silentcall.co

m

Signature Series Model #FA3-55 Medallion SeriesSilent Call Communications

http://www.silentcall.co

m

Signature Series Model #SK2-55 Medallion SeriesSilent Call Communications

http://www.silentcall.co

m

Model #VIB-PJ

Medallion SeriesSilent Call Communications

https://www.maxiaids.co Serene Portable Phone Amplifier-

m

30dB

Serene

Serene Innovations

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-5 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 16 of 16 - Page ID#: 3495

ITEM WKCC FM Radio transmitters for TV/PA system Portable Phone Amplifier Instructor FM transmitter with mic for SAP Wireless earphones for parole/orientation Pocket Talker Vibrating Alarm Watch (purchasable by inmate)
VRI/VRS (2 Kiosk, 2 Laptop)

VENDOR
C. Crane Amazon Amazon Amazon McKesson Walmart

URL/Web Address Where Purchased www.ccrane.com amazon.com amazon.com amazon.com provided by Wellpath walmart.com

Serial and/or Model Number FM Transmitter 2 (FM2) B00I5PV4S Whole House FM Transmitter 3.0 Sony mdr-rf995RK Sound Amplifier W735H-1AV

Brand
C. Crane Reizen Whole House Sony Posey Sony

Purple

www.zvrs.com

WKCC: MJ06UF3A/RC: DWM1742MN Think Centre

Manufacturer
C. Crane Reizen Whole House Sony Posey Sony
Lenovo

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-6 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 1 of 2 - Page ID#: 3496
EXHIBIT 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 94-6 Filed: 05/27/20 Page: 2 of 2 - Page ID#: 3497

Memo to: From: Re: Date:

KDOC/ADA Coordinators Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor Videophone and VRI interview questions May 1, 2020

The best way to evaluate whether videophones are working is by inmate interview—using an interpreter (VRI is fine). Here are interview questions:

1. Name and DOC number: 2. How often do you use the videophone? 3. How well is it working? 4. How do you get access? 5. Do you use it videophone-to-videophone or just on the relay? Why? 6. Are there any issues? 7. How often is it down and if so, what happens, do they offer you the laptop instead? 8. Can other prisoners see the person you’re on the phone with?

VRI: 1. When was the last time you used it? 2. How often do you use it? 3. What do you use it for? 4. Have you used it for any of the following? If not, why not? a. Classification b. Discipline c. Doctor’s visit d. Education e. Conversation with unit administrator, corrections officer, etc. 5. Is it available when you want to use it? 6. Is it offered to you or do you have to ask? 7. How long does it take to get it ready? 8. Is it working okay? 9. Does everyone who uses it seem to know how to use it?

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 1 of 22 - Page ID#: 3512

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT FRANKFORT

OSCAR ADAMS and MICHAEL KNIGHTS

Plaintiffs v.

Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, et al.

Defendants.

Ninth Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor December 16, 2020
Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 625 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109

1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 2 of 22 - Page ID#: 3513
I. INTRODUCTION
The Settlement Agreement in this matter became effective on June 29, 2015, and was originally set to remain in effect for five years from that effective date. I filed my most recent prior report in May 2019, six months ago. It acknowledged the real effort and attention undertaken by KDOC headquarters and institution staff, but expressed concern that substantial compliance had not yet been achieved.
Responsive to that concern, the parties agreed to an extension of the settlement term to the end of 2020. See Amendment to the Settlement Agreement between Defendants the Commonwealth of Kentucky and Plaintiffs Oscar Adams and Michael Knights, ECF #98-1 (Aug. 3, 2020). That document also provided, “The KDOC, however, intends, but is not bound by this Agreement, to provide all accommodations required under the law, including under the U.S. Constitution, the ADA, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Kentucky laws, along with any other applicable federal and state laws, after this Agreement expires.”
In this current filing, although the COVID pandemic has created real obstacles, I am pleased to report yet more progress. I cannot say that each KDOC prison is complying with each and every settlement agreement provision. However, compliance with many of the ADA/Settlement Agreement requirements has been accomplished. And I believe there is now a system in place that can—if the prison authorities so choose—succeed in maintaining that compliance and in solving remaining problems. In order to assist in that process, I continue to offer recommendations for the period after the settlement term closes.
This report is based on several sources of information:
• The self-audit process I have described in prior reports, with most information provided as of October 1, 2020. I shared the most current self-audit checklist with each KDOC ADA Coordinator and Warden on September 15, 2020, along with a request for other information. (The memo I sent is attached as Exhibit 1.) I asked that each institution complete and return it to me two weeks later. The resulting spreadsheet and, where they seem useful, other responses are attached as Exhibit 2. (I have redacted inmate names and id numbers.) I did several additional information requests, dated September 22, October 1, and November 21. All are attached, redacted, in Exhibit 1. I also circulated this report in draft on December 8, and received some additional information by December 14. This is described in Part II.2, below.
• Followups with institutions and KDOC headquarters about the areas of concern identified in the last report, and with KDOC’s medical contractor, Wellpath, about ongoing audiology processing.
• Over 150 inmate telephone interviews, and other inmate communications via letter and JPay, a form of email.
• Telecommunications testing of TTYs and captioned telephones.
As usual, Table 1, below, tallies deaf/HOH inmates at each institution. The numbers presented are based primarily on the information received in October 2020; locations are as of November
2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 3 of 22 - Page ID#: 3514

2020. However, the count of deaf/HOH inmates listed at each institution is not simply the selfreported figure; instead, I supplemented the self-reporting using a master list of deaf/HOH inmates that I maintain based on all the institutions’ prior reporting, and then updated locations using KDOC’s online inmate lookup page. The result addws dozens of inmates to this cycle’s self reporting. (I provided the list of added individuals to KDOC.) There is some remaining confusion around identification/tracking of individuals—I discuss this below at Part II.2.

Table 1: KDOC Institutions

# HOH Inmates Apr. 2019 master

list, locations as of

Institution

Sept. 2019

Blackburn Corr. Complex (BCC)

12 (0 deaf)

Bell County Forestry Camp (BCFC)

3 (0 deaf)

Eastern Ky. Corr. Complex (EKCC)

59 (0 deaf)

Green River Corr. Complex (GRCC)

49 (0 deaf)

Ky. Corr. Inst. For Women (KCIW)

17 (2 deaf)

Ky. State Penitentiary (KSP)

32 (1 deaf)

Ky. State Reformatory (KSR)

217 (2 deaf)

Lee Adjustment Center (LAC)

32 (0 deaf)

Luther Luckett Corr. Complex (LLCC)

155 (2 deaf)

Little Sandy Corr. Complex (LSCC)

92 (1 deaf)

Northpoint Training Center (NTC)

76 (1 deaf)

Roederer Corr. Complex (RCC)

26 (0 deaf)

Western Ky. Corr. Complex/Ross-Cash (WKCC) 55 (0 deaf)

TOTAL 825 (9 deaf)

# HOH Inmates
March 2020 26 (0 deaf) 6 (0 deaf) 94 (0 deaf) 63 (1 deaf) 32 (2 deaf) 69 (1 deaf) 283 (1 deaf) 42 (0 deaf) 211 (1 deaf) 148 (1 deaf) 94 (1 deaf) 86 (0 deaf) 52 (0 deaf) 1206 (8 deaf)

# HOH Inmates
October 2020 26 (0 deaf) 8 (0 deaf) 138 (0 deaf) 91 (1 deaf) 61 (2 deaf) 109 (1 deaf) 327 (1 deaf) 45 (0 deaf) 232 (1 deaf) 165 (1 deaf) 150 (1 deaf) 111 (0 deaf) 68 (0 deaf)
1531 (8 deaf)

In my prior report, I raised the issue whether the Settlement Agreement covers state inmates housed in county jails, which had become more salient because of a lawsuit filed by a hard-ofhearing inmate. See Hicks v. Williams, 5:20-cv-00081-TBR (W.D. Ky.). Complaining that he has been unable to get access to parole-required programming because of his hearing impairment, Mr. Hicks seeks to be moved from the Fulton County Jail to a jail or prison that complies with the Settlement Agreement in this case. I asked both plaintiffs’ and defendants’ counsel to share their thoughts about his case’s appropriate connection to this litigation; both sides agreed that this case was not intended to reach Kentucky’s jails, even for state inmates housed there. Mr. Hicks case remains open. In light of the parties’ shared understanding about the scope of the instant case, and the fact that it is nearing its conclusion, I do not discuss jail issues further.

In what follows, in Part II, I begin with systemwide issues previously discussed. In this report, I repeat the prior identified action items in bold text, followed by a summary of the progress on each. My resulting recommendations for the period of time that follows this report—including after the close of the settlement agreement period—are in bold italic. (For ease of reference, I also repeat these new recommendations, numbered, in the Conclusion.)

3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 4 of 22 - Page ID#: 3515
In Part III, I list additional issues that emerged with high frequency from the many interviews my assistants conducted, and make relevant recommendations for the period following the close of the settlement term. (These, too, are repeated in the Conclusion.)
In Part IV, I move to statistics relating to audiology processing times. These are much improved. Part V lists a few institution-specific issues that seem important enough to memorialize and discuss. Part VI is the Conclusion.
II. PRIOR-IDENTIFIED SYSTEMWIDE ISSUES
1. New ADA Coordinators
Prior recommendation: KDOC should develop and implement an ADA Coordinator transition process, which should include processes for at least the following:
• informing new ADA Coordinators about available resources, • linking them to other facilities’ ADA Coordinators, • walking them through auxiliary aid, reporting, and tracking processes, • updating the recipients of ADA related emails (for example, automated transfer
emails), • updating the KDOC website list of ADA Coordinators.
Progress: KDOC is now compliant with this recommendation. It seems that compliance extends even to its privately run institution, and is underway, as well, for a new institution scheduled to come on-line soon.
In October 2020, I conducted a (remote) 2-hour ADA and compliance training to ADA Coordinators and Wardens, via Zoom. Training slides and a video of the session were provided to KDOC for any future personnel. The slides are attached as Exhibit 3.
2. Inmate tracking, transfer alerts, etc.
Prior recommendation: Someone at KDOC headquarters should check each and every inmate for whom there is a record of a hearing impairment, and ensure that each of them is being appropriately tracked in KOMS.
Individuals whose records have only a general alert, in Kentucky Offender Management System (KOMS) need an ADA alert. The transfer notification system needs to be tested and problems solved, from KDOC headquarters.
Whether the information comes automatically to medical or is relayed by the ADA Coordinator, medical staff responsible for intake should be informed that a deaf/HOH inmate is incoming, so that they can ensure that audiology processes are not interrupted, deal with lost hearing aids, etc.
4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 5 of 22 - Page ID#: 3516
Progress: I previously noted that after some transitional difficulties all the prisons—including the private facility, Lee Adjustment Center—were getting transfer notices. New integration of medical records and KOMS has improved the system by which new identifications are flagged. The new system will automatically insert an ADA alert into an inmate’s KOMS record whenever a medical provider confirms a diagnosis of a hearing impairment. (The system currently requires several steps for this to occur, but is being streamlined in the next several weeks.) Once some technical glitches are fixed, the new system will also send each ADA Coordinator a notice that there’s been a new diagnosis entered for an inmate at his/her prison, so that the ADA Coordinator can then provide further details in the ADA tab’s notes space. As the ADA Coordinators themselves confirmed (see prior report) it would be best for that space to record accommodations/auxiliary aids needed (and date issued); degree of hearing impairment; and communications method of choice. I do not know whether the ADA Coordinators have gone through their inmate lists and entered this information for all of the inmates.
I recommend completion of the planned KOMS improvements. In addition, once the ADA flag is triggered by a medical diagnosis, I recommend that medical staff review the appropriate information for each one and place their diagnoses into KOMS.
Notwithstanding these technical improvements, as of early December, there were a significant number of inmates—over 200—for whom some confusion remained. For over 100 inmates this reporting period, I received audiology-processing information but not auxiliary aid information, and for another several dozen I received auxiliary aid information but have never received audiology information. In addition, I had compiled a list of a few dozen more current inmates who were previously reported to me as Deaf/HOH, but whom no institution flagged in this reporting period. Last week, I provided a list of the problematic names and ID#s to KDOC, and asked that they investigate and report back promptly. For some of the inmates included in this exercise, investigation indicated that they were not Deaf/HOH, after all—some had subsequent medical testing that demonstrated no hearing impairment; others had a non-hearing disability. For others, the issue was that the last day covered by the two reports was not the same. But for quite a few, investigation revealed that the absence of an ADA flag was an oversight. And review of audiology records demonstrated that at some institutions, only hearing impairments classified as “significant” were leading to a hard-of-hearing diagnosis and the corresponding ADA flag. This was incorrect: even a moderate impairment should be recorded and tracked—and if necessary accommodated—once detected.
Wellpath’s speciality clinic coordinator reviewed this issue and informed me that a solution was underway:
I will be emailing my spreadsheet to all providers today so that they can verify that each of their HOH patients including "active", "does not qualify" "refused", and "released" have the correct diagnosis, precaution, and ADA alerts in their chart. I will also be checking any future HOH patient charts to ensure all the correct documentation is included moving forward. I also verified that diagnosis should be entered for any level of hearing loss even if they do not qualify for an Hearing aid.
5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 6 of 22 - Page ID#: 3517
This remedial plan seems very appropriate. To memorialize it in a recommendation, now that ADA identification issues are sorted out, I recommend that KDOC and Wellpath conduct records both retrospective and prospective review to ensure correct documentation and diagnosis flags.
3. Audiology standards
Prior recommendation: Providers at each institution should receive a new memo with the correct audiology standard, and the update should be emphasized in some kind of training or other communications.
Providers at each institution should be trained about how to evaluate the need for binaural hearing aids, and should review recent requests for two hearing aids and evaluate them against the policy, with oversight from the regional medical director. In addition, inmates who have hearing deficits in both ears should have the policy explained to them when they are denied binaural amplification, so that they can make an informed decision whether to grieve the denial.
Progress: At this point, I am satisfied that providers have been appropriately informed about the binaural amplification policy. I continue to have some substantive concern about whether binaural amplification is being provided when appropriate, but I do not feel that either my role or expertise allows me to countermand the recent denials of binaural amplification. I recommend that KDOC make periodic efforts to remind medical providers that while binaural amplification is not to be provided routinely, it is appropriate where there is a safety or vocational need for it. In addition, it would be a good practice for medical grievances raising binaural amplification to be evaluated by a different physician, to bring a fresh perspective to the request.
4. Audiology services delays
a. Prior recommendation: KDOC’s medical provider should centralize a reporting system so that if any inmate has not completed audiology processing in three months—from the first report of a hearing problem to provision of a hearing aid or other resolution—that is reported centrally and headquarters staff take a role in immediately solving the problem.
Progress: Wellpath, KDOC’s medical contractor, has now designated a “specialty clinic coordinator” to track and manage audiology progress. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused some delays (see Part IV, below), but it does seem that a system is now in place to monitor and solve problems.
b. Prior recommendation: There needs to be an instruction to both the transferring and the new institution; the transferring institution should send a progress note for all inmates whose audiology evaluation/provision is in-process, and the new institution should do a thorough chart review for each inmate who might be HOH, to check for in-process audiology needs.
6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 7 of 22 - Page ID#: 3518
Progress: The automated ADA alert in KOMS should help with this problem; if an inmate is flagged in KOMS, the ADA Coordinator and health staff will know about it and be able to look for pending audiology issues. The new “treatment team” approach, combined with case management by Wellpath, can then solve any delays. That said, since the KOMS flag itself does not take place until diagnostic confirmation by a provider, it is still possible for individuals to be accidentally dropped if they are transferred prior to such confirmation. Before the last report, KDOC shared with me a new “Workflow for Auxiliary Aid upon transfer,” which included chart review completed by the institutional Provider “to determine if a patient is being worked up as HOH.” In addition, it seems that Wellpath’s specialty clinic coordinator is tracking people prior to diagnosis. So it seems plausible that this problem has been solved. That said, I recommend that the specialty clinic coordinator conduct spot checking to ensure that her tracking list includes all inmates who are undergoing audiology workup, including prediagnosis, and solve any problems that emerge. 5. Auxiliary aids a. Devices Table 2 itemizes auxiliary aids I’m aware each institution has, based on their reporting.
7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 8 of 22 - Page ID#: 3519
Table 2: Auxiliary Aids Available.

WKCC/ Ross RCC NTC LSCC LLCC LAC KSR KSP KCIW GRCC
EKCC
BCFC BCC

Telecommunication devices/amplification

Captioned telephone*

Y Y

Y

Y Y Y Y IP Y Y Y Y Y

Portable phone amplifiers*

Y Y

Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y YYY

TTY

Y Y

Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y YYY

Videophone kiosk*

Y Y

Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y YYY

Non-telecommunication amplification

Assistive listening (FM radio transmitters)*

Y Y

Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y YYY

Earphones for orientation video* Y Y

Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y YYY

Earphones for parole hearings* Y Y

Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y YYY

Non-auditory alerts

ADA support inmates

Y Y

Y

Y

Y Y Y Y YYY

Bed shakers

Y Y

Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y YY

Lights flash for count etc.**

Y

Y

Y (HOH walks)

Y

Y

Y

Pagers

Y

Y Y

Vibrating watches*

Y Y

Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y YYY

Bed shaker

Vibrating alarm clocks*

Y Y is alarm Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

clock

Interpretation

VRI/VRS laptop*

Y Y

Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y YYY

IP = In Progress * = Recommended for every facility ** = Recommended wherever practicable

Of course, it is not enough to have auxiliary aids available—they need to be used, not set on a shelf. Table 3 demonstrates that KDOC’s institutions are quite uneven in their usage rate of various auxiliary aids. For the institutions where usage is very low, it is likely that better education or access rules would increase the usefulness of these new accommodations.

8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 9 of 22 - Page ID#: 3520

Table 3: Auxiliary Aids Issuance Rate

Auxiliary Aids Issued

# HOH

Clear

inmates Vibrating

masks Captioned

(October

clocks/ Bed- Behind-head (issued telephone

Institution

2020)

watches shakers

masks

to staff) access

BCC

26 (0 deaf)

0

5

2

0

All

BCFC

8 (0 deaf)

0

0

1

0

8

EKCC 138 (0 deaf)

22

0

7

0

25

GRCC

91 (1 deaf)

14

6

25

6

All

KCIW

61 (2 deaf)

8

4

All

0*

All

KSP

109 (1 deaf)

1

1

114

10

8

KSR

327 (1 deaf)

86

45

159

187

2

LAC

45 (0 deaf)

18

7

1

3

No captel

LLCC

232 (1 deaf)

113

2

All

1

2

LSCC

165 (1 deaf)

52

3

106

7

11

NTC

150 (1 deaf)

13

3

15

120

8

RCC

111 (0 deaf)

28

2

61

0

8

WKCC (incl. 68 (0 deaf)

Ross/Cash)

47

0

37

12

2

TOTAL 1531 (8 deaf) 402

78

824

346

229

* Staff remove masks and maintain social distancing when speaking with two inmates

who lip read for communication

i. Videophones:

Prior recommendation: KDOC headquarters needs to solve the Purple videophone outage problem so that outages are both rare and brief, or make a systemwide switch to a more reliable videophone provider.

Progress: Inmates who use the videophones have for several years reported connectivity issues— glitchy or poor connections and pixilation making use difficult (recall, these are videophones; if the user cannot see the image, that’s like not being able to hear on a regular phone). Prior to my May 2020 report, KDOC disagreed with these inmate accounts, and stated that no systemic problems existed. In that report, I urged the Department to evaluate further, and more deeply. I am not aware that this occurred.

In the most recent information request, I asked each institution how many out-of-service days its videophone experienced. I think the question was a little bit unclear in the reporting instrument, and so I only received partial responses. That said, two institutions reported issues: EKCC reported that the videophone is typically out-of-service one to two days per month, and LSCC reported an outage period of 30 days, before it received a new videophone. In addition, an inmate at NTC who uses the videophone reports that the camera frequently turns off in the middle of his calls.

9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 10 of 22 - Page ID#: 3521
I recommend that, going forward, KDOC headquarters closely monitor outage periods and other technical difficulties and consider alternative vendors or other solutions.
In addition, access issues still occasionally arise, particularly on evenings and weekends, where Deaf inmates are refused access to the videophone during some of the hours that hearing inmates have access to regular telephones. The ADA Coordinators should periodically remind staff that access to the videophone, TTY, and captioned telephones should be afforded inmates during the same periods for which hearing inmates can access regular telephones.
Prior recommendation: Each institution in which the videophone is widely visible to other inmates should install such a curtain unless there is a significant security obstacle.
Progress: It was reported to me that the ADA Coordinator at each institution reviewed this situation and solved it where applicable. I have not heard further complaints.
ii. Portable phone amplifiers:
Prior recommendation: Portable phone amplifiers should be available at each institution.
Progress: Compliant as to purchase; there remain some information and access issues which should be monitored. Hard-of-hearing inmates should be informed that the amplifiers exist, and the process for using them should be made easy.
iii. Phone volume control.
Prior recommendation: There should be at least one volume-control phone in every grouping of phones in every institution, including the phones used in restrictive housing.
Progress: Compliant. That said, hard-of-hearing inmates continue to report access difficulties, because these phones are popular for all inmates. It would be appropriate to add additional volume-control phones wherever practicable.
iv. Captioned telephones (or “captels”).
Prior recommendation: Captioned telephones should be made available in every institution, available at the same hours as a regular phone.
Progress: At this point, all the facilities except the Lee Adjustment Center have captioned telephones. Installation and use has been challenging, but testing suggests that they all, finally, work. However, ongoing testing remains essential; phones that work this month can stop working for a variety of reasons. I strongly recommend that headquarters test both the TTYs and captioned telephones at least twice each year, to ensure that they all stay operational.
In addition, as Table 3 tallies, some institutions have authorized only a very small number of inmates to use the captioned telephone. It seems implausible that these institutions don’t have
10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 11 of 22 - Page ID#: 3522
any inmate for whom this technology would help meet the ADA obligation of equal access to telephone services. Access should be offered when needed.
v. Amplified phones.
Prior recommendation: None of KDOC’s institutions has an amplified phone, but these too would be worth looking into, centrally.
Progress: KDOC determined that additional amplified phones were not needed. Captioned telephones have amplification features, so ADA Coordinators should inform hard-of-hearing inmates that these are available to them.
vi. TTYs.
Prior recommendation: Each institution needs to work out and test a protocol by which TTYs can be used—and then write that protocol into full instructions capable of being followed by someone who has never used a TTY before.
Progress: After my prior report, testing demonstrated that there were many problems with TTY usability and access. After months of effort, all the TTYs are finally operational, and their instructions seem adequate. But the testing experience over the settlement agreement period demonstrates that this situation is—always—temporary. I recommend that headquarters staff obtain access to an online TTY (via http://www.nextalk.com/) and then conduct at least twice yearly TTY-to-TTY and TTY-to-voice testing of each institution’s TTY.
viii. Assistive listening systems.
Prior recommendation: At every institution, assistive listening devices should be made readily available for such environments: religious, educational, and rehabilitative programming. The need is particularly urgent for Substance Abuse Programming, which many institutions conduct in extremely noisy and difficult locations.
Progress: Each facility now has FM transmitter devices to use for assistive listening. As previously reported, in some, these are going largely unused; in others, they seem to be quite successful. Which is which seems to depend mostly on whether staff—and particularly the ADA Coordinator—demonstrates their usage to inmates who might benefit. I recommend that the ADA Coordinators for the institutions where the transmitter devices are being used successfully in classes and the like share with their colleagues that practices that are producing those successes.
ix: Earphones for video communication.
Prior recommendation: KDOC should ensure that earphones for video communication are available in each prison, and also anywhere parole hearings are held—that is, in county jails. In addition, individuals who might need this equipment should be informed that it is available.
11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 12 of 22 - Page ID#: 3523
Progress: KDOC now reports that earphones are available in each prison. In addition, Kentucky’s Parole Board Chair reports that there have been no problems providing accommodations to Deaf/HOH inmates. (I do not have any information either confirming or contradicting this latter report.) Before my May report, KDOC stated that it was planning to propose new standard language governing Parole accommodations at the next meeting of the Commission on Corrections:
If the Parole Board is conducting a hearing where the offender has a hearing deficit, the Parole Board would not proceed without appropriate accommodations. The Parole Board would advise KDOC that services would need to be arranged for the offender to accommodate his/her hearing deficit. The arrangements would be made by DOC and the Board would proceed after verification that appropriate services are in place.
The proposed standards language should be adopted.
x. Non-auditory alerts.
Prior recommendation: In any housing unit where it is practicable, KDOC should direct staff to flash the overhead lights to signal chow and pill-call. In addition, KDOC should direct implementation of some kind of personal notification to deaf/HOH inmates, so that they do not miss personal announcements (e.g., “John Smith, report to the Unit Administrator”).
Progress: KDOC previously explained that flashing overhead lights is not always practicable. Each facility now reports that it has some kind of system for alerting Deaf/HOH inmates of announcements. Nonetheless, unequal access to alerts—alerts signally various routine moments every day (count, chow, pill-call, yard), and alerts for personal announcements—remains a major source of difficulty for deaf/HOH inmates. Accordingly, I continue to recommend that at every prison, (1) flashing lights be used for routine alerts where practicable, (2) Deaf/HOH (not just Deaf) inmates be provided a method by which they can obtain non-auditory alarm watches or clocks, and (3) in-person notifications be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates. This issue will require additional fine-tuning, training, and monitoring.
b. Inmate purchases of non-auditory alarm devices.
Prior recommendation: KDOC headquarters should check with the institutions that have already piloted the devices about models and methods, and then should make them available for purchase by deaf/HOH inmates at all the institutions. (When inmates transfer from one institution to another, they should be authorized to bring these devices with them.)
Progress: Substantial progress towards compliance. All the KDOC institutions now allow inmates to purchase non-auditory alert devices. It is important that these also be made available to indigent inmates. At BCC, for example, the policy that has been adopted and communicated to
12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 13 of 22 - Page ID#: 3524
inmates is: “The ADA Coordinator will loan non-auditory watches/alarm clocks to indigent individuals. If you are not indigent but are unable to pay for such devices, they are still available to you by loan via an inmate account lien, when sufficient money comes into your account the lien will be satisfied.”
I do, however, have some concerns that in some of the institutions, the availability of nonauditory items has not been sufficiently communicated to inmates, or perhaps there’s been a breakdown in the purchase system. As Table 3 sets out, usage is extremely low at some institutions. Perhaps inmate preferences are different in those institutions—but my educated guess is, some other implementation issue is dampening access to these useful devices. ADA Coordinators should continue to communicate to inmates that they have access to nonauditory alarms that can help alert them to various scheduled events in the prison.
c. Bulletin boards.
Prior recommendation: Bulletin boards posting non-routine announcements should be provided in every housing area at each institution.
Progress: KDOC agreed to use bulletin boards and other methods, but explained that bulletin boards are not always appropriate. I continue to recommend that non-routine announcements be communicated in some non-auditory fashion; if bulletin boards are not a workable solution, some other solution is needed, in each housing unit.
d. Auxiliary aid processes.
Prior recommendation: KDOC should direct all institutions to implement auxiliary aid evaluations/reviews, and the process should have the following characteristics:
• An auxiliary aid evaluation should be conducted within 2 weeks—and ideally substantially sooner—of each deaf/HOH inmate’s arrival at an institution or identification as deaf/HOH.
• The evaluation/process should be performed at a meeting between the inmate and the ADA Coordinator, so that the inmate learns who the ADA Coordinator is, and so that the inmate is given appropriate information about resources and services.
• Effective communication should be provided at the meeting—meaning that an interpreter is necessary for any inmate who signs to communicate, and that for inmates who do not read, any documents should be fully explained using accessible language.
• At the meeting, the inmate should be informed about all services/resources available—hearing aids, telephonic assistance, interpretation, captioning, etc. The brochure that has been developed for this should be kept on hand, and distributed at the meeting. It should be updated whenever necessary, as new devices or new procedures come online.
• Inmates should receive easy-to-provide resources no later than the meeting. For example, that is when they can get bed cards, hard-of-hearing IDs, etc. Criteria
13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 14 of 22 - Page ID#: 3525
and a clear process should be developed for access to any limited resources (bed shakers, telephone amplifiers, etc.), and explained to the inmates. • Inmates should be informed at the meeting about a clear process for getting any additional auxiliary aids/assistance they need.
Progress: KDOC reports that the auxiliary aid process has been folded into a “Treatment Team” process. The key is for auxiliary aid meetings to be held in person with each inmate and for non-medical staff to affirmatively inform inmates of the available devices and services.
6. Inmate handbook
Prior recommendation: KDOC should standardize a notice for the Inmate Handbook, using text along the lines of what follows:
{Institution} is required to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A disability is a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity such as seeing, hearing, walking, bathing or breathing. (Temporary conditions, like a broken leg, are not considered a disability.) Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, {Institution} will ensure that inmates with disabilities have access to all services, privileges, facilities, advantages, and accommodations that is substantially equivalent to access provided similarly situated non-disabled inmates.
{Institution} will communicate effectively with inmates who are deaf and/or blind, ensuring that they can receive information from and provide information to staff. When needed for effective communication, {Institution} will provide “auxiliary aids and services.” This means devices or services that assist in communication, such as interpretation, hearing aids, captioning, videophones, amplifiers, etc. HOWEVER, if something a disabled inmate seeks—a particular job, for example— would be dangerous, posing a direct threat of injury or death to the inmate or others, {Institution} can bar the inmate’s access to that job after individualized consideration and consultation with appropriate medical experts.
{Institution} has an assigned ADA Coordinator who is responsible for training and advising staff in ADA matters and monitoring ADA concerns such as accessibility requirements and accommodations. The ADA Coordinator also reviews requests for adaptive equipment and accommodations as well as ADA complaints. To contact the ADA Coordinator, you may {HOW TO GET IN TOUCH} {e.g., send written correspondence via Institutional Mail or, in the event you are unable to submit a written request, you may contact your Classification and Treatment Officer who shall document and forward your request.}
There is a federal court Settlement Agreement that governs services for deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. It is available, along with additional information about such services, for all inmates to read on request, in the Inmate Legal Library.
Progress: Compliant.
14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 15 of 22 - Page ID#: 3526
III. ISSUES RAISED REPEATEDLY BY INMATES DURING THIS REPORTING PERIOD
To substitute for site visits (which were not practicable given the pandemic), between August and November, my law-student assistants conducted over 150 phone/videophone interviews of KDOC Deaf/HOH inmates—at least 10 at each prison. In addition, for each inmate my assistants or I had not previously communicated with, I sent a J-Pay, explaining my role and asking about their experience. The most common complaints, across institutions, were:
1. Dozens of inmates reported difficulty hearing announcements, both inside and on the yard, leading to missing meals, mail call, pill call, and the like, and causing conflict and threats of disciplinary action. This is addressed above in Part II.5.a.x and II.5.b.
2. Masks are making it harder to read lips and understand staff, and masks that loop behind the wearer’s ears physically interfering with behind-ear hearing aids.
In response to this complaint, I urged KDOC to issue clear masks to staff who frequently encounter inmates who read lips as part of their communication strategy, and to issue behind-the-head masks to inmates who wear hearing aids. Responses have varied. While each institution reports that both types of masks are now available to staff/inmates, the actual issuance/usage rate varies greatly. (See Table 3.) WKCC’s response seems to me useful for all the institutions to learn from; its ADA Coordinator reported that he interviewed 12 inmates with hearing aids, each of whom told him that the ear-loop masks were posing difficulties. Accordingly, WKCC issued tie-back masks to all 37 inmates with hearing aids.
Recommendation: Clear masks and masks that attach behind the wearer’s head, rather than behind the ears, are essential. Both are reportedly available at all KDOC institutions, but at some institutions seem to be in use only rarely. Inmates who are Deaf/HOH should be affirmatively asked if their comprehension would be assisted by clear masks for staff in their housing units, work-places, programs, etc., and if they answer yes, those masks should be issued/used accordingly. In addition, staff who will deal with Dear/HOH inmates more generally—the ADA Coordinator, Unit Administrators, etc., should be issued clear masks for use when appropriate. All inmates who wear hearing aids should be affirmatively offered behind-head masks.
3. Telephones are difficult to use because of background noise. Telephone voice identification difficult for HOH people to use. Insufficient number of volume-adjustable and HOH phones.
KDOC staff have confirmed that the voice identification and background noise complaints are often well-founded. Recommendation: ADA Coordinators should review phone issues, and ensure that (a) there are enough volume-adjustable and HOH phones for usage patterns, (b) phones are in a space quiet enough to allow HOH individuals to use them, (c) any voice-recognition issues are solved.
15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 16 of 22 - Page ID#: 3527
4. Inmates not getting HOH ids, bed signs, other auxiliary aids; not being informed about available auxiliary aids. (E.g., not knowing they could purchase vibrating clock or watch). After ADA Coordinators met with these individuals in response to my questions, a fair number of these inmates needed additional auxiliary aids.
Recommendation: These complaints suggest a need to conduct auxiliary aid meetings not just once on an inmate’s arrival to a prison, but every year or two.
5. Many inmates raised hearing aid issues: They report that their hearing aids are not working well, not replaced promptly. They are unhappy with bilateral hearing aid denials. They report confiscation and then loss of hearing aids on assignment to restrictive housing. And they report great difficulty getting hearing aid batteries— particularly in segregation, but elsewhere as well. One inmate reported that due to an unrelated medical issue, he lacks the manual dexterity to use his hearing aid—his prison’s ADA Coordinator responded to me that there is only one kind of hearing aid available, so if he is unable to use it, there is nothing that can be done. Obviously, this is unacceptable—medical staff need to evaluate his situation and assess whether a different device would be accessible to him.
Recommendation: The loss of hearing aids on transfer within and between prisons is a longstanding and demonstrated problem. The solution is additional staff training/alertness, and property checklists that include hearing-related equiptment. The battery issue has become more prevalent during the pandemic; I recommend that Wellpath review battery availability, prison by prison, and ensure a sufficient stock to avoid shortages. In addition, KDOC/Wellpath should ensure that inmates receive hearing aids medically suited to their situation.
6. Many inmates complain of disrespect and rudeness from officers, and that they have been threatened with discipline, or even received discipline, for conduct caused by their inability to hear (missing pill call and the like). On investigation, I found several disciplinary records that suggested that an inmate may have been punished for being unable to hear—or, at least, that the staff effort to avoid this unfair consequence was inadequately documented.
Recommendation: Staff responsible for disciplinary adjudication should be trained that it is inappropriate to penalize someone for their disability (e.g., for failing to obey an order they did not hear), and that they should ask appropriate questions and document their thought processes with respect to this issue in relevant disciplinary cases. Each ADA Coordinator should conduct such training immediately for appropriate staff, and then repeat it as necessary when new employees assume the disciplinary adjudication role.
16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 17 of 22 - Page ID#: 3528

IV. AUDIOLOGY PROCESSING

Including all the information I have received since the settlement was entered about hearing aid provision and audiology processing, over the settlement term, KDOC institutions have conducted screening examinations of thousands of inmates for hearing impairments, and have provided over 1400 hearing aids. As in the May 2020 report, I focus below on the individuals who received hearing aids. This is the slowest group, in terms of processing time, so if these inmates are receiving timely services, that is very good news.

Processing timeliness has shown major improvements. My recommendation, made in December 2016, was for a two-month or less turn-around. This has not quite been achieved, but it’s now very close. As Table 4 shows, for inmates whose hearing needs came to KDOC’s attention in 2019, and who ended up getting hearing aids, it took on average 87 days for KDOC to evaluate/meet those needs. (This statistic is 11 days longer than I reported in my prior report, because it now includes all but one of the 11 cases that were ongoing as of May 2020, whose processing times were substantially longer than typical.) Table 3 shows the year-by-year trend (omitting four cases for which I do not have the start and/or the end dates):

Table 4: Processing Times for Inmates Who Received Hearing Aids

When prison alerted to hearing issue 2016 (includes 11 from 2015) 2017 2018 2019 2020 (through December 1) All, 2015 to present

N 89 205 321 477 315 1407

Avg. days to resolution
198 149 138 87 54 107

Still ongoing 0 0 1 1 7 9

Moreover, so far, 2020 is looking notably better than 2019—the average of 54 days is both substantially shorter than the prior year’s average, and it is distorted only by 9 ongoing cases, so is likely to be at least close to the final average, once those last handful of cases are resolved. (See below.) That said, 54 days is an average; resolution times were occasionally far longer. See Table 5:

17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 18 of 22 - Page ID#: 3529

Table 5: 2020, distribution of processing time for inmates who received hearing aids.

Resolved in: <= 30 days 30-60 days 60-90 days 90-120 days 120-180 days > 180 days

%

Cumulative %

19%

19%

52%

71%

20%

91%

5%

96%

3%

99%

1%

100%

As Table 5 shows, about 30% of cases in 2020 have taken over 2 months—one third of those (9%) have taken over 3 months. Moreover, both Table 4 and Table 5 slightly overstate the speed of resolution. As of December 1, there were 9 inmates whose audiology evaluation were still in process; the eight for whom I have data are tallied in Table 6. The COVID-19 pandemic is the reported cause for several of the delays.

Table 6: Ongoing Audiology Needs, as of December 1, 2020

Date KDOC alerted 9/15/2018?? 4/10/2019 3/3/2020 3/16/2020 4/27/2020 5/23/2020
9/18/2020
9/19/2020

Progress/Cause for delay
No notes Being followed by outside ENT. New cochlear implant ordered; waiting for offsite ENT to call when it's ready. COVID delay. No notes Outside ENT appointment scheduled for January 2021. Awaiting offsite appointment to receive special hearing aid. Inconclusive hearing test performed September 2020; (delayed) chart review in November ordered a second test, but COVID lockdown has further delayed test. Inconclusive hearing test performed September 2020; chart review 10 days later ordered a second test, but COVID diagnosis/lockdown has delayed that.

Prison
NTC GRCC

Days in process (as of 12/1/2020) 808 601

LLCC 273 WKCC 260

LSCC 218

KSP 192

LSCC 74

LSCC 73

As of December 1, 2020, the ongoing cases were an average of 312 days old. Obviously by the time they are resolved, the average resolution time will be higher. But unlike in prior reports, there are only a few. And the pandemic obviously poses really significant challenges not previously present—this is particularly the case at LSCC.

These summary statistics mask considerable variation among facilities. Table 7 examines the issue facility by facility (omitting the cases for which dates are unavailable.). It shows days to resolution by prison, setting out both the average and various percentiles (10%ile, 25%ile, 50%ile, 75%ile, and 90%ile). Figures over the 60 day recommendation are highlighted in yellow;

18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 19 of 22 - Page ID#: 3530

outliers are highlighted in red.

Table 7: Days to Resolution by Institution (Cases begun 2020, Hearing Aid Received)

BCC BCFC EKCC GRCC KCIW KSP KSR LAC LLCC LSCC NTC RCC Ross WKCC
Total

N Avg. 10%ile 25%ile 50%ile 75%ile 90%ile

4 57.8 44

49.5

58

66

71

1 23.0 23

23

23

23

23

14 45.1 27

35

48

55

58

11 87.8 25

29

43

165 219

22 35.2 22

23

32

39

61

19 45.8 22

29

40

63

83

50 61.0 30.5

44

58.5

73

86

6 46.5 35

42 44.5 52

61

27 52.7 26

31

36

59

113

24 52.8 27

36

50

65

94

37 57.1 27

33

41

85

111

77 52.7 28

33

41

64

78

4 55.5 21

38.5 63.5 72.5

74

19 49.2 21

31

39

57

75

315 53.5 26

33

44

65

86

The total picture on audiology processing demonstrates that the institution-wide focus on process efficiencies, tracking, and followup is paying off.
V. OTHER ISSUES
A few other issues emerged from reporting:
• GRCC, LLCC, and RCC reported that even inmates who sign to communicate are transported with full hand-restraints. This renders such inmates unable to communicate. Other institutions have implemented special restraints to be used during transport of inmates who sign; those that have not should consult with them and adjust accordingly. See Settlement Agreement XI.A.2 (“The two-point system would allow a Deaf Inmate to use his or her hands for communicating via sign language to some degree. KDOC training will include both the two-point system as well as the agreement that hand restraints will be removed from a Deaf Inmate when the Deaf Inmate is in a secure environment, when security is no longer a threat, or there are other security devices in place to allow the Deaf Inmate to Effectively Communicate.”).
• RCC reported that only a minority of HOH inmates know who the ADA Coordinator is; this suggests that in-person auxiliary aid assessments may not have been done, and that the ADA handout should include the information on how to reach the ADA Coordinator, for inmates’ future reference.
• Several facilities reported that there is no method for an inmate to request a hearing-related accommodation during a disciplinary investigation and/or proceeding, using the KOMS form. This is a state-wide issue; the KOMS entry screen relating to discipline should be adjusted to allow accommodation/interpretation requests.

19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 20 of 22 - Page ID#: 3531
VI. CONCLUSION
The new recommendations in this report are:
1. I recommend completion of the planned KOMS improvements. In addition, once the ADA flag is triggered by a medical diagnosis, I recommend that medical staff review the appropriate information for each one and place their diagnoses into KOMS.
2. Now that ADA identification issues are sorted out, I recommend that KDOC and Wellpath conduct records both retrospective and prospective review to ensure correct documentation and diagnosis flags.
3. I recommend that KDOC make periodic efforts to remind medical providers that while binaural amplification is not to be provided routinely, it is appropriate where there is a safety or vocational need for it. In addition, it would be a good practice for medical grievances raising binaural amplification to be evaluated by a different physician, to bring a fresh perspective to the request.
4. I recommend that Wellpath’s specialty clinic coordinator conduct spot checking to ensure that her tracking list includes all inmates who are undergoing audiology workup, including prediagnosis, and solve any problems that emerge.
5. I recommend that, going forward, KDOC headquarters closely monitor videophone outage periods and other technical difficulties and consider alternative vendors or other solutions.
6. The ADA Coordinators should periodically remind staff that access to the videophone, TTY, and captioned telephones should be afforded inmates during the same periods for which hearing inmates can access regular telephones.
7. Hard-of-hearing inmates should be informed that the phone amplifiers exist, and the process for using them should be made easy.
8. It would be appropriate to add additional volume-control phones wherever practicable. 9. I strongly recommend that headquarters test both the TTYs and captioned telephones at
least twice each year, to ensure that they all stay operational. 10. Captioned telephones have amplification features, so ADA Coordinators should inform
hard-of-hearing inmates that these are available to them. 11. I recommend that headquarters staff obtain access to an online TTY (via
http://www.nextalk.com/) and then conduct at least twice yearly TTY-to-TTY and TTY-tovoice testing of each institution’s TTY. 12. I recommend that the ADA Coordinators for the institutions where the transmitter devices are being used successfully in classes and the like share with their colleagues that practices that are producing those successes. 13. The proposed standards language relating to parole and deaf/HOH inmates should be adopted.
20

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 21 of 22 - Page ID#: 3532
14. I continue to recommend that at every prison, (1) flashing lights be used for routine alerts where practicable, (2) Deaf/HOH (not just Deaf) inmates be provided a method by which they can obtain non-auditory alarm watches or clocks, and (3) in-person notifications be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates. This issue will require additional fine-tuning, training, and monitoring.
15. ADA Coordinators should continue to communicate to inmates that they have access to non-auditory alarms that can help alert them to various scheduled events in the prison.
16. I continue to recommend that non-routine announcements be communicated in some nonauditory fashion; if bulletin boards are not a workable solution, some other solution is needed, in each housing unit.
17. Auxiliary aid meetings should be held, in person, with each inmate and for non-medical staff to affirmatively inform inmates of the available devices and services.
18. Clear masks and masks that attach behind the wearer’s head, rather than behind the ears, are essential. Both are reportedly available at all KDOC institutions, but at some institutions seem to be in use only rarely. Inmates who are Deaf/HOH should be affirmatively asked if their comprehension would be assisted by clear masks for staff in their housing units, work-places, programs, etc., and if they answer yes, those masks should be issued/used accordingly. In addition, staff who will deal with Dear/HOH inmates more generally—the ADA Coordinator, Unit Administrators, etc., should be issued clear masks for use when appropriate. All inmates who wear hearing aids should be offered behind-head masks.
19. ADA Coordinators should review phone issues, and ensure that (a) there are enough volume-adjustable and HOH phones for usage patterns, (b) phones are in a space quiet enough to allow HOH individuals to use them, (c) any voice-recognition issues are solved.
20. Complaints about accommodations suggest a need to conduct auxiliary aid meetings not just once on an inmate’s arrival to a prison, but every year or two.
21. The loss of hearing aids on transfer within and between prisons is a longstanding and demonstrated problem. The solution is additional staff training/alertness, and property checklists that include hearing-related equiptment. The battery issue has become more prevalent during the pandemic; I recommend that Wellpath review battery availability, prison by prison, and ensure a sufficient stock to avoid shortages. In addition, KDOC/Wellpath should ensure that inmates receive hearing aids medically suited to their situation.
22. Staff responsible for disciplinary adjudication should be trained that it is inappropriate to penalize someone for their disability (e.g., for failing to obey an order they did not hear), and that they should ask appropriate questions and document their thought processes with respect to this issue in relevant disciplinary cases. Each ADA Coordinator should conduct such training immediately for appropriate staff, and then repeat it as necessary when new employees assume the disciplinary adjudication role.
23. Institutions that have not implemented special transport restraints for inmates who sign to communicate should consult with those who have implemented such restraints and adjust accordingly.
21

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 22 of 22 - Page ID#: 3533
24. The KOMS entry screen relating to discipline should be adjusted to allow accommodation/interpretation requests.
As has been true throughout the Settlement Agreement period, KDOC staff have been professional in their efforts to implement the agreement, and helpful to me as I ask them monitoring questions. In fact, 2020 saw a significant increase in efforts to improve compliance, led by KDOC headquarters; the resulting compliance improvements are apparent in this report. As usual, there have been both successes and challenges to report—but the balance shifted in this report towards successes. At this point, I believe that KDOC has in place a system already compliant in large part with the ADA and the settlement agreement—and capable of maintaining its successes and improving going forward, if the Department continues to appoint, train, and support the ADA Coordinators and their efforts. It has been a privilege to assist the parties and the Court in this lawsuit.
Respectfully submitted,
Margo Schlanger Settlement Monitor 625 So. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109 adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com December 16, 2020
22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-4 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 1 of 1 - Page ID#: 4688

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT FRANKFORT

OSCAR ADAMS and MICHAEL KNIGHTS

Plaintiffs v.

Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, et al.

Defendants.

Exhibit 1: Exhibit 2: Exhibit 3:

Ninth Semi-Annual Report by the Settlement Monitor December 16, 2020
EXHIBITS
Information Request Memos (September 15, 2020 and subsequent). Spreadsheet and Other Responses to Information Request ADA Coordinator Training Slides

1

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 1 of 55 - Page ID#: 3534
Exhibit 1: Information Request Memos

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 2 of 55 - Page ID#: 3535

Margo Schlanger
Court Appointed Monitor, Adams and Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky
625 So. State Street  Ann Arbor, MI 48109  E-Mail: Adams.Settlement.Monitor@gmail.com
734-615-2618

Memo to:
From: Date: Re:

Kentucky Department of Corrections Director of Operations Janet Conover Programs Branch Manager Debbie Kays All institutions’ ADA Coordinators and backup ADA Coordinators Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor (adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com) September 15, 2020 Followups from recent phone and other contacts with Deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates.

As you know, my law students have recently conducted dozens of inmate interviews, talking to Deaf and hard-of-hearing (HOH) inmates at each KDOC institution. This memo summarizes issues recently raised by inmates we heard from via those phone calls or otherwise. (Note that there were also additional issues raised by inmates who did not want their names shared; some of these are reflected in the “repeat issues” reported below.)

To be completely clear, the descriptions below recount what we’ve heard from inmates—not what we’ve found after investigation. Obviously, we don’t yet know the true state of affairs.

The most common complaints, across institutions, are: 1. Difficulty hearing announcements, both inside and outside, leading to HOH inmates missing meals, mail call, pill call. 2. Masks make it harder to read lips and understand staff, make it harder to wear hearing aids. 3. Telephones are difficult to use because of background noise. Telephone voice identification difficult for HOH people to use. Insufficient number of volume-adjustable and HOH phones. 4. Inmates not getting HOH ids, bed signs, other auxillary aids; not being informed about available auxiliary aids. (E.g., not knowing they could purchase vibrating clock or watch). 5. Hearing aids not working well, not replaced promptly. 6. Bilateral hearing aid denials. 7. Difficulty getting hearing aid batteries, especially in seg, but elsewhere as well. 8. Officers being disrespectful, writing inmates up for hearing-impairment-related issues (e.g., not following an order they didn’t hear) 9. Job dismissals/disqualifications relating to hearing impairments.

For each individual issue identified below, please provide what information you can on what happened in the incident in question. Include timing. That is, for example, if someone says he has not received a hard-of-hearing ID, please include when he arrived at the prison, when he had his auxiliary aid assessment, whether he should have gotten the ID, and when he got it. If someone says he was written up for hearing-related failure to follow an order or the like, please provide full documentation of the relevant disciplinary incident, including its result. And so on.

1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 3 of 55 - Page ID#: 3536

BCC

Repeat issues: A. Inmates report missing announcements; inside COs just yell them out and the yard loudspeaker is also difficult to hear. Therefore, people miss meals, mail call, pill call, and the time to turn in homework for programs. B. Masks make it harder to read lips and understand COs. C. Phones are difficult to use because of the background noise. D. Inmates not offered auxillary aids, and many did know that they had the option to purchase any type of vibrating clock or watch. E. Officers are supposed to flip the lights before making announcements, but most of them don’t. F. Difficulty getting hearing aid batteries. G. HOH people barred from several jobs. H. Unit tv does not typically have closed captions on.

Individual reports:

1.

: Mr.

said that the lunch room he can’t hear anything.

He’s unable to wear his hearing aid because it doesn’t stay on with his glasses and mask.

Mr.

used to have 2 HAs, but when they were sent off to be fixed, he only

received 1 back. Ms. Peach told him he could only have one HA. He also had to pay $10

for this new HA. This new HA wasn’t fitted and is too small, so he doesn’t use it. He

wants to go to medical and tell them it doesn’t work, but doesn’t want to pay $3. He also

has a pocket talker, but it gives him ear infections so he doesn’t use that either. Mr.

requested a bed shaker, but his request was denied. Mr.

has also been

written up for not getting up for diabetic call. Mr.

filed a grievance, but it was

denied (this happened a while ago).

2.

): Mr.

was supposed to receive a HA when he transferred to

BCC from the Fayette County Detention Center, but they were lost. This happened in

2015 and he never received them back. He would like a HA. When he arrived at BCC,

they told him he would receive a bed shaker, he never did. He would also like a HOH ID

card, he has a tag that says HOH, but it’s not the purple card that other people have and is

more obvious. Last month he was written up for not being able to hear a Lieutenant.

3.

: Mr.

was told he’d receive 2 HAs, but he only

received one. He also used to have an HOH aide, but they changed the requirements for

getting one.

4.

: Mr.

doesn’t believe he’d hear the fire alarm if he was

asleep. He also regularly misses announcements. He’s been written up for not hearing

orders before. He is having more issues understanding staff now that everyone’s wearing

masks and you can’t stand near people. Mr.

doesn’t use the phone often because he

can barely hear. He was previously told he couldn’t be in the dog program because of his

hearing, but that rule changed recently. Mr.

cannot hear the unit TV at all and they

don’t closed captions.

5.

: Mr.

has 1 HA but it doesn’t help, it’s just a loud

roaring sound. Mr.

would like a vibrating clock. Mr.

sometimes

attends religious services and says it’s hard to hear because of the background noise.

2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 4 of 55 - Page ID#: 3537

6.

): Mr.

just had a hearing test and is scheduled for HAs.

He’s been waiting to receive them for about a month. Mr.

has a pink card

indicating he has bad vision, but would like a split pink/purple card to also show he’s

HOH. Mr.

lost a job because of his hearing. He used to drive a tractor, but he

couldn’t hear when he was on the tractor so they moved him to landscaping. This

happened before 2019. Mr.

said sometimes it’s hard to hear in religious services

because the room can get loud.

7.

Mr.

has problems with guards threatening to write him

up because he can’t hear. He received a bed shaker yesterday, but he still hasn’t received

an ADA aide. He can’t hear guards yell or pill call.

8.

It took Mr.

around 5 months to get his HA. He

didn’t know other auxiliary aids were available. He does not have a HOH door sign.

There’s no volume controlled phone in SAP.

3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 5 of 55 - Page ID#: 3538

BCFC

Repeat issues: A. Difficulty hearing intercom announcements. B. The TTY used to be free, but now you have to pay for it (the same rate as the regular phone).

Individual reports:

1.

: Mr.

has a dorm runner who helps him with

announcements. He has a HA, but it picks up a lot of background noise, like the wind

when he’s outside. Mr.

said that there are some COs who don’t understand what it

means to be HOH and don’t seem to care even when he shows them his HOH card.

2.

Mr. has issues hearing the intercom. He doesn’t know what it

says unless someone else tells him. This is because there’s so much background noise.

4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 6 of 55 - Page ID#: 3539

EKCC Repeat issues:
A. Problems hearing announcements B. Officers being disrespectful C. Masks making it hard to wear hearing aids D. Delays getting an HOH ID card or door sign E. Difficulties getting hearing aid batteries, F. Absence of closed captioning on the TVs G. Lack of HOH phones and no purple video phones H. Job dismissals/disqualifications relating to hearing impairments.

Individual reports:

1.

: Mr.

said that he had 5 hearing aids lost during his stay

at KSP, and has not been able to get them replaced. He also said the hearing aid and

batteries don’t work.

2.

Mr.

was told that he was fired from the

cleaning job because people with a hearing aid couldn’t work in that job, same with

working outside.

3.

: Mr.

said that the hearing aid doesn’t help during

phone conversations, during which it’s hard to hear. He also said sometimes

communicating with the guards is aggravating because he can’t understand what they

mean, and it messes him up. Mr.

also had an issue where he was told to go back to

his wing and didn’t hear the officer, and was told he was going to be written up for not

listening but never received the write-up. He also said that it was hard to communicate in

disciplinary proceedings because of the fiberglass partition being used.

4.

: Mr.

says he is regularly threatened with write-ups. He

said he has lost all hearing accessories, and that the staff yell and get an attitude with

HOH inmates.

5.

: Mr.

said that he’s often harassed by guards even with

his HOH card, and they get upset when they can’t get his attention. He also said he did

not have an HOH sign for his door, and that COs don’t let them use HOH phones.

6.

: Mr.

said that the sign language phone is broken, and that

the closed captioning phone isn’t always working. He also said he needs lights in the

room to see when the announcements were being made, and that the hearing aids and

batteries don’t work well.

7.

: Mr.

said he has trouble hearing things that are

announced over the intercom, and the officers don’t always knock to let him know that

announcements are being made so he misses things like rec and pill call. He also said it

can take a couple days to get the batteries back. Mr.

also never got his ID card. His

main issue is that many of the officers are not respectful of his hearing issues, and that he

had trouble hearing during his programs, making it difficult to stay motivated to

participate in future programs. He also got written up for missing a movement when he

didn’t hear it being called.

8.

Mr.

said that he was given two hearing tests at

LLCC and then a test at EKCC, several of which came back as inconclusive. He is unsure

if he’s hard of hearing, and doesn’t know if he may have signed a waiver for a hearing

5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 7 of 55 - Page ID#: 3540

aid because he got a form to sign before his hearing test came back. Mr.

has a

HOH door sign, but not an ID card. Also, he said that it would be easier to communicate

if people wore clear masks.

9.

: Mr.

thinks that he needs a hearing aid; he said he lost it,

and they wouldn’t let him go back and get it. It’s been missing since June. He now has

issues hearing the announcements, except pill call, which he said is pretty loud. He said

he did have writeups a few times for not hearing the guards because they thought he was

ignoring them. Even after explaining that he was hard of hearing, they were not

dismissed.

10.

: Mr.

said that the background noise for his hearing

aid is so bad that he can’t wear it, because it’s too difficult to try and focus past the

background noise. He was also told that he had to move to an HOH wing or go to seg; he

was told later that he didn’t have to move, but by then he had already gone through the

moving process and didn’t want to have to move back. Mr. Hayes also said he’s been

yelled at before for not being able to hear an order, although he’s never been written up

for it.

11.

Mr.

said that he was told he does not have hard of hearing

but that he disagrees, and that the test was done incorrectly. He said he has not been

given a hearing test in 2 years.

12.

: Mr. said he has trouble hearing the speakers because

they’re garbled most of the time, so he usually just keeps an eye on the clock. Mr.

also had issues with wearing his mask straps muffling the hearing aid. He also just got his

HOH ID and door sign the day of our interviews. In the past, Mr. had some issues

with a few officers who started yelling when he couldn’t hear anything, and says he gets

in trouble all the time for his hearing problem because it causes interactions to escalate.

13.

: Mr.

said that he was put in segregation for using the

hard of hearing phone a few months back.

14.

Mr.

said that the staff are not that understanding

about inmates being HOH, and that since the inmates don’t wear their ID all the time,

then sometimes staff get upset when he can’t hear them saying things to him. He also

does not have a door sign, and has been having issues with getting the medical staff to

bring batteries in a timely manner.

15.

: Mr.

said that he has been having trouble getting a

hearing impaired sign, a shake watch, and a HOH phone. He also said guards have yelled

at him for not hearing when he’s called.

16.

: Mr.

had been trying to get a HOH sign for over 4

months and was not able to get one. Mr.

also mentioned that he can’t turn the

closed captioning on for the TV.

17.

: Mr.

said that he has trouble hearing the COs yell for

things like count. He said the prison has not given him an ID card or a door sign.

Sometimes, Mr.

has difficulty communicating with the COs when he doesn’t

hear them. The phones are hard to hear well when he uses them. He said the main TV

closed captioning is also not turned on.

18.

: Mr.

has not received any help regarding his hearing. He

does not have a HA or any other auxiliary aid. He’s talked with the ADA director but still

has not received any assistance.

6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 8 of 55 - Page ID#: 3541

GRCC

Repeat issues: A. Inmates not able to hear announcements B. Issues getting ID cards C. Loud phone area D. Not enough HOH phones E. Telephone voice identification difficult for HOH people to use F. Bilateral hearing aid denials G. Hearing aids not replaced in a timely manner H. Inmates in segregation unable to get hearing aid batteries

Generally, the inmates were both aware of the ADA coordinator and had positive things to say about him.

Individual reports:

1.

Mr.

had trouble hearing announcements that

were made in the prison, and with not being woken up for things. His hearing aid doesn’t

work well; he wants to clean the filter, but they didn’t show him how to do it or give him

the materials to do it himself. He also found that the officers were not very understanding

of people with hearing aids, and that they were either not communicative or overbearing.

2.

Mr.

could not always hear the loudspeakers at the

institution. He was also in the process of getting a hearing aid, ID card, and HOH dorm

sign. He had continuous issues with the guards thinking that he was being aggressive

because he was speaking loudly to them, and has been written up for not doing what he

was told because he could not hear. The phones were difficult to hear and to use.

3.

: Mr.

said that his hearing aid and HOH ID are not

in yet, and that he can’t hear the daily announcements, preventing him from getting his

insulin shot. He said he’s also missed pill call and meals.

4.

: Mr.

had his hearing aids lost by the officers after being

put in segregation and having his property taken during that time – his hearing aids were

lost in March, and he has not yet gotten a replacement. The volume controlled phone is

also difficult for him to use because he can’t hear over the background noise, because it’s

right in the middle of the normal phones. Mr.

also said he is not being woken up

by the officers for movements, chow time, and other announcements.

5.

: Mr.

is having issues with his hearing aid not

working well, with medical unable to provide a fix. He also had an issue where a guard

was not waking him up in the morning by knocking or using the speaker on the

megaphone, and was rude when he asked her to start doing those things. He also had his

ID taken and it was never returned to him. Mr.

said the phone was hard to use

because it’s hard to get the voice activation to work in a noisy room.

6.

Mr.

said he is still waiting on an HOH ID card.

7.

: Mr. said that he can’t hear the officers coming around to make

announcements most of the time, and that the bullhorns they bought garble things and

don’t help with the issue.

7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 9 of 55 - Page ID#: 3542

8.

): Mr.

had difficulty hearing announcements on

the intercom, and said the phones are difficult to use because the phone room is crowded

and noisy. He said this is particularly difficult with the new voice recognition system, and

that the volume control phone can be hard to access, as well the phone for the hearing

impaired, because there aren’t enough. Mr.

also said that some of the COs get

mad when he can’t understand them.

9.

: Mr.

said that he was supposed to have ear surgery

and things that he might have some kind of ear cancer, but has not been able to find out

the results yet.

10.

: Mr.

said that he took his hearing aid to medical and it was

sent out for over 4 months. He also said the TTY was not working and officers in the

dorm wouldn’t let him use the phone. He also said that his hearing aid was taken when he

was in RHU, and it was lost; according to Mr.

this was the third time this

happened to him. He also said he got a disciplinary report because he missed count after

not hearing it.

11.

: Mr.

had issues getting a second hearing aid, and he

has trouble hearing the announcements, which he says are made by the officers yelling

them rather than the intercom. He also does not have an ID card, as it was lost during the

transfer.

12.

: Mr.

had trouble hearing announcements, and

has also been having trouble getting batteries from medical. He also had a vibrating

watch taken out of his cell not returned, and has had issues getting his bed shaker and

alarm clock back since getting out of segregation. Mr.

also said he asked for an

interpreter for court call and was denied because they said that they didn’t have anyone.

He also said the captel is not working. He’s had issues hearing in the programs he takes,

and has even dropped out of some programs because he could not hear what was going

on. Mr.

also had issues with being shackled despite using sign language, and with

getting an interpreter for religious services.

8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 10 of 55 - Page ID#: 3543

KCIW Repeat issues:
A. Inmates unable to access the law library during the lockdown B. Difficulty understanding officers because of masks. C. Lots of issues with hearing announcements (alarms, intercoms, etc.) and therefore
missing meals and other things. D. Difficulty getting HA batteries since lockdown started. E. Difficult to hear on the phones; inability to access the phone with the volume adjustment
because so many people want to use it. Also, the phone with the sound amplifier is in the dayroom and it’s very loud in there. F. HAs not working well

Individual reports:

1.

Ms.

has trouble using her HA because of the background

amplification.

2.

Ms.

HA amplifies too much background noise, so it’s

been useless for her.

3.

): Ms.

went to see an ENT last April because of ear

infections. She got tubes, but they were later removed and that’s caused a lot of issues.

It’s hard for her to keep medical on top of her hearing issues. Because of COVID, on July

1, they did a fogging with a cleaning spray in the dorm. Ms.

didn’t hear the

announcement to evacuate and was in her room when they sprayed the solution. She took

her to the ER and she still has a constant cough. Ms.

is in seg and can’t use her

bed shaker because there isnt a plug. Her 1st HA was working properly and it took her

from Sept. 2019 to March 2020 to get a new one. She’s had issues with missing

announcements for chow, especially when she was participating in the WILLOW

program.

4.

Ms.

HA died 2 months ago. She’s had issues getting it

replaced. It also took her several years to get a hearing test. She didn’t know there were

any other auxiliary aids available. She is regularly yelled at by COs for not being able to

hear. In 2015, she spent 15 days in seg for not being able to hear a CO. [After we spoke

Ms.

sent a JPay that she received a new HA]

5.

): It took Ms.

from 2014-2020 to get a HA. Medical never

showed her how it works, so she can’t use it. They don’t seem to care about her HA or

that her ears are always infected.

6.

): Ms.

’s HA has never worked and she would

like a new one.

9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 11 of 55 - Page ID#: 3544

KSP

Repeat issues: A. Difficulty hearing announcements B. Phones are hard to use: they are too close together, so it’s loud. And only one has volume control. C. In seg, inmates have a hard time hearing what the COs yell at the front of the unit when they’re located in the back. D. Trouble with the COs and being written up for hearing issues E. Inmates told they could not purchase auxiliary aids F. Delays in replacing hearing aids G. Hearing aids and pocket talkers not working well.

Individual reports:

1.

: Mr.

said that because he doesn’t have an ID card, he isn’t

able to get access to the volume controlled phone and has trouble hearing his family. He

also has trouble hearing announcements, and communicating with the guards.

2.

: Mr.

said that because there’s only one volume

controlled phone, it’s hard to get on that specific phone, and that the prison should get

more of them. He said he often has trouble hearing the announcements. He said the

prison did not give him information on how to purchase auxiliary aids. Since moving

walks, he no longer has a door sign. On this walk, he also said the guards do not wake

him up and help when he can’t hear things.

3.

Mr.

recently lost all of hearing in his right ear and

50% in his left. He was told his hearing test was unreadable and that he needed to see a

real ENT. Because of COVID he hasn’t had that appointment yet, and his hearing keeps

getting worse.

4.

: Mr.

hearing aid has been broken for about 4 or 5

months, and not having it has been causing him problems in the prison. He is missing

yard and chow because he can’t hear the announcements. He was scolded for missing

count, and has been sent to the hole because when he misses announcements, the guards

get upset “and then it escalates so I start yelling back”. He said that he asked about

getting an auxiliary aid but was told they’re not available. He filed a grievance over a

hearing issue twice, and said that the first time they convinced him to drop it without

resolving the issue but the second time he waited until he got his door sign to dismiss.

5.

: Mr.

HA isn’t working properly. He would prefer a bone

conducting hearing aid that a specialist recommended.

6.

: Mr.

took a hearing test and it said he has good hearing, but

he knows he is HOH and doesn’t know what to do next.

7.

: Mr.

said that he requested a bed shaker, but was told

that his hearing isn’t severe enough to qualify. He was also told that he could buy one,

but only after multiple complaints, and he does not have the funds to purchase one. Mr.

regularly does not wake up for count because he can’t hear it. He was not given

materials on purchasing auxiliary aids, and only knew about it because Mr.

had

one and he saw it in the settlement. He also had to file a grievance to get closed

10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 12 of 55 - Page ID#: 3545

captioning on religious channels at the institution. He’s also been scolded for talking too

loud. He gave us the grievance numbers for his grievances.

8.

: Mr.

said that his hearing aid and pocket talker don’t really

work well because they’re the type that go outside the ear, and not into the ear itself. He

said he asked about getting earbuds for his TV that work better, and he was told that he

could only pay for them himself. He’s willing to do so, but can only do it in installments,

which he was told isn’t possible. Mr.

said he can rarely understand the

announcements, and he’s been put in the hole for not hearing what guards say when his

back is turned. He’s also told that he talks too loudly. Mr.

asked for a new HA but

was told that it costs too much. Also he has one HA, but would like two.

9.

: Mr.

said that his main issue was that he wanted an

information packet on getting noise cancellation earbuds or other auxiliary aids. He said

that the day we scheduled the interview, they came and gave it to him, so he no longer

has any issues. However, Mr.

did say that sometimes he can’t really hear the

announcements

10.

(she/her): She went to the ENT to have tubes put in her

ears, but when she woke up from surgery the doctor said he didn’t put tubes in her ears

(but the prison said he did). She’s not sure what’s going on. When she was in seg, she’d

regularly miss the announcement for rec. It took her a long time to get a hearing test. Her

HA was lost when she was transferred back to seg in KSP. She’s been without one for

several weeks.

11.

: Mr.

doesn’t have a HOH ID or sign to alert COs

he’s HOH. He would like both. He said that he’s been unable to get access to the volume-

controlled phone because he does not have an HOH ID card or door sign. He said that the

facility does not categorize him as hard of hearing (on the masterlist, he’s marked ‘low’)

and that it causes issues because people don’t know he’s hard of hearing and can’t hear

announcements.

12.

: In 2019, Mr.

was sent to the hole and forbidden from

taking his HA or glasses. Since then, he’s been told he could take his HA if he’s sent to

the hole. But in reality, if you’re taken to the hole when you don’t have your HA on you

then you can’t go and get it. And when staff packs up your property, it can take over a

week to get your property (so you’re without your HA during that time). Mr.

had to make his own HOH door sign. It took Mr.

a while to get an initial hearing

test. He didn’t know other auxiliary aids were available.

11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 13 of 55 - Page ID#: 3546

KSR

Repeat issues: A. Medical staff not responsive to reported hearing issues B. Difficult to hear in the phone room C. Difficulty hearing announcements, especially because of housing location D. Staff disrespect E. Hearing aid for the wrong ear F. Too-high qualification for devices G. Difficulties getting battery replacements, H. Poor hearing aid quality I. Difficult getting replacement hearing aids.

Individual reports:

1.

: Mr.

said that he can’t hear times for count, and then

officers beat on his door and are rude to him.

2.

: Mr.

said that although Ms. Wathen is usually

pretty good at solving problems, he’s been unable to get batteries from medical and

hasn’t heard from her yet. He also said that he asked about getting new earbuds to use

with his TV and radio, and hasn’t heard back about that either.

3.

): NOTE: Mr.

had trouble understanding what I was

saying. Mr. Davis said that he can’t hear well in the phone room so isn’t really able to

communicate with his mom. He also said that he doesn’t have hearing aids any more but

that when he did, he was having issues with the batteries. He’s also been yelled at to

lower his voice.

4.

: Mr.

said that his hearing device took a while to get, and

some of the COs were rude when he didn’t hear the call for chow. He said he has trouble

hearing over the noise around him.

5.

Mr.

said that the medical staff are not very

respectful, and that his hearing aid doesn’t work very well.

6.

: Mr.

said that after getting out of quarantine, his HOH

card was thrown away.

7.

: Mr. said that he thinks that he needs another hearing test, and

that he’s been depending on watching other inmates to figure out what is going on.

8.

: Mr.

said that he thought his hearing aid test said

hearing aid recommended, but that he was told he did not meet the standard.

9.

Mr.

said that he needs a hearing aid for his right ear,

rather than his left, because it causes him issues where the staff come up and scream at

him when he doesn’t hear things from his right side. He said he can hear the

announcements about 50% of the time and has missed medical appointments because he

couldn’t hear. Mr.

said he has trouble hearing when he talks on the phone and

getting through the voice ID part at the beginning. He’s been written up in the past for not

being up in time for count because he couldn’t hear over his movie.

10.

: Mr.

said that KSR is good for the most part, but that

officers are not using the PA systems and the PA systems are not working very well, so

he misses announcements.

12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 14 of 55 - Page ID#: 3547

11.

: Mr.

said right now, he’s in a cell in the back, right

underneath the air conditioner. He said he can’t hear them holler pill call, breakfast, etc

but was told he could not be moved. He wants to get a bed shaker, but can’t because the

prison said they are not sending out orders right now.

12.

: Mr. said that he was given a hearing aid for his right ear,

but that it was his left ear that he needs one for. He said that when he wears it in his right

ear, he can’t hear anything at all. Because of his issues hearing, Mr. said he’s

missed announcements and gotten unit writeups for failing to show up places on time. In

the past, he said he had to file 3 or 4 grievances just to be sent out for hearing testing. Mr.

also stopped attending chapel because he couldn’t hear what was going on during

the services. When he asked for a mask that didn’t cause his hearing aid to turn off or

decrease in volume, he was told that he had to use the same standard issue one as

everyone else.

13.

Mr.

said he has been developing hearing loss as a result

of neglect by the prison. He also said his hearing aid is for the wrong ear.

14.

: Mr.

said that sometimes the guards walk away as they

are talking which makes them hard to hear. He also said he can’t make out what’s being

said over the phone because of background noise.

15.

): Mr.

said that he was told he does not need a hearing

aid, but he can’t hear at all if he plugs his left ear. He did say he got written up once when

he couldn’t hear an order, although it was ultimately dropped. The pocket talker doesn’t

work well for him, and he’s nervous that using it will further damage his hearing. He

used to have a hearing aid, and thinks his family would send him one if the jail would

allow it. Mr.

said some of the staff are hard to communicate with, and are not very

patient.

16.

): Mr.

said he’s been having issues with not being

able to hear count, and then being told that he’ll be written up for it. Mr.

said he

often misses things like mail, or chow when he doesn’t hear things so he has to get to

places early or get ready early. Mr.

said he asked for a clock and was told he

wasn’t eligible; later, when he asked again after being written up, he was told he would

have to buy them. He said that he’s 6 months behind in MRT because he can’t hear or

understand the instructor. Mr.

also said he didn’t get his hearing aid in the CPTU,

so he had trouble hearing during court call.

17.

: Mr.

said that he is having trouble getting hearing devices, and that

he has gotten disciplinary reports after not hearing officer orders.

18.

: Mr.

said that the intercom is hard to hear, and that his

hearing aid sometimes beeps and is hard to use with the phone. He also said that the SAP

program was hard to hear because of his hearing impairment.

19.

: Mr.

said that his right ear has substantial hearing

loss, but that he does not have a hearing aid for his right ear and he would like one.

20.

: Mr.

said that he is out of batteries for his hearing

aid and hasn’t been able to get more from medical.

21.

: Mr.

said that he was told he could not replace his

hearing aid, and that it is bad quality. The staff are not respectful, and Mr.

said

they mumble through the mask and don’t care if you miss announcements.

13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 15 of 55 - Page ID#: 3548

22.

: Mr.

said that his hearing aid does not work, and only

picks up sound from behind him. He said it does not help his hearing issues, and that he

has to ask for people to repeat things a lot.

23.

: Mr.

said he was having trouble getting batteries for his

hearing aid, and has been told he will be written up by the guards for not hearing when

they are behind him.

24.

: Mr.

said that he got a hearing test in 2018 and was told that

the doctors said he needed hearing aids. However, he was told at KSR that he does not

qualify.

25.

: Mr.

said that he had blood coming out of his ear and

went to get tests for it, but never heard the results of those tests.

14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 16 of 55 - Page ID#: 3549

LAC

Repeat issues: A. Staff disrespect B. Inmates written up for not hearing announcements C. Phones with volume control difficult to get to D. Unavailability/delay for hearing aid replacements E. Masks making it more difficult to lip read F. Batteries lasting a short time G. Difficult to get auxiliary aids.

Individual reports:

1.

HA was stolen about four months ago and it has not been

replaced. He was not offered a pocket talker in the interim.

2.

Mr.

said his bed shaker is not working any more,

and that his hearing aid is hard to use because of all the feedback. At one point, he was

written up for not hearing something even though he told them he didn’t hear what they

said, but it was later dropped.

3.

Mr.

said that he can barely communicate during visits

because the area is so loud, and it’s the same with the phones.

4.

Mr. said that there’s only one phone with volume

control, so it can be hard to get to it. Mr. also said that in his program, he couldn’t

hear what was going on and it impacted him personally because he felt like people were

treating him like he was stupid. Mr. also said that he lost his old hearing aid, and

now the hearing aid he has is for the wrong ear because it was an incorrect replacement.

5.

Mr.

said that he had issues with not being able to

read lips as well now that people are wearing masks. He said he can’t always hear what’s

being said in announcements unless he can get near the front where the town crier is. He

also said that he doesn’t receive extra batteries, and sometimes when he goes to get extra

batteries medical says they’re locked up and he’ll have to come back. The COs are not

patient when he asks them to repeat things, and was once told that he was going to be

written up for not hearing that it was count. Because the phones take voice ID, he said it’s

hard to use when you can’t hear the prompt to say something into the phone. He’s also

had problems participating in programs where he couldn’t hear what was being said,

because it’s hard to keep up. He also had issues at his job because of his hearing issues.

6.

Mr.

said it is hard to hear people wearing masks

because their voices are muffled. He said he can’t usually hear announcements in the

prison. He also said his hearing aid is not working well and he doesn’t know how to get it

fixed, but right now he can’t wear it inside the dorm. When he asked the institution about

getting a vibrating watch or clock, he was told they didn’t know anything about it. He

said that his hearing issue had caused problems communicating with staff because he

can’t understand people. He’s also had issue talking to people on the phone. Also, Mr.

said he had issues hearing what was happening in his program, and he quit out

of frustration.

7.

: Mr.

said that he can’t really hear the

announcements that are made, but that his hearing assistant inmate tries to help. His

15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 17 of 55 - Page ID#: 3550

biggest complaint was that the batteries only last a few days at a time, and that he hasn’t

been using his hearing aid as much because of that. Mr.

also said that he had a few

minor incidents miscommunicating with an officer where he couldn’t hear her well when

he was trying to explain that he was trimming flowers, but the writeup was dismissed

when he explained it at court call.

8.

: Mr.

said that he was supposed to get a hearing aid after

his last hearing test, but still has not received it. He also said he can’t hear

announcements and so has missed meals. [He has since received a HA]

16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 18 of 55 - Page ID#: 3551

LLCC

Repeat issues: A. Difficulty hearing intercom/announcements, causing inmates to miss meals, when the yard opens, pill call, and changes on the yard. B. Difficulty hearing the buzzer on the rec field indicating the field is closing or announcements indicating that it’s open. C. Difficulty getting information/assistance on HA maintenance, such as how to clean the hearing aid, change filters, and adjust the range and frequency. D. Difficulty getting new batteries can be difficult. E. Inmates in the 7-a d wing report that their HOH aide does not provide them with any assistance. They have told the ADA coordinator and unit director. F. No copy of the settlement in the library. G. Difficulty hearing phones. Some report that there is not a phone with sound amplification. H. COs grow frustrated when HOH people cannot hear them.

Individual reports:

1.

): Someone stole Mr.

HA months ago. He asked

medical to replace them, but has not heard back. He has reached out to Ms. Grissinger

multiple times, but never heard back. He also misses pill call, work, and other

notifications because he is without a HA.

2.

Mr.

is having a difficult time getting in contact with Ms.

Grissinger to follow-up on why his HAs were taken and how to get them back.

3.

: Mr.

uses a pocket talker, his hearing isn’t bad enough for a

HA. But sometimes he still has issues hearing CO, since the pocket talker amplifies

background noise. Mr.

would like his vibrating alarm clock to be replaced. The

display is out on half of it. He doesn’t have the money to buy a new one (this one’s on

loan). He was told it’d be replaced after this phone call. Mr.

has been written up

and put in the hole several times for not hearing COs orders. The last time was in Oct.

2019.

4.

): Mr.

is deaf in his left ear and would like to see an ENT.

He was told that he would be referred to one, but has not been. He has missed chow,

classes, and his job because he didn’t hear the announcements.

5.

): Mr.

was fired, kicked out of the honor dorm, and written

up because an officer thought he was being smart with him when he just couldn’t hear the

officer. Mr.

apologized to the officer and explained he was HOH, but that didn’t

make a difference. He wrote Ms. Grissinger and the Warden and did not hear back. His

grievance was also denied.

6.

): It took Mr.

a year to convince medical he needed a

hearing test. His HA is pretty useless because it picks up so much background noise. He

brought his HA to medical, but they didn’t do anything. He wasn’t offered a pocket

talker. He asked for a 2nd HA and was told that wasn’t going to happen. He used to have

a vibrating watch, but it broke. He tried to get a new one, but it cost too much. He has a

hard time accessing the chapel and day room because it’s so loud. He got written up 2

years ago for not being able to hear a CO, but it was dropped.

17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 19 of 55 - Page ID#: 3552

7.

): It took Mr.

6 months to be recognized as HOH. He still

hasn’t met the HOH helper for his dorm, even though he’s been there for 1.5 years.

8.

: Mr.

requested a bed shaker from Ms. Grissinger

three months ago but he never heard back. Mr. Hodgson has a shake and wake, but the

vibration is so light it doesn’t wake him up. It took Mr.

a long time to get his

HA. He had to file multiple medical grievances because he didn’t have the money to pay

for it. He requests a phone amplifier every time he uses the phone, but the COs told him

they don’t have one. When Mr.

was in the hole he wasn’t allowed to wear his

HA (this was in Jan. or Feb. 2020). He has previously asked officers to write things down

and they said no. Mr.

was kicked out of the STOP Program last year because he

didn’t hear the announcements to go to class. This happened last year. Mr.

has

trouble hearing at religious services. When he wears his HA, the speakers in the chapel

mess with it and it doesn’t work.

9.

: Mr.

is HOH, but was told that he’s not on the HOH list

for who can buy a vibrating watch. But he has found it easier just to deal with the

problems rather than seek assistance and be sent to a different prison.

10.

Mr.

was initially given a HA for the wrong ear, it took him 3

weeks to get a correct HA. He would like to get a vibrating watch, but they’re too

expensive. In Feb. or March he got a write-up for walking out into the core during a fire

alarm. He was moved to the hole for 4 days, moved to the worst dorm, and lost his job.

He told the COs he was HOH and they didn’t care. He’s been called a MF and SOB for

talking too loud. (And maybe also written up due to speaking loud?)

11.

): Mr.

was given one HA, but would like two.

12.

): Mr.

right hearing aid was lost. He filed a theft report

with the UA in his dorm, but has not received a new HA.

13.

): Mr.

HA amplifies more background noise than

speech. He’s tried to fix it, but has been unsuccessful. The prison can take it back if

they’d like.

14.

): Mr.

just took a hearing test a couple days ago and was

told he’d hear back soon. He also took a hearing test 6-8 months ago. He was told he has

hearing loss, but never heard anything else. Mr.

does not have a HOH ID or door

sign. Ms. Grissinger told him it’s in the mail. He was yelled at 2.5-3 months ago for not

hearing a CO. He tried to explain that he’s HOH, but they don’t believe him because he

doesn’t have an ID tag.

15.

): Mr.

received a hearing test 2 weeks ago. He would like

a HA. He’s previously told officers he can’t hear them and they’ll just yell at him and act

like he’s joking. He has a HOH ID, but not a sign for his bed. He’s been written up for

disobeying orders 2 or 3 times, but it’s been a while now. He shows guards his HOH ID,

but they don’t care. Mr.

had problems in his high school diploma class. He told

the teacher he couldn’t hear, but the teacher said he wouldn’t repeat things. He told his

friends and COs about this issue, but nothing changed. Mr.

has gotten in trouble

because COs think he’s screaming at them, when really he’s just HOH.

16.

): Mr.

would like a bed shaker, but doesn’t have the

money to buy one. Mr.

HA was lost when he went to the hole 3 months ago.

The prison said they’d get him a new one, but they haven’t. He’s spoken to his UA,

18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 20 of 55 - Page ID#: 3553

medical, and Ms. Grissinger. COs will yell and curse at him when he can’t hear them.

Usually they apologize after he shows them his HOH ID card.

17.

): Ms.

x uses a HA, but finds it useless. She’s put in

grievances over the past year about her HA not working correctly and never heard back.

She put in sick calls over this issue too, but hasn’t been called up. She requested a 2nd

HA at KSR but was told you can only receive one. She’s had issues in classes when she

can’t get to class early enough to sit in the front.

18.

): Mr.

has 2 HAs, but one of them cracked a couple

months ago. While it still works the casing that holds it together is cracked, so he doesn’t

use it in case it breaks altogether. He’s told Ms. Grissinger about this, but she said they

can’t replace it for free even though it’s under warranty till December 2020. His other

HA falls out because of the mask design, so he stopped wearing it about 2 weeks ago.

19.

): Mr.

has been trying to get an alarm, but can’t pay for it.

He spoke to Ms. Grissinger about this 8 months ago, but she told him he had to pay for it

to receive one. Mr.

is diabetic and gets write-ups for not waking up on time in the

morning. Mr.

asked the dorm officer for a phone amplifier 7 months ago, he never

heard back. Mr.

does not hear announcements for program openings, this keeps

him from participating. He’s also had issues in programs. In MRT he couldn’t hear the

instructor. He told the instructor and the instructor didn’t care. Mr.

has gotten into

disciplinary trouble because of his hearing. Most recently in Feb. 2019, he was in line for

commissary and didn’t hear them call his name. He was yanked out of line and put in the

hole for 15 days. Mr.

believes he didn’t get a closet job (where janitors turn in all

of their materials) because of his hearing (the job requires dealing with a lot of people).

20.

: Mr.

has been incarcerated for 30 years and never received

a hearing test. His hearing isn’t that bad, except when he’s around a lot of noise

21.

Mr.

requested a bed shaker about a month ago, but was

told they’re out of stock and that he’ll be notified when they are available. Last Nov. or

Dec. there was an evacuation for a suspected fire, Mr.

didn’t hear the alarm and

was left in his cell. He was written up for not following orders. He explained that he

didn’t hear the COs and the write up was dropped. He regularly misses pill call and chow

because he can’t hear. His HA doesn’t work well when there’s too much background

noise. He is currently in RHU and it’s difficult to get a new battery. He’s been without a

battery for 5 days now. He requests one twice a day and has a sign in his window asking

for new batteries. In March 2020, Mr.

was yelled at by a CO (Garcia) for

watching his tv too loud. The CO told him he wouldn’t be HOH if he wasn’t shooting

guns. Mr.

filed a grievance, and the captain’s office coerced him into dropping it

because he didn’t want them to take his tv. He would like to use the videophone to talk

with his daughter who’s also HOH, but his request was denied. He would also like a

phone amplifier.

19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 21 of 55 - Page ID#: 3554

LSCC

Repeat issues: A. Need more HOH phones. There are currently 6 phones, but only two have volume control. Even the volume control phone is hard to hear because it’s in the same room with the other phones and that room is loud. People have had their phone calls ended because COs say they’re talking too loud into the phones. There is also only one TTY phone for the entire prisons. The TTY and the captel phone are located in the same room. Therefore, you have to wait for the person using the TTY or cappella phone to be able to use the other one. That makes it harder to get access to that room. B. No auxiliary aid catalogue/brochure as at other institutions. C. Not copy of the settlement in the law library. D. HAs do not work well. E. Difficulty getting new batteries. F. Discipline for using hand gestures. G. Multiple people reported trouble hearing over the PA system. Living assistance aide doesn’t always keep people from missing pill call and chow. H. TVs don’t usually have closed captions.

Individual reports:

1.

: Mr. had a hearing aid at WKCC and asked for a new one. They

gave him a pocket talker instead. He has been asking for a new hearing aid for months

and has put in for 3 sick calls. He’s been put in the hole over his hearing demands. He’s

asked for assistance waking up in the morning and just got a HOH sticker. Nothing has

been done to help him with his hearing issues.

2.

Left HA was stolen when he was at GRCC. Mr.

requested a new HA after filling out a report stating it was missing, but he never received

a new one. Mr.

also asked for a bed shaker, but has not heard back.

3.

): Has trouble hearing the regular phone and would like to use the

TTY phone. He used it once and the prison has not allowed him to use it since. Mr.

can never hear announcements. He regularly misses pill call; he doesn’t miss chow since

everyone goes. Mr. Blair uses a HA, but it still makes the sound muffled.

4.

): Mr.

took a new hearing test and the nurse told him that if it

comes back inconclusive he’ll be charged $10. He wants to know if that’s allowed.

5.

: Mr.

recently got a disciplinary report for refusing

or failing to obey an order. He told an officer he didn’t understand her and asked for her

permission to go to morning chow, but instead received a write-up. He has a hard time

hearing announcements. If he’s in a room by himself he misses count, chow, and other

instructions. Mr.

dropped his HA and broke it. It still works, but it’s damaged.

He doesn’t want to request a repair because with COVID it won’t get fixed. Two-weeks

ago, Mr.

was written up for not being able to hear a CO. He was initially

written-up for disobeying an officer, but it got downgraded to a misdemeanor.

6.

Mr.

uses a pocket talker because it works better than a HA.

The HA doesn’t stay in and bothers his ears. Mr.

is having issues with medical

staff. They will not quickly replace the earbuds on the pocket talker when they stop

20

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 22 of 55 - Page ID#: 3555

working and they only last for a couple of weeks. He was hoping to buy better quality

earbuds.

7.

): Mr.

has nerve damage to his hands and can’t feel his

fingertips. Therefore, his HA is useless because it’s too small. Mr.

would prefer a

HA that was all one piece. He also has allergies that give him inner ear infections and

medical is not addressing the problem.

8.

: Mr.

has been waiting for a hearing test for 6 months.

He had a whisper test at RCC, but hasn’t had any follow-up since then. He went to

medical a couple of weeks ago and they said everything was slow because of COVID.

Mr.

just got a new HOH sign for his locker the day before the interview.

Everytime a particular officer searches his cell he takes it. Then Mr.

has to go

and get a new one. This officer also makes rude remarks about Mr. Hessing’s hearing (he

says “are you stupid”). Mr.

also has constant ringing in his ears which makes

phone calls with his four-year-old son very challenging. Mr.

son has vision and

hearing issues and nonverbal autism. The prison offered to let Mr.

use the TTY,

but that doesn’t solve his communication issue with his son. Mr.

wants to use the

videophone. He makes the request often (most recently the day before the interview). He

has been denied everytime for the past 4 years. Mr.

talks to his daughter every

night, and wants to be able to talk to his son. Mr.

used to work in the kitchen, but

he was eventually fired because he didn’t hear the call for workers in the morning (this

was 3 years ago at RCC).

9.

): Mr.

took a hearing test and says he needs HAs, but was

denied. Mr.

can’t hear COs call count, doesn’t understand the intercom, and can’t

hear on the phones. It took a while to get a HOH ID card, and he would like a vibrating

clock, but would like both. Mr.

has gotten verbal warnings from officers for not

being able to hear them.

10.

: Mr.

would like a vibrating watch. He regularly misses

breakfast because he does not hear the announcement to wake up. Mr.

has

requested a bed shaker 3 times and still hasn’t heard back. He’s had a HA for a year, but

needs a new one. His HA isnt strong enough. He’s asked for a new HA and had a test 2

months ago, but has not heard back. He does not currently have a HOH ID card. It was

taken when he was moved to segregation, and he never got it back. He asked his case

worker for a new one over a month ago.

11.

): Mr.

took a hearing test, but never received the results or

any other assistance.

12.

): Mr.

has a HA and pocket talker. The HAs are so cheap they

make everything distorted. He’s just been using a pocket talker for 2 years now. He

bought a good pair of headphones so it works better. However, his headphones have been

confiscated twice (most recently in June 2020). He filed a grievance and got them back,

but he doesn’t have a form or anything to keep this from happening again. He hasn’t told

anyone the HA doesn’t work well. Mr. Pasha gets in disciplinary trouble frequently

because of his hearing. He gets direct orders he doesn’t understand and misinterprets or

he talks too loud. But it’s been a while since he’s been written up because of this.

13.

: Mr.

reports hearing problems, but that nothing has

been done to help him

21

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 23 of 55 - Page ID#: 3556

14.

): Mr.

has been waiting for a HA for almost a year

now. He has also reqested to see Ms. May and has not yet.

15.

Mr.

regularly misses pill call and chow because he

can’t hear announcements. His HA amplifies too much background noise and makes him

dizzy. He just got a new hearing test yesterday. He also only received one, but would like

two. He hasn’t gotten any write-ups, but he’s been yelled at by guards because of his

hearing. They’ll say he refused to do something, but really he couldn’t understand what

officers were saying. Or with pill call officers will say he’s jumping in line, when he

didn’t hear his dorm called. The officers don’t care when Mr.

shows them his

HOH ID card.

16.

: Mr.

took a hearing test seven months ago and never got

the results. He asked Ms. May about it last week when he found out she was the ADA

coordinator. She said she’d ask medical. Mr.

does not have a HOH ID or sign.

Mr.

has previously been yelled at by officers for not being able to hear, but it

hasn’t happened in a while.

17.

Mr.

HA is not working correctly. It makes a loud

roaring sound. He’s reported the issue to medical several times. Mr.

would also

like a second HA.

22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 24 of 55 - Page ID#: 3557

NTC

Repeat issues A. Inability to hear announcements B. Custody staff not respectful of hearing C. Inmate writeups after not hearing orders or announcements. D. Hearing aid replacement delays, E. Delays in getting ID cards F. Not hearing back from the ADA Coordinator when emailing, G. Trouble getting auxiliary aids

Generally, seems like some issues were dropped when the ADA coordinator position switched from Ms. Baker to Ms. Payton.

Individual reports:

1.

Mr.

experienced difficulty getting replacement

hearing aids and had significant delays. He also has troubles hearing on the phone and

had an issue with a guard where he was denied access to use the TTY. He also hasn’t

gotten the bed shaker he requested. He also has not received his ID card yet.

2.

): Mr. had issues with a guard where he was told to “shut

up” after asking if he could turn around so he could hear better. He also has trouble

hearing at church, and requested a different hearing aid since the one he has now doesn’t

work well. He has issues hearing announcements by the COs and being woken up. Mr.

also feels that a more noticeable HOH card would help with interactions with the

officers. He was also written up for not showing up for pill call, which was because he

did not hear an announcement. He was also dismissed for getting loud in a discussion

with his kitchen job.

3.

: Mr.

said there’s also a long wait to use the hearing impaired

phones, because there are so few of them. He also said he would like to get a vibrating

alarm watch.

4.

): Mr.

had issues with missing announcements

because the intercom was not loud enough, and had a few verbal altercations over not

being able to hear until he ultimately got a new mask that allowed him to tie it in the back

and wear his hearing aids with it. He thinks that he might have accidentally signed a

waiver for an HOH ID card without meaning to. Mr.

said he often has trouble

with staff because he can’t hear them and has been shaken down because of it before, and

was once almost written up until he wrote to the ADA explaining the situation. He also

asked to use the TTY but never heard back. When he wrote the ADA asking to talk, he

said that he never heard back.

5.

: Mr.

said he doesn’t hear chow or count or pill call often,

because he can’t understand the intercom. He also said he needs but cannot pay for the

vibrating watch.

6.

Mr.

said he never heard back from the ADA coordinator

when he sent a message about getting auxiliary devices.

7.

: Mr.

said that he often can’t hear the announcements

for movement and chow call.

23

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 25 of 55 - Page ID#: 3558

8.

): Mr.

sometimes has hearing announcements, but

his main issue is that he can only get one battery at a time and they only last 4 to 5 days.

Mr.

said he also thinks it would be more helpful if he had a HOH card that was

more visible, rather than just having HOH written on his pink medical card, because it

makes it easier for the COs to see. He also had trouble participating in the sex offender

program because he couldn’t hear the instructor very well. He was also written up for

disobeying an order that he didn’t hear because the battery in his hearing aid was dead.

9.

: Mr.

said that he was told the canteen does not have

vibrating watches for sale when he asked.

10.

: Mr.

asked about how to purchase shake watches, because

he’s having trouble hearing the guards call count in the mornings.

11.

Mr.

had issues hearing what was going on at the

prison when guards gave him orders, and sometimes almost gets cuffed up until he

explains that he’s HOH. He didn’t hear movement announcements because the officers

don’t fully come into the wing to announce things. He also thinks a light flashing like it

did at EKCC would be helpful. He also didn’t get his bed shaker replaced after it was

misplaced when he went to the hospital.

12.

: Mr. said that he was told that he doesn’t need a hearing aid or

hearing card. However, he said that he’s still having hearing issues. He also said their

hard of hearing phones are broken.

13.

: Mr.

is having trouble hearing the announcements being

made in the dorm because the officers just yell from their offices when making

announcements. He also said that the non-routine movements make it difficult to know

what’s going on, and he said he got writeups for going to pill call when he thought it was

pill call but was mistaken because he didn’t hear the announcement. Mr.

said he

has a pending grievance for an issue having to do with his hearing, and that the prison is

not doing well on hearing impaired issues. He also said that the ADA-assistant inmates

sometimes get it wrong, causing additional tension. He said that his writeups have caused

him major issues in prison.

14.

): Mr. says he misses pill call and chow regularly

because he can’t hear the announcements. Especially on the weekends, he says that he

has trouble knowing what’s going on. Mr. said that his hearing aid doesn’t help with

most of the hearing issues he has, and that he got released from his kitchen job due to not

hearing things and a writeup for being released early.

15.

: Mr.

said that he doesn’t have an HOH sign on his

bed or one that is visible on his card, and that he’s been having issue where he doesn’t

hear commands made by guards. He also said that he doesn’t have a vibrating watch, and

that the hearing impaired phone often breaks.

16.

: Mr.

said that he’s told the officers he can’t hear well

but has missed meals, chow, medication, pill call, and other announcements.

17.

: Mr.

said that he has been having trouble communicating

with people and reading lips while people in the prison are wearing masks.

18.

: Mr. said that his hearing aid does not work well.

19.

): Mr.

had an issue hearing the intercom

announcements.

24

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 26 of 55 - Page ID#: 3559

20.

): Mr.

had issues with being written up for not wearing

his mask properly, which he wasn’t doing because of his hearing aid. Now, he has a mask

that ties behind his head, but only one – and when he has to wash it, he still has to wear

the other mask that loops behind his ears. Mr.

also said that he can’t hear the

guards very well when they yell announcements and he was told to walk back with his

hands on his head down the walk because he was a minute early for the legal library. Mr.

also said he paid 20 dollars for hearing aids. Mr.

also doesn’t have a hearing

impaired sign. He filed a grievance both about being made to march back with his hands

on his head for not being timely during a movement, and for the mask issue. For the mask

issue, the grievance response was that it’s policy to wear a mask; he hasn’t received

resolution on the other grievance yet.

21.

): Mr.

had issues getting his hearing impairment

signs. Also, Mr.

said that appointing HOH-assistant-inmates has caused

conflict between the inmates when the HOH appointed inmates don’t wake them up. Mr.

also said he had trouble using the TTY because it would not take his pin.

22.

: Mr.

said that he asked for another hearing aid because this one

doesn’t work well, and he was told it would be $500. He said also that he does not have

an HOH ID card and that he’s harassed by the staff for missing announcements.

23.

: Mr.

said that the settlement papers are not in the library.

24.

): Mr.

was having trouble with his hearing aid and his

batteries not lasting for very long. He also asked for written notes on a doctor’s

appointment because he couldn’t hear the explanation of the problem, but they sent him

to an in person doctor’s visit instead – he appreciated this, but would have appreciated the

written copy. He also had an issue where he was called over the loudspeaker and didn’t

hear it, so he was almost disciplined.

25.

): Mr.

was written up for missing the call for work.

This caused his point score to rise and he’s in danger of being sent to maximum custody.

He would like the write-up reexamined.

26.

: Mr.

said that he was given a hearing aid for the wrong ear,

and that his other ear has tinnitus.

27.

: Mr.

said he got a serious write-up for interfering with

count because he did not hear it. He also said he often can’t hear announcements, and has

trouble communicating with the guards.

28.

): Mr.

had an issue getting a vibrating watch, and

has trouble hearing even after receiving his hearing aid; he thinks a hearing aid with a

volume control button would help. He also mentioned that the ADA Coordinator never

got back to him when he sent her a message. During the religious services, he often had

trouble hearing what was going on.

29.

Mr.

was having issues with his hearing aid not

getting cleaned, and not changing the filter on the hearing aid when he asked. He also

mentioned that people don’t come to make announcements. He was also told that he

didn’t qualify initially for assistive devices like vibrating clocks or watches, but now that

he can buy them, it’s been a very delayed process. He’s also had issues with guards

arising from his hearing issues, but has never been written up. He never heard back after

sending a message to the ADA Coordinator

25

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 27 of 55 - Page ID#: 3560

RCC

Repeat issues:

A. Inability to hear announcements B. Masks making it difficult to hear staff C. Hearing aid batteries not lasting very long D. Officer disrespect E. Problems getting or using auxiliary aids

Individual reports:

1.

: Mr.

said that he wanted to get a second hearing

aid, and was told he could not get one. Mr.

said this makes it difficult to

participate in his classes because he can only hear the people on the right of him. He also

said the batteries don’t last very long, and that he can’t get the filter in his hearing aid

changed. Mr.

also had issues with COs being rude when he said he couldn’t hear

them.

2.

): Mr.

said that his batteries only last a few

days, and he can only get two at a time. He also said that half the time he does not hear

announcements over the speakers, and gets threatened because he doesn’t show up for

things like pill call. Since moving units, he has not gotten a new door sign. He also said

that when he talked to the parole board, he could hardly hear anything they said.

3.

): Mr.

said it’s gotten more difficult to read people’s

lips since everyone has started wearing masks in prison.

4.

): Mr. has trouble hearing the announcements sometimes,

depending on who is making announcements over the intercom. He also said he thought

he was supposed to get a hearing aid, but it’s been 2 or 3 months and he hasn’t heard

anything about it yet. Mr. also said he asked for an alarm clock and no one ever got

back to him about it. Although he’s never been written up, he said guards treat him like

he’s slow because he can’t hear well and talk down to him. He also said even with the

volume amplifier, it’s hard to hear over the phone. During his programs, Mr. has

trouble hearing what goes on when they watch movies in the gym, and has to ask other

people to write the reflections on the movie.

5.

): Mr. said that when he’s strapped down to be transported

for court trips, he can’t adjust his hearing aid, and he would find it helpful to use the type

of restraint that people who use sign language get to use.

6.

): Mr.

said he sent one of the unit administrators a

JPay about getting an assistant inmate to wake him up in the mornings for things like

breakfast, but has not heard back yet. He said he can’t always hear the announcements

being made, especially in the morning when he’s still half-asleep. Mr.

also said he

has issues with people in the cafeteria who are trying to rush them through and so he has

trouble hearing when to get the correct food, and knowing where to go. He also said he’s

had disagreements with the officer in charge of the indoor rec area because he can’t hear

her and because of her attitude.

7.

: Mr.

said that he was beaten because he couldn’t hear an

officer and cracked a few ribs.

26

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 28 of 55 - Page ID#: 3561

8.

): Mr.

can’t always hear the announcements, and

people in his dorm often have to come and let him know what’s going on. Mr.

said

that some officers, particularly new ones, will do things like ask if he’s deaf when he

doesn’t hear things. He also said that he asked for a helper to come and wake him up for

chow and rec, but was told he didn’t need one.

9.

Mr.

says he needs to get his hearing aid replaced, and that

it’s been broken for 3-4 months. He said that he wrote medical and the assistant ADA

about it, but that it has not been replaced. Now that it’s missing, he can’t hear a lot of the

announcements, and has issues not hearing what the guards are saying. Once, he said he

was written up for missing chow. He also can’t hear his family when he calls home. Mr.

was also told that only permanent inmates (no idea what this means) were allowed

to purchase auxiliary aids.

10.

): Mr.

said he’s had trouble being woken up for

things like his kitchen duty. Mr.

also said that masks muffle people’s voices,

making it harder to communicate.

11.

Mr.

said that in Unit 3, he got thrown in

the hole for not being able to hear things that the COs were saying, and that they don’t

listen when he tells them that he’s hard of hearing. He’s also had issues with wearing his

mask, because it messes with the volume button on the top.

27

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 29 of 55 - Page ID#: 3562

WKCC

Repeat issues: A. Announcements hard to hear, so inmates miss pill call and chow. B. Not enough phones with volume control. C. Even with volume control it’s still hard to hear in the phone booth. D. HAs amplify too much background noise to be useful.

Individual reports:

1.

Mr.

signed up to buy a vibrating watch, but never heard

back.

2.

): Mr. has severe tinnitus. He is unable to wear his HA because it

intensifies the ringing so much. He would like assistance with this issue

3.

): Mr.

has been seen multiple times by medical for

hearing tests and they keep telling him nothing is wrong with his hearing. However, Mr.

knows he is HOH. He has told them he would like to buy a HA for $10, but they

won’t let him.

4.

): Mr.

has a parole hearing August 25th. He received an

email asking if he needed any hearing assistance. Mr. Bruce said there are earphones he

could use during the hearing, but those arent helpful for Mr.

since they require

him to take out his HA. He needs someone looking at him directly and speaking right in

his face or he can’t hear. The prison will not give him an interpreter for the hearing. Mr.

has also been denied access to the TTY to talk to his family. Further, the TTY is

only available 7:30am-2pm and it’s located in the yard office. This makes it even more

difficult to access.

5.

Mr.

does not know who Mr. Bruce is or how to get in

contact with him.Mr.

is made fun of every day he goes into work because he can’t

read or hear well. He has not told anyone about this issue yet. He also reports that his HA

is not working well.

6.

): Mr.

would like a vibrating watch, but is waiting till he can

afford to buy one. He would like a HA that amplifies less background noise.

7.

): Mr.

has a hard time using the phones because of all the

background noise. He’s also not gotten into the New Directions program yet, but people

who signed up after him did. He was kicked out of MRT because he missed two classes

due to not hearing the announcement for class. This happened 2.5 months ago. He was

told he could pay $25 and get the book.

8.

): COs have threatened to write-up Mr. for not waking up for work

on time. His HA amplifies too much background noise, so he doesn’t use it often. Mr.

has a hard time contacting Mr. Bruce because Mr. Bruce isn’t on JPay and doesn’t

work in the building right now. He had trouble hearing the preacher in Church because the

words would muffle together.

9.

): Mr.

doesn’t use a HA right now, because he’s worried

about how bulky it is. But Mr. Bruce told him they’re fairly small so he might try it out.

He had a pocket talker, but was told to return it in July 2018. He’s not sure why because

he was using it so much. He would like to get a new pocket talker over a HA, but medical

said no. Other HOH individuals received information on purchasing a vibrating watch,

28

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 30 of 55 - Page ID#: 3563

but Mr.

has not. He would like one. He emailed Mr. Bruce about it, but never heard

back. He doesn’t have a HOH ID card. He previously signed a waiver, but now he’s

changed his mind.

Ross-Cash

Repeat issues A. Announcements very hard to hear, so inmates are missing pill call and chow. B. Masks make it more challenging to hear/understand staff.

Individual reports:

1.

): Ms.

regularly misses announcements and has been

written-up 4 times in the last 1.5 months for missing work because she doesn’t wake up

on time. All of her write-ups were dismissed. She does not have a HA or pocket talker,

but thinks she should qualify. She took an Audicus test a couple months ago and hasn’t

heard anything since then. She also requested a vibrating watch a month ago and hasn’t

heard anything else about that. She’s also not sure how she could pay for one and if she

could get a loaner watch.

2.

): Ms.

is supposed to have left and right HAs, but only

has a right HA. This makes it challenging for her to tell what direction sound is coming

from and gives her a constant headache. Ms.

also misses pill call due to not

hearing morning announcements.

3.

): Ms.

would like a vibrating watch, but wants to know

if there’s a way to get one for free.

29

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 31 of 55 - Page ID#: 3564

Margo Schlanger
Court Appointed Monitor, Adams and Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky
625 So. State Street  Ann Arbor, MI 48109  E-Mail: Adams.Settlement.Monitor@gmail.com
734-615-2618

Memo to:
From: Date: Re:

Kentucky Department of Corrections Director of Operations Janet Conover Programs Branch Manager Debbie Kays All institutions’ ADA Coordinators and backup ADA Coordinators Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor (adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com) September 22, 2020 Additional followups from recent phone and other contacts with Deaf and hardof-hearing inmates.

This memo supplements the prior description of individual issues raised by inmates we heard from via those phone calls or otherwise; these additional issues came to me after the initial list sent with my information request. As I said before, the descriptions below recount what we’ve heard from inmates—not what we’ve found after investigation. We don’t yet know the true state of affairs.

For ease of response, I have numbered the issues continuing from the prior lists.

EKCC

19.

): Mr. said that he would like a second hearing aid. He also said

that he has asked for a face shield or mask that could be worn without interfering with his

hearing aid, and was told one could not be located.

20.

): Mr.

said that there was no copy of the settlement

in the legal office when he tried to look and asked for it.

GRCC

13.

): Mr.

said since non-ADA inmates have been housed

in the ADA dorm hard-of-hearing inmates are often unable to access phones.

KCIW

7.

): Ms.

said that she was issued a hearing aid that does not

work, and that medical staff did not help her with the issue.

KSP

13.

): Mr.

said that his hearing test came back inconclusive

multiple times, and that he’s been having hearing issues for years but has never received

a determination of whether he needs a hearing aid or not. Mr.

just had another

medical appointment, but did not yet know the result of his testing when we spoke to

him. He reports he does not having a HOH ID card or a door sign, and would like them.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 32 of 55 - Page ID#: 3565

KSR

26.

): Mr.

said his hearing aid quality is bad and the

device cannot be worn at the same time as a mask.

27.

): Mr.

said that the phones for the hard of hearing and the

TTY do not work, and he has not been able to use either for 3 months.

LLCC

22.

Mr.

said there is no copy of the settlement in the library.

23.

): Mr.

said he’s had issues where he’s been straining to hear

the guards, and the guards have been making fun of him for not being able to hear them.

24.

): Mr.

said that there is no copy of the settlement in the

library.

25.

): Mr.

said he has not received his hard-of-hearing cards.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 33 of 55 - Page ID#: 3566

Margo Schlanger
Court Appointed Monitor, Adams and Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky
625 So. State Street  Ann Arbor, MI 48109  E-Mail: Adams.Settlement.Monitor@gmail.com
734-615-2618

Memo to:
From: Date: Re:

Kentucky Department of Corrections Director of Operations Janet Conover Programs Branch Manager Debbie Kays; All institutions’ ADA Coordinators and backup ADA Coordinators Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor (adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com) October 2, 2020 Open issues

Now that I’ve received your responses to the semi-annual information request, I have put together this list of open items. For each institution, there are as many as four sets of open issues:

A. Items requested in the September 2020 semi-annual information request, but not so far received.
B. Description of additional individual issues raised by inmates to me or my assistants. For these, as I said before, descriptions below recount what we’ve heard from inmates—not what we’ve found after investigation. We don’t yet know the true state of affairs. I know you provided responses to a number of similar issues, but these have been newly raised to me. For ease of response, I have numbered the issues continuing from prior lists.
C. A list of issues mentioned in my last report that were NOT covered by your in-process action plans.
D. A list of individual inmates who have requested a copy of the summary of the settlement agreement. Ordinarily, this would be available to them via the law library. However, we have heard from many of them that either the document is not accessible to them in the law library or the library itself is inaccessible due to COVID. Therefore, I request that you distribute the settlement summary to them (it is attached).

What I request is this:

A. Please provide the missing information, asap. B. Please provide what information you can on what happened in the incident in question.
Include timing. That is, for example, if someone says he has not received a hard-ofhearing ID, please include when he arrived at the prison, when he had his auxiliary aid assessment, whether he should have gotten the ID, and when he got it. If someone says he was written up for hearing-related failure to follow an order or the like, please provide full documentation of the relevant disciplinary incident, including its result. And so on. C. Please provide an update on where things stand on each issue listed; if there are any steps left, explain what they are and your intended timing. D. This request is under consideration by Ms. Conover, and she can report back to me about its resolution.

Thanks for your ongoing cooperation. I ask that this information be provided in one week. If this poses difficulty, please let me know.

1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 34 of 55 - Page ID#: 3567
BCC C. Missing Items from Action Plan:
1. Unequal access to alerts remains a major source of difficulty for deaf/HOH inmates. Inperson notifications should be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates.
2. ADA coordinators should publicize that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money, to recover when money comes into their account. This process is available for both formally indigent individuals or individuals who have insufficient money to pay for the device.
D. Individuals to receive attached settlement summary: • Sean Pernestti (201686)
2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 35 of 55 - Page ID#: 3568

BCFC

C. Missing Items from Action Plan: 1. Unequal access to alerts remains a major source of difficulty for deaf/HOH inmates. Inperson notifications should be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates. 2. ADA coordinators should publicize that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money, to recover when money comes into their account. This process is available for both formally indigent individuals or individuals who have insufficient money to pay for the device.

D. Individuals to receive attached settlement summary:

•

)

3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 36 of 55 - Page ID#: 3569

EKCC

B. Individual issues:

21.

): Mr.

is unaware of what auxiliary aids are available. He is

particularly interested in getting an amplifier for his headphones.

C. Missing Items from Action Plan: 1. Unequal access to alerts remains a major source of difficulty for deaf/HOH inmates. Inperson notifications should be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates. 2. Vibrating alarm clocks should be available to deaf/HOH inmates. 3. ADA coordinators should publicize that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money, to recover when money comes into their account. This process is available for both formally indigent individuals or individuals who have insufficient money to pay for the device.

4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 37 of 55 - Page ID#: 3570
GRCC
A. Missing Items from Information Request: 1. The captel permission section of the Auxiliary Aid tab is not filled out; please complete. 2. Please provide PDFs of pages of the inmate handbook addressing disability, and date for the version of the handbook, rather than simply confirming that they exist. 3. Please provide PDFs of the Deaf/HOH Brochure and other documents provided to deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates, rather than simply confirming they exist in the Information Tool. 4. Please give the number of how many inmates have a non-ear tie mask, rather than simply specifying that they are available; if the answer is zero, please confirm that. 5. Please complete the response to this question (stopped mid-sentence): “When an inmate reports that a hearing aid is not working, what are the steps followed to evaluate the complaint? Include all relevant copays and other procedures.” 6. Please provide a response to this question: “Please describe, in detail, each step that takes place once a person is identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing, to evaluate/offer any auxiliary aids. Include who is responsible for each step.” The information tool said “see attached” but the information required is not in any of the attachments.
C. Missing Items from Action Plan: 1. GRCC had a PA system in the housing units, but often used bullhorns instead. These are very difficult for HOH inmates; the PA system is better, so it should be used. GRCC reported that this issue was solved, but there should be follow-up with inmates to assure that the new system is working. 2. There seems to be some confusion about auxiliary aid devices. I asked whether a captioned telephone was available, and was given information about a videophone. I asked about non-auditory devices, and was given information about intercoms, which are auditory. 3. The general staff training provided seems to be incorrect; it is generic ADA training, rather than the approved training that focuses on deaf/HOH issues. The Department has a training module for staff on communicating with deaf/HOH inmates. That is what they should be getting. 4. A review of disciplinary reports involving hearing issues reveals an issue the ADA Coordinator should have addressed: Inmate David Slusher, DOC# 296648, was charged in Sept. 2019 with failing to report for an assignment, when he stopped attending school. He was asked why he had stopped, and answered, “I tried to tell him I cannot hear that good I was trying to get my hearing aid fix I have hearing problems.” Mr. Slusher received 30 days recreation restriction. I am not suggesting that this was inappropriate. However, there should also have been follow-up on his hearing aid issue. 5. Audiology processing is slow for some people. Table 6 of the Court Report shows that for 25% of GRCC inmates whose hearing issues came to Ky DOC attention in 2019, processing time was 113 days or more.
5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 38 of 55 - Page ID#: 3571

KCIW

A. Missing Items from Information Request: 1. Some of the pages of the ADA Brochure are cut off – please provide a new scan with the full pages contained. 2. Please give the number of how many inmates have a non-ear tie mask, rather than simply specifying that they are available; if the answer is zero, please confirm that.

B. Individual Issues: Both Ms. Callahan and Ms. Coy mentioned that things have gotten worse

since switching from the last ADA Coordinator.

8.

):

a. Ms.

said that some of the guards have attempted to handcuff her, and

have gotten in her face when she could not understand them.

b. Ms.

said she misses breakfast a lot, and that often guards and medical do

not stop or slow down when she tries to signal that she’s deaf in conversations.

c. Besides the social worker, she said that there are many instances when she asked

for the VRI because she cannot read lips but it was not provided to her. She’s also

had trouble getting the prison to provide her with an in-person interpreter when

she asked for one.

d. Ms.

said she does not have any privacy using the videophone, and that

she cannot get the privacy screen.

e. Ms.

also mentioned that she has been moved to a new dorm where she’s

constantly worried about her bed shaker getting broken because the people in her

new area are very rowdy. She currently got a new bed shaker since she requested

it once her old one broke, but is very concerned about it breaking.

f. She said that the videophone was also broken for a while, and was positioned in a

way that her hands were not visible or hard to see.

g. Finally, she said that it’s really hard to be in a dorm without the other deaf person

in the prison, and that she finds it very isolating.

9.

):

a. Ms. has been woken up in the middle of the night to interpret for Ms.

(who is also deaf) even though she told the officers and the warden

several times that she does not wish to be woken up to interpret, and that the

officers need to use the VRI. This has also happened when she was in the gym

using rec time.

b. The videophone is located in an area with lots of other people, including officers

who can sign, are around who can see what Ms. Coy is doing.

c. Ms. cannot remember the last time she was able to use the VRI, because it’s

never provided, even when she asks.

d. The prison has only provided an interpreter for a class once, for other things like

celebrations or church, there is no interpreter.

e. Ms. also said that the masks make it really difficult for her to communicate

because she lip reads, and that she has been put in handcuffs without being able to

use her hands, like when she was taken to the OBGYN.

6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 39 of 55 - Page ID#: 3572
C. Missing Items from Action Plan: 1. Earphones should be available for inmates when watching the orientation videos. 2. Vibrating watches and alarm clocks should be available to HOH inmates, and not only deaf inmates. KCIW reported that HOH inmates would soon have the opportunity to purchase watches and alarm clocks as well, but has not yet confirmed that this change occurred. 3. In the TTY instructions, there were no instructions on getting an outside line for the TTY. However, it’s possible this instruction is not needed, because it is staff who apparently take care of this part.
7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 40 of 55 - Page ID#: 3573

KSP

A. Missing Items from Information Request: 1. Please provide an updated response to this question: “For all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving an inmate who signs, provide report of inmate name, date, and communication method for each.” The current answer is that KSP has no inmates to who sign to communicate, but we believe that is incorrect. 2. Please provide the following: “Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2020 addressing deaf/hard-of-hearing issues.” If there are no existing documents to provide, please confirm that. 3. Please give the number of how many inmates have a non-ear tie mask, rather than simply specifying that they are available; if the answer is zero, please confirm that. 4. Please provide an answer to the following: “What arrangements are made to provide vibrating watches/clocks for inmates who are indigent?”

B. Individual Issues:

14.

): Mr.

said that he can’t hear the doors open and close,

and that he thinks he is going to get in trouble for not being able to hear.

15.

): Mr.

said that inmates living in dorm 6 can’t hear

the announcements because there’s no announcement system, and he isn’t able to hear the

officers yell unless they’re very close to the inmate’s door.

16.

): Mr.

wants to purchase a pair of headphones, but isn’t

able to pay for them all at once. He said that he’s asked the ADA Coordinator multiple

times if he can set up a payment plan or have the institution purchase them and then pay

them back every month, since he is willing to pay but never has enough money in his

account to pay the full amount.

C. Missing Items from Action Plan: 1. In-person notifications should be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates. 2. ADA coordinators should publicize that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money, to recover when money comes into their account. This process is available for both formally indigent individuals or individuals who have insufficient money to pay for the device.

D. Individuals to receive attached settlement summary: •

8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 41 of 55 - Page ID#: 3574

KSR

A. Missing Items from Information Request: 1. Please provide an updated answer to the following: “Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2020 addressing deaf/hard-of-hearing issues.” Several documents were referenced in the Information Tool that were not attached; when reviewing the emails we received, it looks like we did not receive Part 9, which may be the issue.

B. Individual Issues:

28.

• Mr.

said that he thinks KSR needs to get a Sorenson end-touch

videophone because it works much better than the current videophone, which

sometimes has a poor signal and gives him login issues sometimes. He said that

the new Sorenson has a better signal, a better network, and is being offered for

free by the Kentucky Commission on the Deaf and Hard of Hearing.

• Mr.

said that a few times, the prison thought he was going online because

the videophone apparently comes with a keyboard, but that he is not and doesn’t

know much about internet technology.

• Mr.

said that sometimes the door has been locked to get to the videophone

and he’s had to go and get a guard and show them a piece of paper from the ADA

Coordinator saying that the door to the videophone can’t be locked.

• Mr.

also said that masks have made it more difficult to communicate with

people, and that clear face masks would be helpful.

• Mr.

also said the VRI can take a long time to get set up and he has to wait

some time; he also said that if the one in dorm 1 doesn’t work, he has to walk

over to dorm 3 to use it.

• Finally, Mr.

also wants to verify that an in-person interpreter will be

available for his parole board in 2 years, because he does not want to use the VRI

for that.

29.

Mr. said that it’s hard to hear calls for different treatments, and

that he can’t access the settlement because the law library is not accessible during

lockdown.

30.

Mr.

said that he received a write up a few months ago for

not hearing count and being out of place to get a cup of ice. He said it was eventually

thrown out, but that many of the officers still don’t speak loudly or clearly enough to

understand.

31.

): Mr.

said that he was turned down for a hearing aid,

and that he did not get an HOH watch because the ADA Coordinator was supposed to

send the order form out but he never received it. However, Mr.

is being released

on October 30.

C. Missing Items from Action Plan: 1. In-person notifications should be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates.

9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 42 of 55 - Page ID#: 3575
2. ADA coordinators should publicize that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money, to recover when money comes into their account. This process is available for both formally indigent individuals or individuals who have insufficient money to pay for the device.
D. Individuals to receive attached settlement summary: •
10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 43 of 55 - Page ID#: 3576
LAC C. Missing Items from Action Plan:
1. ADA coordinators should publicize that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money, to recover when money comes into their account. This process is available for both formally indigent individuals or individuals who have insufficient money to pay for the device.
2. TV captioning was inconsistent. However, LAC did report that movies are shown at least once with captioning.
3. No intercom systems were in use.
11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 44 of 55 - Page ID#: 3577

LLCC

A. Missing Items from Information Request: 1. Please provide, in addition to the individual grievances, “a summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Should include the issues, summary of response, resolution.” Other prisons have provided this in the form of a one or two sentence summary for each grievance addressing the factors stated in the question.

B. Individual Issues:

26.

): Mr.

would like a vibrating alarm clock or vibrating

watch. However, he is unable to afford one. He says that he is not allowed to have the

watch in advance and have the funds deducted from his inmate account at a later time.

27.

): Mr.

does not have a HOH ID card.

28.

Mr.

said that he was never educated on how to clean his

hearing aid and change the filters, or how to adjust the hearing range and frequencies on

his hearing aid.

29.

): Mr.

primary issue with the videophone is that

when he calls another videophone, the caller ID says the call is related to a prison. Then,

his Deaf friends won’t answer the call. Ms. Grissinger said she would set up a time when

she and Mr.

could call his friends from the VRI, which does not have this

issue, and explain what the caller ID means. Mr.

also said that it can be

challenging to access the VRI, since it’s in the main building and only Ms. Grissinger can

set it up. At times, this can take a few hours, or even longer if Ms. Grissinger is not

available.

30.

Mr.

said that he’s been told he is too close to

being sent home to get treatment for his hearing issues, and that he was told that LLCC

does not have a copy of the settlement by the legal department.

31.

): Mr.

said that he’s sometimes unable to hear when

chow is called, and that he would like to be able to hear it.

32.

: In addition to the complaints Mr.

has already raised, Mr.

also said that in seg he’s been missing the case worker and UA rounds because he

cannot hear and is not being alerted to their attention. He also asked for a new hearing

aid. Mr.

has since transferred to NTC.

C. Missing Items from Action Plan: 1. In-person notifications should be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates. 2. ADA coordinators should publicize that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money, to recover when money comes into their account. This process is available for both formally indigent individuals or individuals who have insufficient money to pay for the device.

D. Individuals to receive attached settlement summary: •

12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 45 of 55 - Page ID#: 3578
•
13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 46 of 55 - Page ID#: 3579

LSCC

A. Missing Items from Information Request: 1. Please clarify your response to the following: “A list of each inmate currently at your institution whose audiology processing FINISHED after March 2020, for whom such processing took or is taking over 60 days, documentation of the explanation for any such delay, and a description of any steps taken to avoid similar problems going forward.” The information tool refers to an attachment; if you are referring to the information contained in the audiology section, please confirm.

B. Individual Issues:

18.

: Mr.

said the background noise makes it difficult to use

the phones, and that he has a lot of difficulty hearing them holler for count in the prison.

He said it would be easier to hear if the guards were louder or the PA system was used

for count. Mr.

also mentioned that social distancing has made it difficult to hear

what’s going on in his programs.

19.

): Mr.

said that at LSCC, he’s missed pill call because he

can’t hear the officers calling for it, and the batteries for the HAs only last 12-15 hours.

Mr.

said that HOH/deaf inmates can’t always hear what the officers say, and that

the HOH phones are being used by non-HOH inmates, limiting access by those who

actually need them. Mr.

said that he liked the lights at KSR that blinked for chow

and pill call, and that he found them helpful.

C. Missing Items from Action Plan: 1. In-person notifications should be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates. 2. ADA coordinators should publicize that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money, to recover when money comes into their account. This process is available for both formally indigent individuals or individuals who have insufficient money to pay for the device. 3. While a memo was issued for stuff concerning instructions on how to use the TTY, it is not clear whether this memo includes instructions on getting an outside line. 4. There seem to be no routine software updates to the VRI laptop. 5. While it was reported that maintenance is working to install a volume adjustment button on telephones in the SAP area, no update has been provided.

D. Individuals to receive attached settlement summary: •

14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 47 of 55 - Page ID#: 3580

NTC

B. Individual Issues:

30.

: Mr.

said that he’s been removed from the videophone

list because the institution says he does not know sign language, but he said that he can

use sign language, body language interpreting and lip interpreting well enough to use it.

Mr.

said that if the TTY is down, the videophone is the only way he can

communicate, and that he hasn’t been able to talk to his attorney or his family effectively

since not being allowed to use it. Mr.

also said his hearing aids broke and that the

institution gave him a pocket talker instead of fixing them.

31.

: Mr.

said that the black box with the plug keeps shutting off

where it’s connected to the camera. He said that he’s talked to the deputy about it and

getting it updated to the In Touch 2 instead of the 1, since that’s an older system, and was

told the prison could not provide that. He also mentioned that the masks made it difficult

to lip read and communicate.

32.

Mr. said that he went to medical and they looked at his hearing

aid to replace two pieces, but it didn’t fix the issues he was having and he still is unable

to use it. He said that using it causes him pain. Mr. is being released in five months,

and said that if his hearing aid can’t be fixed he will probably just wait to get one once

he’s released.

33.

: Mr.

recently transferred to NTC from LLCC. At LLCC,

Mr.

had requested a new hearing aid. Since transferring, Mr.

has requested

a vibrating watch from the ADA coordinator, but has not received a response back. He

has also requested access to the videophone to talk with his daughter. Mr.

also

does not have a HOH ID card.

C. Missing Items from Action Plan: 1. In-person notifications should be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates. 2. ADA coordinators should publicize that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money, to recover when money comes into their account. This process is available for both formally indigent individuals or individuals who have insufficient money to pay for the device.

D. Individuals to receive attached settlement summary: •

15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 48 of 55 - Page ID#: 3581
RCC C. Missing Items from Action Plan:
1. In-person notifications should be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates.
2. ADA coordinators should publicize that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money, to recover when money comes into their account. This process is available for both formally indigent individuals or individuals who have insufficient money to pay for the device.
D. Individuals to receive attached settlement summary: •
16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 49 of 55 - Page ID#: 3582
WKCC / Ross-Cash C. Missing Items from Action Plan:
1. In-person notifications should be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates.
2. ADA coordinators should publicize that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money, to recover when money comes into their account. This process is available for both formally indigent individuals or individuals who have insufficient money to pay for the device.
D. Individuals to receive attached settlement summary: •
17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 50 of 55 - Page ID#: 3583

Margo Schlanger
Court Appointed Monitor, Adams and Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky
625 So. State Street  Ann Arbor, MI 48109  E-Mail: Adams.Settlement.Monitor@gmail.com
734-615-2618

Memo to: cc:
From: Date:

Several institutions’ ADA Coordinators and backup ADA Coordinators Kentucky Department of Corrections Director of Operations Janet Conover Programs Branch Manager Debbie Kays Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor (adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com) November 21, 2020

In working through my final court report, I have several followup questions for 8 of the institutions. Some of these are related to requests previously made where I need more information; a few are new items raised by communications from inmates to me.

I know this is a holiday week. If it’s possible to get me responses prior to Thanksgiving, that would be great. If not, next week will be fine. Thanks very much.

EKCC

1.

reported that he has been having trouble getting a hearing

impaired sign, a shake watch, and a HOH phone. He also said guards have yelled at him

for not hearing when he’s called. Previously reported.

Prior response: “When I have spoken with him previously he had no issues or requests. I

will meet with him again and see what he needs.”

Current question: What happened with that meeting?

2.

, reported trouble hearing the COs yell for things like count.

(Previously reported; no response)

Current question: For Mr.

has there been any followup with him? More

generally, does this indicate that current practices are not sufficient?

3.

, reports that a videophone or captel privacy screen has been

taken down.

Question: Do you know if he’s talking about the videophone or the captel? Is his

report correct? What is the situation?

4.

, reports that he has been sent to the hole for not hearing COs,

that he does not have an HOH ID card or door sign, and that therefore he can’t use the

HOH phone.

Question: Does Mr.

have an ID card and door sign? If not, why not? Has

he been disciplined for failing to hear COs? What was that situation?

5.

reports that the captel phone no longer provides captions.

Question: I believe Mr.

is incorrect; but can someone check and show

him how to use the captel?

1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 51 of 55 - Page ID#: 3584

6.

, reports that he does not hear COs when they call for him and

they try to write him up. He also misses announcements for medical and chow. Mr.

would like his cell speaker turned up. He would also like a vibrating clock or

watch, but does not have the money.

Question: What is the situation? More generally, does this indicate that current

practices are not sufficient? Has Mr.

been told about arrangements for a

vibrating clock or watch for indigent inmates?

GRCC

1.

, filed a grievance about not being able to hear chow and other

announcements.

Question: Please provide full documentation, of the grievance and also any followup

done.

2.

, filed a grievance that he didn’t have access to HOH phone in the

office on the weekends.

Question: Please provide full documentation of the grievance and also explain what

kind of phone this is and how inmates are supposed to get access to it on the

weekends.

3.

, reported trouble hearing the announcements, which he says are

made by the officers yelling them rather than the intercom. This was previously reported,

but the prior response did not address this issue.

Current question: What is the situation? Does the intercom work? Have officers

been instructed to use it?

4.

, reports that he has been waiting a year for a hearing aid

appointment. He is not included in the audiology report we received from GRCC.

Question: What is the situation?

5.

, reports that when he went to segregation, his hearing aid case

with filters and cleaning equipment were confiscated. He would like assistance getting

these back.

Question: Is this correct? Can you get them back to him. Also, if this is correct,

what kind of training/policy announcement can prevent recurrence for him and

others?

6.

, reports that his hearing aid was lost when he was sent to

segregation. He syas he has put in sick calls but has not been able to get it replaced.

Because he doesn't have his hearing aid, he's having trouble waking up for things, which

poses an issue because he needs to wake up to take his psychiatric medication.

Question: Was the hearing aid lost when he want to segregation? If so, how long has

replacement taken? If there’s been a delay, why? And what about other solutions to

effective communication of wake-up calls and the like?

2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 52 of 55 - Page ID#: 3585

KCIW

1.

, reports difficulties with getting staff to use the VRI.

She filed grievance # 20-186, which states that Dr. King refused to use the VRI on

5/14/20. This grievance was rejected as untimely. Ms.

also reports to us more

generally that staff are reluctant to use the VRI, for example, in “class.” (I don’t know

what she means by “class.”)

Question: Has anyone checked with Dr. King to make sure he knows to use the VRI

when communicating with Ms.

and others for whom sign language is their

preferred method of communication? More generally, this has been a long-term

problem: can someone check with the class in question and assess the use of VRI

interpretation and report back?

KSP

1.

, reports he didn’t know about auxiliary aids.

Question: Did he have an auxiliary aid meeting?

2.

, reports difficulty getting new hearing aid batteries. He says he has

asked every day and been told they are not available.

Question: Has there been a period of time where hearing aid batteries have not been

available? What’s being done about this?

KSR

1.

, reported that he is having trouble getting hearing devices, and

that he has gotten disciplinary reports after not hearing officer orders. This was

previously reported.

Prior response: Mr.

was tested and received a hearing aid 2/6/20 but “did not like

the way it looked” and wanted ones that go inside the ear. He turned it in and signed a

refusal on 2/27/20. He just failed his questionnaire on the hearing screen 9/17/20, so he is

being sent back through the process.

Current question: Has he gotten any disciplinary reports related to not hearing an

order? Please send full documentation.

2.

, reported that he’s in a cell in the back, right underneath the air

conditioner. He said he can’t hear officers announcing pill call, breakfast, etc., but was

told he could not be moved. He also wants a non-auditory alarm, but can’t get one

because the prison said they are not sending out orders right now. This was previously

reported.

Response: During the medical lockdown, only emergent issues were being addressed as

all staff were re-assigned to maintain operations of the institution. Now that we have

returned to normal, I will begin accepting orders again.

Question: If Mr.

housing location is causing hearing difficulties, why can’t

he be moved? What else might be done so that he receives effective communication?

3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 53 of 55 - Page ID#: 3586

3.

, reports that he has trouble because COs are not willing to

repeat themselves or help wake him up. He says he doesn’t have money to buy a

vibrating clock, that he is unable to hear well on the phone, and that he was not able to do

SAP because he couldn’t hear. We told him to raise these issues with the ADA

Coordinator.

Question: What is the situation with respect to these complaints? Has Mr.

been offered a phone amplifier? What kinds of accommodations are available for

his participation in SAP? Has he been told about the availability of non-auditory

devices for indigent inmates?

4.

, reports that he was charged ten dollars for his pocket talker.

Question: It was my understanding that the copay for a hearing aid is $10, but not

for a pocket talker. Is that correct? If so, can he get a refund?

LLCC

1.

, filed grievance 20-617 on 7/2/20 claiming that his hearing aids

were taken from him. The grievance was denied as untimely.

Question: Did he get his hearing aids back? Does he need a hearing aid? If so, what

is the plan for getting that for him?

2.

, filed grievance 19-046 on 1/28/19, claiming that he was

wrongfully denied a vibrating watch even though it’s documented that he has hearing

loss. This was deemed nongrievable.

Question: Why is this nongrievable? And what is the obstacle to Mr. Vaughan’s

purchase of a non-auditory alarm?

3.

, reported that he was removed from the SOTP Program last

year because he did not hear the announcements to go to class. Previously reported.

Prior response: “SOTP discharged due to 2 missed classes in 4/2020.

was

educated to the requirements of the program during orientation phase and signed

acknowledgement. To date, he has not requested reapplication for the program.”

Current Question: What you report is consistent with Mr.

report—he

missed some classes, leading to his expulsion from the program. And it is plausible

that he did not reapply because he feels that without accommodation, the problem is

likely to repeat. What steps are being taken within the SOTP program to ensure

effective communication and to avoid penalizing hard-of-hearing individuals for

their need for accommodation? Has anyone reached out to Mr.

to discuss

his communication needs and how they can be met within SOTP?

4.

, reports that he has been written up and put in the hole several

times for not hearing COs orders. The last time was in Oct. 2019. Previously reported.

Question: Is this true? If so, what is needed to avoid recurrence, both for Mr.

and others?

4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 54 of 55 - Page ID#: 3587

5.

9, reports that one of his hearing aids falls out because of the

mask design. Previously reported, with no response.

Question: Has Mr.

and all other inmates who wear behind-ear hearing aids

been offered the special masks that attach behind their heads, rather than behind

their ears?

6.

, reports that he cannot get hearing aid batteries: medical

reports they are unavailable. He has also asked for a non-auditory alarm clock or watch,

but has been told he does not qualify.

Question: What is the situation with respect to hearing aid batteries? And what are

the qualifications for getting a non-auditory alarm clock or watch?

LSCC

1.

, reports that he filed a grievance seeking a hard-of-hearing

door card.

Question: Why would a grievance be necessary for this? What is the situation?

2.

, reports that he would like to use the videophone to talk with his

son. Previously reported.

Prior response: “Mr. Hessing informed UAII Conley he has written to Miss Conover

regarding use of video phone and is awaiting a response. Ms. Conover has not received

any correspondence from Inmate Hessing to date.”

Current question: Has anyone discussed this request with Mr.

Does he or

his son use sign language to communicate? If so, is there a problem?

3.

, would like a vibrating watch; he reports he requested one over a

month ago but has not heard back.

Question: Is the system of ordering non-auditory devices currently operational?

What is the status of this request?

4.

, reports that he has had issues hearing announcements and got

a write-up because of it. He also reports repeated problems with his hearing aid, brought

to medical’s attention but not solved.

Question: Did Mr.

get such a write up? Please provide full

documentation. And what is the situation with his hearing aid?

There are several reports that suggest that the disciplinary process is not considering whether an inmate might not have heard the order he is charged with disobeying. For example:

5.

, was penalized for not showing up for his job on time, “when the

crash gates open.” Many inmates have told us their hearing issues make it hard to know

when the gates open; no consideration of Mr. Shepherd’s hearing was reflected in the

resolution.

5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-1 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 55 of 55 - Page ID#: 3588

6.

, received a writeup on 4/25/20 for showing up late to pill call.

Oversleeping because they’re not woken up or can’t hear the announcement for pill call is

a common issue for HOH inmates. In the documentation, Mr.

stated he had trouble

hearing the intercom announcement since it’s very faint. He was nonetheless found

guilty.

7.

, was written up on 8/18/20, and found guilty of showing up at pill

call without being called. Mr.

said that he went to pill call because he was told it

was pill call by an inmate hearing assistant. It was not addressed in the resolution why

this did not excuse or mitigate the infraction.

Question: Have the staff who conduct court call and make disciplinary decisions been trained that it is inappropriate to penalize someone for their disability (e.g., for failing to obey an order they did not hear), and that they should ask appropriate questions and document their thought processes with respect to this issue in relevant disciplinary cases? It seems appropriate to retrain; there’s certainly a failure with respect to documentation demonstrated by the above examples, and there might be a more substantive failure.

8.

, filed a grievance (NTC #20-327) relating to personalizing

his mask. Documentation explains that masks are part of the issued uniform and should

not be altered.

Question: Has this inmate and other inmates who wear hearing aids, been offered

behind-the-head masks rather than behind-ear masks, to be compatible with

hearing aids?

9.

3, reports problems with COs not waking him up or making

announcements loud enough. Mr.

once got a write-up for going to pill call late

because it was not announced.

Question: Did Mr.

get such a writeup? Does it seem that staff are doing what

is needed to ensure effective communication of announcements?

WKCC / Ross-Cash

1.

, pleaded guilty on 8/4/20 to failure to abide by published schedule or

rule. Apparently, he was paged 3 times and failed to report to the kitchen to assist with

assembling sack lunches. The documentation shows that Mr. explained that he was

hard-of-hearing and didn’t hear the page. There is no further discussion of this situation.

Question: Have the staff who conduct court call and make disciplinary decisions

been trained that it is inappropriate to penalize someone for their disability (e.g., for

failing to obey an order they did not hear), and that they should ask appropriate

questions and document their thought processes with respect to this issue in relevant

disciplinary cases?

6

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 1 of 985 - Page ID#: 3589
Exhibit 2: KDOC Institution Responses to Self-Audit and Information Request Memos

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 2 of 985 - Page ID#: 3590
Blackburn Correctional Complex

Deaf/HOH or

both?

#

A

Both

Both Both Both

Both

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 3 of 985 - Page ID#:

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem Description/Notes

3591

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

ADA coordinator

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Christy Peach / Back up: Cathi Johnson

C

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no

2 ADA coordinator appointed?

No

C

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Yes

C

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates?

Yes

C

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates in a 5 timely and appropriate manner? How?

The ADA Memo posted in 2016 and is updated as

needed.

C

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? (THIS

Both

6 REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit

Both

7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

Both

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

Both

9 Describe training

Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately cover

Both

10 information?

Both

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training)

Both

12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

Both

13 Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's powerpoint)

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with settlement

Both

14 agreement?

Describe method used to ascertain: Back up

Coordinator Cathi Johnson asked Inmate

if he knew who the ADA Coordinator is. He

C

replied "Ms. Peach". Yes inmates are aware of ADA

Coordinator information.

The ADA Memo is posted in both dorms

C

Yes

C

2020 - Online Webinar & Mypurpose

NA

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in

Both

17 implementing the settlement?

Yes. The ADA Coordinator and back up receive

C

weekly report from KOMs via email.

Additional inmates are added upon arrival at BCC

C

Yes.

C

Both

18 Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf inmates?

Both the ADA Coordinator and the Backup

C

Coordinator available to assist deaf inmates.

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on deaf

Both

19 inmates?

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the inmates in

Both

20 those situations?

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective way with the

Both

21 monitor?

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the monitor

Both

22 when necessary?

Both B Reporting obligations

If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was monitor

Both

1 notified?

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

Both

2 inmates?

Yes. Rounds are made weekly and sometimes daily by C

the back up coordinator.

Yes. Deaf/HOH inmates are routinely asked if they are

communicating well with staff.

C

Yes. Reports / Questions etc. are emailed in a timely

manner.

C

Telephone interviews are set up at the monitors

earliest convenience.

C

There has not been a change in ADA Coordinator.

C

The ADA Coordinator maintains a list that is checked

weekly for updates with medical during the

C

Treatment Team Meeting

Both

3 Is the list complete?

Both

4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

Yes. It is checked with the report from KOMs to

C

ensure it is complete and accurate.

The list is emailed to the Unit Staff weekly.

C

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 1

Deaf/HOH or

both?

#

Both
Both Both Both
Both
Both
Both

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem Description/Notes

3592

Compliant

Yes. It was determined in 2016 and approved by the

Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs,

monitor. Each inmate is reviewed on a case by case

6 activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe)

basis.

NA

7 Was it reported to the monitor?

Yes. The monitor approved the direct threat

determination memo in 2016.

C

8 Was the report complete?

Yes.

C

9 Was the report timely?

Yes.

C

Pagers were reviewed again. No other non-auditory

10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert?

alert has been considered.

NA

11 If yes, was the monitor notified?

Yes the monitor was notified that we continue to

review the pager system.

C

Did the institution consult with the monitor about the non12 auditory alert?

Yes, prior to the last audit, the monitor was

consulted about the pager system.

C

Page: 4 of 985 - Page ID#:

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Both

13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

HOH

3 notifications.)

No adjustment in timing for phones has been made.

C

NA

There is an automatic email generated by KOMs sent C

to the ADA Coordinator. Also Medical upon intake,

emails the ADA Coordinator.

NA

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

Deaf

Deaf inmates

Deaf

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

All medical staff have been notified and are aware

C

they need to contact the ADA Coordinator.

NA

Yes. There is an automatic email generated by KOMs

C

sent to the ADA Coordinator. Also Medical upon NA

they need to contact the ADA Coordinator.

C

Yes

C

No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Upon intake, the medical department assesses each

inmate. When the determination is made that he is

Deaf/HOH, the medical department staff emails the

ADA Coordinator with findings. The ADA Assessment

is the completed by the ADA Coordinator. The

following week the inmate meets with the ADA

Coordinator and a member of the medical staff

following the Treatment Team Meeting.

NA

The VRI interpreter has not been needed. (None of

BCC inmates are Deaf. None of BCC HOH inmates

know sign language.) The equipment is installed and

C

in working order.

The in person interpreter has not been needed.

(None of BCC inmates are Deaf. None of BCC inmates

C

know sign language.) In person interpreter service

agreement has been established.

NA

The orientation for BCC is done by a staff member

talking with a powerpoint presentation to include

C

text and pictures.

Yes Orientation is held either in the multipurpose

room of the chapel or in the UA's office for "one on

C

one".

No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation
Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 2

Deaf/HOH or

both?

#

Issue/Question

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 5 of 985 - Page ID#:

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem Description/Notes

3593

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

No amplification has been needed.

C

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general medical intake, and

Both

during medical care more generally:

Yes Orientation/ handbook/ rules and anything else

written is being read to the inmate in a office setting

where all background noise has been held to a

C

minimum by staff members or education staff as

needed.

Yes

NA

Both

1 Is there effective communications planning?

Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if

Both

2 interpretation is needed?

Both

3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?

Yes. When verbal communication fails, BCC Medical Staff try written. If that fails, staff will call the Deaf Services Unlimited for assistance.

Yes

C

Yes

C

Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications

Both

4 techniques?

Both

Notice to medical staff:

Both

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How?

Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover and

Both

6 within the file?

Yes. BCC Medical Staff have been trained to effectively communicate with Deaf/HOH inmates.
Yes. There is a flag that indicates ADA in KOMs where charting is now done.
Yes. The main header contains ADA flag.

C NA
C C

Deaf

7 Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate accommodations.

Knowledgeable about obligation to alert off-site providers of

Deaf

8 need for interpretation?

Yes

NA

When scheduling appointments, BCC Medical Staff notify

C

off site providers of interpretation needs.

No basis for evaluation

Deaf

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

Yes, when scheduling appointments, BCC Medical

Staff notify off site providers of interpretation needs.

C

If it is an emergency medical trip, BCC Medical Staff

notifies ER by phone.

No basis for evaluation

Deaf

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

Deaf

11 Adequate notice?

Outside providers offering effective communication to inmates

Deaf

12 who sign?

Deaf

13 How?

Both

Hearing screening/medical intake:

Both

14 Performed for all new inmates?

Both

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

Both

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

No. BCC currently has no deaf/HOH inmates who rely

on sign language for communication

NA

N/A

C

N/A Describe: N/A
Yes. New intake are seen within 4-6 hours of arrival at the institution. Yes. BCC Medical staff use the Well path Regional screening form.

C NA NA
C C
C

No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation

Both

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

Both

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?

How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by

Both

19 staff?

Both

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

Yes. Inmates are asked If hearing aid is working and if C

they are having issues with them.

Yes.

C

Administered by staff. Questions are asked verbally. NA

Medical

NA

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 3

Deaf/HOH or

both?

#

Both

Both Both Both Both

Both

Both

Both

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20

Audit item

3594

Issue/Question

questions/concerns (note here if a problem Description/Notes

Compliant

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?

Yes. Questions are asked verbally.

C

22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe.

Describe: BCC Medical Staff will contact the Deaf

Services Unlimited for assistance.

C

23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Yes.

C

Other methods of access:

NA

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

Yes

C

25 Staff/ADA Coordinator can refer for screening?

Yes. All staff members can refer inmates for a

screening.

C

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

Yes. Inmates who make a request will be seen by the provider to address issues and concerns.

C

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there 27 further assessment?

Yes. Inmate are then referred to provider for further evaluation.

C

Page: 6 of 985 - Page ID#:

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Adequate determination of need for designation/ audiology

Both

28 services? How?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or HOH,

Both

30 apart from audiology services decision?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

The provider screening determines if audicus is needed. Then the audicus is read by Audiologist. Results come back

C

to the provider and approved by the medical director.

Yes.

C

Yes. Accommodations are made for HOH if audicus is passed and person continues having difficulty hearing.

C NA

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

Yes. However, ECW is not used currently. It is noted under

C

the special needs section in KOMs.

Yes. An ADA email is activated to the ADA

Coordinator and Medical Staff

C

Yes. Alert email is automated.

C

Yes.

C

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

NA

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

HOH

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

HOH

40 initial request/questionnaire?

HOH

41 each relevant medical visit?

HOH

42 any audiology visit?

Yes. After inmates answer yes to one or more

questions on the hearing questionnaire or sick call,

C

inmates are referred for an audiology test.

Yes

C

Yes

C

Obstacles have been addressed and resolved. More staff members have been trained to administer Audicus.

C

Yes.

C

NA

Yes. Questionnaires are documented in the inmates

chart on KOMs.

C

Yes. Each medical visit is documented in the inmates

chart on KOMs.

C

Yes. Audiology visit is documented in the inmates chart on

KOMs and added to the audiology progress spreadsheet by

C

Medical Staff.

HOH

43 hearing aid provision?

Yes. Hearing aids are tracked on the audiology progress

C

spreadsheet by Medical Staff and the ADA Coordinator.

HOH

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks?

Yes. Medical Staff and the ADA Coordinator meet

C

once per week to discuss audiology progress.

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 4

Deaf/HOH or

both?

#

Issue/Question

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 7 of 985 - Page ID#:

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem Description/Notes

3595

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

HOH

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

HOH

46 Shared with monitor when requested

Summary

Yes. Medical Staff and the ADA Coordinator meet

C

once per week to discuss audiology progress.

Yes. Spreadsheet is sent to the monitor as requested.

C

C

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Describe.

47 In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait more
48 than sixty days to receive a hearing aid? 49 What is the cause of the delay?

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) to

50 improve this process?

HOH

Co-pay and availability issues:

HOH

47 Charged only once -- not again for follow-ups

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

HOH

50 7 days/week?

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Both E Information provided inmates

Both

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe)

There are no off site visits to receive a hearing aid.

There are four on site visits. The initial visit with the

nurse, second visit with provider who orders the

audicus test. Third visit audicus is completed. Fourth

visit to follow up with provider and to order hearing

aids.

NA

None

NA

N/A

NA

Medical Staff and ADA Coordinator meet once per week to discuss all existing and new intake status.
Yes. BCC inmates are not charged for follow-ups.
Yes. Yes. Yes. Nursing Staff is available 7 days/week. There is no restriction on housing.

NA NA
C
NA C C C C

After intake and medical assessment, before

orientation the ADA Assessment is completed where

the recommended ADA Handout is given to the

C

inmate.

Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-discrimination and

Both

2 ADA services?

Both

Brochure? Items to include:

Both

3 Non-discrimination obligation

Both

4 Effective communication obligation

Both

5 Auxiliary aids and services available

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services (including

Both

6 hearing aids, and batteries)

Both

7 Communication equipment available, and how to use

Both

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

Both

Other items:

Both

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

Both

10 Request for Accommodations/ Communications Assistance

Both

11 Medical Request form includes request for accommodations

The inmate handbook contains the recommended non-discrimination and ADA Services wording.
Yes Page 2 Yes Page 2 Yes Page 5

C
NA C C C

Yes Page 4

C

Yes Page 7-14

C

Yes Page 14

C

NA

None of BCC HOH inmates know sign language. In

person interpreter service agreement has been

C

established.

Forms are available thru the CO / CTO / Library / ADA

Coordinator.

C

Yes. Sick Call Slip has yes/no checkbox for

accommodations

C

Both

12 Job application form includes request for accommodations

All job applications are done in person only. All Staff

have been trained to ask for accommodations prior

C

to discussing job applications.

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 5

Deaf/HOH or

both?

#

Issue/Question

Both

13 Waiver forms

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 8 of 985 - Page ID#:

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem Description/Notes

3596

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Forms are available thru the CO / CTO / Library / ADA

Coordinator.

C

Both

14 Classification form includes request for accommodations

All classification forms are done in person only. All

Staff have been trained to ask for accommodations

C

prior to discussing classification.

Both

15 Discipline form includes request for accommodations

SAP and other programming form includes request for

Both

16 accommodation

All Discipline are done in person only. All Staff have

been trained to ask for accommodations prior to

C

discussing discipline.

BCC uses state issued SAP forms which includes

request for accommodations

C

Both

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommodation

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in

18 law library? (Need to check)

Both

Do request forms:

All program/club including but not limited to NA/AA applications are done in person only. All Staff have been trained to ask for accommodations prior to discussing program/club applications.
brochure are available in the law library. Confirmed by the Liberian.

C
C NA

Both

19 list available services comprehensively?

Yes. BCC uses the monitor recommended request

C

form which list available services comprehensively.

clearly explain services and aids (what they are and when

Both

20 they are available?

Both

21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?

Yes. BCC uses the monitor recommended request

C

form clearly explains services and aids.

Yes. BCC uses the monitor recommended request

form that clearly explain how to request

C

services/aids.

expressly ask about preferred mode of

Both

22 communication/needed services and why they are useful?

Both

23 explain which items are free?

Both

24 encompass religious and volunteer-provided programming?

Both

Effective communication of these resources:

Both

25 Are the materials in language accessible to each inmate?

Both

26 Is this information provided with effective communication?

Yes. BCC uses the monitor recommended request

form that ask about preferred mode of

C

communication/needed services and usefulness.

Yes. BCC uses the monitor recommended request

form include which items are free.

C

Yes. BCC uses the monitor recommended request

form encompassing religious and volunteer provided

C

programming.

NA

Yes

C

Yes - Information is provided both written and verbal.

C

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity

to meet with a KDOC staff member and interpreter to ask

Both

27 questions about the materials?

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

for a program with staff, is effective communication

Both

28 provided?

Both

29 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

None of BCC HOH inmates know sign language. In

person interpreter service agreement has been

established. Plan is in place to provide opportunity to

meet with a KYDOC staff member and interpreter

as/when needed.

NA

Yes. UA/CTO (Program Staff) are trained to provide

effective communication while discussing enrollment

C

with inmates.

Yes.

C

No basis for evaluation.

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 9 of 985 - Page ID#:

Deaf/HOH or

both?

#

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem Description/Notes

3597

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Effective communication re. programming

NA

Yes. Education Staff are trained to provide effective

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

communication while discussing education

C

Both

30 in education with staff, is effective communication provided?

enrollment with inmates.

Both

31 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Yes.

C

Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

Yes

C

Both

2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Yes

C

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Yes

C

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Yes

C

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

NA

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Yes

C

UA/CTO/CO's are aware to contact the ADA

Coordinator. A Bed Card will be emailed/printed

C

Both

7 Clear process to obtain? Describe

immediately.

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Yes. This is checked weekly.

C

Both

9 Provided timely?

Yes

C

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Yes. This is checked weekly.

C

Both

KOMS alert?

NA

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Yes. This is checked weekly.

C

Both

12 Working process to get new inmate alerts added? (Describe)

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

14 Appropriately obvious

Both

15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

17 Clear? (avoids unclear language/abbreviations?)

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

New intakes and newly diagnosed Deaf/HOH inmates C

are checked for ADA precaution in KOMs

Yes. This is checked weekly.

C

Yes.

C

Yes. This is checked weekly.

C

NA

Yes. All BCC Staff Members are trained on ADA ID

cards during in-service

C

Yes.

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

Both

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?

Both

23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator?

Both

24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver?

Both

25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?

Both

26 Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested ID?

Both

27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

C No

N/A
Yes. Yes. Inmate requested HOH ID during the phone interview to the Settlement Assistant (not the ADA Coordinator)

C
NA C
C

Yes, once the ADA Coordinator was made aware of

C

the request. The inmate was given an ADA ID card.

NA

Yes. The ADA Coordinator receives an email prior to

the transfer.

C

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 7

Deaf/HOH or

both?

#

Both

Both Both

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20

Audit item

ID#: 3598

Issue/Question

questions/concerns (note here if a problem Description/Notes

Compliant

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other 2 deaf/hoh inmates?

Yes. BCC Medical Department emails and calls ADA

Coordinator upon diagnosis.

C

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

Yes. ADA Assessments are conducted within 72 hours C

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

of arrival at BCC

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of 4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

Yes. It is documented on the Assessment form

C

Page: 10 of 985 - Page

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Both

Other assessments

Yes. Each inmate is given the recommended handout

C

and explained each aid/service.

Yes, aids and services are explained.

C

Yes, verbal and visual communication is used during

this meeting.

C

NA

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

Both

9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

Both

2 Cell cards

Both

3 Bed shaker

Both

4 In-person alerts

Yes. All inmates who didn’t receive an assessment on

C

intake have had assessments done.

Yes.

C

Yes.

C

BCC is an open bay housing concept. (no individual

cells)

C

Yes. All bed shakers are currently in use.

C

yes. In-person alerts are made by the Dorm Officer

C

Both

5 Pager

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

Both

9 Other amplification

Both

10 Other (describe)

Both

General issues

Special housing area:

Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH inmates?

Both

11 (Describe)

No. Pagers do not have enough range to work at BCC. C This has been reported to the settlement monitor.

Yes. This has been confirmed with the IT department.

C

Yes

C

Yes Yes Describe: whole room amplifiers are in use. PA systems are also in use.
No. All Deaf/HOH inmates live in all dorms on complex.

C C
NA NA NA
NA

Both

12 If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? (Describe)

If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed

Both

13 there? (such a requirement is non-compliant).

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live

there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to the

Both

14 inmate? Describe any restrictions.

In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is primary

Both

15 consideration given to inmate request?

There is not such an area at BCC however, the benefit

would be that the Officer could concentrate on that

area during an emergency to ensure safety.

NA

There is not such an area at BCC. Inmates can request

to be moved and will be considered regardless of

C

ADA status.

There is not such an area at BCC. All ADA

services/accommodations are fully available to all

C

ADA inmates.

Yes. If an ADA inmate requests an aid/service it is

granted.

C

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 8

Deaf/HOH or

both?

#

Issue/Question

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20

Audit item

ID#: 3599

questions/concerns (note here if a problem Description/Notes

Compliant

Page: 11 of 985 - Page

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and

Services form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a

waiver, or not requesting aids/services, were accommodations

Both

16 provided?

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services documented in

Both

17 inmate institutional files?

Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services shared

Both

18 appropriately with staff?

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Both

20 Have any been out of commission?

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Both

22 hearing aid?

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

Both

24 Promptly?

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

If a NON-ADA inmate requested aids/services and

does not have an ADA diagnosis, he will not be

granted aids/services. If an ADA inmate has signed a

C

waiver or hasn’t previously requested, yes

aids/services would be provided.

Yes

C

Yes - instructions are posted in the dorms. Yes. Broken aids are replaced with new ones. Batteries are replaced when needed.
Inmates are not separated from hearing aid at any time. N/A N/A Yes

C
C NA NA
C C C NA

Both

26 Describe

The following outside details have been approved by

the settlement monitor as a direct threat and are

determined on a case by case basis: Beautification,

Road and KCI Move Crews due to heavy traffic.

NA

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

Both

30 Are classes in sign language provided?

Both

31 deaf inmates given notice?

Both

32 priority given to deaf inmates?

Both I Interpretation in general

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

Deaf

1 communicated to inmates?

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

Deaf

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

3 volunteer-provided programming?

Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation

Deaf

4 method?

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf

6 In-person?

Deaf

7 VRI?

Yes. Each inmate that applies for these crews are

considered on a case by case basis by the ADA

Coordinator and the Outside Detail Supervisor.

C

Yes. The Monitor is aware.

C

BCC currently has no deaf inmates who rely on sign

language for communication however, a plan is in

place to provide an in person interpreter for classes if

C

needed.

Inmates would be notified if an interpreter was

needed.

C

Yes priority would be given to deaf inmates if an in

person interpreter was needed.

C

NA

Yes, during the assessment meeting.

C

None have been needed or requested. BCC currently

has no deaf inmates who rely on sign language for

C

communication

Yes. BCC uses the recommended request form.

C

Yes.

C

yes.

C

NA

Yes

C

Yes

C

No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 9

Deaf/HOH or

both?

#

Deaf

Deaf

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20

Audit item

ID#: 3600

Issue/Question

questions/concerns (note here if a problem Description/Notes

Compliant

Is VRI availability:

NA

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Yes

C

Page: 12 of 985 - Page

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

No basis for evaluation

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Deaf

13 In general

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes BCC does not have RHU. Describe: The VRI laptop is checked for functionality weekly. Yes yes. The VRI is charged at all times.

C C
NA C C

No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Deaf

16 Splitter?

Deaf

17 Instructions?

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Deaf

21 How?

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

Deaf

22 should be first recourse?

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

Deaf

24 Parole?

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

Deaf

27 before?

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

Deaf

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

Deaf

29 Describe

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

Deaf

30 was unavailable)

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

Deaf

31 method?

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

Deaf

35 encounters/communications/settings)

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

Yes. The IT department regularly updates VRI laptop.

C

Describe:

NA

Yes

C

yes. Log Sheet included.

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

yes. Log Sheet included.

C

Log Sheet has a comment section.

C

No basis for evaluation.

C

yes. In person interpreter service agreement has

been established.

C

yes. In person interpreter service agreement has

been established.

C

yes. In person interpreter service agreement has

been established.

C

BCC currently has no deaf inmates who rely on sign

language for communication

C

None has been requested or denied.

C

None has been requested or denied.

C

No

C

N/A

NA

N/A

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

NA

Yes

C

C Yes

No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 10

Deaf/HOH or

both?

#

Deaf J

Deaf

Deaf
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf
Deaf Both K

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem Description/Notes

ID#: 3601

Compliant

Hand Restraints

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

No

NA

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

N/A. BCC currently has no deaf inmates who rely on

C

2 finding of a security threat?

sign language for communication

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

Yes.

C

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

Yes.

C

5 Staff aware of the issue

Yes.

C

Off-site medical care:

NA

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

Available yes.

C

restraints removed when necessary for medical

7 communication?

Yes.

C

Non-auditory Alerts

Page: 13 of 985 - Page

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation

Both

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Both

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

Both

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

Both

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

Both

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

Both

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

Both

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Both

9 been denied?

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Both

11 How often?

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Both

15 used consistently?

Both

16 in all dormitories?

Both

17 in gym?

Both

18 in library?

Both

19 audited and monitored?

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

Both

20 misses a page?

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

Both

21 because of disability?

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

Deaf

2 Allow voice carry-over features?

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

Describe: Flashing lights and in person notification Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

NA C C C C C C

Yes

C

No

C

Yes

C

Describe: Monthly

C

ADA Coordinator and the Captain do random checks

on camera to see that the lights are being flashed at

C

particular times.

Yes - Institutional TV Channel

NA

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

No

NA

N/A

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes Yes None

NA C C
NA

No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 11

Deaf/HOH or

both?

#

Issue/Question

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20

Audit item

ID#: 3602

questions/concerns (note here if a problem Description/Notes

Compliant

Page: 14 of 985 - Page

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

None - Installation was completed. Equipment is

working. BCC currently has no deaf inmates who rely

on sign language for communication

NA

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Deaf

5 alternative offered

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

6 videophone is out of service.

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

Deaf

10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates?

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

Deaf

12 using ordinary phones?

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

Deaf

14 Free?

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone

Deaf

15 calls?

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

Both

TTY:

Both

18 Installed?

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

BCC currently has no deaf inmates who rely on sign language for communication. If it were needed and out of service. BCC would use the VRI/VRS laptop Describe: They would be notified on institutional channel and in person. Yes Yes
Not needed Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Yes

C
NA C C C C C C C C C

No

NA

N/A. BCC currently has no deaf inmates who rely on sign language for communication
Yes Yes

C
NA C C

Yes

C

No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation
No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

Both

23 for non-deaf inmates?

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Both

25 Permission needed?

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

Both

27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates?

None. Equipment installed and working properly. BCC

currently has no deaf inmates who rely on TTY for

telephone communication

NA

Yes

C

Yes

C

Yes

C

No

C

No

NA

Yes

C

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Both

29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Both

30 Can access publicly available relay service phone numbers?

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions for

Both

31 videophones and TTY is less than equitable?

Both

32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

If yes, was determination (including reasoning, evidence, etc.)

Both

33 documented?

N/A. BCC currently has no deaf inmates who rely on

C

sign language for communication

Describe: Yes. A staff member from the business

office whom has never used a TTY was able to make a C

call. 2020

Yes

C

No

NA

N/A

C

N/A

C

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 12

Deaf/HOH or

both?

#

Both

Both

Deaf

Deaf

Deaf

Deaf

Both

Both

Both

Both

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20

Audit item

ID#: 3603

Issue/Question

questions/concerns (note here if a problem Description/Notes

Compliant

34 Was monitor notified?

N/A

C

35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

N/A

C

VRS via laptop

NA

36 Available?

Yes

C

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

Yes

C

38 Used when appropriate?

Yes

C

Phones

NA

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Yes

C

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

Yes

C

CapTel

NA

Page: 15 of 985 - Page

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

43 Request by any inmate denied?

Both

TV/Movies

Both

44 Is captioning available?

Both

45 Is captioning used?

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Yes, equipment was installed and working properly List names: N/A. BCC currently has no deaf/HOH inmates who rely on Captel for telephone communication No
Yes Yes Yes Yes

NA
NA NA NA
C C C C

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

Both

49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

Both

50 Amplification method? (Describe)

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

Both

53 status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

Both

54 deaf inmates?

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

Both

5 (Describe)

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Both

7 because security threat?

Both

8 monitor notified?

Both

9 reasoning explained?

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both

10 of requests?

Both

11 of denials?

Movies are played on a separate institutional channel

weekly. Staff member responsible for movies reports

C

to the ADA Coordinator that captioning is in fact

turned on.

Yes

C

Describe: Pocket talkers/ whole room amplifiers are

available as needed.

NA

Yes

C

C Yes

C Yes

Describe in detail Vibrating Watches Yes Yes

NA C C C

No

NA

Yes

C

N/A

C

N/A

C

N/A

C

NA

Yes

C

Yes

C

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 13

Deaf/HOH or

both?

#

Both N

Deaf Deaf Both O

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20

Audit item

ID#: 3604

Issue/Question

questions/concerns (note here if a problem Description/Notes

Compliant

Disciplinary

Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and

without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been

C

1 punished?

No

2 Was a re-hearing granted?

N/A

C

Grievances

Page: 16 of 985 - Page

Partially Compliant

Non-Compliant NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

No basis for evaluation No basis for evaluation

Both

1 Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA coordinator?

Yes

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator

Both

2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator?

Yes

Both P Training

Both

Types available

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

Yes

C C
NA C

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

Both

3 All appropriate staff?

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

ADA Coordinator / Back up ADA Coordinator Yes Describe: Yes via Webinar

NA C
NA

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

Any additional targeted training on specific needs ? Please

Both

describe in detail

Describe: ADA Coordinator / Back ADA Coordinator NA

Yes

C

No

NA

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 17 of 985 - Page ID#: 3605
USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Name

ID

Housing location

Listed with KOMS ADA Precaution?

Signs to communicate
(Y/N)

Low literacy? (So that written
communication is not effective)

Has Deaf/HOH ID Card? (Y or waived)

Has Bed/Door Card? (Y or waived)

If signs to communicate, noted in KOMS precaution notes?

Auxiliary Aid Assessment meeting took
place?

Bed Shaker? (Not requested;
denied; granted)

Other Alert Device (Not requested; denied; granted)

TTY Access (Not Captel Access requested; (Not requested;
denied; granted) denied;

granted)

D2/C30

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

7/8/2019 Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

D2/C12

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

1/3/2020 Granted

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

D2/C20

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

9/10/2019 Granted

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

MRS

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

8/20/2019 Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

KCI Paducah Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

5/24/2018 Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

D2/C41

Yes

N

no

Yes

Yes

N/A

4/2/2019 Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

D2/B40

YES

N

No

Yes

yes

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

PROBATION Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

1/24/2019 Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

D2/C04

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

3/3/2020 Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

MRS

YEs

N

D2/C06

Yes

N

D2/D 04

Yes

N

D1/A 09

Yes

N

PAROLE

Yes

N

Parole

Yes

N

D2/C028

Yes

N

D2/C16

Yes

N

D2/C10

Yes

N

MRS

Yes

N

Closed

Yes

N

Parole

Yes

N

D2/C14

Yes

N

Closed

Yes

N

D1/ A 10

Yes

N

Taylor CO JAIL Yes

N

D2/ C34

Yes

N

Closed

Yes

N

Closed

Yes

N

D2/C 23

Yes

N

D2/C 40

Yes

N

PAROLE

Yes

N

Closed

Yes

N

D2/C 37

Yes

N

Closed

no

N

D1/ D 6

Yes

N

McCracken Co Yes

N

MRS

Yes

N

MRS

Yes

N

D1/ C 10

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

1/10/2019 Not Requested 4/2/2019 Granted 2/18/2020 Not Requested 8/20/2019 Not Requested 12/20/2018 Not Requested 3/27/2018 Not Requested 3/10/2020 Granted 6/17/2020 Not Requested 2/25/2020 Not Requested 12/20/2019 Not Requested 8/20/2019 Not Requested 2/7/2020 Not Requested 1/4/2019 Not Requested 11/22/2019 Not Requested 12/19/2019 Not Requested 8/12/2019 Not Requested 2/25/2020 Not Requested 12/20/2018 Not Requested 1/28/2020 Not Requested 1/14/2020 Not Requested 4/4/2019 Granted 10/12/2018 Not Requested 8/20/2019 Granted 2/7/2020 Not Requested 7/24/2019 Not Requested 2/25/2020 Not Requested 11/5/2018 Not Requested 12/2/2019 Not Requested 2/15/2019 Not Requested 12/10/2019 Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested Room Amplifier Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

MRS

Yes

N

DISMASS

Yes

N

D2/ C 32

Yes

N

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

2/7/2020 Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested 8/20/2019 Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested 11/12/2020 Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

PAROLE

Yes

N

Parole

Yes

N

LSCC

Yes

N

D1/B 16

Yes

N

D2/C 26

Yes

N

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

8/20/2019 Not Requested 11/5/2019 Not Requested 2/21/2018 Not Requested 12/23/2019 Not Requested 12/2/2019 Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Room Amplifier Not Requested

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 15

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING TH

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 18 of 985 - Page ID#: 3606

Name

ID

Personal Phone Amplifier (Not
requested; denied; granted)

Shake & Wake (Not requested; denied; granted)

Special mask?

Clear mask for staff who deal with this inmate?

Any other auxiliary aid requested?2

Outcome?

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested
Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested
Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested
Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested
Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested
Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested
Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Not Requested Tie Mask Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested
Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Tie Mask
Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested
Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if needed available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if available if needed available if available if available if needed available if available if available if available if

None None None None None None None None None None Requested None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None None Requested None None None Requested None None None None

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 16

Prison: Name of person filling out form:

CasBelac:kb3u:r1n C4o-rrcevct-io0na0l 0Co0m1pl-eGx FVT-EBA
Melissa Wetzel

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 3607

Page: 19 of 985 - Page

Date:

9/18/2020

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening

2/24/2017 12/21/2017 12/1/2017 3/28/2017

4/9/2018

4/7/2017 7/26/2018 8/10/2018 8/28/2018 9/28/2018 9/28/2018

9/4/2018

Intake to RCC

answered yes

Hearing screen Hearing screen

On intake

On intake to On Intake at

to more than 3

on intake to on intake to

screening

DOC

RCC

Intake to RCC questions on Hearing screen BCC

BCC

hearing screen intake screen intake screen intake screen

4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

2/24/2017 12/21/2017 3/22/2018 1/22/2018

12/6/2017

pocket talker hearing aid Hearing Aid

issued

received

Received

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

d

a

A

a

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid patient refuses

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the to go on

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure outside

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

appointment,

states that

pocket talker

works just fine N/A

N/A

na

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does

it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of

receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an

induction loop system.

4/4/2017

4/9/2018

4/7/2017 6/25/2018 8/10/2018 8/28/2018 9/28/2018 9/28/2018

9/4/2018

5/2/2018 7/13/2018 7/26/2018 8/10/2018 8/28/2018 9/28/2018 9/28/2018 10/5/2018

Answered yes Answered yes

answered 3 or to 3 or more to 3 or more

Referred to Referred to 10/2/2018

refer to

more yes to hearing screen hearing screen refer for

provider

provider on audiogram

provider

hearing screen. questions

questions

further eval 10/11/2018 10/11/2018 completed

d

a.

d

d

a

d.

a.

a

Returned from

audiologist on

Patient does

8/10/2018 no

No hearing aid not meet

need for

recommend by criteria for

Passed audio

hearing aids n/a

provider.

hearing aid na

scope.

na

n/a

NA

yes

Yes

yes

yes

yes

NA

NA

yes

na

yes

yes

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing

issue was presented to when the hearing issue was

finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or

determining that a hearing aid was not needed) pocket talker

issued on

hearing aid

3/22/18

received

Medical Visit 1 - Date

3/14/2017

1/5/2018 12/11/2017

4/4/2017

5/2/2018 7/13/2018 7/26/2018 10/3/2018 10/5/2018 10/11/2018 10/11/2018 10/31/2018

Medical Visit 1 - Description

sick call referral provider

Referred to

10/11/2018

for hearing assessment

provider for

Audicus

follow up with follow up with picked up

issues to

referral

intake exam physical

Intake to BCC hearing screen hearing eval hearing screen hearing test provider

provider

hearing aid

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

audiology

answered yes

audiology

consult, order to more than 3 Patient has

audiology

referral to

consult placed audiology

consult ordered

to issue pocket questions on working

talker, received hearing

hearing aid

no hearing aid refer to recommended provider

Referred to Dr. patient issued follow up with Picked up

Kemen

pocket tEaxlkheirb. it 2D,r.BCClifCfo,rdp. 17 hearing aid.

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 31:14-cv-002001-GFV3T-EBA 4Doc I#D:#9:953-2608Filed6: 12/16/270 Page:820 of 9859 - Page 10

11

12

5/25/2017 1/22/2018

1/8/2018 4/18/2017

5/4/2018 10/9/2018 8/14/2018 10/5/2018 10/17/2018

audiology

consult

audiology

appointment consult

patient refused

to go out on

appointment, hearing aid

refusal signed ordered

Audiology

audiology

Consult

consult

Patient signed

refusal stating

his hearing had hearing aids

improved

ordered

provider

Patient signed

referral

refusal

Otology,

Laryngology, The patient

Rhinology

signed refusal

referral placed, for HOH pass

hearing eval Ear wax removal, return as needed if

jgoff
refer to provider

Review by Dr. Kemen The patient received hearing aid on 11/21/2018

10/25/2018
follow up with audicus
completed audicus 11/16/2018

9/19/2017

2/8/2018

2/2/2018

5/3/2017 8/10/2018 1/14/2019 3/11/2019 10/17/2018 6/14/2019

history and follow up

follow up

hearing

Heather Downs provider follow

physical

audiology

Tpraatniesnfetr to BCC audiology

evaluated

audiogram ARNP

up

answered yes

Chronic Care

patient still refuses to have

to multiple questions on hearing

bilateral

patient

Does not meet

audiology consult

hearing aid received

screening question

hearing aids received

no need for hearing aids

referred for hearing aid

referred for criteria for Audicus testing hearing aid.

follow up in 3 months

3/22/2018

2/14/2017

8/2/2017

2/8/2019 3/14/2019

2/7/2020

chronic care appointment patient requested pocket talker, one given to

provider referral

Intake to BCC

answered no

audiology

to all hearing

consult placed questions

received hearing aid

Audicus test performed. Audicus

Completed Pending Audicus test audicus

9/12/2019 Hearing screen patient refused

3/2/2018 8/14/2017

sick call-patient

states he thinks

his hearing aids

Audiology

are broken,

consult

pocket talker

pocket talker recommended issued, hearing hearing aids aids sent out

4/1/2019 2/24/2020

Qualified for bilateral

hearing aid hearing loss

pt. refuses any

Patient does hearing

not want

devices, states

hearing aids, he feels safe

signed refusal. and can hear

3/23/2018 5/16/2018

pick up hearing

aid

Intake to BCC

Right hearing answered

Aid received at "sometimes" to

this time

all of questions

1/4/2019 Audicus retest
refer for audicus review.
4/5/2019 Audicus results Advised that hearing aid has been ordered.
4/23/2019
Issue of hearing aid
Patient issued Hearing aid
Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 18

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 7 - Date Medical Visit 7 - Description
Medical Visit 7 - Outcome
Medical Visit 8 - Date Medical Visit 8 - Description Medical Visit 8 - Outcome
...

Case: 31:14-cv-002001-GFV3T-EBA 4Doc I#D:#9:953-2609Filed6: 12/16/270 Page:821 of 9859 - Page 10

11

12

3/30/2018 5/21/2018

Follow Up after

receiving

provider

hearing aid referral

states the right

hearing aid is patients

helpful and no hearing aids

complaints at sent back out

this time

for repairs

5/30/2018 Hearing aids returned from being repaired

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

9/12/2019 12/21/2017

3/2/2018 4/18/2017 8/10/2018 1/14/2019 3/14/2019

2/7/2020 10/17/2018 9/28/2018

4/5/2019

9/4/2018

9/12/2019

2/8/2018 3/23/2018

5/3/2017 8/10/2018

2/8/2019

4/1/2019 2/24/2020 11/21/2018 10/11/2018 4/23/2019 10/31/2018

0

49

21

15

0

25

18

17

35

13

18

57

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Patient refused until 9/12/2019

Patient does not meet criteria for hearing aid

refused until 1/14/2019 hearing aid received 2/8/19

Patient Refused hearing aid

patient refuses hearing aid

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 19

Prison: Name of person filling out form:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 22 of 985 - Page ID#: 3610

Date:

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening

10/25/2018 10/25/2018 7/19/2018 9/8/2017 8/13/2018 3/21/2019 4/5/2019 10/3/2019 6/3/2019 8/7/2019 7/16/2019 10/27/2019

Intake screen Intake screen sick call

provider Intake screen follow up

Intake

hearing screen

hearing screen

hearing intake screen screen

annual Physical

Intake Screen

11/9/2018 10/25/2018 7/19/2018 9/8/2017 7/5/2018 3/21/2019 4/5/2019 10/3/2019 6/3/2019 8/27/2018 7/16/2019 10/27/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

11/9/2018 10/25/2018 7/19/2018 12/5/2018 1/21/2019 3/29/2019 6/12/2019 10/3/2019 6/3/2019 8/7/2019

10/28/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Referred to provider for

passed

audiogram

Refer for

further

refer for

Hearing aid Referred to Referred to refer to

hearing

recommende referred for

11/9/2018

11/8/2018 further eval evaluation. further eval eval

provider

provider

audiogram screen

d

hearing aid

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

a.

d

a

d.

a

a.

a

a

a

d

a.

a

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Does not meet criteria per Dr. Kemen for

The patient had refused

patient to have

hearing aids

did not meet

n/a

hearing aid

na

on 9/16/2018 na

na

na

na

na

criteria

na

na

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does

it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of

receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an

induction loop system.

yes

na

yes

na

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

na

yes

yes

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing

issue was presented to when the hearing issue was

finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or

determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

does not meet

Medical Visit 1 - Date

10/24/2018

11/8/2018 10/30/2018

yes 9/8/2017 8/13/2018

3/6/2019

6/12/2019

10/3/2019

criteria 6/18/2019 8/7/2019

7/19/2019 10/27/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

10/30/2018

follow up with provider

Hearing

Passed

referred to Hearing

Hearing

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

11/9/2018 provider Patient received

follow up

screen refer to

whisper test Chronic Care provider Follow if

screen

audio gram screen

audio gram intake screen

hearing aid on Referred for 11/27/2018 hearing test

Referred to provider for hearing

audicus.

further eval worsens

referred to

audicus

audicus

referred to audiogram referred to audiogram referred to

provider

completed provider Exchoimbpitle2t,edBCC,ppro.v2id0er

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 313:14-cv-0014001-GFV15T-EBA 16Doc I#D:#91:973-2611File18d: 12/161/920 Pag20e: 23 of 29185 - Pa2g2e

23

24

12/6/2018 12/21/2018 9/16/2017 1/21/2019 3/29/2019 6/25/2019 10/14/2019 7/2/2019 8/16/2019 8/28/2019 10/28/2019

Hearing exam hearing aid Follow up Hearing

completed

ordered

with provider screen

Hearing aid audicus

eval

testing

intake HP

audiogram

eval

audicus

Hearing aid audicus

referred to Dr. kemen

Kemen

approved

The patient refused hearing aids

2/28/2019 1/10/2019 hearing aid
audicus review issued

meets criteria

Failed hearing Hearing aid follow up Referred to for hearing

hearing aid

screen

approved. provider

audiogram aid

completed issued

issued pocket

talker and set

up

appointment

for audio

scope

2/4/2019 5/2/2019 8/19/2019 10/17/2019 7/26/2019 8/22/2019

ordered

Audicus

audio scope Intake

hearing aid audiogram Hearing aid results

refer to provider
10/29/2019 audicus results

Per Dr. Kemen, the patient does not meet criteria for hearing aid
5/27/2019 1/15/2019
audicus test f/u
hearing aid working well
6/28/2019

referred for audicus

The patient has working hearing aid.

patient has audiogram pocket talker completed

Hearing aid Pocket talker

issued

issued

2/5/2019

11/7/2019 10/29/2019

Completed audicus
referred to Dr. Kemen

hearing aid audiogram

issued

discussion

Patient

hearing aid in

working

ordered

order.

hearing aid

2/13/2019

11/29/2019 12/2/20119

order hearing aid
12/9/2019 hearing aid issued
1/13/2020

follow up results
does not meet criteria

hearing aid ordered
3/4/2019 hearing aid given

f/u after

Hearing aid

hearing aid received

The patient

has hearing

aid in good

hearing aid working

working great order.

f/u with provider hearing aid working well
Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 21

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 7 - Date Medical Visit 7 - Description
Medical Visit 7 - Outcome

Case: 313:14-cv-0014001-GFV15T-EBA 16Doc I#D:#91:973-2612File18d: 12/161/920 Pag20e: 24 of 29185 - Pa2g2e

23

24

Medical Visit 8 - Date Medical Visit 8 - Description Medical Visit 8 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

No

No

10/24/2018

11/9/2018

16

No

No

No

No

5/27/2019 12/21/2018 9/8/2017 1/21/2019

6/28/2019 1/15/2019 9/16/2017 3/4/2019

32

25

8

42

No

No

No

No

No

No

3/6/2019 11/7/2019 10/3/2019 6/3/2019 8/16/2019 7/19/2019 10/29/2019

5/2/2019 11/29/2019 10/29/2019 7/26/2019 8/22/2019 8/28/2019 12/9/2019

57

22

26

53

6

40

41

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Does not meet criteria for hearing aid / refuses all services

Patient Refused hearing aids

Patient does not meet criteria for hearing aids

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 22

Prison: Name of person filling out form:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 25 of 985 - Page ID#: 3613

Date:

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

12/16/2019 11/12/2019 11/29/2018 7/24/2019 7/3/2019 12/4/2019 8/6/2019 9/12/2018 9/4/2019 1/20/2020 1/8/2020 3/31/2020

Hearing screen

ENT appointment Physical

Hearing screen

Hearing Intake Screen intake screen screen

Intake Intake Screen Intake screen Intake Screen Screening

annual physical

12/16/2019 11/12/2019 7/5/2018 7/24/2019 7/24/2019 12/4/2019 12/16/2019 11/12/2019 11/29/2018 7/24/2019 7/3/2019 12/4/2019

5/8/2019 9/12/2018 9/4/2019 2/18/2020 1/8/2020 4/17/2020 8/6/2019 11/10/2018 9/16/2019 2/18/2020 1/16/2020 4/17/2020

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

follow up with Refer to

provider

audicus

d

a

na

na

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does

it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of

receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an

induction loop system.

Referred to provider

Refer to

provider

assessment provider

Referred to refer to

provider

audicus

failed hearing failed hearing Hearing

screen

screen

Screen

a

d

d

a

d

d

a

a

No hearing

refused

aid

hearing aid,

Cerumen

recommende

issued sound refused

na

impaction d

na

amplifier

hearing test na

refer for audicus
a

refer to provider
a

yes

yes

na

na

na

na

yes

yes

yes

yes

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing

issue was presented to when the hearing issue was

finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

test recommende

refused hearing aid,

d no hearing

issued sound refused

Ear Cerrumen aid required na

amplifier

hearing test na

Medical Visit 1 - Date

2/11/2020 11/12/2020 11/29/2018 9/20/2019 7/3/2019 12/4/2019 5/8/2019 9/12/2018 9/4/2019 1/20/2020 1/8/2020 3/31/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Description

OSMT

Intake

hearing failed hearing failed hearing screening

Intake

annual

hearing eval appointment physical

sick call

Intake Screen Intake screen screening screen

screen

failed

Screening physical

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

refer to audicus

Refer to audicus

Refer to audio Cerumen

scope

Impaction

Refer to provider

evaluation by no hearing medical staff issues

referred to provider

referred to provider

referred to provider

referred to referred for pEroxvhidibeirt 2, BCaCud, ipcu. s23

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 325:14-cv-0206 001-GF27VT-EBA28 Doc I#D:2#99:93-2614F3il0ed: 12/1316/20 P3a2ge: 26 o33f 985 - P34age 35

36

2/16/2020 11/15/2019 12/13/2018 10/4/2019 7/23/2019 12/5/2019 8/6/2019 9/20/2018 9/16/2019 2/3/2020 1/16/2020 4/17/2020

audicus
audicus completed.

Audicus test
completed audicus

Audiogram audio scope failed. Referred to audicus

Audiogram ear wax flush ordered

Condition improved

audio gram ordered

Nurse assessment
refer to provider

Provider hearing screen
refer to audicus

Intake HP and

hearing

screen

Intake HP

referred for referred for audicus

audicus

audicus

testing

passed

failed whisper

whisper test test

audiogram refer to

ordered

provider

2/25/2020 11/26/2020 12/18/2018

audicus f/u Audicus

Audicus exam

pt. does not meet criteria

Audicus Clara recommende d reviewing Audicus UK audiogram completed

12/10/2019 12/21/2018

Hearing aid Hearing aid eval

Pending referral audiology

Hearing aid approved

12/19/2019 1/10/2019

Called to

UK audiology medical for

records,

hearing aid

Qualified for Received

hearing.

Hearing aid

2/20/2020

Hearing aid
received hearing aid.

ordered

hearing

screen

7/30/2019 12/13/2019 8/27/2019 11/10/2018 9/17/2019 2/18/2020 1/17/2020 4/30/2020

Audiogram

Hearing

audicus

hearing aid

follow up Intake HP audicus exam screen

audiogram testing

audiogram ordered

issued sound

completed referred to audiogram

amplifier

audiogram audicus exam provider

completed

audiogram completed

9/10/2019 1/8/2020 9/11/2019 11/21/2018 9/27/2019 3/2/2020 1/22/2020 5/14/2020

Follow up on

sound

Hearing aid

amplifier

eval

Continue sound amplifier

ordered hearing aid

audicus results refused hearing aid, issued sound amplifier

Hearing eval refused any further hearing testing.

Follow up audicus
ordered Hearing aid

hearing aid follow up

ordered

audicus

hearing aid ordered

hearing aid issued

1/31/2020 10/07/019

10/30/2019 3/21/2020 2/13/2020

hearing aid pick up

follow up on sound amplifier

Received hearing aid.

Sound amplifier working and is effective.

Hearing aid hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

issued

Hearing aid

issued

f/u 30 days

4/21/2020

hearing aid working well

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 24

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 7 - Date Medical Visit 7 - Description
Medical Visit 7 - Outcome

Case: 325:14-cv-0206 001-GF27VT-EBA28 Doc I#D:2#99:93-2615F3i0led: 12/1316/20 P3a2ge: 27 o33f 985 - P34age 35

36

Medical Visit 8 - Date Medical Visit 8 - Description Medical Visit 8 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

2/16/2020 12/19/2019 12/21/2018 9/20/2019 7/30/2019 1/8/2020 9/11/2019 11/10/2018 9/4/2019 2/18/2020 1/8/2020 4/17/2020

2/25/2020 2/20/2020 1/10/2019 10/4/2019 9/10/2019 1/31/2020 10/7/2019 11/21/2018 10/30/2019 3/21/2020 2/13/2020 5/14/2020

9

63

20

14

42

23

26

11

56

32

36

27

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Patient does not meet criteria for hearing aids

Patient has other more pressing health issues

this one is not HOH had ear Patient does pain, flushed not meet them and was criteria for only wax…. hearing aid

Patient refused hearing aids

Patient refused hearing tests

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 25

Prison: Name of person filling out form:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 28 of 985 - Page ID#: 3616

Date:

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

12/17/2019 1/22/2020 12/19/2019 10/4/2018 4/12/2019 2/19/2020 9/20/2019 12/16/2019 6/5/2020

4/30/2020 5/2/2019

annual

physical

intake

intake

CC

provider f/u screening

screening

referred for

hearing

CC

Annual physical provider f/u

12/19/2019 1/22/2020 12/19/2019 10/16/2018 4/12/2019 2/18/2020 10/22/2019 12/19/2019 6/16/2020 12/19/2019 1/23/2020 1/9/2020 10/16/2018 12/19/2019 3/3/2020 11/8/2019 12/19/2019 6/16/2020

5/6/2020 6/4/2019 5/6/2020 6/4/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

refer for audicus
d (refused)

refer to audicus
a

refer to audicus
a

refer to audicus
a

no need for refer to

aids

audicus

refer to audicus

refused audicus

refer to audicus

d

d (refused) d (refused) d (refused) a

refer to refer to audicus audicus

a

d

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

na

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing

issue was presented to when the hearing issue was

does not

finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or

qualify for

determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

hearing aid,

refused

refused

refused

refused

pocket talker

haring aid

hearing aid hearing aid audicus test

issued

Medical Visit 1 - Date

12/17/2019 1/22/2020 12/19/2019 10/4/2018 4/12/2019 2/19/2020 9/20/2019 12/16/2019 6/5/2020

4/30/2020 5/2/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

annual

referred for

physical

intake

intake

chronic care provider f/u screening screening hearing

Chronic care Annual physical provider f/u

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

referred for refer to

audicus

audicus

refer for audicus

refer for audicus

referred for refer to

refer to ENT audicus

audicus

refer to audicus

refer for audicus

refer for refer for audicuEsxahuibdiitcu2s, BCC, p. 26

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 337:14-cv-0308 001-GF39VT-EBA40 Doc I#D:4#19:93-2617F4il2ed: 12/1436/20 P4a4ge: 29 o45f 985 - Pa46ge

47

12/19/2019 1/23/2020 1/9/2020 10/16/2018 7/5/2019 3/3/2020 10/22/2019 12/19/2019 6/16/2020

5/6/2020 6/4/2019

scans

audicus

audicus

audicus

audicus

ordered per audicus

audicus

refused

audicus

audicus

audicus

completed completed completed completed ENT

completed completed audicus test completed completed

completed

refer to provider

refer to provider

refer to provider

hearing aid pending

ordered

scans

refer to provider

refer to provider

refer to provider

refer to refer to provider provider

12/26/2019 seen by provider

1/30/2020 1/30/2020 11/21/2018 9/11/2019 3/13/2020 11/8/2019

hearing aid continued seen by

refused

provider f/u issued

ENT

provider hearing aid

patient refused hearing aid

hearing aid ordered

hearing aid ordered

hearing aid issued

next ENT f/u hearing aid 11/5/19 ordered

2/13/2020 2/13/2020 1/7/2019 12/17/2019 4/20/2020

hearing aid hearing aid

pt. refused

given

issued

provider f/u provider f/u hearing aid

hearing aid working

ENT states no hearing aids needed

3/10/2020

12/19/2019

30 day f/u
hearing aid working

f/u
to return to ENT in 1 yr. for re-eval.

7/6/2020

7/10/2020 6/25/2019

hearing aid

provider f/u issued

provider f/u

hearing aid ordered

pt. does not qualify for hearing aid, pocket talker issued

7/30/2020

9/3/2020

hearing aid f/u after hearing

issued

aid issued

working well

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 27

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 7 - Date Medical Visit 7 - Description
Medical Visit 7 - Outcome

Case: 337:14-cv-0308 001-GF39VT-EBA40 Doc I#D:4#19:93-2618F4il2ed: 12/1436/20 P4a4ge: 30 o45f 985 - Pa46ge

47

Medical Visit 8 - Date Medical Visit 8 - Description Medical Visit 8 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

yes

12/17/2019 1/22/2020 1/30/2020 10/16/2018 12/17/2019 3/3/2020 9/20/2019 12/16/2019 6/5/2020

12/26/2019 2/13/2020 2/13/2020 11/21/2018 12/19/2019 4/20/2020 11/8/2019 12/19/2019 7/30/2020

9

22

14

36

2

48

49

3

55

4/30/2020 7/10/2020
55

5/2/2019 6/25/2019
55

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Patient does not meet patient criteria for refused hearing aids hearing aid

patient refused hearing aid

patient refused audicus test

patient does not meet criteria for hearing aids, pocket talker issued

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 28

Technology

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

How many Where

When obtained

FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device.
3

Chapel, Eduction, SAP 2019

Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers)

10

Dorms 1 &2 2019

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 31 of 985 - Page

IDSp#ec:ifi3cat6io1ns9(URL) https://www.amazon.com/Whole-House-FM-Transmitter-

How do inmates obtain access?

Microphone/dp/B0742MMRKW/ref=sr_1_3_sspa?keywords=whole+house+fm+tra

nsmitter&qid=1582307068&sr=8-3-

During assesment each Deaf/HOH

spons&psc=1&spLa=ZW5jcnlwdGVkUXVhbGlmaWVyPUFSSkhHV0JITENYNVImZW5jc inmate is asked if he wants one or
nlwdGVkSWQ9QTAyMTcwMzM0QVhQRjdKWkdaTDMmZW5jcnlwdGVkQWRJZD1B
MDQ1NDk3MTJURzJUTTNENTY3TTAmd2lkZ2V0TmFtZT1zcF9hdGYmYWN0aW9uPW does he think it will help him in any

NsaWNrUmVkaXJlY3QmZG9Ob3RMb2dDbGljaz10cnVl

way.

https://www.amazon.com/Serene-Portable-Phone-

Amplifier-

During assesment each Deaf/HOH

30dB/dp/B001JSV7Z4/ref=sr_1_1?crid=29M9FW18Q2FT0& inmate is asked if he wants one or

keywords=serene+portable+phone+amplifier&qid=1582307 does he think it will help him in any

466&sprefix=serene+porta%2Caps%2C185&sr=8-1

way.

How well do they work? No Complaints No Complaints

Captioned Telephone (CapTel)
Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like? Yes - Sound Console/PA Speakers/Microphones

1 Dorm 2 C bay

N/A

Chapel

2016

2020 https://www.weitbrecht.com/captel-kentucky.html www.musiciansfriend.com

During assesment each Deaf/HOH inmate is asked if he wants one or does he think it will help him in any way.

No Complaints

Available for all events in the sanctuary

No Complaints

Bed shakers Vibrating watches

5

Dorm 2 C bay 2016

5

N/A

2020

During assesment each Deaf/HOH

https://www.silentcall.com/collections/signature-

inmate is asked if he wants one or

series/products/signature-series-sidekick-ii-418-mhz-

does he think it will help him in any

receiver-with-strobe-light-sk2-ss

way.

https://www.amazon.com/Tech-Tools-Vibrating-Personal-

Shake-N-

Wake/dp/B0027A573Q/ref=asc_df_B0027A573Q/?tag=hypr

od-

20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=238614861298&hvpos=&hvnetw During assesment each Deaf/HOH

=g&hvrand=3034603756450378876&hvpone=&hvptwo=&h inmate is asked if he wants one or

vqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=901423 does he think it will help him in any

5&hvtargid=pla-392043779889&psc=1

way.

No Complaints No Complaints

Vibrating alarm clocks

5

Pagers

N/A

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in

use or under consideration not mentioned above.

N/A

Dorm 2 C bay 2016

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

https://www.silentcall.com/collections/signatureseries/products/signature-series-sidekick-ii-418-mhzreceiver-with-strobe-light-sk2-ss N/A
N/A

During assesment each Deaf/HOH inmate is asked if he wants one or does he think it will help him in any way. N/A

No Complaints N/A

N/A

N/A

Earphones for parole hearings and orientation videos 1

Parole Board

Room

2019

https://www.amazon.com/Dynamic-Headphones-87050- During assesment each Deaf/HOH

Over-ear-

inmate is asked if he wants one or

Miniature/dp/B000E5FQSC/ref=sr_1_17?keywords=87050& does he think it will help him in any

qid=1582307284&sr=8-17

way.

No Complaints

Earphones for orientation videos

ADA

Coordinator's

1

Office

2019

https://www.amazon.com/Dynamic-Headphones-87050- During assesment each Deaf/HOH

Over-ear-

inmate is asked if he wants one or

Miniature/dp/B000E5FQSC/ref=sr_1_17?keywords=87050& does he think it will help him in any

qid=1582307284&sr=8-17

way.

No Complaints

Pocket Talkers

Medical

During Medical intake - hearing

https://mms.mckesson.com/sm/catalog.item.mck?id=6628 questionaire results in a "yes" - then a

16&src=OE&add=0

pocket talker is offered

No Complaints

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 29

Documentation and narrative to provide Grievances:

Case:

3:14-cv-000D0a1te-reGvieFweVd T-CoEmBmeAnts

(pDrobolecms#re:ve9ale9d,-s2olutioFnsi,leetcd.) : ID#: 3620

12/16/20

Page: 32 of 985 - Page

1. Provide summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers

formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Should include the issues, summary of

response, resolution

See Attached

2. Provide full documentation of all grievances that address

hearing/hearing accommodation issues.

None

Discipline

3. For all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving an inmate who

signs, provide report of inmate name, date, and communication method

for each.

BCC currently has no deaf inmates who rely on sign language for communication

4. Provide documentation for all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Auxiliary aids 5. VRI Log (provide). 6. TTY instructions (provide) 7. VRI instructions (provide) Audiology processing delays 8.A list of each inmate currently at your institution whose audiology processing FINISHED after March 2020, for whom such processing took or is taking over 60 days, documentation of the explanation for any such delay, and a description of any steps taken to avoid similar problems going forward. Information provided to inmates, policies, etc. 9. Any pages of the inmate handbook that address disability, and the date for that version of the handbook. 10. The current Deaf/HOH brochure and any other documents provided to deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates. 11.The medical request form currently provided to prisoners. 12. Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2020 addressing deaf/hard-of-hearing issues. 13. A list of each use of an in-person sign-language interpreter from February 2020 to present, and any occasions in which such an interpreter was requested but denied. Please provide written responses to the following questions:
14. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty because staff members are wearing masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?
15. How many staff members are currently using clear masks? How is the decision made who will wear a clear mask? 16. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty with their hearing aids because of the design of their own masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?
17. How many inmates have been issued masks that don't have ear ties?

See Attached See Attached See Attached See Attached
None
See Attached See Attached See Attached See Attached
None
BCC Medical Staff have made daily rounds in each dorm speaking to all inmates duke to the COVID 19 pandemic. Inmates are asked if they are having any COVID related symptoms and if they are having any issues. There have been no complaints from any inmates about difficulty hearing staff member while wearing masks. No Staff members are wearing clear masks. Clear masks are available as needed.
Tie style masks were provided to all institutions. One inmate not Deaf/HOH inmate expressed issues wearing a mask with glasses and was issued a tie style mask. No request or complaints for the tie style masks have been made until the findings of the phone interviews conducted by the Settlement Assistant. Tie style mask was issued to one HOH inmate. Only two BCC inmates have been issued the tie behind the head style facemask.

18. What if anything have you done to solve the problem of inmates having trouble hearing announcements? Please respond in detail, with dates on all responsive steps, prerequisites for any assistance, etc.

An inmate that is having trouble hearing announcements is referred to medical for further evaluation for hearing. In addition, announcements are put on the institutional TV Channel. TV's have been placed in all common areas that are dedicated to the institutional TV Channel only. BCC Staff members flash the lights of the bay to signify Count time, pill call and chow time.

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 30

Documentation and narrative to 19. How have you educated staff

provide that it is

Case: 3:14-cv-000D0a1te-reGvieFweVd T-CoEmBmeAnts
inappropriate to write up an

(pDrobolecms#re:ve9ale9d,-s2olutioFnsi,leetcd.) : ID#: 3621

12/16/20

Page: 33 of 985 - Page

inmate for behavior that is caused by a hearing impairment (e.g., talking

loudly, not following instructions that could not be heard)? If there was a

All staff members have been trained in person with the ADA Coordinator during annual in-service

memo, please provide that.

training.

20. Please describe in detail how inmates are supposed to get hearing aid batteries, including how long it should take them each time.
21. When an inmate reports that a hearing aid is not working, what are the steps followed to evaluate the complaint? Include all relevant copays and other procedures.

BCC Medical Staff keep hearing aid batteries in stock and on hand. Inmates reports to medical at treatment times (7 days a week) and batteries are replaced immediately.
Inmates report to medical during sick call, they are not charged for this visit. BCC Medical Staff contact Audicus with issue of broken hearing aid. The Audicus Company provides shipping label. Hearing aids are shipped within 24 hours. Inmates are offered a pocket talker until hearing aids return.

22. When someone is denied binaural hearing aids, are they provided information on the standard for receiving such assistance, and the opportunity for appeal? How many inmates have received binaural aids since the current binaural hearing aid policy has been in effect?
23. What arrangements are made to provide vibrating watches/clocks for inmates who are indigent? 24. Please describe, in detail, each step that takes place once a person is identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing, to evaluate/offer any auxiliary aids. Include who is responsible for each step.

The provider reviews the inmates audicus test results with explanation of standard for receiving binaural hearing aids. Inmates can request to be retested if they do not agree with test results. One BCC HOH inmate has received binaural hearing aids since the current policy has been in effect. Indigent inmates are provided with vibrating clocks/watches upon request. A lien is placed on the inmates account.
Upon diagnosis of Deaf/HOH an automatic email is placed to the ADA Coordinator. The ADA Coordinator emails security to call up the inmates the following afternoon for ADA Assessment.

25. Please describe, in detail, any situation in 2019 or 2020 in which a deaf/hard-of-hearing inmate has been denied a job or other opportunity (access to a program or the like) because of their disability. Include the inmate’s name, the date, and the circumstances. 26. Please list all training that you have received for your role as ADA Coordinator. 27. Please provide an update on all items in your Deaf/HOH action plan (previously shared with me).

None of BCC HOH inmates have been denied a job due to their disability. State Issued training on My purpose including 1 Webinar No updates

Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 31

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 34 of 985 - Page ID#: 3622

Andy Beshear Governor
Justice Mary C. Noble, Ret. Secretary

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
BLACKBURN CORRECTIONAL COMPLEX
3111 Spurr Road Lexington, KY 40511
859-246-2366 www.corrections.ky.gov

Cookie Crews Commissioner
Abby McIntire
Acting Warden

M E M O R A N D U M

TO:

All Concerned

FROM: Christy Peach, ADA Coordinator

DATE: December 4, 2020

SUBJECT: 2020-09-15 Individual Issues Follow-up - BCC Response BCC REPEAT ISSUES:

A. Inmates report missing announcements; inside COs just yell them out and the yard loudspeaker is also difficult to hear. Therefore, people miss meals, mail call, pill call, and the time to turn in homework for programs. a. BCC Correctional Officer’s flash the lights at count time, mealtime and pill call. An email has been sent to the administrative captain to ensure that this practice is being followed every day on every shift. Classes taught by program staff are currently at a capacity of 10 or less.
B. Masks make it harder to read lips and understand COs. a. No HOH inmates at BCC “read lips” however, clear masks are available. No complaints or requests have been made by staff or inmates to use clear masks.
C. Phones are difficult to use because of the background noise. a. All phones in Dorm 2 have been relocated into separate room 3 feet apart.
D. Inmates not offered auxiliary aids, and many did know that they had the option to purchase any type of vibrating clock or watch. a. Upon intake HOH assessment is done within 72 hours. During the assessment, they are given a handout detailing auxiliary aids. The ADA Coordinator explains the handout to the inmates and asks if they are interested in using any of them.
E. Officers are supposed to flip the lights before making announcements, but most of them don’t. a. CO’s flash the lights at count time, mealtime and pill call. An Email has been sent to the captain to ensure that this practice is being followed every day on every shift.
F. Difficulty getting hearing aid batteries. a. BCC Medical keep batteries in the med room. Inmates with hearing aids come to the window and ask for them. In the early months of the COVID-19 crisis, it was difficult to get various

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 32

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 35 of 985 - Page ID#: 3623

Andy Beshear Governor
Justice Mary C. Noble, Ret. Secretary

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
BLACKBURN CORRECTIONAL COMPLEX
3111 Spurr Road Lexington, KY 40511
859-246-2366 www.corrections.ky.gov

Cookie Crews Commissioner
Abby McIntire
Acting Warden

supplies and HA batteries was one of those things. That was for a short time and was quickly resolved. G. HOH people barred from several jobs. a. Outside details which includes Road, Beautification, KCI Move Crew has been identified as a possible direct threat due to heavy traffic. Each inmate is considered on a case-by-case basis. H. Unit tv does not typically have closed captions on. a. Closed captioning is available upon request in the TV room. No requests or denials for closed captioning has been made or denied.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 33

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 36 of 985 - Page ID#: 3624

Andy Beshear Governor
Justice Mary C. Noble, Ret. Secretary

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
BLACKBURN CORRECTIONAL COMPLEX
3111 Spurr Road Lexington, KY 40511
859-246-2366 www.corrections.ky.gov

Cookie Crews Commissioner
Abby McIntire
Acting Warden

M E M O R A N D U M

TO:

All Concerned

FROM: Christy Peach, ADA Coordinator

DATE: October 8, 2020

SUBJECT: Re: Semi-Annual Information Request- BCC Response OPEN ISSUES:

A. Items requested in the September 2020 semi-annual information request, but not so far received. a. The September 2020 semi-annual information request for BCC was complete.

B. Description of additional individual issues raised by inmates to me or my assistants. For these, as I said before, descriptions below recount what we’ve heard from inmates—not what we’ve found after investigation. We don’t yet know the true state of affairs. I know you provided responses to a number of similar issues, but these have been newly raised to me. For ease of response, I have numbered the issues continuing from prior lists. a. There are no additional individual issues raised by inmates for BCC.

C. A list of issues mentioned in my last report that were NOT covered by your in-process action plans. a. All issues listed in the last report were covered by BCC in-process action plans.

D. A list of individual inmates who have requested a copy of the summary of the settlement agreement. Ordinarily, this would be available to them via the law library. However, we have heard from many of them that either the document is not accessible to them in the law library or the library itself is inaccessible due to COVID. Therefore, I request that you distribute the settlement summary to them (it is attached). a. BCC’s Law and regular Library has not been inaccessible at any time during the COVID 19 pandemic. Both libraries have remained open. A paper copy of the Settlement Agreement is available in both libraries. The Settlement Agreement was printed, put in a three ring binder, labeled on the spine and placed on the shelf.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 34

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 37 of 985 - Page ID#: 3625

Andy Beshear Governor
Justice Mary C. Noble, Ret. Secretary

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
BLACKBURN CORRECTIONAL COMPLEX
3111 Spurr Road Lexington, KY 40511
859-246-2366 www.corrections.ky.gov

Cookie Crews Commissioner
Abby McIntire
Acting Warden

BCC:
C. Missing Items from Action Plan:
1. Unequal access to alerts remains a major source of difficulty for deaf/HOH inmates. In-person notifications should be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates.
A. BCC Staff provide in-person notifications for personal alerts for all inmates (including deaf/HOH) when needed. BCC Correctional Officer’s flash the lights at count time, mealtime and pill call. The Administrative Captain ensures that this practice is followed every day on all shifts.
2. ADA coordinators should publicize that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money, to recover when money comes into their account. This process is available for both formally indigent individuals or individuals who have insufficient money to pay for the device.
A. The following wording has been added to the KDOC Deaf HOH Recommended Handout: a. The ADA Coordinator will loan non-auditory watches/alarm clocks to indigent individuals. If you are not indigent but are unable to pay for such devices, they are still available to you by loan via an inmate account lien, when sufficient money comes into your account the lien will be satisfied. See page 2 of the BCC- KDOC Recommended Handout:

D. Individuals to receive attached settlement summary: • Sean Pernestti (201686) was given a paper copy of the Settlement Agreement on October 5, 2020.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 35

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 38 of 985 - Page ID#: 3626

Andy Beshear Governor
Mary Noble Secretary

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
BLACKBURN CORRECTIONAL COMPLEX
3111 Spurr Road Lexington, KY 40511
859-246-2366 www.corrections.ky.gov

M E M O R A N D U M

Kathleen M. Kenny Commissioner
Amy Robey
Warden

TO:

All Concerned

FROM: Christy Peach, ADA Coordinator

DATE:

December 23, 2019

SUBJECT: Non-auditory Alert for Standing ID Count & Pill Call

Please be advised, per the settlement, Knights & Adams v. Kentucky Department of Corrections, the KYDOC is required to provide non-auditory alerts for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing inmates incarcerated in our facility.
At Blackburn, Deaf and Hard of Hearing inmates are housed in Dorm 2 C bay, Dorm 2 D bay and Dorm 1 D Bay.
Please ensure that the Dorms 1 & 2 Officers are flashing the lights of the designated Bays to announce the beginning of a standing ID count and Pill Call.
Your cooperation is appreciated.
Cc: Amy Robey, Warden
Abby McIntire, Deputy Warden of Programs File

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D Exhibit 2, BCC, p. 36

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 39 of 985 - Page ID#: 3627
Bell County Forestry Camp

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 40 of 985 - Page ID#: 3628
Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 41 of 985 - Page ID#: 3629
Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 42 of 985 - Page ID#: 3630
Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 43 of 985 - Page ID#: 3631

Deaf/HO H or both? #
A Both
Both
Both Both
Both

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

ADA coordinator

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Jared Gibson

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

2 coordinator appointed?

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates?

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates in a

5 timely and appropriate manner? How?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
X X X X X

Both

6

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

(THIS

Describe method used to ascertain: Ten

percent of the inmate population was asked

X

at random and everyone answered correctly.

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit

Both

7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

X

Both

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

X

Both

9 Describe training

Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately cover

Both

10 information?

Both

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training)

Both

12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

Both

13 Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's powerpoint)

Both

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with settlement 14 agreement?

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

Both

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in 17 implementing the settlement?

Both

18 Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf inmates?

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on deaf

Both

19 inmates?

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the inmates in

Both

20 those situations?

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective way with the

Both

21 monitor?

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the monitor

Both

22 when necessary?

Both B Reporting obligations

If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was monitor

Both

1 notified?

The ADA coordinator has received adequate training which includes reviewing all ADA coordinator training documents on the G Drive as well as completing computer based NA trainings on understanding the settlement agreement, creating compliance with the settlement agreement, and effectively communicating with ADA inmates.
X X X X
X
X
X
X X X
X
X
X
X

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 44 of 985 - Page ID#: 3632

Deaf/HO H or both? #
Both
Both Both
Both
Both Both Both

Issue/Question Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH 2 inmates? 3 Is the list complete? 4 Has it been shared in a timely manner? Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs, 6 activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe) 7 Was it reported to the monitor? 8 Was the report complete? 9 Was the report timely?

Both

10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert?

Both

11 If yes, was the monitor notified?

Did the institution consult with the monitor about the non-

Both

12 auditory alert?

Both

13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X

X

X

No jobs or activities have been denied to our

HOH inmates.

NA

X

X

X

BCFC utilizes 2 Dorm Runners who serve to

notify HOH inmates who cannot hear

NA

announcements.

X

X

X

NA X

HOH

3 Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

notifications.)

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

Deaf

Deaf inmates

Deaf

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

The ADA Coordinator receives automatic

notifications every Monday of all current

ADA inmates at this facility as well as across NA

the state. The ADA Coordinator also receives

automatic notifications every time an inmate

is transferred to or from this facility.

All ADA inmates receive an orientation upon

their arrival to this facility. At orientation,

ADA inmates are provided contact

information for the ADA Coordinator and

Assistant. At this time ADA inmates are also

X

assessed and complete their paperwork to

determine what accommodations are

needed.

NA

X

NA

X

X

NA

X

X

NA

X

X

X

X

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 45 of 985 - Page ID#: 3633

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both D
Both
Both
Both
Both
Both
Both Both
Both

Issue/Question Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services Effective Communication during general medical intake, and during medical care more generally: 1 Is there effective communications planning? Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if 2 interpretation is needed? 3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office? Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications 4 techniques? Notice to medical staff: 5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How? Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover and 6 within the file?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Deaf

7 Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate accommodations.

Knowledgeable about obligation to alert off-site providers of

Deaf

8 need for interpretation?

Deaf

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

Deaf

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

Deaf

11 Adequate notice?

Outside providers offering effective communication to inmates

Deaf

12 who sign?

Deaf

13 How?

Both

Hearing screening/medical intake:

Both

14 Performed for all new inmates?

Both

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

Both

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

Both

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

Both

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?

How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by

Both

19 staff?

Both

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

Both

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?

Both

22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe.

Both

23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

Both

25 Staff/ADA Coordinator can refer for screening?

Both

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

Adequate determination of need for designation/ audiology

Both

28 services? How?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Describe: BCFC dos not have any inmates who sign but actively takes measures to ensure that effective communication is maintained with all inmates.
BCFC's medical staff conducts hearing screenings at intake. Describe: BCFC does not have any ADA inmates with low literacy but will provide accommodations if/when the need arises.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA X X X X
NA X X
NA
X X NA X X

NA
NA X X X X X
NA
NA X
X
X NA
X X X X
X X

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 46 of 985 - Page ID#: 3634

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or HOH,

Both

30 apart from audiology services decision?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

X
NA X X X X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

HOH

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

HOH

40 initial request/questionnaire?

HOH

41 each relevant medical visit?

HOH

42 any audiology visit?

HOH

43 hearing aid provision?

HOH

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks?

HOH

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

HOH

46 Shared with monitor when requested

Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it

47 take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Describe.

48 In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait more than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?

49 What is the cause of the delay?

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) to

50 improve this process?

HOH

Co-pay and availability issues:

HOH

47 Charged only once -- not again for followups

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

HOH

50 7 days/week?

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Both E Information provided inmates

Both

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe)

Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-discrimination and

Both

2 ADA services?

Both

Brochure? Items to include:

Both

3 Non-discrimination obligation

Both

4 Effective communication obligation

Both

5 Auxiliary aids and services available

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services (including

Both

6 hearing aids, and batteries)

In the past year, no one had to wait more than 60 days to receive a hearing aid.
BCFC now uses Audicus onsite testing.

NA
X X X X X NA X X X X X X X X
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA X
NA X X X X

All inmates receive a inmate handbook at

intake and all ADA inmates receive a ADA

handbook at orientation that refers to non-

X

discrimination and ADA services.

X

NA X X X

X

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 47 of 985 - Page ID#: 3635

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or both? Both

# Issue/Question 7 Communication equipment available, and how to use

the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Both

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

Both

Other items:

Both

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

Both

10 Request for Accommodations/ Communications Assistance

Both

11 Medical Request form includes request for accommodations

Both

12 Job application form includes request for accommodations

Both

13 Waiver forms

Both

14 Classification form includes request for accommodations

Both

15 Discipline form includes request for accommodations

SAP and other programming form includes request for

Both

16 accommodation

Both

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommodation

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in

18 law library? (Need to check)

Both

Do request forms:

Both

19 list available services comprehensively?

clearly explain services and aids (what they are and when

Both

20 they are available?

Both

21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?

expressly ask about preferred mode of

Both

22 communication/needed services and why they are useful?

Both

23 explain which items are free?

Both

24 encompass religious and volunteer-provided programming?

Both

Effective communication of these resources:

Both

25 Are the materials in language accessible to each inmate?

Both

26 Is this information provided with effective communication?

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity

Both

to meet with a KDOC staff member and interpreter to ask

27 questions about the materials?

Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

Both

for a program with staff, is effective communication

28 provided?

Both

29 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Effective communication re. programming

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

X X NA X X X X X X X
X
X
X
NA X
X
X
X
X X NA X X
X
NA
X
X NA

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Both

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

30 in education with staff, is effective communication provided?

Both

31 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

Both

2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

7 Clear process to obtain? Describe

X

X

X

X

X

X

NA

X

When an ADA inmate arrives at BCFC, a bed

card is provided unless the inmate signs a

X

waiver.

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 48 of 985 - Page ID#: 3636

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

X X X NA X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Both

12 Working process to get new inmate alerts added? (Describe)

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

14 Appropriately obvious

Both

15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?)

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

Both

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?

The ADA Coordinator receives automatic

notifications every Monday of all current

ADA inmates at this facility as well as across

X

the state. The ADA Coordinator also receives

automatic notifications every time an inmate

is transferred to or from this facility.

X

X

X

NA

X

X

X

X

X

X

An inmate's ID card is to always stay with the NA inmate and is not to be taken away.

Both 23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator?

Both

24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver?

Both

25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?

Both

26 Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested ID?

Both

27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Both

3 Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

X

Yes, inmate

has

signed a waiver.

Yes, the inmate's waiver is kept on file.

No, the inmate did not later request ID.

NA
X X X

NA X

X
The ADA Coordinator conducts Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessments with all ADA inmates at orientation. During this meeting available aids and services are clearly explained, the inmate's available methods of X communication are clearly documented, and appropriate communication is available/provided, such as oral, written, or VRI.
X

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 49 of 985 - Page ID#: 3637

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

X

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

X

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

X

Both

Other assessments

NA

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

X

Both

9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

X

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

X

Both

2 Cell cards

X

Both

3 Bed shaker

X

Both

4 In-person alerts

X

Both

5 Pager

X

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

X

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

X

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

X

Both

9 Other amplification

X

Describe: We also have headphones and FM

Both

10 Other (describe)

Transmitters available for parole board

NA

hearings and programs.

Both

General issues

NA

Special housing area:

NA

Both

11 Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH inmates?

(Describe)

Both

12 If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? (Describe)

If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed

Both

13 there? (such a requirement is non-compliant).

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live

Both

there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to the

14 inmate? Describe any restrictions.

In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is primary

Both

15 consideration given to inmate request?

We do not have special housing areas for

HOH inmates. All of our inmates are in the

same dorm and we have volume control

phones on both sides of the dorm. HOH

NA

inmates have bed signs to notify staff they

are HOH and the dorm officer has flash cards

to use in the event they need to notify HOH

inmates of an emergency situation.

NA

X

X

X

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services

Both

form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or

16 not requesting aids/services, were accommodations provided?

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services documented in

Both

17 inmate institutional files?

X
X Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 50 of 985 - Page ID#: 3638

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services shared

Both

18 appropriately with staff?

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Both 20 Have any been out of commission?

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Both

22 hearing aid?

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

Both

24 Promptly?

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Both

26 Describe

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

Both

30 Are classes in sign language provided?

Both

31 deaf inmates given notice?

Both

32 priority given to deaf inmates?

Both I Interpretation in general

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

Deaf

1 communicated to inmates?

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

Deaf

inmate? (not limited to only certain

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

3 volunteer-provided programming?

Deaf

Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation 4 method?

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf

6 In-person?

Deaf

7 VRI?

Deaf

Is VRI availability:

Deaf

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes
We have not had any auxiliary aids or services out of commission.
We have not had a direct threat determination.

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

BCFC does not have a RHU, just temporary holding.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

X X NA NA X X X NA NA X X X X X
NA X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X

X
X X NA X X NA X X
X
X
X

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Deaf

13 In general

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Describe: BCFC's VRI laptop is functioning properly and is tested at least once a month NA to ensure that it is functioning properly.
X X

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 51 of 985 - Page ID#: 3639

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) X

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Deaf

16 Splitter?

Deaf

17 Instructions?

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Deaf

21 How?

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

Deaf

22 should be first recourse?

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

Deaf

24 Parole?

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

Deaf

27 before?

Deaf

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in 28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

Deaf

29 Describe

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

Deaf

30 was unavailable)

Deaf

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred 31 method?

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

Deaf

(not limited to only certain

35 encounters/communications/settings)

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

Deaf J Hand Restraints

Deaf 1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

Deaf

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

2 finding of a security threat?

Describe: BCFC's VRI laptop has with it

everything that is needed for it to function NA

effectively which includes splitter,

instructions, log book, and long power cord.

X

X

X

X

X

BCFC has not had any inmates request to use

the VRI laptop but it is tested at least once a

month to ensure that it is functioning

X

properly.

X

X

X

X

BCFC does not have any inmates that sign

and have not had any request for in-person

X

interpretation.

BCFC does not have any inmates that sign

and have not had any request for in-person

X

interpretation.

X

BCFC has not relied on another inmate to interpret.
BCFC has not relied on another inmate to interpret.

X NA
X

X

X

X

NA

X

BCFC doesn't have any inmates that sign.

X X NA X

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 52 of 985 - Page ID#: 3640

Deaf/HO H or both? #
Deaf
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf
Deaf
Both K

Issue/Question Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might 3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.) 4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed? 5 Staff aware of the issue Off-site medical care: 6 two-point hand restraint system used? restraints removed when necessary for medical 7 communication? Non-auditory Alerts

Both

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Both

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

Both

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

Both

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

Both

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

Both

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

Both

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

X
X X NA X
X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Describe: BCFC has bed shakers, vibrating watches, pagers, ADA support inmates, and flash light for pill call, meal times, counts, and emergency situations.

NA
X X X X X X

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Both

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

9 been denied?

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Both 11 How often?

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Both

15 used consistently?

Both

16 in all dormitories?

Both

17 in gym?

Both

18 in library?

Both

19 audited and monitored?

Both

20

In-person or personal misses a page?

system

notification when an inmate

Both

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only 21 because of disability?

X

BCFC has not had any requests for medically

necessary non-auditory alerts that have

X

been denied.

X

Describe: Non-auditory alerts are tested

twice a month to ensure that they are

X

functioning properly.

Logs are maintained by the ADA Coordinator

and Assistant.

X

NA

X

X

X

X

X

X

If an inmate cannot hear a page, ADA

support inmates are used to notify the

inmate so that they do not miss any

X

information due to their disability.

NA

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both 23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

X

In the event of an emergency, dorm officers

have emergency flash cards to use to

communicate the nature of the emergency

X

with HOH inmates.

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 53 of 985 - Page ID#: 3641

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both Both Both L Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf
Deaf
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf

Issue/Question 24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?
Does the plan account for how effective communication will be 25 provided?
Telecommunications Videophones: 1 Installed? 2 Allow voice carry-over features? 3 Number of days out of service? (Specify) 4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them. When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other 5 alternative offered Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when 6 videophone is out of service. 7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates? 8 Appropriate location? Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends, 9 emergency) if necessary? 10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates? 11 Available same hours as ordinary phones? No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates 12 using ordinary phones? 13 Advance request unnecessary? 14 Free? Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone 15 calls?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes
BCFC does not have any inmates that sign but our captel and tty could be used. Describe: ADA inmates are informed of alternatives at orientation.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) X
X

NA X X
NA NA
X
NA
X X
X
X X
X
X X
X

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

Both

TTY:

Both

18 Installed?

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

Both

23 for non-deaf inmates?

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Both

25 Permission needed?

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

Both

27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates?

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Both

29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Both

30 Can access publicly available relay service phone numbers?

BCFC has not had any inmate request access NA to the videophones and be denied access.

X

NA X X

X

NA X

X

X

X

BCFC has not denied access to the TTY to any

inmate who has requested use.

NA

X

Describe: BCFC's TTY is functioning well and

was last tested on 9/21/20.

X

X

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 54 of 985 - Page ID#: 3642

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Both

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions for 31 videophones and TTY is less than equitable?

BCFC has not had any issues with time usage

for any ADA device.

NA

Both

32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

X

If yes, was determination (including reasoning, evidence, etc.)

Both

33 documented?

X

Both

34 Was monitor notified?

X

Both

35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

X

Deaf

VRS via laptop

NA

Deaf

36 Available?

X

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

X

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

X

Both

Phones

NA

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

X

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

X

Both

CapTel

NA

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

NA

List names: All of BCFC's HOH inmates have

been given access to the CapTel except for

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

, who has not

NA

requested access and has signed to waive all

services.

List names: BCFC has not denied access to

43 Request by any inmate denied?

the Captel to any inmate who has requested NA

use.

Both

TV/Movies

NA

Both

44 Is captioning available?

X

Both

45 Is captioning used?

X

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

X

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

X

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

If captioning is requested it will be turned

on.

X

Both

49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

X

Both

50 Amplification method? (Describe)

Describe: Inmates use headphones to listen

to their TVs.

NA

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

X

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

Both

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

X

53 status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

Both

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

X

54 deaf inmates?

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Describe in detail: BCFC has many ADA

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

devices available which are detailed in the NA

technology tab.

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

X

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

X

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

X

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 55 of 985 - Page ID#: 3643

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Both

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied? 5 (Describe)

There has not been any non-medically

necessary devices denied for purchase.

NA

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

X

Both

7 because security threat?

X

Both

8 monitor notified?

X

Both

9 reasoning explained?

X

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

NA

Both

10 of requests?

X

Both

11 of denials?

X

Both N Disciplinary

Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and

Deaf

without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been

X

1 punished?

There has not been any instances.

Deaf

2 Was a re-hearing granted?

X

Both O Grievances

If a HOH inmate files a grievance, the

grievance coordinator will ask the inmate if

they want to share the grievance with the

Both

1 Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA coordinator?

ADA Coordinator. If the HOH inmate desires

X

the grievance to be shared, then the

grievance coordinator will forward a copy of

the grievance to the ADA Coordinator.

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator

Both

2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator?

X

Both P Training

Both

Types available

NA

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

X

The ADA Coordinator and Assistant has

received training on understanding the

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

settlement agreement, creating compliance

with the settlement agreement, and

NA

effectively communicating with ADA

inmates.

Both

3 All appropriate staff?

X

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

Describe: All staff receive yearly ADA

training.

NA

Describe: Additional live trainings are

offered as well. The ADA Coordinator and

Assistant received training on Purple and

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

ADA. The ADA Coordinator and education

department received training on how to

NA

respond effectively to people with

intellectual and developmental disabilities in

the criminal justice system.

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

X

Any additional targeted training on specific needs ? Please

Both

describe in detail

NA

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 56 of 985 - Page

ID#: 3644

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAF/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Low

literacy?

If signs to

Other Alert

(So that

communica Auxiliary

Device (e.g.,

written Has

Has

te, noted in Aid

vibrating watch,

Personal Phone

Listed with Signs to communica Deaf/HOH Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment Bed Shaker? etc.) (Not

TTY Access (Not Captel Acess Amplifier (Not

Housing KOMS ADA communica tion is not ID Card? (Y Card? (Y or precaution meeting (Not requested; requested;

requested;

(Not requested; requested;

Name

ID

location Precaution? te (Y/N) effective) or waived) waived) notes?

took place? denied; granted) denied; granted) denied; granted) denied; granted) denied; granted)

4 05

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested Not Requested

Granted

Granted

Not Requested

5 01

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested Not Requested

Granted

Granted

Not Requested

3 36

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested Not Requested

Granted

Granted

Not Requested

4 23B

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested Not Requested

Granted

Granted

Not Requested

4 26

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested Not Requested

Granted

Granted

Not Requested

1 12B

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested Not Requested

Granted

Granted

Not Requested

3 12B

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested Not Requested

Granted

Granted

Not Requested

1 16B

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not Requested Not Requested

Granted

Granted

Not Requested

5 25B

Y

N

N

Waived Waived

N/A

Y

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 17

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 57 of 985 - Page ID#: 3645

Name

Clear mask for

Shake & Wake

staff who deal Any other

(Not requested;

with this

auxiliary aid

ID

denied; granted) Special mask? innmate?

requested?

Outome?

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

N/A

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 58 of 985 - Page ID#: 3646

Prison: Bell County Forestry Camp Name of person filling out form: Jared Gibson Date: 9/22/20
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

1
8/17/2016 Intake

3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

8/18/2016 9/16/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening Hearing Impaired
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
A 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
N/A 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
Yes 9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

2

3

4

12/23/2019 Intake

11/13/2019 Intake

12/30/2019 Intake

12/23/2019
12/27/2019 Unspecified Hearing Loss In Unspecified Ear

11/13/2019

1/8/2020

11/19/2019
Unspecified Hearing Loss In Left Ear

1/9/2020 Hearing Impaired

5
2/25/2019 Sick Call 2/26/2020 3/28/2020 Sensorial Hearing Loss

A

D

A

D

N/A

Yes

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/A

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

8/17/2016 Intake Refer To Audiology

12/23/2019 Intake Audiogram Ordered For

11/13/2019 Intake Appointment Made With

12/30/2019 Intake Failed Whisper Test &

3/28/2019 Clincial Appointment Audiogram Ordered

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

9/8/2016 Audiology Consult Ordered Bilateral Hearing Aids

1/9/2020

11/19/2020

1/9/2020

Follow Up On Audiogram

Intake H&P

Audiogram Completed

Right Ear Qualified For Hearing Refused Audiogram & Signed Appointment Made With

4/8/2019 F/U Audiogram Hearing Test Normal

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

10/13/2016 Issued Hearing Aids Follow Up Yearly As Needed

1/27/2020 One Hearing Aid Issued Hearing Aid In Right Ear & Hears

1/15/2020

5/12/2020

Follow Up Audiogram Report Hearing Issues

Hearing Aid For Right Ear

Hearing Loss

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 59 of 985 - Page ID#: 3647

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

1

2

10/31/2017 Follow Up On Hearing Aid Functioning Well

2/7/2020 Annual H&P Follow Up Annually & As

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

2/6/2019 Check Hearing Aid & Battery Working Well

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

9/16/2019 H&P Follow Up Annually As Needed
Yes 8/17/2016 10/13/2016 56
N/A

Yes 1/19/2020 1/27/2020 8
N/A

3
Yes 11/13/2019 11/19/2019 6 N/A

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

N/A

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

4

5

2/17/2020 Follow Up Hearing Aid Follow Up Annually & As

Yes 12/30/2019 2/17/2020 49 N/A
N/A N/A

Yes 12/21/2016 2/20/2017 61
N/A
Outside Audiology Appointment Was Made For 2/20/17 Causing Patient To Go Over 1 Day
Use Audicus On-Site Testing

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 20

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 60 of 985 - Page ID#: 3648

Prison: Bell County Forestry Camp Name of person filling out form: Jared Gibson Date: 9/22/20
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

6
5/12/2020 Scheduled H&P

3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5/18/2020 Refused on 5/18/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Exam Of Ears Without

Abnormal Findings

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

D 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that

it complies with KyDOC policy.

Yes 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop

system.

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

5/12/2020 H&P Audiogram Ordered

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

5/18/2020 Audiogram Refused Follow Up As Needed

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

7

8

9

9/9/2020 Clinical Appointment 9/9/2020 9/12/2020 Unspecified Hearing Loss

7/28/2020 Clinical Appointment 7/28/2020 7/31/2020 Hard Of Hearing

7/6/2020 Chronic Care Appointment
7/7/2020
8/7/2020 Exam Of Ears Without Abnormal Findings

D

A

D

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/A

9/19/2019 Clinical Appointment Unspecified Hearing Loss

7/28/2020 Clinical Appointment Hard Of Hearing

7/6/2020 Chronic Care Appointment Exam Of Ears Without

9/12/2020 Audiogram Completed Minimal Hearing Loss & Pocket

7/31/2020 Audiogram Completed Scheduled F/U Appointment

7/7/2020 Audiogram Completed F/U Appointment Scheduled

8/3/2020 F/U Hard Of Hearing Conductive Hearing Loss

8/3/2020 Repeat Audiogram Appointment Scheduled For

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 21

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 61 of 985 - Page ID#: 3649

6 Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

Yes 5/12/2020 5/18/2020 6
N/A

7
Yes 9/9/2020 9/12/2020 3 N/A

8

9

8/20/2020 Issued Hearing Aid Follow Up With Annual H&P

8/11/2020 Refused Hearing Aid Follow Up As Needed

Yes 7/28/2020 8/20/2020 23
N/A

Yes 7/6/2020 8/11/2020 36
N/A

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

N/A

N/A

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 62 of 985 - Page ID#: 3650

Technology
FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device.

How many Where

When obtained

4

ADA Coordinator's Office

Upon Request

Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers)

1

Medical

Upon Request

Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

1

Inmate housing area

Immediately

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like?

2

Inmate housing area

Immediately

How well do they

Specifications (URL)

How do inmates obtain access?

work?

https://ccrane.com/digital-fm-transmitter-2-for-sending-nearbroadcast-quality
https://www.amazon.com/Scosche-FMT4R-Transmitter-FrequencySelections/dp/B004NEUK86

Request upon arrival during ADA meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or see the ADA coordinator or
back-up during open door and request.

Functionable

Request upon arrival during ADA meeting, weekly https://www.healthykin.com/p-4819-posey-sound-amplifier.aspx ADA meeting, letter, or see the ADA coordinator or
back-up during open door and request.

Functionable

https://www.amazon.com/Hamilton-CapTel-Real-Time-

Captioned-

Request upon arrival during ADA meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or see the ADA coordinator or

Telephone/dp/B005GQTLJO/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=hamilto

back-up during open door and request.

n+captel+840i&qid=1581615618&sr=8-3

Functionable

Volume control on inmate telephones located within the dormitory.

Request upon arrival during ADA meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or see the ADA coordinator or
back-up during open door and request.

Functionable

Other comments
Medcial will order additional phone amplifiers as needed.

Bed shakers

2

ADA Coordinator's Office

Upon Request

https://www.harriscomm.com/silent-call-signature-series-

Request upon arrival during ADA meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or see the ADA coordinator or

Functionable

sidekick-ii-strobe-clock-receiver.html

back-up during open door and request.

Vibrating watches

6

ADA Coordinator's Office

Upon Request

https://assistech.com/store/vibrating-watches/735222

Request upon arrival during ADA meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or see the ADA coordinator or
back-up during open door and request.

Functionable

Vibrating alarm clocks

As Needed

Can be purchased through Keefe.

Pagers
Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration not mentioned above.

5

ADA Coordinator's Office

2

Dorm

Earphones for parole hearings

2

ADA Coordinator's Office

Earphones for orientation videos

2

ADA Coordinator's Office

Upon Request Upon Request
As Needed Upon Request
Upon Request

Ordered through Keefe Group (inmate canteen).

Request upon arrival during ADA meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or see the ADA coordinator or
back-up during open door and request.

https://shop.lrsus.com/collections/staffpagers/products/lrs-staff-alpha-pagingsystem?_ga=2.236932097.164881801.1581615338-
1959105477.1581615338

Request upon arrival during ADA meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or see the ADA coordinator or
back-up during open door and request.

We have two inmates that can be used if needed as ADA Supports to reach inmates who cannot hear announcements.

Request upon arrival during ADA meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or see the ADA coordinator or
back-up during open door and request.

https://www.amazon.com/PANASONIC-Headphones-

Integrated-Controller-

Lightweight/dp/B00009RDIF/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=Panaso

Request upon arrival during ADA meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or see the ADA coordinator or

nic+Stereo+Headphones+with+XBS+Port%2C+Integrated+V

back-up during open door and request.

olume+Controller+and+Foldable+Design&qid=1581615405

&sr=8-1

https://www.amazon.com/PANASONIC-Headphones-

Integrated-Controller-

Lightweight/dp/B00009RDIF/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=Panaso

Request upon arrival during ADA meeting, weekly ADA meeting, letter, or see the ADA coordinator or

nic+Stereo+Headphones+with+XBS+Port%2C+Integrated+V

back-up during open door and request.

olume+Controller+and+Foldable+Design&qid=1581615405

&sr=8-1

Functionable Functionable Functionable Functionable
Functionable

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 23

Documentation and narrative to provide Grievances:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 63 of 985 - Page

ID#: 3651

Date reviewed

Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

1. Provide summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Should include the issues, summary of response, resolution 2. Provide full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Discipline

9/18/2020 9/18/2020

There have been no grievances filled by HoH inmates. There have been no grievances filled by HoH inmates.

3. For all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving an inmate who signs, provide report of inmate name, date, and communication method for each.

9/18/2020

BCFC does not have any inmates who sign.

4. Provide documentation for all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Auxiliary aids 5. VRI Log (provide). 6. TTY instructions (provide) 7. VRI instructions (provide) Audiology processing delays

9/18/2020
9/18/2020 9/18/2020 9/18/2020

There have been no disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate.
Attached Attached Attached

8.A list of each inmate currently at your institution whose audiology processing FINISHED after March 2020, for whom such processing took or is taking over 60 days, documentation of the explanation for any such delay, and a description of any steps taken to avoid similar problems going forward. Information provided to inmates, policies, etc. 9. Any pages of the inmate handbook that address disability, and the date for that version of the handbook. 10. The current Deaf/HOH brochure and any other documents provided to deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates. 11.The medical request form currently provided to prisoners. 12. Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2020 addressing deaf/hard-ofhearing issues.
13. A list of each use of an in-person sign-language interpreter from February 2020 to present, and any occasions in which such an interpreter was requested but denied.
Please provide written responses to the following questions:
14. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty because staff members are wearing masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?
15. How many staff members are currently using clear masks? How is the decision made who will wear a clear mask?
16. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty with their hearing aids because of the design of their own masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?

9/18/2020
9/18/2020 9/18/2020 9/18/2020 9/18/2020 9/18/2020
9/18/2020
9/18/2020
9/18/2020

BCFC has not had any inmates whose audiology processing finished after March 2020 take or is taking over 60 days.
Attached (Pages 31-32, 2/24/20)
Attached Attached Attached
BCFC does not have any inmates who sign and has not had any request for an in-person sign-language interpreter.
All HOH inmates were asked if they wanted staff to wear clear masks to better understand them. No HOH inmate requested staff to wear clear masks. BCFC has clear masks available for staff to wear if the
need arises.
All HOH inmates were asked if they wanted staff to wear clear masks to better understand them. No HOH inmate requested staff to wear clear masks. BCFC has clear masks available for staff to wear if the
need arises.
All HOH inmates with hearing aids were asked if they wanted a differently designed mask (without ear ties) to wear. One HOH inmate requested a differently designed mask and has received it. BCFC has additional differently designed mask available if more need arises.

17. How many inmates have been issued masks that don't have ear ties?

9/18/2020

All HOH inmates with hearing aids were asked if they wanted a differently designed mask (without ear ties) to wear. One HOH inmate requested a differently designed mask and has received it. BCFC has additional differently designed mask available if more need arises.

18. What if anything have you done to solve the problem of inmates having trouble hearing announcements? Please respond in detail, with dates on all responsive steps, prerequisites for any assistance, etc.

9/18/2020

BCFC has 2 ADA support inmates who are available to convey information to HOH inmates who cannot hear announcements. Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 24

Documentation and narrative to provide

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 64 of 985 - Page

ID#: 3652

Date reviewed

Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

19. How have you educated staff that it is inappropriate to write up an inmate for behavior that is caused by a hearing impairment (e.g., talking loudly, not following instructions that could not be heard)? If there was a memo, please provide that.

9/18/2020

All staff recieve training each year on ADA.

20. Please describe in detail how inmates are supposed to get hearing aid batteries, including how long it should take them each time.
21. When an inmate reports that a hearing aid is not working, what are the steps followed to evaluate the complaint? Include all relevant copays and other procedures.
22. When someone is denied binaural hearing aids, are they provided information on the standard for receiving such assistance, and the opportunity for appeal? How many inmates have received binaural aids since the current binaural hearing aid policy has been in effect?
23. What arrangements are made to provide vibrating watches/clocks for inmates who are indigent?

9/18/2020 9/18/2020 9/18/2020 9/18/2020

Inmates receive hearing aid batteries from medical. Once they see medical for the batteries they receive them on the spot.
If an inmate reports that their hearing aid is not working, they are seen by medical, and if necessary scheduled an appointment with provider.
If an inmate is denied binaural hearing aids they would be provided information on the standard for receiving such assistance and the opportunity for appeal.
BCFC has not had any HOH inmate request watches/clocks but has them available if the need arises.

24. Please describe, in detail, each step that takes place once a person is identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing, to evaluate/offer any auxiliary aids. Include who is responsible for each step.

9/18/2020

When an inmate arrives at BCFC, medical does a transfer intake, which includes a hearing assessment. Once an inmate is identified by medical as HOH, they are offered a pocket talker, and will then undergo
further testing by medical to determine if a hearing aid is needed. Once an inmate is identified by medical as HOH, medical notifies the ADA Coordinator, who will conduct an assessment with the inmate
and explain what auxiliary aids and services are available.

25. Please describe, in detail, any situation in 2019 or 2020 in which a deaf/hard-ofhearing inmate has been denied a job or other opportunity (access to a program or the like) because of their disability. Include the inmate’s name, the date, and the circumstances.
26. Please list all training that you have received for your role as ADA Coordinator.
27. Please provide an update on all items in your Deaf/HOH action plan (previously shared with me).

9/18/2020

BCFC has not denied a job or other opportunity to any HOH inmate.

9/18/2020 9/18/2020

I have received the following trainings: G Drive ADA Coordinator training, CBTs on understanding the settlement agreement, creating compliance with the settlement agreement, effectively communicating
with HOH inmates, live trainings on Purple and ADA, how to respond effectively to people with intellectual and developmental disabilities in the criminal justice system, and inservice training on ADA.
BCFC has received the additonal two FM Transmitters ordered.

Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 25

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 65 of 985 - Page ID#: 3653

Cookie Crews Commissioner

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Bell County Forestry Camp 560 Correctional Drive
Pineville, Kentucky 40977 Phone: 606-337-7065

Memorandum

To: Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor

From: Jared Gibson, ADA Coordinator

Date: October 5, 2020

RE: Action Plan for Compliance of Settlement Agreement

Brandy Harm Warden

Bell County Forestry Camp has received the additional FM Transmitters ordered. Bell County Forestry Camp utilizes ADA support inmates to deliver in-person notifications to inmates who cannot hear intercom announcements. Additionally, if an emergency occurs, dorm officers have been equipped and trained with emergency flash cards to use to notify HOH inmates of the nature of the emergency. HOH inmates are informed at orientation that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money, to recover when money comes into their account. Additionally, a memo to this effect has been posted on the inmates’ bulletin board. Staff continue to meet weekly with inmates who are HOH and strive for compliance of the settlement agreement.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D Exhibit 2, BCFC, p. 26

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 66 of 985 - Page ID#: 3654
Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 67 of 985 - Page ID#: 3655

Deaf/HO H or both? #
A Both
Both Both
Both
Both
Both
Both Both
Both
Both Both Both

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

ADA coordinator

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

2 coordinator appointed?

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates? Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates in a
5 timely and appropriate manner? How?
Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? (THIS 6 REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)
Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit 7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held? 8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?
9 Describe training Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately cover
10 information? 11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training) 12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

Description/Notes
Kristopher King
No Yes Yes. There is a TV with an informational slideshow that has a slide about ADA in every inmate housing area. Yes. It is gone over with every new intake during orientation. Yes. HOH Inmates asked knew the ADA Coordinators name when asked. Also knew how to contact me.
Yes Yes Training on G Drive as well as the new CBT's on MyPurpose.
Yes Yes Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

X X X X
X
X
X X X X X X

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Both

13 Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's powerpoint)

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with settlement

Both

14 agreement?

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Yes

X

Yes

X

Weekly report sent by Central Office and e-

mail notifications of hearing screeenings.

X

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in

Both

17 implementing the settlement?

Both

18 Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf inmates?

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on deaf

Both

19 inmates?

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the inmates in

Both

20 those situations?

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective way with the

Both

21 monitor?

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the monitor

Both

22 when necessary?

Both B Reporting obligations

If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was monitor

Both

1 notified?

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

Both

2 inmates?

Both

3 Is the list complete?

Both

4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes. I still walk the dorms every week and

make myself available by being down on the

X

yard during movements when possible.

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

No Change

X

Yes. I maintain a list as well as the list from

Central Office weekly and look for changes.

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 68 of 985 - Page ID#: 3656

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs,

Both

6 activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe)

Both

7 Was it reported to the monitor?

Both

8 Was the report complete?

Both

9 Was the report timely?

Both

10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert?

Both

11 If yes, was the monitor notified?

Did the institution consult with the monitor about the non-

Both

12 auditory alert?

Both

13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

HOH

3 notifications.)

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

Deaf

Deaf inmates

Deaf

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general medical intake, and

Both

during medical care more generally:

Both

1 Is there effective communications planning?

Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if

Both

2 interpretation is needed?

Both

3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

There have been no jobs or activities that

have been denied to any HOH/Deaf inmate

on grounds of their ADA status.

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes. Flashing green lights on each C-lower

wing that illuminates during each

movement, Pill call, chow movements, etc.

Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA X X X

NA X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes. E-mail notification of any inmate transfer with an ADA flag in KOMS.

NA X

Automatic e-mail notifications

NA

The inmate meets with medical for intake

screening and then I meet with them as soon X

as possible.

NA

Yes. Automatic e-mail notifications

X

Automatic ADA Alert e-mails

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Meet with inmate to determine what their

needs are and make accomodations as

needed.

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes. Chapel

X

Yes

X

Orientation is read to them by a staff

member after verifying the inmate can

understand the staff member. If the inmate

is deaf the the VRI can be used to relay the

X

information or an in-person interpreter if

needed.

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 69 of 985 - Page ID#: 3657

Deaf/HO H or both? #
Both Both

Issue/Question Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications 4 techniques? Notice to medical staff:

Both

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How?

Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover and

Both

6 within the file?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Yes

X

NA

Yes. They can look at the patient file and

determine this or have the inmate looked up X

on KOMS.

Yes

X

Deaf

7 Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate accommodations.

Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site providers of

Deaf

8 need for interpretation?

Deaf

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

Deaf

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

Deaf

11 Adequate notice?

Outside providers offering effective communication to inmates

Deaf

12 who sign?

Deaf

13 How?

Both

Hearing screening/medical intake:

Both

14 Performed for all new inmates?

Both

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

Both

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

Both

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

Both

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?

How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by

Both

19 staff?

Both

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

Both

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?

Both

22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe.

Both

23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

Both

25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening?

Both

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

Adequate determination of need for designation/ audiology

Both

28 services? How?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or HOH,

Both

30 apart from audiology services decision?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

Yes Yes
Yes
Yes In-person Interpreter will be contacted or the use of the VRI. VRI will be taken to appointment by staff if needed.
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

NA
X
X NA
X
X
NA NA
X X X X X

Administered by staff.

NA

Medical staff

NA

Yes

X

Forms are read to the patient and discussed

with them.

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes. Anyone can refer for screening

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Follow KY DOC and Wellpath hearing

protocols

X

Yes

X

Determined by audiology services
Yes Yes Yes. Automatic e-mail notification Yes

X
NA X X X X

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 70 of 985 - Page ID#: 3658

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

HOH

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

HOH

40 initial request/questionnaire?

HOH

41 each relevant medical visit?

HOH

42 any audiology visit?

HOH

43 hearing aid provision?

HOH

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks?

HOH

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

HOH

46 Shared with monitor when requested

Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it 47 take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Describe.
In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait more 48 than sixty days to receive a hearing aid? 49 What is the cause of the delay?

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) to

improve this process?

50

HOH

Co-pay and availability issues:

HOH

47 Charged only once -- not again for followups

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

HOH

50 7 days/week?

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Both E Information provided inmates

Both

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe)

Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-discrimination and

Both

2 ADA services?

Both

Brochure? Items to include:

Both

3 Non-discrimination obligation

Both

4 Effective communication obligation

Both

5 Auxiliary aids and services available

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services (including

Both

6 hearing aids, and batteries)

Both

7 Communication equipment available, and how to use

Both

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

Both

Other items:

Both

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

Both

10 Request for Accommodations/ Communications Assistance

Both

11 Medical Request form includes request for accommodations

Both

12 Job application form includes request for accommodations

Yes Yes Yes. Pocket Talker Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

NA X X X X X
NA X X X X X X X

2 trips if the inmate is sent out for an

audiogram. Otherwise everything is done

here at EKCC with Audicus.

NA

10 Provider Scheduling Conflicts Updates to Wellpath protocols to ensure more timely appointments. A new HOH workflow was implemented in the medical department.
Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes

NA NA
NA NA
X NA
X X X X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 71 of 985 - Page ID#: 3659

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or both? Both

# Issue/Question 13 Waiver forms

the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes Yes

Both

14 Classification form includes request for accommodations

Yes

Both

15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations

Yes

SAP and other programming form includes request for

Both

16 accommodation

Yes

Both

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

Yes

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in

18 law library? (Need to check)

Yes

Both

Do request forms:

Both

19 list available services comprehensively?

Yes

clearly explain services and aids (what they are and when

Both

20 they are available?

Yes

Both

21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?

Yes

expressly ask about preferred mode of

Both

22 communication/needed services and why they are useful?

Yes

Both

23 explain which items are free?

Yes

Both

24 encompass religious and volunteer-provided programming?

Yes

Both

Effective communication of these resources:

Both

25 Are the materials in language accessible to each inmate?

Yes

Both

26 Is this information provided with effective communication?

Yes

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity

to meet with a KDOC staff member and interpreter to ask

Both

27 questions about the materials?

Yes

Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

for a program with staff, is effective communication

Both

28 provided?

Yes

Both

29 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Yes

Effective communication re. programming

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

X X X X X
X
NA X X X X X X
NA X X
X
NA
x
X NA

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

Both

30 in education with staff, is effective communication provided?

Both

31 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

Both

2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

7 Clear process to obtain? Describe

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

X

Yes

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes

Yes. Inmate is given one when they are

determined to be HOH. Replacements given

X

as needed due to loss or destruction.

Yes. Every HOH inmate has been given door

sign if not waived. Many have been given

X

replacements as well when requested.

Yes. As soon as possible after I am notified.

X

Yes

X

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 72 of 985 - Page ID#: 3660

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Both

12 Working process to get new inmate alerts added? (Describe)

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

14 Appropriately obvious

Both

15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?)

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

Both

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

NA

Yes

X

Yes. Whenever I am notified of a new inmate

or change such as the issuance of a hearing

X

aid I update the KOMS ADA Alert.

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

The only time an ID is taken away is if a staff member requests it to write down the inmates name and number. Then it is immediately returned.

Both

23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator?

Both

24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver?

Both

25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?

Both

26 Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested ID?

Both

27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

Both

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Both

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

Both

9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

Door signs on inmates cell door Yes Yes Yes Yes

X
NA X X X

NA

Yes. Automatic e-mail notifications

X

Yes. Medical notifies me of the issuance of

hearing aids and any other time they need to X

for ADA updates.

X Yes

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 73 of 985 - Page ID#: 3661

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

Yes

Both

2 Cell cards

Yes

Both

3 Bed shaker

Yes

Both

4 In-person alerts

Yes

Both

5 Pager

No. EKCC has never had pagers.

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

Yes

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

Yes

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

Yes

Both

9 Other amplification

Yes

FM Transmitter and shake and wake

Both

10 Other (describe)

watches.

Both

General issues

Special housing area:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

X X X X X
X
X
X
X
NA NA NA

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH inmates?

Both

11 (Describe)

Both

12 If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? (Describe)

If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed

Both

13 there? (such a requirement is non-compliant).

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live

there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to the

Both

14 inmate? Describe any restrictions.

In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is primary

Both

15 consideration given to inmate request?

Yes. C-Lower wing in each dorm is

considered the HOH wing. Inmates however

request to live there. They do not have to

move to a CL wing unless they want to.

NA

The C-Lower wings have the flashing green

non-auditory alert system installed as well as

normally being a quieter wing and being

next to the Officer floor office.

NA

No. They can request to live there but are not forced.

X

All available accomodations are still available X with no restrictions.

Yes

X

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services

form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or

Both

16 not requesting aids/services, were accommodations provided?

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services documented in

Both

17 inmate institutional files?

Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services shared

Both

18 appropriately with staff?

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Both

20 Have any been out of comission?

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

X

Yes

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

No. The purple videophone has been

reported to have connectivity issues but

Maintenance has checked all the wiring and

found no issues and my test calls have all

been successful.

NA

Intermittent outages reported. Testing has

revealed no issues.

NA

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 74 of 985 - Page ID#: 3662

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Both

22 hearing aid?

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

Both

24 Promptly?

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Both

26 Describe

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

Both

30 Are classes in sign language provided?

Both

31 deaf inmates given notice?

No. Inmates are advised to wear their

X

hearing aid so it is not seperated from them.

If lost Medical will provide a replacement.

X

Yes

X

Every job and program at EKCC has been

determined to be able to accommodate any

Deaf/HOH inmates that wish to participate

or be employed in an area.

NA

N/A

NA

Yes

Yes

X

Sign language classes can be provided if

requested. There have been no requests.

X

There are no deaf inmates housed at EKCC.

There will be notice given if this changes in

X

the future.

Both

32 priority given to deaf inmates?

Both I Interpretation in general

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

Deaf

1 communicated to inmates?

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

Deaf

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

3 volunteer-provided programming?

Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation

Deaf

4 method?

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf

6 In-person?

Deaf

7 VRI?

Deaf

Is VRI availability:

Deaf

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Deaf

13 In general

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

Yes. Priority will be to any deaf inmates

X

should they be housed at EKCC in the future.

NA

Yes

X

Yes
Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes
Yes. Available on all shifts.
Yes
Yes Yes. Can be placed in an unused office and connected for use. Yes. Tested monthly when not used. Yes Yes Yes

X
X
X X NA X X NA X X
X
X
X NA
X X X

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 75 of 985 - Page ID#: 3663

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

All needed items for the VRI to be used are

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

located in a carrying case with the VRI.

Deaf

16 Splitter?

Yes

Deaf

17 Instructions?

Yes

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

Yes

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

Yes

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Yes

Effectiveness of communication is noted in

Deaf

21 How?

the use log.

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

Deaf

22 should be first recourse?

Yes

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

Yes

Deaf

24 Parole?

Yes

Has not been needed or requested. Will

provide in-person interpretation when

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

requested.

Has not been needed or requested. Will

provide in-person interpretation when

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

requested.

Has not been needed or requested. Will

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

provide in-person interpretation when

Deaf

27 before?

requested.

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

Deaf

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

No

Deaf

29 Describe

N/A

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

Deaf

30 was unavailable)

N/A

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

Deaf

31 method?

Yes

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Yes

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

Yes

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

Yes

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

Deaf

35 encounters/communications/settings)

Yes

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

Yes

Deaf J Hand Restraints

Deaf

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

No

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

Deaf

2 finding of a security threat?

N/A

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

Deaf

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

Yes

Deaf

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

Yes

Deaf

5 Staff aware of the issue

Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X X X X X
X
X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X X
X

X

X
X NA
X X X X NA X
X X NA X
X X X

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 76 of 985 - Page ID#: 3664

Deaf/HO H or both? # Deaf Deaf
Deaf Both K

Issue/Question Off-site medical care: 6 two-point hand restraint system used? restraints removed when necessary for medical 7 communication? Non-auditory Alerts

Both

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Both

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

Both

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

Both

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

Both

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

Both

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

Both

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Yes

Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X
X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Yes. Flashing green lights are at the front a

rear of each C-Lower wing and are turned on

during all movements, pill call, chow

movements, etc. in addition to the audible

alert. Also the Fire system has a speaker and

strobe setup that sounds a loud horn and

flashes a white LED Strobe.

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

No. The green light alert only has one alert

type.

X

Yes

X

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Both

9 been denied?

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Both

11 How often?

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Both

15 used consistently?

Both

16 in all dormitories?

Both

17 in gym?

Both

18 in library?

Both

19 audited and monitored?

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

Both

20 misses a page?

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

Both

21 because of disability?

No. In-person alerts are used for this.

X

No

X

Yes

X

Weekly. The Caseworkers in the dorm or the

Unit Administrators test them.

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

In-person alerts

X

No

NA

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

Deaf

2 Allow voice carry-over features?

N/A

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 77 of 985 - Page ID#: 3665

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

1-2 days per month. If I get a complaint

about the phone having connectivity issues I

have Maintenance go check that day or the

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

next and I test it.

NA

If I get a complaint it is tested to verify

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

function.

NA

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Deaf

5 alternative offered

Yes

X

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

They are notified that the VRS laptop is

6 videophone is out of service.

available upon request.

NA

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Yes

X

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

Yes

X

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

Yes

X

Deaf

10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates?

Yes

X

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

Yes

X

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

Deaf

12 using ordinary phones?

Yes

X

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

No advance request is necessary

X

Deaf

14 Free?

Yes

X

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone

Deaf

15 calls?

Same oversight as regular phone calls.

X

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

No

NA

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the 17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

N/A

X

Both

TTY:

NA

Both

18 Installed?

Yes

X

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Yes

X

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made 20 available WITH TTY?

Yes

X

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

Zero

NA

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

Yes

X

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

Both

23 for non-deaf inmates?

Yes

X

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Yes

X

Both

25 Permission needed?

No

X

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

No

NA

Both

27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates?

Yes

X

Yes. There is no charge for the use of the

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

TTY.

Both

29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Annual test passed.

X

Both

30 Can access publicly available relay service phone numbers?

Yes

X

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions for

Both

31 videophones and TTY is less than equitable?

No

NA

Both

32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

N/A

X

If yes, was determination (including reasoning, evidence, etc.)

Both

33 documented?

N/A

X

Both

34 Was monitor notified?

Both

35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

N/A N/A

X X

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 78 of 985 - Page ID#: 3666

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Deaf

VRS via laptop

NA

Deaf

36 Available?

Yes

X

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

Yes

X

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

Used when needed.

X

Both

Phones

NA

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Yes

X

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

Yes

X

Both

CapTel

NA

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

Yes

NA

No. Any HOH inmate that requests to use

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

the Captel has been permitted to use it. NA

43 Request by any inmate denied?

No

NA

Both

TV/Movies

NA

Both

44 Is captioning available?

Yes

X

Both

45 Is captioning used?

Yes

X

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Yes

X

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Yes

X

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

Yes. Recreation leader checks the captioning

and ensures it is turned on.

X

Both

49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

Yes

X

All of the inmate televisions have a

headphone jack that can be used as well as

Both

50 Amplification method? (Describe)

the volume controls.

NA

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

Yes

X

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

X

Both

53 status?

Yes

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

X

Both

54 deaf inmates?

Yes

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

NA

No. The ADA Coordinator and the Business

Office facilitate purchases of other

X

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

reqeusted devices.

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Yes

X

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

Yes

X

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

Both

5 (Describe)

No

NA

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Yes

X

Both

7 because security threat?

Yes

X

Both

8 monitor notified?

Yes

X

Both

9 reasoning explained?

Yes

X

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

NA

Both

10 of requests?

Yes

X

Both

11 of denials?

Yes

X

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 79 of 985 - Page ID#: 3667

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both N
Deaf Deaf Both O

Issue/Question Disciplinary Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been 1 punished? 2 Was a re-hearing granted? Grievances

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

No N/A

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X X

Both

1 Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA coordinator?

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator

Both

2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator?

Both P Training

Both

Types available

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

Both

3 All appropriate staff?

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

Any additional targeted training on specific needs ? Please

Both

describe in detail

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes

X

ADA Coordinators

NA

Yes

X

Yes

NA

ADA Coordinators

NA

Yes

X

Dorm 2 staff have been trained on how to

operate the HOH phones located in the core

area.

NA

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 80 of 985 - Page

ID#: 3668

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Low literacy?

If signs to

(So that

communicat

Other Alert Device

Listed with Signs to written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid

(e.g., vibrating

Personal Phone

KOMS ADA commu communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment Bed Shaker? (Not watch, etc.) (Not TTY Access (Not Captel Acess (Not Amplifier (Not

Housing Precaution nicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting requested;

requested;

requested;

requested;

requested;

Name

ID

location ?

(Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? denied; granted) denied; granted) denied; granted) denied; granted) denied; granted)

7 CL-05 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

2 BL-01 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested

7 AL-09 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 CL-14 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 CU-13 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

2 CL-14 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Granted

Not Requested

6 DU-13 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

2 BU-09 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested

8 CU-07 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 CL-14 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 BU-06 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 CL-11 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested

2 CU-04 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested

6 DL-16 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

2 CL-13 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested

7 AL-12 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 CU-11 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 CL-04 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 AL-15 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

2 CL-16 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Granted

Not Requested

2 CL-15 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Granted

Not Requested

8 AL-09 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

1 BU-11 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

4 CU-10 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

5 AU-05 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

3 AU-16 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 DU-16 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 BL-05 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

4 AL-04 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 DU-13 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

3 BL-10 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

3 CL-09 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

3 CL-15 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 DL-12 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

9 AL-12 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

8 AL-14 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

M 49 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 BL-02 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

M 44 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 BU-05 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

3 BU-06 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 AL-14 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

2 AL-12 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested

2 CL-07 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Granted

Not Requested

4 CL-12 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 AU-01 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

4 CU-16 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

8 BL-13 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

8 DU-14 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 14

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 81 of 985 - Page ID#: 3669

Name

Clear mask for

Shake & Wake

staff who deal Any other

(Not requested;

with this

auxiliary aid

ID

denied; granted) Special mask? innmate?

requested? Outome?

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Yes

Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Yes

Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Yes

Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 15

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 82 of 985 - Page

ID#: 3670

Low literacy?

If signs to

(So that

communicat

Other Alert Device

Listed with Signs to written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid

(e.g., vibrating

Personal Phone

KOMS ADA commu communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment Bed Shaker? (Not watch, etc.) (Not TTY Access (Not Captel Acess (Not Amplifier (Not

Housing Precaution nicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting requested;

requested;

requested;

requested;

requested;

ID

location ?

(Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? denied; granted) denied; granted) denied; granted) denied; granted) denied; granted)

8 BL-04 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

4 AU-10 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

3 AU-06 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

9 BL-01 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

7 AL-06 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 AU-16 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 CL-09 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 CU-06 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 BU-13 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 AU-14 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

M 34 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

1 AL-09 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 BU-02 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

2 CU-15 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested

9 BL-11 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

1 BL-08 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 CU-15 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 AU-04 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

9 AL-07 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

1 AU-13 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

4 CL-02 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

1 AL-16 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

2 BL-04 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested

3 AL-06 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

5 DU-12 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

M 26 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 DL-11 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

2 AL-09 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Granted

2 CL-11 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested

8 AL-15 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

2 AL-08 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested

2 BU-02 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Granted

8 DL-04 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

4 CL-12 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

1 DU-09 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 AL-15 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 BL-13 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

1 AU-11 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

8 CU-06 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

5 DU-13 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

4 CL-11 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

5 AL-07 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

6 BL-07 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 BU-09 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 CL-01 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

3 CU-01 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

2 CL-08 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Granted

7 CL-09 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 BL-06 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

2 CL-14 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 16

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 83 of 985 - Page ID#: 3671

Clear mask for

Shake & Wake

staff who deal Any other

(Not requested;

with this

auxiliary aid

ID

denied; granted) Special mask? innmate?

requested? Outome?

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Yes

Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Yes

Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Yes

Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Yes

Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 17

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 84 of 985 - Page

ID#: 3672

Low literacy?

If signs to

(So that

communicat

Other Alert Device

Listed with Signs to written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid

(e.g., vibrating

Personal Phone

KOMS ADA commu communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment Bed Shaker? (Not watch, etc.) (Not TTY Access (Not Captel Acess (Not Amplifier (Not

Housing Precaution nicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting requested;

requested;

requested;

requested;

requested;

ID

location ?

(Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? denied; granted) denied; granted) denied; granted) denied; granted) denied; granted)

H-08 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 AL-16 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

9 BL-12 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 AL-16 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 CU-15 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

5 AL-14 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

8 BU-14 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

8 BU-03 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

2 BL-08 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested

5 AL-15 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

2 CL-03 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested

7 AL-02 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

1 AL-04 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

8 DU-04 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 CL-07 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 AU-15 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

2 CL-01 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Granted

6 BU-09 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 BL-15 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 BU-15 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 CL-16 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

6 DL-15 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

4 CL-04 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

2 BU-10 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested

6 DU-07 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 AU-07 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

4 BU-05 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

2 CL-15 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested

8 CU-08 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

1 DL-01 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

8 DU-02 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

3 CL-07 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

7 AU-11 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested

2 CU-03 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested

2 BU-05 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Granted

Not Requested

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 18

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 85 of 985 - Page ID#: 3673

Clear mask for

Shake & Wake

staff who deal Any other

(Not requested;

with this

auxiliary aid

ID

denied; granted) Special mask? innmate?

requested? Outome?

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Granted

Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested No

N/A

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 19

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date: Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

CasEKeCC: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 86 of 985 - Page

Amanda Carter

ID#: 3674

9/17/2020

1

2

3

4

5

6

3/4/2019 Patient failed whisper test 3/4/2019 3/29/2020
3/29/2020

1/14/2017

8/16/2019

Patient reported hearing

Provider sick call referral

difficulties during an annual physical and chronic care

Refused OSMT on 1/25/2017

to ENT

8/28/2019

7/29/2020 Patient reported hearing difficulties during a nursing intake
8/11/2019

12/16/2016
Sick Call Patient refused audiogram 6/28/2018

6/22/2019
Chronic Care Provider Appointment
7/9/2019

11/20/2018
Refused OSMT for hearing Evaluation

8/30/2019
Unspecified hearing loss, unspecified ear - H91.90 (Primary), Hearing aid, left ear, ordered

Unspecified hearing loss, unspecified ear - H91.90, Hearing aid, right ear, ordered

7/12/2019 Bilateral hearing loss

7
12/5/2016 Patient reported hearing difficulties during a nursing sick call 3/9/2017 3/9/2017
SNHL right ear

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
a

Patient refused OSMT ENT

for hearing evaluation on

1/25/2017

a

a

(A)

a

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
Audicus Clara
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

3/4/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

H&P

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Audiotmetry Test Ordered

Medical Visit 2 - Date

3/15/2019

Medical Visit 2 - Description

Test performed

Audicus Clara for L ear

Audicus Clara for R ear

1/4/2017

8/16/2019

7/29/2019

1/5/2017

Provider sick call Refer to ENT for hearing evaluation

Annual physical and chronic care Intake

Provider Sick call

Audiogram ordered

Referred for an audiogram Refer for audiogram

1/25/2017

8/28/2019

8/11/2019

6/28/2018

Patient refused ENT OSMT Audiogram Testing

Audiogram

Provider appointment

Audicus hearing aid for left Right Resound high digital

ear

BTE

6/22/2019 Chronic Care Provider Appointment Schedule patient for audiogram
7/9/2019
Provider followup

12/5/2016 Nursing sick call refer to provider 3/9/2017 Audiology Consult

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Audicus testing ordered 4/18/2019 P Sickall

Test performed, audicus ordered Test performed

Audiology referral, patient signed refusal to additional hearing screening

Patient failed audiogram

Referred to provier to review results

11/20/2018

8/30/2019

Chronic Clinic provider visit Audicus testing

8/11/2019 Audiogram Results Review

8/27/2019 Provider appointment for review of audicus results

3/9/2017 Provider Visit

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Patient declines any further

Reviewed Audicus results/hearing treatment for hearing loss,

aid ordered

followup PRN

Test performed

5/9/2019

9/16/2019

No visit

Review of Audicus Results

Hearing aid ordered 9/23/2020 Hearing aid issued

Will order hearing aid for left

ear

Hearing aid ordered

10/10/2019

3/22/2017

Provider visit for review of
hearing aid Exhibit 2, EKCAuCdi,oplo.gy2a0ppointment

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 87 of 985 - Page Patient doing well with

Hearing aid issued

ID#: 3675 Hearing aid ordered

Hearing aid issued

hearing aid, follow up PRN Hearing aid fitted and issued

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

5/21/2019 P F/U Hearing aid eval

10/1/2019 Hearing aid issued Hearing aid issued

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

2/20/2020 Hearing aid eval
Patient seen in medical for hearing aid evaluation. States the hearing aid uses batteries too quick. Does not have hearing aid in use during visit

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

3/4/2019 5/21/2019 78

1/4/2017 11/20/2018 685

8/16/2019 2/20/2020 188

7/29/2019 9/23/2020 422

12/16/2016 6/8/2018 539

6/22/2019 10/10/2019 110

12/5/2016 3/22/2017 107

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

complete
Audicus review was not scheduled. Patient placed sick call for audicus results

complete patient refused ENT appt.

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

HOH scheduling process updated n/a

complete

complete

Hearing aid eval not scheduled HOH scheduling process updated

Hearing aid not ordered HOH ordering process updated

complete

complete

complete

patient refused audiology appt.
n/a

Long time periods between referrals/testing
HOH scheduling process updated

Long time periods between referrals/testing
HOH scheduling process updated

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 21

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Cas1 e: 3:14-cv-000012-GFVT-EBA D3 oc #: 99-2 Filed4 : 12/16/20 Pa5 ge: 88 of 985 -6 Page

7

ID#: 3676

12/18/2019
Patient reported hearing difficulties during a Chronic care visit. Failed whisper test.

3/29/2018
Transfer chart review, reports HOH

12/20/2019

12/20/2019

8/11/2019

6/9/2020

Chronic Care Appointment at

RCC

Annual H&P

8/11/2019

6/14/2020

8/23/2019

6/14/2020

8/8/2019

?

9/14/2017

Patient reported that he had Patient has no records in the

a hearing aid during intake to electronic health record. He

the DOC

discharged in 1998.

New intake at RCC

?

10/11/2017

1/9/2020

10/11/2017

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Other specified hearing loss, unspecified ear - H91.8X9 (Primary), Hearing Aid, right ear, ordered

Conductive hearing loss, needs amplifier

Unspecified hearing loss, Bilateral moderate hearing loss bilateral

pt presenting to medical for his audicus eval. pt currently has a hearing aid, pt left ear is noted to be the better of the two ears even though pt wears his hearing aid in the rigth pt encouraged to put hearing aid in the better ear

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
a
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
Audicus Clara for R ear
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

12/18/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Chronic Care Patient referred for Audicus Testing

Medical Visit 2 - Date

12/20/2019

Medical Visit 2 - Description

Audicus testing

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Test performed

Medical Visit 3 - Date

1/7/2020

Medical Visit 3 - Description

Review of Audicus Results

(D)

(A)

Reports amplifier works fine for his hearing follow up PRN

Audicus Clara

a

a

Audicus Clara Right ear

?

3/29/2018
New transfer chart review Recommend hearing enhancer

8/11/2019 Chronic Care Provider Appointment
Schedule audiogram

6/9/2020

8/8/2019

H&P Audicus screening ordered

Intake Patient reported that he has a hearing aid already

4/2/2018 Appliance pick up Hearing enhancer issued

8/13/2019

6/14/2020

Provider appointment for follow

up on hearing loss

Audicus Screening

Repeat audiogram and follow up

in two weeks

Completed

1/9/2020 Audicus testing Test Complete

8/6/2018 Nursing sick call

8/28/2019 Provider follow up for hearing loss

6/25/2020 Audicus review

1/14/2020 F/U Hearing test

Bilateral SNHL
(A)
Rexton Digital Full Shell Binaural
9/26/2017 Provider visit, new intake Refer to Audiologist 10/11/2017 Return from OSMT Hearing Aids Received 10/25/2017 Return from OSMT
Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 22

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Hearing aid ordered

Needs new amplifier, property lost his

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 3677 Bilateral moderate hearing loss,
Audicus Clara ordered for right

ear

Hearing aid ordered

Page: 89 of 985 - Page Patient encourage to wear his hearing aid in his better ear (left).

Medical Visit 4 - Date

1/28/2020

8/13/2018

11/21/2019

8/6/2020

Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Hearing Aid Issued Hearing aid issued

Appliance pick up Sound amplifier issued, follow up PRN

Hearing aid evaluation Patient reports hearing aid is working well, follow up PRN

Hearing aid Issued Issued

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

2/27/2020 Hearing Aid Eval Eval complete

8/31/2020 Hearing aid eval Eval complete

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

12/18/2019 2/27/2020 71

3/29/2018 8/13/2018 137

8/11/2019 11/21/2019 102

6/9/2020 8/31/2020 83

8/8/2019 1/14/2020 159

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

complete

complete

Long times between

Long times between

referrals/testing/issue

referrals/testing/issue

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process updated updated

Complete Long Times between referrals/testing/issue HOH scheduling process updated

complete Long times between referrals/testing/issue

complete Long times between referrals/testing/issue HOH scheduling process updated

complete No HOH noted in chart n/a

Hearing Aids received 2/12/2018 New intake at EKCC, has hearing aids Follow up PRN if any problems
9/14/2017 10/25/2017 41 complete

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 23

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Cas1 e: 3:14-cv-000012-GFVT-EBA D3 oc #: 99-2 Filed4 : 12/16/20 Pa5 ge: 90 of 985 -6 Page ID#: 3678

?
Patient already has hearing aid. He came into the system with hearing aid ? Came into the system with hearing aid

10/27/2019 Patient reported hearing issues during and annual physical
11/4/2019

9/25/2019

11/4/2019

11/18/2018
Patient reported hearing difficulties during a nursing sick call

1/19/2017
Provider H and P Appointment

12/4/2018

2/2/2017

3/28/2019

2/2/2017

8/4/2017
Intake @ EKCC, hearing screening questionaire Patient refused ent/audiology trip.
n/a

11/4/2016
New intake at RCC 8/23/2019 8/23/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Sensorineural hearing loss,

Unspecified hearing loss,

bilateral - H90.3, Hearing aid, left bilateral - H91.93, Hearing

ear, ordered

aid, right ear, ordered

Conductive hearing loss

Bilateral SNHL

n/a

Bilateral hearing loss

7
10/3/2019 Patient reported hearing difficulties during a provider exam
10/4/2019
10/4/2019 Unspecified hearing loss, unspecified ear - H91.90, Hearing aid, left ear, ordered

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
a
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
Audicus Clara for L ear

a

a

(A)

n/a

Audicus Clara for R ear

Audicus Clara, Right ear

Monaural Digital Full Shell Hearing Aid

(A)

Audicus hearing aid

Audicus Clara for L ear

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

2/21/2008

10/27/2019

11/18/2018

Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Annual H&P
Patient already has hearing aid. He came into the system with hearing aid.

Annual H&P

Nursing sick call

Referred for audicus testing refer to provider

Medical Visit 2 - Date

5/17/2018

11/4/2019

11/21/2018

Medical Visit 2 - Description

Hearing screening

Audicus testing

Provider Visit

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Test performed. Already has left

hearing aid

Test complete

Audiometry ordered

Medical Visit 3 - Date

9/24/2019

11/21/2019

3/28/2019

Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Chronic Care

Audicus results review

Patient reported he had lost his

hearing aid at his previous facility,

Audicus ordered

Hearing aid ordered

Audiometry testing Test complete

Medical Visit 4 - Date

9/25/2019

12/17/2019

4/18/2019

Medical Visit 4 - Description

Audicus Testing

Hearing aid issued

Audicus results review

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Test performed

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid ordered

1/19/2017 Provider H and P Appointment

8/4/2017 Intake @ EKCC, hearing screening questionaire

8/22/2019

10/3/2019

Chronic Care Provider visit Provide F/U

Audiology consult ordered referred to provider

Failed whisper test, will order

audiogram

Audiogram ordered

2/2/2017 Hears to you audiology evaluation
Hearing aids ordered

8/10/2017

9/11/2019

10/4/2019

Provider Soap note referred to ENT/Audiology

Provider followup
Bilateral hearing loss, will order hearing aid for right ear and issue pocket talker

Audiogram Testing Test complete

2/17/2017

9/15/2017

9/30/2019

10/18/2019

Provider Follow up

ENT/Audiology appointment Nurse visit

Provider F/U

Pick up hearing aid

Patient signed refusal. Did

not go to appt.

Patient given hearing aid

Hearing aid ordered

5/15/2019 Chronic Care Provider Appointment
Hearing aid working well for patient

11/20/2019

11/18/2019

Provider vist for hearing aid

evaluation

Hearing aid issued

Patient currently in RHU, but stated that hearing aid was
working wellExhibit 2, EKCHeCar,inpg.a2id4issued

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 91 of 985 - Page

9/26/2019

1/17/2020

5/14/20I1D9 #: 3679

Review of Audicus Results

Hearing aid eval

Hearing aid

Medical Visit 5 - Outcome Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Hearing aid ordered 10/29/2019 Hearing aid issued
Hearing aid issued

Patient pleased with his hearing aid

issued
6/6/2019 Hearing aid Eval
Patient states he is trying to adjust to wearing the hearing aid, but seems there is a lot of jumbled noise. He did not have hearing aid on at the visit today. Information supplied by hearing aid company given to patient to help adjust to wearing a hearing aid Pt verbalized understanding of importance to wear HA daily to help adjust to it

...

12/2/2019 Hearing aid eval

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

2/21/2008 12/2/2019 4302

10/27/2019 1/17/2020 82

11/18/2018 6/6/2019 200

1/19/2017 2/17/2017 29

8/4/2017 9/15/2017 42

8/23/2019 9/30/2019 38

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

long periods of time between long periods of time between long periods of time between

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process updated updated

updated

long periods of time between

referrals, testing, issue

Patient refused ENT appt.

HOH scheduling process

updated

n/a

12/2/2019 Hearing aid Eval Patient reports it has been a period of adjustment with his hearing aid and uses it as needed.
10/3/2019 12/2/2019 60 complete

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 25

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Cas1 e: 3:14-cv-000012-GFVT-EBA D3 oc #: 99-2 Filed4 : 12/16/20 Pa5 ge: 92 of 985 -6 Page

7

ID#: 3680

1/31/2020
CC/Hearing screening 2/6/2020 2/6/2020

10/10/2019
Patient reported hearing difficulties during a nursing sick call.

?

11/2/2016

No documentation of a hearing problem being voiced/reported Provider Sick Call

11/5/2019

n/a

12/15/2016

11/5/2019

n/a

2/12/2019

12/12/2019
H&P 12/12/2019 12/12/2019

Patient reports he has hearing aids upon intake at LLCC, lost per property

3/21/2018

10/4/2016 11/8/2017

Sick Call 7/18/2018 7/18/2018

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Sensorineural hearing loss, bilateral

Unspecified hearing loss,

unspecified ear - H91.90,

Hearing aid, right ear,

approved and ordered

n/a

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

D

a

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision against

providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC Patient did not meet criteria for

policy.

receiving a hearing per DOC

policy

Patient with no hearing aid

and states he has never been

Moderate hearing loss in left given one. Has no hearing

ear and Severe hearing loss complaints. hears well, and

in right ear

passed hearing test.

Severe bilateral SNHL

(D) 2/12/2019 Word

understanding excellent

bilaterally not a good

candidate for hearing aids at

this time. Has annual

Audiology appointment to

evaluate progression of

hearing loss

d

(A)

Hearing aid Audicus dia right ear ordered
a

see above

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

1/31/2020 Provider CC

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date

Audiogram ordered 2/6/2020 Audicus testing completed 2/14/2020 Review of Audicus did not meet criteria

Audicus Clara for R ear

Resound binaural digital BTE

11/27/2017

audicus dia for right ear

10/10/2019 Nursing Sick Call
Referred to provider

8/16/2019 H&P
Patient answered to no to all hearing screening questions.

12/16/2016 Provider followup OSMT
Audiology followup in one year

12/12/2019 H&P
Hearing Screening passed

11/3/2016

3/21/2018

Follow up U of L Audiology Sick Call

Recommend amplification to

enhance sound/ speech

followup as needed

Referred to provider

11/5/2019 Provider Sick Call
Audicus performed

7/27/2020 Provider Soap Note hearing loss removed from problem list.

11/30/2017 Provider visit followup Review of Audiometry recommendations

11/8/2017 Audiology appointment Bilateral SNHL recommend hearing aid

3/23/2018 Provider Sick Cal
Referred to Ent for tinnitus

11/20/2019
Review of Audicus Results Hearing aid approved and ordered

11/7/2018 Provider appointment for Audiometry test
Refer for Audicus

11/27/2017

5/11/2018

Hears to you

ENT Eval

Issued hearing aids, follow up

PRN

Referred for Audiogram

12/18/2019

12/31/2018

Exhibit 2, EKC5/C18,/2p0.128 6

Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 FiledPro:vi1de2r v/is1it f6oll/o2wu0p Page: 93 of 985 - Page

Hearing Aid Issued

ID#: 3681 Audicus

Hearing Aid Issued

Refer for annual Audiology appointment

P F/U
Reviewed OSMT Paperwork and ordered audiology consult

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

1/22/2020 Hearing Aid Eval
Patient reports he is doing well with the hearing aid but the battery runs down quickly

3/14/2019 Review OSMT Audiology
ENT does not recommend hearing aid at this time

7/18/2018 Audiology Appt
Audiogram completed

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

7/23/2018 P F/U
Audiology notes had not been received. Patient referred to be seen at a later date when results had been received. 8/9/2018, P F/U, Notes received from Audiology, hearing aids ordered. 8/28/2018, hearing aid order approved. 9/19/2018 hearing aids issued. 10/1/2018 hearing aid eval completed

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

1/31/2020 2/14/2020 14

10/10/2019 1/22/2020 104

8/16/2019 7/27/2020 346

12/16/2016 3/14/2019 818

12/12/2019 12/12/2019 0

11/3/2016 11/27/2017 389

3/21/2018 10/1/2018 194

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) complete

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

n/a

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

n/a

complete

No documentation of HOH

long periods of time between

referrals, testing, issue

HOH diagnosis

HOH scheduling process

updated

n/a

complete

Complete

long periods of time between

referrals, testing, issue

Passed hearing test

HOH scheduling process

updated

n/a

complete

complete

long periods of time

long periods of time between between referrals, testing,

referrals, testing, issue

issue

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process

updated

updated

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 27

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

Cas1 e: 3:14-cv-000012-GFVT-EBA D3 oc #: 99-2 Filed4 : 12/16/20 Pa5 ge: 94 of 985 -6 Page ID#: 3682

9/18/2017

10/17/2019

5/17/2018

1/13/2020

7/26/2018

9/13/2019

7 6/1/2020

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

New intake at RCC 10/18/2017 10/18/2017

Progress note 10/20/2019 10/20/2019

HOH Eval 5/17/2018

Patient reported hearing difficulties during a an annual physical and chronic care visit Intake H&P

1/16/2020

7/26/2018

1/16/2020

7/26/2018

Intake 10/3/2019 6/28/2020

Provider Sick Call 6/5/2020 6/5/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Bilateral SNHL

Other specified hearing loss, unspecified ear - H91.8X9 (Primary), hearing aid, left ear, ordered

Sensorineural hearing loss, bilateral

Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

(A)

a

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
Binaural Rexton Digital Full Shell ?
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

9/28/2017 Provider visit new intake, failed whisper test

10/17/2019 Progress note

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Refer to Audiologist

Audiogram ordered

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description

10/18/2017 Hears to You appointment

10/20/2020 Audiogram

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Hearing aids ordered
11/9/2017 Hears to you appointment

Performed
10/29/2017 Audiogram review

a

c

a

a

d

Pt. does not meet criteria for a prescription hearing aid per DOC hearing impairment policy dated 11/5/2020

audicus clara left ear

Audicus Clara for L ear

Audicus Dia II, right ear

Audicus Clara, left ear

5/17/2018

1/13/2020

7/26/2018

9/13/2019

HOH Eval Audiogram ordered/Audiology consult entered

Chronic care and Annual H&P Intake H&P

Hearing test performed,

Audicus ordered

Hearing aid ordered

Audiogram Ordered

6/27/2018 Audiology appointment

1/16/2020 Audicus Testing

Audiogram with borderline

results. Repeat in one year. No

action at this time.

Test performed

? Hearing Aid
Issued (No Prosthesis form signed or note regarding when patient was issued hearing aid.

10/3/2019 Audiogram
complete

6/19/2019 Audicus testing

1/22/2020 Review of Audicus Results

11/19/2019 Provider CC & H&P

10/11/2019 Provider F/U

6/1/2020 Provider Sick Call Audicus ordered 6/5/2020 Audicus testing
completed 6/9/2020 Provider F/U

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Binaural hearing aids issued

Hearing aid ordered

complete

Hearing aid ordered

Patient states he has a hearing aid that works. He states he does not use it because "hearing is fine".

Hearing test revealed hearing loss but patient had impacted crumen. Provider Patient did not meet criteria ordered Debrox and re-test for a hearing aid.
Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 28

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-0000112-/G4/2F01V9 T-EBA D7/2o3/c202#0: 99-2 Filed2/1:9/120220/16/20 Page: 95 of 985 -10P/26a/2g01e9

Hearing Aid Issued

ID#: 3683 Audicus results reviewed

Hearing aid

Audiogram

Issued

hearing aid ordered

Issued

Complete

8/14/2020 Hearing Aid
issued

3/12/2020 Hearing Aid Eval
complete

10/29/2019 Provider F/U Patient did not meet criteria for hearing aid.

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

9/18/2017 11/9/2017 52

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) complete

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

10/17/2019 12/4/2019 48
complete

8/14/2020 Hearing Aid Eval Complete

5/17/2018 8/14/2020 820

1/13/2020 3/12/2020 59

complete

complete

long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue
HOH scheduling process updated

6/22/2019 H&P, repeart Audicus ordered. 6/28/2020 Audicus performed. 7/1/2020 Provider F/U Audicus Reviewed. Hearing aid ordered. 7/29/2020 Hearing Aid Issued. 8/27/2020 Hearing Aid Eval Completed. Hearing Aid Eval Completed

7/26/2018 11/19/2019 481

9/13/2019 8/27/2020 349

6/1/2020 6/9/2020 8

complete

complete

complete

long periods of time between long periods of time between

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

HOH scheduling process HOH scheduling process

updated

updated

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 29

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Cas1 e: 3:14-cv-000012-GFVT-EBA D3 oc #: 99-2 Filed4 : 12/16/20 Pa5 ge: 96 of 985 -6 Page

7

ID#: 3684

12/6/2017 Intake 12/11/2017 8/12/2019
Sensorineural hearing loss, bilateral

4/30/2019 CC & H&P 5/3/2019 5/3/2019
Unspecified hearing loss, unspecified ear

11/30/2018
Provider visit, failed hearing screening

7/24/2017
Patient reported hearing difficulties during a provider sick call exam

5/10/2017

11/15/2017

Patient reported hearing

New intake to GRCC followup difficulties during and intake

on hearing assessment

exam

8/9/2018 H&P

12/21/2018

8/9/2017

6/29/2017

11/20/2017

10/3/2018

1/9/2019

8/9/2017

6/29/2017

Extremely mild loss on high

frequencies. Per Audiologist -

"Not enough hearing loss to

be fit with hearing aids-Just

Unspecified hearing loss in right an extemely mild loss on high

ear and severe left ear

frequencies"

Hearing WNL's

7/30/2019

10/3/2018

Please re-evaluate the

affected ear in clinic. If no

cause for the asymmetric

hearing loss can be

determined by PCP, refer for

outside audiogram and ENT

consultation. Pt. does not

meet the criteria for a

prescription hearing aid

specified in the DOC hearing

loss policy dated 5/31/2018.

PCP may order a pocket

Sensorineural hearing loss,

talker at his/her discretion.   bilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

d

a

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision against

providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC

policy.

Patient did not meet criteria for a

hearing aid.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

12/6/2017 Intake Patient referred for hearing screening

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description

12/11/2017 Hearing test

Audicus clara, right ear
4/30/2019 CC & H&P Audicus ordered 5/3/2019 Hearing test

(A)

d

Audicus Clara Left ear issued 3/7/2019

11/30/2018 Provider vist Failed hearing screening , refer for Audiometry test

7/24/2017 Provider Sick Call
Referred to audiology

12/21/2018 Failed audiometry test

8/9/2017 Audiology Consult

(D) 6/29/2017 Hearing WNL's

per audiogram

d

Complies

a Audicus Oro, right eart

5/10/2017 New intake provider visit Refer to audiology, pocket talker issued

11/15/2017 Intake
referred for audiogram

6/29/2017 OSMT Review

11/20/2017 Audiogram testing

8/9/2018 H&P
Audiogram Ordered
10/3/2018 Audicus testing

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Completed

completed

Refer for audiogram

Audiologist found that patient did not have enough hearing loss to be fit with hearing aids. Retreat in 2 years or if patient notices a change in his hearing

Followup in three months, audiogram WNL's, may need tube placement

Test completEe xhibit 2, EKCcoCm,plpet.e3d0

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

12/12/2017

5/8/2019

P CC/H&P

Audiogram Reviewed

Referred to Hears to you

Hearing aid ordered

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 1/9/201I9D#: 3685
Hearing evaluation Audicus completed, recommend left hearing aid

Page: 97 of 985 - Page

9/29/2017 Re-evaluation of need for audiology
Followup prn

11/24/2017

10/23/2018

Chronic Care and Annual

Physical

Audicus Results Reviewed

Audiogram reviewed. Pocket

talker issued.

Hearing aid ordered

4/22/2019
P CC/H&P Audicus ordered

?
Hearing Aid Issued

2/14/2019
Provider evaluation Approved for left hearing aid

2/20/2020 OSMT Review

6/14/2019 Chronic Care and Annual Physical Audicus ordered

11/15/2018
Hearing Aid Issued

5/10/2020
Audicust Test Patient refused

6/20/2019
Hearing Aid Eval Complete

3/7/2019 Left ear hearing aid issued follow up PRN

7/30/2019
Audicus testing Test performed

12/3/2018
Hearing aid Eval Complete

8/9/2019 H&P
Audicus ordered.

8/6/2019 Consult
Patient did not meet criteria for hearing aid. Referred to provider for further treatment of affected ear

8/12/2020 Audicus testing completed. 8/23/2019 Audicus results reviewed. Patient did not meet criteria for a hearing aid. Patient declined a pocket talker. 7/27/2020 HOH diagnosis review. HOH removed from problem list

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

12/6/2017 7/27/2020 964

4/30/2019 6/20/2019 51

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) complete

complete

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

HOH scheduling process updated

11/30/2018 3/7/2019 97

7/24/2017 8/9/2017 16

complete

complete

long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue
HOH scheduling process updated

5/10/2017 6/29/2017 50
complete

9/30/2019 Review of Audicus, patient not a candidate for hearing aids

11/15/2017 9/30/2019 684

8/9/2018 12/3/2018 116

complete

complete

long periods of time

long periods of time between between referrals, testing,

referrals, testing, issue

issue

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process

updated

updated

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 31

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Cas1 e: 3:14-cv-000012-GFVT-EBA D3 oc #: 99-2 Filed4 : 12/16/20 Pa5 ge: 98 of 985 -6 Page ID#: 3686

6/16/2020
CC 6/21/2020 6/21/2020

4/22/2019
hearing screening 5/1/2019 5/1/2019

1/9/2020
Patient Reported hearing difficulties during a nursing sick call exam

2/6/2020 Annual Physical

1/20/2020

2/10/2020

1/20/2020

2/10/2020

8/26/2016
Patient reported hearing difficulties during a nursing intake

2/5/2020 H&P

9/15/2016

2/14/2020

9/15/2016

2/14/2020

7
1/16/2017 Patient reported hearing difficulties during a provider consult 2/7/2017 10/24/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Unspecified hearing loss, unspecified ear

Patient does not qualify for a hearing aid at this time. Will reassess at next H&P and/or through sick call as needed.  

Sensorineural hearing loss, bilateral

Returned from outside

audiology appointment in

stable condition; no hearing

aids required at this time; IM

may have F/U audiology

Unspecified hearing loss,

testing in 1 year if warranted. bilateral

Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral - H91.93 (Primary), Hearing aids, bilateral, requested

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
a
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

a

d

a

d

d

a

Complies

Complies

Patient declined audicus clara for left ear

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
audicus clara, Left ear
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

6/16/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

CC Audicus ordered

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

6/21/2020 Audicus testing Completed

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

6/25/2020 Audicus Review

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Hearing aid ordered
8/6/2020 Hearing Aid

audicus clara, right ear

audicus hearing aid, left ear

Audicus Clara for L & R ear

4/22/2019
hearing screening audicus ordered
5/1/2019 Audicus testing completed
5/7/2019 Audicus results review

1/9/2020
Nursing sick call Referred to provider
1/10/2020 Provider Sick Call Audicus ordered
1/20/2020 Audicus Testing

Hearing aid ordered
5/22/2019 Hearing aid

Test performed
1/23/2020 Audicus Results Review

2/6/2020 Annual Physical Audicus ordered 2/10/2020 Audicus testing complete 2/14/2020 Audicus results reviewed
Hearing aid ordered 3/3/2020 Hearing aid

8/12/2016 Hearing Screening Questionaire Referred to provider

2/5/2020
H&P Audicus ordered

1/16/2017
Progress Note Audiology testing ordered.

8/18/2016 Provider Progress Note Referred to audiology

2/14/2020 Audicus testing completed

2/7/2017 Progress Note Referred to ENT

9/15/2016 Audiology Consult
Per Audiologist- "He is not yet a candidate for hearing aids. I recommended a follow up audiogram in one year."

3/4/2020 Review of Audicus
Patient declined hearing aid at this time

2/28/2017 Progress Note
ENT ordered CT of temporal bones

9/15/2016 Provider F/U

3/27/2017 Progress Note
Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 32

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Issued

issued

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 3687

Patient does not qualify for a hearing aid at this time. Will reassess at next H&P and/or through sick call as needed.

Issued

Page: 99 of 985 - Page
Returned from outside audiology appointment in stable condition; no hearing aids required at this time; IM may have F/U audiology testing in 1 year if warranted

8/26/2020 Hearing aid Eval

4/2/2020 Hearing aid eval

5/24/2017 Provier F/U

Completed

Complete

Pocket talker issued

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

6/16/2020 8/6/2020 51

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) complete

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

4/22/2019 5/22/2019 30
complete

1/9/2020 1/23/2020 14
complete

2/6/2020 4/2/2020 56
complete

8/12/2016 5/24/2017 285

2/5/2020 3/4/2020 28

complete

complete

long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue
HOH scheduling process updated

ENT approved hearing aids
4/26/2017 Hears to You consult Bilateral hearing aids issued and fitted.
10/7/2019 Provider Sick Call
Patient reports that left hearing aid is cracked. Provider requested that the hearing aids be sent to manufacturer for repair if they are still under warranty. If they are not under warranty the provider wants the patient to have an audicus test.
10/17/2019 - patient was informed that his hearing aids were not covered under warranty. Audicus testing was ordered. 10/24/2019 Audicus performed. 11/8/2019 Audicus results reviewed. Bilateral hearing aids requested. 11/19/2019 Bilateral hearing aids approved by TLOC. Hearing aids ordered. 12/17/2019 Hearing aids issued. 1/17/2020 Hearing Aid Eval
1/16/2017 1/17/2020 1096
complete long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue HOH scheduling process updated

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 33

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

Cas1e: 3:14-cv-00001-2GFVT-EBA D3oc #: 99-2 Filed4: 12/16/20 Pa5ge: 100 of 985 6- Page ID#: 3688

1/26/2017

2/12/2020

4/25/2017

3/15/2019

10/23/2019

8/22/2018

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Nurse visit hearing screening CC & H&P

3/20/2017

2/26/2020

3/20/2017 Moderate SNHL left ear and no hearing in right ear

2/26/2020 Unspecified hearing loss

Patient reported hearing difficulties during a provider visit CC

12/11/2017

3/15/2019

12/11/2017

3/22/2019

Bilateral SNHL, bilateral hearing Unspecified hearing loss,

aids ordered

bilateral

CC & H&P

Hearing screening assessment

11/18/2018

8/28/2018

11/18/2018 Sensorineural hearing loss, bilateral

10/16/2018 Bilateral SNHL

7
1/22/2020 Patient reported hearing difficulties during a nursing sick call 1/31/2020 1/31/2020 Sensorineural hearing loss, bilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

(A)

a

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-

coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing

aid compatible with an induction loop system.

Left ear monaural digital full shell

hearing aid

audicus clara, right ear

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

1/26/2017 Nurse visit, hearing screening

2/12/2020 CC & H&P

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Refer to Provider

Audicus ordered

Medical Visit 2 - Date

2/21/2017

2/26/2020

Medical Visit 2 - Description

Provider visit, HOH

Audicus testing

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Refer to Audiology

completed

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

3/20/2017 Audiology appointment

3/4/2020 Audicus results review

a
Starkey AGX SM i1000
4/25/2017 Provider Visit Audiogram ordered 9/5/2017 Annual Physical issued pocket talker 12/11/2017 Audiology Consult

a

d

Audicus Clara, left ear

3/15/2019 CC Audiogram performed, Audicus ordered

10/23/2018 CC & H&P
Audicus ordered

3/22/2020

11/8/2018

Audicus Testing

Audicus testing

Completed

completed

6/10/2019 Audicus Results reviewed

11/14/2018 Hearing aid eval

(A)
Audicus Clara left ear issued 3/7/19

8/22/2018 Hearing Screening

1/22/2020 Nursing sick call

Refer to Provider

referred to provider

8/28/2018

1/28/2020

Hearing Provider Assessment Provider sick call

Refer for Quantitive hearing

test

Audicus ordered

10/16/2018 ENT OSMT

1/31/2020 Audicus testing

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date
Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date

Left ear hearing aid ordered

hearing aid ordered

4/19/2017

4/3/2020

Audiology appointment

Hearing aid

Patient received hearing aid and

fitted, follow up PRN

issued

5/14/2020 Hearing aid eval complete

Recommended hearing aids Hearing aid ordered

1/11/2018

7/2/2019

Hearing aids Fitted and picked up at outside facility

Hearing Aid Issued

7/31/2019 Hearing aid eval Refused

Pt. does not meet the criteria for a prescription hearing aid specified in the DOC hearing loss policy dated 5/31/2018 Audicus performed

Test performed

11/21/2018 Pocket Talker

10/23/2019 Provider visit for review of OSMT

2/19/2020 Hearing aid

Issued

Refer hearing aid evaluation Issued

2/21/2019

9/2/2020

Hearing aid evaluation

Hearing aid eval

Recommend left hearing aid completed

3/7/2019 Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 34

Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 101 of 985 N-urPseavisgit e

ID#: 3689

Received hearing aid

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

1/26/2017 4/19/2017 83

2/12/2020 4/3/2020 51

4/25/2017 1/11/2018 261

3/15/2019 7/31/2019 138

10/23/2018 11/21/2018 29

8/22/2018 3/7/2019 197

1/22/2020 2/19/2020 28

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue
HOH scheduling process updated

long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue
HOH scheduling process updated

long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue
HOH scheduling process updated

long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue
HOH scheduling process updated

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 35

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Cas1e: 3:14-cv-00001-2GFVT-EBA D3oc #: 99-2 Filed4: 12/16/20 Pa5ge: 102 of 985 6- Page

7

ID#: 3690

12/10/2019
Patient reported hearing difficulties during his annual physical.

10/3/2019
Patient reported hearing difficulties during a chronic care exam

11/8/2017

9/10/2018

Patient reported hearing

difficulties during a provider f/u

exam

CC/H&P

12/18/2019

10/21/2019

3/3/2018

9/28/2018

12/18/2019

10/21/2019

3/3/2018

Other specified hearing loss,

bilateral - H91.8X3 (Primary),

New diagnosis- Mild severe

hearing loss in both ears. Will Unspecified hearing loss,

treat left ear with audicus hearing bilateral - H91.93 (Primary),

aid.

bilateral moderate

Sensorineural hearing loss, bilateral

9/28/2018 Unspecified hearing loss

12/4/2016
Sick Call c/o HOH 3/7/2017 3/7/2017

No mention of hearing difficulties noted in chart

10/17/2019

Patient reported hearing difficulties during an nursing No audiology testing in chart intake exam

No HOH diagnosis on problem list

10/28/2019

10/28/2019

Bilateral mild high frequency hearing loss

Unspecified hearing loss, unspecified ear - H91.90 (Primary), Hearing aid, right ear, ordered.

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

(B) Needs repeat audiology

a

a

d

d

exam

c

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Patient wanted time to think Results of hearing test were about being issued hearing aids normal.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
Audicus Clara for L ear
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date
Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

12/10/2019 Chronic Care and History & Physcial Audiogram ordered

Medical Visit 2 - Date

12/18/2019

Medical Visit 2 - Description

Hearing Test

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Audicus performed
12/26/2019 Review of Audicus Results Hearing aid approved and ordered.
1/23/2020
Hearing Aid Issued

Audicus Clara for L ear

10/3/2019 Chronic Care & Annual Physical Audicus Ordered

11/8/2017

9/10/2018

Provider F/U

CC/H&P

Hearing Booth at RCC ordered Hearing test ordered

12/4/2016 Sick Call Hearing Loss, cerumen build up noted debrox/ ear flush

10/21/2019

12/13/2017

9/19/2018

1/16/2017

Audicus Testing Test performed

Provider F/U
Attempt to send patient to RCC failed. Referral to Hears to You audiology placed

Hearing test Completed, audicus ordered

Provider visit for hearing loss
debrox/ flush return in one week

12/2/2019 Audicus Results Reviewed

3/3/2018 Audiology Consult

9/28/2018 Audicus testing

1/13/2017 Provider Visit

Hearing aid ordered

Recommended Hearing aids completed

Referred to Audiology

12/18/2019 Hearing aid

5/11/2018 Patient transferred to EKCC

7/27/2020 Audicus Results

4/10/2017 Provider visit review of Audiology results

Audicus Clara for R ear
10/17/2019 Nursing Intake Referred to provider 10/28/2019 Annual Physical
Audiogram performed 10/19/2019 Provider F/U Hearing aid ordered 12/12/2019 Provider F/U
Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 36

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Patient issued hearing aid and scheduled for a 1 month f/u

Issued

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 103 of 985 - Page ID#: 3691 Patient did not report any
hearing difficulties during intake

and answered no to all hearing Reviewed, patient notified of Followup in one year to

screening questions

a normal hearing test results. repeat audiometry

2/24/2020 Hearing aid eval

1/20/2020 Hearing aid eval

2/21/2020 Audiology chart review

7/5/2017 Refusal

Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

complete

Patient to medical for f/u on hearing aid efficacy. He states that he wears it sometimes and sometimes not as he is still getting used to the feeling of something on the back of his ear

Provider recommended hearing aid. Patient wanted time to think about it.

Refusal signed to be on HOH walk

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

12/10/2019 2/24/2020 76

10/3/2019 1/20/2020 109

11/8/2017 2/21/2020 835

9/10/2018

12/4/2016

n/a

7/27/2020

7/5/2017

n/a

686

213

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)
(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

3/2018 ENT recommended

hearing aids while at KSR.

Transferred to EKCC 5/2018.

Patient did not report any

hearing difficulties during

nursing intake. 2/2020 ENT

notes from 2018 reviewed with

patient. EKCC provider

recommended hearing aids and

long periods of time between long periods of time between patient stated he wanted time long periods of time between long periods of time between

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

to think about it.

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process updated updated

updated

updated

updated

Patient still had not received hearing aid 2/5/2020 Provider Consult
Hearing aid re-ordered 4/2/2020 Hearing Aid Eval Received hearing aid on 3/11/2020, eval complete
10/17/2019 3/11/2020 146 complete
Hearing aid ordered in 10/2019, had to be reordered due to it never being received (2/2020). Patient revecieved hearing aid in 3/2020. HOH scheduling process updated

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 37

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

Cas1e: 3:14-cv-00001-2GFVT-EBA D3oc #: 99-2 Filed4: 12/16/20 Pa5ge: 104 of 985 6- Page ID#: 3692

6/5/2019

1/4/2017

7/15/2020

9/29/2019

5/23/2019

12/2/2016

7 5/15/2018

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Patient failed a whisper test and Referred to Provider for c/o

was referred for an audicus test decreased hearing

Sick Call

6/13/2019

1/19/2017

7/26/2020

9/24/2019

1/19/2017

Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

- H91.93 (Primary), Hearing aid,

left ear, ordered

Severe to Profound SNHL

8/2/2020 bilateral hearing loss

Patient reported difficulties

during an intake history and

physical

Audicus testing

10/3/2019

5/23/2019

10/3/2019

10/24/2019

Unspecified hearing loss, Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral - H91.93 (Primary) bilateral

Provider Sick Call

Patient reported hearing difficulties on a hearing questionaire

2/16/2017

9/27/2018

Recommend another

Never addressed. Patient

audiogram be completed for scheduled with provider for

more consistent results

further evaluation

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
a
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

(A)

a

( C) Patient refused last

Provider appointment, to

a

d

discuss OSMT ENT results

Patient did not meet criteria for hearing aid

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
Audicus Clara for L ear
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

6/5/2019

Phonak Naida B50-SP BTE Audicus hearing aid, left ear Audicus Clara for R ear

1/4/2017

7/15/2020

9/29/2019

5/23/2019

12/2/2016

5/15/2018

Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Provider F/U Audicus Ordered

Provider visit c/o hearing loss Sick call

Refer to Audiology

Patient reporting HOH

Intake History and Physical Audicus testing Hearing difficulties reported completed

Provider Sick Call Refer to Audiology

Nursing Intake
Patient reported hearing difficulties on a hearing questionaire

6/13/2019 Audicus Testing Test complete, retest to confirm hearing deficit

3/31/2017 Provider visit f/u ENT Refer to Audiology for right ear hearing aid

7/20/2020 Provider sick call
Audicus ordered

9/30/2019 Provider F/U
Audiogram ordered

5/30/2019 Audicus Results Review

2/6/2017 Audiology appointment

patient did not meet criteria Follow up with ENT

2/26/2020 Provider F/U
Re-eval at upcoming H&P

9/24/2019 Audicus Testing
Test Complete

2/16/2018 Provider visit for review of OSMT
Fitted for right hearing aid, refer to UK ENT

7/26/2020

10/3/2019

Audicus testing

Audiogram Testing

completed, report came back as

inconclusive with the suggestion

to retest

Test performed

9/7/2019 Sick Call
Audicus ordered

3/22/2017

3/25/2020

ENT Appointment

H&P

Followup with PCP annually,

borderline candidate for Patient answered no to all

hearing aids

hearing screening questions.

Medical Visit 4 - Date

10/4/2019

3/22/2018

8/2/2020

10/11/2019

10/24/2019

6/13/2018

Medical Visit 4 - Description

Provider F/U

Provider visit review of OSMT Audicus testing

Audiogram Results Review Audicus testing

UK ENT
Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 38

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 105 of 985 - Page

Fitted with hearing aid and

ID#: 3693

Repeat hearing test due to

Hearing aid ordered

ear mold, followup PRN

completed

Hearin aid ordered

completed

poor reliability

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

11/18/2019 Hearing Aid
Issued

8/26/2020 Hearing aid
issued

11/1/2019 Hearing Aid
Issued

11/18/2019

9/28/2018

Audicus review

ENT Appointment

Recommend repeat

Patient did not meet criteria audiogram due to

for hearing aid. Pocket talker inconsistent results to

issued.

determine true hearing loss

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

2/21/2020
Hearing Aid Eval
pt presenting to medical for follow up on his hearing aid,. Pt states that it works well but he takes it out when he doesn't want to hear whats going on around him

9/21/2020 Hearing aid eval
complete

12/2/2019
Hearing Aid Eval
Pt states he uses H/A intermittently but not in dorm due to noise in dorm. Pt reports H/A has been helpful with his hearing improvement

9/26/2018 Provider Appointment to review ENT OSMT
Patient refused appointment, followup PRN with Medical

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

6/5/2019 2/21/2020 261

1/4/2017 3/22/2018 442

7/15/2020 8/21/2020 37

9/29/2019 12/2/2019 64

5/23/2019 11/18/2019 179

12/2/2016 9/28/2018 665

5/15/2018 3/25/2020 680

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) complete

complete

complete

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

long periods of time between long periods of time between

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process updated updated

complete

complete

complete

complete

long periods of time

long periods of time between long periods of time between long periods of time between between referrals, testing,

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

issue

HOH scheduling process updated

HOH scheduling process updated

HOH scheduling process updated

HOH scheduling process updated

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 39

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Cas1e: 3:14-cv-00001-2GFVT-EBA D3oc #: 99-2 Filed4: 12/16/20 Pa5ge: 106 of 985 6- Page

7

ID#: 3694

4/25/2018

4/4/2018

11/19/2019

Transfer HOH Screening 6/13/2018 6/13/2018

Intake 4/30/2018 7/27/2018

CC/H&P 11/22/2019 11/22/2019

Bilateral SNHL, left ear- mild, right ear- mild-moderate

Sensorineural hearing loss,

bilateral

Unspecified hearing loss

7/13/2018
Patient reported hearing difficulties during a hearing assessment

9/4/2018
Patient reported hearing difficulties during an intake physical

10/1/2019

9/26/2019

Patient reported that he has his own set of hearing aids that he brought with him upon entering the DOC

Patient reported hearing difficulties during a nursing intake

8/8/2018

11/20/2018

10/11/2019

10/19/2018
Sensorineural hearing loss, bilateral - H90.3 (Primary), Right Ear mild; Left Ear mild

11/20/2018
Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral - H91.93 (Primary), Right Ear profound; Left Ear mild

Unspecified hearing loss, unspecified ear - H91.90

10/11/2019
moderate-severe hearing loss in both ears, Hearing aid, left ear, ordered

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
(A)
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

d

d

a

a

a

a

complies

complies

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
Audicus Dia II
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

4/25/2018

Medical Visit 1 - Description

New transfer HOH

4/4/2018 Intake

11/19/2019 CC/H&P

Audicus Dia II for R ear
7/13/2018 Nursing Assessment

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date
Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Refer to Audiologist

referred to provider

6/13/2018

4/30/2018

Audiology appointment Recommend left hearing aid

Hearing screening completed, pocket talker issued.

6/29/2018 Review OSMT

7/10/2018 Pocket talker eval

Approved for left ear hearing aid Audiogram ordered

7/19/2018 Issue of left ear hearing aid

7/27/2018 Audicus testing completed

Audicus testing ordered 11/22/2019 Audicus testing complete 12/3/2019 audicus review Patient did not meet criteria

referred to provider
7/24/2018
Provider Sick Call
audicus ordered
8/8/2018 Audicus Testing
Test performed
10/9/2018 Audicus Testing Test Performed

Audicus Clara for L ear

Audicus Clara for R ear

9/4/2018

10/1/2019

9/26/2019

Intake Physical

Chronic Care and Annual Physical

Nursing Intake

Referred for Audicus testing

Patient reported that he has his own set of hearing aids that he brought with him upon entering the DOC

Referred to provider

11/20/2018 Audicus testing

10/8/2019 Chronic Care and Annual Physical

test performed

Audiogram ordrered

11/29/2018 Audicus Results Review Hearing aid ordered, referred to ENT

10/11/2019 Audiogram Testing
Test complete

12/26/2018 Hearing Aid Issued

11/7/2019 Hearing aid
Exhibit 2, EKCIssCue,dp. 40

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 107 of 985 - Page

7/30/2018

ID#: 3695 10/19/2018

1/9/2019

Audicus review

Provider Consult

ENT consult

Medical Visit 5 - Outcome Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Patient did not meet criteria for hearing aid

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

4/25/2018 7/19/2018 85

4/4/2018 7/30/2018 117

11/19/2019 12/3/2019 14

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) complete

complete

complete

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

long periods of time between long periods of time between

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process updated updated

Hearing aid ordered

ABR ordered

11/9/2018 Hearing aid
Issued

3/5/2019 ENT F/U
ABR essentially normal, with one abnormality. F/u in 6 month

2/26/2020 Provider f/u,

2/26/2020 Hearing aid eval, complete. No further testing

complete

ordered

7/13/2018 2/26/2020 593

9/4/2018 2/26/2020 540

10/1/2019 10/1/2019 0

complete

complete

complete

long periods of time between long periods of time between

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process

updated

updated

12/11/2019 Hearing aid eval pt states he hears well with his aid, goal is for pt to be able to hear well enough to communicate
9/26/2019 12/11/2019 76 complete long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue HOH scheduling process updated

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 41

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Cas1e: 3:14-cv-00001-2GFVT-EBA D3oc #: 99-2 Filed4: 12/16/20 Pa5ge: 108 of 985 6- Page

7

ID#: 3696

11/14/2016
Nursing sick call 1/16/2019 1/16/2019

1/7/2020

10/9/2018

Patient reported hearing difficulties during an annual physical and chronic care visit sick call

1/17/2020

10/18/2018

1/17/2020

10/30/2018

4/16/2018
Intake with hearing loss 4/10/2018 4/30/2019

12/13/2016

12/3/2019

12/2/2019

Referred to Provider d/t

acoustic neuroma removal in Patient reported hearing

1994 and loss of his hearing difficulties during a provider

aid.

f/u exam

Provider F/U

3/23/2017- UK ENT

12/6/2019

12/2/2019

8/8/2019

12/6/2019

12/5/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Unspecified hearing loss, left

ear - H91.92 (Primary),

Unspecified hearing loss,

Bilateral unspecified hearing loss Hearing aid, left ear, ordered bilateral

Bilateral SNHL

SNHL

Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral, hearing aid, right ear, ordered

Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
(A)
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

a

d

(A) Patient received hearing

(A)

aids 10/03/2019

a

d

complies

complies

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
Audicus
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Audicus clara for L ear

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

4/3/2017 Provider follow up appointment for ENT OSMT Recommendation for bilateral hearing aids

1/7/2020

10/9/2018

Chronic care and Annual H&P Sick Call

Audicus ordered

referred to provider

Right Ear digital BTE hearing

aid

Bicros

Audicus Clara for R ear

4/16/2018 Intake H and P, HOH Refer to Audiologist

12/13/2016 New intake referral for hearing loss
Referred to ENT

12/3/2019 Provider f/u Audicus ordered

12/2/2019 Provider F/U Audicus ordered

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description

10/2/2018 Nurse visit

1/17/2020 Audicus Testing

10/18/2018 Hearing test

4/30/2018 OSMT return

3/23/2017 Referral for OSMT ENT

12/6/2019 Audicus Testing

12/5/2019 Audicus testing

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Refer to Provider for follow up on

hearing

Test performed

completed

Received invoice for hearing ENT recommend MRI of brain

aids

with and without contrast Test complete

complete

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

10/5/2018 Provider follow up Re- issue pocket talker, review audicus

2/11/2020 Hearing aid issued
Hearing aid issued

10/30/2018 Provider f/u Patient transferred to EKCC, provider performed audiogram

5/16/2018

8/17/2017

OSMT return

Return from OSMT

Return with right ear hearing Returned with hearing aid

aid

supplies

12/20/2019 Audicus Results Review
Hearing aid ordered

12/11/2019 Review Audicus Pt. did not qualify for hearing aid

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

2/28/2019 Hearing aid evaluation

3/11/2020 Hearing Aid Eval

11/28/2018 Audiogram review

9/1/2017 Review of ENT OSMT

1/20/2020 Hearing Aid

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Audicus clara for right ear ordered

complete

Patient did not meet criteria

Referred to Audiologist for

hearing aid adjustment

Issued

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 42

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 3697

Page: 109 of 985 - Page

11/22/2017 Chronic Care Provider Appointment

2/11/2020 Hearing aid eval

Referral to Audiologist for another hearing aid adjustment

Patient tolerating HOH well. States able to complete all ADL's. Ears WNL. No difficulties in hearing during assessment and exam.  

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

12/20/2017 OSMT Audiologist Hearing Aid Adjustment

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

1/16/2019 2/28/2019 43

1/7/2020 3/11/2020 64

10/9/2018 11/28/2018 50

4/16/2018 5/16/2018 30

12/13/2016 12/20/2017 372

12/3/2019 2/11/2020 70

12/2/2019 12/11/2019 9

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

completd

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue
HOH scheduling process updated

long periods of time between long periods of time between

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

HOH scheduling process HOH scheduling process

updated

updated

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 43

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Cas1e: 3:14-cv-00001-2GFVT-EBA D3oc #: 99-2 Filed4: 12/16/20 ID#: 3698

4/12/2018

12/6/2017

Patient reported hearing

Patient reported hearing

difficulties during a chronic

difficulties during a nursing intake care visit

7/10/2019 CC/H&P

5/21/2018

3/24/2018

7/19/2019

12/21/2018
Sensorineural hearing loss, bilateral-low frequency, Allergic Rhinitis

3/24/2018 Bilateral SNHL

7/19/2019
Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

3/18/2019
CC 3/20/2019 3/20/2019

Pa5ge: 110 of 985 6- Page

3/19/2018

6/10/2020

Hearing screening 5/9/2018 2/27/2019
Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

CC/H&P 6/14/2020 6/14/2020
Unspecified hearing loss

7
1/31/2017 Sick Call

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
a
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

a

a

a

a

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
Audicus Clara for L ear
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Right hearing aid

Audicus Clara, left

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

4/12/2018 Nursing Intake

12/6/2017 Chronic care exam

7/10/2019 CC/H&P

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Referred to provider

Audiology referral

Audicus ordered

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

4/19/2018 Provider Consult
Referred to audiologist

3/24/2018 Audiology Consult Referred to provider for review

7/19/2019 Audicus testing
complete

Medical Visit 3 - Date

5/21/2018

6/4/2018

8/1/2019

Medical Visit 3 - Description

ENT Consult

Review of Audiology consult Audicus review

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Allergy medication prescribed Hearing aid ordered

Hearing aid ordered

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

6/1/2018 ENT Consult F/U Medication ordered, awaiting approval

6/12/2018 Hearing aid
issued

8/22/2019 Hearing aid
issued

Medical Visit 5 - Date

11/28/2018

9/20/2019

Medical Visit 5 - Description

Chronic Care and Annual Physical

Hearing aid eval

audicus clara, left ear

Audicus Clara, left ear

3/18/2019 CC
Audicus ordered

3/19/2018

6/10/2020

Hearing screening

CC/H&P

failed whisper test, referr for

audiology exam

Audicus ordered

1/17/2017 Sick Call
referred to provider

3/20/2019 Audicus testing

5/9/2018 Audiology testing

6/14/2020 Audicus testing

2/8/2017 Provider sick call

complete

complete

complete

Referred to audiology

3/29/2019

2/27/2019

6/24/2020

5/18/2017

Audicus review Patient did not mee criteria for hearing aid

CC/H&P Audiogram performed

Audicus review Hearing aid ordered

Audiology appointment Patient refused

3/6/2019 Audiology review

7/29/2020 Hearing Aid

Hearing aid ordered 2/12/2020 CC/H&P

Issued 7/29/2020 Hearing Aid
Issued Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 44

Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Audicus ordered

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 3699
complete

Page: 111 of 985 - Page Patient reports having a hearing aid. No documentation of when it was issued in his chart.

12/21/2018 Audicus testing Test complete

8/30/2020 Hearing Aid Eval completed

1/23/2019, Audicus Results

Review, Hearing aid ordered.

11/11/2019 Chronic care and

Physical- patient reported that he

had a hearing aid. When It was

issued is not documented in his

chart. 2/21/2020 A. Carter spoke

to Mr.

to confirm when

he received his hearing aid. He

reported that he received it while

at LSCC and it was around mid

summer. He stated he had a Left

...

hearing aid

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

4/12/2018 2/21/2020 680

12/6/2017 6/21/2018 197

7/10/2019 9/20/2019 72

3/18/2019 3/29/2019 11

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) complete

complete

complete

complete

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

long periods of time between long periods of time between long periods of time between

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process updated updated

updated

3/19/2018 2/12/2020 695

6/10/2020 7/29/2020 49

complete

complete

long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue
HOH scheduling process updated

1/17/2017 5/18/2017 121
complete long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue HOH scheduling process updated

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 45

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Cas1e: 3:14-cv-00001-2GFVT-EBA

5/26/2020
H&P 6/7/2020 6/7/2020

7/21/2019
Nursing sick call 7/29/2019 7/29/2019

Unspecified hearing loss

Bilateral hearing loss

D3oc #: 99-2 Filed4: 12/16/20 ID#: 3700

9/18/2017
patient reported hearing difficulties during a new intake hearing assessment

9/28/2016 Intake

11/2/2017

9/28/2016

11/2/2017

1/7/2019

Bilateral mixed hearing loss

Pa5ge: 112 of 985 6- Page

9/27/2019
Patient reported hearing difficulties during a nursing sick call exam

8/9/2018 New intake

10/23/2019

4/5/2019

11/12/2019

4/5/2019

Encounter for hearing examination following failed hearing screening - Z01.110 (Primary), pt has profound hearling loss in bilateral ears. Hearing aid, right ear, ordered.

7
2/27/2017 Provider visit c/o HOH 3/28/2017 3/28/2017
Mild SNHL bilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
a
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

(A)

d

a

a

(D)

(D)

Patient refused audicus testing and further for hearing difficulties

Per Audicus results on 4/5/2019, does not meet criteria

Per Audiology patient has mild SNHL bilaterally continue to monitor and use hearing protection when needed

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
audicus clara, left ear
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

5/26/2020 H&P

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Audicus ordered 6/7/2020 Audicus testing complete 6/15/2020 Audicus review

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

hearing aid ordered

Audicus hearing aid Clara for left ear

audicus clara, right ear

Audicus Clara for R ear

7/26/2019 Provider sick call for HOH

9/18/2017 Intake exam

9/28/2016 Intake

Audicus testing ordered

Refer to ENT

8/2/2019 Provider appointment for review of Audicus results Hearing aid for left ear ordered

11/2/2017 ENT consult refer to provider for review

9/20/2019 Provider appointment for hearing aid evaluation

12/13/2017 F/u ENT consult

referred to provider 10/18/2016 Provider F/U No hearing loss 10/31/2018 P F/U

No difficulties hearing during assessment, follow up PRN Patient refused appointment

Referred to audiology

9/27/2019 Nursing sick call

8/9/2018 New intake, HOH

2/27/2017 Provider visit c/o HOH

patient referred to provider for possible audicus testing Refer to Provider

Refer to Audiology

10/2/2019 Provider Sick Call Audiometry ordered

4/5/2019 Nursing Audicus performed

4/3/2017 Followup post Audiology OSMT Patient advised followup with medical if needed

10/6/2019

9/6/2019

Audiometry Testing
Test Performed, failed. Audicus ordered.

CC Appointment
Does not meet criteria for hearing aid, continue with amplifier with phone use, follow up PRN
Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 46

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Cas7e/2:3/3202:014-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA D3o/14c/20#18: 99-2 Filed1:/7/120219/16/20 Pa1g0/e23:/2101913 of 985 - Page

Hearing Aid

ID#: 3701 F/U ENTconsult

Audicus testing

Audicus Testing

Issued

Refer to ENT

complete

Test performed

9/1/2020 Hearing aid eval
complete

3/18/2019 Provider f/u

2/22/2019 Audicus review

Audicus testing ordered, patient

refused audicus testing and

further treatment for hearing

difficulties

Hearing aid ordered

11/8/2019 Review Audicus Results
Repeat Audicus ordered

6/3/2020 P CC/H&P

11/12/2019 Audicus Testing

patient stated he has a

hearing aid and it is in good

working order. No record of

when the patient was issued

the hearing in his chart.

Test Performed

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

5/26/2020 7/23/2020 58

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) complete

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

11/20/2019 Review of 2nd Audicus Test. Profound hearing loss bilaterally. Right hearing aid ordered. 12/18/2019 Hearing aid issued. 1/20/2020 Hearing aid eval

7/21/2019 9/20/2019 61

9/18/2017 3/18/2019 546

9/28/2016 6/3/2020

9/27/2019 1/20/2020 115

8/9/2018 4/5/2019 239

2/27/2017 3/28/2017 29

complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

long periods of time between long periods of time between

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process

updated

updated

long periods of time between long periods of time between long periods of time between

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process

updated

updated

updated

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 47

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Cas1e: 3:14-cv-00001-2GFVT-EBA

5/9/2018

5/1/2019

Sick Call 10/16/2018 10/16/2018

CC/H&P 5/1/2019 5/17/2019

Mixed conductive and sensorineural hearing loss

Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

D3oc #: 99-2 Filed4: 12/16/20 Pa5ge: 114 of 985 6- Page ID#: 3702

5/14/2018

8/8/2018

Patient reported hearing

difficulties during a new intake

hearing screening

H&P

2/12/2019

8/30/2018

2/12/2019

10/3/2018

11/22/2019
CC/H&P 11/26/2019 6/7/2020

Unspecified hearing loss

Sensorineural hearing loss, Unspecified hearing loss,

bilateral

bilateral

12/12/2019 Patient reported hearing difficulties during a chronic care and Annual Physical. Audicus test ordrered.
12/19/2019
12/19/2019 Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral - H91.93 (Primary), Will treat right ear with audicus clara

7
5/14/2020 H&P 5/24/2020 Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

a

d

d

a

a

d

Patient refused hearing aids complies

Patient declined hearing aid or amplifier at this time

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

audicus clara, left ear

Medical Visit 1 - Date

5/9/2018

5/1/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

Sick Call

CC/H&P

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

referred to provider

Audiogram ordered

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

6/4/2018 Provider sick call Issued amplifier and ordered f/u in 60 days to re-evaluate

5/10/2019 Audiogram completed
audicus ordered

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

8/3/2018 P F/U Patient did not wish to attend visit. Rescheduled

5/17/2019 Audicus testing
complete

Medical Visit 4 - Date

10/15/2018

5/28/2019

Medical Visit 4 - Description

Hearing screening

Audicus review

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Audicus ordered

Hearing aid ordered

Audicus hearing aid, left

Audicus Clara for R ear

5/14/2018 New Intake

8/8/2018 H&P

11/22/2019 CC/H&P

12/12/2019 Chronic Care and Annual H&P

5/14/2020 H&P

Refer to provider

Referred for audiosope exam Audicus ordered

Audicus ordered

Audicus ordered

5/24/2018 Provider Visit Eval after ear flush and hearing test

8/30/2018 Audioscope exam
referred for audicus testing

11/26/2019 Audicus testing
complete

12/19/2019 Hearing Test
Audicus performed

5/24/2020 Audicus Testing
completed

2/12/2019 Audicus testing
Test complete
2/26/2019
Audicus results review Referred to PCP after an asymmetric hearing test. Recommend HEENT exam.

10/3/2018 Audicus testing complete 10/23/2018 Audicus review

3/5/2020 Hearing Aid
issued 6/15/2020 Audicus review Patient already had hearing aid

12/26/2019 Review of Audicus Results Hearing aid approved and ordered.
1/20/2020
Hearing Aid issued

6/1/2020 Audicus review

patient did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Hearing Aid iEssuxehdibit 2, EKCC, p. 48

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

10/16/2018 Audicus testing

7/2/2020 Hearing aid

complete

issued

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 3/1/201I9D#: 3703
Provider F/U
Flush ordered with hearing test after

Page: 115 of 985 - Page

9/3/2020 Hearing aid eval
complete

2/20/2020 Hearing Aid Eval
pt states that he loves it because he can hear well now

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

1/29/2019 Hearing Aid Eval

7/31/2020 Hearing aid eval

3/20/2019 Provider F/U

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

Hearing aid ordered 2/14/2019 Hearing Aid issued 3/14/2019 Hearing aid eval, completed
5/9/2018 3/14/2019

complete
5/1/2019 7/2/2020

Patient to medical for f/u after ear flush. He does in fact have evidence that right TM has been ruptured previously and has a sclerotic appearance. This would explain his unilateral hearing loss as he reports injury to that ear in the past during military explosion. hearing loss added to diagnosis. Patient wants to have a vibrating watch and is willing to purchase due to not being able to hear his current watch at high frequency. He declines hearing aids at this time.

5/14/2018 3/20/2019 310

8/8/2018 10/23/2018 76

11/22/2019 3/5/2020 104

12/21/2019 2/20/2020 61

5/14/2020 6/1/2020 18

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

complete

Complete

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Hearing aid ordered

long periods of time between 5/28/2020. Received/Issued long periods of time between

referrals, testing, issue

7/2/2020

referrals, testing, issue

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process updated updated

updated

Audicus testing completed

11/26/2019, Hearing aid

received/issued 3/5/2020.

Audicus review not

long periods of time between performed until after

referrals, testing, issue

receiving hearing aid

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process

updated

updated

long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue
HOH scheduling process updated

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 49

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

Cas1e: 3:14-cv-00001-2GFVT-EBA D3oc #: 99-2 Filed4: 12/16/20 Pa5ge: 116 of 985 6- Page ID#: 3704

7/22/2019

2/27/2020

12/16/2019

12/4/2018

11/8/2019

3/19/2020

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Patient reported hearing difficulties during a nursing sick call assessment

CC/H&P

8/16/2019

2/27/2020

8/16/2019

3/9/2020

H&P 12/18/2019 12/19/2018

Patient was unable to hear the audioscope at 2 or more of the benchmark frequencies in at least one ear

Patient reported hearing difficulties during a chronic care visit. Audiometry screening performed and an audicus test was ordered.

Provider sick call

1/9/2019

12/16/2019

3/24/2020

1/9/2019

12/16/2019

3/24/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Unspecified hearing loss,

unspecified ear - H91.90, Hearing

Aid, Right Ear, ordered

Unspecified hearing loss

Unspecified hearing loss,

unspecified ear - H91.90

Audiogram demonstrating no (Primary),Hearing Aid, Right

significant hearing loss

Ear, approved and ordered.

7
7/12/2018
Intake H and P, HOH 7/17/2018 7/17/2018
Right ear mild SNHL, left ear mild SNHL

a, patient had a hearing aid and

reported to the provider upon

the hearind aid eval that it had

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

been stolen. Patient was advised

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

to complete a theft report with

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed security staff and no

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

documentation of a theft report

(d) no hearing aid is needed

has ever been received by

medical

a

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
Audicus Clara for R ear
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Audicus Clara, left ear

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

7/22/2019 Nursing Sick Call Referred to provider

2/27/2020 CC/H&P Audicust testing ordered

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description

7/29/2019 Provider Sick Call

3/9/2020 Audicust testing

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Ear flush and audiogram ordered complete

Medical Visit 3 - Date

8/12/2019

3/24/2020

Medical Visit 3 - Description

Audigram Testing

Review of Audicus

Audicus Clara, Right ear
12/16/2019 H&P Audiogram ordered 12/18/2019 Audiogram completed 12/20/2019 Audiogram review

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Test complete, Audicus ordered Hearing aid ordered

Hearing aid ordered

d complies

a

(A)

Audicus Clara for R ear

Audicus Clara, Left ear

Audicus Dia II Right ear

12/4/2018 Provider Consult Audiogram ordered

11/8/2019 Chronic Care Audicus ordered

3/19/2020 Provider sick call Audicus ordered

7/16/2018 Intake H and P, HOH Refer to Audiology

1/9/2019 Audiogram Testing
Test complete

12/16/2019 Hearing Test
Audicus performed

3/24/2020 audicus testing
completed

7/17/2018 Audiogram SNHL recommend hearing aid right ear follow up PRN

1/23/2019 Chronic Care and Annual Physical

12/18/2019

3/30/2020

Review of Audicus Results Audicus Review

7/31/2018 Hearing aid issued

Audiogram demonstrating no Hearing aid approved and

significant hearing loss

ordered.

Hearing aid ordered
Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 50

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Cas8e/1:6/3201:914-cv-00001-5/G5/2F02V0 T-EBA

Audicus Testing

Hearing Aid

Test Complete

Issued

D1o/27c/20#20: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 HearingIaDid #: 3705
Issued

Pa1g/2e8/:2012017 of 985 5-/5P/20a20ge

Hearing Aid Issued

Hearing aid

Hearing Aid Issued

issued

8/22/2019 Audicus Results Review

6/8/2020 Hearing aid eval

1/31/2020 Hearing aid eval

3/4/2020 Hearing Aid Eval

6/8/2020 Hearing Aid Eval

Unspecified hearing loss,

unspecified ear - H91.90, Hearing

Aid, Right Ear, ordered

complete

completed

complete

Completed

9/24/2019 Hearing Aid Issued

11/22/2019 Hearing aid eval-

Reports he had his hearing aid on

while out in the yard and the

noise was too loud. States he laid

his hearing aid down and it was

stolen. Advised patient to fill out

...

a lost property report

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

7/22/2019 11/22/2019 123

2/27/2020 5/5/2020 68

12/16/2019 1/31/2020 46

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) complete

complete

complete

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

long periods of time between long periods of time between

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process updated updated

12/4/2018 1/23/2019 50
complete

11/8/2019 3/4/2020 117

3/19/2020 5/5/2020 47

complete

complete

long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue
HOH scheduling process updated

7/12/2018 7/31/2018 19
complete

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 51

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Cas1e: 3:14-cv-00001-2GFVT-EBA

5/29/2020

6/17/2019

H&P

CC/H&P

6/7/2020

6/21/2019

6/7/2020

6/21/2019

Unspecified hearing loss, Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral bilateral

D3oc #: 99-2 Filed4: 12/16/20 ID#: 3706

6/28/2018

7/2/2017

New intake hearing assessment Provider followup

7/17/2018

7/24/2017

10/16/2018

7/24/2017

Bilateral SNHL moderate to severe

Mild hearing loss

Pa5ge: 118 of 985 6- Page

10/18/2017 New intake at RCC 11/15/2017 11/15/2017
Bilateral SNHL

2/15/2018 Transer Chart Review/HOH screening
2/15/2018
2/15/2018 Sound Amplifier ordered. Will re-visit the issue if the amplifier does not work.

7
6/22/2019 CC/H&P 6/28/2019 7/1/2019 Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
a
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

a

(A)

(B)

d

Sound Amplifier ordered. Will re-visit the issue if the amplifier does not work.

Audicus testing revealed hearing within normal limits. No hearing aid indicated

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
Audicus hearing aid, right ear
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

5/29/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Description

H&P

Audicus Clara, Right ear
6/17/2019 CC/H&P

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Audicus ordered

Audicus testing ordered

Audicus Oro left ear

Binaural Rexton Digital Full Shell

6/29/2018

7/2/2017

New intake hearing assessment Provider visit

Refer to Provider

Failed whisper test, refer to audiologist

10/20/2017
Provider visit, new intake
Failed hearing test, refer to audiologist

2/15/2108 Transer Chart Review/HOH screening
Sound Amplifier ordered. Will re-visit the issue if the amplifier does not work.

6/22/2019 CC/H&P
Audiogram ordered

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

6/7/2020 Audicus Testing
complete

6/19/2019

7/17/2018

Audicust testing complete Hearing assessment

Refer back to Provider

7/24/2017 OSMT Audiology Mild hearing loss will retest in two years

12/11/2019 OSMT Followup Returned with hearing aids followup PRN

2/16/2018 Sound Amplifier
Issued

6/28/2019 Audiogram
completed

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date

6/15/2020 Audicus Review Hearing aid ordered 7/23/2020 Hearing Aid
Issued 8/24/2020

6/5/2019 CC Audicus reviewed, hearing aid ordered

10/16/2018 Online Audicus
Refer to Provider for evaluation

9/24/2019 Hearing aid

10/23/2018 Provider note

Issued 12/3/2019

Recommend hearing aid left ear 12/10/2018

7/1/2019 Audicus testing
completed
12/10/2019 CC/H&P Audicus testing revealed hearing is within normal limits. No hearing aid indicated.
Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 52

Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

CasHeea:rin3g:A1id4Eva-lcv-00001-HGeariFngVAidTev-aEl BA DPorovcide#r e:va9lua9tio-n2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 119 of 985 - Page

Complete

complete

ID#: 3707 after hearing aid received

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

5/29/2020 7/23/2020 55

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

complete

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

6/17/2019 12/3/2019 169

6/29/2018 12/10/2018 164

7/2/2017 7/24/2017 22

complete

complete

complete

long periods of time between long periods of time between

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process

updated

updated

10/18/2017 11/15/2017 28
complete

2/15/2018 2/16/2018 1
complete

6/22/2019 12/10/2019 171
complete long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue HOH scheduling process updated

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 53

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

Cas1e: 3:14-cv-00001-2GFVT-EBA D3oc #: 99-2 Filed4: 12/16/20 Pa5ge: 120 of 985 6- Page ID#: 3708

8/28/2109

9/4/2020

12/7/2018

8/27/2018

8/29/2018

11/2/2018

7 2/8/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

CC/H&P
9/4/2019
9/11/2019 Unspecified hearing loss, unspecified ear

CC/H&P
9/9/2020
9/9/2020 Unspecified hearing loss, unspecified ear

Patient reported hearing difficulties during an intake hearing screening
12/20/2018
12/20/2018
Unspecified hearing loss

Sick Call 10/3/2018 12/10/2019 Unspecified hearing loss

Patient reported hearing difficulties during an intake history and physical

Intake H and P

CC/H&P

8/30/2018

11/7/2018

3/11/2019

8/30/2018 Bilateral SNHL

11/7/2018 Bilateral hearing loss, right ear moderate, left ear mild

3/22/2019 Unspecified hearing loss

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
d
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
complies
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

8/28/2019 CC/H&P

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Audiogram ordered

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

9/4/2019 Audiogram complete

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

9/11/2019 Audicus testing

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

completed
9/18/2019 Audicus Review

hearing aid has not been

received

d

Complies

Audicus clara, Left ear

a

a

(A)

Audicus Clara, Right ear

Audicus Dia II, left ear

Type not listed

d complies

9/4/2020 CC/H&P
Audicus ordered
9/9/2020 Audicus testing complet
9/15/2020 Audicus Review
Hearing Aid ordered

12/7/2018 Intake Assessment
Referred to provider
12/19/2018 Provider Visit Audiogram ordered
12/20/2019 Audiogram testing
Test Complete
1/24/2019 Hearing Aid Eval

8/27/2018 Sick Call
referred to provider
9/6/2018 Provider Sick Call Audioscope ordered
9/18/2018 Audioscope

8/28/2018 Intake exam
Audicus testing ordered
8/30/2018 Audicus Testing Test complete
8/31/2018 Audicus Results review

11/2/2018 New intake H and P Obtain hearing booth screening
11/7/2018 Hearing screening Audiogram completed
12/10/2018 Hearing aid issued

completed, audicus ordered Hearing aid ordered

10/23/2018 Audicus review

9/28/2018 Hearing aid

2/8/2019 CC/H&P
Audiogram ordered
3/11/2019 Audiogram completed
7/23/2020 Audicus Review Patient did not meet criteria for hearing aid. Pocket talker issued.

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 54

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Pt. did not meet criteria

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 121 of 985 - Page

ID#: 3709 Pt. does not meet the criteria for
a prescription hearing aid

specified in the DOC hearing loss

policy dated 5/31/2018. PCP

may order a pocket talker at

his/her discretion. Outside

records requested concerning Pt. did not meet criteria for

DX of Meniere's disease

hearing aid

Issued

4/9/2019 Provider Sick Call

10/26/2018 Sick Call

This patient presents for c/o hearing difficulty and tinnitus and h/o meniere's disease. I reviewed his hearing exam from December 2018 and Dr Kemen evaluation of the test in January 2019 - he advised the patient does not meet criteria for a hearing aid according to DOC policy therefore I will issue him a pocket-talker. As for his c/o Meniere's we will trial HCTZ, Antivert and Flonase and RTC in 30 days. Patient agreed and understood POC> referred to provider

10/8/2018 Provider f/u
Patient reports that the hearing aid much imporves his hearing

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

8/28/2019 9/18/2019 21

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) complete

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

9/4/2020 Pending
Pending

11/13/2018, Provider Sick Call, Pocket talker issued. 12/10/2019, Audicus testing completed. 12/20/2019 Audicus review, Hearing aid ordered. 1/20/2020, Hearing aid, issued 2/20/2020 Hearing aid eval completed

12/7/2018 4/9/2019 123

8/27/2018 2/20/2020 542

8/29/2018 9/28/2018 30

complete

complete

complete

long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue
HOH scheduling process updated

long periods of time between referrals, testing, issue
HOH scheduling process updated

11/2/2018 12/26/2018 54
complete

2/8/2019 3/11/2019 31
complete

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 55

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Cas1e: 3:14-cv-00001-2GFVT-EBA D3oc #: 99-2 Filed4: 12/16/20 Pa5ge: 122 of 985 6- Page

7

ID#: 3710

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

6/26/2019

1/4/2019

Intake

H&P

6/26/2019

1/4/2019

6/26/2019

1/5/2019

Debrox ordered, patient declined further hearing treatment

12/18/2019 12/18/2019

No record of patient reporting HOH in his chart 6/12/2019

7/3/2019

5/7/2019

Intake

Intake

New intake at RCC

8/2/2020

7/3/2019

5/21/2019

8/2/2020 Patient did not meet criteria

11/29/2019
Patient answered no to all hearing screening questions on most recent H&P

5/21/2019 Bilateral hearing loss

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

d

d

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision against

providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC Patient declined having anything

policy.

else done for hearing after having

ears flushed.

complies

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

6/26/2019 Intake
Pt. answered yes to several questions on the intake hearing screening.

1/4/2019 H&P
Audiogram ordered & completed.

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description

8/16/2019 Provider F/U

7/27/2020 Audiogram review

a
Audicus clara, left ear
12/17/2019 CC/H&P Audiogram ordered 12/18/2019 Audiogram

d complies

(A) Audicus

7/22/2020 CC/H&P

6/12/2019 Intake

Patient answered no to all hearing screening questions Failed hearing screening

7/27/2020 Provider Soap note

9/4/2019 Chart review/Transfer

7/3/2019 Intake

5/20/2019 Provider Intake visit

Oral hearing screening failed Order audiogram

11/29/2019 H&P

5/31/2019 Provider follow up

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Provider ordered debrox of ears No indication of hearing loss completd

9/12/2019 Provider F/U
Patient states he did not use ear drops because he does not have a hearing problem. Provider educated patient and referred patient for a f/u after treatment was followed.

1/8/2020 Audicus Review
Hearing aid ordered

Hearing diagnosis removed from problem list

Upon transferring to a new facility the provider noted failed hearing screening at previous facility. Ordered audicus testing.

Oral screening, patient

Ordered audicus clara right

answered no to all questions ear

9/10/2109 Audicus testing

12/11/2019 Provider Chronic Care Visit

Patient refused

Patient communicates well with hearing aid
Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 56

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Cas9e/2:7/3201:914-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA D1o/9/c202#0: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Pa7g/2e8/:2012023 of 985 - Page

Re-evalualtion/Ear Flush

ID#: Sound Amplifier 3711

HOH eval

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Left ear irrigated, large amount of cerumen removed. Right ear irrigated as well, pus visualized. Provider gave patient ear drops. Patient declines to have anthing else done with his hearing

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

6/26/2019 9/27/2019 93

1/4/2019 7/27/2020 570

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) complete

complete

Issued
1/27/2020 Hearing aid Issued
2/10/2020 Hearing aid eval complete

12/17/2019 1/27/2020 41
complete

7/22/2020 7/27/2020 5
complete

Audicus ordered
8/2/2020 Audicus Testing Complete
8/6/2020 Review of Audicus Pt. did not meet criterea

6/12/2019 8/6/2020 421
complete

7/3/2019 11/29/2019 149
complete

5/7/2019 12/11/2019 218
complete

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Patient transferred from RCC to EKCC on 4/16/2019. Audiogram was completed on 1/5/2019 but never reviewed by provider. EKCC provider reviewed audiogram when the patient was identified.
HOH scheduling process updated

long periods of time

long periods of time between long periods of time between between referrals, testing,

referrals, testing, issue

referrals, testing, issue

issue

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process

HOH scheduling process

updated

updated

updated

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 57

Prisoner First Name

Cas1e: 3:14-cv-00001-2GFVT-EBA D3oc #: 99-2 Filed4: 12/16/20 Pa5ge: 124 of 985 6- Page

7

ID#: 3712

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

11/7/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Patient failed a whisper test during a chronic care and annual physical exam

3. Date of initial hearing screening

11/8/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

11/19/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
b
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

11/7/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Chronic Care and Annual Physical Audiogram Ordered

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

11/8/2019 Audiogram Testing Test complete

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

11/11/2019 F/U Audiogram Hearing aid ordered

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

11/19/2019 Telephone encounter

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

An order for one Audicus Clara for the left ear has been pending since 11/11/2019. However, the audiogram has not been scanned into the Audiology folder. A copy of the audiogram must be sent to Audicus with the order for the hearing aid. Please scan Mr.
audiogram into the Audiology folder and assign it to me for review and processing. Thanks, Dr. Kemen

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 58

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Cas1e1/:193/20:1194-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 125 of 985 - Page

Audicus Testing

ID#: 3713

Test Performed

11/20/2019 Telephone encounter

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Mr.

has moderate

hearing loss in the left ear and

profound loss in the right ear.

The reason for his asymmetric

hearing loss is not addressed in

the progress note ordering the

hearing aid. Please see pt. and

investigate the reason for his

deafness in the right ear. If there

is no explanation for right ear

deafness, please get outside

audiogram and ENT consultation.

If you can explain his asymmetric

hearing loss please respond to

this telephone encounter.

Approval of an Audicus hearing

aid is deferred pending resolution

of the cause for his hearing loss.

11/21/2019, Progress note-ENT

Consult ordered. 1/22/2020 ENT

consult-MRI of brain ordered.

1/30/2020 MRI consult ordered.

Pending approval. 3/4/2020 MRI

completed. 3/12/2020 MRI

review. ENT F/U ordered.

10/20/2020 Patient scheduled for

...

outside appointment with ENT

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

11/7/2019 Pending Pending

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 59

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 126 of 985 - Page ID#: 3714

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device. Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers)

How many Where

1

Academic Wing/Chapel

10

Each Dorm and Minimum Security

How do inmates obtain

When obtained Specifications (URL)

access?

https://wholehousefmtransmitter.com/product/whole- Request use from Program

6/1/2020 house-fm-transmitter-3-0/

Director or Chaplain

Request it from the floor

2 Years ago https://www.harriscomm.com/portable-telephone-amplifierofficer.

How well do they work?

Other comments

Works well. Work very well. Have had no complaints

Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

2

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like?

1

Dorm 3 & Dorm 5 Chapel

1 Year ago https://www.captel.com/captel/phones/captel-840/ 5+ Years ago

Request to use it. Contact ADA

Coordinator. Once approved, Work very well. HOH Inmates

same access as regular phones. like it much more than the TTY.

Used during services and

classes as needed.

Works well.

Captel Model 840

Bed shakers 3

Vibrating watches

30+

Vibrating alarm clocks 0
Pagers 0

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration not mentioned above.
6

Earphones for parole hearings

1

Earphones for orientation videos

1

Storage Issued to HOH Inmates and storage
N/A N/A
Dorm 2,3,4,6,7, & 8 Parole Office Parole Office

5 Years ago 4+ years ago
N/A

Have had no requests for bed https://www.amazon.com/Silent-Call-Signature-Sidekick-Recshakers.
Request during auxiliary aid https://www.amazon.com/Tech-Tools-Vibrating-Personal-Shassessment.

Work well when tested. Limited Range to cells at front of wing. Seem to work well. Clip on the back is not very durable.
Bed Shaker mentioned above works as an alarm clock.

N/A
2 Years ago 10/25/2019 10/25/2019

N/A

N/A

N/A

This is a green light in the wing

that is activated during

movements, pill call, etc. to Work very well. Bright and

signal movement.

easily visible.

Request use from parole office

https://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-Headphones-RP-HT16 staff .

Work well.

Request use from parole office

https://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-Headphones-RP-HT16 staff .

Work well.

EKCC has never had Pagers.

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 60

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 127 of 985 - Page

ID#: 3715

Documentation and narrative to provide

Date reviewed Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

Grievances:

1. Provide summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers

formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Should include the issues, summary of

9/24/2020

response, resolution

Attached as separate Documentation

2. Provide full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing

accommodation issues.

9/24/2020

Attached as separate Documentation

Discipline

3. For all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving an inmate who

signs, provide report of inmate name, date, and communication method for 9/21/2020

each.

EKCC has had no inmate who signs housed at EKCC during this timeframe.

4. Provide documentation for all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Auxiliary aids 5. VRI Log (provide). 6. TTY instructions (provide) 7. VRI instructions (provide) Audiology processing delays

9/23/2020
9/23/2020 9/23/2020 9/23/2020

These will be attached with the rest of the documentation requested.
This will be attached with the rest of the documentation requested. This will be attached with the rest of the documentation requested. This will be attached with the rest of the documentation requested.

9/28/2020

8.A list of each inmate currently at your institution whose audiology

processing FINISHED after March 2020, for whom such processing took or is

taking over 60 days, documentation of the explanation for any such delay,

and a description of any steps taken to avoid similar problems going forward.

Information provided to inmates, policies, etc.

9. Any pages of the inmate handbook that address disability, and the date for 9/23/2020 that version of the handbook.

10. The current Deaf/HOH brochure and any other documents provided to deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates.

9/23/2020

11.The medical request form currently provided to prisoners.

9/23/2020

12. Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2020 addressing deaf/hard- 9/23/2020 of-hearing issues.

13. A list of each use of an in-person sign-language interpreter from February

2020 to present, and any occasions in which such an interpreter was

9/21/2020

requested but denied.

Please provide written responses to the following questions:

14. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty because staff members are wearing masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?

9/23/2020

- Audicus testing completed 11/26/2019, Hearing aid received/issued 3/5/2020. Audicus review not performed until after receiving hearing aid. HOH scheduling process/workflow has been updated to

- delayed due to delay from review to of Audicus to ordering of ensure patients are seen and resolved/completed in the 60

hearing aid. Hearing aid didn't arrive in a timely manner for issue and evaluation.

day period. We also have a regional HOH representative

- Provider recommended hearing aid. Patient wanted time to think that tracks all HOH patients for all sites to ensure they

about it.

receive treatment in a timely matter. - Hearing aid ordered in 10/2019, had to be reordered due to it never

being received (2/2020). Patient revecieved hearing aid in 3/2020.

- Patient transferred from RCC to EKCC on 4/16/2019. Audiogram

was completed on 1/5/2019 but never reviewed by provider. EKCC provider reviewed

audiogram when the patient was identified. No indication of hearing loss.

This will be attached with the rest of the documentation requested.
This will be attached with the rest of the documentation requested. This will be attached with the rest of the documentation requested.
This will be attached with the rest of the documentation requested.
Have had no In-person interpreters or any requests for one.
I walk the dorms each week and speak to any HOH inmates I see and ask them how they are doing. I have spoken to half of the inmates on the HOH list and have had very few complaints. The main complaint has been that the issued masks sometimes interfere with Hearing aids. To remedy this we have made numerous masks that have a large loop that goes around the back of the head instead of the ears. These have been issued to any HOH inmate that has requested them.

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 61

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 128 of 985 - Page

ID#: 3716

Documentation and narrative to provide

Date reviewed Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

15. How many staff members are currently using clear masks? How is the decision made who will wear a clear mask?

The decision is based on what HOH inmates request staff to use a clear mask. The

staff in that area that deal with that inmate will be provided with a clear mask. A

memo was sent to all the HOH Inmates on 8/27/2020 stating they can request this

accommodation at any time by contacting the ADA Coordinator. No requests have

0

been made at this time.

16. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty with their hearing aids because of the design of their own masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?
17. How many inmates have been issued masks that don't have ear ties?

I walk the dorms each week and speak to any HOH inmates I see and ask them how they are doing. I have spoken to probably half of them and have had very few complaints. The main complaint has been that the issued masks sometimes interfere with Hearing aids. To remedy this we have made numerous masks that have a large loop that goes around the back of the head instead of the ears. These 9/23/2020 have been issued to any HOH inmate that has requested them.
9/23/2020 7 have requested them so far and have been issued.

18. What if anything have you done to solve the problem of inmates having trouble hearing announcements? Please respond in detail, with dates on all responsive steps, prerequisites for any assistance, etc.
19. How have you educated staff that it is inappropriate to write up an inmate for behavior that is caused by a hearing impairment (e.g., talking loudly, not following instructions that could not be heard)? If there was a memo, please provide that. 20. Please describe in detail how inmates are supposed to get hearing aid batteries, including how long it should take them each time.

If an inmate notifies staff they are having trouble hearing announcements I am contacted by that staff member and asked for recommendations. The first two recommendations I make are to ask the inmate if having non-auditory alerts would help. If they say yes I ask them if they would like to move to a C-Lower wing where the non-auditory alert system is located. If they do not want to move then the unit staff where that inmate lives is told that they need to begin in-person alerts for 9/23/2020 that inmate.
I attend every annual in-service class to discuss ADA/HOH with all staff. During this persentation I discuss the Settlement and any and all issues including appropriate 9/23/2020 interactions and disciplinary reporting with HOH inmates.
They can get batteries at any Pill Call movement for either side of the institution. In 9/23/2020 RHU the batteries are located on the Pill Call cart that is taken to RHU twice a day.

21. When an inmate reports that a hearing aid is not working, what are the steps followed to evaluate the complaint? Include all relevant copays and other procedures.
22. When someone is denied binaural hearing aids, are they provided information on the standard for receiving such assistance, and the opportunity for appeal? How many inmates have received binaural aids since the current binaural hearing aid policy has been in effect?

They are referred to the provider. The provider will ensure the inmate is cleaning the hearing aid properly and replace any parts needed. If that does not work then the faulty hearing aid is mailed back to Audicus or an outside Audiology clinic for 9/23/2020 outside repair. No copays are required for repairs.
If someone is denied binaural hearing aids the provider will review and discuss with them as to why they did not qualify for them. If they wish to appeal they do this per the grievance process. No binaural hearing aids have been issued at this 9/28/2020 facility since the binaural hearing aid policy has come into effect.

23. What arrangements are made to provide vibrating watches/clocks for inmates who are indigent?

If an inmate requests a vibrating watch/clock and is indigent they are provided 9/23/2020 with a Shake and Wake watch that they can use while they are at EKCC.

24. Please describe, in detail, each step that takes place once a person is identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing, to evaluate/offer any auxiliary aids. Include who is responsible for each step.

Once an Inmate is administered a hearing screening I am notified by an automatic e-mail that the screening has taken place. I record the inmates name and number and follow up with Medical to find out if the inmate is HOH or the test came back as a normal hearing test. If the inmate is determined to be HOH I place the ADA KOMS alert on their file and add them to the HOH list. I then get in touch with the inmate to determine what accommodations they request. I will provide them with a door sign, HOH ID, and give them the HOH Booklet and ask if they have any 9/23/2020 questions.

25. Please describe, in detail, any situation in 2019 or 2020 in which a deaf/hard-of-hearing inmate has been denied a job or other opportunity (access to a program or the like) because of their disability. Include the inmate’s name, the date, and the circumstances.

9/21/2020 No inmates have ever been denied a job or program due to their ADA Status.

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 62

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 129 of 985 - Page

ID#: 3717

Documentation and narrative to provide

Date reviewed Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

Training on G:/Drive / DOC-ADA Coordinator/ Settlement Agreement / DOC AIIS-

Communicating with Deaf and Hard of Hearing Offender / DOC-ADA Coordinator/

CREATE / DOC AIIS- Communicating with Deaf and Hard of Hearing Offenders /

26. Please list all training that you have received for your role as ADA

Effective Communication Strategies with Deaf Offenders using American Sign

Coordinator.

9/28/2020 Language

27. Please provide an update on all items in your Deaf/HOH action plan (previously shared with me).

9/28/2020 See below.

1.) TTY relay issues regarding billing: This issue has been resolved. The problem

was I was trying to place the test call without using an inmate account. I had one of

our HOH inmates use the Relay service to call his mother and we had no issue with

the call. If not using an inmate account then the Relay will only let you place collect

calls.

2.) TTY Instructions insufficient: I submitted our TTY instructions with the last request for information on May 19, 2020. Our instructions for EKCC do not include how to hook up the TTY as it is always in place and available for use for the inmates that utilize it instead of the Captel phone.

3.) Curtain for Videophone Privacy: This has been resolved. A curtain was installed and photo documentation of completion was submitted on May 29, 2020. 4.) Institution Specific Chart: a. ADA Coordinator listing incorrect: Solved. b. ADA Training on G:/Drive: Solved. c. Audiology Assessments timely (Wellpath): Solved. d. Audiology progress tracking shared with ADA Coordinator: Solved. e. Devices: i. Portable Phone Amplifiers: Solved. ii. Assistive Listening device: Solved. iii. Bed Shakers: Solved. iv. Earphones for Parole or other uses: Solved.

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 63

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 130 of 985 - Page ID#: 3718
CD

Cookie Crews
COMMISSIONER

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex 200 Road to Justice
West Liberty Kentucky 41472 (606) 743-2800
Fax (606) 743-2811

To: Janet Conover, Director of Operations
From: Travis Evans, Assistant Safety Coordinator TWE
DP· Thro: David Green, Warden
Date: July 29, 2020

Re: ADA Responses and Plan of Action- EKCC

David Green
WARDEN

1. TTY relay issues regarding billing: This issue has been resolved. The problem was we were trying to place the test call without using an inmate account. We had one of our HOH inmates use the Relay service to call his mother and we had no issue with the call. If not using an inmate account then the Relay will only let you place collect calls.

2. TTY Instructions insufficient: We submitted our TTY instructions with a previous request for information. Our instructions for EKCC does not include how to hook up the TTY as it is always in place and available for use for the inmates that utilize it instead of Captel phone.

3. Curtain for Videophone Privacy: This has been resolved. A curtain was installed and photo documentation of completion was submitted on May 29, 2020.

4. Institution Specific Chart: a) ADA Coordinator listing incorrect: Solved b) ADA Training on G:/Drive:Solved c)Audiology Assessments timely (Wellpath):Solved d)Audiology progress tracking shared with ADA Coordinator: Solved e)Devices: i. Portable Phone Amplifiers: Solved ii. Assistive Listening Device: Solved iii. Bed Shakers: Solved iv. Earphone for Parole or other uses: Solved
V.
No Other Issues Found.

KentuckyUnbridledSplrit.com

~

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/0

Exhibit 2, EKCC, p. 64

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 131 of 985 - Page ID#: 3719
Green River Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 132 of 985 - Page ID#: 3720

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

A ADA coordinator

yes

Both

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Mark Jackson GRCC

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

Both

2 coordinator appointed?

no

Both

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

yes

Both

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates?

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates in a

Both

5 timely and appropriate manner? How?

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? (THIS

Both

6 REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

Memos posted and updated

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit

yes posted in Dorms and advised at

Both

7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

orientation upon Arrival

Both

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

yes

Both

9 Describe training

Ky DOC Annual Trainning And on line

Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately cover

Both

10 information?

Both

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training)

yes

Both

12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

yes

Both

13 Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's powerpoint)

yes

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with settlement

Both

14 agreement?

yes

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

yes

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in

Both

17 implementing the settlement?

Both

18 Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf inmates?

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on deaf

Both

19 inmates?

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the inmates in

Both

20 those situations?

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective way with the

Both

21 monitor?

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the monitor

Both

22 when necessary?

Both B Reporting obligations

If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was monitor

Both

1 notified?

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

Both

2 inmates?

Both

3 Is the list complete?

Both

4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs,

Both

6 activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe)

Both

7 Was it reported to the monitor?

Both

8 Was the report complete?

Both

9 Was the report timely?

yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
yes updated daily yes updated daily
no

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

x x x x x x
x
x x NA
x x x x
x
x
X
x x x
x
x
x

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X
x x x
NA x x x

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 133 of 985 - Page ID#: 3721

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert?

Both

11 If yes, was the monitor notified?

Did the institution consult with the monitor about the non-

Both

12 auditory alert?

Both

13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

HOH

3 notifications.)

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

Deaf

Deaf inmates

Deaf

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general medical intake, and

Both

during medical care more generally:

Both

1 Is there effective communications planning?

Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if

Both

2 interpretation is needed?

Both

3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?

Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications

Both

4 techniques?

Both

Notice to medical staff:

Both

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How?

Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover and

Both

6 within the file?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

yes bed shakers , wih clocks /watches

yes yes, Video phone 40 min , TTY 60

yes koms alert system yes through koms

Koms alert yes yes Hearing aids, VRI , Interprater if needed yes yes yes yes yes yes cant sign we work as team to accomidate inmate
yes VRI if needed yes inmate comes in with assitive device
yes yes
yes
HOH ID and Koms alert
yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA x
x
x
NA x
NA x
NA X
NA x x
NA x x
NA x x x
x

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA x x x x
NA x x

Deaf

7 Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate accommodations.

Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site providers of

Deaf

8 need for interpretation?

Deaf

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

Deaf

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

Deaf

11 Adequate notice?

Outside providers offering effective communication to inmates

Deaf

12 who sign?

Deaf

13 How?

yes
yes yes no yes
yes/ Interpreters

NA
x
x NA
x
x
NA

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 134 of 985 - Page ID#: 3722

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

Hearing screening/medical intake:

Both

14 Performed for all new inmates?

Both

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

Both

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

Both

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

Both

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?

How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by

Both

19 staff?

Both

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

Both

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?

Both

22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe.

Both

23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

Both

25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening?

Both

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

Adequate determination of need for designation/ audiology

Both

28 services? How?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or HOH,

Both

30 apart from audiology services decision?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

yes yes upon arrival yes its used at all Ky DOC yes yes

Verbal and written Admitting medical staff yes yes yes

yes yes yes

yes

knowing the inmate needs yes 7 days

Provider does whisper test

yes yes yes/ater inmate screening alert is sent yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA x x x x x
NA NA
x x x NA x x x
x
x
x
x
NA x x x x

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

HOH

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

HOH

40 initial request/questionnaire?

HOH

41 each relevant medical visit?

HOH

42 any audiology visit?

HOH

43 hearing aid provision?

HOH

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks?

HOH

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

HOH

46 Shared with monitor when requested

Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it

47 take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Describe.

In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait more

48 than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?

49 What is the cause of the delay?

yes on site yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes N/A

NA x x x x x
NA x x x x x x x

on site testing

NA

all inmates were caught up on testing

NA

If there were any delays it was due to the

Covid 19

NA

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 135 of 985 - Page ID#: 3723

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) to

50 improve this process?

HOH

Co-pay and availability issues:

HOH

47 Charged only once -- not again for followups

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

HOH

50 7 days/week?

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Both E Information provided inmates

Both

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe)

Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-discrimination and

there is nothing to do
yes not charged yes yes yes old for new yes
Inmate Hand book provieds information

Both

2 ADA services?

Both

Brochure? Items to include:

Both

3 Non-discrimination obligation

Both

4 Effective communication obligation

Both

5 Auxiliary aids and services available

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services (including

Both

6 hearing aids, and batteries)

Both

7 Communication equipment available, and how to use

Both

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

Both

Other items:

Both

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

Both

10 Request for Accommodations/ Communications Assistance

Both

11 Medical Request form includes request for accommodations

Both

12 Job application form includes request for accommodations

Both

13 Waiver forms

Both

14 Classification form includes request for accommodations

Both

15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations

SAP and other programming form includes request for

Both

16 accommodation

Both

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

yes yes yes yes yes
sick call slip/ADA coordinator yes yes N/A No schedule Vri available 24 hrs contact ADA coordinator yes only KCI yes yes no
yes/complted by CTO Staff yes

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in

18 law library? (Need to check)

Both

Do request forms:

Both

19 list available services comprehensively?

clearly explain services and aids (what they are and when

Yes 3 copies at all times yes

Both

20 they are available?

Both

21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?

expressly ask about preferred mode of

Both

22 communication/needed services and why they are useful?

Both

23 explain which items are free?

Both

24 encompass religious and volunteer-provided programming?

Both

Effective communication of these resources:

Both

25 Are the materials in language accessible to each inmate?

Both

26 Is this information provided with effective communication?

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity

to meet with a KDOC staff member and interpreter to ask

yes yes
yes yes yes if needed will provide
yes yes

Both

27 questions about the materials?

yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA NA
x NA
x x x x
x
x
NA x x x
x
x x NA x x x x x x x
x
x
x
x x
x
x
x
x x NA x x
x

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 136 of 985 - Page ID#: 3724

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

for a program with staff, is effective communication

Both

28 provided?

yes

Both

29 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

yes

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

Both

30 in education with staff, is effective communication provided?

Both

31 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

Both

2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

7 Clear process to obtain? Describe

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Both

12 Working process to get new inmate alerts added? (Describe)

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

14 Appropriately obvious

Both

15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?)

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

yes yes
yes yes yes yes yes HOH signs on door yes yes staff are trained yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes/daily yes yes no abbreveations yes all updated yes upon arrival yes / on shirt yes as soon as reported

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA
x
x NA
x
x x x x x x NA x x x x x NA x x x x x NA x x x x x x

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Both

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?

Both

23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator?

Both

24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver?

Both

25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?

Both

26 Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested ID?

Both

27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

d

yes when housed in RHU
Sign on door HOH no scanned into Koms no it would be
yes
yes When inmate is tranfered Koms

x
NA x x x x
NA
x

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 137 of 985 - Page ID#: 3725

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

yes koms alert system

x

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

x

Both

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

yes

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

yes

x

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

yes

x

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

yes

x

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

all if needed

x

Both

Other assessments

x

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

yes

x

Both

9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

yes

x

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

yes

x

Both

1 On-person ID cards

yes

x

Both

2 Cell cards

yes

x

Both

3 Bed shaker

yes

x

Both

4 In-person alerts

yes

x

Both

5 Pager

no

x

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

yes

x

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

yes

x

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

yes

x

Both

9 Other amplification

yes

x

Both

10 Other (describe)

FM Transmiteer head phones

NA

Both

General issues

NA

Special housing area:

NA

Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH inmates?

Both

11 (Describe)

Deaf inmates housed in Dorm 1 for Purple NA

Both

12 If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? (Describe)

Bed hakers for fire , Purple Phone

NA

If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed

Both

13 there? (such a requirement is non-compliant).

yes if Deaf and sign to use the Purple phone /Also bedshakers for fire alerts

x

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live

there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to the

x

Both

14 inmate? Describe any restrictions.

yes inmates can use the VRS

In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is primary

Both

15 consideration given to inmate request?

yes

x

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services

form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or

Both

16 not requesting aids/services, were accommodations provided?

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services documented in

Both

17 inmate institutional files?

Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services shared

Both

18 appropriately with staff?

need to be ADA approved yes koms alert system yes step by step directions

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 138 of 985 - Page ID#: 3726

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Both

20 Have any been out of comission?

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Both

22 hearing aid?

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

Both

24 Promptly?

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Both

26 Describe

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

Both

30 Are classes in sign language provided?

Both

31 deaf inmates given notice?

Both

32 priority given to deaf inmates?

Both I Interpretation in general

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

Deaf

1 communicated to inmates?

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

Deaf

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

3 volunteer-provided programming?

Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation

Deaf

4 method?

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf

6 In-person?

Deaf

7 VRI?

Deaf

Is VRI availability:

Deaf

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

yes weekley

not for the past 6 months

n/A

yes yes yes no

yes yes interpreter if needed yes yes
yes
yes

yes
yes
yes yes
moving around makes VRI Inefective yes when ever neede
yes

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Deaf

13 In general

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Deaf

16 Splitter?

Deaf

17 Instructions?

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

available 24/7
yes
yes Vri vailable when needed yes yes yes always charged yes updated 9/15/20 yes yes yes step by step 25 ft yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA NA
x
x x NA NA
x x x x x
NA
x

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

x

x
x
x NA
x x NA x
x
x
x
x NA
x x x NA x x x x

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 139 of 985 - Page ID#: 3727

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

yes

Deaf

21 How?

Log book

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

Deaf

22 should be first recourse?

yes

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

yes when requested

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

yes

Deaf

24 Parole?

yes

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

MRT, Sap,

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

no

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

Deaf

27 before?

yes

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

Deaf

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

no we do not relie on other inmates

we do use them if needed in non

Deaf

29 Describe

emergencie

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

Deaf

30 was unavailable)

Always available . Unless service is down

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

Deaf

31 method?

yes

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

yes

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

yes

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

yes

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

yes

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

Deaf

35 encounters/communications/settings)

yes

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

yes

Deaf J Hand Restraints

yes

Deaf

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

yes

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

Deaf

2 finding of a security threat?

yes

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

Deaf

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

yes

Deaf

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

yes

Deaf

5 Staff aware of the issue

yes

Deaf

Off-site medical care:

Deaf

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

All inmates are transported the same

restraints removed when necessary for medical

Deaf

7 communication?

yes

Both K Non-auditory Alerts

Both

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

yes

Both

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

yes

Both

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

yes

Both

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

yes

Both

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

yes

Both

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

yes

Both

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) x x
x
x x x x x
x
x

NA x
x x x NA x

x
x x NA
x

x
x x x x
x

NA x x x x x x

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 140 of 985 - Page ID#: 3728

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Both

9 been denied?

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Both

11 How often?

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Both

15 used consistently?

Both

16 in all dormitories?

Both

17 in gym?

Both

18 in library?

Both

19 audited and monitored?

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

Both

20 misses a page?

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

Both

21 because of disability?

yes
no ADA coordinator advised if not working Once a week no
yes all dorm compliant yes all dorm compliant yes yes yes all dorms complant
yes
yes

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

Deaf

2 Allow voice carry-over features?

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Deaf

5 alternative offered

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

6 videophone is out of service.

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

Deaf

10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates?

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

Deaf

12 using ordinary phones?

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

Deaf

14 Free?

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone

Deaf

15 calls?

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

yes yes yes
flashing lights/bed shakers
yes yes yes
All inmates that use this device yes yes All inmates are housed where needed for devices no no
Inmates sign in and out no yes
yes
no
n/a

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

x
x
x x x NA x x x x x x
x

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA x x x x

NA x x
NA NA
x

NA x x
x
x x
x
x x
x

NA x

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 141 of 985 - Page ID#: 3729

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both Both Both
Both Both
Both Both Both Both Both Both Both Both
Both Both
Both Both Both Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Both Both Both Both Both Both
Both Both Both Both Both

Issue/Question TTY: 18 Installed? 19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff? Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made 20 available WITH TTY? 21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify) 22 Access -- appropriate hours, days? location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones 23 for non-deaf inmates? 24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access? 25 Permission needed? 26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe) 27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates? 28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe) 29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently) 30 Can access publicly available relay service phone numbers? Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions for 31 videophones and TTY is less than equitable? 32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted? If yes, was determination (including reasoning, evidence, etc.) 33 documented? 34 Was monitor notified? 35 Was reasoning explained to monitor? VRS via laptop 36 Available? 37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU) 38 Used when appropriate? Phones 39 Amplification in every group of phones? 40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them? CapTel 41 If so, installed and working? 42 Appropriate for any particular inmate? 43 Request by any inmate denied? TV/Movies 44 Is captioning available? 45 Is captioning used? 46 Is the captioning checked regularly? 47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes yes yes yes
yes step by step directions none yes
yes yes no no yes no charge yes yes
no
yes yes yes yes
yes yes yes yes yes no
yes yes yes in rhu

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

Both

49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

Both

50 Amplification method? (Describe)

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

Both

53 status?

24/7 yes FM trnsmitter yes
yes escorted when needed

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA x x
x
NA x
x
x x NA x
x x
NA x
x
x x NA x x x NA x x NA NA NA NA NA x x x x
x
x NA
x

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

x

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 142 of 985 - Page ID#: 3730

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

Both

54 deaf inmates?

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

Both

5 (Describe)

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Both

7 because security threat?

Both

8 monitor notified?

Both

9 reasoning explained?

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both

10 of requests?

Both

11 of denials?

Both N Disciplinary

Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and

without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been

Deaf

1 punished?

Deaf

2 Was a re-hearing granted?

Both O Grievances

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

no yes yes no yes yes

no yes

yes yes

no

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

x
x NA
x x x
NA x x x x
NA x x

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

x
x x

Both

1 Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA coordinator?

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator

Both

2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator?

Both P Training

Both

Types available

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

Both

3 All appropriate staff?

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

Any additional targeted training on specific needs ? Please

Both

describe in detail

If a grievance ADA coordinator ansewers it.

x

yes

x

yes all yes CBT all staff yes all staff

NA x
NA x
NA NA
x

yes

NA

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 11

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DCEAaR/sHOeH:IN3M:A1TE4I-ScGEvT-T0ING0A0P0PR1OP-RGIAFTEVASTSIS-TEANBCEA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 143 of 985 - Page ID#: 3731

If signs to

Bed Shaker? Other Alert Device

Captel

Signs to Low literacy? Has

Has

communicate, Auxiliary Aid (Not

(e.g., vibrating

Acess (Not Personal Phone

Listed with commu (So that written Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door noted in KOMS Assessment requested; watch, etc.) (Not TTY Access (Not requested; Amplifier (Not

Housing KOMS ADA nicate communication Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution

meeting denied;

requested;

requested;

denied; requested;

Name

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N) is not effective) waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) denied; granted) denied; granted) granted) denied; granted)

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

NR

NR

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

yy

n

y

N/R

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

yy

N/R

N/R

N/R

GG

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

G

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

G

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

G

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

G

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

G

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

y

G

N/R

N/R

G

G

N/R

GExhibit 2, GGRCC, p. 12

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EA Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Name

Shake & Wake

(Not requested;

Clear mask Any other for staff who auxiliary

denied;

Special deal with this aid

ID

granted)

mask?

innmate? requested?

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

y

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 3732

Page: 144 of 985 - Page
Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 13

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 145 of 985 - Page

IDIf#si:gn3s t7o 33

Bed Shaker? Other Alert Device

Captel

Signs to Low literacy? Has

Has

communicate, Auxiliary Aid (Not

(e.g., vibrating

Acess (Not Personal Phone

Listed with commu (So that written Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door noted in KOMS Assessment requested; watch, etc.) (Not TTY Access (Not requested; Amplifier (Not

Housing KOMS ADA nicate communication Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution

meeting denied;

requested;

requested;

denied; requested;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N) is not effective) waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) denied; granted) denied; granted) granted) denied; granted)

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

G

y

G

N/R

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

G

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

y

nn

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

yy

n

y

y

n

y

y

nn

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

G

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

G

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

G

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

y

nn

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

yy

nn

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

y

n

n

y

n

n

y

y

n

y

y

n

y

N/R

N/R

y

N/R

N/R

N/R

G

G

N/R

G

G

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 14

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 146 of 985 - Page

Shake & Wake

ID#: 3734

(Not

Clear mask Any other

requested;

for staff who auxiliary

denied;

Special deal with this aid

ID

granted)

mask?

innmate? requested?

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

N/R

N/A

N

N/A

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 15

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 147 of 985 - Page ID#: 3735

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

8/5/2019

10/2/2018

10/9/2019

8/26/2016

3/9/2020

10/11/2018

Transfer from Luther Luckett 8/16/2017

11/19/2018

12/112017

Failed audiometry test at KSR

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Intake 8/9/2019 8/9/2019

Failed Hearing Failed whisper

assessment test

N/A

11/13/2018 10/16/2019

10/11/2019 10/11/2019

10/19/2016 2/1/2017

Sick Call 8/5/2020 8/5/2020

Intake 10/24/2018 10/24/2018

Transfer from Failed whisper Failed Whisper Failed

Luther Luckett test

Test

assessment

Transfer from Luther Luckett
Transfer from Luther Luckett

9/27/2017 9/27/2017

11/8/2018 11/19/2018

1/30/2018 1/30/2018

Failed audiometry test at KSR
1/15/2019
1/15/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

unspecified hearing loss, Unspecified unspecified ear Hearing loss

unspecified hearing loss, Bilateral hearing unspecified ear loss

unspecified

severe hearing hearing loss,

loss

bilateral

Sensorineural hearing loss/bilateral

bilateral sensorineural hearing loss

Unspecified hearing loss bilateral

Hearing impaired

Sensineural hearing lossbilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

has hearing aid

(d) no hearing aid is needed

for left ear in

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

working order

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that

it complies with KyDOC policy.

Has hearing aid for left ear.

doesn't qualify for hearing aids. Has hearing aids
Documentation provided in binder

does not meet criteria for has hearing aids hearing aids

Had hearing upon arrival at GRCC

Has hearing aids

Hearing aids needed

Received Has hearing aids hearing on in working order 2/15/2019

Documentation provided in binder

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

This hearing device doesn’t requir a Tcoil receptor

This hearing device doesn’t require a T-Coil receptor

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 16

Prisoner First Name

Cas1e: 3:14-cv2-00001-G3FVT-EBA 4 Doc #: 99-52 Filed: 162/16/20 ID#: 3736

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

9. Please provide the following information about ea

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

7Page: 148 of 985 - Page

Medical Visit 1 - Date

8/5/2019

11/26/2018

2/1/2017

3/9/2020

10/11/2018 3/5/2020

9/27/2017

11/19/2018 1/30/2018

1/15/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

Intake

Audicus Hearing Test

Preformed hearing

test

sick call

intake

Audicus audiogram

Audiogram

Audicus hearing Audiology

test

Consultation

Audicus test preformed

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

ordered audiogram

doesn't qualify for hearing aids at this time but will reevaluate annually

Hearing aids were referred to

ordered

provider

audiogram ordered

Sensorineural hearing loss/bilateral

Received hearing aids on Hearing aids Has hearing aids 11/29/2018 were issued

Hearing aids were recommended

Medical Visit 2 - Date
Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date
Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description

8/9/2019

10/22/2019

audiogram

Audicus hearing screen

needs hearing Hearing aid for

aids

left ear ordered

10/31/2019 11/5/2019

pickup hearing Pickup hearing

aids

device

issued hearing aids

Received hearing aid for left ear.

N/A

N/A

N/A N/A

N/A

2/13/2017

8/5/2020

10/24/2018 3/10/2020

10/11/2017 11/29/2018 N/A

Reviewed

Picking up hearing

audiogram

Hearing test Issued hearing

aides

Provider CC performed

results

device

Issued aid

N/A

Hearing aids

does not meet needed,

Received hearing Hearing test criteria for

pending

Hearing aid Hearing aid

devices

ordered

heaing aids

approval

received

received

N/A

N/A

8/5/2020

N/A

N/A

N/A

2/15/2019
picked up hearing aids
picked up hearing aids N/A

audicus test

N/A

completed

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

needs hearing

N/A

aids

N/A

8/21/2020

hearing aids

N/A

issued

hearing aids

N/A

picked up

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 17

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Cas1e: 3:14-cv2-00001-G3FVT-EBA 4 Doc #: 99-52 Filed: 162/16/20 7Page: 149 of 985 - Page ID#: 3737

Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

N/A

N/A

N/A N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ...
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

8/5/2019

N/A

10/22/2019 10/9/2019

8/26/2016

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

3/9/2020

10/11/2018 3/5/2020

8/11/2017

11/8/2018

12/11/2017 12/11/2019

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

10/31/2019 87

11/5/2019 14

10/11/2019 2/13/2017 2 (didn't qualify for hearing aids) 168

8/24/2020 172

10/24/2018 13 ( didn't qualify for

5/28/2020 84

10/11/2017 56

11/29/2018 21

1/30/2018 19

2/15/2019 68

Delayed testing Patient had to go to due to covbidoutside provider 19 pandemic
Patient received hearing from outside provider we now do them in house

Covid-19 caused delayed shipping and delivery of hearing aids.

Patient had to repeat Audicus test
Retest patient

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 18

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 150 of 985 - Page ID#: 3738

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

4/22/2016

8/28/2016

8/12/2020

4/14/2017

9/25/2019

7/27/2020

1/21/2019

1/3/2018

7/23/2020

1/29/2020

2/27/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Inmate was at another facility when hearing loss was documented

Sick Call

8/4/2016 3/27/2017

10/24/2016 10/24/2016

Provider H & P Visit

8/27/2020 8/27/2020

1/22/2018 4/2/2018

Sick Call

Physical

12/27/2019 12/27/2019

7/27/2020 7/27/2020

failed hearing

assessment, but

passed whisper Upon intake to

test.

GRCC

Sick Call

5/13/2019 1/13/2020

1/25/2018 3/6/2018

8/4/2020 8/4/2020

Physical 1/29/2020 1/29/2020

Upon intake at GRCC
3/19/2019
3/19/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Bilateral hearing Hearing loss- no Moderate

loss/Received hearing aids hearing loss

aids

needed

both ears

Mixed conductive and sensorneural hearing loss

Unspecified Hearing loss, unspecified ear

unspecified hearing loss, unspecified ear

Unspecified Hearing Loss, Bilateral

Sensorineural Hearing loss

unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

Unspecified hearing loss, mild impairment bilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

Has hearing aids no hearing aids

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that Documentation

it complies with KyDOC policy.

provided in

binder

Hearing aid ordered for left ear

doesn't qualify Has hearing aids for hearing aids
Documentation provided in binder

Hearing aid right

does not qualify has hearing aid

has hearing aids ear

Has hearing aids has hearing aids for hearing aids for right ear

Documentation provided in binder

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor This hearing

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop device doesn’t

system.

requir a T-coil

receptor

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 3739

Page: 151 of 985 - Page

Medical Visit 1 - Date

9/27/2016

8/28/2016

8/12/2020

4/2/2018

7/27/2020

1/21/2019

1/25/2018

7/23/2020

1/29/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Description

Hearing test Sick call

H&P

Hearing screen preformed

Physical

Physical

Hearing screen

preformed

Sick Call

Physical

3/8/2019 physical

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

approved for L

hearing aid only

due to

referral

ordered hearing Hearing aids

test

recommended

Ordered audiogram

No hearing aids Hearing aids Referred to

needed

recommended provider

ordered audiogram

hearing test ordered

Medical Visit 2 - Date
Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date
Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description

3/27/2017

8/30/2016

8/27/2020

4/24/2018

Hearing test preformed

hearing loss

audicus test completed

Picked up hearing aids

Hearing aids received
N/A

pocket talker needed hearing Received

issued

aids

hearing device

10/24/2016 9/1/2020

N/A

OSMT to

hearing results

N/A

Midwest ENT reviewed

N/A

Hearing loss but

no hearing aids hearing aid for

N/A

needed

left ear ordered N/A

N/A

11/6/2019

N/A

Chronic Care

N/A

Visit

N/A

No hearing aids

and no hearing

N/A

complaints

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

7/27/2020

5/13/2019

3/6/2018

7/29/2020

1/29/2020

3/19/2019

audiogram performed

Audicus test

Picked up hearing aids

audicus test Provider sick call completed

needs hearing aids

Was attempted-

inconsisitent Received

audiogram

results.

hearing device ordered

8/21/2020

1/13/2020

N/A

8/4/2020

9/1/2020

Audicus hearing test
need hearing aids 7/19/2019

hearing aids issued

Audicus Test N/A

hearing aids picked up

Hearing aids

needed

N/A

2/5/2020

N/A

Pickup hearing

aid

N/A

Hearing aid

issued for right

ear.

N/A

8/21/2020

N/A

New hearing

aids received

due to security N/A

audicus test completed
hearing aids needed 8/21/2020 hearing aids issued hearing aids picked up

results received pickup hearing

and reviewed aids

does not qualify

for hearing aids-

will issue pocket

talker if wanted hearing aids

by patient

issued

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 20

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 152 of 985 - Page ID#: 3740

Hearing aids

N/A

N/A

picked up

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ...
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

N/A 4/22/2016

8/28/2016

8/12/2020

N/A 4/2/2020

N/A

N/A

7/27/2020

1/13/2020

1/25/2018

7/23/2020

1/29/2020

2/27/2019

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

9/7/2016 124

10/24/2016 57

In progress

4/24/2018 22

Doesn't qualify for hearing aids 8/24/2020
28

2/5/2020 23

3/6/2018 69

8/21/2020 33

9/1/2020 216

7/19/2019 142

Patient

transferred from

another facility

during hearing No hearing aids

process

needed

Hearing aid was ordered

Patient went to an outside facility for this aid which requires mold and fitting
We now use Audicus

Test results were never received for review.

delayed delivery of hearing aids

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 21

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 153 of 985 - Page ID#: 3741

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

1/22/2020

11/19/2019 2/26/2020

11/14/2019 8/16/2019

4/11/2019

11/7/2019 upon intake @ RCC. 4/10/2018

7/4/2019

1/31/2019 transferred fromKSR

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Provider appt. Intake

8/27/2020 8/27/2020

12/6/2019 12/6/2019

Physical 2/27/2020 2/27/2020

Intake

Upon intake at Complaints of 11/7/2019 upon

RCC

ringing in ears intake @ RCC. Hearing test

Sick Call

11/15/2019 11/15/2019

8/20/2019 8/20/2019

5/21/2019 5/21/2019

Refused Refused

4/10/2018 6/18/2019

7/9/2019 7/9/2019

Presented at KHSeRaring screen at different facility
DEAF

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Unspecified unspecified unspecified severe hearing hearing loss, hearing loss, hearing loss, loss bilateral unspecified ear unspecified ear bilateral

Unspecified Unspecified hearing loss, hearing loss, unspecified ear bilateral

Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

Unspecified hearing loss, unspecified ear DEAF

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

hearing aid

(d) no hearing aid is needed

ordered for left

ear. 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that

it complies with KyDOC policy.

hearing aid in working order

Refused All

Does not qualify Refused hearing

Has hearing aids further

for hearing aids aids

has hearing aid in working order treatment

DEAF uses Hearing aids in Does not qualify american sign working order for hearing aids language

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 3742

Page: 154 of 985 - Page

Medical Visit 1 - Date

8/27/2020

11/19/2019 2/26/2020

11/14/2019 8/20/2019

6/24/2019

refused

4/10/2018

7/4/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

provider appt. intake

Physical

intake

RCC audiogram Audicus

performed

Audiogram

refused

hearing test sick call

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date
Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description

ordered test

referred for hearing test

Audicus test ordered

audiogram ordered

hearing aids Hearing Aids recommended needed

refused

refer to provider

8/27/2020

12/6/2019

2/27/2020

11/15/2019 9/25/2019

7/30/2019

refused

audicus test completed

Audiogram

Audicus test

audiogram performed

Hearing aids issued

Hearing aids receieved

refused

needs hearing hearing aids

aids

needed

9/1/2020

12/18/2019

Does not Qualify needs hearing Received

for hearing aids aids

hearing aid

1/22/2020

N/A

received hearing

aid

refused

N/A

refused

3/11/2019

7/8/2019

Provider sick call Provider sick call

ordered test 5/6/2019

ordered test 7/9/2019

results reviewed Pocket talker
hearing aid for pocket talker left ear ordered issued
12/31/2019
pickup hearing aid
hearing aid issued
8/13/2020 Issued new hearing aids due to old ones

pickup pocket audiogram

HOH CC

N/A

N/A

refused

talker

performed

pt. still does not

wish to have

pocket talker

hearing aids. N/A

N/A

refused

issued

test inconsistent

N/A

N/A

refused

6/18/2019

7/23/2019

N/A

N/A

refused

audicus test CC

hearing aids Doesn't qualify

N/A

N/A

refused

ordered

for hearing aids

N/A

N/A

refused

9/19/2019

12/2/2019

pickup hearing

N/A

N/A

refused

aids.

Physical

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 23

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 155 of 985 - Page ID#: 3743

Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

issued hearing No hearing

N/A

N/A

refused

aids

complaints

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

11/19/2019

N/A

N/A

refused

2/14/2020

N/A

N/A

refused

Physical

Hearing aids

working well, no

N/A

N/A

refused

complaints

8/16/2019

6/24/2019

11/7/2019

3/11/2019

1/31/2019

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

In progress

12/31/2019 42

Doesn't qualify Refused Hearing

for hearing aids aids

9/25/2019

45

7/16/2019 22

Signed refusal on 11/7/2019 5/6/2019

refused

56

Doesn't qualify for hearing aids DEAF

Arrived in mail late

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 24

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 156 of 985 - Page ID#: 3744

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

4/11/2019

4/2/2019

1/15/2020

11/2/2018

3/1/2017

7/15/2018

11/29/2019 1/9/2018

7/9/2020

11/7/2018

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Sickcall 7/30/2019 7/30/2019

IDnetaclkinee@d fGuRrtChCer Physical evaluation/testi ng for hearing 1/16/2020
2/18/2020

Physical

Upon intake to

GRCC

Intake

11/2/2018 11/20/2019

4/13/2017 6/2/2017

7/12/2018 3/17/2020

Provider

Upon intake to

appointment GRCC

Physical

12/1/2019 12/1/2019

1/9/2018 1/31/2018

7/28/2020 7/28/2020

Intake @ RCC 11/19/2018 11/19/2018

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Other specified Hearing loss, unspecified ear

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

Has Hearing aids in

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

working order.

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that

it complies with KyDOC policy.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

Conductive Unspecified Hearing Loss, hearing bilateral bilateral

Unspecified

bilateral hearing

loss

hearing loss

unspecified Sensorineural hearing loss, hearing unspecified ear loss/bilateral

unspecified hearing loss, bilateral ears

unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

Hearing aids ordered

Has hearing aids

has hearing aids

Does not qualify

in working order Has hearing aids in working order has hearing aid Has hearing aids has hearing aids for hearing aids

Documentation provided in binder

Documentation provided in binder

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 25

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 3745

Page: 157 of 985 - Page

Medical Visit 1 - Date

4/11/2019

1/15/2020

11/2/2018

4/13/2017

7/12/2018

11/29/2019 1/9/2018

7/9/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Description

Seen for sickcall

Physical

Onsite audiogram

Preformed hearing test

Audicus test

Preformed provider appt. hearing test

Physical

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Refer to provider

Reported hearing loss

failed whisper test

Hearing aids were recommended

ordered audiogram

Hearing aids Ordered recommended audiogram

Medical Visit 2 - Date
Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date
Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description

7/30/2019
Audicus Hearing Test
8/14/2019
Audicus results
Hearing aids ordered. 9/30/2019 Pickup Hearing aid Issued hearing aid 6/30/2020 Received new hearing aids

1/16/2020

11/20/2019 6/2/2017

3/17/2020

12/1/2019

1/31/2018

7/28/2020

Audicus

Audicus Hearing Picked up

Hearting test test

hearing aids

Audicus test performed

audiogram performed

Picked up hearing aids

Audicus test completed

hearing aids incomplete test needed

2/18/2020

12/17/2019

Received

needs hearing needs hearing Received

hearing device aids

aids

hearing aids

N/A

5/28/2020

12/4/2019

N/A

needs hearing aids
8/21/2020

audicus test completed

pickup hearing

aids

N/A

hearing aids

incomplete test issued

N/A

8/5/2020

1/14/2020

N/A

audicus test

New HOH CC

visit

N/A

needs hearing

aids

N/A

8/21/2020

N/A

hearing aids

issued

N/A

pickup hearing pocket talker

aids

issued

N/A

hearing aids issued

will receive hearing aids upon arrival N/A

12/31/2019 N/A

pickup hearing

aids

N/A

hearing aids

issued

N/A

N/A

N/A

hearing aids issued Hearing aids picked up
Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 26

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 158 of 985 - Page ID#: 3746

hearing aids

Picked up hearing aids

picked up

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ...
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

N/A 4/11/2019

N/A

N/A

N/A

1/15/2020

11/20/2019 4/13/2017

3/17/2020

11/29/2019 1/9/2018

7/9/2020

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

7/30/2019 110

Declined further hearing services 8/21/2020
223

12/17/2019 27

6/2/2017 50

5/28/2020 72

12/31/2019 32

1/31/2018 22

8/25/2020 47

Doesn't Qualify for hearing aids

Inmate transferred before being tested so there was a large gap between when he presented the problem and when he got tested.

Re-testing delayed due to covid-19 pandemic

Delayed shipping and delivery due to covid-19.

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 27

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 159 of 985 - Page ID#: 3747

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

9/5/2019

6/14/2019

9/27/2019

Upon intake to

GRCC

3/14/2016

1/26/2018

5/7/2016

10/22/2018 12/30/2019

8/26/2018 11/7/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Provider appointment
10/18/2019
3/10/2020

Intake at RCC 7/28/2020 8/25/2020

Physical 9/30/2019 9/30/2019

Was told by

patient he had

received hearing

test at KSR but

never received

aids

Sick call

3/3/2017 3/3/2017

4/20/2016 4/20/2016

Failed hearing assessment

Inmate was at another facility when hearing loss was documented Sickcall

2/15/2018 2/15/2018

6/13/2016 2/3/2017

1/22/2019 1/22/2019

Upon intake at Upon intake

RCC

@ RCC

Physical

1/4/2020 1/4/2020

9/6/2018 9/6/2018

11/13/2019 11/13/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Unspecified Hearing Loss, bilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

Hearing aids

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

ordered

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that

it complies with KyDOC policy.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

Unspecified Sensorineural hearing loss, hearing loss unspecified ear bilateral

Bilateral hearing Sensorineural

loss

hearing loss

Bilateral Hearing loss/Hearing aids ordered

Unspecified Hearing loss, bilateral

Unspecified Hearing Loss, Sensineural unspecified ear hearing loss

unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

Has hearing aids

Has hearing aids

has hearing aids in working order has hearing aids in working order Has hearing aids

has hearing has hearing

Has hearing aid has hearing aid aids

aid

Documentation provided in binder

Documentation

provided in

Documentation

binder

provided in binder

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 28

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 3748

Page: 160 of 985 - Page

Medical Visit 1 - Date

9/5/2019

6/14/2019

9/27/2019

3/3/2017

4/20/2016

2/15/2018

6/13/2016

10/22/2018 1/4/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Description

Provider appointment Intake

physical

Audiology consultation

Audiology OSMT to ENT Consultation

Hearing test preformed

Sickcall

Audiogram performed

9/16/2018 11/7/2019
Audicus test preformed physical

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date
Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description

answered yes on

Hearing aids Audiogram-

Voiced concerns hearing

ordered audicus were

needs hearing

with hearing questionaire test

recommended aids

Hearing aids were issued

bilateral hearing loss/hearing aids issued

Referred to provider for evaluation

unspecified hearing aids

hearing loss, recommende audiogram

unspecified ear d

ordered

10/17/2019 7/28/2020

9/30/2019

Audiology consultation was sent to Dr Kemen and

5/19/2016

3/6/2018

9/28/2016

1/22/2019

1/27/2020

10/15/2018 11/13/2020

Hearing

assessment with audicus test

provider

completed

Audicus test performed

Patient received

hearing aids on

8/9/2018

ENT

Hearing aid pick Molding for new aids Audicus Hearing Pick up hearing issued hearing audicus test

up

were made

Test performed aid

aids

performed

test incomplete,

Ordered audicus needs to be re- need hearing

test

tested

aids

Patient received

hearing aids on ordered hearing Received

8/9/2018

aids

hearing aids

Received new hearing Hearing aid

aids

ordered

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid received

severe hearing loss both ears

10/18/2019 8/25/2020

11/18/2019 N/A

8/10/2016

N/A

2/3/2017

3/5/2019

N/A

N/A

12/17/2019

Audicus test performed

pickup hearing

Audicus Re-test aid

N/A

pocket talker

needed

N/A

Hearing test preformed

issued hearing

aid

N/A

pickup

N/A

hearing aid

Severe hearing hearing aid

incomplete test loss both ears issued

N/A

3/10/2020

8/31/2020

Provider test Audicus retest review

3/2/2020

N/A

hearing aids lost

during transfer

from EKCC

N/A

hearing aids needed

Ordered hearing pocket talker

aid for right ear issued

N/A

3/13/2020

N/A

hearing aids

ordered

N/A

pocket talker

issued

N/A

5/19/2016

N/A

pickup hearing aids from ENT N/A

hearing aids

issued

N/A

9/10/2019

N/A

HOH Physical N/A

New hearing aids were hearing aid

received

recieed

N/A

N/A

8/13/2020

N/A

Issued new

hearing aid due

N/A

to old one being N/A

issued hearing

N/A

aid

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 29

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 161 of 985 - Page ID#: 3749

Hearing aids in

working order,

N/A

no hearing

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ...
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

9/5/2019

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

9/27/2019

3/3/2018

3/14/2016

1/24/2018

9/28/2016

1/22/2019

12/30/2019 8/26/2018 11/7/2019

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

11/18/2019 52

8/9/2018 187

5/19/2016 66

3/6/2018 41

2/3/2017 126

3/5/2019 30

1/27/2020 28

10/15/2018 12/17/2019

50

40

193
Had to retest due to no incomplete test/no results

This was done at KSR and inmate Had to go to was transferred outside ENTduring process delayed process
Made sure inmates hearing aid was delivered to GRCC

The appointment for hearing test had to be rescheduled at outside facility due to security staff which delayed the process.
Inmate received his hearing aid

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 30

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 162 of 985 - Page ID#: 3750

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

4/1/2015

Upon intake at WKCC 7/3/2018

1/21/2020

9/18/2018

7/23/2020

5/23/2019

12/7/2018

8/21/2016

2/25/2019

8/19/2019

10/6/2016 6/13/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Inmate was at another facility when hearing became problematic

Upon intake hearing questionaire Physical

2/6/2017 9/26/2016

8/5/2018 8/5/2018

1/23/2020

Failed whisper

test

H&P

10/2/2018 7/28/2020 10/2/2018 7/28/2020

Complaints of

During

hard of

Failed whisper intake/failed

hearing

test

whisper test

OSMT to UK Intake @ RCC Intake CC at RCC ENT

Failed whisper test at RCC

5/23/2019 12/13/2018 10/17/2016 2/25/2019 7/28/2020 5/23/2019 12/13/2018 10/30/2017 2/25/2019 7/28/2020

11/15/2016
OSMT for audiogram

6/14/2019 6/14/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Bilateral hearing Sensoneural

loss in L ear/deaf hearing loss,

in R ear

bilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

Has hearing aids

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that Documentation

it complies with KyDOC policy.

provided in

binder

has hearing aids

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor This hearing

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop device doesn’t

system.

requir a T-coil

receptor

Unspecified hearing loss

Unspecified hearing loss, unspecified ear

Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

Unspecified

hearing loss, Bilateral

bilateral

hearing loss

Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

Unspecified

unspecified Unspecified

hearing loss, sensorineural hearing loss

unspecified ear hearing loss bilateral

has hearing

aid in working has hearing

order

aids

Has hearing Has hearing

aids in

aids in

Has hearing

working order working order aids

Does not qualify for hearing aids. has hearing aids

Documentatio n provided in binder

Has hearing aids in working order

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor

This hearing device doesn’t requir a T-coil receptor

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 31

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 3751

Page: 163 of 985 - Page

Medical Visit 1 - Date

9/26/2016

8/1/2018 1/23/2020 10/2/2018 7/23/2020 5/23/2019 12/13/2018 10/17/2016

8/19/2019

5/18/2018 6/14/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Preformed hearing test
Appointment was made for a second hearing test

Audicus

Audicus

Seen provider Audiogram Audiogram H&P

Appointment

was made for

a second

hearing test Hearing aids

due to

were

audiogram incomplete recommende Audiogram

ordered

testing

d

ordered

Audicus

Audicus

Preformed

Audiogram Audiogram hearing test

Hearing Aids needed

Hearing Aids needed

Confirmed hearing loss; molding for hearing aids were made

Intake CC

Sick call

Audicus Audiogram

failed whisper test

requesting hearing test

hearing aids were recommende d

Medical Visit 2 - Date
Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date
Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description

8/23/2016

8/5/2018

more reliable

hearing test was audicus

preformed

hearing test

Hearing aids were ordered

hearing aids needed

2/6/2017

8/1/2018

Hearing aid pick F/U to review

up

results

Hearing aids

Received hearing ordered by

aids

provider

N/A

9/11/2018

Pickup

N/A

hearing aids

Hearing aids

N/A

received

N/A

N/A

10/19/2018 7/28/2020 7/19/2019 12/21/2019 3/3/2017

Hearing aid issue

hearing test completed

Isue of

Issue of

hearing device hearing aids

Molding for new aids were made

Hearing aids needs hearing Hearing aids Hearing aids Picked up new

were received aids

receieved received

hearing aids

N/A

8/21/2020 N/A

N/A

10/30/2017

New hearing

test

preformed/ne

hearing aids

w aids were

N/A

issued

N/A

N/A

ordered

pickup

Picked up new

N/A

hearing aids N/A

N/A

hearing aids

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

7/28/2020

6/19/2018 7/22/2019

audicus test completed
hearing aids ordered 8/21/2020

Issue of Chronic Care hearing device

Refused OSMT for audiogram

hearing aids received

N/A

Hearing aids

issued

N/A

hearing aids

picked up

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A N/A

N/A Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 32

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 164 of 985 - Page ID#: 3752

Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Medical Visit 6 - Date

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Medical Visit 6 - Description

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ...
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

N/A 9/26/2016

N/A 7/3/2018 1/23/2019 10/2/2018 7/23/2020

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

2/6/2017

9/11/2018

10/19/2018 8/21/2020

131

70

17

29

Audicus failed

to send

results

awaiting

repeat test

Went out to an outside facility while at NTC. Facility had to Was delayed retest and then seeing the mold and fit aids provider

N/A
5/23/2019 7/19/2019 57

N/A
6/13/2019 7/22/2019 39

N/A

10/17/2016

8/19/2019

10/30/2016

Doesn't qualify for hearing aids

8/21/2020

13

367

Refused OSMT for further treatment

Test was ordered, but never completed at RCC upon intake/failing whisper test

N/A
6/14/2019 7/22/2019 38

Inmate received aids as soon as he could

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 33

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 165 of 985 - Page ID#: 3753

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

9/22/2017 1/16/2018 11/15/2017 6/8/2016

6/29/2018

12/13/2016 5/17/2019

Upon intake @ Upon arrival RCC 1/5/2018 7/16/2018

7/12/2017

7/11/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Upon intake aPtatGieRnCtC refused all hearing

PPhatyiseincat ldid not want further

Refused

Upon intake to GRCC

Inmate was at

another

facility when

hearing

became a Failed Hearing Failed

problem

assesment Whisper Test

Physical

11/15/2017 6/8/2016 1/4/2018 7/25/2016

6/p2p9/2018 1/9/2017 with Audiologsit on 9/25/2019

6/4/2019 6/4/2019

Intake 8/9/2016 8/9/2016

Failed Hearing Questionaire Intake

1/12/2018 2/12/2018

7/17/2018 7/17/2018

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Refused

Confirmed

bilateral

hearing loss;

not a canidate

for hearing Sensorineural

Sensorineural aids/return if Hearing loss Conductive

hearing loss worsens

bilateral

Hearing Loss

unspecified hearling loss,bilateral

Unspecified

Hearing Loss, Congenital

bilateral

Hearing loss

7/17/2018

Upon intake

at RCC

Hearing test

7/28/2017 7/11/2019

7/28/2017 11/7/2019

Mixed

conductive &

sensorineural

hearing loss

unilateral left

ear, with

unrestricted

hearing on unspecified

contralateral hearing loss,

side.

bilateral

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

Refused

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that Documentatio

it complies with KyDOC policy.

n in patient

chart

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

Has hearing No hearing Has hearing

aids

aid is needed aids

Documentatio Documentatio Documentatio

n provided in n provided in n provided in

binder

binder

binder

This hearing This hearing This hearing

device doesn’t device doesn’t device doesn’t

requir a T-coil requir a T-coil requir a T-coil

receptor

receptor

receptor

has hearing aids

has hearing aid

has hearing

aids in

Has hearing

has hearing aid working order aid.

has hearing aid

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 34

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 3754

Page: 166 of 985 - Page

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Refused Refused
Refused

12/6/2018 Preformed hearing test
Hearing aids received

7/25/2016 8/7/2018 12/13/2016 6/4/2019

Preformed Audiology

hearing test consultation Whisper Test Audicus

Mild bilateral

hearing

loss/was told

to see

Hearing aids

Audiologist if were

hearng

recommende failed whisper Hearing aids

worsens

d

test

needed

8/9/2016 Audiology consult
ordered hearing aids

1/12/2018 failed hearing test
referred to outside provider

7/17/2018 Audiogram

7/28/2017 Hears to You hearing test performed

7/11/2019
audicus test performed

needs hearing Hearing aids

aids

needed

undetermined

Medical Visit 2 - Date
Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date
Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description

Refused
Refused Refused
Refused
Refused NA NA NA NA NA

1/4/2018 11/19/2019
Audicus Audiology test Testing

9/20/2018 1/9/2017 7/19/2019 9/29/2016 2/12/2018

Outisde trip to

Picked up

Audiology &

hearing aids

Issue of

Hearing

Issue of

from Midwest Hears to you

hearing device Center

hearing device ENT

Hearing test

7/30/2018 8/23/2017 11/7/2019
Issue of pocket talker hearing device Audicus retest

Hearing aids ordered

Audiogram results sent to Hearing aid Dr. kemen received

hearing impaired

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aids

received

received

ordered

pocket talker Hearing aid

issued

recieved

unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

N/A

11/22/2019 NA

2/9/2017 NA

NA

3/1/2018

12/7/2018 NA

12/10/2019

Outside medical

Audicus

trip to Hears to

pickup

N/A

Follow up NA

NA

NA

You

Physical

NA

hearing aid

Not been

wearing

hearing aids.

hearing aids

pocket talker

Picked up

No hearing

hearing aid

N/A

were ordered NA

issued

NA

NA

hearing aids complaints NA

issued

N/A

12/17/2019 NA

4/10/2019 NA

NA

12/10/2019 NA

Hearing aid

N/A

pick up

NA

Physical

NA

NA

HOH Physical NA

received

Referral for

N/A

hearing aid NA

hearing

NA

NA

No hearing complaints NA

N/A

N/A

NA

8/22/2019 NA

NA

NA

Audicus test

N/A

N/A

NA

ordered

NA

NA

NA Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 35

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 167 of 985 - Page ID#: 3755

Test

performed

NA

N/A

N/A

NA

8/30/2019 NA

NA

NA

NA

N/A

N/A

NA

1/21/2020 NA

NA

NA

NA

N/A

N/A

NA

f/u OSMT NA

NA

NA

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ...
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

NA REFUSED

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

N/A

N/A

NA

Needs MRI NA

NA

Refused further hearing treatment

12/6/2017
1/4/2018 32

11/19/2019 8/7/2018

12/17/2019 9/20/2018

28

43

1/9/2017

5/17/2019 8/9/2016 1/12/2018

7/19/2019 58

9/29/2016 37

3/1/2018 62

NA

7/16/2018 7/12/2017 7/11/2019

7/30/2018 14

8/23/2017 30

12/10/2019 152

Was referred to outside provider for further evaluation.
Received hearing aids

First test was undetermined , had to be retsted

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 36

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 168 of 985 - Page ID#: 3756

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

9/9/2019

upon intake at

RCC

2/26/2020

8/13/19 transferred from Roeder 1/4/2018

4/13/2019 2/11/2019 unknown 6/18/2019 8/14/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Failed whisper intake @

test

GRCC

9/22/2019 2/28/2020 9/22/2019 2/28/2020

Presented at Roeder
8/13/2019
12/12/2019

inmate refused on 1/4/2018 any further testing or treatment stated he has adapted to tinhme ahteearrienfgusloedsson Sick Call 1/4/2018 any further testing or 4/17/2019
1/4/2018 any further testing or 8/27/2020

Intake 2/12/2019 2/12/2019

Failed onsite whisper test uRnefkunsoawl snigned at KSR for all hearing services on 7/2/2019

Through sickcall 10/9/2019

7/2/2019 10/9/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

unspecified hearing loss, unspecified ear.

unspecified hearing loss, unspecified ear

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

Has hearing does not

(d) no hearing aid is needed

aid in working qualify for

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

order.

hearing aids.

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that

it complies with KyDOC policy.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

Sensorineural hearing loss

moderate hearing loss both ears

Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral

inmate refused on 1/4/2018 any further testing or treatment stated hearing aid he has adapted to ordered for the hearing loss left ear.

hearing aids in working order

Documentation provided in binder

This hearing device doesn’t requir a Tcoil receptor

Bilateral Sensorineural sensorineural hearing loss hearing loss

has hearing

aid

has hearing aid

This hearing device doesn’t require a TCoil receptor

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 37

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 3757

Page: 169 of 985 - Page

Medical Visit 1 - Date

9/22/2019 2/26/2020 12/12/2019 N/A

Apr-19

Feb-19

7/2/2019 10/9/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

RCC Audiogram physical

Audicus Audiogram N/A

Sick call

Intake screening

Audicus Hearing test Audicus test performed

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Hearing aid ordered

Hearing aid

needed.

audicus test needed

N/A

ordered hearing loss audiogram

Hearing test preformed

Sensorineural hearing loss, bilateral

Medical Visit 2 - Date
Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date
Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description

11/1/2019 2/28/2020 1/21/2020 N/A

pickup

Issue of

hearing aid. audicus test hearing aid N/A

issued hearing does not meet

aid for left criteria for Received

ear.

hearing aids hearing aid N/A

NA

NA

N/A

NA

NA

N/A

NA

NA

N/A

NA

NA

N/A

NA

NA

N/A

NA

NA

N/A

NA

NA

N/A

NA

NA

N/A

4/17/2019 2/12/2019
Audiogram Provider appt performed
referral to hearing aids outside ENT needed 7/25/2019 5/9/2019

OSMT to

pickup

Midwest ENT hearing aids

Recommende hearing aids

d MRI

issued

8/19/2019

MRI Refer back to Otolaryngolog y
9/19/2019

Audiogram

8/1/2019 12/20/2019

Picked up Picking up hearing hearing aids aids

Received

Received hearing

hearing aids aids

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 38

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 170 of 985 - Page ID#: 3758

Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

NA

NA

N/A

NA

NA

N/A

NA

NA

N/A

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ...
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

NA 9/22/2019

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

11/1/2019 40

NA

N/A

12/12/2019 Refused

Doesn't qualify for hearing aids

1/21/2019

39

unchanged
2/17/2020 Physical No hearing aids and still doing well 8/27/2g020 for left ear ordered on

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

8/13/2020 2/11/2019
5/9/2019 In progress 87

6/18/2019

Refused all hearing services

8/1/2019

32

10/9/2019
12/20/2019 74

Wasn't reviewed unitl 11/15/2019 System established of followup to ensure that it goes to the provider 1 week after the testing

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 39

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 171 of 985 - Page ID#: 3759

Technology

How many

FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier

system, or other assistive listening device.

21

Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable

amplifiers)

16

Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

2

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the

like?

3

Bed shakers

30

Vibrating watches

Vibrating alarm clocks

30

Pagers

0

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices

currently in use or under consideration not

mentioned above.

12

Earphones for parole hearings

1

Earphones for orientation videos

0

Where When obtained Specifications (URL)

How do inmates obtain access?

How well do they work? Other comments

all dorms 2017

all dorms 2019

3,6

2020

used on all tv in day room
used to assist in hearing on phones two through Secures

installed
Officers Desk always available

very well
ok good

all Reciever are located in Dorms
Avilable anytim need quiet place

Sap, School 2016 1and 6 orderd order 1and 6 after confr 0

Used when teaching class inmates can hear through radio located with staff

1/30/1900 ADA coor

to help wake inmates up for appointments

ADA coor

to assist in fire and wake up

ADA coor

good good good good

For HOH only

1 and 6 2020 parole 2019 d building order

strobe lights assist in parole hearing assist in orientation videp

installed in cells parole room Build d confrence room

good good good

assist in count time assist in parole hearing assist in orientation

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 40

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 172 of 985 - Page

Documentation and narrative to provide

Date reviewed

ID#: 3760 Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

Grievances:

1. Provide summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers

formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Should include the issues, summary of See Attched

response, resolution

See Attched

2. Provide full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing

accommodation issues.

see attached

Discipline

3. For all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving an inmate who

signs, provide report of inmate name, date, and communication method for

each.

There were no disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving inmate who signs

4. Provide documentation for all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Auxiliary aids 5. VRI Log (provide). 6. TTY instructions (provide) 7. VRI instructions (provide) Audiology processing delays 8.A list of each inmate currently at your institution whose audiology processing FINISHED after March 2020, for whom such processing took or is taking over 60 days, documentation of the explanation for any such delay, and a description of any steps taken to avoid similar problems going forward. Information provided to inmates, policies, etc. 9. Any pages of the inmate handbook that address disability, and the date for that version of the handbook. 10. The current Deaf/HOH brochure and any other documents provided to deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates. 11.The medical request form currently provided to prisoners. 12. Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2020 addressing deaf/hard-of-hearing issues. 13. A list of each use of an in-person sign-language interpreter from February 2020 to present, and any occasions in which such an interpreter was requested but denied. Please provide written responses to the following questions:

yes 09/24/20 yes 09/24/20 yes 09/24/20
2020

14. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty because staff members are wearing masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?

15. How many staff members are currently using clear masks? How is the decision made who will wear a clear mask?

16. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty with their hearing aids because of the design of their own masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?

There were no disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving inmate failing to obey an order or stand for count See Attached See Attched See Attched
There were no new Arrivals due to the Pandemic and all All Audio Processing were up to Date
yes updated 2020 hand book page 3 and 4 in English and Spanish See Attached Yes available in the Library there are Flash Cards Avilble in Each Dorm yes The staff received trainning on the yearly CBT training the ADA coordinarorcompleted Computer based training and yearly CBT . There were I have attached a copy of Inmate Hatfield who required Two interpreters for his Parole hearing . This was in 2019 that is at all that was needed .
I have asked the Hard of hearing if they can hear what im saying and they have had no problem. I have issued clear mas for staff I have the Dorm Officers in Dorm 1( 3) staff ADA Coordinator and assistant coordinator and assistant 6 staff Total as of now
I have spoken to each individual inmate and asked them if they are having problems with the Mask that was assigned to and was it affecting there hearing aids . If the inmate requested a ear tie mask they were given one . I have handed out 25 tie mask so far. 9/24/20

17. How many inmates have been issued masks that don't have ear ties?

ALL Mask that are issued have ear ties . If the inmate was issued a Mask that doesn’t have ear ties he can exchange it for one with ear ties

18. What if anything have you done to solve the problem of inmates having trouble hearing announcements? Please respond in detail, with dates on all responsive steps, prerequisites for any assistance, etc.

We have installed flashing lights inside some of the Cells in Dorm 1 and Dorm 6 we try and move all HOH Inmate to the bottom floor. All
Officers are advised to assist in waking inmates . we do ID counts so they are advised Inmkates are now able to purchEaxsehiWbiattc2h,eGs .RCC, p. 41
Inmates that have a harder time hearing are isuued shakers clocks. There have been flashing lights insalled in some of the Dorms

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 173 of 985 - Page

Documentation and narrative to provide

Date reviewed

ID#: 3761 Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

19. How have you educated staff that it is inappropriate to write up an inmate for behavior that is caused by a hearing impairment (e.g., talking loudly, not following instructions that could not be heard)? If there was a memo, please provide that.

I have advised and met with all shifts before writing an inmate up check there ID and see if there HOH .

Yes I have showed staff to check there ID if the Inmate is Hard of hearing . Before issuing Disiplinary reports All ID are new

20. Please describe in detail how inmates are supposed to get hearing aid batteries, including how long it should take them each time.

Inmate can get hearing aid batteries when ever they are needed . They are exchanged for old batteries during pill call

Inmate Batteries are exchanges at pill call 3 times a day new for old plenty batteries on hand

21. When an inmate reports that a hearing aid is not working, what are the steps followed to evaluate the complaint? Include all relevant copays and other procedures.

When an inmate reports that his hearing aid is not working I advise the inmate to complete a sick call slip and I UAII Jackson send medical an e-mail advising them of the situation. The inmate is then called to medical to see if the hearing aid can be replaced or if it needs replaced. The inmate is then issued a pocket talker until the hearing aid is replaced. There is no medical charge for this issue.

22. When someone is denied binaural hearing aids, are they provided information on the standard for receiving such assistance, and the opportunity for appeal? How many inmates have received binaural aids since the current binaural hearing aid policy has been in effect?

They are exspalined how they will get only one Hearing aide . If they state they need two that request is sent to Dr Kemen/TJOC

23. What arrangements are made to provide vibrating watches/clocks for inmates who are indigent? 24. Please describe, in detail, each step that takes place once a person is identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing, to evaluate/offer any auxiliary aids. Include who is responsible for each step.

Any inmate that is indigent can purchase a watch and the institution will provide as long as the inmate is able to work and has less then 5 00 in his account
See attached

25. Please describe, in detail, any situation in 2019 or 2020 in which a deaf/hard-of-hearing inmate has been denied a job or other opportunity (access to a program or the like) because of their disability. Include the inmate’s name, the date, and the circumstances. 26. Please list all training that you have received for your role as ADA Coordinator.

There were no inmates Denied a Job See Attached

27. Please provide an update on all items in your Deaf/HOH action plan (previously shared with me).

We have installed 6 Flashing lights in Dorm 1 cells and 6 in Dorm 6 , Captel Phones were installed in Dorm 6 and Dorm 1 and we have Two TTY machines that will be located in Dorm 1 and the School. we have received Watches for inmates , we have also received Clear Mask For Inmates or Officers to speak with inmate if Needed. All inmates have recieved New ID and ear tie masks if needed . I have let all inmates know if they are having a problem with there mask and hearing aid to come and see me . I have spoken with all HOH Inmates and advised them if they are having problems with there mask agatating there hearing they can request with ear ties.

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 42

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 174 of 985 - Page ID#: 3762

To: From : Date : Subject:

Janet Conover, Director of Operations ADA Coordinator Mark Jackson UAII, ADA Assistant Steven Gee UAI July 31, 2020 Green River Correctional Updated HOH Report

I Unit Administrator II Mark Jackson, Grievance Coordinator at the Green River Correctional Complex, have completed the following for the Hard of hearing. GRCC has updated and have installed the following to meet the following demands for the Adams et al. v. Kentucky et al. Settlement Agreement--Deaf/HOH. GRCC has installed two (2) captl phones and have been contracted these are connected through Secures so inmates can use them at any time when needed. The Captl phones are in Dorm 1 and Dorm 6 these two Dorms will house the HOH at GRCC.
There have been four (4) strobe lights installed in Dorm 1 cells 17,18,19,20 BL Walk. These lights were installed to assist if the fire alarm is activated or inmates are released to the yard, the assigned Dorm Officer will activate the lights. The Officer will have a remote that will activate these lights. The lights have been installed so that the HOH/Deaf inmates can see these lights when activated.
GRCC also have two (2) TTY devices that are in the School and Building D. These can be retrieved at any time when needed. The Purple phone is in Dorm 1 with a curtain to block the other inmates from viewing the Inmate speaking with their family. Inmates will sign the log located at the Officers desk when using this device. The VRI is in Building D Office and can be retrieved at any time and taken to where it is needed. There are handwritten directions for both the TTY and the VRI and VRS so that it is easier for staff

Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 43

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 175 of 985 - Page ID#: 3763
to follow. The VRI has been used in court hearings, RHU and medical if needed. The VRI/VRS has a 12 ft. cord so that it can be connected to the internet.
There have been phone amplifiers placed in Dorms 1-9 so inmates can use if they are having problems hearing while talking on the phones. All dorms have Closed Captioned on all TVs in the Dayrooms. There are FM transmitters connected to all TV’s. All inmates can use their radios and tune into that channel so they can hear the TV. There are three (3) FM transmitters with microphones that can be and have been used in the schools if needed. Inmates can bring their headphones and radios to connect to the transmitters, so that inmates that are HOH can hear and follow the class.
There are Bed shakers available if inmates require these. There are bed shakers with strobe lights that can be connected to the fire alarm for the Deaf inmates. There are four (4) of these devices located in Building D Office and can be assigned to the inmate when needed. These strobes and shakers are used in cells Dorm 1 BL 17,18,19,20 on lower walks and extra plug in receptacles were installed in these dorms. There are 25 Bed shakers available for inmates and are assigned to them if requested but must return when transferred. Watches (Casio) that vibrate can be ordered and have been through Amazon. These help the inmates to wake up on time for any appointments. Inmates can fill out order forms and then are approved by the ADA coordinator and assistant coordinator. These forms are available in the dorms and Caseworkers. ALL inmates were notified of the watch purchases and are for the HOH only.
Copies of the Adams et al. v. Kentucky et al. Settlement Agreement--Deaf/HOH can be located in the library and legal Office and inmates can review these at any time. I have sound amplifiers on hand if the inmate needs one while waiting on hearing aids and medical have these that are issued out if needed. The medical department has plenty of hearing aid filters and batteries if needed. All the inmate needs to do is fill out a sick call slip and return it to the medical department or get in touch with the Grievance coordinator. Koms precautions have been updated and all HOH inmates added. The ADA coordinator and one medical staff interview all Inmates that arrive at the institution. The inmates are advised who the ADA coordinator and the assistant coordinator are and what to do if ADA assistance needed. The medical staff that speak with the inmates also advise them on what to do. The DOC sends an updated statewide list of HOH, these are sent to medical to be updated in the medical chart, and copies are sent to all staff so they know who the HOH are at this institution. The Assessment forms are then scanned into koms. All HOH IDS are made on the same day they arrive and they are given a HOH sign to hang on their door.
Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 44

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 176 of 985 - Page ID#: 3764
The Institution has placed a sign in the front entrance stating that this institution houses HOH inmates this is placed where visitors and staff can view this. ALL Inmates are given a brochure when assessed containing information for the HOH. These Brochures are also available in the Library and CTO office. AS soon as the institution returns to normal operations, the sign language class for inmates will resume. There have been flash cards made and placed in All Dorms. Mark Jackson UAII
Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 45

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 177 of 985 - Page ID#: 3765
Exhibit 2, GRCC, p. 46

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 178 of 985 - Page ID#: 3766
Kentucky Correctional Institution for Women

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 179 of 985 - Page ID#: 3767

Deaf/HOH or both?
Both
Both Both Both
Both
Both
Both Both Both
Both Both Both

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

A ADA coordinator

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Lisa Wegner

X

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

2 coordinator appointed?

No

X

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Yes

X

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates?

Yes, by memo

X

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates in a 5 timely and appropriate manner? How?

when change was made

X

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? (THIS 6 REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

Yes

X

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit 7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

Posted Memo on bulletin boards and library

X

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

Yes

X

9 Describe training

Computer based training

NA

Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately cover

10 information?

X

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training)

X

12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

X

Both

13 Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's powerpoint)

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with settlement

Both

14 agreement?

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

X

This is part of training

X

Received weekly

X

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in

Both

17 implementing the settlement?

Both

18 Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf inmates?

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on deaf

Both

19 inmates?

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the inmates in

Both

20 those situations?

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective way with the

Both

21 monitor?

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the monitor

Both

22 when necessary?

Both

B Reporting obligations

If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was monitor

Both

1 notified?

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

Both

2 inmates?

Both

3 Is the list complete?

Both

4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs,

Both

6 activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe)

Both

7 Was it reported to the monitor?

Both

8 Was the report complete?

Both

9 Was the report timely?

Both

10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert?

Both

11 If yes, was the monitor notified?

Updated weekly
Yes Yes VRI used when needed Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes

X X X X X X X
X X X X NA
NA

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 180 of 985 - Page ID#: 3768

Deaf/HOH or both?
Both Both Both HOH HOH
HOH HOH Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Both Both Both Both
Both Both
Both Both
Both Both
Both Both Both
Both

# Issue/Question Did the institution consult with the monitor about the non-
12 auditory alert? 13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated? C Intake/Orientation - Corrections
1 Hard of hearing inmates 2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?
Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic 3 notifications.) 4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)
Deaf inmates 5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving? 6 Describe 7 Effective communications planning?
8 Effective communication provided? 9 Describe 10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed? 11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?
Orientation videos 12 Captioned? 13 Shown in a quiet space? 14 Amplification if needed?
Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate? 15 (Describe) D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services
Effective Communication during general medical intake, and during medical care more generally: 1 Is there effective communications planning? Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if 2 interpretation is needed? 3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office? Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications 4 techniques? Notice to medical staff: 5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How? Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover and 6 within the file?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

CC video and a quiet area, amplifiers are avalable if needed VRI available and used when needed when needed In progress with company, VRI used Yes Yes VRI used if needed
Testing

Deaf

7 Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate accommodations.

Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site providers of

Deaf

8 need for interpretation?

Deaf

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

Deaf

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

Deaf

11 Adequate notice?

Outside providers offering effective communication to inmates

Deaf

12 who sign?

Deaf

13 How?

Both

Hearing screening/medical intake:

Both

14 Performed for all new inmates?

Both

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

Both

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

Both

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA x
NA x
NA x
NA x
x
NA x x
NA x x x
x
NA x
x
x
x
NA x
x
NA
x
x NA
x
x
NA NA
x x x x

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 181 of 985 - Page ID#: 3769

Deaf/HOH or both? Both
Both Both Both Both Both Both Both Both Both
Both
Both Both
Both Both Both Both Both Both

# Issue/Question 18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake? How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by 19 staff? 20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical) 21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy? 22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe. 23 Medical history includes hearing questions? Other methods of access: 24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening? 25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening? 26 Inmate can obtain screening on request? If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there 27 further assessment? Adequate determination of need for designation/ audiology 28 services? How? 29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)? Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or HOH, 30 apart from audiology services decision? After assessment, does medical: 31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert? 32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file? 33 Notify ADA coordinator? 34 Is notification prompt?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) x

Describe: Read to them, use VRI if needed yes

NA NA
x x x NA x x x
x

x
x
x
NA x x x x

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

HOH

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

HOH

40 initial request/questionnaire?

HOH

41 each relevant medical visit?

HOH

42 any audiology visit?

HOH

43 hearing aid provision?

HOH

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks?

HOH

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

HOH

46 Shared with monitor when requested

Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it

47 take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Describe.

In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait more

48 than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?

49 What is the cause of the delay?

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) to

50 improve this process?

HOH

Co-pay and availability issues:

HOH

47 Charged only once -- not again for followups

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

HOH

50 7 days/week?

NA x x x x x
NA x x x x x x x
NA
NA NA
NA NA
x NA
x x x

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 182 of 985 - Page ID#: 3770

Deaf/HOH

or both? # Issue/Question

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) x

Both

E Information provided inmates

Both

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe)

Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-discrimination and

Both

2 ADA services?

Both

Brochure? Items to include:

Both

3 Non-discrimination obligation

Both

4 Effective communication obligation

Both

5 Auxiliary aids and services available

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services (including

Both

6 hearing aids, and batteries)

Both

7 Communication equipment available, and how to use

Both

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

Both

Other items:

Both

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

Both

10 Request for Accommodations/ Communications Assistance

Both

11 Medical Request form includes request for accommodations

Both

12 Job application form includes request for accommodations

Both

13 Waiver forms

Both

14 Classification form includes request for accommodations

Both

15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations

SAP and other programming form includes request for

Both

16 accommodation

Both

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

x

x

NA x x x

x

x

x

NA

Scheduled as needed

x

x

x

x

x

Classification is done on one on one basis

The inmate does not fill out a form the staff

conduct the classification.

The disciplinary form is in KOMS and the

inmate does not fill out a form.

x

x

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in

18 law library? (Need to check)

Both

Do request forms:

Both

19 list available services comprehensively?

clearly explain services and aids (what they are and when

Both

20 they are available?

Both

21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?

expressly ask about preferred mode of

Both

22 communication/needed services and why they are useful?

Both

23 explain which items are free?

Both

24 encompass religious and volunteer-provided programming?

Both

Effective communication of these resources:

Both

25 Are the materials in language accessible to each inmate?

Both

26 Is this information provided with effective communication?

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity

to meet with a KDOC staff member and interpreter to ask

Both

27 questions about the materials?

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

for a program with staff, is effective communication

Both

28 provided?

Both

29 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

x NA
x x x x x x NA x x
x
NA
x
x

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 183 of 985 - Page ID#: 3771

Deaf/HOH or both? #

Issue/Question Effective communication re. programming

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) NA

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

Both

30 in education with staff, is effective communication provided?

Both

31 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Both

F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

Both

2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

7 Clear process to obtain? Describe

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Both

12 Working process to get new inmate alerts added? (Describe)

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

14 Appropriately obvious

Both

15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?)

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

x

x

Not posted on each building but is posted inside at each inmates living area.
ADA Coordinator adds once notified by medical.

x x
x
x NA
x x x x x NA x
x
x x x NA x x x x x x

Both

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?

Both

23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator?

Both

24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver?

Both

25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?

Both

26 Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested ID?

Both

27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Both

G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

If taken, it would be temporary to examine and then returned to inmate
Yes No na

NA x x

NA x

x

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 184 of 985 - Page ID#: 3772

Deaf/HOH or both?
Both
Both
Both Both
Both Both
Both Both Both Both Both Both Both Both
HOH HOH
Both Both Both Both
Both Both
Both
Both
Both

# Issue/Question Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified
3 deaf/hoh inmate? At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of
4 communication expressly ascertained and documented? At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate
5 about available auxiliary aids and services? 6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?
Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral 7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )
Other assessments For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on 8 intake, has one been done? 9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year? H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided 1 On-person ID cards 2 Cell cards 3 Bed shaker 4 In-person alerts 5 Pager Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where 6 phones are available?) 7 Amplifier for phone Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize 8 communication difficulties? 9 Other amplification 10 Other (describe) General issues Special housing area: Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH inmates? 11 (Describe) 12 If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? (Describe) If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed 13 there? (such a requirement is non-compliant). If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to the 14 inmate? Describe any restrictions. In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is primary 15 consideration given to inmate request?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes
Describe: NA NA

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services

form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or

Both

16 not requesting aids/services, were accommodations provided?

NA

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services documented in

Both

17 inmate institutional files?

Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services shared

Both

18 appropriately with staff?

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Both

20 Have any been out of comission?

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
x

x
x x x NA x x
x x x x

x
x
x
x NA NA NA
NA NA

x
x x x NA NA

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 185 of 985 - Page ID#: 3773

Deaf/HOH or both?
Both Both Both Both Both
Both Both Both Both Both Deaf
Deaf
Deaf
Deaf
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf

# Issue/Question Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from
22 hearing aid? 23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided? 24 Promptly? 25 Has there been a direct threat determination? 26 Describe
Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of 27 impairment and specific dangers posed) 28 Appropriately reported to monitor? 30 Are classes in sign language provided? 31 deaf inmates given notice? 32 priority given to deaf inmates? I Interpretation in general
Qualified interpretation services available: Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation 1 communicated to inmates? covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 2 encounters/communications/settings) Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other 3 volunteer-provided programming? Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation 4 method? 5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences? Standing arrangement with providers? 6 In-person? 7 VRI? Is VRI availability: 8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Have had college class in past

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

x
x x NA NA

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

x x x x
NA x
x
x
x x NA x x NA x

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Deaf

13 In general

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Deaf

16 Splitter?

Deaf

17 Instructions?

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Deaf

21 How?

x

x

x

Inmates schedules with unit staff when a call

will be made. All inmates in RHU get one call

x

every 30 days.

Describe: Yes, maintained by IT

NA

x

x

x

Describe:

NA

x

x

x

x

We receive no complaints of using the VRI

and ineffective communication while using

x

it.

x

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 186 of 985 - Page ID#: 3774

Deaf/HOH or both?
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf
Deaf
Deaf Deaf
Deaf
Deaf Deaf
Deaf Deaf
Deaf
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf
Deaf
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf
Deaf Both Both Both Both Both Both Both Both

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation 22 should be first recourse?
Is in-person interpretation available: 23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical 24 Parole? 25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered 26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.
Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days 27 before?
Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in 28 non-emergency is non-compliant) 29 Describe
in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI 30 was unavailable)
Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred 31 method? 32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.
Written communication is not needed when inmate has low 33 literacy
Qualified interpretation services available: Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other 34 volunteer-provided programming? for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 35 encounters/communications/settings) 36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates? J Hand Restraints 1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs? Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized 2 finding of a security threat? Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might 3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.) 4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed? 5 Staff aware of the issue Off-site medical care: 6 two-point hand restraint system used? restraints removed when necessary for medical 7 communication? K Non-auditory Alerts 1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe) 2 provided to all inmates who need it? 3 can and does it give alerts in real time? 4 sufficient to signal fire alarm? 5 sufficient to signal count alert? 6 programmed to signal different alerts? 7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Description/Notes We utilize the VRI first, but utiilize in person for certain investigation, request, and prior experience on usage. Determined case by cas basis. have not needed classes, investigation for IA Never N/A No
Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

x

x x
x x x
x NA
x
x x x NA x

x x NA x

x
x x NA x
x

NA

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 187 of 985 - Page ID#: 3775

Deaf/HOH or both?
Both Both Both Both
Both Both Both Both Both Both Both
Both
Both

# Issue/Question Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts
9 been denied? 10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working? 11 How often? 12 monitored/recorded formally?
13 Announcement boards 14 used to notify of schedule changes? 15 used consistently? 16 in all dormitories? 17 in gym? 18 in library? 19 audited and monitored?
In-person or personal system notification when an inmate 20 misses a page?
Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only 21 because of disability?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Describe

We are going to research putting them in the

units.

NA

x NA

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

Both

L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

Deaf

2 Allow voice carry-over features?

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Deaf

5 alternative offered

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

6 videophone is out of service.

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

Deaf

10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates?

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

Deaf

12 using ordinary phones?

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

Deaf

14 Free?

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone

Deaf

15 calls?

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

Both

TTY:

Both

18 Installed?

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Describe: NA
NA

x x x
NA x
NA NA
x
NA x x x x x x x x x
NA
NA x x

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 188 of 985 - Page ID#: 3776

Deaf/HOH or both?
Both Both
Both Both Both Both Both Both Both Both
Both Both
Both Both Both Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Both Both Both Both

# Issue/Question Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made
20 available WITH TTY? 21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify) 22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?
location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones 23 for non-deaf inmates? 24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access? 25 Permission needed? 26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe) 27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates? 28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe) 29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently) 30 Can access publicly available relay service phone numbers?
Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions for 31 videophones and TTY is less than equitable? 32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?
If yes, was determination (including reasoning, evidence, etc.) 33 documented? 34 Was monitor notified? 35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?
VRS via laptop 36 Available? 37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU) 38 Used when appropriate?
Phones 39 Amplification in every group of phones? 40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?
CapTel

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Describe: Feb 2020

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

x NA
x x x x NA x
x x
NA

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA x x x
NA x x x

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

43 Request by any inmate denied?

Both

TV/Movies

Both

44 Is captioning available?

Both

45 Is captioning used?

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Installed and tested but are not ready to use.

x

x

None at this time.

x

x

x

x

x

x

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

Both

49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

Both

50 Amplification method? (Describe)

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

Both

53 status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

Both

54 deaf inmates?

Both

M Miscellaneous Devices

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

Describe: Describe in detail

x x NA x
x
x
NA

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 189 of 985 - Page ID#: 3777

Deaf/HOH or both? Both Both
Both Both Both Both Both Both Both Both Both
Deaf Deaf Both

# Issue/Question 3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator? 4 facilitation of purchase? Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied? 5 (Describe) 6 determined on case-by-case basis? 7 because security threat? 8 monitor notified? 9 reasoning explained? ADA coordinator maintains records
10 of requests? 11 of denials? N Disciplinary
Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been 1 punished? 2 Was a re-hearing granted? O Grievances

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

N/A

No

Both

1 Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA coordinator?

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator

Both

2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator?

Both

P Training

Both

Types available

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

Both

3 All appropriate staff?

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

Any additional targeted training on specific needs ? Please

Both

describe in detail

Describe: Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

x x
NA

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA x x
x
x
x
NA x
NA x
NA NA
x
NA

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 11

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAF/HCOHaINsMeA:TE3IS:G1E4TT-INcGvA-P0PR0O0PR0IA1TE-AGSSFISTVANTCE-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 190 of 985 - Page ID#: 3778

If signs to

Auxiliary Bed Shaker? Other Alert TTY Access Personal Phone Shake &

Low literacy? Has

Has

communicate, Aid

(Not

Device (Not (Not

Amplifier (Not Wake (Not

Listed with Signs to (So that written Deaf/HOH Bed/Door noted in KOMS Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; Any other

Housing KOMS ADA communic communication ID Card? (Y Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied; denied;

denied; auxiliary aid

Name

ID

location Precaution? ate (Y/N) is not effective) or waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted) granted)

granted) requested?

PB

Y

n

GED

Y

y

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

nr

PB

Y

y

GED

Y

y

Yes

NA

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

nr

LW

Y

y

9th

Y

y

Yes

NA

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

nr

RHU

Y

n

GED

Y

y

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

nr

PB

Y

n

masters Y

y

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

nr

MB

Y

n

GED

Y

y

n/a

yes

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

nr

MB

Y

n

GED

Y

y

n/a

yes

yes

NR

NR

Granted

NR

Watch

RV

Y

n

9

Y

y

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

nr

MSU

Y

n

12

Y

y

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

nr

PB

y

n

12

y

y

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

nr

LW

y

n

GED

y

y

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

nr

PB

y

n

GED

y

y

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

nr

LW

y

n

GED

y

y

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

nr

RV

y

n

14

y

y

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

Watch

MSU

y

n

11

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

nr

PB

y

n

12

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

Watch

PB

y

n

14

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

Watch

PB

y

n

15

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

PB

y

n

14

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

PB

y

n

14

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

MSU

y

n

GED

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

PB

y

n

12

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

PB

Y

N

Unknown yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

MB

Y

N

12

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

PB

Y

N

13

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RV

y

N

13

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RV

y

n

11

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

Watch

PB

y

n

13

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RV

y

n

GED

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RV

y

n

GED

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

PB

y

n

12

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RV

y

n

GED

waived waived

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

PB

y

n

13

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

LW

y

n

10

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

LW

y

n

12

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RV

y

n

11

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

MB

y

n

14

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RV

y

n

12

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RV

y

n

11

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

MB

y

n

GED

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

PB

y

n

GED

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RV

y

n

9

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

PB

y

n

8

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

PB

y

n

12

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

PB

y

n

12

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

MSU

y

n

12

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

MSU

y

n

GED

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RHU

y

n

Unknown yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

PB

y

n

14

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

MB

y

n

16

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

PB

y

n

12

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

MB

y

n

PB

y

n

GED

yes

yes

n/a

GED

yes

yes

n/a

yes

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

yes

NR

NR

NR

NRExhibit 2, KCNIWR , p. 12 NR

Prison: KCIW Name of person filling out form: McKay Date: 9/25/2020
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 191 of 985 - Page ID#: 3779

30

32

33

19

1

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

11/2/2018

9/9/2019

9/20/2019

4/11/2019

4/3/2020

12/19/2018

11/21/2014

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Intake hearing screening at

Ross Cash

Intake hearing screening

11/8/2019

9/9/2019

12/12/2019

11/8/2019

12/12/2019

11/8/2019

A

A

Medical Appointment 11/8/2019 11/8/2019 11/8/2019
D

Intake hearing screening 4/11/2019 9/26/2019 9/26/2019

Sickcall 4/23/2020 4/23/2020 4/23/2020

A

C

intake hearing screening 2/1/2019 2/1/2019 2/1/2019

11/21/2014 11/21/2014 2/1/2019 2/6/2019

A

A

2
Jail report inmate was deaf (12/03/2015) Jail report inmate was deaf N/A N/A N/A
D

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

does not meet the criteria for a prescription hearing aid specified in the DOC hearing loss policy dated 11/5/2019.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop

system.

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining Hearing Aid was approved

that a hearing aid was not needed)

on 11/08/2019 and was

received on 12/16/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Date

11/2/2018

Hearing Aid was approved on 11/08/2019 and was received on 12/10/2019 9/9/2019

does not meet the criteria for a prescription hearing aid specified in the DOC hearing loss policy dated 11/5/2019.
9/20/2019

Hearing Aid was approved on 09/27/2019 and was received on 10/28/2019 4/11/2019

YES
Hearing Aid was approved on 04/23/2020 and was received on 05/11/2020 4/3/2020

Yes

Yes

Hearing Aid was

approved on

02/06/2019 Hearing

aid were received

here on 02/25/2019,

Spent out to Ross

Cash, unsure when

they received it

12/19/2018

N/A

Medical Visit 1 - Description

intake screening

intake screening

Doctor Appointment

intake screening Sickcall

intake screening

Inmate is deaf NA
N/A

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 13

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date
Medical Visit 3 - Description

Cas3e0: 3:14-cv-000013-2GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed3:312/16/20 Page: 192 o19f 985 - Page1

2

ID#: 3780

failed hearing screening, no referred to provider for referral made to provider failed hearing screening

reffered to hearing booth

referred to provider for failed hearing screening

IM was see by provider for sickcall, refered to the booth

referral to provider for failed hearing screening

7/24/2019 Sick Call provider follow up for ear pain
referral to audiology booth

9/19/2019

11/8/2019

7/29/2019

intake H&P

Audiology test

Sick Call

Difficulty hearing,

referred to audiology booth Audiology test complete, PT referred to

for audiogram

didn’t need hearing aid

provider

4/23/2020
Audiology Test
Audiology Test complete

1/2/2019
Provider H&P
referred to hearing booth

11/8/2019 audiogram

11/8/2019 audiogram

8/5/2019 provider appointment sick call follow up

4/23/2020 Results reviewed

2/1/2019 audiogram

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

not addressed

Hearing Aids ordered

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date
Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

11/8/2019 audiogram reviewed by Kemen
need repeat audiogram 12/12/2019

11/8/2019
Kemen review of audiogram
hearing aide ordered, refer back to provider for bilateral hearing loss assessment
11/26/2019

repeat audiogram

Provider follow up hearing assessment

12/12/2019 hearing aide ordered

referral to ENT
12/10/2019 hearing aide issued

Medical Visit 7 - Date Medical Visit 7 - Description

12/16/2019 hearing aide issued

Medical Visit 7 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

NO 11/2/2018 12/16/2019 409

2/5/2020

ENT Visit

Bring back for more

extensive audiogram

No

NO 9/9/2019 12/10/2019 92

9/26/2019

5/20/2020

2/6/2019

audiogram

30 day follow up hearing aide ordered

Inmate had 30 day follow up with provider

9/27/2019

5/11/2020

2/25/2019

hearing aides received

audiogram results

at facility and shipped

reviewed

Hearing aid come in to Ross Cash

order for hearing

aides

Hearing aid delieved

10/28/2019

3/22/2019

hearing aide issued 9/24/2020

hearing aide issued

Hearing aid not working

IM giving pocket

talker, and hearing

is being sent off

NO 4/11/2019 10/28/2019 200

4/3/2020 5/11/2020 38

NO 12/19/2018 3/22/2019 92

No

no

2/1/2019

9/8/2017

2/6/2019

9/8/2017

5

0

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 14

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Cas3e0: 3:14-cv-000013-2GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed3:312/16/20 Page: 193 o19f 985 - Page1

2

ID#: 3781

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

referral to provider not made after intake screen

delay in audiology booth audiogram

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

nursing staff educated on

need to not only refer

new process to alert AA of

patient to provider but to need for audiogram, email is

follow up with

now sent directly to the

communication to provider, person scheduling the

scheduler, and HSA.

audiogram

provider did not address failed hearing screen at intake H&P after referral from intake nurse
education to both nursing staff and provider on appropriate time frame and need to review intake screening at H&P

NA

NA

pt transfer from KCIW

to Ross Cash hearing

aides were received at

KCIW then shipped to

Ross Cash.

NA

NA

if patient in process of

audiology work up,

HSA to HSA

communication to

occur in order to alert

and make receiving

facility aware of

where patient is in

process to be

watching for shipment NA

NA

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 15

Prison: KCIW

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Name of person filling out form: McKay

Date: 9/25/2020

3

4

5

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Jail report inmate

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

was deaf

(03/11/2013)

42476

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 194 of 985 - Page ID#: 3782

6

7

8

9

10

3/30/2017

8/10/2018

9/25/2018

8/30/2018

10/12/2018

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Inmate already had

Jail report inmate hearing aides when

was deaf

she arrived

Inmate reported

N/A

01/23/2017

5/3/2017

N/A

01/23/2017

12/10/2018

N/A

01/23/2017

12/14/2018

D

A

A

Inmate report failing screening 4/27/2017 4/27/2017 4/27/2017
C--Give her a pocket talker

failed intake hearing failed intake

screen

hearing screen

10/5/2018

10/9/2018

10/5/2018

10/9/2018

10/9/2018

10/12/2018

Missing at this time-give her a pocket talker A

Sick Call Hearing failed intake

Difficulty

hearing screen

10/9/2018

10/15/2018

10/9/2018

10/15/2018

10/12/2018

10/18/2018

A

A

11
10/29/2018 sick call 10/31/2018 10/31/2018 11/9/2018
A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that

it complies with KyDOC policy.

Inmate is deaf

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop

system.

NA

N

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

N/A

N/A

Medical Visit 1 - Description

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

5/15/2018 Audiology booth

3/30/2017

8/10/2018

Audiology consult

ordered

nurse intake

9/25/2018 Failed Hearing Screening

8/30/2018 Sickcall-- Hearing Problem

10/12/2018 intake

10/29/2018 Provider sick call for hearing loss

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 16

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date
Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Cas3e: 3:14-cv-040001-GFVT5 -EBA Doc6 #: 99-2 F7iled: 12/16/208 Page: 1959 of 985 - P1a0 ge

11

ID#: 3783

Had to resend Audiology results over

6/18/2018

4/27/2017

CC-hearing results

reviewed

Appt.

12/14/2018

5/25/2017

Follow up to Audicus reviewed consult

HA to Rt ear ordered

HA ordered

failed hearing screen, referred to referred to provider provider

10/1/2018 Provider CC f/u appointment

10/5/2018 Provider H&P

referred to hearing booth

referred to hearing booth

10/5/2018

10/9/2018

Referred to provider
10/4/2018 Hearing issue follow up
Referred for hearing test
10/9/2018

audiogram

audiogram

audiogram

failed intake hearing screen, referred to provider

referred to hearing booth

10/16/2018

10/31/2018

provider H&P

audiogram

refer to hearing booth

10/16/2018

11/9/2018

audiogram

hearing aide ordered

1/28/2019 HA received

6/22/2017 HA received

10/9/2018 hearing aide ordered

10/12/2018 hearing aide ordered

10/12/2018 hearing aide ordered

10/18/2018 hearing aide ordered

11/28/2018 hearing aide issued

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date
Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

11/28/2018

11/27/2018

10/30/2018

11/28/2018

hearing aide issued

hearing aide issued

hearing aide issued hearing aide issued

Medical Visit 7 - Date Medical Visit 7 - Description

Medical Visit 7 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

no 3/11/2013 3/11/2013 0

no 1/23/2017 1/23/2017 0

no 5/3/2017 12/28/2018 210

no 27-Apr 22-Jun 57

no 8/10/2018 11/28/2018 110

no 9/25/2018 11/27/2018 63

no 8/30/2018 10/30/2018 61

no

no

10/12/2018

10/29/2018

11/28/2018

11/28/2018

47

30

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 17

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Cas3e: 3:14-cv-040001-GFVT5 -EBA Doc6 #: 99-2 F7iled: 12/16/208 Page: 1969 of 985 - P1a0 ge

11

ID#: 3784

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

date)

NA

NA

NA

NA

provider did not order

audiogram at first visit,

was not ordered until

annual H&P, did not

Delay in hearing

refer to intake

delay in provider

booth assessment

screening by nursing delay in receiving seeing patient

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

NA

and audicus exam

staff

hearing aides

after sick call

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

AA to follow up on

audicus results and

Provider nurse to

double check that

follow up visit is

scheduled within

NA

NA

30 days

all things

completed in a

education to both

timely manner, AA education already

nursing staff and

to follow up on provided to correct

provider on

those hearing the issue of

appropriate time frame aides that are patients being

and need to review taking longer than seen within 7 days

intake screening at 3-4 weeks to

of referral from

H&P

receive.

sick call

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 18

Prison: KCIW Name of person filling out form: McKay Date: 9/25/2020
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 197 of 985 - Page ID#: 3785

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

20

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

10/18/2018

11/2/2018

1/24/2019

2/5/2019

5/10/2019

4/17/2019

5/21/2019

8/15/2019

21 8/23/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

10/18/2018 10/31/2018 10/31/2018 11/9/2018
A

Provider H&P failed screen 12/5/2018 12/5/2018 12/6/2018

Inmate failed screening 4/12/2019 4/12/2019 4/15/2019

Provider H&P failed screen 4/12/2019 4/12/2019 4/15/2019

Inmate failed screening 5/21/2019 5/21/2019 5/21/2019

Inmate failed screening 4/17/2019 5/21/2019 5/21/2019

Medical Appointment 5/21/2019 5/21/2019 5/21/2019

Intake Hearing Screening 8/15/2019 8/27/2019 8/27/2019

Medical Appointment 8/27/2019 8/27/2019 8/27/2019

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop

system.

Yes

Yes

Yes

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

10/17/2018 intake screening

11/2/2018 Annual appointment

1/24/2019 New Intake

Yes
2/5/2019 New intake

Yes
5/10/2019 New Intake

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

4/17/2019 Annual Appointment

2/20/2019 Sickcall--hearing issue

Hearing Aid was approved on 08/28/2019 and was received on 09/25/2019 8/15/2019
intake screening

Hearing Aid was approved on 08/27/2019 and received on 09/25/2019 8/23/2019 Medical Appointment

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 19

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date
Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Cas1e2: 3:14-cv-0130001-GFV1T4-EBA Do1c5 #: 99-2 1F6iled: 12/1617/20 Page1:8198 of 98520- Page 21 ID#: 3786

failed hearing screen, refer to provider

Referred to hearing booth

10/18/2018

12/5/2018

provider H&P

audiogram

refer to hearing booth

10/31/2018

12/6/2018

audiogram

hearing aide ordered

failed hearing

screen, referred to Referred to

provider

hearing booth

2/5/2019

4/12/2019

H&P

audiogram

referral to hearing booth

4/12/2019

4/15/2019

audiogram

hearing aide ordered

referred to provider
5/16/2019 Provider H&P intake
referred to hearing booth
5/21/2019
audiogram

Referred to hearing booth 5/21/2019 audiogram
5/21/2019 hearing aide ordered

referred to provider 5/21/2019 audiogram
5/21/2019 hearing aide ordered

referral to provider

for failed hearing Referred to hearing

screen

booth

8/27/2019

8/27/2019

Provider H&P

audiogram

Referred to hearing booth

8/27/2019

8/28/2019

audiogram

hearing aide ordered

11/9/2018 hearing aide ordered

1/3/2019

4/15/2019

hearing aide

hearing aide issued ordered

5/1/2019 hearing aide issued

5/21/2019 hearing aide ordered

6/6/2019

6/6/2019

8/28/2019

hearing aide

hearing aide issued ordered

9/25/2019 hearing aide issued

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date
Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

11/28/2018
hearing aides issued

5/1/2019
hearing aide issued

6/7/2019
hearing aide issued

9/25/2019 hearing aide issued

Medical Visit 7 - Date Medical Visit 7 - Description

Medical Visit 7 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

no 10/17/2018 11/28/2018 42

no 11/2/2018 1/3/2019 62

no 1/24/2019 5/1/2019 95

no 2/5/2019 5/1/2019 85

no 5/10/2019 6/7/2019 28

no 4/17/2019 6/6/2019 50

no 2/20/2019 6/6/2019 96

NO 8/15/2019 9/25/2019 41

NO 8/23/2019 9/25/2019 32 Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 20

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Cas1e2: 3:14-cv-0130001-GFV1T4-EBA Do1c5 #: 99-2 1F6iled: 12/1617/20 Page1:8199 of 98520- Page 21 ID#: 3787

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)
(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

delay in

delay in audiogram audiogram

completion

completion

delay in audiogram completion

delay in identification of issue during sick call and provider follow up

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

new process to new process to new process to alert AA of need alert AA of need alert AA of need for audiogram, for audiogram, for audiogram, email is now sent email is now sent email is now sent directly to the directly to the directly to the person scheduling person scheduling person scheduling the audiogram the audiogram the audiogram

education already provided to correct the issue of patients being seen within 7 days of referral from sick call

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 21

Prison: KCIW Name of person filling out form: McKay Date: 9/25/2020
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 200 of 985 - Page ID#: 3788

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

6/12/2019

9/13/2019

9/10/2019

11/5/2019

6/11/2019

10/1/2019

9/10/2019

3/11/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Inmate failed screening 7/10/2019 7/10/2019 7/10/2019
A

Medical Appointment 9/27/2019 9/27/2019 9/27/2019
A

Medical Appointment 9/26/2019 9/26/2019 9/26/2019
A

Medical Appointment 12/12/2019 12/12/2019 12/12/2019
A

Medical Appointment 7/10/2019 7/10/2019 7/10/2019
A

Medical Appointment 11/8/2019 11/8/2019 11/8/2019
A

H&P 9/26/2019 9/26/2019 9/26/2019
A

From an F/U appointment 4/19/2019 4/19/2019 4/19/2019
A

31
8/7/2019 Medical Appointment with provider 9/26/2019 9/26/2019 9/26/2019
A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop

system.

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was Hearing Aid was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally

approved by

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining 07/11/2019 and

that a hearing aid was not needed)

received on

08/01/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Date

6/12/2019

Medical

Medical Visit 1 - Description

Appointment

Hearing aid was approved on 09/27/2019 and received on 10/28/2019 9/13/2019 Medical Appointment

Hearing aid was approved on 09/27/2019 and received on 10/28/2019 9/10/2019 Medical Appointment

Hearing Aid was approved on 12/12/2019 and received on 12/27/2019 11/5/2019 Medical Appointment

Hearing Aid was approved on 07/10/2019 and received on 08/01/2019 6/11/2019
H&P

Hearing Aid was approved on 11/08/2019 and received on 12/10/2019 10/1/2019
H&P

Hearing aid was approved on 09/27/2019 and was receivied on 9/10/2019
H&P

Hearing aid was Hearing Aid was

approved on

approved on

4/25/2019 and she 09/27/2019 and

received it on

was received on

05/01/2019

10/29/2019

3/11/2019

8/7/2019

Medical

Medical AppointmenAppointment

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 22

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Cas2e2: 3:14-cv-0203 001-GFVT24-EBA Doc25#: 99-2 F2il6ed: 12/16/2270 Page: 22081 of 985 - 2P9 age

31

ID#: 3789

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date
Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Referred to hearing Referred to hearing Referred to hearing Referred to hearing Referred to hearing Referred to hearing

Referred to hearing

booth

booth

booth

booth

booth

booth

Referred to hearing Referred to hearing booth

7/10/2019

9/26/2019

9/26/2019

12/12/2019

7/10/2019

11/8/2019

09/26/209

4/19/2019

9/26/2019

audiogram

audiogram

audiogram

audiogram

audiogram

audiogram

audiogram

audiogram

auidogram

7/11/2019
hearing aide ordered

9/27/2019
hearing aide ordered

9/27/2019
hearing aide ordered

12/12/2019
hearing aide ordered

7/11/2019
hearing aide ordered

11/8/2019
hearing aide ordered

9/27/2019

4/25/2019

hearing aide hearing aide orderedordered

9/27/2019
hearing aide ordered

8/1/2019

10/28/2019

10/28/2019

12/27/2019

8/1/2019

12/10/2019

10/29/2019

5/1/2019

10/29/2019

hearing aides

hearing aide issued hearing aide issued hearing aide issued hearing aide issued hearing aide issued hearing aide issued hearing aide issued hearing aide issued issued

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date

Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Medical Visit 7 - Date Medical Visit 7 - Description

Medical Visit 7 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

NO 6/12/2019 8/1/2019 40

NO 9/13/2019 10/28/2019 45

NO 9/10/2019 10/28/2019 48

NO 11/5/2019 12/27/2019 52

NO 6/11/2019 8/1/2019 51

NO 10/1/2019 12/10/2019 71

NO 9/10/2019 10/29/2019 49

NO

NO

3/11/2019

8/7/2019

5/1/2019

10/28/2019

51

82

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 23

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Cas2e2: 3:14-cv-0203 001-GFVT24-EBA Doc25#: 99-2 F2il6ed: 12/16/2270 Page: 22082 of 985 - 2P9 age

31

ID#: 3790

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)
(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

delay in order for audiology booth to actual completion of audiogram

delay in audiology booth audiogram

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

new process to alert AA of need for audiogram, email is now sent directly to the person scheduling the audiogram

new process to alert AA of need for audiogram, email is now sent directly to the person scheduling the audiogram

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 24

Prison: KCIW Name of person filling out form: McKay Date: 9/25/2020
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 203 of 985 - Page ID#: 3791
34

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

12/5/2019

2/19/2020

1/14/2020

2/21/2020

1/28/2020

8/18/2020

8/13/2020

8/10/2020

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Medical Appointment, need ears flushed before Doctors appointmenAnnual Exam

12/19/2019

4-Mar

2/24/2020

12/19/2019

3/4/2020

2/24/2020

12/19/2019

3/5/2020

2/28/2020

A

A

A

Intake appointment

with provider

Intake

2/28/2020

2/28/2020

2/28/2020

2/28/2020

3/3/2020

3/3/2020

A

A

Appointment with

Provider

H&P

8/25/2020

8/13/2020

8/25/2020

8/13/2020

8/27/2020

8/13/2020

A

C

Sickcall 8/28/2020 8/28/2020 8/28/2020
A

8/20/2020 Appointment with Provider 8/24/2020 8/28/2020 8/28/2020
A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop

system.

Yes

yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Unknown

Unknown

YES

Unknown

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was Hearing Aid ws

presented to when the hearing issue was finally

approved on

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining 12/20/2019 and

that a hearing aid was not needed)

was received on

01/28/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Date

12/5/2019

Doctor

Medical Visit 1 - Description

Appointment

Hearing aid was approved on 03/05/2020 and received on 03/24/2020 12/29/2020

Hearing Aid approved on 02/28/2020 and received on 03/17/2020 1/14/2020

Intake Screening Annual Exam

Hearing Aid approved on 03/03/2020 and received on 03/24/2020 2/5/2020
Intake

Hearing Aid was approved on 03/03/2020 and received on 03/24/2020 1/28/2020
Intake

Hearing Aid was Approved on 08/27/2020, and received on 09/01/2020. 2/18/2020 Provider appointment

Hearing Aid was Hearing Aid was

approved on

approved on

08/31/2020, we are 08/31/2020 and

waiting on them to was delieved on

come in

09/17/2020

8/13/2020

8/28/2020

H&P

Sickcall

Hearing aid was approved 8/20/2020
H&P

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 25

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date
Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date
Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Cas3e4: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 204 of 985 - Page ID#: 3792

Referred to hearing booth, after 12/13/2019 when ears are flushed

Referred to hearing

Refered to hearing bReffered to Provider Refered to Provider booth

Refered to hearing bRefered to hearing BRefered to hearing B

12/14/2019

1/8/2020

2/24/2020

2/14/2020

2/11/2020

8/25/2020

8/25/2020

8/28/2020

8/28/2020

Nurse follow up Intake with Provider audiology

Intake with provider Intake with provider audiology

audiology

audiology

audiology

ears flushed

audiogram performed

audiogram Refered to Booth Refered to Booth performed

audiogram performed

audiogram performed

audiogram performed

12/19/2019
audiology audiogram performed

2/19/2020 Appointment Refer to audiology

2/28/2020
audiology audiogram performed

2/28/2020
audiology audiogram performed

8/27/2020 Dr. Kemen approved hearing aid

8/31/2020

8/31/2020

Dr. Kemen

approved hearing

aid

Review

Test Reviewed,

hearing aid

Hearing Aid ordered approved

8/31/2020 Dr. Kemen approved hearing aid
Hearing Aid ordered

12/20/2019 F/U audiogram

3/4/2020 audiology

3/17/2020 hearing aides issued

3/24/2020 hearing aides issued

3/24/2020 hearing aides issued

9/11/2020 Received Hearing Aid

8/31/2020 Appointment

9/11/2020

8/31/2020

Received Hearing AidAppointment

hearing aides ordered
1/28/2020

audiogram performed
3/24/2020

hearing aides issued

hearing aides issued

hearing aides issued

Went over Test Hearing Aid given to Went over Test ResuHearing Aid given to Results

9/30/2020

10/9/2020

9/11/2020

hearing aides issued

Hearing Aid Issued

Received Hearing 30 day follow up 30 day follow up Aid

Pending

Pending

Gave Hearing to IM

Medical Visit 7 - Date Medical Visit 7 - Description

Medical Visit 7 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

12/5/2019 1/28/2020 54

2/19/2020 3/24/2020 34

1/14/2020 3/17/2020 63

2/21/2020 3/24/2020 32

1/28/2020 3/24/2020 56

8/18/2020 9/11/2020 24

8/13/2020

8/10/2020

8/20/2020

9/11/2020

9/14/2020

32

25

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 26

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Cas3e4: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 205 of 985 - Page ID#: 3793

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

delay in audiology booth audiogram

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Have a new process with new Providers

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 27

Prison: KCIW Name of person filling out form: McKay Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 206 of 985 - Page ID#: 3794

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

8/31/2020

9/2/2020

9/2/2020

4/17/2018

6/11/2019

2/14/2020

1/14/2020 6/12/2019

7/9/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Appointment with Appointment with Appointment with

Provider

Provider

Provider

H&P

9/2/2020

9/2/2020

9/9/2020

10/19/2018

9/2/2020

9/9/2020

9/9/2020

10/19/2018

9/2/2020

9/9/2020

9/11/2020

10/19/2018

A

A

A

A

H&P 6/11/2019 6/11/2019 6/11/2019
D

H&P 2/28/2020 2/28/2020 3/3/2020

H&P

Intake

2/24/2020 7/10/2019

2/24/2020 7/10/2019

2/24/2020 7/11/2019

Intake 9/26/2019 9/26/2019 9/27/2019

A

A

D

D

Unspecified

Unspecified

hearing loss, hearing loss,

bilateral

bilateral

Notes: Pt. does Notes: Pt. does

Unspecified hearing loss,

not meet the not meet the

bilateral

criteria for a criteria for a

Notes: Pt. does not meet the

prescription prescription

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

criteria for a prescription

hearing aid

hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

hearing aid specified in the

specified in the specified in the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that

DOC hearing loss policy

DOC hearing loss DOC hearing loss

it complies with KyDOC policy.

dated 5/31/2018.

policy dated policy dated

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

5/31/2018.

5/31/2018.

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop

system.

Unknown

YES

YES

YES

N/A

YES

YES

NO

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was Hearing Aid was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally

Approved on

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining 09/02/2020,

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Received on

09/22/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Date

9/2/2020

Hearing Aid was approved on 09/09/2020 on 09/24/2020 9/2/2020

Hearing Aid was approved on 09/11/2020 and received on 09/24/2020 9/2/2020

Hearing Aid was approved on 10/24/2018 and was giving on 11/26/2018 4/17/2018

N/A 6/11/2019

Hearing Aid was approved on 03/03/2020 and received on 03/24/2020. 2/14/2020

Hearing Aid

was approved

on

02/28/2020

and received Hearing Aid was

on

approved on

03/17/2020 07/11/2019

1/14/2020 6/12/2019

Hearing Aid was determinded that they didn’t need hearing aid on 09/27/2019 7/9/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

Intake

Intake

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 28

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 207 of 985 - Page ID#: 3795

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date
Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date
Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Refered to hearing Refered to Hearing

Refered to hearing Refered to Refered to

Refered to

Refered to hearing Brefered to hearing b booth

Booth

Refered to Hearing Booth Booth

hearing Booth hearing Booth hearing Booth

9/2/2020 audiology

9/11/2020 Audiology test

9/9/2020 Audiology test

10/19/2019 Audiology Test

6/11/2019 Audiology Test

2/28/2020 Audiology Test

2/24/2020 Audiology Test

7/10/2019

9/26/2019

Audiology Test Audiology Test

audiogram performed

Audiology Test complete

Audiology Test complete

Audiology Test complete

Audiology Test complete

Audiology Test complete

Audiology Audiology Test Audiology Test

Test complete complete

complete

9/2/2020

9/11/2020

9/11/2020

6/11/2019

3/3/2020

2/28/2020 7/11/2019

9/27/2019

Review

Tested Reviewed Tested Reviewed

Results reviewed

Results Results reviewed reviewed

Results reviewed Results reviewed

Test Review, approv Hearing Aid ApproveHearing Aid Approved

No Hearing Aid needed

Hearing Aid

Hearing Aid neededneeded

no Hearing Aid no Hearing Aid

9/22/2020 Received Hearing Aid

9/25/2020

9/24/2020

Hearing Aid receivedHearing Aid received

8/31/2020 30 Day follow up

3/17/2020 Hearing Aid Received

Hearing Aid given Hearing Aid given

Gave Hearing to IM to IM

to IM

10/22/2020

10/9/2020

10/8/2020

30 day follow up Hearing Aid

with provider

handed out

9/4/2020

follow up Pending

30 Day Follow up 30 Day Follow up Pending

30 day follow up 30 day follow up with Provider

Medical Visit 7 - Date Medical Visit 7 - Description

Medical Visit 7 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

8/31/2020 9/22/2020 22

9/2/2020 9/25/2020 23

9/2/2020 9/24/2020 22

4/17/2018 10/18/2018 183

2/14/2020 3/24/2020 39

1/14/2020 3/17/2020 63

6/12/2019 7/11/2019
Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 29

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 3796

Page: 208 of 985 - Page
delay in order for audiology booth to actual completion of audiogram

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

We have formed a new system with the new Providers

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 30

Prison: KCIW Name of person filling out form: McKay Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 209 of 985 - Page ID#: 3797

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

8/21/2019

8/20/2019

12/18/2018

1/24/2020 9/3/2019

1/28/2020 4/28/2020 1/30/2020

1/31/2020 5/15/2019

4/30/2020

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

H&P 11/8/2019 11/8/2019 11/8/2019
D

Intake 8/27/2020 8/27/2020 8/28/2019
D

CC 7/10/2019 7/10/2019 7/11/2019
D

H&P 1/24/2020 2/14/2020 2/17/2020

Intake

Intake

10/11/2019 2/28/2020

10/11/2019 2/28/2020

11/22/2019 3/3/2020

CC 5/12/2020 5/12/2020 5/12/2020

Sickcall 2/10/2020 2/10/2020 2/10/2020

A

a

A

A

D

H&P

Intake

2/14/2020 5/21/2019

2/14/2020 5/21/2019

2/14/2020 5/21/2019

sick call 5/12/2020 5/12/2020 5/12/2020

A

D

a

Unspecified

Unspecified

Unspecified

Unspecified hearing

Unspecified

hearing loss, hearing loss, hearing loss,

loss, bilateral

hearing loss,

bilateral

bilateral

bilateral

Notes: She has normal

bilateral

Notes: Pt. does Notes: Pt. does Notes: Pt. does

hearing in her better

Notes: Pt. does

not meet the not meet the not meet the

ear.

not meet the

criteria for a criteria for a criteria for a

Pt. does not meet the

criteria for a

prescription prescription prescription

criteria for a

prescription

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

hearing aid

hearing aid

hearing aid

prescription hearing

hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

specified in the specified in the specified in the

aid specified in the

specified in the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that DOC hearing loss DOC hearing loss DOC hearing loss

DOC hearing loss

DOC hearing loss

it complies with KyDOC policy.

policy dated policy dated policy dated

policy dated

policy dated

11/5/2019.

5/31/2018.

5/31/2018.

11/5/2019.

5/31/2018.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop

system.

NO

N/A

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

yes

Hearing Aid

Hearing Aid Hearing Aid was approved Hearing Aid

Hearing Aid

Hearing aid

9. Please provide the following information about each

was approved was approved on

was approved

was approved

was approved

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

Hearing Aid was Hearing Aid was Hearing Aid was on

on

determinded determinded determinded 02/17/2020, 11/22/2019,

that they didn’t that they didn’t that they didn’t and received hearing aid

03/03/2020, on hearing aid 05/12/2020, was received received

Hearing Aid was determinded that they didn’t need

on 02/17/2020, hearing aid

Hearing Aid was on 5/12/2020, determinded inmate that they didn’t received

that a hearing aid was not needed)

need hearing aid need hearing aid need hearing aid on

received on on

hearing aid on hearing aid on

received on need hearing aid hearing aid on

on 08/11/2019 on 08/28/2019 on 07/11/2019 03/03/2020 12/17/2019 03/24/2020 06/04/2020 02/10/2020

03/03/2020 on 05/21/2019 06/4/20

Medical Visit 1 - Date

8/21/2020

8/20/2019

12/19/2020

1/24/2020 9/3/2019

1/28/2020 4/28/2020 1/30/2020

1/31/2020 5/15/2019

4/30/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Description

H&P

Intake

CC

H&P

Intake

Intake

CC

Sickcall

H&P

Intake

Sick Call

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 31

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 210 of 985 - Page ID#: 3798

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date
Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date
Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Refered to

Refered to

Refered to

Refered to Refered to Refered to Refered to Refered to hearing

hearing Booth hearing Booth hearing Booth hearing Booth hearing Booth hearing Booth hearing Booth Booth

Refered to Refered to

referred to

hearing Booth hearing Booth hearing booth

11/8/2019 Audiology Test

8/28/2019 Audiology Test

7/10/2019 Audiology Test

2/17/2020 Audiology Test

10/11/2019 Audiology Test

2/28/2020 Audiology Test

5/12/2020 Audiology Test

2/10/2020 Audiology Test

2/14/2020 Audiology Test

5/21/2019

5/12/2020

Audiology Test audiology test

Audiology Test Audiology Test Audiology Test Audiology Audiology Audiology Audiology Audiology Test

complete

complete

complete

Test complete Test complete Test complete Test complete complete

Audiology Audiology Test audiology test

Test complete complete

complete

11/8/2019

8/28/2019

7/11/2020

2/17/2020 11/22/2019 3/3/2020 5/12/2020 2/10/2020

2/17/2020 5/21/2019

5/12/2020

Results Results reviewed Results reviewed Results reviewed reviewed

Results reviewed

Results reviewed

Results reviewed

Results reviewed

Results reviewed

Results reviewed Test reviewed

Hearing Aid Hearing Aid Hearing Aid Hearing Aid Hearing Aid not no Hearing Aid no Hearing Aid no Hearing Aid Approved Approved Approved Approved approved

Hearing Aid Hearing Aid approved approved

Approved for Hearing Aid

9/15/2020 Received
Pocket talker

3/3/2020 Hearing Aid Received

12/17/2019 Hearing Aid Received

3/24/2020 Hearing Aid Received

6/4/2020 Hearing Aid Received

3/3/2020 Hearing Aid Received

6/4/2020 Hearing Aid received

Hearing Aid given to IM 9/3/2020 30 Day

Hearing Aid given to IM 12/17/2019 follow up

Hearing Aid given to IM 9/8/2020 follow up

Hearing Aid given to IM 7/28/2020 follow up

30 day Follow Follow up

up with

with the

Provider

provider

Follow up with the provider

Follow up with the provider

Hearing Aid given to IM 9/8/2020 follow up
Follow up with the provider

Gave inmate hearing aid
7/1/2020
30 day followup 30 day followup with provider

Medical Visit 7 - Date Medical Visit 7 - Description
Medical Visit 7 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

1/24/2020 3/3/2020 29

9/3/2019 12/17/2019 105

1/28/2020 3/24/2020 56

4/28/2020 6/4/2020 37

1/31/2020 3/3/2020 32

4/30/2020 6/4/2020 35 Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 32

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 211 of 985 - Page ID#: 3799

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Inmate was at Ross Cash

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 33

Prison: KCIW Name of person filling out form: McKay Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 212 of 985 - Page ID#: 3800

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

3/3/2020 1/13/2020

3/2/2020 2/21/2020 6/25/2020 8/12/2020 9/8/2020 8/28/2020

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

sick call 3/4/2020 3/4/2020 3/5/2020
a

Intake 4/2/2020 4/2/2020 4/3/2020
D

H&P 4/1/2020 4/1/2020 4/2/2020

H&P 2/28/2020 2/28/2020 3/3/2020

H&P CC 8/11/2020 8/11/2020 8/12/2020

Intake 8/18/2020 8/18/2020 9/15/2020

H&P 9/10/2020 9/10/2020 9/11/2020

Sickcall 9/15/2020 9/15/2020 9/16/2020

a

a

d

a

a

C

Unspecified

hearing loss,

bilateral

Notes: Pt. does

not meet the

criteria for a

prescription

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

specified in the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that

DOC impaired

it complies with KyDOC policy.

hearing policy

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

dated 11/5/2019.

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop

system.

yes

No

yes

yes

n/a

yes

yes

Unknown

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date

Hearing aid

was approved

on 3/5/2020,

inmate

received

Hearing Aid was

hearing aid on denined on

03/24/20 4/3/2020

3/3/2020 1/13/2020

Hearing aid

was approved Hearing aid

on

was approved

04/02/2020, on 3/3/20,

hearing aid hearing aid Hearing aid

received

was received denied on

5/5/20

3/24/20

9/17/20

3/2/2020 2/21/2020 6/25/2020

Hearing Aid

Hearing aid Hearing aid was Approved

was approved was approved on 09/16/2020,

on 8/26/20, on 8/11/20, Waiting on

hearing aid hearing aid hearing to

received

received

come to

9/11/20

9/24/20

institution

8/12/2020 9/8/2020 4/28/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Description

sick call

Intake

H&P

H&P

H&P

Intake

H&P

SIckcall

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 34

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 213 of 985 - Page ID#: 3801

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome Medical Visit 3 - Date
Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date
Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

referred to referred to

referred to referred to

referred to referred to referred to

hearing booth hearing booth hearing booth hearing booth referred to hea hearing booth hearing booth hearing booth

3/5/2020 4/2/2020

4/1/2020 2/28/2020 8/11/2020 8/18/2020 9/10/2020 9/15/2020

audiology test audiology test audiology test audiology test audiology test audiology test audiology test audiology test

audiology test audiology test audiology test audiology test

audiology test audiology test audiology test

complete complete

complete complete audiology test ccomplete complete complete

3/5/2020 4/3/2020

4/2/2020 3/3/2020 9/17/2020 9/15/2020 9/11/2020 9/16/2020

Test reviewed Test reviewed Test reviewed Test reviewed Test reviewed Test reviewed Test reviewed 9/16/2020

Approved for Approved for Hearing Aid Hearing Aid

Approved for Approved for

Approved for Approved for

Hearing Aid Hearing Aid Denied for Hea Hearing Aid Hearing Aid 9/16/2020

3/24/2020 Hearing Aid received

5/5/2020 Hearing Aid received

3/24/2020 Hearing Aid received

9/17/2020 9/11/2020 Hearing Aid
30 day followu received

9/24/2020 Hearing Aid received

Pending for 30 day follow up

Gave inmate hearing aid
4/24/2020

Gave inmate Gave inmate

Gave inmate Gave inmate

hearing aid hearing aid 30 day followu hearing aid hearing aid

8/31/2020 9/2/2020

10/9/2020 10/8/2020

30 day followup 30 day followup with provider

30 day

30 day

followup

followup

30 day

30 day

followup with followup with

provider

provider

30 day

30 day

followup

followup

30 day

30 day

followup with followup with

provider

provider

Medical Visit 7 - Date Medical Visit 7 - Description

Medical Visit 7 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

3/3/2020 3/24/2020 21

3/2/2020 5/5/2020 64

2/21/2020 3/24/2020 32

8/12/2020 9/11/2020 30

9/8/2020 9/24/2020 16

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 35

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 214 of 985 - Page ID#: 3802

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

date)

21

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

delay in order for audiology booth to actual completion of audiogram

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

We have formed a new system with the new Providers

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 36

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 215 of 985 - Page ID#: 3803

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device. Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers) Captioned Telephone (CapTel) Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like? Bed shakers Vibrating watches Vibrating alarm clocks Pagers

Where

How many

Ridgeview(2), Education, Chapel 4

Each living unit, 1 inmate purchased her own 7

2

Pine Bluff, Main Building

0

4

5

3

3

Not in use/no signal

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration not mentioned above.

Earphones for parole hearings Earphones for orientation videos

Re-entry office

1

2

Intake

When obtained How do inmates obtain access? How well do they work?

Other comments

Nov-19

Ask

no one has used them yet

Aug-19 Sep-20
varies varies

Ask their unit officers In living units NA With inmate or ask to order With inmate or ask to order With inmate or ask to order NA

no complaints no one has used them yet
no complaints no complaints no complaints

9/24/2020 Ask 10/1/2020 Ask

not yet used not yet used

Have not had a need, but purchased one to keep in case. ordered, estimated arrival is 10/7/2020

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 37

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 216 of 985 - Page

ID#: 3804

Documentation and narrative to provide

Date reviewed Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

Grievances:

1. Provide summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal,

withdrawn, etc. Should include the issues, summary of response, resolution

Attached.

2. Provide full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing

accommodation issues.

Attached.

Discipline

3. For all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving an inmate who signs, provide

report of inmate name, date, and communication method for each.

Attached.

4. Provide documentation for all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving failure

to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a

deaf/HOH inmate.

Attached.

Auxiliary aids

5. VRI Log (provide).

Attached.

6. TTY instructions (provide)

Attached.

7. VRI instructions (provide)

Attached.

Audiology processing delays

8.A list of each inmate currently at your institution whose audiology processing FINISHED

after March 2020, for whom such processing took or is taking over 60 days, documentation of the explanation for any such delay, and a description of any steps taken to avoid similar problems going forward.

We had one delay.

was 64 days from order for audiology booth to actual completion of audiogram (4 day delay). We

have a process now that if they are determined to need an Audiology test, we see them as soon as they leave their doctors’

appointments.

Information provided to inmates, policies, etc.

9. Any pages of the inmate handbook that address disability, and the date for that

version of the handbook.

Attached.

10. The current Deaf/HOH brochure and any other documents provided to deaf or hard-

of-hearing inmates.

Attached.

11.The medical request form currently provided to prisoners.

Attached.

12. Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2020 addressing deaf/hard-of-hearing

issues.

Memos attached. Training is computer based and required of all staff. There were no applicable policy changes during this time.

13. A list of each use of an in-person sign-language interpreter from February 2020 to present, and any occasions in which such an interpreter was requested but denied.
Please provide written responses to the following questions: 14. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty because staff members are wearing masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond? 15. How many staff members are currently using clear masks? How is the decision made who will wear a clear mask? 16. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty with their hearing aids because of the design of their own masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?

None during this time due to current pandemic. Classes were paused and there are currently no outside visitors.
Ada Coordinator visited the units to check in with the inmates who are deaf and hard of hearing. As part of the discussion, inmates were asked about issues with understanding staff. Some inmates did report difficulties. Inmates were advised that they can ask staff to back up six feet and pull down their mask. Inmates were also advised that staff have access to clear face shields and that inmates may request staff use them when needed. KCIW have clear face shields available in the security office of each living unit for staff to use when needed. Staff are also social distancing when speaking with the two inmates who utilize the ability to lip read for communication.
Early in the pandemic, all inmates at KCIW were issued a mask that tied behind the head as well as masks that loop over the ears. When it was brought to our attention that the ear loop masks were a problem, the ADA coordinator visited each unit and gave out an additional tied mask for each inmate who wears hearing aids. Additional tied masks were also given to a UA in each unit to have available upon request along with hearing aid batteries.

17. How many inmates have been issued masks that don't have ear ties?

All inmates at KCIW who wear hearing aids were issued another tied mask. We also advised the inmates that they can get additional tied masks upon request to the ADA Coordinator or the UA in their unit who also has hearing aid batteries.

18. What if anything have you done to solve the problem of inmates having trouble hearing announcements? Please respond in detail, with dates on all responsive steps, prerequisites for any assistance, etc.
19. How have you educated staff that it is inappropriate to write up an inmate for behavior that is caused by a hearing impairment (e.g., talking loudly, not following instructions that could not be heard)? If there was a memo, please provide that.

KCIW IT department evaluated all living units to identify any issues and make adjustments with intercom systems. Adjustments were made to the volume in some areas including Pine Bluff where we had most of the issues. Also in Pine Bluff, staff utilized an inmate runner to make inmates aware of announcements, including inmates who are deaf and hard of hearing. Captain Blandford sent out an email advising operations that security staff needed to be sure to wake up inmate who are deaf or hard of hearing for breakfast. When a complaint was made that an officer was not giving announcements to Kathy Coy, this was addressed by Internal Affairs Captain Patton.
All staff have completed the ADA section of Computer Based Training.

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 38

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 217 of 985 - Page

ID#: 3805

Documentation and narrative to provide

Date reviewed Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

20. Please describe in detail how inmates are supposed to get hearing aid batteries, including how long it should take them each time.
21. When an inmate reports that a hearing aid is not working, what are the steps followed to evaluate the complaint? Include all relevant copays and other procedures. 22. When someone is denied binaural hearing aids, are they provided information on the standard for receiving such assistance, and the opportunity for appeal? How many inmates have received binaural aids since the current binaural hearing aid policy has been in effect? 23. What arrangements are made to provide vibrating watches/clocks for inmates who are indigent?

Hearing aid batteries are now available from a Unit Administrator in each living unit at KCIW in an effort to make hearing aid batteries more readily available to the inmate population. This is coordinated between our Medical and Program departments who work together to make sure the inmates get the batteries when needed. Unit Administrators who give out a battery communicate with Medical to ensure documentation of the battery exchange continues. Batteries are also available in Operations and Medical. This new process should eliminate waiting time for batteries as batteries are readily available. If the hearing aid is not working, the inmate notifies Medical, who then contacts Adicus. Adicus gives us the cleans steps, if that does not work we send it back to Adicus and the inmate is offered a pocket talker while their hearing aid is out for repair. If the inmate damages the hearing aid, or loses it they are charged the copay of $10 dollars.
The DOC policy is to provide one hearing. Aid. If they are denied the hearing aid they would follow the grievance policy regarding medical attention.
We have not had any requests from HOH inmates who are indigent. If this were to occur, we would provide a loaner watch.

24. Please describe, in detail, each step that takes place once a person is identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing, to evaluate/offer any auxiliary aids. Include who is responsible for each step. 25. Please describe, in detail, any situation in 2019 or 2020 in which a deaf/hard-ofhearing inmate has been denied a job or other opportunity (access to a program or the like) because of their disability. Include the inmate’s name, the date, and the circumstances.
26. Please list all training that you have received for your role as ADA Coordinator.
27. Please provide an update on all items in your Deaf/HOH action plan (previously shared with me).

Upon intake inmates are to be assessed by medical within 14 days. During that assessment they are asked hearing related questions. If they answer yes to any of them, they are referred to the hearing booth for testing. If they fail the initial hearing test, the results are sent to the audiologist who determines what the inmate needs and communicates that to our medical department. During this process the ADA Coordinator receives an alert that an inmate is in need of screening. The Coordinator communicates with the medical department to stay advised during the process and ensure the timeliness of care. Once identified as deaf or hard of hearing, the inmate meets with the ADA coordinator and is advised of available accommodations within the institution and is given a ID tag and door sign. The ADA Coordinator also adds precaution in KOMS to ensure that all staff are aware. During treatment team meetings hearing issues and inmate needs are also discussed.
No one has been denied a job or program due to disability. Computer Based Trainings ADA Coordinator/Create; Communicating with Deaf and Hard of Hearing Offenders and ADA Coordinator/Settlement Agreement
KCIW now has two Captel phones that have been installed and tested but are not currently ready for use.

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 39

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 218 of 985 - Page ID#: 3806
Available ADA Accommodations
Several accommodations are available at KCIW for those who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing (HOH). There is also a staff member designated as the ADA Coordinator to help you with any ADA questions or concerns you may have. If you have questions or concerns about this list or anything concerning ADA you will need to drop a note to your ADA Coordinator who will meet with you to discuss your ADA concern. The current ADA Coordinator at KCIW is Lisa Wegner. It is important to let the ADA Coordinator know about any issues you are having - if we do not know, we cannot help!
KCIW has the following items in place to make sure we are meeting your ADA Concerns:  HOH bed tags for your door  HOH tag for your name ID  Phone Amplifier available to be checked out from the security desk in your unit  Vibrating watches may be ordered by any inmate who is Deaf or Hard of Hearing. You will need to complete a money slip with the ADA coordinator  Bed shakers/Alarm (available on an as needed basis)  TTY phone  Captel (coming soon - being ordered)  Purple phone and VRI for inmates who are Deaf  Hearing Aide and Case if prescribed by Doctor (When hearing aids aren’t being worn they need to be in their case, you may keep them while in Restrictive Housing.  All forms you will complete ask if ADA accommodations are needed  Pocket Talkers (issued by medical department as needed)  FM transmitters are available for chapel, education, and the program dorm (if needed somewhere else let the ADA Coordinator know)
Inmate Signature/Number:_________________________________________Date:_________________
Staff Signature:___________________________________________________Date:_________________
Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 40

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 219 of 985 - Page ID#: 3807

KCIW Response to Monitor Questions 9/25/2020 Repeat issues:

A. Inmates unable to access the law library during the lockdown Due to positive cases of Covid 19 at KCIW, the entire institution has been in lockdown. Restrictions are starting to lift as we recover, but some things are still not open out of an abundance of caution for the safety of the inmates and staff. During the lockdown, the staff member in charge of the legal aid office has made information and forms available upon request.

B. Difficulty understanding officers because of masks. ADA Coordinator visited units to check in with the inmates who are deaf and hard of hearing. As part of the discussion, inmates were asked about issues with understanding staff. Some inmates did report difficulties. Inmates were advised that they can ask staff to back up six feet and pull down their mask. Inmates were also advised that staff have access to clear face shields and that inmates may request staff use them when needed.

C. Lots of issues with hearing announcements (alarms, intercoms, etc.) and therefore missing

meals and other things.

KCIW IT department evaluated all living units to identify any issues and make adjustments with

intercom systems. Adjustments were made to the volume in some areas including Pine Bluff where

we had most of the issues. Also in Pine Bluff, staff utilized an inmate runner to make inmates

aware of announcements, including inmates who are deaf and hard of hearing. Captain Blandford

sent out an email advising operations that security staff needed to be sure to wake up inmate who

are deaf or hard of hearing for Breakfast. When a complaint was made that an officer was not

giving announcement to

, this was addressed by Internal Affairs Captain Patton.

D. Difficulty getting HA batteries since lockdown started. Hearing aid batteries are now available from a Unit Administrator in each living unit at KCIW in an effort to make hearing aid batteries more readily available to the inmate population. This is coordinated between our Medical and Program departments who work together to make sure the inmates get the batteries when needed. Unit Administrators who give out a battery communicate with Medical to ensure documentation of the battery exchange continues. Batteries are also available in Operations and Medical. This new process should eliminate waiting time for batteries as batteries are readily available.

E. Difficult to hear on the phones; inability to access the phone with the volume adjustment because so many people want to use it. Also, the phone with the sound amplifier is in the dayroom and it’s very loud in there. Phone amplifiers are available in each unit at KCIW. Inmate may also purchase a personal phone amplifier.

F. HAs not working well Hearing aids are sent for repair when needed. Staff is also working with inmates to educate them on how the hearing aids work.

Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 41

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 220 of 985 - Page ID#: 3808

Cookie Crews Commissioner

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
KENTUCKY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION FOR WOMEN P.O. Box 337
Pewee Valley, Kentucky 40056 Telephone: (502) 241-8454

Vanessa Kennedy Warden

To:

Margo Schlanger

From:

Vanessa Kennedy, Warden

Date:

October 7, 2020

Re:

Missing Information and Supplemental Issue

Below you will find the responses to the missing information for KCIW.

A. Missing Items from Information Request: 1. Some of the pages of the ADA Brochure are cut off – please provide a new scan with the full pages contained.
• We have attached a new brochure.

2. Please give the number of how many inmates have a non-ear tie mask, rather than simply specifying that they are available; if the answer is zero, please confirm that.
• We have zero inmates that do not have a tie mask. Early in the pandemic, all inmates (more than 700) were given masks that tie. The first week of September, staff gave out additional tied masks to thirty three inmates who had hearing aids at the time. Masks were also given to about five inmates during meetings about ADA accommodations since September. ADA Coordinator took masks when she toured units in late September to check and offered them to inmates who have hearing aids. Staff still have tie mask available if an inmate breaks or loses their mask.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 42

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 221 of 985 - Page ID#: 3809
C. Missing Items from Action Plan: 1. Earphones should be available for inmates when watching the orientation videos.
• Two pairs of earphones were ordered on October 1, 2020 and will be available in intake as soon as they arrive which should be this week.
2. Vibrating watches and alarm clocks should be available to HOH inmates, and not only deaf inmates. KCIW reported that HOH inmates would soon have the opportunity to purchase watches and alarm clocks as well, but has not yet confirmed that this change occurred.
• Vibrating watches are available for order by any inmate who is deaf or HOH at KCIW. Inmates may order the watches at any time through the ADA Coordinator. Five have already purchased watches. Two more are currently or order. Inmates are allowed to order alarm clocks.
3. In the TTY instructions, there were no instructions on getting an outside line for the TTY. However, it’s possible this instruction is not needed, because it is staff who apparently take care of this part.
• This instruction is not needed, due to the prompts being on the screen but we are going to laminate the instructions and place on the wall next to the tty.
Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 43

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 222 of 985 - Page ID#: 3810

Cookie Crews Commissioner

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
KENTUCKY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION FOR WOMEN P.O. Box 337
Pewee Valley, Kentucky 40056 Telephone: (502) 241-8454

Vanessa Kennedy Warden

MEMORANDUM
TO: All Staff FROM: Lisa Wegner, ADA Coordinator DATE: October 6, 2020 RE: Communication with inmates who are deaf
Please be advised that it is not acceptable to use other inmates to interpret for or help you to better understand an inmate who is deaf or communicates in sign language. A VRI laptop computer is available to check out from Operations. This device will allow you to talk to the inmate through a qualified interpreter. Instructions for use are included in the laptop bag.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D Exhibit 2, KCIW, p. 44

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 223 of 985 - Page ID#: 3811
Kentucky State Penitentiary

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 224 of 985 - Page ID#: 3812

Deaf/HO H or both? #
A Both
Both Both Both
Both
Both
Both Both

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

ADA coordinator

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

CUA I Roger Mitchell

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

2 coordinator appointed?

No

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates?

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates in a

5 timely and appropriate manner? How?

Orientation

Describe method used to ascertain: Posted

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? (THIS

in cell house, ADA Coordinator name is on

6 REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

their HOH ID cards

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit

7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
Y Y Y Y Y

Y

Y Y

Both

9 Describe training

Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately cover

Both

10 information?

Both

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training)

Both

12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

Both

13 Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's powerpoint)

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with settlement

Both

14 agreement?

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in

Both

17 implementing the settlement?

Both

18 Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf inmates?

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on deaf

Both

19 inmates?

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the inmates in

Both

20 those situations?

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective way with the

Both

21 monitor?

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the monitor

Both

22 when necessary?

Both B Reporting obligations

If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was monitor

Both

1 notified?

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

Both

2 inmates?

Both

3 Is the list complete?

Both

4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

ADA Basic Building Blocks Course, Central Office prescribed & Computer Based Training NA
Y Y Y Y
Y
Y
Y
Y Y Y
Y
Y
Y
NA
Y Y Y

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 225 of 985 - Page ID#: 3813

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs,

Both

6 activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe)

Both

7 Was it reported to the monitor?

Both

8 Was the report complete?

Both

9 Was the report timely?

Both

10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert?

Both

11 If yes, was the monitor notified?

Did the institution consult with the monitor about the non-

Both

12 auditory alert?

Both

13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

The only KSP inmate with significant hearing

loss is in Protective Custody.

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA Y

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

HOH

3 notifications.)

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

Deaf

Deaf inmates

Deaf

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general medical intake, and

Both

during medical care more generally:

Both

1 Is there effective communications planning?

Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if

Both

2 interpretation is needed?

Both

3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?

Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications

Both

4 techniques?

Both

Notice to medical staff:

Both

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How?

Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover and

Both

6 within the file?

Automatic notifications are received. ADA Coordinator checks atransfers for ADA alerts. NA

Treatment Team discusses each HOH inmate.

Y

NA

KSP has no deaf inmates.

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Y

Y

NA

No orientation video at KSP.

NA

NA

NA

Sorenson and VRI are available. Staff will

assist those not literate.

Y

Yes, EOMIS and by clue card There are no "files", its a EMR

NA Y Y Y Y
NA Y NA

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 226 of 985 - Page ID#: 3814

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Deaf

7 Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate accommodations.

Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site providers of

Deaf

8 need for interpretation?

Deaf

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

Deaf

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

Deaf

11 Adequate notice?

Outside providers offering effective communication to inmates

Deaf

12 who sign?

Deaf

13 How?

Both

Hearing screening/medical intake:

Both

14 Performed for all new inmates?

Both

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

Both

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

Both

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

Both

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?

How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by

Both

19 staff?

Both

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

Both

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?

Both

22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe.

Both

23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

Both

25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening?

Both

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

Adequate determination of need for designation/ audiology

Both

28 services? How?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or HOH,

Both

30 apart from audiology services decision?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

Describe:HOH specific phones, written communications

NA
Y
Y NA
Y
Y
NA NA
Y Y Y Y Y

administered by staff nursing staff
Describe: this is all done verbally

NA NA
Y Y Y NA Y Y Y
Y

failed hearing screening and /or whisper test

Y

Y

No EOMIS

Y
NA Y Y Y Y

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

HOH

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

HOH

40 initial request/questionnaire?

NA Y Y Y Y Y
NA Y

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 227 of 985 - Page ID#: 3815

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

HOH

41 each relevant medical visit?

Y

HOH

42 any audiology visit?

Y

HOH

43 hearing aid provision?

Y

HOH

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks?

Y

HOH

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

Y

HOH

46 Shared with monitor when requested

Y

Summary

The Audicus is done on site and then hearing

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it

aid is sent directly to the facility and given to

take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Describe.

the patient by the medical staff with a follow

47

0 up in 30 days.

NA

In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait more

48 than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?

8-Jun NA

49 What is the cause of the delay?

approval, manufacturing delays, mutliple audicus performed

NA

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) to

50 improve this process?

We ensure follow up is done weekly

NA

HOH

Co-pay and availability issues:

NA

HOH

47 Charged only once -- not again for followups

Y

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

NA

HOH

48 Available for free?

Y

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

Y

HOH

50 7 days/week?

Y

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Y

Both E Information provided inmates

Both

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe)

Handbook, handout, questions answered in-

person.

y

Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-discrimination and

Both

2 ADA services?

Y

Both

Brochure? Items to include:

NA

Both

3 Non-discrimination obligation

Y

Both

4 Effective communication obligation

Y

Both

5 Auxiliary aids and services available

Y

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services (including

Both

6 hearing aids, and batteries)

Y

Both

7 Communication equipment available, and how to use

Y

Both

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

Y

Both

Other items:

NA

Both

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

Interpreters scheduled upon request.

NA

Both

10 Request for Accommodations/ Communications Assistance

Y

Both

11 Medical Request form includes request for accommodations

Y

Both

12 Job application form includes request for accommodations

Y

Both

13 Waiver forms

Y

Both

14 Classification form includes request for accommodations

Y

Both

15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations

Y

SAP and other programming form includes request for

Both

16 accommodation

Y

Both

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

No such form

NA

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 228 of 985 - Page ID#: 3816

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in

18 law library? (Need to check)

Both

Do request forms:

Both

19 list available services comprehensively?

clearly explain services and aids (what they are and when

Both

20 they are available?

Both

21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?

expressly ask about preferred mode of

Both

22 communication/needed services and why they are useful?

Both

23 explain which items are free?

Both

24 encompass religious and volunteer-provided programming?

Both

Effective communication of these resources:

Both

25 Are the materials in language accessible to each inmate?

Both

26 Is this information provided with effective communication?

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity

to meet with a KDOC staff member and interpreter to ask

Both

27 questions about the materials?

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

for a program with staff, is effective communication

Both

28 provided?

Both

29 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

Both

30 in education with staff, is effective communication provided?

Both

31 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

Both

2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

7 Clear process to obtain? Describe

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Both

12 Working process to get new inmate alerts added? (Describe)

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

14 Appropriately obvious

Both

15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?)

Medical notifies ADA Coordinator who makes additions/updates.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Y
NA Y
Y
Y
Y
Y Y NA Y Y
Y
NA
Y
Y NA
Y
Y
Y Y Y Y NA Y Y Y Y Y NA Y
Y
Y Y Y NA Y Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 229 of 985 - Page ID#: 3817

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Unless in Restrictive Housing

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) Y Y Y Y

Both

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?

Both

23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator?

Both

24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver?

Both

25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?

Both

26 Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested ID?

Both

27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

Both

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Both

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

Both

9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

Both

2 Cell cards

Both

3 Bed shaker

Both

4 In-person alerts

Both

5 Pager

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

Both

9 Other amplification

No, unless in Restrictive Housing Door sign No
As need arises

Y
NA NA NA NA
NA Y
Y
Y
Y
Y Y Y NA Y Y
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 230 of 985 - Page ID#: 3818

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

10 Other (describe)

Both

General issues

Special housing area:

Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH inmates?

Both

11 (Describe)

Both

12 If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? (Describe)

If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed

Both

13 there? (such a requirement is non-compliant).

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live

there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to the

Both

14 inmate? Describe any restrictions.

In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is primary

Both

15 consideration given to inmate request?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Describe: Pocket talker

NO SUCH AREA AT KSP

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services

form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or

Both

16 not requesting aids/services, were accommodations provided?

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services documented in

Both

17 inmate institutional files?

Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services shared

Both

18 appropriately with staff?

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Both

20 Have any been out of comission?

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Both

22 hearing aid?

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

Both

24 Promptly?

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Both

26 Describe

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

Both

30 Are classes in sign language provided?

Both

31 deaf inmates given notice?

Both

32 priority given to deaf inmates?

Both I Interpretation in general

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

Deaf

1 communicated to inmates?

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

Deaf

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

3 volunteer-provided programming?

Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation

Deaf

4 method?

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

This has not occurred at KSP. None have waived
No sign language class provided at KSP.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA NA NA
NA NA
NA

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA

Y

NA

Y
Y
Y NA NA
Y
Y Y NA NA

NA NA NA NA Y
Y
Y Y Y

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 231 of 985 - Page ID#: 3819

Deaf/HO H or both? # Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf

Issue/Question Standing arrangement with providers? 6 In-person? 7 VRI? Is VRI availability: 8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA Y Y
NA Y Y
Y
Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Deaf

13 In general

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Deaf

16 Splitter?

Deaf

17 Instructions?

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Deaf

21 How?

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

Deaf

22 should be first recourse?

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

Deaf

24 Parole?

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

Deaf

27 before?

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

Deaf

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

Deaf

29 Describe

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

Deaf

30 was unavailable)

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

Deaf

31 method?

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

Will be made available whenever requested.

Describe: YES

NA

Y

Y

Y

Describe: case, charger, speaker, internet NA

Requirement for splitter?

Y

Y

Y

Y

Log. Periodic testing.

Y

Y

Upon necessary request by inmate or request by authorized visitor. Situation has not occurred. Situation has not occurred. No
No

Y Y
Y NA
Y Y Y Y NA Y

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 232 of 985 - Page ID#: 3820

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

Deaf

35 encounters/communications/settings)

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

Deaf J Hand Restraints

Deaf

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

Deaf

2 finding of a security threat?

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

Deaf

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

Deaf

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

Deaf

5 Staff aware of the issue

Deaf

Off-site medical care:

Deaf

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

restraints removed when necessary for medical

Deaf

7 communication?

Both K Non-auditory Alerts

Both

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Describe: Bed shaker, pager

Both

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

Both

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

Both

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

Both

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

Both

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

Both

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Both

9 been denied?

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Both

11 How often?

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Both

15 used consistently?

Both

16 in all dormitories?

Both

17 in gym?

Both

18 in library?

Both

19 audited and monitored?

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

Both

20 misses a page?

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

Both

21 because of disability?

No Describe: Monthly

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Y Y NA Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Y
Y Y NA Y

NA Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y
Y
Y Y Y NA Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y
NA
Y
Y

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 233 of 985 - Page ID#: 3821

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Y

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

Y

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

NA

Deaf

1 Installed?

Y

Deaf

2 Allow voice carry-over features?

Y

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

NA

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

NA

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Deaf

5 alternative offered

Sorenson is available

Y

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

6 videophone is out of service.

Describe:

NA

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Y

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

Y

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

Y

Deaf

10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates?

Y

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

Y

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

Deaf

12 using ordinary phones?

Y

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

Y

Deaf

14 Free?

Y

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone

Deaf

15 calls?

Y

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

NA

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the 17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

No instances requiring denial have occurred.

Y

Both

TTY:

NA

Both

18 Installed?

Portable

Y

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Y

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

Y

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

NA

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

Y

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

Both

23 for non-deaf inmates?

Y

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Y

Both

25 Permission needed?

Y

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

NA

Both

27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates?

Y

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

No.

Both

29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Describe: March 2020

Y

Both

30 Can access publicly available relay service phone numbers?

Y

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions for

Both

31 videophones and TTY is less than equitable?

NA

Both

32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

Has not occurred.

NA

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 234 of 985 - Page ID#: 3822

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

If yes, was determination (including reasoning, evidence, etc.)

Both

33 documented?

Both

34 Was monitor notified?

Both

35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

Deaf

VRS via laptop

Deaf

36 Available?

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

Both

Phones

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

Both

CapTel

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

43 Request by any inmate denied?

Both

TV/Movies

Both

44 Is captioning available?

Both

45 Is captioning used?

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

List names List names

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

Both

49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

Both

50 Amplification method? (Describe)

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

Both

53 status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

Both

54 deaf inmates?

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

Both

5 (Describe)

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Both

7 because security threat?

Both

8 monitor notified?

Both

9 reasoning explained?

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both

10 of requests?

Both

11 of denials?

Describe:
TV and Movies are not available to any inmate in RHU at KSP.
Describe in detail
No instances of denial have occurred No instances of denial have occurred No instances of denial have occurred No instances of denial have occurred None

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA
NA NA NA Y Y Y NA Y Y NA NA NA NA NA Y Y Y Y
Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA Y

Y

Y

NA Y Y Y
NA

NA Y Y

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 235 of 985 - Page ID#: 3823

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both N
Deaf Deaf Both O

Issue/Question Disciplinary Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been 1 punished? 2 Was a re-hearing granted? Grievances

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

No

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Y NA

Both

1 Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA coordinator?

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator

Both

2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator?

Both P Training

Both

Types available

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

Both

3 All appropriate staff?

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

Any additional targeted training on specific needs ? Please

Both

describe in detail

Grievance & ADA Coordinator are the same.

Y

Y

Describe: Describe:

NA Y
NA Y
NA NA
Y
NA

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 236 of 985 - Page ID#: 3824
USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Name

Other Alert

Device

(e.g.,

Personal

Low literacy?

If signs to

Bed

vibrating

Phone

(So that

communicat

Shaker? watch, TTY Access Captel

Amplifier Shake &

Clear mask

Listed with Signs to written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

etc.) (Not (Not

Acess (Not (Not

Wake (Not

for staff Any other

KOMS ADA commu communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; requested;

who deal auxiliary

Precaution nicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied; denied; denied; denied; Special with this aid

ID

?

(Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) mask?

innmate? requested?

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Denied N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

N

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

NExhibit 2, NK/SAP, p. 13N

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 237 of 985 - Page ID#: 3825

Name

Other Alert

Device

(e.g.,

Personal

Low literacy?

If signs to

Bed

vibrating

Phone

(So that

communicat

Shaker? watch, TTY Access Captel

Amplifier Shake &

Clear mask

Listed with Signs to written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

etc.) (Not (Not

Acess (Not (Not

Wake (Not

for staff Any other

KOMS ADA commu communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; requested;

who deal auxiliary

Precaution nicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied; denied; denied; denied; Special with this aid

ID

?

(Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) mask?

innmate? requested?

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Granted N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

Y

N

N

N

N/A

N

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N/A

N

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 14

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 238 of 985 - Page ID#: 3826
4

KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

4/24/2007

9/27/2017

Feb-18

1-Jan

sick call request sick call

6/1/2007

3/8/2018

physical intake

prior to incarceration

18-Mar

6/1/2007
mixed hearing loss

3/8/2018 profound bilateral hearing
loss

Sep-18

18-Mar

failed whisper hearing aid

test

needed

A

A

C

A

congenital

malformation R

ear- no hearing

aid indicated L

ear, pocket

NA

n/a

talker given

8/14/2019

8/14/2019 8/14/2019

8/15/2019 8/15/2019

screening

8/15/2019

8/15/2019

9/16/2019

9/20/2019 8/16/2019 10/28/2019

Bilateral Impairment

Mild B/L Bilateral Discrep. Impair.

Mild HL, 0 device

A

A

D

A

D

A

D

8/15/19 Audicus 8/15/19 Audicus

Testing

Testing

Audiologist Report 10/2/19

Audicus Screening

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

No
4/30/200711/9/2007 4/30/2007 Refer to ENT request ENT
consult

3/8/2018

Feb-18

ENT visit physical exam audiology referral no treatment recommended indicated

8/9/2019

7/12/2019

6/5/2019

9/16/2019

9/20/2019 8/16/2019 10/28/2019

screening

screening

screening

scrrening

Screening

screening

ordered

ordered

ordered

complete

Complete

complete Screening

Mild B/L

Impair.

Mild HL

discrepenciew

between ears

Pocket Talker

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 15

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

Case: 3:414-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 3827

Page: 239 of 985 - Page

5/29/2007

5/3/2018

Sep-18

4/6/2018

8/14/2019

8/15/2019

8/15/2019

11/14/2019

9/20/2019

Given to 11/1/2019 Patient

Follow up

hearing aid

screening

screening

screening

Bilateal

Refer to

Review w/

hearing eval ENT/audiology sick call

delivered

completed

needs hearing hearing aid

treatment plan

aid for left ear recommended in process

given to patient needs re-test

completed no significant impairment

completed no significant impairment

Impairment

Audiology

patient

H/A needed for L Unable to score Hearing Aid

Ear

Audicus

Needed

8/27/2020

Released from

11/9/2007 hearing aid
fitting hearing aid
issued
18-Dec chronic care return in 6
months
2/11/2020

7/31/2018

10/29/2018

5/24/2020

10/2/2019

1/9/2020

7/8/2020

11/18/2019

10/2/2019 11/8/2019 KSP

Refused

Repeat Audicus Audicus

Audicus

Discrepincies Hearing Aid

Audiologist

Audicus

hearing aid hearing eval Ordered

Complete

Ordered

between

Ordered

Findings

Review

received hearing NO sign. Impair

Moderate B/L

No further

for hearing

aid

L ear

Does not Qualify Hearing

ears on Audicus

interventions aids

Pocket Talker R

Ear,

Loss

7/10/2020

congenital

Referral to

11/14/2019 defects with

6/9/2020

2/27/2020

1/15/2020 Audiologist

12/23/2019

9/10/2020 2/25/2020

multiple

TLOC approved R Hearing Aid Audicus

Hearing Aid

Audicus

audiology

surgeries

ENT

Ordered

Completed

done

issued

Audicus Ordered Review; pt

H/A send out for

Mild to

given sound

adjustment

and Audiology

Moderate B/L

to Patient

amp.

5/23/2020

9/9/2020

9/15/2020

Repeat Audicus

Scheduled appt

Audicus

12/19/2019 Ordered

6/13/2020

3/23/2020

4/14/2020 with

1/22/2020 Completed

TLOC approved ENT

Scheduled 5/27/2020

Audiologist Scheduled

H/A given to patient

Hearing Aid Ordered

Audiologist

30 Day F/U

and Audiogram

1/24/2020 Inconclusive

H/A Returned to 6/9/2020 TLOC

patient

approved

3/1/2020 no off-sites due
to
COVID
6/15/2020 Patient appt
with ENT
and Audiogram

ENT/Audiologist

7/1/2020

4/23/2020

5/4/2020

Audiogram

30 Day Follow

Complete

Up

H/A Received

30 day F/u

Compelte

scheduled

6/13/2020

Audiologist

Scheduled

7/14/2020

TLOC approved

for device

to be ordered

and was

Aug-20

Sep-20

Hearing Aid is worling fine

9/18/2020 Hearing discrepencies Unable to Score Audiicus

Jan-20 30 Day Follow UP Complete

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 16

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name

Case: 3:414-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 3828

Page: 240 of 985 - Page

KyDOC #
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

ENT-Tubes in ears
20-Sep Followup ENT, OK

Bone Conduction H/A Filling Scheduled

Yes

YES

YES

Feb-20 11/14/2019

Aug-20 1/24/2020

6 months

64 days

Jun-20 Sep-20

COVID shut down
ENT and procedures

90

waiting on H/A Process of

to be

being seen by

outside

serviced to Audiologist,

return to PT then

getting

approval of

TLOC

for speciality

Hearing Aids

and then

setting appt

back up with

specialist

YES Aug-19 Apr-20
240 days
Patient kept faiing Audicus testing and needing a retest,
Then sent to Audioology recievid his hearing aid then had a follow up

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 17

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 241 of 985 - Page ID#: 3829

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

12/17/2019 12/26/2019 11/26/2019 12/20/2019

Mar-18 1/16/2020 1/16/2020 1/22/2020 2/3/2020 2/3/2020 2/4/2020 2/17/2020

screening screening Intake

Intake

ENT

12/24/2019

1/31/2020 2/27/2020

CC

CC

CC

CC

CC

CC

CC

1/20/2020 1/20/2020 1/16/2020

2/3/2020 2/3/2020 2/10/2020

2/4/2020 2/17/2020 2/17/2020

severe B/L HL

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

A

A

A

A

A

D

A

A

A

A

B

D

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

clinical pres

Audicus

Audicus

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

12/24/2019 12/26/2019

12/20/2019

Mar-18 1/16/2020 1/16/2020 1/16/2020 2/3/2020 2/3/2020 2/4/2020 2/14/2020

Bone

Audicus Done WT Failed Pocket Talker Arrived with Conduction whisper test whisper test Audicus Done Whisper Test Whisper Test Whisper Test Audicus

Moderat L Severe R

Audicus Ordered

B/L Hearing H/A is not failed

Aids

authorized

failed

inconclusive retest after meds

Failed

Failed

Failed

no significant

impairment Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 18

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 242 of 985 - Page ID#: 3830

12/26/2019 2/27/2020

Audicus Done Audicus L Mild Imp severe B/L HL R Mild Imp with referral

1/10/2020 12/26/2019

Mar-20

Refused Apt H/A Ordered Pocket Talker

for L Ear

Given

2/10/2020

Jan-20 7/21/2020

30 Day

Refused Apt Update

Audicus

Scheduled 7/24/2020

1/7/2020 Patient refused a hearing aid but accepted a sound amplifier today

7/29/2020 Augiology Referral

9/4/2020 OSMT Scheduled
9/15/2020 Audiologist results do not

4/23/2020 1/20/2020 1/20/2020 2/25/2020 2/12/2020 2/10/2020 2/6/2020 B/L

Patient turned Audicus Done Audicus Done Audicus

Audicus

Audicus Done Pt. Refused

his h/a in to L 0; R mild medical with no device a request for

L severe
R Moderate R H/A Ordered

Re-Tested B/L mildsevere
hearing loss

Done

Moderate loss Audicus

B/L Ears

2/25/2020 2/24/2020

a pocket

B/L R H/A ordered Impairment H/A Ordered

talker and

this was done

2/27/2020 3/2/2020

5/4/2020 5/4/2020 pocket talker H/A Issued

H/A give to PT H/A give to PT issued 30 day
30 day F/U scheduled

4/2/2020 30 Day

6/10/2020

F/U Done

Folllow up

Completed

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 19

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 243 of 985 - Page ID#: 3831

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

2/27/2020 3/2/2020 3/20/2020 3/20/2020 3/23/2020 3/27/2020 4/9/2020 4/3/2020 4/14/2020 4/23/2020 4/23/2020 5/6/2020

Referral

CC

CC

CC

HS Contact Transfer Here CC Visit

CC Visit

3/4/2020 3/23/2020 3/25/2020 3/25/2020

4/13/2020

CC Visit

H & P

H & P

CC 5/7/2020 5/7/2020

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

B

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

minimal h/l

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

B

B

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

Audicus

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

2/28/2020 3/4/2020 3/20/2020 3/20/2020 3/23/2020 3/27/2020 4/9/2020 4/3/2020 4/14/2020 4/22/2020 4/23/2020 5/6/2020

Audicus

Audicus

Audicus

Audicus

HS Contact HOH

CC Visit

CC Visit

CC Visit

H & P Visit H & P Visit CC Visit

REFUSED

Ordered

Ordered

Request for Amplifier

Audicus

given

failed whisper

test

Audicus

Audicus

Ordered

Ordered

Audicus Ordered

Audicus Ordered

Audicus

Audicus

Ordered

Ordered

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 20

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 244 of 985 - Page ID#: 3832

3/9/2020 3/23/2020 3/25/2020 3/25/2020

B/L mild to Audicus

Audicus

moderate H/L Completed R H/A Ordered

Scheduled

Audicus Scheduled

4/13/2020 3/25/2020 3/26/2020 4/28/2020

30 Day F/U mild B/L

Audicus Done R H/A

Complete Hearing Loss Mild BL HL ordered

3/27/2020 4/6/2020 Sound
Pt Refused Amplifier Received by
any devices patient

5/13/2020 H/A Given to

Patient

F/U 30 Days

4/13/2020 4/14/2020 4/15/2020 4/23/2020 4/24/2020 5/7/2020

Audicus

Audicus

Completed Completed Audicus

Audicus

Audicus

Audicus

Inconclusive Completed Completed Completed

4/13/2020 4/15/2020 4/22/2020 4/28/2020 4/28/2020 5/8/2020

Met with

B/L

Patient

Impairment

R H/A

L H/A Ordered Ordered

Audicus Repeated

R H/A ordered Mild H/L

does not

5/13/2020 Refused any

H/A give to

Patient

Devices at

qualify for a device

5/13/2020 5/13/2020 4/24/2020 F/U 30 Days

H/A Given to H/A given to

the Pt

the Pt

L H/A Ordered

this time

9/9/2020 Audicus re-

F\U 30 Days F/U 30 Days

done re: pt complaints

5/13/2020 6/10/2020

mild-mod

H/A give to Follow-up

H/L in B/L

patient

completed

ears

F/U 30 days

6/24/2020 Patient given his B/L hearing aides from home

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 21

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 245 of 985 - Page ID#: 3833

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening

5/6/2020 5/13/2020 5/26/2020 5/15/2020 5/20/2020 6/1/2020 6/5/2020 6/13/2020 6/17/2020 6/16/2020 6/17/2020 7/2/2020

CC

CC/ H&P

CC

H&P

H & P

H & P

CC

CC

CC

CC

CC

Transfer

4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
B 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

5/8/2020 5/13/2020 5/27/2020 5/15/2020 5/26/2020 6/5/2020 6/10/2020 6/16/2020

5/8/2020

5/27/2020

Audicus

Normal b/l mild b/l

R Ear Mil H/L hearing

impairment Completed

D

A

D

D

A

A

A

B

Audicus

Audicus Results

Audicus Results

6/18/2020 Audicus

a

B

here from LSCC
A

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

5/6/2020 5/13/2020 5/27/2020 5/15/2020 5/20/2020 6/1/2020 6/5/2020 6/13/2020 6/22/2020 6/16/2020 6/23/2020 7/9/2020

CC Visit

H&P

H&P

H & P

H & P

CC

CC

Patient

CC

Patient

Treatment

Audicus

Audicus

Audicus

Audicus Ordered

Audicus Ordered

Audicus

Audicus

Audicus

refused

Audicus

Refused

Team

Ordered

Ordered

Completed

Ordered

Ordered Ordered

Audicus

Ordered

Audicus Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 22

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 246 of 985 - Page ID#: 3834

5/8/2020 5/13/2020 6/11/2020 5/28/2020 5/26/2020 6/10/2020 6/10/2020 6/16/2020

Results

Audicus

Audicus

Audicus Res Reviewed Audicus Done Performed Audicus

Audicus

Audicus

No

with patient No

Completed Impairment and a

Impairment

Reviewed Performed Performed

Pocket Talker

Issue

Pocket Talker

5/13/2020 5/20/2020

5/28/2020 Given

6/19/2020 6/24/2020

Patient

Provider apt

refused any to review

mild b/l impairment No Device Required

Patient f/u Patient f/u

L H/A

L H/A

devices at

Ordered Ordered

this time

5/20/2020 Inmate Refused

7/16/2020 Received

Apt re Results

7/16/2020 Hearing Aid Recevied

6/10/2020

Hearing Aid

Refused apt

again

6/18/2020 Audicus Performed
6/22/2020
Patient f/u Pocket Talker
6/24/2020 Pocket Talker given to pt

7/13/2020 Mild to Mod Loss Bilateral
7/21/2020
H/A Ordered
8/11/2020 H/A Given to Patient
9/17/2020 Patient F/U Scheduled

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 23

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 247 of 985 - Page ID#: 3835

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

7/14/2020 7/13/2020 7/14/2020 1/2/2020 7/21/2020 7/22/2020 7/24/2020 7/24/2020 7/24/2020 7/30/2020 7/30/2020 7/30/2020

H&P

H&P

CC

Intake

CC/H&P

Transfer

H & P

7/21/2020 Transfer from GRCC

H&P

H & P

H&P

7/30/2020

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

A

D

B

A

C

A

D

A

D

D

C

D

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

Audicus

Audicus

Audicus

Audicus

Audicus

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

7/14/2020 7/13/2020 7/14/2020 1/2/2020 7/21/2020 7/22/2020 7/24/2020 7/24/2020 7/24/2020 7/30/2020 7/30/2020 7/30/2020

Failed whisper Audicus

Audicus

Intake

Audicus

Transfer

Audicus

Audicus

Audicus

Audicus

Audicus

Audicus

Test/Audicus Ordered Completed

Ordered

Patient has Ordered and from GRCC Ordered

Ordered

Ordered

Ordered

Hearing Aid Completed Met with TT

7/31/2020 7/31/2020 7/30/20202

Ordered

Done

7/31/2020 Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 24

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 248 of 985 - Page ID#: 3836

7/23/2020 7/14/2020 7/16/2020

Refused apt Audicus

Audicus

rescheduled Compelted Completed

Normal B/L

7/27/2020

7/22/2020

Mild B/L Hearing Loss
7/22/2020 Pocket Talker Issued

Minimal Impairment 0 Device Required

7/23/2020 Needs re-test incomplete
7/25/2020 B/L Mild to
Moderate L H/A Ordered
9/10/2020 Audicus requested new Audiogram to adjust H/A
9/15/2020
Audicus tried x3, kicking out with inconclusive results
9/15/2020 Audicus results state 3 tests done w/abnormal

Audicus done Audicus done Audicus done Does not

8/3/2020 Mild R H/L

mild H/L L mild-mod B/L mild low freq qualify for Audicus

Pocket Talker

mild H/L B/L hearing loss Refused Pocket

loss B/L

device

Completed Issued

Talker

8/4/2020

8/19/2020

R H/A ordered
8/25/2020 H/A Given Today

Reviewed ny Provider
9/17/2020 Apt Scheduled Rescheduled for 9/21/20

results and suggests that
this is from noncooperation

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 25

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 249 of 985 - Page ID#: 3837

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name
KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Aug-20 7/2/2020 9/3/2020 8/31/2020

Transfer

Transfer In H&P

H&P

from LLCC

9/10/2020

3/12/2020 9/10/2020

9/9/2020 9/10/2020 H&P
9/9/2020 9/15/2020

9/11/2020 9/11/2020 9/15/2020 9/18/2020 Transfer in Transfer In Transfer In Transfer In 9/9/2020

L H/A

L H/A

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

A

A

D

E

C

C

C

A

D

A

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

Audicus

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

8/27/2020 2/6/2020 9/10/2020 9/10/2020 9/9/2020 9/10/2020 9/9/2020 9/11/2020 9/11/2020 9/15/2020 9/18/2020

Transfer

Intake

Audicus

Audicus

Audicus

Failed H/T Audicus

Transfer in Transfer in Transfer In Transfer In

from LLCC May-20

Completed Completed Mild-Mod

3/12/2020 9/15/2020

H/L in B/L

Audicus scheduled

Completed from NTC

from NTC no device

From WKCC from NTC Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 26

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 250 of 985 - Page ID#: 3838

L H/A Issued Audicus

Normal B/L

9/16/2020 ears

9/15/2020 9/16/2020 9/17/2020 necessary

Hearing

Pt met with

9/17/2020 Audicus

L H/A

Pocket Talker

8/27/22020

3/17/2020

provider,

met with

Performed requested taken at NTC

Patient states pt appt to

refused L H/A provider R

approval by and put in

he lost H/A review

9/16/2020 H/A Needed

9/18/2020 Provider

property that

9/17/2020 Inmate states H/A was packed in his property

LLCC

Audicus

8/28/2020 3/18/2020

LLCC states L H/A Ordered

pt did not

report lost H/A there

4/29/2020

H/A Given to

ADA Coord sent for

Advised

approval

Mild loss R mild-mod L

9/18/2020 approved and ordered

is under quarantine

that is still in quarantine

Patient

7/2/2020 Tx to KSP Intake done no pt comp with device

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 27

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 251 of 985 - Page ID#: 3839

Technology

How many

Where

When obtained

Specifications (URL)

FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device.
Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers)
Captioned Telephone (CapTel) Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like? Bed shakers Vibrating watches Vibrating alarm clocks Pagers

2 microphones, 10 receivers
10
2 3 1

ADA office

1/21/2020

Retekess Tour Guide wireless microphone TR503

8/16/2019

3CH, 7CH, Transition Walk (5-4E), Yard

& 1/17/2020

Office, ADA Office

Reizen Portable Telephone Amplifier, B0015PV94S

8/30/2016 &

Special Security Unit 8/16/2019

& General

Population (pending

connection)

CapTel 840i

1 in 5-4C-01 and 2 as 5/24/2016 &

backup

1/15/2019

SC-Vib

Yard Office

SKU# 6C437 / RX-E467

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration not mentioned above.

Earphones for parole hearings Earphones for orientation videos Sorenson

1

Reentry Office

2

Legal Office

1

Legal Office

HT280 HP100 ASD041517

How do inmates obtain access?

How well do they work?

As needed in Program classes

and Chapel programs

In working order

Other comments

Upon request

In working order

SSU has daily access. GP will be

upon request

In working order

Installed based upon need In working order

Pick up upon let-out

In working order

As scheduled by Parole Board Upon request Daily access to HOH

In working order In working order In working order

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 28

Documentation and narrative to provide Grievances:

Case:

3:14-cv-00001-GFVTD-aEte BrevAiewed

DoCocmm#en:ts9(p9ro-b2lems reFveialeledd, s:olu1tio2n/s,1et6c.)/20 ID#: 3840

Page: 252 of 985 - Page

1. Provide summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Should include the issues, summary of response, resolution 2. Provide full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Discipline
3. For all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving an inmate who signs, provide report of inmate name, date, and communication method for each. 4. Provide documentation for all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Auxiliary aids 5. VRI Log (provide). 6. TTY instructions (provide) 7. VRI instructions (provide) Audiology processing delays
8.A list of each inmate currently at your institution whose audiology processing FINISHED after March 2020, for whom such processing took or is taking over 60 days, documentation of the explanation for any such delay, and a description of any steps taken to avoid similar problems going forward. Information provided to inmates, policies, etc. 9. Any pages of the inmate handbook that address disability, and the date for that version of the handbook. 10. The current Deaf/HOH brochure and any other documents provided to deaf or hard-ofhearing inmates. 11.The medical request form currently provided to prisoners. 12. Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2020 addressing deaf/hard-of-hearing issues.
13. A list of each use of an in-person sign-language interpreter from February 2020 to present, and any occasions in which such an interpreter was requested but denied.
Please provide written responses to the following questions:
14. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty because staff members are wearing masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?
15. How many staff members are currently using clear masks? How is the decision made who will wear a clear mask?
16. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty with their hearing aids because of the design of their own masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?
17. How many inmates have been issued masks that don't have ear ties?
18. What if anything have you done to solve the problem of inmates having trouble hearing announcements? Please respond in detail, with dates on all responsive steps, prerequisites for any assistance, etc.
19. How have you educated staff that it is inappropriate to write up an inmate for behavior that is caused by a hearing impairment (e.g., talking loudly, not following instructions that could not be heard)? If there was a memo, please provide that.

9/29/2020 9/29/2020 9/29/2020 9/29/2020 9/29/2020 9/29/2020 9/29/2020 9/23/2020
9/29/2020 9/29/2020 9/29/2020 9/29/2020
9/18/2020 9/18/2020
9/18/2020
9/29/2020

See bottom of this page Copies of all grievances submitted by deaf/HOH inmates are provided as attachment. KSP has no inmates that sign to communicate.
No deaf/HOH inmate received a disciplinary report for for an incident that can be attributed to communications difficulty.

Provided as attachment Provided as attachment Provided as attachment

- Feb 2020 to Aug 2020 due to COVID shutdown

Jun2020 to Sept 2020 due ot process

of being seen by outside Audiologist, then getting approval of TLOC for specialty hearing aids, followed by setting appt again with specialist.

- Aug 2019 to Apr 2020 patient kept failing Audicus testing and needing a retest, then sent to Audiology to receive hearing

aid and a follow up appt.

KSP Inmate Handbook provided as attachment KSP HOH Handout provided as attachment Healthcare Request Form provided as attachment
No in-person sign-language interpreter used during this timeframe.

The medical staff have had two of the HOH inmates advise us directly that they were not able to understand us with our masks on and accomodations have been made to include written communications and such and were discussed at our weekly treatment teams. There are none in the medical department.
The medical staff have not recived any verbal complaints or written communications stating that they were having trouble wearing their hearing devices with their masks. Inmates were initially issued masks with ear loops. Inmates may go the the Laundry/Clothing House and exchange this mask for one with ear ties. PA system receives troubleshooting as necessary. Wallstand repeat pertinent announcement via bullhorn.
KSP has had no instances of staff writing up an inmate for any behavior that is linked to hearing impairment. Dealing with hearing impaired inmates is part of our annual training.

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 29

Documentation and narrative to provide

Case:

3:14-cv-00001-GFVTD-aEte BrevAiewed

DoCocmm#en:ts9(p9ro-b2lems reFveialeledd, s:olu1tio2n/s,1et6c.)/20 ID#: 3841

Page: 253 of 985 - Page

20. Please describe in detail how inmates are supposed to get hearing aid batteries,

including how long it should take them each time.

9/18/2020

The inmates can get their hearing aid batteries during pill call, nursing rounds or come to the medical department window and pick one up. They are stocked on the carts and are readily available. If by chance they are out on the carts, one would be available within 24 hours.

21. When an inmate reports that a hearing aid is not working, what are the steps followed to evaluate the complaint? Include all relevant copays and other procedures.
22. When someone is denied binaural hearing aids, are they provided information on the standard for receiving such assistance, and the opportunity for appeal? How many inmates have received binaural aids since the current binaural hearing aid policy has been in effect?
23. What arrangements are made to provide vibrating watches/clocks for inmates who are indigent?

9/18/2020

The patient present the H/A to the medical staff and we look at it and see if there is something that we can do to fix or adjust it. If not, it is sent out to wherever the H/A came from for adjustments or repairs. There are no co-pays for the patients at all for this process.

9/18/2020

When a patient is requesting or it is recommended that they have binaural hearing aides, they are presented to the TLOC panel for review. A full case review is done there by a panel of medical and administrative people and it is a determination that is case by case. KSP has had two approvals for Binaural H/A's.

24. Please describe, in detail, each step that takes place once a person is identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing, to evaluate/offer any auxiliary aids. Include who is responsible for each step. 25. Please describe, in detail, any situation in 2019 or 2020 in which a deaf/hard-ofhearing inmate has been denied a job or other opportunity (access to a program or the like) because of their disability. Include the inmate’s name, the date, and the circumstances.
26. Please list all training that you have received for your role as ADA Coordinator.
27. Please provide an update on all items in your Deaf/HOH action plan (previously shared with me).
Summary of non-hearing related grievances filed by HOH inmates Inmate

9/18/2020

Medical : They are identified through a failed hearing test or questionaire and an Audicus is ordered. The Audicus is performed, the results are received within 48 hours and an appointment is set up with the provider for review. The patient is seend by the provider for review and a determination is made based upon the guidelelines if any aides are needed. If the patient is noted as HOH, the ADA coordinator is advised and a H/A is sent for approval and ordering or Pocket Talker is given at that time. No deaf/HOH inmate has been denied a job or other opportunity because of their disability. In 2019, the Program 'Softskills' was delayed for PC inmates from Mar 2019 to April 2019 pending the arrival of the closed caption version.

9/29/2020 9/29/2020

See question 9 on Main tab.
Tracking - in 24 months, KSP has increased from 26 HOH inmates to 84. controled phone on the yard from 1 to 3. Caseworker laptops.

Summary of grievance Requests seized property Reuests property Officer not letting janitors out to work in a timely manner Rejected mail Wants MRI or CT scan on shoulder Not receiving proper treatment for pain Requested a urine cath Nurse gave the wrong meds Has difficulty with his handwriting. Does not feel safe from COVID Hand shakes when writing; wants to use the phone. Being kept against will because of COVID Wants MP3 player back Filed grievance on disciplinary report MP3 player not on pproerty sheet Not receiving meds Wants a cell with a window Did not get morning psych meds in timely manner Wants a soap dish in RHU Wants to shave in RHU Wants approved for double-cuff and shoulder checked by medical Wants released from 7CH Wants woken up during staff rounds Wasn't brought the pictures he wanted Wants to be able to shave in 7CH Wants better deodorant in RHU Wants help getting glasses

Volume Control Phones - KSP has increased the volume VRI Access - Purple has been installed on
Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 30

Documentation and narrative to provide

Case:

3:14-cv-00001-GFVTD-aEte BrevAiewed

DoCocmm#en:ts9(p9ro-b2lems reFveialeledd, s:olu1tio2n/s,1et6c.)/20 ID#: 3842 Ink pens are too expensive

Page: 254 of 985 - Page

Canteen is out of ink pens

Has lost weight in RHU

Wants released from RHU

Received disciplinary report for seized property

Has numerous items missing from his property

Too much property was seized when he transferred

Wants to assist other inmates with legal work

Pad locks were confiscated

Property is missing from transfer

Has not been allowed to clean cell often enough

Reduced amount of food at breakfast

Wants the rest of his art order

Wants a new dryer for PCs

Wants items placed back in Access Catalog

Memo to close windows is not being followed

AC is not working in 5CH

4th floor ice runner was allowed to enter PC walk

Transition laundry man was out when PCs went to chow

Meds have been reduced

Janitor is not being let out to do job

DR investigations are not done in a timely manner

Received informal late

Canteen out of V05 shampoo

Canteen was stolen out of chow hall

Aramark staff are not wearing hairnets

Keefe is out of serveral items

Issue with 6 month statements from Inmate Accounts

Keefe is raising prices for the 4th time in a year

False information was provided on his coleslaw grievance

Request to clean drink containers himself

State pay was short for March

Keefe is cutting ingredients short

Beverage containers were finally cleaned

Doctor told him he would have to live with pain in jaw

Wants rejected grievance processed

Wants rejected grievance forwarded to Warden

Wants rejected grievance forwarded to Warden

Photos were rejected

Has no cable in his cell

Colored pencils were swized by officer

Photos of family were rejected

Wants confiscated property

Wants to be on Kosher Meal Plan

PC inmates not allowed enough time to eat

Wants medical showers daily

Was told that he would not receive his medical shower

$1.90 was deducted from account

ADA Coordinator would not stop and talk with him while passing out chow

Wants ADA Coordinator to make 'lockdown rounds'

Sack lunch from WKCC has too little food

Side door is being left open and bugs enter the chow hall

Access catalog is missing items

Plastic window coverings were removed

Charts were reviewed in lieu of a face-to-face visit

4th floor ice runner was allowed to enter PC walk

Was charged for a chronic care med

C/O Shaffer was loud

GPs were at crach gate when PCs were let out for chow

Grievances are overdue

PCs need 7 days of rec Was prevented from filing PREA

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 31

Documentation and narrative to provide

Case:

3:14-cv-00001-GFVTD-aEte BrevAiewed

DoCocmm#en:ts9(p9ro-b2lems reFveialeledd, s:olu1tio2n/s,1et6c.)/20 ID#: 3843 Nurse did not respond when he cut his leg

Page: 255 of 985 - Page

Wants contents of letter back from mailroom

Stepped on glass and cut his foot

Has submitted 2 property request forms

Blue folder was confiscated

Property is missing from transfer

Free phone call was not long enough

Has not been seen at sick call

Wants COVID testing

Letter was delayed by mailroom

Cholesterol meds have been discontinued

Eye doctor refused to order my meds

Wants COVID testing

Wants released from RHU

Wants to be assigned a job

Was denied use of library

Was refused a protective mask

Was not properly treated as sick call

Was blamed for damage to cell

Denied medical treatment

Denied medical treatment

Cell move request has been ignored

Grievance for medical treatment was rejected

Awoke with rapid heart rate; medical didn't treat

Wants SAP or MH treatment

Wants CTO replaced

Medical open records was denied

Is missing SGTR

Gets the same sack lunch for Kosher

Not receiving enough deodorant in RHU

Wants canteen replaced

Has not received Psych counseling

Sick call slip was ignored

CTO used excessive force while restrained

Items were missing from property

Was refused a shower

Not receiving Kosher

Wanted to call witness for court call

Cell was searched and left in disarray

Kosher meal portion sizes are incorrect

Aramark is not following Kosher menu

Has bulging discs

Meds have not been renewed

Wants shower on the walk

Wants breathing treatment

Denied job

Does not want GP inmate near PC inmates

Wants assault investigated

GPs inmates came out of chow hall while PCs were being served

Missing property

Missing property

Items were missing from property

Wants an alternative meal

Wants Feb state pay and WFTC

Wants ice for foot

Want rejected grievance processed

Denied religious medalion

Wants released from RHU

Wants released from RHU

Wants to be tested for STD

Was not informed about Passover signup His psych meds are fluctuating

Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 32

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 256 of 985 - Page ID#: 3844
Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 33

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 257 of 985 - Page ID#: 3845
Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 34

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 258 of 985 - Page ID#: 3846
KSP
Repeat issues:
A. Difficulty hearing announcements. Daily movement schedule is posted in all living and common areas. Special announcements for events and services occur but inmates directly affected are provided memos for attendance prior to time period. PA announcements are simply reminders for staff/inmates and inmates will be physically contacted for missing appointments due to the high security nature of KSP and a standard practice.
B. Phones are hard to use: they are too close together, so it’s loud. And only one has volume control.
KSP has had the volume control phones in place for past several years. A portable amplifying device is available upon the inmate’s request. As phones are replaced through normal wear, additional volume control phones are added.
C. In seg, inmates have a hard time hearing what the COs yell at the front of the unit when they’re located in the back.
Standard protocol is to make announcement twice, front and back as a round is being conducted. There is the practice of placing inmate with HoH indication close to front of walks as well in all living units.
D. Trouble with the COs and being written up for hearing issues.
No HOH inmate has received a disciplinary report for not hearing an officer’s instructions. Please provide any specific complaints of this claim, if available, for further investigation.
E. Inmates told they could not purchase auxiliary aids.
No inmate has been denied a request to purchase an auxiliary aid. Please provide any specific complaints of this claim, if available, for further investigation.
F. Delays in replacing hearing aids.
Indication of such is not known to staff.
G. Hearing aids and pocket talkers not working well.
A malfunction device will be replaced when staff become aware.
1
Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 35

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 259 of 985 - Page ID#: 3847
KSP A. Missing Items from Information Request:
1. Please provide an updated response to this question: “For all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving an inmate who signs, provide report of inmate name, date, and communication method for each.” The current answer is that KSP has no inmates to who sign to communicate, but we believe that is incorrect.
KSP has two inmates who are proficient at ASL; one of which is HOH. KSP has no inmates who use ASL to communicate with staff or other inmates. 2. Please provide the following: “Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2020
addressing deaf/hard-of-hearing issues.” If there are no existing documents to provide, please confirm that. Forms were updated, but no new memoranda or policy were published during subject period. 3. Please give the number of how many inmates have a non-ear tie mask, rather than simply specifying that they are available; if the answer is zero, please confirm that. 114 4. Please provide an answer to the following: “What arrangements are made to provide vibrating watches/clocks for inmates who are indigent?” If an inmate’s hearing loss is significant enough to warrant a vibrating watch/clock, and the inmate is indigent, a lien may be placed against the inmates account for the purchase of the item.
1
Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 36

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 260 of 985 - Page ID#: 3848

C. Missing Items from Action Plan: 1. In-person notifications should be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates. In-person notifications are made by KSP staff to HOH inmates, when necessary, regarding issues such as medical appointments and classification. In both instances, the inmate would have already received a written notification in advance of the scheduled event. In-person notifications are also made for unscheduled events, in which staff need to speak with an inmate. 2. ADA coordinators should publicize that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money, to recover when money comes into their account. This process is available for both formally indigent individuals or individuals who have insufficient money to pay for the device.
KSP currently has no watches/alarms clocks on hand for loan to indigent inmates or those with insufficient funds. An exception can be made to place a lien against the HOH inmate’s account for the purchase of these devices.

D. Individuals to receive attached settlement summary:

•

Inmate

received the summary on 10/6/2020.

3
Exhibit 2, KSP, p. 37

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 261 of 985 - Page ID#: 3849
Kentucky State Reformatory
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 262 of 985 - Page ID#: 3850

Deaf/HO H or both? #
A Both Both Both Both
Both
Both Both Both

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

ADA coordinator

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Cindy Wathen

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

2 coordinator appointed?

No

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Yes.

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates?

Yes.

As soon as an inmate is identified an in-person

meeting is arranged. During the medical lock-down,

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates in a

information on how to contact me and all relevant

5 timely and appropriate manner? How?

information was relayed via Unit staff.

I meet with all inmates identified as HOH/Deaf. At

that time I introduce myself and tell them how to

reach me and explain that the information is also in

the brochure they get at that meeting. It is also on

the memo that is routinely updated in the living

areas. My name is on the back of their HOH ID card

to remind them as well. Describe method used to

ascertain: Most recently, I sent out a survey during

medical lockdown and that was one of the

questions. Out of 360+ inmates surveyed 32 said

they did not know how to reach me during the

lockdown. Individual letters were sent to each one

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? (THIS

of them explaining the multiple ways to reach me,

6 REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

and a JPAY message went out as well.

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit

7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

Yes.

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

Yes.

Compliant
x x x x x
x
x x

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Both

9 Describe training

*Initial in-person training by the former ADA

Coordinator before he retired. *ADA Basic Building

Blocks Course- ADA National Network. ADA Title 1

Employment Requirements- New England ADA

learning. *ADA in Jails and Prisons: A Guide to

Accommodating Inmates and Visitors with

Disabilities-Mid-Atlantic ADA Center. *Effective

Communication Strategies with Deaf Offenders

Using Sign Language-PURPLE. *How to Respond

Effectively to People with Intellectual and

Developmental Disabilities in the Criminal Justice

System- Eunice Kwak (host). *ADA Title II Tutorial-

ADA National Network. *ADA Disability Related

Access for Inmates and Visitors Guide-Southwest

ADA center. *Communications Issues Involving Deaf

and Hard of Hearing Offenders-KDOC Binder. *ADA

Orientation Portfolio- Binder. *ADA Coordinator

Training CREATE Compliance- KDOC (Power Point)

*ADA Coordinator/Settlement Agreement- KDOC

MyPurpose Training. *ADA Coordinator/CREATE-

KDOC MyPurpose Training. *Communicating with

Deaf and Hard of Hearing Offenders-KDOC

MyPurpose Training. (The ones in blue are reviewed

as annual training)

NA

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 263 of 985 - Page ID#: 3851

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately cover

Both

10 information?

Both

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training)

Both

12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Yes. Yes. Yes.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
x
x x

Both

13 Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's PowerPoint)

Yes.

x

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with settlement

Both

14 agreement?

Yes.

x

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Yes.

x

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in

Both

17 implementing the settlement?

Both

18 Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf inmates?

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on deaf

Both

19 inmates?

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the inmates in

Both

20 those situations?

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective way with the

Both

21 monitor?

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the monitor

Both

22 when necessary?

Both B Reporting obligations

If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was monitor

Both

1 notified?

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

Both

2 inmates?

Both

3 Is the list complete?

Both

4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs,

Both

6 activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe)

Both

7 Was it reported to the monitor?

Both

8 Was the report complete?

Both

9 Was the report timely?

Both

10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert?

Both

11 If yes, was the monitor notified?

Did the institution consult with the monitor about the non-

Both

12 auditory alert?

Both

13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

HOH

3 notifications.)

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

N/A

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

No.

NA

N/A

N/A

N/A

No.

NA

N/A

N/A

Yes.

x

NA

Yes.

x

KOMS sends out notifications upon inmate transfer.

I also monitor transfer memos and communications

from other ADA Coordinators.

NA

Yes. Best practice communications are used based

on each individual and their needs. Medical

assesses inmates upon arrival and has pocket

talkers ready in case they are needed. If necessary

x

and appropriate, written communication can be

used.

N/A-No change.
N/A- No direct threat. N/A- No direct threat. N/A- No direct threat. N/A-Nothing new to report. N/A-Nothing new to report.
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 264 of 985 - Page ID#: 3852

Deaf/HO H or both? # Deaf Deaf

Issue/Question Deaf inmates 5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general medical intake, and

Both

during medical care more generally:

Both

1 Is there effective communications planning?

Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if

Both

2 interpretation is needed?

Both

3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?

Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications

Both

4 techniques?

Both

Notice to medical staff:

Both

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How?

Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover and

Both

6 within the file?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

NA

Yes.

x

KOMS sends out notifications upon inmate transfer.

I also monitor transfer memos and communications

from other ADA Coordinators.

NA

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

The VRI is readily available in the event an inmate

who communicates with sign is brought into the

institution. It is located in the control center and

available to all staff 24/7.

NA

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

NA

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes. Individual basis.

x Verify if

they have hearing aids/pocket talker that would

help them hear the video. Make sure they have

these before proceeding.

We do have volume controlled headphones that

help amplify the sound as well.

The orientation video provides a good visual of

what is expected of inmates as it demonstrates,

rather than just talks about scenarios and policies.

The CTO will ask questions of the inmate to verify if

x

they understand. Anything that needs review will be

addressed with simple language and if necessary,

visual demonstration/drawings.

The VRI is used in addition to the video for deaf

inmates who sign.

We have never had

the scenario, but in the event of a deaf inmate who

does not sign, and is illiterate, we would have to

rely on a more visual approach- pictures and

demonstrations.

NA

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

NA

Yes. The information is their chart under "problems"

EOMIS and readily seen under the ADA tab in KOMS

x

as well.

Yes.

x

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 265 of 985 - Page ID#: 3853

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Deaf

7 Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate accommodations.

Knowledgeable about obligation to alert off-site providers of

Deaf

8 need for interpretation?

Deaf

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

Deaf

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

Deaf

11 Adequate notice?

Outside providers offering effective communication to inmates

Deaf

12 who sign?

Deaf

13 How?

Both

Hearing screening/medical intake:

Both

14 Performed for all new inmates?

Both

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

Both

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

Both

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

Both

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?

How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by

Both

19 staff?

Both

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

Both

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?

Both

22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe.

Both

23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

Both

25 Staff/ADA Coordinator can refer for screening?

Both

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

Adequate determination of need for designation/ audiology

Both

28 services? How?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or HOH,

Both

30 apart from audiology services decision?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Yes. Yes. Yes. Years ago- before I was ADA Coordinator.

NA
x
x NA

Yes.

x

Describe: Most outside providers are set up to

accommodate deaf inmates who sign, however, we

also send the VRI just in case.

NA

NA

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

This question is asked verbally.

x

Yes.

x

If they have trouble with the form, medical staff

assist. Literacy is taken into consideration.

NA

Medical

NA

Yes.

x

Describe: If necessary, the form is read for the

individual.

x

Yes.

x

NA

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes. Any inmate answering 1+ question is referred

for a whisper test, then to Audiology, if they fail the

whisper. Medical providers sometimes send

x

inmates on through to audiology based on

interaction with the inmate.

Yes.

x

x

Yes. ECW was replace by EOMIS. Yes. Yes.

NA x x x

unknown- before my time.
Per our HSA: All inmates are put through the same process for HOH, there have been no separate determinations made.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 266 of 985 - Page ID#: 3854

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Yes. We now get instant notifications via email as

soon as medical charts the hearing screen. This has

been a huge help. It eliminates missing a screen

because someone forgot to notify the correct

person. As soon as one question is marked yes or

sometimes in the electronic chart, it generates a

notification to the ADA Coordinator. I then verify

with my person in medical and add the name to my

list for tracking.

Compliant x

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

HOH

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

HOH

40 initial request/questionnaire?

HOH

41 each relevant medical visit?

HOH

42 any audiology visit?

HOH

43 hearing aid provision?

HOH

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks?

HOH

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

HOH

46 Shared with monitor when requested

Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it 47 take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Describe.

In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait more 48 than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?

What is the cause of the delay? 49

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) to improve this process?
50

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes- medical and I update together. Yes.

NA x x x x x
NA x x x x x x x

0. All testing is done on site. Occasionally, there is a

case where the inmate needs to go out, but that is

not the norm.

NA

October 2019- February 2020 115

March 2020- present 39

Total-

154

NA

Inmate behavior. Communication break-down.

Outside trips. Audicus test has to be repeated.

Inmate health.

NA

Inmate behavior- we have to wait for behavior to

settle down for safety of inmate and staff.

Communication break-down- we have incorporated

KOMS generated notices to alert ADA of all failed

hearing screens. Outside trips-it takes time to

schedule outside trips based on available staff for

transportation (emergent cases take priority) and

the availability of appointments with the outside

provider. Audicus test has to be repeated- at times

the provider will ask for a test to be repeated with a

proctor available. Inmate health- we schedule

inmates as soon as we can after other health issues

are resolved.

NA

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 267 of 985 - Page ID#: 3855

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or both? #

Issue/Question

the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

HOH

Co-pay and availability issues:

NA

HOH

47 Charged only once -- not again for follow-ups

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

Yes. Charged one time. Yes.

x NA
x

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

Yes.

x

Yes- we also give inmates a full pack so that they

will not run out if they monitor use. Treatment

room, HOH Nurse's office and closed units also have

x

HOH

50 7 days/week?

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

availability,

Yes.

x

Both E Information provided inmates

Intake orientation covers non-discrimination and

ADA. During the initial meeting/assessment with

me, they are given a Brochure that covers KSR

specific accommodations and services. I go over the

brochure verbally with them and allow them to ask

x

questions. I also give them information on how to

make special purchases (such as vibrating alarm

Both

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe)

Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-discrimination and

Both

2 ADA services?

watches and bed shaker alarms).

Yes.

x

Both

Brochure? Items to include:

Both

3 Non-discrimination obligation

Both

4 Effective communication obligation

NA

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Both

5 Auxiliary aids and services available

Yes.

x

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services (including

Both

6 hearing aids, and batteries)

Yes.

x

Both

7 Communication equipment available, and how to use

Yes.

x

Both

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

Both

Other items:

Both

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

Yes.

x

NA

Yes.

x

Both

10 Request for Accommodations/ Communications Assistance

Yes.

x

Both

11 Medical Request form includes request for accommodations

Yes.

x

Both

12 Job application form includes request for accommodations

Yes.

x

Both

13 Waiver forms

Yes.

x

Both

14 Classification form includes request for accommodations

Yes.

x

Both

15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations

Yes.

x

SAP and other programming form includes request for

Both

16 accommodation

Yes.

x

Both

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommodation

Yes.

x

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in 18 law library? (Need to check)

x Yes. Checked 9/24/20

Both

Do request forms:

Both

19 list available services comprehensively?

Yes.

clearly explain services and aids (what they are and when

Both

20 they are available?

Yes.

NA x
x

Both

21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?

Yes.

x

expressly ask about preferred mode of

Both

22 communication/needed services and why they are useful?

Yes.

x

Both

23 explain which items are free?

Yes.

x

Both

24 encompass religious and volunteer-provided programming?

Yes.

x

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 268 of 985 - Page ID#: 3856

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Both

Effective communication of these resources:

Both

25 Are the materials in language accessible to each inmate?

Yes.

Both

26 Is this information provided with effective communication?

Yes.

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity

to meet with a KDOC staff member and interpreter to ask

Both

27 questions about the materials?

Yes.

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

for a program with staff, is effective communication

Both

28 provided?

Yes.

Both

29 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Yes.

Effective communication re. programming

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA x x
x
NA
x
x NA

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

Both

30 in education with staff, is effective communication provided?

Both

31 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

Both

2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

7 Clear process to obtain? Describe

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Both

12 Working process to get new inmate alerts added? (Describe)

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

14 Appropriately obvious

Both

15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

17 Clear? (avoids unclear language/abbreviations?)

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

x

Yes.

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

NA

Yes.

x

Yes. Inmates are given the door sign at our initial

meeting/assessment. At that time, they are told

that they should write me via institutional mail to

get replacements. If they are uncomfortable with

writing, they may have Unit staff call or email me. I

often get requests as I walk through the yard. Once

x

the request is made, I make the replacement and

send it along with an Accommodation Request

Form to them. They sign and return the form so

that I know for certain they received it. The form is

scanned into KOMS.

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

NA

Yes.

x

Yes. As soon as I am notified that an inmate has

been identified as Deaf/HOH, I enter the alert into

KOMS under the ADA tab as well as the

x

Demographic Physical Profile tab.

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

NA

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 269 of 985 - Page ID#: 3857

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

Both

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Yes.

Yes.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) x

Both

23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator?

Both

24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver?

Both

25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?

Both

26 Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested ID?

Both

27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

Both

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Both

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

Both

9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

Both

2 Cell cards

Both

3 Bed shaker

Both

4 In-person alerts

Both

5 Pager

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

Both

9 Other amplification

Both

10 Other (describe)

Both

General issues

Special housing area:

Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH inmates?

Both

11 (Describe)

Both

12 If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? (Describe)

If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed

Both

13 there? (such a requirement is non-compliant).

If the inmate is in RHU or CPTUC , a temporary cell

x

door sign is issued.

Yes.

NA

Yes. Also entered into KOMS.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

NA

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

x Yes.

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

NA

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
Yes. Yes.
Yes. Yes. Describe: FM Transmitters

x x x x x
x
x
x
x NA NA NA

No.

NA

N/A

NA

N/A

x

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 270 of 985 - Page ID#: 3858

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live

there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to the

x

Both

14 inmate? Describe any restrictions.

N/A

In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is primary

Both

15 consideration given to inmate request?

Yes.

x

Any inmate who is identified as HOH/deaf may

change his mind at any time regarding

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services

accommodations- even if a waiver was signed. As

x

form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or

their needs change, they may also request

Both

16 not requesting aids/services, were accommodations provided?

additional or different accommodations.

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services documented in

Both

17 inmate institutional files?

Yes. Entered into KOMS.

x

Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services shared

Both

18 appropriately with staff?

Yes.

x

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Yes.

x

Both

20 Have any been out of commission?

Yes.

NA

Our TTY was not out of commission, but the service

was requiring a method of payment not available to

inmates. This was resolved. In the past week, two of

the HOH Phones in separate dorms were out of

order. Inmates notified me and they were fixed by

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

IT the next day.

NA

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Both

22 hearing aid?

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

Both

24 Promptly?

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Both

26 Describe

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

Both

30 Are classes in sign language provided?

Both

31 deaf inmates given notice?

Both

32 priority given to deaf inmates?

Every effort is made to assure the inmate is not

separated from his hearing aid. However, if the

situation is emergent and the inmate is not wearing

it, it will likely get packed with his property. We

x

have added "hearing aids" to the pack-up slip and

educated officers to look out for them. If they get

packed up, the inmate lets us know and we retrieve

it for him as soon as possible.

Yes. If the hearing aid cannot be found, we offer a

pocket talker and work toward getting a

x

replacement hearing aid.

Yes.

x

No.

NA

N/A

NA

N/A N/A No. We do have DVD's on learning basic sign language available to inmates.

N/A N/A

N/A- no direct threat.
N/A- no direct threat. N/A- no direct threat.
N/A- No classes offered. Inmates are told about the DVD's at our initial meeting and at the annual review N/A

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 271 of 985 - Page ID#: 3859

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both I Deaf
Deaf
Deaf
Deaf
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf

Issue/Question Interpretation in general Qualified interpretation services available: Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation 1 communicated to inmates? covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 2 encounters/communications/settings) Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other 3 volunteer-provided programming? Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation 4 method? 5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences? Standing arrangement with providers? 6 In-person? 7 VRI? Is VRI availability: 8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
Yes.

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

Yes.

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

Yes.

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

Yes.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA x

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

x

x
x x NA x x NA x x
x
x

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Deaf

13 In general

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Deaf

16 Splitter?

Deaf

17 Instructions?

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Deaf

21 How?

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

Deaf

22 should be first recourse?

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

Deaf

24 Parole?

Yes. VRI is available 24/7 in control center. RHU

checks it out for all communications and uses it for

x

VRS if inmate needs/and is allowed to make a call.

Describe: Yes. It has VRI and VRS capabilities.

NA

Yes.

x

Yes- includes power cord just in case.

x

Yes.

x

Describe: The bag has a splitter, a usage log, an

external microphone, external speakers, a long

power cord, air card and detailed instructions.

NA

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

VRI log includes a column to report VRI

effectiveness.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 272 of 985 - Page ID#: 3860

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

In-Person Interpreters for

: 2/3/20

SOTP 2/5/20 AA Meeting 2/10/20 NA Meeting

2/12/20 AA Meeting. 2/17/20 NA Meeting 2/19/20

AA Meeting 2/24/20 SOTP 2/26/20 AA Meeting

3/4/20 Interpreter scheduled for AA meeting but

Interpreter had an emergency and did not show

3/11/20 AA Meeting 3/23/20 SOTP 3/30/20 SOTP

(Once COVID hit, we went on medical lock-down

and all classes were cancelled. As soon as we start

up again, we will make sure Mr.

has an

interpreter available.)

Compliant x

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

N/A

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

Deaf

27 before?

Yes.

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

Deaf

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

No.

Deaf

29 Describe

N/A

x x NA

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
N/A- We have provided in-person interpreter for all requested events.

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

Deaf

30 was unavailable)

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

Deaf

31 method?

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

Deaf

35 encounters/communications/settings)

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

Deaf J Hand Restraints

Deaf

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

Deaf

2 finding of a security threat?

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

Deaf

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

Deaf

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

Deaf

5 Staff aware of the issue

Deaf

Off-site medical care:

Deaf

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

restraints removed when necessary for medical

Deaf

7 communication?

N/A Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
Yes. Yes. Yes. Only if required for security/safety.
Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

x x x NA x
x
x
NA
x
x x x NA x x

N/A- no emergency situations occurred requiring interpretation.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 273 of 985 - Page ID#: 3861

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both K

Issue/Question Non-auditory Alerts

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Both

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Both

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

Both

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

Both

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

Both

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

Both

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

Both

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Both

9 been denied?

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Both

11 How often?

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Both

15 used consistently?

Both

16 in all dormitories?

Both

17 in gym?

Both

18 in library?

Both

19 audited and monitored?

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

Both

20 misses a page?

Describe: Pagers for deaf and extremely HOH- used

anytime an announcement is made for the yard and

for individual alerts. Bed-shakers are issued to

severely hard of hearing/deaf inmates. We also

allow the purchase of vibrating alarm watches and

bed-shaker alarms. In addition, we they can sign up

for in-person alerts where they will be notified of

announcements/appointments. Lights flash in the

event of emergency. In the event of emergency, we

now have a system of placards that the officer is to

take around as he checks each cell- one for

fire/tornado and active shooter.

NA

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

No.

x

Yes.

x

Describe: Fire and Safety monitors the alarm

system with flashing lights. A log is kept for in-

person alerts. (At our initial meeting, I tell inmates

how to reach me if something is not working or if

x

they are having issues. Then I have annual meetings

as well. Open communication allows them to voice

any concerns.)

Yes.

x

NA

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 274 of 985 - Page ID#: 3862

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

Both

21 because of disability?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

During our medical lockdown, I had complaints that

they were missing announcements. This was partly

because our In-Person Alert workers were not

allowed to do their jobs due to COVID. However,

the only announcements during this time due to

lockdown, were for meal and medication pass-

which occurred on the same time each day in the

dorm.

NA

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

Deaf

2 Allow voice carry-over features?

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Deaf

5 alternative offered

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

6 videophone is out of service.

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

Deaf

10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates?

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

Deaf

12 using ordinary phones?

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

Deaf

14 Free?

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone

Deaf

15 calls?

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

During lock-down, officers posted written versions

of the announcements for a length of time in the

wing windows to solve the issue. We ensured all

were posted on every wing. We have returned to

normal as of this week, so In-person notifications

have returned.

We also offer the

x

vibrating alarm watches and bed shaker alarm

clocks to ALL HOH/Deaf inmates regardless of

financial standing. Since most events happen at the

same time each day, they can simply set a device to

alert them. If there is a specific event that they are

not making, the In-Person alerts are available.

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes. We have a set of emergency flash cards that

show tornado, fire, active shooter in pictures.

x

NA

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

0

NA

N/A

NA

N/A- Videophone has not been out of service during

this report time. However, if it had been, we would

x

use the VRI Laptop to pull up VRS.

Describe: When I am notified of an outage, I contact

the inmate in person and use written

communication to tell him what is going on. I ask if

he wishes to use the VRI to discuss the details.

NA

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

No.

NA

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 275 of 985 - Page ID#: 3863

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

N/A

Both

TTY:

NA

Both

18 Installed?

Yes.

x

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Yes.

x

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

Yes.

x

Our TTY has not been out of service during the

report time, but the company started requiring

payment. Inmates could still make a collect call, but

otherwise it required a money card (which inmates

do not have access to). 6/8/20 we were back up and

running. Now calls are free. During this time, the

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

CapTel was still available.

NA

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

Yes.

x

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

Both

23 for non-deaf inmates?

Yes.

x

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Yes.

x

Both

25 Permission needed?

No. Inmates have a key to access whenever they

need to.

x

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

No.

NA

Both

27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates?

Yes.

x

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Yes. Call is now free.

Both

29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Describe: 6/8/20 TTY successfully tested.

Both

30 Can access publicly available relay service phone numbers?

Yes.

x

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions for

Both

31 videophones and TTY is less than equitable?

No.

NA

Both

32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

N/A

If yes, was determination (including reasoning, evidence, etc.)

Both

33 documented?

N/A

Both

34 Was monitor notified?

N/A

Both

35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

N/A

Deaf

VRS via laptop

NA

Deaf

36 Available?

Yes.

x

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

Yes.

x

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

Yes.

x

Both

Phones

NA

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Yes.

x

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

Yes.

x

Both

CapTel

NA

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

Yes.

NA

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

List names:

NA

43 Request by any inmate denied?

List names: No

NA

Both

TV/Movies

NA

Both

44 Is captioning available?

Yes.

x

Both

45 Is captioning used?

Yes.

x

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Yes.

x

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Yes.

x

Yes. The Recreation Supervisor has a schedule for

equal time to show movies with and without

x

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

captions.

Both

49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

Yes.

x

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) N/A-no denials.
N/A- no events to report. N/A N/A N/A
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 276 of 985 - Page ID#: 3864

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Both

50 Amplification method? (Describe)

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

Both

53 status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

Both

54 deaf inmates?

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

Both

5 (Describe)

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Both

7 because security threat?

Both

8 monitor notified?

Both

9 reasoning explained?

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both

10 of requests?

Both

11 of denials?

Both N Disciplinary

Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and

without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been

Deaf

1 punished?

Deaf

2 Was a re-hearing granted?

Both O Grievances

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Describe: Most inmates have earbuds. I am working

on finding suitable volume control earbuds that will

be available as are the vibrating alarm watches and

bedshaker alarm clocks.

NA

Yes.

x

x Yes.

x Yes.

Describe in detail: Casio Men's Vibrating Alarm Watch, Lielongren Bed Shaker Alarm Clock No. These are ordered through the ADA Coordinator. Yes. Yes.

NA
x
x x

No.

NA

Yes.

x

N/A

N/A

N/A

NA

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

x No. N/A

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
N/A- any HOH/Deaf inmate may purchase approved devices. Each case individually decided. N/A N/A
N/A- no events to report

Both

1 Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA coordinator?

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator

Both

2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator?

Both P Training

Both

Types available

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

Both

3 All appropriate staff?

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

Yes.

x

Yes.

x

NA

Yes.

x

ALL employees- state and contract, new and

existing.

NA

Yes.

x

Describe: I address every incoming group of

employees to introduce myself and go over KSR

specific ADA information. I am also available to train

any staff member on using equipment or to answer

any questions they may have.

NA

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 277 of 985 - Page ID#: 3865

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Describe: All new employees- State and contract.

We also had an In-Service day a couple of years ago

to talk to existing staff.

NA

Yes.

x

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Any additional targeted training on specific needs ? Please

Both

describe in detail

VRI training is common. I also work with new

CTO's/Staff to make sure they understand what is

available and how to handle certain situations. For

example the process for an inmate to obtain a

special watch or other device or what to do if an

inmate reports a lost hearing aid. I highly encourage

open communication and welcome questions.

NA

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 17

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HCOHaINsMeA:TE3IS:1GE4TT-INcGvA-P0PR0O0PR0IA1TE-GASSFISTVANTC-EEBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 278 of 985 - Page

ID#: 3866

If signs to

Bed Shaker? (Not

communicate, noted Auxiliary Aid requested NR; Other Alert Device TTY Access

Low literacy? (So

in KOMS precaution Assessment denied D;

(e.g., vibrating

(Not

Listed with

Signs to that written

Has Deaf/HOH ID Has Bed/Door notes? (N/A

meeting granted G-Hi- watch, etc.) (Not requested NR;

KOMS ADA communicate communication is Card? (Y or N- Card? (Y or N- indicates IM does took place? light indicates requested NR;

denied D;

Name

ID

Housing location Precaution?

(Y/N) not effective) waived)

waived)

not use sign)

Y-Yes N-No they purchased) denied D; granted G) granted G)

DAL A 04 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

G

NR

DORM3 B 06 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DAL A 07 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 22 yes

Y

No

Y

Y

Yes

Y

G

G

NR

DORM9 D 202 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DM10 B 08 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 D 05L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 D 01 yes

N

No

N- Waived

N- Waived N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 A 22 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 35L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 A 09 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 28U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 09 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 03L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 B 22 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 A 113 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

DORM3 A 04

yes DORM3 B 05 yes DORM9 A 111 yes CPTUC L 15 yes DORM3 C 09 yes DORM1 D 219L yes DORM3 B 04 yes DM10 A 06 yes DORM1 B 112U yes DORM3 D 10 yes DM10 C 16 yes DORM3 A 08 yes DORM1 C 220U yes DORM3 B 36U yes CPTUA U 10 yes DM10 B 04 yes DORM7 B 03 yes CPTUC L 19 yes DM10 C 09 yes DORM12 A 113 yes
DAL D 02 yes CPTUC U 06 yes DORM9 A 112U yes DORM9 D 218 yes DORM3 A 17 yes DORM3 D 12 yes DORM7 A 04 yes DORM3 C 21 yes DORM1 B 103L yes NC A 07-B yes DORM1 B 119U yes DORM3 D 21U yes DORM3 B 16 yes DORM7 B 15 yes

N

No

N

Yes

N

No

N

Yes

N

No

N

Yes

N

No

N

Yes

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

N

No

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N- Waived Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

N- Waived N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

Y

G

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

G

G

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

G

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

G

G

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

G

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

G

NR

Y

G

G

NR

Y

NR

G

NR

Y

NR

G

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

G

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

G

NR

NR

Y

NR

G

NR

Y

G

NR

G

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

ExNhRibit 2, KSR, p. 18 NR

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HCO ase: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Name

Captel Acess Personal Phone Shake &

(Not

Amplifier (Not Wake (Not Special

requested NR; requested NR; requested NR; mask?

denied D; denied D;

denied D; Y=YES

ID

granted G) granted G)

granted G) n=NO

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

G

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

N

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

N

NR

N

NR

N

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

N

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

Y

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 279 of 985 - Page

ID#: 3867

Clear mask for Any other

staff who deal auxiliary aid

with this

requested?

innmate? Y- Yes NR=Not

N- No

Requested Outome?

Y

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

Y

Pager

Granted.

N

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

Requested volume control headphones.

Currently researching to find best option.

Then will get approval from Warden and

N

YES

offer to those who qualify.

Y

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

N

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

N

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

N

NR

Y

NR

Y

NR

N

NR

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 19

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/2If 0signs Pto age: 280 of 985Bed-SPhaakegr?e(Not

ID#: 3868

communicate, noted Auxiliary Aid requested NR; Other Alert Device TTY Access

Low literacy? (So

in KOMS precaution Assessment denied D;

(e.g., vibrating

(Not

Listed with

Signs to that written

Has Deaf/HOH ID Has Bed/Door notes? (N/A

meeting granted G-Hi- watch, etc.) (Not requested NR;

KOMS ADA communicate communication is Card? (Y or N- Card? (Y or N- indicates IM does took place? light indicates requested NR;

denied D;

ID

Housing location Precaution?

(Y/N) not effective) waived)

waived)

not use sign)

Y-Yes N-No they purchased) denied D; granted G) granted G)

DORM1 B 103U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 03U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

CPTUA L 14 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 A 19 yes

N

No

N- Waived

N- Waived N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 D 21 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM12 A 104 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 C 212 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 C 203 yes

N

No

N- Waived

N- Waived N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 35U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM1 A 113L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DAL A 06 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 08 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

DM10 B 11 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

CPTUA U 19 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 B 24 yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DAL B 02 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 D 31 yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 05 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM12 A 109 yes

N

No

Y

Y

Yes-Only for Parole Y

G

G

NR

DORM3 D 15U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 20 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 C 15 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

DORM1 A 109U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NC A 09-A yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 A 112 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 B 13 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

DORM9 A 119U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM1 B 115U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 C 21U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 08 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 13 yes

N

No

N- Waived

N- Waived N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 A 105 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM7 D 04 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 07 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 A 09 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 A 02 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 C 220 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 C 19 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 B 10 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 C 30U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 A 118U yes

N

No

N- Waived

N- Waived N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 17 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 C 23U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

NC A 21-A yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 C 32 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DM10 B 19 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 B 14 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

G

NR

DORM7 C 11 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

G

NR

DORM3 C 25U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 33U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

CPTUA U 11 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 D 18 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 C 33U yes DORM1 C 211U yes

N

No

Y

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

ExNhRibit 2, KSR, p. 20 NR

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 281 of 985 - Page

Captel Acess Personal Phone Shake &

Clear maIsDk fo#r : A3n8y o6th9er

(Not

Amplifier (Not Wake (Not Special staff who deal auxiliary aid

requested NR; requested NR; requested NR; mask?

with this

requested?

denied D; denied D;

denied D; Y=YES

innmate? Y- Yes NR=Not

ID

granted G) granted G)

granted G) n=NO

N- No

Requested Outome?

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

G

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

Pager

Granted.

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 21

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/2If 0signs Pto age: 282 of 985Bed-SPhaakegr?e(Not

ID#: 3870

communicate, noted Auxiliary Aid requested NR; Other Alert Device TTY Access

Low literacy? (So

in KOMS precaution Assessment denied D;

(e.g., vibrating

(Not

Listed with

Signs to that written

Has Deaf/HOH ID Has Bed/Door notes? (N/A

meeting granted G-Hi- watch, etc.) (Not requested NR;

KOMS ADA communicate communication is Card? (Y or N- Card? (Y or N- indicates IM does took place? light indicates requested NR;

denied D;

ID

Housing location Precaution?

(Y/N) not effective) waived)

waived)

not use sign)

Y-Yes N-No they purchased) denied D; granted G) granted G)

DORM9 D 205 yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 03 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 B 02 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 B 113 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DAL A 09 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 C 06 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM1 A 108L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 A 08U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM1 D 211U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM1 A 102U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 15 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

G

NR

DORM7 B 06 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DAL A 19 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM9 D 203 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 C 07 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM1 C 212U yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 D 26 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 14U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DAL C 08 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM1 C 211L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 C 01 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

DM10 B 20 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM12 A 103 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

CPTUA L 06 yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 C 01 yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 33 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 C 201 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM1 A 115U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DM10 C 02 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 19U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM1 A 118U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 C 08 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 A 117 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 D 03 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 21 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 27 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

G

NR

NC B 08

yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 B 117 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 C 09 yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 C 08 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 D 05 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

G

NR

DORM7 D 28 yes

N

No

N- Waived

N- Waived N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 28 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 D 20 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 04U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 07 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 B 09 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NC A 16-A yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM1 A 120L yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DAL C 07 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 36 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

NC ANX 08 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

CPTUC L 11 yes DM10 C 19 yes

N

No

Y

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

Y

G

ExNhRibit 2, KSR, p. 22 NR

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 283 of 985 - Page

Captel Acess Personal Phone Shake &

Clear maIsDk fo#r : A3n8y o7th1er

(Not

Amplifier (Not Wake (Not Special staff who deal auxiliary aid

requested NR; requested NR; requested NR; mask?

with this

requested?

denied D; denied D;

denied D; Y=YES

innmate? Y- Yes NR=Not

ID

granted G) granted G)

granted G) n=NO

N- No

Requested Outome?

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 23

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/2If 0signs Pto age: 284 of 985Bed-SPhaakegr?e(Not

ID#: 3872

communicate, noted Auxiliary Aid requested NR; Other Alert Device TTY Access

Low literacy? (So

in KOMS precaution Assessment denied D;

(e.g., vibrating

(Not

Listed with

Signs to that written

Has Deaf/HOH ID Has Bed/Door notes? (N/A

meeting granted G-Hi- watch, etc.) (Not requested NR;

KOMS ADA communicate communication is Card? (Y or N- Card? (Y or N- indicates IM does took place? light indicates requested NR;

denied D;

ID

Housing location Precaution?

(Y/N) not effective) waived)

waived)

not use sign)

Y-Yes N-No they purchased) denied D; granted G) granted G)

DORM9 B 109 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 D 02 yes

N

No

N- Waived

N- Waived N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 24 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 C 31 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DAL A 16 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 A 11 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NC A 12-A yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 B 06 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 19 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

CPTUC U 20 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DAL A 05 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 05U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DAL A 12 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

G

NR

NC B 03

yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

CPTUA L 03 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM1 D 204L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 C 04 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

CPTUB L 03 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM9 A 104 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 C 32U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 13U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM12 A 114 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM1 D 207U yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 12U yes

N

No

N- Waived

N- Waived N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 C 08 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

DORM1 D 220U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM9 B 116 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

DORM1 B 104L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 01 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 29 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 27 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 B 04 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

CPTUC L 02 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 A 103 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

NC A 05-A yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 A 16 yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DAL C 09 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 C 28 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 18 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 D 06L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 A 28 yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM12 A 117 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DAL C 05 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DAL C 05 yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM1 B 116U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

NC A 04-A yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 D 16 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 20U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

DORM7 A 06 yes

N

No

N- Waived

N- Waived N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 C 13 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM1 B 102L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 C 29 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 C 03 yes DORM7 A 07 yes

N

No

Y

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

Y

NR

ExNhRibit 2, KSR, p. 24 NR

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 285 of 985 - Page

Captel Acess Personal Phone Shake &

Clear maIsDk fo#r : A3n8y o7th3er

(Not

Amplifier (Not Wake (Not Special staff who deal auxiliary aid

requested NR; requested NR; requested NR; mask?

with this

requested?

denied D; denied D;

denied D; Y=YES

innmate? Y- Yes NR=Not

ID

granted G) granted G)

granted G) n=NO

N- No

Requested Outome?

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

Pager

Granted.

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 25

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/2If 0signs Pto age: 286 of 985Bed-SPhaakegr?e(Not

ID#: 3874

communicate, noted Auxiliary Aid requested NR; Other Alert Device TTY Access

Low literacy? (So

in KOMS precaution Assessment denied D;

(e.g., vibrating

(Not

Listed with

Signs to that written

Has Deaf/HOH ID Has Bed/Door notes? (N/A

meeting granted G-Hi- watch, etc.) (Not requested NR;

KOMS ADA communicate communication is Card? (Y or N- Card? (Y or N- indicates IM does took place? light indicates requested NR;

denied D;

Housing location Precaution?

(Y/N) not effective) waived)

waived)

not use sign)

Y-Yes N-No they purchased) denied D; granted G) granted G)

DM10 B 25 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM1 C 204U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 24 yes

N

No

N- Waived

N- Waived N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM12 A 111 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 18 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM12 A 110 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 A 31 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 A 19 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NC A 22-A yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 17U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 11 yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

DAL A 01 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 26 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 12 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

G

NR

DORM1 B 105L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

NC A 16-B yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

CPTUC U 14 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 C 202 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 A 26 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 D 30 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

G

NR

DORM1 D 216U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 A 120 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

CPTUB L 10 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 B 07 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DAL C 06 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 08U yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 15U yes

N

No

N- Waived

N- Waived N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 C 202U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DM10 A 05 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 C 35U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NC B 04

yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM1 A 111L yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 30 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 D 09 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

G

NR

DORM3 B 36 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM9 D 220 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 C 04 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

NC B 02

yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

CPTUB U 04 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM1 C 205L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 37L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DM10 C 27 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 C 14 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM1 B 110L yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 A 24 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM7 A 15 yes

N

No

N- Waived

N- Waived N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 C 24 yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 B 106 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM1 C 213U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 D 27 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 C 22 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DAL C 02 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 C 12 yes DORM3 C 33 yes

N

No

Y

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

Y

NR

ExNhRibit 2, KSR, p. 26 NR

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 287 of 985 - Page

Captel Acess Personal Phone Shake &

Clear maIsDk fo#r : A3n8y o7th5er

(Not

Amplifier (Not Wake (Not Special staff who deal auxiliary aid

requested NR; requested NR; requested NR; mask?

with this

requested?

denied D; denied D;

denied D; Y=YES

innmate? Y- Yes NR=Not

ID

granted G) granted G)

granted G) n=NO

N- No

Requested Outome?

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 27

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/2If 0signs Pto age: 288 of 985Bed-SPhaakegr?e(Not

ID#: 3876

communicate, noted Auxiliary Aid requested NR; Other Alert Device TTY Access

Low literacy? (So

in KOMS precaution Assessment denied D;

(e.g., vibrating

(Not

Listed with

Signs to that written

Has Deaf/HOH ID Has Bed/Door notes? (N/A

meeting granted G-Hi- watch, etc.) (Not requested NR;

KOMS ADA communicate communication is Card? (Y or N- Card? (Y or N- indicates IM does took place? light indicates requested NR;

denied D;

ID

Housing location Precaution?

(Y/N) not effective) waived)

waived)

not use sign)

Y-Yes N-No they purchased) denied D; granted G) granted G)

DORM9 B 108 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

G

NR

NC A 14-A yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 C 217 yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM1 D 217L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DAL D 06 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM1 B 111L yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 27 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DM10 A 07 yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM1 C 219L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 10 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

DORM3 B 30 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

DORM3 A 16 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM12 A 108 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 C 209 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

NC ANX 06 yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DAL A 08 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 17U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 C 18 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 C 06 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 21 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 20U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 D 213 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 D 07L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 D 06 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 C 201U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 15 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM1 D 205U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 A 23 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 22 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 02U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

G

NR

DORM1 A 117L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 32 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 C 17 yes

N

No

N- Waived

N- Waived N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DAL B 10 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DM10 A 30 yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DAL D 01 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

NC A 01-B yes

N

No

N- Waived

N- Waived N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 C 26 yes

N

No

N- Waived

N- Waived N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NC A 04-B yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 C 28 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM3 D 19 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 B 103 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

CPTUB L 07 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 C 12 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 17 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

NC IA 02-A yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DAL D 04 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

G

NR

DORM3 B 11U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

G

DORM3 C 02 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DM10 B 23 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NC A 20-B yes

N

Yes

N- Waived

N- Waived N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 14 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM7 B 09 yes DORM7 C 04 yes

N

No

Y

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

Y

NR

ExNhRibit 2, KSR, p. 28 NR

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 289 of 985 - Page

Captel Acess Personal Phone Shake &

Clear maIsDk fo#r : A3n8y o7th7er

(Not

Amplifier (Not Wake (Not Special staff who deal auxiliary aid

requested NR; requested NR; requested NR; mask?

with this

requested?

denied D; denied D;

denied D; Y=YES

innmate? Y- Yes NR=Not

ID

granted G) granted G)

granted G) n=NO

N- No

Requested Outome?

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

G

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 29

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/2If 0signs Pto age: 290 of 985Bed-SPhaakegr?e(Not

ID#: 3878

communicate, noted Auxiliary Aid requested NR; Other Alert Device TTY Access

Low literacy? (So

in KOMS precaution Assessment denied D;

(e.g., vibrating

(Not

Listed with

Signs to that written

Has Deaf/HOH ID Has Bed/Door notes? (N/A

meeting granted G-Hi- watch, etc.) (Not requested NR;

KOMS ADA communicate communication is Card? (Y or N- Card? (Y or N- indicates IM does took place? light indicates requested NR;

denied D;

ID

Housing location Precaution?

(Y/N) not effective) waived)

waived)

not use sign)

Y-Yes N-No they purchased) denied D; granted G) granted G)

DM10 C 10 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM7 C 05 yes

N

Yes

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DAL D 09 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 A 32U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

DORM7 A 14 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

G

NR

DORM3 C 27 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 B 15 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

NR

NR

DORM3 B 32U yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

G

NR

DORM3 A 31L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

G

NR

CPTUA L 24 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

CPTUB U 20 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM3 D 04L yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

DORM9 C 216 yes

N

No

Y

Y

N/A

Y

G

G

NR

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 30

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 291 of 985 - Page

Captel Acess Personal Phone Shake &

Clear maIsDk fo#r : A3n8y o7th9er

(Not

Amplifier (Not Wake (Not Special staff who deal auxiliary aid

requested NR; requested NR; requested NR; mask?

with this

requested?

denied D; denied D;

denied D; Y=YES

innmate? Y- Yes NR=Not

ID

granted G) granted G)

granted G) n=NO

N- No

Requested Outome?

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

N

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

N

NR

NR

NR

NR

Y

Y

NR

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 31

Technology

Case: 3:H1o4w-mcavny-00001-GWFheVreT-EBA Doc #:W9he9n-o2btaineFdiled: 12/16S/p2ec0ificatPionas (gUeRL:) 292 of 985 - Page

ID#: 3880

Purchased from Whole House

www.wholehousefmtransmitter.com/

FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device.

*Whole House Transmitter 3.0 *Whole House 3.0 Lavalier Microphone *Whole House Source FM Radio.

$124.99

3 Transmitters 10

CPTU for Programs/Classes,

per transmitter, $12.99 per receiver, $9.99 for

Receivers

SOTP, and the Chapel.

4/14/2019 microphone.

Will soon be available for check

out in all dorms. Right now

10

there is 1 in use in Dorm 9 and 3 in CPTU. * 1 is in ADA

Purchased from Maxiaids www.maxiaids.com

Serene

Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable

Coordinators office for

Portable Phone Amplifier 30DB

$27.00

amplifiers)

emergencies.

9/13/2019 each.

Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

2

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like? N/A

Nursing Care/Dorm 10 and

Dorm 3

N/A

N/A

Purchased from Weitbrecht www.weitbrecht.com (WCI) Item #- 757-000300 2/17/2020 each N/A

Communications Captel 840
$75.00

Bed shakers
Vibrating watches Vibrating alarm clocks Pagers Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration not mentioned above.
Earphones for parole hearings Earphones for orientation videos

First ones ordered when previous

ADA Coordinator was here. (I

took over in August of 2017) From that point, they were ordered as they were needed.

Purchased from Silent Call & Harris Communications

www.silentcall.com

harriscomm.com

Silentcall Sidekick

Individual inmates have

II (with strobe light) $280 for the Receiver. $100

31

possession. 3 are in my office.

for Transmitter and $34 for shaker.

Purchased from Amazon

First one sold on 5/1/19

amazon.com

Casio

Men's Super Illuminator Quartz Stainless Steel and

Available to all HOH/Deaf

Resin Watch

Model:W-735H-1A2VCF

88 +

Inmates

Range from $22-32.

Purchased from Amazon

Available to all HOH/Deaf

First one sold on 6/7/19

amazon.com Lielongren Alarm Clock with Bed Shaker Range

25

Inmates

from $30-34.

First ones ordered when previous

Individual inmates have

ADA Coordinator was here. (I

3 in use-most of the guys possession. I also have some in took over in August of 2017)

who used them are no my office in case I have a

From that point, they were

longer at KSR.

request.

ordered as they were needed.

Purchased from Long Range Systems

LRSUS.com

Model: RX-

E467

$65.00

N/A

N/A

N/A

They are located in the Control

Center which is next to the

Parole Board Room. The Re-

Entry staff who run the Parole Nov-19

Board Meetings have been

notified, and there is a sign at

the door that states they are

1

available in the Control Center.

1

CPTU for Orientation

Nov-19

N/A

ARKARTECH Headset ARKARTECH Headset

model #: N11 model #: N11

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 32

How do inmates obtain access?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA DHoowcwe#ll:do9th9ey-2work?Filed: 12/1O6th/e2r c0ommPenatsge: 293 of 985 - Page ID#: 3881

Inmates are told about the system at the original meeting/assessment and reminded at the annual

meeting. Information on the system is also in the HOH Brochure and on the Information Update

Memo that is posted in all living areas. They just contact the ADA Coordinator or tell the program

supervisor that they would like to use it. The staff who work with programs and classes are aware of

the system and can recommend it as well. The inmate signs an accommodation request form that is The inmate who used it for SOTP said it

scanned into KOMS. Inmates are told to bring their own ear buds.

really helped.

The amplifier is kept in the control center for each of the dorms. To have access in a dorm, the

inmate must request the ADA Coordinator to use the device. He signs an accommodation request

form that is scanned into KOMS. A note that he has been approved to use the amplifier is entered

We have had a few in CPTU and in Dorm 9 since last year.

into KOMS under the ADA tab. The inmate is also issued a special card to notify staff he is approved. I have had one inmate who uses one Recently, I ordered enough of these to go in each dorm but

The inmate will sign out the amplifier and leave his ID badge for the officer to hold until the device and says he can hear much better with with the medical lock down they have not yet been placed. I

returns. (Without a check out system, these readily walk off.)

it.

The inmate contacts the ADA Coordinator and a meeting is set up with him to explain the rules and

am in the process of setting up a check out system.

how to use the device. The inmate is issued a key to the "phone booth" where the CapTel is located

for free access. He signs an accommodation request form that is scanned into KOMS. A note that he

has been approved to use the CapTel is entered into KOMS under the ADA tab. The inmate is also I have had a couple of inmates use it

issued a special card to notify staff he may use the CapTel at any time regular phones are available to that used to call via the TTY. They both

other inmates.

liked CapTel much better.

N/A

N/A

We do not have any additional amplification systems.

Request ADA Coordinator. He signs an accommodation request form that is scanned into KOMS. A note that he has been issued a bed shaker is entered into KOMS under the ADA tab.

We found that inmates were using these

as alarm clocks. Their use for alerts is

not effective. We do not have the man-

power to push the transmitters for each

and every announcement in every

dorm, and the inmate would have to be

in bed to receive the notifications-

Once we started offering the sale of the vibrating alarm

unlikely during the day when most of watches and bedshaker alarms clocks, some guys turned theirs

the announcements are made.

in.

Very popular. Most events in the

institution occur at the same time each

The inmate contacts the ADA Coordinator and they are sent a Purchase Request Form to take to their day. If an inmate has difficulty hearing

CTO where they obtain a money slip. The form and the slip are returned to the ADA Coordinator and announcements, he can set his watch to

the watch is ordered.

go off at certain times to remind him.

The inmate contacts the ADA Coordinator and they are sent a Purchase Request Form to take to their

CTO where they obtain a money slip. The form and the slip are returned to the ADA Coordinator and

the bed shaker alarm clock is ordered.

Inmates report they work very well.

Request ADA Coordinator. The inmate signs an Accommodation Request Form that is scanned into KOMS. A note that he has been issued a pager is entered into KOMS under the ADA tab.

These are not very reliable due to the thick walls inside the dorms and the way the buildings are situated.

N/A

Nothing new to report.

The Re-Entry staff are aware of inmate needs before the hearing. They meet with them and if the inmate indicates he cannot hear or if the staff members feel he may need the assistance they will pick up the headphones for him. On a case by case basis-The CTO who does orientation asks the inmates if they can hear the video. They are readily available if needed.

They amplify well. We have not had an opportunity to use them in the parole board room.
They work well for orientation.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 33

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 294 of 985 - Page

Documentation and narrative to provide

Date reviewed

ID#: 3882 Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

Grievances: 1. Provide summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers

formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Should include the issues, summary

of response, resolution

See Attachment: Grievances-HOH Feb-now 2020

2. Provide full documentation of all grievances that address

hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Discipline 3. For all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving an inmate

See attachments:

Grievance,

Grievance, and

Grievance 2

who signs, provide report of inmate name, date, and communication

method for each.

No inmates who sign to communicate have had a disciplinary during the report time.

4. Provide documentation for all disciplinary proceedings since February

2020 involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or

other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate.

See Attachments that start with DR and then the inmate's last name. Also see attachment Disciplinary Report for list and summary.

Auxiliary aids 5. VRI Log (provide).

See attachment: VRI Log

6. TTY instructions (provide)

See attachment: How to use the TTY. Also included CapTel instructions: How to use the CapTel

7. VRI instructions (provide) Audiology processing delays 8.A list of each inmate currently at your institution whose audiology

See attachment: VRI Laptop Directions (these are in the bag with the VRI Laptop and available on the H-Drive as a power point.)

processing FINISHED after March 2020, for whom such processing took

or is taking over 60 days, documentation of the explanation for any such

delay, and a description of any steps taken to avoid similar problems

going forward.

See Attachment "Over 60" and supporting attachments - 60-inmate name

Information provided to inmates, policies, etc.

9. Any pages of the inmate handbook that address disability, and the date for that version of the handbook. 10. The current Deaf/HOH brochure and any other documents provided to deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates. 11.The medical request form currently provided to prisoners.

See attachment "From Inmate Handbook" See attachments: Deaf-HOH Brochure 2.0, Accommodations Request, ADA Purchase Request Form, HOH Watch-Alarm Purchase, KSR Def-Hard of Hearing Update Sheet, Watch-Alarm See attachment: sick call

12. Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2020 addressing deaf/hard-of-hearing issues.
13. A list of each use of an in-person sign-language interpreter from February 2020 to present, and any occasions in which such an interpreter was requested but denied. Please provide written responses to the following questions: 14. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty because staff members are wearing masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond? 15. How many staff members are currently using clear masks? How is the decision made who will wear a clear mask? 16. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty with their hearing aids because of the design of their own masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?

Policies: KSR 14-00-02 LRC Americans with Disabilities Act and Inmate Program Access

MEMOS See attachments: Memo to Staff HOH-Deaf issues, Memo Temp Door Tag, HOH Inmate Memo Captel, ADA CARD MEMO, ADA Clock-watch Memo,

HOH During Shutdown, Inmate Memo-Jpay 7-10-20, Available Accommodations 2020 sent to inmates, Available Accommodations 2020 sent to staff,

Pandemic Survey, ALL HOH-Deaf inmates Watch-Alarm orders 9-21-20, JPay- Masks 9-14-20, I also did 2 or 3 other JPay memos early on, regarding how to

get batteries during lockdown, but I was new to the JPay process and didn't save a copy), Sent staff a copy of Deaf-HOH Brochure 2.o for review 9/21/20.

Training: On a normal basis, I personally address every new staff member hired including contract personnel. Due to COVID and our medical lock-down I

was not in the building and the Training Coordinators covered that information. The power point we use covers KSR specific accommodations and services.

(See Attachment: Communicating with Deaf 2). Incoming staff also receive the online training which includes DOC Communicating with Deaf and Hard of

Hearing Offenders. On Day 10 of the Academy at the training center, they have a class called Communicating with Deaf and Hard of Hearing. Current

employees also do the online training for review- Communicating with Deaf and Hard of Hearing Offenders. I am always available to answer questions

regarding procedure and to train employees on how to use the various devices available.

In-Person Interpreters for

: 2/3/20 SOTP 2/5/20 AA Meeting 2/10/20 NA Meeting 2/12/20 AA Meeting. 2/17/20 NA Meeting 2/19/20 AA

Meeting 2/24/20 SOTP 2/26/20 AA Meeting 3/4/20 Interpreter scheduled for AA meeting but Interpreter had an emergency and did not show 3/11/20

AA Meeting 3/23/20 SOTP 3/30/20 SOTP (Once COVID hit, we went on medical lock-down and all classes were cancelled. As soon as we start up again, we

will make sure Mr.

has an interpreter available.)

I surveyed the KSR HOH/Deaf population. 167 out of 350+ surveyed indicated an issue. If they are having trouble, all they have to do is ask for the staff member to switch to the clear face shield or (if it is a short communication and appropriate) use a notepad.
All staff members have access as they are available in all units per the Warden.

I surveyed the KSR HOH/Deaf population. 162 out of 350+ surveyed indicated an issue. I ordered some masks when I learned of the issue. After the survey,

I had to order masks in case

several anyone

more. The tie changes their

behind mind.

the

head

masks

were

issued

to

all

those

who

responded

that

they

neeEdxehdibonite2o,nKtSheRs,uprv.e3y.4I

have

additional

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 295 of 985 - Page

Documentation and narrative to provide

Date reviewed

ID#: 3883 Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

17. How many inmates have been issued masks that don't have ear ties?

161 tie behind the head masks have been issued to HOH/Deaf inmates.

18. What if anything have you done to solve the problem of inmates having trouble hearing announcements? Please respond in detail, with dates on all responsive steps, prerequisites for any assistance, etc.
19. How have you educated staff that it is inappropriate to write up an inmate for behavior that is caused by a hearing impairment (e.g., talking loudly, not following instructions that could not be heard)? If there was a memo, please provide that.

Since May of 2019, Inmates have been allowed to purchase vibrating alarm watches as well as bed-shaker alarm clocks. (As of June 2020, Inmates may purchase those devices regardless of their financial standing.) Announcements for things like chow and pill call are made at the same time every day. Inmates only need to set their watch or bed shaker alarm if they are worried they might miss it. We also have In- Person alerts. Upon request an inmate can ask to be made aware of certain announcements they may be missing. We also have the workers go around each wing to announce for chow, pill call, yard open etc. This process began in November of 2018, and has become progressively more effective. The inmates in charge of making these announcements keep logs that are turned into me on a regular basis. Interested inmates need only contact me to set up In-Person alerts. (During the medical lock-down, the In-Person alerts were not allowed to avoid the spread of the virus. I spoke with our Major in security and the officers began putting notes in the window of each dorm wing after announcements. (However, meals and medical rounds were made about the same time each day to each dorm/wing- hard to miss.) A few of the inmates who are severely hard of hearing or deaf have pagers. These were put into place sometime before I took over as ADA Coordinator. They are not very effective in and around our buildings. Information on each of these accommodations is given to the inmates at the time of our original meeting/assessment. It is also available in the HOH Brochure and on a memo that is regularly updated and posted in all living areas. I also review at our annual meeting and answer individual queries via JPay and institutional mail.
This is covered in a recent memo that I sent out. See attachment Memo to Staff HOH-Deaf Issues 9/21/20. It is also discussed in New Employee Orientation with all incoming staff and is covered in the online training provided by the DOC. In the event an inmate does believe he was written up for not hearing an order, he may appeal after the adjustment hearing and that would come to the Warden's attention who would send it to me for investigation.

20. Please describe in detail how inmates are supposed to get hearing aid batteries, including how long it should take them each time.
21. When an inmate reports that a hearing aid is not working, what are the steps followed to evaluate the complaint? Include all relevant copays and other procedures. 22. When someone is denied binaural hearing aids, are they provided information on the standard for receiving such assistance, and the opportunity for appeal? How many inmates have received binaural aids since the current binaural hearing aid policy has been in effect? 23. What arrangements are made to provide vibrating watches/clocks for inmates who are indigent?
24. Please describe, in detail, each step that takes place once a person is identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing, to evaluate/offer any auxiliary aids. Include who is responsible for each step. 25. Please describe, in detail, any situation in 2019 or 2020 in which a deaf/hard-of-hearing inmate has been denied a job or other opportunity (access to a program or the like) because of their disability. Include the inmate’s name, the date, and the circumstances.

On a normal basis, inmates are issued an entire pack of batteries. It is their responsibility to take the pack to medical supply handout on Fridays after count if they are running low. (It is an even exchange- for each battery turned in, they get a fresh one.) If they run out during the week, they can report to sick call or contact me and arrangements are made to get some out to them. This information is relayed during our initial meeting, in the HOH Brochure and in the annual review. During the lockdown, medical visited every dorm, every day. Inmates were advised to reach out to medical during these rounds if they needed replacement batteries. This was relayed to them verbally by medical as they made their rounds and in multiple JPAY messages from me, addressed to HOH/Deaf Inmates. In those messages, I also advised them to contact me or the HOH nurse assistant if they missed medical. In addition, I responded to any letters/JPAY messages I received on the matter. In some cases, staff called for individuals in need who could not write. When I conducted the survey during the lock-down, one to the questions asked if they were aware of the process. (The process was explained within the question, and I responded to the handful who said they were unaware by writing to them individually.) We are now off lockdown and the process has returned to normal. The inmate reports to sick call to let medical know there is an issue. If the problem is an easy fix, they make the repair at that time. If they cannot fix the issue at pill call, the inmate is directed to the HOH Nurses' office, The HOH Nurse and his assistant evaluate the issue and repair it if they are able. If not, they will send the hearing aid back to the manufacturer for repair. The inmate is offered a Pocket Talker in the meantime. If the manufacturer can fix the issue, the hearing aid is repaired, returned to the institution. The HOH Nurse's office will call the inmate in and re-issue the device. There is a $3 copay for the visit. There is no charge for the repair.
This is reviewed with the patient by the provider at KSR. Five have been approved for the whole state. The appeal option for each inmate would be to file a grievance to have the decisions reviewed by the H.S.A and Health Care Grievance committee. Any inmate may purchase a vibrating alarm watch or a bed shaker alarm clock regardless of how much money is in their account. If they wish to have one of the devices, we purchase it and put a freeze on their account until the item is paid for.
Providers determine if an inmate is hard of hearing and recommend a hearing aid, if deemed appropriate. The provider will send their recommendation to Dr. Kemen who approves or denies the device. The hearing aid is then ordered through Audicus. If the inmate does not qualify for a hearing aid, the provider may recommend a Pocket Talker. There is a $10 co-pay for each device. (If the inmate is given a temporary pocket talker, they do not get a second co-pay when they return it for the hearing aid.) If the inmate starts the process due to a failed hearing screen during an annual physical, there is no charge for the visit. If they come to sick call and report to report the issue, there is a $3 charge for the visit. Once the diagnosis is made, there is a meeting between the inmate, the ADA Coordinator and the HSA to discuss other available accomodations. The ADA coordinator verbally explains what is available to deaf/HOH inmates at KSR and asks what they would find helpful. This information is also available in the brochure that is given to them at the meeting and in a memo that is regularly updated in a permanent memo on bulletin boards in all living areas. They are told how to reach the ADA coordinator should they have questions or wish to request any of the accommodations at a later date. The HSA is available at the meeting to answer any questions they may have about their devices or future testing.

KSR has not denied any inmate a job or placement in a program due to a disability during that time frame.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 35

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 296 of 985 - Page

Documentation and narrative to provide

Date reviewed

ID#: 3884 Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)
*Initial in-person training by the former ADA Coordinator before he retired. *ADA Basic Building Blocks Course- ADA National Network. ADA Title 1

Employment Requirements- New England ADA learning. *ADA in Jails and Prisons: A Guide to Accommodating Inmates and Visitors with Disabilities-Mid-

Atlantic ADA Center. *Effective Communication Strategies with Deaf Offenders Using Sign Language-PURPLE. *How to Respond Effectively to People with

Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities in the Criminal Justice System- Eunice Kwak (host). *ADA Title II Tutorial- ADA National Network. *ADA

Disability Related Access for Inmates and Visitors Guide-Southwest ADA center. *Communications Issues Involving Deaf and Hard of Hearing Offenders-

KDOC Binder. *ADA Orientation Portfolio- Binder. *ADA Coordinator Training CREATE Compliance- KDOC (Power Point) *ADA Coordinator/Settlement

26. Please list all training that you have received for your role as ADA

Agreement- KDOC MyPurpose Training. *ADA Coordinator/CREATE-KDOC MyPurpose Training. *Communicating with Deaf and Hard of Hearing Offenders-

Coordinator.

KDOC MyPurpose Training. (The ones in blue are reviewed as annual training)

27. Please provide an update on all items in your Deaf/HOH action plan

KSR plan of action for remaining compliance issues.

(previously shared with me).

KSR specific issues:

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 36

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 297 of 985 - Page ID#: 3885

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

2 11/6/2014

c/o HL at provider Appt.

1/24/2017

4/29/2019

Hearing evaluation report from Hears To You states

that left ear is nonfunctional. States right ear does

well with a moderate amount of amplification.

A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA FOR RIGHT EAR

3 1/17/2017

Chronic Care Clinic. Reports he has some trouble hearing out of his left ear. He last saw ENT in Aug 2016

1/17/2017

7/15/2019

Failed questionnaire; reports he lost his HA at LLCC

& filed report. Will ask ADA coordinator to follow D‐ (Unknown) Reports he has one‐ no record and

up with finding report. If not available, will have not wearing. Signed waiver‐ does not want to be

patient file a new report

tested.

4 11/4/2015

Chronic Care Appt.

5 11/26/2013

frequent ear infections/ sick calls/ appts.

6 3/14/2014

Intake Screening

7 10/23/2018

Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

1/24/2017 7/1/2019

3+ yes/ sometimes; YES to he has & currently uses a

HA and YES to HA is working okay

A ‐ Audicus Dia II for Left ear

1/25/2017 11/4/2019 3 + yes or sometimes

A‐Audicus Clara Left

1/26/2017 7/1/2019

Answered YES to "Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid?"

A ‐ Audicus Oro for Right Ear

10/23/2018 4/2/2019

3 + yes/sometimes; including YES to Currently has

and uses a hearing aid

A‐ Audicus Clara Left

8 5/23/2017

Provider assessment / failed Whisper test

9 6/15/2014

sick call

5/23/2017 6/5/2019 1/5/2018 1/6/2020

Answered No to all questions

A ‐ Right ear (Audicus Oro)

3 + yes/sometimes; including YES to 'Do you

D ‐ Audicus Clara for Right Ear (Inmate returned

currently have & use a hearing aid and YES to Is the hearing aid. Wanted pocket talker instead. Was

hearing aid working okay?

issued one on 5/22/19)

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 37

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 298 of 985 - Page ID#: 3886

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

2 Unknown

12/20/2014

drops ordered

2/6/2015

3 (unknown)

1/17/2017

Chronic Care Clinic. Reports he has some trouble

hearing out of his left ear. He last saw ENT in Aug

2016. Was dx with cholesteatoma & conductive Conductive hearing loss, unilateral, left ear, with

hearing loss in left ear. Was recommended to have unrestricted hearing on the contralateral side.

surgery, but he declined at that time.

Please notify counselor of HOH

1/27/2017

Ear drainage/odor. Inmate presents to medical with c/o foul smell and drainage coming from his L ear for approximately 2 weeks. Odor can be smelled from 10 feet away. Brown purulent drainage.

4 No 5 no

2/1/2016

Consult for audiologist

4/11/2016 c/o hearing loss ‐ history of pituitary tumor

referred to audiology

6 No 7 No

4/25/2014

10/23/2018

Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

hearing eval ‐ referred to audiology 3 + yes/sometimes

2/24/2016 4/27/2016 U of L Audiology 7/21/2014 11/1/2018 Hearing booth

8 No 9 N/A

5/23/2017 whisper test 6/25/2014 c/o hearing loss

failed whisper pocket talker ordered

6/8/2017 Offsite consult 2/25/2015 Admit to Seg‐

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 38

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 299 of 985 - Page ID#: 3887

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

2 audiologist recommended hearing aids

2/5/2016

seen by ENT‐ Tube placement recommended .. Has not been

addressed. Emailed E Cornett for appt for IM. . Also to

address hearing aides. IM uses pocket talker.

1/17/2017

Left ear flushed with warm H2O. White cottage cheese like pus removed. Per standing order: Polymixin drops to be picked up by inmate from pill 3 call NOW, MRSA protocol initiated, culture obtained 1/31/2017

No show for provider appointment. Inmate was scheduled to see the provider for a f/u related to ear infection but was a no show.

Per nursing staff, inmate finally showed up a 1/2 hour past his

appt time. Per J. Ingram, APRN, inmate is currently on correct

med regimen and does not require f/u unless s/s persist or

worsen.

4/18/2017

4 saw audiology and new aids recommended

4/4/2016

5 Hearing aid not recommended issued pocket talker. 2/2/2017

Hearing Screen

6 hearing aid eval‐ recommended

10/10/2014

7 Issued a pocket talker

11/2/2018 Intake H & P w/provider

issued new hearing aids

6/9/2016

3+ yes/ sometimes. IM does not understand why he cannot

get hearing aids. Referred to provider.

2/6/2017

HA‐ molded

3/6/2015

Chronic, progressing. Pt has bilateral hearing loss. Pt was

tested in hearing booth yesterday and it showed hearing loss

in both ears. Pt was issued a pocket talker. Await results of

hearing booth screening. Follow medical director orders for

hearing devices.

11/9/2018

8 HA recommended 9 Sign placed outside door to alert HOH

8/8/2017

Intake

6/10/2015 H&P

Hearing screening No changes in hearing

8/11/2017 2/11/2016
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 39

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 300 of 985 - Page ID#: 3888

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

2

ENT recommended HA for R ear

3/1/2017

Chronic care visit with provider. PT has hearing loss

L Ear though a study performed by ENT at UK

showed only mild conductive hearing loss, L side

w/normal hearing R side. Of more concern is

Referral to ENT Dr. Welsh for cholesteatoma L ear.

cholesteatoma L ear. Aug 2016 was advised to have Ciprofloxacin for ear drainage/infection. Referral to

surg on mass as it was enlarging. Didn't receive surg Otology, Laryngology, Rhinology for L side cholesteatoma.

3 d/t wanting transferred to other institution.

Follow up after visit with Dr. Welsh, ENT

6/26/2017

Outside medical appt to ENT

4

adjusted new hearing aids

IM does not understand why he cannot get hearing

5 aids.

IM referred for 2nd opinion

6

HA‐ fitting

7 Dr. Kemen ‐ Hearing Aid Evaluation

Audicus Oro for Left Ear approved

9/26/2017

Provider visit; multiple issues; also c/o hearing deficiencies & broken HA

2/27/2017

Advanced ENT/ Allergy

8/5/2015

12/10/2018

Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

8 Provider assessment 9 sick call

Inmate reports he wears HA / no proof to this ear infection

1/16/2018

Hearing screening

5/10/2016

sick call

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 40

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 301 of 985 - Page ID#: 3889

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

2 R HA issued

1/19/2018 HA not working properly

Will send HA to HTY for eval & repair

1/31/2018

Diagnosis: Chronic Otitis Media; Nasal Polyposis; Hx

cholesteatoma. Will definitely need surgery on left ear.

Must clear infection first. RX Cipro; Ofloxacin; Fluticasone;

3 plus peroxide douches to left ear BID

7/6/2017

H&P; CC; OSMT ENT. Hist of seizures since MVA RX Cipro; Ofloxacin solution; Flonase; Hydrogen

which also injured L ear/continual drainage. Patient Peroxide flush L ear BID x 2d. Patient to have

seen in late June plan is to clear infection L ear then repeat Audiology testing once surgery completed

CT scans, w/surg to follow.

and healed.

8/7/2017

4 referral placed for HTY : HA broken

10/13/2017 3 Wk. F/U; states HA needs to be repaired.

traditional Hearing aides of no benefit / recommend eval

5 for ossicular reconstruction

6/14/2017

Advanced ENT

Referral was placed in September

10/23/2017

Consult for ossicular reconstruction ‐ options explained‐ will depend on what will be approved 8/16/2017

6 HA‐ out for repair

9/30/2015

3 + yes/sometimes; including YES to Currently has and uses

7 a hearing aid and YES to Hearing aid is working okay

2/25/2019

HA‐ out for repair

5/27/2016

Original hearing aid never located. Hearing aid re‐

ordered. (HOH nurse attempted reorder, but order

did not go through.)

4/2/2019

8 3 + yes/sometimes 9 fungal infection ears

1/31/2018 Provider visit 5/10/2016 sick call

Hearing normal L ear infection

2/14/2018 5/25/2016
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 41

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 302 of 985 - Page ID#: 3890

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

2 HA Returned 3 Outside appt with Commonwealth ENT

R HA returned to IM. IM states it is working better

5/15/2018 I/M dropped off hearing aid for repair

Will need to do sinus surgery prior to surgery on L ear.

8/17/2017

OSMT ENT r/t CT scan. Saw ENT late June w/plan to clear infection L ear, then CT scans of internal auditory canal & sinuses w/surgery L ear to follow. At recent f/u in August ENT now wants to perform sinus surgery first prior to surgery on L ear.

4 Referral answered 5 Advanced ENT

HA sent to HTY for evaluation & repair

12/7/2017 Returned from HTY

consult for ossicular reconstruction‐ IM wants to proceed

with surgery or HA

10/31/2017 Jewish Hospital

6 IM to UL eval new HA

6/20/2016 IM to UL for fitting new HA

7 Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes; including YES to Currently has and uses

a hearing aid (only has pocket talker at this point)

4/9/2019

Annual H & P. C/O difficulty hearing but it not using pocket talker. States he was supposed to have a hearing aid but never received one.

8 Provider visit 9 sick call

Requesting ear buds for pocket talker ear infection

4/25/2018 Annual hearing screening 1/5/2018 hearing screen

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 42

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 303 of 985 - Page ID#: 3891

AI

AJ

AK

AL

AM

1 Medical Visit 8 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 9 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Date

2 Mailed HA to U of L Audiology

6/5/2018

HA returned

Patient had been prescribed flonase but didn't

know he was to go to TX RM once a day to get med.

Patient taken to TX RM & administered dose.

Instructed to come QD in AM for Flonase. Patient

instructed to use ear drops. Referral for sinus

3 surgery.

10/11/2017

Outside medical appointment

HA repaired & returned from U of L & returned to inmate. IM states it is working properly at this time 6/13/2018

Inmate had sinus surgery

10/12/2017

IM has HA back and is satisfied w/them; they are in

4 working order

7/18/2018

Annual Hearing Questionnaire;

5 R ear surgery

10/31/2017 f/u surgery

Answered 3 +yes/sometimes; Answered Yes, he has

HA and Yes it is working okay

8/17/2018

no issues‐ declines pain meds

11/1/2017

6

8/3/2017

ANNUAL HEARING SCREEN‐ reports HA WORK

6/27/2018

Co‐sign note to HOH nurse to investigate location of

hearing aid ordered on 11/9/18 by medical director.

7 Left Audicus Oro

5/13/2019

Hears To You Consult ‐ APRN Himler. Inmate not Needing Hears To You appt for hearing evaluation

present

and one hearing aid. Audicus will not benefit him 6/13/2019

8 3 + yes/sometimes 9 3+ sometimes or yes

6/7/2018

Annual Physical

1/29/2018

Chronic Care/ Hearing Eval

Refer to audiology

6/18/2018

IM declines further eval/ satisfied with pocket talker 1/1/2019 Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 43

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 304 of 985 - Page ID#: 3892

AN

AO

AP

AQ

1 Medical Visit 10 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

11 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 11 ‐ Description

HA (that was just sent to U of L) not working properly, has constant buzzing sound & IM can't 2 hear out of it

Will send back out to U of L for eval and repair

9/14/2018

Inmate reports that he has lost his hearing aid

3 Chronic care visit; F/U Outside medical treatment

Septoplasty & turbinate reduction performed yesterday

& patient returns with orders for salt water sniffs and

pain medication with f/u in next 2 weeks

10/20/2017

Patient had post 0p surg visit w/ENT. ENT attempted to perform nasal endoscopy for nasal debridement but had much difficulty d/t scabbing, crusting & debris in nasal cavities. ENT insisted patient must do salt water saline rinses

4 Hearing Aids both broken and not working

HA will be sent out for repair; Pocket Talker issued until

HA returned

8/27/2018

Pocket talker not working

5 f/u surgery

no issues

12/5/2017

Chronic Care

6 annual hearing screen 7 HOH UPDATE

HA working properly at this time

7/17/2018

Annual H & P; R HA broken & needing repair

Patient was educated on where his hearing aid & consult is currently. He verbally understood. Patient was wearing his pocket talker.

6/24/2019

Outside appt at Advanced ENT & Allergy.

8 Hearing Booth 9 PPD/Annual Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Never resulted, will retest

7/24/2018

3 + yes/sometimes; including YES to 'Do you currently have & use a hearing aid and YES to Is the hearing aid working okay?

1/22/2019

Hearing Exam Whisper test

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 44

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 305 of 985 - Page ID#: 3893

AR

AS

AT

AU

AV

1 Medical Visit 11 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

12 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 12 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 12 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 13 ‐ Date

2 Will get re‐tested for new hearing aid

9/25/2018

Provider visit

No referral back to Dr Morris until patient demonstrates

willingness/compliance to comply with post surgical orders

regarding saline flushes. Patient educated on importance of

flushes & asked to sign document attesting he understands

tx plan. Compliance will be monitored & other steps taken if October ‐

3 patient doesn't come for saline flushes.

November 2017

Provider put in audio consult to get hearing aid replaced

12/27/2018

Compliance with salt water flushes irregular

1/22/18 (Rescheduled from 1/8/18. Inmate showed up late had to be rescheduled)

Issued new battery for pocket talker, and it is in good 4 working order now

8/27/2018

Visit w/provider; broken HA

HA out of warranty; failed portable audiometry screening; refer to audiology

9/14/2018

5 Reports increased hearing ability post op

12/27/2017 Advanced ENT/ Allergy

Post op f/u ‐ Return 6 mo

1/9/2018

Check to see if audiometry completed; provider states she

6 cannot find results

7/23/2018

Suspect EAC Atresia ‐ RT; Stenosis or Atresia of Left EAC. Cerumen present bilaterally. Will begin otic drops and follow up in main office (DuPont) to re‐exam with 7 microscopy on return in a couple weeks

7/3/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening

3 + yes/sometimes; Yes to has & uses a HA; NO to is

it working okay

7/24/2018

Chart review of ENT notes. Inmate not present. DX

suspect atresia right ear, stenosis or atresia left,

recs for ofloxacin drops then f/u to re‐evaluate at

main office with microscopy.

Referral to Otolaryngology

8/5/2019

8 Severe Impairment

8/29/2018

Provider (Lyons) F/U Audicus results

Failed whisper test & has pocket talker. Refer to Audicus

9 hearing booth for testing

2/8/2019

Audicus hearing booth

Bilateral Severe impairment in all frequencies; needs bed shaker

8/31/2018

5000; 1000; 2000; 4000; & 8000 Hz respectively. Left Ear: 45; 40; 40; 80; 80 dB. Right Ear: 35; 25; 35; 75; 75 dB.

2/8/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 45

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 306 of 985 - Page ID#: 3894

AW

AX

AY

AZ

1 Medical Visit 13 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 13 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 14

Date

Medical Visit 14 Description

2 Audicus hearing booth

Patient unable to complete audicus testing. CNA explained the test & directions x 4; patient could not follow the directions to complete the test. Provider has been notified.

2/1/2019

Provider referral

Patient to have daily salt water nasal sniffs prior to

Patient returns from ENT following successful NSR, admin of Flonase. This will continue for the next 2

SMR, and tess in prep for left cholesteatoma

months. Records of patient's compliance with sniffs

surgery in the future. Patient nasal wise ok. ENT and Flonase need to be kept. f/u 6 wks. for possible

3 requesting f/u in 2 months with CT prior to return ENT referral, check hearing

5/3/2018

Referral ENT for surgery. Mr. Rollings was seen by Dr Morris in January and he wanted a 2 month follow up with a CT. He has a cholesteatoma in his ear.

4 Audicus hearing booth 5 f/u 12/27/17 ENT visit 6 Hearing exam 7 Outside appt

Moderate hearing impairment bilaterally consult placed for 6 mo. f/u

10/12/2018 HA Eval by Dr. Kemen 4/25/2018 F/U on hearing

Moderate/Severe impairment

8/6/2018

Bilateral stenosis of auditory canals. SNL. Nasal

septal deviation. Recommend peroxide flushes (full

strength) follow up in one week ‐ two weeks. Use

Ofloxacin TID x 10 days

8/8/2019

F/U Audicus results w/provider
ENT Referral (APRN Himler) Inmate not present. Chart review of consult sheet from OSMT with ENT. Rec'd orders for Ofloxacin; peroxide flushes; and f/u ENT

8 Dr. Kemen HA evaluation

Audicus Oro for R Ear Approved

9/17/2018 Issue of HA

Hearing aid ‐ APRN Himler review of Audicus results. Sent ECW message to medical director to request

9 Inmate not present.

hearing aid

2/13/2019

Hearing aid evaluation ‐ ‐ ‐ Dr. Kemen. Inmate not present.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 46

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 307 of 985 - Page ID#: 3895

BA

BB

BC

BD

BE

1 Medical Visit 14 Outcome

Medical Visit 15

Date

Medical Visit 15 Description

Medical Visit 15 Outcome

Medical Visit 16 Date

Patient failed first attempt with Audicus booth. 2 Reschedule for second attempt.

2/4/2019

Ear pain/drainage. Reports pain in R ear &

Inner ear canal cloudy, unable to visualize TM. No

green/yellow drainage with foul odor. Symptoms x drainage noted in outer canal. Will add to

1 week. Sick call.

provider's list for sick call.

2/7/2019

Due to scheduling difficulties with Dr Morris' office, called patient up to discuss sending patient to another ENT for surgery. Nursing discussed with patient and he declined any further treatment 3 stating on refusal for "I am feeling much better." 5/24/2018

Transfer Assessment (from LLCC to LAC)

He is slow to respond to questions, looks around

like he's thinking, but answers appropriately. Does

have a hx of hearing problems & has misplaced his

"hearing device" but that does not seem to be the

issue. Will assign the chart to LPN Walton for

hearing eval with the provider

6/12/2018

Audicus Dia II Left Hearing Aid approved and 4 ordered

10/25/2018

passed Whisper test 04/25/18, R ear has improved

5 hearing

11/12/2018

Annual PPD Hearing Screen

Issued Audicus Dia II L hearing aid. Inmate

educated on use, battery replacement, etc. Inmate

verbalized understanding.

3/26/2019

3+answered on screen

11/27/2018

6 Severe impairment; will order HA; pending approval 8/6/2018

7 Referral to Otolaryngology. F/U in 2 wks. ENT

8/19/2019

Dr. Kemen review of Audicus results

Audicus Oro approved for R ear

10/11/2018

Outside medical trip to Advanced ENT & Allergy. F/U on long‐term hearing loss.

Physical exam shows narrowing of both auditory

canals. Diagnosis: Stenosis of auditory canals; snl R.

Refer to Dr G. Thomas McMurry for auditory

stenosis in 2‐3 weeks

9/3/2019

HA issued to inmate. Educated on basic function &

battery replacement & exchange. IM verbalized

8 understanding

9/24/2018

F/U hearing. Inmate to medical & complains that since his hearing aide he "hears too much". Wants to move to another dorm. Inmate reports pain in the R ear (ear without the hearing aide)

Encouraged to submit bed move to dorm 3 with UA

through proper request form. R TM erythemnetous

& cloudy, tender. L TM with hearing aide removed

& observed wnl. Normal speech & communication

with hearing aide. RX antibiotic given. Follow up as

needed.

11/1/2018

9 Audicus Clara for Right Ear approved

2/20/2019

Provider visit; APRN Himler; audicus results

Inmate states he is happy with the pocket talker & he does not wish to have hearing aid at this time. 3/5/2019
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 47

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 308 of 985 - Page ID#: 3896

BF

BG

BH

BI

1 Medical Visit 16 Description

Medical Visit 16 Outcome

Medical Visit 17

Date

Medical Visit 17 Description

2 Ear drainage resolved. 3 Hearing Screening Questionnaire.

Patient presents to tx room before provider appt. Upon assessment, bilateral ears free of drainage & wax impaction. Issue has resolved & appt canceled. Educated to return to sick call if problem returned 2/28/2019
Yes to multiple questions, including has & uses hearing aid and it's working okay. Also states that he HAD a hearing aid prior to cholesteatoma removal L ear‐states he does not feel as though he needs one anymore and had rather have a pocket talker if anything. Needs f/u ct scan of IAC and f/u appt w/ENT after CT scan

Audicus. Inmate not present. Chart review is for

Audicus hearing testing. On 9/14/18 testing

completed & IM qualified for DIA II Left HA.

ECW message to medical director to review latest

Repeated Audicus testing on 10/10/18. IM asking if Audicus results and make determination for hearing

4 he qualifies for bilateral HA.

aid.

6/4/2019

Passed whisper test. Right TM retracted & scarring

Whisper test. States he has difficulty hearing in noted. Left TM with perforation / chronic, no

crowds. No hx of hearing aid, but has history of ear erythema or dng in canal. Refer to audiology (not

5 surgery L ear in past.

sure why provider did this. Passed whisper)

11/5/2019

Ear pain/drainage. Patient has 1 wk. hx of progressive drainage & pain from right ear. Patient has a pocket talker but does not use.
US Results. While inmate is here, he states he needs 2 HA for safety. Currently has 1 per DOC policy. Claims he cannot hear loud trucks on yard if they're on his right side. Note: He is able to hear scheduler call his name down the hall from a separate room in the clinic.
Annual Screening

6 Meeting with HOH nurse

Issued right hearing aid and educated on its operation and cleaning.

11/6/2018

R hearing aid not working

7 Referral

Out to Dr. MCMurry in 2‐3 weeks

9/5/2019

Inmate is wearing HA in L ear, able to carry on a

conversation with provider at normal volume &

tone) w/o difficulty. Audicus results from 10/10/18

reviewed w/patient (patient states he is already

aware) Severe hearing loss all frequencies

Inmate here to review the results of his Audicus. bilaterally. Protocol dictates on hearing is provided.

States he has HA for L ear & can hear better with it. I do not see that an exception for second hearing

8 Is requesting a second hearing aide.

aid needs to be made in this case.

6/5/2019

9 Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued to inmate in good working order. Inmate educated on usage, care, battery placement & exchange. Inmate verbalized understanding. 3/15/2019

Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire Hearing aide use. States he does not want the hearing aid, states pocket talker worked better and he would rather have the pocket talker back. Not wearing his hearing aid.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 48

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 309 of 985 - Page ID#: 3897

BJ

BK

BL

BM

BN

1 Medical Visit 17 Outcome

Medical Visit

18 Date

Medical Visit 18 Description

R ear canal red, + exudate, unable to visualize TM.

Antibx ear drops x 7 days. F/u in 7 days if no

2 improvement.

3/9/2019

Weekly Assessment

Medical Visit 18 Outcome

Medical Visit 19 Date

Received last ear drop yesterday for cerumen buildup in R ear. R ear clear of cerumen today but unable to see TM. Inner canal narrow but free of erythema & drainage. Refer to provider for continued ear pain

3/14/2019

INMATE WITH MULTIPLE MENTAL HEALTH 3 APPTS/ISSUES

12/4/2018

YES to multiple questions; including has and uses a

hearing aid; hearing aid is working okay; has been

Transferred to KSR (Mental Health Transfer) ‐ Intake diagnosed with hearing loss; has a hearing aid (in

Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

his property) that he no longer uses.

4/24/2019

Safety need for 2 HA reviewed & inmate is able to

hear his name called down the hall from a separate

room wearing 1 aide. I feel inmate is safe with 1

hearing aid. His occupation is grievance coordinator

4 & he is not exposed to large vehicles at work.

7/1/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Answered YES to "Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid?" and YES to "Is the hearing aid working

okay?"

7/17/2019

5 Failed Questionnaire

11/5/2019

Inmate brought R HA to HOH clinic. Nurse

troubleshooted HA and still not working; is sending

out for repair. Offered pocket talker to inmate to

use while HA is out and inmate declined at this

6 time.

11/20/2018

Audicus Hearing aid re‐issued

Dr. Mc Murray does not see prisoners. Trying to get

7 approval.

10/7/2019

ENT Specialist Visit

PTA: L‐36 R‐45

11/18/2019

Right HA issued back to inmate after being repaired.

I/M confirms HA is working properly at this time.

Educated to not get HA wet & keep locked up in

case when not wearing. Inmate verbalized

understanding.

7/1/2019

It was determined that he needs surgery. He is not

interested in surgery at this time. Just wants a

hearing aid for left ear. Is scheduled to see provider

to discuss.

10/11/2019

8 Answered NO to all questions

6/19/2019

Please order pocket talker, schedule with HOH

nurse as inmate states he does not want hearing aid

anymore, likes pocket talker better, wants to return

9 hearing aid

5/22/2019

Annual Physical Pocket Talker

Bilateral hearing aides; communicates normally, bilat TM without erythema and canal free from debris after hearing aides removed

6/24/2019

Pocket talker given per providers note. Patient was educated on use and DME form signed.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 49

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 310 of 985 - Page ID#: 3898

BO

BP

BQ

BR

1 Medical Visit 19 Description

Medical Visit 19 Outcome

Medical Visit

20 Date

Medical Visit 20 Description

F/U ear infection with provider. Patient continues No pain with pinna movement. Right TM not

with right ear pain and drainage. Completed ear visualized due to whitish debris. RX oral Antibxs x

2 drops.

10 days. F/U in 7‐10 days if no improvement.

3/18/2019

Attempted Audicus hearing booth.

Cerumen impaction L ear, flushed in clinic, bilat tm

To clinic for f/u cc & lab review. States he has

scarred no erythema or bulge noted. Does not

3 hearing aides but doesn't wear them.
3 month CC; H & P. He has L HA & states he has difficulty

wear his hearing aids

7/15/2019

hearing with it. Important to note he is "straining & leaning

forward" to "hear" my conversation, make a point to turn

head so only L ear is facing me as he claims he's unable to hear

out of R ear and can barely hear out of Left. He takes out

hearing aid as I exit the room, and I tell him I'm going to get

the otoscope with my back facing him, he responds "oh,

States hearing aid not helping. TMs normal. Refer

4 okay".

to onsite Audicus exam.

8/8/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Audicus hearing booth

5 Provider Review

Left Audicus Clara ordered. Approved by Dr. Kemen

11/20/19.

12/13/2019 HOH Nurse Visit

6 Annual Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Answered YES to "Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid?"

1/6/2019

7

HA Approved by Dr. Kemen

11/6/2019 HOH Nurse Visit

He went to an OSMT ENT @CHS in Marion KY. Was recommended to have an amplification AU device for his left ear back on 6/8/17, which looks like a hearing aid but is peach colored. He was issued a hearing aid after going through Audicus on 9/17/19 8 Patient seen today to follow up on hearing devices. for his R ear. Patient has no concerns noted.

9

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 50

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 311 of 985 - Page ID#: 3899

BS

BT

BU

BV

1 Medical Visit 20 Outcome

Medical Visit

21 Date

Medical Visit 21 Description

Medical Visit 21 Outcome

Patient unable to complete test, said he was half color blind, and didn't understand directions. Second attempt at testing, will email provider for 2 further instruction

3/26/2019

Referral placed to Hears to You

Refer to Hears To You for testing d/t failed 3 attempts at Audicus hearing booth testing

Failed questionnaire; reports he lost his HA at LLCC

& filed report. Will ask ADA coordinator to follow

up with finding report. If not available, will have

3 patient file a new report

7/23/2019

Annual Physical. History of tubes as a child. HOH,

has pocket talker, but does not use

Encouraged to use pocket talker as needed

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz. LEFT EAR: 50; 70;

80; 80; 80 dB. RIGHT EAR: 45; 80; 75; 80; 80 dB.

4 PTA: L‐70; R‐70

8/16/2019

Patient received hearing aid and was educated on

usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange,

etc. Patient verbalized understanding &

5 demonstrated use.

To medical for f/u Audicus results. He currently Reviewed new Audicus results. Severe hearing loss

wears Audicus Clara L ear. States he has to turn this both ears. He's asking for 2 HA. D/w inmate he

up to full volume & has difficulty hearing speech, doesn't meet criteria for 2 as his job as a grievance

and that this causes him difficulty at work. C/O coordinator is not presenting a safety hazard. Send

constant ringing in both ears.

to HOH nurse to troubleshoot hearing aid.

6 HA Broken

1/14/2020 HOH Nurse

Issued Left Audicus Clara. Educated on use and 7 care.

Issued Pocket Talker

8 9
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 51

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 312 of 985 - Page ID#: 3900

BW

BX

BY

BZ

1 Medical Visit 22 Date 2 3/26/2019

Medical Visit 22 Description

Medical Visit 22 Outcome

Medical Visit 23 Date

F/U Ear infection. Patient with bilateral hearing loss

who continued to complain of left ear pain and

"popping." Patient just completed course of oral 3 RX given. Antibiotic ear drops; oral antibx; and

Antibx w/o significant change.

Ibuprofen for pain. F/U in 2 weeks if no better.

4/8/2019

3 7/29/2019
4 8/26/2019 5 6 1/17/2020 7

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire HOH Hearing Aid Evaluation

Answered YES to "Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid?" and YES to "Is the hearing aid working

okay?"

8/5/2019

HOH Nurse cleaned Hearing Aid and noted that she carried on a normal conversation w/pt. Hearing Aid is in working order.

Audicus

PTA: L‐84 R‐81

2/5/2020

8 9
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 52

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 313 of 985 - Page ID#: 3901

CA

CB

CC

CD

1 Medical Visit 23 Description

Medical Visit 23 Outcome

Medical Visit

24 Date

Medical Visit 24 Description

2 Audicus hearing booth

Was not brought over for appt

4/18/2019 Was sent out to hospital for a fall

3
4 5 6 Provider Review 7

Needs repeat Audicus testing

9/5/2019 Audicus

Medical Reviewed and wants retest with HA in.

8 9
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 53

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 314 of 985 - Page ID#: 3902

CE

CF

CG

CH

CI

1 Medical Visit 24 Outcome

Medical Visit

25 Date

Medical Visit 25 Description

Medical Visit 25 Outcome

Medical Visit 26 Date

Returned to KSR. Fell again but didn't need to be

2 sent out again.

4/29/2019

Return from outside medical trip to Hears to You

Hearing evaluation report states that left ear is

nonfunctional. States right ear does well with a

moderate amount of amplification. Paperwork will

be sent to scheduling. No c/o's voiced.

5/6/2019

Awaiting results and provider review. Test may have

3 frozen.

10/7/2019 Audicus

4 5 6 7

Came in for re‐test. Having issues w/his ears. Referred to sick call.

10/25/2019

8 9
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 54

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 315 of 985 - Page ID#: 3903

CJ

CK

CL

CM

1 Medical Visit 26 Description 2 Hearing eval F/U. Inmate not present

Medical Visit 26 Outcome
Inmate seen by Hears To You on 4/29/19 for eval. Has nonfunctional L ear and Moderate snl in R ear. They are recommending hearing aid for Right Ear only.

Medical Visit 27 Date
5/8/2019

Medical Visit 27 Description Dr Kemen ‐ Hearing aid evaluation. Patient is not present. Has history of chronic L otitis media & gets periodic f/u by an otolaryngologist. Couldn't complete Audicus test so was sent out for audiogram at HTY on 4/29/19. Audiogram from 4/29 was reviewed.

3 Audicus Test
4 5 6 7

PTA: L‐18 R‐14

11/13/2019 HOH Nurse Visit

8 9
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 55

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 316 of 985 - Page ID#: 3904

CN 1 Medical Visit 27 Outcome

CO

CP

Medical Visit

28 Date

Medical Visit 28 Description

CQ Medical Visit 28 Outcome

CR
Medical Visit 29 Date

Right Ear Severe; Left Ear Deaf. AUDICUS CLARA 2 FOR RIGHT EAR

6/12/2019

HOH Nurse Bentley delivered his hearing aid to desk

nurse, Mallory Napier, RN

6/14/2019

Signed refusal for testing. Still unsure if he has ever had a hearing device, but says he is fine without 3 anything for now.

4 5 6 7

8 9
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 56

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 317 of 985 - Page ID#: 3905

CS

CT

CU

CV

1 Medical Visit 29 Description 2 Hearing aide issued

Medical Visit 29 Outcome

Medical Visit 30

Date

Medical Visit 30 Description

Hearing aide, cleaning kit, and x4 batteries issued to

patient at this time. Patient educated as to the use

and care of this piece of medical equipment.

Patient verbalizes and demonstrates proper use

DME form signed and to be scanned in.

12/31/2019

HOH Nurse Vistit

3
4 5 6 7

8 9
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 57

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 318 of 985 - Page ID#: 3906
CW 1 Medical Visit 30 Outcome
2 HOH nurse returned repaired Hearing Aid to IM.
3
4 5 6 7
8 9
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 58

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 319 of 985 - Page ID#: 3907

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

10 3/14/2018

Annual Hearing Screening

11 3/7/2003

IM HOH since childhood‐ never tested

1/26/2017

3/13/2019

Failed questionnaire; states his hearing aid got lost

when he was packed up. HOH nurse is going to

follow up.

D‐ Lost/Stolen. Refused replacement

3/21/2018 3/7/2019

Answered Yes to every question, including YES to

Currently has and uses a hearing aid, and YES to Is

the hearing aid working okay?

D ‐ Pocket Talker issued

12 12/14/2017 13 10/6/2017

Intake (to RCC ) Hearing Screening Questionnaire 12/14/2017 6/4/2019

Answered Yes to "Do you currently have & use a

hearing aid?" and Yes to "Is the hearing aid working

okay?"

A ‐ AUDICUS DIA II LEFT EAR; also has Pocket Talker

Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes; Yes to both 'Do you have & use

10/6/2017 12/3/2019 a HA' and Yes to 'Is the HA working ok?'

A ‐ Has Right hearing aid from Hears to You.

14 7/6/2018

Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

12/10/2018 3/5/2019

3 + yes/sometimes; Including YES to currently has

and uses a hearing aid but NO to hearing aid is

working okay. Will email Jeremy Nation to see what A ‐ Audicus Oro Right Ear (pocket talker issued

we need to do about his hearing aid

2/6/19) AUDICUS CLARA RIGHT EAR

15 10/20/2004

Noted upon Intake

10/20/2004 3/5/2019 No to all questions

D ‐ patient has had multiple hearing aids given to him. He has broken all of them (some, by his admission, willfully) Per Dr Manning, as he is unable to retest for Audicus, issue pocket talker

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 59

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 320 of 985 - Page ID#: 3908

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

10 N/A

3/14/2018 annual hearing screening

11 Yes

12/19/2007 Alvada Audiology

Answered 3+

3/29/2018 Whisper Test

ears impacted with cerumen, reschedule appt

1/9/2009 UL audiology

12 No 13 Yes

12/14/2017 Intake (to RCC) Hearing Screening Questionnaire Failed questionnaire

10/6/2017 Hearing screening questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

12/22/2017 Hearing test 10/11/2017 Hearing loss (test)

14 No

7/6/2018

Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

15 Yes

5/7/2014

received new hearing aids

7/12/2018 Audicus Hearing Booth

3/7/2016

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 60

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 321 of 985 - Page ID#: 3909

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

Passed tuning fork bilaterally; failed Whisper Test 10 bilaterally. Inmate will be given a pocket talker. 6/14/2018

Provider visit; IM reports difficulty hearing & is waiting for his hearing exam

Check on hearing aids

7/26/2018

11 BL HA ordered

4/14/2014

LEFT EAR: 1K‐25; 2K‐40; 3K‐45; 4K‐40; 6K‐70; 500Hz‐

45; 1K‐30. RIGHT EAR: 1K‐30; 2K‐40; 3K‐55; 4K‐65;

12 6K‐80; 500Hz‐50; 1K‐40.

12/28/2017

Intake H & P

13 Failed

10/18/2017 HOH/Intake H&P

ct scan ordered, continue atb. (cipro ordered on 4/11/14 for

ear during sick call)

7/9/2014

Acute, bilateral ears occluded w/cerumen. Pt is hoh but this

may be impacted by amount of cerumen in both ear canals.

Will re‐eval hearing after cerumen is removed. RX Debrox x 5

days. Then report to medical in 5 days to flush ears. F/U in 2

wks. for hearing eval after cerumen treatment.

1/17/2018

Failed hearing test; refer to audiology

11/1/2017

Severe Impairment bilaterally at 500 Hz; Moderate L

& Severe R at 1000 Hz; Mild L & Moderate R at 2000

14 Hz

7/19/2018

Intake H & P w/provider

Pt failed whisper test in both ears. Audicus testing revealed

Severe/moderate and mild hearing loss at 500, 1000 and 2000

Hz frequencies respectively.

7/20/2018

15 hearing aids sent out for repairs

5/17/2016

not repairable issued amplifier

5/17/2016
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 61

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 322 of 985 - Page ID#: 3910

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

10 Whisper Test 11
12 Sick Call 13 Outside appt

Failed Audioscope testing; refer to Audiology

9/4/2018

Audicus hearing booth

seen audiologist, antihistamine ordered

3/29/2016

States he never received ear wax removal drops. Debrox was ordered. Order for Debrox given to pill call to order. Inmate verbalized understanding to check at pill call med pick up tomorrow

1/18/2018

Ear drops

HTY Clinic. Recommended bilateral HA for inmate

11/30/2017

Outside appt. ‐ HTY

14 Sick call. States hearing amplifier quit working

Battery changed in hearing amplifier

15

new hearing aids ordered

7/23/2018

Dr. Kemen ‐ Hearing Aid Evaluation

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 62

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 323 of 985 - Page ID#: 3911

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

Mild impairment L ear at 2000 hz; Moderate impairment R

10 ear at 2000 hz; otherwise no impairment

9/17/2018

Provider visit (Lyons) to go over Audicus results

Normal Audicus results, not requiring hearing aids.

Inmate has pocket talker he only wears when he

needs it

10/9/2018

11 consult to audiologist

3/22/2017 HTY

BL HA recommended

4/5/2017

12 Start Debrox solution. 5 drops affected ear, BID, x 5 days 2/13/2018

Intake Assessment (from RCC to LSCC) Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

2/19/2018

13 Inmate given bilateral hearing aids

RCC transfer to RHU; Intake Screening 12/17/2017 Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes; Yes to both 'Do you have & use

a HA' and Yes to 'Is the HA working ok?'

3/20/2018

14 Audicus Oro for Right Ear approved 15 received new hearing aids

8/10/2018 Hearing aid issued
10/4/2016

Issued R hearing aid and pamphlet

9/14/2018

hearing aid recommended. 4th pair IM has damaged. Previous pair non repairable.

3/16/2017

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 63

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 324 of 985 - Page ID#: 3912

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

RETESTED with Audicus Hearing Booth new decibel

10 level

Ranging from Mild to Severe Impairment

10/24/2018 Dr. Kemen ‐ Hearing Aid Evaluation

11 HTY

BL HA issued per HTY

6/22/2018

Hearing screening. Patient is here today c/o

difficulty hearing in both ears. He states that he

was supposed to have audiometry done at RCC

prior to transfer here, but they gave him Debrox

and told him that he would need an ear lavage Cerumen obstruction noted right EAC. Left TM within

done to remove cerumen obstruction prior to

normal limits. Cerumen obstruction removed from Right

audiometry. Patient never received ear lavage and EAC. Will now reschedule audiometry. Refer to audiology

12 was sent here to LSCC.

for bilateral hearing loss.

3/28/2018

chronic care visit reported HA were lost
Outside appt ‐ Audiology Department, King's Daughter's Medical Center, Ashland, KY

13 Intake screening assessment to NTC

3 + yes/sometimes; Yes to both 'Do you have & use a HA'

and Yes to 'Is the HA working ok?'

4/18/2018

HA batteries

14 F/U on pocket talker

IM reports he is not wearing his HA "because it doesn't

work. When I have it on low, I can't hear, then when I turn

it up, I hear all the background noise & not what I'm trying

to hear." Discussed wearing the hearing aid while awake,

ears need to adjust to the sounds, the background noise

should improve over time. I'm verb understanding and

agrees to wear it.

12/10/2018

Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

15

BL HA ordered per HTY

3/28/2017

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 64

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 325 of 985 - Page ID#: 3913

AI

AJ

AK

AL

AM

1 Medical Visit 8 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 9 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Date

10 Audicus Oro for Left Ear

11/8/2018

Meeting with HOH Nurse

HA issued to IM in good working order. Educated as

to use, battery replacement, problems, etc. IM

verbalized understanding

3/13/2019

11 scheduled for a hearing evaluation

7/2/2018

Hearing Exam

Audiogram revealed a mild sloping to moderate

HFSNHL bilaterally. Borderline candidate for

hearing aids. Need approval from insurance before

12 hearing aids are purchased.

6/6/2018

Chronic Care; H & P

Inmate given 2 new HA batteries in exchange for 2

13 old ones

5/26/2018

HA batteries

3 + yes/sometimes; Including YES to currently has

and uses a hearing aid but NO to hearing aid is

working okay. Will email Jeremy Nation to see what

14 we need to do about his hearing aid

12/21/2018

Hearing aid not working

Results pending

7/12/2018

TMs within normal limits. Voices no complaints.

Passed Whisper Test.

6/12/2018

Inmate issued 2 new HA batteries in exchange for 2

old ones

6/15/2018

Patient turned hearing aid into the HOH nurse with

note stating it didn't work. Batteries changed &

device cleaned. Hearing aid appears to be

functioning properly. Educated patient how to

obtain batteries, keeping device clean, maintenance

issues. Patient verbalized understanding. Hearing

aid returned to patient in working order

2/5/2019

15 BL HA issued per HTY

7/3/2018

Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes; Yes to has & uses a HA; and Yes

to HA is working okay

9/5/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 65

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 326 of 985 - Page ID#: 3914

AN

AO

AP

AQ

1 Medical Visit 10 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

11 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 11 ‐ Description

10 PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire; states his hearing aid got lost when he was packed up. HOH nurse is going to follow up.

3/15/2019

Annual physical & Chronic care. States he doesn't have his hearing aid, because it was confiscated.

11 Provider (Ramey) review of Audicus results.
12 Pocket talker issued 13 HA batteries

no impairment at 500, 1000, 2000

7/13/2018

Review by Dr. Kemen

Inmate was given 1 pocket talker, batteries and headphones

7/18/2018

Hearing Aid Evaluation by Dr Kemen ‐ Patient is not present. Audiogram done on 3/28/18 was reviewed. The hearing threshold in dB at each of the benchmark frequencies (500; 1000; 2000; 4000 Hz) is as follows: Right Ear: 30; 25; 35; 60. Left Ear: 30; 25; 35; 50.

Inmate issued 2 new #13 HA batteries in exchange for 2

old ones

7/7/2018

HA batteries

14 hearing aid lost 15 Left HA broke

Inmate says he gave his hearing aid to a nurse in CPTU

but no one can find it

2/6/2019

Pocket talker

Inmate dropped Left HA off to HOH clinic broken in half.

Stated he 'dropped it.' Inmate still has a Right HA that is

properly working. Sending HA to HTY with warranty

info.

9/27/2018

Hearing aid returned

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 66

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 327 of 985 - Page ID#: 3915

AR

AS

AT

AU

AV

1 Medical Visit 11 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

12 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 12 ‐ Description

Inmate educated and encouraged to file a lost and stolen

10 report for his hearing aide

3/15/2019

RE: Hearing aid

Medical Visit

Medical Visit 12 ‐ Outcome

13 ‐ Date

Per ADA Wathen, she spoke with the Captain who

packed Hollern's property. There was no hearing

aid in his possession at that time. Inmate Hollern

will need to provide a copy of a theft report to the

nurse at sick call in order for his request for a

replacement hearing aid to be considered. He will

also be responsible for the $10 copay per CPP 13.2. 6/5/2019

11 Dr. Kemen rejected HA order

8/31/2018

Issued pocket talker to inmate. Educated inmate on

usage and battery replacement. Inmate verbalized

understanding

3/7/2019

Right ear mild to moderate; Left ear mild to moderate. 12 Audicus Dia II for Left Ear

7/19/2018

Hearing aid order approved

Inmate issued 2 new #13 HA batteries in exchange for 2 old

13 ones

8/23/2018

Intake to KSR; Screening assessment

Dr Kemen approved the hearing aid order for an

Audicus Dia II for Left Ear

8/2/2018

3 + yes/sometimes; Yes to both 'Do you have & use

a HA' and Yes to 'Is the HA working ok?'

4/12/2019

Pocket talker issued. Patient was educated on use and demonstrated use. He was educated on battery pickup in 14 dorm 12. He verbally understood.

2/25/2019

Left hearing aid issued back to inmate & he confirmed it is

working properly. At this time, inmate gave HOH nurse his

RIGHT HA that was broken into two pieces. Nurse asked

what happened to HA & he stated he dropped it. Will speak

with HAS on sending R HA back out for repair. (Will be

15 considered damaged so warranty won't cover)

10/19/2018

Issued pack of size 13 batteries

C Bentley ordered hearing aid, but order did not go

through and was never sent.

3/5/2019

ADA Coor. called HOH nurse stating IM Davis lost or

misplaced old HA batteries & asked if I would issue

him a pack. Called IM up, explained to put old

batteries in pack as he uses them to turn in on

Fridays to get a new pack. Inmate verbalized

understanding & stated he would keep up with

them better

10/22/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 67

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 328 of 985 - Page ID#: 3916

AW

AX

AY

AZ

1 Medical Visit 13 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 13 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 14

Date

Medical Visit 14 Description

10 Theft report

Patient was educated on getting theft report done

so we can move forward in his hearing aids. Patient

verbally understood.

6/19/2019

Chronic Care visit with provider. States he recently had his hearing aides lost. "They were lost when they packed me up."

11 Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Answered every question YES, including Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? And Is the Hearing aid working okay?

9/10/2019

HOH Nurse Visit Per ADA Coordinator

12 Hearing aid

1 Audicus Hearing aid issued to inmate

11/14/2018

ADA Wathen is writing back to inmate to inform

ADA Wathen received letter from Mr. Hines stating him that he needs to follow protocol and go to sick

13 his hearing aid is broken

call.

4/22/2019

Intake Assessment (from LSCC to KSR) Hearing screening questionnaire
Inmate arrives to sick call for "My left hearing aid broke and right hearing aid acting like it's clogged."

14 Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire 15 Damaged HA

3 + yes/sometimes; Including YES to currently has

and uses a hearing aid but NO to hearing aid is

working okay. Will email Jeremy Nation to see what

we need to do about his hearing aid

3/8/2019

Unit administrator reported that IM Davis reported

to him that he 'got mad and broke his HA.' Called

IM up, IM said his hands shake & he can't hold on to

things. I told him his HA was in pieces, not

consistent with dropping, & UA reported that IM

had destroyed HA. Called IM provider to get VO for

pocket talker. VO given. Advised IM of battery

exchange

3/5/2019

Annual Physical & Chronic Care visit with provider PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 68

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 329 of 985 - Page ID#: 3917

BA

BB

BC

BD

BE

1 Medical Visit 14 Outcome

Medical Visit 15

Date

Medical Visit 15 Description

Educated again to file a lost/stolen report. Bilateral

wet white appearing cerumen in bilat canals, with

dry flaky skin around ear canals, noted some

erythema reported intense puritis. Sebhorreic

dermatitis. RX selenium to wash ears and short

10 course Lamisil.

8/30/2019

Meeting with HOH Nurse Asst.

Medical Visit 15 Outcome

Medical Visit 16 Date

Discussed turning in theft report once again. IM verbally understood.

12/16/2019

11 Issued new earbuds for pocket talker

9/11/2019 Audicus

Inconclusive. Refer to provider.

10/9/2019

3 + yes/sometimes; HAS HEARING AIDS IN

12 WORKING ORDER

12/4/2018

Assessment showed ear wax in both ears but did

not improve hearing after cleaned out. Inmate

educated he would be referred to do a hearing test

13 to check hearing device.

4/23/2019

Chronic Care visit with provider

Patient HOH ‐ patient has a pocket talker and a hearing aid

6/4/2019

Chronic Care visit with provider. Is wearing his Bilateral scarring and retracted TM, no erythema or

hearing aides, but says that he has difficulty hearing canal injury. Please notify Cassie that he is

with them.

requesting to have his hearing aides fixed.

4/30/2019

Failed whisper test. Not currently wearing his 14 hearing aide due to it being out for repair.

5/9/2019

Audicus hearing booth

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT

EAR: 40; 45; 60; 80; 80 dB. RIGHT EAR: 35; 40; 40;

80; 70 dB. PTA: Left 56; Right 49

5/14/2019

15 No to all questions

3/6/2019

Annual Physical & Chronic Care visit with provider.

HOH states he broke his pocket talker

Treatment: Please replace pocket talker

3/21/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 69

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 330 of 985 - Page ID#: 3918

BF

BG

BH

BI

1 Medical Visit 16 Description

Medical Visit 16 Outcome

Medical Visit 17

Date

Medical Visit 17 Description

10 HOH Nurse Visit

Patient refused replacement Hearing Aid due to $10 copay. Complained of issues with his ears‐ referred to provider
12/19/2019

Provider Visit

11 Audicus Retest

PTA: L‐19 R‐41 Refer to Dr. Kemen. He reviewed and called for reevaluation of ear in clinic. If provider deems necessary‐ send for outside audiology.

9‐Dec

Outside Audiology

12 PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire 13 HOH nurse ‐ Hearing aid dropped and cracked

Answered Yes to "Do you currently have & use a

hearing aid?" and Yes to "Is the hearing aid working

okay?"

6/18/2019

Patient stated that he dropped his hearing aide

(left). Part of the housing is gone. Patient was

educated on the hearing aid policy. He verbally

understood.

5/13/2019

Annual Physical Hearing aide given

Audiogram results ‐ No visit with inmate. Chart 14 review only

Audicus Clara for Right Ear (pending approval of medical director)

6/6/2019

Hearing aide issued

15 Whisper test

Failed whisper test. Refer to audiology.

4/5/2019

Audicus hearing booth

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 70

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 331 of 985 - Page ID#: 3919

BJ

BK

BL

BM

BN

1 Medical Visit 17 Outcome

Medical Visit

18 Date

Medical Visit 18 Description

Medical Visit 18 Outcome

Medical Visit 19 Date

10 Ear flush and drops 11 Profound Hearing Loss

12/27/2019 HOH Nurse Visit 12/11/2019 Provider Visit

Claims that drops and ear flush fixed his hearing issue and that he does not need a hearing aid.

Unilateral hearing loss. Recommended for effusion.

Medication ordered. Waiting approval.

2/21/2020

Has left hearing aid but does not wear d/t "does not 12 feel he needs". F/U in 6 months
Patient was given his one hearing aid from Hears To You that went out for repair. Right hearing aid. Patient states it is working better. No further 13 concerns noted. Hearing aide issued to patient in good working order. Patient educated on usage, care, maintenance, exchange of batteries, and replacement of device. Instructed to wear it to all appts. Patient stated he is going to wear it in his left ear because it works better. Patient was educated on his hearing loss was greater in the right ear and that is why they ordered a right side hearing aide. He verbalized understanding and 14 stated he is still going to wear it in his left ear.

15 Inmate unable to complete test. Emailed provider 4/12/2019 Provider note

Patient unable to complete Audicus testing. Patient

may have pocket talker

5/23/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 71

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 332 of 985 - Page ID#: 3920

BO

BP

BQ

BR

1 Medical Visit 19 Description

Medical Visit 19 Outcome

Medical Visit

20 Date

Medical Visit 20 Description

10 11 Provider Review

Referred him back to outside ENT.

12 13

14

15

Inmate threw down pocket talker, breaking it

5/29/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 72

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 333 of 985 - Page ID#: 3921

BS

BT

BU

BV

1 Medical Visit 20 Outcome

Medical Visit

21 Date

Medical Visit 21 Description

Medical Visit 21 Outcome

10 11

12 13

14 15 Inmate was issued a new pocket talker

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 73

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 334 of 985 - Page ID#: 3922

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

16 2/9/2018

Intake RCC

17 2/28/2018

Sick Call

18 1/12/2015

Intake Assessment

19 12/9/2005

Intake Assessment

20 7/7/2017

Intake Screening Questionnaire

2/9/2018 7/15/2019 Failed questionnaire

B

7/28/2018 1/7/2020 1/12/2015 7/9/2019

D ‐ LSCC unable to locate HA. He states he would

prefer to keep his pocket talker anyway, and signed

3 + yes/sometimes answers; including Yes to Do you a refusal for the hearing aid on 8/15/19. Audicus

currently have and use a hearing aid? And Yes to Is Oro for Right Ear (broken when at previous

the hearing aid working okay?

facility?? Pocket talker issued in meantime.)

Answered Yes to Currently has and uses a hearing

aid and Yes to Is hearing aid working okay. But says

he has nerve damage and hearing aids don't work.

Has been noncompliant with wearing them for a

long time

A ‐ Bilateral ‐ HTY

1/13/2017 9/3/2019

3+ yes/ sometimes; YES to currently has & uses a HA

and YES to HA is working okay. In the process of

obtaining a new ear mold.

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)

7/7/2017 12/28/2018 3 + yes/sometimes

D ‐ CURRENTLY HAS POCKET TALKER. SHOWS NO SIGNIFICANT HEARING IMPAIRMENT WHICH REQUIRES A HEARING AID AT THIS TIME.

21 6/2/2018 22 3/14/2018

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

6/2/2018 6/9/2019 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA RIGHT EAR

Annual Hearing screen

3/14/2018 3/6/2019

3+ yes/ sometimes; Including YES to Currently has &

uses a hearing aid and YES to Is hearing aid working

okay; but also answered YES to has a HA that he no

longer uses

A ‐ Right (Audicus)

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 74

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 335 of 985 - Page ID#: 3923

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

16 N/A

2/9/2018

Intake Screening

Answered 3+

2/23/2018 Intake physical

17 N/A

7/28/2018

Sick Call ‐ Patient is with complaint of increased difficulty hearing

Refer to HOH Clinic

8/26/18

Intake (to SEG) Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

18 Yes 19 Yes

6/29/2016
8/20/2012

Needs Eval.
Audiologist recommended hearing aids

8/26/2016

20 N/A

7/7/2017

Intake Screening Questionnaire

Answered Yes to "Do you have hearing difficulties?" 7/23/2017 Whisper test

21 No

6/2/2018

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

1/21/2019 Whisper test

22 No

1/11/2018 Annual hearing screen.

Answered 3+

1/30/2018 Whisper Test

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 75

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 336 of 985 - Page ID#: 3924

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

16 referred to HTY

3/26/2018 HTY Appt.

Results reviewed. Sensorial HL one ear. No intervention at this time.

9/7/2018

17 Failed screening questionnaire

8/28/2018 KSR to RHU Pre Seg Intake Assessment

seen by Laurel Stocks APRN who stated hearing was

normal. Email sent to Martha Gilstrap to have seen

18 for hearing evaluation.

2/3/2017

19 hearing aids issued in 2013.

Failed hearing screening questionnaire IM seen in clinic. Consult to HTY. hearing aids sent for repair and reissued in 2013

9/11/2018 2/20/2017 3/3/2017

20 Left without being seen

10/9/2017 Whisper/Audiometer testing

21 Failed whisper test. Refer to audiology

2/12/2019 Audicus Hearing Booth

Audiometer completed & failed both ears. Will place on list

for pocket talker

10/12/2017

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. Left Ear: 25; 40;

50; 80; 0 dB. Right Ear: 10; 0; 0; 0; 0 dB. (Results show

discrepancies between each ear. Recommended retesting to

confirm. If 2nd test receives same status, recommend having

patient tested by local Audiologist to confirm hearing or

approved by a physician

3/6/2019

22 Referred to Hears to You

6/15/2018 Hearing Booth

Never Resulted / Retest

8/6/2018 Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 76

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 337 of 985 - Page ID#: 3925

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

16 Provider visit ‐ Chronic Care

Chronic, progressing hearing loss to the R ear. Ear canals free of cerumen. Pt failed whisper & finger rub testing in R ear. The RCC hearing booth showed multiple frequency hearing loss > 45 db in the R ear. L ear was wnl.

1/8/2019

F/U; whisper test

17 Intake (back to KSR) Assessment from LLCC

Failed hearing screening questionnaire

10/3/2018

Intake Assessment (to Little Sandy)

18 19
20 Pocket talker issued.

HTY ordered BL HA

3/13/2017

Audiology referral to HTY

3/20/2017

Pocket talker with ear buds issued to inmate. Instructed on

use & informed of responsibility & care. Instructed he was

to return the pocket talker upon leaving this facility. Inmate

verbalized understanding.

11/8/2017

F/U pocket talker & meds

21 Audicus hearing booth

Patient was unable to complete the test

3/9/2019

22 Hearing Booth

Moderate impairment

8/13/2018

F/U Audiogram w/provider

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 77

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 338 of 985 - Page ID#: 3926

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

16 Failed whisper test. Refer to Audicus testing

1/16/2019 Audicus hearing booth

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT

EAR: 20; 20; 20; 50; 60 dB. RIGHT EAR: 35; 40; 35;

70; 75 dB.

3/5/2019

17 Said he has hearing difficulties and is hard of hearing

10/30/2018 Hearing Screening Questionnaire (at Little Sandy) Failed hearing screening questionnaire

11/6/2018

18 Issued BL HA per HTY

7/17/2017 Annual hearing screening questionnaire

19 HTY ordered BL HA

03/30/217

Is not wearing the pocket talker today, states he usually

wears it and it amplifies everything. States that he can

hear better. He feels PT is a 10 as far as improving his

hearing. Pocket talker working well. He feels his hearing is

20 improved

11/9/2017

Issued headphones

3 + yes/sometimes Picked up BL HA from HTY

7/18/2017 5/24/2018

Inmate returned ear buds from pocket talker due to

a short in the ear buds and unable to hear with

them. Gave headphones in place of ear buds.

5/15/2018

21 Sent to outside hospital ER for medical issue

3/27/2019 Audicus results (Dr Manning)

Reviewed Audicus results with patient. Left ear with 2 readings > 35 dB. Refer for hearing aid.

6/9/2019

Moderate Impairment all levels ‐ HA ordered. Pending 22 approval

8/13/2018

HA Eval ‐ Dr. Kemen. IM not present.

Audicus Dia II for R Ear

8/31/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 78

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 339 of 985 - Page ID#: 3927

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

16 Chronic Care visit with provider 17 Audicus hearing online test 18 Annual H & P 19

Reviewed Audicus results with inmate and he does not qualify for hearing aid or bed shaker at this time.

7/15/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

(500; 1000; 2000; 4000 Hz) RIGHT EAR: No impairment; no

impairment; mild impairment; severe impairment. LEFT

EAR: No impairment; no impairment; mild impairment;

severe impairment

11/14/2018

Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr. Kemen. Patient is not present. Audicus online hearing test done on 11/6/18 was reviewed.

Is HOH but doesn't wear hearing aids Sent Left hearing Aid to HTY for repair

6/11/2018 CC visit w/provider 6/5/2018 HA Returned

20 Batteries

Batteries given for hearing device at this time

7/17/2018 Issued batteries

21 Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire Failed questionnaire

6/21/2019 CC/H & P

22 HA issued

R Hearing Aid issued to inmate. Educated on battery replacement, etc. Inmate verbalized understanding.

3/6/2019 PPD/Hearing screen

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 79

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 340 of 985 - Page ID#: 3928

AI

AJ

AK

AL

AM

1 Medical Visit 8 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 9 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Date

16 Failed questionnaire

7/17/2019

Annual Physical

TMs normal. Refer to audiology for Audicus hearing

test d/t failed whisper test

9/4/2019

17 Audicus Oro for Ear of Patient's choice (Right)

12/10/2018 Hearing aid issued

Issued 1 Audicus hearing aid, brush & booklet

4/25/2019

Has hearing aids but doesn't use them. "they don't

18 help"

7/24/2018

HA returned from HTY w/new tubing. They would

like for him to be scheduled to make a new mold for

his HA. Will refer to clinic for consult to be sent

19 back out to HTY. HA working properly at this time. 6/20/2018

H & P; has cerumen in ears; has hearing aids but doesn't use them

Debrox ordered x 3 days then irrigate w/warm water; encouraged to wear hearing aids

Provider visit; Inner molds of bilateral HA have worn Referred to audiology for bilateral HA molds ‐

out and needs replacements

replacements

8/9/2018 7/2/2018

2 AAA batteries returned from hearing device. 20 Issued 2 new AAA batteries

8/3/2018

Batteries

Failed whisper test; refer to Audicus (test taken on

21 2/12 recommended retest)

7/29/2019

Audicus Hearing Booth

3+ yes/ sometimes; Including YES to Currently has &

uses a hearing aid and YES to Is hearing aid working

okay; but also answered yes to has a HA that he no

22 longer uses

3/13/2019

Annual Physical

Inmate returned 2 dead AAA batteries in exchange

for 2 new ones for his hearing device

8/10/2018

Patient unable to complete test. Email sent to provider

7/29/2019

Failed whisper test & last Audicus test shows moderate hearing loss at all frequencies. Will repeat audiology

3/19/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 80

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 341 of 985 - Page ID#: 3929

AN

AO

AP

AQ

1 Medical Visit 10 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

11 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 11 ‐ Description

16 Audicus

Test Results inconclusive, refer to provider.

9/26/2019

Provider Review

3 + yes/sometimes answers; including Yes to Do you

Intake (back to KSR) Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening currently have and use a hearing aid? And Yes to Is the

17 Questionnaire

hearing aid working okay?

5/14/2019

Meeting with ADA Wathen

60 day eval w/provider; has some cerumen in 18 canals. Will lavage ears.

Debrox given x 5 days; will lavage ears; won't wear hearing aids

10/23/2018 60 day evaluation. He is HOH

19 Audicus hearing booth 20 Batteries issued

Mild/Moderate Impairment Bilaterally

9/5/2018

Inmate returned 2 AAA batteries in exchange for 2 new

ones for hearing device

8/17/2018

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire Batteries ‐ Inmate came to treatment time to exchange dead AAA batteries for his pocket talker. He has been getting them often. Asked him why, he said the batteries writer gave him last week were not working. He dropped them on the floor & they bounced, he said that was what they do when they are dead.

Per nursing staff, inmate could not complete the onsite

Review of audiogram results (APRN Lyons) Inmate Audicus testing. Refer to Hears To You for outside

21 not present.

testing.

8/15/2019

Outside medical trip to Hears To You

22 Retest ‐ Audicus Hearing Booth

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz, respectively. LEFT EAR: 50; 50; 45; 80; 80 dB. RIGHT EAR: 60; 65; 60; 80; 80 dB. 5/20/2019

Audicus results. Inmate had hearing aides and states he filed a lost and stolen report twice. (once with an officer who later got walked out)

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 81

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 342 of 985 - Page ID#: 3930

AR

AS

AT

AU

AV

1 Medical Visit 11 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

12 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 12 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 12 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 13 ‐ Date

Had a sudden onset of deafness in 2012. only 1 Audiogram

16 on file refer for ENT Consultation.

10/21/2019

Advanced ENT and Allergy

Recommended an MRI

10/31/2019

Inmate advises his hearing aid was broken at his previous institution when he had a stroke. Also sending to HOH 17 nurse Bentley to be issued a pocket talker today.

5/14/2019

Pocket talker issued to inmate in good working

order. He was educated on usage, care and battery

replacement.

6/18/2019

Has hearing aids but does not wear them because he says

18 they don't help

12/10/2018

60 day evaluation

Has hearing aids but can't understand what's being

said. So, he doesn't wear them.

2/14/2019

3 + yes/sometimes; YES to currently has & uses a HA and YES

19 to HA is working okay

9/18/2018

Got 2 new batteries & marked them with his last name & IM

number, & asked him to go get pocket talker & we would

put batteries in & make sure they work. He did, & they did

work. Will see if he brings back the same marked batteries

next week. He should not be going thru them that fast, & he

probably needs another hearing eval anyway, because rules

20 have changed.

8/23/2018

Provider consult for HTY

Provider entered consult to be sent to HTY for new

ear molds to be made

10/15/2018

F/U Hearing. Presents for hearing eval. Has not had recent hearing eval since new policy updates. Has been using pocket talker. Denies any new problems

Failed Audiometry screening, will refer for Audicus

testing

10/9/2018

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz. L: 45; 45; 45; 90; 100 dB. R:

21 30; 25; 20; 60; 75 dB.

8/16/2019

APRN Lyons contacted HOH nurse Bentley, and was told to educate inmate to put another lost/stolen report in and get 22 a copy, then take copy to sick call. Inmate aware of process. 6/5/2019

APRN Lyons review of HTY results. Inmate not present.
Theft report

Audicus Clara Right Ear recommended. Order

pending Dr Kemen's approval

8/19/2019

Patient was educated on getting a theft report for

his hearing aid. Patient stated that he did one with

an officer that got walked out. Patient was

educated to get another one and so we can start

the process for replacing his hearing aid. He

verbally understood.

9/23/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 82

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 343 of 985 - Page ID#: 3931

AW

AX

AY

AZ

1 Medical Visit 13 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 13 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 14

Date

Medical Visit 14 Description

16 Review of ENT Note 17 Discuss hearing aids.

Ordered MRI‐ scheduled 11/26

1/7/2020

Patient was called to HOH nurse regarding his

hearing aid. He stated that he had them last in the

shower at LSCC when he had his fall. Note stated

he showed them his hearing aid. Will forward this

on to DON for further contact with other facility.

ADA notified.

7/30/2019

Outside visit to have MRI. DON Coles contacted LSCC DON.

Chronic Care visit with provider. Has hearing aids

18 but doesn't wear them

Hearing loss refuses to use hearing aids

4/8/2019

Chronic care visit with provider. Asked where his hearing aids were. "they don't work."

19

Hearing Aid returned to inmate

9/28/2018 Annual Physical & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

20 Audicus hearing booth

Left Ear Moderate impairment at 4000 Hz. Otherwise, no hearing impairment bilaterally

2/19/2019 Audicus results

ADDENDUM BY DR KEMEN ON BOTTOM OF LYON'S AUDICUS CLARA RIGHT EAR ‐ ORDER APPROVED BY

21 8/16/19 NOTE

DR KEMEN

9/24/2019

Hearing aide issued

Finally received Theft Report. Reorder HA‐ report

22

found 11/13/19

12/16/2019 Visit to HOH Nurse

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 83

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 344 of 985 - Page ID#: 3932

BA

BB

BC

BD

BE

1 Medical Visit 14 Outcome

Medical Visit 15

Date

Medical Visit 15 Description

Medical Visit 15 Outcome

Medical Visit 16 Date

16 Had MRI. Waiting on results.

2/5/2020

States will look for hearing aid and will contact KSR

17 with results

8/15/2019

Outside ENT Appt.
LSCC notified KSR that they could not locate his hearing aid

Results to be reviewed by provider
HOH nurse called him down to her office, and he stated that he could hear better with the pocket talker that he has anyway, and would rather have that than a hearing aid. He signed a refusal for a hearing aid.

18 HOH noncompliant w/use of hearing aids

5/7/2019

3+ yes/ sometimes; YES to currently has & uses a HA

and YES to HA is working okay. In the process of

19 obtaining a new ear mold.

10/10/2018

Hearing aid

Unit nurse check with Mr. Allyn regarding his "broken" hearing aid. He stated that they aren't broken, they just 'aren't working out for him'

6/6/2019

Sending out Left HA to be repaired. Right HA works

well.

11/2/2018

Patient shows no hearing impairment which 20 requires hearing aid or further testing
Hearing aide issued to patient in good working order. Patient educated on usage, care, maintenance, exchange of batteries, and replacement of device. Instructed to wear it to all 21 appts.
Patient received replacemnet hearing aid and was educated on usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient verbalized understanding & demonstrated use. 22

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 84

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 345 of 985 - Page ID#: 3933

BF

BG

BH

BI

1 Medical Visit 16 Description

Medical Visit 16 Outcome

Medical Visit 17

Date

Medical Visit 17 Description

16 17 18 Hearing Screening Questionnaire 19 Meeting with HOH Nurse

Answered Yes to Currently has and uses a hearing aid and Yes to Is hearing aid working okay. But says he has nerve damage and hearing aids don't work. Has been noncompliant with wearing them for a long time

Left HA returned in working order.

9/6/2019

HOH Nurse.

20 21 22

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 85

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 346 of 985 - Page ID#: 3934

BJ

BK

BL

BM

BN

1 Medical Visit 17 Outcome

Medical Visit

18 Date

Medical Visit 18 Description

Medical Visit 18 Outcome

Medical Visit 19 Date

16

17

18

19 HA's not working. Turned in to HOH Nurse.

10/8/2019

20 21 22

HA Repaired and returned to inmate Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 86

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 347 of 985 - Page ID#: 3935

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

23 1/15/2010

Chronic Care Appt.

1/12/2017 12/3/2019 3+ yes/ sometimes

24 10/6/2017 25 10/4/2017

Intake Screening

10/6/2017 12/2/2019 3 + yes or sometimes

Intake Assessment (from RCC to WKCC) Hearing Screening Questionnaire

10/4/2017 12/2/2019 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)
A ‐ Audicus Clara for Right Ear D‐ HA recommended (declined hearing aid but wants ID)

26 11/27/2017

Hearing Screening Questionnaire

27 7/20/2007

Intake H&P

3 + yes/sometimes, including YES to has and uses a A ‐ Audicus Clara for Left Ear (also has Pocket 10/25/2017 1/28/2020 hearing aid and YES to hearing aid is working okay talker)

8/3/2017

7/15/2019

Answered YES to "Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid?" and YES to "Is the hearing aid working

okay?"

A ‐ Left ear (Has BAHA implant Right ear)

28 2/6/2019

Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

2/6/2019

7/15/2019

States he currently has a hearing aid but it isn't

working. Educated to bring HA to HOH nurse or sick

call to have device evaluated. He verbalized

understanding.

A ‐ Audicus Clara for Left Ear

29 2/1/2019 30 3/27/2011

Intake Assessment (to RCC) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

2/1/2019 3/27/2011

1/8/2020 5/21/2019

Answered YES to Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? And YES to Is the hearing aid working okay?

A ‐ Audicus Clara Left. A ‐ Right Ear ‐ U of L

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 87

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 348 of 985 - Page ID#: 3936

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

23 Yes

10/6/2010

bilateral hearing loss, amplification recommended

by audiology

1/27/2012

24 N/A 25

10/6/2017 Intake screening

answered 3+ yes / sometimes

10/4/2017

Intake Assessment (from RCC to WKCC) Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

10/30/2017 10/10/2017

HOH Whisper/Audiometer testing. Relates history of being a drummer for 40 years. Has trouble hearing in a crowded room and the intercom. He states some people sound muffled.

26 No

11/27/2017 Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

11/27/2017 Whisper Test

27 Unknown (UL) 1/1/2007

IM had cochlear implant in 2004

10/11/2016

UNKNOWN (CAME FROM 28 V.A.)

2/6/2019

Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes; including Yes to has and uses a hearing aid, and Yes to hearing aid is working okay 2/11/2019

Annual Physical & Chronic Care new intake to KSR. Has bilateral hearing aids, needing batteries. Wearing hearing aid in left ear, states needing battery for right hearing aid.

29 No

2/1/2019

Intake Assessment (To RCC) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

30 Unknown(UL) 9/23/2011

Issued pocket talker

2/12/2019 Intake H & P 10/10/2014

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 88

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 349 of 985 - Page ID#: 3937

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

23 hearing aid ordered for left ear

4/1/12

24 1 deficit L ear. 0 deficit R ear. Pocket talker ordered 1/4/2018

Intake Screening ‐ KSR

Audiometer testing bilateral ears failed. Will place

on list for pocket talker device to enhance hearing.

25 Inmate agreeable to plan of care

10/13/2017

Pocket talker issued

Received hearing aid

5/9/2012

3+ yes/sometimes

1/8/2018

1310 pocket talker with ear buds issued to inmate. Instructed

on use and informed of responsibility and care. Instructed he

was to return the pocket talker upon leaving this facility.

Inmate verbalized understanding.

11/1/2017

Failed whisper test Right ear, no cerumen, TM intact

26 pearly gray. Refer to audiology

1/26/2018

Outside Appt at Hears to You

IM had cochlear implant in 2004 and frequent ear

infections. Outer piece of cochlear was lost. IM had

multiple surgeries to R ear. IM was referred to ENT

27 Dr Welsch who referred him to audiology

2/23/2017

Inmate instructed on battery exchange procedure for hearing aids, he will pick up this week, he 28 understands.

2/15/2019

Hearing aid batteries given

29 TMs normal. Refer for audiogram. 30 Issued hearing aids

2/12/2019 Audiogram completed 12/2/2014

5/18/2018

BL HA recommended

3/22/2017

Patient was given size 10 Duracell batteries 1 pack. He was educated on exchange policy for batteries. ROI was done to release records on hearing aids with VA for repair @ PT request in front of ADA coordinator C. Wathen.

2/25/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000 Hz. RIGHT EAR: 20; 15; 20; 40 LEFT EAR: 15; 20; 25; 45

2/15/2019

sent hearing aid in to be fixed

12/10/2014

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 89

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 350 of 985 - Page ID#: 3938

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

23 24 whisper test 25

pocket talker given after hearing aid was broken failed ‐ refer to HTY Released from WKCC

2/17/2016

4/19/2018 5/16/2018

sick call
Intake Assessment (to RCC) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

26 Audiogram results ‐ Dr Richards

Reviewed patient's audiogram and both agreed to trial of pocket talker best option for patient at this point. Issued pocket talker to patient.

11/28/2018

H&P; Hearing screening questionnaire

27 OSMT

L HA issued.

4/26/2018

Patient hearing aids are his personal. He will have to be

referred for Audicus. Nurse Cassie Bentley requested his

audiology records from the VA. He states, "his hearing aids

are at the time of replacement for free from the VA."

Waiting for records. Patient signed DME form. He was

Pocket talker. Patient was given a pocket talker R/T educated on use and getting batteries. He verbalized

28 his hearing aid was dropped and in 2 pieces.

understanding

4/16/2019

Right ear minimal impairment; Left ear minimal impairment.

Patient does not meet the criteria for a prescription hearing

Hearing Aid Evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen. Patient not aid specified in the DOC hearing loss policy. PCP may order a

29 present. Audiogram done on 8/12/19 was reviewed pocket talker at his/her discretion

5/18/2019

30

Received hearing aid back

7/19/2016

HA not working properly
Provider visit. States hearing aid is broken and is using pocket talker to communicate. Hearing aid is out of warranty Foreign body to Right Ear/Drainage to Left Ear. States ear has been draining so much that he has to keep toilet paper in it. R ear has a piece of an ear plug in it, that's been there for a while. Tried to pull it out himself but couldn't

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 90

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 351 of 985 - Page ID#: 3939

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

23 new pocket talker given 24 Pt. Requests Hearing Aid. Scheduled for Eval. 25 Failed questionnaire
26 3 + yes/sometimes

7/6/2017

BL HA issued

5/24/2018

6/13/2018 6/29/2018

Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire
Intake Assessment (From RCC to EKCC) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

8/9/2018

No physical health complaints/injuries. Advised to

fill out a sick call form for non‐emergent health

issues

11/1/2018

11/28/2018

ECW encounter ‐ APRN Fortwengler to Dr. Kemen.

Please review hearing test. Was originally approved

for a HA but never received d/t changing vendors. Dr. Kemen answered: I will review the audiogram

Ok to order from new vendor or need Audicus

and order an appropriate Audicus HA for his Left

testing.

Ear. No need for retesting.

11/30/2018

27 HA given to nurse to send out for repair

5/3/2018 Sick call; HA

Schedule patient for hearing booth test and start

eval process for possible new hearing aids

7/11/2018

Refer to audiologists. Needing Audicus hearing exam, d/t 28 hearing aid that is broken and no longer under warranty 4/29/2019

R ear canal noted w/bright green foreign body. Unable to visualize ear drum. Instructed not to insert anything into ear canals. Avoid getting water into ears. Notified 29 provider via telephone

5/24/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT

EAR: 40; 45; 55; 80; 80 dB. RIGHT EAR: 40; 45; 55;

Audicus hearing booth

80; 80 dB. PTA: L‐55; R‐55.

5/6/2019

Left ear‐EAC plugged by toilet paper deep into the

EAC. Right ear‐Green colored piece of ear plug

Foreign body Right Ear/Drainage both ears. Patient deep into the canal. RX Neomycin‐Polymyxin‐

says he has a piece of ear plug in R ear, but has had Dexameth Suspension both ears x 7 days. Follow up

diminished hearing both ears.

if symptoms don't improve or they worsen

7/18/2019

30 sent hearing aid to be fixed

3/29/2017

R HA issued per U of L Audiology clinic

8/1/2017

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 91

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 352 of 985 - Page ID#: 3940

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

23 BL Hearing aids not working / Sent to HTY for repair

6/5/2018 HA returned from HTY

24 Hearing ‐ visit with provider

Hearing loss slow, progressive, can hear adequately in 1 to

1 conversation L ear. 'There is a hearing evaluation on

record'

10/19/2018

Intake Screening Assessment ‐ Hearing Questionnaire

Intake Assessment (From EKCC to KSR) ‐ Hearing 25 Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire (also stated he had pocket talker, but

it was taken away when he left EKCC)

12/1/2018

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

26 Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen

Audicus Clara for Left Ear approved

1/2/2019

27 annual hearing screening

hearing aids working properly at this time

9/4/2018 Referral

SEVERE HEARING IMPAIRMENT. Will order left hearing

Audicus results ‐ APRN Himler. Inmate not present. aid. Audicus Clara for Left Ear (pending Dr Kemen's

28 Review is for Audicus results.

approval)

5/7/2019

29 Intake Assessment (from BCC to KSR)

Answered: "Do you have hearing difficulties?" YES; "What type of hearing impairment do you have?" HOH; "What is the diagnosis?" HEARING LOSS; "What auxiliary aids do you have?" NONE

8/12/2019

Dr Kemen put Addendum on bottom of Himler's 5/6/19 HA order
Sick call

30 (repaired‐ no documentation)

HA returned to IM

4/3/2018 c/o R HA broken

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 92

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 353 of 985 - Page ID#: 3941

AI

AJ

AK

AL

AM

1 Medical Visit 8 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 9 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Date

HA returned to IM. Working properly at this time

23 with no complaints

9/10/2018

3 + yes/sometimes; states used to have pocket

talker but stated it didn't work & he lost it. Replaced

24 by ADA Coordinator.

10/30/2018

25 Failed questionnaire

6/13/2019

HA not working

HA sent to HTY for repair

9/12/2018

Whisper Test Whisper test. States he was a drummer for 40 yrs on the streets & didn't wear hearing protection. States that he especially has trouble hearing in a large group, like in chow.

Failed whisper test (no audioscope available). Refer

to audiology

11/13/2018

TMs clear, no cerumen impaction. Whisper test failed on Right. Schedule for Audicus testing

7/1/2019

26 Delivered hearing aid

1/24/2019

Intake hearing screening questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes; including YES to currently has and uses a hearing aid and YES to is hearing aid working okay.

2/5/2019

Dr Manning put in a new referral to do the Audicus

27 Hearing Booth

9/12/2018

Audicus Hearing Booth

28 Order for Audicus Clara for Left Ear Approved

6/12/2019

Hearing aid issued

Requesting HOH ID card. Will refer to ADA 29 Coordinator
30 sent to UL Audiology for repair

8/15/2019

Pocket talker

4/17/2018

Moderate/Severe Impairment

9/24/2018

L hearing aid was issued to inmate in good working

order. Patient was educated on usage, care,

maintenance, battery exchange, and replacement

of device, including co‐pay, and filling out theft/lost

report and taking to sick call. Patient was instructed

to wear hearing aid to all medical appts. Patient

verbalized understanding and demonstrated proper

use of device.

7/15/2019

HOH nurse issued pocket talker to inmate today
HA returned from U of L Audiology and working properly

8/26/2019 5/2/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 93

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 354 of 985 - Page ID#: 3942

AN

AO

AP

AQ

1 Medical Visit 10 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

11 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 11 ‐ Description

Pocket talker issued to inmate to use while HA being

23

repaired.

9/17/2018

HA returned

24 Hearing Booth 25 Audicus hearing booth

Moderate/Severe impairment bilaterally

12/4/2018

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz, respectively. LEFT EAR:

35; 35; 40; 55; 25 dB. RIGHT EAR: 30; 40; 40; 65; 35 dB.

PTA: L‐41; R‐44

7/12/2019

Annual physical & chronic care; Audicus results
F/U Audicus results (APRN Himler). Mild hearing loss bilaterally. He does want hearing aid.

26 Meeting w/ADA Wathen 27 Medical Director Review

Inmate noted that he needs new headphones for pocket

talker + batteries. Advised how to get replacement

batteries, and ADA Wathen will check on getting

replacement headphones

2/6/2019

Pocket talker

Medical Director is requesting a BAHA implant to be

discussed at the TLOC meeting in October as an Audicus

hearing aid will not work.

11/30/2018

Audiology referral by provider

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire. He stated Educated him to bring HA to HOH nurse or sick call to

28 that he has a hearing aid, but it isn't working.

have device evaluated. He verbalized understanding. 7/29/2019

Reported to the ADA Coordinator his HA lost after trip to the hospital

29 Whisper Test 30 Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed Whisper Test. Referred to Audiology.
Answered 3 + yes/sometimes, including YES to he currently has & uses a hearing aid.

8/30/2019

Audicus

5/17/2018

Provider visit

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 94

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 355 of 985 - Page ID#: 3943

AR

AS

AT

AU

AV

1 Medical Visit 11 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

12 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 12 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 12 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 13 ‐ Date

HA returned to IM in good working order and pocket talker 23 given back to HOH nurse
Reviewed Audicus results w/inmate. L ear Moderate impairment at 500; 1000 w/severe at 2000; 4000 Hz. R ear Moderate impairment 500 ‐ 2000 and severe at 4000 Hz. 24 Refer to medical director for approval of hearing aid

12/11/2018 12/6/2018

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire Dr. Kemen ‐ Hearing aid evaluation

3 + yes/sometimes Audicus Clara for Right Ear approved

Mild hearing impairment. Left Audicus Clara ordered. 25 Pending approval of medical director

7/15/2019

*ADDENDUM ON 7/12/19 NOTE*

Order approved for Left Audicus Clara

1/4/2019 1/4/2019 7/30/2019

Pocket talker issued at previous facility. He needed new ear

phones. Patient was educated on use & demonstrated use.

Educated on battery pickup in dorm 12. Patient verbalized

26 understanding.

2/25/2019

Inmate not present. Chart review for BAHA cochlear device

f/u. BAHA device was ordered for inmate & has arrived to

KSR. Now inmate needing f/u w/Audiology doing cochlear

devices. Refer to U of L Audiology for BAHA device to right

27 ear, needing evaluation

1/28/2019

Baha fitting ‐ UL Audiology

Told to file theft/lost report and get a copy to the ADA 28 Coordinator or medical.

8/14/2019

Request for new hearing aid

Hearing aids found at LLCC and being sent to KSR Patient seen today for BAHA fitting. Went live, patient reported good sound quality. Patient was counseled on device use, cleaning & storage, wear time & realistic expectations. He was also counseled on abutment site hygiene. Remote was verified to be functioning.

2/27/2019 7/15/2019

Patient states hearing aid was stolen. Theft report

filled out and scanned into Audicus folder. ADA

Wathen & HOH nurse Bentley notified (Theft report

decided to be not complete‐ no investigation or

officer signature.)

12/16/2019

29 PTA L:55 R:58

10/14/2019

Inmate currently has hearing aid for right ear & is satisfied

30 with aid.

5/21/2019

Audicus Review Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Dr. Kemen approved Audicus Clara Left Answered YES to Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? And YES to Is the hearing aid working okay?

11/6/2019 10/29/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 95

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 356 of 985 - Page ID#: 3944

AW

AX

AY

AZ

1 Medical Visit 13 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 13 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 14

Date

Medical Visit 14 Description

23 24 Hearing aid issued 25

Hearing aid needs repair

2/1/2019

Right hearing aid issued. Educated on use and battery replacement. Inmate voices understanding.

Signed refusal for Hearing Aid.

8/1/2019

HOH Visit

26 Provider visit 27 PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire
28 HOH Nurse Visit 29 HOH Nurse Visit 30 Sick Call

Does not have hearing aids, due to over the ear lost

due to having O2 over the ear oxygen

3/13/2019

Hearing aid issue. Patient refused his hearing aid at another facility & stated it did not stay in with O2 lines.

Answered YES to "Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid?" and YES to "Is the hearing aid working

okay?"

7/22/2019

Whisper test

Replacement HA issued to IM. Patient received hearing aid and was educated on usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient verbalized understanding & demonstrated use.

Hearing Aid issued. Educated on use and care.

Hearing Aid turned in for repair.

12/13/2019 HOH Nurse Visit

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 96

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 357 of 985 - Page ID#: 3945

BA

BB

BC

BD

BE

1 Medical Visit 14 Outcome

Medical Visit 15

Date

Medical Visit 15 Description

HA will be shipped to HTY on 2/11/19. They are

leaving on vacation and do not want them to be lost

23 in the mail. HA still under warranty.

3/1/19

Hearing aid returned

Medical Visit 16

Medical Visit 15 Outcome

Date

Patient's hearing aids came in from HTY after repair

request. Hearing aids and patient placed in ears

and stated, "its works" Patient was educated on

care & responsibilities again. He verbally

understood.

4/22/2019

24
Hearing Aid arrived after IM signed refusal. He was called in to make sure he still wanted to decline. He 25 is declining at this time. Hearing aid was placed in ear with hub around outside of ear, against his head. The O2 line was placed against the hearing hub. Hearing aid stayed in and patient stated that he did not have ear cushions before & now it will stay. He stated he can hear with the hearing aid. Inmate was instructed on usage, care, and battery replacement. Inmate 26 verbalized understanding.
Patient already has a BAHA implanted hearing device. States that it works well and "nothing will ever be perfect" and he feels he can hear 27 adequately with it. Passed whisper test today.

28

29
HA returned to inmate in working order. But the battery door was not replace due to expense 30

12/19/2019

HOH Nurse Visit

Issued new Hearing Aid to replace broken one.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 97

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 358 of 985 - Page ID#: 3946

BF

BG

BH

BI

1 Medical Visit 16 Description

Medical Visit 16 Outcome

Medical Visit 17

Date

Medical Visit 17 Description

23

Patient was given a pocket talker

6/3/2019

Return pocket talker

24

25

26 27

28 29 30
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 98

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 359 of 985 - Page ID#: 3947

BJ

BK

BL

BM

BN

1 Medical Visit 17 Outcome

Medical Visit

18 Date

Medical Visit 18 Description

Patient came to DM assessment and turned in his pocket talker. He received his hearing aid from the property room and states "it works". No concerns 23 noted.

Medical Visit 18 Outcome

Medical Visit 19 Date

24

25

26 27

28 29 30
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 99

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 360 of 985 - Page ID#: 3948

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

31 4/12/2016

Intake Exam

1/26/2017 6/5/2019

Answered YES to Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid? And YES to Is the hearing aid working

okay?

A ‐ Audicus Dia II for Right Ear

32 3/3/2016 33 3/5/2018

C/O in Sick Call

3 + yes/sometimes; Yes to currently has & uses a HA

1/26/2017 11/4/2019 and Yes to HA is working ok

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)

Provider visit ‐ IM states hearing getting worse

1/2/18 (No

Failed questionnaire, and is already in the process

to all)

1/16/2020 of obtaining hearing aid

A ‐ Audicus Clara for Left Ear

34 9/28/2017 35 8/10/2017

Annual Hearing Screen Annual Hearing Screen

36 12/19/2017

Intake hearing screen

9/28/2017 9/2/2019 8/10/2017 8/2/2019

3+ yes/ sometimes

A‐ Audicus Clara Left ear

Audicus exam ‐ Severe impairment all frequencies,

bilaterally

A ‐ Audicus Oro for Right Ear

1/29/2017 4/3/2019

Answered YES to Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid? And YES to Is the hearing aid working

ok?

A ‐ Right Oro Audicus Hearing Aid

37 2/2/2019 38 2/17/2017

Sick call; "I need to have my hearing checked." Had

previously answered No to all questions on hearing

screen.

2/2/2019

11/25/2019 Failed questionnaire

A‐ Audicus Clara Left

Annual Hearing Screening

2/17/2017 2/7/2020

3+ yes/ sometimes; including YES to Currently has &

uses a hearing aid and YES to Is the hearing aid

working ok?

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 100

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 361 of 985 - Page ID#: 3949

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

31 No

4/12/2016

32 Yes 33 No

3/14/2016

3/5/2018

Provider visit

Bilateral hearing aids upon admission

4/12/2016

recommended amplification

4/20/2016

Inmate states hearing is getting worse. Needs hearing test.

5/4/2018 Hearing Screening

34 No 35 No

9/28/2017 Annual Hearing Screen 8/10/2017 Annual Hearing Screening

3+ yes/ sometimes 3 + yes / sometimes

11/15/2017 Whisper Test 8/11/2017 Provider assessment

36 No
37 N/A 38 Yes

1/17/2018 2/2/2019

Annual Hearing screen

Answered 3+

1/30/2018 Provider Assessment

Bilateral ears assessed for increased cerumen. R

ear canal noted with scant wax, effusion noted. L

ear noted with moderate amt of wax, TM noted

intact, opaque. Bilateral ears cleaned, completed

Sick call; "I need to have my hearing checked." Had another hearing screening questionnaire.

previously answered No to all questions on hearing Answered 3 + yes or sometimes. Educated to RTC in

screen.

5 days for f/u on ears, possible referral to provider 2/11/2019

New Intake; Whisper Test

2/17/2017 Intake screening assessment

3 + yes/sometimes

4/24/2017 Whisper Test

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 101

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 362 of 985 - Page ID#: 3950

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

31 2nd Consult for Audiologist 32 Issued amplifier 33 3 + yes/sometimes

6/6/2018

annual hearing exam

6/26/2017

5/7/2018

Whisper test

34 Referred to Hears to You 35 Failed Whisper test / referred to audiology

12/19/2017 Hears to You

7/2/2018

Hearing Booth

36 Ears impacted / return after ear flush

3/5/2018

Bilateral Ear Flush

Failed portable audiometry, refer to Audicus 37 hearing booth

2/28/2019 Audicus hearing booth

38 Failed L ear; passed R ear; refer to audiology

5/22/2017

3+ yes/ sometimes / refer to clinic BL HA issued Failed Whisper Test ‐ Refer to hearing booth

6/20/2018 8/23/2017 7/17/2018

Extremely mild Hearing Loss. No HA's recommended. mild/moderate hearing impairment

9/24/2018 7/13/2018

Ears clear and will refer back to clinic

Scheduled 6/28/2018

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 20;

20; 15; 35; 30 dB. RIGHT EAR: 15; 25; 20; 35; 45 dB.

3/6/2019

HTY for eval‐ HA recommended

6/5/2017

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 102

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 363 of 985 - Page ID#: 3951

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

31 Provider annual H&P 32 33 Provider consult

Referred to Audiologist

7/2/2018

Hearing Exam

seen by HTY‐ further education given on HA‐ ground down hearing aid for comfort. Notify medical for further issues. 6/18/2018

BL Hearing aids not working properly / Sending to HTY

Refer to Audiologist for on site eval

8/30/2018

Hearing Exam Scheduled

34 Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

35 Review Audicus results. Inmate not present

HA Recommended. Waiting approval.

36 hearing exam

was in hospital

11/13/2018

Hearing Booth

8/7/2018

Annual hearing screening

7/24/2018

Hearing Booth

37 Audicus results 38

Inmate not present. No hearing aid indicated by Audicus

results.

3/13/2019

Inmate to medical for f/u Audicus hearing results

HA pick up from HTY

8/21/2018

HA sent out to HTY for repair

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 103

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 364 of 985 - Page ID#: 3952

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

31 Mild Impairment

7/12/2018 Provider review of results

Mild Impairment bilaterally at 2000hz; otherwise

normal

8/20/2018

32 33 Mild hearing impairment

6/27/2018

Hearing Aids returned repaired and working properly

9/11/2018 Provider visit (Haun)

Left ear moderate impairment at 4000 Hz; Right ear severe

34 impairment at 4000 Hz

12/27/2018 F/U Audicus results

35 3 + yes/sometimes;

8/9/2018 HA Rejected; pocket talker will be issued

6/27/2018

Audicus hearing test says mild hearing impairment.

Will f/u

11/28/2018

APRN Himler reviewed results w/inmate; doesn't

qualify for hearing aid at this time. Advised inmate

to f/u if he feels hearing loss is worsening and we

can retest hearing. Inmate understands. Does not

require pocket talker at this time as his only c/o

hearing impairment is d/t background noise while

watching TV

9/2/2019

Tina Lyons sent IM letter informing him pocket

talker will be ordered, he does not meet

requirements for HA

10/10/2018

36 Severe Impairment

8/16/2018 F/U Audicus Results w/APRN Lyons

HA ordered. Awaiting approval.

8/21/2018

Reviewed Audicus hearing results. No hearing aid 37 indicated at this time. He understands.

11/25/2019 TB/Hearing Screening

38 Awaiting HA return

9/10/2018 HA return

Failed Screening/Signed Refusal for testing

11/25/2019

Returned repaired HA back to inmate in working

order

10/19/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 104

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 365 of 985 - Page ID#: 3953

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

31 Dr. Kemen review of results

HA order rejected from F/U OSMT, referred to Audicus 8/21/2018 Hearing Aid Evaluation / Dr. Kemen

after leaving my office inmate dropped his left HA 32 and it broke. Sending back to HTY

7/9/2018 HA returned from HTY

33 Whisper test

Failed whisper test. Refer to audiology

12/27/2018 Audicus hearing booth

34 Hearing Questionnaire 35 Audicus ‐ Retesting under new decibel level

Answered 3+ Severe Impairment at all frequencies bilaterally

9/4/2019 Whisper Test 10/24/2018 Dr Kemen Hearing aid evaluation

36 HA Eval by Dr. Kemen

Audicus Oro R Ear Approved

9/5/2018 Issued Audicus Right Oro Hearing Aid

37 Audicus 38 Bilateral HA not working properly

R‐ 80 L‐75

12/20/2019 Provider Review

HOH nurse changed batteries & wax rings and inmate

stated HA were still not working properly. Will send out to

HTY for repair.

10/29/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 105

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 366 of 985 - Page ID#: 3954

AI

AJ

AK

AL

AM

1 Medical Visit 8 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 9 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Date

31 Approved inmate for Audicus Dia II for right ear 9/4/2018

Issued Audicus Right HA

Hearing aids returned from HTY in working order

32 and issued back to inmate

7/12/2018

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT

EAR: 60; 60; 70; 80; 80 dB. RIGHT EAR: 65; 70; 75;

33 80; 80 dB.

1/9/2019

HA returned from HTY PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

I/M states he can hear well out of Right ear

6/5/2019

HA returned to IM and IM states it is working properly

7/23/2018

Failed questionnaire (is already in the process of

obtaining hearing aids)

1/17/2019

34 Return 9/19/19 following ear flush.

9/19/2019

Whisper Test

35 Audicus Oro for Ear of patient's choice approved 11/1/2018

Audicus Results w/provider

Failed Whisper Test refer to Audicus

9/23/2019

Hearing aid already approved. Inmate chooses right

ear

11/8/2018

Hearing Aid working properly at this time, F/U as

36 needed

4/3/2019

Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Answered YES to Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid? And YES to Is the hearing aid working

ok?

5/9/2019

37 Retest

1/6/2020

HA's returned from HTY and returned to inmate. Inmate states they are working properly at this 38 time.

10/31/2018

Audicus re‐test Hearing aids not working.

L‐ 68 R‐75 Will send out for repair

1/22/2020 11/3/2018
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 106

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 367 of 985 - Page ID#: 3955

AN

AO

AP

AQ

1 Medical Visit 10 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Outcome

31 Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Answered YES to Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? And YES to Is the hearing aid working okay?

Medical Visit 11 ‐ Date
6/26/2019

Medical Visit 11 ‐ Description Annual Physical. Not wearing hearing aid again today. Important to note that he has not worn hearing aid to one appt since he was issued HA. Today he is agitated & states "I lost my job because my hearing aid won't work." He has not had HA assessed. He has not placed a s/c to address HA not working. I remind him that he never wore HA to previous appts & he states he wants to start wearing it now.

32 HA not working properly. 33 Audicus results ‐ Mike Haun ARNP

HA sent out to HTY 7/24/18 for repair

7/30/2018

Provider visit

Inmate is eligible for hearing aid per Audicus. Will refer

to med director Dr. Kemen

1/21/2019

Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen

34 Audicus 35 Meeting with HOH Nurse
36 Sick call ‐ malfunctioning hearing aid

PTA: L‐41 R‐46

11/5/2019

R Hearing Aid issued to inmate. Educated on battery replacement, etc. Inmate verbalized understanding. 11/9/2018

Provider Review Chronic Care visit with provider

Inmate's hearing aid cleaned and preventative

maintenance performed. This did not correct the issue.

TMs clear and not bulging. Referral for hearing aid

6/26/2019

Hearing follow up

37 HOH Nurse Visit 38

Issued Pocket Talker to use until his Hearing Aid comes

in.

2/5/2020

Provider Review

Consult placed to have IM go out to HTY to have HA adjusted

11/29/2018

Appt at Hears to You

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 107

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 368 of 985 - Page ID#: 3956

AR

AS

AT

AU

AV

1 Medical Visit 11 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

12 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 12 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 12 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 13 ‐ Date

TMs normal. Refer to Audicus for failed whisper test. Has

31 hearing aid but feels hearing is worse now.

7/22/2019

Audicus hearing booth

Inmate's HA are under warranty & he needs to go out to 32 HTY for re‐fitting & adjustment. Will make referral.

8/28/2018

HTY appt

33 Audicus Clara for Left Ear approved

2/15/2019

Hearing aid issued

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz. LEFT EAR: 50; 55; 70; 80; 80 dB. RIGHT EAR: 40; 50; 65; 80; 80 dB. PTA: L‐64; R‐59

8/9/2019

HA were repaired & returned to inmate

11/5/2018

Hearing aid issued to inmate & he was educated on

use and care of hearing aid, battery exchange,

loss/theft, etc. Inmate verbally understood &

demonstrated use

Provider ordered Audicus Clara for left ear and Dr. Kemen

34 approved.

11/5/2019

Has his hearing aide to right ear and is working well. Inmate

denies difficulty with hearing now that he has a hearing

35 aide.

5/31/2019

Patient's hearing aid doesn't work after putting in a new battery. I hear squealing and then it goes dead. Will send 36 out to Audicus for repair.

6/26/2019

HOH Nurse Visit

Issued hearing aid. Education

Chronic Care visit with provider. C/O ear wax, and states he would like some ear drops
ADDENDUM to bottom of note

RX for Debrox ears drops given After troubleshooting with Audicus rep, we will not be sending HA out for repair. Hearing device works. Calling inmate down to pick up. Educated him on changing out the wax guard. HA given back to patient and he states that it works.

37 Audicus Clara Left Hearing Aid ordered and approved.

2/21/2020

HOH Nurse Visit

Inmate returned from HTY where they reprogrammed both

38 hearing aids. Inmate is very happy with programming.

2/1/2019

PPD/Hearing screen

Issued Left Hearing Aid. Educated on use and care.

3+ yes/ sometimes; including YES to Currently has &

uses a hearing aid and YES to Is the hearing aid

working ok?

2/5/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 108

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 369 of 985 - Page ID#: 3957

AW

AX

AY

AZ

Medical Visit 14

1 Medical Visit 13 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 13 ‐ Outcome

Date

Medical Visit 14 Description

Reviewed Audicus results w/inmate. Shows severe

impairment for bil ears, R ear slightly better hearing

than L. He has a R hearing aid and is instructed to

take it to HOH nurse now for eval. Nurse cleaned

cerumen from hearing aid, changed batteries, and

Audicus results. States he is not wearing his HA now HA is working well. Inmate is reminded it's his

today d/t "batteries are dead and I did not get new responsibility to schedule maintenance for HA,

ones on Friday because I had to be somewhere else report issues and change batteries. He

31 at that time."

understands.

32 Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes; Yes to currently has & uses a HA

and Yes to HA is working ok

3/20/2019

33

34 35
36

37 38 Chronic Care; H & P with provider

Was not currently wearing hearing aids; told to go get them; brought them in & changed the batteries per nursing. Inmate reports he can hear well with working hearing aids.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 109

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 370 of 985 - Page ID#: 3958

BA

BB

BC

BD

BE

1 Medical Visit 14 Outcome

Medical Visit 15

Date

Medical Visit 15 Description

Medical Visit 15 Outcome

Medical Visit 16 Date

31

Patient went to sick call & turned in his hearing aid.

States "tube keeps falling out of base." Hearing aid

is in 2 pieces & will not stay in base. Service request

32 form filled out & sent to Audicus for repair.

6/7/2019

Hearing aid found

33

34 35
36

37 38

Patient's repaired hearing aid was found and given to patient. Patient placed in ear and states he can 'hear better now'. Patient was educated on sick call policy for repairs. 1 pack battery exchange was given today. No further concerns noted.
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 110

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 371 of 985 - Page ID#: 3959

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

39 3/9/2017

Intake Screening

3/9/2017 3/6/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

D ‐ Refused hearing aids due to hurt his ear. Given pocket talker.

40 7/12/2017

Intake Assessment (from RCC to BCC)

41 4/4/2018

annual hearing screening

42 9/5/2018

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

7/12/2017 1/14/2020 2/2/2017 4/2/2019 3+ yes / Sometimes 9/5/2018 9/3/2019 Failed Whisper Test‐ refer to audiology.

A ‐ Audicus Oro Right Ear
D ‐ Refused hearing aid. Pocket talker given.
D ‐ Bilateral MILD impairment. Does not qualify for a hearing aid at this time

43 4/4/2018 44 4/18/2018

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

4/4/2018

4/2/2019

3 + yes/sometimes; including Yes to Currently has &

uses a hearing aid

A ‐ Audicus Dia II Left Ear

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

4/18/2018 4/2/2019 3+ yes/ sometimes

A‐ Audicus Clara Left

45 6/20/2018

Annual Hearing Screening Questionnaire

6/20/2018 6/11/2019 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ Audicus Clara Left Ear

46 7/11/2018 47 10/27/2017
48 10/11/2017

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire H&P Intake

7/11/2018

7/15/2019

Answered YES to "Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid?" and YES to "Is the hearing aid working

okay?"

A ‐ Audicus Dia II for Left Ear

10/27/2018 8/2/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)

Hearing screening questionnaire

10/11/2017 9/4/2019 Answered 3 + yes/sometimes

A ‐ Audicus Dia II for Left Ear

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 111

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 372 of 985 - Page ID#: 3960

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

39 Yes

7/6/2017

Admitted with BL hearing aids

3/2/2018 PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

40 No 41 N/A

7/12/2017

Intake Assessment (from RCC to BCC) Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

4/4/2018

Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire Failed questionnaire

7/27/17

H & P; Hearing Screening Questionnaire

7/25/2018 Whisper test

42 N/A

9/5/2018

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

9/17/2018 Annual Physical & chronic Care; Whisper test

43 No 44 N/A

4/4/2018

Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire 3 + yes/sometimes

4/18/2018 Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Answered 3+

45 No

6/20/2018 Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

4/20/2018 Annual Physical & chronic care /whisper test 7/26/2018 Whisper Test
7/12/2018 Whisper Test

46 No 47 Yes
48 N/A

7/11/2018 10/27/2017

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire H&P Intake

10/11/2017 Hearing screening questionnaire

Answered 3+ 3 + yes/sometimes; reports everything sounds muffled
3 + yes/sometimes

7/30/18 11/2/2017

Whisper Test Encounter for exam of ears & hearing w/o abnormal findings

Provider visit ‐ answered 3 + yes/sometimes on 11/16/2017 hearing screen; whisper test

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 112

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 373 of 985 - Page ID#: 3961

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

3 + yes/sometimes; YES to he has & uses a HA and

39 YES to hearing aid is working okay

6/13/2018

Failed questionnaire. Unable to hear provider speaking in normal tone, turning R ear towards speaker, asking to repeat several times. Failed whisper test bilaterally. Refer to Audiology for 40 hearing eval

9/15/2017

HAs Broken Outside appt at UK ENT

Sent for repair.

6/28/2018

Moderate sloping to severe SNHL bilaterally. PTA: R ‐ 57; L ‐

57

10/19/2017

Passed tuning fork bilaterally; failed whisper test

41 bilaterally. Will refer to audiology

8/30/2018

Conducted portable audiometry testing today. Inmate without haring impairment. Passed exam. He understands to f/u if he feels hearing is 42 worsening

2/5/2019

HEARING EXAM

No hearing impairment

Whisper test; to medical for whisper test d/t c/o

difficulty hearing per hearing questionnaire. Then

at appt he states he does not know why he needs to

have hearing checked as he feels he does not have

trouble hearing

Failed portable hearing test; refer to audiology

9/24/2018 3/1/2019

Inmate unable to pass Weber or Rinne test. Able to

converse without difficulty. Will refer for further

43 workup.

6/18/2018

Failed Whisper Test; passed tuning fork. Referred to

44 audiology.

9/4/2018

Audicus hearing booth Audicus hearing booth

Left Ear mild impairment at 2000 Hz; otherwise no sign impairment

10/10/2018

Bilateral Mild Hearing Impairment

9/20/2018

45 Failed Whisper; will schedule for audiology

7/16/2018 Hearing Exam

No sign of impairment

10/9/2018

Passed tuning fork; failed whisper L ear. Refer to

46 audiology.

9/4/2018

47 Will arrange for hearing booth

1/3/2018

Failed whisper; decreased Rinne & Weber; Refer to

48 HTY for evaluation

2/17/2018

Audicus hearing booth OSMT ‐ Hearing Evaluation
Appt at HTY

No hearing impairment HA recommended
No new orders

9/13/2018 1/9/2018 8/15/2018
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 113

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 374 of 985 - Page ID#: 3962

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

39 40 Outside appt at UK ENT 41 Provider visit 42 Audicus hearing booth

HAs returned

10/17/2018

Intake Screening Assessment (Returned from SEG) ‐ Hearing Questionnaire

Repeat testing. PTA: R‐60; L‐65. Decided on 2 Phonak Bolero B50‐5P in P4 with emtech ear molds. Ear mold impressions taken without incident bilaterally. Will order clear half shell ear molds from emtech.

12/11/2017

F/U Physical therapy/BP. Recommended transfer to facility for more intensive PT due to chronic pain, gout. States willing to refuse hearing aids to transfer at this point.

Results from Audicus study reviewed with inmate, inmate

aware

10/9/2018

Audicus hearing booth ‐ Retest

Patient may or may not have completed. Patient stated he

pushed buttons and then the screen was gone. Waiting to

see if we get results from test.

3/6/2019

Audicus results; provider visit

43 Retested w/new standards Audicus hearing booth 44 Provider visit; review of Audicus results

LEFT EAR: Mild impairment at 500 & 2000 Hz; Moderate at 4000 Hz. RIGHT EAR: Moderate impairment at 5000; 1000; 2000 & 4000 Hz. Reviewed Audicus results with inmate. Mild hearing impairment noted. Inmate does not want hearing aids at this point.

11/13/2018 4/2/2019

Review Audicus results PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

45 Audicus Retesting under new decibel level

Left ear Moderate at 4000Hz; R ear Mild at 4000Hz

11/1/2018

Audicus results with provider

46 Provider visit ‐ Audicus results 47 Provider visit ‐ S/P Outside Hearing Eval. ‐
48 Provider (Lyons) review of HTY results

No hearing impairment for all L & R frequencies. No further

interventions needed

10/10/2018

HA recommended. Preauth for HA submitted.

4/18/2018

Retested ‐ Audicus hearing booth HA Batteries

Recommend R HA

8/16/2018

Dr. Kemen ‐ HA Evaluation

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 114

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 375 of 985 - Page ID#: 3963

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

3 + yes/sometimes; Inmate states he lost his hearing aids.

Will call LLCC to ask about lost HA, and also schedule for

39 Whisper Test

10/23/2018

Whisper Test

Inmate arrived 45 mins late for appt then refused to

go ahead & be seen. Wouldn't sign refusal

1/16/2019

Discussed risks and benefits. Patient signed refusal for 40 hearing aids at this time.

12/20/2017

LEFT EAR: Moderate impairment at 4000 Hz; RIGHT EAR:

Moderate impairment at 2000 Hz and Severe impairment

41 at 4000 Hz

10/24/2018

Intake Assessment (from BCC to LSCC) Hearing Screening Questionnaire
Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen. Patient is not present. Audicus online hearing test done on 10/9/18 was reviewed.

Failed questionnaire

1/4/2018

Right ear moderate; Left ear no significant

impairment. Patient does not meet the DOC policy

criteria for a prescription hearing aid. PCP may

order a pocket talker at his/her discretion.

4/2/2019

Did not complete the Audicus test d/t he "stopped listening to the directions about halfway through." He agrees to attempt test again & pay attention to 42 instructions.

4/1/2019

Audicus hearing booth

Test showed inconsistent results during testing. The user should retake the hearing test.

4/4/2019

Patient here to review Audicus results. Refer to medical

43 director for eval of hearing aids.

11/21/2018 Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen

Audicus Dia II for LEFT Ear approved

44 3 + yes/sometimes

7/23/2019

Sick call; needs hearing eval d/t decreased hearing R ear worse than L; hearing screening questionnaire Failed questionnaire

12/7/2018 8/16/2019

Patient does not qualify for a hearing aid at this time. Advised that if hearing seems to be worsening, to let us 45 know

6/11/2019

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

6/20/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: Mild;

Mild; None; None. RIGHT EAR: Severe; Severe; Moderate;

46 Mild.

11/13/2018

Patient here today to review Audicus results with provider

Left ear: 500 & 1000 Hz mild impairment. Right ear:

500, 1000 Hz severe; 2000 Hz moderate and 4000

Hz mild impairment. Refer to medical director for

eval of hearing aides

11/21/2018

47 IM issued 2 batteries & placed in HA Both ears minimal to moderate hearing loss; does not meet criteria for HA. PCP may order a pocket talker at
48 his/her discretion

5/9/2018 9/11/2018

HA Batteries Given Audicus Hearing Booth testing

2 new HA batteries issued & placed in HA No hearing impairment

5/17/2018 9/13/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 115

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 376 of 985 - Page ID#: 3964

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description Whisper test. States he already has hearing aids that he chooses not to wear d/t "hurt ear and
39 squeal."
40 New intake visit with provider; Hearing Screen.

Medical Visit

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

Inmate does NOT need whisper test today. He has DX

sensorineural hearing loss and has been prescribed

hearing aids that he chooses not to wear. Please schedule

to have hearing aid fixed. Inmate states he does not wear

it d/t "it's broken."

1/25/2019 Interview with ADA Coordinator

Patient says he is a turnaround transfer here for PT then

will go back. Has already been to audiology and had

hearing molds completed. Is supposed to go back go get

them but was shipped here. Thinks he will get them when

he goes back to BCC. (*Please note* at this point, inmate

Intake Assessment (from LSCC to BCC) Hearing

Whitlock had signed a refusal for his hearing aids)

5/28/2018 Screening Questionnaire

41 Annual Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

4/23/2019 Whisper test

Hearing referral. Inmate not present. Note from nurse: inmate having difficulty comprehending 42 instructions for Audicus testing. (APRN Himler)
43 Hearing aid issued

Will refer to Hears To You for outside testing

4/16/2019

Issued Left Audicus Dia II Hearing Aid to inmate. Showed

inmate basic functions/battery placement/volume control.

Issued a pack of batteries, cleaning brush & extra ear buds.

Demonstrated how to wear HA. Inmate verbalized

understanding. F/U with sick call as needed or if issues

with HA come to HOH clinic.

2/24/2019

To medical for whisper test. States hearing worse in

44 right ear than left.

Failed whisper test. Refer for Audicus hearing exam.

8/29/2019

Hears To You referral (APRN Himler). Inmate not present.
HOH Nurse Visit Auduicus

Did not meet requirements for hearing aides in the

45 past, due for testing

Refer for Audicus onsite exam

7/8/2019 Audicus hearing booth

Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen. Patient not 46 present 47 HA Batteries
48 Pocket talker

Audicus online hearing test done on 10/10/18 was reviewed. R: Severe; Severe; Moderate; Mild. L: Mild; Mild; None; None. Audicus Dia II for Left Ear approved

12/7/2018

Issued Left Audicus Dia II Hearing Aid

2 new HA batteries issued & placed in HA

6/12/2018

Issued pocket talker to inmate. Educated on use & battery

replacement & exchange. Inmate demonstrated

understanding. F/U as needed

10/9/2018

H&P Intake ‐ Intrasystem ‐ 1 Institution to another Audicus Retesting

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 116

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 377 of 985 - Page ID#: 3965

AI

AJ

AK

AL

AM

1 Medical Visit 8 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 9 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Date

Inmate showed up to interview with broken hearing

39 aids. Nurse Bentley will send out for repair.

2/1/2019

Failed questionnaire. Patient is HOH and states that

he has already been seen at UK and had molds

made for hearing aids. Audiology appt requested

40 on patient's behalf for follow up.

6/5/2018

41 Failed whisper test. Refer to audiology

4/29/2019

Needing Hears to You eval d/t cannot complete 42 Audicus testing

4/24/2019

Inmate complains that his hearing aid is not working

properly, that it has static and a hollow sound.

Inmate educated that a note will be sent to HOH

43 nurse Bentley for f/u.

3/1/2019

HA will be shipped to HTY on 2/11/19. They are

leaving on vacation and do not want them to be lost

in the mail. HA still under warranty.

2/28/2019

Hearing aid review by Dr Kemen. Patient is not

present. (Outside) audiogram done on 9/15/17 was

reviewed. The hearing threshold in dB at each of

the benchmark frequencies (500; 1000; 2000; 4000

Hz) is as follows: Right ear: 50; 60; 60; 80. Left ear: Right ear moderate; Left ear severe. AUDICUS ORO

50; 65; 55; 65

RIGHT EAR APPROVED

6/27/2018

Audicus hearing booth

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT

EAR: 30; 25; 25; 80; 70 dB. RIGHT EAR: 20; 30; 45;

80; 80 dB.

5/3/2019

Outside appt at Hears to You

Both ears are clear. Patient reports a history of work related noise. He has a very mild hearing loss in both ears, with excellent understanding ability with a very mild amplification. PTA: R‐25; L‐20 5/6/2019

Hearing aid repair

Patient went to sick call and stated his hearing aid has the following issues: When in room by himself he hears static; when talking with others it echoes; ear piece doesn't fit right. Will mail to Audicus for repair.

3/13/2019

44 Tested and awaiting results

9/13/2019

Audicus Results

PTA: L‐59 R‐66

10/23/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz. LEFT EAR: 30; 35;

30; 80; 70 dB. RIGHT EAR: 25; 35; 40; 80; 75 PTA: L‐

45 44; R‐45

7/17/2019

Hearing aid issued to inmate. Educated on basic

functions, battery replacement, volume control,

care. Issued a pack of 312 batteries, cleaning brush,

and extra ear buds. Demonstrated how to wear HA.

Inmate verbalized understanding. F/U with sick call

46 as needed or if issues with hearing aid

7/15/2019

47 3 + yes/sometimes L ear ‐ Mild Imp at 2000Hz & Severe at 4000Hz; R ear ‐ Mild at 1000Hz, Moderate at 2000Hz and
48 Severe at 4000Hz

7/11/2018 10/23/2018

Review of Audicus results (APRN Lyons) Inmate not Audicus Clara Left Ear (pending approval by medical

present

director)

7/18/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire Sick call ‐ issues w/HA 'whistling'
Hearing aid evaluation by Dr. Kemen

Answered Yes to "Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid?" and Yes to "Is the hearing aid working

okay?"

7/31/2019

Referred to HOH Nurse.

7/11/2018

Audicus Dia II for Left ear approved

11/1/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 117

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 378 of 985 - Page ID#: 3966

AN

AO

AP

AQ

1 Medical Visit 10 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

11 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 11 ‐ Description

39

Hearing Aids repaired and returned to IM

3/1/2019

Hearing aid returned

40 Hearing aid issued

Issued 1 hearing aid w/case; booklet, cleaning brush (2)

and tips.

5/31/2019

Hearing aid ordered ‐ APRN Lyons. No visit, Audicus

41 review only.

Requesting Audicus Clara for Left Ear (pending approval) 6/12/2019

Refused HA

Hearing results ‐ APRN Himler. Inmate not present.

Chart review is for hearing results from Hears To Reviewed hearing test results. Bilateral MILD

42 You.

impairment. Does not qualify for hearing aid per policy. 6/4/2019

Chronic Care visit with provider; review audiology results with inmate

43 Hearing aid re‐issue

Hearing aid was issued to inmate from Audicus, post repairs. Educated on use, battery exchange, & not getting it wet. Patient verbally understood all education.

4/2/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

44 Audicus Review

DR. Kemen approve HA for left ear.

11/6/2019

HOH Nurse Visit

45 *ADDENDUM on Lyons 7/17 note

Dr Kemen approved order for Audicus Clara Left Ear 8/1/2019

Issue Hearing Aid

Annual Physical. He has hx HOH & was issued L hearing aid in 12/2018. He does not wear it 46 because he "feels I can hear better without it." 47 HA not working properly
48 Provider review of Audicus results

Needing Audicus hearing exam as last exam was in 9/2018

8/5/2019

HA sent to HTY for repair

7/19/2018

Dr. Kemen has already approved a hearing aid. Awaiting

its arrival.

11/8/2018

Audicus hearing booth HA returned from HTY
Meeting with HOH Nurse

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 118

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 379 of 985 - Page ID#: 3967

AR

AS

AT

AU

AV

Medical Visit

1 Medical Visit 11 ‐ Outcome

12 ‐ Date

Patient stated that he doesn't want his hearing aids that

they hurt his ear. They are hard and with the stroke he

suffered they hurt his head. He states he can hear to a point

in one on one conversations. Will follow up with other

39 choices and inform patient.

3/6/2019

Medical Visit 12 ‐ Description Annual Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Medical Visit 12 ‐ Outcome 3 + yes/sometimes

Medical Visit 13 ‐ Date
4/1/2019

40 Transferred from BCC to NTC

6/26/2019

Patient refused his hearing aid and pocket talker was given. Refusal signed and pocket talker DME was signed. 41 Education on use and responsibility. He verbally understood

Intake Assessment (from NTC to KSR)

Answers YES to Do you have hearing difficulties? He is HOH and brought with him his hearing aid for his Left ear. (should be Right ear)

Reviewed Hears To You hearing results with inmate. No 42 hearing aid indicated at this time. He understands.

3 + yes/sometimes; including Yes to Currently has & uses a 43 hearing aid
44 Issued hearing aid. Educated on use and care. Patient was given his hearing aid today, and educated on usage, care & maintenance. 1 pack of batteries was given. Hearing aid was placed in his ear and he states it works. He was informed to wear it to all medical appts. Patient
45 verbalized understanding.

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz. LEFT EAR: 30; 30; 35; 45; 25 46 dB. RIGHT EAR: 30; 30; 30; 40; 25 dB. PTA: L‐35; R‐33
HA returned to IM's unit. Educated if any problems notify 47 HOH nurse.
LHearing Aid issued to inmate. Educated on battery 48 replacement, etc. Inmate verbalized understanding.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 119

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 380 of 985 - Page ID#: 3968

AW

AX

AY

AZ

1 Medical Visit 13 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 13 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 14

Date

Medical Visit 14 Description

39 Pocket talker

Patient was issued a pocket talker. He was educated on use.

40 41 42

43 44
45

46 47 48
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 120

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 381 of 985 - Page ID#: 3969

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

49 10/24/2018

Intake Assessment (to RCC) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

10/24/2018 11/26/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

D‐ Unable to complete Audicus test d/t dementia. Patient may have a pocket talker.

50 10/9/2018 51 2/2/2017 52 1/11/2018

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire Hearing Screening Questionnaire annual hearing screen

53 6/2/2017

Intake Screening

10/9/2018 2/2/2017 1/11/2018

10/8/2019 3/5/2019 1/6/2020

3 + yes/sometimes

A ‐ Audicus Clara for ear of patient's choice (LEFT)

3 + yes/sometimes; including YES to Currently has &

uses a hearing aid & YES to is the hearing aid

working okay?

A ‐ Bilateral ‐ HTY

3+ yes/sometimes; including Yes to currently has

and uses a hearing aid, and Yes to hearing aid is

working okay

A ‐ Audicus Dia II for Left Ear

6/2/2017

11/4/2019

3+ yes/ sometimes; Including YES to Currently has &

uses a hearing aid and YES to Is hearing aid working

okay?

A ‐ Audicus Dia II R Ear

54 11/7/2018 55 1/26/2017 56 4/18/2018

Hearing Screening Questionnaire Annual Hearing Screen Annual Hearing Screening

11/7/2018 1/26/2017 4/18/2018

11/7/2018 10/15/2018 4/2/2019

3+ yes/sometimes

A ‐ Audicus Clara for Right Ear

3+ yes/ sometimes; including YES to Currently has

and uses a hearing aid, and YES to Is the hearing aid

working okay?

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)

3+ yes/ sometimes; including Yes to Currently has &

uses a hearing aid and Yes to Is hearing aid working

okay.

A ‐ Audicus Oro Left

57 1/11/2017

Annual Physical

58 4/24/2017

Annual Hearing Screening

2/2/2017 1/7/2020 Failed questionnaire 4/24/2017 2/12/2019 3+ yes/ sometimes

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY) A ‐ Right (HTY)
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 121

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 382 of 985 - Page ID#: 3970

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

49 No

10/24/2018

Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

Intake Assessment (to KSR) ‐ Hearing Screening 11/10/2018 Questionnaire

50 No 51 Yes 52 No
53 No

10/9/2018 PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

2/2/2017

Hearing screening questionnaire

1/11/2018 Annual hearing screen.

6/2/2017

Intake Hearing Screening

3 + yes/sometimes 3 + yes/sometimes Answered 3+
3+ yes/ sometimes

11/12/18 Hearing booth 3/3/2017 Annual physical & Hearing screen; Hearing loss L ear 2/2/2018 Whisper Test
11/8/2017 Annual Hearing screen

54 No 55 Yes 56 No

11/7/2018 Hearing Screening Questionnaire

1/26/2017 Annual Hearing Screening

2/9/2017

Hearing screening

3+ yes/sometimes 3+ yes/ sometimes ‐ referred to provider 3 + yes/sometimes

11/14/18 Whisper test 10/29/2017 annual hearing screen 4/18/2018 Annual hearing screening

57 Yes 58 Yes

1/12/2017

4/24/2017

Annual Hearing Screening

audiologist consult recommended by provider

2/2/2017

3+ yes/ sometimes

2/6/2018 Annual Hearing Screen

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 122

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 383 of 985 - Page ID#: 3971

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome 49 3 + yes/sometimes

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

11/20/2018 Meeting with ADA coordinator & HOH nurse

Medical

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Visit 4 ‐ Date

Inmate reported HA wasn't working well. HOH nurse cleaned

and inmate reported it was better but not great. Was advised

to report to sick call so provider could evaluate him for a new

hearing aid.

11/23/2018

Moderate impairment bilaterally at 2000 Hz; Severe

50 impairment bilaterally at 4000 Hz

12/21/2018

Impacted cerumen bilateral; RX Debrox x 5 days;

51 RTC 3/10 for ear flush

4/24/2017

Bilateral Ear Flush

52 Referred to Hears to You

6/15/2018 Hearing booth testing

53 3+ yes/ sometimes

11/22/2017 Provider visit

Dr. Manning wrote order for pocket talker while waiting for

possible hearing aid

1/15/2019

Bilateral Ear Flush

5/18/2017

Never Resulted / Retest

8/29/2018

TM's clear. Normal Light reflex; pt shows definite signs of

decreased hearing without evidence for external ear disorder

or waxy occlusion. ‐ No consult placed / Pocket talker

recommended

8/14/2018

Patient failed Whisper Test (no audioscope avail).

54 Refer to Audicus testing

12/28/2018 Audicus hearing booth

55 3+ yes/ sometimes

11/14/2017 failed whisper test

56 Answered 3+

5/1/2018

Whisper test

Inmate unable to understand instructions or complete test. Will need to be sent for outside testing. Provider notified. 1/16/2019

referred to audiology

1/20/2018

Failed Whisper test / pocket talker issued

6/5/2018

Seen by provider hearing loss BL with right ear 57 being worse than left audiologist consult placed. 2/3/2017

58 3+ yes/ sometimes

2/6/2018

Annual H&P / whisper test

issued pocket talker failed whisper test/ referral to HTY

3/7/2017 3/31/2018
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 123

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 384 of 985 - Page ID#: 3972

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

49 Sick call for hearing problem.

Nurse told him he needs to be referred out for his hearing

aids. Has upcoming appt to address hearing concerns.

11/29/2018

F/U appt hearing aid (Dr Manning)

50 Provider visit; review Audicus results

Moderate hearing impairment at 2000 Hz & Severe

impairment 4000 Hz bilaterally. Sent ECW message to med

director to request hearing aid

1/17/2019

Hearing Aid Evaluation by Dr. Kemen ‐ Inmate not present

51 F/U Ear Flush; Whisper Test

Failed whisper test; Refer to audiology

6/6/2017

HTY appt

52 Hearing Booth

No hearing impairment

9/10/2018

Provider review of results

53 Provider visit; Whisper Test

Emailed Tina Lyons to ask if he passed/failed the Whisper

Test

8/16/2018

(Late entry by provider RE: hearing screen on 8/14/18)

Audiology referral ‐ APRN Himler. Inmate not present. Unable to complete Audicus hearing 54 exam.

Refer to Hears To You for outside audiology testing

55 Hears to You

BL HA recommended

56 Sick call

Wants HA instead of pocket talker

2/21/2019 2/22/2018 6/27/2018

Appt at Hears to You Hears to You Provider assessment

57 58 HTY

BL HA ordered per HTY BL HA recommended

3/23/2017

6/29/2018

Dr. Kemen Reviewed Audiology results

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 124

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 385 of 985 - Page ID#: 3973

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

Patient is here today for f/u on hearing aid. Patient 49 wearing hearing aid in right ear without any complaint

1/8/2019

50 Audicus Clara for Ear of Patient's Choice

2/6/2019 Hearing aid choice

CTO reports that IM's HA was stolen or lost.

1/11/2019

Nurse C. Bentley called inmate up. Patient has chosen to have a hearing aid for his Left Ear. Email was sent to Renee @ Regional office for order placement.

2/15/2019

51 Bilateral HA recommended & ordered

6/27/2017 HTY appointment

52 Negative for threshold for HA. May have pocket talker 9/12/2018 Pocket talker

Received bilateral HA & extra batteries Pocket talker issued to inmate in working order. Educated on usage, battery replacement, etc. Inmate demonstrated understanding

3/7/2018 10/9/2018

53 Failed hearing screen ; refer to audiology

9/10/2018 Audicus hearing booth

Mild/moderate hearing impairment

10/1/2018

Returned from Hears to You. Results need to be reviewed

54 by provider. Puretone averages R‐37 L‐35

3/26/2019

Review of audiology notes (Dr Manning)

55 BL HA issued per HTY

10/12/2018 HA Turned in Broken

56 Failed Audiometer / refer to Audiologist

9/7/2018 Audicus hearing booth

Reviewed hearing test (Hears to You) with patient.

Mild to moderate hearing loss. Refer for hearing

aid.

3/29/2019

HA Sent for Repair

10/15/2018

Moderate/Severe Impairment

10/1/2018

57 BL HA issued per HTY 58 Ordered R HA

7/8/2018 HOH Nurse 7/23/2018 HA Issued

Sent for repair R HA Issued to IM in good working order

7/20/2018 2/12/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 125

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 386 of 985 - Page ID#: 3974

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description 49 Chronic Care visit with provider; multiple issues

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

Under Assessments: Patient has R hearing aid from before

incarceration. Patient complains of bilateral hearing loss &

that hearing aid does not help much.

4/2/2019

Audicus hearing test

50 Hearing aid issued
51 Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire Retested ‐ Audicus Hearing Booth under new
52 decibel level
53 Provider visit (Lyons) ‐ Audicus results

Hearing aid issued to inmate & he was educated on use

and care of hearing aid, battery exchange, loss/theft, etc.

Inmate verbally understood & demonstrated use

3/14/2019

3 + yes/sometimes; YES to 'has & uses a HA' & YES to 'is it

working okay'

3/21/2018

Hearing aid f/u with provider. Provider visit; hearing screen; IM states has BL HA but quit wearing them 3 wks. ago because batteries wear out so quick.

Mild Impairment bilaterally at 1000Hz; Severe impairment

bilaterally at 4000Hz

10/24/2018 Hearing Aid Evaluation ‐ Dr. Kemen

Mild hearing loss noted bilat at all frequencies except

found moderate hearing loss bilat at 2000Hz. Submit for

hearing aid. (Pending Dr Kemen eval/approval)

10/2/2018

Dr Kemen ‐ Hearing aid evaluation

Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen. Patient not 54 present.
55 PPD/Hearing Screen
56 Provider visit; CC; Audicus results

Audiogram done on 2/21/19. Right Ear moderate; Left Ear

moderate. Audicus Clara for Right Ear approved

4/27/2019

Issued hearing aid

3+ yes/ sometimes; including YES to Currently has and uses a hearing aid, and YES to Is the hearing aid working okay? 10/19/2018 meeting with HOH nurse

Will request hearing aid (pending approval); inmate hears

better out of left ear

10/2/2018

Dr Kemen ‐ Hearing aid evaluation (inmate not present)

57 Received HA back from Being Repaired 58 PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Hearing Aid returned to inmate & it is working properly 1/8/2019 Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

2/19/2019

Failed hearing questionnaire, needing whisper test. Inmate had right hearing aid issued 7/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 126

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 387 of 985 - Page ID#: 3975

AI

AJ

AK

AL

AM

1 Medical Visit 8 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 9 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Date

Inmate is in D10B (locked down unit) and was not 49 brought over for appt. Was a no show
To medical for f/u hearing aid. He just received right hearing aid, states he is not wearing it today d/t "it is raining outside and the thing is too loud anyway." Please schedule f/u with HOH nurse to 50 adjust hearing aid, enc inmate to wear hearing aid IM advised he needs to wear his HA and how & when to obtain replacement batteries. IM 51 verbalized understanding

4/10/2019
3/20/2019 3/5/2019

Audicus hearing booth
Hearing aid f/u with HOH nurse PPD/Hearing Screen

52 Audicus Dia II for ear of patient's choice

11/8/2018

Meeting with HOH Nurse

Patient unable to complete test. Email sent to

provider.

4/12/2019

Patient was seen by provider for hearing aid follow

up. Hearing aid is working fine. He was re‐

educated on volume use. Volume was turned down

and patient stated it works better. No further

action needed.

4/30/2019

3 + yes/sometimes; including YES to Currently has &

uses a hearing aid & YES to is the hearing aid

working okay?

3/19/2019

Left HA issued to IM in good working order.

Educated as to use, battery replacement, problems,

etc. IM verbalized understanding

1/1/2019

53 Audicus Dia II for R ear

10/16/2018

Hearing aid issued as prescribed. Patient was

educated on use of hearing aid & repair (sick call).

$10 copay is required for replacement & repair. He

verbally understood. Hearing aid placed in Right

ear. No issues at this time. Will need 30 day follow

54 up with provider

4/30/2019

Meeting with HOH Nurse Lost hearing aid

Issued right Hearing Aid and educated on care and

operation

11/13/2018

Patient is a 59 y/o WM with dementia who

apparently has lost his Audicus hearing aid that he

received on Saturday, 3 days ago. Due to patient's

dementia, he is unable to adequately take care of a

small hearing aid, which will be consistently lost.

Will issue a pocket talker.

5/20/2019

55 HA Returned in working order 56 Audicus Oro L Ear approved

12/7/2018

HA not working; 'squealing'

10/16/2018 Meeting with HOH Nurse

57 Failed questionnaire

4/1/2019

Ears/hearing aid. Left ear shows wax build up

Inmate to bring hearing aid to clinic to view before

58 completing new hearing test.

3/22/2019

Appt w/provider. Must bring HA to appt.

Nurse is sending out both hearing aids for repair 3/21/2019

Issued left Hearing Aid and educated on care and

operation

4/2/2019

Patient came to HOH nurse w/HA that need repair.

L HA shows a small crack which is making his

hearing aid muffled sounding. HTY will be

contacted on repair & warranty. After examining

his left ear, patient was given Debrox drops. He was

educated on use & to come to TX room for ear flush

on Friday. He verbally understood.

6/4/2019

States right HA, works well when wearing but does

not usually wear. Asked him again to bring to

medical appts. He leaves appt to get. Brings back a

Right HA. Encouraged to wear hearing aid daily. 2/19/2020

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 127

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 388 of 985 - Page ID#: 3976

AN

AO

AP

AQ

1 Medical Visit 10 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

11 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 11 ‐ Description

49 Provider note

Patient unable to complete Audicus testing due to dementia. Patient may have pocket talker.

4/23/2019

Issue of pocket talker

Hearing aid not working properly. Crackles all the 50 time
51 Chronic Care & H & P
52 PPD/Annual Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Hearing aid will be sent out for repair.

5/20/2019

Not wearing hearing aids d/t "forgot them in my room."

States they work well when he does wear them. No

complaints of today.

3 + yes/sometimes; including Yes to currently has and

uses a hearing aid, and Yes to hearing aid is working

okay

53 PPD/Hearing screen

3+ yes/ sometimes; Including YES to Currently has & uses a hearing aid and YES to Is hearing aid working okay?

Hearing aid

54 ADDENDUM TO DR MANNING'S NOTE ON 4/30/19 55 Hearing aid check 56 Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

NURSE CONNIE DAWSON FOUND AND HAS HIS HEARING AID IN THE NURSE'S STATION. Patient was asked if he received his hearing aid after it was sent to be fixed. He stated he got them. Everything is working. 3+ yes/ sometimes; including Yes to Currently has & uses a hearing aid and Yes to Is hearing aid working okay.

57 58 Annual H & P

HAS TO GO BACK THROUGH PROCESS. HTY results sent

to Audicus

6/7/2019

HEARING AID FOUND

Hearing Aids work

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 128

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 389 of 985 - Page ID#: 3977

AR

AS

AT

AU

AV

1 Medical Visit 11 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

12 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 12 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 12 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 13 ‐ Date

Pocket talker issued. Educated on how to use, patient 49 voices understanding.

Patient came for his repaired hearing aid. Patient states it 50 works well. No concerns noted at this time.
51
52

53

54

55

56

Repaired hearing aid from HTY was given back to patient.

He placed in ear and states "it works". Patient stated that

he was never scheduled for ear flushing last time when he

arrived at tx rm. TX Rm nurse notified and rescheduled him

for ear flush next week. R ear shows wax and L ear has small

amount of wax. Patient was educated on use of his Debrox

drops and he verbally understood. No concerns noted at

57 this time.

6/10/2019

Ear flush

58

Bilateral ears flushed with warm water and soft brown wax noted in drainage. TMs visible bilaterally with small amount of dark brown wax noted each ear. Tolerated procedure without difficulties. 2x2 placed in each ear for drainage.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 129

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 390 of 985 - Page ID#: 3978

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

59 1/17/2018

Annual Screening Form

60 3/7/2018

Hearing Screening Questionnaire

1/17/2018 1/7/2020 3+ yes/ sometimes

A ‐ Audicus Oro for Right ear

3/7/2018

3/5/2019

3 + yes/sometimes; including YES to Currently has and uses a hearing aid & YES to Is the hearing aid working okay?

A‐ (Audicus Oro for R Ear)

61 12/5/2018

Intake (To RCC) Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

12/5/2018 5/9/2019

3 + yes/sometimes, including YES, Currently has & uses a HA; and YES, Hearing aid is working okay. A ‐ Audicus Clara for Right Ear

62 1/27/2017

Annual Hearing Screening

1/27/2017 5/7/2019

Answered YES to Do you currently have and use a D ‐ Bilateral (HTY) Turned in pocket talker and

hearing aid? And YES to Is the hearing aid working hearing aids because they 'hurt his ears' and signed

okay?

a refusal for both

63 6/20/2018

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

64 3/26/2008

Provider Appt.

6/20/2018 3/26/2008

6/11/2019 7/30/2019

Failed questionnaire

A‐ Audicus Clara for left Ear

3+ yes/ sometimes; YES to he has & currently uses a

HA but NO to is HA working okay. States "I don't D ‐ Left (U of L) (On 5/23/19, went to sick call and

wear inside because of buzzing noise. Outside it asked to exchange hearing aids for pocket talker.

works okay."

Signed a refusal for the hearing aid)

65 4/20/2017 66 6/19/2018
7/14/17*(*pre‐ vious records 67 unavailable)

Intake (To RCC) Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire Intake
Annual Hearing Screen

4/20/2017 6/19/2018

3/19/2019 1/30/2020

3 + yes/sometimes; including YES to Currently has &

uses a hearing aid & YES to is the hearing aid

working okay?

A ‐ Bilateral, Hears To You

Failed questionnaire

A‐ Audicus Oro Right Ear

7/14/2017

7/23/2019

Answered YES to "Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid?" and YES to "Is the hearing aid working

okay?"

A ‐ Bilateral (Hears To You)

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 130

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 391 of 985 - Page ID#: 3979

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

59 No

1/17/2018 Annual Hearing screen

Answered 3+

1/30/2018 Provider Assessment

60 No 61 No

3/7/2018

Hearing screening questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

12/5/2018

Intake Assessment (To RCC) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

7/5/2018 Whisper Test 12/16/2018 Whisper Test

62 N/A

1/27/2017

63 No 64 N/A

6/20/2018 PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire
3/28/2008

Hearing Screen ‐ 3+ Referred to PCP

3/15/2017

Failed questionnaire

6/27/18

Annual Physical; whisper test

moderate hearing loss, hearing aids recommended by audiologist

5/7/2016

65 YES 66
67 Yes

4/20/2017 6/19/2018
7/14/2017

Intake (to RCC) Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire Intake
Hearing screening questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

4/25/2017

Failed questionnaire

6/26/2018

Answered YES to "Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid?" and YES to "Is the hearing aid working

okay?" (was not referred to clinic as he answered

he has hearing aid and it's working okay)

8/3/2017

Intake visit with provider; hearing questionnaire Hearing Test
Hearing test ‐ visit with provider. States he has had difficulty hearing for a couple of years and it is getting worse.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 131

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 392 of 985 - Page ID#: 3980

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

59 Ears impacted / return after ear flush

3/5/2018

Bilateral Ear Flush

Ears clear and will refer back to clinic

Scheduled 6/28/2018

60 Failed; refer to audiology

8/31/2018 Audicus Hearing Booth

Patient failed whisper test. Patient has not had hearing aids in the past. Obtain hearing booth 61 screening. F/U after Medical Director evaluation.

12/20/2018

Hearing screening

Severe Impairment Bilaterally

9/27/2018

Hearing screening obtained. Results to be given to provider 1/21/2019

62 Failed whisper test‐ Referred to HTY

3/23/2017

HTY recommend HA

4/12/2017

63 Failed whisper test. Refer to Audicus onsite testing 7/19/2018 Audicus Hearing Booth

No sign of impairment at any of the tested frequencies

7/24/2018

64 new amplifier given

9/7/2016

3 + yes/sometimes; inmate had Left hearing aid, but

65 it is at home

5/5/2017

66 At RCC

7/3/2018

Decreased hearing bilaterally with Rinne and

Weber, does not hear soft spoken word from either

67 side. Refer to audiology

8/23/2017

HOH visit with provider. Understands normal verbal communication with background noise all w/o asst device. States he cannot get or have anyone send in his hearing aid. States he has no family & his landlord likely threw his hearing aid away. No known disciplinary issues related to not being able to hear. Audicus

audiologist recommended new aids
Refer to audiology for testing, for decreased hearing. Completed Audicus Testing

12/16/2016
5/16/2017 7/6/2018

Appt at Hears to You

PTA: Right Ear ‐ 70; Left Ear ‐ 67. Ordered bilateral hearing aids with 2 programs (normal and noisy) along with telecoils 9/19/2017

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 132

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 393 of 985 - Page ID#: 3981

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

59 hearing exam 60

went to hospital

7/31/2018

Issued Pocket Talker & educated on battery replacement, use, etc. Instructed that if hearing aid is ordered, pocket talker should be turned in when HA is issued to him

10/1/2018

Whisper test Provider visit to review Audicus results

61 Hearing aid evaluation

Audicus Clara for Right Ear approved

2/8/2019

Hearing aid issued

62 63 To medical for F/U Audicus hearing exam.

BL HA picked up

5/8/2018

Reviewed Audicus hearing exam results with inmate. No

sign of impairment detected at any level. He understands

he does not qualify for hearing aids at this time. May repeat

screening process if condition worsens

10/10/2018

Annual physical & Chronic Care visit; hearing screening questionnaire
RETEST under new Audicus guidelines

64

L ear hearing aid issued.

5/15/2018

Hearing aid not working

65 Outside appt at Hears To You 66 Intake H&P
67 Outside appt at HTY to pick up hearing aids

Hearing aids were recommended Hearing Aid ordered.

6/5/2017 7/13/2018

Received hearing aids. Cleaning tool, extra batteries, and

pouch given to inmate. No complaints voiced

5/12/2018

Outside appt at Hears To You Dr. Kemen's Review
Intake Assessment (from KSR to EKCC) Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 133

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 394 of 985 - Page ID#: 3982

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

59 rescheduled

8/13/2018 Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test‐Refer to audiology.

9/11/2018

Needs hearing aid. Has pocket talker which is working. 60 (Awaiting Dr. Kemen eval)

10/2/2018

Hearing aid evaluation by Dr Kemen

Audicus Oro R Ear approved

10/16/2018

61 Hearing aid was issued to inmate while housed at RCC

2/22/2019

Intake (to KSR) Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes, including YES, Currently has & uses a HA; and YES, Hearing aid is working okay. 3/8/2019

Failed questionnaire; Currently has a hearing aid but states

62 he doesn't wear it because it makes his ear sore.

5/16/2018

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Mild impairment bilaterally at 500 Hz. Otherwise, no sign

63 of impairment

6/11/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

64 Sent to U of L for repair with warranty card

5/25/2018 Medical Visit

Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire Hearing Aids Returned

11/12/2018 6/26/2019 8/14/2018

65 Received bilateral hearing aids 66 Order rejected.

8/15/2017 7/12/2018

Answered YES to "Do you currently have and use a hearing

67 aid?" and YES to "Is the hearing aid working okay?"

7/21/2018

Intake (to WKCC) Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire Audicus

3 + yes/sometimes; including YES to Currently has &

uses a hearing aid; and YES to Is hearing aid working

okay?

1/17/2019

Audicus Completed

7/13/2018

Annual Physical; Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Answered YES to "Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid?" and YES to "Is the hearing aid working

okay?"

1/15/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 134

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 395 of 985 - Page ID#: 3983

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

59 Audicus Hearing Booth

Mild/Moderate Impairment

9/28/2018 Provider visit ‐ review of Audicus results

60 Meeting with HOH Nurse

Issued right Hearing Aid and educated on care and operation

3/5/2019 PPD/Hearing screen

H & P/CC visit with provider; 1 month hearing 61 evaluation

He was issued hearing aids one month ago and states he

only wears them sometimes as he feels he does not need

at all times, he does not have hearing aid in now.

5/10/2019

Meeting with ADA Coordinator Wathen

62 Chronic Care visit with provider

Inmate states "they gave me hearing aids but I cannot wear them, they make my head hurt and my ears hurt." 2/8/2019

Pocket talker headphones

TMs normal. Mild hearing impairment per 10/2018

Chronic care visit; Whisper test. No c/o hearing loss Audiology report. Failed whisper test. Refer for Audicus

63 today

onsite testing

7/15/2019

Annual Physical & Chronic Care; Hearing Screening 3+ yes/ sometimes; YES to he has & currently uses a HA

Questionnaire; was told to return to dorm & put HA but NO to is HA working okay. States "I don't wear inside

64 in, states he does not like to wear his HA

because of buzzing noise. Outside it works okay."

5/23/2019

Audicus Hearing Booth Hearing aid exchange

65 66 Review by Medical Director
67 Chronic Care visit with provider

Transferred to LLCC Approved Audicus Oro for Right ear.
States his hearing is good with his hearing aids, no complaints offered

3/19/2019 8/2/2018

Intake (to KSR) Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

7/2/2019

Annual Physical & Chronic Care; hearing screening questionnaire

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 135

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 396 of 985 - Page ID#: 3984

AI

AJ

AK

AL

AM

1 Medical Visit 8 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 9 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Date

Mild/Moderate hearing loss bilaterally. Emailed 59 medical director for hearing aid approval

11/9/2018

Dr. Kemen hearing aid evaluation

3 + yes/sometimes; including YES to Currently has and uses a hearing aid & YES to Is the hearing aid 60 working okay?

3/8/2019

Inmate McGan states that his hearing aid was recently lost when he was packed up and sent to RHU for a couple weeks. ADA Wathen is calling 61 LLCC to see if they might still have.

5/30/2019

Hearing aid not working

Audicus Oro for ear of patient's choice Inmate came to sick call with complaints that his hearing aid wasn't working. A new battery was installed & the hearing aid was working but inmate stated that it will die after 30 minutes. Will co‐sign to hard of hearing.

11/30/2018 4/30/2019

Cindy Wathen is sending him a copy of his theft report, and he has been told to report to sick call. 6/7/2019

Patient was given a set of headphones for his 62 pocket talker

5/7/2019

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz. LEFT EAR: 25; 15;

30; 65; 65 dB. RIGHT EAR: 20; 20; 30; 65; 75 dB.

63 PTA: L‐34; R‐34

8/26/2019

Patient went to sick call and asked for a pocket

talker instead of using his hearing aids. Patient was

issued a pocket talker. He signed a refusal for

64 hearing aids and dme form for pocket talker.

7/30/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Answered YES, he currently has & uses a hearing

aid, and YES it is working okay

5/22/2019

Dr. Kemen approved Hearing Aid for left ear. Failed questionnaire. Conflicting answers. Says he has HA, but signed refusal for same in May & received pocket talker instead. Also denies at this visit, having ever had a HA.

9/24/2019 8/2/2019

3 + yes/sometimes; including YES to Currently has and uses a hearing aid; and YES to hearing aid is 65 working okay 66 Inmate issued Right Hearing Aid @RCC

5/30/2019 2/5/2020

Answered YES to "Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid?" and YES to "Is the hearing aid working

67 okay?"

7/23/2019

Intake Assessment (to KSR from EKCC) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Stated his hearing aids were lost during ADA meeting Issued Pocket Talker/Hearing Aid Lost

6/5/2019 2/21/2020

Answered YES to "Do you currently have and use a hearing aid?" and YES to "Is the hearing aid working okay?"

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 136

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 397 of 985 - Page ID#: 3985

AN

AO

AP

AQ

1 Medical Visit 10 ‐ Description
59 Issued Right hearing aid
60 HOH ‐ Troubleshoot hearing aid. Hearing aid returned from LLCC and returned to
61 inmate

Medical Visit

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Outcome

11 ‐ Date

Issued Right Audicus Oro hearing aid to inmate. Showed

inmate basic functions, battery replacement, volume

control. Issued a pk of 312 batteries, cleaning brush, &

extra ear buds. Demonstrated how to wear HA. Inmate

verbalized understanding.

Medical Visit 11 ‐ Description

Patient was educated on use of hearing device and where to get hearing aid batteries. He verbally understood. Hearing aid is working fine after last visit with treatment room nurse. No complaints noted. Patient was given back his hearing aid today, and re‐ educated on usage, care & maintenance. 1 pack of batteries was given. Hearing aid was placed in his ear and he states it works. He was informed to wear it to all medical appts. Patient verbalized understanding.

62 Annual Physical & Chronic Care visit. 63 Hearing Aid Issue

Not currently wearing his pocket talker ‐ reports he

"gave his hearing aids back"

5/22/2019

Hearing aid issued as prescribed. Patient was educated

on use of hearing aid and repair (sick call). $10 copay is

required for replacement and repair. He verbally

understood. Hearing aid placed in right ear. No issues

at this time. Will need 30 day f/u with provider.

Hearing aids/pocket talker (HOH Nurse note)

64 Annual physical/CC. Denies any complaint

HOH and does not use his hearing aides

8/8/2019

65 Hearing aids found 66 HOH Nurse Visit
67

Hearing aids found at LLCC and returned to Simpson at KSR Hearing Aid Issued 2/21/20. Audicus Oro for Right.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 137

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 398 of 985 - Page ID#: 3986

AR

AS

AT

AU

AV

1 Medical Visit 11 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

12 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 12 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 12 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 13 ‐ Date

59

60

61 Patient knocked on this office and stated the pocket talker doesn't work. PT was informed he will not be able to get the one they had before. We don't order those. His HA that work and are still here. He stated that he doesn't want them, they hurt his ears. He threw his hands in the air and said "you can keep them and I will bring you the pocket talker in a few days." He left the office. Patient was called to this office & signed a refusal for hearing aids & pocket talker. Patient was educated on going to sick call since his
62 complaints are they hurt his ears.

63
Per HOH nurse, he does not need further intervention right 64 now d/t signed refusal in May

65 66
67
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 138

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 399 of 985 - Page ID#: 3987

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

68 8/22/2018 69 2/6/2017
70 12/13/2017

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire Annual Hearing Screening
Annual Hearing Screen

71 11/19/2018

Hearing Screening Questionnaire

8/22/2018 8/2/2019 2/6/2017 1/2/2019

Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire, but was issued a hearing aid on 10/11/18

A‐ Audicus Clara Left A‐ (Audicus Oro for R Ear)

12/13/2017 12/3/2019 3+ yes/ sometimes

D ‐ Doesn't qualify for hearing aid at this time.

11/19/2018 4/2/2019

3 + yes/sometimes; including YES to Currently has &

uses a hearing aid

A ‐ Audicus Clara Right Ear

72 6/5/2019 73 2/3/2017
74 12/1/2017 75 6/21/2018

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire Annual Hearing Screening

6/5/2019 2/3/2017

6/5/2019 2/17/2020

Failed questionnaire 3+ yes/ sometimes; Including YES to has & uses a hearing aid and YES hearing aid is working okay.

A‐ Audicus Clara Left A ‐ Audicus Dia II for L Ear

Annual Hearing Screen Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes; Yes to currently has and uses a

12/1/2017 11/18/2019 HA and Yes it is working okay

A‐Audicus Clara Left

6/21/2018 6/5/2019 Failed questionnaire

D ‐ Mild impairment, doesn't qualify for hearing aid at this time. Signed refusal for pocket talker.

76 5/15/2018 77 7/6/2016 78 10/1/2018

Annual physical & chronic care; hearing screening questionnaire
Hearing Screening Questionnaire

5/15/2018 7/6/2016

5/15/2019 9/4/2019

Audicus‐ Hearing Aid

A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA RIGHT EAR

3 + yes/sometimes; inmate states he doesn't wear

HA d/t 'can hear better without them." Answered

No to Is HA working okay? Encouraged inmate to

wear HA & if HA aren't working, to go to HOH nurse

to discuss repairs. He states he doesn't want to do

so

A‐ Bilateral (refuses to wear)

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

10/1/2018 10/7/2019 Failed questionnaire

D‐ Meet qualifications for HA but wants Pocket Talker instead. Signed refusal.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 139

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 400 of 985 - Page ID#: 3988

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

68 No 69 No

8/22/2018 8/2/2017

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire Annual Hearing Screening

Failed questionnaire Answered no to all

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

Inmate to medical for whisper test, d/t answered he

"sometimes can't hear people." Eval 1 month ago &

denied hearing loss. Today he states he just

answered the question that way because he

selectively does not want to hear people

9/19/2018 sometimes. He denies hearing loss today.

5/9/2018 Hearing screening

70 N/A

5/1/2018

Provider hearing screening

Failed Whisper test, Ordered pocket talker

5/23/2018 Sick call

71 No

11/19/2018 Hearing screening questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

Intake H & P. Unspecified hearing loss, bilateral; 11/19/2018 chronic, progressing. Ear canals free of cerumen.

72 No 73 No
74 no 75 N/A

6/5/2019 12/4/2017

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire Annual hearing screen.

Failed questionnaire Answered 3+

12/1/2017

Annual Hearing Screen

3+ yes/ sometimes

6/21/2018 Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Answered 3+

6/19/2019 Annual physical; whisper test 2/2/2018 Whisper Test

12/5/2017

Whisper Test

7/26/18

Whisper Test

76 No

5/15/2018

Annual physical & chronic care; hearing screening

questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

6/6/18

Hearing screening

77 unknown

7/6/2016

Hearing screening questionnaire

78

10/1/2018

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

7/7/2016 Provider visit; Whisper test

3 + yes/sometimes; Then WENT TO SEG HOLD AT

LLCC

10/31/2018 Intake Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 140

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 401 of 985 - Page ID#: 3989

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

68 Whisper test WNL. No hearing loss noted 69 3 + yes/sometimes

8/2/2019 5/16/2018

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire Annual Physical; Hearing Evaluation

70 Doesn't like pocket talker, requesting HA

6/5/2018

Patient failed whisper test. Patient states he has

not had a hearing aid before. Obtain hearing booth

evaluation. F/U with Medical Director

71 recommendations

11/20/2018

Sick Call. Audiogram

72 Failed whisper test. Refer for Audicus onsite testing 7/11/2019

73 Referred to Hears to You

6/15/2018

Audicus hearing booth Hearing Booth

74 Referred to Hears to You 75 Failed. Referred to audiology.

2/10/2018 Hears to You

9/4/2018

Audicus hearing booth

Failed questionnaire passed tuning fork, failed whisper
Wants to know if scheduled for hearing test

8/22/2019 6/15/2018
6/14/2018

Results scanned into chart

11/20/2018

Patient could not hear any tones at any of the frequencies tested. If pt demonstrates trouble, refer offsite to ENT. If not, pt should be retested with explanation of testing process 7/29/2019

Never Resulted / Will retest

8/6/2018

Mild to moderate hearing loss/ RTC 2 years for re eval or PRN

for indication of hearing aids. HAs not recommended at this

time.

7/23/2018

No hearing impairment

9/12/2018

76 Patient passed whisper test

5/14/2019 Annual PPD & hearing screening questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

5/15/2019

Inmate had HA prior to incarceration but was stolen; difficulty reading lips; failed Whisper Test; 77 Refer to Audiology

8/3/2016

OSMT ‐ Hearing Center

78 3 + yes/sometimes

11/13/2018 Whisper test

Bilateral hearing aids ordered

7/13/2017

Could not perform whisper test d/t impacted cerumen right

ear. Please schedule for ear irrigation & then reschedule for

whisper test once ears cleaned.

11/21/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 141

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 402 of 985 - Page ID#: 3990

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

68 Annual physical 69 Hearing booth

Wax in ear canal. Start Debrox, schedule for ear flush with

nursing in 1 week, then f/u with provider in 1‐2 weeks for

whisper test

8/22/2018

Never resulted / will retest

8/28/2018

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire Hearing Booth

70 Hearing Booth

Never resulted / will retest

8/28/2018

AUDICUS EXAM

Intake Assessment (From RCC to KSR) ‐ Hearing 71 Screening Questionnaire
72 2nd Audicus onsite exam 73 Hearing booth

3 + yes/sometimes answers This test was successfully completed. Pt indicated they could not hear any tones. Retest the pt to ensure they understand the process. Otherwise, need to be referred locally for ENT consultation.

11/29/2018 8/5/2019

Mild/Moderate Impairment

8/13/2018

Hearing Aid Evaluation ‐ Dr. Kemen
3rd Audicus exam Provider (Lyons) review of audiology report. IM not present.

74 Pocket Talker 75 Provider visit

Pocket Talker Issued to IM in good working order
Inmate made aware of Audicus results (No significant impairment at this time)

11/5/2018 10/10/2018

Annual Hearing Screening Questionnaire Retested under Audicus new decibel level

76 Chronic Care & H &P 77 CC visit w/provider 78 Ear Flush

Bilateral cerumen impaction; failed whisper test; refuses audiogram; does not want hearing aides

6/5/2019

Patient was called to HOH nurse for him to sign a refusal for his audiogram.

Is HOH, has HA but refuses to wear them. States "I tried

them 4‐5 days & it makes it worse."

9/2/2017

Mod to L amt cerumen noted to R inner ear canal. Flushed

w/ear pick; removed all cerumen. Scant amt of cerumen in L

ear, was able to remove most of it. Tolerated well w/no

issues or bleeding.

11/29/2018

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening; 3 + yes/sometimes; Yes to has HA; No to is it working ok. States he does not use because "it does not help. I have high pitch hearing loss."
Whisper Test

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 142

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 403 of 985 - Page ID#: 3991

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

68 Failed screen‐ needs Whisper Test. 69 Moderate impairment

9/11/2019 9/12/2018

Whisper Test Provider review of Audicus results w/inmate

70 No hearing impairment

10/3/2018 F/U multiple issues; Audicus results

71 Audicus Clara for Right Ear approved

Hearing Screening Questionnaire ‐ Intake 12/10/2018 Assessment

Got email from Drew at Audicus. Results same as 2

previous attempts. Patient indicated he could not hear any

72 tones. Awaiting further instruction from provider

9/24/2019

Audicus

73 HA ordered. Awaiting approval.

8/13/2018 Dr. Kemen review; IM not present

3 + yes/sometimes; Yes to currently has and uses a HA and

74 Yes it is working okay

11/18/2019 TB/Hearing Screening

Mild impairment at 4000hz bilaterally and Mild at 4000hz

75 R ear

11/1/2018

Audicus results w/provider

Failed Whisper Test‐Refer to audiology. Moderate hearing loss bilaterally ‐ HA pending approval by Dr. Kemen

9/17/2019 9/13/2018

Audicus results, show does not qualify for hearing

aid presently

10/9/2018

3 + yes/sometimes

1/25/2019

PTA: L‐ 80 R‐83 Audicus Dia II for L Ear Approved

10/10/2019 8/31/2018

Failed Questionaire

11/21/2019

Mild impairment; will submit results to Dr Kemen

for review

11/9/2018

Patient stated that he would like to have the Audicus

testing now. He is currently having issues with his hearing.

76 Tina Lyons, APRN notified for referral for Audicus

6/6/2019

Audiology referral. Patient not present. Initially

declined audiogram, but requests to have the test

now.

APRN Lyons placed referral for Audicus testing

6/17/2019

Inmate does not want to be sent out to audiologist for evaluation of hearing. Both ears cleaned (wax buildup) 77 given Debrox x 5 days & told to return to medical 9/6/17

9/18/2017

Signed Refusal for Hearing aids to be adjusted (high

pitch deafness)

10/6/2017

78 Inmate passed whisper test normal hearing

10/7/2019 H&P/ Hearing Questionnaire.

Failed Questionnaire

10/8/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 143

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 404 of 985 - Page ID#: 3992

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

68 Audicus Dr. Kemen review of Audicus results (inmate not
69 present)

Audicus results: PTA L:51 R:51) Audicus Oro for R Ear

9/20/2019 Provider Review 10/11/2018 Meeting with HOH nurse

70 Audicus Retest 71 Hearing aid issued

Moderate bilaterally at 4000.

11/1/2018

Hearing aid issued. Patient educated on use, battery

exchange, and not getting it wet. Hearing aids work. 5

batteries given. Patient verbally understood all education.

HA batteries are 312

2/20/2019

Audicus results
30 day evaluation on hearing aid that was issued; usage & effectiveness

72 Provider Review 73 HA issued

Order Audicus Clara for left ear. Approved by Dr. Kemen on 10/11/19. R Hearing Aid issued to inmate. Educated on battery replacement, etc. Inmate verbalized understanding.

11/5/2019 2/6/2019

HOH Nurse Visit PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

74 Audicus 75 Dr. Kemen hearing aid evaluation

L‐ 48 R‐51 Right ear mild impairment; Left ear no significant impairment. PCP may order a pocket talker at his/her discretion

11/25/2019 Provider Review 6/5/2019 Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

76 Audicus Hearing Booth 77 Refusal of Treatment

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 20; 15; 25; 80; 65 dB. RIGHT EAR: 20; 20; 20; 80; 60 dB. PTA: L ‐ 35; R ‐ 35

6/18/2019

Inmate not present. Audicus results reviewed by APRN Lyons

Refusing any outside trips for hearing eval, hearing aids, eval for hearing, high pitch deafness, don't need hearing aids checked or fixed. Won't use them. Refuse hearing screening

9/5/2018

Annual Hearing Screening Questionnaire

78 Audicus

PTA: L‐85 R‐85 Needs retest with proctor in room.

10/30/2019 Audicus Re‐test

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 144

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 405 of 985 - Page ID#: 3993

AI

AJ

AK

AL

AM

1 Medical Visit 8 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 9 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Date

68 HA Ordered and approved by Dr. Kemen

10/11/2019

Issued Right hearing aid and educated on its

69 operation and cleaning.

1/2/2019

Reviewed results with patient. Doesn't qualify for a

HA. Will defer to ADA coordinator for HOH

70 designations on nametag & room door.

12/3/2019

Inmate is not wearing HA today d/t "didn't feel like

it." States hearing aid does work when he uses it.

71 Encouraged inmate to wear hearing aid.

4/2/2019

Hearing aid is here but he wants to hold off until 72 state pay comes in.
3+ yes/ sometimes; Including YES to has & uses a 73 hearing aid and YES hearing aid is working okay.

12/5/2019 2/17/2020

74 Approved for Audicus Clara Left 75 Failed questionnaire

12/13/2001 6/25/2019

Audicus Clara for Right Ear ordered. Pending 76 approval by medical director

7/16/2019

3 + yes/sometimes; including Yes he has a hearing

77 aid and Yes the hearing aid is working okay

9/28/2018

Hearing aid issued Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Patient received hearing aid and was educated on usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient verbalized understanding & demonstrated use. Failed questionnaire but was issued a hearing aid 10/11/18

TB/ Hearing Screening

Failed questionnaire.

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire HOH Nurse Visit

3 + yes/sometimes; including YES to Currently has & uses a hearing aid Hearing aid issued to inmate in working order. Inmate educated as to use, care, battery exchange, loss of device, etc. Inmate verbalized understanding.

Annual H & P HOH Nurse Visit

States hearing aid works Patient received hearing aid and was educated on usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient verbalized understanding & demonstrated use.

Patient was called up to HOH nurse's office and

Pocket talker

offered a pocket talker. He signed a refusal for one.

Audicus hearing aid R ear given. Instructed patient

on usage, care, maintenance, battery exchange, co‐

pay, etc., also to report any issues to sick call and fill

out a lost/stolen report if necessary, and that

inmate would be responsible for replacement co‐

Hearing aid issued

pay of $10. Patient acknowledged understanding.

3 + yes/sometimes; inmate states he doesn't wear

HA d/t 'can hear better without them." Answered

No to Is HA working okay? Encouraged inmate to

wear HA & if HA aren't working, to go to HOH nurse

to discuss repairs. He states he doesn't want to do

Annual Physical & Hearing Screening Questionnaire so

78 PTA: R‐85 L‐83

1/31/2020

Provider Review

Declined hearinging aid and wants a pocket talker instead.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 145

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 406 of 985 - Page ID#: 3994

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

79 6/13/2018 80 10/24/2018 81 7/12/2006

Hearing Screening Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire
Hearing Screening

6/13/2018 6/4/2019 Failed questionnaire

D ‐ signed a waiver for all HOH services

10/24/2018 12/2/2019 7/12/2006 2/6/2019

3 + yes/sometimes

A ‐ Audicus Clara Right

3+ yes /sometimes; including YES to Currently has &

uses a hearing aid and YES to Is the hearing aid

working okay?

A ‐ Bilateral (U of L)

82 5/21/2018 83 9/4/2018

H & P; Whisper test H&P and Hearing Screen

5/21/2018 5/14/2019 Failed questionnaire 9/4/2018 9/11/2019 Failed Questionaire

D ‐ Does not qualify for a hearing aide at this time. A‐ Right Audicus

84 12/1/2017 85 11/7/2018

Annual Hearing Screening Hearing Screening Questionnaire

12/1/2017 11/18/2019 3+ yes/ sometimes 11/7/2018 11/18/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

86 11/21/2018

Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

11/21/2018 12/13/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

87 11/2/2018 88 1/25/2010
89 12/10/2018

Chronic care visit with provider Chronic Care Appt.
Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

11/2/2018 2/5/2019 Passed the Hearing Screening 1/25/2010 1/31/2017 3+ yes/ sometimes
12/10/2018 10/7/2019 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA FOR LEFT EAR A‐ Audicus Clara Right
A ‐ Audicus Clara for Left Ear
D ‐ Does not qualify for hearing aid at this time. Issued Pocket Talker. A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)
A‐ Approved for Audicus Clara Right

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 146

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 407 of 985 - Page ID#: 3995

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

79 N/A 80 No 81 N/A
82 83 No

6/7/2017 10/24/2018

Annual Hearing Screening
Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

7/12/2006 Came into institution with BL HA

5/21/2018 H & P; Whisper test

9/4/2018

H&P and Hearing Screen WKCC

Answered 3 + 3 + yes/sometimes
3 + yes/sometimes; failed whisper; refer to audiology Failed Hearing Screen

6/26/2017 Whisper test 11/7/2018 Audiogram 5/19/2011 Hearing Screening UofL Hearing Center
5/21/2018 Provider visit 9/19/2018 Audiometry WKCC

84 No 85

12/1/2017 11/7/2018

Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Annual hearing screen. Answered 3+ 3 + yes/sometimes

12/11/2017 Whisper Test 11/14/18 Annual H & P; Hearing Screening Questionnaire

86 No
87 N/A 88 Yes 89 no

11/21/2018
11/2/2018 1/25/2010

Intake assessment ‐ hearing screening questionnaire
Chronic care visit with provider; ears itching and cough for a month. Difficulty hearing "I think they need to be flushed."

3 + yes/sometimes

1/18/2019

Bilateral cerumen impaction; some removed in

clinic; TM appear red & dull, w/erythema in canal as

well. Failed audioscope tympanometry. Needs

onsite hearing screen, needs ears irrigated and clear

AOM first. Please do not administer test before 2

wks.

12/27/2018

Pocket talker ordered. No documentation that it

was issued.

2/28/2010

Whisper Test Audicus hearing booth

12/10/2018

Intake assessment ‐ hearing screening questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

2/12/2019 Whisper test

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 147

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 408 of 985 - Page ID#: 3996

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

79 Passed Rinne & Weber tests/ Hearing Normal

6/13/2018 Annual hearing screening

80 Results scanned into chart

11/28/2018 Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen

81 BL Hearing aids issued

10/5/2016 Lost Hearing Aids

Answered 3+ Right ear sloping mild to moderate impairment; Left ear sloping normal to moderate impairment. Audicus Clara for ear of patient's choice approved

7/25/2018 12/10/2018

New consult and BL Hearing aids ordered

2/1/2017

82 Failed whisper test 83 All frequencies no impairment

6/18/2018 Hearing booth 10/19/2018 Dr. Kemen Hearing Aid Evaluation

Never resulted / Will be rescheduled Does not meet criteria‐ May order PT if needed.

8/6/2018 10/26/2018

84 Referred to Hears to You 3 + yes/sometimes; Left Ear Cerumen; Debrox x 3
85 days then lavage

1/6/2018 1/7/2019

Whisper test

Very mild BL hearing loss. No HA's recommended. Passed whisper test

11/13/2018 11/18/2019

Passed whisper test. No further testing needed at

86 this point.

4/23/2019

Whisper Test (cannot find questionnaire or reason Failed whisper test. Refer to Audicus hearing booth for

for new whisper test)

testing

4/29/2019

87 Did not complete test 88 Pocket talker issued.

2/5/2019 1/8/2017

Hearing screening questionnaire

Failed portable audiometry screening. Refer to 89 audiology

2/28/2019

Audicus hearing booth

Passed questionnaire Emailed Lesa to make appt for hearing eval. IM may not be candidate for pocket talker d/t advanced dementia.

5/21/2019 1/31/2017

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 15;

15; 15; 35; 15 dB. RIGHT EAR: 10; 20; 30; 35; 30 dB.

3/6/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 148

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 409 of 985 - Page ID#: 3997

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

Failed Whisper on L; normal on R; tuning fork 79 normal bilaterally

Will refer to audiology

8/30/2018

HEARING EXAM

80

Rt. Hearing aid issued

12/28/2018

Annual H & P/CC/HOH visit with provider.

81 Annual hearing screening

3+ yes / sometimes / referred to clinic for a whisper test 2/14/2017

Provider Annual Screening

82 Hearing Booth 83

No sign of impairment Issued Pocket Talker WKCC

84 PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire 85 TB/ Hearing Screen

3 + yes/sometimes Failed Questionaire

8/15/2018

Provider (Ramey) of Audicus results

11/14/2018
2/25/2019 11/19/2019

Follow‐Up Chronic Care visit with provider. States he was supposed to have hearing tested at outside facility & overslept appt. Chart review shows last audiology exam 1/2018 with mild hearing impairment and recs for no hearing aid, to recheck in 2 years.
Chronic Care H&P

86 Audicus hearing booth

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 40;

40; 45; 80; 80 dB. RIGHT EAR: 50; 55; 60; 80; 80 dB. PTA

LEFT: 51 PTA RIGHT: 61

5/1/2019

Audicus Review ‐ Dr Manning

Chronic care; states he cannot complete the 87 Audicus online instructions 88 Hearing Screening
89 Review Audicus results

Failed whisper test; refer to Hears to You for outside hearing

test

6/20/2019

3 + yes/sometimes

2/21/2017

Inmate not present. Chart review is for Audicus results. Reviewed Audicus results. No hearing aid indicated at this time.

10/7/2019

Outside appt at Hears to You H&P/Hearing Screen

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 149

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 410 of 985 - Page ID#: 3998

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

79 No hearing impairment

9/19/2018

Inmate does not have hearing aide in today and states his

80 left ear has been hurting for 2 days

1/15/2019

Provider visit; CC; Audicus results Inmate admitted to KSR

Reviewed Audicus results with inmate, no hearing

impairment. He understands.

10/10/2018

Intake Assessment ‐ Inmate answered No to the question "Do you have hearing difficulties?"

4/17/2019

81 HA are working properly

5/8/2018 Reports HA aren't working properly

Audicus report shows no significant impairment bilaterally,

82 at all 3 frequencies

10/10/2018 Retested under new Audicus guidelines

Sent to U of L for repair

5/21/2018

500; 1000; 2000; 4000 Hz respectively. RIGHT EAR:

Mild; Mild; Mild; Severe impairment. LEFT EAR: No

impairment; No impairment; No impairment;

Moderate impairment.

11/13/2018

83 IM reports PT is working .

7/19/2019 Audicus Testing

PTA: L‐40; R‐40

8/5/2019

TMs normal. Refer to audiology for Audicus hearing exam

84 d/t hx mild hearing loss, recs for retesting.

2/28/2019

Audicus hearing booth

85 Needed Ears Flushed

12/4/2019 Audicus

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; & 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT

EAR: 25; 25; 35; 65; 45 dB. RIGHT EAR: 40; 40; 40;

70; 60 dB.

3/12/2019

Was scheduled for testing but still impacted. Ears

flushed again,

12/12/2019

Moderate impairment of Left Ear (better ear). Patient qualifies for a left ear hearing aid based on Audicus 86 testing. Audicus Clara for Left Ear (pending approval)

6/26/2019 Audicus

Patient reports having a hard time hearing from a distance

but close up is good. Patient has a very mild loss in right

ear with a mild to mildly moderate loss in his left ear. PTA:

87 L‐32; R‐23

8/16/2019

88 referral for HTY

3/7/2017

Audicus results

Patient qualifies for a L ear hearing aid based on Audicus testing. Audicus Clara for L ear

6/26/2019

PTA: L‐32; R‐23 BL HA ordered per HTY

8/16/2019 3/23/2017

89 Failed Questionnaire.

10/11/2019 Audicus Test

PTA: L‐40 R‐35

11/6/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 150

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 411 of 985 - Page ID#: 3999

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description 79 Audicus retest 80 Chronic Care & New Intake visit with provider

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome 500; 1000; 2000; 4000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: Moderate impairment at 4000 Hz (otherwise no impairment) RIGHT EAR: Mild impairment at all frequencies

Medical Visit

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

6/4/2019 Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Schedule with HOH nurse to eval hearing aide for repairs

as it is not working

4/30/2019

HOH Nurse

81 BL HA returned from U of L 82 Audicus results ‐ Dr Manning

HA working properly

11/8/2018 Meeting with HOH Nurse

Patient here to review Audicus results. Left ear Moderate

impairment. Right ear Mild/Severe impairment. Refer to

medical director for eval for hearing aides.

11/21/2018

Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen. Patient is not present. Audicus online hearing test done on 10/10/18 was reviewed.

83 HA Evaluation by Provider WKCC

Unspecified Hearing Loss bilateral.

8/26/2019 Dr. Kemen Review

84 To medical for F/U Audicus results 85 Audicus

Send ECW message to medical director to request hearing

aid

3/14/2019

Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen. Inmate not present

PTA: L‐55 R‐50

12/23/2019 Provider Review

86 Dr Kemen ‐ review

AUDICUS CLARA L EAR APPROVED PER DR KEMEN

7/26/2019 Hearing aid

Audicus review. Reports he has difficulty hearing at Educated inmate he does not meet requirements for

87 times. Audiogram with mild hearing loss.

hearing aide, may have pocket talker.

88

BL HA issued per HTY

8/22/2019 Pocket talker 4/13/2017 HA broken

89 Audicus Review

Approved for Audicus Clara for right ear by Dr. Kemen. 12/13/2019 HOH Nurse Visit

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 151

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 412 of 985 - Page ID#: 4000

AI

AJ

AK

AL

AM

1 Medical Visit 8 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 9 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Date

79 Failed questionnaire

6/24/2019

80 HA Broken. Sent out for repair.

5/20/2019

81 HA returned after repair

2/6/2019

Patient does not meet the criteria for a prescription

hearing aid specified in the DOC hearing loss policy

dated 5/31/18. PCP may order a pocket talker at

82 his/her discretion.

5/14/2019

83 WKCC Approved Right HA

10/1/2019

Hearing aid PPD/Hearing screen

Signed waiver for HOH services but has ID Patient came for his repaired hearing aid. Patient states that it works well. No concerns noted at this time. 3+ yes /sometimes; including YES to Currently has & uses a hearing aid and YES to Is the hearing aid working okay?

Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire Left HA issued to IM in good working order. Educated as to use, battery replacement, problems, etc. IM verbalized understanding

Audicus online hearing test done on 2/28/19 was

84 reviewed. Audicus Clara for Left Ear approved

4/1/2019

Audicus Clara for the left side ordered and

85 approved 12/30/19.

1/23/2020

Hearing aid given to patient. Explained to him

usage, care, battery exchange, to go to sick call if he

has any issues with the device. Also told him if it

gets lost or stolen, he has to file a report and pay a

$10 co‐pay to have it replaced. Patient verbalized

86 understanding.

Hearing aid issued HOH nurse visit

Patient received hearing aid and was educated on usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient verbalized understanding & demonstrated use. Hearing Aid issued. Inmate educated on care and use.

Patient was given a pocket talker and batteries. He

was educated on use, care and replacing batteries.

87 He verbally understood

HA was found on floor in several pieces & clearly

88 broken. Sent out on 4/20/17 to be repaired

5/3/2017

Patient received hearing aid and was educated on

usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange,

etc. Patient verbalized understanding &

89 demonstrated use.

CC visit w/provider

Hearing test was done & consult sent. No hearing

aids. Will resubmit to Hears to You

8/9/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 152

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 413 of 985 - Page ID#: 4001

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

90 5/7/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

5/7/2019 5/7/2019 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ Audicus Clara Right Ear

91 10/9/2018 92 9/5/2018
93 6/13/2018

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

10/9/2018 10/7/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

9/5/2018 9/3/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

A ‐ Audicus Clara for ear of patient's choice (LEFT)
D‐Moderate hearing loss in Right Ear. No impairment in left.

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

6/13/2018 6/4/2019

Answered YES to Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid? And YES to Is the hearing aid working

okay?

A ‐ Audicus Oro for Right Ear

94 2/21/2018 95 2/9/2017 96 2/2/2017 97 5/22/2019

Annual Hearing Screen

2/21/2018 2/6/2019 3+ yes/ sometimes

A‐ AUDICUS CLARA RIGHT EAR

Hearing Screening Annual Hearing Screening

2/9/2017 2/2/2017

7/15/2019 3/6/2019

3 + yes/sometimes Answered YES to Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? And YES to Is the hearing aid working okay?

D ‐ Does not meet criteria at this time. Pocket talker issued.
A ‐ Audicus Dia II R Ear

Wound follow up visit with provider; also filled out

hearing screening questionnaire d/t feels he is

having trouble hearing

5/22/2019

6/6/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. BILATERALLY: 80 dB at all frequencies. PTA: Bilaterally ‐ 80

A‐ Audicus Clara Left

98 6/1/2019

Hearing Screening Questionnaire

6/1/2019 6/1/2019 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA RIGHT EAR

99 12/3/2018 100 9/5/2017

Hearing Screening Questionnaire Annual Hearing Screening

12/3/2018 12/3/2019 3 + yes/sometimes 9/5/2017 3/6/2019 Answered No to all questions

A ‐ Audicus Clara for Right Ear A ‐ Left (Audicus)
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 153

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 414 of 985 - Page ID#: 4002

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

90 No

5/7/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

5/31/2019 Annual Physical & Chronic Care; Whisper test

91 No 92 N/A

10/9/2018 PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

9/5/2018

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

10/18/2018 Whisper Test
Annual physical & CC; Whisper Test; bilateral 9/12/2018 cerumen impaction

93 No

6/13/2018 Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Answered 3+

8/7/2018 Whisper Test

94 N/A 95 N/A 96 No 97 No 98 No 99 NO 100 No

2/21/2018 Annual hearing screen

3+ yes/ sometimes

3/12/2018 FU hearing screen

2/9/2017

Annual Hearing screening

3 + yes/sometimes

7/23/2018 Annual hearing screening

3/30/2018 5/22/2019 6/1/2019

Annual Hearing Screening

Failed Whisper test

6/15/2018 Hearing Booth

Wound follow up visit with provider; also filled out

hearing screening questionnaire d/t feels he is

Refer to Audicus hearing exam d/t failed hearing

having trouble hearing

screen

6/6/19

Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

6/3/2019

Audicus hearing booth Called patient up to assess ears related to recent sick call that was cosigned to this nurse stating patient was having difficulty hearing. Wanted to make sure ears were not impacted with cerumen.

12/3/2018 9/5/2017

Hearing Screening Questionnaire Provider assessment

3 + yes/sometimes Failed Whisper test

12/27/18 Whisper test 11/3/2017 Annual Hearing screening
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 154

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 415 of 985 - Page ID#: 4003

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Wax in bilateral ear canals; Ear flush in tx room bilaterally, then f/u 2‐3 wks. for whisper test after 90 ears flushed

6/15/2019

Ear Flush

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

Bilateral ears flushed with copious amount of cerumen removed. Able to visualize both TMs and patient voices that "I can hear now. I could not hear almost at all before, but I can hear."

6/17/2019

91 Referred to Audiology 3 + yes/sometimes; to tx rm for ear irrigation, then reassess for hearing exam. F/U 3 wks. for hearing
92 test w/provider

11/13/2018 9/14/2018

Hearing Booth Ear Flush

Mild impairment bilaterally at 1000 Hz; Severe impairment

bilaterally at 4000 Hz

1/16/2019

Small amt cerumen noted to bilateral ear canals. Flush w/ear

pick. Curette used to scoop out wax in outer canal. Removed

all visible cerumen w/o issues. IM tolerated well.

10/3/2018

93 Failed. Referred to audiology.

9/10/2018 Whisper test

Failed whisper test; refer to audiology

9/17/2018

IM passed all hearing tests/ Insists he has hearing

94 problem w/ L ear.. Issued pocket talker

2/6/2019

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed hearing screening questionnaire

5/8/2019

95 3 + yes/sometimes

7/24/2018 CC & H & P w/Provider

Able to appreciate tuning fork bilaterally; but unable to appreciate whisper on the left. Will refer to audiology

8/30/2018

96 Never Resulted so will retest

8/28/2018

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. BILATERALLY: 80 dB at all frequencies. PTA: 97 Bilaterally ‐ 80 Bilateral ear canals noted with minimal cerumen, able to remove with cotton tip applicator. TM's visible clear, no effusion noted. Will now cosign 98 HOH screening to HOH scheduler for review.

6/11/2019 6/5/19

Hearing Booth

Mild/Moderate Impairment

Audicus review by Dr Fortwengler. Results

suspicious for error as each frequency for both ears Results of Audicus done on 6/6/19 suspicious for error.

are all 80dB. All values are the same.

Discussed with Dr Kemen. Will repeat Audicus testing

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed Questionnaire

9/4/2018 7/1/2019 6/17/2019

Failed portable audiometry screening. Refer to 99 audiology
100 3+ yes/ sometimes

1/15/2019 Audicus hearing booth 12/13/2017 Annual Hearing Screening

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. Left ear: 45; 40;

50; 80; 80 dB. Right ear: 35; 45; 50; 80; 65 dB.

3/5/2019

3+ yes / sometimes

3/21/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 155

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 416 of 985 - Page ID#: 4004

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

To medical for whisper test. He had ears irrigated

last week for a cerumen impaction. States he feels Failed whisper test. Refer to Audicus hearing booth for

90 like everyone is talking loud now.

exam

7/11/2019

Audicus hearing booth

91 Audicus results with APRN Himler 92 Hearing test with provider

Inmate requesting LEFT Hearing aid. Will send ECW message

to med director to request hearing aid

1/17/2019

Hearing Aid Evaluation ‐ Dr. Kemen

Failed portable exam; refer to audiology

10/22/2018

Hearing Booth

93 Audicus Hearing Booth

Will have to be rescheduled. Inmate was in dog handling

training and could not come to appt

10/22/2018

Hearing Booth

94 Whisper test 95 Hearing Exam 96 Provider review of Audicus results 97 Audicus Retest 98 H & P; Whisper Test 99 Review Audicus results ‐ APRN Himler 100 Annual Hearing Screening

Failed whisper. Refer to audiology

5/23/2019

Audicus hearing booth

No hearing impairment

10/9/2018

HA (Approval required) Pending approval The test was completed. The patient indicated they could not hear any tones. If patient demonstrates significant hearing issues, refer to offsite consultation. Otherwise, retest.

9/6/2018 7/15/2019

Normal speech and communication. Failed whisper test. Refer to onsite Audicus exam

7/11/2019

ECW message to medical director to request hearing aid. Reviewed Audicus results with inmate.

3/6/2019

Answered 3+ yes / sometimes

4/19/2018

Retested under new Audicus decibel levels Dr. Kemen ‐ HA Eval. Referral to HTY. Inmate not present. Multiple failed attempts at onsite Audicus hearing test
Audicus Hearing Booth
Dr Kemen ‐ Hearing aid evaluation Provider assessment

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 156

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 417 of 985 - Page ID#: 4005

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR:

35; 40; 30; 75; 75. RIGHT EAR: 25; 35; 35; 70; 65. PTA: L‐

90 45; R‐41

8/19/2019

APRN Himler ‐ Review of Audicus results

Audicus Clara for Ear of patient's choice (Left per previous

91 note)

2/15/2019

Hearing aid issued

92 Audicus results show No Hearing Impairment

9/6/2019 H&P Whisper Test

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

Reviewed Audicus hearing results with inmate. Severe loss bilaterally. He is wanting to pursue hearing aid. Order Audicus Clara Right Ear ‐ pending approval by Dr Kemen

8/19/2019

Hearing aid issued to inmate & he was educated on

use and care of hearing aid, battery exchange,

loss/theft, etc. Inmate verbally understood &

demonstrated use

3/19/2019

Has to debrox before Whisper Test can be performed.

9/23/2019

Audicus results vary from No Impairment at certain 93 frequencies to Severe Impairment
500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 35; 35; 40; 50; 40 dB. RIGHT EAR: 30; 35; 30; 45; 35 dB. 94 PTA: L‐40; R‐35

10/26/2018 7/10/2019

Hearing Aid Evaluation ‐ Dr. Kemen

Audicus Oro for R ear approved

11/11/2018

Reviewed results w/inmate. He agrees to $10 co‐

pay for HA & wants to order R HA. Advised him to

Audicus results. Mild hearing loss bilaterally, right f/u w/ADA coordinator to address TTY use as I have

ear slightly better than L. He agrees that he does explained HA will improve his impairment and he

want a Right hearing aid. He is asking if he is able to shouldn't need any additional device. AUDICUS

use TTY device to type text for his class d/t his

CLARA FOR RIGHT EAR (mild hearing impairment)

hearing impairment

Pending approval of medical director

7/10/2019

Left ear ‐ Moderate impairment at 4000 Hz; Right ear mild

95 impairment at 2000 Hz and Severe at 4000 Hz

10/18/2019 Provider visit; review Audicus results from 10/9/18 Hearing aids (pending approval from Dr Kemen)

10/19/2018

96 Audicus Dia II R Ear APPROVED

9/17/2018 HA Issued

Refer to Hears To You for testing d/t cannot understand

97 Audicus instructions

8/13/2019

Outside appt at Hears To You

HA issued to IM in working order

3/5/2019

Severe loss both ears; however, he only requires a

moderate amount of amplification in order to

understand conversation. PTA: R‐82; L‐78

9/13/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz. LEFT EAR: 40; 40; 60; 80; 98 80 dB. RIGHT EAR: 30; 45; 45; 60; 65 dB. PTA: L‐55; R‐45 7/17/2019

Audicus online hearing test done on 1/15/19 was 99 reviewed. Audicus Clara for Right Ear
100 Failed Whisper test / referred to Audiologist

3/22/2019 6/19/2017

Hearing aide request (APRN Lyons). Inmate not present.
Hearing aid issued Audicus Hearing Booth

Audicus Clara Right Ear requested. Pending

approval of medical director. (Dr Kemen)

7/18/2019

Hearing aid issued to inmate in good working order.

Inmate was educated on use, care, battery

placement & exchange, loss of device & cost of

replacement. Inmate verbalized understanding 4/18/2019

Results pending

7/13/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 157

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 418 of 985 - Page ID#: 4006

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

90 Dr Kemen ‐ Addendum 91 Hearing aid f/u 92 Audicus 93 Issued HA

Order for Audicus Clara Right Ear ‐ APPROVED

9/24/2019

To medical for f/u on hearing aid. He received right

hearing aid 4 weeks ago. He is wearing today and states

no issues with device. States it works well for him.

Encouraged him to wear HA to all appts. He understands.

F/U with HOH nurse if issues with hearing aid.

14‐Oct

Hearing aide issued Audicus

PTA: L‐31 R‐46

10/7/2019

Issued Right Audicus Oro to inmate. Showed inmate basic

functions/battery replacement/volume control. Issued a

pack of 312 batteries, cleaning brush & extra ear buds.

Demonstrated how to wear HA. Inmate verbalized

understanding.

6/4/2019

Provider Review Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

*Addendum by Dr Kemen on bottom of APRN 94 Himler's order
95 Hearing aid evaluation by Dr Kemen 96 Hearing aid batteries stolen

ORDER APPROVED FOR AUDICUS CLARA RIGHT EAR Patient does not meet the criteria for a prescription hearing aid specified in the DOC hearing loss policy dated 5/31/18. PCP may order a pocket talker at his/her discretion

8/1/2019 10/26/2018

Hearing Aid issued Issued pocket talker

Patient educated to fill out a theft report, and report to

dorm 12 to obtain new batteries today.

3/6/2019

Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

97 Provider Review

HA recommended by provider and approved by Dr. Kemen 10/2/2019 Hearing Aid issued

*ADDENDUM on Lyons' note of 7/17/19.* (by Dr

98 Kemen)

Audicus Clara Right Ear ‐ order approved by Dr Kemen

8/1/2019

99 Scheduled for a 30 day hearing aid f/u

Patient came to appt & didn't stay because he had canteen. Came back 2 hrs. later but was told we would reschedule the appt

5/2/2019

100 Provider assessment on Audicus results

Issued L HA

3/6/2019

Issue of Hearing Aid
Hearing aid follow up Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 158

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 419 of 985 - Page ID#: 4007

AI

AJ

AK

AL

AM

1 Medical Visit 8 ‐ Outcome Hearing aide issued to patient in good working order. Patient educated on usage, care, maintenance, exchange of batteries, and replacement of device. Instructed to wear it to all
90 appts.

Medical Visit 9 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Date

Noted that Hearing Aid had already been issued so 91 Audiology not performed. H
Moderate loss on right and no impairment on left. 92 No intervention at this time.
Answered YES to Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? And YES to Is the hearing aid working 93 okay?

Hearing aid issued to inmate in working order. Inmate educated as to use, care, battery exchange, loss of device, etc. Inmate verbalized 94 understanding.
Issued inmate a pocket talker. Instructed how to operate, battery placement & exchange. Inmate 95 demonstrated understanding. Answered YES to Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? And YES to Is the hearing aid working 96 okay? Hearing aid issued to inmate & he was educated on use and care of hearing aid, battery exchange, loss/theft, etc. Inmate verbally understood & 97 demonstrated use Hearing aid issued to inmate & he was educated on use and care of hearing aid, battery exchange, loss/theft, etc. Inmate verbally understood & 98 demonstrated use States left hearing aid is working well. He states he usually wears it except to crowded places. TMs clear. Encouraged inmate to wear hearing aid as 99 ordered and to all medical appts. He agrees. Answered No to all questions (emailed HOH nurse 100 to check on HA)

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 159

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 420 of 985 - Page ID#: 4008

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

101 11/5/2018 102 1/17/2018 103 8/22/2019

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire Chronic Care appt. Sick Call

11/5/2018 11/18/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

1/12/2018 8/22/2019

12/2/2019 2/6/2020

Failed questionnaire Sick call with c/o trouble hearing; failed questionnaire

A ‐ Audicus Clara for Left Ear D ‐ Pocket Talker A‐ Adicus Clara Left

104 5/30/2018

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

5/14/2019 5/14/2019 Failed questionnaire

D ‐ Does not qualify for a hearing aid at this time. Per Dr Kemen, Right Ear Mild; Left Ear Normal

105 3/6/2019 106 7/19/2017 107 9/29/2017
108 3/27/2017 109 3/1/2018

Intake Assessment (to KSR) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire Annual Hearing Screening Intake Screening
referred from staff Annual Hearing Screen

3/6/2019 7/19/2017
9/29/2017

3/7/2019 7/25/2018
6/5/2019

Failed questionnaire

A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA RIGHT EAR

D ‐ (Lost‐Refused testing for new Hearing Aids) still

3+ yes/ sometimes

has ID

Answered Yes to Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid? And Yes to Is the hearing aid working

okay?

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)

4/24/2017 3/1/2018

11/18/2019 3/5/2019

3+ yes/ sometimes; including YES to Currently has

and uses a hearing aid, and YES to Is the hearing aid

working okay?

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)

3+ yes/ sometimes; Including YES to Currently has &

uses a hearing aid and YES to Is hearing aid working

okay?

D ‐ Pocket Talker

110 8/21/2018 111 12/22/2017
112 6/22/2018

Intake Assessment (to LLCC) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire
Intake Assessment

8/21/2018 9/4/19 12/22/2017 10/3/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 25; 20; 35; 80; 80 dB. RIGHT EAR: 25; 25; 35; 80; 75 dB. 3 + yes/sometimes; Yes to currently has & uses a HA; No to is HA working okay. Will call up to see what is wrong with HA

A ‐ Audicus Clara for Right Ear A (Left Only) (HTY)

Intake Hearing Screening Questionnaire

6/22/2018 7/1/2019

Passed questionnaire. Answered YES to 'Do you

currently have and use a hearing aid?' and YES to 'Is

the hearing aid working okay?'

A ‐ Audicus Oro Right Ear

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 160

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 421 of 985 - Page ID#: 4009

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

101 No 102 N/A 103 NO

11/5/2018 1/12/2018 8/22/2019

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire chronic care appt Sick Call ‐ hearing issues

3 + yes/sometimes

11/19/18 Whisper test

Failed Whisper test

1/12/2018

Inmate with complaints of trouble hearing. Will get

scheduled for whisper test

8/22/2019

Whisper Test Hearing Screening Questionnaire d/t Sick Call ‐ Trouble Hearing

104 N/A
105 No 106 N/A 107 Yes 108 Yes 109 N/A

5/30/2018 PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

6/21/18

F/U 1 month hearing eval. Whisper test

3/6/2019 7/19/2017

Intake Assessment (to KSR) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

6/14/2019

Annual Screening‐ Answered yes to 3+ referred to

provider

7/31/2017

Was scheduled for a whisper test

9/29/2017 Intake Screening

3+ yes / sometimes

10/10/2017 Provider screening

4/27/2015

wick placed by ENT, refused to go out for follow up and wants NP to remove wick

3/30/2018 Provider Screening

Failed Whisper test / Referred to hearing booth 6/14/2018 Hearing Booth

110 NO 111 Yes

8/21/2018

Intake Assessment (to KSR) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

12/22/2017 New Intake Screening (RCC)

3+ yes/ sometimes on screen

8/23/2018 Whisper test 1/10/2018 H&P

112 No

6/22/2018 Intake Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

7/5/2018 Whisper Test & Tuning Fork

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 161

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 422 of 985 - Page ID#: 4010

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

101 Failed portable hearing exam; refer to audiology 12/5/2018

102 Referred to Hears to You

6/2/2018

103 Failed questionnaire. Will schedule for whisper test 9/4/19

Audicus hearing booth Hears to You Whisper Test

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; & 8000 Hz respectively. Left ear: 25;

25; 40; 80; 65 dB. Right ear: 30; 35; 40; 80; 65 dB.

1/3/2019

BL Full shell Rexton Hearing Aids recommended

7/17/2018

Failed Whisper Test‐referred to audiology.

10/25/2019

Inmate passed tuning fork and whisper test on left

104 but not on right. Will refer to audiology.

7/11/2018

Audicus hearing booth

Patient with bilateral cerumen impaction. Debrox

to ears for 3 days, then treatment room for lavage.

105 Re‐check hearing next week.

7/8/2019

106 IM referred to HTY by provider

8/24/2017

Whisper Test

107 referred to HTY

10/26/2017 HTY screening

No sign of impairment

10/10/2018

Patient's canals are clear. Failed whisper test. Schedule Audicus testing
BL HA ordered

7/15/2019 9/8/2017

BL HA ordered

11/17/2018

108 wick removed by NP. 109 Never Resulted so will retest

1/30/2017 7/24/2018 Hearing Booth

issued pocket talker Mild/Moderate Impairment

3/27/2017 8/3/2018

Passed whisper test. No need for further hearing

110 evaluation.

9/7/2018

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

111 Referred to HTY

1/22/2018 HTY‐ hearing test

Passed whisper and tuning fork test on the right but

had more difficulty on the left. Will refer to

112 audiology

7/9/2018

Hearing Booth

3 + yes/sometimes BL HA recommended/ IM requested only LHA
Mild impairment Right ear at 2000Hz

9/21/2018 2/10/2018
10/10/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 162

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 423 of 985 - Page ID#: 4011

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

101 Hearing Screening Questionnaire 102 HA Evaluation with Dr. Kemen 103 Audicus Test
104 Retested under new Audicus decibel level

3 + yes/sometimes

1/16/2019

Hearing loss not severe enough to require HA per DOC policy 8/10/2018

PTA: L‐85 R‐85

11/19/2019

Audicus Results ‐ Angela Himler APRN F/U to discuss audiology results Provider Review

500; 1000; 2000; 4000 Hz, respectively. LEFT EAR: Moderate

impairment at 4000 Hz. RIGHT EAR: Mild impairment at 500

Hz; Severe impairment at 4000 Hz.

11/15/2018

Review Audicus results with provider. Left ear moderate at 4000 Hz; Right ear mild at 500 and severe at 4000 Hz.

105 Audicus Hearing Booth 106
107

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz. LEFT: 60; 55; 60; 80; 80 dB.

RIGHT: 50; 50; 55; 80; 80 dB. PTA: L‐64; R‐59

8/14/2019

BL HA issued per HTY

7/9/2018

Rexton BL HA issued

3/28/2018

Audicus results (Dr Manning) Sick Call
Sick Call Needs Batteries for HA

108 109 Provider review of Audicus Results
110 Whisper test 111 HTY

consult for HTY

4/10/2017

Will order Pocket Talker

8/13/2018

August 2018 ‐

Present (March

2019) ‐ Patient

being treated for

Failed whisper test. Patient reports past history of difficulty other medical

hearing. Refer to audiology.

issues

L HA issued

3/7/2018

Chronic care visit w/provider

112 RETEST Audicus Hearing Booth

Mild/Moderate & Severe Impairment

10/24/2018

Dr. Kemen ‐ Hearing Aid Evaluation

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 163

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 424 of 985 - Page ID#: 4012

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

Reviewed Audicus results with inmate. ECW message sent

to med director to request hearing aid. Inmate

101 understands

1/17/2019

Does not qualify for HA. May benefit from Pocket Talker.

102 (Pocket Talker ordered 8/14/18)

8/15/2018

Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr. Kemen. Inmate not present
Pocket Talker

Audicus Clara for Left ear approved

2/15/2019

Pocket Talker issued to IM in good working order. 12/6/2018

103 Re‐test 104 Refer to medical director for review

11/21/2019 11/21/2018

Audicus Re‐Test
Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen. Audicus online hearing test done on 10/10/18 was reviewed.

L‐76 R‐78

1/8/2020

Patient does not meet the criteria for a prescription

hearing aid specified in the DOC hearing loss policy

dated 5/31/18. RIGHT EAR MILD; LEFT EAR

NORMAL. PCP may order a pocket talker at his/her

discretion.

5/14/2019

Severe impairment both ears. Right ear is better ear. Audicus Clara for Right Ear. (Pending approval by Dr 105 Kemen, Medical Director) Reports HA were stolen 1 month after he got them / 106 Never reported to medical until today / refer to provider

9/20/2019 7/25/2018

Provider Review Annual Hearing Screening

HA Ordered. Approved by Dr. Kemen 9/23/19 3 + yes/sometimes

9/23/2019 8/8/2018

107 issued 2 # 13 HA batteries

6/11/2018 Sick Call Requesting batteries for HA

Issued 2 # 13 HA batteries

7/8/2018

108 HTY ordered BL HA (PTA: R ‐ 28; L ‐ 70) 109 Pocket Talker Issued

4/19/2017 8/21/2018 Interview w/ADA Coordinator

BL HA issued per HTY

11/5/2018

IM states Pocket Talker isn't working properly. New

one being ordered.

8/22/2018

110 111 Check with nursing to get HA batteries
112 Audicus Oro for Right Ear

3/4/2019 5/3/2018
11/8/2018

Audicus hearing booth Chronic care visit w/provider; chronic, progressing sensorineural hearing loss, bilateral
HA issued

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT

EAR: 25; 20; 35; 80; 80 dB. RIGHT EAR: 25; 25; 35;

80; 75 dB.

3/6/2019

Prev pt had surg both ears; deaf in R ear, minimal

hearing in L ear. Pt had not had hearing aids

previously

10/8/2018

Issued Right Hearing Aid to inmate. Educated

inmate on basic usage, battery replacement,

volume control, etc. Issued a pack of 312 batteries,

cleaning brush, and extra ear buds. Demonstrated

how to wear HA. I/M verbalized understanding. 7/1/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 164

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 425 of 985 - Page ID#: 4013

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description
101 Hearing aid issued 102 Hearing Screening Questionnaire 103 Provider Review

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

Hearing aid issued to inmate & he was educated on use

and care of hearing aid, battery exchange, loss/theft, etc.

Inmate verbally understood & demonstrated use

3/13/2019

To medical for f/u on left hearing aid with provider. Inmate recently received left hearing aid, he is wearing it today.

Failed questionnaire

12/12/2019 Whisper Test

Audicus Clara Left ordered and approved.

2/5/2020 HOH Nurse Visit

104 PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

5/15/2019 Annual Physical & Chronic Care

105 106 Return from outside hospital 107 Sick call requesting HA batteries
108 PPD/Hearing Screen 109

Dr. Kemen Approved hearing aid. Audicus Clara Right

10/28/2019

IM returned from Norton's Brownsboro after 1 week stay

for CVA

1/22/2019

HOH Nurse Visit Whisper Test

Issued 2 # 13 HA batteries

6/5/2019 Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3+ yes/ sometimes; including YES to Currently has and uses a hearing aid, and YES to Is the hearing aid working okay? 4/12/2019

Inmate brought his hearing aid to Lesa Robinson this morning stating it was broken. (Dropped on floor, ran over with his wheelchair)

Given new Pocket Talker

3/5/2019 PPD/Hearing screen

110 Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen. 111 Annual TB & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Audicus online hearing test done on 3/1/19 was reviewed.

Audicus Clara for Right Ear approved

3/22/2019

3 + yes/sometimes; Yes to currently has & uses a HA; No to

is HA working okay. Called and dorm nurse addressed

issue with volume.

Hearing aid issued

112 PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Passed questionnaire. Answered YES to 'Do you currently have and use a hearing aid?' and YES to 'Is the hearing aid working okay?'

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 165

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 426 of 985 - Page ID#: 4014

AI

AJ

AK

AL

AM

Medical Visit 9 ‐

1 Medical Visit 8 ‐ Outcome

Date

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Description

States it works well & his hearing has improved with

hearing device. No c/o today. Advised inmate to

f/u with HOH nurse if any issues with hearing aid, he

101 understands.

Cleaned ears. Passed whisper test. No further

102 testing needed.

Hearing Aid issued. Instructions given on care and

103 use.

Has a recent Audicus result from 10/2018 on file showing only moderate hearing loss at 4000 Hz and no other impairment in Left ear. Does not qualify 104 for a hearing aid.

Inmate issued hearing aid at this time. Inmate educated on how to clean hearing aid and how to change batteries. Inmate advised that a $10 charge 105 will be charged to have hearing aid replaced.

106 Failed whisper test

4/10/2019

Answered Yes to Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid? And Yes to Is the hearing aid working

107 okay?

Lesa spoke with ADA Wathen, then called HTY to

check on warranty. It's good until 5/11/19 but

there will be a $350 charge to replace/repair. Will

108 need to be approved first?

4/18/2019

3+ yes/ sometimes; Including YES to Currently has &

uses a hearing aid and YES to Is hearing aid working

109 okay?

Audicus Hearing Booth Shipped hearing aides

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Date

Inmate signed refusal for Audicus testing

Inmate signed co‐pay form and hearing aids were

shipped to Hears To You for repair.

5/13/2019

Hearing aid issued to inmate. Inmate educated on usage, care, battery exchange, etc. Inmate 110 verbalized understanding.
111

112

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 166

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 427 of 985 - Page ID#: 4015

AN

AO

AP

AQ

1 Medical Visit 10 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

11 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 11 ‐ Description

101 102 103

104

105 106 107
108 Hearing aid 109

Patient was given 2 hearing aids that were sent out for repair. He was educated on taking care of his hearing aids and that new policy states he is required to have only one hearing aid now. He verbally understood

110 111 112
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 167

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 428 of 985 - Page ID#: 4016

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

113 9/5/2018

Annual hearing screening

9/5/2018 9/4/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

114 11/7/2018

Annual H & P; Hearing screening questionnaire 11/7/2018 7/29/2019 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ Audicus Oro for Right ear A ‐ Audicus Clara Right Ear

115 5/7/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

116 7/19/2017

Annual Hearing Screening

5/7/2019 7/19/2017

5/7/2019 7/15/2019

Failed questionnaire

A‐ Audicus Clara Left

Answered Yes to "Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid?" but No to "Is the hearing aid working

okay?" Will co‐sign to HOH nurse to call him up and

check his hearing aid

A ‐ Right (Audicus)

117 6/4/2019
118 8/2/2019 119 9/28/2018 120 10/9/2018 121 1/9/2019 122 9/17/2018 123 12/3/2018

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

6/4/2019 6/4/2019 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA LEFT EAR

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

8/2/2019

8/2/2019

Failed questionnaire. States he used to wear a

hearing aid and when he got locked up he left it at

home.

A‐ Audicus Clara Left

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

9/28/2018 8/2/2019 Failed questionnaire

D ‐ No indication for hearing device at this time.

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

80 dB hearing loss at all frequencies bilaterally. 10/9/2018 10/8/2019 Provider is referring for outside testing

A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA LEFT EAR

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

1/9/2019 1/7/2020 3 + yes/sometimes

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

9/17/2018 9/4/2019 Failed Whisper Test‐ refer to audiology.

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

12/3/2018 12/3/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

A ‐ Audicus Clara for Right Ear D‐ (Declined. Hearing aid was ordered and arrived‐ IM declined all accommodations and identification.)
D ‐ Does not meet criteria for HA per DOC policy at this time. Was offered a pocket talker and refused.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 168

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 429 of 985 - Page ID#: 4017

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

113 No 114 No

9/5/2018

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

11/7/2018

Annual H & P; Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire. TMs normal. Refer for Audicus audiogram

9/11/2018 Whisper test 12/14/2018 Audicus hearing booth

115 no 116 Yes

5/7/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

7/31/2017 Provider hearing evaluation

Failed questionnaire recommends ear flush, then F/U

6/4/2019 Whisper test 9/29/2017 reevaluation on hearing

117 No
118 No 119 N/A 120 No 121 No 122 N/A 123 N/A

6/4/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

6/7/2019 CC; H & P

8/2/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire. States he used to wear a

hearing aid and when he got locked up he left it at

home.

8/22/2019

Annual Physical

9/28/2018 PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

10/23/2018 Whisper Test

10/9/2018 PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

Appointment with provider. Having hearing 4/29/2019 trouble. Whisper test

1/9/2019

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

1/16/2019 Whisper test

9/17/2018 Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

10/15/2018 Whisper Test

12/3/2018 Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + YES/SOMETIMES

12/28/2018 Portable Screening Audiometer

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 169

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 430 of 985 - Page ID#: 4018

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

113 Failed whisper. Refer to audiology

9/17/2018 Audicus Hearing Booth

Will have to reschedule. Inmate was in SAP & unable to come

to appt

10/19/2018

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz. LEFT EAR: 45; 35; 114 40; 65; 45 dB. RIGHT EAR: 35; 30; 30; 45; 20 dB. 12/20/2018
115 Failed whisper test. Refer to Audicus hearing booth 6/13/2019

Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen. Patient is not Right ear mild; Left ear mild to moderate impairment.

present. Audicus online hearing test was reviewed. Audicus Clara for Right Ear

12/21/2019

Patient was in the hearing booth today but unable to

complete the test. The instructions were explained to him

several times, and he said he understood. He was in the

booth for one hour, then the tech checked on him and he had

not progressed at all. He said "it's yellow, I don't hear

anything. I haven't heard anything the whole time." Tech

Audicus hearing booth ‐ attempted

emailed provider to see how they want to proceed.

7/29/2019

116 Referred to RCC booth

12/8/2017 Consult placed for HTY

Appt Scheduled

3/24/2018

Failed whisper test. Both TM wnl and canal clear

117 from debris. Refer to Audicus onsite exam

7/8/2019

Audicus hearing booth

Patient unable to complete test. Provider notified

7/31/2019

Refer to Audicus hearing exam. Will need 118 assistance for entire test process.

9/5/2019

Audicus

119 Inmate failed portable screening; refer to audiology 11/13/2018 Audicus Hearing Booth

120 Failed hearing test. Refer to onsite audiogram

5/13/2019 Audicus hearing booth

121 Failed whisper test. Refer to audiology Failed portable screening. States "I don't really have trouble hearing." Impacted cerumen R ear.
122 Flush ears, then refer to Audicus hearing booth

2/11/2019 10/24/2018

Audicus hearing booth Hearing Booth

123 Failed portable screening; refer to audiology

1/3/2019

Audicus hearing booth

Completed audiology. Awaiting results and provider review. 9/6/2019

Mild impairment bilaterally at 4000 Hz

1/17/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. Both LEFT & RIGHT ears, 80 dB at ALL frequencies. PTA BOTH EARS: 80 5/14/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. Left Ear: 70; 70;

80; 80; 80 dB. Right Ear: 60; 70; 75; 80; 80 dB.

2/25/2019

Unable to complete the test. Stated he could not hear anything.

11/12/2018

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; & 8000 Hz respectively. Left Ear: 25;

20; 35; 80; 35 dB. Right Ear: 25; 25; 30; 65; 20 dB.

2/28/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 170

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 431 of 985 - Page ID#: 4019

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

113 Hearing Booth

Audicus results show moderate/severe impairment

10/31/2018

Provider review of Audicus results

114 ADDENDUM on bottom of 12/20/18 note.

Order Approved for Audicus Clara Right Ear

1/11/2019

Hears To You referral. Inmate not present. Chart review is for inmate unable to complete Audicus 115 hearing exam. Needing referral to Hears To You.

Refer to HTY for outside testing. Unable to complete Audicus hearing exam.

9/6/2019

Audicus

116 HTY visit 117 Outside exam at Hears To You

Recommends BL Hearing aids

6/5/2018

Patient has a mild mid frequency loss & moderate to

moderately severe high frequency loss, slightly worse on the

right side.

PTA: R‐38; L‐33

8/2/2019

Hearing aide request. Inmate not present

118 Audicus Results 119 Audicus results ‐ Dr. Manning
120 Audicus review only, no visit. 121 Pocket talker issued 122 Hearing Evaluation ‐ Christina Lyons APRN 123 Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen

PTA: L‐ 60 R‐76 Discrepancy noticed. Retest.

9/23/2019

Reviewed Audicus results with patient. No indication for

hearing device at this point.

2/18/2019

Inmate online Audicus test does not match patient

presentation. Inmate understands spoken word, but

audiogram reads flat 80 dB hearing loss at all frequencies.

Will request consult for audiogram only at Hears To You. 6/20/2019

Patient was issued a pocket talker while he waits for his

hearing aids to come in. Patient verbally understood use of

pocket talker & getting batteries on Friday.

3/6/2019

Audicus Re‐test Results Audicus results with APRN Lyons. States he hears ringing in ears at times. Communicates with provider without issue.
Outside appt at Hears To You
To medical for f/u Audicus results with provider

Referral to Hears To You for Audiogram Patient doesn't meet the criteria for a prescription HA per DOC policy. PCP may order a pocket talker at his/her discretion

11/29/2018 4/1/2019

Appt at Hears to You Discuss hearing aid issues. Per Dr. Kemen's 2/28/19 note, patient didn't qualify for HA at this time. He was offered a pocket talker per Dr Kemen's note.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 171

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 432 of 985 - Page ID#: 4020

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

113 HA (approval required) (order pending approval)

11/9/2018 Dr Kemen Hearing Aid Evaluation

114 1 Audicus hearing aid issued to inmate

1/31/2019 F/U new hearing aid

Audicus Oro for ear of patient's choice Not currently wearing hearing aid. Said he doesn't wear it to work in the greenhouse because he is afraid it will fall in the water. Otherwise when he wears it it works well.

11/30/2018 2/26/2019

No tones heard in either ear. Recommended that he be

115 referred to outside audiology.

11/21/2019 Hears to You

Audiogram reviewed Dr. Kemen ordered Audicus HA for

116 Right ear

6/18/2018

Issued Right Hearing Aid from Audicus

Ordered Audicus Clara for Left/approved by Dr. Kemen 11/27/19

12/13/2019

Hearing aid working properly and demonstrated

how to use.

7/15/2019

Audicus Clara Left Ear (pending approval of medical 117 director)

8/5/2019

Addendum on bottom of hearing aid request of 8/2/19

DR KEMEN APPROVES ORDER FOR AUDICUS CLARA

LEFT EAR

8/27/2019

118 PTA: L‐ 65 R‐74 Awaiting provider review.

10/11/2019 Audicus Review

Audicus results reviewed, does not meet requirements for

119 hearing aid at this time.

8/2/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Hearing aid approved by Dr. Kemen Failed questionnaire

11/5/2019 8/14/2019

120 PTA: R‐ 68; L ‐ 57
Reviewed Audicus results. Send message to medical 121 director requesting hearing aid

6/24/2019 3/6/2019

Provider (APRN Lyons) Review of HTY results
Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen. Patient not present

122 Decibels: R ‐ 25; L ‐ 67

11/29/18

Patient refused pocket talker. Patient was educated on

123 yearly hearing assessments. He verbally understood.

12/3/2019

Appt w/provider to review results H&P; Hearing screening questionnaire

Audicus Clara L Ear requested ‐ Pending approval by

medical director

7/23/2019

Audicus Clara for Right Ear approved Severe hearing loss at greater than 2 frequencies bilaterally per audiogram. Will forward to medical director for review for hearing aid

3/22/2019 12/17/2018

Failed Questionaire

1/10/2020

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 172

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 433 of 985 - Page ID#: 4021

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description 113 Issued Right Audicus hearing aid

Medical Visit

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

Issued Right Audicus Oro to inmate. Showed inmate basic

functions, battery placement, volume control. Issued pk of

312 batteries, cleaning brush & extra ear buds.

Demonstrated how to wear HA. Inmate verbalized

understanding.

114
115 HOH Nurse Visit 116 PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire
117 HOH Nurse Visit
118 HOH Nurse Visit 119 Whisper Test 120 Hearing aid issued 121 Hearing aid issued 122 Dr Kemen hearing aid evaluation 123 HOH Nurse Visit

Re‐issued 1 repaired hearing aid to inmate

7/23/2019

Patient received hearing aid and was educated on usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient verbalized understanding & demonstrated use.

Answered Yes to "Do you currently have and use a hearing aid?" but No to "Is the hearing aid working okay?" Will co‐ sign to HOH nurse to call him up and check his hearing aid Issued Left Audicus Clara to inmate. Showed inmate basic functions/battery replacement/volume control. Issued a pack of batteries, cleaning brush & extra ear buds. Demonstrated how to wear HA. Inmate verbalized understanding. Issued Left Audicus Clara to inmate. Showed inmate basic functions/battery replacement/volume control. Issued a pack of batteries, cleaning brush & extra ear buds. Demonstrated how to wear HA. Inmate verbalized understanding.
Passed Whisper Test. Hearing aid was issued to inmate in good working order. He was educated on the usage, care, maintenance, battery exchange, co‐pays, problems w/hearing aid, etc. He verbalized understanding Hearing aid issued to inmate in working order. Inmate educated as to use, care, battery exchange, loss & replacement cost. Inmate verbalized understanding.
Audicus Clara for Right Ear approved
Signed refusal for further testing.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 173

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 434 of 985 - Page ID#: 4022

AI

AJ

AK

AL

AM

1 Medical Visit 8 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 9 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Date

113 114 Transferred from LSCC to KSR

115 116
117
118 119 120 121 122 123
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 174

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 435 of 985 - Page ID#: 4023

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

124 11/14/2018

Hearing Screening Questionnaire

11/14/2018 11/18/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

C‐ Audicus Clara Left

125 9/16/2018 126 5/2/2018

Hearing Screening Questionnaire Annual Hearing Screening

127 10/22/2018 128 5/8/2019

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

9/16/2018 2/7/2014

12/3/2019 5/8/2019

Failed Whisper Test‐ refer to audiology. Answered Yes to Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? And Yes to Is the hearing aid working okay?

A ‐ Audicus Clara for Right Ear A ‐ Left (HTY)

10/22/2018 10/8/2019 3 + yes/sometimes 5/8/2019 5/8/2019 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ Audicus Clara for Left Ear A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA LEFT EAR

129 7/30/2019 130 11/21/2018

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire
Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

7/30/2019 7/30/2019 Failed questionnaire 12/3/2018 8/5/2019 Failed whisper test; refer to audiology

A‐ Left Audicus Clara A ‐ Audicus Clara Left

131 3/3/2019 132 6/13/2018

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire Intake

3/3/2019 3/3/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

A ‐ Audicus Clara Right Ear

6/13/2018

7/30/2019

Answered YES to "Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid?" and YES to "Is the hearing aid working

okay?" However; patient also states hearing aid is

functioning, but not assisting with hearing even

with volume all the way up. Educated to return to

have hearing aid evaluated for possible issues.

A ‐ Right (Audicus)

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 175

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 436 of 985 - Page ID#: 4024

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

124 No

11/14/2018 Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome 3 + yes/sometimes

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

12/31/18

Whisper test; IM states hearing difficulties have been a recent change & he only has issues sometimes

125 No 126 Yes
127 No 128 No

9/16/2018 Hearing Screening Questionnaire

2/7/2014

U of L Audiology

10/22/2018 PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

5/8/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes recommended L HA
3 + yes/sometimes Failed questionnaire

10/10/2018 Whisper Test 4/19/2016 HTY

11/1/2018 Whisper Test

5/8/19

Whisper Test

129 No 130 NO 131 No

7/30/2019 PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

11/21/2018

Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire 3 + yes/sometimes

3/3/2019

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

8/7/2019

Annual physical; whisper test; inmate states he is hard of hearing

12/3/2018 Complete History & Physical.

3/4/2019 H & P; Chronic Care visit with provider

132 No

6/13/2018 Intake Assessment

3+ yes / sometimes

6/18/2018 Provider Hearing Screening

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 176

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 437 of 985 - Page ID#: 4025

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome Left ear TM normal, Right ear TM obscured by dark brown cerumen in canal. Successfully removed impacted cerumen in right canal. No hearing loss
124 per portable audiogram after removal of cerumen

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Date
2/11/2019

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description Whisper Test

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome Passed Whisper test.

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date
11/18/2019

125 Failed audioscope. Refer to audiology.

1/17/2019 Audicus hearing booth

126 issued Left HA

4/21/2018 Provider Visit / Hearing Screening

Failed whisper test (no audioscope available). Refer

127 to audiology

12/27/2018 Audicus hearing booth

128 Failed whisper test. Refer to Audicus testing

5/23/2019 Audicus hearing booth

Bilateral TM wnl; Failed whisper test; Refer for 129 onsite Audicus exam

8/15/2019

Chronic, progressing hearing loss bilaterally. Both ear canals cerumen free. Patient failed whisper 130 test. Patient has not had hearing aids in the past.

12/6/2018

Audicus hearing booth Audiogram (hearing booth)

Failed hearing questionnaire, needing further 131 testing. Refer to audiology

3/20/2019 Audicus hearing booth

Was unable to complete the test. Will have to be sent out for

testing.

4/1/2019

Sent L HA to HTY for repair

5/10/2017

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; & 8000 Hz respectively. Left Ear: 50; 50; 50; 75; 50 dB. Right Ear: 50; 55; 55; 80; 65 dB. Unable to complete hearing test. States he couldn't hear anything, and when I left the room he just sat there and didn't move to the next screen for 30 minutes. Patient unable to complete test. He stated he doesn't know anything about computers and wasn't comfortable. Nurse explained that he only had to push 2 buttons & he stated he understood. She watched 1st 5 mins then returned after 10 more mins to check on him. He had exited the test and was just staring at computer hitting the red button. Nurse restarted the test, and he still was unable to complete it.

1/29/2019 6/26/2019
9/6/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. RIGHT EAR: 30; 35; 40; 50; not tested. LEFT EAR: 25; 35; 45; 65; not tested. 12/14/2018

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 25;

20; 10; 45; 65 dB. RIGHT EAR: 20; 25; 15; 40; 65 dB.

3/26/2019

132 Failed Whisper test

6/19/2018 Medical Director Review

R HA approved and ordered

7/19/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 177

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 438 of 985 - Page ID#: 4026

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

124 TB/Hearing Screen

Failed Hearing Screen

11/25/2019

Audicus

125 Audicus hearing booth

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 25;

15; 25; 80; 80 dB. RIGHT EAR: 15; 10; 20; 80; 70 dB.

4/11/2019

Audicus F/U (ARNP Haun). Inmate underwent Audicus testing on 4/1/19. Results reveal inmate failed 2 frequencies in bilateral ears.

126 Hearing aid returned from HTY

L hearing aid returned to inmate in proper working order 5/2/2018

Annual Hearing Screening

Hearing Aid Evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen. Patient not 127 present
128 Outside appt at Hears To You for hearing test

Audicus Clara for Left Ear approved

2/15/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 25;

30; 30; 35; 55 dB. RIGHT EAR: 30; 40; 40; 40; 60 dB. PTA: L‐

28; R‐38

7/16/2019

Hearing aid issued Hearing Aide Request (APRN Lyons)

129 Audicus

Awaiting results‐ No tones heard in either ear. Recommended that he retest/reinstruct.

Hearing aid evaluation by Dr. Kemen. Patient is not

present. R ear mild to moderate; L ear mild to

130 moderate.

Audicus Clara for ear of patient's choice approved

Chart review is for Audicus results. (APRN Himler) Reviewed Audicus hearing results. Hearing aid is not

131 Inmate not present.

indicated at this time.

9/19/2019

Audicus hearing booth

12/26/2018

Hearing aid issued

4/8/2019

Hearing F/U. Inmate to CPTU for Audicus hearing exam results.

132

Audicus R HA issued

7/30/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 178

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 439 of 985 - Page ID#: 4027

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

124 L‐ 61 R‐63

12/3/2019 Provider Review

Approved for Audicus Clara for Left

12/20/2019

Hearing is better in Right ear. Order Audicus Clara for 125 Right Ear (pending review and approval by Dr Kemen)

4/15/2019

Addendum at bottom of Mike Haun's note from 4/11/19

Dr Kemen approved order for Audicus Clara for R

Ear

4/27/2019

126 3+ yes/ sometimes

5/4/2018 Provider visit

Hearing aid issued to inmate & he was educated on use

and care of hearing aid, battery exchange, loss/theft, etc.

127 Inmate verbally understood & demonstrated use

3/1/2019

Hearing aid check.

Audicus Clara Left Ear. Pending approval of medical 128 director

7/17/2019 *Addendum on bottom of Lyon's note*

No change in hearing / L HA working properly Patient turned in hearing aid for repair stating that it is cutting on and off. Can't understand voices on one on one conversations. Will be sent out for repair to Audicus.

5/8/2019 3/13/2019

Dr Kemen approves order for AUDICUS CLARA LEFT

EAR

8/1/2019

129 PT: L‐70 R‐78

9/20/2019 Provider Review

130 Hearing aid is issued to inmate

3/20/2019

Left Ear moderate. Right Ear moderate. Reviewed results

with inmate. He agrees to pay DME cost for hearing aid.

131 Audicus Clara for Right Ear ‐ Order pending approval.

4/8/19

Answered YES to "Do you currently have and use a hearing

aid?" and YES to "Is the hearing aid working okay?"

However; patient also states hearing aid is functioning, but

not assisting with hearing even with volume all the way up.

Educated to return to have hearing aid evaluated for

132 possible issues.

8/9/2019

Meeting w/ADA Coordinator
Hearing aid is not functioning. Patient states "I cannot hear on the highest setting."

HA ordered and approved by De. Kemen.

10/11/2019

Inmate stated he was given his hearing aid while at

another institution, but they did not give him any

instructions, information, etc. KSR HOH notified &

she is going to call him up.

3/21/2019

Hearing aid order approved by Dr Kemen

4/26/2019

HA was inspected and this nurse could not hear

anything with it by my ear. Will send off for repair

by Audicus. Patient was offered a pocket talker and

he declined. Refusal signed

8/12/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 179

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 440 of 985 - Page ID#: 4028

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

124 HOH nurse Visit
125 Hearing aid issued 126 Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire 127 Hearing aid re‐issued 128 Issued Hearing Aid

HA issued to IM in working order. Educated as to use & battery replacement. IM verbalized understanding. Hearing aid issued as prescribed. Patient was educated on use of hearing aid and repair (sick call). $10 copay is required for replacement and repair. He verbally understood. Hearing aid placed in right ear. No issues at this time. Will need 30 day f/u with provider.
Answered YES to Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? And YES to Is the hearing aid working okay? Patient was re‐issued his hearing aid, post repairs from Audicus. Educated on use, battery exchange, and not getting it wet. Patient states it works well. Patient verbally understood all education. Hearing aid issued to inmate in working order. Inmate educated as to use, care, battery exchange, loss of device, etc. Inmate verbalized understanding.

129 HOH Nurse Visit 130 Hearing aid education ‐ HOH nurse 131 Received hearing aid

Audicus Clara for Left issued to inmate in working order. Inmate educated as to use, care, battery exchange, loss of device, etc. Inmate verbalized understanding.
New intake from another facility. Inmate was educated on hearing aid usage, care, battery replacement, volume control, loss, etc. Inmate verbalized understanding. Inmate issued hearing aid at this time. Inmate educated on how to clean hearing aid and how to change batteries. Inmate advised that a $10 charge will be charged to have hearing aid replaced.

132 HOH Nurse Visit

Hearing Aid returned to pt. in working order.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 180

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 441 of 985 - Page ID#: 4029

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

133 5/7/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

5/7/2019 5/7/2019 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA RIGHT EAR

134 9/12/2018 135 2/12/2019

Annual Hearing Screening Questionnaire PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

136 8/3/2017

Annual Hearing Screen

9/12/2018 9/12/2018 3 + yes/sometimes 2/12/2019 2/3/2020 Failed whisper test 8/3/2017 7/15/2019 Failed questionnaire

137 9/13/2019 138 7/17/2018

Intake Exam Hearing Test

9/13/2019 2/5/2020 7/17/2018 8/7/2018

Failed questionnaire 3 + yes/sometimes

A ‐ Audicus Clara Right Ear A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA FOR RIGHT EAR
D (Mild hearing loss)
B‐ Declines all but identification. Signed Waiver. NEW SCREEN A ‐ Left (Audicus)

139 10/3/2019 140 5/11/2016 141 1/26/2017

Intake Annual Hearing Screening Annual Hearing Screening

142 7/30/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

10/3/2019 10/3/2019 Failed Questionaire

A‐ Audicus Clara for Right

9/28/2017 1/26/2017

9/4/2019 3/12/2019

3+ yes/ sometimes; YES to he has & uses a HA

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)

3+ yes/ sometimes; including YES to currently has &

uses a hearing aid and YES to hearing aid is working

okay. (inmate has a pocket talker)

D (Pocket Talker)

7/30/2019 7/30/2019 Failed questionnaire

D signed refusal.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 181

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 442 of 985 - Page ID#: 4030

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

133 No

5/7/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

5/23/2019 Whisper test??

134 No 135 NO 136 N/A

9/12/2018 Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire 3 + yes/sometimes

2/12/2019 PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

8/3/2017

Annual Hearing Screen

3+ yes/ sometimes

1/18/19

Whisper Test

3/4/2019 Whisper test

8/9/2017 Whisper Test

137 138 No

9/13/2019 7/17/2018

Intake Exam Hearing Test

Failed questionnaire Moderate to Severe Hearing Loss Bilaterally

9/18/2019 Audicus 7/23/2018 Provider review of results

139 No 140 Yes 141 N/A
142 N/A

10/3/2019 Intake @RCC 5/11/2016 11/14/2012
7/30/2019 PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed Questionaire

10/11/2019 Provider Vistit @RCC

Issued amplifier

6/24/2016

lipoflavonoid recommended for tinnitus, poor

hearing

11/14/2014

Failed questionnaire. Inmate reports he was

previously diagnosed with hearing loss and had a

hearing aide prior to incarceration and has not used

one since then

8/14/2019

Annual physical

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 182

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 443 of 985 - Page ID#: 4031

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 45;

50; 55; 75; 60 dB. RIGHT EAR: 50; 50; 50; 65; 50 dB. PTA: L‐

133

6/7/2019

Audicus hearing booth

56; R‐54

6/11/2019

134 Failed whisper test. Schedule for Audicus testing 2/12/2019 Audicus hearing booth 135 Failed whisper test; bilateral cerumen impaction 3/12/2019 Audicus hearing booth

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. Left Ear: 25; 15;

35; 80; 80 dB. Right Ear: 20; 20; 25; 80; 80 dB.

2/25/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; & 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 25;

20; 30; 70; 65 dB. RIGHT EAR: 20; 20; 20; 70; 60 dB.

3/14/2019

136 Referred to Hears to You

10/17/2017

Mild Hearing loss left ear. No HA's recommended.

7/11/2018

137 PTA: L‐48 R‐54 138 Will refer to Dr. Kemen

10/8/2019 7/23/2018

Audicus HA Eval; Dr. Kemen (Inmate not present)

PTA: L‐51 R‐33 Audicus Oro L Ear Approved

10/9/2019 8/7/2018

139 Failed Audiogram

10/14/2019 Provider Visit

140 audiologist consult/in process

1/10/2017

141 issued amplifier

1/10/2017

Failed whisper test. TM bilat wnl. Refer for Audicus

142 hearing test

8/22/2019

Audicus hearing booth

Issued Pocket Talker @RCC
No documentation of audiology consult being completed. Email to Elaina for appt.

10/14/2020 2/3/2017

Emailed Elaina for appt as IM has not had hearing eval .

4/4/2017

Test complete with assistance from the AA. Awaiting results

from Audicus

9/13/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 183

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 444 of 985 - Page ID#: 4032

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

Patient qualifies for a hearing aid. Order Audicus Clara for

133 Audicus review/Hearing aid order ‐ Dr Fortwengler Right Ear (pending approval)

6/11/2019

Dr Kemen ‐ review

134 135 Dr Kemen ‐ Hearing aid evaluation

Results being sent to provider Audicus Clara for Right Ear

136 Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

3/26/2019 4/1/2019

Review of Audicus results (Dr Manning) Hearing aid issued

7/17/2018

Provider visit; whisper test

137 Chronic Care Visit Intake assessment to KSR; Hearing Screen
138 Questionnaire

Declines Hearing Aid but wants ID. 3 + yes/sometimes

11/8/2019 8/14/2018

ADA Meeting

139 H&P 140 141 142 Audicus Results

Audicus Clara for Right ordered and approved.

11/1/2019

spoke with medical director Michael Jordan about inmate

John Miller states he will get the inmate in to see a provider.

Inmate Miller does have pocket talker.

2/21/2017

referral for HTY placed

4/13/2017

Provider Review

PTA: L‐44 R‐46

9/23/2019

Provider Review

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 184

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 445 of 985 - Page ID#: 4033

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

133 Hearing aid order approved for Audicus Clara Right Ear 7/2/2019

Patient here to review Audicus results. No hearing devices

currently used. Right and Left ear with 2 or more > 35 dB.

134 Refer for hearing aid.

3/29/2019

Patient received hearing aid and was educated on usage,

care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient

135 verbalized understanding & demonstrated use.

2/4/2020

Had audiogram previously for HOH, didn't meet

requirements for HA. Normal communication w/normal

speech; occasionally asks to repeat responses. Borderline

136 hearing loss, no HA recommended

7/15/2019

*Addendum on 6/11 note* by HOH Nurse Bentley Pocket talker given, waiting on hearing aid

7/2/2019

Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen. Patient is not present.

Audicus online hearing test done on 2/12/19 was

reviewed. Right Ear severe high frequency loss; Left

Ear severe high frequency loss. Audicus Clara for

Right Ear

4/27/2019

HOH Nurse Visit

"Can't hear out of it" (hearing aid)

2/19/2020

PPD/Hearing Screening

Failed questionnaire

7/19/2019

137 Decline Haring Aids but not ID. Was given hearing aid per K Diaz‐Esquivel AA. Provided
138 with instructions to care for hearing aid.

2/5/2020 12/3/2019

Annual H&P

139 Issued Hearing Aid @RCC

1/27/2020

Failed Hearing Screen‐ refer for Whisper test‐ but

has cerumen impaction. Follow up in 2 weeks.

2/12/2020

Hearing Aid turned in for repair

1/10/2020

CTO emailed to say he had lost his HA for the third time. The first two times it was recovered, but this time they cannot locate it. IM advised to get a theft report and CTO asked to help him with the process. 2/5/2020

140 HTY recommended BL HA 141 IM signed a refusal for HTY Outside medical trip .

3/13/2017 3/21/2018 Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

BL HA issued per HTY 3 + yes/sometimes; including YES to Currently has and uses a hearing aid and YES to hearing aid is working okay

7/20/2018 7/26/2018

142 HA Ordered. Approved by Dr. Kemen 9/24/19.

IM refused Hearing Aid and was a no show to all 10/23/2019 Appointment w/HOH Nurse to receive Hearing Aid attempts to meet with ADA Coordinator

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 185

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 446 of 985 - Page ID#: 4034

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description
133 Hearing aid given
134 Hearing aid issued Met with HOH Nurse for cleaning and trouble
135 shooting issue resolved

Medical Visit

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

Pocket talker returned. Hearing aid issued to inmate in

good working order. Inmate was educated on policy,

usage, care, maintenance, battery exchange, co‐pays,

lost/theft report, replacement of hearing aid, reporting to

sick call for any issues, wearing to all medical appts.

Patient verbally understood & demonstrated use.

Hearing aid issued as prescribed. Patient was educated on

use of hearing aid & repair (sick call). $10 copay is

required for replacement & repair. He verbally

understood. Hearing aid placed in Right Ear. No issues at

this time.

136 Annual Physical/Whisper Test

Passed whisper test

137 Treatment Room 138 HOH Nurse Visit

Ear Flush. Issued new Hearing Aid to replace broken one.

139 140 141 F/U hearing evaluation
142

Hearing Aid found. HA Sent out for repair Inmate using pocket talker without issue.

7/26/2018 3/12/2019 Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 186

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 447 of 985 - Page ID#: 4035

AI

AJ

AK

AL

AM

1 Medical Visit 8 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 9 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 9 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 10 ‐ Date

133

134 135 136

137 138

139

140 HA returned to IM in good working order

9/17/2018

3 + yes/sometimes; including YES to currently has &

uses a hearing aid and YES to hearing aid is working

141 okay (inmate has a pocket talker)

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

142

3+ yes/ sometimes; YES to he has & uses a HA

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 187

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 448 of 985 - Page ID#: 4036

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

143 4/9/2019

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

4/9/2019 4/9/2019 Failed hearing questionnaire

144 11/12/2018

Hearing Screening Questionnaire

11/12/2018 11/4/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

A‐ AUDICUS CLARA FOR RIGHT EAR A ‐ Audicus Clara for Right Ear

145 7/30/2019
146 1/2/2019 147 11/29/2017

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

7/30/2019 7/30/2019 Failed questionnaire

Hearing Screening Questionnaire Intake Assessment (to KSR) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

1/2/2019 7/24/2019 3 + yes/sometimes 11/29/2017 8/2/2019 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA RIGHT EAR
A‐ Right Audicus A‐ Audicus Clara right

148 6/11/2019 149 10/8/2019
150 6/14/2017 151 12/3/2019

Hearing Screening Questionnaire PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire
Hearing Screening TB/Hearing Screening

6/11/2019 7/11/2019 PTA: RIGHT ‐ 69; LEFT ‐ 66

A‐ Audicus Clara Left Ear

10/8/2019 6/14/2017

10/8/2019 6/5/2019

Failed questionnaire Answered YES to Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? And YES to Is the hearing aid working okay?

A‐ Audicus Clara Right A ‐Bilateral (HTY)

12/3/2019 12/3/2019 Failed questionnaire

A‐ Audicus Clara Right

152 7/30/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

7/30/2019 7/30/2019 Failed questionnaire

*12/19/2016 *1st

record available in

153 new ECW

Outside appt to pick up hearing aids.

12/19/2016 1/16/2020 Failed questionnaire

154 2/8/2019

Intake Assessment (RCC to KSR) Hearing Screening

Questionnaire

2/8/2019

1/10/2020 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA RIGHT EAR A D‐ Refused Hearing Aids‐ Still wants identification
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 188

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 449 of 985 - Page ID#: 4037

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

143 No 144 No

4/9/2019

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

11/12/2018 Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

4/17/2019 Whisper test 12/28/2018 Whisper Test

145 No 146 No 147 No
148 No 149 no 150 Yes 151 NO

7/30/2019 PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

1/2/2019 11/29/2017

Hearing screening questionnaire Intake Assessment (to KSR) Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes Failed questionnaire

6/11/2019 10/8/2019

Hearing screening questionnaire PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

6/21/2017 12/3/2019

Hearing Screen TB/Hearing Screening

Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire
Answered 3+ Failed Screening.

8/7/2019 Annual physical

No visit today. Failed whisper test/hearing screen 3/27/2019 in past visit.

12/7/2017 Whisper test

6/18/2019

Whisper Test. Inmate reports he is getting HOH, over the years. States he doesn't even hear his neighbor's alarm clock

10/15/19 Audicus

7/5/2017 Whisper Test 12/16/2019 Whisper Test

152 No 153 No 154 N/A

7/30/2019 PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

*12/19/2016

*1st record

available in new

ECW

Outside appt

Failed questionnaire

8/5/2019 Annual Physical; Whisper Test

Inmate returned from outside appt to pick up hearing aids. He was instructed to come to medical when he needs a new battery or for any problems. 1/10/2017

Issued hearing batteries

2/8/2019

Intake Assessment (RCC to KSR) Hearing Screening

Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

Whisper test; no hx of hearing aides; reports hard 2/28/2019 of hearing, hx of tubes in ears as child

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 189

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 450 of 985 - Page ID#: 4038

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

143 Refer to onsite Audicus exam d/t failed whisper test 4/29/2019 Audicus hearing booth

Failed portable audiometry screening. Refer to 144 audiology

1/3/2019

Audicus hearing booth

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 15; 15; 30; 60; 35 dB RIGHT EAR: 15; 15; 20; 45; 35 dB. PTA: L‐30; R‐24

5/6/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. Left ear: 50; 50;

55; 75; 40 dB. Right ear: 45; 50; 45; 65; 40 dB

1/18/2019

Failed whisper test; TM bilateral effusion, no 145 erythema. Refer to Audicus onsite exam

8/15/2019 Audicus hearing booth

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz. LEFT EAR: 35; 30; 35; 80; 50

dB. RIGHT EAR: 25; 30; 30; 80; 60 dB. PTA: L‐45; R‐41

8/19/2019

146 Refer to audiology Patient passed whisper test. No further testing
147 needed.

4/1/2019 8/2/2019

Audicus Hearing Booth. Was able to perform test 500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 40;

without problem.

40; 45; 60; 45 dB. RIGHT EAR: 35; 40; 40; 50; 45 dB.

4/11/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

10/18/2019

Bilateral ear canal with soft thin cerumen removed,

with curette. TM dull, no erythema. Failed whisper

148 test. Refer for onsite Audicus exam

7/11/2019

Audicus hearing booth

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz. LEFT EAR: 55; 55; 75; 80; 70

RIGHT EAR: 60; 65; 70; 80; 70 PTA: L‐66; R‐69

7/17/2019

149 PTA: L‐44 R‐40

10/18/2019 Audicus Review by provider. Audicus.

Audicus Clara for right ear recommended.

10/25/2019

150 Failed Whisper Test sent to HTY/HA's recommended 7/18/2017

151 Refer to Audicus

12/23/19

Hears to You Audicus

BL Hearing Aids Received PTA L‐35 R‐34

6/13/2018 1/10/2020

R ear with cerumen impaction; removed in clinic with curette; failed whisper test. Refer for onsite 152 Audicus exam

8/12/2019

Issued hearing aid batteries x 3. Inmate also instructed his hearing aid can be cleaned daily in 153 medical and as needed.

1/18/2019

Bilateral TM with scarring; failed whisper test. 154 Refer to audiology

3/20/2019

Audicus hearing booth
Chronic care & H & P; hearing screening questionnaire
Audicus hearing booth

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz. LEFT EAR: 65; 65; 65; 80; 80

dB. RIGHT EAR: 45; 50; 55; 75; 60 dB. PTA: L‐69; R‐56

8/19/2019

Answered Yes, he has a hearing aid, and Yes it's working okay,

and Yes he has HA he no longer uses. When asked why, he

states "I can't hear with it. It just jumbles the sounds."

7/19/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz, respectively. LEFT EAR: 35;

55; 35; 45; 55 dB. RIGHT EAR: 30; 30; 20; 45; 30 dB.

3/26/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 190

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 451 of 985 - Page ID#: 4039

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

Audicus results. APRN Himler. Inmate not present.

143 Chart review is for Audicus results.

Audicus Clara for Right Ear (Pending approval of Dr Kemen) 5/7/2019

ECW message sent to med director to request hearing aid. If

approved, will f/u w/inmate within 30 days of receiving

144 Hearing results ‐ APRN Himler. Inmate not present hearing aid to eval effectiveness

1/21/2019

DR KEMEN PUT ADDENDUM TO HIMLER'S NOTE OF 5/6/19
Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen

145 Audicus results review, no visit.

Audicus Clara Right Ear. Pending approval by Dr Kemen, Medical Director

Chronic care visit; states he has difficulty hearing, Bilateral moderate loss. Audicus Clara Right Ear. Dr

146 review Audicus results

Kemen's Approval required.

147 Audicus Test

PTA: L‐80 R‐69

8/19/2019
4/29/2019 10/25/2019

Dr Kemen ‐ Addendum on Lyon's note
Hearing aide Audicus Review

148 Hearing aid request (APRN Lyons) 149 Dr. Kemen Response to request
150 Annual hearing screening 151 Provider Review

Audicus Clara Left Ear (pending medical director approval) 7/18/2019

Wants Audicus result from 10/15/19 entered before he can

review.

11/6/2019

3+ yes / sometimes; answered Yes to 'Do you have & use a

hearing aid?'

7/13/2018

Audicus Clara for right ear ordered and approve on 1/13/20. 1/22/2020

*ADDENDUM* on bottom of Lyons 7/17 note Audicus Review
Provider visit; bilateral cerumen impaction HOH Nurse Visit

152 Audicus review only. Inmate not present.
153 Admit to KSR ‐ Intake Assessment Chart review is for Audicus results. Inmate not
154 present.

Audicus Clara Right Ear ‐ Order pending approval by Dr Kemen

8/19/2019

Hearing is poor, bilaterally. Has a hearing aid, but states due

to type of hearing loss it does not help, able to understand

our conversation and make needs known

7/23/2019

Reviewed Audicus hearing results. Mild impairment left

ear; no hearing impairment right ear. No hearing aid

indicated at this time.

1/6/2020

Dr Kemen ‐ Addendum Intake visit with provider; H & P Hearing Screening

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 191

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 452 of 985 - Page ID#: 4040

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

143 Order for Audicus Clara for Right Ear APPROVED 144 Audicus Clara for Right Ear approved

6/12/19

Issue of hearing aide

2/15/2019 Hearing aid issued

145 Audicus Clara Right Ear ‐ Approved by Dr Kemen

9/26/2019

Patient's hearing aide was given to CPTU nurses to issue to

146 him.

5/16/2019

147 Approved for Audicus Clara right ear.

11/5/2019

Hearing aide issued
F/U eval hearing aide HOH Nurse Visit

148 Dr Kemen approved order for Audicus Clara Left Ear

8/1/2019 Hearing aid issued

149 Approved for Audicus Clara for the right ear by Dr. Kemen. 11/27/2019 HOH Nurse Visit

RX Debrox x 14 days; go to TX Rm in 2 wks. for a flush; then

150 start wearing HA again

6/5/2019

Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

151 Issued Pocket Talker to use until his Hearing Aid comes in. 2/5/2020

HOH Nurse Visit

152 Order for AUDICUS CLARA RIGHT EAR APPROVED

9/26/2019 Hearing aide issued

Medical Visit

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

7 ‐ Date

R hearing aid was issued to inmate in good working

order. Patient was educated on usage, care,

maintenance, battery exchange, and replacement

of device, including co‐pay, and filling out theft/lost

report and taking to sick call. Patient was instructed

to wear hearing aid to all medical appts. Patient

verbalized understanding and demonstrated proper

use of device.

Hearing aid issued to inmate & he was educated on

use and care of hearing aid, battery exchange,

loss/theft, etc. Inmate verbally understood &

demonstrated use

Hearing aide issued to patient in good working

order. Patient educated on usage, care,

maintenance, exchange of batteries, and

replacement of device. Instructed to wear it to all

appts.

Denies hearing issues. Not wearing his hearing

aide today. Normal hearing and communication.

No complaints with hearing aide.

Issued Hearing Aid and educated on use and care. Hearing aid issued to inmate in working order. Inmate educated as to use, care, battery exchange, loss of device, etc. Inmate verbalized understanding.

Issued Audicus Clara for right. Answered YES to Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? And YES to Is the hearing aid working okay?

Issue Hearing Aid. Educated on care and use. Hearing aide issued to patient in good working order. Patient educated on usage, care, maintenance, exchange of batteries, and replacement of device. Instructed to wear it to all appts.

Failed whisper test. Patient has hearing aids but doesn't

153 wear.

2/14/2020

HOH Nurse

Returned HA back to IM after repair.

154 Failed Questionnaire

1/30/2020 Provider Review

Signed refusal for Pocket talker or hearing aid

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 192

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 453 of 985 - Page ID#: 4041

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

155 1/2/2019

Hearing Screening Questionnaire

1/2/2019 1/6/2020 3 + yes/sometimes

A ‐ Audicus Clara for Right Ear

156 7/1/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

157 8/31/2017

annual hearing screen

7/1/2019 8/31/2017

7/1/2019 7/30/2019

Failed questionnaire

A ‐ Audicus Clara Right

Failed questionnaire. Reported that he has lost his

HA, but has not filed a report. Educated him that

he has to file that report and medical will follow up.

He verbalized understanding

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY) (lost ‐ needs to file report)

158 7/30/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

159 5/8/2019

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

7/30/2019 7/30/2019 Failed questionnaire 5/8/2019 5/8/2019 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA RIGHT EAR A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA LEFT EAR

160 3/13/2019

Intake Assessment (to KSR) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3/13/2019 8/6/2019 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ Audicus Clara Right Ear

161 7/15/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

162 4/9/2019 163 5/22/2018

Intake to NCF (KSR) ‐ Failed hearing test Provider Visit

7/15/2019 7/15/2019 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA RIGHT

4/9/2019

2/14/2020

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz, respectively. LEFT

EAR: 25; 30; 35; 65; 65 dB. RIGHT EAR: 20; 35; 35;

65; 60 dB.

A ‐ Audicus Clara for Left Ear

5/22/2018 5/8/2019 Mod. Hearing Loss

A‐ Left Audicus

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 193

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 454 of 985 - Page ID#: 4042

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

155 No

1/2/2019

Hearing screening questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

1/25/2019 Annual Physical & Chronic Care. Whisper Test

156 No 157 Yes

7/1/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

8/31/2017 Annual Hearing Screen

Failed questionnaire 3+ yes/ sometimes

7/31/2019 CC/Whisper test 11/22/2017 FU on hearing screen

158 No 159 No

7/30/2019 PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

5/8/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire

8/6/2019 5/8/2019

Annual Physical
Annual Physical & Chronic Care. C/O hearing difficulty x a few months, hard to hear in a crowd, same in both ears

160 No

3/13/2019

Intake Assessment (to KSR) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

3/27/2019 Whisper test

161 No
162 No 163 NO

7/15/2019 PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

4/9/2019 5/22/2018

Intake to NCF (KSR) ‐ Failed hearing test Provider Visit

Failed questionnaire
Refer to audiology IM failed whisper tests

7/23/2019 Annual Physical/Whisper test

4/15/19

Audicus Hearing Booth

5/23/2018 Hearing screening

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 194

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 455 of 985 - Page ID#: 4043

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

Failed portable audiometer screening. Refer to 155 audiology

2/7/2019

Audicus hearing booth

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; & 8000 Hz respectively. Left Ear: 30;

35; 45; 55; 35 dB. Right Ear: 25; 40; 40; 55; 25 dB.

2/13/2019

156 Failed whisper test; Refer to onsite Audicus exam 8/30/2019 Audicus hearing booth

157 refer to audiology

01/27/218 HTY

No show BL HA ordered

9/4/2019 2/22/2018

Failed Whisper test. Normal ear exam. Schedule

158 for Audicus testing

8/12/2019

Audicus hearing booth

159 Refer to Audicus hearing exam

5/23/2019 Audicus hearing booth

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz. LEFT EAR: 40; 35; 35; 50; 40

dB. RIGHT EAR: 35; 35; 30; 50; 30 dB. PTA: L‐40; R‐38

8/19/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 45;

30; 55; 80; 80 dB. RIGHT EAR: 60; 45; 65; 80; 80 dB. PTA: L‐

53; R‐63

6/25/2019

Patient failed whisper test. Refer to Audicus 160 hearing booth

4/8/2019

Audicus hearing booth

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 60;

60; 75; 80; 80 dB. RIGHT EAR: 50; 60; 65; 80; 80 dB.

4/11/2019

161 Failed whisper test. (need to refer to audiology) 8/5/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz, respectively. LEFT

EAR: 25; 30; 35; 65; 65 dB. RIGHT EAR: 20; 35; 35;

162 65; 60 dB.

5/1/2019

163 Answered 3+

8/31/2018

Audicus hearing booth
Audicus results ‐ Dr Manning Audicus Hearing Booth

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz. LEFT EAR: 75; 75; 80; 80; 75

dB. RIGHT EAR: 75; 80; 75; 80; 75 dB. PTA: L‐78; R‐78

8/5/2019

Patient qualifies for left hearing aid (better ear). Moderate hearing loss to left ear. Audicus Clara for Left Ear (pending approval)

6/26/2019

Moderate Hearing Loss bilaterally

9/24/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 195

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 456 of 985 - Page ID#: 4044

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

155 Hearing aid eval ‐ ‐ ‐ Dr Kemen. Inmate not present. Audicus Clara for Right Ear approved

3/1/2019

Hearing aid issued.

156 Audicus Retest 157 HTY

PTA: L‐61 R‐51 BL HA issued

9/16/2019

Provider Review

7/30/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Audicus Clara Right Ear ordered ‐ pending approval by Dr 158 Audicus review by APRN Lyons. Inmate not present Kemen

8/19/2019

Order L ear Audicus Clara ‐ Pending approval of medical 159 Provider review of Audicus results ‐ APRN Himler director

6/25/2019

Dr Kemen ‐ Addendum
DR KEMEN ‐ ADDENDUM ON HIMLER'S NOTE OF 6/25/19

160 HOH; Audicus F/U (Mike Haun, ARNP)

Inmate had Audicus testing done on 4/8/19. Reveals moderate to severe hearing loss bilateral. Right ear is the better ear. Audicus Clara to be fitted in Right Ear (Pending approval by medical director)

4/15/2019

Addendum on bottom of Mike Haun's 4/11/19 order for HA

161 Hearing aide request (APRN Lyons)
162 Audicus report 163 Provider Review of Audicus Results

Audicus Clara Either Ear (pending approval of medical director)

8/6/2019

Patient qualifies for L hearing aid (better ear). Moderate

hearing loss. Audicus Clara for L Ear

6/26/2019

Results sent to medical director for review

10/3/2018

ADDENDUM ON 8/5/19 NOTE
Dr Kemen review of results Medical Director Review

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 196

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 457 of 985 - Page ID#: 4045

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

Medical Visit

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

30 f/u after hearing aid issued. Inmate states he

Hearing aid issued to inmate in good working order.

has great results from hearing aides, is currently

Inmate educated on usage, care, and battery replacement

wearing them, but does not wear them at work

155 & exchange. Inmate verbalized understanding.

4/16/2019 where it is "loud"

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

Hearing aides effective. May have batteries weekly

156 HA ordered. Order approved by Dr. Kemen 9/17/19.

10/11/2019

Failed questionnaire. Reported that he has lost his HA, but

has not filed a report. Educated him that he has to file

that report and medical will follow up. He verbalized

157 understanding

12/16/2019

HOH Nurse Visit HOH Nurse Visit

158 Audicus Clara Right Ear ‐ Approved 159 ORDER APPROVED FOR AUDICUS CLARA L EAR

9/25/2019 Hearing Aid Issue 7/25/2019 Hearing aide issued

160 Dr Kemen approved order for Audicus Clara for Right Ear 4/26/2019 Hearing aide issued

AUDICUS CLARA EITHER EAR ‐ ORDER APPROVED BY DR 161 KEMEN

8/28/2019

Hearing aide issued

162 AUDICUS CLARA L EAR APPROVED BY DR KEMEN 163 Hearing aid approved and ordered

7/24/2019 Hearing aid issued 10/16/2018 Meeting with HOH nurse

Hearing aid issued to patient in good working order. Patient educated on usage, care, maintenance, exchange of batteries, and replacement of device. Instructed to wear it to all appts. Patient received replacement hearing aid and was educated on usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient verbalized understanding & demonstrated use. Hearing aid issued as prescribed. Patient was educated on use of hearing aid and repair (sick call). $10 copay is required for replacement and repair. He verbally understood. Hearing aid placed in right ear. No issues at this time. Will need 30 day f/u with provider. Hearing aid issued to inmate in good working order. Educated him on usage, care, maintenance, battery exchange, any issues, co‐pays, etc. Inmate verbalized understanding. Patient's hearing aide issued. Educated in use and care of device. Issued x5 batteries & demonstrated use. Verbalizes understanding and easily able to place in ear. Reports optimal functioning and hearing ability greatly improved. Informed patient of $10 copay and his responsibility in regards to hearing aide. Accepts responsibility at this time. Patient's hearing aide issued. Educated in use and care of device. Issued x5 batteries & demonstrated use. Verbalizes understanding and easily able to place in ear. Reports optimal functioning and hearing ability greatly improved. Informed patient of $10 copay and his responsibility in regards to hearing aide. Accepts responsibility at this time. Hearing aid issued to inmate in good working order. Educated him on usage, care, maintenance, battery exchange, co‐pay, issues w/hearing aid, etc. Inmate verbalized understanding Issued left hearing aid and educated on operation and care.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 197

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 458 of 985 - Page ID#: 4046

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

164 2/6/2019 165 1/17/2018

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire Annual Screening

2/6/2019 2/6/2019 1/17/2018 1/6/2020

3+ yes/sometimes Answered No to all questions

A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA RIGHT EAR A ‐ Left (Audicus)

166 4/3/2019 167 9/24/2018

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

4/3/2019

5/15/19 ‐ HTY APPT

Report states bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Both ears clear. Patient has mild to moderate loss in his right ear with a moderate loss in his left ear. A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA RIGHT EAR

Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

9/24/2018 3/12/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

A ‐ Audicus Dia II for Right Ear

168 11/12/2018 169 10/6/2017

Hearing Screening Questionnaire Hearing Screening Questionnaire

170 7/17/2017

Annual Hearing Screening

11/12/2018 11/4/2019 3 + yes/sometimes 10/6/2017 10/7/2019 3 + yes/sometimes
7/17/2017 7/1/2019 3+ yes/ sometimes

D ‐ Mild impairment. Does not require HA at this point
D ‐ Signed refusal for all accommodations except ID
A ‐ Bilateral (HTY) Broken‐ C. Bentley following up.* Inmate currently has one working hearing aid as required by policy.

171 8/20/2007 172 5/14/2019

Chronic Care appt. PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

173 8/2/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

1/17/2017

7/15/2019

Answered Yes to "Do you currently have and use a D ‐ Bilateral (HTY) (Turned in hearing aid and

hearing aid?" and Yes to "Is hearing aid working batteries. Signed refusal. Still wants to be

okay?"

identified.)

5/14/2019 5/14/2019 Failed questionnaire

A‐ Audicus Clara Left

8/2/2019 8/2/2019 Failed Questionaire

A‐ Audicus Clara Right

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 198

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 459 of 985 - Page ID#: 4047

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

164 No 165 No

2/6/2019 1/17/2018

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire Annual hearing scree

3 + yes/sometimes 3+ yes/ sometimes

5/31/2019 Whisper Test 2/13/2018 F/U hearing screen

166 No 167 No

4/3/2019

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

9/24/2018

Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

4/9/2019 Chronic care and H & P 10/1/2018 Whisper Test

168 N/A 169 N/A

11/12/2018 10/1/2018

Hearing Screening Questionnaire Annual hearing screening questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes 3 + yes/sometimes

2/7/19

Whisper test

10/29/2018 Whisper Test

170 Yes

7/17/2017

3+ yes/ sometimes

7/31/2017

171 Unknown (UL) 1/9/2017

172 No

5/14/2019

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

173 No

8/2/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

IM apparently had hearing aids at EKCC which were

taken when he transferred in 2006. Email sent for

eval with PCP as there is no documentation of

hearing eval in chart.

1/16/2017

Failed questionnaire

6/24/19

Whisper test. Reports he has hx of hearing issues in past

Failed questionnaire

8/7/2019 Whisper Test

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 199

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 460 of 985 - Page ID#: 4048

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

164 Failed whisper. Refer to Audicus hearing booth 165 failed whisper test‐ refer to audiology

6/6/2019 3/31/2018

Audicus hearing booth Hears to you

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 35;

30; 40; 60; 30 dB. RIGHT EAR: 35; 30; 40; 55; 30 dB. PTA: R‐

41; L‐40.

6/11/2019

BL HA recommended

7/25/2018

166 Refer to audiologists for onsite audiogram Patient reports long history of difficulty hearing in both ears. No cerumen impaction noted. Pt failed whisper test. Obtain hearing booth screening &
167 forward to medical director.

4/15/2019 10/5/2018

Audicus hearing booth Audiogram (hearing booth)

He has completed the Audicus hearing test &

provider has reviewed results with him in 10/2018 ‐

168 no further testing needed today.

3/12/2019

Failed portable audiometry testing. Refer to

169 audiology.

12/28/2018

Per DON, needs f/u for whisper test Audicus hearing booth

170 BL HA ordered per HTY

8/24/2017

Unable to complete test

5/15/2019

The hearing threshold in dB at each of the benchmark

frequencies (500, 1000, 2000, 4000 Hz) is as follows: Right

Ear: 20, 40, 40, 60. Left Ear: 35, 45, 35, 70.

10/12/2018

Inmate not seen by provider. Was scheduled for f/u for

whisper test. He has previously failed audiometry screening

& therefore was tested with Audicus exam, which showed

mild hearing impairment in 10/2018. Will retest with Audicus

today d/t having failed previous screenings.

3/13/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; & 8000 Hz respectively. Left Ear: 10;

5; 30; 75; 55 dB. Right Ear: 10; 15; 25; 80; 65 dB.

1/16/2019

BL HA Issued per HTY

6/11/2018

Consult for audiology inmate is being schedule to 171 see audiologist 01/16/2017
Failed whisper test. Retracted R TM. Canals bilat 172 free from debris. Refer to onsite Audicus.

2/21/2017 7/1/2019

173 Referred to Audicus

8/29/19

Audicus

HTY recommend BL HA Inmate with continuing issues of self harming behavior

3/23/2017 11/21/2019

Completed audiology. PTA L:41 R:38

9/5/2019 Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 200

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 461 of 985 - Page ID#: 4049

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

Patient qualifies for a hearing aid. Audicus Clara for Right

164 Audicus review/hearing aid order ‐ Dr Fortwengler Ear ordered. Pending approval

HA Evaluation ‐ IM not present ‐ Reviewed 3/31/18

165 audiogram

Audicus Dia II for L ear recommended

6/11/2019 8/15/2018

Dr Kemen ‐ addendum to Dr Fortwengler's note HA Issued

166 Outside appt at Hears To You 167 Dr. Kemen ‐ Hearing Aid Evaluation
168 Retested ‐ Audicus hearing booth 169 Audicus results with APRN Himler

Report states bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Both ears

clear. Patient has mild to moderate loss in his right ear with

a moderate loss in his left ear.

5/17/2019

Provider (APRN Lyons review of Audicus results)

Audicus Dia II for Right Ear approved

10/1/2018

Hearing aid is issued to inmate

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz, respectively. LEFT EAR: 30;

20; 20; 40; 45 dB. RIGHT EAR: 25; 20; 25; 45; 40 dB.

3/15/2019

Reviewed Audicus results with inmate. He does not meet

criteria for hearing aid at this time. He understands.

10/7/2019

Provider review of hearing results. Inmate not present.
H&P/Hearing Questionnaire

170 Sending R hearing aid to HTY for repair

6/27/2018

HA returned from HTY

171 172 Audicus
173 Provider review

BL HA issued per HTY PTA: L‐36 R‐40
Audicus Clara for Rt. Ear

7/3/2018 12/3/2019

annual hearing screening Provider Review

9/6/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 201

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 462 of 985 - Page ID#: 4050

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome
164 Audicus Clara Right Ear approved 165 HA issued to IM in good working order
Audicus Clara for Right Ear. Pending approval by Dr Kemen. F/U in 30 days from getting hearing aide for 166 evaluation.

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

7/2/2019 1/2/2019

Hearing aid issued Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

6/6/2019 Hearing aide issued

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

Hearing aid issued to inmate in good working order. Inmate was educated on policy, usage, care, maintenance, battery exchange, co‐pays, lost/theft report, replacement of hearing aid, reporting to sick call for any issues, wearing to all medical appts. Patient verbally understood & demonstrated use.

Answered No to all questions Patient received hearing aid today, in good working order. He was educated on proper maintenance, care, battery exchange, usage and replacement (including co‐pay, going to sick call, and filling out theft/loss report) of device. He was educated to wear device to all appts. Patient verbalized understanding and demonstrated use.

167 No details recorded.

11/26/2018 1 month f/u hearing aid

Patient reports hearing has much improved since he received the hearing aid.

Chart review is for Audicus hearing results. No hearing aid 168 indicated at this time. Audicus hearing results reviewed. 11/7/2019

Audicus

169 Failed questionnaire

10/16/2019 Audicus Test Signed refusal.

Declined since he just had a test 3 months ago and was found to only have mild impairment.

170 Returned to inmate and working properly

3/1/2019 Hearing aid check

Patient brought hearing aid to nurse. His hearing

aid is broken. Will send out for repair.

5/13/2019

171 HA working properly

7/15/2019 PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

172 Audicus Clara for Left ordered and approved by Dr. Kemen 12/31/2019 HOH Nurse Visit

173 Approval by Dr. Kemen

10/2/2019 Hearing Aid Issued

Answered Yes to "Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid?" and Yes to "Is the hearing aid working

okay?"

7/17/2019

Issued Hearing aid for left ear. Inmate educated on

care and use.

Hearing aid issued to inmate in working order.

Inmate educated as to use, care, battery exchange,

loss of device, etc. Inmate verbalized

understanding.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 202

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 463 of 985 - Page ID#: 4051

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

164 165

166 167

168

169 170 HOH

Patient was called down to this nurse to see if he had his one functioning hearing aid. He does and he states, it works. Patient was educated on he is only required to have one per policy. He verbally understood. No further concerns noted.

Refusal of hearing aid. Patient had hearing screen 2 Patient brought hearing aid back, and handed HA and 2

days ago. Asked patient if he was using his HA and packs of batteries to this nurse and stated "I don't need

he stated at that time that it was not working.

the hearing aid." Asked patient why and he stated "I just

Educated patient to bring hearing back to this nurse don't need it." Patient was educated on the potential

and this nurse would attempt to troubleshoot it and consequences of not wearing HA as prescribed for his

see if the problem could be resolved in house, and if hearing loss. Patient insisted he didn't need the device

171 necessary we would send it out to get repaired. and never used it. Patient signed a refusal for the device.

172

173

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 203

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 464 of 985 - Page ID#: 4052

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

174 9/9/2019 175 4/17/2007

Intake to RCC Intake Assessment

176 4/11/2008 177 3/17/2017 178 10/7/2019 179 11/2/2016

Screen at LLCC Annual Hearing Screening Intake Provider visit

9/9/2019 4/17/2007

9/12/2019 3/5/2019

Failed questionnaire

A‐ Audicus Clara Left

3+ yes or sometimes; YES to currently has & uses a

HA, and YES to hearing aid is working okay

A ‐ Bilateral ‐ U of L

4/11/2008 3/17/2017

7/1/2019 12/3/2018

Answered YES to 'Do you currently have and use a

hearing aid?' and YES to "Is the hearing aid working

okay?'

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)

3+ yes/ sometimes; NO to he has & currently uses a

HA and YES to have you ever used a hearing aid that

you no longer use.

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)

10/7/2019 10/7/2019 Failed questionnaire

A‐ Audicus Clara Left

2/3/2017

Answered 3 + yes or sometimes, including YES to 2/12/2019 has & uses a HA and YES hearing aid is working okay A ‐ Bilateral (U of L)

180 6/13/2019
181 5/5/2019 182 5/16/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

6/13/2019 6/13/2019 Failed questionnaire

Sick Call ‐ Requesting hearing test because he did

not understand the questions the last time he took

the questionnaire

5/5/2019

5/5/2019

Failed questionnaire

Intake

5/16/2019 11/6/2019 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ Audicus Clara Right Ear
A‐ Audicus Clara Right ear D‐ Issued L Audicus Clara but could not tolerate amplification, so he traded it for a Pocket Talker.

183 3/5/2019 184 9/14/2018 185 6/20/2019 186 9/3/2019 187 11/4/2019

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire
Intake Screening Questionnaire Intake Assessment RCC ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire
PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire
PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3/5/2019 3/5/2019 3 + yes/sometimes 9/14/2018 8/2/2019 Failed questionnaire 6/20/2019 9/10/2019 3 + yes/sometimes 9/3/2019 9/3/2019 Failed questionnaire 11/4/2019 11/4/2019 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ Audicus Clara Right Ear D ‐ Inmate does not meet criteria for a hearing aid at this time A‐ Audicus Clara Right A‐ Audicus Clara Right A‐ Audicus Clara Left
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 204

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 465 of 985 - Page ID#: 4053

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

174

9/11/2019

175 Unknown (UL) 9/7/2016

Intake from RCC

Audiogram failed

9/12/2019 Intake from RCC

ear molds made post evaluation, hearing aids to be

delivered once authorization is received

12/22/2016

176 Yes

1/11/2017

IM was at LLCC and was sent to HTY and BL HA ordered

2/13/2017

177 Yes 178

3/17/2017 10/7/2019

179 Unknown (UL) 7/24/2013

180

6/13/2019

181 182 N/A

5/5/2019 5/16/2019

Annual Hearing Screening

IM answered yes to 3+ on HS

7/26/2017

Intake Screen

Failed Hearing Screen. hearing aids mailed out to be repaired/returned and sent back out on 6/4/14/returned and sent back out on 2/10/16

12/3/2019 5/4/2016

Provider Visit

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

6/25/19

Annual Physical & Chronic Care. C/O ringing in ears; R ear hearing worse than L. Hx of being musician; work in loud factories

Sick Call ‐ Requesting hearing test because he did

not understand the questions the last time he took

the questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

6/5/19

Whisper test

Intake

Failed Questionaire

5/31/2019 Audicus

183 No 184 N/A 185 No 186 No 187 no

3/5/2019

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

9/14/2018 6/20/2019

Intake Hearing Screening Questionnaire Intake Assessment (to RCC) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes 3 + yes/sometimes

9/3/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

11/4/2019 PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

3/13/2019 Annual Physical & Chronic Care; Whisper test 10/24/2018 Hearing booth 8/20/2019 Audiogram 10/10/19 Audicus 11/8/2019 Audicus
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 205

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 466 of 985 - Page ID#: 4054

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

174 Failed questionnaire

10/2/2019

175 scheduled with U of L Audiology for hearing aid Fit. 1/27/2016

Provider Review of RCC audiogram

BL HA ‐ picked up. IM was still housed at LLCC at this

176 time.

2/13/2017

Refusal of hearing aids

177 HTY recommend BL HA 178 Ringing in the ears

8/8/2017 12/12/19

Audicus

179 recommend for new hearing aid

12/18/2016

TMs normal. Failed whisper test, refer for Audicus

180 hearing exam

7/22/2019

Audicus Hearing Booth

181 Failed whisper test; refer to Audicus 182 Hearing Aid Reccommended

6/13/2019 6/11/2019

Audicus Hearing Booth Audicus Review

Refer to Audicus

10/14/2019

hearing aid fitting scheduled.

1/26/2017

IM returned to medical after receiving HA stating he was also

to get earplugs. Nurse advised that earplugs were not

approved by medical & he would not receive a pair. IM

slammed HA onto table & left. Was called back to medical &

signed a refusal for his hearing aids

2/22/2017

BL HA issued per HTY
PTA: L‐84 R‐83
Does not meet criteria for hearing aids. IM was offered a pocket talker and declined it.

12/5/2017 12/31/2019
2/8/2017

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz. LEFT EAR: 50; 55; 55; 80; 70

dB. RIGHT EAR: 50; 50; 50; 70; 55 dB. PTA: L‐60; R‐55

8/9/2019

Patient showed inability to hear any tones. Recommended to complete the hearing test again to verify results. May need clinical audiogram completed if results remain consistent. 8/29/2019

Audicus Clara for L Ear Approved and ordered by Dr. Kemen 7/2/2019

183 Failed whisper test; refer to audiology

3/19/2019

Left ear Moderate; Right ear Severe impairment at

184 4000Hz. Otherwise no impairment.

2/21/2019

185 Left mod‐severe Right Mod‐severe

9/9/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 20;

Audicus hearing booth

20; 30; 80; 70 dB. RIGHT EAR: 15; 20; 35; 80; 70 dB.

Audicus Results w/APRN Himler. He was scheduled

to f/u with these results in 12/2018 but signed a

refusal at that time. Will review results today.

Inmate does not meet criteria for a hearing aid

5/15/2019 8/2/2019

RCC Provider Review

Left mod‐severe Right Mod‐severe

10/21/2019

186 PTA: L‐49 R‐48

11/11/2019 Audicus Review

Test indicates retest or outside audiology. Signed

187 refusal then changed mind.

11/11/2018 Audicus Retest with Proctor

Audicus Clara for the right ear ordered‐ needs approval.

11/14/2019

PTA: L‐56 R‐59

11/18/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 206

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 467 of 985 - Page ID#: 4055

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

174 Audicus Test 175

PTA: L‐61 R‐66 BL hearing aids issued.

10/29/2019 6/13/2018

Audicus Review HAs broken

176 HA issued
177 PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire 178 Provider Review

Inmate was issued HA on 2/22/17; inmate verified they are

both working & was advised he may exchange batteries as

needed during pill calls in RHU

7/18/2018

3+ yes/ sometimes; YES to he has & currently uses a HA and

YES to HA is working okay

12/3/2018

Retest in Audicus.

1/14/2020

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire
PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire Provider Review

179 Reviewed Audicus results with inmate. Severe impairment Left ear; Moderate impairment Right ear. He does want a hearing aid and agrees to $10
180 charge

Hearing Aid Fitting requested per A Mihalyov
Audicus Clara Right Ear (pending approval of medical director)

3/29/2017 8/9/2019

ADDENDUM by Dr Kemen ON APRN Himler's note of 8/9/19

181 Audicus Results 182 HOH Nurse Visit

PTA L:80 R:75 Issued Hearing Aid (Audicus Clara Left) and given instructions on care and usage.

9/17/2019 7/3/2019

Provider Review HOH Nurse Visit

183 Audicus results review 184 PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire 185 Dr. Kemen ‐ Hearing Aid Evaluation 186 Provider Review 187 Provider Review

Audicus Clara Right Ear recommended. Will need to be approved by medical director

6/6/2019

Hearing aid issued

Failed questionnaire Audicus Clara Right side approved

8/30/2019 11/6/2019

H&P Visit HOH Nurse Visit

Audicus Clara for right ear approved by Dr. Kemen

12/16/2019

HOH Nurse Visit

Order for Audicus Clara for Left.

12/13/2019

HOH Nurse Visit

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 207

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 468 of 985 - Page ID#: 4056

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

174 Approved for Audicus Clara for the left by Dr. Kemen 175 Sent for repair

11/26/2019 HOH Nurse Visit 6/25/2018

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome Audicus Clara for left issued. Hearing aid issued to inmate & he was educated on use and care of hearing aid, battery exchange, loss/theft, etc. Inmate verbally understood & demonstrated use HA repaired and issued to inmate and is working properly

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date
3/5/2019

3 + yes/sometimes; YES to he has & uses a HA and YES to 176 hearing aid is working okay
3+ yes/ sometimes; NO to he has & currently uses a HA and YES to have you ever used a hearing aid that you no 177 longer use.

7/1/2019 12/6/2018

178 Audicus Clara for left ordered and approved.

2/6/2020

Annual Hearing Screening Questionnaire. (Patient Answered YES to 'Do you currently have and use a

has current hearing aids and they work, 1 pack of hearing aid?' and YES to "Is the hearing aid working

batteries was given in exchange for used pack)

okay?'

Annual Physical HOH Nurse Visit

Inmate has hearing aids but does not wear them. No issues with communication. Hearing Aid issued to inmate in good working order. Instructions given on care and use.

179 BL HA fitted and issued per UL

4/26/2018 Provider CC / Hearing screening visit

180 Order approved by Dr Kemen for Audicus Clara Right Ear 9/24/2019 Hearing aid issued

Audicus Clara for Right Ear ordered by provider and

181 approved by Dr. Kemen

10/11/2019

Found the Hearing Aid to be too loud and traded out for a

182 Pocket Talker.

HOH Nurse Visit

Has hearing aids but not wearing them at this time.

States they work very well.

2/12/2019

Hearing aid issued to inmate in good working order.

Inmate was educated on use, care, battery

placement & exchange, loss of device & cost of

replacement. Inmate verbalized understanding

Hearing aid issued to inmate in good working order.

Inmate was educated on use, care, battery

placement & exchange, loss of device & cost of

replacement. Inmate verbalized understanding

Patient received hearing aid today in good working order. He was educated on usage, care, maintenance, and replacement of device. He was educated on how to obtain 183 and exchange batteries. Patient verbalized understanding.

184 Passed Whisper Test
185 Issued Left Audicus Clara. Educated on use and care. Patient received hearing aid and was educated on usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient
186 verbalized understanding & demonstrated use. Patient received hearing aid and was educated on usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient
187 verbalized understanding & demonstrated use.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 208

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 469 of 985 - Page ID#: 4057

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

174 175 Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3+ yes or sometimes; YES to currently has & uses a HA, and YES to hearing aid is working okay

176 177 178 179 PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire
180
181 182

Answered 3 + yes or sometimes, including YES to has & uses a HA and YES hearing aid is working okay

183 184 185 186 187
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 209

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 470 of 985 - Page ID#: 4058

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

188 8/2/2019 189 6/23/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

8/2/2019 8/2/2019 Failed questionnaire

Sick Call. Inmate reports difficulty hearing. States he was diagnosed with hearing loss outside of prison but was unable to afford a hearing aid. Would like to be assessed for hearing aid.

6/23/2019

6/23/2019

Failed questionnaire

A‐Audicus Clara Right A ‐ Audicus Clara Left Ear

190 4/29/2019 191 9/3/2019 192 8/17/2017 193 7/3/2019 194 2/9/2017 195 12/2/2019 196 12/2/2019 197 12/3/2019 198 2/20/2019 199 10/9/2018 200 12/3/2019 201 12/3/2018

Chronic care visit with provider; whisper test

4/29/2019 7/1/2019

Failed questionnaire (already in process though of

receiving hearing aid)

A ‐ AUDICUS CLARA RIGHT EAR

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire
Chronic Care visit Intake Assessment (To KSR from RCC) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire
Annual Hearing Screening TB/Hearing Screening TB/Hearing Screening TB/Hearing Screening Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

9/3/2019 11/15/2017

9/3/2019 11/26/2019

3 + yes/sometimes

A

3+ yes/ sometimes; Including YES to Currently has &

uses a hearing aid and YES to Is hearing aid working

okay?

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)

7/3/2019
2/9/2017 12/2/2019

12/2/2019
6/4/2019 12/2/2019

Failed questionnaire Answered YES to Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? And YES to Is the hearing aid working okay? Failed questionnaire

A‐ Audicus Clara Left
A ‐ Bilateral (HTY) A‐ Audicus Clara Right

12/2/2019 12/2/2019 Failed questionnaire 12/3/2019 12/3/2019 Failed questionnaire

D‐ Signed refusal for Hearing Aid‐ still wants ID A‐ Audicus Clara Right

2/20/2019 2/20/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

D ‐ UNABLE TO COMPLETE TEST D/T DEMENTIA. PATIENT MAY HAVE POCKET TALKER

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire TB/Hearing Screening

10/9/2018 10/7/2019 3 + yes/sometimes 12/3/2019 12/3/2019 Failed questionnaire

A ‐ Audicus Clara for Left Ear A‐ Audicus Clara Right

Hearing Screening Questionnaire

12/3/2018 12/19/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

C‐ Audicus Clara Right

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 210

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 471 of 985 - Page ID#: 4059

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

188 No 189 No

8/2/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

6/23/2019

Sick Call. Inmate reports difficulty hearing. States he was diagnosed with hearing loss outside of prison but was unable to afford a hearing aid. Would like to be assessed for hearing aid.

Failed questionnaire

8/20/2019 7/8/2019

Annual physical; whisper test Audicus hearing test (nurse put in flowsheet that he was unable to complete test, was given directions several times, and after an hour the system put a message unable to calculate results. Provider notified. However, we DID receive results from Audicus)

190 No 191 No 192 Yes 193 No 194 Yes 195 NO 196 197 No 198 N/A 199 No 200 No
201

4/29/2019

Chronic Care visit with provider; whisper test

Failed whisper test

6/14/2019 Audicus Hearing Booth

9/3/2019

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

9/17/2019 Whisper Test/H&P

8/17/2017 7/3/2019

Chronic Care visit. IM c/o decreased hearing
Intake Assessment (To KSR from RCC) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

referred to HTY Failed questionnaire

11/15/2017 Annual Hearing screen 8/29/2019 Intake/Whisper Test

2/9/2017 12/2/2019 12/2/2019 12/3/2019
2/20/2019

TB/Hearing Screening TB/Hearing Screening TB/Hearing Screening
Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Hearing Screen‐ 3+ Lost hearing Aid in County Jail Failed Screening. Failed Screening. Failed Screening.

2/13/2017 12/18/2019 Whisper Test
12/4/2019 Whisper Test 12/11/2019 Whisper Test

3 + yes/sometimes

3/27/2019 Whisper test

10/9/2018 12/3/2019

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire TB/Hearing Screening

3 + yes/sometimes Failed Screening.

10/19/2018 Annual Physical 12/19/2019 Whisper Test

12/3/2018 Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

12/6/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 211

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 472 of 985 - Page ID#: 4060

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

188 Passed whisper test

8/27/2019 Audicus hearing booth

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz. LEFT EAR: 45; 50;

60; 80; 80 dB. RIGHT EAR: 60; 60; 75; 80; 80 dB.

189 PTA: L‐59; R‐73

7/17/2019

Hearing aid request (APRN Lyons)

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively.

Bilaterally, results were the same. 65; 75; 80; 80; 80

190 dB. PTA: L ‐ 75; R ‐ 75

6/18/2019

Audicus review ‐ APRN Lyons

191 Failed Whisper Test

9/19/2019 Audicus

192 3+ yes/ sometimes

12/12/2017 Hears to You appointment

193 Failed Whisper Test‐refer to Audiology.

9/16/2019 Audicus

194 Hearing Exam by PCP 195 Refer to Audicus

3/15/2017 12/20/19

Audicus

196 Refer to Audicus 197 Failed Whisper Test

12/18/19 1/13/19

Audicus Audicus

Patient failed whisper test. Refer to audiology for

198 Audicus testing

4/8/2019

Audicus hearing booth

Bilateral hearing loss possibly due to cerumen 199 impaction. Refer to audiology when ears clear.

11/13/2018 Hearing Booth

200 Refer to Audicus

12/26/19

Audicus

201 Passed whisper test

12/2/2019 TB/ Hearing Screen

PTA L:69 R:66

9/17/2019

Audicus Clara Left Ear ‐ pending approval by medical director 7/18/2019

Inmate not present. Audicus results reviewed. Order Audicus Clara for Right Ear (pending approval of medical director) 7/1/2019

PTA: L‐85 R‐85

9/20/2019

BL hearing Aids recommended
Completed audiology. PTA L‐51 R‐54. Awaiting provider review.

1/13/2018 9/20/2019

HTY recommend HA L‐ 54 R‐54

3/28/2017 1/6/2020

PTA: L‐59 R‐60 PTA L‐31 R‐28

12/23/2019 1/29/2020

Patient unable to complete test. Email sent to provider for

send out (outside testing).

4/12/2019

Mild/moderate/severe impairment bilaterally at 500 ‐ 4000

Hz

11/29/2018

PTA L‐84 R‐83

1/9/2020

Failed Questionaire

2/4/2020

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 212

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 473 of 985 - Page ID#: 4061

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

188 Provider Review

Provider ordered Audicus Clara for Right ear and was approved by Dr. Kemen

10/11/2019

HOH Nurse Visit

189 *ADDENDUM at bottom of Lyons' 7/17/19 order Dr Kemen approves order for ‐ Audicus Clara Left Ear

8/1/2019

Hearing Aid Issued

190 PPD/Annual Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire, but already in process of receiving a

hearing aid

7/16/2019

Hearing aid issued

191 Provider Review

HA Ordered and Approved by Dr. Kemen.

10/11/2019

HOH Nurse Visit

192 Hears to You

BL HA pick up

11/12/2018

PPD/Hearing screen

193 Provider Review

HA Ordered and Approved by Dr. Kemen.

10/11/2019

HOH Nurse Visit

194 195 Provider Review 196 Provider Review 197 Provider Review
198 Hearing test (note by Dr Manning)

HTY issued BL HA Audicus Clara for Right Ear ordered and approved.

6/13/2018 2/5/2020

Hearing Aid audicus clara for right ordered and approved. Audicus Clara Right ordered and approved. Hearing test (note by Dr Manning) Patient unable to complete Audicus testing due to dementia. Patient may have pocket talker.

12/30/2019 2/14/2020
5/21/2019

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire HOH Nurse Visit
HOH Nurse Visit
Pocket talker

199 Hearing aid eval by Dr. Kemen

Audicus Clara for ear of patient's choice approved

12/21/2018

Hearing aid issued

200 Provider Review

Right Hearing Aid ordered and approved.

2/5/2020

HOH Nurse Visit

201 Whisper Test

Failed Whisper test

2/11/2020

Audicus

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 213

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 474 of 985 - Page ID#: 4062

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Patient received hearing aid today in good working order. He was educated on usage, care, maintenance, and replacement of device. He was educated on how to obtain 188 and exchange batteries. Patient verbalized understanding.

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

Hearing aid issued to inmate in working order. Inmate educated as to use, care, battery exchange, loss of device, 189 etc. Inmate verbalized understanding. Audicus hearing aid R ear given. Instructed patient on usage, care, maintenance, battery exchange, co‐pay, etc., also to report any issues to sick call and fill out a lost/stolen report if necessary, and that inmate would be responsible for replacement co‐pay of $10. Patient 190 acknowledged understanding. Hearing aid issued to inmate in working order. Inmate educated as to use, care, battery exchange, loss of device, 191 etc. Inmate verbalized understanding.

3+ yes/ sometimes; Including YES to Currently has & uses a 192 hearing aid and YES to Is hearing aid working okay?
Hearing aid issued to inmate in working order. Inmate educated as to use, care, battery exchange, loss of device, 193 etc. Inmate verbalized understanding.

3+ yes/ sometimes; YES to he has & currently uses a HA 194 and YES to HA is working okay 195 Issued Hearing Aid. Educated on use and care.

6/4/2019

196 Hearing Aid approved by Dr. Kemen. 197 Inmate issued Hearing Aid and educated on care and use.
Pocket talker issued with instructions for use, instructed patient to let nursing know when he needed a new 198 battery. Issued Audicus Left hearing aid; educated on usage, volume control, battery replacement, replacement cost. 199 Inmate verbalized understanding Issued Audicus Right hearing aid; educated on usage, volume control, battery replacement, replacement cost. 200 Inmate verbalized understanding

1/23/2020

Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire HOH Nurse Offic

Answered YES to Do you currently have and use a hearing aid? And YES to Is the hearing aid working okay?
Signed refusal‐ worried he would not be able to keep up with it

201 PTA L‐65 R‐58

2/24/2020 Providere Review

Audicus Clara for Right ordered.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 214

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 475 of 985 - Page ID#: 4063

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

202 5/4/2011 203 10/11/2017 204 7/19/2017

follow up visit Annual Hearing Screen Annual Hearing Screen

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening
1/26/2017
10/11/2017
7/19/2017

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening
1/7/2020
10/8/2019
7/15/2019

I

J

6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

3+ yes/ sometimes; including YES Currently has &

uses a hearing aid and YES Hearing aid is working

okay

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)

3 + yes/sometimes; YES to currently has and uses a

HA

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)

3+ yes/ sometimes; YES to he has & currently uses a

HA and YES to HA is working okay

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)

205 7/3/2018 206 10/16/2019 207 12/2/2019
208 5/8/2019

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire Intake @RCC
Intake

7/3/2018 7/1/2019 Failed questionnaire 10/16/2019 11/6/2019 Failed questionnaire
12/2/2019 12/2/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

5/8/2019 5/8/2019 Failed questionnaire

209 9/3/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

9/3/2019 9/3/2019 Failed Questionaire

D‐ mild impairment. A‐ Audicus Clara Left
A‐ Audicus Clara right
D‐ Declines all HOH services, accommodations and identification.) D‐ Audicus Clara Left approved but declined. "Cannot afford" Checked his account and he has money even after several canteen purchases. Still identified.

210 1/17/2019 211 8/20/2018

Hearing Screening Questionnaire Annual Physical & CC w/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

1/17/2019 1/7/2020 8/20/2018 8/2/2019

3 + yes/sometimes 3 + yes/sometimes

A ‐ Audicus Clara for Right Ear A ‐ Audicus Oro L Ear

212 5/6/2019
213 10/16/2020
214 12/3/2018
215 10/8/2019 216 11/20/2019 217 11/8/2019 218 9/19/2018

Annual Physical & Chronic Care visit with provider 5/6/2019

5/9/2019

Audicus results were: LEFT EAR PTA: 50. RIGHT EAR PTA: 46.

A ‐ Audicus Clara for Right Ear

Hearing Screen

10/16/2019 10/16/2019 Failed hearing questionnaire

A‐ Adicus Clara Left

Hearing Screening Questionnaire

12/3/2018 12/4/2019 3 + yes/sometimes

A ‐ Audicus Clara for Right Ear

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

10/8/2019 10/8/2019 Failed questionnaire 11/20/2019 11/20/2019 Failed questionnaire

Contacted ADA Coordinator

11/11/2019 11/11/2019 Failed questionnaire

Annual Physical & Chronic Care Visit w/Provider &

3 + yes/sometimes; failed portable audiometry

Portable Screening Audiometer

9/19/2018 9/4/2019 screen; needs hearing testing (audiology)

A‐ Approved for Audicus Clara Left A‐ Audicus Clara Right
A‐ Audicus Clara Right D ‐ signed refusal for hearing aids, wants to keep pocket talker

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 215

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 476 of 985 - Page ID#: 4064

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

202 Yes 203 Yes 204 Yes

8/21/2014 10/11/2017 7/19/2017

Annual Hearing Screening Annual Hearing Screening

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome per audiology‐ L ear appropriate for hearing aid. R ear impacted with cerumen. Need to return after flush

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

11/12/2014

3+ yes/ sometimes ‐ referred to provider

11/16/2017 provider visit/ hearing exam

3+ yes/ sometimes ‐ referred to provider

9/25/2017 provider visit/ hearing exam

205 N/A 206 207 No
208 N/A

7/3/2018 10/16/2019
12/2/2019

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire Intake
Intake

Answered 3+ Failed Questionaire
Failed Questionaire

5/8/2019

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

7/26/2018 Whisper Test 10/27/2019 H&P

12/4/2019 5/29/2019

Provider Visit To medical for c/o R ear pain x 1 month; has drainage, states ear always wet. Feels like fluid is popping in ear. Whisper test.

209 N/A 210 No 211 No
212 NO 213 NO 214 NO 215 no 216 No 217 No 218 N/A

9/3/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

1/17/2019 8/20/2018

Hearing Screening Questionnaire Annual Physical & CC w/Hearing Screening Questionnaire; Portable hearing testing

Failed questionnaire

9/3/2019

3 + yes/sometimes

1/28/2019

3 + yes/sometimes; failed portable testing; refer to

audiology

9/12/2018

Whisper Test Whisper test. States he couldn't hear anything recently related to sinus issues. Says his hearing is better now.
Audicus hearing booth

5/6/2019

Annual Physical & Chronic Care visit with provider.

Reports difficulty at times with hearing. "Everybody Canal free from debris. Bilateral TMs within normal

says they scream at me." "Sometimes it seems like limits. Failed Whisper test. Refer to onsite

people are whispering."

audiogram

5/8/2019

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

10/16/2019 Hearing Screen

Failed questionnaire

12/10/2019 Provider Visit

12/3/2018 Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

1/16/19

Whisper Test; c/o hard of hearing

10/8/2019 11/20/2019
11/8/2019
9/19/2018

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire
Contacted ADA Annual Physical & Chronic Care Visit w/Provider & Portable Screening Audiometer

Failed questionnaire Failed Hearing Screen. "One ear drum is gone and I can't hear out of the other very well." 3 + yes/sometimes; failed portable audiometry screen; needs hearing testing (audiology)

10/11/19 Audicus Test 11/26/2019 Whisper Test
11/11/2019 Hearing Screening
10/19/18 Audicus Hearing Booth

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 216

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 477 of 985 - Page ID#: 4065

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

Pocket talker was ordered. Needs consult for follow

202 up to audiology for R ear.

1/9/2017

203 Failed whisper test ‐ referred to audiology

1/11/2018 Hears to You

204 Referred to Hears to You

1/13/2018 Hears to You

Failed Whisper test; failed tuning fork. Referred to

205 audiology.

9/4/2018

206 Referred to Audiology

10/28/2019

Hearing booth Provider Review

207 Refer to Audicus

12/5/2019 Audicus hearing booth

TMs normal. Flonase rx (pending approval). Failed 208 hearing screen. Refer to Audicus hearing booth 6/7/2019

Audicus hearing booth

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

Email to Elaina to eval current hearing needs. Still needs to

see audiology for R ear.

1/16/2017

BL HA ordered

2/22/2018

BL HA ordered

2/22/2018

L ear mild impairment at 2000 Hz; otherwise no hearing impairment Audicus Clara for Left ordered and approved by Dr. Kemen.

9/20/2018 10/29/2019

PTA: L‐43 R‐39 500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 30; 30; 35; 55; 30 dB. RIGHT EAR: 35; 40; 35; 55; 35 dB. PTA: L‐ 38; R‐ 41

12/11/2019 6/11/2019

209 Failed Whisper Test‐ref
210 Failed portable screening audiometer 211 Moderate/Severe Impairment

9/5/2019
2/7/2019 9/25/2018

Audicus hearing booth

Waiting for results

9/16/2019

Audicus hearing booth

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; & 8000 Hz respectively. Left Ear: 35;

30; 35; 60; 45 dB. Right Ear: 30; 30; 25; 45; 40 dB.

2/13/2019

Provider (APRN Himler) review of Audicus results HA recommended ‐ Order pending approval by Dr. Kemen 10/3/2018

212 Failed questionnaire

5/9/2019

Audicus hearing booth

213 Referred to Audicus

12/19/2019 Audicus hearing booth

214 Failed portable screening; will refer to audiology 1/21/2019 Audicus hearing booth

215 PTA: L‐46 L‐50 216 Failed Whisper Test. Refer to Audicus.
217 Failed questionnaire Bilaterally, Mild‐Moderate‐Severe at 1000Hz‐
218 2000Hz‐4000Hz

10/16/2019 Physical

12/11/19

Audicus

11/12/19

Audicus

11/14/2018 Refusal

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 45;

45; 45; 65; 40 dB. RIGHT EAR: 45; 45; 40; 55; 35 dB. PTA: L‐

50; R‐46

5/14/2019

PTA: L‐41 R‐49

1/7/2020

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; & 8000 Hz respectively. Left Ear: 60;

65; 70; 80; 80 dB. Right Ear: 60; 65; 70; 80; 80 dB.

1/29/2019

Needs ear flush PTA: L‐43 R‐40

11/6/2019 1/27/2020

PTA: L‐55 R‐54

12/4/2019

Signed refusal for hearing aids. Wants to keep pocket talker 4/16/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 217

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 478 of 985 - Page ID#: 4066

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

202

audiology consult placed

3/15/2017

203 Hears to You

BL HA issued

10/8/2018

204 Hears to You

BL HA issued

7/3/2018

205 Provider visit; review of Audicus results 206
207 Provider Review

Reviewed Audicus results with inmate. No significant hearing impairment, no requirement of hearing aids Issued Pocket Talker. Audicus Clara for Right ear ordered and approved by Dr. Kemen 12/12/19

7/1/2019 11/6/2019
12/31/2019

Patient meets criteria for hearing aid. Order Audicus Clara

208 Audicus review/hearing aid order ‐ Dr Fortwengler for Left Ear (pending approval)

6/11/2019

Annual PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire
PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire Annual Hearing Screening Questionnaire. Patient does not currently have any hearing devices. He was told he has mild impairment. Intake @KSR
HOH Nurse Visit
Dr Kemen ‐ addendum on Dr Fortwengler's note

209 Provider Review

Audicus Clara for left ear ordered and approve by Dr. Kemen

9/17/19

10/15/2019

Dr Kemen ‐ ‐ ‐ Hearing aid evaluation. Inmate not

210 present

Audicus Clara for Right Ear approved

3/1/2019

211 Hearing Aid Evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen

Audicus Oro for L ear approved

10/16/2018

HOH Nurse Visit
Hearing aid issued Meeting with HOH Nurse

212 Audicus review/hearing aide request. No visit.

Audicus Clara for Right Ear (pending approval by medical director)

6/6/2019

Hearing aide issued

213 Provider Review of Audicus Results

Hearing Aid ordered/ approved. Left Audicus

2/6/2020

Hard of Hearing Nurse visit

214 Hearing Aid Evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen

Audicus Clara for Right Ear approved

2/15/2019

Hearing aid issued

215 Audicus Review 216 Provider Review
217 Provider Review
218 Chronic care visit with provider

Approved for Audicus Clara for the left ear by Dr. Kemen. 12/13/2019

Right Audicus Clara ordered.

2/14/2020

Audicus Clara Right ordered.Not yet approved. States he uses a pocket talker for hearing ‐ with good results. Needs battery change

12/31/2019 6/24/2019

HOH Nurse Visit HOH Nurse Visit
HOH Nurse Visit
Follow up hearing aid

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 218

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 479 of 985 - Page ID#: 4067

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

202 BL HA ordered per HTY

3/28/2017

203 3 + yes/sometimes; YES to currently has and uses a HA 3+ yes/ sometimes; YES to he has & currently uses a HA
204 and YES to HA is working okay

BL HA picked up

1/2/2019

205 Failed questionnaire 206 Failed questionnaire

12/26/2019

207 Hearing Aid issued and inmate educated on care and use.

Hearing Aid arrived. IM in CPTU.

208 Order approved for Audicus Clara Left Ear

IM decline HA due to cost. (he has money on his account, 209 but is choosing canteen over HA)
Hearing aid issued to inmate in working order. Inmate educated on usage, care, battery exchange and 210 replacement. Inmate verbalized understanding Issued left Hearing Aid and educated on care and 211 operation Patient received hearing aid today, in good working order. He was educated on proper maintenance, care, battery exchange, usage and replacement (including co‐pay, going to sick call, and filling out theft/loss report) of device. He was educated to wear device to all appts. Patient 212 verbalized understanding and demonstrated use. Hearing aid issued to inmate & he was educated on use and care of hearing aid, battery exchange, loss/theft, etc. 213 Inmate verbally understood & demonstrated use Hearing aid issued to inmate & he was educated on use and care of hearing aid, battery exchange, loss/theft, etc. 214 Inmate verbally understood & demonstrated use Patient received hearing aid and was educated on usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient 215 verbalized understanding & demonstrated use. 216 Issued hearing aid. Given instructions on use and care. Inmate issued heaing aid for right ear. Educated on use 217 and care. Patient has a pocket talker, it works and he has batteries. 218 He signed DME form.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 219

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 480 of 985 - Page ID#: 4068

AE

AF

AG

AH

1 Medical Visit 7 ‐ Description
202 Annual PPD/Hearing Screen 203 204

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

8 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 8‐ Description

3+ yes/ sometimes; including YES Currently has & uses a hearing aid and YES Hearing aid is working okay

205 206
207

208

209
210 211

212 213 214 215 216 217 218
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 220

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 481 of 985 - Page ID#: 4069

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening

219 10/19/2018

Questionnaire

220 6/26/2018

Annual Physical

221 12/30/2019 222 12/27/2019

Intake Intake

223 7/29/2019 224 9/4/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

225 12/11/2015 226 10/1/2019 227 7/1/2019 228 12/2/2019
229 12/11/2009
230 12/23/2019 231 10/14/2019 232 12/27/2019

Upon Intake TB/Hearing Screening (KSP) PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire TB/Hearing Screening
Annual Physical
Hearing Screen H&P/Hearing Screening Intake

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

10/19/2018 9/4/2019 3 + yes/sometimes 6/26/2018 6/11/2019 3+ yes/sometimes

A ‐ Audicus Clara for Right Ear A ‐ Right (Audicus)

12/30/2019 12/30/2019 Failed questionnaire 12/27/2019 12/27/2019 Failed questionnaire

A‐ Audicus Clara Right A‐ Audicus Clara Left

7/29/2019 9/4/2019 12/11/2015 w/ H&P‐ No screening done. 10/1/2019 7/1/2019 12/2/2019

7/29/2019 9/4/2019
5/8/2018 10/1/2019 1/24/2020 12/2/2019

Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire
Hearing Impaired Failed questionnaire Provider Referral Failed questionnaire

D‐ Refuses Hearing Aid but wants to be Identified. D‐ Signed refusal for Hearing Aid wants ID
A (refuses to wear) A‐ Right Audicus D‐ Declines hearing aids all but wants ID. D‐ Signed refusal for Hearing Aid. Wants ID.

9/6/2017 9/3/2019 3+ yes/ sometimes; YES to currently has & uses a HA A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)

12/23/2019 9/4/2019 Failed hearing questionnaire 10/14/2019 10/14/2019 Failed questionnaire 12/27/2019 12/27/2019 Failed questionnaire

A‐Audicus Clara Right A‐Audicus Clara Left A‐ Audicus Clara Left

233 2/20/2019

Annual Physical & Chronic Care; Failed Whisper test 2/20/2019 2/20/2019 Failed Whisper Test‐ refer to audiology.

D ‐ (Declined all services, Accommodations and Identification.)

234 5/14/2019 235 9/17/2019
236 3/8/2018 237 12/1/2017

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire Letter to ADA Coordinator
Hearing Screening Questionnaire (at LLCC) annual hearing screen

5/14/2019 5/14/2019 Failed questionnaire 9/17/2019 9/18/2019 Failed questionnaire

D ‐ (INMATE SIGNED REFUSAL FOR POCKET TALKER and waiver for all other accommodations)
A‐ Audicus Clara Left

3/8/2018

5/21/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT

EAR: 10; 20; 25; 50; 25 dB. RIGHT EAR: 15; 15; 30;

50; 45 dB.

D ‐ Pocket talker issued

12/1/2017 11/4/2019 Hears properly with hearing aid

A ‐ Left Ear ‐ Audicus

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 221

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 482 of 985 - Page ID#: 4070

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?
219 No 220 No
221 N/A 222 N/A
223 224

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Intake Assessment ‐ Hearing Screening

10/19/2018 Questionnaire

6/26/2018 Annual Hearing Screen

12/30/2019 12/27/2019

Intake Intake

7/29/2019 9/4/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome
3 + yes/sometimes Answered 3+ on HS
Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire
Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

10/24/2018 Annual physical & chronic care; whisper test 6/27/2018 Annual Hearing Assessment

1/10/2020 Whisper test 12/31/2019 Whisper Test

10/25/2019 Audicus Test 9/9/2019 Whisper Test

225 N/A 226 No 227 228 N/A
229 Yes
230 231 232

5/16/2016 10/1/2019 7/1/2019 12/2/2019
12/11/2009
12/23/2019 10/14/2019 12/27/2019

Hearing Screening Questionnaire PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire TB/Hearing Screening
Hearing Screen H&P/Hearing Screening Intake

audiology consult mentioned in progress note Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire Failed Screening.
pocket talker requested
Failed Questionaire Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire

1/10/2017 10/1/2019 7/19/2019 12/18/2019

Provider CC visit Whisper Test Annual physical Whisper Test

1/29/2010

12/23/2019 Whisper Test 10/24/2019 Audicus Test 12/31/2019 Provider Note

233

2/20/2019 Whisper test

Failed whisper test. Refer to audiology

2/28/2019 Audicus hearing booth

234 235 no
236 N/A 237 No

5/14/2019 9/17/2019

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire Hearing Screen

Failed questionnaire Needs to debrox and then follow up.

5/30/19

Whisper Test.

10/10/2019 Audicus

3/8/2018

H & P; Hearing screening questionnaire. Was at

LLCC. Patient complaining of nasal congestion & ear Failed questionnaire. Requested records from ENT

issues L side from previous injury.

in Paducah and will start on Flonase.

5/24/2018

Intake Assessment (from LLCC to LAC) Hearing Screening Questionnaire

6/14/2018 Audicus Hearing Exam

Moderate/ Severe Impairment / Waiting on HA 8/14/2018 Provider review of audiology results

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 222

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 483 of 985 - Page ID#: 4071

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome Failed whisper test. Refer to audiology for Audicus
219 hearing test 220 Whisper Test

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Date
11/12/2018 7/2/2018

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description
Hearing booth Audicus

221 Failed Whisper Test 222 Failed whisper test

1/11/2020 1/1/2020

Audiogram Audiogram

223 PTA: L‐50 R‐48 224 Failed whisper test

11/8/2019 Provider Review 10/29/2019 Audicus

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome Ranging from mild to severe impairment bilaterally at different frequencies hearing exam

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date
11/29/2018 7/16/2018

Audiogram Completed Audiogram completed

1/17/2020 1/10/2020

Hearing Test not addressed. Email sent to provider to review. 11/19/2019

PTA: L‐85 R‐85 Needs provider to review.

11/11/2019

225 refuses to wear hearing aids 226 Failed Whisper Test 227 Passes whisper test 228 Failed Whisper Test

6/16/2017 10/2/2019 1/24/2020 12/19/19

Provider Chronic Care visit Audicus Testing Chronic Care Audicus

Has HA's but does not wear them. States he doesn't like them 5/8/2018

L‐61 R‐54

10/31/2019

Provider referred him to Audicus.

1/28/2020

PTA L‐49 R‐54

12/23/2019

229 IM had pocket talker at visit. Refer to Audicus‐ note not sent to AA in HOH
230 nUrse's office 231 PTA: L‐51 R‐55 Needs provider review 232 Order Audiogram

1/16/2017 Hearing eval w/provider

12/26/2019 10/28/2019 1/2/2020

Audicus Audicus Review Audiogram

Amplifier ordered by provider
PTA: L‐59 R‐55 Noted in chart Audicus Clara for left ear. Not yet ordered. Audiogram completed

9/25/2017
12/31/2019 11/4/2019 1/15/2020

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT

EAR: 10; 10; 35; 70; 70 dB. RIGHT EAR: 5; 10; 35;

233 75; 65 dB.

3/6/2019

Dr Kemen ‐ Hearing aid evaluation. Patient is not Audicus online hearing test done on 2/28/19 was reviewed.

present.

Audicus Clara for Left Ear approved.

3/8/2019

Wax in ear canal. Removed in office today. Failed

234 Whisper Test. Refer for Audicus testing

6/6/2019

Audicus Hearing Booth

235 PTA: L‐53 R‐54

10/14/2019 Audicus Review

236 Passed questionnaire

2/6/2019

Audicus hearing booth

237 HA Ordered ‐ Awaiting Approval from Dr. Kemen 8/16/2018 Dr. Kemen review.

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 5; 20;

10; 20; 35 dB. RIGHT EAR: 5; 30; 25; 40; 35 dB. PTA: L‐14; R‐

25

6/11/2019

Approved for Audicus Clara for left ear by Dr. Kemen

11/7/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 10;

20; 25; 50; 25 dB. RIGHT EAR: 15; 15; 30; 50; 45 dB.

2/22/2019

Audicus Oro for L Ear Approved

8/27/2018

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 223

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 484 of 985 - Page ID#: 4072

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description
219 Dr Kemen ‐ hearing aid evaluation 220 Audiology Eval.
221 Provider Review 222 Provider Review
223 224 Audicus Retest w/ Proctor

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

Audicus Clara for ear of patient's choice R Hearing Aid Approved/ordered

12/21/2018 8/8/2018

Hearing aid issued Audicus HA

Audicus Clara Right Hearing Aid ordered. Approved 1/22/20 2/6/2020

Audicus Clara Left Hearing Aid ordered and approved

1/27/2020

Hearing Aid approved by Dr. Kemen PTA: L‐64 R‐63

12/13/2019 1/17/2020

Provider Review

225 Provider Annual H&P 226 Provider Review 227 Audicus 228 Provider Review
229 hearing eval w/ provider
230 Provider review of Audicus results 231 HA Approval 232 Provider Review
233 F/U Audicus hearing with APRN Lyons

Has Hearing aids but won't wear them Hearing Aid ordered and approved for right PTA: L‐75 R‐71 Audicus Clara Right ordered and approved 12/30/19.

2/14/2020 11/27/2019 1/28/2020 1/14/2020

normal hearing with bilateral hearing aids in place

9/5/2018

Audicus Clara Hearing Aid ordered and approved for Right. 1/23/2020

Approved for Audicus Clara Left by Dr. Kemen.

11/27/2019

Audius Clara Left Hearing Aid ordered and approved.

2/6/2020

ADA Visit HOH Nurse Visit
Annual Hearing Screening Questionnaire HOH Visit HOH Nurse Visit HOH Nurse Visit RCC

Approved for hearing aid, but feels he doesn't need hearing

aid, ‐ please stop order

3/20/2019

Return of hearing aid

234 Audicus review ‐ Dr Fortwengler 235 HOH Nurse Visit
Hearing aid evaluation ‐ Dr Kemen. Patient is not 236 present
237 Issue of HA

Patient does not qualify for a hearing aid based on 6/6/19 Audicus testing, although there is some mild hearing loss. Please offer the patient a pocket talker. Continued to observe and if hearing worsens, testing can be repeated. 6/18/2019 Issued Hearing Aid (Audicus Clara Left) and given instructions on care and usage. Audicus online hearing test done on 2/6/19 was reviewed. R ear mild high frequency impairment; L ear minimal impairment. Patient does not meet the criteria for a hearing aid at this time. PCP may order a pocket talker at his/her discretion. HA issued to IM in good working order. Educated as to use, battery replacement, problems, etc. IM verbalized understanding

Refusal for pocket talker

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 224

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 485 of 985 - Page ID#: 4073

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome Right hearing aid issued; educated on use and battery
219 replacement 220 Issued R hearing aid to inmate in working order
Issued Right Audicus Clara. Educated on use and care 221 @RCC. 222 Hearing Aid issued to inmate.
Hearing Aid arrived and IM was called to come get it. Did 223 not show up. 224 IM has mod‐severe hearing loss, but refuses hearing aid.

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

1/9/2020 HOH Nurse Visit

Spoke with Dr. Manning and he agreed to get IM a Pocket Talker to see if he can use it. Hearing aids useless due to 225 dementia and loss of motor skills. 226 Received Hearing Aid @ KSP 227 Signed Refusal 228 Signed refusal for Hearing Aid but wants ID

229 3 + yes/sometimes; Yes to has and uses a hearing aid

230 Hearing Aid issued and instruction given on care and use. 231 Issued Audicus Clara for Left. 232 Hearing Aid Issued
Patient signed refusal on 3/13/19 for hearing aid. Hearing aids came in. Request made for return. Audicus sent return order and hearing aid was mailed out using USPS 233 w/tracking number. Patient educated that a pocket talker was recommended from hearing screening. PT educated on and he demonstrated use. After demonstrated use, patient stated he hears fine without it & signed a refusal. He was educated that once a year a hearing questionnaire will be given & at this time he can address any further hearing loss or go to sick call. he verbally understood. Refusal scanned into Audiology chart and Refusal chart. Co‐signed 234 ADA, ASST to note.

235

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

Refused Hearing Aid. Signed Waiver.

236 237
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 225

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 486 of 985 - Page ID#: 4074

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

238 11/4/2019 239 10/7/2019
240 7/3/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire TB/Hearing Screening
Intake from RCC

11/4/2019 11/4/2019 Failed questionnaire 10/7/2019 10/7/2019 Failed questionnaire
7/3/2019 12/2/2019 Failed questionnaire

A‐ Audicus Clara Left A Left Audicus Clara
A‐ Audicus Clara for Right

241 9/26/2019

Sick Call

9/26/2019 1/6/2020 Failed questionnaire

A‐Audicus Clara Right

242 11/4/2019

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

11/4/2019 11/4/2019 Failed questionnaire

A‐ Audicus Clara Left

243 10/7/2019 244 11/7/2019 245 10/7/2019
246 6/20/2019

H&P/Hearing Screening Intake H&P/Hearing Screening Intake Assessment (from RCC to KSR) Hearing Screening Questionnaire

10/7/2019 11/7/2019 10/7/2019

11/4/2019 11/7/2019 10/7/2019

Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire

6/20/2019 6/20/2019 Failed questionnaire

A‐ Approved for Audicus Clara Right A‐ Audicus Clara Left A‐ Audicus Clara Right D ‐ Declined all accomodations except for identification

247 10/7/2019 248 10/7/2019
249 4/2/2019 250 12/17/2019 251 1/7/2020

H&P/Hearing Screening H&P/Hearing Screening
PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire Sick Call PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

10/7/2019 10/7/2019 Failed questionnaire 10/7/2019 10/7/2019 Failed questionnaire
4/2/2019 4/2/2019 3+ yes/sometimes 12/17/2019 12/17/2019 Referred to Audicus 1/7/2020 1/7/2020 Failed questionnaire

A‐ Approved for Audicus Clara Left A‐ Audicus Clara left
D ‐ Normal Audicus results. Inmate does not meet criteria per policy for hearing aid at this time. D‐ Signed Refusal still wants to be identified D‐ signed refusal

252 10/8/2019 253 10/8/2019
254 2/20/2019 255 11/27/2019 256 8/27/2019 257 10/14/2019 258 10/8/2019 259 1/6/2020
260 5/1/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

10/8/2019 10/8/2019 Failed questionnaire 10/8/2019 10/8/2019 Failed questionnaire

During CC visit w/provider, scarring noted to bilateral TM; gave whisper

2/20/2019 5/21/2019 Failed Whisper Test‐ refer to audiology.

Annual Hearing Screen Notified ADA Coordinator of hearing issues

11/27/2019 11/27/2019 Failed questionnaire 8/27/2019 9/17/2019 Failed Whisper Test

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire TB/Hearing Screening

10/14/2019 10/14/2019 Failed questionnaire 10/8/2019 10/8/2019 Failed questionnaire 1/6/2020 1/6/2020 Failed questionnaire

Chronic Care & H & P visit with provider; whisper

test

5/1/2019

5/8/2019

Failed questionnaire

A‐ Left Audicus Clara A‐ Audicus Clara Right
D ‐ Doesn't qualify for hearing aid at this time. D‐ Pocket Talker Issued. Does not qualify for Hearing Aid. A‐ Audicus Clara Left
A‐ Audicus Clara Left A‐ Audicus Clara Right D‐ signed refusal
D ‐ Mild to Moderate Hearing Impairment. No HA's at this time.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 226

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 487 of 985 - Page ID#: 4075

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

238 no 239 No
240 No

11/4/2019 10/7/2019
8/19/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire TB/Hearing Screening
Intake/Whisper Test

Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire
Failed Whisper Test refer to audiology.

11/8/2019 Audicus 10/8/2019 Audicus
8/27/2019 Audicus

241 no 242 no

9/26/2019 Sick Call 11/4/2019 PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire

10/18/2019 Audicus

Failed questionnaire/signed refusal for any and all

testing hearing related.

11/7/2019 Audicus

243 no 244 245 No
246 N/A

10/7/2019 11/7/2019 10/7/2019
6/20/2019

H&P/Hearing Screening Intake H&P/Hearing Screening Intake Assessment (from RCC to KSR) Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire
Failed questionnaire

10/24/2019 Audicus 12/2/2019 Provider Note 10/9/2019 Audicus
7/17/2019 Intake visit; H & P; Whisper Test

247 no 248 No

10/7/2019 10/7/2019

H&P/Hearing Screening H&P/Hearing Screening

Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire

10/22/2019 Audicus 10/9/2019 Audicus

249 N/A 250 N/A 251 N/A

4/2/2019 12/17/2019 1/7/2020

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire Sick Call PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes Referred to Audicus Failed questionnaire

4/19/2019 1/14/2020 1/16/2020

Whisper test Audicus Whisper Test

252 no 253 No
254 N/A 255 N/A 256 No 257 No 258 No 259 N/A
260 N/A

10/8/2019 10/8/2019
2/20/2019 11/27/2019 9/17/2019 10/14/2019 10/8/2019 1/6/2020
5/1/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire

10/10/19 Audicus 10/22/2019 Audicus Test

Chronic Care visit with provider; scarring noted to Failed Whisper test; refer to Audiology for onside

bilateral tm; gave whisper test

Audicus testing

2/28/2019 Audicus hearing booth

Annual Hearing Screening Whisper Test

Failed questionnaire Failed Whisper Test refer to audiology.

12/23/2019 Whisper Test 10/18/2019 Audicus Test

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire TB/Hearing Screening

Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire Failed Screening.

10/16/2019 Audicus Test 10/16/2019 Audicus Test 1/9/2020 Whisper Test

Chronic care & H & P visit with provider; whisper

test

Failed whisper test; needs Audicus testing

5/8/2019 PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 227

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 488 of 985 - Page ID#: 4076

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome
238 PTA: L‐50 R‐50 239 PTA: L‐39 R‐ 38 240 PTA‐ L‐68 R‐66

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

11/26/2019 Provider Review 10/9/2019 Provider Review
9/30/2019 Provider Review

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

Orderd Audicus Clara Left and approved by Dr. Kemen 11/27/19 Audicus Clara for left ear ordered and approve by Dr. Kemen Provider ordered hearing aid for right ear. Dr. Kemen approved Audicus Clara.

12/13/2019 11/5/2019
11/6/2019

241 PTA: L‐63 R‐59 242 PTA: L‐46 R‐55

11/6/2019 Audicus Review

11/11/19

Provider Review

Approved for Audicus Clara for the right ear by Dr. Kemen. 12/13/2019

Audicus Clara for Left ear ordered. Approved by Dr. Kemen on

11/14/19

12/13/2019

243 PTA L‐45 R‐38 244 Obtain Audiogram 245 PTA: L‐43 R‐44
TMs normal. Failed whisper test. Refer to Audicus 246 testing

11/5/2019 12/3/2019 10/10/2019
8/8/2019

Audicus Review Audiogram Audicus Review
Audicus hearing booth

Approved for Audicus Clara for the right ear by Dr. Kemen. Inmate completed audiogram Audicus Clara for right ear approved by Dr. Kemen. 500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz. LEFT EAR: 25; 15 25; 80; 80 dB. RIGHT EAR: 20; 25; 30; 80; 75 dB. PTA: L‐36; R‐39

12/13/2019 12/6/2019 11/5/2019
9/4/2019

247 PTA: L‐39 R‐45 248 PTA L‐61 R‐60

11/6/2019 Audicus Review 10/14/2019 Audicus Review

249 Had to repeat whisper test. Refer to audiologist 250 PTA: L‐ 15 R‐45 251 Failed Whisper Test

4/29/2019 1/29/20 1/20/20

Audicus hearing booth Provider Review Audicus

Approved for Audicus Clara for the left ear by Dr. Kemen. 12/13/2019

Approved for Audicus Clara for left ear by Dr. Kemen

11/5/2019

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 30;

35; 35; 55; 35 dB. RIGHT EAR: 25; 35; 40; 60; 50 dB. PTA LEFT

EAR: 39 PTA RIGHT EAR 40

5/20/2019

Has sensorineural hearing loss but declines hearing aid.

1/29/20

PTA: L‐59 R‐53

2/5/2020

252 PTA: L‐53 R‐50 253 PTA: L‐43 R‐34
500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 15; 10; 20; 40; 50 dB. RIGHT EAR: 30; 20; 20; 254 50; 65 dB.

11/11/2019 11/6/2019
3/5/2019

Provider Visit NTC Audicus Review
Audicus review

Ordered Left Hearing Aid

12/13/2019

Approved for Audicus Clara for the right ear by Dr. Kemen. 11/27/2019

No need for hearing aids per Audicus review

3/20/2019

255 Failed Whisper Test 256 PTA: L‐58 R‐56
257 PTA: L‐40 R‐50 258 PTA: L‐53 R‐48 259 Refer to Audicus
Failed questionnaire (HAD WHISPER BEFORE 260 QUESTIONNAIRE)

12/18/2019 10/22/2019
10/28/2019 1/23/2019 1/17/20
5/13/2019

Audiogram Audicus review Audicus Review (Provider) recommends Audicus Clara for left Audicus Review Audicus
Audicus hearing booth

Refer to provider for review Dr. Kemen approved Audicus Clara for left ear. Recommends Audicus Clara for left‐ not yet approved by Dr. Kemen. Approved for Audicus Clara for right by Dr. Kemen PTA: L‐49 R‐49 500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 15; 15; 30; 65; 30 dB. RIGHT EAR: 25; 20; 20; 45; 40 dB. PTA: L 31; R 28.

1/20/2020 11/7/2019
11/27/2019 11/6/2019 2/5/2020
5/14/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 228

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 489 of 985 - Page ID#: 4077

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description
238 HOH Nurse Visit 239 HOH Nurse Visit 240 HOH Nurse Visit
241 HOH Nurse Visit
242 HOH Nurse Visit
243 HOH Nurse Visit 244 Provider review 245 HOH Nurse Visit 246 Provder Review
247 HOH Nurse Visit 248 HOH Nurse Visit
249 Audicus results 250 Clinic 251 Provider Review
252 HOH Nurse Visit 253 HOH Nurse Visit

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome Patient received hearing aid and was educated on usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient verbalized understanding & demonstrated use. Issued Audicus Clara for left ear. Educated on use and care.

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

Issued Hearing Aid and educated on use and care. Patient received hearing aid and was educated on usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient verbalized understanding & demonstrated use. Patient received hearing aid and was educated on usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient verbalized understanding & demonstrated use. Patient received hearing aid and was educated on usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient verbalized understanding & demonstrated use. Audicus Clara Left Hearing Aid ordered and approved Issued Hearing Aid and educated on use and care. Severe Impairment Bilateral. Inmate signed refusal for Hearing Aid. Patient received hearing aid and was educated on usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient verbalized understanding & demonstrated use. Issued Hearing Aid and educated on use and care.

12/31/2019

Normal Audicus results. Inmate does not meet criteria per policy for hearing aid. Inmate aware and agreeable to plan. Signed Refusal for hearing aids. Signed Refusal for hearing aid. Patient received hearing aid and was educated on usage, care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient verbalized understanding & demonstrated use. Issue Audicus Clara for Right.

254 Appt with provider; Audicus results
255 Provider Review 256 HOH Nurse Visit
257 HOH Nurse Visit 258 HOH Nurse Visit 259 Provider Review
260 Provider Review

To medical for Audicus review (No Notes) Does not qualify for hearing aid at this time. Issued a Pocket Talker. Issued Audicus Clara and educated on care and use.
Audicus Clara for Left ear issued. Issue Hearing Aid. Educated on use and care. Signed Refusal for hearing aid. Does not meet requirements for hearing aid at this time. (per ECW message from Tina Lyons, APRN, his impairment is mild to moderate)

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 229

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 490 of 985 - Page ID#: 4078

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

238 239
240

241

242

243 244 Hearing Aid issued to inmate. 245
246

247 248

249 250 251

252 253

254
255 256
257 258 259

260

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 230

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 491 of 985 - Page ID#: 4079

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

I 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

261 2/13/2019

Intake Assessment (RCC to KSR) Hearing Screening

Questionnaire

2/13/2019 9/3/2019

3 + yes/sometimes

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
D ‐ Mild hearing impairment left ear; no hearing impairment right ear. No hearing aid indicated at this time.

262 10/7/2019
263 12/18/2019 264 10/5/2017 265 9/4/2019 266 11/17/1994

H&P/Hearing Screening
Hearing Screen Intake H&P PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire Annual H&P

10/7/2019 10/7/2019 Failed questionnaire

12/18/2019
10/5/2017 9/4/2019
11/17/1994

12/18/2019
9/2/2019 9/4/2019
2/6/2019

Failed questionnaire 3 + yes/sometimes; YES to currently has & uses a hearing aid Failed questionnaire 3+ yes/ sometimes; YES to currently has & uses a HA, and YES to it is working okay

A‐ Audicus Clara Right D‐ Issued Pocket Talker. Does not qualify for hearing aid at this time‐ moderate to severe loss in right and mild loss in the left.
A ‐ Bilateral (HTY) A‐ Audicus Clara Right
A ‐ Bilateral

267 4/3/2019 268 9/3/2019 269 11/25/2019 270 8/31/2017
271 10/1/2019
272 9/4/2019
273 4/4/2014 274 11/18/2019 275 5/2/2019
276 10/29/2017

Hearing Screening Questionnaire PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire TB/Hearing Screening Annual Hearing Screen
Requested by Asst. HSA
PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire
Intake Assessment TB/Hearing Screening Intake
Annual Hearing Screening

277 2/26/2015
278 1/31/2020 279 1/6/2020 280 1/22/2019

Annual Hearing Screening
Intake RCC TB/Hearing Screening H&P Hearing Screening Questionnaire

4/3/2019 9/3/2019 11/25/2019 8/31/2017
10/1/2019

4/3/2019 9/3/2019 11/25/2019 8/2/2019
10/1/2019

3 + yes/sometimes Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire 3+ yes/ sometimes Inmate requested test due to class action lawsuit with military

D‐ Does not want HA. A‐Audicus Clara Right A‐ Audicus Clara Right D (Mild hearing loss)
A‐ Audicus Clara Left

9/4/2019
10/2/2017 11/18/2019 5/2/2019 10/29/2017

9/4/2019
10/3/2019 11/18/2019 5/2/2019 10/8/2019

Failed questionnaire 3+ yes/ sometimes; YES to currently has and uses a HA; YES to HA is working okay. States he does not think to use it. It can be uncomfortable. Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire 3 + yes/sometimes; Yes to currently has and uses a hearing aid

D‐ Signed refusal for Hearing Aid.
A (Right only) A‐ Audicus Clara Right. A‐ Left Audicus A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)

2/26/2015 11/13/2018 3+ yes/ sometimes
1/31/2020 1/31/2020 Failed questionnaire 1/6/2020 1/6/2020 Failed questionnaire 1/22/2019 1/22/2019 Failed questionnaire

D‐ Waives all but a door sign.
C‐ Audicus Clara Left C‐ Audicus Clara Right A‐ Left Audicus
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 231

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 492 of 985 - Page ID#: 4080

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor?
261 N/A

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome

2/13/2019

Intake Assessment (RCC to KSR) Hearing Screening

Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

3/8/2019 Whisper test

262 no

10/7/2019 H&P/Hearing Screening

Failed questionnaire

10/11/2019 Audicus Test

263 N/A

12/18/2019

264 Yes 265 No

10/5/2017 9/4/2019

266 Unknown (UL) 12/14/2016

Hearing Screen
Intake H&P / HOH PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire
failed whisper test‐ refer to Hears to You Failed questionnaire seen by audiology with recommendations for hearing aids.

12/31/2019 Whisper Test
12/12/2017 Hears to You 10/8/2019 Audicus Test
12/14/2016

267 N/A 268 No 269 No 270 N/A
271 No

4/3/2019 9/3/2019 11/25/2019 8/31/2017
10/1/2019

Hearing Screening Questionnaire PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire TB/Hearing Screening Annual Hearing Screen
Requested by Asst. HSA

272

9/4/2019

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

273 Unknown 274 275 No
276 Yes

4/4/2014 11/18/2019 5/2/2019
9/15/2016

TB/Hearing Screening Intake

277 N/A
278 279 280

7/11/2016

1/31/2020
1/6/2020 1/22/2019

Intake RCC TB/Hearing Screening H&P Hearing Screening Questionnaire

3 + yes/sometimes Failed questionnaire Failed Hearing screen 3+ yes/ sometimes Inmate requested test due to class action lawsuit with military

4/9/2019 9/25/2019 11/26/2019 9/21/2017

Whisper test Audicus Test Audicus Whisper Test

10/10/19 Audicus

Failed questionnaire

9/30/2019 Whisper test

admitted with hearing aid right ear Failed Screening. Failed questionnaire

10/2/2017 Annual hearing screening questionnaire 11/19/2019 Audicus 6/5/2019 Audicus

in process of scheduling audiologist appointment 12/15/2016

Seen by Kelly Mike. No tuning fork available to

assess hearing. IM able to hear and respond at that

time. RS appt.

11/29/2016

Failed Screening.
Failed Screening. Failed questionnaire

2/3/2020 Whisper Test
1/24/2020 Whisper Test 3/18/2019 Telephone encounter with Dr. Kemen to Provider

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 232

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 493 of 985 - Page ID#: 4081

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome 261 Failed whisper test. Refer to audiology.

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

3/18/2019 Audicus hearing booth

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz, respectively. LEFT EAR: 40;

30; 30; 40; 40 dB. RIGHT EAR: 25; 20; 30; 35; 35 dB.

3/26/2019

262 PTA: L‐34 L‐33

11/7/2019 Provider Review

IM approved for Audicus Clara for Right ear by Dr. Kemen. 12/13/2019

263 Failed Whisper Test

1/1/2020

Audiogram

264 BL Hearing Aids recommended 265 PTA: L‐80 L‐71
inmate refused pocket talker states he will wait on 266 hearing aids to come in.

1/13/2017 10/10/2019
3/17/2017

Hears to you Provider Review

Refer to provider for review

1/13/2020

BL HA issued

9/7/2018

Ordered Audicus Clara for Right ear. Approved by Dr. Kemen 11/5/2019

BL HA issued per audiology

2/28/2018

267 Failed whisper test; refer to audiology 268 PTA: L‐ 64 R‐64 269 L‐58 R‐56 270 Referred to Hears to You
271 PTA: L‐44 R‐53

4/15/2019 10/9/2019 12/3/19 2/17/2018
10/1/2019

Audicus hearing booth Audicus Review Provider Review Hears to You
Audicus Review

500; 1000; 2000; 4000; 8000 Hz respectively. LEFT EAR: 45; 50; 45; 55; 40 dB. RIGHT EAR: 45; 50; 50; 60; 50 dB. Hearing Aid approved by Dr. Kemen. Audicus Clara for Right ordered and approved by Dr. Kemen. Mild BL Hearing Loss. F/U 2yrs. No HA's recommended. Audicus Clara ordered for left ear. Approved by Dr. Kemen 10/14/19

5/9/2019 11/5/2019 12/23/2019 2/17/2018
11/6/2019

272 Refer to Audicus hearing exam.

10/8/2019 Audicus Test

3+ yes/ sometimes; YES to currently has and uses a 273 HA; YES to HA is working okay 274 PTA:L‐44 R‐38 275 Retest
Amplification recommended. Awaiting approval. 276 Email to Bill to place consult.

10/2/2018 1/27/20 6/19/2019
1/16/2017

Annual PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire Provider Review Audicus

IM seen for H&P. Dx of HOH. Declines referral for ENT. IM states he gets by fine and wouldn't wear 277 them anyway.

11/13/2018

Annual hearing screening questionnaire

PTA: L‐53 R‐49

11/6/2019

3+ yes/ sometimes; YES to currently has and uses a HA; YES to

HA is working okay. States he does not think to use it.

10/3/2019

Audicus Clara Right ordered and approved.

2/14/2020

Hearing Aid Reccommended.

7/22/2019

consult placed for BL hearing aides.

2/23/2017

3 + yes/sometimes

11/14/2018

278 Failed Whisper Test
279 Failed Whisper Test 280 Inmate qualifies for Audicus Clara left ear.

2/5/2020
1/29/20 5/20/2019

Audiogram
Audicus HA Eval; Dr. Kemen‐ approved and ordered

Provider to review
PTA: L‐61 R‐61 Hearing aid approved and ordered

2/11/2020
2/21/2020 6/11/2019

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 233

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 494 of 985 - Page ID#: 4082

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description Audicus. Inmate not present. Chart review is for
261 Audicus hearing results.
262 HOH Nurse Visit

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome

Date

Reviewed Audicus hearing results. Mild hearing impairment

left ear; no hearing impairment right ear. No hearing aid

indicated at this time.

Patient received hearing aid and was educated on usage,

care, replacement of HA, battery exchange, etc. Patient

verbalized understanding & demonstrated use.

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

263 Provider Review

Does not qualify for Hearing Aid‐moderate‐sever in Right and mild loss in the Left. Issued a pocket talker.

264 Annual Hearing Screening 265 HOH Nurse Visit
266 Annual Hearing Screening

3 + yes/sometimes; YES to currently has & uses a HA Issue Hearing Aid. Educated on use and care. 3+ yes/ sometimes; YES to currently has & uses a HA, and YES to it is working okay

Audicus results with provider. States he does not want a hearing aid right now, he may want one in the future and he will go through sick call to let me know as he states "I don't have the funds right now." He also does not want a pocket talker right 267 now. 268 HOH Nurse Visit 269 HOH Nurse Visit 270 HTY

Issued Hearing Aid. Educated on use and care. Hearing Aid issued and inmate educated on care and use. Does not recommend HA ‐ recheck in 2 years

2/6/2019

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Met with Cindy

5/15/ or 5/16 and

he DOES want

Hearing aid. Was

advised to go to

sick call to let

them know this

271 HOH Nurse Visit 272 Audicus Review

Issued Hearing Aid. Educated on use and care Has moderate hearing loss bilaterally and qualifies for a hearing aid, but does not want one at this time. Refusal signed.

273 Annual TB and Hearing Screen 274 HOH Nurse Visit 275

Failed questionnaire Issue Audicus Clara for Right. Educated on care and use. Hearing Aid Issued @RCC. Audicus Clara for Left.

276
Annual Physical; failed whisper test; currently not 277 wearing hearing aids; Left TM cerumen impaction

BL HA issued per HTY

10/22/2018

Inmate HOH & states he has hearing aids but he will not use

them "I don't want to and I already signed the paper."

Debrox given in clinic & instructed on use. Instructed to

watch for note to return to tx room for ear flush

Annual hearing screening questionnaire

278 Provider Review
279 Provider Review 280

Audicus Clara for left ordered. Not yet approved.
Audicus Clara for right ordered. Approved on 2/24/20, Hearing aid issued at LLCC

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 234

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 495 of 985 - Page ID#: 4083

Z

AA

AB

AC

AD

1 Medical Visit 5 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit

6 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Description

Medical Visit 6 ‐ Outcome

Medical Visit 7 ‐ Date

261

262

263
264 265
3+ yes/sometimes; YES to currently has & uses a HA, and 266 YES to it is working okay

267 268 269 270 271
272
273 274 275
3 + yes/sometimes; Yes to currently has and uses a hearing 276 aid
277
278 279 280

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 235

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 496 of 985 - Page ID#: 4084

E

F

1. Date hearing

problem first

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

1 presented to KDOC KDOC

281 1/7/2020

Hearing Screen

282 8/27/2015 283 11/4/2019 284 10/4/2019
285 1/6/2020

Upon Intake PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire Intake (RCC)
TB/Hearing Screening

286 10/7/2019 287 10/3/2017

H&P/Hearing Screening Provider Visit

G 3. Date of initial hearing screening 1/7/2020

H 4. Date of most recent hearing screening 1/7/2020

I
5. Results of most recent hearing screening Failed questionnaire

1/24/2017 11/4/2019 10/4/2019

1/7/2020 11/4/2019 10/4/2019

1 Yes answer Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire

1/6/2020 1/6/2020 Failed questionnaire

10/7/2019 10/7/2019 Failed questionnaire 10/3/2017 12/2/2019 Normal Hearing

J
6. Hearing aid status ‐ list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
D‐ signed refusal for hearing aid but wants ID D (Declined all services, accommodations and identification) C‐ Audicus Clara Right A‐ Audicus Clara for left Ear D‐ signed refusal Declines hearing aids, ID & any other accommodations.
D‐ Declines Hearing Aid but wants ID. D‐ signed refusal for accommodations except ID

288 5/23/2019 289 10/23/2019 290 1/13/2020 291 12/2/2019
292 3/11/2017 293 4/11/2018 294 10/8/2019 295 8/27/2019 296 10/7/2019
297 3/17/2017
298 2/11/2016 299 12/9/2016 300 12/3/2018

Intake Assessment (to KSR) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire Intake RCC Hearing Screening H & P note
Intake Screening Intake PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire PPD H&P/Hearing Screening
Annual hearing screen
Per ADA request Provider Appt. PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

5/23/2019 5/23/2019 Failed questionnaire

D ‐ Pocket talker

10/23/2019 1/14/2020 Failed questionnaire

A‐ Audicus Clara Left

1/13/2020 1/13/2020 Failed questionnaire

C‐ Audicus Clara Right

12/2/2019
3/11/2017 4/11/2018
10/8/2019 8/27/2019 10/7/2019

12/2/2019
3/13/2019 10/12/2019
10/8/2019 10/29/2019 10/7/2019

Referred by Provider to Audicus

A‐ Audicus Clara Left

3 + yes/sometimes. Answered YES to currently has

& uses a hearing aid and YES hearing aid is working

okay.

A ‐ Bilateral (HTY)

Failed questionnaire

A‐ Audicus Clara Left

D‐ Declines all accommodations except

Failed questionnaire

identification

Failed questionnaire

A‐ Right Audicus

Failed questionnaire

D‐ Declines hearing aids and identification

3/17/2017 11/2/2018 3 + yes/sometimes

D ‐ (Declined all services, Accommodations and Identification except DOOR SIGN.)

1/17/2018 1/7/2020 3+ yes/ sometimes

A (has waived all identification/accomodations except HAs and batteries)

12/9/2016 2/11/2020 Failed Whisper test

A (Left Only)

12/3/2018 12/3/2018 Failed questionnaire

D‐ Signed refusal of all accommodations

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 236

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 497 of 985 - Page ID#: 4085

K

L

M

N

O

P

8.T‐coil 1 receptor? 281
282 N/A 283 284 No
285
286 N/A 287 N/A

Medical Visit 1

‐ Date

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Description

1/7/2020

Hearing Screen

1/10/2017 11/4/2019 10/4/2019
1/6/2020

PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire Intake
TB/Hearing Screening

10/7/2019 10/3/2017

H&P/Hearing Screening Provider visit

Medical Visit 1 ‐ Outcome Failed Screening. email to Jan to eval hearing needs. No documentation of eval since being with DOC. Failed Hearing Screen. Failed questionnaire
Failed Screening.
Failed questionnaire Failed Whisper test / Refer to Audiology

Medical Visit

2 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 2 ‐ Description

1/22/2020 Whisper Test

1/23/2017 11/19/2019 Audicus 10/14/2019 Provider Visit

1/29/2020 Whisper Test

10/9/2019 Audicus 12/6/2017 Annual Hearing Screening

288 N/A 289 290 No 291 No

5/23/2019 10/23/2019 1/13/2020 12/2/2019

Intake Assessment (to KSR) ‐ Hearing Screening Questionnaire Intake RCC Hearing screening questionnaire PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire

Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire Complaint with hearing

6/5/2019 Whisper test ‐ Dr Manning 11/5/2019 Intake H&P 1/27/2020 Audiogram 12/19/19 Provider Review

292 Yes 293
294 295 No 296

3/14/2017 4/11/2018
10/8/2019 8/27/2019 10/7/2019

Intake to LSCC
PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire PPD LLCC H&P/Hearing Screening

Intake H&P ‐ failed whisper test‐ referred to HTY 3/22/2017

Failed Questionaire

12/27/18 Audiology at LSCC

Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire Failed questionnaire

10/16/19 9/10/19 10/11/19

Audicus Test Audicus Audicus Test

297 N/A

3/17/2017

Annual Hearing Screening

3 + yes/sometimes

5/5/2017 CC/HOH Provider visit

298 Unknown (UL) 3/4/2016

299 Unknown

12/16/2016

300 N/A

12/3/2018

PPD/Hearing Screening Questionnaire

audiologist recommended bilateral hearing aids
L hearing aid issued Failed questionnaire/ signed refusal for further testing.

8/16/2016 3/6/2018 provider visit/ hearing exam

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 237

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 498 of 985 - Page ID#: 4086

Q

R

S

T

U

1 Medical Visit 2 ‐ Outcome 281 Failed Whisper Test
282 Declines further treatment 283 PTA: L‐24 R‐21 284 Audiogram (RCC)
285 Failed Whisper Test
286 PTA: L‐35 R‐31 287 States his hearing is normal

Medical Visit

3 ‐ Date

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Description

1/30/20

Audicus

1/11/2018 12/3/19 10//16/19

Annual hearing screening questionnaire Provider Review

1/31/20

Audicus

10/18/2019 Provider Review 12/7/2017 Outside Medical Trip to HTY

Patient with dementia. Please provide patient with

288 pocket talker.

6/10/2019

289 Audiogram Ordered

11/7/2019

290 Referred to provider for review

2/7/2020

291 Hearing Aid for Left ear ordered. Awaiting approval. 1/23/2020

Pocket talker issued Provider Review Provider Review HOH Nurse Visit

Medical Visit 3 ‐ Outcome Retest

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Date 2/5/2020

Only answered 2 + yes/sometimes

1/2/2019

Audicus Clara for Right ordered and approved by Dr. Kemen. 12/20/2019

issued pocket talker

11/1/2019

PTA: L‐ 46 R‐49

2/6/2020

Mild hearing loss bilaterally. Qualifies for hearing aid but

signed refusal.

Signed Refusal

Pocket talker issued to patient concurrent with provider order

due to patient being hard of hearing. Patient educated about

use of pocket talker demonstrates proper use to myself at

this time durable medical equipment form signed and placed

in bin for scanning.

Audicus Clara for Right ordered and approved. Issued Pocket

Talker.

12/13/2019

Audicus Clara Hearing Aid ordered for Right ear. Approved

same day.

Issued hearing Aid 1/23/20.. Educated on care and use.

292 HTY recommended BL HA 293 PTA: L‐30 R‐40
294 PTA: L‐56 R‐49 Declines all but Identification 295 PTA: L‐28 R‐21 296 PTA: L‐40 L‐48
297

4/5/2017 1/23/2019

Review of Audiology

10/22/2019 10/15/2019 11/7/2019

Provider Review Provider Review

11/1/2017 Annual physical & chronic care

BL HA issued per HTY Audicus Clara for left ear approved by Dr. Kemen. IM has sensorineural hearing loss. Declines hearing aid but wants to be identified. Issued Hearing Aid LLCC. Educated on care and use. Declines hearing aid or pocket talker. Very HOH; has toilet tissue packed in ears on top of cerumen impaction. Refuses to allow provider to remove; refuses to be evaluated for hearing aides

3/13/2019 2/5/2019

298 hearing aids received Failed whisper test ‐ has HA, not wearing at this
299 time, encouraged to wear
300

2/1/2018

Hearing Screen

Has HA's but does not wear them.

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 238

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 499 of 985 - Page ID#: 4087

V

W

X

Y

1 Medical Visit 4 ‐ Description 281 Audicus
282 Annual hearing screening 283 HOH Nurse Visit 284
285 Provider Review
286 287

Medical Visit 4 ‐ Outcome Has hearing loss but s.igned refusal
Only answered 1 question Yes Issue Hearing Aid. Educated on use and care. Issued hearing aid.
Has unspecified sensorineural hearing loss.

Medical Visit 5 ‐

Date

Medical Visit 5 ‐ Description

288 289 290 291
292 PPD & Hearing Screening Questionnaire 293 294 295 296
297
298 299 300

Inmate issued Hearing Aid @RCC
3 + yes/sometimes. Answered YES to currently has & uses a hearing aid and YES hearing aid is working okay. Hearing Aid issued @ GRCC

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 239

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 500 of 985 - Page ID#: 4088
KSR
Repeat issues:
A. Medical staff not responsive to reported hearing issuesDuring the COVID-19 medical lockdown, emergent medical issues were the priority as staff were handling medical emergencies and treating those who tested positive. Medical has returned to normal operations for all medical issues to include hearing concerns. B. Difficult to hear in the phone room During the medical lockdown, all inmates were restricted to the wing so there was more traffic in the wing than normal. Now that we have returned to normal operations, there should not be an issue. C. Difficulty hearing announcements, especially because of housing location During the medical lockdown, officers posted written versions of special announcements in every wing. To contain the spread of the virus during the COVID-19 medical lockdown our in-person alert workers were not allowed to deliver messages. The only verbal announcements were activities that happened at the same time each day (meals and medication pass). We have allowed inmates to purchase vibrating watches and bedshaker alarms to help them self manage when it is time for meals, medication pass, etc. With the return to normal operations, the in-person alert workers are being utilized and there should be no issues. D. Staff disrespect I readdressed appropriate communication with deaf/HOH inmates with all staff via a memo. See attachment Memo to Staff HOH-Deaf Issues. It is also a part of annual training. E. Hearing aid for the wrong ear Per medical, Hearing aids are provided based on the results of the audiology testing and not the patient preference. F. Too-high qualification for devices The qualifications for a hearing aid are set by medical and determined by testing and provider input. All other accommodations are considered on an individual basis. G. Difficulties getting battery replacements, Inmates were supposed to let medical know they needed batteries when they made their daily rounds to the dorms during the lockdown. This was establish on 7/11/20 the day after the lockdown began. This information was relayed to them by medical and via Jpay messages and a memo (see attachment HOH during Shutdown), sent by me. They were advised they could contact me if they missed medical and I did receive written requests and JPay messages-these were forwarded immediately to the appropriate medical staff. I also sent an individually addressed survey that told them exactly how to get them. We have returned to normal operations now so this should no longer be an issue.
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 240

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 501 of 985 - Page ID#: 4089
H. Poor hearing aid quality We get our Hearing Aids through Audicus. I. Difficult getting replacement hearing aids. This depends greatly on individual situation. A theft report is required to restart the process and a co-pay of $10. Many times, it is several weeks before the inmate gets around to asking for the theft report and delays the process. Other times, the inmate has to be retested if the hearing aids were older. We do offer them a pocket talker in the meantime.
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 241

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 502 of 985 - Page ID#: 4090
KSR A. Missing Items from Information Request: 1. Please provide an updated answer to the following: “Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2020 addressing deaf/hard-of-hearing issues.” Several documents were referenced in the Information Tool that were not attached; when reviewing the emails we received, it looks like we did not receive Part 9, which may be the issue. I resent Part 9 and cc’d myself. It came through on my end, but let me know if you still did not get it and I will split up the attachments. I am attaching an additional memo that just went out as well (see attachment ‘Memo Sp. Purchase Orders’)
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 242

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 503 of 985 - Page ID#: 4091

Cookie Crews
Commissioner

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Kentucky State Reformatory

Anna Valentine

3001 W. Hwy 146

Warden

LaGrange, Kentucky 40032

Telephone: 502-222-9441

www.kentucky.gov

To: KSR Staff

From: Cindy Wathen, ADA Coordinator

Date: September 15, 2020

Subject: Hard of Hearing/Deaf Inmate Accommodations

Kentucky State Reformatory has the following accommodations available for deaf/hard of hearing inmates:
1. Deaf/HOH IDs- Unless a waiver is signed, KSR’s ADA Coordinator will issue a special ID card to Deaf/HOH inmates upon medical diagnosis of hearing loss. This notice helps staff easily identify inmates with a hearing impairment, so they can take steps to provide effective communication.
2. Door Sign- Signage provided by the ADA Coordinator is placed outside the cell door of an inmate with a hearing impairment.
3. Hearing aids/Amplifiers- Hearing aids, amplifiers and the necessary batteries are provided free of charge if medical staff determines that they are appropriate.
4. Video Captioning- Closed Captioning is available on televisions located in common areas as well as videos shown in classrooms and recreational movies. TVs in common areas should have the captions turned on at all times.
5. Written materials- An inmate who does not understand something that a staff member verbally communicates, may ask the staff to write it down.
6. Non-auditory alerts- KSR has several devices for inmates who are unable to hear announcements. -Strobe-light cells- fire alarm automatically triggers a very bright flashing light. -Bed shaker with flashing light alerts- this device sits under the inmate’s bed pillow and vibrates when the fire alarm goes off. -Pagers are available to inmates medically diagnosed as deaf or severely hearing impaired. Messages that can be sent via pager as well as a list of who has these devices can be found on the H-Drive > EVERYONE > Hearing Impaired. -In-Person Alerts can be arranged upon request for announcements such as pill call etc. -Other adaptive equipment such as vibrating alarm watches and bed shaker alarm clocks may be purchased by inmates via by making a request to the ADA coordinator.
7. FM Transmitter System- available in any class or program and the Chapel upon request, this system allows the speaker’s voice to be transmitted directly to an individual’s ear via a small receiver and earbuds. Inmates must be identified as hard of hearing, and request to use the system. They must also provide their own earbuds.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 243

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 504 of 985 - Page ID#: 4092
Telecommunications Devices8. For inmates who communicate via sign language, KSR has a videophone, which makes it possible to
sign to a person at the other end or to communicate via Video Relay Service (VRS), through which a remote interpreter translates sign into English and vice versa. 9. Inmates who are severely Hard of Hearing may request to use a Captel Phone. This device captions the conversation so it can be heard and read for better communication. 10. There are also TTYs (Teletypewriters) available, which allow one to type a phone message to another TTY user or use a relay service to communicate to someone with a regular phone.
• The videophone is located in Dorm 3. Inmates should contact the ADA Coordinator to gain access to the Videophone or a TTY.
• Deaf inmates who communicate using sign language have access to the videophone during the same hours as non-deaf inmates have access to the regular phone. The TTY is also available during regular phone hours.
11. Qualified Interpreter Services- For inmates who communicate with sign language, qualified interpreter services are provided for significant communications, using either the Video Remote Interpretation (available for staff to check out in the main Control Center 24/7 365 days a year) or an inperson qualified interpreter, depending on the circumstances. Inmates, who would like to request an interpreter, should contact the ADA Coordinator via Institutional Mail or ask their CTO to provide a Request for Communication Assistance Form (located on the H-Drive). Please allow 48 hours’ notice if an in-person interpreter is being requested.
Interpreter services MUST be used for the following, unless the inmate signs a waiver form (located on the H-Drive > EVERYONE > Hearing Impaired > Forms or contact the ADA Coordinator):
• Initial intake/classification • Auxiliary aids/services assessment and other accommodation assistance • On-site medical, mental health and dental evaluations/care/appointments • Classification and transfer hearings and related meetings • Grievance hearings • Adjustment committee hearing • All meetings related to discipline • Parole hearings • Rehabilitative and educational classes and clubs • Transitional programs • Conversations with post-release supervisor • Translating written material • Other significant communications, on request
Inmates who have not yet been diagnosed as hard of hearing, but are experiencing difficulty with their hearing, should report to sick call. If you have a lost or stolen device, report it immediately to the ADA Coordinator and/or medical and obtain a theft report. For broken hearing aids or pocket talkers, report to sick call with the device for review.
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact ADA Coordinator Cindy Wathen. David Gatton from Fire and Safety is the Assistant ADA Coordinator.
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 244

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 505 of 985 - Page ID#: 4093

Cookie Crews
Commissioner

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Kentucky State Reformatory
3001 W. Hwy 146
LaGrange, Kentucky 40032
Telephone: 502-222-9441 www.kentucky.gov

Anna Valentine
Warden

To: KSR Staff

From: Cindy Wathen, ADA Coordinator

Date: 9/21/20

A recent survey sent out to all Hard of Hearing/Deaf inmates brought to light some complications they are experiencing during the pandemic. We also have several new staff members and I wanted to reach out to them as well.

Several inmates have indicated they cannot understand the conversation when staff members talk with masks on. Per the Warden, inmates may request that you use the clear face shield for communication if you are having a meeting with them. You can also use written communication, when appropriate, for shorter conversations.

Announcements are difficult on any given day. We had addressed this issue by allowing the purchase of vibrating alarm watches, bed shaker alarms and In-Person alerts. During lock-down, the In-Person alerts did not happen in order to avoid spreading the virus, but we need these reinstated now that we are opening up again. If an inmate indicates that he is having difficulties getting to a specific event, such as pill call, diabetics etc., please tell them to contact me to set them up for InPerson Alerts.

Some dorms do not have an intercom, and the officer calls out announcements. It would be helpful to repeat the announcement two times and make sure each wing can hear. Use your runners to make sure all Hard of Hearing inmates in your dorm, identified by the blue and yellow signs on their cell, know every announcement.

Please be respectful. Yelling at a deaf/hard of hearing inmate, approaching them from behind or banging on their cell door is not appropriate. It is also inappropriate to write up an inmate for behavior that caused by a hearing impairment. They

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 245

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 506 of 985 - Page ID#: 4094
should not be written up for talking loudly or for not following instructions that they could not hear, such as standing for count. This does not mean that an HOH/Deaf inmate cannot be written up for ignoring established rules and policies. I am attaching a copy of the brochure we hand out to inmates identified as HOH/Deaf. Please review for information regarding available accommodations for our Deaf/HOH inmates here at KSR. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me. Cindy Wathen, ADA Coordinator Cynthia.wathen@ky.gov 502-222-9441 ext. 4002
Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 246

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 507 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4095

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

Start Date of

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

most recent

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

process

needed

(screen/lost/

Days to

Documentation & Steps taken to avoid similar problems (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

broken)

End Date

Resolution Reason for Delay

going forward.

(d) no hearing aid is needed

3/18/2020

5/19/2020

62

Being treated for ear infection.

(See attachment: 60-

A- Audicus Clara Left

Scheduled for Audicus 4/6 but in NC on SEG Status at Process delayed until inmate able to test without harming

3/30/2020

6/5/2020

67

that time. 4/13 Proctor out sick

himself or others.

A - Audicus Clara Left

Our schedule has returned to normal as we have been

Process slowed due to COVID-Long gap between Audicus released from the medical lock-down. We have also

and Provider Review. Took 1 month for company to

streamlined our entire process and added alerts for hearing

3/4/2020

5/18/2020

75

deliver hearing aid.

screens.

A-Audicus Clara Right

2/24/20 & 2/27/20 NO SHOW retest 3/30/20 5/1 No Explained the importance of keeping appointments to

2/19/2020

5/4/2020

75

show for pick up.

inmate.

A- Audicus Clara Right

Our schedule has returned to normal as we have been

released from the medical lock-down. We have also

Process slowed due to COVID- Whisper not done at

streamlined our entire process and added alerts for hearing

same time which resulted in an additional appointment screens. (See attachments: 60-

for retest & eOMIS

5/4/2020

7/29/2020

86

to schedule. Also had to be retested.

Offender Alert)

A- Audicus Clara Left

2/21/2020

5/1/2020

70

Inmate had to be retested.

See attachment: 60-

A- Audicus Clara Left

Needed Audicus retest. Scheduled 6/18/20 Rescheduled

several times- no show. 6/30 No show for provider

Explained the importance of keeping appointments to

5/4/2020

7/29/2020

86

review.

inmate. (See attachment: 60-

for retest)

A- Audicus Clara Left

Our schedule has returned to normal as we have been

Process slowed due to COVID- Whisper not done at

released from the medical lock-down. We have also

same time which resulted in an additional appointment streamlined our entire process and added alerts for hearing D- Signed refusal for hearing aid or pocket talker. Wants

4/14/2020

6/15/2020

62

to schedule.

screens.

identification.

4/14/2020

6/19/2020

66

Had to be retested.

(See attachment: 60-

for retest)

D- Signed refusal for hearing aid or pocket talker.

Our schedule has returned to normal as we have been

Process slowed due to COVID- Whisper not done at

released from the medical lock-down. We have also

same time which resulted in an additional appointment streamlined our entire process and added alerts for hearing

5/12/2020

7/16/2020

65

to schedule.

screens.

A- Audicus Clara Left

No show for an appointment on 5/19. Provider ordered

retest on Audicus after reviewing results. After second

Audicus test, had to be scheduled for outside

Explained the importance of keeping appointments to

appointment- CT scan for temporal bones per the

inmate. (See attachment: 60-

for retests and outside

4/23/2020

7/29/2020

97

provider.

appt.)

A - Audicus Clara Left

Our schedule has returned to normal as we have been

released from the medical lock-down. We have also

Process slowed due to COVID- Took over a month to streamlined our entire process and added alerts for hearing

2/21/2020

5/1/2020

70

schedule Provider Review.

screens.

A-Audicus Clara Left

Our schedule has returned to normal as we have been

released from the medical lock-down. We have also

Process slowed due to COVID- Took over a month to streamlined our entire process and added alerts for hearing

3/17/2020

5/19/2020

63

schedule Provider review.

screens.

A- Audicus Clara Left

Our schedule has returned to normal as we have been

Due to COVID, the whisper and the hearing screen were released from the medical lock-down. We have also

done separately. Inmate had to re-test per provider

streamlined our entire process and added alerts for hearing

5/6/2020

7/29/2020

84

request.

screens. (See attachment: 60-

for retest)

A- Audicus Left

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 247

Prisoner Last Name Prisoner First Name

Start Date of most recent process (screen/lost/ KyDOC # broken)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

End Date

Days to Resolution Reason for Delay

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 508 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4096

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

Documentation & Steps taken to avoid similar problems (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

going forward.

(d) no hearing aid is needed

2/24/2020 5/4/2020 3/9/2020

Due to COVID, the whisper and the hearing screen were Our schedule has returned to normal as we have been

done separately. Inmate also had to be retested using a released from the medical lock-down. We have also

proctor. Took about a month for Hearing Aid to arrive streamlined our entire process and added alerts for hearing

5/19/2020 118 after it was approved by Dr. Kemen.

screens. (See attachment: 60-

for retest)

A-Audicus Clara Right

The issue with slow delivery from Audicus was addressed and

improved before COVID. Once the pandemic set in, delivery

Took a month for hearing aid to arrive after approval has been taking a month or more most times. This should

from Dr. Kemen. Inmate also had to be retested as

improve as things return to normal. (See attachment: 60-

7/16/2020

73

requested by the provider.

for re-test)

A- Audicus Clara Left

Our schedule has returned to normal as we have been

Process slowed due to COVID- Took over a month to released from the medical lock-down. We have also

schedule Provider review. Took a month for hearing aid streamlined our entire process and added alerts for hearing

5/22/2020

74

to arrive after approval from Dr. Kemen.

screens.

A- Audicus Clara Left

Our schedule has returned to normal as we have been

released from the medical lock-down. We have also

streamlined our entire process and added alerts for hearing

screens. The issue with slow delivery from Audicus was

Process slowed due to COVID- Took over a month to addressed and improved before COVID. Once the pandemic

schedule Provider Review. Took a month for hearing aid set in, delivery has been taking a month or more most times.

2/28/2020

5/19/2020

80

to arrive after approval from Dr. Kemen.

This should improve as things return to normal.

A- Audicus Clara Right

The issue with slow delivery from Audicus was addressed and

improved before COVID. Once the pandemic set in, delivery

HA Broken Have

has been taking a month or more most times. This should

to retest)

Inmate had to re-test in Audicus. Took a month for

improve as things return to normal. (See attachment: 60-

2/25/20

5/19/2020

83

hearing aid to arrive after approval from Dr. Kemen. Johnson for re-test)

A - Audicus Clara Right

12/2/2019
4/9/2020 3/9/2020 2/28/2020 2/14/2020

We now have KOMS alerts that have rectified this problem.

Now ADA Coordinator receives a notification on ALL failed

Failed hearing screen not reported to HOH nurse for 2 hearing screens and can start tracking immediately. (See

3/25/2020 114 months.

attachment: eOMIS Offender Alert for example of alert) A- Audicus Clara Right

The issue with slow delivery from Audicus was addressed and

improved before COVID. Once the pandemic set in, delivery

has been taking a month or more most times. This should

Inmate had to re-test in Audicus. Took a month for

improve as things return to normal. (See attachment: 60-

7/16/2020

98

hearing aid to arrive after approval from Dr. Kemen. Jones for re-test)

A- Audicus Clara Left

The issue with slow delivery from Audicus was addressed and

improved before COVID. Once the pandemic set in, delivery

Took a month for hearing aid to arrive after approval has been taking a month or more most times. This should

5/19/2020

71

from Dr. Kemen.

improve as things return to normal.

A- Audicus Clara Left

Had to have effusion then wait 2 months for a review

7/16/2020 139 per providers orders.

(See attachment: 60-

A- Audicus Clara Left

We immediately tried to re-route the hearing aids to KSR

RCC sent the hearing aids out for repair and Inmate

from Audicus, but it was too late and they ended up going to

5/1/2020

77

transferred to KSR.

RCC anyway.

A - AUDICUS CLARA FOR RIGHT EAR

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 248

Prisoner Last Name Prisoner First Name

KyDOC #

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 509 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4097

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

Start Date of

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

most recent

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

process

needed

(screen/lost/

Days to

Documentation & Steps taken to avoid similar problems (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

broken)

End Date

Resolution Reason for Delay

going forward.

(d) no hearing aid is needed

Inmate reported hearing aid broken. Issued a pocket

talker and sent through Audicus testing. Provider

reviewed the first test and ordered another one.

Provider ordered a 3rd test. At the next review, inmate

came in with 2 hearing aids he already had and said they

1/6/2020

4/10/2020

95

both work.

(See attachment: 60-

& 60-

Provider Note)

A - Audicus Oro for Right Ear

5/4/2020

7/29/2020

86

Audicus had to be repeated, slowing his process.

(See attachment: 60-

A- Audicus Clara Right

Inmate was at RCC for process. Looks like he had to

repeat the Audicus test -first one was in December.

D- Was issued Hearing Aid @LLCC but returned it and

12/12/2019 3/18/2020

96

Second one was in February.

(See attachment: 60-

signed refusal.

The issue with slow delivery from Audicus was addressed and

improved before COVID. Once the pandemic set in, delivery

Took a month for hearing aid to arrive after approval has been taking a month or more most times. This should

4/16/2020

6/25/2020

70

from Dr. Kemen.

improve as things return to normal.

A-Audicus Clara Right

11/18/2019 7/15/2019 12/3/2019 5/4/2020 3/10/2020 2/19/2020

Had to have ears flushed two times before testing could

1/23/2020

66

be completed.

(See attachment: 60-

A- Audicus Clara Right

His treatment involved outside appointments (MRI and

ENT). Has other medical issues that complicate

D- Inmate signed refusal for Hearing Aid after outside ENT

3/19/2020 248 scheduling.

(See attachment: 60-

appointment. Other medical issues.

Our schedule has returned to normal as we have been

COVID slowed the process- Long gap between hearing released from the medical lock-down. We have also

screen and whisper test. Took a month for hearing aid to streamlined our entire process and added alerts for hearing

3/27/2020 117 arrive after approval from Dr. Kemen.

screens.

A- Audicus Clara Right

Our schedule has returned to normal as we have been

COVID slowed the process- Long gap between hearing released from the medical lock-down. We have also

screen and whisper test. Took a month for hearing aid to streamlined our entire process and added alerts for hearing

7/16/2020

73

arrive after approval from Dr. Kemen.

screens.

A- Audicus Clara Right

Our schedule has returned to normal as we have been

released from the medical lock-down. We have also

Process slowed due to COVID- Took over a month to streamlined our entire process and added alerts for hearing

5/18/2020

69

schedule Provider Review.

screens.

A- Audicus Clara Right

The issue with slow delivery from Audicus was addressed and

improved before COVID. Once the pandemic set in, delivery

has been taking a month or more most times. This should D- Audicus Clara Right was ordered and he refused it upon

5/1/2020

72

Took from 3/21/20 to 5/1/20 to be delivered.

improve as things return to normal.

arrival. Wants HOH identification.

5/31/2019

5/1/2020 336 Failed hearing screen not reported to HOH nurse.

Took over a month for hearing aid to arrive after

2/25/2020

4/30/2020

65

approval from Dr. Kemen.

We now have KOMS alerts that have rectified this problem.

Now ADA Coordinator receives a notification on ALL failed

hearing screens and can start tracking immediately.

A- Audicus Clara Left

The issue with slow delivery from Audicus was addressed and

improved before COVID. Once the pandemic set in, delivery

has been taking a month or more most times. This should

improve as things return to normal.

A- Audicus Clara Left

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 249

Prisoner Last Name Prisoner First Name

KyDOC #

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 510 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4098

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

Start Date of

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

most recent

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

process

needed

(screen/lost/

Days to

Documentation & Steps taken to avoid similar problems (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

broken)

End Date

Resolution Reason for Delay

going forward.

(d) no hearing aid is needed

After hearing screen had impaction. Still in place at time The issue with slow delivery from Audicus was addressed and

of first whisper so had another ear flush. Had multiple improved before COVID. Once the pandemic set in, delivery

Audicus attempts (even with proctor) with inconsistent has been taking a month or more most times. This should

results. Case sent to TLOC. Referred to outside

improve as things return to normal. (See attachment: 60-

6/11/2019

5/6/2020 330 audiology. Took over a month for delivery.

A- Audicus Clara Left

Our schedule has returned to normal as we have been

released from the medical lock-down. We have also

Each stage in the process was about 10-12 days apart. streamlined our entire process and added alerts for hearing

5/4/2020

7/16/2020

73

Covid made scheduling difficult.

screens.

A- Audicus Clara Left

Our schedule has returned to normal as we have been

released from the medical lock-down. We have also

Process slowed due to COVID- Took over a month to streamlined our entire process and added alerts for hearing

1/24/2020

3/25/2020

61

schedule Provider Review.

screens.

A- Audicus Clara Right Ear

Exhibit 2, KSR, p. 250

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 511 of 985 - Page ID#: 4099
Lee Adjustment Center

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 512 of 985 - Page ID#: 4100

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

A ADA coordinator

Both

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Mitchell Brandenburg

X

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

Both

2 coordinator appointed?

No

X

Both

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Yes

X

Both

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates?

Yes

X

Included in the Inmate Handbook all inmates

receive upon arrival and in HOH Inmate

Informational Packet provided to each HOH

X

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates in a

inmate at the time of assessment by the ADA

Both

5 timely and appropriate manner? How?

Coordinator.

ADA is receiving inquires from the inmate

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? (THIS

population (especially HOH inmates) on an

X

Both

6 REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

almost daily basis.

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit

Both

7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

Yes

X

Both

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

See #26 on Questions & Documents tab.

X

Both

9 Describe training

NA

Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately cover

Both

10 information?

Yes

X

Both

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training)

Yes

X

Both

12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

Yes

X

Both

13 Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's powerpoint)

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with settlement

Both

14 agreement?

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Yes

X

Yes

X

KOMS generated reports are received

weekly and are checked against the ADA

Coordinator's list of HOH inmates on a

random basis with any inconsistencies being

promptly investigated and addressed.

Medical staff notifies the ADA Coordinator

X

when a new HOH inmate is identified and

the ADA Coordinator adds this information

to KOMS to generate an ADA Alert. The ADA

alert adds the new HOH inmate to the

weekly KOMS generated lists of inmates with

ADA precautions.

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

Yes

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in

Both

17 implementing the settlement?

Yes

Both

18 Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf inmates?

Yes

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on deaf

Both

19 inmates?

Yes

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the inmates in

Both

20 those situations?

Yes

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective way with the

Both

21 monitor?

Yes

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the monitor

Both

22 when necessary?

Yes

X
X X X
X
X
X Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 513 of 985 - Page ID#: 4101

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both B
Both
Both

Issue/Question Reporting obligations If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was monitor 1 notified? Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH 2 inmates?

Both

3 Is the list complete?

Both

4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs,

Both

6 activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe)

Both

7 Was it reported to the monitor?

Both

8 Was the report complete?

Both

9 Was the report timely?

Both

10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert?

Both

11 If yes, was the monitor notified?

Did the institution consult with the monitor about the non-

Both

12 auditory alert?

Both

13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

HOH

3 notifications.)

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

Deaf

Deaf inmates

Deaf

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

No

X

Yes

X

This list is updated continuous as inmates

come in; are transferred or released; and as

X

new HOH inmates are identified.

List is sent to appropriate individuals update

each update.

X

No

NA

N/A

N/A

N/A

No

NA

N/A

N/A

Yes

X

NA

Yes

X

Few transfers occurred during this reporting

period due to COVID-19, however it appears

that past problems with not getting

notification has now been resolved.

NA

No inmate received during this reporting

period required special accommodations for

X

communication.

NA

The same process referenced in line 41

above applies to deaf inmates.

X

No deaf inmates were received during to this

reporting period.

NA

No deaf inmates were received during to this

reporting period.

No deaf inmates were received during to this

reporting period.

NA

No use of an interpreter was required during

this reporting period.

No use of an interpreter was required during

this reporting period.

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Activity did not occur during reporting period. Activity did not occur during reporting period. Activity did not occur during reporting period. Activity did not occur during reporting period. Activity did not occur during reporting period.
Activity did not occur during reporting period. Activity did not occur during reporting period. Activity did not occur during reporting period. Activity did not occur during reporting period.
Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 514 of 985 - Page ID#: 4102

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general medical intake, and

Both

during medical care more generally:

Both

1 Is there effective communications planning?

Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if

Both

2 interpretation is needed?

Both

3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?

Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications

Both

4 techniques?

Both

Notice to medical staff:

Both

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How?

Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover and

Both

6 within the file?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Individual assistance is provided to inmates

as needed.

Yes
Yes Yes
Yes
Yes, it is documented in KOMS and on pink card.
Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
X

NA X X X X
NA X
X

Deaf

7 Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate accommodations.

Knowledgeable about obligation to alert off-site providers of

Deaf

8 need for interpretation?

Deaf

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

Deaf

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

Deaf

11 Adequate notice?

Outside providers offering effective communication to inmates

Deaf

12 who sign?

Deaf

13 How?

Both

Hearing screening/medical intake:

Both

14 Performed for all new inmates?

Both

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

Both

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

Both

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

Both

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?

How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by

Both

19 staff?

Both

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

Both

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?

Both

22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe.

Both

23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

Both

25 Staff/ADA Coordinator can refer for screening?

Both

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

Adequate determination of need for designation/ audiology

Both

28 services? How?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or HOH,

Both

30 apart from audiology services decision?

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

No

NA

N/A

N/A N/A
Yes, a verbal screening is conducted. Yes Yes Yes Yes

NA NA
X X X X X

Administered by staff. Nurse Yes Verbally given and simple language used. Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes, if an inmate fails verbal hearing screen they are referred to the provider and an audiogram is ordered. Yes, a determination is done by Wellpath medical director. Yes

NA NA
X X X NA X X X
X
X
X

Yes

X

Activity did not occur during reporting period. Activity did not occur during reporting period.
Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 515 of 985 - Page ID#: 4103

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Yes Yes Yes Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X X X X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

HOH

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

HOH

40 initial request/questionnaire?

HOH

41 each relevant medical visit?

HOH

42 any audiology visit?

HOH

43 hearing aid provision?

HOH

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks?

HOH

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

HOH

46 Shared with monitor when requested

Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it

47 take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Describe.

In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait more

48 than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?

49 What is the cause of the delay?

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) to

50 improve this process?

HOH

Co-pay and availability issues:

HOH

47 Charged only once -- not again for follow-ups

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

HOH

50 7 days/week?

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Both E Information provided inmates

Both

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe)

Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-discrimination and

Both

2 ADA services?

Both

Brochure? Items to include:

Both

3 Non-discrimination obligation

Both

4 Effective communication obligation

Both

5 Auxiliary aids and services available

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services (including

Both

6 hearing aids, and batteries)

Both

7 Communication equipment available, and how to use

Both

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

Both

Other items:

Both

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

Both

10 Request for Accommodations/ Communications Assistance

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes, a follow-up is scheduled in one week.

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Inmates do not go off site unless special

audiology services are required.

NA

One inmate. Approval of the inmate for a hearing aid. The Health Services Administrator and Director of Nursing monitor the hearing screening process.
Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes

NA NA
NA NA
X NA
X X X X

Each inmate receives an Inmate Handbook

upon arrival.

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

X

Yes

X

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 516 of 985 - Page ID#: 4104

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or both? Both

the audit, and what has been done

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

11 Medical Request form includes request for accommodations

Description/Notes Yes

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) X

Both

12 Job application form includes request for accommodations

Both

13 Waiver forms

Both

14 Classification form includes request for accommodations

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

The inmate disciplinary reports are

generated by KOMS. I don't see anything

during the investigation phase allowing an

inmate to request accommodations, but it

would the DOC's responsibility to

X

incorporate this into the document. If

there's another way that this is already being

Both

15 Discipline form includes request for accommodations

SAP and other programming form includes request for

Both

16 accommodation

done state-wide I am not aware of it.

Yes

X

See Notes

Both

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommodation

Yes

X

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in

X

18 law library? (Need to check)

Yes

Both

Do request forms:

NA

Both

19 list available services comprehensively?

Yes

X

clearly explain services and aids (what they are and when

Both

20 they are available?

Yes

X

Both

21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?

Yes

X

expressly ask about preferred mode of

Both

22 communication/needed services and why they are useful?

Yes

X

Both

23 explain which items are free?

Yes

X

Both

24 encompass religious and volunteer-provided programming?

Yes

X

Both

Effective communication of these resources:

Both

25 Are the materials in language accessible to each inmate?

Both

26 Is this information provided with effective communication?

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

to meet with a KDOC staff member and interpreter to ask

X

Both

27 questions about the materials?

Yes

Effective communication re. programming

NA

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

for a program with staff, is effective communication

X

Both

28 provided?

Yes

Both

29 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Yes

X

Effective communication re. programming

NA

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

Both

30 in education with staff, is effective communication provided?

Both

31 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

Both

2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

7 Clear process to obtain? Describe

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

This is the same as line 155 above. This is the same as line 156 above.
Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes

X X X X NA X X X X

See Comment See Comment
Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 517 of 985 - Page ID#: 4105

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Both

12 Working process to get new inmate alerts added? (Describe)

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

14 Appropriately obvious

Both

15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

17 Clear? (avoids unclear language/abbreviations?)

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

X NA
X X X X X NA X X X X X X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Both

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?

Both

23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator?

Both

24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver?

Both

25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?

Both

26 Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested ID?

Both

27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

Both

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Both

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

YAensID card is taken from an inmate when

placed into restrictive housing, but it

remains on a clipboard outside the cell door.

X

A HOH housing sign is placed on the cell

NA

Not in these reporting period.

X

Not in these reporting period.

X

N/A

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

X Yes

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Only one inmate did not have an assessment

with a few days of intake during this

reporting period due to him being in

X

quarantine. The assessment was conducted

on day 14 upon his release from quarantine.

Activity did not occur during reporting period. Activity did not occur during reporting period. Activity did not occur during reporting period.
Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 518 of 985 - Page ID#: 4106

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Both

9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

All current HOH inmates have been assessed

with the past 12-months.

X

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

Yes

X

Both

2 Cell cards

Yes

X

Both

3 Bed shaker

Available to HOH inmates for purchase.

X

Both

4 In-person alerts

Yes

X

Both

5 Pager

N/A

Not used at this facility.

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

Yes

X

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

Yes

X

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

Yes

X

Both

9 Other amplification

An active listening system was purchased but

has not yet been utilized.

X

Both

10 Other (describe)

Describe:

NA

Both

General issues

NA

Special housing area:

NA

Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH inmates?

Both

11 (Describe)

No

NA

Both

12 If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? (Describe)

N/A

NA

If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed

Both

13 there? (such a requirement is non-compliant).

N/A

Not used at this facility.

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live

there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to the

Both

14 inmate? Describe any restrictions.

N/A

Not used at this facility.

In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is primary

Both

15 consideration given to inmate request?

Yes

X

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services

form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or

Both

16 not requesting aids/services, were accommodations provided?

N/A

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services documented in

Both

17 inmate institutional files?

Yes

Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services shared

Both

18 appropriately with staff?

Yes

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Yes

Both

20 Have any been out of commission?

Not during this reporting period.

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

N/A

One inmate placed in RHU did not have

his hearing aid, however it is not know

whether or not he was wearing them at

the time of placement. When I became

aware of this situation I retrieved the

hearing aid from the inmate's stored

property the provided it to him. An email

included in the supporting

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from documentation was issued to all staff

Both

22 hearing aid?

following this incident.

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

Yes

X X X NA NA
X
X

Activity did not occur during reporting period.
Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 519 of 985 - Page ID#: 4107

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Both

24 Promptly?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

It was provided within minutes of me

receiving notification. Inmate claims to

have ask other staff about it prior to that

however he did not provide specific

dates, times or which staff he ask. As the

result I was not able to confirm that he

made such requests.

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

No

Both

26 Describe

N/A

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

N/A

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

N/A

Both

30 Are classes in sign language provided?

No

Both

31 deaf inmates given notice?

N/A

Both

32 priority given to deaf inmates?

N/A

Both I Interpretation in general

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Yes

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

Deaf

1 communicated to inmates?

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

Deaf

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

3 volunteer-provided programming?

Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation

Deaf

4 method?

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf

6 In-person?

Deaf

7 VRI?

Deaf

Is VRI availability:

Deaf

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

Yes Sign Language of Kentucky Purple

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X

NA NA
NA X X X X X
NA X X
NA X X X X

Activity did not occur during reporting period. Activity did not occur during reporting period. Activity did not occur during reporting period. Activity did not occur during reporting period. Activity did not occur during reporting period. Activity did not occur during reporting period. Activity did not occur during reporting period.
No use of an interpretation services occurred during this reporting period. No use of an interpretation services occurred during this reporting period. No use of an interpretation services occurred during this reporting period. No use of an interpretation services occurred during this reporting period. No use of an interpretation services occurred during this reporting period.

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

Yes, via laptop or escort of inmate to area

X

with Kiosk when area is clear of GP inmates.

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 520 of 985 - Page ID#: 4108

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Become operational since last report, but no

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

inmate has used it.

NA

Deaf

13 In general

X

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

X

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

X

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Yes

NA

Deaf

16 Splitter?

X

Deaf

17 Instructions?

X

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

X

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

X

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

N/A

Has not been used to date.

Activity did not occur during

Deaf

21 How?

N/A

reporting period.

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

Deaf

22 should be first recourse?

Yes

X

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

Sign Language of Kentucky

X

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

Yes

X

Deaf

24 Parole?

Yes

X

Activity did not occur during

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

N/A

reporting period.

Activity did not occur during

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

N/A

reporting period.

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

Activity did not occur during

Deaf

27 before?

N/A

reporting period.

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

Deaf

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

No

X

Deaf

29 Describe

N/A

NA

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

Activity did not occur during

Deaf

30 was unavailable)

N/A

reporting period.

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

Deaf

31 method?

Yes

X

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Yes

X

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

Yes

X

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

NA

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

Yes

X

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

X

Deaf

35 encounters/communications/settings)

Yes

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

Deaf J Hand Restraints

Facility had no inmates that sign during this

Deaf

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

reporting period.

NA

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

Activity did not occur during

Deaf

2 finding of a security threat?

N/A

reporting period.

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

Deaf

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

Yes

X

Deaf

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

Yes

X

Deaf

5 Staff aware of the issue

Yes

X

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 521 of 985 - Page ID#: 4109

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Deaf

Off-site medical care:

Deaf

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

restraints removed when necessary for medical

Deaf

7 communication?

Both K Non-auditory Alerts

Both

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Both

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

Both

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

Both

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

Both

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

Both

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

Both

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Facility had no inmates that sign during this

reporting period.

N/A

N/A

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
NA Activity did not occur during reporting period. Activity did not occur during reporting period.

Facility does not have any automated or programmable non-auditory alert systems. NA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

No basis for evaluation. No basis for evaluation. No basis for evaluation. No basis for evaluation. No basis for evaluation. No basis for evaluation.

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Both

9 been denied?

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Both

11 How often?

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

N/A
N/A Facility does not have any automated or programmable non-auditory alert systems. N/A N/A

No basis for evaluation. No basis for evaluation.
No basis for evaluation. No basis for evaluation.

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Both

15 used consistently?

Both

16 in all dormitories?

Both

17 in gym?

Both

18 in library?

Both

19 audited and monitored?

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

Both

20 misses a page?

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

Both

21 because of disability?

Bulletin boards and paper postings are used. NA X X X X X X
Pagers have not been utilized at this facility to date.

Not to my knowledge.

NA

No basis for evaluation.

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

Deaf

2 Allow voice carry-over features?

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

N/A

Staff ensure that all inmates in any area,

HOH or otherwise, are evacuated during any

X

emergency or drill requiring evacuation

Staff ensure that all inmates in any area,

HOH or otherwise, are evacuated during any

X

emergency or drill requiring evacuation

X

NA

VRI Kiosk according to KDOC is considered a

videophone.

X

X

Unknown.

NA

No basis for evaluation. Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 522 of 985 - Page ID#: 4110

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

West Dorm unit lost connection and was

reported to Securus to resolve upon

discovery. No inmates use the unit to my

knowledge and no request for access to an

alternate unit that was operational were

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

received during the down period.

NA

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Deaf

5 alternative offered

N/A

No basis for evaluation.

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

Inmates will be provided access to a

6 videophone is out of service.

different operable unit.

NA

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Yes

X

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

Yes

X

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

Yes

X

Deaf

10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates?

Yes

X

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

Yes

X

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

Deaf

12 using ordinary phones?

Yes

X

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

No

X

Deaf

14 Free?

Yes

X

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone

Deaf

15 calls?

Yes

X

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

No

NA

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

Activity did not occur during

17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

N/A

reporting period.

Both

TTY:

NA

Both

18 Installed?

Yes

X

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Yes

X

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made 20 available WITH TTY?

Yes

X

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

N/A

NA

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

Yes

X

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

Both

23 for non-deaf inmates?

Yes

X

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Yes

X

Both

25 Permission needed?

No, inmates just request it. TTY can be used

by non HOH inmates as well.

X

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

No

NA

Both

27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates?

Yes

X

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Both

29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Both

30 Can access publicly available relay service phone numbers?

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions for

Both

31 videophones and TTY is less than equitable?

Both

32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

If yes, was determination (including reasoning, evidence, etc.)

Both

33 documented?

Both

34 Was monitor notified?

Both

35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

Yes, routed through Secures phone network.

1/24/2020 X

Yes

X

Not to my knowledge.

NA

N/A

N/A N/A N/A

No basis for evaluation.
No basis for evaluation. No basis for evaluation. No basEisxfhoirbeitva2l,uaLtAioCn., p. 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 523 of 985 - Page ID#: 4111

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Deaf

VRS via laptop

NA

Deaf

36 Available?

X

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

X

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

X

Both

Phones

NA

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

All inmate phones have volume control.

X

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

Yes

X

Both

CapTel

NA

Pending installation by Secures as of

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

9/22/20.

NA

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

List names

NA

43 Request by any inmate denied?

List names

NA

Both

TV/Movies

NA

Both

44 Is captioning available?

X

Both

45 Is captioning used?

X

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

X

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

No

X

Instructions were given to ensure that at

least one showing of movie each day will

X

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

have captions turned on.

Both

49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

Yes

X

Both

50 Amplification method? (Describe)

Describe:

NA

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

Yes

X

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

Have not received any deaf inmates, but

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

equal access to communication services is

X

Both

53 status?

provided to all inmates.

No deaf inmates to date, but HOH inmate

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

communication monitoring is consistent for

all inmates regardless of their hearing

X

Both

54 deaf inmates?

conditions.

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

ADA offers HOH inmates the opportunity to

purchase vibrating watches and alarm clocks

with bed shakers at their expense. There is

currently no markup on these items over the

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

ADA Coordinator's cost.

NA

No, these orders do not go through the

commissary. Requests to purchase are made X

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

directly to ACA Coordinator.

No requests for other items have been

received during this reporting period. All

request will be considered when there is a

documented medical need for an item that

X

may assist them, however security

considerations must be considered prior to

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

the approval of any request.

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

X

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 524 of 985 - Page ID#: 4112

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

No purchase of a non-medically necessary

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

device has been denied during this reporting

Both

5 (Describe)

period.

NA

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

N/A

No basis for evaluation.

Both

7 because security threat?

N/A

No basis for evaluation.

Both

8 monitor notified?

N/A

No basis for evaluation.

Both

9 reasoning explained?

N/A

No basis for evaluation.

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

NA

Both

10 of requests?

X

Both

11 of denials?

X

Both N Disciplinary

Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and

There were no incidents in this reporting

without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been

period of an inmate requesting or being

Deaf

1 punished?

denied an interpreter for the hearing.

No basis for evaluation.

Deaf

2 Was a re-hearing granted?

N/A

No basis for evaluation.

Both O Grievances

Both

1 Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA coordinator?

An inmate can share his grievances with

anyone he chooses.

X

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator

Both

2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator?

X

Both P Training

Both

Types available

NA

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

X

All staff receive HOH training during annual

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

in-service.

NA

Both

3 All appropriate staff?

X

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

Instructor led class.

NA

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

All staff.

NA

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

X

Any additional targeted training on specific needs ? Please

Both

describe in detail

None to date.

NA

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 525 of 985 - Page ID#: 4113
USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Name

Other Alert

Device

(e.g.,

Personal

Low literacy?

If signs to

Bed

vibrating

Phone

(So that

communicat

Shaker? watch, TTY Access Captel

Amplifier Shake &

Clear mask

Listed with Signs to written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

etc.) (Not (Not

Access (Not (Not

Wake (Not

for staff

KOMS ADA commu communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; requested;

who deal Any other

Housing Precaution nicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied; denied; denied; denied; Special with this auxiliary aid

ID

location ?

(Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) mask?

inmate? requested?

NG-16 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

SB-48 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

SB-25 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Purchased Purchased N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Clock

Watch

w/shaker (12/20/19)

(5/22/20)

SB-27 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

Purchased N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Watch

(1/24/20)

later

reported

stolen by

3rd party.

Watch

recovered

the

returned to

Inmate

(7/24/20).

M108T Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

SA-48 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

SC-27 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

SA-46 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

SA-18 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

SA-24 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

SB-52 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

Purchased N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

watch

(3/16/20)

SA-10 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Purchased Purchased N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

clock

watch

w/shaker (1/7/20) &

(3/6/20) (9/3/20)

M-107B Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

Purchased N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Watch

(9/21/20)

SB-51 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

Purchased N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

watch

(1/7/20)

SA-53 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Purchased Purchased N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Clock

Watch

w/Shaker (2/12/20)

(2/12/20)

SC-38 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Purchased N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Clock

w/Shaker

(3/16/20)

NG-24 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

ExNh/iRbit 2, LACN,/Rp. 14 No

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 526 of 985 - Page ID#: 4114

Other Alert

Device

(e.g.,

Personal

Low literacy?

If signs to

Bed

vibrating

Phone

(So that

communicat

Shaker? watch, TTY Access Captel

Amplifier Shake &

Clear mask

Listed with Signs to written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

etc.) (Not (Not

Access (Not (Not

Wake (Not

for staff

KOMS ADA commu communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; requested;

who deal Any other

Housing Precaution nicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied; denied; denied; denied; Special with this auxiliary aid

ID

location ?

(Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) mask?

inmate? requested?

NF-09 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

SD-31 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

Purchased N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Watch

(12/19/19)

SC-14 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

L-204B Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

NF-21 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

SC-35 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

SC-17 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

Purchased N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Watch

(2/12/20)

SD-30 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

SD-06 Yes

No

No

Waived

Waived N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

(1/21/20) (1/21/20)

SB-08 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

Purchased N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Watch

(1/7/20) &

(9/17/20)

O-107B Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

SA-01 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

SC-05 Yes

No

No

Yes

Waived N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

(9/20/19)

SD-40 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Purchased N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Clock

W/Shaker

(5/14/20)

NG-50 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

M-203B Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Purchased Purchased N/R

N/R

Issued to N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Clock

Watch

inmate

W/Shaker (8/28/20)

(8/27/20);

(9/28/20)

Unit

purchased

by Inmate

(9/28/20)

NG-51U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

Purchased N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Watch

(3/27/20)

MED-1 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

Watch N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Purchase

(2/12/20)

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 15

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 527 of 985 - Page ID#: 4115

Other Alert

Device

(e.g.,

Personal

Low literacy?

If signs to

Bed

vibrating

Phone

(So that

communicat

Shaker? watch, TTY Access Captel

Amplifier Shake &

Clear mask

Listed with Signs to written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

etc.) (Not (Not

Access (Not (Not

Wake (Not

for staff

KOMS ADA commu communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; requested;

who deal Any other

Housing Precaution nicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied; denied; denied; denied; Special with this auxiliary aid

ID

location ?

(Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) mask?

inmate? requested?

RH-B210 Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

Watch N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Purchased

2/19/20);

Reported

Missing

Upon

Placement

in RHU;

Purchased

another

watch

8/25/20

given to

Property

Officer to

put in his

property.

SA-33 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

LNI-48 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

RH-B209 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

Purchased N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Watch

(3/11/20);

7/23/20

Stated

watch was

taken by

unknown

I/M

NH-27 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

SD-52 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

Stated he N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

might want

to use at

time of

AAA, but

has not

request use

of device

SD-15 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

Purchased N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

watch

(12/31/19

& 2/27/20)

NH-18 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

SA-35 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

O-110B Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 16

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 528 of 985 - Page ID#: 4116

Other Alert

Device

(e.g.,

Personal

Low literacy?

If signs to

Bed

vibrating

Phone

(So that

communicat

Shaker? watch, TTY Access Captel

Amplifier Shake &

Clear mask

Listed with Signs to written

Has

Has

e, noted in Auxiliary Aid (Not

etc.) (Not (Not

Access (Not (Not

Wake (Not

for staff

KOMS ADA commu communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; requested;

who deal Any other

Housing Precaution nicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied; denied; denied; denied; denied; denied; Special with this auxiliary aid

ID

location ?

(Y/N) effective)

waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) mask?

inmate? requested?

SB-20 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

Purchased N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Watch

(4/30/20) &

(9/11/20)

SC-40 Yes

No

No

LNI-09 Yes NF-14 Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Purchased Purchased N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Clock

watch

w/Shaker (7/7/20)

(8/18/20)

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

Yes

Waived N/A

Yes

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

N/R

No

(9/20/19)

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 529 of 985 - Page ID#: 4117

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Lee Adjustment Center Chasity Combs, Director of Nursing (Wellpath)
9/17/2020

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Provider f/u

Intake

Intake Screen appt

Sick call

Intake

H&P

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Provider f/u

appt

Provider CC H&P

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

8/4/2017

8/21/2019 6/26/2018 4/25/2018 1/15/2020 10/9/2019

5/23/2019 9/6/2019

7/31/2018 9/20/2018 1/28/2020 6/25/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Does not

qualify for Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for

hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

(a) has hearing (a) has hearing (a) has hearing (a) has hearing (d) no hearing aid in working aid in working aid in working aid in working Refused

aid needed order

order

order

order

hearing aid

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

6/3/2020

5/16/2019 9/6/2018

6/24/2020
Qualifies for hearing aid

5/23/2019
Does not qualify for hearing aid

9/6/2018
Refused audicus

(a) has hearing

aid in working (d) no hearing Refused

order

aid needed audicus

N/A

N/A

N/A

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 530 of 985 - Page ID#: 4118
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/A

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

8/4/2017 Intake

8/21/2019 Intake

6/26/2018 Provider f/u appt

4/25/2018 Sick call

1/15/2020 Intake

10/9/2019 H&P

6/3/2020 Provider f/u appt

5/16/2019 CC

9/6/2018 H&P

Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed hearing Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen screen at RCC hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

5/8/2019

9/6/2019

7/31/2018 4/26/2018 1/28/2020 6/25/2020 6/24/2020 5/23/2019 9/6/2018

Provider appt Audiogram Audiogram Provider appt Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram H&P

Qualifies for Qualifies for Pocket talker Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for No hearing aid Refused

Audiogram hearing aid hearing aid issued

hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid needed

audicus

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

5/23/2019 9/18/2019 8/3/2018

5/25/2018 2/10/2020 6/30/2020 6/25/2020 5/16/2019

Audiogram Inconclusive

Provider appt Provider appt Sick call

Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt

Audiogram Audiogram

Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram

reviewed with reviewed with Failed verbal reviewed with reviewed with reviewed with reviewed with

patient

patient

hearing screen patient

patient

patient

patient

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

6/6/2019

9/19/2019

Audiogram Provider

8/3/2018 Provider

8/1/2018 2/10/2020 6/30/2020 6/25/2020 Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt

No hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid Referral to

needed

ordered

ordered

audiology

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid

ordered

ordered

ordered

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 531 of 985 - Page ID#: 4119

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

6/6/2019

10/10/2019

Provider appt Clinic

Audiogram

reviewed with Hearing aid

patient

issued

12/12/2018 Clinic
Hearing aid issued

9/20/2018 Audiology appt

3/2/2020 Clinic

Qualifies for Hearing aid hearing aid issued

7/29/2020
Clinic Hearing aid issued but patient refused

8/3/2020 Clinic
Hearing aid issued

10/2/2018 3/25/2020

Provider f/u

Provider appt appt

Hearing aid 30d hearing

issued

aid f/u

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 20

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 532 of 985 - Page ID#: 4120

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening

Hearing Screen

Hearing Screen

Sick call

Audicus

H&P

Hearing Screen

Hearing Screen

Provider f/u H&P

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5/18/2018 7/11/2019 6/15/2020 2/14/2020 6/14/2019 12/4/2018 3/1/2019

4/19/2018 5/28/2018

3/8/2019

8/6/2019

6/24/2020 2/14/2020 6/19/2019 3/15/2019 3/6/2019

5/21/2018 8/14/2018

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Does not

Does not

qualify for Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for qualify for Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for

hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

(a) has hearing (a) has hearing (a) has hearing (a) has hearing

(a) has hearing (a) has hearing (a) has hearing

(d) no hearing aid in working aid in working aid in working aid in working (d) no hearing aid in working aid in working aid in working

aid needed order

order

order

order

aid needed order

order

order

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 21

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 533 of 985 - Page ID#: 4121
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

Yes

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

5/18/2018 Hearing Screen

7/11/2019 Hearing Screen

6/15/2020 Sick call

2/14/2020 6/14/2019 Audiogram H&P

12/4/2018 Hearing Screen

3/1/2019 Hearing Screen

4/19/2018 5/29/2018 Provider f/u H&P

Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal Qualifies for Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen hearing aid hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

5/18/2018 8/6/2019 Provider appt Audiogram

Referral to audiology

Qualifies for hearing aid

6/24/2020 Audiogram
Qualifies for hearing aid

3/3/2020 6/19/2019

Provider appt Audiogram

Audiogram

reviewed with Qualifies for

patient

hearing aid

12/13/2018 3/6/2019

Provider appt Audiogram

Cerumen

impaction

noted. Ears Qualifies for

flushed

hearing aid

5/21/2018 Audiogram
Qualifies for hearing aid

8/14/2018 Audiology referral
Qualifies for hearing aid

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

7/12/2018 Audiology Referral
Cerumen removal

8/6/2019

6/25/2020 3/3/2020

9/18/2019 3/15/2019 3/22/2019 6/4/2018

Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt Audiogram Clinic

Audiogram Audiogram

Audiogram

reviewed with reviewed with Hearing aid reviewed with No hearing aid Hearing aid

patient

patient

ordered

patient

needed

issued

Provider appt Audiogram reviewed with patient

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

3/8/2018

8/6/2019

6/26/2020 3/20/2020

Audiogram Provider appt Provider appt Clinic

No hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid

needed

ordered

ordered

issued

9/19/2019 3/29/2019

Provider appt Provider appt

Audiogram

Hearing aid reviewed with

ordered

patient

6/4/2018 Provider appt
Hearing aid ordered

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 534 of 985 - Page ID#: 4122

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

9/19/2019 Clinic

7/29/2020 Clinic

4/1/2020 Provider f/u appt

10/10/2019 Clinic

Hearing aid Hearing aid 30d hearing Hearing aid

issued

issued

aid f/u

issued

7/16/2018 Clinic
Hearing aid issued

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 23

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 535 of 985 - Page ID#: 4123

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Intake

Intake

Hearing

Audicus

Screen

H&P

Hearing

Screen

H&P

H&P

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

7/26/2018 7/23/2018 6/24/2020 4/19/2018 5/17/2019 8/6/2019

8/1/2018

9/14/2018

8/9/2018

8/2/2018

6/24/2020 5/21/2018 6/12/2019 8/6/2019

1/30/2019 9/14/2018

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Does not

Does not

Does not

Does not

qualify for qualify for Qualifies for qualify for Qualifies for qualify for Qualifies for

hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid Refused

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

(a) has hearing

(a) has hearing

(a) has hearing

(d) no hearing (d) no hearing aid in working (d) no hearing aid in working (d) no hearing aid in working

aid needed aid needed order

aid needed order

aid needed order

Refused

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

H&P 11/6/2018 12/7/2018 Does not qualify for hearing aid
(d) no hearing aid needed
N/A

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 24

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 536 of 985 - Page ID#: 4124
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

N/A

N/A

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

7/26/2018 Intake

7/23/2018 Intake

6/24/2020 Aduigoram

4/19/2018 Hearing Screen

5/17/2019 H&P

8/6/2019 Hearing Screen

8/1/2018 H&P

Failed verbal Failed verbal Qualifies for Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal hearing screen hearing screen hearing aid hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

8/6/2018

8/2/2018

6/25/2020 5/21/2018 5/29/2019 8/6/2019

1/30/2019

Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt Audiogram Nurse Visit Audiogram Audiogram

Refer for audiogram

Audiogram

Pocket talker reviewed with No hearing aid

issued

patient

needed

Ear flush

No hearing aid Qualifies for

needed

hearing aid

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

8/9/2018
Audiogram
No hearing aid needed

6/26/2020 6/4/2018 6/7/2019 8/8/2019 2/13/2019

Hearing

Provider appt Provider appt Screen

Provider appt Provider appt

Audiogram

Audiogram Audiogram

Hearing aid reviewed with Failed verbal reviewed with reviewed with

ordered

patient

hearing screen patient

patient

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

8/14/2018 Provider appt Audiogram reviewed with patient

8/5/2020 Clinic

6/4/2018 6/12/2019 9/6/2019 Provider appt Audiogram Clinic

2/13/2019 Provider appt

Hearing aid Pocket talker Qualifies for Pocket talker Hearing aid

issued

issued

hearing aid issued

ordered

N/A
11/6/2018 H&P Failed verbal hearing screen 12/7/2018 Audiogram
No hearing aid needed

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 25

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 537 of 985 - Page ID#: 4125

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

8/14/2018 Provider
Refused pocket talker

6/19/2020
Provider appt
Audiogram reviewed with patient
7/29/2019
Clinic Hearing aid issued

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 26

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 538 of 985 - Page ID#: 4126

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

3. Date of initial hearing screening

H&P

Hearing

Provider CC Screen

Intake

H&P

Hearing

Hearing

Screen

Screen

H&P

Sick call

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

12/26/2017 11/18/2019 2/15/2019 12/5/2018 12/2/2019 8/1/2017 2/8/2017

5/8/2018

11/18/2019 2/15/2019 2/15/2019 1/13/2020 9/8/2017

2/8/2017

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Does not

Does not

qualify for qualify for Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for

hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

(a) has hearing (a) has hearing (a) has hearing (a) has hearing (d) no hearing (d) no hearing aid in working aid in working aid in working aid in working

aid needed aid is needed order

order

order

order

Refused

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

11/5/2018 11/8/2019
11/30/2018 11/26/2019
Qualifies for Qualifies for hearing aid hearing aid

(a) has hearing (a) has hearing

aid in working aid in working

order

order

N/A

N/A

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 27

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 539 of 985 - Page ID#: 4127
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

12/26/2017 H&P

11/18/2019 Provider CC

2/15/2019 Hearing Screen

12/5/2018 Intake

12/2/2019 H&P

8/1/2017 Hearing Screen

2/8/2017 Hearing Screen

11/5/2018 H&P

11/8/2019 Sick call

Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

5/8/2018

11/26/2019 2/15/2019 2/15/2019 1/13/2020 9/8/2017

2/8/2017

11/30/2018 11/26/2019

Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram

No hearing aid No hearing aid Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for

needed

needed

hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

12/17/2019 2/22/2019 2/15/2019 1/23/2020 9/8/2017

2/8/2017

12/6/2018 12/10/2019

Clinic Pocket talker

Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt

Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram

reviewed with reviewed with reviewed with reviewed with

patient

patient

patient

patient

Refused

Provider appt Provider appt

Audiogram Audiogram

reviewed with reviewed with

patient

patient

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

2/22/2019 2/15/2019 1/23/2020 9/8/2017 Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid

ordered

ordered

ordered

ordered

12/6/2018 12/10/2019 Provider appt Provider appt

Hearing aid Hearing aid

ordered

ordered

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 28

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 540 of 985 - Page ID#: 4128

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

3/13/2019 Clinic

3/5/2019 Clinic

2/12/2020 Clinic

9/21/2017 Clinic

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

issued

issued

1/2/2019 Clinic

12/24/2019 Clinic

Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

2/4/2019 Provider f/u appt 30d hearing aid f/u

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 29

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 541 of 985 - Page ID#: 4129

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Notes in mig Hearing

Hearing

Hearing

H&P

H&P

H&P

Sick call

notes in ECW Screen

Screen

Screen

Sick call

3. Date of initial hearing screening

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

10/22/2019 5/20/2019 1/8/2020

6/5/2020

11/18/2019 5/21/2019 1/9/2020

6/22/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Does not

Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for qualify for

hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

(a) has hearing (a) has hearing (a) has hearing aid in working aid in working aid in working (d) no hearing

order

order

order

aid needed

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

12/12/2018 7/3/2018 11/9/2018 7/30/2019
12/12/2018 10/8/2018 3/13/2019 7/31/2019
Inconclusive Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for audiogram hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid

(a) has hearing (a) has hearing (a) has hearing

Refused

aid in working aid in working aid in working

further testing order

order

order

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 30

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 542 of 985 - Page ID#: 4130
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

10/22/2019 5/20/2019 1/8/2020

6/5/2020

H&P

H&P

H&P

Sick call

Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

11/18/2019 5/21/2019 1/9/2020

6/22/2020

Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram

Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for No hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid needed

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

12/2/2019 5/28/2019 1/15/2020 6/25/2020

Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt

Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram

reviewed with reviewed with reviewed with reviewed with

patient

patient

patient

patient

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

12/2/2019 5/29/2019 1/15/2020 6/29/2020 Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid Pocket talker

ordered

ordered

ordered

issued

N/A

Yes

Yes

Yes

12/12/2018 Hearing Screen

7/3/2018 Hearing screen

11/9/2018 Hearing screen

7/30/2019 Sick call

Inconclusive Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal audiogram hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen

10/8/2018 12/28/2018 7/31/2019 Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram

Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid

10/12/2018 1/16/2019 8/12/2019

Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt

Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram

reviewed with reviewed with reviewed with

patient

patient

patient

10/12/2018 1/16/2019 8/12/2019 Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid

ordered

ordered

ordered

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 31

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 543 of 985 - Page ID#: 4131

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

12/18/2019 7/2/2019

Clinic

Clinic

2/21/2020 Provider f/u

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

issued

1/15/2020 Provider f/u appt 30d hearing aid f/u

7/16/2019 Provider f/u appt 30d hearing aid f/u

2/15/2019 9/19/2019 Provider f/u Clinic

Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 32

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 544 of 985 - Page ID#: 4132

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Sick call

Sick call

Intake

Sick call

4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

3/24/2020 6/5/2020

11/5/2019 1/13/2017

4/3/2020

6/10/2020 11/6/2019 1/13/2017

Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for

hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid Refused

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

(a) has hearing (a) has hearing (a) has hearing aid in working aid in working aid in working

order

order

order

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 33

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 545 of 985 - Page ID#: 4133
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

Yes

Yes

Yes

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

3/24/2020 6/5/2020

11/5/2019 1/13/2017

Sick call

Sick call

Intake

Provider appt

Failed verbal Failed verbal Failed verbal Refer to hearing screen hearing screen hearing screen audiology

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

4/3/2020

6/10/2020 11/6/2019 1/13/2017

Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram Provider appt

Qualifies for Qualifies for Qualifies for hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid Refused

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

4/15/2020 6/15/2020 11/26/2019

Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt

Audiogram Audiogram Audiogram

reviewed with reviewed with reviewed with

patient

patient

patient

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

4/15/2020 6/15/2020 11/26/2019 Provider appt Provider appt Provider appt

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid

ordered

ordered

ordered

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 34

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 546 of 985 - Page ID#: 4134

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

5/15/2020 Clinic

7/20/2020 Clinic

12/16/2019 Clinic

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

issued

1/10/2020 Provider f/u appt 30d hearing aid f/u

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 35

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 547 of 985 - Page ID#: 4135

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device.
Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers)

How many Where When obtained Specifications (URL)

1

Mobile Feb-20

Hamilton Buhl Item #ALS700 (Transmitter and 6 Receivers

(additional receivers can be purchased separately)

How do inmates obtain access?

How well do they work?

For use in group sessions such as Not used yet as of 9/21/20.

SAP, religious programs, etc. when

needed.

Other comments

4

ADA Feb-20

Universal Portable Phone Amplifier Model UA-30 (purchased Offered by ADA when inmate

Inmate issued first unit on Inmate completed purchase of phone

Office

from Serene Innovations)

reports having problems hearing on 8/27/20 and reported that is amplifier on 9/28/20.

(3) /

phones (subject to verification by works very well for him.

Issued

ADA through monitoring of inmate's Inmate wishes to purchase

(1)

phone conversations).

unit for himself.

Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

2

ADA Aug-20

Captel 840 & Captel 2400i

Office

Captel 840 to be installed in

Pending installation by

universal location assessable to all Securus as of 9/21/20.

general population inmates.

Inmates will request access to

system through ADA Coordinator

who will provide access to cage lock

without other employee assistance

being required.

Captel 2400i will serve as a backup and can be used with staff office phone lines running through internet.

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like? Unknown Medical On-going as McKesson Pocket Talker additional units are needed.

Bed shakers

0

N/A N/A

N/A

Vibrating watches

0

NA

N/A

N/A

Through medical while waiting for hearing aid or when otherwise needed for their hearing condition. N/A

Varies from inmate to inmate, some say it helps them while others say they don’t.

N/A

HOH inmates are permitted to

purchase their own alarm clock with

bed shaker. See "vibrating alarm

clocks" below.

N/A

N/A

HOH inmates are permitted to

purchase their own vibrating wrist

watch through the ADA Coordinator.

As of 9/21/20 HOH inmates have

purchased 25 watches (some having

purchased 2 watches). The watch

offered is a Casio W-735H-1A2VCF.

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 36

Technology Vibrating alarm clocks

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 548 of 985 - Page ID#: 4136

How many Where When obtained Specifications (URL)

0

N/A N/A

N/A

How do inmates obtain access? N/A

How well do they work? N/A

Other comments
HOH inmates are permitted to purchase their own load alarm clock with bed shaker through the ADA Coordinator. As of 9/22/20 HOH inmates have purchased 7 of these clocks. The cloth offered is Lielongream LLR010AGUS-X-BDQVibrating Alarm Clock.

Pagers

0

N/A N/A

N/A

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices

0

N/A N/A

N/A

currently in use or under consideration not

mentioned above.

Earphones for parole hearings

0

N/A N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

We have not purchased earphones

specifically for this purpose, however

they are available within the facility in

the event needed. At each hearing

the board ask the inmate if he can

hear and see them ok. As of 9/22/20

no inmate has indicated that he cannot

hear them.

Earphones for orientation videos

0

N/A N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

We have not purchased earphones

specifically for this purpose, however

they are available within the facility in

the event needed. The active listening

system can also be utilized when

needed as well.

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 37

Documentation Grievances:

and

narrative

to

provideCase:

3:14-cv-00001D-GateFreVviTew-eEdBACommDeontcs (p#IrD:ob9#le9:m-4s2r1ev3eF7aleilde, dso:lu1tio2n/s1, 6etc/2.) 0

Page: 549 of 985 - Page

1. Provide summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers

9/28/2020

(medical not sending inmate to outside medical provider for heart related

formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Should include the issues, summary of

treatment).

(wearing of mask by contract food service staff member).

response, resolution

(commissary sales); #20-062 (replacement hose for CPAP machine); #20-147

(compensation for work assignment); #20-163 (commissary ordering kiosk).

- #20-

209 (job duties).

- #20-115 (shower/sink water temperature); #20-162 (commissary

ordering kiosk); #20-170 (standing count process/heart condition); #20-266 (processing/delivery of mail).

- #20-188 (medical treatment for spinal issues); #20-216 (medical treatment/physical therapy).

- #20-092 (missing postage stamps).

- #20-180 (employee

not wearing mask); #20-171 (standing count process/staff actions).

- #20-054 (access to

ice).

- #20-136G (meal service).

- #20-156 (medical diet

compliance).

2. Provide full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing accommodation issues. Discipline 3. For all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving an inmate who signs, provide report of inmate name, date, and communication method for each. 4. Provide documentation for all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate.
Auxiliary aids 5. VRI Log (provide).
6. TTY instructions (provide) 7. VRI instructions (provide) Audiology processing delays 8.A list of each inmate currently at your institution whose audiology processing FINISHED after March 2020, for whom such processing took or is taking over 60 days, documentation of the explanation for any such delay, and a description of any steps taken to avoid similar problems going forward.
Information provided to inmates, policies, etc. 9. Any pages of the inmate handbook that address disability, and the date for that version of the handbook. 10. The current Deaf/HOH brochure and any other documents provided to deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates. 11.The medical request form currently provided to prisoners. 12. Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2020 addressing deaf/hard-of-hearing issues. 13. A list of each use of an in-person sign-language interpreter from February 2020 to present, and any occasions in which such an interpreter was requested but denied. Please provide written responses to the following questions: 14. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty because staff members are wearing masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?
15. How many staff members are currently using clear masks? How is the decision made who will wear a clear mask?

9/28/2020 9/17/2020 9/17/2020
9/17/2020 9/17/2020 9/17/2020 9/23/2020
9/17/2020 9/17/2020 9/22/2020 9/17/2020 9/17/2020
9/22/2020
9/24/2020

No grievances filed by HOH inmates at Lee Adjustment Center during this reporting period referenced or involved hearing or hearing accommodation related matters. Lee Adjustment Center has not had an inmate that communicates by signing during this reporting period.
Disciplinary reports are included in Supporting Documentation as follows:
Kiosk units are located where HOH inmate have free access so there is no log of their use. However I am not aware of any inmate that has used the VRI. No use of the laptop has occurred during this reporting period. Included in Supporting Documentation Included in Supporting Documentation There were no incidents of taking more that 60 days during this audit period.
Included in Supporting Documentation Included in Supporting Documentation Included in Supporting Documentation (provide from medical 9/22/20) Included in Supporting Documentation No requests for nor denials have occurred during this reporting period.
No formal surveys have been conducted, however a few (less than 5) inmates have mentioned it to me in general conversation. Our staff are aware that it's harder to hear and/or understand what is being said when masks are worn. This is true for staff talking to inmates; inmates talking to staff, staff talking to staff and for HOH and non-HOH individuals. Everyone has to make an extra when during this situation to ensure effective communication is established. Our first order of clear mask arrived on 9/22/20 and notice of their availability was sent to all staff via email on that date. As of now (9/24/20 9:50 AM) three (3) staff member have picked up a clear mask. At present we do not have deaf inmates or any that rely solely on lip reading to communicate, therefore we are not mandating that clear masks be worn by any staff member at this time. We will continue to monitor this and make adjustments to requirements for wearing of clear masks as deemed necessary.
Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 38

D16o.cHuomwehnatavteioynouanadscneartrarianteivdewthoepthreorvdideeCaf/ahasrde-o:f-h3e:a1rin4g-incmva-te0s0ar0e01D-Ga9te/F2r2eV/v2i0Te2w0-eEdBACNoomfomrDmeaonltcssu(rp#vIreD:oybs9#leh9:mav-4se2r1beev3eenF8alceiolden,ddsuoc:ltue1tdi,o2hn/os1w, 6eetvc/e2.r) o0ne

Page: 550 of 985 - Page
HOH has mentioned this to me to date. This

was

on

experiencing difficulty with their hearing aids because of the design of

9/21/20. An order had already been placed for a different type of mask to accommodate inmates with hearing

their own masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically?

aids, however the product has not been delivered yet. Upon arrival these mask will be provided to the inmate

How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you

that ask me about one, and will also be distributed to any other HOH who requests it.

respond?

17. How many inmates have been issued masks that don't have ear ties?

9/22/2020 See #16 Above.

18. What if anything have you done to solve the problem of inmates having trouble hearing announcements? Please respond in detail, with dates on all responsive steps, prerequisites for any assistance, etc.

9/22/2020

I do not recall any complaints of this nature being made to me directly during this reporting period. This type of issue is addressed on a case by case basis and the action taken will be dependent on the situation.

19. How have you educated staff that it is inappropriate to write up an inmate for behavior that is caused by a hearing impairment (e.g., talking loudly, not following instructions that could not be heard)? If there was a memo, please provide that.
20. Please describe in detail how inmates are supposed to get hearing aid batteries, including how long it should take them each time.

9/22/2020 9/23/2020

To date I've not needed to address this matter with our staff. If it needs to be done in the future, my actions will be based on the situation which will determine if the matter needs to be addressed with a specific individual or from a facility-wide prospective.
Batteries are kept in the pharmacy. Inmates are to return their old battery and a new battery will be signed out and issued to him.

21. When an inmate reports that a hearing aid is not working, what are the steps followed to evaluate the complaint? Include all relevant copays and other procedures. 22. When someone is denied binaural hearing aids, are they provided information on the standard for receiving such assistance, and the opportunity for appeal? How many inmates have received binaural aids since the current binaural hearing aid policy has been in effect? 23. What arrangements are made to provide vibrating watches/clocks for inmates who are indigent?
24. Please describe, in detail, each step that takes place once a person is identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing, to evaluate/offer any auxiliary aids. Include who is responsible for each step.
25. Please describe, in detail, any situation in 2019 or 2020 in which a deaf/hard-of-hearing inmate has been denied a job or other opportunity (access to a program or the like) because of their disability. Include the inmate’s name, the date, and the circumstances. 26. Please list all training that you have received for your role as ADA Coordinator.
27. Please provide an update on all items in your Deaf/HOH action plan (previously shared with me).

9/23/2020 9/23/2020

Medical assesses the hearing aid functioning. If the hearing aid isn't working it is sent to Audicus. If it's necessary to replace the hearing aid the inmate will be charged a $10 co-pay.
Yes. As of this date one (1) inmate at this facility has received binaural hearing aids.

9/22/2020 9/22/2020
9/17/2020

No requests for such have been received from an HOH inmate that is indigent to date. If such request is received, it will be evaluated to determine whether there's an actual need for the device or if the inmate just wants the device. If a legitimate need is established, I will make every effort to find a solution that's appropriate to meet the inmate's need.
For any inmate arriving at the facility that has already been identified as HOH, the ADA Coordinator will meet with the inmate within a few days of arrival to conduct the assessment. At this meeting the ID Card, Housing Sign and Handout are provided to the inmate (unless waived at the time of meeting). During this encounter, the ADA will determine what, if any, other aids might be beneficial to the inmate and offer them accordingly. The Medical department handles pocket talkers and hearing aids only with all other aids being done by the ADA. The same process is followed when the ADA is notified of a new HOH diagnoses by the medical department. The ADA's meeting with the HOH inmate normally occurs within seven 7 of admission/notification, but in most cases is completed within 2-3 days.
To my knowledge, no incidents of this nature occurred at the facility during this time period.

9/22/2020 9/22/2020

Review of training materials provided by Court Monitor in August 2019. KDOC Communicating With HOH Offenders - May 2020. KDOC ADA Coordinator (CREATE) and Settlement Agreement on-line training September 2020.
Other than for CapTel which is still in progress, I believe all other issues for this facility have been resolved. We are currently working with Secures to install a cage where both a Captel and TTY will be available to HOH at the same location.

Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 39

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 551 of 985 - Page ID#: 4139
Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 40

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 552 of 985 - Page ID#: 4140
Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 41

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 553 of 985 - Page ID#: 4141
Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 42

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 554 of 985 - Page ID#: 4142
Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 43

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 555 of 985 - Page ID#: 4143
Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 44

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 556 of 985 - Page ID#: 4144
Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 45

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 557 of 985 - Page ID#: 4145
Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 46

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 558 of 985 - Page ID#: 4146
Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 47

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 559 of 985 - Page ID#: 4147
Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 48

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 560 of 985 - Page ID#: 4148
Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 49

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 561 of 985 - Page ID#: 4149
Exhibit 2, LAC, p. 50

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 562 of 985 - Page ID#: 4150
Luther Luckett Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 563 of 985 - Page ID#: 4151

Margo Schlanger
Court Appointed Monitor, Adams, and Knights v. Commonwealth of Kentucky
625 So. State Street  Ann Arbor, MI 48109  E-Mail: Adams.Settlement.Monitor@gmail.com 734-615-2618

Memo to:
From: Date: Re:

Kentucky Department of Corrections Director of Operations Janet Conover Programs Branch Manager Debbie Kays All institutions’ ADA Coordinators and backup ADA Coordinators Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor (adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com) September 15, 2020 Followups from recent phone and other contacts with Deaf and hard-ofhearing inmates.

As you know, my law students have recently conducted dozens of inmate interviews, talking to Deaf and hard-of-hearing (HOH) inmates at each KDOC institution. This memo summarizes issues recently raised by inmates we heard from via those phone calls or otherwise. (Note that there were also additional issues raised by inmates who did not want their names shared; some of these are reflected in the “repeat issues” reported below.)

To be completely clear, the descriptions below recount what we’ve heard from inmates—not what we’ve found after investigation. Obviously, we don’t yet know the true state of affairs.

The most common complaints, across institutions, are: 1. Difficulty hearing announcements, both inside and outside, leading to HOH inmates missing meals, mail call, pill call. 2. Masks make it harder to read lips and understand staff, make it harder to wear hearing aids. 3. Telephones are difficult to use because of background noise. Telephone voice identification difficult for HOH people to use. Insufficient number of volumeadjustable and HOH phones. 4. Inmates not getting HOH ids, bed signs, other auxiliary aids; not being informed about available auxiliary aids. (E.g., not knowing they could purchase vibrating clock or watch). 5. Hearing aids not working well, not replaced promptly. 6. Bilateral hearing aid denials. 7. Difficulty getting hearing aid batteries, especially in seg, but elsewhere as well. 8. Officers being disrespectful, writing inmates up for hearing-impairment-related issues (e.g., not following an order they didn’t hear) 9. Job dismissals/disqualifications relating to hearing impairments.

For each individual issue identified below, please provide what information you can on what happened in the incident in question. Include timing. That is, for example, if someone says he has not received a hard-of-hearing ID, please include when he arrived at the prison, when he had his auxiliary aid assessment, whether he should have gotten the ID, and when he got it. If someone says he was written up for hearing-related failure to follow an order or the like, please provide full documentation of the relevant disciplinary incident, including its result. And so on.

1
Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 564 of 985 - Page ID#: 4152
LLCC
Repeat issues: A. Difficulty hearing intercom/announcements, causing inmates to miss meals, when the yard opens, pill call, and changes on the yard. Continue verbal reminders to staff during roll call regarding the use of the intercom for announcements and utilization of the HoH Aides for in person alerts. B. Difficulty hearing the buzzer on the rec field indicating the field is closing or announcements indicating that it’s open. Review auditory levels of Recreation field buzzer to determine most effective sound level and possibly alternate the length of the sounding. C. Difficulty getting information/assistance on HA maintenance, such as how to clean the hearing aid, change filters, and adjust the range and frequency. Requested Medical provide written and verbal instructions regarding the maintenance, cleaning, etc. regarding hearing aid model. D. Difficulty getting new batteries can be difficult. Battery replacement has two options 1. Through submission of sick call slip for a one for one exchange or 2. Exchange on Fridays from Medical at Pill Call window. E. Inmates in the 7-a d wing report that their HOH aide does not provide them with any assistance. They have told the ADA coordinator and unit director. Counsel with HoH Aides and Unit staff to determine the completion of assigned tasks and necessity of additional aides. F. No copy of the settlement in the library. The settlement agreement has been in the legal library since 2016. September 2020 agreement was added to the inmate library for convenience to the population. G. Difficulty hearing phones. Some report that there is not a phone with sound amplification. Each living unit has amplified phones. Each unit also has portable amplifiers in the living unit Control Center for check out and use by inmates. September 18, 2020 requested from LLCC Systems Department to have present phone provider to increase the amplified versions. H. COs grow frustrated when HOH people cannot hear them . Continue verbal instructions to staff during roll call regarding interaction with Deaf/HoH inmates.
2
Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 565 of 985 - Page ID#: 4153
Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 566 of 985 - Page ID#: 4154
LLCC A. Missing Items from Information Request: 1. Please provide, in addition to the individual grievances, “a summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Should include the issues, summary of response, resolution.” Other prisons have provided this in the form of a one or two sentence summary for each grievance addressing the factors stated in the question. Attached
Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 567 of 985 - Page ID#: 4155
C. Missing Items from Action Plan: 1. In-person notifications should be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates. 10/06/2020: implemented log for HoH aides to document notification whether individual or general. Logs will be turned into ADA Coordinator on a monthly basis. (Attachment) 2. ADA coordinators should publicize that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money, to recover when money comes into their account. This process is available for both formally indigent individuals or individuals who have insufficient money to pay for the device. Shake N Wake availability added to the inmate HoH handbook on 10/05/2020. D. Individuals to receive attached settlement summary: Completed 10/06/2020 via institutional legal mail to ensure receipt by inmate.
Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 5

Prison: Luther Luckett Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 568 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4156

^

^

1

2

. . .

Annual H&P

9/18/2019

12/2/2019

12/10/2019 4/3/2017

4/4/2017

4/28/2017

6/8/2017

6/16/2017

8/30/2017

10/9/2017

Hearing screening

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Self Reported

Self Reported

form

4/3/17 nursing

4/4/17 nursing

sick call

9/18/2019

12/2/2019

12/10/2019 issued pocket talker issues pocket talker

4/28/2017

hearing screening

form

noted during H&P hearing screening

6/13/2017

7/28/2017

8/30/2017

10/9/2017

4/14/2017

4/11/2017

5/17/2017

6/26/2017

7/28/2017

11/7/2017

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

referred to audiology

referred to audiology

hearing aids recommended

referrred to audiology

fitted for hearing

aids

has hearing aids

c, Second Audicus test on

10/21/2019. Awaiting APRN review,

on 11/6/2019 assessment of ear

drums revealed fluid, will need to

repeat Audicus test on 12/6/2019,

Audicus completed on 12/6/2019 a, Audicus

b, Audicus

awaiting results at this time,

completed, APRN completed on

Awating outsdie ENT appointment, stated in note that 12/16/2019, APRN

Follow up with ENT in 1-2 weeks, she would order ordered L hearing

will have CT of ear canals completed hearing aid, not aid on 12/19/2019,

on 2/19/2020. Awaiting CT results ordered at this time, Dr. Kemen approved

as of 2/26/2019. MD follow up on patient received on 12/19/2019.,

3/4/2020, patient does not meet hearing aid on

moved to NTC on

a, transferred with

criteria for hearing aid.

2/19/2020.

1/13/2020

a, received 5/23/17 a, received 5/17/17 a, received 6/30/17 a, received 7/25/17 a

c

hearing aid

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Doc #: 919-2 Filed2 : 12/16/2.0. . ID#: 4157

Page: 569 of 985 - Page

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed) Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date

4/6/2017

5/16/2017

5/17/2017

6/13/2017

ER for medical

condition

onsite CC visit

ENT

on site provider hearing assessment

8/30/2017 H&P

returned to facility 4/14/2017

recommended hearing aids

refer to audiology

5/18/2017

6/26/2017

referred to audiology
9/7/2017

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 7

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 919-2 Filed2 : 12/16/2.0. . Page: 570 of 985 - Page ID#: 4158

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

provider evaluation

on site follow up with provider

audiology appointmet

follow up review of medical records

meds 5/5/2017
CC and H&P visit on site

tested and fitted for audiology referral hearing aids

6/8/2017

7/25/2017

audiology fitted for hearing aids

audiology received hearing aids

6/30/2017

CC visit in 3 months

9/18/2019 3/4/2020
168
168

12/2/2019 2/19/2020
79
79

12/10/2019 2/11/2020
63
63

4/3/2017 5/23/2017
50
50

audiology received hearing aids

4/4/2017 5/17/2017
43
43

4/28/2017 6/30/2017
63
63

6/8/2017 7/25/2017
47
47

6/16/2017 7/11/2017
25
25

8/30/2017 12/8/2017
100
100

10/9/2017 10/9/2017
0
0

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 8

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?
Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 919-2 Filed2 : 12/16/2.0. . Page: 571 of 985 - Page ID#: 4159

Second Audicus test on 10/21/2019.

Awaiting APRN review, on

11/6/2019 assessment of ear drums

revealed fluid, will need to repeat

Audicus test on 12/6/2019, Audicus

completed on 12/6/2019 awaiting a, Audicus

Audicus completed

results at this time, Awating outsdie completed, APRN on 12/16/2019,

ENT appointment,Follow up with stated in note that APRN ordered L

ENT in 1-2 weeks, will have CT of ear she would order hearing aid on

canals completed on 2/19/2020. hearing aid, not 12/19/2019, Dr.

Awaiting CT results as of 2/26/2019. ordered at this time, Kemen approved on

MD follow up on 3/4/2020, patient patient received 12/19/2019., moved

does not meet criteria for hearing hearing aid on

to NTC on

aid.

2/19/2020.

1/13/2020

H-S-A to go through

each encounter on

APRN schedule and

email appropraite

Followed by outside facilities and CT parties involved in

scans, follow up appropriate.

order placement. Patient transferred

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 9

Prison: Luther Luckett Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 572 of 985 - Page ID#: 4160

10/6/2017

10/26/2017

11/22/2017

12/1/2017

12/1/2017

12/6/2017 12/14/2017

hearing screening Self report

transfer hearing screen

transfer hearing screen

transfer hearing screen

transfer hearing screen

transfer hearing screen

10/26/2017

11/22/2017

12/1/2017

12/1/2017

12/6/2017 12/14/2017

10/6/2017

11/2/2017

11/22/2017

12/1/2017

12/1/2017

12/6/2017 12/14/2017

12/14/2017 transfer hearing screen
12/14/2017
12/14/2017

1/2/2018 Annual hearing screen
1/2/2018
1/2/2018

1/5/2018 transfer hearing screen
1/5/2018
10/29/2018

1/5/2018 transfer hearing screen
1/5/2018
1/5/2018

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

has hearing aids

referred to ENT

transferred with hearing aids

came with hearing Came with hearing Came with hearing

aids

aids

aids

came with hearing came with hearing

aid

aids

passed L failed R referred to audiology

Audicus hearing exam done

has hearing aids

a, transferred with

hearing aids

b

a

a

a

a

a

a

d

b

a

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 4161

Page: 573 of 985 - Page

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed) Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date

4/6/2018
ENT visit
Recommend hearing amplification devices
6/13/2018

issue a pocket talker. Able to hear at 30 to 50 DB in the
250 to 2000 HZ range

10/29/2018

8/14/2018

Audicus hearing exam done

on site provider

denies any current issues with hearing
11/7/2018

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 11

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 574 of 985 - Page ID#: 4162

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

audiology results to Dr. Kemen
right ear moderate hearing loss, L ear normal to mild loss May issue pocket talker at provider discretion. Not required.
8/2/2018
issued poscket talker

Report forwarded to Dr. Kemen
11/9/2018 Kemen,Frederick 11/9/2018 11:36:57 AM > Audicus Dia II for left ear

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

10/6/2017 10/6/2017
0
0

10/26/2017 8/3/2018 281
281

11/22/2017 11/22/2017
0
0

12/1/2017 12/1/2017
0
0

12/1/2017 12/1/2017
0
0

12/6/2017 12/6/2017
0
0

12/14/2017 12/14/2017
0
0

12/14/2017 12/14/2017
0
0

1/2/2018 12/3/2018
335
335

1/5/2018 4/23/2018
108
108

1/5/2018 1/5/2018
0
0

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 12

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 575 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4163

Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

2/28/2018 transfer hearing screen
2/28/2018
2/28/2018

3/6/2018 transfer hearing screen
3/21/2018
3/21/2018

3/28/2018

3/28/2018

4/11/2018

4/27/2018

4/27/2018

4/30/2018

4/30/2018

transfer hearing

Annual Hearing screen

Annual Hearing

Transfer

Transfer

Annual Hearing

Transfer

H&P

3/28/2018

3/28/2018

4/11/2018

4/27/2018

4/27/2018

4/30/2018

3/28/2018

4/25/2018

4/11/2018

4/27/2018

4/27/2018

4/30/2018

5/1/2018
Transfer 5/1/2018 5/1/2018

5/25/2018
5/25/2018 11/13/2018

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

has hearing aids

audiology referral audiology referral

Deaf in R ear,

received hearing aid

Hearing aid Left ear 08/28/18

Tx. With hearing audiollogy referral aids

otitis R ear reevaluate

Issued pocket talker

a

d

d

d

a

a

a

b

a

d

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 4164

Page: 576 of 985 - Page

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed) Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Pocket Talker

moderate R ear, pocket talker issued Issued pocket talker

severe L ear 4/16/18 4/19/18

4/25/18

7/24/2018
audiology report to Dr. Kemen

6/21/2018 UofL ENT

Medical Visit 2 - Date

8/15/2018
resent audiology report to Dr. Kemen

audiogram done 8/13/2018

Patient underwent Audicus testing shows severe hearing impairment in the 4000Hz range in both ears but No to mild hearing impairment across remaining fields. Disability coordinator for site informed of patient's hearing deficit. Patient informed does not meet criteria for hearing aid at this time but will be reevaluated annually for changes in his hearing.
7/23/2018
provider
did not do a referral or hearing eval.
9/30/2018

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 14

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 577 of 985 - Page ID#: 4165

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

results to Dr.

Kemen, not sent by

provider Holtman as

charted 07/02/18

H&P

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

8/16/2018

10/12/2018

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

2/28/2018 2/28/2018
0
0

3/6/2018 4/16/2018
41
41

3/28/2018 4/19/2018
22
22

3/28/2018 4/25/2018
28
28

Dr. Kemen ordered hearing aid for L ear.

4/11/2018 5/31/2018
50
50

4/27/2018 8/28/2018
123
123

Dr. Kemen ordered hearing aid for L ear
11/12/2018
Issued hearing aid for L ear

4/27/2018 4/27/2018
0
0

4/30/2018 11/12/2018
196
196

4/30/2018 4/30/2018
0
0

referred for audiogram 11/13/2018
Audicus
11/26/2018 Does not meet criteria for hearing aids

5/1/2018 8/9/2018
100
100

5/25/2018 11/26/2018
185
185

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 15

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 578 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4166

Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

5/25/2018

5/25/2018

5/24/2018

6/7/2018

10/26/2018

Transfer

Transfer

Transfer

Transfer

H&P

H&P

5/25/2018

5/25/2018

5/24/2018

6/7/2018

7/2/2018

7/9/2018

7/10/2018

7/16/2018

7/17/2018

H&P 7/9/2018 7/9/2018

H&P 7/10/2018 7/10/2018

H&P 7/16/2018 7/16/2018

H&P 7/17/2018 7/17/2018

7/24/2018
H&P 7/24/2018 7/24/2018

8/3/2018
8/3/2018 8/3/2018

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Tx. With hearing aids

Tx. With hearing aids

Audicus DIA II for R L hearing aid

ear ordered

1/30/19

passed whisper test Audiology referral passed whisper

passed whisper

Passed whisper

Passed whisper

a

a

a

d

a

d

d

d

d

d

d

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 4167

Page: 579 of 985 - Page

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

7/26/2018

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

audiogram results to Dr. Kemen

Medical Visit 2 - Date

Hearing aid ordered for R ear
8/15/2018

Audicus online hearing test done on 12/27/2018 was reviewed. The hearing threshold in dB at each of the benchmark frequencies (500 Hz, 1000 Hz, 2000 Hz, 4000 Hz, 8000 Hz) is as follows:

       Right Ear: 40, 40, 45, 70, 70

       Left Ear: 45, 45, 45, 70, 60.

7/3/2018

12/27/2018

hearing aid results audiogram

to Dr. Kemen

completed

Right Ear no significant impairment; Left Ear no significant impairment
8/15/2018
Hears to you

Hearing aid ordered for R ear

8/15/2018

1/14/2019

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 17

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 580 of 985 - Page ID#: 4168

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Hearing aid issued , R ear

Hearing aid issued for R ear

Kemen,Frederick 1/14/2019 10:23:47 AM > Audicus Clara for ear of patient's choice, patient chose L ear

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

5/25/2018 8/15/2018
82
82

5/25/2018 5/25/2018
0
0

5/24/2018 5/24/2018
0
0

6/7/2018 8/15/2018
69
69

10/26/2018 1/30/2019
96
96

7/9/2018 8/1/2018
23
23

7/10/2018 10/17/2018
99
99

7/16/2018 7/16/2018
0
0

7/17/2018 7/17/2018
0
0

7/24/2018 7/24/2018
0
0

8/3/2018 8/3/2018
0
0

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 18

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 581 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4169

Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

8/7/2018

9/25/2018

Sick call

H&P

8/7/2018

8/13/2018

H&P 9/25/2018 9/25/2018

9/28/2018

9/30/2018

10/8/2018

H&P 9/28/2018 11/13/2018

transfer

9/30/2018

10/8/2018

5/2/2018

7/24/2018

10/26/2018

9/7/2018

11/26/2018 Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

10/26/2018

10/26/2018

11/6/2018

11/6/2018

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

cerumen to use debrox and follow up in 2 weeks

Cerumen in ears

cerumen in ears, debrox and schedule for audiogram reevaluate

tx. With bilat hearing aids

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for schedule for audiogram audiogram

schedule for audiogram

a, L hearing aid

12/10/18

d

d

a, L hearing aid

1/30/19

a

b

b

d

a, R hearing aid 12/13/18

a, R hearing aid 12/13/18

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 4170

Page: 582 of 985 - Page

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

Hearing issues resolved with Cerumen removal on 10/16/18

Patient underwent

Audicus testing shows

severe hearing

impairment in the

4000Hz range in both

ears but No to mild

hearing impairment

across remaining

Audicus online

fields. Disability

hearing test done

coordinator for site on 12/6/2018 was

informed of patient's reviewed. The

hearing deficit.

hearing threshold

Patient informed does in dB at each of

not meet criteria for the benchmark

hearing aid at this frequencies (500

time but will be

Hz, 1000 Hz,

reevaluated annually 2000 Hz, 4000

for changes in his Hz, 8000 Hz) is as

hearing.

follows:

9/28/2018

       Right Ear: 30, 25, 35, 80, 80

       Left Ear: 30, 25, 35, 75, 70.

11/13/2018

10/26/2018

signed refusal for

online hearing test Audicus online

on 12/18/18.

test 10/26/19

Patient underwent Audicus testing shows severe hearing impairment in the 4000Hz range in both ears but No to mild hearing impairment across remaining fields. Disability coordinator for site informed of patient's hearing deficit. Patient informed does not meet criteria for hearing aid at this time but will be reevaluated annually for changes in his hearing.

Audicus online hearing test performed on 11/6/18

6/11/2018

Audicus hearing test on 11/6/18

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome Medical Visit 2 - Date

Rick Richards on site APRN
Ears with debris still present and has an ear infection. To reevaluate ears after additional debrox and antibitic for otitis externa.
10/29/2018

Audicus testing

Provider

referred for audiogram

11/26/2018

12/6/2018

Refused provider visit

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 20

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 583 of 985 - Page ID#: 4171

Audicus testing

Patient underwent

Audicus testing shows

severe hearing

impairment in the

4000Hz range in both

ears but No to mild

hearing impairment

across remaining

fields. Disability

coordinator for site

informed of patient's

hearing deficit.

Patient informed does

not meet criteria for

hearing aid at this

time but will be

reevaluated annually

for changes in his

hearing.

audiogram done

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

11/6/2018 Results to Dr. Kemen

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

11/9/2018
Kemen,Frederick 11/9/2018 11:43:45 AM > Audicus Oro for left ear

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

8/7/2018 12/10/2018
125
125

9/25/2018 10/16/2018
21
21

       Right Ear: 30, 25, 35, 80, 80        Left Ear: 30,
1/14/2019
Audicus Clara for L ear

9/28/2018 11/26/2018
59
59

9/30/2018 1/30/2019
122
122

10/18/2018 1/2/2019 76
76

11/26/2018 12/18/2018
22
22

5/2/2018 -43222 -43222

7/24/2018 8/1/2018
8
8

10/26/2018 12/13/2018
48
48

9/7/2018 12/13/2018
97
97

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 21

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 584 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4172

Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

9/7/2018

9/9/2018 10/19/2018

9/14/2018

9/21/2018

9/24/2018 10/11/2018 10/15/2018 10/16/2018

10/26/2018 10/26/2018

11/7/2018 11/12/2018

Annual H&P

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P

11/13/2018 11/15/2018 11/15/2018

11/15/2018 11/15/2018

10/30/2018

11/20/2018

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for schedule for audiogram audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

a, 01/24/190

a, R hearing aid a, L hearing aid

a, L hearing aid

a, L hearing aid hearing aid L

d, issued pocket

a, R hearing aid

d

1/2/19

3/4/19

d

1/2/19

b

1/30/19

ear

d

talker

d

d

2/27/19

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 4173

Page: 585 of 985 - Page

Patient underwent

Audicus testing shows

severe hearing

impairment in the

4000Hz range in both

ears but No to mild

hearing impairment

across remaining fields.

Disability coordinator

for site informed of

patient's hearing

deficit. Patient

informed does not meet

criteria for hearing aid

at this time but will be

reevaluated annually Audicus

for changes in his

hearing test

hearing.

11/15/18

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-

coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the

hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

Patient underwent

Audicus testing shows

severe hearing

impairment in the

4000Hz range in both

   Audicus online

ears but No to mild

hearing test

hearing impairment

done on

across remaining fields.

12/3/2018 was

Disability coordinator

reviewed. The

for site informed of

hearing

Audicus

patient's hearing

hearing test deficit. Patient

11/15/18 had informed does not

to be repeated meet criteria for

threshold in dB

Audicus hearing at each of the

exam 10/30/18 benchmark

with poor

frequencies

due to poor hearing aid at this time

results retested (500 Hz, 1000

results.

but will be reevaluated Audicus hearing 1/22/19 with Hz, 2000 Hz,

Redone

annually for changes in test on

inconsistant 4000 Hz, 8000

1/28/19.

his hearing.

11/15/18.

results

Hz) is as follows:

Deficit only at 4000Hz in each ear. Advised that it is not severe enough to require a hearing aid at this point

His ear exam is WNL at this time, 4/2/2019

Informed of     Audicus

haring test

online hearing

results, and that test done on

the patient 11/27/2018 was

does not meet reviewed. The

the criteria for a hearing

hearing aid or threshold in dB

any other assist at each of the

device. Patient benchmark

states that he frequencies

doesnt have (500 Hz, 1000

any issues

Hz, 2000 Hz,

hearing in the 4000 Hz, 8000

first place.

Hz) is as follows:

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

11/15/2018

       Right Ear: 40, 25, 40, 55, 35

       Left Ear: 35, 30, 35, 50, 45.

1/24/2019

12/6/2018

       Right Ear: 45, 35, 35, 50, 45
       Left Ear: 40, 35, 35, 55, 45 12/6/2018 11/27/2018

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

audiogram performed

Hearing aid for L ear

audiogram performed

audiogram performed

audiogram performed

Medical Visit 2 - Date

1/18/2019

1/14/2019

1/18/2019

1/14/2018

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 23

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 586 of 985 - Page ID#: 4174

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

no DB levels on results will be rescheduled.

Audicus Clara for left ear.  Per Dr. Kemen

Communicated to patient he did not qualify for hearing aid based on audiology test results. Patient offered pocket talker and he accepted, patient instructed on use of pocket talker.

Kemen,Frederic k 1/14/2019 10:04:47 AM > Audicus Clara for ear of patient's choice, patient chose R ear

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

9/7/2018 11/26/2018
80
80

9/9/2018 1/2/2019
115
115

10/19/2018 3/4/2019 136
136

9/14/2018 11/16/2018
63
63

9/21/2018 1/2/2019
103
103

9/24/2018 7/3/2019
282
282

10/11/2018 1/30/2019
111
111

10/15/2018 1/24/2019
101
101

10/16/2018 11/13/2018
28
28

10/18/2018 1/18/2019
92
92

10/26/2018 4/2/2019 158
158

7-Nov 1/18/2019
72
72

11/12/2018 2/27/2019
107
107

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 24

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 587 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4175

Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

11/9/2018

11/5/2018

11/6/2018 11/13/2018

3/21/2018

12/3/2018

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P H&P at KSR H&P

H&P

12/3/2018 11/26/2018 11/26/2018 arrive1d2/w11it/h2018

1/3/2019 Schedu1le/d3/a2t019

1/2/2019 12/11/2018

working hearing

another facility

H&P

H&P

aids

Annual H&P and transferred Annual H&P Annual H&P

11/20/2018 11/20/2018 11/20/2018

12/3/2018

12/3/2018 11/26/2018 11/26/2018

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

Refused hearing

aid, did not a, R hearing aid a, L hearng aid a, L hearing aid

want to pay $10 2/7/19

1/2/19

1/30/19

b

refused hearing aid, did not want to pay $10 b

a, R hearing aid

d

3/4/19

a

a, L hearing aid a, L hearing aid

d

2/19/19

1/30/19

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 25

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 4176

Page: 588 of 985 - Page

Audicus online   Audicus online

hearing test hearing test

done on

done on

11/27/2018 was 11/27/2018 was

reviewed. The reviewed. The

hearing

hearing

threshold in dB threshold in dB

at each of the at each of the

benchmark benchmark

frequencies frequencies

(500 Hz, 1000 (500 Hz, 1000

Hz, 2000 Hz, Hz, 2000 Hz, Audicus

4000 Hz, 8000 4000 Hz, 8000 hearing test Hz) is as follows: Hz) is as follows: 11/30/18

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-

coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the

hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

Audicus hearing test 12/13/18

Audicus test 12/27/18

       Right Ear:        Right Ear:

20, 15, 30, 45, 75, 80, 80, 80,

50

75

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by

providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was

not needed)

       Left Ear: 15,        Left Ear: 80,

10, 25, 65, 55. 80, 80, 80, 80.

Medical Visit 1 - Date

11/27/2018 11/27/2018

Medical Visit 1 - Description

       Right Ear: 20, 20, 15, 60, 40

       Left Ear: 10, 15, 15, 60, 45.
12/13/2018

12/18/2018

43126

Seen by

provider and

declines hearing Audicus hearing

aid at this time, test 12/4/18

is using a

retested

pocket talker 1/28/19

12/14/2018 12/13/2018

12/4/2018

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

audiogram performed

audiogram performed

audiogram performed

audiogram performed

audiology

audiogram performed

audiogram performed

audiogram performed

     Audicus Audicus

online hearing online hearing

test done on test done on

1/10/2019 was 12/27/2018

reviewed. The was reviewed.

hearing

The hearing

threshold in threshold in

dB at each of dB at each of

the

the

benchmark benchmark

frequencies frequencies

(500 Hz, 1000 (500 Hz, 1000

Hz, 2000 Hz, Hz, 2000 Hz,

4000 Hz,

4000 Hz,

8000 Hz) is as 8000 Hz) is as

follows:

follows:

       Right Ear:        Right Ear:

25, 40, 60, 80, 55, 55, 70, 80,

70

80

1/10/2019

       Left Ear: 15, 20, 55, 80, 45.
1/10/2019

       Left Ear: 45, 45, 50, 75, 80.
12/27/2018

audiogram performed

audiogram performed

audiogram performed

Medical Visit 2 - Date

1/14/2019

1/11/2019

01/11/199

needs pocket talker

1/22/2019

1/18/2019

1/18/2009

1/18/2019

1/18/2019

1/18/2019

1/17/2019 1/14/2019

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 26

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 589 of 985 - Page ID#: 4177

Kemen,Frederic k 1/11/2019 11:42:18 AM > Kemen,Frederic Audicus Clara k 1/14/2019 for ear of 9:59:22 AM > patient's choice, Audicus Clara order for right for right ear ear

Kemen,Frederic

k 1/11/2019

11:47:30 AM >

Audicus Clara

for ear of

patient's choice, does not meet

patient chose L criteria for

ear

hearing aids

Communicated

to patient he did

not qualify for

hearing aid

based on

audiology test

results. Patient

stated he would

not want one even if he qualified. Patient told if his hearing

patient seen and told qualified for hearing aid but

worsened to declined at this

place sick call time, has a

questionable

for issue and his pocket talker results for

hearing would that is working audiogram, will

be reevaluated. for him.

reschedule

Communicate

d to patient he Communicate

did not qualify d to patient he

for hearing aid did not qualify

based on

for hearing aid

audiology test based on

results.

audiology test

Patient told if results.

hearing

Patient told if

declines and his hearing

he would like worsened to

Kemen,Freder

to be tested place sick call Kemen,Freder ick 1/14/2019

again to place for issue and ick 1/17/2019 10:30:53 AM

sick call and his hearing 10:51:18 AM > > Audicus

he would be would be

Audicus Clara Clara for left

evaluated

reevaluated. for left ear ear

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

11/9/2018 1/30/2019
82
82

11/5/2018 2/7/2019
94
94

11/6/2018 1/2/2019
57
57

11/13/2018 1/30/2019
78
78

3/21/2018 1/22/2019
307
307

12/3/2018 2/18/2019
77
77

12/3/2018 1/18/2019
46
46

11/26/2018 1/18/2019
53
53

11/26/2018 3/4/2019 98
98

12/11/2018 1/15/2019
35
35

1/3/2019 1/18/2019
15
15

1/3/2019 1/18/2019
15
15

1/2/2019 2/19/2019
48
48

12/18/2018 1/30/2019
43
43

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 27

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 590 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4178

Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

12/10/2018 10/25/2018

10/9/2018

1/22/2019

1/22/2019

1/25/2019 10/18/2018

1/29/2019

1/29/2019

1/29/2019

1/30/2019

1/15/2019

2/5/2019

2/5/2019

Annual H&P Transfer

transfer

Annual H&P

Annual H&P Annual H&P

1/22/2019

1/25/2019

1/22/2019

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P

1/29/2019

1/29/2019

1/29/2019

1/30/2019

2/1/2019

2/5/2019

2/5/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

schedule for audiogram

passed whisper schedule for

test

audiogram

schedule for audiogram

Audicus test

complete,

awaiting

schedule for

provider review audiogram

schedule for audiogram

Patient refused

follow up on schedule for

4/11/19

audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

c, Hearing aid

ordered on

b, Dr. Kemen 5/27/2019,

Pocket talker

approved

pending Dr.

given on

hearing aid for R Kemen

4/23/2019

ear on

approval,

during follow up

5/20/2019, hearing aid

with APRN as

Patient received delivered to

patient does a, Hearing aid

a, L hearing aid

a, left hearing

hearing aid on patient on

a, R hearing aid not want

delivered on

1/30/19

d

aid from RCC d

6/11/2019

7/3/2019

2/18/19

hearing aids 5/3/2019

d

d

d

d

b

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 28

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 4179

Page: 591 of 985 - Page

Audicus online hearing test done on 12/14/2018 was reviewed. The hearing threshold in dB at each of the benchmark frequencies (500 Hz, 1000 Hz, 2000 Hz, 4000 Hz, 8000 Hz) is as follows:
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-
coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the
hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

       Right Ear: 10, 20, 60, 80, 80

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by

providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was        Left Ear:

not needed)

10, 25, 60, 80,

75.

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

11/19/2018

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Dr. Kemen determined does not meet criteria while at RCC

Audicus online hearing test done on 12/14/2018 was reviewed. The hearing threshold in dB at each of the benchmark frequencies (500 Hz, 1000 Hz, 2000 Hz, 4000 Hz, Audicus hearing audicus hearing 8000 Hz) is as test 3/12/19 test 3/14/19 follows:

3/18/2019

       Right Ear: 50, 45, 45, 75, 55
       Left Ear: 50, 50, 55, 75, 60.
12/14/2018

results to Dr. Kemen

audiogram performed

audicus test 3/14/19
4/8/2019 Approved for R ear Hearing Aid

audicus test 2/15/19
4/11/2019 Patient refused follow up

Audicus test 3/14/19

Medical Visit 2 - Date

1/11/2019

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 29

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 592 of 985 - Page ID#: 4180

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Kemen,Freder ick 1/11/2019 11:52:45 AM > Audicus Clara for ear of patient's choice, patient chose L ear

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

12/10/2018 1/30/2019
51
51

10/25/2018 11/9/2018
15
15

10/9/2018 10/19/2018
10
10

1/22/2019 1/22/2019
0
0

1/22/2019 6/11/2019
140
140

1/25/2019 7/3/2019
159
159

10/18/2018 2/18/2019
123
123

1/29/2019 4/23/2019
84
84

1/29/2019 5/3/2019
94
94

1/29/2019 3/29/2019
59
59

1/30/2019 4/11/2019
71
71

1/15/2019 2/20/2019
36
36

2/5/2019 3/29/2019
52
52

2/5/2019 4/2/2019
56
56

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 30

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 593 of 985 - Page ID#: 4181

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

APRN did not

place order for

hearing aid until

2 months after Audicus not

hearing loss completed until

identified.

3/14/2019

H-S-A to go

through each

encounter on

APRN schedule

and email

H-S-A to email

appropraite RN Supervisor

parties involved for completion

in order

of Audicus

placement. testing.

Audicus not Audicus not

completed until completed until

4/16/2019

3/14/2019

H-S-A to email RN Supervisor for completion of Audicus testing.

H-S-A to email RN Supervisor for completion of Audicus testing.

Audicus not completed until 4/9/2019
H-S-A to email RN Supervisor for completion of Audicus testing.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 31

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 594 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4182

Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

2/5/2019

2/5/2019

2/5/2019

2/6/2019 10/25/2018

1/24/2019

2/5/2019

2/7/2019

1/28/2019

2/11/2019

2/11/2019

2/12/2019

2/14/2019

2/25/2019

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Transfer

2/5/2019

2/5/2019

2/5/2019

2/6/2019

transfer

11/9/2018

transfer

annual

annual

annual

annual

annual

Annual H&P Annual H&P

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Audicus test

complete,

awaiting

schedule for

provider review audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

Audicus test Audicus test Audicus test

complete,

complete,

complete,

awaiting

awaiting

awaiting

schedule for

provider review provider review provider review audiogram

a, Dr. Kemen

approved

b, Dr. Kemen

hearing aid on

approved

4/22/2019,

a, Hearing aid hearing aid for R a, Hearing aid

a, Hearing aid a, received

received

a, hearing aid

delivered on ear on

delivered on

a, tx. with one a, tx. with R

delivered on hearing aid on hearing aid on delivered on

d

5/3/2019

5/20/2019

5/17/2019

d

hearing aid hearing aid d

d

d

5/17/2019

7/3/2019

5/17/2019

4/30/2019

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 32

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 4183

Page: 595 of 985 - Page

Patient refused hearing aids on 4/19/2019 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

audicus hearing test 3/12/19

  Audiogram done on 10/31/2018 was reviewed. The hearing threshold in dB at each of the benchmark frequencies (500 Hz, 1000 Hz, 2000 Hz, 4000 Hz) is as follows:

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

       Right Ear: 20, 15, 15, 25

4/8/2019

3/18/2019

       Left Ear: 20, 0, 5, 40.
4/12/2019

Approved for R Hearing Aid

referred to Dr. Kemen, Patient paroled on 7/1/2019 from KSR.

referred to Dr. Kemen

2/7/2019

2/11/2019

positive hearing

positive hearing

screen, refused Patient released screen, declined

audicus

from KYDOC Audicus

4/8/2019
Approved for L ear hearing aid

Medical Visit 2 - Date

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 33

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 596 of 985 - Page ID#: 4184

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

2/5/2019 4/19/2019
73
73

2/5/2019 5/3/2019
87
87

2/5/2019 6/18/2019
133
133

2/6/2019 5/17/2019
100
100

10/25/2018 11/9/2018
15
15

11/28/2019 12/26/2019
28
28

6/19/2019 7/23/2019
34
34

2/7/2019 2/7/2019
0
0

1/28/2019 3/8/2019
39
39

2/11/2019 2/11/2019
0
0

2/11/2019 5/17/2019
95
95

2/12/2019 7/3/2019
141
141

2/14/2019 5/17/2019
92
92

2/25/2019 4/30/2019
64
64

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 34

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 597 of 985 - Page ID#: 4185

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Audicus not Audicus not Audicus not Audicus not

completed until completed until completed until completed until

4/9/2019

3/21/2019

3/12/2019

4/4/2019

H-S-A to email RN Supervisor for completion of Audicus testing.

H-S-A to email RN Supervisor for completion of Audicus testing.

H-S-A to email RN Supervisor for completion of Audicus testing.

H-S-A to email RN Supervisor for completion of Audicus testing.

Audicus not Audicus not Audicus not Audicus not

completed until completed until completed until completed until

4/5/2019

4/5/2019

4/5/2019

3/28/2019

H-S-A to email RN Supervisor for completion of Audicus testing.

H-S-A to email RN Supervisor for completion of Audicus testing.

H-S-A to email RN Supervisor for completion of Audicus testing.

H-S-A to email RN Supervisor for completion of Audicus testing.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 35

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 598 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4186

Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

2/25/2019

5/16/2018

2/22/2019

2/19/2019 11/18/2018

9/4/2018

12/1/2018

2/11/2019

3/5/2019

3/5/2019

3/11/2019

3/14/2019

3/21/2019

3/22/2019

Annual H&P transfer

Transfer

transfer

transfer

transfer

tranfer

transfer

transfer

transfer

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P

3/11/2019

3/14/2019

3/21/2019

3/22/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Audicus test complete, awaiting provider review

Audicus test

complete,

Pt refused

awaiting

audiology

provider review testing

schedule for audiogram

8/27/18 issued

L hearing aid

hearing aid,

issued but

9/20/19 lost

didn't like it

d, patient

hearing aid,

a, hearing aid given pocket

d, does not

a, Hearing Aid refused

Pt given pocket a, hearing aid

1/31/19 issued a, right hearing received on talker on

meet criteria for d, normal

d, DNQ per Dr. d, DNQ per Dr. delivered on audiology

talker on

delivered on

d

pocket talker aid

7/26/2019

1/24/19

a, L heraing iad hearing aids hearing R ear Kemen 6/8/18. Kemen 12/6/18 5/30/2019

testing

3/21/2019

7/3/2019

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 36

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 4187

Page: 599 of 985 - Page

Patient does not meet qulaification for hearing aid based on audicus testing results from 4/30/2019 8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed) Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 37

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 600 of 985 - Page ID#: 4188

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

2/25/2019 4/30/2019
64
64

5/16/2018 8/27/2018
103
103

10/9/2018 11/16/2018
38
38

5/13/2019 7/26/2019
74
74

11/18/2018 12/26/2018
38
38

9/4/2018 12/26/2018
113
113

12/1/2018 12/14/2018
13
13

2/11/2019 8/21/2019
191
191

6/4/2018 6/8/2018
4
4

11/29/2018 12/6/2018
7
7

3/11/2019 5/30/2019
80
80

3/14/2019 3/14/2019
0
0

3/21/2019 3/21/2019
0
0

3/22/2019 7/3/2019
103
103

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 38

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 601 of 985 - Page ID#: 4189

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Had to have 2 Audicus test completed due to original not being consistent.

Audicus not completed until 6/27/2019

Audicus not completed until 6/27/2019

Patient had to be sent out to ENT

Audicus not completed until 7/12/2019

H-S-A to email H-S-A to email

Audicus for RN Supervisor

results if not for completion

received within of Audicus

48 hours.

testing.

H-S-A to email RN Supervisor for completion of Audicus testing.

H-S-A to email RN Supervisor for completion of Audicus testing.

Audicus not completed until 4/4/2019
H-S-A to email RN Supervisor for completion of Audicus testing.

Audicus not completed until 5/13/2019
H-S-A to email RN Supervisor for completion of Audicus testing.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 39

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 602 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4190

Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

3/22/2019

3/22/2019

3/26/2019

3/26/2019

3/27/2019

3/29/2019

4/1/2019

4/2/2019

4/17/2019

4/18/2019

4/19/2019

4/26/2019

4/29/2019

5/2/2019

Follow Up from

H&P

Follow Up

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Follow Up

Follow Up

Requesting Hearing Screen Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Follow Up

Annual H&P

3/22/2019

1/21/2019

3/26/2019

3/26/2019

3/27/2019

3/29/2019 12/18/2019

1/28/2019

4/17/2019

4/18/2019

4/19/2019

4/26/2019

4/29/2019

5/2/2019

4/22/2019

4/5/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Send to Kemen schedule for

for Review

audiogram

Audicus test

complete,

awaiting

schedule for

provider review audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

Audicus test

complete,

Awaiting

awaiting

Outside ENT

provider review Appointment

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

a, hearing aid delivered on 7/3/2019

a, hearing aid delivered on 6/11/2019

d. Pt does not

qualify for

hearing aid

based on follow a, hearing aid

up from

delivered on

5/6/2019

7/3/2019

d, Pt refused audiology testing

d, Debrox,

a, Hearing aid

repeat hearing delivered on

screening

5/17/2019

d, no hearing needed, reference note from 6/6/2019

d. Patient does

not qualify for a

hearing aid d, Pt signed

based on follow refusal for not

up from

wanting

5/7/2019.

Audicus testing

d, Pt passed bilateral whisper test

d, Pt passed bilateral whisper test and stated he did not want hearing aids during 4/26/2019 HP

Patient received a, hearing aid

pocket talker on delivered on

6/5/2019

7/3/2019

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 40

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , please provide medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 4191

Page: 603 of 985 - Page

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a tcoil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed) Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date

Patient passed Audicus hearing screen on 4/16/2019, follow up on 4/22/2019 with APRN

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 41

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 604 of 985 - Page ID#: 4192

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

3/22/2019 7/3/2019
103
103

3/22/2019 6/11/2019
81
81

3/26/2019 5/6/2019
41
41

3/26/2019 7/3/2019
99
99

3/27/2019 3/27/2019
0
0

3/29/2019 4/5/2019
7
7

4/1/2019 5/17/2019
46
46

1/28/2019 6/6/2019
129
129

4/17/2019 5/7/2019
20
20

4/18/2019 4/18/2019
0
0

4/19/2019 4/19/2019
0
0

4/26/2019 4/26/2019
0
0

4/29/2019 6/5/2019
37
37

5/2/2019 7/3/2019
62
62

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 42

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 605 of 985 - Page ID#: 4193

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Hearing aid not

order not

placed by the Audicus not

APRN until

completed until

5/30/2019

4/22/2019

H-S-A to go

through each

encounter on

APRN schedule

and email

H-S-A to email

appropraite RN Supervisor

parties involved for completion

in order

of Audicus

placement. testing.

Audicus not completed until 5/29/2019
H-S-A to email RN Supervisor for completion of Audicus testing.

Patient was sent out to ENT

Awaiting Audicus test results
H-S-A to email Audicus for results if not received within 48 hours.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 43

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 606 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4194

Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5/7/2019

5/7/2019

5/8/2019

5/8/2019

5/13/2019

5/13/2019

5/17/2019

5/17/2019

5/27/2019

5/27/2019

5/27/2019

5/31/2019

5/31/2019

6/5/2019

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Follow Up

Follow Up

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P

5/7/2019

5/7/2019

5/8/2019

5/8/2019

5/13/2019

5/13/2019

5/17/2019

4/5/2019

5/27/2019

5/27/2019

5/27/2019

5/31/2019

5/31/2019

6/5/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

a, hearing aid delivered on 7/3/2019

a, hearing aid delivered on 7/3/2019

c, APRN ordered

hearing aid on

6/4/2019,

awaiting Dr.

Kemen approval

at this time.

6/10/2019 Dr.

d, Patient

Kemen states d, Pt refused

signed refusal does not meet audiology

for hearing test criteria.

testing

d, Pt refused audiology testing

a, hearing aid delivered 6/11/2019

c, Pt received hearing aid on 5/17/2019

Patient

assessed by

APRN on

5/31/2019,

decided patient

needs pocket

talker.

Scheduled to d, Patient

receive on

transferred to

6/6/2019

KSP

d, Patient signed refusal for hearing aid on 5/31/2019

d, Paitnet signed refusal for hearing aid on 7/8/2019.

c, APRN Hearing

aid ordered on

7/8/2019 for L d, Patient

ear. 8/9/2019 L signed refusal

Hearing Aid for Audicus

Delivered

testing.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 44

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 607 of 985 - Page ID#: 4195

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

5/7/2019 7/3/2019
57
57

5/7/2019 7/3/2019
57
57

5/8/2019 5/8/2019
0
0

5/8/2019 6/10/2019
33
33

5/13/2019 5/13/2019
0
0

5/13/2019 5/13/2019
0
0

5/17/2019 6/11/2019
25
25

4/5/2019 5/17/2019
42
42

5/27/2019 6/6/2019
10
10

5/27/2019 8/16/2019
81
81

5/27/2019 5/31/2019
4
4

5/31/2019 7/8/2019
38
38

5/31/2019 8/9/2019
70
70

6/5/2019 6/5/2019
0
0

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 45

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 608 of 985 - Page ID#: 4196

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Patient was moved to KSP

Awaiting Audicus test results
H-S-A to email Audicus for results if not received within 48 hours.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 46

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 609 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4197

Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

6/6/2019

6/7/2019

6/10/2019

6/11/2019

6/13/2019

6/13/2019

6/14/2019

5/7/2019

6/27/2019

6/27/2019

6/27/2019

7/1/2019

7/2/2019

7/2/2019

Follow Up

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Follow Up

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P

6/6/2019

6/7/2019

6/10/2019

6/11/2019

6/13/2019

6/13/2019

6/14/2019

6/18/2019

6/27/2019

6/27/2019

6/27/2019

7/1/2019

7/2/2019

7/2/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Audicus test complete

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

Follow Up

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

c, Hearing aid

ordered by Dr.

Kemen on

7/25/2019.

a, received Left 8/21/2019 L

hearing aid on Hearing Aid

7/3/2019

Delivered

a, hearing aid delivered on 8/7/2019

a, hearing aid delivered on 8/7/2019

c, R hearing aid ordered on 8/8/2019. 9/18/2019 R Hearing Aid Delivered

b, Audicus

testing was

incosistnet, Dr.

Kemen advised

for outside

audiology

appointment-

Went out to

Audiology on

the 17th,

hearing aid

ordered at that

time, R Hearing

Aid delivered to d, Patient

patient on

transferred to

11/12/2019. NTC. CALL NTC

Audicus

completed on

6/27/2019,

Folluw up on

c, Hearing aid

7/19/2019, c, Order for d, APRN charted

ordered by Dr.

hearing aids hearing aids on on 7/19/2019

Kemen on

ordered on 7/25/2019. patient does

7/25/2019.

10/15/2019, 8/21/2019 L not meed

d, Patient has 8/21/2019 R

given to patient hearing aid criteria for

been tranferred Hearing Aid

on 10/31/2019 delivered

hearing aids. to KCPC.

Delivered

d, Patient signed refusal

d, Patient signed refusal for hearing aid

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 47

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 610 of 985 - Page ID#: 4198

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

6/6/2019 7/3/2019
27
27

6/7/2019 8/21/2019
75
75

6/10/2019 8/7/2019
58
58

6/11/2019 8/7/2019
57
57

6/13/2019 9/18/2019
97
97

6/13/2019 11/12/2019
152
152

6/14/2019 8/27/2019
74
74

6/18/2019 10/31/2019
135
135

6/27/2019 8/21/2019
55
55

6/27/2019 7/19/2019
22
22

6/27/2019 8/2/2019
36
36

7/1/2019 8/21/2019
51
51

7/2/2019 7/2/2019
0
0

7/2/2019 7/2/2019
0
0

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 48

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 611 of 985 - Page ID#: 4199

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Took 14 days to complete Audicus from initial encoutner, took another 7 days for Dr. Kemen to approve order.
H-S-A to go through each encounter on APRN schedule and email appropraite parties involved in order placement.

Patient had to have repeat Audicus due to inconsistent results.

Patient had to be seen by an outside Audiologist per Dr. Kemen

H-S-A to email

Audicus for Follow Up

results if not Appropriate due

received within to offsite

48 hours.

referral need

APRN did not order hearing aid in timely manner.
H-S-A to go through each encounter on APRN schedule and email appropraite parties involved in order placement.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 49

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 612 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4200

Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

7/10/2019

7/11/2019

7/12/2019

7/16/2019

7/16/2019

7/19/2019

7/19/2019

7/23/2019

7/25/2019

7/26/2019

8/1/2019

8/7/2019

8/9/2019

8/9/2019

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Follow Up

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P

7/10/2019

7/11/2019

7/12/2019

7/16/2019

7/16/2019

7/19/2019

7/19/2019

7/23/2019

7/25/2019

7/26/2019

8/1/2019

8/7/2019

8/9/2019

8/9/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Whisper Test Passed

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for

repeat

audiogram.

APRN saw

patient on

7/19/2019 and

noted that he

failed the entire

test without

numerical

schedule for

values.

audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

d, Patient

passed whipser

test on

d, Patient

7/10/2019

signed refusal

d, Hearing aid

d, Patient

not needed,

refused Hearing APRN note on

screen/ Audicus 9/10/2019

d, Does not meet criteria for hearing aid, a, Has had seen by APRN hearing aids on 8/9/2019 since 2017

a, Received hearing aid on 9/18/19

d, met with APRN on 8/9/2019, determined that patient a, Received does not qualify hearing aid on for hearing aid 9/18/19

d, APRN note

D, patient

from 9/11/2019

refused Audicus states patient d, Patient

testing on

does not qualify expired on

8/1/2019

for hearing aid 9/18/2019

d, Patient discharged home on 9/17/19

c, Hearing aid ordered on 9/13/19. 10/08/2019 R Hearing Aid Delivered

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 50

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 613 of 985 - Page ID#: 4201

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

7/10/2019 7/10/2019
0
0

7/11/2019 7/11/2019
0
0

7/12/2019 7/12/2019
0
0

7/16/2019 9/10/2019
56
56

7/16/2019 8/9/2019
24
24

7/19/2019 7/31/2019
12
12

7/9/2019 9/18/2019
71
71

7/23/2019 8/9/2019
17
17

7/25/2019 9/18/2019
55
55

7/26/2019 8/1/2019
6
6

8/1/2019 9/11/2019
41
41

8/7/2019 9/18/2019
42
42

8/9/2019 9/17/2019
39
39

8/9/2019 10/8/2019
60
60

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 51

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?
Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 614 of 985 - Page ID#: 4202
Schedule for repeat audiogram. APRN saw patient on 7/19/2019 and noted that he failed the entire test without numerical values.

Repeat testing was needed, appropriate follow up.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 52

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 615 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4203

Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

8/19/2019

8/19/2019

8/20/2019

8/20/2019

8/20/2019

8/23/2019

8/26/2019

8/26/2019

8/26/2019

9/9/2019

9/16/2019

9/19/2019

10/3/2019

10/3/2019

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Referral from

ADA

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Annual H&P Annual H&P

Annual H&P

8/19/2019

8/19/2019

8/20/2019

8/20/2019

8/20/2019

8/23/2019

8/26/2019

8/26/2019

8/26/2019

9/9/2019

9/16/2019

9/19/2019

10/3/2019

10/3/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

c, Hearing aid ordered on 9/9/2019. 10/08/2019 R Hearing Aid Delivered

d, APRN note

from 9/10/2019 c, Hearing aid

states that

ordered on

patient does 9/9/2019.

not meet

10/08/2019 R

qualifications Hearing Aid

for hearing aid. Delivered

c, Hearing aid ordered on 9/9/2019. 10/08/2019 L Hearing Aid Delivered

d, APRN note

d, Patient

from 9/9/2019

refused audicus states patient

testing on

does not meet

9/7/2019

qualifications

c, Hearing aid ordered on 9/19/2019. 10/15/2019 R Hearing Aid Delivered

d, Patient signed refusal on 9/27/2019

c, Awaiting DR.

Kemen approval

for hearing aid

from

9/20/2019.

10/15/2019 R d, Refused

Hearing Aid hearing

Delivered

screening

b, Audicus test

completed on

10/21/2019,

d, Has appoinment

Patient had repeat

with APRN on

Audicus test on

10/28/2019 to

11/18/2019,

review Audicus

received results b, Audicus test

results, patient

on 11/27/2019, completed on

had to have repeat

Provider ordered 10/21/2019,

Audicus due to

hearing aid on Repeat Audicus

inaccurate results

12/2/2019, Dr. test completed

on 10/28/2019, on a, Hearing aid Kemen approved on 11/18/2019,

11/14/2019 APRN ordered on order on

received resilts

advised patient he 10/18/2019, 12/2/2019,

on 11/27/2019,

does not meet Left Hearing aid Hearing aid given signed refusal

criteria for hearing delivered on to patient on

for heaing aid

aid.

11/18/2019 12/18/2019

on 12/2/2019

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 53

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 616 of 985 - Page ID#: 4204

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

8/19/2019 10/8/2019
50
50

8/19/2019 9/10/2019
22
22

8/20/2019 10/8/2019
49
49

8/20/2019 10/8/2019
49
49

8/20/2019 9/7/2019
18
18

8/23/2019 9/19/2019
27
27

8/26/2019 10/15/2019
50
50

8/26/2019 9/27/2019
32
32

8/26/2019 10/15/2019
50
50

9/9/2019 9/9/2019
0
0

9/16/2019 11/14/2019
59
59

9/19/2019 11/18/2019
60
60

10/3/2019 12/18/2019
76
76

10/3/2019 12/2/2019
60
60

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 54

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 617 of 985 - Page ID#: 4205

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Patient had to have repeat Audicus due to first test not being consistent
Repeat testing was needed, appropriate follow up.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 55

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 618 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4206

Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

10/4/2019 10/16/2019 10/22/2019 10/22/2019 10/28/2019

11/5/2019

11/5/2019

11/7/2019

11/7/2019 11/12/2019 11/19/2019 11/19/2019 11/19/2019 11/18/2019

Annual H&P From ADA

Annual H&P Annual H&P Follow Up

Annual H&P Follow Up

Sick Call/Follow

Up

Annual H&P

Annual H&P Annual H&P OSMT

Per Sherri Findings

Per Sherri Findings

10/4/2019 10/16/2019 10/22/2019 10/22/2019 10/28/2019

11/5/2019

11/5/2019

11/7/2019

11/7/2019 11/12/2019 11/19/2019 11/19/2019 11/19/2019 11/18/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

b, Audicus test completed on 10/21/2019, Patient refused screening on 10/21/2019

c, Audicus test b, Audicus

completed on completed on

10/28/2019, 11/18/2019,

Sent DR. Kemen received results

ECW message on 11/27/2019,

on 11/16/2019 L hearing aid

for follow up, ordered on

Dr. Kemen

12/2/2019, and

approved

approved by Dr.

hearing aid on Kemen on

d, patient

11/19/2019, 12/2/2019, signed refusal

Hearing aid Hearing aid on 10/22/2019

given to patient given to patient for further

on 12/18/2019 on 12/18/2019 testing

c, Audicus test

completed on

b, Needs

11/5/2019,

Audicus testing, b, Needs Audicus

C, OSMT follow

Patient refused

Audicus test testing, Audicus

up on

F/U on

completed on test completed on

11/19/2019,

b, Needs

11/14/2019,

11/18/2019, 11/18/2019,

stated that it

Audicus testing,

scheduled to be

received results received results

would be

patient moved

seen again on

on 11/27/2019, from Audicus on

forwarded to

to EKCC on

11/19/2019, c, Hearing aid scheduled to be 11/27/2019, APRN

Dr. Kemen for

11/27/2019,

c, L hearing aid hearing aid ordered for L reviewed on ordered hearing aid

review, Dr.

Audicus review

ordered on ordered and ear on

12/5/2019, on 12/2/2019,

Kemen ordered

on 12/20/2019,

10/28/2019 by approved on 11/14/2019 by patient signed a awaiting Dr. Kemen b, Needs

b, Needs

and approved

hearing aid

Dr. Kemen, 11/19/2019, Dr. Kemen, refusal on

approval at this Audicus testing, Audicus testing, on 11/22/2019, d, Patient

ordered on

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid 12/5/2019 for time. Patient

Refused

Refused

Hearing aid refused Audicus 12/20/2019.

given to patient given to patient given to patient hearing aid, has moved to NTC on Audicus testing Audicus testing given to patient testing on

HAS emailed on

on 11/25/2019 on 12/18/2019 on 12/18/2019 pocket talker. 12/6/2019.

on 11/18/2019 on 11/19/2019 on 12/17/2019 11/19/2019 12/2/2019

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 56

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 619 of 985 - Page ID#: 4207

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

10/4/2019 10/21/2019
17
17

10/16/2019 12/18/2019
63
63

10/22/2019 12/18/2019
57
57

10/22/2019 10/22/2019
0
0

10/18/2019 11/25/2019
38
38

11/5/2019 12/18/2019
43
43

11/5/2019 12/18/2019
43
43

11/7/2019 12/5/2019
28
28

11/7/2019 1/1/2020
55
55

11/12/2019 11/18/2019
6
6

11/19/2019 11/19/2019
0
0

11/19/2019 12/17/2019
28
28

11/19/2019 11/19/2019
0
0

11/18/2019 1/20/2020
63
63

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 57

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?
Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 620 of 985 - Page ID#: 4208
Audicus test completed on 10/28/2019, Sent DR. Kemen ECW message on 11/16/2019 for follow up, Dr. Kemen approved hearing aid on 11/19/2019, Hearing aid given to patient on 12/18/2019
H-S-A to go through each encounter on APRN schedule and email appropraite parties involved in order placement.

Patient moved to EKCC on 11/27/2019,
Patient transferred

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 58

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 621 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4209

Date:

^

^

^

^

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

11/20/2019 11/22/2019 11/22/2019 11/25/2019 11/27/2019

12/3/2019

12/5/2019

12/6/2019

12/9/2019 12/10/2019 12/10/2019

12/11/2019

Follow Up

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Follow Up

Annual H&P Annual H&P Follow Up

11/20/2019 11/22/2019 11/22/2019 11/25/2019 11/27/2019

12/3/2019

12/5/2019

Follow Up

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P

12/6/2019

12/9/2019 12/10/2019 12/10/2019

12/11/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for schedule for audiogram audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

c, Hearing aid for R

ear ordered on

11/20/2019 by

APRN, Dr. Kemen

has not approved

as of 11/22/2019

@ 0643, sent Dr.

Kemen a message

in ECW on

11/27/2019, he

responded on

12/2/2019 stating

Renee ordered on d, Needs

11/25/2019,

Audicus testing,

Hearing aid given refused Audicus d, patient

to patient on

testing on

refused on

12/18/2019

11/25/2019 11/22/2019

d, patient refused on 11/25/2019

d, patient met with APRN on 12/9/2019 where Audicus was reviewed, patient does not meet criteria for hearing aid at this time.

b, R hearing aid

d, Audicus completed on

approved

11/22/2019, APRN

1/23/2019 at b, Audicus

ordered hearing aid for

b, Audicus completed on

LSCC. No

completed on the R ear on 12/6/2019, at

12/16/2019. Results not

further

12/10/2019, this time Dr. Kemen has

available at this time. Will

documentation. APRN ordered not approved the order.

be scheduled to see an

Audicus

hearing aid for R Dr. Kemen noted that b, Audicus

outside ENT related to

completed on ear on

patient does not meet completed on

hearing loss as Audicus

12/10/2019, 1/3/2020, Dr. criteria for hearing aid and 12/10/2019,

test are not resulting. ENT

APRN stated on Kemen also that the APRN may order APRN approved

appointment scheduled for

1/3/2020 that approved order pocket talker at

L hearing aid on d, patient

d, patient

2/17/2020, Audicus review

patient does on 1/3/2020, R discretion, pocket talker 1/7/2020.Patien signed refusal signed refusal on 2/25/2020, Dr. Kemen

not meet

hearing aid given to patient on week t had R hearing for hearing test for hearing test approved on 2/25/2020 for

criteria for a delivered on of 12/16/2019, Received aid delivered on and hearing aids and hearing aids L ear. Left hearing aid

hearing aid. 1/21/2020

on 1/21/2020

1/29/2020. on 12/16/2019 on 12/16/2019 delivered on 3/18/2020

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 59

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 622 of 985 - Page ID#: 4210

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

11/20/2019 12/18/2019
28
28

11/22/2019 11/25/2019
3
3

11/22/2019 11/22/2019
0
0

11/25/2019 11/25/2019
0
0

11/27/2019 12/9/2019
12
12

12/3/2019 1/3/2020
31
31

12/5/2019 1/21/2020
47
47

12/6/2019 1/21/2020
46
46

12/9/2019 1/29/2020
51
51

12/10/2019 12/16/2019
6
6

12/10/2019 12/16/2019
6
6

12/11/2019 3/18/2020
98
85

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 60

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 623 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4211

Date:

^

^

^

^

^

^

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

12/13/2019

12/13/2019 12/16/2019 12/16/2019 12/18/2019

1/10/2020

Follow Up

Annual H&P

Annual H&P Annual H&P Follow Up

Annual H&P Visit at EKCC

12/13/2019

12/13/2019 12/16/2019 12/16/2019 12/18/2019

1/10/2020

1/8/2020
Ear S/C 1/8/2020

12/12/2019

1/20/2020

Annual H&P

12/12/2019

1/20/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

b, Audicus completed on

1/14/2020, results not valid. Will

b, Audicus completed

b, Audicus

need to be restetsted. APRN

on 12/17/2019, retest b, Audicus completed completed on

assessed patient on 1/29/2020,

for Audicus completed on 12/17/2019, retest 12/18/2019, b, Audicus

b, Audicus

b, Audicus

lots of ear wax in canal at this

on 1/2/2020 as

for Audicus completed APRN ordered L completed on completed on completed on time. Will order medication and

original results did not on 1/2/2020 as

hearing aid on 12/18/2019, 12/23/2019, 1/14/2020, F/U follow up in a week. Seen by

calculate. Will have to original results did not 1/2/2020,

APRN ordered APRN ordered L scheduled with APRN, ordered another hearing

be retested as od calculate. Follow up awaiting Kemen Lhearing aid on hearing aid on APRN on

screen. Scheduled to be seen on b, Audicus follow up on

1/7/2020, as test did with APRN for results approval.

1/2/2020,

1/2/2020,

1/21/2020, Dr. 2/27/2020. Patient followed up 12/12/2020, repeat Audicus

not calculate, F/U on 1/10/2020, APRN Pocket talker awaiting Kemen awaiting Kemen Kemen

with by APRN on 3-12-2020 for completed once ear diagnosis is

with APRN on

ordered L hearing aid given on

approval, Dr. approval, Dr. approved order Audicus and patient had ear flush cured, Repeated on 1/7/2020

b, patient seen APRN on

1/21/2020, R Hearing on 1/10/2020, Dr. 1/2/2020 until Kemen

Kemen

on 1/22/2020 at that time, repeat Audicus to be results not vlaid, repeated on

2/14/2020 for Audicus

aid ordered on

Kemen approved on hearing aid approved on approved on for L hearing performed. APRN ordered hearing 1/14/2020, awaiting follow up with follow up, patient was

1/21/2020, R hearing 1/13/2020, left

arrives.

1/2/2020. Pt 1/2/2020.

aid, Delivered aid on 3/18/2020, approved by Dr. APRN, does not meet hearing aid approved for R Hearing

aid delivered on

hearing aid delivered Received on refused on

Received on left hearing aid Kemen on 3/18/2020, L hearing aid criteria, given pocket talker on aid but refused. Pocket

2/5/2020

on 1/29/2020

1/21/2020

1/21/2020

1/21/2020

on 2/6/2020 delivered on 4/30/2020

1/21/2020

talker issues.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 61

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 624 of 985 - Page ID#: 4212

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

12/13/2019 2/5/2020 54
54

12/13/2019 1/29/2020
47
47

12/16/2019 1/21/2020
36
36

12/16/2019 1/21/2020
36
36

12/18/2019 1/21/2020
34
34

1/10/2020 2/6/2020
27
27

1/8/2020 4/30/2020
113
56

12/12/2019 1/21/2020
40
40

1/20/2020 2/14/2020
25
25

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 62

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 625 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4213

Date:

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Annual H&P

1/22/2020

1/23/2020

1/31/2020

2/6/2020

2/6/2020

2/7/2020

2/11/2020

2/11/2020

2/12/2020

2/17/2020

3/3/2020

3/6/2020

Annual H&P Follow Up

Annual H&P

1/22/2020

1/23/2020

1/31/2020

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P

Annual H&P Annual H&P Follow Up

Follow Up

Annual H&P

2/6/2020

2/6/2020

2/7/2020

2/11/2020

2/11/2020

2/12/2020

2/17/2020

3/3/2020

3/6/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for schedule for audiogram audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

Patient failed whisper test and

Audicus

hearing screening on 1/22/2020.

completed on

Patient to be scheduled for

2/10/2020,

Audicus, follow up with APRN on

awaiting results

Audicus completed

2/17/2020, patient has failed 3

Audicus completed on at this time.

on 2/19/2020, results

Audicus hearing screens, will get

2/12/2020, awaiting

Results are back

inconsistent. Repeat

with Medical Director on next

results at this time.

as of 2/26/2020, Audicus

Audicus shceduled for

steps. Patient has pending outside Patient failed

Patient scheduled to be sent to

completed on 2/26/2020. Scheudled

appointemt with ENT in March. whisper test

retested on 2/27/2020 as scheduler.

2/11/2020, follow up for

Audicus

Patient was given a pocket talker and hearing Left hearing aid first test was not

Pocket talker scheduled to 2/28/2020. Patient

completed on

on 4/10/2020 since outside

screening on ordered on consistent. Reviewed on given on

see APRN on reviewed hearing

2/19/2020,

appointment is being delayed due 1/23/2020. 2/13/2020 by 3/3/2020 L hearing aid 2/28/2020, 2/21/2020, L Audicus results on 3-6- Audicus

Audicus follow

to COVID-19. As of 5/7/2020,

Patient to be the APRN,

ordered, Dr. Kemen has patient gets hearing aid 2020, APRN

completed on up on

awaiting outside facility to resume scheduled for approved by Dr. not approved at this

released in 32 ordered by Dr. requested L hearing 2/19/2020,

2/25/2020,

seeing patients due to COVID-19. Audicus. Met Kemen on

time. Hearing aid was days and

Kemen on

aid and Dr. Kemen Audicus follow patient does

Patient is to be seen offiste at the with APRN on 2/13/2020. ordered by Regional on wanted a

2/24/2020. approved on 3-6- up on

not meet

end of July. Refused offsite for 2/5/2020, does Hearing aid 3/10/2020 per Office pocket talker Hearing aid 2020. Left hearing aid 2/25/2020, criteria for

Audiology after APRN education not meet

delivered on 3-9- Manager. Left hearing aid instead of a delivered on 3-6- delivered on

patient refused hearing aid at

on 6/16/2020.

criteria.

2020

delivered on 3/18/2020 hearing aid. 2020

3/18/2020

hearing aid. this time.

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

Patient needs whipser test performed

Audicus completed on 2/19/2020, Audicus follow up on 2/25/2020, patient does not meet criteria for hearing aid at this time. Patient offered pocket talker, issued on 2/25/2020.

Patient has hearing

aid at this time,

referral to outside

audiologist as the

cochlear impalnt is

broken and parts

have been

discontinued. As of

5/7/2020 awaiting

for offsite facility

to resume patient

contact due to

COVID-19.

Awaiting offsite

facility to get the

part shipped in

that is needed,

appointment

cannot be made Patient passed

until part has

whisper test on

arrived on site. 3-11-2020.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 63

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 626 of 985 - Page ID#: 4214

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

1/22/2020 6/16/2020
146
42

1/23/2020 2/5/2020
13
13

1/31/2020 3/9/2020
38
20

2/6/2020 3/18/2020
41
27

2/6/2020 2/28/2020
22
22

2/7/2020 3/6/2020
28
26

2/11/2020 3/18/2020
36
22

2/11/2020 2/25/2020
14
14

2/12/2020 2/19/2020
7
7

2/17/2020 2/25/2020
8
8

3/3/2020 -43893 -43893

3/6/2020 3/11/2020
5
5

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 64

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 627 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4215

Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

3/6/2020

3/18/2020

4/1/2020

4/2/2020

4/6/2020

4/10/2020

4/28/2020

4/28/2020

4/30/2020

5/4/2020

5/13/2020

5/14/2020

5/19/2020

Sick Call

Annual H&P

Sick Call

Sick Call

Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P

Annual H&P Theft Report Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P Annual H&P

3/6/2020

3/18/2020

4/1/2020

4/2/2020

4/6/2020

4/10/2020

4/28/2020

4/28/2020

4/30/2020

5/4/2020

5/13/2020

5/14/2020

5/19/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

schedule for

schedule for

schedule for

schedule for

schedule for Needs whisper schedule for

audiogram

audiogram

audiogram Vaughn to

audiogram

audiogram

test

audiogram

complete Audicus

exam on 4/1/2020.

4/1/2020 results

are not sufficient.

Retest needs to be

completed. Vaughn

completed repeat

Vaughn to

on 4/7/2020. To Vaughn to complete complete

see APRN on

Audicus exam on Audicus exam

Patient failed

4/13/2020 as

4/6/2020. APRN on 4/7/2020. Patient has whisper test on

results are not back follow up scheduled Follow up with audicus

4/28/2020 and had

Patient failed

as of 4/10/2020. on 4/13/2020. Left APRN scheduled completed. Audicus completed

Patient has Audicus whipser test on Patient has broken hearing aid order for 4/13/2020. Patient meets on 4/28/2020,

completed on 3-6- 3/18/2020, will

R hearing aid, after palced on

Patient refused criteria for Left resulted in need of

2020, patient was need an Audicus Audicus review 4/13/2020 by APRN. hearing aid on hearing aid. another Audicus.

reviewed with the completed. APRN patient only

Dr. Kemen

4/14/2020. Ordered by the 2nd Audicus

APRN on 3-11-2020 ordered L hearing qualifies for L

approved on

Refusal signed. APRN on

performed with

and a hearing aid aid on 3/31/2020, hearing aid at this 4/13/2020. Left Hearing aid 4/20/2020, Dr, recommendation

was ordered for the Dr. Kemen

time. APRN advised hearing aid

delivered on Kemen also for a 3rd test. 3rd

left ear. Dr. Kemen approved on

patient that he only delivered on

8/13/2020 as approved on test to be

has not approgved 3/31/2020 for left meets criteria for L 5/13/2020. Lost patient changed 4/20/2020. Left completed on

at this time. Hearing ear. Left hearing aid hearing aid at this hearing aid, new his mind from hearing aid 5/7/2020. Refused

aid for L ear given delivered on

time and has

one delivered on April when he delivered on hearing aid on

on 4/1/2020.

4/30/2020.

refused pocket 7/17/2020.

initially refused. 5/13/2020. 5/15/2020.

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

Needs

Audiogram,

APRN follow up APRN ordered R

on 5-6-2020 hearing aid on

patient does 5/13/2020

not need

awaiting Dr. Needs

hearing aid and Kemen to

Audiogram,

was offered approve at this signed refusal

pocket talker. time. R hearing for pocket

Patient refused aid given to talker and

pokcet talker at patient on

hearing aid on

this time.

6/8/2020.

5/15/2020

schedule for audiogram
Hearing aid ordered on 5/28/2020. Received R hearing aid on 6/30/2020.

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

Test results not conclusive, repeat test needed. Will R hearing aid have retest ordered on Audicus this 5/29/2020. week. Pocket Hearing aid talker given on delivered on 6/11/2020. 7/17/2020.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 65

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 628 of 985 - Page ID#: 4216

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

3/6/2020 4/1/2020
26
26

3/18/2020 4/30/2020
43
43

4/1/2020 4/13/2020
12
12

4/2/2020 5/13/2020
41
41

4/6/2020 4/14/2020
8
8

4/10/2020 5/13/2020
33
33

4/28/2020 5/15/2020
17
17

4/28/2020 5/6/2020
8
8

4/30/2020 6/8/2020
39
39

5/4/2020 5/15/2020
11
11

5/13/2020 6/30/2020
48
48

5/14/2020 6/11/2020
28
28

5/19/2020 7/17/2020
59
59

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 66

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 629 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4217

Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5/19/2020

5/19/2020

5/28/2020

6/16/2020

6/16/2020

6/23/2020

6/26/2020

7/6/2020

7/10/2020

7/6/2020

7/13/2020

7/13/2020

7/17/2020

Follow Up

Annual H&P Annual H&P

5/19/2020

5/19/2020 Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Annual H&P Nurse F/U

Annual H&P Annual H&P

Follow Up

Sick Call

Annual H&P Annual H&P

6/16/2020

6/16/2020

6/23/2020

6/26/2020

7/6/2020

7/10/2020

7/6/2020

7/13/2020

7/13/2020

7/17/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

Order hearing schedule for

schedule for audiogram aide

audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

Needs Audiogram,

Audicus completed

on 6/18/2020.

Follow up with

APRN scheduled for States he lost

6/30/2020. APRN hearing aid…per Dr. Needs Audicus, Audicus

ordered pocket Fortwengler…retest has failed 2 completed on

talker on

. Patient had

Audicus, APRN 6/26/2020,

6/30/2020, but Audicus completed referred to ENT APRN review

Medical Director on 6/21/2020,

for hearing loss. scheudled for

wants Weber test which stated the Awaiting

6/30/2020,

completed. Weber test needed to be appointment approval for R

Patient refused

Left hearing aid test scheduled for repeated due to date at this hearing aid.

pocket talker R hearing aid ordered by

7/1/2020. Left

inconsistencies. time. Outside Hearing aid

and hearing aid ordered on APRN on

hearing aid ordered Patient refused to appointment ordered on

on 6/2/2020. 5/29/2020 by 6/12/2020. on 7/1/2020.

repeat the test on scheduld for 7/1/2020.

Pocket talker APRN. Hearing Hearing aid Hearing aid

6/29/2020, refusal July. COVID Hearing aid

given on

aid delivered on delivered on delivered on

signed, Pocket

Reschedule for delivered on

7/31/2020. 7/17/2020. 7/17/2020. 7/24/2020.

talker issued.

10/08/2020. 7/24/2020.

Needs Audicus.

Scheduled to be

completed on

Patient refused Needs Audicus.

7/14/2020. Needs

hearing aid in Scheduled to be Needs Audicus.

Needs Audicus, repeat Audicus as of Fenruary but completed on Scheduled to be

Audicus

7/27/2020. On

opted for a 7/14/2020. completed on

completed on 8/6/2020, APRN

pocket talker. APRN ordered 7/14/2020. Will

7/9/2020.

reviewed Audicus

Now patient is hearing aid on be referred to

Needs repeat results and it

wanting a

7/24/2020, was ENT as of

Audicus as of reccomends a 3rd

hearing aid. Dr. not sent to 7/24/2020.

7/27/2020. retest. 3rd test

Kemen has

Kemen. H.S.A Seen

Repeat Audicus completed on

approved

sent to Kemen 9/14/2020: tube

was 3rd test, 8/10/2020. Patient to hearing aid at on 7/27/2020. placed on theat

referral to ENT be seen by APRN on this time for R Dr. Kemen

ate; no further

placed. ENT saw 8/20/2020, APRN

ear, ordered on approved order hearing test

on 9/16/2020. requested hearing aid 7/7/2020.R on 7/28/2020. required.

Needs Audicus.

No hearing aid for left ear on

hearing aid Right hearing Hearing well Patient refused

recommended 8/20/2020. LEFT hearing delivered on aid delivered on since placement Audicus testing

at this time. aid issued 9/28/2020. 7/29/2020. 8/13/2020. of tube.

on 7/24/2020.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 67

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 630 of 985 - Page ID#: 4218

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description

Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description

Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

5/19/2020 6/2/2020
14
14

5/19/2020 7/17/2020
59
59

5/28/2020 7/17/2020
50
50

6/16/2020 7/24/2020
38
38

6/16/2020 6/29/2020
13
13

6/23/2020 -44005 -44005

6/26/2020 7/24/2020
28
28

7/6/2020 9/16/2020
70
70

7/10/2020 9/28/2020
78
78

7/6/2020 7/29/2020
23
23

7/13/2020 8/13/2020
31
31

7/13/2020 9/14/2020
61
61

7/17/2020 7/24/2020
7
7

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 68

Prison: Luther Luckett

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 631 of 985 - Page

Name of person filling out form: Cody Pittman, RN, HSA

ID#: 4219

Date:

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Annual H&P

7/24/2020

7/29/2020

8/3/2020

8/11/2020

8/11/2020

8/11/2020

8/11/2020

8/21/2020

8/31/2020

9/3/2020

9/3/2020

9/16/2020

9/17/2020

Annual H&P Annual H&P

Sick Call

Review of chart Review of chart Review of chart Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Lost Hears to

You Aid

CC Visit

Annual H&P Annual H&P

7/24/2020

7/29/2020

8/3/2020

8/11/2020

8/11/2020

8/11/2020

8/11/2020

8/21/2020

8/31/2020

9/3/2020

9/3/2020

9/16/2020

9/17/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening Yellow means they do not qualify for a hearing aid Blue means they have a hearing aid Green waiting for a hearing aid Purple has a pocket talker Orange needs to be audicus tested Pink, Waiting OSMT

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for audiogram

schedule for

Needs Audicus, Audicus

audiogram, Failed

compelted on 7/31/2020.

whisper test on

Results were received on

schedule for

8/11/2020. Patient

8/6/2020, patient needs a

audiogram, Audicus to see APRN on

repeat Audicus due to "non

completed on

8/18/2020 for result

cooperation" of the patient

8/7/2020. Emailed review. Patient has schedule for

as docuemnted by Audicus

Audicus for results repeat Audicus test audiogram,

audiologist. 3rd test

on 8/12/2020 as we on 8/18/2020, APRN Failed whisper

completed on 8/10/2020,

have not received. to review on

test on

advises that facility needs Needs Audicus. Received results 8/20/2020. Patient 8/11/2020.

to dtermine how to

Refused

from Audicus on needs repeat

Audicus

proceed based on possible Audicus testing. 8/13/2020. Dr.

Audicus per APRN completed on

non cooperation. Per APRN, Signed refusal, Kemen ordered

from 8/20/2020. Per 8/11/2020,

patient will be tested a 4th patient stated hearing aid on

APRN review on adivsed to

time through Audicus.

he does not 8/14/2020. Left

8/28/2020, patient retest. Signed

Signed a refusal on

want a hearing hearing aid received does not qualify for refusal on

8/17/2020.

aid.

on 9/3/2020.

hearing aid.

8/13/2020

schedule for

schedule for audiogram,

audiogram, Failed whisper schedule for

Failed whisper test on

audiogram,

test on

8/11/2020. failed whisper

8/11/2020. Audicus

test on

Audicus

completed on 8/21/2020,

completed on 8/11/2020, Audicus

8/11/2020, advises to

completed on

adivsed to

retest. Patient 8/23/2020. R

retest. Patient to see APRN on hearing aid

to see APRN on 8/18/2020 for ordered on

8/18/2020 for review of

8/31/2020 by

results review. results. Refused APRN. Issued

Refusal signed offsite ENT on RIGHT hearing

on 8/18/2020. 8/18/2020, iad 9/24/2020.

Failed whisper

test on

9/3/2020.

Audicus

Schedule for completed on

Audicus.

9/8/2020.

Audicus

Followed up

completed on with APRN on

9/4/2020,

9/15/2020,

Failed whisper review with needs repeat

test on

APRN next step. Audicus test

8/31/2020, Followed up completed. Failed whisper

needs Audicus. with APRN on Scheduled for test on

Patient refused 9/15/2020, 9/17/2020. 9/16/2020.

further Audicus does not meet Scheduled to be Audicus test

testing on

criteria for

seen by APRN scheduled for

9/10/2020. hearing aid. on 9/18/2020. 9/18/2020.

Schedule for Audicus on 9/18/2020

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 69

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name Prisoner Number Medical Visit 2 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 632 of 985 - Page ID#: 4220

Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

7/24/2020 8/17/2020
24
24

7/29/2020 7/29/2020
0
0

8/3/2020 9/3/2020
30
30

8/11/2020 8/28/2020
17
17

8/11/2020 8/13/2020
2
2

8/11/2020 8/18/2020
7
7

8/11/2020 8/18/2020
7
7

8/21/2020 9/24/2020
-44064
-44064

8/31/2020 9/10/2020
-44074
-44074

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 70

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 633 of 985 - Page ID#: 4221

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

A ADA coordinator

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Sherri Grissinger

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

2 coordinator appointed?

No

X

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Yes

X

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates?

Yes

X

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates in a 5 timely and appropriate manner? How?

In person meetings; Memorandums in living

units,

X

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? (THIS 6 REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)
Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit 7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held? 8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?
9 Describe training Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately cover
10 information? 11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training) 12 Adequate w/r/t state law?
13 Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's powerpoint) Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with settlement
14 agreement? Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly
15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?
16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list? Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in
17 implementing the settlement? 18 Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf inmates?
Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on deaf 19 inmates?
Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the inmates in 20 those situations?
Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective way with the 21 monitor?
Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the monitor 22 when necessary? B Reporting obligations
If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was monitor 1 notified?
Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH 2 inmates? 3 Is the list complete? 4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

Describe method used to ascertain: Semi

X

annual surveys sent to all HoH/Deaf inmates.

yes living unit bulletin boards yes online training through KYDOC for ADA Coordinators;ADAbasic.org;

X X NA

x

x x

x

x

x

x

x x x

x

x

x

no change

x

x

x x

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 71

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 634 of 985 - Page ID#: 4222

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs, 6 activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe) 7 Was it reported to the monitor? 8 Was the report complete? 9 Was the report timely? 10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert? 11 If yes, was the monitor notified?
Did the institution consult with the monitor about the non12 auditory alert? 13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated? C Intake/Orientation - Corrections
1 Hard of hearing inmates
2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving? Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic
3 notifications.)
4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe) Deaf inmates
5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?
6 Describe
7 Effective communications planning? 8 Effective communication provided? 9 Describe 10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed? 11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?
Orientation videos 12 Captioned? 13 Shown in a quiet space? 14 Amplification if needed?
Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate? 15 (Describe) D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services
Effective Communication during general medical intake, and during medical care more generally: 1 Is there effective communications planning? Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if 2 interpretation is needed? 3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office? Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications 4 techniques? Notice to medical staff: 5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How? Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover and 6 within the file?

No

NA

x

X

x

NA

x

x

x

ADA automatic transfer alerts emailed to Coordinators;

NA x

NA

any inmate received is reviewed by Medical

prior to the transfer and instiution receiving

provides accommodations as necessar such

x

as VRI, Inperson Interpreter.

NA

Yes

x

ADA automatic tranfer alerts emailed to

Coordinator.

NA

Medical has VRI avialble and a portable VRI

laptop available for Admissions area.

X

yes

x

NA

x

x

NA

yes

x

yes

x

yes,

x

yes, orientation information will be read to

inmate and VRI or translator utilized.

x

NA

yes, VRI located in Medical intake area,

x

yes, also ask about functioning of hearing aid

or othe raccommodation

x

yes

x

yes. yes. ADA markeriin KOMS and ECW

x
NA x

yes

x

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 72

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 635 of 985 - Page ID#: 4223

# Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

7 Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate accommodations. Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site providers of
8 need for interpretation?
9 Procedure in place to ensure notification? 10 Has there ever been a notification to provider? 11 Adequate notice?
Outside providers offering effective communication to inmates 12 who sign?
13 How? Hearing screening/medical intake:
14 Performed for all new inmates? 15 Within first 3 days at institution? 16 Approved screening form? (need to review) 17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid? 18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?
How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by 19 staff? 20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical) 21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?
22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe. 23 Medical history includes hearing questions?
Other methods of access: 24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening? 25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening? 26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?
If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there 27 further assessment?
Adequate determination of need for designation/ audiology 28 services? How? 29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?
Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or HOH, 30 apart from audiology services decision?
After assessment, does medical: 31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert? 32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file? 33 Notify ADA coordinator? 34 Is notification prompt?

NA

yes.

x

yes. When appointment is made, staff chart

of accommodation request.

x

NA

x

x

Describe: in person and video relay interpretation at hospitals and dr. office, amplification units for inmate if without hearing aid.
yes yes yes yes yes

NA NA
x x x x x

yes Describe: the questions are verbal with health providers documenting answers. yes
yes yes yes

NA NA
x
x
x NA
x x x

yes

x

yes, screening, whisper test, audicus testing,

further screenings at ENT if necessary

x

yes

x

yes

x

NA

yes

x

yes

x

yes

x

yes

x

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist) 35 Audiology services offered when needed? 36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles) 37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid? 38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services 39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

NA

yes

x

yes

x

yes

x

yes

x

yes

x

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 73

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 636 of 985 - Page ID#: 4224

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

NA

40 initial request/questionnaire?

yes

x

41 each relevant medical visit?

yes

x

42 any audiology visit?

yes

x

43 hearing aid provision?

yes

x

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks?

yes

x

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

yes

x

46 Shared with monitor when requested

yes

x

Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it

no off site trips are necessary under the

47 take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Describe.

audicus provision.

NA

In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait more

48 than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?

13 NA

Health conditions related to and unrelated

What is the cause of the delay?

ears, COVID reschedules; awaiting parts for aged cochlear implant - COVID has

49

hampered parts construction/delivery.

NA

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) to 50 improve this process?

closer tracking of individuals who are over the 30 day mark on audicus product return. Continue to reschedule ENT appointments; NA

Co-pay and availability issues:

NA

47 Charged only once -- not again for followups

yes

x

Hearing aid batteries

NA

48 Available for free?

yes

x

49 In sufficient numbers?

yes

x

50 7 days/week?

yes, through sick call process

x

51 regardless of housing?

yes

x

E Information provided inmates

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe)

Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-discrimination and

2 ADA services?

yes

x

Brochure? Items to include:

NA

3 Non-discrimination obligation

yes

x

4 Effective communication obligation

yes

x

5 Auxiliary aids and services available

yes

x

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services (including

6 hearing aids, and batteries)

yes

x

7 Communication equipment available, and how to use

yes

x

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

yes

x

Other items:

NA

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

yes. Contract with outside vendor to provide

inperson

x

10 Request for Accommodations/ Communications Assistance

yes

x

11 Medical Request form includes request for accommodations

yes

x

12 Job application form includes request for accommodations

yes

x

13 Waiver forms

yes

x

14 Classification form includes request for accommodations

no. staff ask and note on form

15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations

no staff ask and note on form

SAP and other programming form includes request for 16 accommodation

yes

x

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 74

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 637 of 985 - Page ID#: 4225

# Issue/Question 17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

yes

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in 18 law library? (Need to check)
Do request forms: 19 list available services comprehensively?
clearly explain services and aids (what they are and when 20 they are available? 21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?
expressly ask about preferred mode of 22 communication/needed services and why they are useful? 23 explain which items are free? 24 encompass religious and volunteer-provided programming?
Effective communication of these resources: 25 Are the materials in language accessible to each inmate? 26 Is this information provided with effective communication?
Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity to meet with a KDOC staff member and interpreter to ask 27 questions about the materials? Effective communication re. programming When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application for a program with staff, is effective communication 28 provided? 29 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion? Effective communication re. programming

yes and copy is now avialable in inamte library yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
yes
yes yes,

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

x x NA x x x x x x NA x x
x
NA
x

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application 30 in education with staff, is effective communication provided? 31 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion? F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates
1 Notice posted at entrance to institution? 2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?
3 Notice posted outside housing units? 4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator? 5 Cell/bed cards 6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert? 7 Clear process to obtain? Describe 8 Each inmate has one if not waived? 9 Provided timely? 10 Replacements provided when needed?
KOMS alert? 11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

yes yes
yes yes yes, on living unit bulletin boards and on entry to yard yes
yes yes, write to ADA Coordinator yes, write has A Coordinaifr yes yes
yes

x
x
x x
x
x NA
x x x x x NA x

12 Working process to get new inmate alerts added? (Describe) 13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

After assessment conducted, ADA

Coordinator adds to inmate precaution

indicting an HOH status and providing details

in the notes section of the precaution. Latest

Demographics section is also updated to

include the HOH status and details

yes

x

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 75

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 638 of 985 - Page ID#: 4226

# Issue/Question 14 Appropriately obvious 15 Updated timely Individual ID cards 16 Staff aware of meaning? 17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?) 18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived? 19 Provided timely? 20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times? 21 Prompt replacements provided?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

yes

yes

yes yes yes yes yes yes when notified of the need

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?
23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator? 24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver? 25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file? 26 Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested ID? 27 If yes, was an ID provided? G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment
Identification to ADA Coordinator Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon 1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate? Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other 2 deaf/hoh inmates? Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified 3 deaf/hoh inmate? At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of 4 communication expressly ascertained and documented? At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate 5 about available auxiliary aids and services? 6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained? Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral 7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions ) Other assessments For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on 8 intake, has one been done? 9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year? H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided 1 On-person ID cards 2 Cell cards 3 Bed shaker 4 In-person alerts 5 Pager Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where 6 phones are available?) 7 Amplifier for phone

no
no official indicator for HOH yes yes yes
yes, email yes, email
yes yes yes yes yes
yes yes yes yes yes yes no yes yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

x x NA x x x x x x

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

x

x
NA x x x
NA x

x
x
x x x NA x x
x x x x x x x

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 76

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 639 of 985 - Page ID#: 4227

# Issue/Question Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize
8 communication difficulties? 9 Other amplification 10 Other (describe)
General issues Special housing area: Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH inmates? 11 (Describe) 12 If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? (Describe) If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed 13 there? (such a requirement is non-compliant). If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to the 14 inmate? Describe any restrictions. In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is primary 15 consideration given to inmate request?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

no, unless requested by inmate or staff for

specific reason

Describe:

no no benefit no
no yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

x
x NA NA NA
NA NA
x

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

x

x

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or 16 not requesting aids/services, were accommodations provided? Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services documented in 17 inmate institutional files? Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services shared 18 appropriately with staff? 19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained? 20 Have any been out of comission?
21 Describe -- which and for how long? Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from
22 hearing aid? 23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided? 24 Promptly? 25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

x

no

yes

x

yes

x

purple communications in 2019

NA

random outages. Since early 2020, Purple

has seen no outages lasting longer than 5

mins.

NA

yes yes none

x x NA

26 Describe Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of
27 impairment and specific dangers posed) 28 Appropriately reported to monitor?
30 Are classes in sign language provided? 31 deaf inmates given notice? 32 priority given to deaf inmates?

threat to inmate safety through tasks of job. NA
yes yes Learn ASL DVDs shown via inmate news channel after news. New class each week. Learn ASL books provided in the inmate library all inmates have the opportunity to attend via instiutional news channel all inmates have the opportunity to attend via instiutional news channel

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 77

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 640 of 985 - Page ID#: 4228

# Issue/Question I Interpretation in general
Qualified interpretation services available: Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation 1 communicated to inmates? covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate? (not limited to only certain 2 encounters/communications/settings) Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other 3 volunteer-provided programming? Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation 4 method? 5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences? Standing arrangement with providers? 6 In-person? 7 VRI? Is VRI availability: 8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

yes
yes yes
yes yes- ASL Interpreting Services Purple Communications yes

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

yes

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

10 notice)?

yes

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA x

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

x

x

x NA
NA x x x x

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe VRI laptop functional?
13 In general 14 Always checked for sufficient battery power? 15 Routine software updates?
VRI laptop has necessary items with it?
16 Splitter? 17 Instructions? 18 Long power cord? 19 Usable as VRS? 20 VRI effectiveness tracked?
21 How? Information used to determine when in-person interpretation
22 should be first recourse? Is in-person interpretation available:
23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical 24 Parole?
25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered
26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

Describe: yes, Inmates housed in RHU that

require the VRI are taken to a holding cage

x

where the VRI is set up for them to effective

communicate with staff and to make calls.

NA

yes

x

yes, powercord available in VRI bag also

x

yes

x

Describe:

NA

splitter is not necessary with the VIOP phone

service.

x

yes

x

yes

x

yes

x

yes

x

Inmate is requested to complete a form after

use.

x

yes

x

yes

x

yes

x

In person interpretation has never been

requested at LLCC.

x

In person interpretation has never been

requested at LLCC.

x

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 78

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 641 of 985 - Page ID#: 4229

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

27 before?

Yes.

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

no

29 Describe

n/a

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

30 was unavailable)

never

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

31 method?

yes

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

yes

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

33 literacy

yes, can utilize picture cards if necessary

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

34 volunteer-provided programming?

yes

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

35 encounters/communications/settings)

yes

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

yes

J Hand Restraints

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

only during transport

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

2 finding of a security threat?

yes

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

yes

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

yes

5 Staff aware of the issue

yes

Off-site medical care:

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

yes

restraints removed when necessary for medical

yes restraints are modified to provide for

7 communication?

medical communication

K Non-auditory Alerts

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Describe: in Person alerts used

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

yes

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

yes

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

yes

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them? Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts
9 been denied? 10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?
11 How often? 12 monitored/recorded formally? 13 Announcement boards 14 used to notify of schedule changes?

yes
no
Describe: daily through bulletin boards, In person alerts yes, staff alert yes, yes, staff alert of schedule changes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
x

NA x
x x
NA x
x
x
NA
x
x x x NA x x
NA x x x x x x x
x
x x NA x

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 79

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 642 of 985 - Page ID#: 4230

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

15 used consistently?

yes, staff alert

x

16 in all dormitories?

yes, staff alert

x

17 in gym?

yes, staff alert

x

18 in library?

yes, staff alert

x

19 audited and monitored?

yes, staff alert

x

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate 20 misses a page?

yes, staff alert, or alert completed by HoH

aide

x

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

Unsure, staff and Hoh Aide alert when

21 because of disability?

missed announcements

NA

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

continue staff alert and HoH Aide alert to

any missed announcement/alarms/info

x

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

yes, staff alert inmates in emergencies

x

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

yes, staff alert in deaf or HOH inmates in

emergency

x

yes, directives will be provided via hand and

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

board signals. Information will be written

x

25 provided?

when necessary.

L Telecommunications

Videophones:

NA

1 Installed?

yes

x

2 Allow voice carry-over features?

yes

x

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

hasn't occurred longer than 5 mins in 2020. NA

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

system just required a reboot

NA

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Yes, VRS available. In person interpreter can

5 alternative offered

also be used.

Describe: inmates are notified in writing and

an alert provided by the HoH aides. Laptop

VRI /VRS can be utilized until the main VRS is

back in service through stff making

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

appointments and setting up the system in

6 videophone is out of service.

the living area.

NA

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

yes,

x

8 Appropriate location?

yes, living unit floor office

x

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends, 9 emergency) if necessary?

yes, staff escort after hours weekends

emergency if necessary

x

10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates?

yes, 30 mins

x

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

yes,

x

yes, alert living unit staff of intent to use and

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

when completed the intent to return to

x

12 using ordinary phones?

living unit if after hours.

13 Advance request unnecessary?

no, just alert staff of intent if moving from

one unit to 7D - location of VRS

x

14 Free?

yes,

x

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone 15 calls?

yes,

x

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

no

NA

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial. 17

x n/a. no denial of VRS.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 80

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 643 of 985 - Page ID#: 4231

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

# Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

TTY:

NA

18 Installed?

yes,

x

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

yes,

x

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made 20 available WITH TTY?

yes,

x

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

none

NA

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

yes,

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones 23 for non-deaf inmates?

yes, VRS, TTY and CapTel located together in

living unit 7D.

x

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

yes,

25 Permission needed?

no just to alert the staff of movement if after

hours or yard closure occurs.

x

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

no

NA

27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates?

yes,

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

yes, if necessary

Describe: yes. I contacted inmate's family

with him prior to him using the Captel call

29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

family.

30 Can access publicly available relay service phone numbers?

yes,

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions for

31 videophones and TTY is less than equitable?

no

NA

32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

n/a

x

If yes, was determination (including reasoning, evidence, etc.)

33 documented?

n/a

x

34 Was monitor notified?

n/a

x

35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

n/a

x

VRS via laptop

NA

36 Available?

yes

x

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

yes and in RHU

x

38 Used when appropriate?

yes

x

Phones

yes, staff alert in

NA

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

yes,

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them? CapTel
41 If so, installed and working? 42 Appropriate for any particular inmate? 43 Request by any inmate denied?
TV/Movies 44 Is captioning available? 45 Is captioning used? 46 Is the captioning checked regularly?
47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

yes,check out from living unit control centers

x

NA

yes

NA

and

NA

no requests made

NA

NA

yes

x

yes

x

yes. Captain's Office monitors captioning

x

Captain's Office monitors captioning 24

hours each day as the inmate news chaneel

equipment for broadcasting is locted in the

x

Captain's Office.

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe) 49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning? 50 Amplification method? (Describe)

yes yes Describe: headphones are required with TV

x
x NA

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 81

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 644 of 985 - Page ID#: 4232

# Issue/Question All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe
52 problems) Access to communication services for deaf inmates in segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same
53 status? Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-
54 deaf inmates? M Miscellaneous Devices
1 Devices available? (Describe) 2 devices in commissary list? 3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator? 4 facilitation of purchase?
Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied? 5 (Describe) 6 determined on case-by-case basis? 7 because security threat? 8 monitor notified? 9 reasoning explained?
ADA coordinator maintains records 10 of requests? 11 of denials? N Disciplinary
Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been 1 punished? 2 Was a re-hearing granted? O Grievances

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

yes

yes,

yes,
Describe in detail batteries for HoH watches yes, yes,
Describe yes, case by case basis yes, if necessary yes, yes,
yes, yes,

no. n/a

1 Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA coordinator? If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator
2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator? P Training
Types available 1 CBT? (Using approved training?) 2 Who received? (Describe) 3 All appropriate staff?

yes, yes,
yes, NEO and Annual training for all staff yes,

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
x

NA x x x
NA x x x x
NA x x
x
x
x
x
NA x
NA x

4 Live training? (Information only) 5 Who received? (Describe) 6 All appropriate staff?
Any additional targeted training on specific needs ? Please describe in detail

Describe: reminders regarding Deaf/Hoh

inmates, useage of VRI , VRS, & Captel

through Roll Call to staff via Captain's Office NA

Describe: Security staff

NA

yes

x

no

NA

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 82

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 645 of 985 - Page

Name

ID

Housing location

ID#: 4233 Listed with Signs to communicate Low literacy? Has

Has

If signs to Auxiliary Aid Bed Shaker? (Not

Other Alert Device (e.g.,

KOMS ADA (Y/N)

(So that

Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door communicat Assessment requested; denied; vibrating watch, etc.) (Not

Precaution

written

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or e, noted in meeting granted)

requested; denied; granted)

?

communicatio waived) waived) KOMS

took place?

7 D A 263L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

TTY Access (Not requested; denied; granted)
Not requested

7 C A 154U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D D 114L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E A 154L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E A 155L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D BU 004

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D C 229L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A D 208L 7 A CL 002 7 D D 107U

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851; Travelway

Not requested

vibrating alarm clock

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Requested but denied at Not requested

issuance. Wanted an

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Timex T49851

Not requested Not requested

7 B B 135U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H

Not requested

7 E B 143L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

RHUAA U 102

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 C B 248U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H

Not requested

7 A C 123U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D A 257L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A D 213L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H

Not requested

7 E D 112L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851;

Not requested

7 E C 229L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

SonicBoom SB300ss

Not requested

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 83

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 646 of 985 - Page

Name

ID

ID#: 4234 Captel Acess (Not Personal Phone Amplifier (Not requested; Shake & Wake (Not requested; Special mask?

Clear mask for

requested;

denied; granted)

denied; granted)

staff who deal

denied; granted)

with this

innmate?

Not requested Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There

from living unit Control Center

are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement

is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake ; from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake - Attempted Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There

from living unit Control Center

issuance twice with NO SHOW each are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement

time.

is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake; from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 84

Name

ID

Housing

locCatiaonse:

3:14Li-sctevd w-0ith0S0ig0ns1to-GcomFmVunTica-tEe BLoAw liteDracoy?c

KOMS ADA (Y/N)

(So that

#HDIeaD:as f9#/H9:O-H42I2D 3HBeFa5ds /ilDeoodr :

1If 2sig/n1s 6to/20AuxilPiaray AgideB:e6d S4ha7keor?f(N9ot85
communicat Assessment requested; denied;

-OPthear gAleert Device (e.g.,
vibrating watch, etc.) (Not

TTY Access (Not requested;

Precaution

written

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or e, noted in meeting granted)

requested; denied; granted) denied; granted)

?

communicatio waived) waived) KOMS

took place?

7 C A 155U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

7 E B 140L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H

Not requested

7 C D 108L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Sonic Bomb SB500ss

Not requested

7 E DU 001

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H ; Sonic Alert

Not requested

7 E D 108L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H

Not requested

RHU B U 208 7 D A 163L 7 D C 131L

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H - reported stolen

Not requested

6/24/2020

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851; Sonic Bomb

Not requested

SB300SS

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 B D 105L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H

Not requested

7 B C 230L 7 A B 140U

Yes

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H; Sonic Alert portable Not requested

vibrating alarm clock ; Casio

W735H

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H

Not requested

7 A DL 004

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E B 139L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

7 E A 159U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

7 C A 261L 7 D C 225U 7 A A 164L

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

GRANTED: Shake N Wake; Casio Not requested

W735H

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Sonic Alert portable alarm clock - Not requested

battery operated

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D D 212U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

7 C D 214L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 85

Name

ID

Creaqputeesl tAecde;sCs (aNost ePd:eern3sioe:dn1;alg4rPah-noctneevd)A-m0p0lif0ie0r (1No-tGreqFueVstTed-; EBSdheAankieed&;DgWraoanktceed(#N)IoD:t r9#eq9:u-e4s2t2ed3; F6iSlpeedcia:l m1a2sk/?16/20

Page: 648 of 985 - PagCelear mask for
staff who deal

denied; granted)

with this

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

innmate? Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement

is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake ; from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 86

Name

ID

Housing

locCatiaonse:

3:14Li-sctevd w-0ith0S0ig0ns1to-GcomFmVunTica-tEe BLoAw liteDracoy?c

KOMS ADA (Y/N)

(So that

#HDIeaD:as f9#/H9:O-H42I2D 3HBeFa7ds /ilDeoodr :

1If 2sig/n1s 6to/20AuxilPiaray AgideB:e6d S4ha9keor?f(N9ot85
communicat Assessment requested; denied;

-OPthear gAleert Device (e.g.,
vibrating watch, etc.) (Not

TTY Access (Not requested;

Precaution

written

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or e, noted in meeting granted)

requested; denied; granted) denied; granted)

?

communicatio waived) waived) KOMS

took place?

7 E D 103L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A B 140L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D B 246U 7 A A 161L

Yes

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851; Sonic Bomb

Not requested

SB500ss

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H

Not requested

7 A A 163L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D C 223L 7 E AL 002

Yes

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H; Sonic Portable

Not requested

battery operated

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E C 126L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A C 125U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A A 261L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E A 264L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

7 A D 109U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A B 146L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A B 244L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A A 160U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

; Casio W735H

Not requested

7 D C 220L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A B 143L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A B 139L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A B 135U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851- lost/stolen; Casio Not requested

W735H

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 87

Name

ID

Creaqputeesl tAecde;sCs (aNost ePd:eern3sioe:dn1;alg4rPah-noctneevd)A-m0p0lif0ie0r (1No-tGreqFueVstTed-; EBSdheAankieed&;DgWraoanktceed(#N)IoD:t r9#eq9:u-e4s2t2ed3; F8iSlpeedcia:l m1a2sk/?16/20

Page: 650 of 985 - PagCelear mask for
staff who deal

denied; granted)

with this

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

innmate? Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement

is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake; from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 88

Name

ID

Housing

locCatiaonse:

3:14Li-sctevd w-0ith0S0ig0ns1to-GcomFmVunTica-tEe BLoAw liteDracoy?c

KOMS ADA (Y/N)

(So that

#HDIeaD:as f9#/H9:O-H42I2D 3HBeFa9ds /ilDeoodr :

1If 2sig/n1s 6to/20AuxilPiaray AgideB:e6d S5ha1keor?f(N9ot85
communicat Assessment requested; denied;

-OPthear gAleert Device (e.g.,
vibrating watch, etc.) (Not

TTY Access (Not requested;

Precaution

written

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or e, noted in meeting granted)

requested; denied; granted) denied; granted)

?

communicatio waived) waived) KOMS

took place?

7 B A 262L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E B 144L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

7 E A 257U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E DL 004

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E A 154U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

7 B B 139L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A D 113L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A A 155U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A D 102U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A A 164U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Sonic Super Shaker SB200sb

Not requested

7 D D 204L 7 C B 136U 7 C A 257L

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851; replacement Timex Not requested

T49851;

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T48951; replacement

Not requested

Timex T49851

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A D 108U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H

Not requested

7 A AL 002

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E B 242L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851;

Not requested

RHU B L 106 7 D C 127U

Yes

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Attempted purchase NSF in

Not requested

account ;

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A D 202L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 89

Name

ID

Creaqputeesl tAecde;sCs (aNost ePd:eern3sioe:dn1;alg4rPah-noctneevd)A-m0p0lif0ie0r (1No-tGreqFueVstTed-; EBSdheAankieed&;DgWraoanktceed(#N)IoD:t r9#eq9:u-e4s2t2ed4; F0iSlpeedcia:l m1a2sk/?16/20

Page: 652 of 985 - PagCelear mask for
staff who deal

denied; granted)

with this

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

innmate? Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement

is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 90

Name

ID

Housing

locCatiaonse:

3:14Li-sctevd w-0ith0S0ig0ns1to-GcomFmVunTica-tEe BLoAw liteDracoy?c

KOMS ADA (Y/N)

(So that

#HDIeaD:as f9#/H9:O-H42I2D 4HBeFa1ds /ilDeoodr :

1If 2sig/n1s 6to/20AuxilPiaray AgideB:e6d S5ha3keor?f(N9ot85
communicat Assessment requested; denied;

-OPthear gAleert Device (e.g.,
vibrating watch, etc.) (Not

TTY Access (Not requested;

Precaution

written

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or e, noted in meeting granted)

requested; denied; granted) denied; granted)

?

communicatio waived) waived) KOMS

took place?

7 E D 105U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T 49851

Not requested

RHUAA L 105

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 B C 132U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

RHUAA L 101

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H

Not requested

7 A C 122L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851;

Not requested

7 A AL 004

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A B 137L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D C 123L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E DU 003

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H

Not requested

7 E B 137U 7 A B 136U

Yes

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851; Sonic Bomb

Not requested

SB500ss

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E D 209L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A A 259L 7 E A 256L

Yes

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Sonic Bomb SB500SS- traded in

Not requested

broken Sonic Boom for Sonic

Bomb alarm clock

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

7 C D 109U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A C 130L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A D 107L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E B 244U 7 C A 259U

Yes

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851; Sonic Bomb

Not requested

SB500SS

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 91

Name

ID

Creaqputeesl tAecde;sCs (aNost ePd:eern3sioe:dn1;alg4rPah-noctneevd)A-m0p0lif0ie0r (1No-tGreqFueVstTed-; EBSdheAankieed&;DgWraoanktceed(#N)IoD:t r9#eq9:u-e4s2t2ed4; F2iSlpeedcia:l m1a2sk/?16/20

Page: 654 of 985 - PagCelear mask for
staff who deal

denied; granted)

with this

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

innmate? Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement

is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 92

Name

ID

Housing

locCatiaonse:

3:14Li-sctevd w-0ith0S0ig0ns1to-GcomFmVunTica-tEe BLoAw liteDracoy?c

KOMS ADA (Y/N)

(So that

#HDIeaD:as f9#/H9:O-H42I2D 4HBeFa3ds /ilDeoodr :

1If 2sig/n1s 6to/20AuxilPiaray AgideB:e6d S5ha5keor?f(N9ot85
communicat Assessment requested; denied;

-OPthear gAleert Device (e.g.,
vibrating watch, etc.) (Not

TTY Access (Not requested;

Precaution

written

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or e, noted in meeting granted)

requested; denied; granted) denied; granted)

?

communicatio waived) waived) KOMS

took place?

7 C D 113L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851; TICCI 8 alarm

Not requested

7 A D 109L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A D 104U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E C 132U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 C C 220U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 B DL 004

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E C 131L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 B D 210U 7 C B 244L

Yes

No

Yes

YES

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Sonic Alert portable alarm clock - Not requested

battery operated

N/A

Yes

Yes

YES

Yes

GRANTED

Timex T48951

GRANTED

7 E A 161L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

RHU B U 203

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 B D 208U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D A 160L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A D 111L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 B D 212L 7 D A 164L

Yes

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H; Sonic Bomb

Not requested

SB500ss

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851;

Not requested

RHU ANNEX AL103 7 A B 134L

YES

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Attempted purchase of watch NSF Not requested

in account ;

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

D/A 160L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 93

Name

ID

Creaqputeesl tAecde;sCs (aNost ePd:eern3sioe:dn1;alg4rPah-noctneevd)A-m0p0lif0ie0r (1No-tGreqFueVstTed-; EBSdheAankieed&;DgWraoanktceed(#N)IoD:t r9#eq9:u-e4s2t2ed4; F4iSlpeedcia:l m1a2sk/?16/20

Page: 656 of 985 - PagCelear mask for
staff who deal

denied; granted)

with this

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

innmate? Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement

is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 94

Name

ID

Housing

locCatiaonse:

3:14Li-sctevd w-0ith0S0ig0ns1to-GcomFmVunTica-tEe BLoAw liteDracoy?c

KOMS ADA (Y/N)

(So that

#HDIeaD:as f9#/H9:O-H42I2D 4HBeFa5ds /ilDeoodr :

1If 2sig/n1s 6to/20AuxilPiaray AgideB:e6d S5ha7keor?f(N9ot85
communicat Assessment requested; denied;

-OPthear gAleert Device (e.g.,
vibrating watch, etc.) (Not

TTY Access (Not requested;

Precaution

written

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or e, noted in meeting granted)

requested; denied; granted) denied; granted)

?

communicatio waived) waived) KOMS

took place?

7 E DL 001

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Sonic Alert portable alarm clock - Not requested

battery operated

7 D B 247U

Yes Profoundly hard of

N/A

hearing - reads lips - self

taught

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

requested and approved; Not requested

inmate denied at

equipment issuance.

GRANTED

7 D BL 004

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E A 265L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D A 158L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 B B 142L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Sonic Bomb SB500SS

Not requested

7 D D 210L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

7 A D 105L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A CU 004

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A D 205U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 B D 112L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 B A 152U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H; TICCI Brand

Not requested

7 C D 111U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

7 B A 157U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

TICCI Brand

Not requested

7 D A 254L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 B D 208L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A D 209L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

7 E D 202L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D C 127L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 95

Name

ID

Creaqputeesl tAecde;sCs (aNost ePd:eern3sioe:dn1;alg4rPah-noctneevd)A-m0p0lif0ie0r (1No-tGreqFueVstTed-; EBSdheAankieed&;DgWraoanktceed(#N)IoD:t r9#eq9:u-e4s2t2ed4; F6iSlpeedcia:l m1a2sk/?16/20

Page: 658 of 985 - PagCelear mask for
staff who deal

denied; granted)

with this

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

innmate? Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement

is needed.

GRANTED

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake; from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 96

Name

ID

Housing

locCatiaonse:

3:14Li-sctevd w-0ith0S0ig0ns1to-GcomFmVunTica-tEe BLoAw liteDracoy?c

KOMS ADA (Y/N)

(So that

#HDIeaD:as f9#/H9:O-H42I2D 4HBeFa7ds /ilDeoodr :

1If 2sig/n1s 6to/20AuxilPiaray AgideB:e6d S5ha9keor?f(N9ot85
communicat Assessment requested; denied;

-OPthear gAleert Device (e.g.,
vibrating watch, etc.) (Not

TTY Access (Not requested;

Precaution

written

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or e, noted in meeting granted)

requested; denied; granted) denied; granted)

?

communicatio waived) waived) KOMS

took place?

7 A C 228L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A D 205L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A C 120L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E A 254L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

7 B DU 002

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 C D 213L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 C B 142L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E B 237U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

7 A C 221U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D C 130U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E AL 004

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 C A 256L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H

Not requested

7 A A 163U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E B 139U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

7 D BL 002

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A C 132U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D A 155L 7 B B 245L 7 E DU 004

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851; Sonic Bomb

Not requested

SB500ss

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851- stolen/loss

Not requested

08/06/2019; Timex T49851

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 97

Name

ID

Creaqputeesl tAecde;sCs (aNost ePd:eern3sioe:dn1;alg4rPah-noctneevd)A-m0p0lif0ie0r (1No-tGreqFueVstTed-; EBSdheAankieed&;DgWraoanktceed(#N)IoD:t r9#eq9:u-e4s2t2ed4; F8iSlpeedcia:l m1a2sk/?16/20

Page: 660 of 985 - PagCelear mask for
staff who deal

denied; granted)

with this

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

innmate? Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement

is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 98

Name

ID

Housing

locCatiaonse:

3:14Li-sctevd w-0ith0S0ig0ns1to-GcomFmVunTica-tEe BLoAw liteDracoy?c

KOMS ADA (Y/N)

(So that

#HDIeaD:as f9#/H9:O-H42I2D 4HBeFa9ds /ilDeoodr :

1If 2sig/n1s 6to/20AuxilPiaray AgideB:e6d S6ha1keor?f(N9ot85
communicat Assessment requested; denied;

-OPthear gAleert Device (e.g.,
vibrating watch, etc.) (Not

TTY Access (Not requested;

Precaution

written

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or e, noted in meeting granted)

requested; denied; granted) denied; granted)

?

communicatio waived) waived) KOMS

took place?

7 A DL 003

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851- lost/stolen

Not requested

7 D A 259L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A D 113U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E CL 004

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

RHU B U 205

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 B D 110L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A D 214L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D C 231L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D D 208L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

7 B B 144L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D A 152L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

RHU A L 104

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D C 231U 7 B A 160U

Yes

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Sonic Boom SB300SS; Casio

Not requested

W735H - 2nd to replace one

stolen -loss

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H; Timex T49851

Not requested

RHU B U 204 7 D C 222L

Yes

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

GRANTED:Shake N Wake upon

Not requested

release from RHU

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A B 146U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 B B 245U

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H

Not requested

7 E CU 001

Yes Profoundly hard of

N/A

hearing - reads lips-

taught by school for the

deaf in MO.

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

GRANTED

Timex T49851

GRANTED

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 99

Name

ID

Creaqputeesl tAecde;sCs (aNost ePd:eern3sioe:dn1;alg4rPah-noctneevd)A-m0p0lif0ie0r (1No-tGreqFueVstTed-; EBSdheAankieed&;DgWraoanktceed(#N)IoD:t r9#eq9:u-e4s2t2ed5; F0iSlpeedcia:l m1a2sk/?16/20

Page: 662 of 985 - PagCelear mask for
staff who deal

denied; granted)

with this

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake; from living unit Control Center

innmate? Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement

is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake upon

from living unit Control Center

release from RHU

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake; from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake; from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

GRANTED

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

yes, for Sex Offender Treatment Program
Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 100

Name

ID

Housing

locCatiaonse:

3:14Li-sctevd w-0ith0S0ig0ns1to-GcomFmVunTica-tEe BLoAw liteDracoy?c

KOMS ADA (Y/N)

(So that

#HDIeaD:as f9#/H9:O-H42I2D 5HBeFa1ds /ilDeoodr :

1If 2sig/n1s 6to/20AuxilPiaray AgideB:e6d S6ha3keor?f(N9ot85
communicat Assessment requested; denied;

-OPthear gAleert Device (e.g.,
vibrating watch, etc.) (Not

TTY Access (Not requested;

Precaution

written

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or e, noted in meeting granted)

requested; denied; granted) denied; granted)

?

communicatio waived) waived) KOMS

took place?

7 C D 111L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 E A 153L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

7 E D 211L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 A B 145L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

7 D D 208U RHU B L 110U

Yes

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Sonic Bomb SB500SS; Casio

Not requested

W735H

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

7 B B 239L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

GRANTED: Shake N Wake

Not requested

7 E A 159L 7 A D 102L

Yes

No

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851; Conic Bomb

Not requested

SB500ss; 2nd order of Timex

T49851- reported 2019 loss-stolen

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Casio W735H

Not requested

7 E DL 002

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Timex T49851

Not requested

7 E C 223L

Yes

No

N/A

Yes

Yes

N/A

Yes

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested

MRS //7/10/2020 9/21/2020: transferred to LSCC
Transferred to NTC 9/15/2020
Transferred to LSCC on 9/21/2020; Was RCC HOLD TICKET in RHU when requested. Waiting to roll from RCC to LLCC before issuing.
Discharged from KSR 8/8/2020
Transferred to LAC 2-19-2019
Transferred to LAC 01/22/2020
Transferred to NTC 5/28/2020
Transferred to LAC 01/29/2020
Transferred to LAC 01/29/2020

Timex T 49851
TimexT48951 mailed to LACChristy Hale Timex T 49851
Timex T 49851
Sonic Boom SB300ss
Timex T 49E8x51hibit 2, LLCC, p. 101

Name

ID

Creaqputeesl tAecde;sCs (aNost ePd:eern3sioe:dn1;alg4rPah-noctneevd)A-m0p0lif0ie0r (1No-tGreqFueVstTed-; EBSdheAankieed&;DgWraoanktceed(#N)IoD:t r9#eq9:u-e4s2t2ed5; F2iSlpeedcia:l m1a2sk/?16/20

Page: 664 of 985 - PagCelear mask for
staff who deal

denied; granted)

with this

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

innmate? Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement

is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED:Shake N Wake upon release Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There

from living unit Control Center

from RHU

are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement

is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout GRANTED: Shake N Wake; from living unit Control Center

Not requested

Not available at LLCC; units available for checkout Not requested from living unit Control Center

Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.
Not requested. All inmates were provided tie masks in March 2020. There are over the ear and tie masks available in the Laundry area if replacement is needed.

Granted: Shake N Wake Granted: Shake N Wake;
GRANTED Shake N Wake -issue upon release from RHU GRANTED Shake N Wake -issue upon release from RHU and becoming LLCC inmate.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 102

Name

ID

Housing

locCatiaonse:

3:14Li-sctevd w-0ith0S0ig0ns1to-GcomFmVunTica-tEe BLoAw liteDracoy?c

KOMS ADA (Y/N)

(So that

#HDIeaD:as f9#/H9:O-H42I2D 5HBeFa3ds /ilDeoodr :

1If 2sig/n1s 6to/20AuxilPiaray AgideB:e6d S6ha5keor?f(N9ot85
communicat Assessment requested; denied;

-OPthear gAleert Device (e.g.,
vibrating watch, etc.) (Not

TTY Access (Not requested;

Precaution

written

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or e, noted in meeting granted)

requested; denied; granted) denied; granted)

?

communicatio waived) waived) KOMS

took place?

Transferred to KSP 1/10/2020

Casio and Sonic BombSB500ss-

watch stolen-loss 11/02/2019

Commutation of Sentence 08/27/2020 MRS 06/08/2020

Timex T49851 Casio w735H

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 103

Technology

CHaowsmea:ny3:14-cWvhe-r0e 0001-GFVT-EWhBenAobtainDedoc S#pe:cif9ica9tio-n2s (URLF) iled: 12/16/20 Page: 666 of 985 - Page ID#: 4254

FM radio transmitter, usable as an amplifier system, or 1

Gym

other assistive listening device.

prior to 2016

BH FM Transmitter Audio Adapter// B076X3GGSMH

Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable

10

amplifiers)

in all living unit control centers

on going first obtained in SKU is 903010 @ maxiaids.com. (https://www.maxiaids.com/serene-portable-phone-amplifier-30db)

2017/2018

Units can also be found cheaper on Amazon or through Allegromedical – Allegro ID 571631 Item:

0836217- (https://www.allegromedical.com/daily-living-aids-c519/portable-telephone-amplifier-

p571631.html

Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

2- one in living unit; 7D/ IT Systems 1 for back up.

2020

MODEL: 840 through CapTel site: https://www.captel.com/captel/phones/captel-840/

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like? Bed shakers Vibrating watches

Assisted listening Chapel and Academic system - 4 receiver School

2017/2018

https://www.kingdom.com/peavey-assisted-listening-system-4-receivers.html

3

Currently 2 are issued to

2017/2018

Harris Communications or Amazon: HC- Lifetone2//Lifetone HLAC151 Bedside Fire Alarm & Clock with Bed Shaker -

inmates; 1 as backup

Sound, Light & Vibrating Alert in Case of Fire - Fire Alarm for Hard of Hearing or Deep Sleepers

3 styles

Through ADA Coordinator began sales in October Timex Expedidition T49851//https://www.amazon.com/Timex-T49851-Expedition-Vibration-

as quarterly sale.

2018

Alarm/dp/B004GHLEMQ?th=1

Casio Super Illuminator #W735H-1AVCF //https://www.amazon.com/Casio-W735H-1AVCF-SuperIlluminatorWatch/dp/B00BS8U88W/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=cASIO+VIBRATING+WATCH&qid=1583356745&s=appar el&sr=1-2 TICCI 8 Vibrating Alarm TOOO3VB//https://www.amazon.com/TICCI-Vibrating-Medication-ReminderWaterproof/dp/B07R6D4BF5/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=TICCI+watch+men&qid=1583356943&sr=8-1

Vibrating alarm clocks

4 Styles

Through ADA Coordinator as quarterly sale.

began sales in October 2018

SONIC Bomb with pulsating lights- # SBB500SS//https://www.amazon.com/Sonic-Alert-SBB500SS-ExtraLoud-Flashing/dp/B000OOWZUK/ref=pd_di_sccai_1/137-89957599852061?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B000OOWZUK&pd_rd_r=6247c16f-3823-4923-9c8cfadc43a5fc25&pd_rd_w=LwJBB&pd_rd_wg=nXYDh&pf_rd_p=e532f109-986a-4c2d-85fc16555146f6b4&pf_rd_r=BGTXXA4D Sonic Alert Dual # SBB200SS//https://www.amazon.com/Sonic-Alert-Extra-AlarmShaker/dp/B000EX7LNM/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=Sonic+Alert+Dual+Alarm+with+Shaker&qid=158335799 2&s=electronics&sr=1-1 Sonic Bomb Extra Large Dual Alarm # SBB300SS//https://www.amazon.com/Sonic-Alert-SB300SSVibratingDisplay/dp/B000EX5HRO/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=sonic+Bomb+extra+large+dual+alarm&qid=158335817 5&s=electronics&sr=1-3 Shake N Wake wrist alarm # PI-107//https://www.amazon.com/Tech-Tools-Vibrating-Personal-Shake-NWake/dp/B0027A573Q

Pagers

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in 40 use or under consideration not mentioned above.

located through out the Living Units

2016/2017

In person notifications completed through inmate workers ( HoH Aides)

Earphones for parole hearings Earphones for orientation videos

2// I -in use the other as back up

Parole Room Cart located in the Chapel

2// I -in use the other as back up

Orientation Area

2017 and ongoing 2017 and ongoing

Koss # 3261351 URI 10I//CDWG.org (https://www.cdwg.com/search/?key=headphones%7cKOSS%7CUR10i&searchscope=all&sr=1&ln=2)
Koss # 3261351 URI 10I//CDWG.org (https://www.cdwg.com/search/?key=headphones%7cKOSS%7CUR10i&searchscope=all&Esrx=h1i&blint =22,) LLCC, p. 104

How do inmates obtain access? utilize through radio and headset

Case: H3ow:1we4ll-dco tvhe-y0w0or0k?01-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 9O9th-e2r commFeinltes d: 12/16/20 Page: 667 of 985 - Page ID#: 4255
Well

Check out from Living Unit Control Center via inmate ID. ID is given Well to Officer and the unit is issued. At conclusion, amplifier returned and ID returned to Inmate.

Key check out from 7D Living Unit Control Center via inmate ID. ID is Well given to Officer and thekey to the area is issued. At conclusion, key returned and ID returned.

Check out from staff or inmate assigned to audio visual via inmate Well ID. ID provided and unit issued . At conclusion, unit returned and ID returned.

upon Medical determination of need; ADA Coordinator issues.

Well

Quarterly sale through ADA Coordinator.

Well

Quarterly sale through ADA Coordinator.

Well

replacement batteries have been placed on the Inmate Canteen.

Quarterly sale through ADA Coordinator.

Well

Quarterly sale through ADA Coordinator.

Well

Well Well

request from ADA Coordinator

Well however, construction of unit's clip is faulty and units have to be replaced due to breakage;

Any inmates that have complained that the unit vibration do not wake them- have been counseled and worked with to find an alternative postion for the unit and implemented wakeups from staff or HoH Aides.

Replacement batteries availble through Inmate Canteen or ADA Coordinator.

N/A
All Calls are completed immediately; other alerts for appointment requested through contact with HoH Aide, Unit staff or ADA Coordinator
Request use through ReEntry Coordinator

Pagers purchased in 2017. Units did not work as anticipated. Units were Due to the facility construction, the pagers did not

collected and have not been utilized since 2017.

receive texts as anticipated. In person notifications that

were in place continued.

Inperson alerts regarding All Calls works well, inmates notify in person bytouring each living unit walk; In person alerts as reminders for specific appointments are regulated by HoH interaction with HoH Aide or Unit staff.

Well

Request through Orientation staff.

Well

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 105

Documentation and narrative to provide Grievances:

Case:

3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EDBatAe revieDweod c

C#om: m9en9ts-(2probleFmsilreevdea:led1, s2olu/t1io6ns,/e2tc0.) ID#: 4256

Page: 668 of 985 - Page

1. Provide summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Should include the issues, summary of response, resolution

9/17/2020

Attachment

2. Provide full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing accommodation issues.

9/29/2020

Attachment

Discipline

3. For all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving an inmate who signs, provide report of inmate name, date, and communication method for each.

9/22/2020

//Report # LLCC-2020-00041//Incident Date 01/07/2020// Charge: Physical action-force against other inmate w/no injury. VRI and written documentation utilized throughout- noted in report.

4. Provide documentation for all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving failure to

obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH

inmate.

Attachment

Auxiliary aids

5. VRI Log (provide).

9/18/2020 Attachment

6. TTY instructions (provide)

9/18/2020 Attachment

7. VRI instructions (provide)

9/18/2020 Attachment

Audiology processing delays

8.A list of each inmate currently at your institution whose audiology processing FINISHED after March 2020, for whom such processing took or is taking over 60 days, documentation of the explanation for any such delay, and a description of any steps taken to avoid similar problems going forward. Information provided to inmates, policies, etc. 9. Any pages of the inmate handbook that address disability, and the date for that version of the handbook. 10. The current Deaf/HOH brochure and any other documents provided to deaf or hard-ofhearing inmates. 11.The medical request form currently provided to prisoners. 12. Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2020 addressing deaf/hard-of-hearing issues. 13. A list of each use of an in-person sign-language interpreter from February 2020 to present, and any occasions in which such an interpreter was requested but denied. Please provide written responses to the following questions:

- ENT Provider visit rescheduled for 10/08/2020 due to COVID;

- 3rd Audicus completed

7/27/2020. ENT provider visit scheduled for 9/16/2020 - no hearing aid recommended at this time.;

-1st

audicus test occurred 7/14/2020, 3rd audicus test completed 8/20/2020. Hearing aid recieved 9/28/2020.

- audicus scheduled for 7/14/2020- ENT scheduled for 9/14/2020- no issues after tube placement.

9/16/2020

Attachment Attachment Attachment Attachment No such event occurred. All were VRI.

14. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty because staff members are wearing masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?
15. How many staff members are currently using clear masks? How is the decision made who will wear a clear mask?
16. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty with their hearing aids because of the design of their own masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?
17. How many inmates have been issued masks that don't have ear ties?
18. What if anything have you done to solve the problem of inmates having trouble hearing announcements? Please respond in detail, with dates on all responsive steps, prerequisites for any assistance, etc.

9/22/2020 9/23/2020

No inmates reported the issue of having difficulty with staff wearing masks to the ADA Coordinator. Sex Offender Treatment

program staff requested due to enrolling

reads lips & profoundly HoH into the program. LLCC began

constructing mask with view area prototypes and subsequently provided ten (10) for security staff and program staff to wear

when interacting with inmates if necesary. We have also purchased and are awaiting delivery of disposable masks with the viewing

area for placement in areas for staff to have readily avialable when necesssary. I have held multiple assessments and interactions

with hard of hearing inmates with no complaints reported. It was not until the receipt of the phone call follow ups memorandums

dated 9/15/2020 & 09/22/2020 that I was alerted to the complaints. .

1/2 SOTP program staff that have

in their class utilize clear masks. At request, whether by staff or inmate, a

clear mask can be issued for utilization when speaking with an HoH inmate.

9/22/2020 9/29/2020

No inmates have reported the issue of having difficulty with their mask and hearing aids to the ADA Coordinator. It was not until the receipt of the phone call follow ups memorandums from 9/15/2020 & 9/22/2020 that the topic was brought to light.
All inmates were issued tie masks in March 2020. As replacment masks were ordered, an over the ear option was incorportated. Both over the ear and tie masks are avialable in the Laundry for pickup.

9/18/2020

An inmate HoH aide job was established in 2018 to help allieviate the common issue of inmates hearing announcements. HOH aides provide in person notification to all wings of a living unit. All HoH aides are provided a current list of HoH inmates housed in the unit each Friday. The auditory and clarity levels of the yard announcement can be check by the Maintenance Department.
Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 106

Documentation and narrative to provide

Case:

3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EDBatAe revieDweod c

C#om: m9en9ts-(2probleFmsilreevdea:led1, s2olu/t1io6ns,/e2tc0.) ID#: 4257

Page: 669 of 985 - Page

19. How have you educated staff that it is inappropriate to write up an inmate for behavior

that is caused by a hearing impairment (e.g., talking loudly, not following instructions that

could not be heard)? If there was a memo, please provide that.

9/18/2020 Staff are reminded in roll call and during in service training.

20. Please describe in detail how inmates are supposed to get hearing aid batteries, including how long it should take them each time.

9/18/2020

There are two options and both are free:
1. For a one to one exchange of a battery, a sick call slip is to be submitted to Medical indicating the need to exchange a hearing aid or pocket talker battery. the sick call slip is triaged and the inmate called for as scheduled. There is no co-pay associated with battery exchange.
2. Every Friday there is a multi-pack battery exchange. Battery Exchange is announced in the units and on the yard. Inmates report to Medical/Pill Call and trade in their dead battery pack for a new battery pack. RHU has batteries on their MED CART. Inmates request battery exchange during sick call walk through and medical staff shange accordingly.

21. When an inmate reports that a hearing aid is not working, what are the steps followed to evaluate the complaint? Include all relevant copays and other procedures.
22. When someone is denied binaural hearing aids, are they provided information on the standard for receiving such assistance, and the opportunity for appeal? How many inmates have received binaural aids since the current binaural hearing aid policy has been in effect?
23. What arrangements are made to provide vibrating watches/clocks for inmates who are indigent?

9/18/2020

Inmates complete a sick call slip indicating the hearing aid is not working properly. Medical triages the complaint and schedules appointment. If the aid can be repaired in house ( e.g. batteries, cleanings, ) repairs are completed and hearing aid reissued. If it is necessary for the hearing aid to be repaired outside of the instiution, the inmate is provided a pocket talker until the repair /replacement is returned.

9/18/2020 9/16/2020

Denials for binaural hearing aids are completed by medical providers and inmates are verbally educated regarding the protocol in place. No inmates have received binaural hearing aids since the policy took effect.
All inmates that request are issued a ShakeNwake wrist alarm clock.

24. Please describe, in detail, each step that takes place once a person is identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing, to evaluate/offer any auxiliary aids. Include who is responsible for each step.

9/16/2020

ADA Coordinator is notified by Medical of receipt of hearing related accommodations or if inmates is unable to be helped by hearing aid/pocket talker; ADA Coordinator sends out HoH ID card and cell notification; ADA Coordinator schedules face to face meeting with inmate to introduce and deliver ADA handbook, including educate/offer other available aids and explains the procedure to receive other available aids.

25. Please describe, in detail, any situation in 2019 or 2020 in which a deaf/hard-of-hearing inmate has been denied a job or other opportunity (access to a program or the like) because of their disability. Include the inmate’s name, the date, and the circumstances.
26. Please list all training that you have received for your role as ADA Coordinator. 27. Please provide an update on all items in your Deaf/HOH action plan (previously shared with me).

9/17/2020
9/17/2020 9/23/2020

No inmate has been denied a job or programming opportunity.
ADA Coodinator/Create; Communicating with Deaf and HoH Offenders; ADA Coordinator /Settlement Agreement; ADAbasic.org; ADA Compliance in business; Communicating with Deaf and Hard of Hearing Offenders; ADA Made Simple; Mid Atlantic ADA Conference: Corrections and Law Enforcement
Plan of action for LLCC: CapTel: Purchase and installation of equipment: Equipment was purchased and operational June 29, 2020; inmates notified and utilizing by 7/1/2020. Grievance: Ongoing Monitoring of filed grievances for prospective issues relating to deaf and HoH inmate population. Medical: Ongoing Continued monitoring of the effectiveness of the HoH/ADA meetings on the timeliness of medical processing and identification. Staff training: Ongoing Continued staff training on the topics of effective communication styles with all inmates, active listening, and tactical communication methods.

Exhibit 2, LLCC, p. 107

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 670 of 985 - Page ID#: 4258
Little Sandy Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 671 of 985 - Page ID#: 4259

Deaf/HO H or both? #
A
Both
Both
Both Both

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for

Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

ADA coordinator

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

ADA Coordinator Rhonda May. Backup ADA

Coordinator Lorie Conley

X

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

2 coordinator appointed?

No

X

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

KyDOC website has the correct ADA

coordinator listed for LSCC.

X

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates?

Yes

X

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates in a

Both

5 timely and appropriate manner? How?

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? (THIS

Both

6 REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit

Both

7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

Both

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

ADA coordinator information is included in

the inmate handbook that every inmate

X

transferring into LSCC receive. ADA

coordinator also attends all orientations for

incoming inmates.

Describe method used to ascertain:

X

The ADA Coordinator list is posted on all

bulletin boards in both general population

housing units and the minimum security

X

unit.

Yes

X

Both

9 Describe training

Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately cover

Both

10 information?

Both

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training)

Both

12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

Both

13 Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's powerpoint)

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with settlement

Both

14 agreement?

CBT's (Communicating with Deaf and Hard of

Hearing Offenders, ADA

Coordinator/CREATE, ADA

Coordinator/Settlement Agreement, LSCC

ADA); Annual In-Service; ADA National

Network Learning Session: COVID19, Health

Care, and the ADA webinar; The Importance

of Essential Job Functions for Disability Law

Compliance and Inclusion webinar; The ADA

in Jails and Prisons: A Guide to

Accommodating Inmates and Visitors with

Disabilities webinar

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 672 of 985 - Page ID#: 4260

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

during the audit, and what has been

H or

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for

both? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

ADA coordinator receives the ADA Statewide

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

List every Monday. The Health Service

Administrator at LSCC also sends ADA

X

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

coordinator a weekly Audicus List.

Yes, additional inmates are added to ADA

coordinator's list as they arrive at the

institution and when they are newly

X

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

diagnosed as HOH.

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in

Both

17 implementing the settlement?

Both

18 Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf inmates?

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on deaf

Both

19 inmates?

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the inmates in

Both

20 those situations?

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective way with the

Both

21 monitor?

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the monitor

Both

22 when necessary?

Both B Reporting obligations

If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was monitor

Both

1 notified?

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

Both

2 inmates?

Both

3 Is the list complete?

Both

4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs,

Both

6 activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe)

Both

7 Was it reported to the monitor?

Both

8 Was the report complete?

Both

9 Was the report timely?

Both

10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert?

Both

11 If yes, was the monitor notified?

Did the institution consult with the monitor about the non-

Both

12 auditory alert?

Both

13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

HOH

3 notifications.)

Yes, the ADA coordinator has assisted in

X

implementing the settlement.

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

There have been no changes in ADA

coordinator.

X

Yes the ADA coordinator maintains a list of

HOH/Deaf inmates.

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

No

NA

NA

NA

X

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

X

NA

KOMS Alert is sent to ADA Coordinator for all

inmates transferring in and out of the

institution. Transfer Coordinator also sends

X

ADA Coordinator all transfer memos.

ADA coordinator receives a KOMS alert

when HOH inmates transfer to and from the

institution.

NA

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 673 of 985 - Page ID#: 4261

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

Deaf

Deaf inmates

Deaf

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

ADA precaution in KOMS notifies staff of

HOH/Deaf inmates. ADA Coordinator meets

with inmate for hearing assessment to

X

determine what is needed for effective

communication.

NA

Yes ADA precaution in KOMS.

X

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general medical intake, and

Both

during medical care more generally:

Both

1 Is there effective communications planning?

Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if

Both

2 interpretation is needed?

Both

3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?

Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications

Both

4 techniques?

Both

Notice to medical staff:

Both

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How?

Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover and

Both

6 within the file?

KOMS Alert notification is emailed to ADA

Coordinator. ADA Coordinator then notifies

property room staff so that appropriate

communications is planned and provided. NA

X

X

The VRI laptop is available to be utilized by

staff as needed.

NA

Yes

X

Yes as needed

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes, headphones are available.

X

Provisions have been made that the assigned

CTO will read the captions for the HOH

inmates who are not literate and the VRI will

X

be used for deaf inmates who sign.

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes ADA precaution in KOMS. ADA

Coordinator also provides medical staff with

ADA List for all HOH/Deaf inmates in the

X

institution.

Yes, if the problem is not already listed, the

problem will be listed by the provider after

X

the examination.

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 674 of 985 - Page ID#: 4262

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Deaf

7 Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate accommodations.

Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site providers of

Deaf

8 need for interpretation?

Deaf

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

Deaf

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

Deaf

11 Adequate notice?

Outside providers offering effective communication to inmates

Deaf

12 who sign?

Deaf

13 How?

Both

Hearing screening/medical intake:

Yes, a list of issues is sent with the patient. Administrative assistant notifies off site provider during scheduling. Yes Yes Administrative assistant notifies outside provider during scheduling to prepare for effective communication. Describe:

NA X
X NA
X
X
NA NA

Both

14 Performed for all new inmates?

Both

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

Both

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

Both

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

Both

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?

How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by

Both

19 staff?

Both

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

Both

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?

Both

22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe.

Both

23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

Both

25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening?

Both

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

Adequate determination of need for designation/ audiology

Both

28 services? How?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or HOH,

Both

30 apart from audiology services decision?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file?

All inmates get a hearing screening coming

into the system at RCC. A hearing screening

X

is done on any inmate coming into the

institution with a hearing complaint.

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes, hearing questions are asked with all

new intakes.

X

Forms are only completed by staff.

NA

Nursing staff and providers.

NA

Yes.

X

During the initial hearing assessment with

ADA Coordinator, inmates literacy level is

X

checked in KOMS.

Yes, if any complaints of hearing problems,

the provider completes hearing form and

assessment, refers for Audicus onsite testing

X

as needed.

NA

Yes, all routine physicals are asked about

hearing problems.

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes they are sent to the provider if 1+ yes

answers for further assessment.

X

Yes, all hearing issues are assessed by the

provider and Audicus testing is ordered

X

accordingly.

Yes

X

Yes, Audicus testing performed on site with

results given to provider.

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 675 of 985 - Page ID#: 4263

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Yes, Health Service Administrator sends ADA

Coordinator updated Audicus List.

X

Yes

X

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

HOH

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

HOH

40 initial request/questionnaire?

HOH

41 each relevant medical visit?

HOH

42 any audiology visit?

HOH

43 hearing aid provision?

HOH

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks?

Yes, offered within 30 days after being ordered by the provider. Yes. Yes, Pocket Talkers are available for all inmates waiting on hearing aids. Yes Yes
Yes and we keep an ongoing Audicus log. Yes Yes Yes Yes, it is done weekly by the Health Service Administrator.

NA
X
X
X
X X NA X X X X
X

HOH

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

HOH

46 Shared with monitor when requested

Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Describe.

47 In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait more
48 than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?

49 What is the cause of the delay?

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) to

50 improve this process?

HOH

Co-pay and availability issues:

HOH

47 Charged only once -- not again for followups

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

HOH

50 7 days/week?

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Yes, Health Service Administrator sends ADA

coordinator Audicus List weekly. They also

X

meet weekly for Treatment Plan meeting.

Yes.

X

We don't send them off-site. We test within

7 to 10 days of providers orders then it takes

about 2 weeks to get results back that is

then reviewed by Dr. Kemen. If a hearing aid

is needed, it is ordered and takes around 2

to 3 weeks.

NA

We have had 3 inmates that have had to

wait more than sixty days.

NA

2 inmates were transferred and 1 inmate

was unknown.

NA

We have assigned our Audicus to one nurse

who reviews it weekly. She also schedules

testing.

NA

NA

Yes only charged once and not for follow-

ups.

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 676 of 985 - Page ID#: 4264

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both E

Issue/Question Information provided inmates

Both

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe)

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

During intake, all incoming inmates receive an inmate handbook. During initial orientation, ADA Coordinator speaks to each X individual inmate to do an initial ADA classification.

Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-discrimination and

Both

2 ADA services?

Both

Brochure? Items to include:

Both

3 Non-discrimination obligation

Both

4 Effective communication obligation

Both

5 Auxiliary aids and services available

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services (including

Both

6 hearing aids, and batteries)

Both

7 Communication equipment available, and how to use

Both

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

Both

Other items:

Both

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

Both

10 Request for Accommodations/ Communications Assistance

Both

11 Medical Request form includes request for accommodations

Both

12 Job application form includes request for accommodations

Both

13 Waiver forms

Both

14 Classification form includes request for accommodations

Both

15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations

SAP and other programming form includes request for

Both

16 accommodation

Both

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in

18 law library? (Need to check)

Both

Do request forms:

Both

19 list available services comprehensively?

clearly explain services and aids (what they are and when

Both

20 they are available?

Both

21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?

expressly ask about preferred mode of

Both

22 communication/needed services and why they are useful?

Both

23 explain which items are free?

Both

24 encompass religious and volunteer-provided programming?

Both

Effective communication of these resources:

Both

25 Are the materials in language accessible to each inmate?

Both

26 Is this information provided with effective communication?

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity

to meet with a KDOC staff member and interpreter to ask

Both

27 questions about the materials?

Yes, on page 72 of LSCC's inmate handbook,

X

refers to Auxiliary Aids and Services.

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

LSCC does not have a regular schedule of

interpreters. Interpreters are called into the

X

institution as needed.

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Discipline form is in KOMS.

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Checked on 9/25/2020 Yes

X
NA X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

X Yes

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 677 of 985 - Page ID#: 4265

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

Deaf/HO

during the audit, and what has been

H or

done about it, or if the problem

both? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

for a program with staff, is effective communication

Both

28 provided?

Yes

Both

29 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Yes

Effective communication re. programming

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA
X
X NA

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

Both

30 in education with staff, is effective communication provided?

Both

31 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

Both

2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

7 Clear process to obtain? Describe

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Both

12 Working process to get new inmate alerts added? (Describe)

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

14 Appropriately obvious

Both

15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?)

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

Both

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?

Both

23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator?

Both

24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver?

Both

25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?

X

Yes

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes

X

ADA coordinator offers HOH/Deaf inmates

HOH ID card and housing sign when they self-

report or withing a couple of days of arrival

X

to the institution.

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes

X

KOMS alerts are added as inmates self report

or get diagnosed.

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

NA

Yes

X

Yes, no abbreviations are on the card.

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes unless in Restricted Housing Unit then it

stays with the DOC identification card.

X

Yes

X

HOH ID cards are not permitted to be in the

inmate's possession while housed in

Restricted Housing Unit. It stays with the

X

DOC ID card and is returned to the inmate

upon release.

HOH ID cards are kept with the inmates DOC

ID card on the ID board in RHU and are

X

visible to all RHU staff.

Yes

NA

Yes

X

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 678 of 985 - Page ID#: 4266

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

26 Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested ID?

Both

27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

Both

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Both

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

Both

9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

Both

2 Cell cards

Both

3 Bed shaker

Both

4 In-person alerts

Both

5 Pager

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

Both

9 Other amplification

Both

10 Other (describe)

Both

General issues

Special housing area:

Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH inmates?

Both

11 (Describe)

Both

12 If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? (Describe)

If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed

Both

13 there? (such a requirement is non-compliant).

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live

there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to the

Both

14 inmate? Describe any restrictions.

In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is primary

Both

15 consideration given to inmate request?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Yes but not in this reporting period.

Yes

Yes, KOMS Alert is emailed to the ADA coordinator. Yes, medical reports weekly with ADA coordinator.

Yes
Yes Yes, ADA coordinator gives each inmate a brochure and goes over available auxiliary aids and services. Yes
Yes

Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes To date, a pager has not been requested.
Yes Yes upon request.
Yes Yes Describe: Chapel and SAP has amplification system.

No, deaf/HOH inmates are housed with general population.

Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

X X
NA X
X
X
X
X
X X NA X X
X X X X X X X X X
NA NA NA
NA NA
NA
NA
X

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 679 of 985 - Page ID#: 4267

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services

form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or

Both

16 not requesting aids/services, were accommodations provided?

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services documented in

Both

17 inmate institutional files?

Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services shared

Both

18 appropriately with staff?

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Both

20 Have any been out of comission?

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Both

22 hearing aid?

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

Both

24 Promptly?

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Both

26 Describe

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

Both

30 Are classes in sign language provided?

Both

31 deaf inmates given notice?

Both

32 priority given to deaf inmates?

Both I Interpretation in general

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

Deaf

1 communicated to inmates?

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

Deaf

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

3 volunteer-provided programming?

Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation

Deaf

4 method?

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf

6 In-person?

Deaf

7 VRI?

Deaf

Is VRI availability:

Deaf

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

If an inmate is found not to be deaf/HOH, no

X

auxiliary aids are provided.

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

NA

Purple videophone was out of commission

for a month but VRI was utilized as backup. NA

Inmates are to keep their hearing aid with

them at all times during housing moves or

X

transfers.

Yes, a replacement is provided should an

inmate become separated from their hearing X

aid.

X

No

NA

There has been no direct threat

determination.

NA

NA

NA

No, but we utilize the VRI as needed.

X

NA

NA

NA

Yes

X

X Yes
X

Yes Yes
InterpreTalk Yes
Yes

X
X NA
X X NA X

Yes available 24 hours a day 7 days a week.

X

Yes available 24 hours a day 7 days a week.

X

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 680 of 985 - Page ID#: 4268

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

Deaf/HO

during the audit, and what has been

H or

done about it, or if the problem

both? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

Yes

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

Yes the VRI laptop is utilized in RHU.

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Describe: Yes it is functional.

Deaf

13 In general

Yes

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Yes, and it also has an electrical cord.

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

Yes, COT updates.

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Describe:

Deaf

16 Splitter?

Yes

Deaf

17 Instructions?

Yes

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

Yes

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

Yes

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Yes

Comment section used when staff sign VRI

Deaf

21 How?

laptop back in.

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

Deaf

22 should be first recourse?

Yes

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

Yes

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

Yes

Deaf

24 Parole?

Yes

LSCC only has one inmate who signs and he

has been notified that he can request in

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

person interpretation at any time.

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

None

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

Yes, parole board hearings are scheduled

Deaf

27 before?

approximately 2 months in advance.

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

Deaf

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

No

Deaf

29 Describe

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

Deaf

30 was unavailable)

No

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

Deaf

31 method?

Yes

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Yes

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

Yes

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

Deaf

35 encounters/communications/settings)

Yes

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

Yes

Deaf J Hand Restraints

Deaf

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

Not during this reporting period.

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

Deaf

2 finding of a security threat?

Not during this reporting period.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

X X NA X X X NA X X X X X X
X X X X
X
X X
X NA
X
X X X NA X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X X NA X

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 681 of 985 - Page ID#: 4269

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

Deaf

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

Deaf

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

Deaf

5 Staff aware of the issue

Deaf

Off-site medical care:

Deaf

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

restraints removed when necessary for medical

Deaf

7 communication?

Both K Non-auditory Alerts

Both

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Both

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

Both

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

Both

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

Both

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

Both

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

Both

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Both

9 been denied?

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Both

11 How often?

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Both

15 used consistently?

Both

16 in all dormitories?

Both

17 in gym?

Both

18 in library?

Both

19 audited and monitored?

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

Both

20 misses a page?

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

Both

21 because of disability?

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

Deaf

2 Allow voice carry-over features?

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes, however this has not occurred during this reporting cycle.

X
X X NA X
X

Describe: Yes Yes Yes Yes, staff flip the lights on/off and count is called. No No

NA X X X
X

No
No Yes Describe: Quarterly They are monitored and recorded through Fire Safety Coordinator.
Yes (bulletin boards) Yes Yes (except in RHU) Yes Yes Yes
Yes

X
X X
X
NA X X X X X X
X

No

NA

NA

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes

X

Yes Yes 30 days Purple sent a new videophone.

NA X X
NA NA

X X X
Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 682 of 985 - Page ID#: 4270

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

during the audit, and what has been

H or

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for

both? # Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Deaf

5 alternative offered

Yes, VRI was offered as an alternative.

X

Describe: There is a sign in ADA phone room

beside Purple phone informing inmates that

should videophone be out of service come

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

see ADA coordinator or shift supervisor for

6 videophone is out of service.

alternate service.

NA

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Yes

X

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

Yes

X

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

Escort is not necessary for use of the

videophone.

X

Deaf

10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates?

Yes

X

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

Yes

X

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

Deaf

12 using ordinary phones?

No more permission needed. Only

additional staff notification.

X

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

Yes

X

Deaf

14 Free?

Yes

X

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone

Deaf

15 calls?

Same as regular calls.

X

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

Yes

NA

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

Both

TTY:

Both

18 Installed?

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

Both

23 for non-deaf inmates?

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Both

25 Permission needed?

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

Both

27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates?

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Both

29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Both

30 Can access publicly available relay service phone numbers?

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions for

Both

31 videophones and TTY is less than equitable?

Both

32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

If yes, was determination (including reasoning, evidence, etc.)

Both

33 documented?

Both

34 Was monitor notified?

Both

35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

sign language.

. He doesn't know

Yes Yes

Yes None Yes

Yes Yes No No Yes None Describe: Annual test completed on 7/30/2020 with no issues. Yes

X
NA X X
X
NA X
X
X X NA X X
X
X

No

NA

NA

NA

NA NA

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 683 of 985 - Page ID#: 4271

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Deaf

VRS via laptop

Deaf

36 Available?

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

Both

Phones

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

Both

CapTel

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

43 Request by any inmate denied?

Both

TV/Movies

Both

44 Is captioning available?

Both

45 Is captioning used?

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

remains)

Description/Notes

Yes Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes List names No

Yes Yes Yes Yes

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

Both

49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

Both

50 Amplification method? (Describe)

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

Both

53 status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

Both

54 deaf inmates?

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

Both

5 (Describe)

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Both

7 because security threat?

Both

8 monitor notified?

Both

9 reasoning explained?

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both

10 of requests?

Both

11 of denials?

Both N Disciplinary

Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and

without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been

Deaf

1 punished?

Deaf

2 Was a re-hearing granted?

Yes Yes Describe: Yes
Yes
Yes Describe in detail No, all auxiliary aids and services are requested through ADA coordinator. Yes Yes through ADA coordinator No
Yes Yes
No

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X X X
NA X X
NA NA NA NA NA
X X X X
X
X NA
X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X

X

NA
X
X X
NA NA NA NA NA
NA X X

X
NA Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 684 of 985 - Page ID#: 4272

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both O
Both
Both Both P Both
Both Both Both
Both Both Both
Both

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

during the audit, and what has been

done about it, or if the problem

NA, unknown, or no basis for

Issue/Question

remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

Grievances

1 Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA coordinator?

Yes, ADA-related grievances are answered by

the ADA coordinator.

X

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator

2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator?

Yes

X

Training

Types available

NA

Yes, in-service training was provided to all

staff. All new staff members also receive

X

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

training during pre-service academy.

2 Who received? (Describe)

All institutional staff

NA

3 All appropriate staff?

Yes

X

Due to Covid19, we have not had

4 Live training? (Information only)

Describe: None

NA

in person training.

5 Who received? (Describe)

Describe:

NA

6 All appropriate staff?

NA

Any additional targeted training on specific needs ? Please

describe in detail

NA

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 14

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DCEAaR/sHOeH:IN3M:A1TE4I-ScGEvT-T0ING0A0P0PR1OP-RGIAFTEVASTSIS-TEANBCEA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 685 of 985 - Page ID#: 4273

Name

Other Alert

Device (e.g.,

Low literacy?

If signs to

vibrating

Personal

(So that

communicate,

Bed Shaker? watch, etc.) TTY Access Captel Acess Phone

Shake & Wake

Signs to written

Has

Has

noted in

Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not

Amplifier (Not (Not

Listed with commu communicati Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; requested;

Housing KOMS ADA nicate on is not Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N) effective) waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

E-104L Yes D-108L Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Vibrating

Yes

Not requested Watch

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

H-123L Yes C-121L Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

A-220L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

C-206U Yes F-222L Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

H-122L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

H-219L Yes H-121L Yes F-104L Yes

No

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Vibrating

Yes

Not requested Watch

Granted

Not requested Granted

Granted

B01

Yes

C-217L Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Granted

Not requested Not requested Granted

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

B-215U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

H-207L Yes F-221L Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

E-113L Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

G-101L Yes H-110L Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

B-204L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

A-103L Yes A-121U Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Not requested Granted

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

A-219L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Not requested Not requested

H-125L Yes G-103L Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 15

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING T

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 686 of 985 - Page ID#: 4274

Name

Clear mask

for staff

who deal Any other

Special with this auxiliary aid

ID

mask?

innmate? requested? Outome?

No

No

PocketTalker

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

PocketTalker

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

PocketTalker

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 16

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 687 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4275

Other Alert

Device (e.g.,

Low literacy?

If signs to

vibrating

Personal

(So that

communicate,

Bed Shaker? watch, etc.) TTY Access Captel Acess Phone

Shake & Wake

Signs to written

Has

Has

noted in

Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not

Amplifier (Not (Not

Listed with commu communicati Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; requested;

Housing KOMS ADA nicate on is not Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N) effective) waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

H-201L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Not requested

A-118L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Not requested Not requested

B-107L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Not requested Granted

G-123L Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

A12

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Not requested

A-122L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

E-108U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Medical Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

B-120L Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

D-125U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Granted

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

F-112L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

E-215L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

D-110L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Requested Not requested Granted

Not requested Not requested

E-106L Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

F-205L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

D-106U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

A-106L Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

C18

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

H-139725 Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

D08

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

C-223L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

A-211L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

A-203L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

A20

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

D-112L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested NoEt rxehqiubeistt2ed, LGSrCanCte,dp. 17

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 688 of 985 - Page ID#: 4276

Clear mask

for staff

who deal Any other

Special with this auxiliary aid

ID

mask?

innmate? requested? Outome?

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

PocketTalker

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 18

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 689 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4277

Other Alert

Device (e.g.,

Low literacy?

If signs to

vibrating

Personal

(So that

communicate,

Bed Shaker? watch, etc.) TTY Access Captel Acess Phone

Shake & Wake

Signs to written

Has

Has

noted in

Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not

Amplifier (Not (Not

Listed with commu communicati Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; requested;

Housing KOMS ADA nicate on is not Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N) effective) waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

A-104L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

F11

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Granted

Not requested Granted

Not requested Not requested Granted

C05

Yes

No

No

Waived

Waived

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

C-109L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

A14

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

A-111U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

F-107U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Not requested Granted

C22

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

F08

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

C-107L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

G-103U Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

G-202U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

G-207L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

E-115L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

C-112L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Not requested Granted

A-214L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

B08

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

D-123U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

F-110L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

H-202L Yes

No

No

Yes

Waived

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

D14

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

G-212L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

C-223U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

D-116L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

D-105L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested NoEt rxehqiubeistt2ed, LGSrCanCte,dp. 19

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 690 of 985 - Page ID#: 4278

Clear mask

for staff

who deal Any other

Special with this auxiliary aid

ID

mask?

innmate? requested? Outome?

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

PocketTalker

No

No

PocketTalker

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 20

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 691 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4279

Other Alert

Device (e.g.,

Low literacy?

If signs to

vibrating

Personal

(So that

communicate,

Bed Shaker? watch, etc.) TTY Access Captel Acess Phone

Shake & Wake

Signs to written

Has

Has

noted in

Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not

Amplifier (Not (Not

Listed with commu communicati Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; requested;

Housing KOMS ADA nicate on is not Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N) effective) waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

A-225L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

F07

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

E-112L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

B-209L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested PocketTalker Granted

D-212L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

B07

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

F-216L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

A-120L Yes

Yes No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Granted

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

F-202L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

F-109L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

E10

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

G-122L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

A-103U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Granted

Granted

B-120U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

B12

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

A22

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

A-110L Yes F-111L Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Vibrating

Yes

Not requested Watch

Not requested Granted

Not requested Granted

C-122L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

D14

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not Requested Not Requested Not Requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

H-213U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

A-108U Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Not requested Granted

F-123L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

D-111L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

H-217U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested NoEt rxehqiubeistt2ed, LNSoCt Cre,qpue. s2te1d

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 692 of 985 - Page ID#: 4280

Clear mask

for staff

who deal Any other

Special with this auxiliary aid

ID

mask?

innmate? requested? Outome?

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

PocketTalker

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

PocketTalker

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

PocketTalker

No

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 22

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 693 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4281

Other Alert

Device (e.g.,

Low literacy?

If signs to

vibrating

Personal

(So that

communicate,

Bed Shaker? watch, etc.) TTY Access Captel Acess Phone

Shake & Wake

Signs to written

Has

Has

noted in

Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not

Amplifier (Not (Not

Listed with commu communicati Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; requested;

Housing KOMS ADA nicate on is not Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N) effective) waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

C-102L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

B-110L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

D-107U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested PocketTalker Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

H-224L Yes C-124L Yes B-104L Yes

No

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Vibrating

Yes

Not requested Watch

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Vibrating

Yes

Not requested Watch

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

F-121L Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

C-126L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

C-212U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

F-114L Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

A-121L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

H-113U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

H-113L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

C-113L Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

H-101L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

B-119L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

B-207L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

Granted

Not requested

F-213L Yes

No

No

Waived

Waived

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

H-123U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

B24

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

G-104L Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

F-122L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

D-109L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

H-204L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

G-112L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested NoEt rxehqiubeistt2ed, LGSrCanCte,dp. 23

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 694 of 985 - Page ID#: 4282

Clear mask

for staff

who deal Any other

Special with this auxiliary aid

ID

mask?

innmate? requested? Outome?

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

PocketTalker

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

PocketTalker

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 24

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 695 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4283

Other Alert

Device (e.g.,

Low literacy?

If signs to

vibrating

Personal

(So that

communicate,

Bed Shaker? watch, etc.) TTY Access Captel Acess Phone

Shake & Wake

Signs to written

Has

Has

noted in

Auxiliary Aid (Not

(Not

(Not

(Not

Amplifier (Not (Not

Listed with commu communicati Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door KOMS

Assessment requested; requested; requested; requested; requested; requested;

Housing KOMS ADA nicate on is not Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N) effective) waived) waived) notes?

took place? granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

granted)

A-102L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

F-124L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

F04

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

G-214U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

A24

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Not

Yes

Not requested Not requested requestedq Not requested Not requested Not requested

D-110U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

C-102U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Granted

G-111L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

F-106U Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

H-126L Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 25

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 696 of 985 - Page ID#: 4284

Clear mask

for staff

who deal Any other

Special with this auxiliary aid

ID

mask?

innmate? requested? Outome?

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 26

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 697 of 985 - Page ID#: 4285

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device. Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers)
Captioned Telephone (CapTel) Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like?
Bed shakers

How many Where When obtained

2

ADA Coordinator's office

6

ADA Coordinator's office

1

ADA Phone room

2

SAP Dorm/Chapel

3

Maintenance Supervisor's office

Specifications (URL) https://www.amazon.com/Whole-House-FM-Transmitter.com www.harriscomm.com/portable-telephone-amplifier.html https://www/captel.com/captel/phones/captel/840i www.musciansfriend.com https://silentcall.com/collections/medallion

How do inmates obtain access? Request through ADA Coordinator
Request through ADA Coordinator Request through ADA Coordinator
SAP Director/Chaplain Request through ADA Coordinator

Vibrating watches Vibrating alarm clocks Pagers

http://www.amazon.com/TICCI-Vibrating-Medication-

Request through ADA

5

Inmates cells

Reminder-Waterproof.com

Coordinator

Request through ADA

45

ADA Coordinator's office

https://www.maxiaids.com/timeshaker-wow

Coordinator

Request through ADA

0

Coordinator

How well do they work?

Other comments

No issues to date.

No issues to date.

It is working great. No issues to date.

No issues to date.
Inmates say they work great but the batteries run low in a couple of weeks.

No issues to date.

None requested to date.

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration not mentioned above.
12

Earphones for parole hearings

1

Earphones for orientation videos

1

Medical Department

https://mms.mckesson.com/product/662816/Posey-8274

www.amazon.com/Logitech-Headset-H390-Noise-

Pre-Release/Pre-Parole Coordinat Cancelling.com

www.amazon.com/Logitech-Headset-H390-Noise-

ADA Coordinator's office

Cancelling.com

Medical Department/Request through ADA Coordinator
Pre-Release/Pre-Parole Coordinator

No issues to date. No issues to date.

ADA Coordinator

No issues to date.

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 27

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 698 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4286

Documentation and narrative to provide

Date reviewed Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

Grievances:

1. Provide summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates.

Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Should include the issues,

summary of response, resolution

Attached

2. Provide full documentation of all grievances that address

hearing/hearing accommodation issues.

Attached

Discipline

3. For all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving an

inmate who signs, provide report of inmate name, date, and

9/25/2020

There have been no disciplinary proceedings on any inmate who signs since July

communication method for each.

2019.

4. Provide documentation for all disciplinary proceedings since July

2019 involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for

9/25/2020

count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate.

Attached

Auxiliary aids

5. VRI Log (provide).

9/28/2020

Attached

6. TTY instructions (provide)

9/28/2020

Attached

7. VRI instructions (provide)

9/28/2020

Attached

Audiology processing delays

8.A list of each inmate currently at your institution whose

audiology processing FINISHED after March 2020, for whom such

processing took or is taking over 60 days, documentation of the 9/25/2020

explanation for any such delay, and a description of any steps taken

to avoid similar problems going forward.

Response attached.

Information provided to inmates, policies, etc.

9. Any pages of the inmate handbook that address disability, and 6/4/2020
the date for that version of the handbook.

Attached

10. The current Deaf/HOH brochure and any other documents provided to deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates.

9/23/2020

Attached

11.The medical request form currently provided to prisoners.

9/28/2020

Attached

12. Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2020 addressing 9/28/2020 deaf/hard-of-hearing issues.

VRI training completed for medical staff on 3/13/2020.

13. A list of each use of an in-person sign-language interpreter from

February 2020 to present, and any occasions in which such an

9/28/2020

interpreter was requested but denied.

No

Please provide written responses to the following questions:

14. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing

inmates are experiencing difficulty because staff members are

wearing masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically?

How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did

No inmates have reported experiencing any difficulty with staff members wearing

you respond?

9/28/2020

masks.

15. How many staff members are currently using clear masks? How

Clear masks have been issued to staff members (7) working dorms where inmates who

is the decision made who will wear a clear mask?

9/28/2020 read lips are housed.

16. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing

inmates are experiencing difficulty with their hearing aids because of the design of their own masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many

We have only had one instance where a deaf/hard of hearing inmate was experiencing difficulty with their hearing aids because of the ear ties. Inmate received a new mask the same day without the ear ties. Since this incident, all inmates who have been issued

reported an issue? How did you respond?

9/28/2020 hearing aids have received a mask without the ear ties.

17. How many inmates have been issued masks that don't have ear

ties?

9/28/2020 We have issued 106 masks that don't have ear ties.

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 28

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 699 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4287

Documentation and narrative to provide

Date reviewed Comments (problems revealed, solutions, etc.)

18. What if anything have you done to solve the problem of

inmates having trouble hearing announcements? Please respond in

detail, with dates on all responsive steps, prerequisites for any

For inmates who routinely have problems hearing announcements, Resident Helpers can

assistance, etc.

9/28/2020 be/have been assigned to assist with announcement notifications.

19. How have you educated staff that it is inappropriate to write up

an inmate for behavior that is caused by a hearing impairment

(e.g., talking loudly, not following instructions that could not be

Protocol for staff communicating with deaf/hard of hearing inmates is covered in annual

heard)? If there was a memo, please provide that.

9/28/2020 in-service training.

20. Please describe in detail how inmates are supposed to get

hearing aid batteries, including how long it should take them each

Our medical department is open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Inmates go to medical

time.

9/28/2020 and exchange hearing aid batteries as needed.

21. When an inmate reports that a hearing aid is not working, what

If an inmate reports that a hearing aid is not working, medical is called immediately and

are the steps followed to evaluate the complaint? Include all

the inmate is sent to the medical department for the hearing aid to be checked. There

relevant copays and other procedures.

9/28/2020 are no copays for follow-ups for hearing issues.

22. When someone is denied binaural hearing aids, are they

provided information on the standard for receiving such assistance,

and the opportunity for appeal? How many inmates have received

binaural aids since the current binaural hearing aid policy has been

If an inmate is denied for binaural hearing aids, they are given the opportunity to put in

in effect?

9/28/2020 another sick call and get reassessed.

23. What arrangements are made to provide vibrating

Hard of hearing/deaf inmates who are indigent can request a vibrating alarm clock or

watches/clocks for inmates who are indigent?
24. Please describe, in detail, each step that takes place once a person is identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing, to evaluate/offer

9/25/2020 vibrating watch to the ADA coordinator at no cost. Once an inmate is identified as deaf/hard of hearing, ADA coordinator schedules a hearing assessment with the inmate. During the hearing assessment, ADA coordinator evaluates and informs inmate of LSCC's obligation, procedures, and aids and services

any auxiliary aids. Include who is responsible for each step.

9/28/2020 offered.

25. Please describe, in detail, any situation in 2019 or 2020 in which

a deaf/hard-of-hearing inmate has been denied a job or other

opportunity (access to a program or the like) because of their

disability. Include the inmate’s name, the date, and the

There have been no instances or situations in 2019 or 2020 in which a deaf/hard of

circumstances.

9/25/2020 hearing inmates has been denied a job or other opportunity because of their disability.

26. Please list all training that you have received for your role as ADA Coordinator.
27. Please provide an update on all items in your Deaf/HOH action plan (previously shared with me).

CBT's (Communicating with Deaf and Hard of Hearing Offenders, ADA Coordinator/CREATE, ADA Coordinator/Settlement Agreement, LSCC ADA); Annual In-Service; ADA National Network Learning Session: COVID19, Health Care, and the ADA webinar; The Importance of Essential Job Functions for Disability Law Compliance and Inclusion webinar; The ADA in Jails and Prisons: A 9/25/2020 Guide to Accommodating Inmates and Visitors with Disabilities webinar
TTY instructions are included in LSCC's ADA Brochure that each inmate receives at their initial ADA classification assessment. We also have a memo issued for staff concerning TTY instructions that I have attached. Our Purple phone has been updated with a new machine and it is working great. We also have a backup VRI laptop in central should we experience any outages. A sign has been posted beside the Purple phone informing inmates of this service if an outage happens. Maintenance has constructed a sound barrier around the ice machine in SAP dorm to dampen the sound. Volume adjustment button has been added by maintenance in December 2019 to the SAP dorm phone. Inmates who are moved to RHU will be instructed to wear their hearing aids during the 9/28/2020 move.

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 29

Prison: LSCC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Name of person filling out form: T Moore

Date: 9/25/2020

1

2

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 4288

3

4

5

Page: 700 of 985 - Page

6

7

9/12/2018 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

6/5/2019

6/4/2019

2/11/2020

6/3/2019

5/15/019

9/7/2017

8/3/2020

8/2/2018

7/24/2018

H&P 3. Date of initial hearing screening

9/12/2018

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

11/22/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Hearing aid

ordered

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue

was presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

9/12/2018

Medical Visit 1 - Description

H&P

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

H&P

H&P

H&P

Intake

Sick Call

Intake

H&P

Intake

H&P

6/5/2019
6/5/2019 Pocket talker issued

6/4/2019
6/4/2019 Hearing aid ordered

2/11/2020
3/8/2020 Hearing aid ordered

6/3/2019
6/18/2019 Hearing Aid ordered

5/15/2019
5/17/2019 Hearing aid ordered

9/7/2017
9/28/2019 Hearing aid ordered

8/8/2020
8/8/2020 Hearing aid ordered

8/2/2018

7/24/2018

N/A

8/30/2018

Refused further Hearing aid

testing

ordered

D

A

A

A

A

A

A

D

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

6/5/2019

9/6/2019

2/11/2020

6/3/2019

H&P/Audioscope Whisper Test Whisper Test Intake

5/15/2019 sick call

9/7/2017 Intake

8/3/2020 H&P

8/2/2018 Intake

7/24/2018 Hearing Screening

2/2/2018 CC/HP 2/2/2018 2/1/2019 Hearing Aid Ordered
A
N/A
N/A
2/2/2018 CC/HP

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

DOC Criteria not Order audicus Order Audicus Referred to

Refer to Audiology met.

test

test

provider

9/14/2018

10/22/2019 3/8/2020

6/17/2019

Hearing booth

Audicus Test Audicus Test H&P

ordered audiogram
5/17/2019
audiogram

hearing test 9/18/2017 f/u hearing

ordered audiogram
8/8/2020
audiogram

Hearing

screening/Refus

ed further

Refer to

testing

Audiology

8/30/2018

Audicus test

Refer to Audiology 2/1/2019 Audicus Test

DOC Criteria not met

Order hearing aid

Failed whisper

Ordered hearing test, ordered

aid

audiogram

refer to Completed test audiology

completed test

Hearing aid Exhoirbditer2e,dLSCC, pH.e3a0ring aid ordered

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-000101-GFVT-2EBA Do3c #: 99-2 4 Filed: 125/16/20 P6age: 701 o7 f 985 - Page ID#: 4289

9/5/2019 H&P

6/26/2019

5/22/2019

9/28/2017

9/1/2020

Hears to You F/u audiogram f/u audiogram appt.

test results reviewed

10/11/2018 4/2/2019

HA

HA

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Audiogram ordered
11/22/2019 audicus

ordered hearing

aid

ordered HA

8/2/2019 f/u on HA

ordered HA
10/13/2017 HA

orderd HA
9/23/2020 HA

Received hearing aid

Hearing aid issued

testing complete

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

12/10/2019 audicus results HA ordered

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date

1/1/2020 HA Received HA

9/5/2019

(b) End date

1/1/2020

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

118 days

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

date)

n/a

6/5/2019 6/5/2019 0
n/a

f/u as needed

Picked up HA HA issued

6/4/2019 12/13/2019 192
n/a

2/11/2020 4/2/2020 50
N/A

6/3/2019 7/22/2019 49 days
n/a

5/15/2019 7/8/2019 53 days
n/a

9/7/2017 10/13/2017 36 days
n/a

8/3/2020 9/23/2020 51 days
n/a

8/2/2018 9/18/2019 412 days
n/a

7/24/2018 10/11/2018 79 days
n/a

2/2/2018 4/2/2019 424 days
n/a

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 31

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-000101-GFVT-2EBA Do3c #: 99-2 4 Filed: 125/16/20 P6age: 702 o7 f 985 - Page ID#: 4290

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

There was a too long of a time period between each step. Pt. had a hearing test prior and did not meet criteria, then was retested and did meet criteria. n/a

Intital hearing screening done at KSR no follow up until 10/22/2019

Solution: Nursing staff to do test ASAP

First hearing

screening done

This pt. arrived to

at LLCC, when

LSCC on 8/22/2018,

patient arrived

he came before

to LSCC on

chart reviews was

9/5/2019, after This was

completed for

chart review, completed at hearing issues and

we tried to

KSR and it looks when he reported

complete

like it took 30 hearing issues to

audicus within 2 days to get the case worker,

weeks of arrival audicus

medical completed

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

but pt. refused. completed.

hearing tests.

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 32

Prison: LSCC Name of person filling out form: T Moore Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 703 of 985 - Page ID#: 4291

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

3/19/2019 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

3/6/2020

6/14/2018

2/5/2019

2/25/2019

7/5/2018

1/2/2020

10/8/2019

6/17/2018

3/27/2019

6/21/2019

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Intake

H&P

3/19/2019

3/6/2020

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

4/10/2019

3/8/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Hearing aid

Criteria not met ordered

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

D

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

N/A

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue

was presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

3/19/2019

3/6/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Description

Intake

H&P

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Intake

Intake

6/14/2018

2/5/2019

12/28/2018

9/1/2019

Hearing Aid Hearing Aid Ordered Ordered

A

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

6/14/2018 Intake

2/5/2019 Intake

Sick Call 2/25/2019 3/18/2019 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
2/25/2019 Sick Call

Intake

Chronic Care Intake

Sick Call

H&P

Intake

7/5/2018

1/2/2020

7/30/2019

1/21/2020

Hearing aid Criteria not met ordered

10/8/2019

6/17/2018

3/27/2019

6/21/2019

1A0n/s8w/e2r0e1d9yes to 2/20/2019

5/17/2019

11/20/2019

7 questions on DOC Criteria not DOC Criteria Not DOC Criteria not

hearing

met

met

met

D

A

B

D

D

D

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

7/5/2018 Intake

1/2/2020

10/8/2019

Chronic Care Intake

6/17/2018 Sick Call

3/27/2019 H&P

6/21/2019 Intake

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Refer to audiology

Refer to Refer to Audicus Refer to audiology audiology

4/5/2019

3/7/2020

12/28/2018

9/1/2019

Whisper Test Audicus test Audicus test

Audicus test

Faild whisper test/refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

3/18/2019

7/30/2019

1/21/2020

Audicus Test Audicus Test Audicus Test

Refer to audiology
3/2/2020
Audicus test

Hearing test ordered
2/20/2019
Audicus test

Hearing test ordered
5/17/2019
Audiucs Test

Hearing test ordered
11/20/2019
Audicus test

Failed test

Hearing aid ordered

Hearing test Hearing aid ordered ordered

Hearing aid ordered

Does not meet Hearing aid

criteria

ordered

Hearing aid ordered

DOC criteria not DOC criteria not DOC criteria not

met

Exhibmite2, LSCC, p. 3m3et

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 704 of 985 - Page ID#: 4292

4/10/2019

4/2/2020

2/5/2019

10/28/2019 4/29/2019

2/11/2020

3/12/2020

Audicus test HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Hearing aid Criteria not met issued

Hearing aid Hearing Aid Issued issued

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date

3/19/2019 3/6/2020

(b) End date

4/10/2019 4/2/2020

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

22 days

27 days

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

date)

n/a

n/a

6/14/2018 2/5/2019 236 days

2/5/2019 10/28/2019 265 days
n/a n/a

2/25/2019 4/29/2019 63 days
n/a

7/5/2018 7/30/2019 390 days
n/a

1/2/2020 2/11/2020 40 days
n/a

10/8/2019 3/12/2020 142 days
N/A

6/17/2018 2/20/2019 613 days
n/a

3/27/2019 5/7/2019 41 days
n/a

6/21/2019 11/20/2019 152 days
n/a

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 34

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 705 of 985 - Page ID#: 4293

n/a Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

This also fell during the time before we were doing chart reviews for hearing issues and when he reported to case worker then we complete hearing test. Looks like he had several tests scheduled at RCC but was never completed.

The first

screening at RCC

was completed

and provider

seen patient but

did not address Patient failed to

HOH and when show up for the

he got to LSCC, first two

found this upon scheduled

chart review and hearing tests

then completed causing a delay

testing.

in testing.

1st hearing screening done at LAC and no f/u's, pt transferred to LSCC and hearing issue found during H&P and testing then was completed. n/a

This patient had

placed a sick call

His hearing

r/t hearing

screening was issues d/t wax in

done at RCC and ear and given

never followed ear drops and to

up on, found flush in 5 days.

during recent He then

chart review, on reported HOH to

list to be

Case worker and

completed. Will we completed

have completed testing at that

within 7 days. time.

n/a

1st hearing screening completed at RCC and was not addressed there but upon transfer to LSCC, chart review completed and testing done.

Solution: All Solution:

staff need to be Education

more timely especially to sick

with completing call nurse to f/u

audicus.

with patient.

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 35

Prison: LSCC Name of person filling out form: T Moore Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 706 of 985 - Page ID#: 4294

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

11/4/2019 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

11/4/2019

7/30/2020

8/12/2019

6/2/2017

11/13/2018 4/27/2020

4/20/2020

11/13/2019

H&P 3. Date of initial hearing screening

11/4/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

11/11/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Whisper test

passed

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

D

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue

was presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

11/4/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

H&P

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

H&P

H&P

11/4/2019

7/30/2020

12/26/2019 8/9/2020

DOC criteria not Hearing Aid

met

Ordered

D

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

11/4/2019 H&P

7/30/2020 H&P

Sick Call 8/12/2019 9/1/2019 Hearing Aid Ordered
A
N/A
N/A
8/12/2019 Sick Call

Sick Call 6/15/2017 6/15/2017 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
Yes
6/2/2017 Sick Call

Chronic Care sick call

H&P

Intake

11/13/2018
12/20/2018 Hearing aid ordered

4/27/2020

4/20/2020

11/13/2019

8/6/2020

6/12/2020

12/5/2019

Referral for outside

Hearing Aid

ENT

Hearing aid ordered Ordered

A

B

A

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

11/13/2018 Chronic Care

4/27/2020 Provide Sick call

4/20/2020 H&P

11/13/2019 Intake

9/26/2019 Intake 9/26/2019 1/21/2020 DOC Criteria not met
D
N/A
N/A
9/26/2019 Intake

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Whisper test ordered
11/11/2019
Whisper test

Hearing test ordered
12/26/2019
Audicus test

Hearing Test Ordered
8/9/2020
Audicus Test

Refer to provider

Refer to audiology

8/15/2019

6/15/2017

Provider sick call Audiology

Refer to audiology
12/20/2018
Audicus test

Hearing test ordered
7/30/2020
Audicus test

Failed whisper test/refer to audiology
6/12/2020
Audicus test

Refer to audiology
12/5/2019
Audicus test

Refer to audiology
1/21/2020
Audicus test

Passed test/no

hearing aid

DOC criteria not

Hearing test

needed

met

test completed ordered

Hearing aid ordered

Hearing aid ordered

test completed

Hearing aid DOC criteria not Hearing aid ordered orderedExhibit 2m, LetSCC, p. 36

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 707 of 985 - Page ID#: 4295

9/1/2020

9/1/2019

Provider reviewed results Audicus Test

7/6/2017 Audiology

2/5/2019 HA

8/12/2020
Test results reviewed

7/23/2020 HA

12/31/2019 HA

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Hearing aid ordered
9/24/2020 HA

Hearing aid ordered
10/29/2019 HA

Picked up hearing aid

Hearing aid issued

Referral for Outisde

Hearing aid

ENT appt

Hearing aid issued issued

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date

11/4/2019

(b) End date

11/11/2019

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

7days

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

date)

n/a

11/4/2019 12/26/2019 52 days
n/a

7/30/2020 9/24/2020 57 days
n/a

8/12/2019 10/29/2019 78 days
n/a

6/2/2017 7/6/2017 34 days
n/a

11/13/2018 2/5/2019 83 days
n/a

4/27/2020 n/a
152 days

4/20/2020 7/23/2020 104 days
n/a

11/13/2019 12/31/2019 48 days
n/a

9/26/2019 1/21/2020 117 days
n/a

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 37

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 708 of 985 - Page ID#: 4296

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Hearing screening

Pt. was not tested, done at RCC on

1st hearing

due to changing 4/20/2020 with no

screening was

Hearing test housing areas, and follow up.

completed at

results were not being in and out of Transferred to LSCC

RCC and not

received and RHU. The process is on 5/13/2020. LSCC

addressed and

Upon review of

reviewed until ongoing due to done hearing test on

when

chart, the

1/23/2019

appointment with 6/12/2020. Received

transferred to

provider took 26

causing delay in outside ENT. Appt. results 6/18/2020.

LSCC, after chart

days to review

ordering of

scheduled for

Hearing aid received

review, testing

n/a

n/a

n/a

results.

n/a

hearing aid. 10/1/2020

on 7/23/2020

n/a

completed.

Solution: Provider to review results ASAP.

Solution: Nurses

will be educated on

importance of

Solution: Follow completing test Solution: Notify

up to make sure within timely

facilities of issues

results are

manner, and to test when patients are

received in a even if pt. is housed transferred before

timely manner. in the RHU unit. completion.

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 38

Prison: LSCC Name of person filling out form: T Moore Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 709 of 985 - Page ID#: 4297

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

6/15/2018 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

9/26/2019

7/5/2018

2/9/2017

6/13/2018

8/23/2018

11/19/2019 2/4/2019

9/12/2017

11/7/2018

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Intake

6/15/2018

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

4/24/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

DOC Criteria not

met

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

D

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue

was presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

6/15/2018

Medical Visit 1 - Description

Intake

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Intake 9/26/2019 10/14/2019 Hearing Aid Ordered
A
N/A
N/A
9/26/2019 Intake

H&P

Intake

7/5/2018

2/9/2017

7D/o5e/s20n1o8t meet criteria. Pocket talker issued

3/27/2017
Hearing aid ordered

D

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

7/5/2018 H&P

2/9/2017 Intake

Chronic Care Chronic Care Chronic Care Chronic Care Sick Call

Intake

6/13/2018
7/11/2018 Hearing aid ordered

8/23/2018
1/30/2019 Hearing aid ordered

11/19/2019
1/21/2020 Hearing aid ordered

2/4/2019

9/12/2017

5/8/2018

3/28/2019

10/3/2017

11/26/2018

DOC criteria not Not a candidate Hearing aid

met

for hearing aid ordered

A

A

A

D

D

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

6/13/2018 Chronic Care

8/23/2018 Chronic Care

11/19/2019 Chronic Care

2/4/2019 Chronic care

9/12/2017 Sick Call

5/8/2018 Intake

7/25/2019 H&P 7/25/2019 7/26/2019 DOC criteria not met
D
N/A
N/A
7/25/2019 H&P

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Refer to Refer to audiology Audiology

4/24/2019

10/11/2019

Audicus test

Audicus test

Hears fine with Refer to pocket talker audiology
3/27/2017
Audiology

Refer to audiology
7/11/2018
Audicus Test

Refer to Audiology
1/30/2019
Audicus test

Refer to audiology
1/21/2020
Audicus test

Refer to audiology
3/28/2019
Audicus test

Refer to Audiology
10/3/2017
Audiology

Refer to audiology
11/26/2018
Audicus test

Refer to audiology
7/26/2019
Audicus test

Hearing aid DOC criteria not met ordered

Hearing aid ordered

Hearing aid ordered

Hearing aid ordered

Hearing aid ordered

Patient not a

DOC criteria not candidate for Hearing aid DOC criteria not

met

hearing aidsExhiboritde2r,eLdSCC, p.m3e9t

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 710 of 985 - Page ID#: 4298

11/7/2019

4/25/2017

8/2/2018

2/26/2019

2/11/2020

12/13/2019

HA

Audiology

HA

HA

HA

HA

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Hearing aid issued

Picked up hearing aid

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date

6/15/2018

(b) End date

4/24/2019

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

313 days

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

date)

n/a

9/26/2019 11/7/2019 42 days
n/a

7/5/2018 7/5/2018 0 days
n/a

2/9/2017 4/25/2017 75 days
n/a

6/13/2018 8/2/2018 50 days
N/A

8/23/2018 2/26/2019 187 days
n/a

11/19/2019 2/11/2020 84 days
n/a

2/4/2019 3/28/2019 52 days
n/a

9/12/2017 10/3/2017 21 days
n/a

11/7/2018 2/13/2019 98 days
n/a

7/5/2019 7/26/2019 21 days
n/a

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 40

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?
Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 711 of 985 - Page ID#: 4299

In 2018 he did have

a hearing screening

done with

yes/sometimes

answers but

Upon chart

provider saw him on

review, looks

8/6/18 and she

like it was over

charted that he

30 days before

denied hearing

referral made to

issues. Pt. told case

go out to

worker of hearing

audiology and

issues and hearing

then 30 days

screening was

before going

redone and testing

back to pick up

completed.

n/a

n/a

hearing aid.

Upon reiview of

Upon chart Upon chart

chart, it took

review, it took 5 review, it took 2

the provider 2.5

months to get months to get

months to

audicus test audicus test

review tests

completed. completed. n/a

n/a

results.

n/a

Solution: We Solution: We

have since

have since

assigned a nurse assigned a nurse

to complete to complete

audicus so they audicus so they

get completed get completed

in a timely

in a timely

manner.

manner.

Solution: Education provided to staff to review and completed ASAP.

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 41

Prison: LSCC Name of person filling out form: T Moore Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 712 of 985 - Page ID#: 4300

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

1/15/2020 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

12/5/2018

3. Date of initial hearing screening

CC

Intake

6/1/2018

12/5/2018

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

1/15/2020

12/20/2018

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Answered yes to Hearing aid

4 questions ordered

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

B

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/a

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

N/A

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue

was presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

1/15/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Description

CC

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

1/17/2019 H&P 1/17/2018 2/1/2019 Hearing Aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A

12/20/2018 2/9/2018

H&P

Intake

3/27/2019

8/7/2019

Intake

H&P

12/19/2018 CC/HP

2/5/2019
Hearing screening

2/28/2019

12/5/2017

3/27/2019

8/7/2019

12/6/2017

2/5/2019

2/28/2019

2/9/2018

Whisper test Has hearing aid passed

9/12/2019

11/15/2019

1D/o2e1s/2n0o2t 0meet

3/7/2020

DOC criteria not Need to repeat criteria for hearing Hearing aid

met

hearing test aid

ordered

A

D

D

B

D

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

12/20/2018 Intake

2/9/2018 Intake

3/27/2019 Intake

8/7/2019 H&P

12/2/2019 Nurse visit

2/5/2019 Hearing screening

8/20/2020 4/1/2019

H&P

Intake

8/20/2020 4/1/2019

8/20/2020
Hearing aid ordered

4H/e8a/r2in0g19test was inconclusive/P

C

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

8/20/2020 4/1/2019

H&P

Intake

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Refer to audiology 3/2/2020 Audicus Test
DOC criteria not met

Refer to audiology
12/20/2018
Audicus test

Refer to audiology
2/22/2018
Whisper test

Refer to audiology
9/12/2019
Audicus test

Refer to audiology
9/1/2019
Audicus test

No follow up done after hearing Refer to audiology screening

Audicus ordered

Refer to audiology

1/21/2020

3/7/2020

8/22/2020 4/8/2019

Audicus test

Audicus Test Audicus Test Audicus Test

Hearing aid ordered

Passed test/no

hearing aid

DOC criteria not Repeat test on DOC Criteria not

needed

met

11/15/19

met

Hearing aid

Hearing aid

ordered ExhTiebsitt C2o,mLpSleCteC,orpd.e4re2d

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 713 of 985 - Page ID#: 4301

2/8/2019 HA
Hearing aid issued

2/3/2020
Audicus test
Patient walked out before completing test 3/22/2020 Audicus Test

4/2/2020 HA

9/17/2020 Provider Review of Results

1/30/2020 HA

Hearing aid issued

Hearing Aid ordered

Refused hearing aid/entered DOC system with his own hearing aid

2/3/2019 Audiologist

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date

1/15/2020

(b) End date

3/2/2020

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

43 days

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

date)

n/a

12/5/2018 2/8/2019 55 days
n/a

1/17/2019 7/10/2019 174 days
n/a

12/20/2018 2/8/2019 50 days
n/a

2/9/2018 2/22/2018 13 days
n/a

3/27/2019 9/12/2019 169 days
n/a

Hearing aid ordered
4/30/2020
HA Hearing aid issued

8/7/2019 4/30/2020

12/19/2018 1/21/2020 398 days
n/a

Repair/cleane d hearing aid

5/5/2019 KSR 3/7/2020 LSCC 4/2/2020 26 days LSCC

8/20/2020 9/26/2020 57 days

n/a

n/a

4/1/2019 4/1/2019 0 days
n/a

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 43

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 714 of 985 - Page ID#: 4302

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Upon chart review,

patient had

Initial hearing

multiple hearing screening done

screenings at KSR at KSR with no

1st hearing

and no audiogram further action.

screening done Delay in testing completed but he After being

at KSR, was after initial

had other medical transferred to

Upon review of

transferred order. Pt. had to issues with ears, LSCC, Audicus

chart, the

multiple times retest several upon transfer to test was

provider did not

before

times to get an LSCC, testing was completed and

review results

completing accuarte

completed in a hearing aid

n/a

for 3.5 months n/a

n/a

testing at LLCC. reading

timely manner. ordered.

Solution: The provider to more timely with review of results.

Solution: Staff educated on hearing test completetions in a timely manner

Solution: Follow up action to be completed after hearing screening.

Patient had working hearing aid upon entry.

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 44

Prison: LSCC Name of person filling out form: T Moore Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 715 of 985 - Page ID#: 4303

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

7/3/2019 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

1/2/2019

9/18/2020 6/26/2018 5/30/2019 7/30/2020 1/30/2020 12/11/2018

5/31/2017 5/4/2018 10/23/2018 12/14/2017

H&P 3. Date of initial hearing screening

7/3/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

7/30/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Hearing aid

ordered

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue

was presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

7/3/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

H&P

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

H&P 1/2/2019 1/11/2019 Hearing Aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
1/2/2019 H&P

H&P

CC

9/18/2020
awaiting audicus test

6/26/2018
6/26/2018 Hearing aid ordered

B

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

9/18/2020 6/26/2018

H&P

CC

H&P

H&P

5/30/2019 7/30/2020

5/31/2019
DOC criteria not met

8/8/2020
Hearing aid ordered

D

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

5/30/2019 7/30/2020

H&P

H&P

Intake

Intake

1/30/2020 12/11/2018

2/10/2020
DOC criteria not met

12/27/2018
Hearing aid ordered

D

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

1/30/2020 12/11/2018

Intake

Intake

Intake

Intake

H&P

Sick Call

6/13/2017 6/14/2018 10/23/2018 12/14/2017

6/13/2017
Whisper test passed

7H/e2a5r/in2g01a8id 12/14/2018

not

Hearing aid

recommende ordered

2/19/2019
Hearing aid ordered

D

D

A

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

5/31/2017 5/4/2018

Intake

Intake

10/23/2018 12/14/2017

H&P

Sick Call

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Audicus ordered

7/30/2019 1/11/2019

Audicus test Audicus test

Pocket talker issued

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to Audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to Refer to provider audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

6/26/2018 5/31/2019 8/8/2020 2/10/2020 12/24/2018

6/13/2017 7/25/2018 12/14/2018 2/19/2019

Audicus test Audicus test Audicus test Audicus test H&P

Whisper test ENT

Audicus test Audicus test

Hearing aid Hearing test

ordered

ordered

Hearing aid DOC criteria Hearing aid DOC criteria Audiogram

ordered

not met

ordered

not met

ordered

No hearing Hearing aid Hearing aid Test passed loss indicatedExohrdibeirte2d, LSCCor,dpe.re4d5

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 716 of 985 - Page ID#: 4304

10/28/2019 2/5/2019

8/2/2018

9/23/2020

12/27/2019

1/11/2019 3/13/2019

HA

HA

HA

HA

Audicus

HA

HA

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Test completed
1/4/2019 HA Evaluation

Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

ordered HA

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date

7/3/2019

(b) End date

10/28/2019

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

117 days

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

date)

n/a

1/2/2019 2/5/2019 34 days
n/a

9/18/2020 8 days

6/26/2018 8/2/2018 37 days
n/a

5/30/2019 5/31/2019 1 day
n/a

7/30/2020 9/23/2020 55 days
n/a

1/30/2020 2/28/2020 29 days
n/a

12/11/2018 6/2/2020

5/31/2017 6/13/2017 13 days
n/a

5/4/2018 7/25/2018 82 days
n/a

10/23/2018 1/11/2019 80 days

2/19/2019 3/13/2019 22 days

n/a

n/a

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 46

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?
Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 717 of 985 - Page ID#: 4305

Pt. was issued HA

in early 2019 but

lost it.Hearing aid

was ordered by

GRCC. Pt.

transferred to

LSCC on 5/17/2019

On 12/14/2017,

and brought to

Patient had to

pt. placed sick

LSCC's attention.

be sent out to

call and was

GRCC was

ENT, so the

given a pocket

It took

contacted regarind

process is a

talker which

provider 2

aid and they said

little longer

improved his

months to

they would mail it

d/t doing

hearing, then

read hearing

to LSCC upon

consult,

Took too long while at LAC an

test then took

receipt. LSCC

getting

to get the audicus was

a month to

received and

approved and actual audicus completed and

receive

issued HA on

getting

test

he was given a

hearing aid. n/a

n/a

6/2/2020

n/a

appointment. completed. hearing aid.

Solution: Provider has been educated on timely reading of audicus testing.

Solution: Educate all staff on importance of follow up care

Solution: Nursing staff to do testing ASAP

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 47

Prison: LSCC Name of person filling out form: T Moore Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 718 of 985 - Page ID#: 4306

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

9/18/2019 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

3/26/2020

8/2/2018

3/7/2019 2/5/2020 6/21/2018

6/6/2017 1/23/2018 8/7/2018 5/3/2019 1/22/2019 9/30/2019

H&P 3. Date of initial hearing screening

9/18/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

10/9/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

DOC criteria

not met

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

D

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue

was presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

9/18/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

H&P

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

H&P 3/26/2020 4/4/2020 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
3/26/2020 H&P

Intake 8/2/2018 10/10/2018 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
8/2/2018 Intake

Intake

Intake

Intake

3/23/2019 2/14/2020 6/21/2018

3/25/2019
Hearing Aid Ordered

3/7/2020
Hearing aid ordered

12/20/2018
Hearing aid ordered

A

A

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

3/7/2019 Intake

2/14/2020 Hearing assessment

6/21/2018 Intake

Intake

Chronic Care Sick Call

Intake

Intake

H&P

6/9/2017 1/23/2018 8/3/2018 5/3/2019 1/22/2019 9/30/2019

6/22/2017
Hearing aid ordered

7/30/2019
Hearing Aid ordered

4/16/2019
Hearing aid ordered

5/3/2019 5/7/2019
Answered yes Hearing aid to 2 questions ordered

11/11/2019
Hearing Aid ordered

A

A

A

B

A

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

6/6/2017 Intake

1/23/2018 5/3/2019

CC

Sick Call

5/3/2019 Intake

1/22/2019 9/30/2019

Intake

HP/CC

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to Audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

11/8/2019 4/4/2020 9/7/2018

3/25/2019 3/7/2020 12/20/2018 6/22/2017 7/30/2019 4/16/2019

Audicus test Audicus Test Audicus Test Audicus Test Audicus Test Audicus Test Audicus Test Audicus Test Audicus Test

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

5/17/2019 11/11/2019

Audicus Test Audicus Test

DOC criteria Hearing aid Hearing aid

not met

ordered

ordered

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid

ordered

ordered

ordered

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid

ordered

ordered

ordered

Hearing aid Hearing aid Eoxrhdiebrietd2, LSCoCr,depr.e4d8

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 719 of 985 - Page ID#: 4307

4/30/2020 11/30/2018 4/17/2019 4/2/2020 2/6/2019

7/6/2017 10/28/2019 5/9/2019

9/17/2019 12/20/2019

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

issued

1/1/2020 HA

returned hearing aid stating that he didn't want it

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

issued

Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date

9/18/2019

(b) End date

11/8/2019

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

51 days

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

date)

n/a

3/26/2020 4/30/2020 35 days
n/a

8/2/2018 11/30/2018 120 days
n/a

3/7/2019 4/17/2019 41 days
n/a

2/5/2020 4/2/2020 56 days
n/a

6/21/2018 2/6/2019 230 days
n/a

6/6/2017 7/6/2017 30 days
n/a

1/23/2018 8/7/2018 10/28/2019 5/9/2019

n/a

n/a

5/3/2019 n/a

1/22/2019 9/17/2019
n/a

9/30/2019 12/20/2019 81 days
n/a

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 49

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 720 of 985 - Page ID#: 4308

n/a Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

All this was Initial hearing

completed at screening

KSR, upon

completed at

review of chart RCC and

it appears to f/u'ed up

have extended with, upon

periods of time arrival to LSCC

between getting pt placed a

audicus and sick call and

getting hearing process was

aid ordered. completed.

Initial hearing screening was done at RCC and f/u'ed up with, upon arrival to LSCC, pt. placed a sick call and time lapse between steps was too long. n/a

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 50

Prison: LSCC Name of person filling out form: T Moore Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 721 of 985 - Page ID#: 4309

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

12/23/2019 5/14/2020 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

12/30/2019 1/4/2019

8/29/2019 12/4/2019 6/26/2019 6/3/2019

8/9/2018

11/14/2019 3/5/2020

8/8/2019

5/24/2019

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Sick Call

12/23/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

12/27/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Hearing aid

ordered

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue

was presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

12/23/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

Sick Call

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

H&P

Intake

5/14/2020 12/30/2019

5/17/2020
Hearing aid ordered

1/8/2020
Hearing aid ordered

A

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

5/14/2020 12/30/2019

H&P/Whisper

test

Intake

Intake

Intake

Sick Call

H&P

8/30/2019 12/4/2019

Refused further testing N/A

12/26/2019

Refused

DOC criteria

N/A

further testing not met

7/17/2019
1Fa1i/l1e4d/22019 tests/Need repeat test

N/A

N/A

D

B

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

1/4/2019 Sick Call

8/29/2019 12/4/2019 6/26/2019

Intake

Sick Call

H&P

CC/HP 6/3/2019 6/7/2019 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
6/3/2019 CC/HP

Intake 8/9/2018 10/24/2018 Hearing Aid Ordered
A
N/A
N/A
8/9/2018 Intake

H&P 11/14/2019 11/15/2019 Hearing Aid Ordered
A
N/A
N/A
11/14/2019 H&P

H&P 3/5/2020 3/22/2020 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
3/5/2020 H&P

H&P 8/8/2019 9/6/2019 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
8/8/2019 H&P

H&P 6/26/2019 8/13/2019 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
5/24/2019 H&P

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refused

Refused

Refer to

further testing further testing audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

5/17/2020 1/8/2020

12/26/2019 8/8/2019 6/7/2019 10/24/2018 11/15/2019 3/8/2020 9/6/2019 8/13/2019

Audicus Test Audicus test Audicus Test

Audicus Test Audicus Test Audicus test Audicus test Audicus test Audicus test Audicus test Audicus test

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid

ordered

ordered

ordered

DOC criteria Failed

not met

test/repeat

Hearing aid ordered

Hearing aid ordered

Hearing aid ordered

Results inconclusive/ Hearing aid Hearing aid ReEtexsht ibit 2, LoSrCdeCre,dp. 51 ordered

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 722 of 985 - Page ID#: 4310

7/28/2020 1/27/2020

11/14/2019 6/18/2019 11/19/2018 12/13/2019 3/22/2020 10/28/2019 9/24/2019

HA

HA

Audicus test HA

HA

HA

Audicus test HA

HA

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

Failed

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid

test/repeat issued

issued

issued

ordered

issued

issued

3/11/2020 Audicus test

4/30/2020 HA

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

DOC criteria not met

Hearing aid issued

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date

12/23/2019

(b) End date

1/27/2020

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

35 days

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

date)

n/a

5/14/2020 7/28/2020 75 days
N/A

12/30/2019 1/27/2020 28 days

1/4/2019

n/a

8/29/2019

12/4/2019

6/26/2019

6/3/2019 6/18/2019 15 days
n/a

8/9/2018 11/29/2018 112 days

11/14/2019 12/13/2019 29 days

3/5/2020 4/30/2020 58 days

n/a

n/a

n/a

8/8/2019 10/28/2019 81 days

5/24/2019 9/24/2019 123 days

n/a

n/a

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 52

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 723 of 985 - Page ID#: 4311

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Hearing test results were not received until 6/8/2020
Solution: Contact Audicus to ensure results are received in a timely manner

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 53

Prison: LSCC Name of person filling out form: T Moore Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 724 of 985 - Page ID#: 4312

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
6/25/2019 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

6/7/2019

2/5/2019

3/30/2018 EKCC

9/17/2019

6/26/2017

7/3/2019

3/2/2020

11/8/2018

11/8/2018

No complaints

on file

5/30/2018

8/28/2019

H&P 3. Date of initial hearing screening

6/25/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

7/6/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Hearing aid

ordered

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue

was presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

6/25/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

H&P

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

H&P 6/7/2019 7/30/2019 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
6/7/2019 H&P

Intake 2/5/2019 2/19/2019 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
2/5/2019 Intake

Intake

CC

3/30/2020 9/17/2019

4/12/2020
Hearing aid ordered

10/29/2019
Hearing aid ordered

A

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

3/30/2018 9/17/2019 Intake/Hearin g screening CC

Intake 6/30/2017 10/19/2017 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
6/26/2017 Intake

H&P

H&P

7/3/2019 3/2/2020
8P/t.5s/t2a0t1e9s no 3/31/2020 further action Hearing aid is needed/Can ordered

N/A

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

7/3/2019 H&P

3/2/2020 H&P

H&P 11/8/2018 12/17/2018 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
11/8/2018 H&P

Chronic Care N/A

Intake

12/5/2018 9/26/2018 5/30/2018

12/5/2018
Hearing aid ordered

8/20/2019 1/9/2019

No complaints Hearing aid

on file

ordered

A

N/A

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

11/1/2018 9/26/2018 5/30/2018

CC

Intake

Intake

H&P 8/28/2019 10/10/2019 DOC criteria not met
D
N/A
N/A
8/28/2019 H&P

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Pt. denies

Order whisper need for

test

hearing aids

Audicus test ordered

Refer to audiology

Refer to provider

6/27/2019 7/30/2019 2/14/2019 4/12/2020 10/29/2019 10/19/2017 8/5/2019

Audicus test Audicus test Whisper test Audicus test Audicus test Audiology Follow Up

Refer to audiolgoy

Refer to audiology

Refer to provider

No hearing Refer to

issues

audiology

Refer to audiology

3/31/2020 12/17/2018 12/5/2018 8/20/2019 1/9/2019 10/10/2019

Audicus test Audicus test Audicus test CC

Audicus test Audicus test

Hearing aid Hearing aid Refer to

ordered

ordered

audiology

Hearing aid ordered

Hearing aid

Hearing issues

recommende Hearing aids resolved with Hearing aid

d

ordered

treatment ordered

Hearing aid Hearing aid No hearing Hearing aid

recommende recommende issues

recommende DOC criteria

d

d

repEoxrhteibdit 2, LdSCC, p. 54 not met

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 725 of 985 - Page ID#: 4313

7/19/2019 10/28/2019 2/19/2019 8/10/2020 12/20/2019 11/9/2017

4/30/2020 1/11/2019 2/7/2019

HA

HA

Audicus test HA

HA

Audiology

HA

HA

HA

2/5/2019 HA

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid ordered

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

bilateral Hearing aids issued

3/7/2019 HA

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued of choice ear

Hearing aid issued

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Hearing aid issued

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date

6/25/2019

(b) End date

7/19/2019

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

24 days

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

date)

n/a

6/7/2019 10/28/2019 143 days

2/8/2019 3/7/2019 27 days

n/a

n/a

4/12/2020 8/10/2020 120 days
n/a

9/17/2019 12/21/2019 95 days

6/26/2017 11/9/2017 105 days

n/a

n/a

7/3/2019

3/2/2020 4/30/2020 59 days
n/a

11/8/2018 1/11/2019 64 days
n/a

11/8/2018 2/7/2019 92 days
n/a

No complaints

on file

5/30/2018

2/5/2019

8/28/2019 11/15/2019

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 55

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 726 of 985 - Page ID#: 4314

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Hearing aid order was approved on 4/16/2020. Reason for delay in receipt of hearing aid is unknown.
Solution: Closer follow up on all audiology proceedings.

Delay in testing. Pt. was not test for 30 days after audicus ordered delaying the process.
Solution: Educate nurses on timely testing

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 56

Prison: LSCC Name of person filling out form: T Moore Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 727 of 985 - Page ID#: 4315

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

12/18/2019 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

12/2/2019

3. Date of initial hearing screening

H&P

Intake

12/18/2019 12/2/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

12/18/2019 12/6/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Hearing test Hearing aid

ordered

ordered

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

B

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

N/A

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue

was presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

12/18/2019 12/2/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

H&P

H&P

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Hearing test to

be performed

after ear

infection has

been treated,

after the date of Refer to

1/1/2020

audiology

1/2/2020 8/9/2019

CC

H&P

1/2/2020 8/9/2019

1/2/2020
Hearing test ordered

9/6/2019
Hearing aid ordered

B

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

1/2/2020 CC

8/9/2019 H&P

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

3/31/2019 Intake 3/31/2019 2/13/2019 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A N/A
3/31/2019 Intake
Refer to audiology

1/4/2020 9/10/2018

CC/H&P

H&P

1/8/2020 7/30/2019

1/8/2020
Hearing test ordered

11/20/2019
Hearing aid ordered

A

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

1/4/2020 CC/HP

9/10/2018 H&P

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

1/27/2017 Hearing screening at KSR

7/14/2019 Intake

1/27/2017 7/14/2019

8R/ig2h7t/2e0a1r 8 hearing aid, multiple ENT

11/11/2019
Hearing aid ordered

A

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

1/27/2017 Hearing screening

7/14/2019 Intake

Refer to Refer to ENT audiology

N/A N/A 9/17/2019 9/17/2019 Refer to audiology
B
N/A N/A
9/17/2019 H&P
Refer to audiology

4/22/2019 11/4/2019 10/20/2017

CC

Intake

Intake NTC

4/22/2019 11/4/2019 N/A

4D/o2e4s/2n0o1t9 11/4/2019

meet

Hearing test

criteria/Pocke ordered

1/3/2018 Hearing aids

D

B

C

Does not

meet criteria N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

4/22/2019 11/4/2019 10/20/2017

F/U

Intake

Intake

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

3/12/2020 Audicus Test

12/6/2019 Audicus test

1/9/2020 Refused audicus test

9/6/2019 Audicus test

2/13/2019 Audicus test

3/4/2020 Refused Audicus test

7/30/2019 Audicus test

6/6/2018 11/11/2019 Whisper test Audicus test

3/7/2020 4/24/2019 Audicus Test Audicus test

1/3/2018 Audicus Test

Hearing aid ordered

Hearing aid ordered

Hearing aid Hearing aid

ordered

ordered

Repeat test

Hearing aid DOC Criteria DOC Criteria

Hearing aids

ordered

not met

nEoxthmibeitt 2, LSCC, p. 57 ordered

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 728 of 985 - Page ID#: 4316

4/29/2020 HA

12/31/2019 8/8/2020 8/22/2019

Refused

HA

Audicus test HA

8/22/2019 HA

11/20/2019 8/27/2018 12/17/2019

Audicus

Audicust test HA

5/8/2019

1/25/2018

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

Hearing aid ordered

right ear hearing aid issued, ENT visit

Hearing aid issued

12/20/2019 HA

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Hearing aid issued

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date

12/18/2019

(b) End date

4/29/2020

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

132 days

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

date)

n/a

12/2/2019 12/31/2019 29 days

1/2/2020 1/9/2020 7 days

N/a

n/a

8/9/2019 10/28/2019

3/31/2019 8/22/2019 144 days

n/a

n/a

1/4/2020 3/4/2020 58 days
n/a

9/10/2018 12/20/2019 101 days

1/27/2017 8/27/2018 578 days

n/a

7/14/2019 N/A 12/17/2019

Pocket talker issued

Bilateral Hearings Aids issued

4/22/2019 4/30/2019

11/4/2019 9/15/2020

1/3/2018 1/25/2018 23 days

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 58

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 729 of 985 - Page ID#: 4317

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Provider initially requested delay in testing due to ear infection treatment. Staff failed to follow up and the test was delayed.
Solution:Educat e staff on importance of following up with hearing issues/tests.

Inmate has been housed at LSCC since 2/12/2020. Reason for delay unknown.

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 59

Prison: LSCC Name of person filling out form: T Moore Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 730 of 985 - Page ID#: 4318

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

9/11/2019 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

6/7/2019

1/26/2017 2/21/2020 9/11/2020 9/27/2018 8/1/2019

9/9/2019

8/1/2018

1/16/2020 4/14/2020 10/25/2019 10/12/2017

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Sick Call

9/12/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

11/22/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

DOC criteria

not met

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue

was presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

9/11/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

Sick call

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

H&P 6/7/2019 7/11/2019 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
6/7/2019 H&P

Intake 1/26/2017 10/24/2019 cochlear implants
D
N/A
N/A
5/4/2018 Intake

H&P 2/21/2020 3/8/2020 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
2/21/2020 H&P

H&P 9/11/2020 9A/u1d1i/c2u0s 20 ordered awaiting
B
N/A
N/A
9/11/2020 H&P

Intake

Intake

Intake

H&P

H&P

H&P

H&P

Sick Call

9/27/2018 8/1/2019 9/23/2019 8/1/2018 1/16/2020 4/14/2020 10/25/2019 10/12/2017

10/9/2018
Hearing aid ordered

10/9/2019 10/22/2019

Whisper test Hearing aid

passed

ordered

8/8/2018
Hearing aid ordered

3/7/2020
Hearing aid ordered

4/26/2020
Hearing aid ordered

12/6/2019
DOC criteria not met

2/15/2018
Hearing is normal

A

D

A

A

A

Refused

D

D

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

9/27/2018 8/1/2019

Intake

Intake

9/9/2019 Intake

8/1/2018 H&P

1/16/2020 4/14/2020 10/25/2019 10/12/2017

H&P

H&P

H&P

Sick Call

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Patient has cochlear implants

Refer to Audiology

Audicus ordered

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

11/22/2019 7/11/2019

3/8/2020 9/19/2020 10/9/2018 10/9/2019 10/22/2019 8/8/2018 3/7/2020 4/26/2020 12/6/2019 2/15/2018

Audicus test Audicus test

DOC criteria Hearing aid

not met

ordered

Audicus Test
Hearing aid ordered

Audicus test
Test Completed

Audicus test
Hearing aid ordered

Whisper test Audicus test

Passed

test/ear wax

removed/No

further

Hearing aid

hearing issues ordered

Audicus test
Hearing aid ordered

Audicus test
Hearing aid ordered

Whisper test Audicus test Audiology
Patient has Hearing aid DOC Criteria normal ordEexrhedibit 2, LnSoCt Cm,etp. 60 hearing

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 731 of 985 - Page ID#: 4319

8/22/2019

4/2/2020

10/25/2018

11/6/2019 9/11/2018 4/2/2020 4/26/2020

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

Hearing aid issued

Right ear hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Inmate REFUSED hearing aid for right ear

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date
9/11/2019 (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

6/7/2019 8/22/2019

1/26/2017

2/21/2020 4/2/2020 42 days
n/a

9/11/2020 14 days

9/27/2018 8/1/2019 10/25/2018

9/9/2019 11/6/2019

8/1/2018 9/11/2018

1/16/2020 4/2/2020 78 days

10/25/2019 10/12/2017

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 61

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 732 of 985 - Page ID#: 4320

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Audicus testing was delayed by nursing staff after order date.
Solution: Educate nursing on timely testing after receiving orders

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 62

Prison: LSCC Name of person filling out form: T Moore Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 733 of 985 - Page ID#: 4321

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2/7/2020 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

11/14/2018 9/8/2020

5/16/2018 8/13/2020 7/15/2019 10/19/2018 1/3/2019

3/27/2020 6/13/2019 4/11/2018 3/27/2020 8/24/2019

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Sick Call

2/7/2020

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

2/18/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

DOC criteria

not met

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

B

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue

was presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

2/7/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Description

Sick Call

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

CC 12/20/2018 1/23/2019 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
11/14/2020 CC

H&P

Sick Call

9/8/2020 5/22/2018
9D/e8t/e2r0m2i0ned 10/5/2018 no hearing aid Hearing aid is needed. ordered

Determined no hearing aid is needed. A

N/A N/A

5/16/2018 Sick Call

CC

H&P

Intake

H&P

8/13/2020 7/31/2019 10/19/2018 1/3/2019

8d/e1te3r/m20in20ed to AHuega-r1in9g aid 3/1/2019

12/11/2019

have had no recommende

Hearing aid

hearing loss d/Patient No complaints ordered

D

D

D

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

7/15/2019 10/19/2018 1/3/2019

H&P

Intake

H&P

H&P 3/27/2020 4/4/2020 Hearing Aid Ordered
A
N/A
N/A
3/27/2020 H&P

Intake

Intake

6/13/2019 4/11/2018

8/9/2019
Has working hearing aid

5/30/2018
Hearing Aid Ordered

A

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

6/13/2019 4/11/2018

Intake

Intake

H&P 3/27/2020 4/5/2020 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
3/27/2020 H&P

CC 7/12/2018 9/5/2019 Refer to provider
B
N/A
N/A
8/24/2019 CC

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

2/18/2020 12/20/2018

Audicus test Audicus test

DOC criteria not met

Refer to audiology 10/5/2018 Audicus test
Hearing aid ordered

Refer to audiology

Refer to provider

8/20/2019 3/1/2019

Audicus test Intake

Refer to audiology

Refer to Provider

Has working Refer to hearing aid provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

12/11/2019 4/4/2020

5/30/2018 4/5/2020

Audicus test Audicus Test

Audicus test Audicus test

Hearing aid No hearing Hearing aid Hearing aid

ordered

issues

ordered

ordered

Hearing aid Hearing aid ordEexrhedibit 2, LoSrCdeCre,dp. 63

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 734 of 985 - Page ID#: 4322

2/5/2019

11/27/2018

12/17/2019

1/20/2020 4/30/2020

7/19/2018 4/5/2020

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

H/A

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Refuses hearing aid

Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

Hearing aid issued

Left ear hearing aid issued

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date

2/7/2020

(b) End date

2/18/2020

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

11 days

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

date)

11/14/2018 2/5/2019

9/8/2020 9/8/2020 o days

5/16/2018 11/27/2018

8/13/2020 8/13/2020 0 days

7/15/2019

10/19/2018 1/3/2019 1/20/2020

4/4/2020

6/13/2019

4/11/2018 7/19/2018

3/27/2020

8/24/2019

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 64

Prison: LSCC Name of person filling out form: T Moore Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 735 of 985 - Page ID#: 4323

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

6/18/2019 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Intake

6/18/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

8/1/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

No hearing

issues

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

D

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue

was presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

6/18/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

Intake

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

5/22/2020 H&P 5/22/2020 6/12/2020 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
5/22/2020 H&P

6/28/2019 7/26/2017

Intake

CC

6/28/2019 7/26/2017

10/10/2019
Hearing aid ordered

6/19/2019
Hearing aid ordered

A

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

6/28/2019 7/26/2017

Intake

CC

1/31/2018 Intake 1/31/2018 4/24/2019 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
1/31/2018 Intake

7/3/2019 10/12/2018 12/3/2019

Intake

H&P

Intake RCC

7/18/2019 10/12/2018 3/21/2020

11/21/2019
Hearing Aid Ordered

12/3/2018
Hearing aid ordered

3/21/2020
Hearing aid ordered

A

A

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

7/3/2019 Intake

10/12/2018 12/3/2019

H&P

Intake RCC

4/30/2019 CC 4/30/2019 5/23/2019 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
4/30/2019 CC

6/12/2020 H&P 6/12/2020 6/12/2020 hearing aid orderd
A
n/a
N/A
6/12/2020 H&P

8/21/2019 1/26/2017

Intake

Nurse Treatment

8/21/2019 1/26/2017

8/22/2019 10/5/2018

Refuses

Hearing aid

hearing tests ordered

D

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

8/21/2019 1/26/2017

Intake

Nurse TX

6/14/2019 H&P 6/14/2019 7/11/2019 DOC criteria not met
D
N/A
N/A
6/14/2019 H&P

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to Audiology

Refer to Audiology

audicus ordered

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

8/1/2019 6/12/2020 10/10/2019 6/19/2019 4/24/2019 7/19/2019 12/3/2018 3/21/2020 5/23/2019 8/22/2020 9/6/2019 10/5/2018 7/11/2019

CC

Audicus test

Patient states

he can hear

fine/ no

further action Hearing aid

required

ordered

Audicus test
Hearing aid ordered

Audicus test
Hearing aid ordered

Audicus test
Hearing aid ordered

Audicus test
Results not reviewed

Audicus test
Hearing aid ordered

Audicus test
Hearing aid ordered

Audicus test
Hearing aid ordered

Audicus test CC

Audicus test Audicus test

Refuses

further

testing/sound

amplifier

Hearing aid DOC criteria

test complete issEuexdhibit 2, LoSrCdeCre,dp. 65 not met

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 736 of 985 - Page ID#: 4324

7/22/2020 11/5/2019 6/20/2019 2/26/2019 11/21/2019 2/14/2019 4/30/2020 7/8/2019 9/10/2020

HA
Left ear hearing aid issued

HA
Hearing aid issued

HA
Hearing aid issued

HA
Hearing aid issued

Repeat audicus test HA

Hearing aid Hearing aid

ordered

issued

HA

HA

Replacement

HA issued

09/16/2020,

1st audicus

done on

03/27/2020,

Rt ear hearing Hearing aid

aid

issued

Test results reviewed
HA ordered

12/18/2019 HA

9/24/2020 HA

10/24/2018 HA
Hearing aid issued

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Hearing aid issued

Hearing Aid issued

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date
6/18/2019 (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

5/22/2020 7/22/2020 61 days

6/28/2019 11/5/2019

7/26/2017 7/22/2019

1/31/2018

7/3/2019 10/12/2018 12/3/2019 12/18/2019 2/14/2019

4/30/2019 7/8/2019

6/12/2020 9/24/2020

8/21/2019 9/6/2019

1/26/2017 6/14/2019 10/24/2018

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 66

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 737 of 985 - Page ID#: 4325

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Delay in hearing test being completed by nursing staff.
Solution: Instruct nursing staff to complete tests in timely manner.

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 67

Prison: LSCC Name of person filling out form: T Moore Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 738 of 985 - Page ID#: 4326

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

4/22/2019 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

9/4/2019

11/6/2019 8/14/2019 1/10/2020 11/11/2019 5/3/2019

2/13/2020 11/6/2019 12/20/2019 8/30/2019 8/1/2019

12/5/2017

F/U 3. Date of initial hearing screening

4/22/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

4/24/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Hearing aid

ordered

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue

was presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

4/22/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

F/U

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

H&P 9/4/2019 11/15/2019 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
9/4/2019 H&P

H&P

Intake

11/6/2019 8/15/2019

1H/e1a4r/in2g02A0id 8H/e1a6r/in2g01a9id

recommende ordered/Pt.

d

refused

C

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

11/6/2019 8/14/2019

H&P

Intake

H&P

H&P

Intake RCC

1/10/2020 11/11/2019 3/11/2020

1/10/2020
Hearing test ordered

11/11/2019 3/11/2020
Need Audicus Hearing Aid hearing test Ordered

B

B

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

3/7/2020 11/11/2019 5/3/2019

Audicus Test H&P

Intake RCC

H&P 2/13/2020 3/8/2020 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
2/13/2020 H&P

Intake

H&P

H&P

11/11/2019 12/20/2019 8/30/2019

11/13/2019 1/21/2020
Need Audicus DOC criteria hearing test not met

11/21/2019
Hearing aid ordered

B

D

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

11/6/2019 12/20/2019 8/30/2019

Intake

H&P

H&P

Intake 8/13/2019 8/15/2019 Hearing Aid Ordered
A
N/A
N/A
8/1/2019 Intake

F/U 7/30/2019 8/6/2019 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
12/5/2017 F/U

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Hearing aid Refer to

ordered

provider

4/24/2019 11/15/2019 1/14/2020 8/16/2019 4/6/2020

Audicus test Audicus test Audicus test Audicus test HA

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

3/11/2020 3/8/2020

Audicus test Audicus test

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

1/21/2020 11/21/2019 8/15/2019 7/30/2019

Audicus test Audicus test Audicus test Audicus test

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid

ordered

ordered

ordered

ordered

issued

hearing aid hearing aid

ordered

ordered

DOC criteria hearing aid hearing aid hearing aid

not met

ordEexrhedibit 2, LoSrCdeCre,dp. 68 ordered

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 739 of 985 - Page ID#: 4327

5/28/2019 12/13/2019 1/30/2020 9/23/2019 4/13/2020

4/30/2020 4/2/2020

12/13/2019 9/23/2019 8/22/2019

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

HA

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Patient refused hearing aid

Hearing aid issued

Returned HA/refusing to pay for HA

Left ear hearing aid issued

hearing aid issued

Hearing aid Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

issued

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date

4/22/2019

(b) End date

5/28/2019

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

date)

9/4/2019 11/6/2019 12/13/2019

8/14/2019 9/23/2019

1/10/2020 4/6/2020 86 days

11/11/2019

2/13/2020 4/2/2020 48 days
n/a

11/6/2019 12/20/2019 8/30/2019 8/1/2019

12/20/2019

12/13/2019 9/23/2019

12/5/2017 8/22/2019

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 69

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 740 of 985 - Page ID#: 4328

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Delay in hearing test by nursing staff
SolutionStaff educated on completeing hearing tests in timely manner

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 70

Prison: LSCC Name of person filling out form: T Moore Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 741 of 985 - Page ID#: 4329

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

12/20/2019 7/16/2019 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

3/19/2019

9/18/2020

8/23/2019

9/11/2018

7/30/2019

7/12/2017

11/5/2019

1/28/2017

6/20/2019

9/24/2019

H&P 3. Date of initial hearing screening

12/20/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

12/20/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Refer to

provider

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

B

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue

was presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

12/20/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

H&P

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

H&P 7/16/2019 8/28/2019 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
7/16/2019 H&P

H&P 3/19/2019 5/23/2019 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
3/19/2019 H&P

H&P

Intake

H&P

9/18/2020 8/23/2019 9/11/2018

9/18/2020
Audicus test ordered

8/27/2019
DOC criteria not met

1P/a2s8se/2d020 whisper test/no HA

B

D

D

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

9/18/2020 8/23/2019 9/11/2018

H&P

Intake

H&P

H&P

Sick Call

H&P

7/30/2019 7/17/2017 11/5/2019

8/28/2019
DOC criteria not met

7/28/2017
Hearing aid ordered

11/5/2019
Refer to audiology

D

A

B

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

7/30/2019 7/12/2017 11/5/2019

H&P

Sick Call

H&P

Sick Call

H&P

Intake

2/7/2017 6/20/2019 10/3/2019

6/18/2018
Hearing aids ordered

12/30/2019
DOC criteria not met

1P0a/ti3e/n2t019 refused further

A

D

D

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

1/28/2017 6/20/2019 9/24/2019

Sick Call

H&P

Intake

12/5/2018 CC 1/11/2019 1/11/2019 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
12/5/2018 CC

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Audicus test Refer to

ordered

provider

Passed whisper test/no HA needed

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

8/28/2019 5/23/2019

8/27/2019

8/28/2019 7/28/2017

Audicus test Audicus test

Audicus test

Audicus Test Audiology

hearing aid hearing aid

ordered

ordered

DOC criteria not met

DOC criteria not met

Received Bilateral hearing aids ordered

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to audiology

Refer to provider

6/18/2018 12/30/2019 10/3/2019 1/11/2019

Audicus Test Audicus test Audiology Audicust Test

Hearing aid DOC criteria Refused

Hearing aid

ordered

noEt xmheitbit 2, LtSeCstiCng,.p. 71 ordered

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 742 of 985 - Page ID#: 4330

10/28/2019 7/8/2019

7/19/2018

HA

HA

HA

2/13/2019 HA

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date

12/20/2019

(b) End date

4/2/2020

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

date)

7/16/2019 10/28/2019

3/19/2019 7/8/2019

9/18/2020 7 days

8/23/2019

9/11/2018

7/30/2019

7/12/2017

11/5/2019

1/28/2017 7/19/2018

6/20/2019

9/24/2019

12/5/2018

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 72

Prison: LSCC Name of person filling out form: T Moore Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 743 of 985 - Page ID#: 4331

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

3/18/2019 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Sick Call

4/3/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

6/4/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Hearing aid

ordered

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue

was presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

3/18/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

Sick Call

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

3/12/2019 Hearing Screen KSR 10/11/2019 12/16/2019 Hearing Aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
3/12/2019 Hearing screen KSR

11/16/2017 12/21/2017

Intake

Intake

11/16/2017 12/21/2017
11/16/2017 1/22/2018 Answered yes Hearing Aid to 3 questions ordered

D

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Yes

11/16/2017 12/21/2017

Intake

Intake

5/13/2019 9/9/2019 1/29/2019 1/11/2019 12/16/2019

intake

Intake

H&P

Intake

Intake

5/13/2019 9/9/2019 1/29/2019 1/11/2019 12/16/2019

9/1/2019
DOC criteria not met

9/9/2019 2/25/2019

Refused

DOC criteria

further testing not met

1/21/2019 12/16/2019

Passed

Refer to

Whisper test provider

D

D

D

D

B

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

5/13/2019 9/9/2019

Intake

Intake

1/29/2019 1/11/2019 12/16/2019

H&P

Intake

Intake

3/9/2019 6/12/2019 5/31/2019

Intake

H&P

H&P

3/9/2019 6/12/2019 5/31/2019

3/9/2019 11/15/2019
Answered yes DOC criteria to 3 questions not met

7/11/2019
Hearing aid ordered

B

D

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

3/9/2019 Intake

6/12/2019 5/31/2019

H&P

H&P

4/22/2019 F/U 4/22/2019 4/24/2019 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
4/22/2019 F/U

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

6/4/2019 10/11/2019 11/21/2017 1/22/2018 9/1/2019 11/1/2219 2/25/2019 1/21/2019

Audicus Test Audicus test F/U

Audiology Audicus test Audicus test Audicus

Whisper test

Hearing aid ordered

Hearing aid ordered

Refused to see provider regarding Hearing aid hearing issues ordered

DOC criteria not met

DOC criteria Refused test not met

Passed test/No need for ha

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

11/15/2019 7/11/2019 4/24/2019

Audicus Test Audicus Test Audicus Test

DOC criteria Hearing aid Hearing aid noEt xmheitbit 2, LoSrCdeCre,dp. 73 ordered

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 744 of 985 - Page ID#: 4332

7/19/2019 12/16/2019

2/8/2018

HA

HA

Audiology

8/22/2019 5/23/2019

HA

HA

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued for left ear

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date

3/18/2019

(b) End date

7/19/2019

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start

date)

3/12/2019

11/16/2017 12/21/2017 5/13/2019 2/8/2018

9/9/2019

1/29/2019 1/11/2019 12/16/2019 3/9/2019

6/12/2019

5/31/2019 8/22/2019

4/22/2019 5/23/2019

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 74

Prison: LSCC Name of person filling out form: T Moore Date: 9/25/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 745 of 985 - Page ID#: 4333

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

10/28/2019 9/6/2018 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

10/5/2018 10/4/2018 11/22/2019

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Intake

10/28/2019

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

11/1/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

DOC criteria

not met

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids

are needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

D

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid

needed) , consult the medical documentation of the

decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure

that it complies with KyDOC policy.

N/A

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it

have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor

makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction

loop system.

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about

each medical encounter from when the hearing issue

was presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date

10/28/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Description

Intake

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

H&P 9/6/2018 5/9/2019 DOC criteria not met
D
N/A
N/A
9/6/2018 Intake

H&P 3/10/2017 10/5/2018 Hearing Aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
10/5/2018 H&P

H&P 10/4/2018 10/22/2018 Hearing aid ordered
A
N/A
N/A
10/4/2018 H&P

Intake 11/22/2019 12/2/2019 Passed whisper test
D
N/A
9/23/2019 Sick call

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

11/1/2019 11/1/2019

Audicus Test Audicus Test

Refer to provider

Refer to provider

10/22/2018 10/9/2019

Audicus Test Audicus Test

DOC criteria DOC criteria

not met

not met

Hearing aid Hearing aid

ordered

ordered

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 75

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 746 of 985 - Page ID#: 4334

11/8/2018 12/20/2019

HA

HA

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Hearing aid Hearing aid

issued

issued

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description Medical Visit 6 - Outcome ... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date

10/28/2019 (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)

9/6/2018 9/26/2019

10/5/2018

10/4/2018 11/8/2018

11/22/2019

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 76

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 747 of 985 - Page ID#: 4335

Cookie Crews
COMMISSIONER

Justice and Public Safety Cabinet LITTLE SANDY CORRECTIONAL COMPLEX
505 Prison Connector Sandy Hook, KY 41171
(606) 738-6133

Keith Helton WARDEN

MEMORANDUM

TO:

Janet Conover, Director of Operations

FROM: Rhonda May, ADA Coordinator

DATE: July 31, 2020

RE:

LSCC’s Updated Plan of Action

LSCC’s TTY instructions have been included in the ADA Brochure that we give to inmates at their initial ADA classification assessment. Additionally, we have issued a memo for staff concerning instructions on how to use the TTY. Our TTY phone is available in the ADA phone room during normal operations. We also have a backup TTY phone that can be utilized in central control.
LSCC’s Purple phone has been updated with a new machine with no issues to-date. We also have a backup VRI laptop in central control should we experience any outages. A sign is posted in the ADA phone room beside our Purple phone letting inmates know, should there be an outage, that there is an alternative and to ask the ADA Coordinator or Shift Supervisor for access to the VRI laptop.
Our SAP dorm ice machine now has a sound barrier constructed around it to dampen the noise level. We have also moved many SAP classes to classrooms. The ADA Coordinator emails an updated ADA List to the SAP Director weekly. SAP dorm telephones have also been updated with a volume adjustment button as of December 2019.
As inmates enter our Restricted Housing Unit, they are advised to wear their hearing aids. I advise them of this during initial classification. In the event that the hearing aid is not on their person, they need to inform staff forthwith.
Since this report was issued, LSCC has a new Health Service Administrator who I am working closely with in monitoring ADA issues.

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 77

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 748 of 985 - Page ID#: 4336

An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/D

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 78

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 749 of 985 - Page ID#: 4337

LSCC

A. Missing Items from Information Request:

1. Please clarify your response to the following: “A list of each inmate currently at your institution whose audiology processing FINISHED after March 2020, for whom such processing took or is taking over 60 days, documentation of the explanation for any such delay, and a description of any steps taken to avoid similar problems going forward.” The information tool refers to an attachment; if you are referring to the information contained in the audiology section, please confirm. See attached documentation.

B. Individual Issues:

18.

said the background noise makes it difficult to

use the phones, and that he has a lot of difficulty hearing them holler for count in the

prison. He said it would be easier to hear if the guards were louder or the PA system was

used for count. Mr.

mentioned that social distancing has made it difficult to

hear what’s going on in his programs. ADA coordinator met with Inmate

on 8/24/2020 and informed him of how to access the ADA phone room. He

received an updated brochure, a vibrating alarm clock, and re-issued a

HOH ID card. Inmate

is not currently participating in any

programs. He was previously in SAP. Our SAP program has an

amplification system for HOH inmates and ADA coordinator emails

updated ADA List to SAP Director so she will know which inmates in her

program are HOH. Inmate

has received no disciplinary report for

missing count and has not requested a Resident Helper for in-person

notifications.

19.

said that at LSCC, he’s missed pill call because

he can’t hear the officers calling for it, and the batteries for the HAs only last 12-15

hours. Mr.

said that HOH/deaf inmates can’t always hear what the officers say,

and that the HOH phones are being used by non-HOH inmates, limiting access by those

who actually need them. Mr.

said that he liked the lights at KSR that blinked for

chow and pill call, and that he found them helpful. Inmate

was issued a

vibrating alarm clock on 8/6/2020 and will be assigned a Resident Helper

when released from RHU. Maintenance has installed the ADA phone room

with an ID scanner that will be accessible to HOH inmates. This will be

active by Friday, 10/9/2020.

C. Missing Items from Action Plan:

1. In-person notifications should be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates. LSCC utilizes Resident Helpers for in-person notifications. We also have staff who do wake-up calls for 3rd shift workers and diabetics.

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 79

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 750 of 985 - Page ID#: 4338
2. ADA coordinators should publicize that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money, to recover when money comes into their account. This process is available for both formally indigent individuals or individuals who have insufficient money to pay for the device. ADA auxiliary aids are listed in the LSCC ADA brochure. During the hearing assessment, the ADA coordinator explains the brochure informing the inmate what auxiliary aids are available. If an inmate requests auxiliary aids whether he is indigent or not, a loan agreement is signed and the inmate is given the item requested. 3. While a memo was issued for stuff concerning instructions on how to use the TTY, it is not clear whether this memo includes instructions on getting an outside line. Step 5 on the memo issued informs staff how to access an outside line. 4. There seem to be no routine software updates to the VRI laptop. ADA coordinator will check VRI for software updates during the first week of the month through our Commonwealth Office of Technology. 5. While it was reported that maintenance is working to install a volume adjustment button on telephones in the SAP area, no update has been provided. Maintenance has installed a volume adjustment button on the telephones in the SAP area. This was completed in December 2019. D. Individuals to receive attached settlement summary:
Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 80

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 751 of 985 - Page ID#: 4339

LSCC Repeat issues: A. Need more HOH phones. There are currently 6 phones, but only two have volume control. Even the volume control phone is hard to hear because it’s in the same room with the other phones and that room is loud. People have had their phone calls ended because COs say they’re talking too loud into the phones. There is also only one TTY phone for the entire prisons. The TTY and the Captel phone are located in the same room. Therefore, you have to wait for the person using the TTY or cappella phone to be able to use the other one. That makes it harder to get access to that room. I have attached the ADA phone room log. It shows the actual use in that room. LSCC has 2 TTY phones, one is stationary and one is portable.
B. No auxiliary aid catalogue/brochure as at other institutions. We have a Maxi Aids catalog available. C. No copy of the settlement in the law library. Assistant ADA Coordinator UAII Conley went to the library on 9/25/2020 and verified that the settlement agreement is still located in the legal library.
D. HAs do not work well. If an inmate is having difficulties with his hearing aid, he can put a sick call in and get his hearing aid checked.
E. Difficulty getting new batteries. Medical staff is available 24/7. Inmates go to our medical department, turn in their old hearing aid batteries to medical staff, they then provide them with a new hearing aid battery.
Hearing aid batteries are always on hand.
F. Discipline for using hand gestures. ADA Coordinator has received no reports from inmates getting disciplinary reports for using hand gestures.
G. Multiple people reported trouble hearing over the PA system. Living assistance aide doesn’t always keep people from missing pill call and chow. If inmates are having trouble with their Resident Helper, inmates should report to their unit administrator for a new assignment of a Resident Helper.
H. TV’s don’t usually have closed captions. When making rounds in the dorms, unit administrator’s look to see if the captioning is on for at least one T.V. ADA coordinator has had no complaints regarding
captioning.

Individual reports:

1.

had a hearing aid at WKCC and asked for a new one. They gave him

a pocket talker instead. He has been asking for a new hearing aid for months and has put in for 3

sick calls. He’s been put in the hole over his hearing demands. He’s asked for assistance waking up

in the morning and just got a HOH sticker. Nothing has been done to help him with his hearing

issues.

There is no documentation in Inmate

chart with complaints of hearing issues. Inmate Able may

place a sick call requesting to start the hearing process. Assistant ADA Coordinator UAII Conley

checked with medical and they had no sick calls from Inmate

Assistant ADA Coordinator UAII

Conley met with Inmate and explained medical has received no sick calls from him and

explained the sick call process. Inmate reported a disciplinary report in 2018 at AC. Upon

evaluation by UAII Conley, the only disciplinary report at AC was a 3-11 for a physical altercation.

2.

Left HA was stolen when he was at GRCC. Mr.

requested a new

HA after filling out a report stating it was missing, but he never received a new one. Mr.

also

asked for a bed shaker, but has not heard back.

Inmate

was seen on 7/6/2020 for H&P, stolen hearing aid was not mentioned. Patient

stated that he had a history of hearing loss but wasn’t wearing an aid. Patient was released from

custody on 9/20/2020. ADA Coordinator reviewed records and no request was made for a bed

shaker.

3.

Has trouble hearing the regular phone and would like to use the TTY phone.

He used it once and the prison has not allowed him to use it since. Mr. can never hear

announcements. He regularly misses pill call; he doesn’t miss chow since everyone goes. Mr.

uses a HA, but it still makes the sound muffled.

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 81

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 752 of 985 - Page ID#: 4340

If Mr. is experiencing issues with his hearing aid, he may place a sick call and ask to be reevaluated. Assistant ADA Coordinator UAII Conley explained the process of using the TTY phone and Inmate said he would start using it. He also stated to UAII Conley that he misses pill call because he has dementia and forgets to go. He has been assigned a Resident Helper, issued a vibrating alarm clock and vibrating watch.

4.

: Mr.

took a new hearing test and the nurse told him that if it comes

back inconclusive he’ll be charged $10. He wants to know if that’s allowed.

There is no charge for hearing tests, there is a $10.00 charge for the hearing aid itself unless patient

is indigent. Assistant ADA Coordinator met with Inmate

and he informed her he knew there

was not a co-pay for his hearing test.

5.

Mr.

recently got a disciplinary report for refusing or failing

to obey an order. He told an officer he didn’t understand her and asked for her permission to go to

morning chow, but instead received a write-up. He has a hard time hearing announcements. If he’s

in a room by himself he misses count, chow, and other instructions. Mr.

dropped his HA

and broke it. It still works, but it’s damaged. He doesn’t want to request a repair because with

COVID it won’t get fixed. Two-weeks ago, Mr.

was written up for not being able to hear

a CO. He was initially written-up for disobeying an officer, but it got downgraded to a

misdemeanor.

If Mr.

hearing aid is broken he will need to bring it to medical and it will be sent out for

repairs immediately. Assistant ADA Coordinator UAII Conley was advised by Mr.

that he

has not came to medical because he thought that there would be a delay in repair due to Covid19.

She informed him to put in a sick call to get his hearing aid repaired. The disciplinary report is

attached.

6.

Mr.

uses a pocket talker because it works better than a HA. The HA

doesn’t stay in and bothers his ears. Mr.

is having issues with medical staff. They will not

quickly replace the earbuds on the pocket talker when they stop working and they only last for a

couple of weeks. He was hoping to buy better quality earbuds.

Inmate

should only have one hearing device,both are not needed. If Inmate.

has

issues with his hearing aid he should place a sick call to request retesting. The earbuds that come

with the pocket talker are the only ones available. Inmate

may purchase earbuds at canteen.

Inmate

informed Assistant ADA Coordinator UAII Conley that he purchased a pair of earbuds

from canteen.

7.

Mr.

has nerve damage to his hands and can’t feel his fingertips.

Therefore, his HA is useless because it’s too small. Mr.

would prefer a HA that was all one

piece. He also has allergies that give him inner ear infections and medical is not addressing the

problem.

The Audicus Company that we are contracted with only offers the one type of hearing aid. Inmate

Haddix may place a sick call regarding his allergy issues.

8.

Mr.

has been waiting for a hearing test for 6 months. He had a

whisper test at RCC, but hasn’t had any follow-up since then. He went to medical a couple of weeks

ago and they said everything was slow because of COVID. Mr.

just got a new HOH sign

for his locker the day before the interview. Everytime a particular officer searches his cell he takes

it. Then Mr.

has to go and get a new one. This officer also makes rude remarks about Mr.

hearing (he says “are you stupid”). Mr.

also has constant ringing in his ears

which makes phone calls with his four-year-old son very challenging. Mr. Hessing’s son has vision

and hearing issues and nonverbal autism. The prison offered to let Mr.

use the TTY, but

that doesn’t solve his communication issue with his son. Mr.

wants to use the videophone.

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 82

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 753 of 985 - Page ID#: 4341

He makes the request often (most recently the day before the interview). He has been denied

everytime for the past 4 years. Mr.

talks to his daughter every night, and wants to be able to

talk to his son. Mr.

used to work in the kitchen, but he was eventually fired because he

didn’t hear the call for workers in the morning (this was 3 years ago at RCC).

On 10/09/2019 Inmate.

refused to take a hearing test and on 11/27/2019 during his H&P

with the provider, he answered “no” to all of the hearing screening questions. There is no

documentation that Inmate

has placed any sick calls regarding hearing issues. He may place

a sick call to get the hearing process started. Covid19 has not made HOH accommodations delayed.

Inmate

met with Assistant ADA Coordinator UIIA Conley stating that he has not put in a sick

call and he doesn’t think he needs a hearing aid and stated his main problem is tinnitus. He informed

UAII Conley he has written to Miss Conover regarding use of video phone and is awaiting a

response. Ms. Conover has not received any correspondence from Inmate Hessing to date.

9.

Mr.

took a hearing test and says he needs HAs, but was denied. Mr.

can’t hear CO’s call count, doesn’t understand the intercom, and can’t hear on the phones. It

took a while to get a HOH ID card, and he would like a vibrating clock, but would like both. Mr.

Hiles has gotten verbal warnings from officers for not being able to hear them.

Inmate

initial hearing test was on 02/01/2019 at that time he did not meet the DOC criteria for

a hearing aid. Inmate.

was re-tested on 9/12/2020 and a hearing aid was ordered on 9/17/2020,

we are awaiting the delivery of his hearing aid. Inmate

has been issued a vibrating alarm clock.

10.

Mr.

would like a vibrating watch. He regularly misses breakfast

because he does not hear the announcement to wake up. Mr.

has requested a bed shaker 3

times and still hasn’t heard back. He’s had a HA for a year, but needs a new one. His HA isn’t

strong enough. He’s asked for a new HA and had a test 2 months ago, but has not heard back. He

does not currently have a HOH ID card. It was taken when he was moved to segregation, and he

never got it back. He asked his case worker for a new one over a month ago.

Inmate

saw a provider on 9/30/2020 regarding request about hearing aid. This will be

addressed with TLOC for recommendations. ADA coordinator has checked his records and has had

no requests for bed shaker. Assistant ADA Coordinator UAII Conley met with Inmate Jones about a

bed shaker and he stated he did not request one. Assistant ADA Coordinator explained to Inmate

the process for requesting auxiliary aids. Inmate

informed UAII Conley that he received

a new hearing aid a couple of weeks ago. Inmate

does have a HOH ID card and housing sign.

11.

Mr.

took a hearing test, but never received the results or any other

assistance.

Mr.

did not meet the DOC criteria for a hearing aid. He may place a sick call for further

assistance.

12.

Mr.

has a HA and pocket talker. The HAs are so cheap they make

everything distorted. He’s just been using a pocket talker for 2 years now. He bought a good pair of

headphones so it works better. However, his headphones have been confiscated twice (most

recently in June 2020). He filed a grievance and got them back, but he doesn’t have a form or

anything to keep this from happening again. He hasn’t told anyone the HA doesn’t work well. Mr.

gets in disciplinary trouble frequently because of his hearing. He gets direct orders he doesn’t

understand and misinterprets or he talks too loud. But it’s been a while since he’s been written up

because of this.

Inmate

saw provider on 9/30/2020 regarding request. This will be addressed with TLOC for

recommendations. Assistant ADA Coordinator UAII Conley talked to Inmate

about the

headphones being taken but he received them back within a couple of hours. Inmate

has

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 83

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 754 of 985 - Page ID#: 4342

received his order for his headphones to be carried on the yard. A review of his disciplinary reports shows he has received no reports in the last 5 years due to his hearing.

13.

Mr.

reports hearing problems, but that nothing has been

done to help him.

Inmate.

denied any hearing issues during his hearing assessment on 8/1/2019 and has had

no complaints documented since then. Inmate

may place a sick call to start the hearing

testing process. Assistant ADA Coordinator UAII Conley met with Inmate

and he told her

he has never put in a sick call for hearing. He states he only has 8 months to serve on his sentence

and if he has any medical issues, he would rather handle them when he gets out.

14.

Mr.

has been waiting for a HA for almost a year now. He

has also requested to see Ms. May and has not yet.

On 9/6/2019 Inmate

stated that he did not want any hearing devices but was issued a sound

amplifier on 9/9/2019. He may place a sick if he is having hearing issues to get the process started.

Inmate

spoke with ADA coordinator and was advised on 8/25/2020 to place a sick call so

that he may be evaluated and tested. As of 9/30/2020 inmate has not placed a sick call requesting

further follow up.

15.

Mr.

regularly misses pill call and chow because he can’t hear

announcements. His HA amplifies too much background noise and makes him dizzy. He just got a

new hearing test yesterday. He also only received one, but would like two. He hasn’t gotten any

write-ups, but he’s been yelled at by guards because of his hearing. They’ll say he refused to do

something, but really he couldn’t understand what officers were saying. Or with pill call officers

will say he’s jumping in line, when he didn’t hear his dorm called. The officers don’t care when Mr.

shows them his HOH ID card. Inmate

saw provider on 9/30/2020 regarding

request. This will be addressed with TLOC for recommendations. Inmate

states to

Assistant ADA Coordinator UAII Conley that he has not received a disciplinary report due to

hearing.

16.

Mr.

took a hearing test seven months ago and never got the

results. He asked Ms. May about it last week when he found out she was the ADA coordinator. She

said she’d ask medical. Mr.

does not have a HOH ID or sign. Mr.

has previously

been yelled at by officers for not being able to hear, but it hasn’t happened in a while.

Inmate

does not meet DOC criteria for hearing aids. He may place a sick call requesting a

pocket talker if he continues to have hearing issues. Inmate

is awaiting a vibrating alarm

clock. He received both an HOH card and sign on 8/24/2020.

17.

Mr.

HA is not working correctly. It makes a loud roaring sound.

He’s reported the issue to medical several times. Mr.

would also like a second HA.

Inmate

was seen on the following dates: 8/19/2019, 10/14/2019 and 01/16/2020, at no time

when asked about his hearing aid, did he voice any complaints. On all three dates he states that his

hearing aid is working fine. If he is having issues, he may place a sick call to be retested. This would

get sent to the provider for further evaluation. Assistant ADA Coordinator UAII Conley met with

Inmate

and the only complaint he had was “he should be issued an entire pack of hearing aid

batteries instead of one”.

Exhibit 2, LSCC, p. 84

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 755 of 985 - Page ID#: 4343
Northpoint Training Center

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 756 of 985 - Page ID#: 4344

Deaf/HO H or both? #
A Both Both Both Both
Both
Both

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

ADA coordinator

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Jessica Payton

Christina Coleman (back-up)

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

2 coordinator appointed?

No

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

yes

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates?

Yes

yes, via memo issued to the housing units

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates in a and posted in legal library and also

5 timely and appropriate manner? How?

through Jpay Announcement

Describe method used to ascertain: randomly

surveyed inmates on the dorms to see if they

were aware of the information. Nearly all of

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? (THIS

inmates surveyed were aware of ADA

6 REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

yes

Coordinator.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
X X X X
X

X

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit

Both

7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

yes

Both

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

yes

Both

9 Describe training

Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately cover

Both

10 information?

yes

Both

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training)

yes

Both

12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

yes

Both

13 Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's powerpoint) yes

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with settlement

Both

14 agreement?

yes

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

yes

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list? yes

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in

Both

17 implementing the settlement?

yes

Both

18 Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf inmates? yes

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on deaf

Both

19 inmates?

yes

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the inmates in

Both

20 those situations?

yes

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective way with the

Both

21 monitor?

yes

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the monitor

Both

22 when necessary?

yes

memo from Warden announcing appointment to

X

position of ADA Coordinator is posted.

X

online computer based training titled: DOC ADA

Coordinator: Settlement Agreement, DOC ADA

Coordinator: Create, and DOC AllS

Communicating with Deaf and Hard of Hearing

Inmates. Also, all training materials located on

the G Drive to include settlement monitor's

powerpoint

NA

X

X X

X

X

reports are received weekly

X

yes if they are not already on list they are added

X

X

staff and inmates may make contact with ADA

coordinator at any time. Inmates may speak with

their unit staff to assist in scheduling an

X

appointment with ADA coordinator or may write

a letter

X

yes, the purple laptop is used for interpretation

services

X

X

X

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 757 of 985 - Page ID#: 4345

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both B
Both
Both Both Both

Issue/Question Reporting obligations If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was monitor 1 notified? Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH 2 inmates? 3 Is the list complete? 4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs,

Both

6 activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe)

Both

7 Was it reported to the monitor?

Both

8 Was the report complete?

Both

9 Was the report timely?

Both

10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert?

Both

11 If yes, was the monitor notified?

Did the institution consult with the monitor about the non-

Both

12 auditory alert?

Both

13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

yes

X

yes

tracking spreadsheet and weekly reports received

X

yes

X

yes

X

There have been no instances where it was

determined that an inmate could not be hired for

a job or be placed in a program due to HOH

N/A

status.

NA

N/A

X

N/A

X

N/A

X

shaker beds, vibrating watches, vibrating clocks.

We have looked at flashing lights but

maintenance department states that NTC will not

be able to accommodate this due to electrical

yes

issues

NA

yes

X

yes

X

yes

X

NA

yes

X

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

automatic KOMS notification that states Transfer coordinator also puts on transfer memo

HOH

3 notifications.)

an inmate is being transferred

if someone is HOH so intake staff are aware

NA

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

yes

X

Deaf

Deaf inmates

NA

Deaf

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

yes

X

automatic KOMS notification that states

Deaf

6 Describe

an inmate is being transferred

NA

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

yes

X

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

yes

X

Deaf

9 Describe

VRI interpreter used if needed

NA

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

yes

X

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

yes

X

Both

Orientation videos

NA

Both

12 Captioned?

yes

X

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

yes

X

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

headphones used if needed that allow for volume

yes

control

X

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate? yes, one-on-one orientation completed

Both

15 (Describe)

and VRI interpreter used if needed

X

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general medical intake, and

Both

during medical care more generally:

NA

Both

1 Is there effective communications planning?

yes

X

Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if

Both

2 interpretation is needed?

yes

X

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 758 of 985 - Page ID#: 4346

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both
Both Both

Issue/Question 3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?
Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications 4 techniques?
Notice to medical staff:

Both

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How?

Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover and

Both

6 within the file?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) X

yes

X

NA

HOH on their medical alert cards and in their

yes

chart

X

it is in their electronic record and also precaution

yes

entered in KOMS

X

Deaf

7 Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate accommodations.

Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site providers of

Deaf

8 need for interpretation?

yes

off-site providers ask if an interpreter is needed when scheduling the appointment

NA X

Deaf

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

yes

Deaf

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

yes

Deaf

11 Adequate notice?

yes

Outside providers offering effective communication to inmates

Deaf

12 who sign?

yes

Deaf

13 How?

Both

Hearing screening/medical intake:

Both

14 Performed for all new inmates?

yes

Both

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

yes

Both

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

yes

Both

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

yes

Both

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?

yes

How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by

Both

19 staff?

Both

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

Both

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?

yes

when scheduling an off-site provider appointment, medical notifies provider of HOH/Deaf status and accommodations needed notice provided during scheduling and also on medical record that is sent to the visit notice provided during scheduling and also on medical record that is sent to the visit

X
NA X

X

either through in-person interpretation or video interpreters
done upon intake to facility
use the hearing screening form

NA NA
X X X X X

staff ask as a series of questions

NA

the nurse doing the intake completes the hearing

screening form

NA

we ask if they are able to read and write on intake

X

Both

22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe.

yes

Both

23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

yes

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

yes

Both

25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening?

yes

Both

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

yes

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

yes

Adequate determination of need for designation/ audiology

Both

28 services? How?

yes

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

yes

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or HOH,

Both

30 apart from audiology services decision?

yes

the nurse reads the questions to them and then explains so that they are able to comprehend what is being asked

X
X NA
X X X

further assessment by provider

X

the provider will order further testing as needed

X

X

X

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 759 of 985 - Page ID#: 4347

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

yes

yes

as an ADA alert

yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X X X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

notification is made as soon as determination is

made. KOMS also now sends automatic alert to

X

ADA coordinator when hearing results are

yes

entered into KOMS/electronic file

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

yes

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

yes

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

yes

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

yes

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

yes

HOH

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

HOH

40 initial request/questionnaire?

yes

HOH

41 each relevant medical visit?

yes

HOH

42 any audiology visit?

yes

HOH

43 hearing aid provision?

yes

HOH

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks?

yes

HOH

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

yes

HOH

46 Shared with monitor when requested

yes

Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it

47 take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Describe.

In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait more

48 than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?

None, everything is done on-site now One

NA X X X X X
NA X X X X X X X
NA
NA

What is the cause of the delay?

49

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) to

50 improve this process?

HOH

Co-pay and availability issues:

HOH

47 Charged only once -- not again for followups

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

yes

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

yes

HOH

50 7 days/week?

yes

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

yes

Due to inmate testing positive for Covid and being

in RHU, the audicus could not be done sooner NA

monitoring HOH database to ensure compliance

and timely services

NA

NA

the hearing screen is completed with intake and

physical so no charge assessed. They have a $10

X

one-time charge for hearing aid.

NA

X

X

available 24 hours a day/7 days a week

X

batteries are available in all housing areas from

medical

X

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 760 of 985 - Page ID#: 4348

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both E
Both Both Both Both Both Both Both Both Both Both
Both Both Both Both Both Both

Issue/Question Information provided inmates
1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe) Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-discrimination and
2 ADA services? Brochure? Items to include:
3 Non-discrimination obligation 4 Effective communication obligation 5 Auxiliary aids and services available
How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services (including 6 hearing aids, and batteries) 7 Communication equipment available, and how to use 8 ADA coordinator and how to reach
Other items:
9 Institution schedule of interpreters 10 Request for Accommodations/ Communications Assistance 11 Medical Request form includes request for accommodations 12 Job application form includes request for accommodations 13 Waiver forms 14 Classification form includes request for accommodations

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)
yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
N/A yes yes yes yes yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

Description/Notes

all inmates receive orientation upon arrival to

NTC within 7 days. If an inmate has an ADA alert

that denotes them as HOH/Deaf, notice is also

placed on the transfer memo so that all staff are

aware and so that appropriate accommodations

can be made. All inmates receive the inmate

handbook that describes ADA services. If

someone is already identified as HOH/Deaf, the

person conducting orientation meets with them

X

initially to see if any accomodations need to be

made in order for them to receive proper

orientation. If at any point during the orientation

process, an inmate states that they have issues

with hearing (even if not currently noted), the

individual is treated as HOH and accomodations

are made. They are also referred to medical for

further screening.

X

NA X X X

X

we do not currently have any interpreters at the institution. All interpretation is completed using the purple laptop

X X NA
X
X X X X X

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Both

15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations

SAP and other programming form includes request for

Both

16 accommodation

yes

Both

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in

18 law library? (Need to check)

yes

This form is a KOMS form that has not been

updated. However, when adjustment is

scheduled to meet with a HOH/Deaf inmate, they

determine if accomodations are needed and note

X

it on the document. If the inmate declines

accomodations, the inmate signs a waiver form

that is attached to the disciplinary.

X

No form for AAg/NA at NyTC

X

me a copy of all documents available in the legal

X

library and then verified again during rounds on

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 761 of 985 - Page ID#: 4349

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Both

Do request forms:

Both

19 list available services comprehensively?

yes

clearly explain services and aids (what they are and when

Both

20 they are available?

yes

Both

21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?

yes

expressly ask about preferred mode of

Both

22 communication/needed services and why they are useful? yes

Both

23 explain which items are free?

yes

Both

24 encompass religious and volunteer-provided programming? yes

Both

Effective communication of these resources:

Both

25 Are the materials in language accessible to each inmate? yes

Both

26 Is this information provided with effective communication? yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X
X
X
X
X X NA X X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity

to meet with a KDOC staff member and interpreter to ask

Both

27 questions about the materials?

yes

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

for a program with staff, is effective communication

Both

28 provided?

yes

Both

29 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion? yes

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

Both

30 in education with staff, is effective communication provided? yes

Both

31 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion? yes

Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

Both

2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

yes

Both

7 Clear process to obtain? Describe

yes

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

yes

Both

9 Provided timely?

yes

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

yes

each inmate meets a treatment team comprised of ADA Coordinator, Medical staff, and housing unit staff to evaluate needs and accommodations so that is can be documented appropriately by each. An inmate may request to meet with team (meets every week) anytime outside of their initial meeting and scheduled review if needed.
NA
X
X NA
X
X

NA

X

cell/bed cards are issued through the unit offices

due to bed moves, etc. going through these

X

offices.

X

X

X

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 762 of 985 - Page ID#: 4350

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Both

12 Working process to get new inmate alerts added? (Describe) yes

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

yes

Both

14 Appropriately obvious

yes

Both

15 Updated timely

yes

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

yes

Both

17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?)

yes

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

yes

Both

19 Provided timely?

yes

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

yes

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

yes

once an inmate is identified as Deaf/HOH by medical, the ADA coordinator is notified and creates the ADA alert in KOMS. Also, now the ADA Coordinator receives an alert from KOMS regarding hearing tests on inmates and can review and initiate the ADA alert based on that. all reviewed and alert is present bright blue ADA in the header
attaches to ID

X
X X X NA X X X X X

as soon as ADA Coordinator is notified of need

X

Both

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?

No

there is no reason for an ID card to be taken away from an inmate

Both

23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator?

ID cards are not taken

Both

24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver?

No

Both

25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?

waiver would be scanned into KOMS

Both

26 Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested ID?

have not had an inmate sign a waiver

Both

27 If yes, was an ID provided?

ID would be provided

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

yes, KOMS alert and medical notifies

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

yes, new KOMS alert from medical and medical notifies

X
NA X X X
NA X
X

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

Both

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

yes

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

yes

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

yes

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

yes

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

yes

each identified inmate meets with a committee

made up of ADA Coordinator, medical providers,

X

psychology staff, and Unit Administrators

X

X X X

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 763 of 985 - Page ID#: 4351

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both
Both

Issue/Question Other assessments For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on 8 intake, has one been done?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

each inmate is reviewed yearly (we utilize

X

Both

9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

yes

classification months to keep on schedule at NTC)

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

yes

X

Both

2 Cell cards

yes

X

Both

3 Bed shaker

yes

X

Both

4 In-person alerts

yes

X

Both

5 Pager

No

Pagers are not available at NTC

X

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

yes

X

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

yes

X

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

yes

X

Both

9 Other amplification

FM radio transmitter in programs building and chapel

X

Both

10 Other (describe)

Describe:

NA

Both

General issues

NA

Special housing area:

NA

Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH inmates?

Both

11 (Describe)

No

Both

12 If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? (Describe) N/A

If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed

Both

13 there? (such a requirement is non-compliant).

N/A

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live

there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to the

Both

14 inmate? Describe any restrictions.

N/A

In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is primary

Both

15 consideration given to inmate request?

yes

Each individual is taken into consideration when

determining housing to see what is most

appropriate. If dorms are known to be louder,

those are avoided. If a shaker bed is needed, they

are housed on Dorm 2 because that is currently

where shaker beds are wired.

NA

NA

X

X

X

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services

form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or

Both

16 not requesting aids/services, were accommodations provided? yes

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services documented in

Both

17 inmate institutional files?

yes

Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services shared

Both

18 appropriately with staff?

yes

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

yes

Both

20 Have any been out of comission?

No

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Both

22 hearing aid?

yes

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

N/A

Both

24 Promptly?

N/A

X

casenoted and scanned into KOMS

X

through training and also instructions posted with

the aid/service

X

hearing aid remains with the inmate we have not had this issue but a replacement would be provided promptly

NA NA
X
X X

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 764 of 985 - Page ID#: 4352

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Both

26 Describe

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) No

Description/Notes
there have been no jobs identified that would be too dangerous for a HOH/Deaf inmate to be placed in.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NA NA

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

N/A N/A

Both

30 Are classes in sign language provided?

Yes

Both

31 deaf inmates given notice?

yes

Both

32 priority given to deaf inmates?

yes

Both I Interpretation in general

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

Deaf

1 communicated to inmates?

yes

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

Deaf

2 encounters/communications/settings)

yes

These classes were previously provided by the

Kentucky School for the Deaf. However, due to

X

Covid, new classes have not been started.

X

X

during orientation and during treatment team meeting

NA X

X available for all inmate-staff communication

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

3 volunteer-provided programming?

yes

Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation

Deaf

4 method?

yes

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

yes

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf

6 In-person?

yes

Deaf

7 VRI?

yes

Deaf

Is VRI availability:

Deaf

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

yes

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)? yes

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

yes

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

yes

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

yes

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

yes

Deaf

13 In general

yes

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

yes

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

yes

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

yes

Deaf

16 Splitter?

yes

Deaf

17 Instructions?

yes

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

yes

includes all programming, committees, inmate-

X

staff interaction, volunteer-inmate interaction

X

X

NA

X

X

NA

X

VRI is stored in the control center so that all staff

on all shifts have access to it

X

X

X

the VRI can be taken to RHU when needed. It can

be utilized in the supervisor office or the visitation X

room.

no issues reported with VRI laptop and passes

monthly tests

NA

stored in control center. The control center

operator ensures all items are in the bag and the

X

battery is sufficiently charged

X

X

all items are stored with the VRI laptop in control

center

NA

X

X

X

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 765 of 985 - Page ID#: 4353

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

yes

yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) X X

Deaf

21 How?

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

Deaf

22 should be first recourse?

yes

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

yes

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

yes

Deaf

24 Parole?

yes

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

Deaf

27 before?

yes

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

Deaf

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

Deaf

29 Describe

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

Deaf

30 was unavailable)

No

VRI is tested monthly. Also, when used, staff and

inmates provide feedback and if there are issues

X

with it then it is addressed immediately.

X

X

X

X

there have been no instances where in-person

interpretation was needed

X

there have been no instances where in-person

interpretation has been denied

X

X

no, inmates are not relied upon to interpret

X

NA

VRI is always used unless situation warrants for in-

person interpretation

X

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

Deaf

31 method?

yes

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

yes

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

yes

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

yes

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

Deaf

35 encounters/communications/settings)

yes

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

yes

Deaf J Hand Restraints

Deaf

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

yes

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

Deaf

2 finding of a security threat?

yes

inmate's preferred method of communication is

always used unless there is a significant reason

X

another form would be needed. This has not

been the case at NTC to this date.

X

X

NA

X

X

all inmates receive information regarding the

process during orientation and treatment team

X

meeting.

NA

X transportation to medical appointments

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

Deaf

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

yes

Deaf

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

yes

Deaf

5 Staff aware of the issue

yes

Deaf

Off-site medical care:

Deaf

6 two-point hand restraint system used?

yes, inmate can be placed in RHU Visitation room

X

unrestrained with staff on opposite side

X

X

NA

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 766 of 985 - Page ID#: 4354

Deaf/HO H or both? #
Deaf Both K

Issue/Question restraints removed when necessary for medical 7 communication? Non-auditory Alerts

Both

1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe)

Both

2 provided to all inmates who need it?

Both

3 can and does it give alerts in real time?

Both

4 sufficient to signal fire alarm?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

shaker bed, inmates may purchase vibrating

watches and alarm clocks, hired ADA runners to

yes

make in-person notifications

NA

we currently have more bed shakers ordered for

those who have requested them. All HOH/Deaf

inmates may purchase vibrating watches/alarm

X

yes

clocks

yes

X

yes

X

Both

5 sufficient to signal count alert?

Yes

vibrating watches and alarm clocks can be used to

signal routine counts. ADA in-person runners are

X

utilized for any non-routine alerts as well

Both

6 programmed to signal different alerts?

Yes

Both

7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Yes

shaker beds are used for all emergency

X

notifications as well as ADA in-person runners

ADA aides are utilized to make in-person

notifications

X

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them? yes

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Both

9 been denied?

No

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working? yes

Both

11 How often?

ADA Aides are utilized to make in-person

X

notifications such as pill call, kitchen wake-up, etc.

no requests have been denied

X

X

tested monthly

X

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

yes

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

yes

Both

15 used consistently?

yes

Both

16 in all dormitories?

yes

Both

17 in gym?

yes

Both

18 in library?

yes

Both

19 audited and monitored?

yes

fire, safety, and sanitation monitors conduct monthly tests of shaker beds and document

X
NA X X X X X X

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

Both

20 misses a page?

yes

Institution now utilizes ADA Aides (paid inmate

positions) to make in-person notifications. If an

X

inmate still doesn't report, staff are notified to go

check on them.

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

Both

21 because of disability?

yes

some inmates have reported missing

announcements such as pill call or chow due to

not being able to hear them. We have now

implemented ADA aides to help alleviate this

issue as well as continue to remind staff to make

the announcements on the wings, not just from

the office or the foyer.

NA

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 767 of 985 - Page ID#: 4355

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future? yes

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

yes

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)
X
X X

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

yes

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

yes

Deaf

2 Allow voice carry-over features?

yes

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

None

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them. None

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Deaf

5 alternative offered

yes

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

6 videophone is out of service.

yes

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

yes

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

yes

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

yes

NTC is implementing the use of emergency flash

cards that will also be used when responding to

the different types of emergencies so that

X

inmates are shown specifically what type of

emergency is occuring.

No reports of outages after switching the Sorenson and the VRS to where the Sorenson is the main videophone used.

NA X X
NA NA

we have a back-up VRS that can be used.

X

Inmates (we currently have two that use the

videophone) are advised that if they are having

issues with the videophone, they can report it

directly to the unit office so that the phones can

be switched out.

NA

X

X

escort is not usually needed since the videophone

is in a room accessible to the inmate. However, if

the inmate wishes to use it during lockdown

hours (when the crash gates to the wings are

X

locked) an officer must open the crash gate for

them.

Deaf

10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates?

yes

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

yes

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

Deaf

12 using ordinary phones?

yes

30 minute phone calls allowed at a time. For the

most part, this isn't an issue that requires a lot of

X

oversight because we do only have two inmates

who currently utilize the videophone.

X

X

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

yes

Deaf

14 Free?

yes

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone

Deaf

15 calls?

yes

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

yes

only requires initial approval for use of it but advance request to access it is not necessary.
all are treated equally, no more disciplinary oversight than the regular phone calls.

X X X
NA

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 768 of 985 - Page ID#: 4356

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

17

yes

Both

TTY:

Both

18 Installed?

yes

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff? yes

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

yes

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

yes

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

yes

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

Both

23 for non-deaf inmates?

yes

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

yes

Both

25 Permission needed?

yes

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

No

Both

27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates?

yes

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Yes

, denied on 9/1/2020.

Inmate requested to be able to use the

videophone but states that he does not know any

X

sign language. Also states those that he

communicates with do not know sign language.

He states that he reads body language.

NA

X

ADA coordinator approves and marks HOH ID card

with the approved device. Discussed with

inmates during orientation and treatment team

X

meetings

instructions are hanging in the box with the TTY the TTY has not been out-of-service

X
NA X

located on the wing in the housing unit only initial approval from ADA Coordinator

X
X X NA

according to service tech the phone call now goes

through the relay service as a collect call. The

X

inmate is not charged.

Both

29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Yes

Both

30 Can access publicly available relay service phone numbers? yes

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions for

Both

31 videophones and TTY is less than equitable?

No

Both

32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

N/A

If yes, was determination (including reasoning, evidence, etc.)

Both

33 documented?

N/A

Both

34 Was monitor notified?

N/A

Both

35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

N/A

Deaf

VRS via laptop

Deaf

36 Available?

yes

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

yes

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

yes

Both

Phones

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

yes

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

yes

Both

CapTel

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

yes

phones were tested on 7/29/20 by service tech

who came in to correct Captel issue and wire both

X

phones correctly. No issues reported since.

X

NA

NA X X X
NA X X
NA NA

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 13 NA

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 769 of 985 - Page ID#: 4357

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

43 Request by any inmate denied?

Both

TV/Movies

Both

44 Is captioning available?

Both

45 Is captioning used?

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Audit item questions/concerns (note here if a problem was discovered during the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains) No
yes yes yes
yes

Description/Notes List names
officers log in log book during safety and security checks

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NA NA
X X X
X

NonCompliant
NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe) yes

Both

49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

yes

Both

50 Amplification method? (Describe)

yes

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

yes

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

Both

53 status?

yes

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

Both

54 deaf inmates?

yes

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

No

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

yes

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

yes

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

Both

5 (Describe)

No

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

yes

Both

7 because security threat?

No

Both

8 monitor notified?

N/A

Both

9 reasoning explained?

N/A

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both

10 of requests?

yes

Both

11 of denials?

yes

Both N Disciplinary

Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and

without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been

Deaf

1 punished?

yes

closed captioning is always turned on

X

X

headphones used if needed that allow for volume

control

NA

X

X

X

Inmates may purchase vibrating watches or alarm

clocks

NA

Keefe states that they do not have any items

available like this.

X

Inmates may purchase through Jack L Marcus or

Amazon

X

caseworkers, Unit Administrators, and ADA

Coordinator all know how to assist in the

X

faciliation of the purchase of items

all HOH/Deaf inmates may purchase vibrating watches and alarm clocks. Any other devices would be looked at on a case-by-case basis to determine need
noted in inmate file noted in inmate file

NA
X
X X X NA X X

Inmate

- was used for

X

investigation but not adjustment

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 770 of 985 - Page ID#: 4358

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Deaf

2 Was a re-hearing granted?

yes

Both O Grievances

Both

1 Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA coordinator? yes

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator

Both

2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator?

yes

Both P Training

Both

Types available

Both

1 CBT? (Using approved training?)

yes

Both

2 Who received? (Describe)

all staff

Both

3 All appropriate staff?

yes

ADA Coordinator contacted Warden to send back

for a re-hearing as soon as it was found that the

staff member filling in for the Adjustment Officer

X

did not utilze the interpreter and there was no

waiver form present. The DR ended up being

dismissed on rehearing.

X X

NA X
NA X

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

yes

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

yes

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

yes

how to properly use the TTY, Captel, and VRS all unit staff

NA NA
X

Any additional targeted training on specific needs ? Please

Both

describe in detail

yes

met with each shift to go over what the HOH ID

and Bed cards looked like and what they meant,

review requirements for making annoucements

on the dorms, and discussed how to deal with

HOH/Deaf inmates when handling issues such as

disciplinary (providing interpreter, etc.)

NA

ADA Aides also received training on how to communicate with deaf/HOH inmates. We utilized the same training that is provided to staff.

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 15

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HCOHaINsMeA:TE3IS:1GE4TT-INcGvA-P0PR0O0PR0IA1TE-GASSFISTVANTC-EEBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 771 of 985 - Page ID#: 4359

Name

Low literacy?

(So that

written

Has

If signs to

Bed Shaker? Other Alert Device

Has

communicate, Auxiliary Aid (Not

(e.g., vibrating

Captel Acess

(Not

Personal Phone

Listed with Signs to

communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door noted in KOMS Assessment requested; watch, etc.) (Not TTY Access (Not requested; Amplifier (Not

Housing KOMS ADA communicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution

meeting denied;

requested; denied; requested;

denied;

requested;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N)

effective)

waived)

waived) notes?

took place? granted)

granted)

denied; granted) granted)

denied; granted)

hearing aides

Dorm 4 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aides

Dorm 3 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aide

Dorm 3 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested granted

not requested granted

Not requested

hearing aide

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aides

Dorm 4 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aides

Dorm 4 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aides

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

Dorm 4 Yes

N

Dorm 5 Yes

N

Dorm 1 Yes

N

Dorm 5 Yes

N

Dorm 2 Yes

N

Dorm 6 Yes

N

Dorm 2 Yes

N

Dorm 6 Yes

N

Dorm 6 Yes

N

Dorm 4 Yes

N

Dorm 6 Yes

N

Dorm 4 Yes

N

Dorm 4 Yes

N

Dorm 4 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested not requested not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aide

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aide

Y

Not requested granted

granted

granted

Not requested

requested hearing aide

Y

then waived granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aides

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aide

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aide

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aide

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aide

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aide

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aide

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aide

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aide

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

requested hearing aide

Y

then waived granted

not requested not requested Not requested

Dorm 6 Yes

N

Dorm 3 Yes

N

Dorm 3 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested not requested not requested granted

Not requested

requested arrived with

Y

then waived hearing aide

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aide

Y

Not requested ordered

not requested not requested Not requested

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 16

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING TH

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 772 of 985 - Page ID#: 4360

Name

Clear mask for Any other

Shake & Wake

staff who deal auxiliary

(Not requested; Special with this

aid

ID

denied; granted) mask?

innmate?

requested? Outome?

Not requested N

Y

Not requested Y

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested Y

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

vibrating approved

watch

to

Not requested Y

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested Y

Y

Not requested N

Y

watch/capt

el

vibrating

watch

approved

Not requested Y

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested Y

Y

Not requested Y

Y

Not requested N

N

Not requested N

N

Not requested N

N

Not requested Y

Y

vibrating

watch

approved

Not requested Y

Y

Not requested Y

Y

vibrating

watch

approved

Not requested N

Y

Not requested Y

Y

Not requested Y

Y

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 17

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 773 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4361

Low literacy?

(So that

If signs to

Bed Shaker? Other Alert Device

Captel Acess

written

Has

Has

communicate, Auxiliary Aid (Not

(e.g., vibrating

(Not

Personal Phone

Listed with Signs to

communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door noted in KOMS Assessment requested; watch, etc.) (Not TTY Access (Not requested; Amplifier (Not

Housing KOMS ADA communicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution

meeting denied;

requested; denied; requested;

denied;

requested;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N)

effective)

waived)

waived) notes?

took place? granted)

granted)

denied; granted) granted)

denied; granted)

hearing aide

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aide

Dorm 6 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

Dorm 6 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested not requested not requested not requested Not requested

Dorm 1 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested not requested not requested granted

Not requested

Dorm 5 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested not requested not requested not requested Not requested

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested not requested not requested not requested Not requested

Dorm 6 Yes

N

Dorm 2 Yes

N

Dorm 6 Yes

N

Dorm 5 Yes

N

Dorm 2 Yes

N

Dorm 4 Yes

N

Dorm 2 Yes

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Not requested not requested not requested not requested Not requested

arrived with

Y

granted

hearing aide

not requested not requested Not requested

denied by medical,

Y

Not requested ordered amplifier not requested granted

Not requested

refused hearing

Y

Not requested aides

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aides

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

denied by medical,

Y

Not requested ordered amplifier not requested granted

Not requested

hearing aides

Y

Not requested granted

granted

not requested Not requested

Dorm 6 Yes

N

Dorm 2 Yes

N

Dorm 2 Yes

N

Dorm 6 Yes

N

Dorm 4 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested not requested not requested not requested Not requested

arrived with

Y

Not requested hearing aide

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aides

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

arrived with

Y

Not requested hearing aide

not requested not requested Not requested

arrived with

Y

Not requested hearing aide

not requested not requested Not requested

Dorm 4 Yes

N

Dorm 6 Yes

N

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested not requested not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aides

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

arrived with

Y

Not requested hearing aide

not requested not requested Not requested

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

granted

not requested not requested granted

Not requested

Dorm 4 Yes

N

Dorm 4 Yes

N

Dorm 5 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested not requested not requested granted

Not requested

hearing aides

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aides

Y

Not requested granted

not requested notErexqhuibeistte2d, NNToCt ,repq.u1es8ted

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 774 of 985 - Page ID#: 4362

Clear mask for Any other

Shake & Wake

staff who deal auxiliary

(Not requested; Special with this

aid

ID

denied; granted) mask?

innmate?

requested? Outome?

Not requested N

Y

Not requested Y

Y

vibrating

watch

approved

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

N

Not requested Y

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

N

Not requested N

N

Not requested N

N

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

person approved interpreter for both

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

N

Not requested N

N

Not requested N

N

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

vibrating

watch

approved

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 19

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 775 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4363

Low literacy?

(So that

If signs to

Bed Shaker? Other Alert Device

Captel Acess

Listed with Signs to

written

Has

Has

communicate, Auxiliary Aid (Not

communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door noted in KOMS Assessment requested;

(e.g., vibrating

(Not

watch, etc.) (Not TTY Access (Not requested;

Personal Phone Amplifier (Not

Housing KOMS ADA communicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution

meeting denied;

requested; denied; requested;

denied;

requested;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N)

effective)

waived)

waived) notes?

took place? granted)

granted)

denied; granted) granted)

denied; granted)

hearing aides

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

arrived with

Dorm 4 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested hearing aide

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aides

Dorm 6 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aide

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

Dorm 2 Yes

N

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested not requested not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aides

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

Dorm 2 Yes

N

Dorm 2 Yes

N

Dorm 2 Yes

N

Dorm 2 Yes

N

Dorm 6 Yes

N

Dorm 1 Yes

N

Dorm 2 Yes

N

Dorm 6 Yes

N

Dorm 2 Yes

N

Dorm 3 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Not requested inmate refused not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aides

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aides

Y

granted

granted

not requested not requested Not requested

arrived with

Y

Not requested hearing aide

not requested not requested Not requested

arrived with

Y

Not requested hearing aide

not requested not requested Not requested

arrived with

Y

Not requested hearing aide

not requested not requested Not requested

arrived with

Y

Not requested hearing aide

not requested not requested Not requested

arrived with

Y

Not requested hearing aide

not requested not requested Not requested

hearing aides

Y

Not requested granted

not requested not requested Not requested

arrived with

Y

Not requested hearing aide

not requested not requested Not requested

Dorm 4 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested not requested not requested Not requested

Dorm 6 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested not requested not requested Not requested

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Hearing Aid issued not requested not requested Not requested

Dorm 4 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested granted

not requested Not requested

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Hearing Aid issued granted

not requested Not requested

Dorm 2 Yes

N

Dorm 5 Yes

N

Dorm 3 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Hearing Aid issued not requested not requested Not requested

vibrating watch

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested approved

Not requested Not requested Not requested

does not meet

signed refusal for

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested critera for HA

Not requested Not requested pocket talker

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 20

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 776 of 985 - Page ID#: 4364

Clear mask for Any other

Shake & Wake

staff who deal auxiliary

(Not requested; Special with this

aid

ID

denied; granted) mask?

innmate?

requested? Outome?

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

vibrating

watch

approved

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 21

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 777 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4365

Low literacy?

(So that

If signs to

Bed Shaker? Other Alert Device

Captel Acess

written

Has

Has

communicate, Auxiliary Aid (Not

(e.g., vibrating

(Not

Personal Phone

Listed with Signs to

communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door noted in KOMS Assessment requested; watch, etc.) (Not TTY Access (Not requested; Amplifier (Not

Housing KOMS ADA communicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution

meeting denied;

requested; denied; requested;

denied;

requested;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N)

effective)

waived)

waived) notes?

took place? granted)

granted)

denied; granted) granted)

denied; granted)

Dorm 4 Yes

N

Dorm 1 Yes

N

Y

Waived

Waived N/A

Y

Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

vibrating watch

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested approved

Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 6 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 6 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 6 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 6 Yes

N

Dorm 6 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

vibrating watch

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested approved

Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 4 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 3 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 1 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 1 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 3 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 3 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 6 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 4 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 5 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 6 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 4 Yes

N

Y

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

RHU

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 1 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 3 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 3 Yes

N

Hearing aid issued,

vibrating watch

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested approved

Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 3 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 778 of 985 - Page ID#: 4366

Shake & Wake (Not requested; Special denied; granted) mask? Not requested N Not requested Y Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N Not requested N

Clear mask for Any other

staff who deal auxiliary

with this

aid

innmate?

requested? Outome?

Y

Y Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 23

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 779 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4367

Low literacy?

(So that

If signs to

Bed Shaker? Other Alert Device

Captel Acess

written

Has

Has

communicate, Auxiliary Aid (Not

(e.g., vibrating

(Not

Personal Phone

Listed with Signs to

communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door noted in KOMS Assessment requested; watch, etc.) (Not TTY Access (Not requested; Amplifier (Not

Housing KOMS ADA communicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution

meeting denied;

requested; denied; requested;

denied;

requested;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N)

effective)

waived)

waived) notes?

took place? granted)

granted)

denied; granted) granted)

denied; granted)

Dorm 2 Yes

N

Hearing aid issued,

vibrating watch

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested approved

Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 3 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 4 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 1 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested Hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 3 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

RHU

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 3 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 3 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 1 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 1 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 4 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 1 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 6 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 4 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 3 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 3 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 4 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested hearing aid issued Not requested NotErxehquibeistte2d, NNToCt ,repq.u2e4sted

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 780 of 985 - Page ID#: 4368

Clear mask for Any other

Shake & Wake

staff who deal auxiliary

(Not requested; Special with this

aid

ID

denied; granted) mask?

innmate?

requested? Outome?

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 25

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 781 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4369

Low literacy?

(So that

If signs to

Bed Shaker? Other Alert Device

Captel Acess

written

Has

Has

communicate, Auxiliary Aid (Not

(e.g., vibrating

(Not

Personal Phone

Listed with Signs to

communicatio Deaf/HOH ID Bed/Door noted in KOMS Assessment requested; watch, etc.) (Not TTY Access (Not requested; Amplifier (Not

Housing KOMS ADA communicate n is not

Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution

meeting denied;

requested; denied; requested;

denied;

requested;

ID

location Precaution? (Y/N)

effective)

waived)

waived) notes?

took place? granted)

granted)

denied; granted) granted)

denied; granted)

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 3 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested hearing aid issued Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 1 Yes

N

Dorm 2 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

HA offered-patient

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested refused

Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 4 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 6 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

RHU

Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Dorm 6 Yes

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested not requested Not requested Not requested Not requested

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 26

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 782 of 985 - Page ID#: 4370

Clear mask for Any other

Shake & Wake

staff who deal auxiliary

(Not requested; Special with this

aid

ID

denied; granted) mask?

innmate?

requested? Outome?

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Not requested N

Y

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 27

Technology

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/1H6o/w2d0o inmaPtesaogbtaein: 783 of 985 - Page

How many Where When obtained

Specifications (URL)

ID#: 4371

access?

How well do they work?

Other comments

FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device.
2

Instituti onal Religious Center and Program s Building Unknown

www.ccrane.com

Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers)

kept on the unknown, minmate

varies

depending on

inmate

Medical orders from McKesson

turn their radios to the designated channel

actually work really well. I recently served as the Acting Chaplain for the institution and would utilize the transmitter in the chapel to hear the service when I was in my office. It was very clear.

Those who utilize them say they

work. Some inmates do

complain that they don't work

to the degree that they want

them to. These inmates are

medical department orders for referred back to medical for any

the inmate

issues.

Captioned Telephone (CapTel) Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like?

2 None

Dorm 2 and Dorm 6 Oct-18

www.amazon.com Serial Number 401I2800063, Captel, Hamilton

Once approved by ADA Coordinator, captel phone is located on the dorm and HOH ID card allows them access

Now that all previous issues have been resolved, they work as they should.

Bed shakers

various dates 6, with two Dorm 2

Johnson Controls/Simplex Grinnell

request through ADA Coordinator, once approved then unit staff will make bed move into the shaker beds

they have passed all monthly tests and drills

Vibrating watches

varies

kept on

the

varies depending on

inmate inmate

can be purchased through Jack L Marcus or Amazon

request through caseworker, Unit Administrator, or ADA coordinator

no issues reported by inmates

Vibrating alarm clocks

Pagers

varies none

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in

use or under consideration not mentioned above.

none

kept on

the

varies depending on

inmate inmate

can be purchased through Jack L Marcus or Amazon

Earphones for parole hearings

stored

with

Parole

Board

equipme

1

nt

May-20

Vogek headphones purchased from Amazon

request through caseworker, Unit Administrator, or ADA coordinator

no issues reported by inmates

Reentry Coordinator meets

with all at least 7 days prior to

hearing to determine if

accomodations are needed.

The inmate may decide that

day that they need to use them

and the headphones are

readily available.

no issues reported by inmates

Earphones for orientation videos

stored in

Program

s CTO

office in

Program

s

1

building Unknown

Vogek headphones purchased from Amazon

The person conducting orientation asks if any accommodations are needed, to include headphones. If so, the headphones are utilized.

no issues reported by inmates

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 28

Documentation

and

narrative

to

prCovaisdee :

3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc
Date reviewed

#ICD:om9#9:m-4e2n3t7s F2(pirloebdle:m1s2r/e1v6ea/2le0d,

soPluatigones:,

7et8c.4)

of

985

-

Page

Grievances:

1. Provide summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates.

Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Should include the issues,

summary of response, resolution

see attached document (NTC Grievance Summary)

2. Provide full documentation of all grievances that address

hearing/hearing accommodation issues.

see attached documents

Discipline

3. For all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving an

inmate who signs, provide report of inmate name, date, and

9/29/2020

Inmate

- Investigation 7/8/20 VRI Laptop, Adjustment 7/31/20 (VRI not

communication method for each.

used and no waiver signed, sent back for rehearing), Rehearing 9/29/20 VRI (DR dismissed)

4. Provide documentation for all disciplinary proceedings since July

2019 involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for

9/29/2020

count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate.

Auxiliary aids

5. VRI Log (provide).

9/22/2020

6. TTY instructions (provide)

9/22/2020

7. VRI instructions (provide)

9/22/2020

Audiology processing delays

see attached
attached attached attached

8.A list of each inmate currently at your institution whose audiology

processing FINISHED after March 2020, for whom such processing

took or is taking over 60 days, documentation of the explanation for

any such delay, and a description of any steps taken to avoid similar

problems going forward.

9/24/2020

Information provided to inmates, policies, etc.

9. Any pages of the inmate handbook that address disability, and 9/29/2020
the date for that version of the handbook.

10. The current Deaf/HOH brochure and any other documents provided to deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates.

9/29/2020

11.The medical request form currently provided to prisoners.

9/29/2020

12. Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2020 addressing 9/29/2020
deaf/hard-of-hearing issues.

13. A list of each use of an in-person sign-language interpreter from

February 2020 to present, and any occasions in which such an

9/22/2020

interpreter was requested but denied.

Due to inmate testing positive for Covid and being in RHU, the audicus could not be done sooner. The initial hearing screen was completed on 7/16/20 and most recent screening was completed on 9/22/20 and provider is in the process of determining if hearing aid is needed. Due to Covid and need to quarantine, this was an issue that could not be avoided and one that a plan of action could not be completed for. Inmate presented no complaints regarding hearing while in RHU but was advised if he needed any type of accomodations in the time being, NTC would work to afford those to him.
attached-page 22 and 23 of inmate handbook
attached attached
attached
There have been no cases from February 2020 to present where an in-person interpreter was used, requested, or denied.
Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 29

Documentation

and

narrative

to

prCovaisdee :

3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc
Date reviewed

#ICD:om9#9:m-4e2n3t7s F3(pirloebdle:m1s2r/e1v6ea/2le0d,

soPluatigones:,

7et8c.5)

of

985

-

Page

Please provide written responses to the following questions:

14. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty because staff members are wearing masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?
9/22/2020

15. How many staff members are currently using clear masks? How is the decision made who will wear a clear mask?

9/29/2020

16. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing

inmates are experiencing difficulty with their hearing aids because

of the design of their own masks? Did you survey them? Talk to

them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many

reported an issue? How did you respond?

9/29/2020

17. How many inmates have been issued masks that don't have ear

ties?

9/29/2020

Staff spoke with Hard-of-Hearing inmates on the dorms when making rounds after the mask mandate was initiated. Approximately 60 HOH inmates were talked to in regards to how they were responding to the mask mandate. At first, most reported that they were not having issues with staff wearing masks and understood the necessity for safety reasons. However, as the mask mandate progressed, inmates did begin reporting issues with hearing announcements or knowing that staff were talking to them. The institution responded to this by ordering the clear see through masks for staff who inmates may have the most contact with first. Once these were found to be more effective and HOH friendly, an additional 150 masks were ordered for staff since it appears that the mask mandate will be a long-term mandate.
119 staff members are currently utilizing clear masks. We currently have an additional 150 ordered. Staff working permanent posts that inmates routinely come into contact with were given priority. This includes housing units on all shifts, legal library, library, Investigator and Adjustment Officer, Kitchen officer, Outside Detail Officer, Restrictive Housing Unit staff, Yard Supervisor, Medical and Hub Officer. The masks ordered will be distributed to all programs staff, recreation staff, and Chaplain. We are working to provide one for all staff members that may have routine contact with inmates.
An institution-wide memo was sent out detailing to inmates with HOH issues how they could obtain a masks that ties if they feel like it would be more accomodating and easier to wear with hearing aid devices. The inmates were told to either request through their unit staff or the ADA coordinator who then coordinated with our Fire, Safety, and Sanitation department who make the masks with ties. Each inmate who was identified as HOH and requested a tie mask received a mask with ties. These were issued the same day as the request.
All inmates were initially issued masks that don't have ear ties. However, upon request, 15 inmates have now been issued masks with ear ties.

18. What if anything have you done to solve the problem of inmates having trouble hearing announcements? Please respond in detail, with dates on all responsive steps, prerequisites for any assistance, etc.
9/29/2020

Staff have been reminded on mulitple occasions that they must make the announcements on each wing of the dorm and be mindful of any HOH/Deaf inmates that are currently housed on their dorms. They have been educated on what the HOH bed sign and ID Card look like. On July 7, 2020, the ADA Aid positions were created. These positions were opened up on each wing of each dorm for each shift. Part of the job duties are to notify all HOH inmates of nonroutine announcements such as pill call, chow, programs, etc. The only prerequisite for this assistance is to be designated as HOH and have a HOH bed sign so that the ADA aide is aware of who they need to inform. This new addition started off a little rough as HOH inmates and the ADA Aides worked to understand the job duties and new process. It appears to be more beneficial now as we have worked to smooth out the kinks and there are fewer complaints about the new positions as well as missed announcements.

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 30

Documentation

and

narrative

to

prCovaisdee :

3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc
Date reviewed

#ICD:om9#9:m-4e2n3t7s F4(pirloebdle:m1s2r/e1v6ea/2le0d,

soPluatigones:,

7et8c.6)

of

985

-

Page

19. How have you educated staff that it is inappropriate to write up an inmate for behavior that is caused by a hearing impairment (e.g., talking loudly, not following instructions that could not be heard)? If there was a memo, please provide that.

ADA Coordinator met with shift supervisors for each shift to discuss how to address behavior that is caused by a hearing impairment. It was noted during this discussion that the issues have been greater especially with the mask mandate. Supervisors were asked to remind staff of how to communicate professionally with inmates. Supervisors were also asked to monitor any type of disciplinary issued for hearing impairment issues. A supervisor is already required to review each disciplinary and sign off on them so they were asked to look at each one, use their discretion, contact me if need be, and then also address with staff if necessary.

20. Please describe in detail how inmates are supposed to get hearing aid batteries, including how long it should take them each time.

9/24/2020

21. When an inmate reports that a hearing aid is not working, what

are the steps followed to evaluate the complaint? Include all

relevant copays and other procedures.

9/24/2020

Medical staff is available 24 hours a day at NTC to issue hearing aid batteries as they are needed and requested by the patient. We carry all sizes and types of batteries that are used in the hearing aids our patients have so there is never a delay in them getting a replacement battery. It is explained to the patient when a hearing aid is issued or on intake if they are transferring here with a hearing aid that they can come to medical and get a battery any time it is needed. They just need to trade their old battery for a new one in medical.
If a patient tells medical their hearing aid is not working properly medical staff will first replace the battery and then replace the clear plastic tube if needed. If the hearing aid will still not work properly the hearing aid is sent out for repair by Kelly Buckley. The patient doesn’t have to pay a copay for their hearing aid to be repaired.

22. When someone is denied binaural hearing aids, are they provided information on the standard for receiving such assistance, and the opportunity for appeal? How many inmates have received binaural aids since the current binaural hearing aid policy has been in effect?

23. What arrangements are made to provide vibrating watches/clocks for inmates who are indigent?

9/30/2020 9/22/2020

When patients are going through the hard of hearing process the provider explains the policy to the patient. It is explained they will only be issued one hearing aid per the Hard of Hearing Protocol and it will be for the ear with the best hearing. If the patient is requesting hearing aids for both ears the following will need to be done. A patient who requests two hearing aids must submit a sick call describing his/her reason or reasons for requesting two hearing aids. The patient is then referred to the provider who reviews the most recent audiogram to determine whether the hearing in each ear (separately) meets the DOC requirement for a prescription hearing aid. If both ears meet the DOC requirement for a hearing aid, the PCP will determine whether either of the two additional criteria for two hearing aids are met. The PCP will then either order a second hearing aid or deny the request for two hearing aids. Any request for two hearing aids is to be referred to the Therapeutic Level of Care Committee for review. We currently have two patients with bilateral hearing aids.
A state restitution lien is placed on the inmate's account so that the vibrating watch/clock can go ahead and be ordered. The lien is then repaid in accordance with policy (if any incoming money is received).

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 31

Documentation

and

narrative

to

prCovaisdee :

3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc
Date reviewed

#ICD:om9#9:m-4e2n3t7s F5(pirloebdle:m1s2r/e1v6ea/2le0d,

soPluatigones:,

7et8c.7)

of

985

-

Page

24. Please describe, in detail, each step that takes place once a

person is identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing, to evaluate/offer

any auxiliary aids. Include who is responsible for each step.

9/29/2020

25. Please describe, in detail, any situation in 2019 or 2020 in which

a deaf/hard-of-hearing inmate has been denied a job or other

opportunity (access to a program or the like) because of their

disability. Include the inmate’s name, the date, and the

circumstances.

9/29/2020

An inmate is assessed by the medical department upon intake and during annual physical and the hearing screening form is completed. If an inmate answers yes to any of these questions, they are referred to the provider for further examination. The provider will determine if further testing is needed. Once the audiology process is completed, medical will determine if hearing aids are necessary. The treatment team comprised of medical staff, ADA Coordinator, and unit housing staff will meet with each HOH/Deaf inmate and discuss the inmate's accommodation request and availalbe auxiliary aids. At this time, any waivers will be signed and the inmate is informed by the ADA Coordinator that they may request accommodations at any time even if they have previously waived them.
There have been no instances in 2019 or 2020 where a deaf/HOH inmate has been denied a job or other opportunity because of their disability.

26. Please list all training that you have received for your role as ADA Coordinator. 27. Please provide an update on all items in your Deaf/HOH action plan (previously shared with me).

9/29/2020

online computer based training titled: DOC ADA Coordinator: Settlement Agreement, DOC ADA Coordinator: Create, and DOC AllS Communicating with Deaf and Hard of Hearing Inmates. Also, all training materials located on the G Drive to include settlement monitor's powerpoint

9/29/2020 ·         Devices § Videophone does not allow for voice carry-over features. The Sorenson video phone allows for voice carry-over features. This issue has been resolved. § No Captel is available. This issue was resolved on 7/29/20. The phone is now working properly.
·         Continuing problem with timely audiology processing. HSA Stephanie Thompson reports that audiology processing is occurring now within the 60 day timeframe. The process is now reviewed by HAS Stephanie Thompson and she will continue to monitor and review to ensure compliance. Medical continues to be in compliance with audiology processing with the exception of one inmate who had tested positive for Covid-19 and was placed in quarantine. He has since had his second test and is in the process of determining if a hearing aid is necessary.

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 32

Documentation

and

narrative

to

prCovaisdee :

3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc
Date reviewed

#ICD:om9#9:m-4e2n3t7s F6(pirloebdle:m1s2r/e1v6ea/2le0d,

soPluatigones:,

7et8c.8)

of

985

-

Page

·         Inmates are apparently doing sign language interpretation for other inmates and the VRI is not being used when appropriate. The prior NTC Adjustment Officer did not offer the VRI laptop for interpretation during an inmate’s adjustment hearing. It was offered during the investigation phase of the disciplinary proceeding. All staff were reminded that this is not just a recommendation but a requirement that Hard of Hearing inmates be offered interpretation services during any classification committee proceeding, disciplinary proceeding, or any other hearing/proceeding. The ADA coordinator will continue to monitor this for compliance. A review of disciplinary violations for deaf/HOH shows that the Adjustment staff are offering/using an official interpreter via the purple laptop. ADA Coordinator did find one incident where an adjustment hearing was conducted by someone filling in for the adjustment officer. The staff member did not utilize the interpreter during the hearing and did not have a waiver signed. I notified the Warden and requested that it be sent back for a rehearing. It was ultimately dismissed on the rehearing. (Email strand attached.)

·         Inmates can get access to the videophone only until 11:00 pm, even though regular phones are available several hours later. In addition, we have been told that videophone access is unavailable during lockdowns, even though ordinary phone access remains available. All telephones shut off at 11:00 PM through the week and 1:00 AM on the weekends. Inmates using the videophone are able to access it the same hours as general population inmates. The phone is located outside of the crash gates on the dorms that are locked during lockdown. The inmate does have to request to use it during this time with staff. However, the inmate is granted access to the videophone room and staff do not have to remain in the room with the inmate. The room is located in the same foyer as the officer station so that security is not a concern and inmate behavior can be monitored as needed. We have received some complaints that staff are not allowing the inmates who utilize the videophone out to use it when the crash gate is closed. This was addressed with supervisor staff on 3-11/11-7 shift. We will continue to follow up with the inmates who utilize the videophones to ensure that there are no future issues. The issue was addressed with staff and there have been no further issues reported by the inmate. (Email addressing issue attached.)

·         No instructions on how to access the relay on TTY phones. The instructions to access the

relay are included with the TTY phones. The TTY instructions will also be updated to include the

new locations on the dorms and how to access them (those approved will receive combination

to lock.) This will be completed by June 22, 2020. This was postponed due to the need to

reconfigure inmate telephones to work the TTY phones. This was completed on 7/29/20. The

new instructions will be updated by 8/7/20 and placed in the cabinet with the phones. The

inmates currently using the phones have been trained on the new setup. The new TTY

instructions have been completed and placed in the box with the TTY machines on the

housing units. This has been resolved.

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 33

Prison: Northpoint Training Center Name of person filling out form: Ali Drury Date: 9/29/2020
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

1

2

3/6/2019 Sick Call

11/7/2017

4/10/2019

Intake to NTC

Physical

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 789 of 985 - Page ID#: 4377

3

4

5

6

7

8

1/26/2017

9/18/2019

Chronic Care Visit

Chronic Care Visit

9/11/2020 PE

1/15/2019 Physical

3/11/2019 Physical

6/14/2019 11/30/2016

Physical

Intake

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

3/8/2019

11/13/2017

4/10/2019

3/28/2017

9/18/2019

9/11/2020

2/14/2019

3/11/2019

6/14/2019

12/6/2016

9
11/19/2018 Intake
11/20/2018

7/2/2020 PE/CCC
7/2/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

3/26/2019

1/3/2018

Hearing aid

needed and Hearing aid needed and

ordered

ordered

4/22/2019
Hearing aid needed and
ordered

3/28/2017

12/10/2019

9/23/2020

Hearing aids

Hearing aids offered- patient
refused

In process of determining whether a HA is
needed

5/16/2019
Hearing aid needed and
ordered

3/20/2019
Hearing aid needed and
ordered

6/25/2019
Hearing aid needed and
ordered

2/7/2017
Hearing aid needed and
ordered

11/20/2018

7/6/2020

Hearing aid In process of needed and determining if a
ordered HA is needed

A

C

A

A

D

B

A

A

A

A

A

B

Patient signed

refusal for

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

hearing aid

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

3/6/2019 Sick Call

11/7/2017

4/10/2019

1/26/2017

9/18/2019

Provider visit for Provider visit for Provider chronic

Intake to NTC

physical chronic care

care visit

9/11/2020

1/15/2019

3/11/2019

6/14/2019

12/6/2016 11/19/2018

Provider visit for Provider visit for

Provider visit for physical/audiosc physical-failed

PE

physical

ope whisper test

Provider visit Intake Physical

7/2/2020
Provider Encounter

Referral to provider

Refer to Provider

Failed audioscope referred for audiogram

Sent to outside ENT

Patient refused Initial Hearing

hearing Screening, refer

assessment

for Audicus

Scheduled for audioscope

Schedule for hearing test

Schedule for hearing test

Audiology consult
submitted

Initial Hearing Referred for Screening, Refer
audiogram for Audiogram

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 34

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 31:14-cv-00001-GFVT-E2 BA Doc3 #: 99-2 4 Filed: 12/16/20 5Page: 7960 of 985 7- Page 8

9

ID#: 4378

3/8/2019

11/13/2017

Provider visit Provider Encounter

4/22/2019

3/28/2017

12/5/2019

On-Site Audiogram

Provider chronic

Off-site ENT

care visit

9/23/2020

2/14/2019

3/20/2019

6/25/2019

2/7/2017

Provider visit for

Encounter

audioscope

On-site hearing test

Audiology visit,

hearing test

completed and

On-site hearing fitted for hearing

test

aids

11/20/2018
Audiogram completed

7/6/2020 Encounter

Audioscope completed, referred for
audicus

Hearing Screening Questionairre, refer to
Hears To You

Completed referred back to
provider

Return in 2 Referred for onmonths for f/u site hearing test

3/26/2019

1/3/2018

6/3/2019

5/19/2017

12/10/2019

On-site hearing Outside Appointment

test

Encounter

Provider visit

On-Site hearing

Provider visit

test

Audicus Referral for onObtained site hearing test

Refer back to provider

Refer back to provider

Return for hearing aids

Refer back to provider

5/16/2019

4/8/2019

7/12/2019

2/22/2017 11/29/2018

On-site hearing test

Provider visit

Provider visit Audiology visit

Provider visit

Audiogram Obtained
7/13/2020
Provider f/u

Report to provider
4/8/2019

Hearing Evaluation obtained
1/9/2018

Hearing aids Referred back to Referred back to

ordered

ENT

provider

7/18/2019

6/16/2017

12/19/2019

Provider visit Provider Encounter Provider visit Outside ENT Provider visit

Hearing Aid ordered, issued hearing amplifier until receipt of
HA
6/5/2019
Encounter

Hearing aids in Received hearing Refused Hearing

HA were ordered use and effective

aids

Aid

1/25/2018 Encounter

7/27/2017 Provider
Encoutner

Refer back to provider 1/8/2020
Provider visit

Hearing aid ordered
6/7/2019
Encounter

Hearing aid Received hearing

ordered

aids

8/27/2019

6/23/2020

Encounter

Provider Encounter

Hearing aid ordered

Audiogram reviewed. HA
ordered.

12/26/2018

8/12/2020

Encounter

Encounter

Amplifier Issued

Hearing aids for use until HA

ordered

is received

Patient is profoundly deaf,
pt able to hear some
sound/speech with R HA. L HA is broken. Refer to Audiology for HA Issued reassessment

HA Issued

1/29/2020

7/2/2019 10/28/2019

1/22/2019

Encounter

Encounter Provider visit

Provider visit

HA Issued

HA Issued

HA Issued

HA x2 in good working
condition

HA Issued

HA Issued

Hearing aid in good working
condition

Patient not wearing HA at this encounter, but stated they
do work

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 35

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 31:14-cv-00001-GFVT-E2 BA Doc3 #: 99-2 4 Filed: 12/16/20 5Page: 7961 of 985 7- Page 8

9

ID#: 4379

11/6/2019

6/19/2020

2/24/2020 10/25/2019

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

Medical Visit 7 - Date, Description, Outcome

Patient had reported 1

broken HA to medical,

patient previouosly had

Reviewed 2. He does not meet

Maintenance, current DOC criteria for

Encourged use of 2, patient currently has

HA

1 working HA

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)
(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

7/2/2020, Provider Encounter, HA is
broken & provider states that it is broken
beyond repair. Audiogram Obtained on same day, Audicus
requested a repeat 7/10, F/U with provider
on 7/17- HA ordered 8/11/2020 Encounter-
HA Issued

3/6/2019 6/5/2019
-91
NA

11/7/2017 1/25/2018

4/10/2019 7/2/2019
-83
NA

1/26/2017 6/16/2017
-141
NA

9/18/2019 12/19/2019
-92
NA

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Provider had entered order
incorrectly.
Provider educated on correct way to enter orders

Scheduler did not place patient back on provider
schedule in timely manner.

Unsure delay from GRCC

Patient signed refusals which
lead to delay

Scheduler Review all new

educated also arrivals with

H.S.A reviewing

HOH

NA

Hearing Aid in Patients reports

good working effectiveness of

condition

HA

1/15/2019 1/29/2020
-379
NA

3/11/2019 7/2/2019 -113
NA

6/14/2019 8/27/2019
-74
NA

11/30/2016 2/22/2017 -84
NA

11/19/2018 12/26/2018
-37
NA

Found on audit of HOH database
patient had not received f/u with
provider to review audicus.

Provider had Transferred from Off-site referral entered order another facility took extended
incorrectly. delayed care time to schedule

Scheduler educated also H.S.A reviewing

Provider educated on correct way to enter orders

Review all new arrivals with HOH

Now using onsite audicus
Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 36

Prison: Northpoint Training Center Name of person filling out form: Ali Drury Date: 9/29/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 792 of 985 - Page ID#: 4380

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

12/18/2019

9/6/2017

11/7/2019

8/23/2018

1/3/2019

8/29/2018

4/16/2019

2/18/2019

6/29/2018

3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Intake 12/30/2019
12/30/2019

Intake

Physical

Nursing visit

9/15/2017

11/14/2019

9/19/2018

10/5/2017

11/14/2019

9/28/2018

Intake

Physical

1/18/2019

8/29/2018

9/18/19-Patient

signed refusal for

2/14/2020

testing

Physical 4/16/2019
4/18/2019

Intake physical 3/10/2019

PE 6/29/2018

6/12/2019

7/13/2018

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Patient signed refusal for hearing aid

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Patient signed refusal

Patient signed refusal

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing Aid needed and
ordered

D

A

A

A

D

D

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision against

providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC

policy.

Patient signed

Patient signed Patient signed

refusal for

refusal for

refusal for

hearing aid

N/A

N/A

N/A further testing further testing

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by

providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was

not needed)

A

A

N/A

N/A

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

12/18/2019

9/15/2017

11/7/2019

8/23/2018

1/3/2019

8/29/2019

4/16/2019

2/18/2019

6/29/2018

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Provider visit for

Physical/Audiosc

Intake Provider visit

physical Provider visit

Intake

Physical

ope

Intake physical

PE

7/1/2020 Yearly PE 7/1/2020 7/2/2020 Hearing Aid needed and ordered
C
7/1/2020 Physical

8/22/2018 Physical
8/31/2018 10/5/2018 Hearing aid needed and
ordered
A
N/A
8/22/2018 Physical

Referred to provider

Refer to audiology

Refer for audiogram

Referred for audioscope

Referred for on- Referred for on-

Referred for

site hearing

site hearing

hearing screen

testing

testing

Re-check after debrox

Initial Hearing Screening
Questionairre

Initial Hearing Screening
Questionaire

Schedule for audiogram

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 37

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 793 of 985 - Page ID#: 4381

12/30/2019

10/5/2017

11/14/2019

9/19/2018

1/18/2019

9/18/2019

4/18/2019

3/12/2019

7/13/2018

7/2/2020

8/31/2018

Provider visit

Audiology appointment

Audiogram completed

Audioscope Hearing screen

complete

completed

Audicus

Audicus

F/U after debrox

Encounter

Encounter

Audioscope completed

Hearing test and Patient signed fitting completed.
refusal for Hearing aids hearing aid were ordered
11/9/2017
Encounter

Refer back to

Patient signed

provider Refer for audicus Refer to provider

refusal

11/19/2019

9/28/2018

Provider visit Audicus testing

1/23/2019
Provider evaluation of hearing screen

Refer back to provider
5/14/2019
Provider visit

Refer for audiogram
4/8/2019
Provider visit

Audiogram Audiogram Obtained onsite

7/19/2018

7/13/2020

Provider Provider follow

Encounter

up

Refer for audiogram
10/5/2018
Audicus completed

HA Issued
6/23/2020
Provider Encounter

Hearing aids Referred back to

ordered

provider

Does not meet criteria for
hearing aids

12/13/2019

10/5/2018

3/1/2019

Encounter Provider visit Provider visit

F/U to assess effectiveness of
HA, patients reports HA is effective and
voiced no complaints at this
time

HA Issued
6/23/2020 Provider
Encounter

Hearing aids hearing screen re-

ordered

ordered

10/18/2018 Encounter

4/15/2019 Provider
Encounter

F/U to assess effectiveness of
HA, patient states HA is effective at this
time.

HA Issued

Does not meet criteria for hearing aid

Hearing aid ordered
6/5/2019
Encounter

Hearing aid ordered
7/2/2019

Audiogram reviewed, HA
needed and ordered
8/4/2018

Encounter

Encounter

Hearing aid ordered
8/11/2020
Encounter

Refer back to provider
10/18/2018 Provider
evaluation of audicus

HA Issued

HA Issued
6/23/2020 Provider
Encounter

HA Issued

HA Issued

Hearing aids ordered
11/10/2018
Encounter

F/U to assess effectiveness of HA, patient states
he lost it and signed a refusal
today for a replacement

HA Issued
Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 38

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 794 of 985 - Page ID#: 4382

6/23/2020

2/14/2020

Provider Encounter

Provider visit

Medical Visit 7 - Date, Description, Outcome

F/U to assess effectiveness of HA, pt. states he
uses it in academic setting
only but it is effective.

Patient signed refusal for
further testing

11/27/2018 Provider
Encounter
HA in good working order

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)
(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

12/18/2019 12/30/2019
-12

9/6/2017 11/9/2017
-64
NA

11/7/2019 12/13/2019
-36

8/23/2018 10/18/2018
-56

1/18/2019 3/1/2019 -42

8/29/2019 9/18/2019
-20

4/16/2019 6/5/2019
-50

2/18/2019 7/2/2019
-134

8/22/2018 11/10/2018
-80

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Off-site referral took extended time to schedule
Now using onsite audicus

Patient was transferred to
NTC without hearing aid
Review all new arrivals with HOH

Scheduler did not place patient
back on provider schedule in
timely manner.
New protocol, also scheduler educated on time frame of testing
Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 39

Prison: Northpoint Training Center Name of person filling out form: Ali Drury Date: 9/29/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 795 of 985 - Page ID#: 4383

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening

7/6/2017

2/8/2019

Provider visit Provider visit

7/6/2017

3/1/2019

4/22/2020 PE
4/22/2020

1/28/2018 Sick Call
2/20/2018

11/8/2019

11/27/2019

Physical 11/8/2019

Sick Call 12/3/2019

8/24/2016

7/7/2017

Intake Intake Physical

5/21/2018
Provider appointment

8/24/2016

7/18/2017

5/21/2018

3/2/2020 PE
3/2/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

7/25/2017

3/7/2019

4/28/2020

2/20/2018

11/22/2019

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing Aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

A

A

A

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

7/6/2017

2/8/2019

4/22/2020

1/28/2018

11/8/2019

12/9/2019

9/22/2016

8/7/2017

8/21/2019

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

A

A

A

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

11/27/2019

8/24/2016

7/18/2018

5/21/2018

3/31/2020 Hearing Aid needed and
ordered
A
N/A
3/2/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Provider visit Intake physical

PE

Sick Call

Physical

Sick Call

Intake Intake Physical Provider visit

PE

10/27/2019 Intake
10/28/2019 10/28/2019 Hearing aid needed and
ordered
A
N/A
10/27/2019 Intake

Referred to offsite audiology F/u after debrox

Initial Hearing Screening
Questionairre

Referred to provider Refer for audicus

referred to provider

Referred to audiology

Referred to audiology

Referred to audiology

Initial Hearing Screening
Questionaire

Referred for audiogram

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 40

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 796 of 985 - Page ID#: 4384

7/25/2017

3/1/2019

4/28/2020

1/31/2018

11/22/2019

12/3/2019

9/22/2016

8/7/2018

6/21/2018

3/26/2020

Off-Site Audiology appointment

Provider follow up

Encounter Provider visit

Audicus

Provider visit

Audiology appointment

Audiology Appointment

Audiogram review

Encounter

10/29/2019
Audiogram reviewed

Hearing aids ordered

Audiogram

Referred for off-

ordered Audicus Obtained site audiology

Refer back to provider Audicus referral

8/3/2017

3/29/2019

4/30/2020

2/20/2018

12/3/2019

12/16/2019

Provider follow up F/U audiogram

Provider Encounter

Off-Site Audiology

Provider visit

Provider visit

Hearing Aids ordered
10/14/2016
Encounter

Hearing Aids ordered
8/7/2018
Encounter

Hearing aids ordered Audicus Obtained

7/19/2018

3/13/2020

Encounter

Provider Encounter

Await hearing aids
8/9/2017
Encounter

F/U Audicus, HA

needed and

ordered. Hearing

Amplifier Issued

Hearing aid until hearing aid

ordered

is received

Hearing aids ordered
3/7/2019

Hearing aids ordered
12/20/2019

Encounter

Encounter

Hearing aid ordered

HA Issued

12/31/2019

9/29/2017

Encounter

Provider Appointment

HA Issued

HA needed and

HA Issued

ordered

8/21/2019

4/24/2020

Encounter

Provider Encounter

HA Issued
11/10/2017 Provider
Appointment

HA Issued
11/17/2018 Provider
Appointment

HA Issued
1/3/2020 Provider Appointment

Provider noted

previously issued

HA, patient was

not wearing them

in clinic at

appointment

HA Issued

time

1/17/2020 Provider
Appointment

F/U to assess

effectiveness of

Audicus repeated HA, Pt. states it is

due to losing HA

working and

on transport to

voiced no

NTC from halfway complaints at this

house

time

9/20/2019 Provider
Encounter

Hearing aid ordered
2/13/2020
Intake to NTC
Referred to provider states
not received hearing aid 2/21/2020
Physical
Hearing aid reordered
3/12/2020 Encounter

F/U on HA, I/M was not wearing
HA at this appointment

Hearing Aid

F/U on HA,

F/U on HA,

noted at patient reports it patient reports it

appointment, no is working well is working well &

complaints and voiced no

voiced no

voiced by patient complaints at this complaints at this

at this time

time

time

F/U hearing test reviewed,
replacement HA ordered

HA Issued
Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 41

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 797 of 985 - Page ID#: 4385
10/30/2019
Encounter

Medical Visit 7 - Date, Description, Outcome

HA Issued

6/23/2020
Provider Encounter
Finds HA is "too effective" at times. Other than that no
complaints were voiced, F/U PRN

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)
(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

7/6/2017 8/9/2017
-34

2/8/2019 4/23/2019
-74

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Delayed as provider treated
for cerumen impaction prior
to testing hearing.

1/28/2018 3/7/2018 -38

11/8/2019 12/20/2019
-42

11/27/2019 12/31/2019
-34

8/24/2016 10/14/2016
-51

7/7/2018 8/7/2018
-31

5/21/2018 7/19/2018
-59

10/27/2019 3/12/2020
-137

Patient was transferred to
NTC without receiving hearing aids. NTC had to
re-order.
Process of reviewing all new
HOH intakes helped to find
issue
Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 42

Prison: Northpoint Training Center Name of person filling out form: Ali Drury Date: 9/29/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 798 of 985 - Page ID#: 4386

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening

9/15/2017 Provider visit
9/15/2017

7/12/2016 Intake
8/25/2019

4/19/2019 Physical
4/19/2019

6/28/2019 Sick Call
7/23/2019

5/15/2020 PE

12/14/2017 Intake

11/12/2018 Physical

5/12/2020
CCC Provider Encounter

6/4/2020
Provider Appointment

5/15/2020

12/14/2017

11/29/2018

5/12/2020

6/4/2020

7/13/2020 PE/CCC
7/13/2020

1/26/2020 Sick Call
2/5/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

8/25/2016

4/30/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Hearing amplifier

D 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

9/15/2017

Hearing Amplifier

Hearing aids

ordered

A

D

Patient issused N/A hearing amplifier

7/12/2016

4/19/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Provider visit

Intake

Physical

8/23/2019

5/18/2020

1/16/2018

1/9/2019

5/19/2020

6/11/2020

Hearing aid No intervention

needed and needed at this

ordered

time

Hearing aids No intervention

ordered

needed

Hearing Aid needed & ordered

Hearing Aid neeed and
ordered

A

D

A

No intervention

needed at this

N/A

time

N/A

D

A

A

N/A

N/A

6/28/2019

5/15/2020

12/14/2017

11/12/2018

5/12/2020

6/4/2020

Sick Call

Provider physical

Provider

Provider

PE

Intake

visit Encounter-CCC Appointment

7/16/2020 Hearing Aid needed and
ordered
A
7/13/2020 PE/CCC

2/10/2020 Hearing Aid needed and
ordered
A
N/A
1/26/2020 Sick Call

Whisper test completed
ordered hearing amlifier

Referred to audiolgoy

Audicus requested

Referred to provier

Initial Hearing Screening,

Referred to provider

Initial Hearing Initial Hearing Initial Hearing

Schedule Screening. Refer Screening. Refer Screening/Refer

audioscope

for Audicus

for Audicus

for Audicus Refer to provider

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 43

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 799 of 985 - Page ID#: 4387

8/25/2016

6/3/2019

7/23/2019

5/18/2020

1/2/2018

11/29/2018

5/19/2020

6/11/2020

7/16/2020

2/5/2020

Audiology Appt. Provider visit

Audioscope

Encounter Provider visit

Audioscope

Audiogram

Encounter

Provider Encounter visit/audioscope

Hearing aids ordered Issued amplifier

8/25/2016

7/25/2019

Encounter

Provider Encounter

Refer for audiogram 8/23/2019
F/U audicus

Audiogram completed
5/21/2020
Provider Encounter

Referred to audiology
1/22/2018
Audiology appointment

Schedule audiogram
1/23/2019
Provider f/u audiogram

Audiogram Obtained
6/12/2020
Provider Encounter

Audiogram Obtained

Audiogram Obtained

6/12/2020

7/28/2020

Provider

Provider Encounter/Chart

Encounter

Review

Refer for audiogram 2/10/2020
Encounter

Reassess Hearing Amplifier, patient
reports it is effective and
wishes to HA Issued continue use

No intervention

Hearing aids needed at this

ordered

time

9/18/2019

Encounter

Hearing aid No intervention

ordered

needed

2/6/2018

Encounter

Hearing Aid ordered
7/15/2020
Encounter

Hearing Aid ordered
7/16/2020

Audicus reviewed. HA
needed and ordered
8/11/2020

Encounter

Encounter

Audiogram Obtained
2/28/2020
Provider f/u audiogram

Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description
Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

HA Issued
9/19/2019 Provider
Encounter
F/U to assess effectiveness of
HA, patient reports
effectiveness and voiced no
complaints at this time

HA Issued

HA Issued
9/2/2020 Provider Encounter

HA Issued
9/2/2020 Provider Encounter

HA Issued

HA ordered 3/18/2020 Encounter

F/U receipt of

HA, complaint

F/U receipt of regarding battery

HA, patient life, other than

voiced no

that reports

complaints at this hearing aid is

time, functional effective when

and working well

worn

HA Issued
Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 44

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
Medical Visit 7 - Date, Description, Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 800 of 985 - Page ID#: 4388
5/18/2020
Provider encounter
Patient had 2 hearing aids prior
to audicus, then issued one with audicus. That one had broke. Taken to TLOC 6/9/2020 approved for one hearing aid only.
Hearing aid ordered.

4/20/2020
Provider F/U
Patient reports that HA is
effective & is wearing it in the
left ear

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)
(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

6/23/2020: Provider visit, ordered hearing
aid. It was previously
ordered incorrectly. 7/15/2020 HA
Issued

9/15/2017 10/4/2017
-19

7/12/2016 8/26/2016
-14

4/19/2019 6/3/2019 -45

6/28/2019 9/18/2019
-82

12/14/2017 2/6/2018 -54

11/29/2018 1/23/2019
-55

5/12/2020 7/15/2020
-63

6/4/2020 7/16/2020
-42

1/26/2020 3/18/2020
-62

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Scheduler did not place patient
back on provider schedule in
timely manner.
New protocol, also scheduler educated on time frame of testing

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 45

Prison: Northpoint Training Center Name of person filling out form: Ali Drury Date: 9/29/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 801 of 985 - Page ID#: 4389

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening

6/22/2020
Provider Encounter

12/19/2018 Intake PE

6/22/2020

2/20/2018

3/9/2020 PE/CCC
3/9/2020

8/14/2019 PE

6/4/2019
Provider assessment

10/3/2019 Intake

5/15/2020
Provider Encounter-
PE/CCC

4/13/2020
Provider Encounter-PE

8/14/2019

6/4/2019

10/15/2019

5/15/2020

4/13/2020

7/16/2019 PE
7/16/2019

1/31/2020 Provider
encounter
1/31/2020

11/18/2019 Sick Call
11/22/2019

2/13/2019 Provider
encounter
2/13/219

5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)
Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

6/23/2020

12/20/2018

3/23/2020

8/15/2019

12/2/2019

11/8/2019

5/18/2020

4/20/2020

8/13/2019

2/10/2020

3/11/2020

3/25/2019

Hearing Aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aids HA needed and

ordered

ordered

Hearing aids Patient refused

ordered

hearing aids

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing Aid

needed and HA needed and HA needed and

ordered

ordered

ordered

Does not meet Criteria

Does not meet Criteria

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

D-Patient refused

A

A

A

A

hearing aids

A

A

A

A

D

D

A

Does not meet Does not meet

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Criteria

Criteria

N/A

6/22/2020

12/19/2018

Provider Encounter

Intake PE

3/9/2020 PE/CCC

8/14/2019

6/4/2019

10/15/2019

PE Audicus testing

PE

5/15/2020

4/13/2020

7/16/2019

Provider Encounter-
PE/CCC

Provider Encounter-PE

Provider Encounter-PE

1/31/2020

11/22/2019

Provider encounter

Provider encounter

2/13/2019
Provider encounter

Initial Hearing Screening
Questionaire, refer for
Audioscope

Referred for hearing screen

TX of Cerumen Impaction

Referred for audiogram

Provider Seen by provider

reviewed and order debrox.

scheduled with Will recheck in 2

ENT

weeks

Refer for Audiogram

Initial Hearing Screening
Questionaire

Seen by provider

with hearing

questionaire. Seen by provider

Initial Hearing

Provider for hearing loss Seen by provider

Screening requesting a and refer for and refer for

Questionaire

audiogram

audicus

audiogram

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 46

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 802 of 985 - Page ID#: 4390

6/25/2020

12/20/2018

3/23/2020

8/19/2019

12/2/2019

11/7/2019

5/18/2020

4/20/2020

8/13/2019

2/24/2020

12/11/2019

3/25/2019

Encounter

Encounter

Provider Encounter

Encounter ENT appointment

Provider Encounter

Encounter

Encounter

Encounter

Provider encounter Audicus testing

Audicus

Audiogram Obtained

Audiogram

6/26/2020

1/10/2019

Provider Encounter Provider f/u visit

Reassesed Cerumen Impaction, referred for Audiogram. Audiogram Obtained
6/19/2020
Provider Encounter

Audiogram Obtained 9/3/2019
Encounter

Recommend hearing aids

Hearing eval Refer fot
Audiogram

12/4/2019

11/19/2019

F/U ENT appointment Audicus results

Audicus Test Completed 5/21/2020
F/U Audicus

Audicus Complete 6/19/2020
F/U Audicus

Audicus Complete

Follow up Audiogram and
hearing aids order

Audicus testing Completed

Audicus testing completed

8/23/2019

2/25/2020

12/19/2019

3/26/2019

F/U Audicus

Telephone Encounter

Provider Encounter

Telephone encounter

Awaiting provider

HA needed and review of hearing

ordered

screen

F/U Audiogram F/U Audiogram, results HA ordered

Patient refused hearing aids

7/29/2020

1/21/2019

6/19/2020

9/9/2019

Encounter

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

Encounter

Hearing aid ordered

HA needed & ordered

HA needed and ordered

Paitent doesn’t

meet the

requirements for

a hearing aid.

May have a

HA needed and pocket talker at

ordered

this time.

Patient is not a candidate for hearing aid at Heaing amplifier this time issued to patient

12/13/2019

6/17/2020

7/15/2020

9/25/2019

2/26/2020

2/26/2020

4/8/2019

Encounter

Encounter

Encounter

Encounter

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

HA Issued

Provider ordered

ear flushes, &

repeat

Audiogram after

ears have been

flushed &

Audiogram

Cerumen

evaluation, HA

Impaction

ordered

removed

Issued Sound Ampifier while
waiting for Audiogram
results

9/2/2020 Provider Encounter

2/8/2019 Encounter

7/2/2020 Encounter

9/25/2019 Encounter

Hearing Aid Issued
12/19/2019
Provider Visit

Hearing Aid Issued

HA Issued
9/2/2020 Provider Encounter

Hearing amplifer

HA Issued

issued Refer for Audicus

11/5/2019 Provider
Encounter

3/11/2020 Encounter

Hearing aid ordered
10/30/2019
Encounter

F/U receipt of hearing aid, wears it sometimes,
reports he feels unbalanced w/
hearing aid in good ear

HA Issued

Audiogram Obtained HA Issued at RCC

F/U HA, patient states that HA is effective at this
time

F/U receipt of hearing aid,
states when he wears it he can
hear well

F/U to assess effectiveness of
HA, pt. encouraged to
wear HA

Audicus Obtained
Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 47

Hearing Aid Issued

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 803 of 985 - Page ID#: 4391

3/8/2019

7/13/2020

11/19/2019

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

Encounter

3/18/2020

11/26/2019

Provider Encounter

Provider encounter

Medical Visit 7 - Date, Description, Outcome
... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Patient reports

that HA is Provider request

effective, no re-test for 3rd

complaints

time.

Tranferred to NTC on
10/14/2019, Provider F/U on
above date, patient reports HA is effective

7/17/2020, EncounterAudiogram Obtained. 7/28/2020
Provider Encounter/Chart
review, HA needed and
ordered 8/11/2020Encounter, HA
Issused

12/19/2018 2/8/2019 -51

8/14/2019 9/25/2019
-42

6/4/2019 12/4/2019
-183

10/15/2019 12/13/2019
-59

5/15/2020 6/17/2020

4/13/2020 7/15/2020

F/U repeat

Audiogram, no

F/U with

HA needed at provider, patient

this time, sound reports that HA is

amplifier offered, effective at this

patient refused

time

1/31/2020 2/26/2020
-26

11/18/2019 12/19/2019
-31

2/13/2019 10/30/2019
-259

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Patient was referred to
outside audioglogy. Also,
signed refusal.
On-site testing now.

Provider had entered order
incorrectly.

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 48

Provider educated on correct way to enter orders

Prison: Northpoint Training Center Name of person filling out form: Ali Drury Date: 9/29/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 804 of 985 - Page ID#: 4392

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening

2/1/2018 Provider encounter
2/1/2018

3/15/2019

4/4/2018

10/17/2019

PE

Annual PPD

Encounter

3/15/2019

10/9/2018

10/22/2019

3/6/2020

2/11/2019

1/10/2020

1/10/2020

10/6/2017

12/12/2019

Intake 3/6/2020

Sick call 4/5/2019

PE 1/10/2020

PE

Intake

PE

1/10/2020

10/10/2017

12/12/2019

12/12/2019 PE
12/19/2019

2/27/2019 PE
2/27/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

2/1/2018

3/26/2019

11/26/2018

3/13/2020

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

No intervention Signed refusal for No intervention Does not meet Signed refusal for

needed

hearing aid

needed

criteria Audicus testing

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

D

D

No intervention Signed refusal for

needed

hearing aid

D
Does not meet criteria

D
Does not meet criteria

D
Refusal Signed for Audicus testing

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

2/1/2018

3/15/2019

4/4/2018

10/17/2019

Provider encounter

Provider encounter

Annual PPD Nurse encounter

3/6/2020 Intake

4/5/2019 Hearing aid needed and
ordered
A
N/A
2/11/2019 Sick call

1/13/2020 Hearing aid needed and
ordered
A
N/A
1/10/2020 Provider
Encounter

1/13/2020 Hearing aid needed and
ordered
A
N/A
1/10/2020 Provider
Encounter

11/16/2017 Hearing aid
A N/A 10/10/2017

12/16/2019 Hearing aid needed and
ordered
A
N/A
12/12/2019 Provider
Encounter

12/16/2019

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

A

A

N/A

N/A

12/12/2019

2/27/2019

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

Seen by provider,

hearing

screening

revealed mild

hearing loss. No Seen by provider,

intervention

hearing

warranted based screening, Refer

on findings for audiogram

Seen patient for

Hearing hearing difficulty

screening

and refer to

questionaire

provider

Patients reports

hearing

Hearing

difficulties.

Screening Issued a pocket

Questionaire talker at the visit

Hearing screening questionaire Refer for audiogram

Hearing Screening Questionaire

Hearing test

Hearing Screening Questionaire & Audiogram

Hearing Screening Questionaire. Refer for Audiogram

Hearing screening Questionaire

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 49

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 805 of 985 - Page ID#: 4393

3/27/2019

4/19/2018

10/21/2019

3/13/2020

2/14/2019

1/21/2020

1/21/2020

11/16/2017

12/16/2019

12/16/2019

3/6/2019

Telephone encounter hearing screen

Provider encounter

Provider Encounter

Intake

Provider encounter

Provider Encounter

Encounter

Hearing amplifier refer for further

issued

testing

4/8/2019

10/9/2018

Provider encounter

Provider encounter

Refer for Audiogram, refer

audiogram

for audicus

10/22/2019

4/1/2020

Encounter

Encounter

hearing screening 4/5/2019
Encounter

Hearing Aid ordered

Follow up Audiogram &
Hearing aid ordered at this
time.

Audicus (Hearing Audicus (Hearing

Hearing report

Test)

Test)

Hearing aid Evaluation. Hearing aid ordered at this
time

2/12/2020

2/11/2020

12/11/2017

12/20/2019

1/3/2020

6/17/2019

Encounter

Encounter

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

Encounter

Follow up heaing test. Patient
signed refusal

Audiogram Refer for obtained and audiogram giving to provider

Refusal Signed for Audicus test

Audicus Report

2/13/2019

10/28/2019

4/19/2019

Per Dr. Kemen

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

Hearing aid issued
3/12/2020
Provider Encounter

HA Issued
9/2/2020
Provider Encounter

Patient doesn’t meet criteria for
hearing aid

Does not meet criteria

F/u hearing results. Hearing aids order at this
time

F/U with provider to
assess effectiveness, patients reports HA helps and
voices no complaints at
this time

F/U with provider to
assess effectiveness of
hearing aid, reports hearing aid is effective -
working well

11/25/2019

Encounter

Hearing aid ordered
4/3/2018

Follow up

Hearing test and

Follow up hearing aid order

Hearing test

at this time.

1/24/2020

1/30/2020

Encounter

Encounter

Encounter

HA Issued 7/15/2019
Sick call

HA Issued
2/27/2020 Provider
Encounter

HA Issued
2/11/2020 Provider
Encounter

HA Issued

Hearing aid issued at this
time.

F/U with

F/U with

provider, patient provider, patient

reports HA is reports HA is

effective and effective and

Hearing loss with

voiced no

voiced no

hearing aids. complaints at complaints at

Started Debrox

this time

this time

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 50

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 806 of 985 - Page ID#: 4394

2/10/2020
Provider Encounter

12/11/2019
F/U HA, patient reports that HA is
effective and voiced no
complaints at this time

Medical Visit 7 - Date, Description, Outcome

F/U with provider, HA in
good working order and patient
reports it is effective at this
time

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)
(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

2/1/2019 2/1/2019
0

3/15/2019 4/8/2019
-24

4/4/2018 2/13/2019
-315

10/17/2019 10/28/2019
-11

2/11/2019 11/25/2019
-287

1/10/2020 2/12/2020
-33

1/10/2020 2/11/2020
-32

10/6/2017 4/3/2018 -179

12/12/2019 1/24/2020
-43

12/12/2019 1/30/2020 -47

2/27/2019 6/17/2019
-110

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Provider did not refer correctly for review
New protocol in place since this
date.

Ordered at previous facility did not ship with
patient.
Process of reviewing all new
HOH intakes helped to find
issue

Extended time to receive hearing aids

Extended time to receive
hearing aids

New proctocol since this time.

New procotol since this time
Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 51

Prison: Northpoint Training Center Name of person filling out form: Ali Drury Date: 9/29/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 807 of 985 - Page ID#: 4395

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening

2/21/2020 12/10/2018

6/11/2019

Provider

Provider

Intake Appointment Appointment

8/11/2017

2/14/2019

Sick Call Intake H&P

2/21/2020 CCC/PE

11/7/2019
CC with Provider

2/27/2020 Intake

11/4/2019 Intake

4/22/2020 12/11/2018

CC with Provider

Intake

2/28/2020 12/10/2018

6/11/2019

8/17/2017

2/19/2019

2/21/2020

11/7/2019

3/6/2020

11/4/2019

4/22/2020 12/11/2018

8/6/2018 PE
8/6/2018

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

3/25/2019

7/24/2019

9/13/2017

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Signed a refusal

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

D

A

A

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision against

providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC

policy.

Refusal signed

for further

hearing eval

N/A

N/A

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by

providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was

not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

2/21/2020 12/10/2018

6/11/2019

Intake

Provider

Appointment/A

CC/Audiscope

udioscope

8/11/2017 Sick Call

6/21/2019 Hearing aid
needed & ordered
A
N/A
2/14/2019 Intake

3/19/2020 11/22/2019

3/6/2020 12/11/2019

5/4/2020 12/27/2018

8/1/2019

Hearing aid neede and
ordered

Hearing aid Signed Refusal

needed and

for further

ordered

screening

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing Aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing Amplifier

A

A

D

A

C

A

D

Refusal signed

for further

Hearing

N/A

N/A

screening

N/A

N/A

N/A Amplifier issued

2/21/2020

11/7/2019

2/27/2020

11/4/2019

4/22/2020 12/11/2018

8/6/2018

CC with

PE/CCC

CC

Intake

Intake

Provider

Intake

PE

Hearing Screeing Questionaire

Schedule for Audiogram

Schedule for Audiogram

Refer to Provider

Schedule for Audiogram

Schedule for Initial Hearing

Audiogram

Screening

Refer to Initital Hearing

provider

Screening

Initial Hearing Screening

Initial Hearing Screening

Initial Hearing Screening &
Issued Hearing Amplifier

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 52

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 808 of 985 - Page ID#: 4396

2/28/2020

4/8/2019

8/13/2019

8/17/2017

2/9/2019

3/19/2020 11/18/2019

3/6/2020 11/12/2019

5/4/2020 12/24/2018

9/17/2018

Issued

Provider

Amplifier/Refer

Encounter F/U Audiogram F/U Audiogram to Audiology

Hearing Test

Audicus

Audicus

CCC

Audicus

HOH

Assessment-

Patient signed a

refusal for

further Audicus Clara Audicus Clara

evaluation of ordered for left ordered for left

hearing loss

ear

ear

Outside Appointment
Scheduled

6/5/2019 Encounter

9/24/2019 Encounter

9/13/2017
Appointment with Hears To
You

Hearing Screening obtained

Hearing Test

Couldn’t

Obtainted calculate results

Hearing Screening Questionaire & refusal signed for further evaluation of hearing loss

Audicus Obtained

2/26/2019
Hearing Aid Evaluation

3/24/2020 11/22/2019
Provider Encounter Repeat Audicus

12/11/2019
Hearing evaluation with
provider

Encounter

Intake H&P/HOH

Encounter

Audicus Obtained
5/15/2020
Provider Encounter

Obtain

Issue new

Audiogram sound amplifier

1/11/2019

8/1/2019

Review of Audiogram

Recheck Hearing

HA Issued
12/6/2019
Provider Encounter

HA Issued

Hearing Aid ordered

Audicus Clara ordered for right ear

Audicus Clara ordered

Results Obtained

9/27/2019
F/U with Provider

10/12/2017
Appointment with Hears To
You

5/18/2020

12/2/2019

Encounter F/U Audicus

F/U Audiogram,

Audicus Clara Audicus Clara

for right ear

ordered

Audicus Clara

ordered for Sound Amplifier

right ear

is effective

12/31/2019

6/16/2020

1/20/2019

Encounter

HA in good working order
at this time, encouraged use
of device

Encourage use Delivered HA to

of device

pt.

HA Issued

Hearing Aid ordered for R
ear

6/19/2020 Provider
Encounter

1/1/2020 Encounter

Patient signed refusal for HA, states that he does not use it

HA Issued

Audicus Clara re-

ordered by

HA Issued

provider

HA Issued

1/9/2020

8/11/2020

2/28/2019

F/U hearing aid

Encounter F/U hearing aid

Hearing aid is effective

I/M not wearing

HA at time of

appointment,

importance of

using it was

HA Issued

discussed

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 53

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 809 of 985 - Page ID#: 4397
1/28/2020
F/U with provider to
review effectiveness

Medical Visit 7 - Date, Description, Outcome

HA is effective

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)
(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

2/21/2019 2/28/2019
-7

12/10/2018 6/5/2019 -177

6/11/2019 9/27/2019
-108

8/11/2017 10/12/2017
-62

2/14/2019 3/7/2019
-21

2/21/2020 3/5/2020
-13

11/7/2019 1/1/2020
-55

11/4/2019 12/21/2019
-47

12/11/2018 1/30/2019
-50

8/6/2018 8/6/2018
0

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Delay in scheduling patient for
audicus

Delay in Using outside receiving audiology which hearing aid. caused delay

New procotol in New procotol in

place since this place since this On-site testing

time.

time.

now.

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 54

Prison: Northpoint Training Center Name of person filling out form: Ali Drury Date: 9/29/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 810 of 985 - Page ID#: 4398

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening

9/17/2020

1/21/2020

PE/CCC

PE

3/4/2019 Intake

5/26/2020 10/16/2017

CC with Provider

Intake

9/17/2020

1/21/2020

3/20/2019

5/26/2020

12/5/2017

5/2/2019

7/16/2020

4/12/2020 12/21/2018

1/10/2020

Intake

PE

PE/CCC

Intake

Encounter

5/2/2019

7/16/2020

4/12/2020 12/21/2018

1/10/2020

3/3/2020 PE
3/3/2020

5/1/2018 Encounter 5/1/2018

5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

9/22/2020
In process of determining
whether hearing aid is
needed

1/23/2020
Hearing aid needed and
ordered

3/20/2019
Hearing aid needed and
ordered

6/9/2020
Hearing aid needed and
ordered

12/5/2017
Hearing aid needed and
ordered

5/21/2019

9/22/2020

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

In process of determining wether a HA is
needed

5/19/2020
Hearing Aid needed and
ordered

12/27/2018

7/16/2020

3/12/2020

9/17/2019

In process of of

Hearing aid determining

needed and wether a HA is

ordered

needed

No hearing aid No intervention

is needed

needed

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

B

A

A

A

A

A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

B

A

A

N/A

N/A

B

D

D

Refusal signed Doesn’t qualify

for further for HA at this

hearing eval

time

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

9/17/2020

1/21/2020

3/4/2019

5/26/2020 10/16/2017

5/2/2019

7/16/2020

4/13/2020 12/21/2018

1/10/2020

3/3/2020

5/1/2018

PE, CCC

Provider Encounter

Intake

CC with Provider

Provider Encounter

Intake

PE

PE/CCC

Intake

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

Initial Hearing Screening, refer
for Audicus

Hearing Screening Questionaire, Refer for audiogram

Refer for Initial Hearing

audiogram

Screening

Physicalhearing screening questionaire

Initial Hearing Screening

PE/Initial Hearing Screening Refer for Audiogram

Hearing

Assessment

Refer for Initial, Refer for

audiogram

Audiogram

Hearing Assessment
Refer for audiogram

Hearing Screening Questionaire & Refer for
Audicus

Hearing Screening Questionaire & Issue a Pocket
talker

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 55

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 811 of 985 - Page ID#: 4399

9/22/2020

1/23/2020

4/11/2019

6/3/2020 10/27/2017

5/21/2019

9/22/2020

5/19/2020 12/27/2018

1/13/2020

3/12/2020

9/17/2019

Encounter

Encounter

Provider Encounter

Encounter

Provider Encounter

Encounter

Encounter

Encounter

Encounter

Encounter

Audicus

Encounter

Audicus Audicus Hearing

Obtained

test

Hearing aid order at this
time

1/28/2020

5/9/2019

Provider Encounter

Encounter

Hearing eval

Refer Patient to

hears to you

Audiogram

hearing

6/9/2020

11/7/2017

Provider Encounter Intake screening

Audiogram Obtained
5/24/2019
Provider Encounter

Audicus Obtained

Audicus Obtained

Hearing Test Obtained

5/21/2020

1/11/2019

Provider Encounter

Provider Encounter

Audicus Obtained
1/21/2020
Provider Encounter

Audicus Obtained Audicus

3/17/2020 10/16/2019

Encounter

Provider Encounter

Follow up hearing test. Hearing aid ordered at this
time
2/12/2020
Encounter

F/U Audiogram, HA Issued HA ordered

Hearing Screening F/U Audiogram, Questionaire HA ordered

7/16/2020 11/13/2017

7/2/2019

Encounter

Provider Encounter

Encounter

Review Audiogram-HA
ordered

F/U Hearing Test, Audicus Clara ordered

Patient doesn’t qualify for
hearing aid at this time

Refusal signed Patient doesn’t

for further

qualify for

evaluation hearing aid

6/17/2020

1/30/2019

7/15/2020

Encounter

Encounter

Provider Encounter

HA Issued

Refer to Hears

to you for

HA Issued

evaluation

HA Issued

1/3/2018 Encounter

8/23/2019 CC with Provider

F/U with

provider to

check

effectiveness of

HA, patient

reports HA is

effective and

voiced no

complaints at

HA Issued

this time

HA Issued

HA Issued

2/28/2019

Encounter
F/U with provider to
check effectiveness of
HA, Patient reports HA is
effective & voiced no
complaints at this time

PE/Initial Hearing Screening 7/16/2020 Encounter
Audiogram Obtained
Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 56

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 812 of 985 - Page ID#: 4400
7/28/2020
Provider Encounter/Char
t Review

Medical Visit 7 - Date, Description, Outcome

Audiogram reviewed. HA
needed & ordered

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?
Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

1/21/2020 2/12/2020
-22

3/4/2019 5/9/2019
-66

5/26/2020 7/16/2020
-51

10/16/2017 1/3/2018 -79

5/2/2019 7/2/2019
-39

8/11/2020Encounter, HA
Issued

4/12/2020 6/17/2020

12/21/2018 1/30/2019 -40

1/10/2020 1/21/2020
-11

5/1/2018 5/1/2018
0

Scheduler did not place
patient back on provider
schedule in timely manner.
Scheduler educated also H.S.A reviewing

Using outside audiology
New protcolol since this time

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 57

Prison: Northpoint Training Center Name of person filling out form: Ali Drury Date: 9/29/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 813 of 985 - Page ID#: 4401

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC 2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC
3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening

7/11/2019

2/28/2020

Provider Physical Encounter-CC

9/10/2019 CCC

7/11/2019

2/28/2020

9/10/2019

9/1/2020 PE/CCC

5/12/2020 PE/CCC

1/25/2019

8/29/2018

H&P CC Provider

8/1/2018
Provider Encounter

2/13/2017
Provider Encounter

9/1/2020

5/12/2020

1/25/2019

9/24/2018

8/1/2018 12/19/2017

7/4/2020 Sick Call NA

1/15/2020 Intake
2/5/2020

6/26/2019 Physical
6/26/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

9/1/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

No Intervention needed

3/19/2020
Hearing aid needed and
ordered

11/22/2019

9/23/2020

In process of

Hearing aid determining

needed and whether a HA is

ordered

needed

5/19/2020
Hearing aid needed and
ordered

3/14/2019
Hearing aid needed and
ordered

10/5/2018

8/19/2019

Hearing aid

needed and Patient signed

ordered

refusal

12/6/2018

NA

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Patient signed refusal for
provider visit

3/12/2020
Hearing aid needed and
ordered

D

A

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision against

providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC

policy.

Doesn’t qualify

for HA at this

time

N/A

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by

providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was

not needed)

B

A

A

A

D

A

D

A

Refusal signed

for further

N/A

N/A

N/A hearing eval

N/A refusal signed

N/A

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

7/11/2019

2/28/2020

9/10/2019

9/1/2020

5/12/2020

1/25/2019

8/29/2018

8/1/2018

2/13/2017

7/9/2020

2/5/2020

Provider

Provider Initial hearing

Encounter Encounter-CC

test

PE/CCC

PE/CCC

Provider

Provider

Provider

Provider Provider

H&P

Encounter

Encounter

Encounter

Encounter Encounter

9/17/2019 Hearing Aid needed and
ordered
A
N/A
6/26/2019 Physical

Hearing Screening Questionaire Refer for audiogram

TX for Serious Otitis, refer for
Audiogram

Refer for Initial Hearing Initial Hearing

Audiogram

Screening

Screening

Hearing Initial Hearing Screening Screening, refer Questionaire for Audiogram

Initial Hearing Screening-Refer Physical to Audiology

Patient signed TX & F/U Cermen

refusal for Impation, Serous

provider visit

Otitis Failed audiogram

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 58

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 814 of 985 - Page ID#: 4402

9/1/2019

3/19/2020 11/22/2019

9/23/2020

5/19/2020

3/14/2019

9/24/2018

8/13/2019

3/16/2017

2/20/2020

9/17/2019

Provider

Encounter

Encounter

Audicus

Encounter

Encounter

Audicus Audioscope

Encounter

ENT

Audicus Obtained-Note
in chart "Audicus did not
work"
9/25/2019
Encounter

Audiogram Obtained

Audicus obtained

3/20/2020

12/3/2019

Provider Encounter F/U hearing test

Audicus Obtained

Audicus Obtained
5/21/2020
Provider Encounter

Audicus Obtained

Audioscope obtained

Patient signed refusal for further evaluation

F/U one year

4/2/2019 10/18/2018

12/14/2018

Provider Encounter F/U Audioscope

Encounter

Provider Encounter

Encounter

Continue TX for Serous Otitis
3/9/2020
Provider Encounter

Audicus 10/28/2019
Provider F/U

Per Dr. Kemem asking for a re-
evaluate

Audicus Clara

Ordered

ordered for Aduicus Clara L

fitting of L ear

ear

10/3/2019

5/18/2020 12/20/2019

Provider Encounter

Encounter

F/U Audiogram, F/U Audicus, HA Audicus Dia II

HA Ordered

Ordered

ordered

6/29/2020

7/3/2019 11/10/2018

Encounter

Encounter

Encounter

Hearing aid ordered
1/4/2019
Encounter

Hearing Screening Obtained, Refer for Audicus
3/12/2020

Hearing aid ordered

Encounter

Encounter

Follow up Hearing test. Refer to ENT
11/11/2019 ENT Appointment

HA Issued
6/10/2020 Provider
Encounter

HA Issued
1/6/2020 F/U with provider

ENT Consult

F/U on HA to check
effectiveness, patient reports HA is effective and voiced no
complaints at this time

Instructed pt. on how to
adjust volume, HA is effective

Hearing aid reordered.
Ordered incorrectly on
5/21/2020
7/29/2020
Encounter

HA Issued

HA Issued
11/26/2018 F/U with provider

HA Issued

Encouraged use of HA

Hearing aid Issued
1/17/2020 Provider
Encounter

Audicus Obtained Hearing aid issued

3/20/2020 Provider
Encounter

12/4/2019 Provider
encounter

Hearing aid is effective

Review Audioscope, HA
needed and ordered

Hearing aid effective

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 59

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
Medical Visit 7 - Date, Description, Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 815 of 985 - Page ID#: 4403

1/31/2020

9/2/2020

5/7/2020

Provider Encounter-CC
Patient transferred to NTC, noted hearing loss at this appointment with provider Provider stated patient does not need further eval of hearing loss at this time

Provider Encounter
F/U after receipt of hearing aid, reports it is functional, finds it helpful when worn - states that the hearing aid picks up a lot of extra
things

Encounter HA Issued

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)
(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

7/11/2019 4/9/2020
-273

2/20/2020 5/18/2020
-88

9/10/2019 12/20/2019
-101

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

ENT workup at previous facility delaying hearing impairment dx

Delay in scheduling
audicus
Scheduler educated also H.S.A reviewing

8/29/2018 11/10/2018
-73

8/1/2018 8/13/2018
-12

2/13/2017 1/4/2019 -690

1/15/2020 5/7/2020

6/26/2019

-113

Delay in receiving hearing aid and reviewing for hearing aid
New protocol in place since this
time.

Seen by outside ENT
recommended f/u one year
New protocol since this time
and on-site testing

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 60

Prison: Northpoint Training Center Name of person filling out form: Ali Drury Date: 9/29/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 816 of 985 - Page ID#: 4404

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

4/22/2019

2/12/2020

5/11/2018

3/9/2020 11/13/2018

4/24/2018

4/10/2019

4/5/2019

12/5/2018

3/20/2020

3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Physical

Intake

Physical

Intake Provider visit

4/22/2019

2/28/2020

5/11/2018

3/18/2020

7/31/2019

Intake

Physical

NA

4/10/2019

Physical

Intake

CC/HP

4/5/2019 12/11/2018

3/20/2020

4/22/2020

5/20/2017

PE/CCC Provider visit

4/22/2020

5/20/2017

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

6/12/2019

5/19/2020

8/28/2018

3/19/2020

7/31/2019

NA

4/19/2019

4/24/2019 12/14/2018

3/26/2020

4/28/2020

6/6/2017

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing Aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid

needed and Does not meet

ordered

criteria

Hearing aid

needed and No intervention

ordered

needed

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

A

A

A

D

A

D

A

A

A

A

A

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Patient does not meet criteria, signed refusal for a pocket

No need for HA, patient has

talker on

perm. Hearing

N/A

N/A

N/A

6/23/2020

N/A

loss

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by

providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was

not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

4/22/2019

2/12/2020

5/11/2018

3/9/2020 11/13/2018

4/24/2018

4/10/2019

4/5/2019

12/5/2018

3/20/2020

4/22/2020

5/20/2017

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Provider visit

Intake

Physical

Intake Provider visit

Intake

Physical

Physical

Intake

CC/HP

PE/CCC Provider visit

Treating for otitis externa
prior to performing audioscope

Failed whisper

Noted HOH test referred for

upon intake

audiogram

Refer for Audiogram

Schedule hearing
screening

Noted HOH

Failed audioscope referred for audiogram

Failed audioscope referred for audiogram

Referred to Initial Hearing Initial Hearing

provider

Screening

Screening

Audiology consult

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 61

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 817 of 985 - Page ID#: 4405

5/21/2019

2/28/2020

8/30/2018

3/18/2020

9/27/2019

7/24/2019

5/14/2019

6/3/2019 12/11/2018

3/26/2020

4/28/2020

6/6/2017

Provider Review hearing

Provider Review hearing

PE

Encounter

test Appointment

test

F/U hearing test F/U hearing test

Provider

Intake

results

results appointment

Encounter

Encounter

Nurse visit return from
audiology

Schedule for audiogram

Dx with acute serous otitis
media, will reevaluate after
tx.

Hearing aids ordered

7/26/2019

5/18/2020

9/7/2018

PE/CCC & F/U Provider f/u Ear Infection

Encounter

Audiogram Obtained
3/19/2020

Hearing Aid needed and
ordered
11/26/2019

Noted HOH

Hearing aids ordered

Audioscope

Hearing aids failed referred

ordered

for audicus

7/30/2019

6/15/2019

7/2/2019 12/14/2018

Encounter

Encounter Provider visit

Encounter

Encounter Encounter

Audicus

Audicus Obtained

Hearing aids ordered

3/27/2020

5/1/2020

6/27/2017

Provider Provider Encounter Encounter

Hears To You Appointment

Hearing aids ordered

Schedule for Audioscope

8/14/2019

5/19/2020

Encounter

Encounter

HA Issued

Audicus Obtained
6/23/2020
Provider Encounter

No need for HA,

established

perm. Hearing

HA Issued

loss

HA Issued

Audicua HA Issued Obtained

Reviewed Audicus, HA
ordered

HA Ordered

8/19/2020 12/21/2018

5/18/2020

5/18/2020

Encounter

Provider Encounter

Encounter

Encounter

HA Issued

HA Issued
9/20/2019 Provider
Encounter

Audioscope Obtained
5/26/2020 Provider
Encounter

Patient does not meet criteria for
HA at this time per DOC policy,
signed refusal for a pocket talker

Brought hearing

aid to medical

and stated he

no longer

wanted it.

Patient signed a HA needed and

refusal for HA

ordered

1/10/2019

Encounter

HA Issued
9/2/2020 Provider Encounter

HA Issued
6/19/2020 Provider
Encounter

F/U to check effectiveness of
HA, patient reports
improved hearing function

Review Audiscope, HA
ordered

F/U to assess

effectiveness of

HA, patient says

Patient was HA is effective

discharged and voiced no

9/1/2020, prior complaints at

HA Issued

to F/U

this time

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 62

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 818 of 985 - Page ID#: 4406

6/17/2020

3/4/2019

Encounter

Provider Encounter

Medical Visit 7 - Date, Description, Outcome

Issue HA

F/U to assess effectiveness of HA, patient says
HA is effective and voiced no complaints at
this time

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)
(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

4/22/2019 8/14/2019
-114

2/12/2020 6/17/2020
-126

5/11/2018 9/7/2018
-119

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Patient treated for ear infection
prior to completing hearing test

Patient treated for Acute
Serous Otitis Media prior to
hearing test

Patient was at KSR on 5/11/18 for HOH work-
up. Appears time between appointments was delayed.

New protocol

has been

established

NA

since this time.

11/13/2018 11/26/2019
-378

4/24/2018 7/30/2019
-462

4/10/2019 6/15/2019
-66

4/5/2019 7/2/2019
-88

12/5/2018 1/10/2019
-36

3/20/2020 5/18/2020

5/20/2017 6/27/2017
-38

Patient arrived

at LSCC on

4/24/18 with

HOH compliant

on intake. Then

Patient was at transferred to

LAC when initial BCC. Once at

HOH evaluated, BCC only took 6

transferred to

days to

LSCC.

evaluate.

More in depth chart reviews of
patients transferring.

New workflow created to
review all new arrivals

Scheduler did not place
patient back on provider
schedule in timely manner.
Scheduler educated on
timeframe. H.S.A also reviewing.

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 63

Prison: Northpoint Training Center Name of person filling out form: Ali Drury Date: 9/29/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 819 of 985 - Page ID#: 4407

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

12/10/2019

5/8/2018

4/16/2019

7/19/2019 11/23/2019

9/10/2019

2/11/2020

5/15/2020

5/20/2018

7/1/2020

3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Physical Provider visit

Physical

Physical

Sick Call

PE

PE/CCC

PE

Sick Call

12/10/2019

6/5/2018

4/16/2019

7/19/2019 11/27/2019

9/10/2019

2/11/2020

5/15/2020

10/4/2018

PE 7/1/2020

8/13/2019 PE
8/13/2019

9/18/2019 PE
9/18/2019

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

12/16/2019

7/17/2018

4/22/2019

8/21/2019

12/9/2019

7/21/2020

3/11/2020

5/18/2020

11/6/2018

7/2/2020

9/18/2019

9/23/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Hearing aid

needed and Does not meet No intervention

ordered

criteria

needed

Hearing Aid

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing Aid needed and
ordered

Hearing Aid needed and
ordered

Hearing Aid No intervention

needed and needed/pocket

ordered

talker

Hearing aid ordered

Hearing Aid needed and
ordered

Hearing Aid needed and
ordered

A

D

D

A

A

C

A

A

D

C

A

A

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision against

providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Does not meet criteria, may

Does not meet Does not meet

have a pocket

N/A

criteria

criteria

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

talker

N/A

N/A

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by

providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was

not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

12/10/2019

5/8/2018

4/16/2019

7/19/2019 11/23/2019

9/10/2019

2/11/2020

5/15/2020

5/20/2018

7/1/2020

8/13/2019

9/18/2019

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Physical Provider visit

Physical

Physical

Sick call

PE

PE

PE

Sick Call

PE

PE

PE

Patient treated Audioscope Audioscope

Whisper test for wax in ear completed and completed and

failed scheduled and informed to failed. Refer for failed. Refer for

for hearing test

return audiogram. audiogram.

Refer to provider

Initial Hearing Screening

Initial Hearing Screening

Initial Hearing Screening
Questionaire

Refer to Initial Hearing Initial Hearing Initial Hearing

provider

Screening

Screening

Screening

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 64

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 820 of 985 - Page ID#: 4408

12/16/2019

5/22/2018

5/31/2019

8/21/2019 11/27/2019

7/21/2020

3/11/2020

5/18/2020

6/27/2018

7/2/2020

8/26/2019

9/23/2019

Encounter

Provider visit to

review

Provider visit

audiogram

Encounter Provider visit

Encounter

Encounter

Encounter Provider visit

Encounter

Encounter

Encounter

Continue to use

Audicus debrox then Does not meet

Obtained

flush ears

criteria

Audioscope failed-referred Audicus for audiogram

12/19/2019

6/5/2018

F/U Audicus Provider visit

9/20/2019
Provider visit to review hearing
test

1/7/2020 Provider visit

Audicus Obtained
7/28/2020
Provider Encounter

Audicus Obtained
3/18/2020
Provider Encounter

Audicus Given pocket

Audicus

Obtained

talker Obtained Onsite

5/21/2020

8/13/2018

7/13/2020

Provider Encounter Provider visit

Provider encounter

Audicus Obtained 9/9/2019
Encounter

Hearing aids ordered
1/24/2020
Encounter

Refer to audiology
7/19/2018 Review of audiology
report

Hearing Aid ordered

F/U Audicus, HA

Hearing aids needed and F/U Audiogram, F/U Audicus, HA

ordered

ordered HA ordered

ordered

Pocket talker helps but function problems.
Replaced with new pocket talker.

10/9/2019

1/31/2020

Encounter Encounter

5/6/2020 Encounter

6/17/2020 Encounter

10/4/2018
Provider visitTrouble with pocket talker

Hearing aid ordered

Dr. Kemen: Note from Audicus to
evaluate speech, if speech is okay,
retest.

8/11/2020

9/18/2019

Encounter

Encounter

Audicus Obtained 3/18/2020 Encounter
HA Issued 4/20/2020
Provider Encounter

Does not meet criteria for
HA Issued hearing aid
2/11/2020 Provider
Encounter
F/U to check effectivness of
HA, patient reports HA is
helping, encouraged use

HA Issued HA Issued
2/12/2020 Provider
Encounter
F/U with provider to
check effectiveness of
HA, no complaints were voiced at
this time

HA Issued
5/27/2020 Provider
Encounter

HA Issued

Audioscope completed and failed ordered
audiogram

7/23/2020 Provider
Encounter

11/21/2018 Hearing aid evaluation

HA Issued

F/U to assess

effectiveness of

HA, states it is

Audicus working well for

Obtained

him

9/30/2019 Provider
Encounter

F/U with

F/U with

provider to provider to

check

check

effectiveness of effectiveness of Does not meet

HA. No

HA. No

criteria for

complaints

complaints hearing aid.

voiced at this voiced at this May give pocket

time

time

talker

HA needed and ordered
Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 65

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 821 of 985 - Page ID#: 4409
10/30/2019
Encounter

Medical Visit 7 - Date, Description, Outcome

HA Issued

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)
(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

12/10/2019 1/24/2020 -45

5/8/2018 7/19/2018
-72

4/16/2019 5/31/2019
-45

7/19/2019 10/9/2019
-82

11/23/2019 1/31/2020 -69

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Patient was treated for wax
impacation prior to hearing
test
NA

Scheduler did

not place

patient back on

Delay in

provider

scheduling schedule in

audicus timely manner.

Scheduler educated also H.S.A reviewing

Scheduler educated on
timeframe. H.S.A also reviewing.

2/11/2020 5/6/2020

5/20/2018 6/27/2018
-38

7/30/2020 Provider
Encounter - lost HA, request
replacement ordered

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 66

Prison: Northpoint Training Center Name of person filling out form: Ali Drury Date: 9/29/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 822 of 985 - Page ID#: 4410

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

7/10/2020

9/5/2019

7/19/2017 10/14/2019

4/22/2019 10/29/2018

5/2/2017

8/15/2019

9/18/2018

3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

PE Intake at RCC

Intake

Physical

Nurse visit

Physical

7/10/2020

9/5/2019

7/26/2017 10/14/2019

4/24/2019 10/29/2018

Intake 5/2/2017

Intake 8/15/2019

Sick Call 9/21/2018

12/19/2019 Intake
1/2/2020

9/11/2020 Sick Call
9/21/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

7/21/2020

9/20/2019

3/21/2018

1/6/2020

4/24/2019

11/6/2018

5/23/2017

3/6/2020

10/5/2018

3/11/2020

9/22/2020

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Hearing Aid needed and
ordered

Hearing Aid needed & ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid

needed and Does not meet

ordered

criteria

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

Hearing aid needed and
ordered

In process of

Hearing aid needed Hearing aid needed Hearing Aid needed & determining whether a

and ordered and ordered 11/10/18

ordered

HA is needed

A

A

A

A

D

A

A

A

A

A

B

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision against

providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC

policy.

Does not meet

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

criteria

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by

providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was

not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

7/10/2020

9/5/2019

7/26/2017 10/14/2019

4/22/2019 10/29/2018

5/2/2017

Provider PE Intake at RCC appointment

Physical

Nurse visit

Physical

Intake

8/15/2019 Intake

9/18/2018 Sick Call

12/19/2019 Intake

9/11/2020 Sick Call

Initial Hearing Screening

Refer to provider for Audiogram

Refer to audiology

Failed audioscope schedeuled for Audicus ordered
audicus by provider

Audioscope failed referred
for audicus

Referred to Refer to provider for

provider

audiogram Refer for Audioscope

Refer to provider

Refer to Provider

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 67

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 823 of 985 - Page ID#: 4411

7/21/2020

9/20/2019

8/9/2017

1/7/2020

4/30/2019

1/23/2019

5/11/2017

3/16/2019

9/21/2018

1/2/2020

9/21/2020

Encounter

Audiology Encounter appointment Provider f/u visit

Hearing aid evaluation

Hearing aid evaluation Provider visit

Encounter Provider Encounter

Provider visit

Encounter

Audicus Obtained
7/28/2020
Encounter/Char t Review

Patient refused audiology
Audiogram appointment

9/1/2019 Encounter

3/13/2018
Sick Callrequesting hearing check

Hearing aid Does not meet

ordered

criteria

Hearing aids ordered

Referred to

Failed Audioscope,

audiologist Audiogram Obtained Refer for Audiogram

Impacted cerumen treatment then audicus

1/30/2020

2/1/2019

5/23/2017

2/25/2020

10/5/2018

2/4/2020

Encounter

Audiologist Encounter appointment

Intake at NTC with hearing amplifier

Encounter

Intake to NTC

Initial Hearing Screening 9/22/2020
Encounter

HA needed and Refusal Signed

ordered

for HA

8/11/2020

3/6/2020

Referred to provider
3/16/2018

Encounter

PE at NTC Provider visit

HA Issued
3/5/2020
Provider Encounter

Complaint of

hearling loss, HA

ordered due to

results of

previous

HA Issued

Audiogram

F/U with

provider to

check

effectiveness of

HA, patient

voiced no

Referred to complants at

audiology

this time

3/31/2020 Encounter

3/21/2018 Audiology appointment

HA Issued

Hearing aids ordered

6/7/2017

Audiology appointment

Reports HOH Audiogram Obtained Denied any HOH issues

3/6/2020

10/18/2018

3/11/2020

Audicus Obtained

CCC Audiogram Provider Encounter

Encounter

HA Issued

Hearing Aid recommended
3/18/2020
Nurse Encounter

HA needed and ordered Audiogram Obtained

11/10/2018

3/20/2020

Encounter Provider Encounter

HA Issued

Hearing Aid ordered

Hearing aid issued

Review Audiogram, HA

HA Issued

Ordered

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 68

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 824 of 985 - Page ID#: 4412

4/23/2020

4/6/2018

6/23/2020

11/27/2018

5/6/2020

Provider Encounter Encounter

Provider Encounter Provider Encounter

Encounter

Medical Visit 7 - Date, Description, Outcome

F/U to assess effectiveness of
HA, Patient states HA is working well HA Issued

F/U to assess

F/U to check

effectivenss of HA, effectiveness of HA,

patient reports HA is Patient reports HA is

effective and voiced no effective and voiced no

complaints

complaints

HA Issued

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?
Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

9/5/2019 3/31/2020

3/13/2018 4/6/2018
-24

10/14/2019 1/30/2020
-108

4/22/2019 4/30/2019
-8

10/29/2018 2/1/2019 -95

5/2/2017 6/7/2017
-36

Audiogram performed at
RCC, refusal signed for HA.
When pt. arrived at NTC he complained of hearing loss
& HA was ordered

Found on audit of HOH
database patient had not
received audicus
H.S.A reviewing logs

Evaluation of hearing test
delayed.
New protocol in place to avoid this

8/15/2019 3/18/2020

9/18/2018 11/10/2018
-53

12/19/2019 5/6/2020
-139

Patient never had audicus testing at previous facility as ordered and was transferrer to NTC. Denied HOH on intake
to NTC.
More in depth chart reviews of patients
transferring.
Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 69

Prison: Northpoint Training Center Name of person filling out form: Ali Drury Date: 9/29/2020

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 825 of 985 - Page ID#: 4413

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

12/18/2018

7/24/2018

9/8/2020

8/9/2018

9/18/2020

3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

Physical 12/18/2018

Sick Call 8/9/2018

Sick Call 9/21/2020

Physical PE 8/9/2018

9/18/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

12/28/2018

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed

Does not meet criteria

D 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Does not meet criteria

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

12/18/2018

8/9/2018

9/22/2020

8/21/2018

9/23/2020

Patient refused further testing

In process of determining wether
HA is needed

In process of Hearing aid needed determing wether a
and ordered HA is needed

D
Patient refused further testing

B

AB

N/A

7/24/2018

9/8/2020

8/9/2018

9/18/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Physical

Sick Call

Sick Call Provider physical visit PE

PE, Initial Hearing Audiogram ordered Referred to provider Referred to Provider Audiogram ordered Screening

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 70

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 826 of 985 - Page ID#: 4414

1/23/2019

7/26/2018

9/21/2020

8/27/2018

9/23/2020

Hearing aid evaluation

Provider visit Provider Encounter

Provider eval of audiogram Encounter

Does not meet criteria

Referral to ENT

Initial Hearing Screening, refer for
Audicus Hearing aids ordered Audicus Obtained

8/9/2018

9/22/2020

9/6/2018

Outside ENT appointemnt

Encounter

Encounter

Recommend MRI 9/11/2018

Audicus Obtained

MRI appointment

HA Issued

Patient refused appointment

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 71

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description
Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 827 of 985 - Page ID#: 4415

Medical Visit 7 - Date, Description, Outcome

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date)
(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

12/18/2018 12/28/2018
-10

7/24/2018 9/11/2018
-49

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

8/9/2018 9/6/2018
-28

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 72

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 828 of 985 - Page ID#: 4416

Cookie Crews Commissioner

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Northpoint Training Center P.O. Box 479
Burgin, Kentucky 40310 Telephone: (859) 239-7012
Fax: (859) 239-7560

Brad Adams Warden

To: Janet Conover, Director of Operations

From: Brad Adams, Warden

Date: July 30, 2020

Subject: Hard of Hearing Plan of Action

The below concerns were noted on the final draft court report for the Hard of Hearing settlement. Northpoint Training Center is committed to ensuring compliance in all areas and have the below plans of action for noted concerns.

 Devices
 Videophone does not allow for voice carry-over features. The Sorenson video phone allows for voice carry-over features. This issue has been resolved.
 No Captel is available. This issue was resolved on 7/29/20. The phone is now working properly.
 Continuing problem with timely audiology processing. HSA Stephanie Thompson reports that audiology processing is occurring now within the 60 day timeframe. The process is now reviewed by HAS Stephanie Thompson and she will continue to monitor and review to ensure compliance.
 Inmates are apparently doing sign language interpretation for other inmates and the VRI is not being used when appropriate. The prior NTC Adjustment Officer did not offer the VRI laptop for interpretation during an inmate’s adjustment hearing. It was offered during the investigation phase of the disciplinary proceeding. All staff were reminded that this is not just a recommendation but a requirement that Hard of Hearing inmates be offered interpretation services during any classification committee proceeding, disciplinary proceeding, or any other hearing/proceeding. The ADA coordinator will continue to monitor this for compliance. A review of disciplinary violations for deaf/HOH shows that the Adjustment staff are offering/using an official interpreter via the purple laptop.
 Inmates can get access to the videophone only until 11:00 pm, even though regular
phones are available several hours later. In addition, we have been told that
videophone access is unavailable during lockdowns, even though ordinary phone access remains available. All telephones shut off at 11:00 PM through the week and 1:00 AM on the weekends. Inmates using the videophone are able to access it the same hours as general population inmates. The phone is located outside of the crash gates on the dorms that are locked during lockdown. The inmate does have to request to use it during this time with staff. However, the inmate is granted access to the videophone

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal OppEoxrhtuibniti2ty, NETmCp, lpo.y7e3r M/F/D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 829 of 985 - Page ID#: 4417
room and staff do not have to remain in the room with the inmate. The room is located in the same foyer as the officer station so that security is not a concern and inmate behavior can be monitored as needed. We have received some complaints that staff are not allowing the inmates who utilize the videophone out to use it when the crash gate is closed. This was addressed with supervisor staff on 3-11/11-7 shift. We will continue to follow up with the inmates who utilize the videophones to ensure that there are no future issues.  No instructions on how to access the relay on TTY phones. The instructions to access the relay are included with the TTY phones. The TTY instructions will also be updated to include the new locations on the dorms and how to access them (those approved will receive combination to lock.) This will be completed by June 22, 2020. This was postponed due to the need to reconfigure inmate telephones to work the TTY phones. This was completed on 7/29/20. The new instructions will be updated by 8/7/20 and placed in the cabinet with the phones. The inmates currently using the phones have been trained on the new setup.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

AnExEhiqbuita2l, ONTpCp,opr.tu7n4ity Employer M/F/

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 830 of 985 - Page ID#: 4418
NTC Response to Issues (Follow-up)

30)

said that he’s been removed from the videophone list because the institution

says he does not know sign language, but he said that he can use sign language, body language interpreting, and lip

interpreting well enough to use it. Mr.

said that if the TTY is down, the videophone is the only way that he can

communicate, and that he hasn’t been able to talk to his attorney or his family effectively since not being allowed to

use it. Mr.

also said his hearing aids broke and that the institution gave him a pocket talker instead of fixing

them.

Per Medical-Patient had two hearing aids. Patient reported to medical on 6/20/20 with one broken hearing aid. Patient was advised we now only issue one hearing aid. Patient was reassessed by provider and was informed that he would not get another hearing aid at this time. Then patient reported back on 7/2/20 to medical with the other hearing aid broken and it looked like it had been smashed. At that time patient was reevaluated and audicus testing was repeated on 7/10/20. He was seen for a follow-up on 7/17/20 and the new hearing aid was ordered. The hearing aid was issued to him as soon as it came in on 8/11/20. On 9/17/2020 medical noted they saw him to review hearing aid and he said it is working well for him. There is no further documentation or sick calls from him about his hearing aid being broken.

On 10/6/20, Inmate

was called to medical to discuss his hearing aid issue and he said what he was telling them is

that he had washed his original hearing aids that he had that were a lot better quality and ruined them. His hearing aid

was replaced with another hearing aid made by another company and the hearing aid he got isn’t as good of quality as

the ones he had. He is calling his hearing aid a pocket talker because he said it works about as good as a pocket talker in

his opinion. He stated the hearing aid is not broken he just like the old ones he had better.

On 9/9/20, Inmate

made a request through his caseworker to utilize the videophone for calls. The request was

denied as Mr.

admitted that he does not know sign language nor do any of his family members. He states that

he reads body language. A review of the inmate’s call logs shows that he is utilizing the TTY phone and regular phones

almost daily (the last two months records attached for review) without issue. He has not reported any issues to staff

with the operations of the TTY phone or not being able to communicate with an attorney or family.

31)

said that the black box with the plug keeps shutting off where it’s connected to the

camera. He said that he’s talked to the deputy about it and getting it updated to the In Touch 2 instead of the 1 since

that’s an older system and was told the prison could not provide that. He also mentioned that the masks made it

difficult to lip read and communicate.

On 10/5/20, the videophone was tested and observed for any issues by IT. There were no issues to report. Inmate has been informed that if there is an issue with the phone to notify staff immediately so that we can see what the problem is and try to resolve it. Mr. reports that he has been able to use the phone daily to talk to his family but would like to see the phone updated to the newest version. NTC is currently looking at implementing new videophones on each dorm and will be implementing the newest available version to us when that occurs. Staff have been issued clear face masks and routine rounds show that they are utilizing them. There have been complaints that they fog up easily and hold condensation so that may make it difficult for others to read lips at times but they are doing the best they can to keep them clean and free of fog, especially when dealing with inmates.

32)

said that he went to medical and they looked at his hearing aid to replace two pieces

but it didn’t fix the issues he was having and he is still unable to use it. He said that using it causes him pain. Mr.

is being released in five months and said that if his hearing aid can’t be fixed he will probably just wait to get one once

released.

Inmate had provider visit 10/5/2020 and said nothing about hearing aid not working and there is no note or sick call in his chart about it. On 10/6/20, Inmate was called to medical to discuss the issue with his hearing aid and he stated the problem with the hearing aid doesn’t have anything to do with the hearing aid at all. He said the problem is that everyone is so loud the hearing aids can’t work because no one will be quiet. He stated he is satisfied with his hearing aid the problem is that he is in such a loud environment. He clarified that what he was explaining in his interview questions was that he was getting out soon and wanted to go to a doctor of his choosing to purchase better quality hearing aids and that is what he meant by they are not comfortable in this environment because everything is amplified so loud and it hurts your ears.

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 75

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 831 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4419

33)

recently transferred to NTC from LLCC. At LLCC, Mr.

had requested a

new hearing aid. Since transferring, Mr.

has requested a vibrating watch from the ADA Coordinator but has not

received a response back. He also requested access to the videophone to talk with his daughter. Mr.

also does

not have a HOH ID Card.

Inmate

was issued a HOH card on 9/16/20. Staff verified that Inmate

still has this ID card in his

possession. ADA coordinator has not received a request for a vibrating watch from Inmate

but the proper forms

were mailed to him on 10/5/20. ADA coordinator also has not received a request for use of the videophone but it

appears that Inmate

did make this request at LLCC and was denied because he did not know sign language and his

family did not. LLCC’s ADA coordinator stated that they observed Inmate

on a visit with family and there was no

use of sign language. I have reviewed Inmate

call logs and it shows that he is using the regular phones without

issue to contact family. It appears that he has successfully made multiple calls each day since he has arrived to NTC.

NTC medical department reviewed Inmate

file on 10/6/20. On intake on 9/15/20, Inmate

answered that

he did not use a hearing aid. The notes from LLCC medical department stated that they did a follow up provider visit

with Inmate

on 12/27/19 and he reported that his hearing aid was working fine. There was no noted request for a

new hearing aid. Inmate

was advised on 10/6/20 that if he was having issues with his hearing aid to submit a sick

call slip to be seen by medical.

During the auxiliary aids assessment conducted on 9/16/20 with Inmate

at NTC, Inmate

reported he had

hearing aid for his left ear. He requested a HOH ID card (issued), HOH bed ID (issued), and waived all other auxiliary

devices and qualitative interpretive services.

Missing Items from Action Plan:

1) In-person notifications should be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates.

NTC makes in-person alerts for all personal alerts. Staff may provide the alert or utilize the ADA aide assigned to the wing that the HOH inmate lives on to make the alert. The ADA aide position was created at NTC in July 2020 to help provide notifications to HOH/Deaf inmates and is proving to be a positive implementation for both NTC staff and HOH/Deaf offenders.

2) ADA Coordinators should publicize that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money to recover when money comes into their account. This process is available to both formally indigent or individuals who have insufficient money to pay for the device.

The NTC Information for Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing Inmates brochure has been updated to include this information on page 15. Also, a memo to the inmate population publicizing this information was sent out on 10/6/20. (see attached)

D. Individuals to receive attached settlement summary (distributed on 10/6/20)

Exhibit 2, NTC, p. 76

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 832 of 985 - Page ID#: 4420
Roederer Correctional Complex

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 833 of 985 - Page ID#: 4421

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

NA, unknown, or no basis for

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

evaluation (Explain)

A ADA coordinator

Both

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

DW Jessica Durrett, CUAII Brittany Puckett,

CUAI Jordan Wright, and CUI Craig Lish

X

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

Both

2 coordinator appointed?

X

Both

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

X

Both

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates?

X

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates in a

Both

5 timely and appropriate manner? How?

X

Describe method used to ascertain: We

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? (THIS

intreviewed 40 inmates 15 knew an ADA

Coordinator, 3 looked on their HOH ID card,

x

Both

6 REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

and 35 didn't know

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit

Both

7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

X

Both

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

X

DOC-ADA Coordinator/Settlement

Agreement, DOC-ADA Coordinator/CREATE,

DOC AIIS-Communication with deaf and hard

of hearing Offenders, DOC AIIS-

Communication with deaf and hard of

hearing offenders, ADA Building Blocks,

CBTs, Annual In-Service, ADA in Jails &

Prisons Webinar, ADA Coordinator CREATE

Compliance Training (powerpoint),

Deaf/HOH Training: Settlement Monitor's

Recommended Revision (powerpoint),

Federal Court Deaf/HOH Settlement

Agreement (powerpoint), Tips for

Communicating with Inmates are are HOH

(word document), Communicating with

Deaf/HOH Offenders (powerpoint). Jordan

and Brittany have completed Effective

Communication Strategies with Deaf

Offenders using American Sign Language.

Craig and Jessica are schedule to attend the

Both

9 Describe training

webiner in October. NA

Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately cover

Both

10 information?

X

Both

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training)

X

Both

12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

X

Both

13 Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's powerpoint)

X

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with settlement

Both

14 agreement?

X

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 834 of 985 - Page ID#: 4422

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Both

15

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X

X

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in

Both

17 implementing the settlement?

Both

18 Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf inmates?

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on deaf

Both

19 inmates?

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the inmates in

Both

20 those situations?

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective way with the

Both

21 monitor?

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the monitor

Both

22 when necessary?

Both B Reporting obligations

If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was monitor

Both

1 notified?

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

Both

2 inmates?

Both

3 Is the list complete?

Both

4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs,

Both

6 activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe)

Both

7 Was it reported to the monitor?

Both

8 Was the report complete?

Both

9 Was the report timely?

Both

10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert?

Both

11 If yes, was the monitor notified?

Did the institution consult with the monitor about the non-

Both

12 auditory alert?

Both

13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

X
X X
X
X
X
X
X X X N N/A N/A N/A X X X X
NA X

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

HOH

3 notifications.)

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

New Intake Inmates: Medical notifes ADA

Coordinator/Alert is generated by KOMS if

inmate answers "yes" to any HOH questions

from provider upon assessment. Inmates

Transferring from another facility: Emailed

notification by KOMS automatic alert.

NA

ADA precaution in KOMS notifies staff that

offender is Deaf/HOH. ADA Coordinators

meet with inmate to determine what is

X

needed for effective communication.

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 835 of 985 - Page ID#: 4423

Deaf/HO H or both? # Deaf Deaf

Issue/Question Deaf inmates 5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general medical intake, and

Both

during medical care more generally:

Both

1 Is there effective communications planning?

Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if

Both

2 interpretation is needed?

Both

3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?

Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications

Both

4 techniques?

Both

Notice to medical staff:

Both

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How?

Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover and

Both

6 within the file?

New Intake Inmates: Medical notifes ADA

Coordinator/Alert is generated by KOMS if

inmate answers "yes" to any HOH questions

from provider upon assessment. Inmates

Transferring from another facility: Emailed

notification by KOMS automatic alert.

NA

X

X

A VRI Laptop is available and we have a

contract with a Certified Interpreter if

needed. TTY and Videophone are available

upon ADA Assessment.

NA

X

X

NA

X

X

X

A VRI Laptop is available and we have a

contract with a Certified Interpreter if

needed. TTY and Videophone are also

X

available.

NA X X X X
NA X X

Deaf

7 Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate accommodations.

Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site providers of

Deaf

8 need for interpretation?

Deaf

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

Deaf

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

Deaf

11 Adequate notice?

Outside providers offering effective communication to inmates

Deaf

12 who sign?

Deaf

13 How?

Describe:

NA
X
X NA
X
X
NA

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 836 of 985 - Page ID#: 4424

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

Hearing screening/medical intake:

Both

14 Performed for all new inmates?

Both

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

Both

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

Both

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

Both

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?

How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by

Both

19 staff?

Both

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

Both

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?

Both

22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe.

Both

23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

Both

25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening?

Both

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

Adequate determination of need for designation/ audiology

Both

28 services? How?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or HOH,

Both

30 apart from audiology services decision?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Describe:
Further assessment is completed within 5 days. In KOMS

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X X X X X
X
X X X X NA X X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

x
X
X
X NA
X
X X

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

HOH

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

HOH

40 initial request/questionnaire?

HOH

41 each relevant medical visit?

HOH

42 any audiology visit?

HOH

43 hearing aid provision?

HOH

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks?

HOH

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

HOH

46 Shared with monitor when requested

NA X X X X X
NA X X X X X X X

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 837 of 985 - Page ID#: 4425

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question Summary

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Describe. 47

In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait more

48 than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?

49 What is the cause of the delay?

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) to

50 improve this process?

HOH

Co-pay and availability issues:

HOH

47 Charged only once -- not again for followups

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

HOH

50 7 days/week?

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Both E Information provided inmates

Both

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe)

Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-discrimination and

Both

2 ADA services?

Both

Brochure? Items to include:

Both

3 Non-discrimination obligation

Both

4 Effective communication obligation

Both

5 Auxiliary aids and services available

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services (including

Both

6 hearing aids, and batteries)

Both

7 Communication equipment available, and how to use

Both

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

Both

Other items:

Both

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

Both

10 Request for Accommodations/ Communications Assistance

Both

11 Medical Request form includes request for accommodations

Both

12 Job application form includes request for accommodations

Both

13 Waiver forms

Both

14 Classification form includes request for accommodations

Both

15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations

SAP and other programming form includes request for

Both

16 accommodation

Both

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in

18 law library? (Need to check)

Both

Do request forms:

Both

19 list available services comprehensively?

clearly explain services and aids (what they are and when

Both

20 they are available?

Both

21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) X

NA
NA NA
NA NA
X NA
X X X X
X
X
NA X X X
X
X X NA X X X X X X X
X
X
X
NA X
X
X

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 838 of 985 - Page ID#: 4426

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

expressly ask about preferred mode of

Both

22 communication/needed services and why they are useful?

Both

23 explain which items are free?

Both

24 encompass religious and volunteer-provided programming?

Both

Effective communication of these resources:

Both

25 Are the materials in language accessible to each inmate?

Both

26 Is this information provided with effective communication?

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity

to meet with a KDOC staff member and interpreter to ask

Both

27 questions about the materials?

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

for a program with staff, is effective communication

Both

28 provided?

Both

29 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Effective communication re. programming

X
X X NA X X
X
NA
X
X NA

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

Both

30 in education with staff, is effective communication provided?

Both

31 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

Both

2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

7 Clear process to obtain? Describe

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Both

12 Working process to get new inmate alerts added? (Describe)

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

14 Appropriately obvious

Both

15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?)

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

X

X

X

X

X

X

NA

X

During the initial interview with an ADA

Coordinatior the cell/bed cards are issued. If

the waive them during this time, but then

X

decided they would like one they can

contact an ADA coordinator to receive one.

X

X

When we are notified a replacement is

needed

X

NA

X

X

X

X

X

NA

X

X

X

X

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 839 of 985 - Page ID#: 4427

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Both

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?

No they go behind their institutional ID.

Both

23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator?

Both

24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver?

Both

25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?

Both

26 Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested ID?

Both

27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

Both

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Both

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

Both

9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

Both

2 Cell cards

Both

3 Bed shaker

Both

4 In-person alerts

Both

5 Pager

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

Both

9 Other amplification

Both

10 Other (describe)

Both

General issues

Special housing area:

Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH inmates?

Both

11 (Describe)

Both

12 If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? (Describe)

No Pagers are provided Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) X X
N

N/A Y
X X X
NA X
X

X

X
X x X NA X X
X X X X

X
X
X
X NA NA NA
NA NA

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 840 of 985 - Page ID#: 4428

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed

Both

13 there? (such a requirement is non-compliant).

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live

there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to the

Both

14 inmate? Describe any restrictions.

In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is primary

Both

15 consideration given to inmate request?

Only if they have requested the use of a bed

X

shaker

due to logistics of other units the bed shaker X is unable to be set up
X

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services

form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or

Both

16 not requesting aids/services, were accommodations provided?

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services documented in

Both

17 inmate institutional files?

Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services shared

Both

18 appropriately with staff?

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Both

20 Have any been out of comission?

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Both

22 hearing aid?

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

Both

24 Promptly?

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Both

26 Describe

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

Both

30 Are classes in sign language provided?

Both

31 deaf inmates given notice?

Both

32 priority given to deaf inmates?

Both I Interpretation in general

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

Deaf

1 communicated to inmates?

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

Deaf

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

3 volunteer-provided programming?

Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation

Deaf

4 method?

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf

6 In-person?

Deaf

7 VRI?

x
X
X X NA NA X X X NA NA NA NA X X X
NA X
X
X
X X NA X X

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 841 of 985 - Page ID#: 4429

Deaf/HO H or both? # Deaf Deaf

Issue/Question Is VRI availability: 8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Deaf

13 In general

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Deaf

16 Splitter?

Deaf

17 Instructions?

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Deaf

21 How?

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

Deaf

22 should be first recourse?

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

Deaf

24 Parole?

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

Deaf

27 before?

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

Deaf

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

Deaf

29 Describe

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

Deaf

30 was unavailable)

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

Deaf

31 method?

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

Deaf

35 encounters/communications/settings)

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

RCC does not have an on-site RHU Describe: Describe:
no inmates interpret

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X
X
X
X
N/A NA
X X X X X X X X N/A N/A
N/A
X X X N/A N/A
N/A
X
NA
X
X
X
X
NA
X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X X

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 842 of 985 - Page ID#: 4430

Deaf/HO H or both? # Deaf J Deaf
Deaf
Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf Deaf
Deaf Both K Both Both Both Both Both Both Both

Issue/Question Hand Restraints 1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs? Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized 2 finding of a security threat? Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might 3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.) 4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed? 5 Staff aware of the issue Off-site medical care: 6 two-point hand restraint system used? restraints removed when necessary for medical 7 communication? Non-auditory Alerts 1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe) 2 provided to all inmates who need it? 3 can and does it give alerts in real time? 4 sufficient to signal fire alarm? 5 sufficient to signal count alert? 6 programmed to signal different alerts? 7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

would be used on initial transport

RCC doesn’t have an RHU

Describe: Bed Shaker

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Both

9 been denied?

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Both

11 How often?

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Both

15 used consistently?

Both

16 in all dormitories?

Both

17 in gym?

Both

18 in library?

Both

19 audited and monitored?

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

Both

20 misses a page?

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

Both

21 because of disability?

no requests have been denied every quarter checked if not in use
no

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

N/A
N/A N/a NA
X
X

NA X X X x X X
X
X
X X X NA X X X X X X
X

NA X X X X

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 843 of 985 - Page ID#: 4431

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

1 Videophone Installed

Deaf

2 Allow voice carry-over features?

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

VRI Laptop is available if Videophone is out

Deaf

5 alternative offered

of service

Describe: Information is posted by

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when

Videophone and ADA Coordinator

6 videophone is out of service.

communicates with ADA Inmates

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

Outside Unit Door

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

No escort required

Deaf

10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates?

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

List of approved inmates available for

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

staff/KOMS precaution also available. Must

Deaf

12 using ordinary phones?

have approval from ADA Coordinator.

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

Not necessary

Deaf

14 Free?

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone

Deaf

15 calls?

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA X X
NA NA
X

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA X X X X X
X
X X X
NA

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

17 inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial.

Both

TTY:

Both

18 Installed?

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

Both

23 for non-deaf inmates?

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Both

25 Permission needed?

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

Both

27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates?

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

No inmates have been denied use during

X

this audit period.

NA

1 Available

X

Addressed in ADA Handbook. Also available

through communication with ADA

X

Coordinator

X

NA

Available 7 days per week/12 hours per day

X

Located outside housing unit next to CapTel

phone

X

X

Must have approval from ADA Coordinator

X

NA

X

Inmates are not charged for TTY usage

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 844 of 985 - Page ID#: 4432

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Both

29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Both

30 Can access publicly available relay service phone numbers?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Describe: Test conducted on 1/23/2020.

Discovered first TTY was broken and taken

out of service. Test with second TTY was

successful.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X

X

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions for

Both

31 videophones and TTY is less than equitable?

Both

32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

If yes, was determination (including reasoning, evidence, etc.)

Both

33 documented?

Both

34 Was monitor notified?

Both

35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

Deaf

VRS via laptop

Deaf

36 Available?

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

Both

Phones

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

Both

CapTel

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

NA X

X

X

X

NA

X

There is not a RHU at this institution.

X

X

NA

X

X

NA

CapTel Phone is not recognizing voice

biometrics. Securus temprorarily disabled

users' voice biometrics so they could make

X

calls. Securus is supposed to find a

permanent solution.

List names:

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

43 Request by any inmate denied?

Both

TV/Movies

Both

44 Is captioning available?

Both

45 Is captioning used?

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

Both

49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

Both

50 Amplification method? (Describe)

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

NA

No HOH inmates have been denied access. NA

NA

X

X

Checked weekly in all units.

X

X

Closed captioning must be turned on the

institutional channel by recreation as well as

X

individual TVs in the units

X

Describe:

NA

X

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 845 of 985 - Page ID#: 4433

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

Both

53 status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

Both

54 deaf inmates?

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

X Institution does not have segregated housing

X

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

Both

5 (Describe)

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Both

7 because security threat?

Both

8 monitor notified?

Both

9 reasoning explained?

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both

10 of requests?

Both

11 of denials?

Both N Disciplinary

Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and

without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been

Deaf

1 punished?

Deaf

2 Was a re-hearing granted?

Both O Grievances

Both

1 Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA coordinator?

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator

Both

2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator?

Describe in detail: Sound Amplifiers available

through medical. Phone Amplifiers and Bed

Shakers available through ADA Coordinator.

Permanent inmates can order a vibrating

watch through ADA Coordinator

NA

No devices available through commisary

NA

Devices available upon request

X

ADA Coordinator assists with purchase

X

Non requested

NA NA NA NA NA
NA X X

There have been no interpreter requests

X

during this review period.

NA

X X

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 846 of 985 - Page ID#: 4434

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both P Both Both Both Both

Issue/Question Training Types available 1 CBT? (Using approved training?) 2 Who received? (Describe) 3 All appropriate staff?

Both

4 Live training? (Information only)

Both

5 Who received? (Describe)

Both

6 All appropriate staff?

Any additional targeted training on specific needs ? Please

Both

describe in detail

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

All Staff receive annual trainning
Describe: Provided by Institutional Training Coordinator Describe: All staff receive annual training

NA X X X
NA NA
X

NA

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 847 of 985 - Page ID#: 4435
USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE

Name

Other Alert

Listed with

Signs to

communi

cate (Y/N)

Low literacy? (So

Has

that written Has Deaf/HOH Bed/Door

If signs to communicate, Auxiliary Aid noted in KOMS Assessment

Bed Shaker? (Not requested;

Device (e.g.,

vibrating

watch, etc.) TTY Access

(Not

(Not

requested; requested;

Personal

Phone

Captel Acess Amplifier

(Not

(Not

requested; requested;

Shake & Wake (Not requested;

KOMS ADA

communication ID Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting took denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

ID

Housing location Precaution?

is not effective) waived)

waived)

notes?

place?

granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) granted)

RC N 05

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P-07

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC O 19

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC O 17

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC O 24U

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC O 23U

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P-3 U

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P-13U

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC N 24

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC O 12U

Y

N

N

Y

Waived

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P 09U

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC N 03U

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P 24

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC T 04

y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC N 04

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC N 07U

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q-16U Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B4 04

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q 16

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC N 25

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q 20U

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC N 08

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q 24U

Y

N

N

Y

y

N/A

y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q 02U

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q 03U

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC S 35

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P 25U

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC T 02

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q 15

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q 22

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC Q 05U

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC M 07

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC M 01L

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC H 32

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B1 22

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC S 27

Y

N

N

Y

Waived

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC T 31

Y

N

N

Y

Waived

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC D 56

Y

N

Y

Y

Waived

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC N 07

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B5 25

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Granted

NR

AC B 44

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC G 07

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B3 15

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Granted

NR

AC H 44

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC B 14

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC F 35

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC E 36

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC B 01

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Granted

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B4 11

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 848 of 985 - Page ID#: 4436
USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEA

Name

Clear mask

for staff who Any other

Special

deal with this auxiliary aid

ID

mask?

innmate? requested? Outcome?

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Sound Amplifier Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered/ Sound Amplifier Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered/ Sound Amplifier Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered/ Sound Amplifier Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Sound Amplifier Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Sound Amplifier Issued

NR

NR

NR

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Ordered/ Sound Amplifier Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued / Phone Amplifier Issued

NR

NR

N

Sound Amplifier Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued / Phone Amplifier Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Sound Amplifier Refused

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Sound Amplifier Issued

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 16

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 849 of 985 - Page ID#: 4437

Other Alert

Listed with

Signs to

communi

cate (Y/N)

Low literacy? (So

Has

that written Has Deaf/HOH Bed/Door

If signs to communicate, Auxiliary Aid noted in KOMS Assessment

Bed Shaker? (Not requested;

Device (e.g.,

vibrating

watch, etc.) TTY Access

(Not

(Not

requested; requested;

Personal

Phone

Captel Acess Amplifier

(Not

(Not

requested; requested;

Shake & Wake (Not requested;

KOMS ADA

communication ID Card? (Y or Card? (Y or precaution meeting took denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

denied;

ID

Housing location Precaution?

is not effective) waived)

waived)

notes?

place?

granted) granted) granted) granted) granted) granted)

AC C 49

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC A 40

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B1 09

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B5 05

Y

N

N

Waived

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC L 10

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B3 23

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC F 29

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC I 28

Y

N

N

Waived

Waived

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P 10U

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC H 13

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC D 14

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC A 30

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

LLCC HT

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

Granted

AC E 20

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC I 06

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B7 18

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC C 62

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Granted

NR

AC G 06

Y

N

N

Waived

Waived

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC M 17

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC E 56

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC C 48

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

Granted

NR

AC M 23L

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC C 39

Y

N

N

Y

Waived

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC G 28

Y

N

N

Y

N

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC B 32

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC G 02

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC B 18

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC B 24

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC C 36

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC A 12

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B8 23

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC E 54

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC A 34

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC I 27

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC H 22

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B8 05

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC A 26

Y

N

N

Y

Waived

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC J 13

Y

N

N

Waived

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC A 06

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

AC L 23L

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC B5 15

Y

N

N

Waived

Waived

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P 11L

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

RC P 19L

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 17

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 850 of 985 - Page ID#: 4438

Clear mask

for staff who Any other

Special

deal with this auxiliary aid

ID

mask?

innmate? requested? Outcome?

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Sound Amplifier Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Waived Use of Hearing Device

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Sound Amplifier Refused

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Wavied Use of Hearing Device

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Sound Amplifier Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Waived Use of Hearing Device

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Sound Amplifier Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

NR

NR

N

Hearing Aid Issued

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 851 of 985 - Page ID#: 4439

Technology FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device.
Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers)

How many Where

Medical

10

AC Program

Administrators

5

Office

Outside Unit

When obtained NA
NA 7/29/2020

Specifications (URL)

Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

1

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the like?

Bed shakers 1

Vibrating watches 17

Vibrating alarm clocks

1

Pagers

NA

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in

use or under consideration not mentioned above.

NA

Earphones for parole hearings

1

Earphones for orientation videos

2

AC Program Administrators Office
Given to HOH inmate who ordered a vibrating watch
Given to HOH inmate who ordered a vibrating alarm clock

NA NA (ID Department distributes vibrating watches upon arrival)
NA (ID Department distributes vibrating alarm clocks upon arrival)

Re-Entry

NA

AC Program

Administrators

Office

NA

How do inmates obtain access?

How well do they work?

Other comments

Issued once verified as HOH In working order

Request through ADA Coordinator
Request through ADA Coordinator

In working order
Voice Biometrics for users was temporarily disabled due to phone not recognizing it. Securus is supposed to find permanent solution.

Request through ADA Coordinator

In working order

Request through ADA Coordinator

In working order

Request through ADA Coordinator

In working order

Request through Re-Entry Coordinator
Request through ADA Coordinator

In working order In working order

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 19

Documentation

and

narrative

to

proCvidaese:

3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc
Date reviewed

#ICD:o9#m9:m-42e4n4tsF0(iplerodb:le1m2s/1re6v/e2a0led,Psoalugteio:n8s,5e2tc.o) f

985

-

Page

Grievances:

1. Provide summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates. Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Should include the issues, summary 9/22/2020 of response, resolution

See attachment

2. Provide full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing accommodation issues.

9/22/2020

There were no grievances that address hearing/hearing accommodation issues this review period.

Discipline

3. For all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving an inmate who signs, provide report of inmate name, date, and communication method for each.

9/18/2020

There have been no inmates who sign before Adjustment Committee during this review period.

4. Provide documentation for all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or 9/18/2020 other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate.

There have been no discplinary reports regarding failure to obey orders or comply with count regarding deaf/HOH inmates during this review period.

Auxiliary aids 5. VRI Log (provide). 6. TTY instructions (provide) 7. VRI instructions (provide)

9/18/2020 9/18/2020 9/18/2020

See attachment See attachment See attachment

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 20

Documentation

and

narrative

to

proCvidaese:

3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc
Date reviewed

#ICD:o9#m9:m-42e4n4tsF1(iplerodb:le1m2s/1re6v/e2a0led,Psoalugteio:n8s,5e3tc.o) f

985

-

Page

Audiology processing delays

8.A list of each inmate currently at your institution whose audiology 9/18/2020

delayed appointment due to quarantine and keeping patients separate

processing FINISHED after March 2020, for whom such processing took

from wing to wing in order to get patients in medical and to audiobooth. A process was

or is taking over 60 days, documentation of the explanation for any such delay, and a description of any steps taken to avoid similar

put in place to call each patient needing to be seen by wing for all of medical. Visits are coordinated with the providers and nurses.

problems going forward.

a delay in receiving the hearing aid from the outside vendor

, delayed appointment due to quarantine and keeping patients separate from wing to wing in order to get patients in medical and to audiobooth. A process was put in place to call each patient needing to be seen by wing for all of medical. Visits are coordinated with the providers and nurses.

, a delay in receiving the hearing aid from the outside vendor

a delay in receiving the hearing aid from the outside vendor

delayed appointment due to quarantine and keeping patients separate from wing to wing in order to get patients in medical and to audiobooth. A process was put in place to call each patient needing to be seen by wing for all of medical. Visits are coordinated with the providers and nurses.

outside vendor.

a delay in receiving the hearing aid from the

Information provided to inmates, policies, etc. 9. Any pages of the inmate handbook that address disability, and the date for that version of the handbook. 10. The current Deaf/HOH brochure and any other documents provided to deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates. 11.The medical request form currently provided to prisoners. 12. Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2020 addressing deaf/hard-of-hearing issues.

9/22/2020
9/22/2020 9/22/2020 9/22/2020

13. A list of each use of an in-person sign-language interpreter from February 2020 to present, and any occasions in which such an interpreter was requested but denied.

9/22/2020

See attachement See attachement See attachement None
None

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 21

Documentation

and

narrative

to

proCvidaese:

3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc
Date reviewed

#ICD:o9#m9:m-42e4n4tsF2(iplerodb:le1m2s/1re6v/e2a0led,Psoalugteio:n8s,5e4tc.o) f

985

-

Page

Please provide written responses to the following questions:

14. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty because staff members are wearing masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?
9/18/2020

J. Wright typically does not reach out to the ADA inmates after the initial assessment. Several of the HOH inmates in Units 1 and 2 reach out to her through JPay if they have questions/concerns, but none of them have reached out to her about experiencing difficulty because staff members are wearing masks. C. Lish typically doesn’t reach out after the initial interview, he gives them all of his contact information on how to get ahold of him and tells them they are more than welcome to contact him with any issues or concerns. While interviewing them he typically asks them if they are having any issues with understanding him if he is wearing the mask but there has only been a couple of times where it was an issue at best and even then they said it was more of an annoyance than anything else. B. Puckett said they check on them when doing their wing walks for units 4 and 5 (every day). Only one inmate had difficulty hearing SAP class assignments because of the masks, so they created the clear plastic masks for the facilitators to wear. They have talked to all of them, we currently have 17 HOH inmates in units 4 and 5, and some have left since this started, so she would say she has talked to 25 or so.

15. How many staff members are currently using clear masks? How is the decision made who will wear a clear mask?

None 9/18/2020

16. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty with their hearing aids because of the design of their own masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond?

No HOH inmates in Units 1 or 2 have said they are having difficulty with their hearing aids because of the design of their masks.No inmates in Unit 3 have expressed any concerns over the masks interfering with hearing aids. No inmates in Unit 4/5 are having issues with their hearing aids and the masks. We had two options, one that goes around the ears and one that ties around their heads. We have given them the option of which one 9/18/2020 works best for them.

17. How many inmates have been issued masks that don't have ear ties?

AC staff reissued masks that don’t have ear ties on Tuesday, September 15th. All HOH inmates in Units 1 and 2 have at least one mask that can tie around their head rather than go over their ears/hearing aids.All HOH inmates in Unit 3 have been issued masks that tie around their head and not around their ears. In Units 4/5, only 3 inmates prefer the masks that tie around their heads over the ones that go around their ears. All 17 have been issued 9/18/2020 masks that tie around their heads, and those 3 also have the ones with ear ties.

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 22

Documentation

and

narrative

to

proCvidaese:

3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc
Date reviewed

#ICD:o9#m9:m-42e4n4tsF3(iplerodb:le1m2s/1re6v/e2a0led,Psoalugteio:n8s,5e5tc.o) f

985

-

Page

18. What if anything have you done to solve the problem of inmates having trouble hearing announcements? Please respond in detail, with dates on all responsive steps, prerequisites for any assistance, etc.
19. How have you educated staff that it is inappropriate to write up an inmate for behavior that is caused by a hearing impairment (e.g., talking loudly, not following instructions that could not be heard)? If there was a memo, please provide that.
20. Please describe in detail how inmates are supposed to get hearing aid batteries, including how long it should take them each time.
21. When an inmate reports that a hearing aid is not working, what are the steps followed to evaluate the complaint? Include all relevant copays and other procedures.
22. When someone is denied binaural hearing aids, are they provided information on the standard for receiving such assistance, and the opportunity for appeal? How many inmates have received binaural aids since the current binaural hearing aid policy has been in effect?

We are implementing an ADA Announcement Aide to each unit effective on October 1, 2020 This aide will have all the schedules for the month and go to each wing to let the deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates know what the announcements are. Along with adding digital clocks to all of the wings in order for inmates to follow all the posted schedules. (Recreation, pill call, meal times, count times, class times.) We will evaluate these two solutions in a month to see if they are helping the hard of hearing and deaf inmates hear 9/24/2020 announcement better.
While the ADA coordinators are making rounds throughout the institutions we remind staff how many deaf and hard of hearing inmates we have at RCC/AC. We talk with them on how to identify them in case the staff my be having issues with their behavior that is 9/25/2020 caused by a hearing impairment. In the mornings when nursing does the wing walks, the patients that need batteries will let the nurses know at that time. The nurses will then bring back batteries to that patient. If it is on 2nd shift, after hours, the patient will tell the officer who will then contact medical. Nursing will either have the officer send the patient to medical to retrieve the batteries or nursing will take the batteries to the patient. It is the same on the weekends 9/18/2020 also. The patient brings his hearing aid to medical. The nurses will change out the batteries and have the patient check to see if it begins working. If it does not, the patient is offered a pocket talker while his hearing aid is being sent out for repairs. There are no co-pays to 9/18/2020 get hearing aids repaired.  
RCC is currently assessing a patient for Binaural hearing aids. This patient has completed another audigram and will be taken to the next TLOC meeting.  
9/18/2020

23. What arrangements are made to provide vibrating watches/clocks for inmates who are indigent?
24. Please describe, in detail, each step that takes place once a person is identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing, to evaluate/offer any auxiliary aids. Include who is responsible for each step.

Inmates can request vibrating watches/clocks through the ADA coordinators. When an inmate is verifed to be indigent we will provide the inmate with a vibrating watch/alarm clock while the inmates is housed at RCC/AC. When the inmate is transferred to another 5/20/2020 facility we will get the devices back from that inmate.
9/17/2020 See Attachment

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 23

Documentation

and

narrative

to

proCvidaese:

3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc
Date reviewed

#ICD:o9#m9:m-42e4n4tsF4(iplerodb:le1m2s/1re6v/e2a0led,Psoalugteio:n8s,5e6tc.o) f

985

-

Page

25. Please describe, in detail, any situation in 2019 or 2020 in which a deaf/hard-of-hearing inmate has been denied a job or other opportunity (access to a program or the like) because of their disability. Include the inmate’s name, the date, and the circumstances.

N/A
9/18/2020 DOC-ADA Coordinator/Settlement Agreement, DOC-ADA Coordinator/CREATE, DOC AIISCommunication with deaf and hard of hearing Offenders, DOC AIIS-Communication with deaf and hard of hearing offenders, ADA Building Blocks, CBTs, Annual In-Service, ADA in Jails & Prisons Webinar, ADA Coordinator CREATE Compliance Training (powerpoint), Deaf/HOH Training: Settlement Monitor's Recommended Revision (powerpoint), Federal Court Deaf/HOH Settlement Agreement (powerpoint), Tips for Communicating with Inmates are are HOH (word document), Communicating with Deaf/HOH Offenders (powerpoint)

26. Please list all training that you have received for your role as ADA Coordinator.
27. Please provide an update on all items in your Deaf/HOH action plan (previously shared with me).

9/21/2020 9/25/2020 See Attachment

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 24

Prison: Name of person filling out form:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 857 of 985 - Page ID#: 4445

Date:

1

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

8/3/2020

3. Date of initial hearing screening

f/u ear infection/impaction intake

3/11/2020

3/27/2020

7/18/2019

Annual H&P

Annual H&P at LSCC (transferred to RCC on 10/8/19)

Intake

2/11/2020

3/19/2020

1/17/2020

1/28/2020

intake

Intake HP

Intake

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

1/21/2020

3/11/2020

3/27/2020

7/18/2019

2/11/2020

3/19/2020

1/17/2020

2/11/2020

8/3/2020

5/28/2020

3/27/2020

2/6/2020

3/10/2020

4/3/2020

1/17/2020

2/12/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Mild hearing loss R ear,

moderate hearing loss right

L ear moderate hearing

Moderate-severe hearing severe hearing loss moderate hearing loss L moderate hearing loss

ear, severe hearing loss left L moderate and R mild loss, R ear moderate to Moderate to severe

loss bilaterally

bilaterally

ear

bilateral ears

ear

hearing loss

profound hearing loss hearing loss

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

c

a

a

a

d

d

a

a

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision

against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it

complies with KyDOC policy.

pt signed refusal for hearing

aid on 3/10/20

refused

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

1/21/2020

3/11/2020

3/27/2020

7/18/2019

2/12/2020

3/19/2020

1/17/2020

2/11/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Annual HP

intake

annual H&P

Annual H&P

inspect bilateral ears for cerumen build up

intake

Intake HP

Intake HP

R ear wax impaction

one or more questions

answered yes to one or answered with sometimes

answered yes to one or more questions on

or yes on hearing screening

more questions

screening

for annual H&P

Referral to AUdicus for

audiogram

no cerumen build up

answered

Answered yes or

yes/sometimes to one or sometimes to one or

more questions

more questions

Failed Whisper Test

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 25

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 858 of 985 - Page

1

ID#: 4446

R ear flush

1/28/2020 ear exam

3/12/2020

3/28/2020

8/28/2019

audiogram

Audicus testing

audiogram

3/10/2020

3/20/2020

ear inspection

audiogram

7/21/2020 Audiogram

2/12/2020

cerumen still noted in ear canal nurse advised inmate to use debrox 5 more days

cerumen build up, debrox issued x 5 days

audiogram completed

audiogram through audicus was completed

audiogram completed

cerumen build up, debox issued x5 days

audiogram completed

2/2/2020

3/17/2020

4/2/2020

9/27/2019

3/18/2020

3/25/2020

7/21/2020

2/19/2020

repeat ear flush

f/u cerumen build up f/u audiogram

f/u audicus audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u cerumen build up f/u audiogram

F/U Provider

small amount of cerumen

noted also what appears to

be loose skin tissue. also

noted Lt ear cerumen

right ear with some

impaction. no contents cerumen and left ear

expelled from ear during with moderate

irrigation multiple attempts cerumen after flush,

made no cerumen expelled debrox x 5 days

Does not qualify for hearing aid

hearing aid ordered

qualified for hearing aids,

patient refused, refusal

signed. Pt stated that he

does not feel like he needs it

at this time and feels like he

is safe to hear alrams and

announcements. He also

stated he should be getting right ear still with

out soon.

cerumen build up

Pt qualifies for L hearing

aid and hearing aid was

ordered.

Sound Amplifier Issued

Hearing Aid Ordered

6/25/2020

3/22/2020

7/2/2020

11/4/2019

4/21/2020

3/31/2020

7/30/2020

3/2/2020

difficulty hearing/ ear impaction sick call

f/u cerumen build up repeat audiogram

hearing aid offered to patient, patient refused r/t co-pay, signed refusal for hearing aid and sound amplifier

requesting to try the hearing f/u right ear cerumen

aids out at this time

build up

sound amplifier issued Heaing Aid Issued

pt to use debrox ear drops x5 days then f/u in medical

Large amount of

cerumen still present

after flush, reviewed

debrox instructions and

instructed to use x 5

days

audiogram completed

sound amplifier returned to medical and refusals signed referred

bilateral ears clear, hearing screening completed again

hearing aid pending

7/2/2020

3/28/2020

7/14/2020

ear check/flush

f/u cerumen build up f/u repeat audiogram chronic care

2/6/2020

5/11/2020

4/3/2020

8/13/2020

provider to see pt, regarding

requesting hearing aid

audiogram

hearing aid issued

Moderate to severe

Unsuccessful attempt x2 in

hearing loss in L ear, R

R ear x3 in L ear. IM to

ear is normal. Repeat

continue use of debrox gtts ears flushes, ears clear, audiogram ordered. Pt

x 5 more days then

pt unable to hear from refused pocket talker

scheduled for a 2nd flush L ear

and hearing aid.

whisper test failed, audiogram ordered

hearing aid ordered, refused

pocket talker

audiogram completed

7/7/2020

5/28/2020

7/16/2020

2/21/2020

5/12/2020

6/2/2020

9/8/2020

ear flush attempt #2

audiogram

repeat audiogram #2 f/u audiogram

came to medical requesting

to now have the pocket

talker

f/u audiogram

f/u hearinEg xaihdibit 2, RCC, p. 26

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 859 of 985 - Page

1

ID#: 4447

The eardrums are covered with hard cerumen. Attempted 2 flushes without success. Plan to refer to the provider for possible removal

audiogram completed

audiogram completed

hearing aid ordered

pocket talker issued

pt reports that his

(COVID 19 delay) patient hearing aid is working

refused hearing aid

well

7/13/2020

6/9/2020

7/21/2020

3/2/2020

6/4/2020

6/3/2020

bilat wax removal

F/u audiogram

f/u repeat audiogram Hearing aid issued

hearing aid issued

f/u audiogram

extracted wax from both

ears using a plastic currette.

Bilateral TMs noted to be

pt changed his mind

bulging with white mucous

Qualifies for R hearing

about hearing aids.

in both ear canals. f/u ear Pt refused hearing

aid which has been

Hearing aid ordered,

infection in 7-10 days

aid/sound amplifier ordered

sound amplifier refused.

7/21/2020

6/11/2020

8/11/2020

4/1/2020

6/18/2020

7/29/2020

f/u ear infection

F/u hearing

hearing aid issued

F/u Hearing aid efficacy hearing aid efficacy

H/A efficacy

Both ears have significant

amount of white cerumen

impaction against the

tympanic membrane.

Discussed re-using Debrox

treatment twice daily along Pt changed his mind

with above drops and then and wants a hearing

returning on Friday for ear aid, sound amplifier

irrigation with Hydrogen given and hearing aid

Peroxide

ordered

7/24/2020

7/25/2020

patient states"has helped my hearing very much"

no issues with hearing aid

Pt turned in hearing aid as he did not want to pay $10

9/8/2020

Ear flush with hydrogen peroxide, only very small amount of content expelled from each ear after multiple attempts in each ear, no other contents expelled hearing aid issued

f/u hearing aid; Pt reports that his aid is working well

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 27

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 860 of 985 - Page

1

ID#: 4448

7/27/2020

8/7/2020

wax removal with curette F/U hearing aid

Both ears impacted with

cerumen and a white

substance; appears to be

toilet paper. Curette used

with a 10cc syringe and

catheter tip to flush ears Pt reports that hearing

and retrieve substnace. Will aid is not working well,

follow up in 1 week re: he was given larger ear

hearing

bud to try

Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date
(b) End date
(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today - start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why? Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

8/3/2020 f/u hearing/ears after extraction
Both ears are clear of cerumen. Pt reports some hearing loss in the L ear. Audiogram to be completed

audiogram

8/5/2020

audiogram completed

8/21/2020 f/u audiogram

Pt qualifies for hearing aid and hearing aid was ordered

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 28

Prison:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Name of person filling out form:

Date:

2

3

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 ID#: 4449

4

5

6

Page: 861 of 985 - Page
7

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

2/14/2020

12/17/2019

12/19/2019

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Intake

Intake

Intake

Intake

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

2/19/2020

1/6/2020

2/6/2020

2/18/2020

1/8/2020

2/6/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

moderate hearing loss

Moderate to severe

moderate hearing loss bilat

Severe

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

a

a

a

a

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision

against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it

complies with KyDOC policy.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

2/19/2020

1/6/2020

2/6/2020

12/4/2019

1/14/2020

2/6/2020

2/24/2020

2/14/2020

Intake

Intake

Annual HP

Intake

12/13/2020

1/22/2020

2/7/2020

2/24/2020

2/17/2020

2/7/2020

2/13/2020

2/14/2020

2/25/2020

3/2/2020

normal hearing in the R ear and moderate hearing loss in the L ear moderate hearing loss

moderate-severe hearing loss bilaterally

moderate-severe hearing loss

d

a

a

refused

d released

12/13/2019

1/22/2020

2/7/2020

2/24/2020

2/17/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Intake HP

Intake HP

Intake HP

Intake HP

Intake HP

Intake HP

Annual HP

Intake HP

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test Debrox Ordered

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test Debrox Ordered

Failed Whisper Test Debrox Ordered

Failed Whisper Test Debrox Ordered

Failed Whisper Test

Failed Whisper Test

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 29

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Case: 3:142 -cv-00001-G3FVT-EBA D4oc #: 99-2 F5 iled: 12/16/260 Page: 8627 of 985 - Page ID#: 4450

2/18/2020

Audiogram

Ear Flush

1/22/2020

2/6/2020

2/7/2020

Audiogram

Audiogram

Ear Flush

1/26/2020 Ear Flush

2/13/2020 Audiogram

2/25/2020 Audiogram

3/2/2020

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

2/19/2020

1/24/2020

2/22/2020

2/21/2020

2/13/2020

2/14/2020

F/U Provider

Audiogram

F/U Provider

F/U Provider

Audiogram

Audiogram

F/U Provider

3/3/2020 F/U Provider

3/2/2020

Sound Amplifier Issued Hearing Aid Ordered
3/2/2020

Sound Amplifier Issued Sound Amplifier Issued

Hearing Aid Ordered Hearing Aid Ordered

2/6/2020

3/2/2020

3/2/2020

2/21/2020

Sound Amplifier Issued

Sound Amplifier Issued

Hearing Aid Ordered

Hearing Aid Ordered

3/3/2020

3/18/2020

3/23/2020

Heaing Aid Issued

F/U Provider

Hearing Aid Issued

Hearing Aid Issued

F/U Provider

F/U Provider

Hearing aid Issued

Discharged Home

Sound Amplifier Issued Hearing Aid Ordered
3/2/2020
Hearing Aid Issued

Refusal of Sound Amplifer signed.

Sound Amplifier Issued Hearing Aid Ordered
3/18/2020
Hearing Aid issued

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 30

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 863 of 985 - Page ID#: 4451

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC 3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

2/11/2020

Follow Up Appointment with

Provider

Intake

12/5/2020

arrived from GRCC with hearing 1/14/2020, patient has hearing

1/31/2020 aid on 3/4/20

aids on street

2/17/2020

2/13/2020

Intake

Classroom

Intake

2/14/20 patient answered NO 1/14/2020 to all questions

2/12/2020

2/14/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

R ear moderate, L ear severe

moderate hearing loss

moderate-severe hearing loss hearing loss

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

d

a

a

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision

against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it

complies with KyDOC policy.

per KYDOC Policy

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

3/9/2020

3/3/2020

moderate hearing loss in both

ears

moderate-severe hearing loss severe hearing loss

d

a

a

2/20/2020
2/20/2020 3/3/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

2/11/2020

2/21/2020

Follow Up Appointment with

Provider

Follow UP with Provider

3/9/2020

2/17/2020

2/20/2020

Intake H&P, patient stated he

did not want to pursue hearing

aids at this time r/t going up for

parole in April, patient did agree

to use sound amplifier at this Patient circled Hard of Hearing

time, patient signed refusal for on the History form in

hearing aid also on this day

Classroom

inspection of ears for wax

Failed Whisper Test

Hearing aid ordered sound amplifier issued

sound amplifier issued

large amount of cerumen in

right ear, small amount in left,

patient scheduled for H&P with debrox issued, ear irrigation

provider

scheduled for 2/25/20

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 31

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 864 of 985 - Page ID#: 4452

Audiogram

2/12/2020

3/18/2020

Hearing aid issued

3/2/2020

failed whisper test

ear irrigation

2/25/2020

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

F/U Provider

2/21/2020

audiogram ordered audiogram test

ears free of wax 3/3/2020
audiogram

3/3/2020

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Sound Amplifier Issued

audiogram completed

audiogram completed

3/12/2020

3/12/2020

F/U after Audiogram

F/U audiogram

hearing aid ordered

hearing aid ordered

sound amplifier issued

sound amplifier issued

3/30/2020

3/30/2020

Hearing Aid

Hearing Aid

Hearing Aid Issued

Hearing Aid Issued

9/2/2020

f/u hearEinxghaiidbit 2, RCC, p. 32

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 865 of 985 - Page ID#: 4453
pt reports that his hearing aid is working well

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 33

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 866 of 985 - Page ID#: 4454

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

2/7/2020

2/11/2020

2/5/2020

2/11/2020

2/14/2020

2/11/2020

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Intake

Intake

Intake

Intake

Intake

Intake

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

2/7/2020

2/11/2020

2/5/2020

2/11/2020

2/14/2020

2/11/2020

3/10/2020

3/10/2020

2/27/2020

2/13/2020

2/28/2020

2/18/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

R ear moderate to severe and L

R ear moderate-severe, L ear

right moderate, left severe to

moderate hearing loss

ear moderate hearing loss

Moderate bilat hearing loss moderate hearing loss

Moderate hearing loss

profound

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

d

a

a

a

a

a

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision

against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it

complies with KyDOC policy.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

2/10/2020

2/12/2020

2/5/2020

2/12/2020

2/17/2020

2/12/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

inspection of ears for wax

inspection of ears for wax

inspection of ears for wax

inspection ofears for wax

inspection ofears for wax

inspection ofears for wax

heavy cerumen noted, debrox issued scheduled for ear irragation 2/15/20

ears free of wax build up,

ears free of wax build up

ears free of wax build up

ears free of wax build up

large amount of cerumen, debrox issues, scheduled for ear irrigation 2/17/20
Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 34

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 867 of 985 - Page ID#: 4455

Ear Irrigation

2/15/2020 audiogram

3/10/2020 audiogram

2/9/2020 audiogram

2/13/2020 audiogram

2/28/2020 ear irrigation

2/17/2020

Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

ears free of wax audiogram

audiogram completed

audiogram completed

audiogram completed

audiogram completed

ears free of wax

3/10/2020

3/13/2020

2/27/2020

2/25/2020

3/2/2020

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

audiogram

2/18/2020

audiogram completed

hearing aid ordered, patient given a sound amplifier

hearing aid ordered, patient given sound amplifier

hearing aid ordered

hearing aid ordered

audiogram completed

3/12/2020

4/29/2020

3/13/2020

3/13/2020

3/13/2020

2/26/2020

F/U audiogram

Hearing aid issued

F/U Audiogram

patient refused amplifier and signed refusal this date

Hearing Aid Issued

Hearing Aid Issued

4/6/2020

hearing aid efficacy

Hearing Aid Issued

Hearing aid ordered. 3/13/2020
Hearing Aid Issued

hearing aid effective

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 35

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 868 of 985 - Page ID#: 4456

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Intake

4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

1/9/2020 Intake
1/21/2020 1/17/2020

2/12/2020 Intake
2/12/2020 3/13/2020

3/10/2020 Intake
3/10/2020 3/16/2020

Unspecified hearing loss
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
d
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

moderate-severe hearing loss moderate hearing loss

a

a

severe bilat c

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

1/11/2020

2/13/2020

3/11/2020

2/14/2020

2/11/2020

2/19/2020

Intake 2/14/2020 3/16/2020

Intake 2/11/2020
3/8/2020

2/19/2020 3/13/2020

moderate to severe hearing loss moderate to severe hearing loss

a

a

3/11/2020

3/3/2020

2/20/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

inspection ofears for wax

inspection of ears for wax

inpsection of ears for wax

inspection of ears for wax

Intake H&P HOH

inspection of ears for wax

Bilateral ear canals clear of cercum. Pt reports he has reports hearing loss with DOC and receieved hearing aides in the past.

bilateral ears clogged with cerumen, debrox ordered, scheduled for ear irrigation on 2/18/20

bilateral ears clear of cerumen

bilateral ears clear of cerumen

Ears clogged with cerumen,

debrox ordered, failed whisper

test

bilateral ears clear of cerumen

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 36

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 869 of 985 - Page ID#: 4457

Audiogram

1/17/2020 ear irrigation

2/18/2020 audiogram

3/16/2020 audigram

3/16/2020 bilateral ear flush

3/8/2020 audiogram

3/13/1930

F/U Audiogram

ears still clogged with cerumen,

debrox for 5 more days and

bilateral ears clear of cerumen,

then irrigate again

audiogram completed

audiogram completed

audiogram completed also

audiogram completed

1/21/2020

2/25/2020

3/17/2020

3/18/2020

3/18/2020

3/18/2020

ear irrigation

fu/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

Inmate has hearing loss in left ear but doesn't qualify for a hearing aid.
Paient refused all hearing services.

bilateral clear of cerumen

sound amplifier issued, hearing sound amplifier issued, hearing sound amplifier issued, hearing sound amplifier issued, hearing

aid ordered

aid ordered

aid ordered

aid ordered

3/13/2020

4/29/2020 transferred to KSR on 3/18/20

4/29/2020

4/29/2020

Audiogram

Hearing Aid Issued

Hearing Aid Issued

Hearing Aid Issued

audiogram completed 3/17/2020

9/2/2020

f/u audiogram

f/u hearing aid

sound amplifier issued, hearing aid ordered Hearing Aid Issued

pt reports that hearing aid is working well but it is currently lost, pt to fill out lost/stolen report and have repeat audiogram to assess need

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 37

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 870 of 985 - Page ID#: 4458

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

3/2/2020

2/19/2020

2/17/2020

2/25/2020

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Intake

Intake

intake

intake

intake

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

3/2/2020

2/19/2020

2/17/2020

2/25/2020

3/9/2020

3/9/2020

3/9/2020

3/11/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

L ear moderate-severe hearing

significant hearing loss

loss, R ear moderate-severe

moderate hearing loss

bilaterally

moderate hearing loss

hearing loss

moderate

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

a

a

a

a

d

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision

against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it

complies with KyDOC policy.

released

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

3/3/2020

2/20/2020

2/18/2020

2/26/2020

2/28/2020

2/19/2020

Intake 2/28/2020 3/11/2020

2/19/2020 3/12/2020

moderate hearing loss

a

3/2/2020

2/20/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

inspection of ears for wax

inspection of ears for wax

inspection of ears for wax

inspection of ears for wax

inspection of ears for wax

inspection of ears for wax

scant amount of cerumen

ears impacted with cerumen, ears impacted with cerumen, ears impacted with cerumen,

debrox ordered, scheduled for debrox ordered, scheduled for debrox ordered, scheduled for

ear irrigation on 2/25/20

ear irrigation on 2/25/20

ear irrigation on 3/3/20

ears clear, refer to provider

IM's ears are noted to be clogged with cerumen build up. Ordered Debrox per SO page 96 for use for 5 days, and flush scheduled on 2/25/2020.

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 38

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 871 of 985 - Page ID#: 4459

audiogram

3/9/2020

2/25/2020

2/25/2020

bilateral ear flush

bilateral ear flush

audiogram

3/11/2020 Ear Irrigation

2/25/2020

bilateral ears still clogged with

cerumen, debrox ordered for 5

more days. Scheduled for ear

audiogram completed

irrigation 3/1/20

bilateral ears clear of cerumen

3/19/2020

3/1/2020

3/9/2020

f/u audiogram

bilateral ear flush

audiogram

bilater ear flush

no cerumen impaction noted in

ear canal in either ear very small

amount of cerumen remaining

in the opening of ears in each

ear irrigation offered inmate

states he did not want to have

audiogram completed

irrigation done.

3/3/2020

3/23/2020

3/12/2020

f/u audiogram

Audiogram

Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

sound amplifier issued, hearing

aid ordered

bilateral ears clear of cerumen audiogram completed

bilateral ears are clear

sound amplifier issued, hearing

aid ordered.

Audiogram Completed

4/29/2020

3/9/2020

3/19/2020

3/11/2020

4/7/2020

3/25/2020

Hearing Aid Issued

audiogram

f/u audiogram

audiogram

Discharged Home

f/u audiogram

audiogram complete

sound amplifier issued, hearing

aid ordered

audiogram completed

3/19/2020

4/29/2020

20-Mar

f/u audiogram

Hearing Aid Issued

f/u audiogram

sound amplifier issued, hearing aid ordered
4/29/2020
Hearing Aid Issued

sound amplifier issued, hearing aid ordered
4/29/2020
Hearing Aid Issued

sound amplifier issued, hearing aid ordered Hearing Aid Issued

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 39

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 872 of 985 - Page ID#: 4460

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Intake

4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
mild hearing loss 6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
a 7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

2/25/2020

3/12/2020

2/19/2020

2/17/2020

3/19/2020

3/14/2020

Audiogram

Intake

Intake

Intake

Intake HP

2/25/2020

3/12/2020

2/19/2020

2/17/2020

3/19/2020

3/14/2020

3/12/2020

3/12/2020

3/13/2020

3/12/2020

3/22/2020

3/15/2020

moderate hearing loss

unspecified hearing loss

L ear mild to moderate, R ear

Severe hearing loss bilaterally moderate hearing loss

moderate hearing loss

a

d

a

a

a

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

2/18/2020

3/12/2020

2/20/2020

2/18/2020

3/20/2020

3/14/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

inspection of ears for wax

Audiogram

IM's ears assessed r/t failing hearing screen during intake. IM's ears noted to be clear of cerumen impaction.

Audiogram Completed

inspection of ears for wax

inspection of ears for wax

inspection of ears for cerumen Intake HP

IM's ears are noted to be clean and free of cerumen build up

ears noted to be full of

cerumen, and per SO page 96,

issued order for Debrox ear

drops to be used. Ordered pt

specific r/t being out of stock

currently. Will need to provide

pt with instructions once Debrox

arrives. Ear flush to be

scheduled on 2/24/2020.  

bilateral ears clear of cerumen

Failed whisper test audiogram ordered.

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 40

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 873 of 985 - Page ID#: 4461

Audiogram

3/12/2020 F/U Audiogram

3/25/2020 Audiogram

3/13/2020 Ear Irrigation

2/25/2020 audiogram

3/22/2020 Audiogram

3/15/2020

ear irrigation was not

performed because the patient

had not had the Debrox drops to

put in his ears. The patient was

given the Debrox and given the instructions to use the drops 4,

audiogram complete

Audiogram Complete

4 times per day for 5 days.

Patient was told to return on

Audiogram Completed

sound amplifier issued, hearing

aid ordered.

Audiogram Completed

3/1/2020 for an ear exam and ear flush if necessary.  

3/25/2020

4/29/2020

3/25/2020

3/1/2020

3/30/2020

3/31/2020

F/U Audiogram

Hearing Aid Issued

F/U Audiogram

Ear Irrigation

f/u audiogram

F/U Audiogram

sound amplifier issued, hearing aid ordered.
6/15/2020

signed refusal for hearing aid and sound amplifier

inmate to medical for ear

irrigation bilateral ears irrigated

after small amounts of cerumen

expelled during irrigation after

procedure ears free of any

cerumen at this time inmate sound amplifier issued, hearing

tolerated well.  

aid ordered

Sound amplifer issued hearing aid ordered

3/12/2020

4/29/2020

4/29/2020

Audiogram

Hearing Aid Issued

Hearing Aid Issued

hearing aid issued

Audiogram Completed 3/26/2020
F/U Audiogram
sound amplifier issued, hearing aid ordered
4/29/2020 Hearing Aid Issued

9/2/2020 f/u hearing aid
pt reports that his hearing aid is working well but causes a lot of background noise
Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 41

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 874 of 985 - Page ID#: 4462

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

2/12/2020

3/25/2020

3/24/2020

3/1/2018 (pt qualified for sound amplifier at that time, received 3/29/2020 sound amplifier on 3/23/18)

3. Date of initial hearing screening 4. Date of most recent hearing screening

intake

intake 2/12/2020

intake H&P 3/25/2020

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

3/29/20 transfer to RCC from 3/11/2020 NTC with Right hearing aid

Intake 3/1/2018

3/11/2020

4/3/2020

3/24/2020

3/31/2020

3/27/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

moderate hearing loss

moderate-severe hearing loss mild hearing loss in L ear,

moderate hearing loss

moderate hearing loss

bilaterally

bilaterally

moderate hearing loss in R ear bilaterally

bilaterally

mild hearing loss

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

a

a

a

a

a

d

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision

against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it

complies with KyDOC policy.

3/31/2020
3/31/2020 4/16/2020

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

2/13/2020

3/26/2020

3/24/2020

3/29/2020

3/28/2020

4/1/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

inspection of ears for cerumen inspection of ears for cerumen intake H&P

Annual H&P

Audiogram

inspect bilateral ears for cerumen build up

bilateral ears impacted cerumen, debrox given

bilateral ears with moderate wax, debrox given

failed whisper test

one or more questions answered with sometimes or yes on hearing screening for annual H&P

audiogram completed

no cerumen build up
Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 42

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 875 of 985 - Page ID#: 4463

bilateral ear flush

2/18/2020 bilateral ear flush

3/31/2020 audiogram

3/25/2020 Audiogram

3/31/2020 f/u audiogram

4/16/2020 audiogram

4/16/2020

cerumen still noted in ears

ears clear of cerumen after flush, audiogram scheduled

audigram completed

hearing aid ordered, pt. already has sound amplifier

audiogram completed

audiogram

3/11/2020 audiogram

4/3/2020 f/u audiogram

Audiogram completed

4/8/2020

4/14/2020

F/u Audiogram

Hearing Aid Issued

5/15/2020 f/u audiogram

4/29/2020

audiogram completed

audiogram completed

sound amplifier issued, hearing sound amplifier issued, hearing

aid ordered

aid ordered

4/6/2020

4/8/2020

4/29/2020

5/15/2020

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

Hearing Aid Issued

Hearing Aid Issued

sound amplifier issued, hearing sound amplifier issued, hearing

aid ordered

aid ordered

4/29/2020

4/29/2020

9/2/2020

Hearing Aid Issued

Hearing Aid Issued

f/u hearing aid

pt reports that hearing aid works well but batteries die quickly

sound amplifier issued, does not qualify for hearing aid at this time
Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 43

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 876 of 985 - Page ID#: 4464

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

4/9/2020

3/23/2020

3/26/2020

3/4/2020

4/24/2020

5/13/2020

4/30/2020

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Provider sick call

Intake

Intake

intake

sick call

annual H&P

annual H&P

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

4/9/2020

3/6/2020

3/26/2020

5/6/2020

1/14/2020

5/13/2020

12/6/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

4/20/2020

3/24/2020

4/13/2020

5/6/2020

5/6/2020

/ 5/27/2020

hearing loss right ear,

5/6/2020

mod-severe hearing loss

moderate to severe

moderate hearng loss modeate hearing loss

bilaterally

severe hearing loss bilaterally moderate hearing loss

moderate hearing loss

hearing loss

left ear

bilateral ears

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision

against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it

complies with KyDOC policy.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

4/9/2020

3/9/2020

4/9/2020

3/3/2020

4/24/2020

5/13/2020

4/3/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

nurse sick call for c/o ringing in

ears

Ear Exam

Intake HP

Intake

sick call for hearing problems

annual H&P

annual H&P

referred to provider

IM's ears assessd r/t failing

hearing screening during intake.

IM's ears noted to have

excessive cerumen build up. Failed whisper test Audigram

Debrox issued

ordered.

answered yes to one or more questions on hearing screening referred to provider

referred for audiogram referred for audiogram

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 44

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 877 of 985 - Page ID#: 4465

f/u ringing in ears

4/17/2020 Ear Irrigation

3/14/2020

Ear inspection

3/4/2020 audiogram

5/6/2020

5/27/2020

audiogram

audiogram

5/6/2020

audiogram ordered audiogram

inmate to medical for ear

irrigation inmate used debrox

gtts 5 days prior to medical

upon assessment of both ears

no cerumen noted no irrigation

needed

4/20/2020

3/23/2020

Intake HP

Audiogram

no cerumen build up

audiogram completed audiogram completed

4/13/2020 audiogram

audiogram completed

5/6/2020

6/4/2020

6/3/2020

6/1/2020

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

audiogram completed

Failed Whisper Test

4/29/2020

4/24/2020

audiogram completed

sound amplifier issued, hearing aid ordered

hearing aid ordered, patient given a sound amplifier

hearing aid ordered, patient given a sound amplifier

4/23/2020

6/4/2020

7/25/2020

7/25/2020

7/10/2020

f/u audiogram

Audiogram

F/U Audiogram

f/u audiogram

hearing aid issued

hearing aid issued

hearing aid issued

sound amplifier offered but pt declined, hearing aid ordered
5/15/2020

Sound Amplifier Issued, Hearing sound amplifier issued, hearing

Aid Ordered

aid ordered

4/30/2020

5/15/2020

8/6/2020

8/5/2020

8/3/2020

9/3/2020

Hearing Aid Issued

F/U Audiogram

Hearing Aid Issued

hearing aid issued

f/u hearing aid

f/u hearing aid

f/u hearing aid

Sound Amplifier Issued, Hearing Aid Ordered
5/15/2020
Hearing Aid Issued

Pt reports that his hearing aid is working well 9/2/2020

Pt reports that his hearing aid is working well

Pt reports that his hearing aid is working well

f/u hearing aid

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 45

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 878 of 985 - Page ID#: 4466
pt reports that hearing aid works well

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 46

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 879 of 985 - Page ID#: 4467

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

6/3/2020

6/10/2020

5/29/2020

6/18/2020

6/26/2020

4/30/2020

6/25/2020

6/24/2020

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Annual H&P

Chronic care visit

Annual H&P

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

1/22/2020

6/3/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

mild to moderate hearing

loss bilaterally

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

a

d

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision

against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it

complies with KyDOC policy.

6/10/2020

5/29/2020

6/18/2020

3/11/2020

1/28/2020

6/25/2020

6/24/2020

6/10/2020

5/29/2020

6/18/2020

6/26/2020

4/30/2020

6/25/2020

6/24/2020

mild hearing loss bilaterally

L ear mild and R ear

moderate bilat hearing

Bilat moderate-severe

moderate hearing loss loss

L ear mild hearing loss hearing loss

Mild bilat hearing loss

a

a

a

d

a

a

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

6/3/2020

6/10/2020

5/29/2020

6/25/2020

6/26/2020

1/28/2020

6/25/2020

6/24/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

annual H&P

annual H&P

annual H&P

annual H&P

annual H&P

intake

chronic care visit

annual H&P

answered yes or answered sometimes to sometimes to one or one or more questions more questions

answered yes or answered sometimes to answered sometimes to answered sometimes to sometimes to one or one or more questions one or more questions one or more questions more questions

answered yes or answered sometimes to sometimes to one or one or more questions more questions

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 47

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 880 of 985 - Page ID#: 4468

audiogram

6/5/2020 audiogram

6/12/2020 audiogram

6/6/2020 audiogram

6/20/2020 audiogram

6/26/2020 audiogram

1/29/2020 audiogram

6/26/2020 audiogram

6/25/2020

audiogram completed audiogram completed audiogram completed audiogram completed audiogram completed audiogram completed audiogram completed audiogram completed

6/12/2020

6/24/2020

6/18/2020

6/25/2020

6/30/2020

2/28/2020

7/6/2020

7/8/2020

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

pt issued sound amplifier and hearing aids ordered pt does not qualify

pt initially refused hearing aid/sound amplifier but then changed his mind and sound amplifier was pt issued sound amplifier issued and hearing aid and hearing aid ordered was ordered

Pt does not qualify for pt issued sound amplifier hearing aid, sound and hearing aid ordered amplifier issued

Pt issued sound amplifier pt issued sound amplifier and ordered hearing aid and ordered hearing aid

7/25/2020

7/25/2020

8/4/2020

7/25/2020

4/30/2020

7/28/2020

7/28/2020

hearing aid issued
8/6/2020 f/u hearing aid

hearing aid issued

hearing aid issued

hearing aid issued

annual H&P

hearing aid issued

hearing aid issued

7/30/2020

9/4/2020

answered yes or sometimes to one or more questions

7/28/2020

5/6/2020

7/31/2020

8/5/2020

f/u hearing aid efficacy f/u hearing aid

f/u hearing aid

audiogram

f/u hearing aid

f/u hearing aid

Pt reports that his hearing aid is working well

pt reports that his hearing aid is working well

pt reports that his hearing aid is working well

pt reports that his hearing aid is working well

repeat audiogram

Pt reports that device is Pt reports that his device

completed

working well

is working well

6/1/2020

f/u repeat audiogram

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 48

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Outcome
...

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 881 of 985 - Page ID#: 4469
Does not qualify for hearing aid, pt to continue using sound amplifier

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 49

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 882 of 985 - Page ID#: 4470

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

7/9/2020

7/2/2020

7/6/2020

6/30/2020

7/7/2020

7/1/2020

7/13/2020

1/28/2018

3. Date of initial hearing screening

f/u visit

intake HP

Annual H&P

Intake HP

Annual HP

Intake HP

Annual HP

Intake HP

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

9/29/2019

7/2/2020

7/6/2020

6/30/2020

2/7/2020

7/1/2020

7/13/2020

1/28/2018

9/29/2019

7/2/2020

7/6/2020

6/30/2020

7/7/2020

7/1/2020 7/132020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Moderate hearing loss in

L ear mild hearing loss, R L ear moderate to severe

R ear; Severe hearing Moderate hearing loss Moderate hearing loss Moderate hearing loss ear moderate hearing and R ear moderate

Severe bilateral hearing

loss in L ear.

bilaterally

bilaterally

bilaterally

loss

hearing loss

loss

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

a

d

a

d

d

d

d

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision

against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it

complies with KyDOC policy.

released

released

released 8/27/20

9. Please provide the following information about each

medical encounter from when the hearing issue was

presented to when the hearing issue was finally

addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining

that a hearing aid was not needed)

7/17/2020 Moderate hearing loss bilat
a

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

7/9/2020

7/2/2020

7/6/2020

6/30/2020

7/7/2020

7/1/2020

7/13/2020

7/17/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

f/u visit

Intake HP

Annual HP

Intake HP

Annual HP

Intake HP

annual HP

sickcall for HOH

pt complains of ringing in Answered sometimes to

ears

one or more questions

Answered yes or sometimes to one or more questions on screening

Answered yes or sometimes to one or more questions on screening

Answered yes or sometimes to one or more questions on screening

Answered yes or sometimes to one or more questions

Answered yes to one or

more questions on

screening

scheduled for audiogram

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 50

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 883 of 985 - Page ID#: 4471

audiogram

7/11/2020 audiogram

7/19/2020 audiogram

7/20/2020 audiogram

7/20/2020 audiogram

7/8/2020 audiogram

7/20/2020 audiogram

7/16/2020 audiogram

7/27/2020

audiogram completed audiogram completed audiogram completed audiogram completed audiogram completed audiogram completed audiogram completed audiogram completed

7/20/2020

7/20/2020

7/20/2020

7/21/2020

7/21/2020

7/21/2020

7/28/2020

8/3/2020

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

Pt qualifies for R hearing Pt qualifies for hearing Pt qualifies for hearing

pt issued sound amplifier pt issued sound amplifier pt issued sound amplifier Pt qualifies for L hearing Pt qualifies for L hearing aid and hearing aid was aid and hearing aid was aid and hearing aid was

and ordered hearing aid and ordered hearing aid and ordered hearing aid aid but refused

aid but refused

ordered

ordered

ordered

8/13/2020

8/11/2020

7/24/2020

8/3/2020

hearing aid issued

hearing aid issued

Pt transferred to county

hearing aid issued

9/17/2020 f/u hearing aid

9/8/2020 f/u hearing aid
Pt reports that hearing aid is working well

9/21/2020 f/u hearing aid
Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 51

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 884 of 985 - Page ID#: 4472

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

7/24/2020

8/3/2020

7/30/2019

6/17/2019

7/18/2020

8/3/2020

8/7/2020

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Annual HP

Annual HP

Annual HP

Intake HP

sick call

annual HP

sick call

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

7/8/2019

8/3/2020

7/30/2019

6/17/2019

4/28/2020

2/12/2020

8/7/2020

7/24/2020

8/3/2020

6/12/2020

6/17/2019

4/28/2020

8/3/2020

8/7/2020

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

Moderate to severe

Moderate hearing loss Moderate hearing loss Moderate hearing loss Moderate hearing loss Moderate hearing loss Moderate hearing loss

hearing loss bilaterally bilaterally

bilaterally

bilaterally

bilaterally

bilaterally

bilaterally

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies:

(a) has hearing aid(s) in working order

(b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are

needed

(c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids

(d) no hearing aid is needed

a

a

a

a

c

c

c

7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) ,

consult the medical documentation of the decision

against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it

complies with KyDOC policy.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the hearing issue was finally addressed (by providing a hearing aid or determining that a hearing aid was not needed)

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description

7/24/2020

8/3/2020

7/30/2019

6/17/2019

7/18/2020

8/3/2020

8/7/2020

Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

annual HP

annual HP

annual HP

Intake HP

Nursing sickcall

annual HP

nursing sickcall

Answered yes to one or more questions on screening

Answered yes to one or more questions on screening

answered yes to one or more questions on screening

answered yes to one or more questions on screening

Pt will severe ear pain

pt complaining of hearing

and reporting hearing Pt answered sometimes loss, screening

loss, referred to provider to one or more questions completed, referred for

for evaluation

on screening

audiogram

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 52

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description
Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 885 of 985 - Page ID#: 4473

audiogram

7/27/2020 audiogram

8/4/2020 audiogram

7/31/2019 audiogram

7/31/2019

7/21/2020

Severe ear pain and hearing loss

audiogram

8/4/2020 audiogram

8/8/2020

audiogram completed

audiogram completed

audiogram completed

audiogram completed

Pt started antibiotics for ear infection and will audiogram completed follow up in 2 weeks

audiogram completed

8/6/2020

8/7/2020

8/8/2019

8/14/2019

8/7/2020

8/18/2020

8/26/2020

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

F/U ear infection

f/u audiogram

f/u audiogram

Pt qualifies for hearing aid and hearing aid was ordered

Pt qualifies for hearing aid and hearing aid was ordered

Pt qualifies for hearing aid and hearing aid was ordered

Pt qualifies for hearing aid and hearing aid was ordered

Ear canals clear. Pt reports decreased hearing. F/u with audiogram

Pt qualifies for hearing Pt qualifies for hearing

aid and hearing aid was aid and hearing aid was

ordered

ordered

8/21/2020

8/21/2020

9/23/2019

9/23/2019

8/13/2020

9/17/2020

hearing aid issued

hearing aid issued

hearing aid issued

hearing aid issued

audiogram

hearing aid issued

9/8/2020

10/17/2019

audiogram completed

10/15/2019

8/20/2020

F/u hearing aid

f/u hearing aid

f/u hearing aid

f/u audiogram

pt reports hearing aid is Pt reports that hearing

working well

aid is working well

Pt reports that hearing aid is working well

Pt qualifies for hearing aid and hearing aid was ordered.

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 53

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 886 of 985 - Page ID#: 4474

To: Janet Conover, Director of Operations From: Jessica Durrett, Deputy Warden Date: July 30, 2020 RE: ADA Reports Update
Concerns addressed in Report:

Have the Medial provider retrospectively reviewed and evaluated prior requests for binaural hearing aids.
Eric Glover 115246-RCC
Forms Modification
Auxiliary Aids Available
Inmate purchasing non auditory alarm clocks and watches RCC, for example, reports, “We are currently looking to see what would be the best option to provide privacy from the inmate sitting in the caseworker waiting area so they would not be able to look over and see the videophone. Possible options is place a curtain or a partition coming off the wall behind where the inmate would be sitting to use the videophone.” I am not sure of the situation at some facilities.

Page 7
Page 9 Page 11 Page 19 Page 13

Inmate Glover received 2 hearing aids on 1/13/17 while he was at NTC. On 5/24/19, he reported to NTC medical department he was having issues with the right hearing aid. On 7/11/19, he was seen by the provider at NTC to discuss the issue with the right hearing aid and the patient stated he did not need another hearing aid that he has one and it was working just fine. He signed a refusal for further evaluation and replacement of the right hearing aid.
Forms have been updated
Needs to be update see below.
Memo attached to allow HOH inmates to purchase those devices at RCC Maintenance built a mobile stand with a curtain attached. It will be about 6ft tall and 3ft wide. This will make it to where the inmates in the caseworker waiting area will not be able to see the screen on the videophone, but will allow officers in the Unit 1 Control Center to observe the inmate using the videophone. It will be stored against the wall next to the videophone when not in use.

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 54

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 887 of 985 - Page ID#: 4475

Prior Areas of Concerns:

Prior Areas of Concerns The new ADA Coordinator has done only ADA basic training, not the settlement agreement and other training The KY DOC website lists the wrong ADA coordinator No Confirmation that the settlement summary, settlement, and brochure are available in the library KOMS alerts are inconsistent

Response/Progress Reported Solved
Solved Solved
Report Solved

Additional Devices RCC has added:

Vibrating Watches Amazon Model #W-735H-1A2VCF Casio Casio
https://www.amazon.com/Digital-Shaker-7-inch-DisplayCharger/dp/B07HFZSBDQ/ref=pd_ybh_a_43?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=VB01GP49BV7ZEAMKQ06
Vibrating Alarm Clock Amazon Model #LLR010AGUS Lielongren Lielongren
https://www.amazon.com/Digital-Shaker-7-inch-DisplayCharger/dp/B07HFZSBDQ/ref=pd_ybh_a_43?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=VB01GP49BV7ZEAMKQ06
CapTel Phone WCI Captel 840i CapTel CapTel This device has been orders for RCC. Once our IT employee is, back he will run the line and have SECURUS come in to finish installing it.
https://www.weitbrecht.com/product.php?mode=add&productid=478&cat=&page=1&is_featured_prod uct

TTY Ultratec

Our IT employees is looking into getting our TTY set up so the inmates can use it on the inmate phone system.

Other Notes:
Verified that all units have a phone with the volume control and is in working condition.

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 55

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 888 of 985 - Page ID#: 4476

To: Janet Conover, Director of Operations From: Jessica Durrett, Deputy Warden Date: July 30, 2020 Updated 9/24/2020 RE: ADA Reports Update
Concerns addressed in Report:

Have the Medial provider retrospectively reviewed and evaluated prior requests for binaural hearing aids.
Forms Modification Auxiliary Aids Available

Page

7 Inmate

received 2 hearing aids on 1/13/17 while

he was at NTC. On 5/24/19, he reported to NTC medical

department he was having issues with the right hearing

aid. On 7/11/19, he was seen by the provider at NTC to

discuss the issue with the right hearing aid and the

patient stated he did not need another hearing aid that

he has one and it was working just fine. He signed a

refusal for further evaluation and replacement of the

right hearing aid.

Page

9 Forms have been updated

Page

11 Needs to be update see below.

Inmate purchasing non auditory alarm clocks and watches

Update: This has been updated on the G: Drive. Page 19 Memo attached to allow HOH inmates to purchase those
devices at RCC.

RCC, for example, reports, “We are currently looking to see what would be the best option to provide privacy from the inmate sitting in the caseworker waiting area so they would not be able to

Update We are allowing AC inmates to purchase devices. Page Maintenance built a mobile stand with a curtain 13 attached. It will be about 6ft tall and 3ft wide. This will
make it to where the inmates in the caseworker waiting area will not be able to see the screen on the videophone, but will allow officers in the Unit 1 Control

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 56

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 889 of 985 - Page ID#: 4477

look over and see the videophone. Possible options is place a curtain or a partition coming off the wall behind where the inmate would be sitting to use the videophone.” I am not sure of the situation at some facilities.

Center to observe the inmate using the videophone. It will be stored against the wall next to the videophone when not in use.

Prior Areas of Concerns:

Prior Areas of Concerns
The new ADA Coordinator has done only ADA basic training, not the settlement agreement and other training

Response/Progress
Solved Update DOC-ADA Coordinator/Settlement Agreement, DOC-ADA Coordinator/CREATE, DOC AIIS-Communication with deaf and hard of hearing Offenders, DOC AIIS-Communication with deaf and hard of hearing offenders, ADA Building Blocks, CBTs, Annual In-Service, ADA in Jails & Prisons Webinar, ADA Coordinator CREATE Compliance Training (PowerPoint), Deaf/HOH Training: Settlement Monitor's Recommended Revision (PowerPoint), Federal Court Deaf/HOH Settlement Agreement (PowerPoint), Tips for Communicating with Inmates are HOH (word document), Communicating with Deaf/HOH Offenders (PowerPoint) and Jordan and Brittany have completed Effective Communication Strategies with Deaf Offenders using American Sign Language. Craig and Jessica are schedule to attend the webinar in October.

The KY DOC website lists the wrong ADA coordinator

Solved

No Confirmation that the settlement summary, Solved settlement, and brochure are available in the library

KOMS alerts are inconsistent

Solved

Additional Devices RCC has added:
Update Is on excel sheet on G: Drive
Vibrating Watches Amazon Model #W-735H-1A2VCF Casio Casio
https://www.amazon.com/Digital-Shaker-7-inch-DisplayCharger/dp/B07HFZSBDQ/ref=pd_ybh_a_43?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=VB01GP49BV7ZEAMKQ06
Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 57

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 890 of 985 - Page ID#: 4478

Vibrating Alarm Clock Amazon Model #LLR010AGUS Lielongren Lielongren

https://www.amazon.com/Digital-Shaker-7-inch-DisplayCharger/dp/B07HFZSBDQ/ref=pd_ybh_a_43?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=VB01GP49BV7ZEAMKQ06

CapTel Phone WCI Captel 840i CapTel CapTel This device has been orders for RCC. Once our IT employee is, back he will run the line and have SECURUS come in to finish installing it.

Update CapTel phone has been installed. https://www.weitbrecht.com/product.php?mode=add&productid=478&cat=&page=1&is_featured_prod uct

TTY Ultratec

Our IT employees is looking into getting our TTY set up so the inmates can use it on the inmate phone system.

Update the inmates can use the TTY phone through the inmate phone system by using the CapTel phone.

Other Notes:
Verified that all units have a phone with the volume control and is in working condition.

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 58

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 891 of 985 - Page ID#: 4479

RCC Repeat Issues:
A. Inability to hear announcements:

– We are implementing an ADA Announcement Aide to each unit effective on October 1, 2020 This aide will have all the schedules for the month and go to each wing to let the deaf and hardof-hearing inmates know what the announcements are. Digital clocks have been installed in all of the wings in order for inmates to follow all the posted schedules. (Recreation, pill call, meal times, count times, class times.) We will evaluate these two solutions in a month to see if they are helping the hard of hearing and deaf inmates hear announcement better. The ADA coordinators communicated to the deaf and hard of hearing inmates the importance of wearing their hearing aid during the day. The ADA coordinators also relayed that if the inmates are having issues with their hearing aid they need to go to medical.

B. Mask are making it difficult to hear staff:

- Deputy Warden, Jessica Durrett, spoke on the matter during the Captain’s meeting, stating that we need to be more professional when speaking with inmates. The HOH ID card can identify Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing inmates. If they are having difficulty hearing, maybe try talking with them face to face in a quiet area.

The following items were discussed in roll call with security staff:

•

Hard-of-Hearing inmates have a special card attached to their ID.

•

We have close to 100 inmates at RCC that are hard-of-hearing.

•

If you are having an issue communicating with an inmate it could possibly be that they

have hearing issues, the card has information of what is going on with the inmate.

•

When communicating with inmates that are hard-of-hearing, it’s good to communicate

face to face in an area with little to no background noises if at all possible

•

Hard-of-hearing inmates may or may not have hearing aids; however, they all have

significant hearing loss.

•

Be professional when dealing with hard-of-hearing inmates

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 59

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 892 of 985 - Page ID#: 4480

C. Hearing aid batteries are not lasting very long:
– Duracell Batteries are given out. Inmates can request batteries as frequently as they need to. We do a battery exchange, one for one. Bring in the old one and you will receive a new one. This is available through medical 7 days a week/24 hours.
D. Officer disrespect
– Deputy Warden Chisholm and Major Harper have been informed of the issues. During the Captains meeting, the issues that are going on with the deaf and hard of hearing inmates here at RCC were discussed. Concerns were also addressed during roll call with security staff.
E. Problems getting or using auxiliary aids.
– AC inmates now have the ability to order watches and alarm clocks.

Individual reports:

1.

Inmate

said that he wanted to get a second hearing aid, and was

told he could not get one. Inmate

said this makes it difficult to participate in his classes because

he can only hear the people on the right of him. He also said the batteries don’t last very long, and that

he can’t get the filter in his hearing aid changed. Inmate

also had issues with the COs being rude

when he said he couldn’t hear them.

Inmate

has Deaf/HOH ID card, bed card, Hearing Aid Issued, and Phone Amplifier Issued

-Inmate

was seen on 8/20/2020 for a consult for his 2nd hearing aid. Inmate

had

an audiogram on 9/11/2020. A follow up from audiogram was on 9/17/2020 and will be

presented to TLOC on 10/13/2020. Inmate

can come to medical and they will look into

getting a filter for his hearing aid.

2.

Inmate

said that his batteries only last a few days, and he can

only get two at a time. He also said that half the time he does not hear announcements over the

speakers, and gets threatened because he doesn’t show up for things like pill call. Since moving units, he

has not gotten a new door sign. He also said that when he talked to the parole board, he could hardly

hear anything they said.

Inmate

has Deaf/HOH ID card, bed card, and Hearing Aid Issued

-Jordan Wright (ADA Coordinator, Unit 1 & 2) states that Inmate

received a bed sign

when he was interviewed in the Assessment Center. He moved to Unit 2 on 8/11/2020. She

checked her JPays from him and he never mentioned needing a sign. Re-Entry advised that they

ask inmates if they are hard of hearing when they see the parole board. There is also a sign in

Re-Entry stating you can request accommodations if you fall under ADA. There is also an

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 60

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 893 of 985 - Page ID#: 4481

amplifier in the parole boardroom along with headphones that can be used for parole board

hearings. Inmate is now is Unit 5.

-Brittany Puckett (ADA Coordinator, Unit 4 &5) states that Inmate

received a bed sign

when he was initially interviewed when he was moved from Unit 3 to Unit 2 on 8-11-2020. He

did not bring bed sign with him and did not request new one. Inmate

said that he is

good now. He said that he did not have the sign in AC, but still has the one I gave him when he

came over to unit 5.

-We do a battery exchange, one for one. Bring in the old one and you will receive a new one.

3.

): Inmate

said it’s gotten more difficult to read people’s lips since

everyone has started wearing masks in prison.

Inmate

has Deaf/HOH ID card, and Hearing Aid Issued

- Brittany Puckett interviewed him and Inmate

said he was still able to hear people

talking. While it has become more difficult due to the fact of everyone wearing masks, it has not

become a huge inconvenience. He states he sometimes has to ask them to repeat.

4.

): Inmate has trouble hearing the announcements sometimes, depending on

who is making announcements over the intercom. He also said he thought he was supposed to get a

hearing aid, but it’s been 2 or 3 months and he hasn’t heard anything about it yet. Inmate also said

he asked for an alarm clock and no one ever got back to him about it. Although he’s never been written

up, he said guards treat him like he’s slow because he can’t hear well and talk down to him. He also said

even with the volume amplifier, it’s hard to hear over the phone. During his programs, Inmate has

trouble hearing what goes on when they watch movies in the gym, and has to ask other people to write

the reflections on the movie.

Inmate has Deaf/HOH ID card, bed card, and sound Amplifier Issued.

-Brittany Puckett (ADA Coordinator, Unit 4 &5) explained to Inmate that he could purchase an alarm clock. She also spoke to Jay Bell (SAP Program Administrator) about the SAP movies, she states that he never mentioned anything to them about not being able to hear, but she will make sure that he is seated towards the front from now on so that he can hear and also see the closed captioning that is always on. The Inmates are also required to be up at a certain time and the officers in the unit announce

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 61

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 894 of 985 - Page ID#: 4482

and then walk through to wake everyone up. The mentors in the unit assist staff with waking those that sleep heavier if tapping the bed does not wake them.
-As of February 19, 2020 Inmate does not meet the requirement to receive a hearing aid. He was given a pocket talker (sound amplifier) on February 19, 2020.

5.

): Inmate said that when he is strapped down to be transported for court

trips, he can’t adjust his hearing aid, and he would find it helpful to use the type of restraint that people

who use sign language can get to use.

Inmate has Deaf/HOH ID card, bed card, and Hearing Aid Issued

-RCC follows CPP 9.1 in references to using restraints on deaf and hard of hearing inmates. “B. Deaf and Hard of Hearing Inmates
1. Hand restraints shall be used: a. When transporting a deaf inmate to or from another institution; b. When transferring a deaf inmate in or out of a special management unit; c. When transporting to on-site medical care; and d. As needed in response to security threats.
2. Off-Site Medical Care a. Two-point hand restraint system shall be used on deaf inmates for off-site medical care for effective communication while considering the safety and security of the inmate and those located at the off-site medical care facility; and b. If a medical decision made by medical professionals requires removal or adjustment of hand restraints, institutional staff shall follow the procedures of CPP 9.14.”

6.

): Inmate

said he sent one of the unit administrators a JPay about

getting an assistant inmate to wake him up in the mornings for things like breakfast, but has not heard

back yet. He said he could not always hear the announcements being made, especially in the morning

when he is still half-asleep. Inmate

has issues with people in the cafeteria who are trying to rush

them through and so he has trouble hearing when to get the correct food, and knowing where to go. He

also said he has had disagreements with the officer in charge of the indoor rec area because he cannot

hear her and because of her attitude.

Inmate

has Deaf/HOH ID card, bed card, and Hearing Aid Issued

-Jordan Wright (ADA Coordinator, Unit 1 & 2) states that he requested an ADA helper in May

2020. She thought she responded to him, but she does not have access to her sent JPays. He

was in B Wing from 1/13/2020-9/9/2020. We verified through medical that inmate

did

not have any new issues going on with his hearing aid. Inmate

had an appointment with

Medical on 3/20/20 with the provider to see how well his hearing aid was working. He stated,

“hearing aid is working well, sometimes I take it out when watching TV in the dorm.” He

reported there being too much background noise. We also checked with the officers in the

wings who have not noticed any issues with him hearing announcements. After reviewing his

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 62

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 895 of 985 - Page ID#: 4483

case it was determined that, he does not need an ADA helper. There has been a lot of manipulation for the HOH ADA Helpers. Inmate is now in Unit 5, where we have SAP mentors that assist.

7.

): Inmate

officer and cracked a few ribs.

said the he was beaten because he could not hear an

Inmate

has Deaf/HOH ID card, bed card, and Hearing Aid Issued

-3 weeks prior to 8/4/2020, Inmate

reported to Medical and claims he had an incident

where he fell and another inmate landed on his rib cage. After the incident, he claims that his

right side ribs are tender to touch. There is no documentation of Inmate

claim of being

beaten by an officer.

8.

): Inmate

cannot always hear the announcements, and people in his

dorm often have to come and let him know what is going on. Inmate

said that some officers,

particularly new ones, will do things like ask if he’s deaf when he doesn’t hear things. He also said that

he asked for a helper to come and wake him up for chow and rec, but was told he did not need one.

Inmate

has Deaf/HOH ID card, bed card, and Hearing Aid Issued

-Jordan Wright (Unit Administrator I) said that Inmate

requested an ADA helper in May

2020. He had been in B Wing since 12/27/2019 with no issues. We verified through medical that

inmate

did not have any new issues going on with his hearing aid. Inmate

had an

appointment with Medical on 2/21/2020 to see how well the hearing aid was working. He

claimed that the hearing aid has been effective and did not report any issues with the device.

We also checked with the officers in the wings who have not noticed any issues with him

hearing announcements. After reviewing his case it was determined that, he does not need an

ADA helper. There has been a lot of manipulation for the HOH ADA Helpers. He is now at LAC.

9.

): Inmate

says he needs to get his hearing aid replaced, and that it’s

been broken for 3-4 months. He said that he wrote medical and the assistant ADA about it, but that it

has not been replaced. Now that it’s missing, he can’t hear a lot of announcements, and has issues not

hearing what the guards are saying. Once, he said he was written up for missing chow. He also can’t

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 63

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 896 of 985 - Page ID#: 4484

hear his family when he calls him. Inmate

was also told that only permanent inmates (No idea

what this means) were allowed to purchase auxiliary aids.

Inmate

has Deaf/HOH ID card, bed card, and Hearing Aid Issued

-There are no disciplinary reports listed in KOMS for him missing chow. -Jordan Wright (Unit Administrator I) says she directed him to talk to medical about his hearing aids not working. She did deny him a vibrating watch because we were only allowing permanents to purchase them at the time. Since AC transfers are slow at the moment, we started offering the watches to AC inmates. He is now at NTC. -Kim McDonald (HSA) called him up and told him to fill out the lost or stolen form if his hearing aid had not been located by 5/21/2020. He was told to continue using a pocket talker until the hearing aid arrives. Hearing aid was received and sent to NTC.

10. kitchen duty. Inmate communicate.

): Inmate

said he’s had trouble being woken up for things like his

also said that masks muffle people’s voices, making it harder to

Inmate

has Deaf/HOH ID card, bed card, and Hearing Aid Issued

-Staff are waking inmates up that work in the kitchen. Inmate states some days officers open the

door to wake him and other days they just knocked on the door. Video was reviewed for several

days in the beginning of September and inmate

was up and ready for work in his kitchen

greys.

11.

): Inmate

said that in Unit 3, he got thrown in the hole for

not being able to hear things that the COs were saying, and that they don’t listen when he tells them

that he’s hard of hearing. He’s also had issues with wearing his mask, because it messes with the volume

button on the top.

Inmate

has bed card, and Hearing Aid Issued

-External Movements in KOMS does not reflect this. He arrived at the Assessment Center on

1/23/2020, was transferred to Unit 4 on 3/5/2020, no transfer to Luther Luckett Correctional

Complex, which is where RCC houses inmates in RHU (hole), is listed. Inmate

has been

given a tie mask and an elastic one.

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 64

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 897 of 985 - Page ID#: 4485

To: Janet Conover, Director of Operations From: Jessica Durrett, Deputy Warden Date: July 30, 2020

Updated 9/24/2020

Updated 10/6/2020 RE: ADA Reports Update

Concerns addressed in Report:

In-Person notifications should be provided where needed for personal alerts, whether by staff or other inmates
ADA coordinators should publicize that non-auditory watches/alarm clocks are available for indigent individuals by loaning the device or by forwarding the money, to recover when money comes into their account. This process is available for both formally indigent individuals or individuals who have insufficient money to pay for the device.
Individuals to receive attached settlement:

We are implementing an ADA Announcement Aide for each unit effective on October 1, 2020 This aide will have all the schedules for the month and go to each wing to let each deaf and hard-of-hearing inmate know what the announcements are. Will follow up in one month to see if this has made a difference with the inperson notifications. Inmates can request vibrating watches/clocks through the ADA coordinators. When an inmate is verified to be indigent, we will provide the inmate with a vibrating watch/alarm clock while the inmates is housed at RCC/AC. When the inmate is transferred to another facility, we will get the devices back from that inmate.
Memo posted on 10/6/2020 see attached memo Settlement given to inmate on 10-5-2020 Placed in Law Library on 10-5-2020

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 65

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 898 of 985 - Page ID#: 4486

Concerns addressed in Previous Audit:

Have the Medial provider retrospectively reviewed and evaluated prior requests for binaural hearing aids.
Forms Modification Auxiliary Aids Available

Page Inmate

received 2 hearing aids on 1/13/17 while

7 he was at NTC. On 5/24/19, he reported to NTC medical

department he was having issues with the right hearing

aid. On 7/11/19, he was seen by the provider at NTC to

discuss the issue with the right hearing aid and the

patient stated he did not need another hearing aid that

he has one and it was working just fine. He signed a

refusal for further evaluation and replacement of the

right hearing aid.

Page

9 Forms have been updated

Page

11 Needs to be update see below.

Inmate purchasing non auditory alarm clocks and watches

Update: This has been updated on the G: Drive. Page 19 Memo attached to allow HOH inmates to purchase those
devices at RCC.

RCC, for example, reports, “We are currently looking to see what would be the best option to provide privacy from the inmate sitting in the caseworker waiting area so they would not be able to look over and see the videophone. Possible options is place a curtain or a partition coming off the wall behind where the inmate would be sitting to use the videophone.” I am not sure of the situation at some facilities.

Update We are allowing AC inmates to purchase devices.
Page Maintenance built a mobile stand with a curtain 13 attached. It will be about 6ft tall and 3ft wide. This will
make it to where the inmates in the caseworker waiting area will not be able to see the screen on the videophone, but will allow officers in the Unit 1 Control Center to observe the inmate using the videophone. It will be stored against the wall next to the videophone when not in use.

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 66

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 899 of 985 - Page ID#: 4487

Prior Areas of Concerns:

Prior Areas of Concerns
The new ADA Coordinator has done only ADA basic training, not the settlement agreement and other training

Response/Progress
Solved Update DOC-ADA Coordinator/Settlement Agreement, DOC-ADA Coordinator/CREATE, DOC AIIS-Communication with deaf and hard of hearing Offenders, DOC AIIS-Communication with deaf and hard of hearing offenders, ADA Building Blocks, CBTs, Annual In-Service, ADA in Jails & Prisons Webinar, ADA Coordinator CREATE Compliance Training (PowerPoint), Deaf/HOH Training: Settlement Monitor's Recommended Revision (PowerPoint), Federal Court Deaf/HOH Settlement Agreement (PowerPoint), Tips for Communicating with Inmates are HOH (word document), Communicating with Deaf/HOH Offenders (PowerPoint) and Jordan and Brittany have completed Effective Communication Strategies with Deaf Offenders using American Sign Language. Craig and Jessica are schedule to attend the webinar in October.

The KY DOC website lists the wrong ADA coordinator

Solved

No Confirmation that the settlement summary, Solved settlement, and brochure are available in the library

KOMS alerts are inconsistent

Solved

Additional Devices RCC has added:
Update Is on excel sheet on G: Drive

Vibrating Watches

Amazon Model #W-735H-1A2VCF

Casio Casio

https://www.amazon.com/Digital-Shaker-7-inch-Display-

Charger/dp/B07HFZSBDQ/ref=pd_ybh_a_43?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=VB01GP49BV7ZEAMKQ06

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 67

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 900 of 985 - Page ID#: 4488

Vibrating Alarm Clock Amazon Model #LLR010AGUS Lielongren Lielongren

https://www.amazon.com/Digital-Shaker-7-inch-DisplayCharger/dp/B07HFZSBDQ/ref=pd_ybh_a_43?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=VB01GP49BV7ZEAMKQ06

CapTel Phone

WCI Captel 840i CapTel CapTel This device has been orders for RCC. Once our IT employee is, back he will run the line and have SECURUS come in to finish installing it.

Update CapTel phone has been installed. https://www.weitbrecht.com/product.php?mode=add&productid=478&cat=&page=1&is_featured_product

TTY Ultratec

Our IT employees is looking into getting our TTY set up so the inmates can use it on the inmate phone system.

Update the inmates can use the TTY phone through the inmate phone system by using the CapTel phone.

Other Notes:
Verified that all units have a phone with the volume control and is in working condition.

Exhibit 2, RCC, p. 68

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 901 of 985 - Page ID#: 4489
Western Kentucky Correctional Complex (including Ross-Cash)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 902 of 985 - Page ID#: 4490

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

A ADA coordinator

Both

1 Who is the designated ADA coordinator?

Jacob Bruce

Has there been a time (since last audit) when there was no ADA

Both

2 coordinator appointed?

No

Both

3 Is correct ADA coordinator on KyDOC website?

Yes (checked 9/20/2020)

Both

4 Is ADA coordinator info shared w/ affected inmates?

Was the ADA coordinator information shared with inmates in a

At arrival/orientation or by medical upon

Both

5 timely and appropriate manner? How?

diagnosis

Are inmates aware of ADA coordinator information? (THIS

Both

6 REQUIRES ASKING A SAMPLE)

Interviewed several inmates.

Is the information prominently posted in any housing unit

Both

7 where deaf/HOH inmates are held?

Both

8 Did the ADA coordinator receive training?

Both

9 Describe training

Is training's length/method sufficient to adequately cover

Both

10 information?

Both

11 Adequate w/r/t federal law? (Online ADA training)

Both

12 Adequate w/r/t state law?

Both

13 Adequate w/r/t agreement? (Settlement monitor's powerpoint)

Does ADA coordinator possess familiarity with settlement

Both

14 agreement?

Does ADA coordinator retrieve or receive at least monthly

Both

15 reports on KOMS/medical records of deaf inmates?

Both

16 Are additional inmates added to the coordinator's tracking list?

Has the ADA coordinator assisted appropriately in

Both

17 implementing the settlement?

Both

18 Is (s)he available to assist in accommodating deaf inmates?

Does (s)he regularly communicate with or check on deaf

Both

19 inmates?

Does (s)he ensure Effective Communication for the inmates in

Both

20 those situations?

Does (s)he communicate in a timely and effective way with the

Both

21 monitor?

Does (s)he facilitate inmate communication with the monitor

Both

22 when necessary?

Both B Reporting obligations

If there was any change in ADA coordinator, was monitor

Both

1 notified?

Does the ADA coordinator maintain a list of deaf and HOH

Both

2 inmates?

Both

3 Is the list complete?

Both

4 Has it been shared in a timely manner?

Was there a direct threat determination made for jobs,

Both

6 activities, etc.? (Y/N/describe)

Both

7 Was it reported to the monitor?

Both

8 Was the report complete?

No change No determination made.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Y Y Y Y Y
Y
Y Y NA Y Y Y Y
Y
Y
Y
Y Y Y
Y
Y
Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Y
Y Y Y
NA Y Y

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 903 of 985 - Page ID#: 4491

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Both

9 Was the report timely?

Both

10 Did the institution consider any non-auditory alert?

Both

11 If yes, was the monitor notified?

Did the institution consult with the monitor about the non-

Both

12 auditory alert?

Both

13 Adjustment in timing for phones: Communicated?

Both C Intake/Orientation - Corrections

HOH

1 Hard of hearing inmates

HOH

2 Adequate process for knowing if someone HOH is arriving?

Describe (The ADA Coordinator should receive automatic

HOH

3 notifications.)

HOH

4 Effective communications planned/provided? (Describe)

Deaf

Deaf inmates

Deaf

5 Adequate process for knowing if someone deaf is arriving?

Deaf

6 Describe

Deaf

7 Effective communications planning?

Deaf

8 Effective communication provided?

Deaf

9 Describe

Deaf

10 Use of VRI interpreter when needed?

Deaf

11 Use of in-person interpreter when needed?

Both

Orientation videos

Both

12 Captioned?

Both

13 Shown in a quiet space?

Both

14 Amplification if needed?

Accommodation for deaf/HOH inmates who are not literate?

Both

15 (Describe)

Both D Medical care: intake, care more generally, audiology services

Effective Communication during general medical intake, and

Both

during medical care more generally:

Both

1 Is there effective communications planning?

Does medical staff ask inmates who have difficulty hearing if

Both

2 interpretation is needed?

Both

3 Are pocket amplifiers on hand at medical office?

Are staff aware of, and use, effective communications

Both

4 techniques?

Both

Notice to medical staff:

Both

5 Do medical staff know deaf or HOH status? How?

Medical file identifies individuals as deaf/HOH on cover and

Both

6 within the file?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

KOMS alert/medical file review

Hasn't occurred this period Hasn't occurred this period

ADA flag in KOMS, medical file ADA flag in KOMS (medical file in KOMS)

Deaf

7 Off-site medical: Provision of appropriate accommodations.

Knowledegable about obligation to alert off-site providers of

Deaf

8 need for interpretation?

Deaf

9 Procedure in place to ensure notification?

Deaf

10 Has there ever been a notification to provider?

Deaf

11 Adequate notice?

Outside providers offering effective communication to inmates

Deaf

12 who sign?

No notification has been needed Has not occurred.

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Y NA
Y
Y
Y
NA Y
NA Y
NA Y
NA Y Y
NA Y Y
NA Y Y Y
Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA Y Y Y Y
NA Y Y
NA Y Y
NA Y Y

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 904 of 985 - Page ID#: 4492

Deaf/HO

H or

both? # Issue/Question

Deaf

13 How?

Both

Hearing screening/medical intake:

Both

14 Performed for all new inmates?

Both

15 Within first 3 days at institution?

Both

16 Approved screening form? (need to review)

Both

17 Asks about functionality of current hearing aid?

Both

18 Hearing questions come at start of medical intake?

How? Do inmates fill out the form or is it administered by

Both

19 staff?

Both

20 Which staff is responsible? (best practice is medical)

Both

21 Conducted with awareness of possible low literacy?

Both

22 Accommodations for low literacy? Describe.

Both

23 Medical history includes hearing questions?

Both

Other methods of access:

Both

24 Do annual/routine physicals include hearing screening?

Both

25 Staff/ADA Cooardinator can refer for screening?

Both

26 Inmate can obtain screening on request?

If screening indicated problem (1+ "yes" answers), is there

Both

27 further assessment?

Adequate determination of need for designation/ audiology

Both

28 services? How?

Both

29 Is further assessment timely (within several days)?

Separate determination of whether inmate is deaf or HOH,

Both

30 apart from audiology services decision?

Both

After assessment, does medical:

Both

31 Note deaf or HOH status in ECW as alert?

Both

32 Is the notice immediately obvious in electronic file?

Both

33 Notify ADA coordinator?

Both

34 Is notification prompt?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA NA
Y Y Y Y Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Describe:

NA NA
Y Y Y NA Y Y Y
Y

Provider assessment after screening failure <72 hrs from assessment Provider determination of HOH status prior to audiology
now all in KOMS
automatic notification of screening

Y
Y
Y
NA Y Y Y Y

HOH

Audiology services/processes (See also Audiology Checklist)

HOH

35 Audiology services offered when needed?

HOH

36 Timely? (60 days if no obstacles)

HOH

37 Amplifier offered while waiting for hearing aid?

HOH

38 Adequate addressing of obstacles to services

HOH

39 Hearing aid provided when medically appropriate?

HOH

Adequate progress tracking? Should include:

HOH

40 initial request/questionnaire?

HOH

41 each relevant medical visit?

HOH

42 any audiology visit?

HOH

43 hearing aid provision?

HOH

44 Audiology progress chart updated every 1-2 weeks?

HOH

45 Shared with ADA Coordinator?

HOH

46 Shared with monitor when requested

NA Y Y
Y Y NA Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 905 of 985 - Page ID#: 4493

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or both? #

Issue/Question

the audit, and what has been done about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Summary

When nothing unusual happens, how many off-site trips does it 47 take for an inmate to receive a hearing aid? Describe.

None. All audiology conducted inside.

NA

In the past year, how many individuals have had to wait more 48 than sixty days to receive a hearing aid?
49 What is the cause of the delay?

17 NA

Most due to other health issues or multiple

retests

NA

What steps is your institution taking (or has it taken) to

50 improve this process?

HOH

Co-pay and availability issues:

HOH

47 Charged only once -- not again for followups

Wellpath now has stricter guidelines for speed of care

NA NA
Y

HOH

Hearing aid batteries

HOH

48 Available for free?

HOH

49 In sufficient numbers?

NA Y Y

HOH

50 7 days/week?

Y

HOH

51 regardless of housing?

Y

Both E Information provided inmates

Both

1 Provided at intake/orientation? (Describe)

Y

Inmate handbook adequately refers to non-discrimination and

Both

2 ADA services?

Y

Both

Brochure? Items to include:

NA

Both

3 Non-discrimination obligation

Y

Both

4 Effective communication obligation

Y

Both

5 Auxiliary aids and services available

Y

How to obtain, request, and use all aids/services (including

Both

6 hearing aids, and batteries)

Y

Both

7 Communication equipment available, and how to use

Y

Both

8 ADA coordinator and how to reach

Y

Both

Other items:

Both

9 Institution schedule of interpreters

Both

10 Request for Accommodations/ Communications Assistance

NA Y Y

Both

11 Medical Request form includes request for accommodations

Y

Both

12 Job application form includes request for accommodations

Y

Both

13 Waiver forms

Y

Both

14 Classification form includes request for accommodations

Both

15 Discipline form includes request for accomodations

SAP and other programming form includes request for

Both

16 accommodation

Y

any changes occur at dept. level

Y

Y

Both

17 NA/AA form includes request for accommocation

Y

Settlement summary, settlement, and brochure available in 18 law library? (Need to check)

Y Checked again 9/20/2020

Both

Do request forms:

NA

Both

19 list available services comprehensively?

Y

clearly explain services and aids (what they are and when

Both

20 they are available?

Y

Both

21 clearly explain how to request services/aids?

Y

expressly ask about preferred mode of

Both

22 communication/needed services and why they are useful?

Y

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 906 of 985 - Page ID#: 4494

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Both

23 explain which items are free?

Both

24 encompass religious and volunteer-provided programming?

Both

Effective communication of these resources:

Both

25 Are the materials in language accessible to each inmate?

Both

26 Is this information provided with effective communication?

Can inmates request and receive a meaningful opportunity

to meet with a KDOC staff member and interpreter to ask

Both

27 questions about the materials?

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

for a program with staff, is effective communication

Both

28 provided?

Both

29 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Effective communication re. programming

When deaf/ HOH inmate discusses enrollment in/application

Both

30 in education with staff, is effective communication provided?

Both

31 are potential accommodations covered in the discussion?

Both F Notice re. deaf/HOH inmates

Both

1 Notice posted at entrance to institution?

Both

2 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

3 Notice posted outside housing units?

Both

4 Include picture of ID card and other official indicator?

Both

5 Cell/bed cards

Both

6 Staff aware of corresponding need to alert?

Both

7 Clear process to obtain? Describe

Both

8 Each inmate has one if not waived?

Both

9 Provided timely?

Both

10 Replacements provided when needed?

Both

KOMS alert?

Both

11 Staff aware of use of KOMS

Both

12 Working process to get new inmate alerts added? (Describe)

Both

13 Present for each deaf/HOH inmate? (Need to check)

Both

14 Appropriately obvious

Both

15 Updated timely

Both

Individual ID cards

Both

16 Staff aware of meaning?

Both

17 Clear? (avoids unclear laguage/abbreviations?)

Both

18 Provided to all deaf/HOH if not waived?

Both

19 Provided timely?

Both

20 Can the inmate carry the ID at all times?

Both

21 Prompt replacements provided?

On bulletin board inside near entrance

Both

22 Can ID card be taken away for some purpose?

Both

23 If yes, what is the substitute official indicator?

Both

24 Has any inmate signed ID Waiver?

Both

25 If yes, is the waiver kept in inmate's file?

Inmate keeps HOH ID card Yes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Y Y NA Y Y
Y
NA
Y
Y NA
Y
Y
Y Y Y Y NA Y Y Y Y Y NA Y Y Y Y Y NA Y Y Y Y Y Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Y
NA Y

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 907 of 985 - Page ID#: 4495

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Both

26 Has any inmate who signed a waiver later requested ID?

No request has been made.

Both

27 If yes, was an ID provided?

Both G Auxiliary Aids & Services Assessment

Both

Identification to ADA Coordinator

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification upon

Both

1 intake of each deaf/hoh inmate?

Does the ADA coordinator receive timely notification of other

Both

2 deaf/hoh inmates?

Does the ADA coordinator conduct an Auxiliary Aids and

Services Assessment with every arriving or newly identified

Both

3 deaf/hoh inmate?

At this meeting, are each inmate's available methods of

Both

4 communication expressly ascertained and documented?

At this meeting, does the ADA coordinator inform each inmate

Both

5 about available auxiliary aids and services?

Both

6 Are the auxiliary aids/services request forms explained?

Is appropriate communication used during this meeting? (oral

Both

7 and written; VRI; or visual descriptions )

Both

Other assessments

For all deaf/hoh inmates who didn't receive an assessment on

Both

8 intake, has one been done?

Both

9 Are Auxiliary Aids assessments updated every year?

Both H Particular Auxiliary Aids & Services Provided

Both

1 On-person ID cards

Both

2 Cell cards

Both

3 Bed shaker

Not a appropriate for open dorms

Both

4 In-person alerts

Both

5 Pager

Not offered

Phone volume adjust setting (available in each location where

HOH

6 phones are available?)

HOH

7 Amplifier for phone

Consideration of specific housing assignment to minimize

Both

8 communication difficulties?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

Y Y
NA Y
Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Y

Y
Y Y Y NA Y Y
Y Y Y Y

Y Y Y

Both

9 Other amplification

Both

10 Other (describe)

Both

General issues

Special housing area:

Is there a special housing area for deaf/HOH inmates?

Both

11 (Describe)

Both

12 If there is such an area, what is the benefit from it? (Describe)

If there is such an area, are inmates required to be housed

Both

13 there? (such a requirement is non-compliant).

If there is such an area, and an inmate chooses not to live

there, are accommodations etc. still fully available to the

Both

14 inmate? Describe any restrictions.

In determining auxiliary aids/services to provide, is primary

Both

15 consideration given to inmate request?

FM transmitters for TVs and class instructors

Y

Describe:

NA

NA

NA

No special housing area

NA NA
Y

Y

Y

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 908 of 985 - Page ID#: 4496

Deaf/HO H or both? #

Issue/Question

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

If any inmate filled out a Request for Auxiliary Aids and Services

form after not being found deaf or HOH, signing a waiver, or

Both

16 not requesting aids/services, were accommodations provided?

Are waivers of Auxiliary Aids and Services documented in

Both

17 inmate institutional files?

Are instructions for the use of all auxiliary aids/services shared

Both

18 appropriately with staff?

Both

19 All auxiliary aids/services maintained?

Both

20 Have any been out of comission?

Both

21 Describe -- which and for how long?

Inmates moving housing or transferred: not separated from

Both

22 hearing aid?

Both

23 If (s)he has been, is replacement provided?

Both

24 Promptly?

Both

25 Has there been a direct threat determination?

Both

26 Describe

Appropriately individuated (must consider specific degree of

27 impairment and specific dangers posed)

Both

28 Appropriately reported to monitor?

Both

30 Are classes in sign language provided?

Both

31 deaf inmates given notice?

Both

32 priority given to deaf inmates?

Both I Interpretation in general

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Is the process for using VRI/in-person interpretation

Deaf

1 communicated to inmates?

covers all inmate-staff communication when requested by

inmate? (not limited to only certain

Deaf

2 encounters/communications/settings)

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

3 volunteer-provided programming?

Effective process for choosing qualified interpretation

Deaf

4 method?

Deaf

5 primary consideration given inmates' preferences?

Deaf

Standing arrangement with providers?

Deaf

6 In-person?

Deaf

7 VRI?

Deaf

Is VRI availability:

Deaf

8 flexible (regarding requests and usage)?

Deaf

9 after hours when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

on weekends when needed (not allowing for 48 hours of

Deaf

10 notice)?

during emergencies (including medical emergencies) when

Deaf

11 needed (not allowing for 48 hours of notice)?

12 Appropriate preparations made for use in RHU? Describe

No inmate has filled out a form after being

Y

determined not HOH.

Y

There has been no determination made

Y
Y NA NA
Y
Y Y NA NA

Services available, no inmate who signs during this period.
VRI laptop, interview room

Y Y Y Y
NA Y
Y
Y
Y Y NA Y Y NA Y Y
Y
Y Y

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 909 of 985 - Page ID#: 4497

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Deaf

VRI laptop functional?

Describe:

Deaf

13 In general

Deaf

14 Always checked for sufficient battery power?

Deaf

15 Routine software updates?

Deaf

VRI laptop has necessary items with it?

Describe:

Deaf

16 Splitter?

Deaf

17 Instructions?

Deaf

18 Long power cord?

Deaf

19 Usable as VRS?

Deaf

20 VRI effectiveness tracked?

Deaf

21 How?

Information used to determine when in-person interpretation

Deaf

22 should be first recourse?

Deaf

Is in-person interpretation available:

Deaf

23 When VRI insufficient in programming, medical

Deaf

24 Parole?

25 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been offered

26 Describe each time in-person interpretation has been denied.

Parole board notified of need for interpretation at least 7 days

Deaf

27 before?

Has facility relied on another inmate to interpret? (Reliance in

Deaf

28 non-emergency is non-compliant)

inmates do not interpret.

Deaf

29 Describe

in an emergency? (in which time was of the essence and VRI

Deaf

30 was unavailable)

Communication with inmates uses inmate's preferred

Deaf

31 method?

Deaf

32 Written communication is limited to only simple matters.

Written communication is not needed when inmate has low

Deaf

33 literacy

Deaf

Qualified interpretation services available:

Does the request form clearly encompass religious and other

Deaf

34 volunteer-provided programming?

for all inmate-staff communication when requested by inmate?

(not limited to only certain

Deaf

35 encounters/communications/settings)

Deaf

36 Is the process for using VRI communicated to inmates?

Deaf J Hand Restraints

Deaf

1 Hand restraints ever used on inmate who signs?

None who sign at WKCC this period.

Used for an appropriate reason? transportation to/from

prison? Escort in/out of restrictive housing? Individualized

Deaf

2 finding of a security threat?

Security procedure allows use of VRI by inmate who might

Deaf

3 ordinarily be restrained (in RHU, e.g.)

Deaf

4 Necessary equipment purchased and installed?

Deaf

5 Staff aware of the issue

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA Y Y Y
NA Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y
Y Y Y Y Y
Y
Y
NA
Y
Y
Y
Y
NA
Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Y Y NA Y

Y
Y Y

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 910 of 985 - Page ID#: 4498

Deaf/HO H or both? # Deaf Deaf
Deaf Both K Both Both Both Both Both Both Both

Issue/Question Off-site medical care: 6 two-point hand restraint system used? restraints removed when necessary for medical 7 communication? Non-auditory Alerts 1 Does the prison have non-auditory alerts? (Describe) 2 provided to all inmates who need it? 3 can and does it give alerts in real time? 4 sufficient to signal fire alarm? 5 sufficient to signal count alert? 6 programmed to signal different alerts? 7 used to notify of prison-wide events?

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Describe:
fire alarm strobe staff flash overhead lights staff flash overhead lights staff flash overhead lights

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA Y
Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

NA Y Y Y Y Y Y

Both

8 used to notify deaf or HOH inmates of events specific to them?

Have any requests for medically necessary non-auditory alerts

Both

9 been denied?

Both

10 Non-auditory alerts monitored to ensure they are working?

Both

11 How often?

Both

12 monitored/recorded formally?

Both

13 Announcement boards

Both

14 used to notify of schedule changes?

Both

15 used consistently?

Both

16 in all dormitories?

Both

17 in gym?

Both

18 in library?

Both

19 audited and monitored?

In-person or personal system notification when an inmate

Both

20 misses a page?

Has any inmate missed announcements/alarms/ info only

Both

21 because of disability?

in-person alerts No denials. Describe
Library located in gym
None reported.

Y
Y
Y Y Y NA Y Y Y Y Y Y
Y
NA

Both

22 Were corrective steps taken to solve the problem in the future?

Both

23 Sufficient to notify inmates in emergencies?

Both

24 Plan to evacuate deaf or HOH inmates in emergency?

Does the plan account for how effective communication will be

Both

25 provided?

Both L Telecommunications

Deaf

Videophones:

Deaf

1 Installed?

Deaf

2 Allow voice carry-over features?

Deaf

3 Number of days out of service? (Specify)

4 Describe any technical difficulties, and efforts to solve them.

When out of service, VRS used instead? Or describe other

Deaf

5 alternative offered

Describe how inmates are informed of alternatives, when 6 videophone is out of service.

Y
Y Y
Y

NA Y Y
0 NA NA

VRS laptops can be used.

Y

Auxiliary Aids Assessment, ADA Coordinator

explains options if videophone is out of

service as well

NA

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 911 of 985 - Page ID#: 4499

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Deaf

7 Same times of access as non-deaf inmates?

Deaf

8 Appropriate location?

Escort routinely provided (incl. after hours, weekends,

Deaf

9 emergency) if necessary?

Deaf

10 Time: 2x that for non-deaf inmates?

11 Available same hours as ordinary phones?

No more permission needed than that for hearing inmates

Deaf

12 using ordinary phones?

Deaf

13 Advance request unnecessary?

Deaf

14 Free?

Disciplinary oversight no more intense than regular phone

Deaf

15 calls?

Has any inmate requested access to the videophones and been

16 denied?

No requests.

Denial appropriate? Explain the circumstances, including the

inmate's name, the date, and the reason for the denial. 17

Both

TTY:

Both

18 Installed?

Both

19 Protocol for how to access TTY known to inmates and staff?

Easy-to-understand, institution specific instructions made

20 available WITH TTY?

Both

21 Function -- days out of service? (Specify)

Both

22 Access -- appropriate hours, days?

location substantially as accessible as conventional telephones

Both

23 for non-deaf inmates?

Both

24 hard of hearing inmates allowed to access?

Both

25 Permission needed?

Both

26 Has any request to use the TTY been denied? (Describe)

Both

27 Time: 3x that for non-deaf inmates?

Both

28 Money charged appropriate? (Describe)

Both

29 Annual test ok? (List when most recently)

Both

30 Can access publicly available relay service phone numbers?

Need staff member to use staff phone No denials.
Describe:

Has KDOC determined that time usage permissions for

Both

31 videophones and TTY is less than equitable?

NO

Both

32 If yes, how was ratio adjusted?

If yes, was determination (including reasoning, evidence, etc.)

Both

33 documented?

Both

34 Was monitor notified?

Both

35 Was reasoning explained to monitor?

Deaf

VRS via laptop

Deaf

36 Available?

Deaf

37 Known to relevant staff? (In RHU)

Deaf

38 Used when appropriate?

Both

Phones

Both

39 Amplification in every group of phones?

Both

40 Portable amplifiers available to inmates who need them?

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain) Y Y
Y
Y Y
Y
Y Y
Y

NA
Y
NA Y Y Y
0 NA Y Y Y Y
NA Y
Y Y

NA Y
Y
Y Y NA Y Y Y NA Y Y

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 912 of 985 - Page ID#: 4500

Audit item questions/concerns (note

Deaf/HO

here if a problem was discovered during

H or

the audit, and what has been done

both? # Issue/Question

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Both

CapTel

Install in progress

Both

41 If so, installed and working?

Both

42 Appropriate for any particular inmate?

List names

43 Request by any inmate denied?

List names

Both

TV/Movies

Both

44 Is captioning available?

Both

45 Is captioning used?

Both

46 Is the captioning checked regularly?

entered in dorm staff logbook each shift

Both

47 Are the checks of the captioning logged?

entered in dorm staff logbook each shift

captioning turned on by staff when starting

Both

48 Recreational movies: Captioning turned on regularly (Describe)

each movie

Both

49 Are inmates allowed to purchase tvs w/ captioning?

Both

50 Amplification method? (Describe)

Describe:

All technology/ equipment in good working order? (Describe

Both

52 problems)

Access to communication services for deaf inmates in

segregated housing equivalent to non-deaf inmates of same

Both

53 status?

Does KDOC monitor communications of deaf or HOH inmates

only to the same extent and with the same discretion as non-

Both

54 deaf inmates?

Both M Miscellaneous Devices

Both

1 Devices available? (Describe)

Vibrating alarm clock/watch

Both

2 devices in commissary list?

No, but options are communicated

Both

3 possibility to request other devices from ADA coordinator?

Both

4 facilitation of purchase?

Purchase of any non-medically necessary device denied?

Both

5 (Describe)

No denials

Both

6 determined on case-by-case basis?

Both

7 because security threat?

Both

8 monitor notified?

Both

9 reasoning explained?

Both

ADA coordinator maintains records

Both

10 of requests?

Both

11 of denials?

Both N Disciplinary

Have any discipline occurred without an interpreter and

without an inmate waiver, for which an inmate has been

Deaf

1 punished?

Has not occurred.

Deaf

2 Was a re-hearing granted?

Both O Grievances

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA NA NA NA NA
Y Y Y Y
Y
Y NA
Y

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Y

Y

NA Y Y Y
NA Y Y Y Y
NA Y Y

Y Y

Both

1 Inmates told they can share grievances with ADA coordinator?

Y

If inmates choose to do that, does grievance coordinator

Both

2 forward copy of grievance to ADA coordinator?

Y

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 913 of 985 - Page ID#: 4501

Deaf/HO H or both? # Both P Both Both Both Both Both Both Both
Both

Issue/Question Training Types available 1 CBT? (Using approved training?) 2 Who received? (Describe) 3 All appropriate staff? 4 Live training? (Information only) 5 Who received? (Describe) 6 All appropriate staff? Any additional targeted training on specific needs ? Please describe in detail

Audit item questions/concerns (note

here if a problem was discovered during

the audit, and what has been done

about it, or if the problem remains)

Description/Notes

Describe: Describe:

Compliant

Partially Compliant

NonCompliant

NA Y
NA Y
NA NA
Y
NA

NA, unknown, or no basis for evaluation (Explain)

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 914 of 985 - Page ID#: 4502
USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT EACH DEAR/HOH INMATE IS GETTING APPROPRIATE ASSISTANCE (some rows hidden if inmate is no longer at WKCC)

Name

If signs to

Signs to

Low literacy? (So that

Has Bed/Door communicate, noted Auxiliary Aid

Bed Shaker? (Not

Housing

Listed with KOMS communicate written communication is Has Deaf/HOH ID Card? (Y or

in KOMS precaution Assessment meeting requested; denied;

ID

location

ADA Precaution? (Y/N)

not effective)

Card? (Y or waived) waived)

notes?

took place?

granted)

C2-02

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C1-48

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C2-48

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

A2-50

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

B1-42

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C1-21

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

A1-38

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C1-64

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C1-14

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

SMU F-7

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

A2-16

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C1-26

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C3-38

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C3-40

Y

N

Limited basis

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C3-56

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

B1-34

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C3-24

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

A2-43

Y

N

Y (illiterate)

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C1-29

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C1-23

Y

N

N

waived

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

B1-30

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

A2-13

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

B2-40

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C1-22

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C3-12

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C3-04

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

B2-13

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C1-62

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C1-17

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

B2-11

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C1-38

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C1-18

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C1-68

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C3-09

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C3-46

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

B1-31

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C3-15

Y

N

N

waived

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

A2-02

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

A2-03

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

A2-24

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

SMU D6

QUARANTINE UNTIL 10/2/20

C3-28

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C2-20

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

C2-30

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

A1-46

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C1-52

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 915 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4503

USE THIS SHEET FOR ENSURING THAT

Clear mask

for staff

Other Alert Device TTY Access (Not Captel Acess (Not Personal Phone Amplifier

who deal

(Not requested; requested; denied; requested;

(Not requested; denied; Shake & Wake/Watch (Not Special with this Any other auxiliary

Name

ID

denied; granted) granted)

denied; granted) granted)

requested; denied; granted) mask?

innmate? aid requested? Outcome?

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 7/27/20

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Requested/Approved

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 7/1/20

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Requested/Approved

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 7/14/20

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 7/1/20

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 7/27/20

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 6/26/20

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 6/26/20

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 8/24/20

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 7/27/20

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 7/14/20

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Granted; loaner

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 8/11/20

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 7/27/20

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Requested/Approved

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Granted; loaner

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Requested/Approved

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 7/1/20

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 8/24/20

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 7/14/20

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 6/26/20

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Granted; loaner

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 6/26/20

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 7/1/20

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Requested/Approved

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Requested/Approved

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 8/24/20

Y

Available None

N/A

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 14

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 916 of 985 - Page ID#: 4504

If signs to

Signs to

Low literacy? (So that

Has Bed/Door communicate, noted Auxiliary Aid

Bed Shaker? (Not

Housing

Listed with KOMS communicate written communication is Has Deaf/HOH ID Card? (Y or

in KOMS precaution Assessment meeting requested; denied;

ID

location

ADA Precaution? (Y/N)

not effective)

Card? (Y or waived) waived)

notes?

took place?

granted)

C3-76

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

A2-48

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C1-34

Y

N

Limited basis

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

C3-45

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

A2-10

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

B1-16

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

A2-23

Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

C1-45

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

CLRKB 06 Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

CLRKB 04 Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

CLNSA 26 Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

CLRKA 16 Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

CLRKA 21 Y

N

N

Y

waived

N/A

Y

Not requested

CLNSA 34 Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

CLNSA 10 Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

Y

Not requested

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 15

Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 917 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4505

Clear mask

for staff

Other Alert Device TTY Access (Not Captel Acess (Not Personal Phone Amplifier

who deal

(Not requested; requested; denied; requested;

(Not requested; denied; Shake & Wake/Watch (Not Special with this Any other auxiliary

ID

denied; granted) granted)

denied; granted) granted)

requested; denied; granted) mask?

innmate? aid requested? Outcome?

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Granted

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 6/26/20

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 8/24/20

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Purchased 8/11/20

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Requested/Approved

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

N

Available None

N/A

Not requested

Not requested

Not requested Available for checkout

Not requested

Y

Available None

N/A

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 918 of 985 - Page ID#: 4506

Technology

How many

FM radio transmitters, usable as an amplifier system, or other assistive listening device.
10

Where Public TVs

When obtained In use since prior to 2017

Specifications (URL)

How do inmates obtain access?

How well do they Other

work?

comments

https://www.ccrane.com/item/acc_trans_trans2/100106/digital_f Preinstalled/inmates tune in to

m_transmitter_2_for_sending_near_broadcast_quality

FM frequency

Good

Phone amplifiers (not volume control: portable amplifiers) Captioned Telephone (CapTel)

5

Dorms/Operations

Install in progress Operations/Clarke

Other amplifiers, amplification systems, or the 2

SAP

like?

Bed shakers

N/A

N/A

Whenever phones are open
Install in progress Fall 2019 N/A

ttps://www.amazon.com/Reizen-Portable-Telephone-Amplifier-

30dB/dp/B00I5PV94S/ref=pd_sbs_121_4/134-6840137-

9359611?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B00I5PV94S&pd_rd_r=b63f3f

96-6691-11e9-af2b-

df456cd2a423&pd_rd_w=Hedu8&pd_rd_wg=4CL1N&pf_rd_p=588

939de-d3f8-42f1-a3d8-

d556eae5797d&pf_rd_r=XABEYJH2C66M6RY0449Q&psc=1&refRID

=XABEYJH2C66M6RY0449Q

Check out from staff

Good

https://www.weitbrecht.com/captel-840.html

Install in progress

Install in progress

https://www.amazon.com/Whole-House-FM-Transmitter-30/dp/B00GHWUHD0/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=whole+house+fm+tran smitter&qid=1581956281&s=hpc&sr=8-1

Staff tune

instructors utilize/inmates in to FM frequency

Good

N/A

N/A

N/A

Vibrating watches

5 loaners/inmate

purchase

inmate purchase

June 2020

https://www.amazon.com/Casio-W735H-1AVCF-Super-Illuminator-

Watch/dp/B00BS8U88W/ref=sr_1_2?dchild=1&keywords=casio+vi

brating+watch&qid=1593522946&sr=8-2

Order through ADA Coord.

Great

Vibrating alarm clocks

N/A

Pagers

N/A

Other non-auditory alerts or assistive devices currently in use or under consideration not mentioned above.

flashing dayroom lights

Earphones for parole hearings

2

Earphones for orientation videos

2

inmate purchase N/A
Each housing unit Operations/Collins Operations/Collins

https://www.amazon.com/Tech-Tools-Vibrating-Personal-Shake-N-

Wake/dp/B0027A573Q/ref=sr_1_3?crid=33T0I6KHHFC42&dchild=

available as of June 2020 (none 1&keywords=shake+n+wake+alarm+clock&qid=1593523006&spref

purchased yet)

ix=shake+n+wake+%2Caps%2C193&sr=8-3

Order through ADA Coord.

N/A

N/A

N/A

Each announcement for count,

5-minute count warning, chow,

and med call. N/A

2018

https://www.sony.com/electronics/headband-headphones/mdrrf995rk#product_details_default

2018

https://www.sony.com/electronics/headband-headphones/mdrrf995rk#product_details_default

Staff flash lights Upon request at hearing Upon request at orientation

N/A N/A
Great Great None requested

None purchased

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 17

Documentation and narrative to provide Grievances:

Case:

3:14-cDvat-e0re0vie0w0ed1-PCGolemaFmseVenseTtse(-paErtotabBclehAmeds rreevDpeoaroletdcf,osro#aIlulD:ltico9o#nms9:,me-4t2ec5.n)t0s rF7elialteeddt:o

12/16/20
this section.

1. Provide summary of ALL grievances by all deaf/HOH inmates.

Covers formal, informal, withdrawn, etc. Should include the issues,

9/21/2020

summary of response, resolution

2. Provide full documentation of all grievances that address hearing/hearing accommodation issues.

9/21/2020

Discipline

3. For all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving an

inmate who signs, provide report of inmate name, date, and

9/20/2020

communication method for each.

Page: 919 of 985 - Page

4. Provide documentation for all disciplinary proceedings since July 2019 involving failure to obey an order, or failure to stand for count, or other communications difficulty by a deaf/HOH inmate. Auxiliary aids 5. VRI Log (provide). 6. TTY instructions (provide) 7. VRI instructions (provide) Audiology processing delays 8.A list of each inmate currently at your institution whose audiology processing FINISHED after March 2020, for whom such processing took or is taking over 60 days, documentation of the explanation for any such delay, and a description of any steps taken to avoid similar problems going forward. Information provided to inmates, policies, etc. 9. Any pages of the inmate handbook that address disability, and the date for that version of the handbook. 10. The current Deaf/HOH brochure and any other documents provided to deaf or hard-of-hearing inmates. 11.The medical request form currently provided to prisoners. 12. Any memoranda, training, policy, etc. issued in 2020 addressing deaf/hard-of-hearing issues. 13. A list of each use of an in-person sign-language interpreter from February 2020 to present, and any occasions in which such an interpreter was requested but denied. Please provide written responses to the following questions: 14. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty because staff members are wearing masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond? 15. How many staff members are currently using clear masks? How is the decision made who will wear a clear mask? 16. How have you ascertained whether deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates are experiencing difficulty with their hearing aids because of the design of their own masks? Did you survey them? Talk to them systematically? How many did you talk to? How many reported an issue? How did you respond? 17. How many inmates have been issued masks that don't have ear ties? 18. What if anything have you done to solve the problem of inmates having trouble hearing announcements? Please respond in detail, with dates on all responsive steps, prerequisites for any assistance, etc.

9/21/2020 9/22/2020 9/21/2020 9/22/2020
9/20/2020
9/22/2020 9/22/2020 9/22/2020 9/22/2020 9/20/2020
9/20/2020 9/20/2020
9/20/2020 9/21/2020
9/22/2020

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 18

Documentation and narrative to 19. How have you educated staff

provide that it is

Case:
inappropriate to

3:14-cDvat-e0re0vie0w0ed1-CGomFmVenTts (-pErobBleAms
write up

revDeaoledc, so#lu:tio9ns9, e-t2c.) Filed: ID#: 4508

12/16/20

an inmate for behavior that is caused by a hearing impairment (e.g.,

talking loudly, not following instructions that could not be heard)?

If there was a memo, please provide that.

9/22/2020

20. Please describe in detail how inmates are supposed to get

hearing aid batteries, including how long it should take them each

time.

9/20/2020

21. When an inmate reports that a hearing aid is not working, what

are the steps followed to evaluate the complaint? Include all

relevant copays and other procedures.

9/22/2020

22. When someone is denied binaural hearing aids, are they

provided information on the standard for receiving such assistance,

and the opportunity for appeal? How many inmates have received

binaural aids since the current binaural hearing aid policy has been

in effect?

9/22/2020

23. What arrangements are made to provide vibrating

watches/clocks for inmates who are indigent?

9/20/2020

24. Please describe, in detail, each step that takes place once a

person is identified as deaf or hard-of-hearing, to evaluate/offer

any auxiliary aids. Include who is responsible for each step.

9/22/2020

25. Please describe, in detail, any situation in 2019 or 2020 in which

a deaf/hard-of-hearing inmate has been denied a job or other

opportunity (access to a program or the like) because of their

disability. Include the inmate’s name, the date, and the

circumstances.

9/20/2020

26. Please list all training that you have received for your role as

ADA Coordinator.

9/20/2020

27. Please provide an update on all items in your Deaf/HOH action plan

(previously shared with me).

9/23/2020

Page: 920 of 985 - Page

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 921 of 985 - Page ID#: 4509

Inmates >60 days during review period (process finished after 3/1/2020)

Inmate Name

Number Days Reason for delay

Corrective action

76 Due to multiple hearing retests and delay in HA delivery due to COVID-19 No issues with process; multiple retests and delivery delay.

71 Delay in hearing aid delivery due to COVID

No issues with process; delivery delay.

Multiple hearing tests and delay bewteen tests, and shipping delay due to Monitor and minimize delays between steps and/or retests in

69 COVID-19

the process; multiple hearing tests/COVID delay.

74 Delay in hearing aid delivery due to COVID

No issues with process; delivery delay.

Nurses were educated on the referring to providers. Workflow

issues were addressed and process was instructed to providers

to follow until New EMR workflow in process. Wellpath also

There was a breakdown in the referral process from nurse to Provider. issued new guidelines for speed of care for HOH inmates that

75 Delay due to retest and no workflow for new EMR.

should eliminate future issues.

Delay in care due to suspension of non-essential trips. First ENT visit 8/24.

104 (in process; number of days as of 9/24)

No issues with process; COVID delay for outside care.

Delay in care due to suspension of non-essential trips. First ENT visit 8/24.

106 (in process; number of days as of 9/24)

No issues with process; COVID delay for outside care.

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 20

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 922 of 985 - Page ID#: 4510

23

27

69

70

75

83

2/12/2020

6/6/2017

7/29/2019

10/20/2017

1/15/2019

5/21/2020

90 5/9/2020

127 5/22/2020

3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Sickcall

physical ;

sick call at KSR

transfer screening

Physical at RCC

CC/Physical

Sick Call

Sick Call

2/12/2020

7/13/2017

8/2/2019

10/20/2017

1/18/2019

5/21/2020

5/12/2020

5/22/2020

3/6/2020

10/11/2018

8/22/2019

2/15/2018

4/13/2019

6/10/2020

8/24/2020

7/2/2020

Failed screening

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Retest needed

Seen by specialist requested MRI

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Has bilateral hearing a. Has hearing aid in work Has HA in working order Has HA in working order Has HA in working order Has HA in working order aids in working order. b

No HA needed

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

2/12/2020

6/7/2019

7/29/2019

10/20/2017

1/15/2019

5/21/2020

5/9/2020

5/22/2020

Sickcall

physical

sick call

transfer

failed audiocope refer to Afailed whisper referred audiology

referred to provider

failed screening

Physical at RCC Failed Screening

cc/physical failed screening

sick call refer to provider

Sick call hearing problem instructed to debrox and have ears flucshed.

2/14/2020

7/13/2017

8/2/2019

10/24/2017

1/18/2019

6/10/2020

5/12/2020

5/27/2020

Scheduled at EKCC (Cance Audiology

failed whisper test

hearing evaluation

Audiometry

audicus test

cloudy ears

ears flushed

Schedulded for Test on 3/5Rec Hearing Aide

Patient referred to Audicufailed audiometer

inconclusive at RCC

retest needed

treated with medication foreger to provider Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 21

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 923 of 985 - Page

23

27

69 ID#: 451170

75

83

90

127

3/5/2020

9/28/2017

8/12/2019

11/2/2017

2/15/2019

6/16/2020

6/2/2020

6/8/2020

Audicus Test

Issued Hearing Aid x 2 Audicus test

issued amplification

Retested

Audicus Screening

follow up and examinationfollow up with ears. Au

Recommended Retest

recommended retesting

inconclusive at RCC

failed audiogram, refer to

Did not hear any tones audicus

failed screening refer to

9/25/2018 Patient transferred to

WKCC and reported 1

3/6/2020 HA Lost

8/22/2019

11/20/2017

4/8/2019

6/24/2020

6/10/2016

7/2/2020

Refer to audicus for

Audicus Retest

retesting

#2 Audicus test

amplification follow up sick call about hearing Follow up with provider audicus testing

Audicus Test

Hearing ? May retest or

send out?

Approved

10/11/2018

3/20/2020 Audicus Test

dissatisfied w/amplificatio retested

9/20/2019

1/24/2018

Exam done and sent to Kemen.

test had trouble calculating left ear recommended ent consult.

pending results

4/16/2019

6/29/2020

6/16/2020

7/10/2020

Audicus Retest 3rd.

Approved for hearing aid HA ordered

audiology consult

Follow HOH

Hearing evalutaion

Audicus Test

Audicus Follow Up

Hearing device ordered for left ear.
4/28/2020

Audicus Clara for right ear;

Patient transferred from

another facility. WKCC

received patient

inconsistent/ retest

09/13/2019. Ordered HA. recommended

Approved for HA by RCC provider

Audicus Clara for left ear. Dual hearing aids needed due to inability to localize sounds without amplification.

Referred to ENT for medical problem with left ear.

Device ordered for right ear. (Pending Approval)

11/9/2018

10/9/2019

2/15/2018

5/20/2019

7/29/2020

8/24/2020

7/13/2020

hearing aid left ear

Issue of hearing aid Hearing aid right ear repeat audiology

issued hearing aids

Hearing Aids

seen by outsitde provider Update from Kemen

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 22

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 924 of 985 - Page

23

27

69 ID#: 451270

75

83

90

127

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

normal hearing in the

right ear. Online

hearing test on

7/2/2020 confirmed

that hearing threshold

in the right ear is >30

dB at only one of 5

benchmark

frequencies.

recommend MRI and Therefore, she does

Patient transferred to

follow up. Patient

not meet the criteris

WKCC with prior

schedule for MRI on 9/17 for a prescription

Patient issued hearing

approval for hearing aids. Hearing Aid for right and and follow up with ENT hearing aid defined in

Issued hearing aid left ear aid left ear.

Patient issued hearing aid recommend HA

Hearing aids issued.

left ear issued.

on 9/28

the DOC impaired

...

Hearing aid issued

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

(a) Start date

2/12/2020

9/25/2018

8/2/2019

10/20/2017

1/15/2019

5/21/2020

6/10/2020

5/22/2020

(b) End date

4/28/2020

11/9/2018

10/9/2019

3/14/2018

5/20/2019

7/29/2020

7/13/2020

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

76

45

68

145

125

69

52

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today -

start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

163 Patient tested multiple times at RCC and tests

were inconclusive.

Patient retested at RCC a

third time and was

Two separate cycles;

approved for hearing

one was 82 days in 2017

aids 04/14/2019.

Multiple hearing tests

Due to multiple hearing and the second was 45 Inmate had to be

Transferred to WKCC and delay bewteen tests, Delay due to scheduling

retests and delay in HA days in 2018 when one retested to verify level of Delay due to multiple 04/16/2019 received and shipping delay due outside ENT (COVID

delivery due to COVID-19 HA was lost.

need.

retestings.

hearing aids 05/20/2019. to COVID-19

related)

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Multiple hearing tests

Due to multiple hearing

and delay bewteen tests, Delay due to scheduling

retests and delay in HA First cycle: hard to say. Inmate situation required Inmate situation required Inmate situation required and shipping delay due outside ENT (COVID

delivery due to COVID-20 Second cycle' was good. multiple testings.

multiple testings.

multiple testings.

to COVID-20

related)

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 23

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20

WKCC Jacob Bruce

WKCC Jacob Bruce

ID#: 4513 Highlighted = in progress
in progress days at bottom of column

11/20/2020

11/20/2020

1

2

3

4

Page: 925 of 985 - Page Highlighted = in progress in progress days at bottom of

5

6

Transferred in 11/30/18

7/3/2020

7/29/2016

12/4/2018

8/28/2020

5/16/2018

3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system. 9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

Had HA upon arrival N/A N/A
We do not issue T-coil hearing aids.

Sick Call

sick call request

physical

Sick Call

transfer

7/3/2020

7/29/2016

8/28/2020

5/16/2018

7/13/2020

2/9/2017

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

did not meet criteria for hearing aid

8/31/2020

10/26/2018

Does not meet criteria for did not meet criteria for perscription hearing aid. hearing aid

Has HA in working order Has HA in working order No HA needed

No HA needed

No HA needed

Compliant

Compliant

Compliant

Sick Call Refer to provider

7/3/2020 sick call
failed screening

7/23/2016

12/4/2018

8/28/2020

5/16/2018

physical

sickcall

transfer screening

referred to audicus

failed screening refer to

audicus

refer to provider

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

7/7/2020

7/29/2016

1/21/2019

8/31/2020

5/31/2018

Hearing Sceening

provider visit

Audicus testing

Audicus Screening

audiometer screening

Refer for Audicus Test

No obvious hearing deficit

did not meet criteria for hearing aids

pending results

no deficits noted

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 24

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 926 of 985 - Page

1

2

ID#3 : 4514

4

5

6

Audicus Test

7/8/2020 Audiology/ENT

2/9/2017

Rescheduled. Site was down.

Recommended HA

9/2 Requested test results

from audicus. Received and

scanned to chart and

provider.

9/3/2020

follow up with provider.

Patient did not get seen on

9/3 due to patient load on

provider and

vacation/holiday. Patient

scheduled for 9/8 for follow

up.

Audicus testing

10/8/2018

7/13/2020

3/23/2017

Audicus Test
Audicus Clara Right ear ordered and approved

fitted for HA's

no impairment

9/8/2020

follow up with Audicus Hearing Test
Does not meet criteria for perscription hearing aid.

10/26/2018 Audicus retest

7/21/2020

4/28/2017

Hearing aid ordered for Hearing aids issued

right ear

ordered and approved

no HA needed

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

8/18/2020 Hearing aid issued for right ear.

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 25

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 927 of 985 - Page

1

2

ID#3 : 4515

4

5

6

follow up in 3 to 4 weeks Follow up hearing on 9/8/2020. Will follow up yearly hp.

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?
Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

No

Yes

2/10/2016

7/12/2017

518

Issued at another facility. Cannot find date documented that patient received hearing aids. Looks like patient received 2nd set 12/5/2017. Patient stated in transfer note to NTC that he had hearing aids on 7/12/2017.

No 7/3/2020 8/18/2020
46

Yes 7/29/2016 4/28/2017
273

Original screening noted no deficit, revisited later

No action needed. Delay was due to early screening noting no issue.

Yes 12/4/2018 1/21/2019
48

No 8/28/2020
9/8/2020 11

5/16/2018 10/26/2018
163

Original process was 15 days. Retest using Audicus to verify original results; Audicus verified no HA needed.

No action needed. No delay in service existed, time frame due to additional screening.

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 26

Prison:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Name of person filling out form:

column

Date:

7

8

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

7/16/2018

12/21/2017

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

KDOC

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 928 of 985 - Page

ID#: 4516

Some columns hidden if inmate is no longer at WKCC

Some columns hidden if inma

9

10

11

12

13

10/4/2018

5/16/2019

3/3/2020

1/25/2018

10/3/2018

3. Date of initial hearing screening

physical

transfer

physical

sickcall request

History

transfer screening

physical

4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

7/16/2018

12/21/2017

10/4/2018

5/16/2019

3/3/2020

1/25/2018

10/3/2018

10/8/2018

1/10/2018

10/11/2018

5/24/2019

3/5/2020

2/2/2018

10/11/2018

did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Pocket talker issued

did not meet criteria for hearing aid

did not meet criteria for hearing aid

No hearing Imapairment failed audiometry

Approved for HA

No HA needed

No HA needed

No HA needed

No HA needed

No HA Needed

No HA needed

Has HA in working order

Compliant

Compliant

Compliant

Compliant

Compliant

Compliant

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

physical

7/16/2018 transfer

12/21/2017 pysical

10/4/2018

5/16/2019

sickcall; earache

Physical

3/3/2020

1/25/2018

failed screening

physical

10/3/2018

referred to Audicus

failed screening

failed screening

failed audiometry

Failed refer to Audicus

refer to provider

refer to Audicus

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

7/30/2018

12/27/2017

10/11/2018

5/24/2019

3/5/2020

2/2/2018

10/11/2018

Audicus testing

provider visit

Audicus testing

Audicus testing

Audicus Test

Audimetry

Audicus

Did not meet criteria for failed screening; issued

hearing aid

pocket talker

No HA needed

No HA needed

No hearing impairment

Failed; signed refusal for further testing

Approved for HA

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 27

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 929 of 985 - Page

7

8

9ID#: 4517

10

11

12

13

10/8/2018

1/10/2018

Audicus retest

Amplification follow up

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Inmate is satisfied with pocket talker. Inmate refused further testing.

11/9/2018 Issued hearing Aid

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 28

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 930 of 985 - Page

7

8

9ID#: 4518

10

11

12

13

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

No

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today -

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

No 7/16/2018 10/8/2018
84

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

No actual delay in inmate service; initial Audicus test on 7/30/18 indictated no need for HA, retest on 10/8/18 repeated those results.

No 12/21/2017
1/10/2018 20

Yes 10/4/2018 10/11/2018
7

Yes 5/16/2019 5/24/2019
8

No actual delay in inmate service; initial Audicus test on 7/30/18 indictated no need for HA, retest on 10/8/18 repeated those results.

No 3/3/2020 3/5/2020
2

No 1/25/2018
2/2/2018 8

10/3/2018 11/9/2018
37

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 29

Prison:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA
ate is no longer at WKCC

Name of person filling out form:

Date:

14

15

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

8/7/2020

12/5/2018

2. How hearing problem was first presented to

KDOC

Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 931 of 985 - Page ID#: 4519

16

17

18

19

3/19/2020

8/1/2018

9/1/2018

3/5/2020

20 9/12/2018

3. Date of initial hearing screening

physical

physical

physical

physical

physical

Physical

Physical

4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

8/7/2020

12/5/2018

3/19/2020

8/1/2018

9/1/2018

3/5/2020

9/12/2018

8/21/2020

12/5/2018

3/20/2020

refused audicus and device if

needed. "I think I can hear

Approved for HA

failed audiometry

fine"

Approved for HA

8/8/2018

9/11/2019

4/8/2020

10/24/2018

Approved for HA

did not meet criteria for hearing aid. No deficiency hearing aid for right ear

Has HA in working order No HA needed

No HA needed

Has HA in working order Has HA (shipped to KSR) No HA needed

Has HA in working order

Compliant

Compliant

Compliant

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

sick call

8/7/2020 physical

12/5/2018 physical

3/19/2020 physical

8/1/2018 physical

9/1/2018 physical

3/5/2020 Physical

9/12/2018

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

refer to provoder for testing failed audiometry Refused further testing
8/14/2020
failed audiology

failed audiomentry refer to Audicus

failed screening

failed screening

failed screening

No further testing needed.

3/20/2020

8/8/2018

9/19/2018

3/20/2020

10/24/2018

Audicus

Audicus screening

audiometry

Audicus Hearing Screening Audicus

refer to audicus

Refused

Approved for HA

referred to Audicus

Retest required

hearing aid for right ear appro

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 30

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 932 of 985 - Page

14

15

1I6D#: 4520

17

18

19

20

8/21/2020
audicus test
HA for left ear ordered and approved.
9/10/2020 Hearing aid for left ear issued.
Follow up in 3 weeks

9/24/2018

Perfect test. 10/11/2018

4/8/2020

11/17/2018

Hearing aid issued

Audicus testing

Patient retested

approx date of issue at other facility.

No HA needed. Issued pocket talker.

Patient has hearing aid for

waiting on results

right ear.

perfect test and audicus said

highly unlikely

7/19/2019

4/27/2020

Audicus retest

Patient was retested

Approved for HA

Patient did not meet criteria for hearing device. Excellent hearing, not HOH as os 4/27

9/11/2019

Transfer to KSR

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Hearing aids shipped to KSR Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 31

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 933 of 985 - Page

14

15

1I6D#: 4521

17

18

19

20

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

Yes

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today -

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

No 8/7/2020 9/10/2020
34

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Yes 12/5/2018 12/5/2018
0

No 3/19/2020 3/20/2020
1

Yes 8/1/2018 9/24/2018
54

Yes 9/1/2018 9/11/2019
375

No 3/5/2020 4/27/2020
53

9/12/2018 11/18/2018
67

Inmate was originally determined as not eligible within the 60 day timeframe. Upon further review, inmate needed retesting and was deemed eligible. Each instance took <60 days.

Patient was tested and completed at other facility

We discovered a flaw in how the Audicus results were being interpreted and have since corrected the issue, initiating the retest.

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 32

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 934 of 985 - Page ID#: 4522

21

22

24

25

26

28

8/1/2018

8/31/2018

10/8/2019

9/12/2017

7/31/2020

8/2/2019

29 9/5/2018

3. Date of initial hearing screening

physical

intake

sick call request

Intake

follow up from sick call

physical

physical

4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

8/1/2018

8/31/2018

10/8/2019

9/12/2017

7/31/2020

8/2/2019

9/5/2018

8/8/2018

1/24/2018

10/9/2019

10/3/2017

8/5/2020

10/18/2019

9/28/2018

did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Hearing aids not recommended

Approved for HA

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Approved for HA

Approved HA

Approved for HA

No HA needed Compliant

No HA needed Compliant

Has HA in working order No HA needed

Has HA in working order Has HA in working order Has HA in working order

Compliant; inmate at WKCC 4/3/19-8/9/19, no complaints noted while here.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

8/1/2018

8/31/2018

10/8/2019

9/12/2017

7/31/2020

8/2/2019

9/5/2018

physical

intake

sick call

Intake

follow up sickcall

physical

physical

failed screening referred to Audicus

Refer to audiology

failed screening referred to Audicus

failed screening refer to audiology

failed screening refer to audicus

failed screening

failed screening referred to Audicus

8/8/2018

1/24/2018

10/9/2019

10/3/2017

8/5/2020

10/18/2019

9/28/2018

Audicus screening

Audiology

Audicus screening

Audiology

Audicus Test

Audicus Test

Audicus screening

No impairment.

Hearing aids not recommend Approved for HA

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid.

Pending provider review

HA ordered

Approved for HA

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 33

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 935 of 985 - Page

21

22

2I4D#: 4523

25

26

28

29

10/9/2018 Audicus retest offered Refused testing.

12/8/2019 Isssued hearing aid
1/3/2020 follow up with hearing aid follow up one year at HP

8/10/2020

11/5/2019

10/31/2018

Hearing device right ear ordered

issue of hearing aid

Issued hearing aid

Ordered and Approved from Audicus Clara for R ear

Kemen.

issued

8/21/2020 Issued hearing aid for right ear

follow up 3 to 4 weeks 9/3/2020
follow up hearing device

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

follow up yearly hp Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 34

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 936 of 985 - Page

21

22

2I4D#: 4524

25

26

28

29

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

No

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today -

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

No 8/1/2018 10/9/2018
69

Yes 8/31/2018 10/24/2018
54

No 10/8/2019 12/10/2019
63

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Inmate was originally determined ineligible for hearing aids. Audicus settings may have been incorrect; retest ordered.

Delay due to provider review (testing on 10/9, approval on 11/14)

9/12/2017 10/3/2017
21

Yes 7/31/2020 8/21/2020
21

No 8/2/2019 11/5/2019
95

9/5/2018 10/31/2018
56

Process occurred at another facility

Ensure Audicus settings reflect KYDOC standards.

Ensure prompt review of test results for efficient delivery if needed.

Process occurred at another facility

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 35

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 937 of 985 - Page ID#: 4525

30

31

32

33

34

35

4/3/2017

9/11/2018

2/25/2020

6/22/2016

12/10/2019

10/3/2018

36 9/9/2019

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Sick call

Physical

Physical

Audiology testing

physical

physical

physical

4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

4/3/2017

9/11/2018

2/25/2020

5/12/2016

12/10/2019

10/3/2018

9/9/2019

10/10/2017

9/14/2018

3/5/2020

6/22/2016

12/11/2019

10/11/2018

9/9/2019

Approved for HA

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

has HA in working order No HA needed

Has HA in working order Has HA in working order Has HA in working order Has HA in working order No HA needed

compliant

Compliant

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

sick call

4/3/2017 physical

9/11/2018 physical

2/25/2020

6/22/2016

audiology testing

physical

12/10/2019 physical

10/3/2018 physical

9/9/2019

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

refer to ENT/Audiology

Refer for audiology

patient stated that he had HArecommended bilateral heari failed screening referred to Audicus

failed screening referred to Audicus

failed screening referred to Audicus

4/13/2017

9/11/2018

3/3/2020

8/30/2016

12/11/2019

10/11/2018

10/14/2019

audiology

Audiology Test

Provider Follow up

audiology for hearing

Audicus screening

Audicus screening

Signed refusal for testing

9/17/2018 Results did not Failed Screening refer to

No recommendations for hea meet criteria.

Audicus

Hearing aids issued

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Refused testing

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 36

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 938 of 985 - Page

30

31

3I2D#: 4526

33

34

35

36

8/1/2017
Audiology
Impacted Ears repeat 10/10/2017
Audiology Exam
recommended bilateral aids 11/2/2017
received hearing aids

3/5/2020
Audicus Test
Approved for HA for left ear 3/17/2020
Issue of device
Hearing aid left ear issued. 4/7/2020
follow up hearing aid

1/21/2020

11/19/2018

Issued hearing aid

Issued hearing aid

2/6/2020 follow up hearing aid
follow up yearly/HP

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Received Bilateral Aids

follow up yearly/HP

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 37

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 939 of 985 - Page

30

31

3I2D#: 4527

33

34

35

36

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

No

No

(a) Start date

4/3/2017

(b) End date

11/2/2017

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

213

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today -

start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

At previous facility patient was orginally determined as

not exligible within the 60

day time frame. Patient was

sent out for further

problems and then retested

again on 10/10/2017.

Patient received in

timeframe upon receiving

further testing.

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Yes 9/11/2018 9/17/2018
6

No 2/25/2020 3/17/2020
21

Yes 6/26/2016 8/30/2016
65

No 12/10/2019
1/21/2020 42

Yes 10/3/2018 11/19/2018
47

9/9/2019 10/14/2019
35

Process was at a prior facility

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 38

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 940 of 985 - Page ID#: 4528

37

38

39

40

41

42

3/3/2020

1/16/2017

7/27/2018

1/2/2018

2/11/2020

7/7/2020

43 11/22/2019

3. Date of initial hearing screening

physical

Provider referral

intake screening

physical

physical

sick Call

sick call request

4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

3/3/2020

1/16/2017

7/27/2018

10/5/2017

2/11/2020

7/7/2020

11/22/2019

3/3/2020

4/12/2017

10/10/2018

1/2/2018

2/12/2020

7/15/2020

12/11/2019

did not meet criteria for hearing aid.

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Approved for HA

Did not meet criteria for device ordered for left ear hearing aid

No HA needed

Has HA in working order Has HA in working order No HA needed

Has HA in working order Has HA in working order No HA needed

Compliant

Compliant

Compliant

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

3/3/2020

1/16/2017

7/27/2018

physical

provider note

Intake

physical

Failed screening refer for

audicus

refer to audiology

refer for Audiology

failed screening

10/5/2017 physical
failed screening

2/11/2020 Sick Call

7/7/2020 sick call

11/22/2019

Failed screening refer to audi failed screening

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

3/20/2020

2/7/2017

9/7/2018

1/2/2018

2/12/2020

7/8/2020

12/11/2019

Audicus Testing Completed audiology

audicus test

Audiology

Audicus screening

Audicus Test

Audicus screening

?Retest due to changes in

No recommendation for hear recommended bilateral aids policy

Not recommended for HA Approved for HA

System down will Reschedule.

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 39

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 941 of 985 - Page

37

38

3I9D#: 4529

40

41

42

43

4/12/2017

10/10/2017

audiology

Audicus

recommended bilateral hearing aids

approved for hearing aid for left ear

hearing aids

4/24/2017 hearing aid

11/30/2018

hearing aid issued for left bilateral hearing aids issued. ear

3/12/2020

7/15/2020

Issued hearing aid

Audicus Test

Follow up 3-4 weeks

waiting for results

4/2/2020

7/21/2020

follow up hearing aid

Hearing device ordered for left ear

follow up yearly/HP

8/18/2020 hearing aid issued for left ear

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

follow up 3to4 weeks Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 40

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 942 of 985 - Page

37

38

3I9D#: 4530

40

41

42

43

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

Yes

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today -

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

No 3/3/2020 3/20/2020
17

No 1/6/2017 4/24/2017
108

No 7/27/2018 11/30/2018
126

Yes 10/5/2017
1/2/2018 89

Yes 2/11/2020 3/12/2020
30

Yes 7/7/2020 8/18/2020
42

11/22/2019 12/11/2019
19

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Scheduling with outside audiology in the rural setting Process was at a prior facility Process was at a prior facility of WKCC
Wellpath has since established new protocols and has a new vendor Audicus. Testing is done onsite and hearing aids are shipped to the facility.

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 41

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 943 of 985 - Page ID#: 4531

44

45

46

47

48

48

2/4/2020

7/25/2017

6/11/2020

3/16/2020

1/25/2018

7/16/2020

49 8/10/2018

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Physical

transfer screening

physical

Physical

transfer screening

physical

intake screening

4. Date of most recent hearing screening

5. Results of most recent hearing screening

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

Refused No HA needed Compliant

2/4/2020

7/25/2017

6/11/2020

3/16/2020

1/25/2018

7/16/2020

7/31/2018

3/4/2020

2/20/2018

6/26/2020

Approved for HA

No hearing impairment

Retest patient

4/3/2020

11/26/2018

7/20/2020

8/21/2018

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

device for left ear ordered Approved for HA

Has HA in working order No HA needed

b

Compliant

No HA needed

Has HA in working order Has HA in working order

Compliant

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

2/4/2020

History and Physical

transfer in

failed screening refer to prov failed screening

7/25/2017

6/11/2020

3/16/2020

History Physical

physical

transfer in

failed hearing screening refer for Audicus Test

failed screening refer to Audi failed screening

1/25/2018 physical
refer to audicus

7/16/2020

7/31/2018

intake screeining

failed refer for testing

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

2/14/2020

9/12/2017

6/26/2020

4/3/2020

1/29/2018

7/20/2020

8/10/2018

Audiioscope with provider Audiometer screening

Audicus Hearing Test

Audicus Testing

Audiometer screening

Audicus TEST

audiology testing

failed refer for audicus

failed both ears.

Pending Results

Please retest

failed screening

Results scanned to provider hearing aid for left ear Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 42

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 944 of 985 - Page

44

45

4I6D#: 4532

47

48

48

2/20/2020

9/26/2017

Patient is not able to

perform test at this time due

to other medical conditions. issued pocket talker

6/30/2020

2/9/2018

8/6/2020

49 9/6/2018

Audicus Testing

Recheck of hearing

Follow up with Audicus Test

Retest due do test not completed.

Not using pocket talker at all

times

No hearing impairment

3/4/2020

2/7/2018

Retest of Audicus

follow up at physical

Patient refused. Doesn’t think that he needs

referred to audiology

2/20/2018

Audiology consult

amplification follow up

hearing evalustion

hearing aid for left ear

feels that pocket talker is effective.

Hearing aid for left ear ordered and approved by kemen

Issued hearing aid for left ear

11/16/2018

8/21/2020

Audicus screening

Issued hearing aid for left ear Transfer

10/18/2018

Did not qualify for HA

follow up 3 to 4 weeks

9/3/2020

Hearing aid lost prior to transfer
3/11/2019

follow up hearing device

hearing aid for left ear

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Approved for two HA 3/14/2018
Issued hearing aids

follow up yearly hp

Hearing aid lost prior to transfer. Issued replacement for left ear.

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 43

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 945 of 985 - Page

44

45

4I6D#: 4533

47

48

48

49

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

Yes

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today -

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

No 2/4/2020 3/4/2020
29

7/25/2017 3/14/2018
232

Yes 6/11/2020 6/30/2020
19

No 3/16/2020 4/30/2020
45

Yes 1/25/2018 11/16/2018
295

No 7/16/2020 8/21/2020
36

7/31/2018 9/6/2018 37

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Inmate re-evaluated upon recommendation of monitor.

Transferred to KSR due to Inmate re-evaluated upon

other medical conditions on recommendation of

4/30/2020

monitor.

Protocol adjusted to ensure inmates are properly accommodated

Protocol adjusted to ensure inmates are properly accommodated

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 44

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 946 of 985 - Page ID#: 4534

50

51

52

53

54

55

3/3/2020

11/6/2018

6/18/2020

1/23/2020

2/26/2019

8/30/2017

56 9/9/2019

3. Date of initial hearing screening

physical

physical

physical

provider visit

sick call

sick call

sick call

4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

3/3/2020

11/6/2018

6/18/2020

1/23/2020 2/26/19 (LAC)

8/30/2017

9/9/2019

3/20/2020

12/7/2018

6/22/2020

2/5/2020

6/7/2019

11/7/2017

10/9/2019

Approved HA for left ear

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Has HA in working order No HA needed

Has HA in working order Has HA in working order Has HA in working order Has HA in working order Has HA in working order

Compliant

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

3/3/2020

physical

physical

Failed audiogram refer to

audicus

failed screening

11/6/2018

6/18/2020

physical

provider visit

failed screening refer to audicus

failed screening

1/23/2020

2/26/2019

8/30/2017

sick call

sick call

physical

refer for testing

failed screening referred to

audiology

failed screening

9/9/2019

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

3/20/2020

12/7/2018

6/22/2020

2/5/2020

Audicus Testing

Audicus screening

Audicus Screening

Audicus screening

transfer in

Did not meet criteria for Audicus clara for left ear. hearing aid

hearing aid ordered for right

ear.

Approved for HA

6/7/2019

11/7/2017

10/9/2019

Audiology

Audicus screening

recommended hearing aid

for left ear.

Approved for HA

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 45

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 947 of 985 - Page

50

51

5I2D#: 4535

53

54

55

56

4/28/2020

6/24/2020

2/28/2020

6/7/2019

HA ordered on 11/13/19

12/8/2017

12/9/2019

hearing aid left ear Issued hearing aid left ear.

follow up with Audicus

Hearing aid issued

Audicus screening

hearing aid

Issued hearing aid

hearing aid ordered for right Issued for left ear

Approved for HA

hearing aid issued for left ear

7/29/2020

9/8/2020

7/19/2019

Issue Hearing aid

follow up hearing aid

Issued hearing aid

Audicus Clara for right ear iss will follow up yearly hp 9/11/2020
follow up with hearing device.

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Follow up at yearing hp

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 46

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 948 of 985 - Page

50

51

5I2D#: 4536

53

54

55

56

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

Yes

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today -

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

No 3/3/2020 4/28/2020
56

Yes 11/6/2018 12/7/2018
31

Yes 6/18/2020 7/29/2020
41

Yes 1/23/2020 2/28/2020
36

No 2/26/2019 7/19/2019
143

Yes 8/30/2017 12/8/2017
100

9/9/2019 12/9/2019
91

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Inmate status was lost in transfer; process only took 42 days from start-finish once discovered at WKCC.

Delay due to provider review (testing on 10/9, Process was at a prior facility approval on 11/14)

Processes now in place to better track HOH inmates upon transfer

Ensure prompt review of test results for efficient delivery if needed.

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 47

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 949 of 985 - Page ID#: 4537

57

58

59

60

61

62

11/8/2019

9/1/2017

12/10/2019

9/18/2019

2/14/2018

2/28/2020

63 12/14/2017

3. Date of initial hearing screening

chronic care visit

Intake screening

physical

physical

transfer screening

Sick Call

sick call at EKCC

4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

11/8/2019

9/1/2017

12/10/2019

9/18/2019

2/14/2018

2/28/2020

1/8/2018

11/8/2019

10/19/2017

12/19/2019

10/2/2019

3/29/2018

3/5/2020

1/8/2018

Transferred to EKCC in process on 12/10/19

Approved for HA

Refused hearing aid

Approved for HA

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Approved for HA

b. In process

Has HA in working order

refused hearing aid (No HA

needed)

Has HA in working order

No HA needed

No HA needed

Has HA in working order

Compliant

Compliant

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

11/8/2019

chronic care visit

Intake screening

9/1/2017 12/0/2019 physical

physical

9/18/2019 transfer

2/14/2018 Sick Call

2/28/2020 sick call

12/14/2017

failed screening

refer for testing

failed screening refer for test failed screening refer to audicfailed screening

failed screening refer to Audi ringing in ear

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

Transferred to EKCC on 12/10/2019

10/19/2017

12/12/2019

9/25/2019

3/29/2018

3/5/2020

1/8/2018

Audiology

Audicus Test

Audicus

Audiology screening

Audicus Testing

Audiology screening

Recommended binaural hearing aids

Mild to moderate hearing loss in left and right ear Inconclusive Retest

Did not meet criteria for hearing aids

Did not meet criteria for hearing aids

Did not meet criteria for HA

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 48

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 950 of 985 - Page

57

58

5I9D#: 4538

60

61

62

63

12/16/2019

11/9/2017

12/19/2019

9/26/2019

Audicus Test

hearing aids

Review of Audicus Results witRetest Audicus

Unkown; completed at EKCC

Received binaural hearing aids

Patien declined to obtain hearing aid at this time. States he will get one when he gets out.

Retest Audicus

2/17/2020 Hearing Aid Right Ear

Audicus

10/2/2019

Hearing aid recommended 11/7/2019
hearing aid

8/16/2018

Chart review done by Dr. Kemen.
HA approved to improve tinnitis.

Issued HA

8/30/2018

Issued HA

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Hearing aid issued

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 49

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 951 of 985 - Page

57

58

5I9D#: 4539

60

61

62

63

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

Yes

(a) Start date

(b) End date

Unknown

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today -

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

No 11/8/2019

Yes 9/1/2017 11/9/2017
69

No 12/10/2019 12/19/2019
9

No 9/18/2019 11/7/2019
50

Yes 2/14/2018 3/29/2018
43

Yes 2/28/2020
3/5/2020 6

12/14/2017 8/30/2018 259

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Transferred to EKCC on 12/10/19 while in process Process was at prior facility.

Process was at prior facility.

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 50

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 952 of 985 - Page ID#: 4540

64

65

66

67

68

71

9/11/2020

8/4/2020

9/10/2018

9/19/2019

7/10/2020

4/20/2018

72 1/10/2018

3. Date of initial hearing screening

Sick Call

sick call

physical

sick call

follow up sick call

Hearing Questionnaire

Hearing Questionnaire

4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9/11/2020

8/6/2020

9/10/2018

9/19/2019

7/10/2020 4/20/18 at GRCC

9/16/2020

8/10/2020

9/28/2018

9/19/2019

7/15/2020 7/19/18 at GRCC

HA for left ear ordered and HA for left ear ordered and

approved.

approved

Approved for HA

Failed screening/refused Audicus

right ear device

Approved for HA

c

Has HA in working order Has HA in working order No HA needed

Has HA in working order Has HA in working order

Compliant

1/10/2018 (KSR) 1/3/2019 (WKCC) Signed refusal for further testing.
No HA needed
Compliant

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

9/11/2020

8/4/2020

Sick Call

sick call

physical

Failed questionaire refer to provider for furher testing. refer to provider

failed screening

9/15/2020

8/6/2020

failed hearing screening hearing screening and audiog Audicus testing

9/10/2018

9/19/2019

7/10/2020

4/20/2018

1/10/2018

sick call request
failed screening refused further testing 9/28/2018

forllow up sick call
failed sceening refer to audicus

transfer failed questionaire

Hearing screening Failed

7/15/2020

6/23/2018

1/24/2018

Audicus

provider f/up

Physical

refer to audicus

refer to Audicus

Approved for HA

approved for hearing aid for rConsult for Audiology

Ordered testing at KSR

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 51

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 953 of 985 - Page

64

65

6I6D#: 4541

67

68

71

72

9/16/2020

8/10/2020

10/22/2018

Audicus Testing Pending Results

Audicus

Issued hearing aid

HA for left ear ordered and approved

9/18/2020

9/10/2020

discussed results with patientHA for left ear issued

Audicus Clara for left ear ordered.

follow up in 3 wks

7/17/2020

7/19/2018

5/12/2018

hearing aid ordered and appr Outside Audiology appt

Refused testing Hears for You

awaiting hearing aid

HA ordered

8/21/2020 issued hearing aid for right eaHA issued

8/17/2018 Physical

1/3/2019

follow up 3 to 4 weeks

Hearing Aid issued

9/11/2020

follow up hearing device

Order Audicus screening 1/24/2019
signed refusal

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

follow up yearly hp Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 52

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 954 of 985 - Page

64

65

6I6D#: 4542

67

68

71

72

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Yes 9/11/2020
70

No 8/4/2020 9/10/2020
37

Yes 9/10/2018 10/22/2018
42

Yes 9/19/2019 9/19/2019
0

No 7/10/2020 8/18/2020
39

Yes 4/20/2018 8/17/2018
119

1/3/2019 1/24/2019
21

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Patient signed refusal twice Process was at prior facility for additional testing.

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 53

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 955 of 985 - Page ID#: 4543

73

74

76

77

78

79

1/6/2020

12/11/2017

3/23/2018

12/19/2019

2/5/2018

8/1/2018

80 7/21/2020

3. Date of initial hearing screening

physical

Hearing screening

transfer screening

chronic care visit

transfer screening

physical

chart review

4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

1/6/2020

12/11/2017

3/23/2018

12/19/2019

2/5/2018

8/1/2018

7/24/2020

1/8/2020

1/3/2018

1/2/2019

1/8/2020

11/9/2018

8/21/2018

8/5/2020

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Approved for HA

passed questionnaire at physical on 1/2/19

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

hearing device ordered and approved

No HA needed

Has HA in working order No HA needed

Has HA in working order Has HA in working order Has HA in working order Has HA in working order

Compliant

Compliant

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description Medical Visit 1 - Outcome
Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description
Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

physical

1/6/2020 screening

failed screening

failed

1/8/2020

12/11/2017

3/26/2018

12/19/2019

2/5/2018

8/1/2018

7/24/2020

transfer

chronic care visit

transfer

physical

hearing screening

failed screening

failed screening

failed screening issued amplification

failed screening

failed screening referto audicus

1/3/2018

5/20/2018

1/8/2020

2/22/2018

8/21/2018

8/5/2020

Audicus screening

Audiometry

Audiology screening

Audicus screening

amplification followup

Audicus screening

audicus Screening

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Approved for HA

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Approved for hearing aid satisfied w/ amplificaiton Approved for hearing aid provider review

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 54

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 956 of 985 - Page

73

74

7I6D#: 4544

77

78

79

80

1/25/2018

1/2/2019

1/29/2020

10/18/2018

9/11/2018

8/10/2020

Issued Hearing Aid

physical

Issued Hearing aid

hearing followup

Issued Hearing Aid

passed questionnaire at screening

refer to Audicus

Issued hearing aid

hearing device ordered

ordered and approved by kemen on 8/10/2020

11/9/2018 Audicus screening

8/21/2020 Issued hearing aid fo rlight ea

Approved for HA 12/17/2018
Issued hearing aid

follow up 3 to 4 weeks

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 55

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 957 of 985 - Page

73

74

7I6D#: 4545

77

78

79

80

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

Yes

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today -

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

No 1/6/2020 1/8/2020
2

No 12/11/2017
1/25/2018 45

Yes 3/23/2018 5/20/2018
58

Yes 12/19/2019
1/29/2020 41

Yes 2/5/2018 12/17/2018
315

Yes 8/1/2018 9/29/2018
59

7/21/2020 8/21/2020
31

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Inmate re-evaluated upon recommendation of monitor.

Protocol adjusted to ensure inmates are properly accommodated

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 56

Prison: Name of person filling out form:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 958 of 985 - Page ID#: 4546

Date:

81

82

84

85

86

87

88

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

4/21/2017

10/3/2019

10/2/2018

9/18/2017

1/4/2017

10/4/2017

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Patient transferred to WKCC

on 9/18/2020 from NTC

04/21/2017at RCC

physical

physical

transfer screening

01/04/2017 sick call GRCC transfer screening

with hearing device.

3. Date of initial hearing screening

4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

06/27/2017at RCC N/A Inmate refused further testing at WKCC
No HA needed
Compliant

10/3/2019

10/2/2018

9/18/2017

10/3/2018

12/13/2018

1/8/2018

Inmate refused further testing

Approved for HA

did not meet criteria for hearing aid

failed

1/4/2017 2/1/2017

10/4/2017 10/9/2017

Inmate refused testing

No HA needed

Has HA in working order No HA needed

Has HA in working order

Compliant

Compliant

Compliant

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

physical

10/3/2018 physical

10/2/2018 transfer

9/18/2017 sick call

1/4/2017 transfer

10/4/2017

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

failed screening refused further testing

failed screening

failed screening

failed

failed screening

11/15/2018

1/8/2018

2/20/2017

10/8/2017

provider visit

Audiology

Audiology

whisper test

relieved impaction, failed did not meet criteria for

screening

hearing aid

failed screening

failed screening Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 57

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 959 of 985 - Page

81

82

8I4D#: 4547

85

86

87

88

12/13/2018

refused further testing on

10/9/17

4/3/2017

10/3/2018

Audicus screening
Approvd for hearing aid 1/14/2019
Issued hearing aid

issued hearing aids

physical

issued hearing aids

refused further testing

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 58

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 960 of 985 - Page

81

82

8I4D#: 4548

85

86

87

88

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

No

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today -

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

No 4/21/2017 6/27/2017
67

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Patient identified as HOH at RCC on 04/21/2017. Patient screened on-site 06/27/2017. Patient noted not to want hearing aids. Patient transferred to WKCC and during phyical patient signed refusal for further testing.

Yes 10/3/2018 10/3/2018
0

No 10/2/2018 1/14/2019
104

No 9/18/2017
1/8/2018 112

No 1/4/2017 4/3/2017
89

10/4/2017 10/9/2017
5

Other medical issues that needed resolution before final testing

Patient arrived to WKCC

with hearing aids upon

arrival. Patient screened and

Scheduling with outside received hearing aids from

audiology in the rural setting GRCC from an outside

of WKCC

provider.

No problem with process; unrelated medical delay

Wellpath has since established new protocols and has a new vendor Audicus. Testing is done Began utilizing Audicus in onsite and hearing aids are 2018 to shorten timeframe. shipped to the facility.

Patient refuses to be further testing. Patient first identified at transfer. Followed up with during annual physical. Patient refused testing again.

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 59

Prison: Name of person filling out form:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 961 of 985 - Page ID#: 4549

Date:

89

91

92

93

94

95

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

2/14/2018

5/21/2018

6/12/2020

1/12/2018

1/8/2019

10/8/2019

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Follow up from ear problems that was treated with little to no

transfer screening

sick call

improvement

Physical at RCC 01/12/2018 physical at RCC 1/8/19

sick call

sick call

3. Date of initial hearing screening

96 9/21/2020

4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

2/14/2018

5/29/2018

6/12/2020

1/12/2018

1/8/2019

10/8/2019 questianare on 9/21/2020

1/21/2019

11/9/2018

8/24/2020

2/12/2018

1/14/2019

10/11/2019 questianare on 9/21/2020

Approved for HA

Did not meet criteria for Seen by specialist requested

hearing aid

MRI

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

refer to provider

Has HA in working order No HA needed

b

Compliant

Has HA in working order Has HA in working order Has HA in working order b

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

transfer failed screening

2/14/2018 sick call

5/21/2018

6/12/2020

follow up for continued ear

problems.

physical at RCC

flushed inmate ear

Failed Audiogram. Referred

to Audicus

failed

1/12/2018 physical at RCC
failed

1/8/2019 Sick call

10/8/2019

9/21/2020

sick call failed questionaire

failed screening

refer to provider

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

2/21/2018

5/29/2018

6/22/2020

2/12/2018

1/14/2019

10/11/2019

9/24/2020

on-site screening

hearing follow up

Audicus Test

Audiology consult

on-site screening

Audicus screening

Hearing screening

issued pocket talker

failed screening

Refered to ENT for Medical

problem with ear.

failed screening

failed screening

Approved for hearing aid Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 60

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 962 of 985 - Page

89

91

9I2D#: 4550

93

94

95

96

3/8/2018

6/2/2018

8/24/2020

3/1/2018

2/8/2019

12/10/2019

follow up

sick call request

seen by outsitde provider Hearing aids issued

continued hearing issues. I/M stated at visit that he satisfied with pocket talker would be OK

recommend MRI and follow

up. Patient schedule for

MRI on 9/17 and follow up

with ENT on 9/28

Issued hearing aids

Hearing aid issued Issued Hearing Aid

Hearing aid issued

1/21/2019

10/18/2018

Audicus testing

hearing follo up

Approved for hearing aid failed screening

3/11/2019

11/9/2018

Issued hearing aid

Audicus screening

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

did not qualify for HA

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 61

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 963 of 985 - Page

89

91

9I2D#: 4551

93

94

95

96

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

Yes

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today -

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Yes 2/14/2018 3/11/2019
390

Yes 5/21/2018 11/9/2018
172

Yes 6/12/2020
161

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Inmate was satisfied with pocket talker initially. Audicus testing later determined eligiblity for hearing aid.

Delay due to scheduling Delay due to scheduling outside ENT (COVID related) outside ENT (COVID related)

Yes 1/12/2018 3/1/2018
48

Yes 1/8/2019 2/8/2019
31

10/8/2019 12/10/2019
63

Delay due to provider review (testing on 10/11, approval on 11/14)

9/21/2020 60

All inmates who fail screening are now forwarded to Audiology.

Other issues needed addressed before level of Delay due to scheduling need could be established. outside ENT (COVID related)

Ensure prompt review of test results for efficient delivery if needed.

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 62

Prison: Name of person filling out form:

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 964 of 985 - Page ID#: 4552

Date:

97

98

99

100

101

102

Prisoner First Name

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

1. Date hearing problem first presented to

KDOC

9/10/2020

6/27/2020

2/23/2017

10/2/2018

11/29/2019 See below

2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Transferred from WKCC on 11/29/2018; should

physical

sick call

sick call

physical

physical

not be included

3. Date of initial hearing screening

4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system. 9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

9/10/2020

7/24/2020

2/23/2017

10/2/2018

11/29/2019 N/A

9/16/2020

8/14/2020

4/28/2017

11/16/2018

12/11/2019 N/A

did not meet criteria for

hearing device

HA ordered for left ear. Approved for HA

Did not meet criteria for Did not meet criteria for

hearing aid

hearing aid

N/A

d

Has HA in working order Has HA in working order No HA needed

No HA needed

N/A

Compliant

Compliant

N/A

N/A

9/10/2020 failed hearing screening sick call

6/27/2020 sick call

2/23/2017 physical

1/2/2018 physical

11/29/2019

103
10/8/2018 Physical at RCC
10/8/2018 10/8/2018 Approved for HA
Has HA in working order

physical

10/3/2018

refer to audicus

refer to provider

failed screening

failed screening

failed screening

failed screening

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

9/16/2020

7/24/2020

3/23/2017

11/16/2018

12/11/2019

Audicus Testing

hearing screening

Audiology consult

Audicus screening

Audicus screening

Pending Results

refer to audicus

recommended HA both Did not meet criteria for Did not meet criteria for

ears

hearing aid

hearing aid

10/8/2018 audiometry at RCC
Failed screening Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 63

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 965 of 985 - Page

97

98

9I9D#: 4553

100

101

102

103

9/18/2020

8/5/2020

4/28/2017

Discussed results with patient

Audicus

Audiologist

Patient does not meet criteria for hearing device. Provider request to retest Issued hearing aids

8/14/2020
retest
HA ordered and approved on 8/28 due to new record. NO workflow with new EMR system.
9/10/2020
hearing aid issued for left ear.

9/17/2020

10/12/2018

physical

failed hearing screening refer to audicus

Audicus

9/18/2020

pending results
9/22/2020
patient did not meed criteria for hearing device.

Chart review Approved for hearing aid
10/25/2018 received hearing aid received hearing aid

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

follow up in 3 weeks

follow up yearly hp Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 64

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 966 of 985 - Page

97

98

9I9D#: 4554

100

101

102

103

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

... Any part of audiology process occurred during covered time period? (a) Start date (b) End date (c) Days for resolution (End date - start date) (d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today start date) (e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?
Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Yes 9/10/2020 9/16/2020
6

No 6/27/2020 9/10/2020
75

No 2/23/2017 4/28/2017
64

Yes 10/2/2018 11/16/2018
45

No 11/29/2019 12/11/2019
12

There was a breakdown in

the referral process from

nurse to Provider. Delay due Scheduling with outside

to retest and no workflow audiology in the rural setting

for new EMR.

of WKCC

Nurses were educated on the referring to providers. Workflow issues were addressed and process was instructed to providers to follow until New EMR workflow in process.

Wellpath has since established new protocols and has a new vendor Audicus. Testing is done onsite and hearing aids are shipped to the facility.

No 0

10/3/2018 10/25/2018
22

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 65

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 967 of 985 - Page ID#: 4555

104

105

106

107

108

109

10/25/2018

8/27/2020

7/22/2020

10/22/2018

11/14/2018

6/20/2018

110 5/16/2019

3. Date of initial hearing screening

physical

Sick Call

physical

physical

Physical

sick call

intake screening

4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

10/25/2018

8/27/2020

7/22/2020

10/22/2018

12/13/2018

6/20/2018

5/16/2019

11/16/2018

9/2/2020

7/27/2020

11/9/2018

12/13/2018

7/20/2018

6/6/2019

Did not meet criteria for

hearing aid

HA ordered for left ear

Approved for HA

Did not meet criteria for Did not meet criteria for

hearing aid

hearing aid

Approved for HA

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

No HA needed

c

Compliant

Has HA in working order No HA needed

No HA needed

Has HA in working order No HA needed

Compliant

Compliant

Compliant

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

physical

10/25/2018 sick call

8/27/2020 physical

7/22/2020 physical

10/22/2018 physical

11/14/2018 sick call

6/20/2018

5/16/2019

intake screening

failed screening

failed screening refer to prorefer to audicus

failed screening

refer to audicus

refer to provider

failed screening

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

11/9/2018

9/1/2020

7/27/2020

11/9/2018

12/13/2018

6/25/2018

5/22/2019

Audicus screening

Provider hearing screening Audicus

Audicus screening

Audicus Test

audiometry

audiometry

inconclusive; retest

Did not meet criteria for

failed audiogram refer for aresults sent to provider hearing aid

Waiting results

failed screening

failed screening

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 66

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome
Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 968 of 985 - Page

104

105

10I6D#: 4556

107

108

109

110

11/16/2018

9/2/2020

7/31/2020

Audicus screening

Audicus Test

hearing aid for left ear ordered

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Results sent provider. Patient scheduled for follow up appointment on Ordered and approved by 9/8 due to holiday on 9/7. kemen on 8/04/2020

9/8/2020

8/18/2020

follow up from test

issued hearing aid for left ear

Audicus Clara Left ear ordered.

follow up 3 to 4 weeks

9/22/2020

9/11/2020

Patient called to medical to issue hearing device. follow up hearing device

Patient stated that he did

not want the device. jUst

wanted HOH card so that

if he got In trouble or

written up. Stated that he

did not have money on his

account. Patient does

have $55 on hes account

as of today.

follow up yearly hp

12/20/2020

7/20/2018

6/6/2019

Hearing Review

Audicus screening

Audicus screening

Did not meet criteria for Patient did not meet criteria Approved for hearing aid hearing aid

8/10/2018 Hearing aid issued

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 67

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 969 of 985 - Page

104

105

10I6D#: 4557

107

108

109

110

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

No

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today -

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Yes 10/25/2018 11/16/2018
22

Yes 8/27/2020
85

No 7/22/2020 8/18/2020
27

No 10/22/2018
11/9/2018 18

No 11/14/2018 12/20/2018
36

Yes 6/20/2018 8/10/2018
51

5/16/2019 6/6/2019 21

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 68

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 970 of 985 - Page ID#: 4558

111

112

113

114

115

116

11/26/2019

9/9/2020

5/30/2019

7/27/2020

1/21/2019

9/3/2019

117 1/22/2020

3. Date of initial hearing screening

visit with provider

H&P

intake

follow up

intake

intake

intake

4. Date of most recent hearing screening 5. Results of most recent hearing screening

11/26/2019 12/9/2019

9/9/2020 9/10/2020

5/30/2019 5/30/2019

6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

Approved for HA Has HA in working order

pending Audicus results Referred to outside ENT

b

Released in process

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

7/27/2020

1/21/2019

9/3/2019

1/22/2020

8/14/2020

2/1/2019

10/11/2019

1/30/2020

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Has HA in working order Has HA in working order No HA needed Compliant

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

11/26/2019

9/9/2020

5/30/2019

7/27/2020

1/21/2019

provider visit

H&P

intake

follow up

Intake

intake screening

failed screening

failed screening

failed screening

failed screening refer to audicus

failed screening refer to audiology

failed screening

9/3/2019

1/22/2020

intake screening

failed screening

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

12/9/2019

9/10/2020

6/17/2019

8/14/2020

2/1/2019

10/11/2019

1/30/2020

Audicus screening

Audicus test

released from prison

audiucs testing

Audiogram

Audicus screening

Audicus screening

recommended ENT visit Approved for hearing aid Test inconsistent RETEST upon release

waiting for results

approved for hearing aid for rApproved for hearing aid

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 69

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 971 of 985 - Page

111

112

11I3D#: 4559

114

115

116

117

12/24/2019

9/14/2020

Hearing aid issued

Audicus Retest

Results sent to provider on 9/15
9/16/2020 Audicus Clar Right ear Recommended.
Approved for hearing aid for left ear by Dr. Keman and ordered on 9/16/2020

8/31/2020

3/22/2019

12/17/2019

Audicus Clara For left ear approved and ordered by kemen.

hearing aid

Hearing aid issued

Waiting for delivery of device.

Issue of hearing aid for right ear.

9/21/2020 Issued hearing device for left ear.

follow up 3-4 weeks

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 70

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 972 of 985 - Page

111

112

11I3D#: 4560

114

115

116

117

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

Yes

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today -

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

11/26/2019 12/24/2019
28

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

yes 9/9/2020
72

Yes 5/30/2019 6/17/2019
18

Yes 7/27/2020 9/21/2020
56

Yes 1/21/2019 3/22/2019
60

Yes 9/3/2019 12/17/2019
105

1/22/2020 1/30/2020
8

Delay due to time between screening and audiology, and delay in provider review (testing on 10/11, approval on 11/22)

Ensure prompt testing and review of test results for efficient delivery if needed.

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 71

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 973 of 985 - Page ID#: 4561

118

119

120

121

122

123

5/29/2019

6/20/2019

3/1/2018

9/20/2018

10/23/2019

10/1/2019

124 1/21/2020

3. Date of initial hearing screening

intake screening

intake

intake

sick call

intake

intake

intake

4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.
8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

5/29/2019

6/20/2019

3/1/2018

9/20/2018

10/23/2019

10/1/2019

6/7/2019

7/11/2019

3/25/2019

10/9/2018

12/9/2019

12/9/2019

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Inconclusive/other medical issues

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

No HA needed

No HA needed

In process to determine Has HA in working order Has HA in working order Has HA in working order no hearing aid needed

Compliant

Compliant

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

5/29/2019

6/20/2019

3/1/2018

intake screening

intake screening

intake screening

sick call

9/20/2018

10/23/2019

10/1/2019

intake screening

intake screening

intake

1/21/2020

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

failed screening

failed screening

failed screening issued pocket talker

failed screening

failed screening

failed screening

failed screening refer to audio

6/7/2019

7/11/2019

3/15/2018

10/9/2018

12/9/2019

12/9/2019

2/14/2020

audiometry

Audicus screening

Pocket talker follow up Audicus screening

Audicus screening

Audicus screening

Audicus test

failed screening

Did not meet criteria for hearing aid

Feels PT helps, continue Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

did not meet criteria for hearing device.

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 72

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 974 of 985 - Page

118

119

12I0D#: 4562

121

122

123

124

7/11/2019 Audicus Inmate signed refusal

6/7/2018

11/7/2018

12/24/2019

12/24/2019

Audiometry

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Hearing aid issued

Passed screening
2/25/2019 Audiometry

failed screening 3/25/2019
Audicus screening

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

Retest required/pending resolution of other medical issues

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 73

Prisoner First Name

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 975 of 985 - Page

118

119

12I0D#: 4563

121

122

123

124

Prisoner Last Name

KyDOC #

Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

Yes

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today -

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

yes 5/29/2019 7/11/2019
43

Yes

No

6/20/2019

3/1/2018

7/11/2019 10/16/19 transfer

21

225

Yes 9/20/2018 11/7/2018
48

Yes 10/23/2019 12/24/2019
62

Yes 10/1/2019 12/24/2019
84

1/21/2020 2/14/2020
24

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Inmate had ongoing medical issues to be resolved prior to hearing testing

Delay due to delay in Audicus testing (screening on 10/23/19, Audicus on 12/9/19)

Delay due to delay in Audicus testing (screening on 10/1/19, Audicus on 12/12/19)

Ensure prompt testing if Ensure prompt testing if

failed screening for efficient failed screening for efficient

delivery if needed.

delivery if needed.

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 74

Prison: Name of person filling out form: Date:
Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # 1. Date hearing problem first presented to KDOC
2. How hearing problem was first presented to KDOC

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 976 of 985 - Page ID#: 4564

125

126

128

128

129

130

1/15/2020

2/17/2020

6/5/2020

5/21/2019

12/7/2017 4/8/2018

3. Date of initial hearing screening
4. Date of most recent hearing screening
5. Results of most recent hearing screening
6. Hearing aid status - list which one applies: (a) has hearing aid(s) in working order (b) in process of determining whether hearing aids are needed (c) in process of obtaining or repairing hearing aids (d) no hearing aid is needed
7. For each inmate in status (d) (no hearing aid needed) , consult the medical documentation of the decision against providing a hearing aid, and ensure that it complies with KyDOC policy.

intake

physical

treatment time

intake

intake

intake

1/15/2020

2/17/2020

6/15/2020

5/21/2019

12/7/2017 4/8/2018

1/30/2020

3/6/2020

7/2/2020

6/6/2019

10/8/2019 4/25/2018

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Approved for HA

Has HA in working order Has HA in working order

Has HA in working order

Has HA in working order

Has HA in working order

Has HA in working order

8. For each inmate who has a hearing aid , does it have a t-coil (telecoil) receptor? (This type of receptor makes the hearing aid compatible with an induction loop system.

9. Please provide the following information about each medical encounter from when the hearing issue was presented to when the

Medical Visit 1 - Date Medical Visit 1 - Description
Medical Visit 1 - Outcome

1/15/2020

intake screening

physical

2/17/2020

6/5/2020

5/21/2019

12/7/2017 4/8/2018

Presented at treatment time

for ear flush

intake screening

intake screening

intake

failed screening

failed audiogram

no results, instructed inmate

to debrox and return

failed screening

failed screening

failed screening

Medical Visit 2 - Date Medical Visit 2 - Description Medical Visit 2 - Outcome

1/30/2020

Audicus screening

Audicus Test

3/4/2020

6/15/2020

follow up with ears

audiometry

5/22/2019

12/18/2017 4/25/2018

Audicus

Audiometry

screening

Approved for HA

Malfunction of TEST

flushed and failed hearing

screening

failed screening

failed audiometry;issued pocket talker

Approved for HA
Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 75

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC #
Medical Visit 3 - Date Medical Visit 3 - Description
Medical Visit 3 - Outcome
Medical Visit 4 - Date Medical Visit 4 - Description Medical Visit 4 - Outcome
Medical Visit 5 - Date Medical Visit 5 - Description Medical Visit 5 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 977 of 985 - Page

125

126

12I8D#: 4565

128

129

130

3/12/2020

3/6/2020

7/2/2020

6/6/2019

8/27/2019 5/23/2018

Hearing aid issued

Audicus Retest

Audicus Screening

Audicus screening

Provider follow up

Issued hearing aid

Follow up in 3-4 Weeks Approved for hearing aid pending results

Approved for hearing aid referred to Audicus

4/28/2020

7/10/2020

7/16/2019

10/8/2019

hearing aid left ear

Audicus Follow Up

Hearing aid issued

Audicus testing

Device ordered for right ear. Issued hearing aid left ear. Approved on 7/13/2020
8/18/2020
issued hearing aid

Approved for HA 10/24/2019
Hearing aid issued

Medical Visit 6 - Date Medical Visit 6 - Description

follow up 3 to 4 weeks

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 76

Prisoner First Name Prisoner Last Name KyDOC # Medical Visit 6 - Outcome

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 978 of 985 - Page

125

126

12I8D#: 4566

128

129

130

...

Any part of audiology process occurred during

covered time period?

Yes

(a) Start date

(b) End date

(c) Days for resolution (End date - start date)

(d) If in process, how many days so far? (Today -

start date)

(e) If either (c) or (d) is > 60 days, why?

Solution to problems revealed in (e)?

Yes 1/15/2020 3/12/2020
57

Yes 2/17/2020 4/28/2020
71

Yes 6/5/2020 8/18/2020
74

Delay in shipping device due Delay in shipping device due

to COVID-19

to COVID-19

Yes 5/21/2019 7/16/2019
56

No

12/7/2017 4/18/2018

10/24/2019 5/23/2018

686

35

Delay due to inmate satisfaction with process, and process was corrected later. Inmate was retested, new process was within 60-day timeframe. (8/27/19-10/24/19)

Delay in shipping device due Delay in shipping device due

to COVID-19

to COVID-19

Solution was the retest

Exhibit 2, WKCC, p. 77

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 979 of 985 - Page ID#: 4567

Cookie Crews Commissioner

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Western Kentucky Correctional Complex 374 New Bethel Road
Fredonia, Kentucky 42411 Phone: 270-388-9781

Timothy W. Lane Warden

TO:

Janet Conover, Director of Operations

FROM:

Jacob Bruce, ADA Coordinator

THRU:

Tim Lane, Warden

DATE:

July 29, 2020

SUBJ:

WKCC ADA Action Plan Update

Please see below for updates to the most recent action plan submitted by WKCC. The previous plan is included in this memo below for reference as well.

• We have implemented centralized ADA bulletin boards at WKCC and Ross-Cash as a one-stop location for memos/information to the populations. These boards are in addition to the general notice boards in each living unit.
• The ADA Aide inmate positon has been implemented at both WKCC and Ross-Cash and is showing to be an effective tool to assist swift communication between the ADA Coordinator and the HOH population.
• We have updated our spreadsheet to include current information discovered during the recent ECW/KOMS alert review.
• We have begun planning to move our TTYs to Securus-connected lines. Please note that we have not had any issues connecting calls with the TTY devices using staff phone lines.
• WKCC/Ross-Cash will also install Captel phones. As of this date, we are awaiting the arrival of the Captel phones to begin the install. o We will advise when installations of the Securus TTY and Captel phones are completed.

Please read below for our action plan based upon the report the Monitor submitted to the courts on May 27, 2020. Each area is labeled with the corresponding page on the Monitor’s report.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal EOxphpiboit r2t,uWnKitCyCE, mp. p78loyer M/F/D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 980 of 985 - Page ID#: 4568
• P.11 – Non-auditory alerts o Inmates are now able to purchase both vibrating watches and clocks (the Monitor’s report listed clock purchases as “in progress”). Resolved. o We are implementing an inmate ADA aide to facilitate communication between the ADA
Coordinator and the D/HOH inmate population. This aide will assist in disseminating information, notifying D/HOH inmates of changes, pages, etc.

Institution-specific issues listed on P.42:

Prior Areas of Concern

Response/Progress

Audiology:

As with other institutions, there was a hand-off Resolved. Communication about HOH inmates’ status

problem when inmates in the middle of the continues to be smooth.

audiology process arrived at WKCC (including

Ross-Cash).

WKCC’s medical provider had been using an Reported solved.

outdated policy for decision-making about

hearing aid prescriptions, and therefore not all

inmates who should receive a hearing aid are

getting one.

Auxiliary aid assessments are not yet

Reported solved.

regularized, and are not being consistently

performed in a timely manner.

Coordination between the ADA Coordinator Resolved. Utilized shared network folder since mid-

and medical staff is not yet smooth; a shared 2019, in addition to other communication

folder might solve this problem.

improvements.

Devices:

The Substance Abuse Program (SAP) should try Reported solved.

an assistive listening device, and was willing to

do so—but no devices had been bought for

them.

WKCC had purchased portable phone

Resolved. Inmates have been aware of the amplifiers

amplifiers, but had not actually used them. since their introduction; a recent polling of some

HOH inmates showed that they simply preferred not

to use them.

One TTY may be missing.

Resolved. Found and location added

to the ADA handout for future reference.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal EOxphpiboit r2t,uWnKitCyCE, mp. p79loyer M/F/D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 981 of 985 - Page ID#: 4569

Cookie Crews Commissioner

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Western Kentucky Correctional Complex 374 New Bethel Road
Fredonia, Kentucky 42411 Phone: 270-388-9781

Bobbi Jo Butts Warden

TO:

Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor

FROM:

Jacob Bruce, ADA Coordinator

THRU:

Bobbi Jo Butts, Warden

DATE:

September 24, 2020

SUBJ:

WKCC ADA Action Plan Update

Please see below for updates to the most recent action plan submitted by WKCC. The previous plan is included in this memo below for reference as well.

 We have implemented centralized ADA bulletin boards at WKCC and Ross-Cash as a one-stop location for memos/information to the populations. These boards are in addition to the general notice boards in each living unit.
 The ADA Aide inmate positon has been implemented at both WKCC and Ross-Cash and is showing to be an effective tool to assist swift communication between the ADA Coordinator and the HOH population.
 We have updated our spreadsheet to include current information discovered during the recent ECW/KOMS alert review.
 We have begun planning to move our TTYs to Securus-connected lines, using the Captel phones. Please note that we have not had any issues connecting calls with the TTY devices using staff phone lines.
 WKCC/Ross-Cash has begun installation for Captel phones. One will be located at Operations and one in Clarke Dorm. We have obtained the phones and ran lines for the installation. We received the analog card adapter for the phone system, and are scheduled for Securus to come in and complete the install on 9/28/2020. o We will advise when installations of the Securus TTY and Captel phones are completed.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal EOxphpiboit r2t,uWnKitCyCE, mp. p80loyer M/F/D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 982 of 985 - Page ID#: 4570
Please read below for our action plan based upon the report the Monitor submitted to the courts on
May 27, 2020. Each area is labeled with the corresponding page on the Monitor’s report.

 P.11 – Non-auditory alerts o Inmates are now able to purchase both vibrating watches and clocks (the Monitor’s report listed clock purchases as “in progress”). Resolved. o We are implementing an inmate ADA aide to facilitate communication between the ADA Coordinator and the D/HOH inmate population. This aide will assist in disseminating information, notifying D/HOH inmates of changes, pages, etc.

Institution-specific issues listed on P.42:

Prior Areas of Concern

Response/Progress

Audiology:

As with other institutions, there was a hand-off Resolved. Communication about HOH inmates’ status

problem when inmates in the middle of the continues to be smooth.

audiology process arrived at WKCC (including

Ross-Cash).

WKCC’s medical provider had been using an Reported solved.

outdated policy for decision-making about

hearing aid prescriptions, and therefore not all

inmates who should receive a hearing aid are

getting one.

Auxiliary aid assessments are not yet

Reported solved.

regularized, and are not being consistently

performed in a timely manner.

Coordination between the ADA Coordinator Resolved. Utilized shared network folder since mid-

and medical staff is not yet smooth; a shared 2019, in addition to other communication

folder might solve this problem.

improvements.

Devices:

The Substance Abuse Program (SAP) should try Reported solved.

an assistive listening device, and was willing to

do so—but no devices had been bought for

them.

WKCC had purchased portable phone

Resolved. Inmates have been aware of the amplifiers

amplifiers, but had not actually used them. since their introduction; a recent polling of some

HOH inmates showed that they simply preferred not

to use them.

One TTY may be missing.

Resolved. Found and location added

to the ADA handout for future reference.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal EOxphpiboit r2t,uWnKitCyCE, mp. p81loyer M/F/D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 983 of 985 - Page ID#: 4571

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

Cookie Crews Commissioner

Western Kentucky Correctional Complex 374 New Bethel Road
Fredonia, Kentucky 42411 Phone: 270-388-9781

Bobbi Jo Butts Warden

TO:

Margo Schlanger, Settlement Auditor

FROM: Jacob Bruce, ADA Coordinator

THRU: Bobbi Jo Butts, Warden

SUBJECT: WKCC Additional Information Request Response

DATE: October 6, 2020

Please see the response to your request for additional information, below:

1. In-person notifications for inmates are a standard practice here and have been provided by staff, regardless of HOH status, for many years. We continue to practice in-person notifications, thus it wasn’t included in a plan of action for change.

2. Availability of the clocks/watches to inmates who cannot afford to purchase one is made known at every Auxiliary Aids/Services Assessment. Upon review, we have updated the memo concerning watch/clock purchase to include that information (attached), have sent it to HOH inmates, and have posted it on the ADA bulletin boards.

3.

has received a copy of the settlement summary. Additionally, the ADA

Coordinator again verified that a copy of the summary exists in the WKCC and Ross-Cash

libraries. COVID-19 has not affected the library availability at WKCC.

Captel phones are now installed: one at WKCC in Operations, and the other at Ross-Cash in Clarke Dorm.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal EOxphpiboit r2t,uWnKitCyCE, mp. p82loyer M/F/D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 984 of 985 - Page ID#: 4572

Cookie Crews Commissioner

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Western Kentucky Correctional Complex 374 New Bethel Road
Fredonia, Kentucky 42411 Phone: 270-388-9781

Bobbi Jo Butts Warden

TO:

Margo Schlanger, Settlement Monitor

FROM: Jacob Bruce, ADA Coordinator

THRU: Bobbi Jo Butts, Warden

SUBJECT: WKCC Individual Issues Information Response

DATE: September 24, 2020

Please read below for our response to the individual issues presented during inmate interviews. Responses below are numbered corresponding to the memo provided for ease of reference.

WKCC

Repeat issues

A. Meals, pill call, and count occur at the same time each day. Schedules noting these times are posted on bulletin boards throughout the institution. In addition to announcements, Dorm Officers also flash overhead lights during announcements for chow, pills, 5-minute warning for count, and count time. No inmate has reported any issues with this system to the ADA Coordinator.

B and C. There is at least one phone with volume control in each area where inmate phones are provided. We currently have 55 HOH inmates at WKCC: 1 in SAP, 10 in A2 honors, 13 in C3 honors, 1 in SMU, and the remaining 30 in general population. We have 5 volumecontrolled phones: one in the GP phone area, one in the C3 honor wing, one in the SAP program dayroom, and 2 in the A2 honor dayroom. Phones are available at WKCC for approximately 12.5 hours each day. Every HOH inmate has ample opportunity to place a call using a volume controlled phone. Additionally, inmates may check out a portable amplifier to accommodate their phone volume needs. Memos describing how to obtain the amplifiers, with photos, are on display in bulletin boards in each living unit and in the GP phone area, are included in the inmate brochure, and are discussed during the Auxiliary Aids/Assessment meeting with each HOH inmate.

D. The ADA Coordinator continues to monitor this issue. All complaints are addressed through the medical request process, and device effectiveness is evaluated with follow-up visits after the inmate receives their hearing aid(s). We recognize that background noise may be a greater challenge for HOH inmates to overcome in an open dorm setting as opposed to a cellblock environment.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal EOxphpiboit r2t,uWnKitCyCE, mp. p83loyer M/F/D

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-2 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 985 of 985 - Page ID#: 4573
Ross-Cash
Repeat Issues
A. Meals, pill call, and count occur at the same time each day. Schedules noting these times are posted on bulletin boards throughout the institution. In addition to announcements, Dorm Officers also flash overhead lights during announcements for chow, pills, 5-minute warning for count, and count time. No inmate has reported any issues with this system to the ADA Coordinator.
B. Clear window masks were issued to pertinent staff to aid in effective communication.

KentuckyUnbridledSpirit.com

An Equal EOxphpiboit r2t,uWnKitCyCE, mp. p84loyer M/F/D

 Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 1 of 114 - Page ID#: 4574
Exhibit 3: ADA Coordinator Training (Oct. 2020)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 2 of 114 - Page ID#: 4575
Kentucky Department of Corrections
ADA Coordinator Training The Americans with Disabilities Act
AND Federal Deaf/Hard of Hearing Settlement Agreement
(October 25, 2020)
1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 3 of 114 - Page ID#: 4576
Training Overview (1)
This training begins with a very general overview of the Americans with Disabilities Act itself.
Then it turns to the 2015 federal Settlement Agreement governing treatment of deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates. The case is formally titled Knights & Adams v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (Eastern District of Kentucky). It is before Judge Gregory F. Van Tatenhove.
This training will introduce and review some main points of the Settlement Agreement. It does not cover every aspect of the Agreement.
For more information, read the Agreement itself, the summary of it, and the Settlement Monitor’s Compliance Reports and Recommendations – all are in the KDOC G-drive folder called “ADA.”
2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 4 of 114 - Page ID#: 4577
The Americans with Disabilities Act
3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 5 of 114 - Page ID#: 4578
ADA Requirements
• Non-discrimination
– Including reasonable modification to polices and practices
• Effective communication
– Including auxiliary aids and services
4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 6 of 114 - Page ID#: 4579
Non-discrimination

APPLIES TO ALL INMATES WITH DISABILITIES (not just deaf/HOH)

Current policy: The KYDOC will ensure that deaf and

hard of hearing inmates have full and equal access

to and enjoyment of all services, privileges,

facilities, advantages, and accommodations

available to similarly situated non-deaf inmates.

The KYDOC shall provide deaf and hard of hearing

inmates with access to services, privileges, facilities,

advantages, and accommodations substantially

equivalent to those offered to similarly situated

non-deaf inmates.

5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 7 of 114 - Page ID#:
Potential violat45i8o0 ns of the non-
discrimination rule
• Discrimination plain and simple: Barring inmate with a disability from a program, service, activity.
• Accommodation/modification failure: Declining to offer reasonable modifications to rules, practices, or equipment that exclude deaf/HOH inmates. E.g., Punishing deaf inmate for failure to obey an order he didn’t hear; failing to offer needed captioning, non-auditory telecommunications devices, etc.
• Direct Threat Error: Barring deaf/HOH inmates from particular jobs or other opportunities on the basis of assumed risk, without considering their individual circumstances and whether the risk is (a) applicable to the individual inmate, and (b) unable to be mitigated by an accommodation or modification of some kind.
• Isolation/segregation:
– Insisting that deaf/HOH inmates live in special housing, when their needs can be accommodated elsewhere.
– Barring deaf/HOH inmates who do live in special housing from various privileges or opportunities.
6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 8 of 114 - Page ID#: 4581
Effective communication

(Applies to all inmates with communications-related disabilities; deaf/HOH, blind/low vision, etc.)

Current policy: KYDOC will communicate effectively with deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates—ensuring that inmates can receive information from and provide information to staff.

Effective communication may require auxiliary

aids/services (e.g., interpretation, amplication). Or it

may require other interventions—holding

conversations or program in quiet spaces, dampening

noisy machinery, using clear masks, etc.

7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 9 of 114 - Page ID#:
ALL Deaf/HOH inm45a82tes are covered by effective communication requirement
• Inmates who use sign language:
– Must provide live or remote interpretation when useful
• Inmates who do not use sign language:
– Amplification – Oral communications strategies – Non-auditory strategies
• Remember: Many inmates have low literacy! So written communication is often not effective communication.
8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 10 of 114 - Page
Potential violatioID#n:45s83 of the effective communication rule
• Failing to provide remote or in-person interpretation. Using inmates to interpret other inmates.
• Failure to provide amplification when needed.
• Using only auditory alerts for count, pill call, etc.
• Wearing an opaque mask while talking to inmates who lip-read, in whole or in part.
• Talking to HOH inmates from behind.
9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 11 of 114 - Page ID#: 4584
Settlement agreement
10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 12 of 114 - Page ID#: 4585
Settlement Overview
The settlement covers many topics, including:
1. Hearing assessment 2. Audiology services 3. Auxiliary aids assessment 4. Informing inmates 5. Educating staff 6. Auxiliary aids/services, in general 7. Interpretation 8. Other accommodations
11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 13 of 114 - Page ID#: 4586
Training Overview
• For each category, this training describes:
a) Requirements b) Role of the ADA Coordinator c) Effective communications issues d) Outcomes
• I focus on the aspects of the settlement that align with the ADA itself. That means not much should change when the settlement expires—except the lifting of reporting to me, and court oversight via my reports.
12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 14 of 114 - Page ID#: 4587
Post-Settlement Changes
The settlement will expire at the end of calendar 2020. At the end of the training, we’ll talk about post-settlement changes.
13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 15 of 114 - Page
1. HearingID#A: 45s88sessment:
a) Requirements
Medical staff should assess all persons who may be deaf or hard-of-hearing during initial intake, and also in routine (bi)annual physicals.
• All inmates receive hearing screening, administered by medical staff.
• If the screen indicates a hearing problem, a medical examination by a provider occurs in the next few days, followed up as necessary by specialist evaluation/services.
• The process is designed to both identify deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates, and to provide them necessary audiology and other care/services.
14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 16 of 114 - Page
1. HearingID#A: 45s89sessment:
b) Role of the ADA Coordinator
1. Ensure medical staff are properly trained about the settlement’s requirements.
• Medical staff conduct hearing assessments, but YOU are responsible for making sure everything that needs to happen does happen.
2. Oversee and track screening and followup processes
• Track whether the hearing assessments are occurring as they should be, and whether the outcomes are being recorded/followed up appropriately.
• Oversee the process and identify problems. Ex., if a deaf inmate is not identified in the screening, why wasn’t he?
3. Track deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates, and report names etc. to the settlement monitor
4. Assess how the process can be improved, and fix it.
15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 17 of 114 - Page
1. HearingID#A: 45s90sessment:

c) Effective Communication

Medical staff must:
• Ask questions about hearing early in the process. Provide accommodations, if needed, for the rest of the medical screening.

• Ask inmates with hearing difficulties whether they use sign language to communicate.

• Offer, without request, interpretation services to inmates who use sign language to communicate.

– Be able to readily access VRI laptops and know how to use them.

• Have pocket amplifiers on hand and available to

use if needed.

16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 18 of 114 - Page
1. HearingID#A: 45s91sessment: d) Outcomes
For all inmates who are deaf or hard-of-hearing • Alerts placed in KOMS and EMR that are
immediately obvious when the inmate’s file is opened. • Notice provided to ADA Coordinator so nonmedical followups can be done. • Medical followups are started and tracked. • Identification card provided to inmate.
17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 19 of 114 - Page
2. AudioloID#g: 45y92 Services: a) Requirements
• Inmates who need hearing aids should be provided them promptly.
– 60 days from first request to provision of hearing aids is reasonable. If it takes longer, without good cause for the delay, that is a problem.
• Batteries should be readily available, without copay.
18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 20 of 114 - Page
2. AudioloID#g: 45y93 services: b) Role of the ADA Coordinator
Medical staff must evaluate/coordinate care for inmates in need of audiology services. But it’s the ADA Coordinator’s job to
• Monitor/track progress • Problem solve • Report to the Settlement Monitor
19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 21 of 114 - Page
2. AudioloID#g: 45y94 Services: c) Effective Communication
Ensure that inmates are told, effectively, that if they want a hearing aid, they need to request one.
20

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 22 of 114 - Page
2. AudioloID#g: 45y95 Services: d) Outcomes
For all inmates who have requested hearing aids • Progress is tracked weekly. • Obstacles to service provision are eliminated. • Hearing aids are provided timely (within 60
days of the request) • Tracker with full and accurate information is
provided to the Settlement Monitor
21

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 23 of 114 - Page
3. Auxiliary Aids ID#:4596 Assessment: a) Requirements
• Each institution must conduct an “auxiliary aids and services assessment” for each deaf/hard-of-hearing inmate.
• “Primary consideration” is to be given to an inmate’s requests as to what sorts of accommodations they prefer.
• Covers the whole range of potential needs and accommodations.
22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 24 of 114 - Page
3. Auxiliary Aids ID#:4597 Assessment: b) Role of the ADA Coordinator
• Plan and arrange the assessment meetings • Conduct the assessments • Ensure that the needs revealed in the
assessment are addressed with appropriate aids and accommodations. • Evaluate the effectiveness of accommodations
23

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 25 of 114 - Page
3. Auxiliary Aids ID#:4598 Assessment:
c) Effective Communication
• This is an interactive meeting between the ADA Coordinator and the inmate.
• There must be effective communication during the meeting
– Sign language interpreters, amplifiers, or provision of written information may be necessary.
– Because this is the meeting that allows you to determine what exactly the inmates’ communication needs are, don’t make assumptions before the meeting; be aware of communications difficulties and be prepared to adjust as the meeting progresses.
– The point is not the paperwork but the substance. 24

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 26 of 114 - Page
3. Auxiliary Aids ID#:4599 Assessment: d) Outcomes
• The assessment covers, and produces readily available documentation of:
– The inmate’s needs related to hearing. – The inmate’s preferences on auxiliary
aids/accommodations – A plan to put in place whatever
services/accommodations are necessary
25

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 27 of 114 - Page
4. InformingID#: the 4600 Inmates: a) Requirements
The prison must inform inmates about their rights under the ADA and the Settlement Agreement, and about available accommodations and aids.
26

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 28 of 114 - Page
4. InformingID#: the 4601 Inmates: b) Role of the ADA Coordinator
• Share written information, and ensure that it is understood: Brochure, policy, etc.
• Arrange the processes for informing inmates; gather feedback from inmates to evaluate information effectiveness.
• When other staff are providing inmates information on available services/ accommodations, to inmates, the ADA Coordinator trains/monitors staff effectiveness.
27

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 29 of 114 - Page
4. InformingID#: the 4602 Inmates: c) Effective Communication
• Interpreters as needed.
– Use VRI – or, if necessary, live interpreter. – Check that other staff are using VRI; logs can
confirm that it is being used as required.
• For non-signing inmates:
– Remember low literacy. Written material does not communicate effectively for someone who can’t read.
– In-person demonstrations of equipment can be helpful.
28

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 30 of 114 - Page
4. InformingID#: the 4603 Inmates:
d) Outcomes

• Including, but not limited to:

– Each deaf/h-of-h inmate receives a written description and schedule for what aids and services are available, and (for those who sign) when interpreters are available, and how to request.

– Each deaf/h-of-h inmate receives forms to be used request services.

– Each deaf/h-of-h inmate receives explanation of

the above, and also of ways in which programs

can be made more accessible (e.g., assistive

listening, tutors, etc.)

29

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 31 of 114 - Page
5. EducatiIDn#: 4g604 the Staff: a) Requirements
• All prison staff who interact with inmates must receive training on:
– Their obligations under the Agreement. – How to communicate effectively with deaf/ hard-
of-hearing inmates.
• Some training is available via a computerbased-training module.
• Other training should be live and in-person. (E.g., how to use the VRI laptop).
30

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 32 of 114 - Page
5. EducatiIDn#: 4g605 the Staff: a) Requirements (2)
Training should focus on concrete staff roles and responsibilities
E.g.: In the event a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate is paged, staff should know to check KOMS for a hearing alert and to individually alert the inmate if he or she does not respond to the page.
31

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 33 of 114 - Page
5. EducatiIDn#: 4g606 the Staff: b) Role of the ADA Coordinator
• Either conduct the training or make sure it is being provided regularly.
– Ensure that all staff have received computerbased-training.
– Offer live training as appropriate.
• Ensure the training is effective and up-to-date
– Update training as appropriate, if new issues arise – If staff do not understand the training, adjust as
necessary.
32

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 34 of 114 - Page
5. EducatiIDn#: 4g607 the Staff: d) Outcomes
• All staff receive training • Monitoring demonstrates when the training
“takes” – when staff are and are not acting on the training provided. • Retraining is offered as appropriate.
33

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 35 of 114 - Page
6-8. AccommodatID#i:o460n8 s/Auxiliary Aids/ Interpretation (Overview)
When might accommodations/auxiliary aids/ interpretation be needed? • Certainly at formal meetings: Disciplinary
hearings, classification, grievance hearings, parole board hearings • At regular meetings as well: Classes and programs • Any time there is staff/inmate communication, including informal conversations.
34

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 36 of 114 - Page
6. Auxiliary Aids and ID#:4609 Services:
a) Requirements
• Auxiliary aids and services necessary and appropriate must be provided to deaf/hard-ofhearing inmates. Auxiliary aids include:
– Live or remote interpreters – Hearing aids – Assistive listening systems, amplifiers – Captioning – “TDDs” or “TTYs” – Captioned telephones – Videophone and access to telephone relays – Non-auditory alerts – Etc.
35

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 37 of 114 - Page
6. Auxiliary Aids and ID#:4610 Services: b) Role of the ADA Coordinator
• Track use; make sure equipment is available for use, in good working order, and actually being used.
• Videophone/TTY/Captioned Telephones should be readily available without special request for inmates who need them for telecommunications.
• Evaluate effectiveness; regularly follow up to ensure that aids are effective. If not, adjust.
36

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 38 of 114 - Page
6. Auxiliary Aids and ID#:4611 Services: c) Effective Communication
• Make sure that communication with deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates about their preferences and needs for aids and services is effective. E.g.:
– Use VRI interpreter to help when you are explaining services to an inmate who signs.
– Do not rely on a written brochure to inform an inmate of aids and services if he has low literacy.
37

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 39 of 114 - Page
6. Auxiliary Aids and ID#:4612 Services: d) Outcomes
• Auxiliary aids and services are available and in working order.
• Auxiliary aids and services are used when appropriate.
38

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 40 of 114 - Page
7. InteIDr#:p461r3 eters: a) Requirements
• Interpreters (either in-person or through VRI) should be readily available when necessary for effective communication with inmates who use sign language.
39

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 41 of 114 - Page
7. InteIDr#:p461r4 eters:
b) Role of the ADA Coordinator
• Consider: which situations require in-person interpreters, and for which can VRI be effective?
• REady: ensure all staff who may need to use VRI or inperson interpretation know how to set that up.
• Arrange contract with interpretation service and VRI laptops, and ensure that laptops are updated, in good working condition, and have all necessary accessories available (e.g. splitters, chargers, instructions).
• Track and Evaluate: Ascertain that interpreters are being used in relevant situations. Follow up with deaf inmates and staff who use interpreters, make sure process is smooth, and adjust process to prevent any problems they report from recurring.
40

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 42 of 114 - Page
7. InteIDr#:p461r5 eters: c) Effective Communication
• Some situations are more appropriate for inperson rather than VRI interpretation.
– Especially when there are several people talking together (e.g., a class or group)
• VRI should be fully functional and easily accessible without in-advance arrangement, to be effective.
• VRI should not be reserved for special occasions. Any communication with an inmate who signs is appropriate for interpretation.
41

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 43 of 114 - Page
7. InteIDr#:p461r6 eters:
d) Outcomes

Interpretation services are provided (not just by

policy, but in practice) for

• Medical and mental health care

• Disciplinary hearings—including all meetings

• Transfer and classification processes

• Rehabilitative programming (including AA and

NA)

• Educational programming

• Other times

42

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 44 of 114 - Page
8. Effective CIDo#: 46m17 munication a) Requirements
The ADA requires that prison staff communicate effectively with deaf/HOH inmates. This covers: • Announcements/alerts • Communication during education,
programming, jobs • All other communication.
43

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 45 of 114 - Page
8. Effective CID#o: 46m18 munication
b) Role of the ADA Coordinator
• Consider the needs of the inmates and how they might interact with various assignments/ programs. E.g.:
– Non-auditory alerts are important. Could be by switching on and off lights, buzzers/strobes, ADA Aids, personal notification. But need to be routine and effective.
– Auditory alerts should be made as accessible as possible. Amplification is crucial—yelling is ineffective.
– Amplification should be easily and routinely available across the prison, for classes, programming, religious programs, etc.
44

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 46 of 114 - Page
8. Effective CIDo#: 46m19 munication c) Effective Communication
• Inmates do not know what is available. This needs to be explained to them, and the explanation must be effectively communicated.
45

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 47 of 114 - Page
8. Effective CIDo#: 4m620 munication: d) Outcomes
• ADA Coordinator knows where all deaf / hardof-hearing inmates are housed, and appropriate technologies/processes are tracked and provided, including in segregated housing.
• Same for education, jobs, etc.
46

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 48 of 114 - Page
9. Other AccID#o: 46m21 modations a) Requirements
Non-auxiliary aid accommodations are also required when necessary/appropriate: • Housing assignment • Assistance in education • Etc.
47

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 49 of 114 - Page
9. AccomID#m: 4622odations
b) Role of the ADA Coordinator
• Consider the needs of the inmates and how they might interact with various assignments/ programs. E.g.:
– Deaf inmates may need to be in a housing area with easy access to the videophone.
– A hard-of-hearing inmate may do better in a quieter unit, or closer to the loudspeaker, or to staff (so they can alert him in-person when necessary)
– Track housing assignments; if an inmate is moved, ensure accommodations are re-evaluated. This is particularly necessary for segregated housing.
– An inmate taking a class may need to sit up front, or to have an inmate tutor to repeat instructions as useful.
48

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 50 of 114 - Page
9. AccommodaItD#i: 4o623ns for Housing: c) Effective Communication
• Inmates do not know what is available. This needs to be explained to them, and the explanation must be effectively communicated.
49

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 51 of 114 - Page
9. AccommodaItD#i: 4o624ns for Housing: d) Outcomes
• ADA Coordinator knows where all deaf / hardof-hearing inmates are housed, and appropriate accommodations are tracked and provided, including in segregated housing.
• Same for education, jobs, etc.
50

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 52 of 114 - Page ID#: 4625
After the settlement ends?

• The settlement agreement is scheduled to expire at the

end of 2020. What happens then?

• The ADA and the ADA Coordinators will both still be in

place.

• Self-audit techniques will become even more

important, because prison staff will themselves need to

detect, analyze, and solve problems.

• The “CReATE Compliance” method is described in the

next training slide deck.

• Collaboration among ADA Coordinators is an important

tool.

• Assistance and guidance from HQ staff—Branch

Manager Debbie Kays and Director of Operations Janet

Conover.

51

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 53 of 114 - Page ID#: 4626
Questions?
• If you are wondering what is required, go back and read the Settlement Agreement and the Settlement Monitoring reports.
• Reach out to Margo Schlanger, the Settlement Monitor. Adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com.
52

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 54 of 114 - Page ID#: 4627
Kentucky Department of Corrections
ADA Coordinator Training:
Detecting ADA Issues
(Oct. 25, 2020)
1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 55 of 114 - Page ID#: 4628
Detection Methods
Asking inmates – individually -- in small groups -- surveys
Testing equipment Checking equipment logs Annual self-assessments Tracking of timing on audiology, etc. Complaints, requests Grievances Discipline

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 56 of 114 - Page ID#: 4629
Detection Methods
• Grievances • Disciplinary reports • Survey/Interviews • Requests • Self-audit

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 57 of 114 - Page ID#: 4630
Detection goals
• Individual problem-solving • General problem detection

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 58 of 114 - Page ID#: 4631
Grievances: The Irrelevance of Procedural Issues
• Note that grievances often should trigger investigation/response even if they are late or procedurally flawed. E.g.:
• Claim made more than 5 days after incident that a hearing aid was lost on transfer from jail.
• Claim (made more than 5 days after incident) that hearing aids were confiscated on entering into segregation.
• Grievances can fail because of information gaps—but multiple grievances can offer insight into the facts

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 59 of 114 - Page ID#: 4632
Disciplinaries, The Partial Irrelevance of Outcome
• There can be guilty pleas even if there’s an underlying problem.
• The outcome itself may indicate a problem (requiring staff training)

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 60 of 114 - Page ID#: 4633
Sample problems from grievances, interviews:
• Inmates report that they are not being given personal notifications—just PA announcements, which they can’t hear.
• Inmate grievance that VRI not being used for communication. • Inmate reports that he’s in a cell in the back, right underneath the air
conditioner, so having trouble hearing announcements. • Inmate reports that he was kicked out of SOTP last year because he didn’t
hear the announcements to go to class.
• Response: SOTP discharged due to 2 missed classes. “I/M was educated to the requirements of the program during orientation phase and signed acknowledgment. To date, he has not requested reapplication for the program. “
• Inmate states he was denied a meal for having an altered mask, which he changed to make it easier to also wear hearing aid.
• Inmates report staff are rude when asked to accommodate hearing difficulties.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 61 of 114 - Page ID#: 4634
Sample problems from discipline:
• Writeup for showing up late to pill call. Inmate told committee that he had trouble hearing the intercom announcement since it’s very faint, but was still found guilty. No discussion of hearing issue
• Writeup for showing up at pill call without being called. Inmate told committee that he went to pill call because he was told it was pill call by an inmate ADA aide. Resolution did not explain why this did not excuse the infraction.
• Inmate pleaded guilty to failure to abide by published schedule or rule. He was paged 3 times and failed to report to the kitchen to assist with assembling sack lunches. He said he was HOH and didn’t hear the page. Given a reprimand and a warning.

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 62 of 114 - Page ID#: 4635
Kentucky Department of Corrections
ADA Coordinator Training: CREATE Compliance (Oct. 25, 2020)
1

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 63 of 114 - Page
There are five steps to every ID#: 4636 task or problem you encounter as ADA Coordinator: C RE A T E
Consider Ready Arrange Track Evaluate
Compliance
You may not need to use every step for every problem you come across, but it’s important to consider each, every time!
2

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 64 of 114 - Page ID#: 4637
Step One:
Consider REady Arrange Track Evaluate C RE A T E Compliance
3

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 65 of 114 - Page ID#: 4638
Step One: Consider
First, consider three questions:
• What are the desired outcomes or goals? • What communications needs are relevant • What are the obstacles to success?
– For example, if an area is noisy, hearing aids will be ineffective.
Example: An inmate is in a class. • Goal: Equal access to educational services • Communications needs: Ongoing complex oral
communication, with many different speakers. • Obstacles: E.g., Background noise in the classroom or other
students talking at the same time make hearing aids and assistive listening devices less effective.
4

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 66 of 114 - Page ID#: 4639
Step One: Consider
Remember, communications needs may vary by the inmate: • Examples:
– Low literacy or illiteracy makes written communication ineffective.
– Non-traditional signing makes VRI ineffective.
5

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 67 of 114 - Page ID#: 4640
Step Two:
Consider REady Arrange Track Evaluate C RE A T E Compliance
6

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 68 of 114 - Page ID#: 4641
Step Two: Ready
Next, ready other staff. • You must make sure other staff are know how to:
– Fulfill their obligations under the settlement agreement – Access and use technology (such as VRI laptops) – Effectively communicate with deaf and hard-of-hearing
inmates
• Without this step, it will be difficult or impossible to do your job successfully—almost every problem you will encounter will require the participation of other staff members.
– But, it is ultimately your responsibility to make sure that other staff members are fulfilling their duties under the Agreement.
7

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 69 of 114 - Page ID#: 4642
Step Three:
Consider REady Arrange Track Evaluate C RE A T E Compliance
8

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 70 of 114 - Page ID#: 4643
Step Three: Arrange
Next, arrange: prepare in advance so that equipment and processes are in place. • This step will look different depending on the situation
– Sometimes, arranging will be the bulk of your obligations – Other times, you won’t need to do anything for this step
(as long as you readied other staff effectively in Step Two).
• Example: an inmate who is deaf but cannot sign needs access to a TTY in order to communicate telephonically with family. You will need to arrange:
– Where the TTY goes and how the inmate can get ready access.
– That the inmate understands how to use the TTY
9

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 71 of 114 - Page ID#: 4644
Step Four:
Consider REady Arrange Track Evaluate C RE A T E Compliance
10

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 72 of 114 - Page ID#: 4645
Step Four: Track
Then, check in with all the people involved to track the progress of everything you arranged. • After checking in to track progress, you might
have to return to one of the earlier steps:
– Step One (Consider) to re-assess needs and barriers
– Step Two (Ready) to re-train other staff about how to perform their tasks
– Step Three (Arrange) to coordinate more action.
11

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 73 of 114 - Page ID#: 4646
Step Four: Track
• When you are tracking, you may discover that something about the situation has changed
– For example, a deaf or hard-of-hearing inmate has been moved to segregated housing
• Or perhaps an obstacle has appeared or something has stalled:
– For example, there may be a delay in payment of an audiologist, preventing pickup of a hearing aid.
• In addition, sometimes the Settlement Agreement requires that your formally track and report certain situations. That is also part of this step.
12

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 74 of 114 - Page ID#: 4647
Step Five:
Consider REady Arrange Track Evaluate C RE A T E Compliance
13

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 75 of 114 - Page ID#: 4648
Step Five: Evaluate
Finally, you need to gather accurate feedback and evaluate the effectiveness of whatever you just did. • Feedback might come from routine records
(logs, etc.), prison staff, outside providers (interpreters, etc.), or inmates.
14

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 76 of 114 - Page ID#: 4649
Step Five: Evaluate
• You might gather feedback by asking for it at regular intervals.
– Example: asking an inmate if non-auditory alerts are effective.
• Or, gather feedback by creating a system to get feedback every time a certain event happens.
– Example: have a form that an inmate fills out evaluating effectiveness of communication after every disciplinary hearing.
• Make sure to gather feedback from every person involved
– Staff, inmate, outside providers (e.g., interpreters, audiologists)
• Once you obtain feedback, you need to evaluate the results—this may then lead you back to one of the first two steps to re-train staff (Step Two: Ready) or re-assess needs and barriers (Step One: Consider).
15

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 77 of 114 - Page ID#: 4650
Example 1: Non-auditory alerts
• Let’s use the example of deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates’ need for non-auditory alerts to demonstrate how you can CREATE compliance.
16

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 78 of 114 - Page ID#: 4651
Step One: Consider
• Consider, for non-auditory alerts
– What is your desired outcome? – What are the communications needs of the
inmates? – What special obstacles does the situation
present?
17

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 79 of 114 - Page ID#: 4652
Step One: Consider
• Goals:
– Deaf and hard-of-hearing inmates are entitled to communication that is as effective as that provided other inmates. This includes bells, announcements, and the like.
• Communications Needs:
– The needs of inmates will vary: deaf inmates and hard-of-hearing inmates have different issues. And the needs of hard-of-hearing inmates are likely to be more acute in the morning, when they are sleeping, so cannot see what others are doing and before they have put on hearing aids.
• Obstacles:
– Varied housing area layouts, types of alerts, etc.
18

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 80 of 114 - Page ID#: 4653
Step Two: Ready
• Readying staff is crucial to succeed at the task of ensuring effective communication.
• For this step, think of what staff are involved in communication, what they need to know, and what physical tools they need to be successful.
–What did you come up with?
19

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 81 of 114 - Page ID#: 4654
Step Two: Ready
Housing unit staff conduct alerts—make sure they know: • What equipment is available to them • What other techniques (e.g., ADA Aids,
personal notification) are available to them • Who the deaf/HOH inmates are in their units. • That effective communication is their
obligation, under both the law and the settlement agreement.
20

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 82 of 114 - Page ID#: 4655
Step Three: Arrange
Next, arrange: prepare in advance so that equipment and processes are in place. What needs arranging for non-auditory alerts?
21

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 83 of 114 - Page ID#: 4656
Step Three: Arrange
• Have inmates who might benefit from nonauditory alarm clocks or watches been told about them?
• Have arrangements been made—and communicated—to address indigent inmates’ needs?
• What is the method used in each housing area? (Light flicker, ADA Aids, etc.)
• (Also consider whether auditory alerts are as accessible as possible—amplified, HOH inmates moved to where loudest, etc.)
22

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 84 of 114 - Page ID#: 4657
Step Four: Track
What would be useful to track the progress of everything you arranged?
23

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 85 of 114 - Page ID#: 4658
Step Four: Track
• If housing units vary, keep track of what is being done in each.
• Whether the method chosen is technological or personal notification, track if it’s actually being used.
• This step makes sure that everything is happening the way you anticipated in Step One (Consider), as you readied for and arranged in Steps Two and Three
24

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 86 of 114 - Page ID#: 4659
Step Five: Evaluate
How can you best evaluate the effectiveness of the non-auditory communication? • What are good sources of feedback?
– Inmates – Staff – Other
25

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 87 of 114 - Page ID#: 4660
Step Five: Evaluate
• Ask housing unit staff what they think is working well; what could be improved.
• Ask inmates what they think is working well; what could be improved.
• Gather information to figure out why any mistakes happened and evaluate how you can fix the process.
26

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 88 of 114 - Page ID#: 4661
Example 2: Initial Screening
• Now, we will use the example of the initial screening for hearing difficulties to demonstrate how you can CREATE compliance.
27

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 89 of 114 - Page ID#: 4662
Step One: Consider
• Consider, for initial hearing screening of inmates
– What is your desired outcome? – What are the communications needs of the
inmates? – What special obstacles does the situation
present?
28

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 90 of 114 - Page ID#: 4663
Step One: Consider

• Goals:

– Medical staff will identify all deaf and hard-of-hearing

inmates, offer them immediately necessary auxiliary aids

and services (amplifiers, identification cards, alert in computer system), and communicate their presence to the

ADA Coordinator.

• Communications Needs:

– The needs of inmates will vary and there won’t be any way

to know, for any particular inmate, what they might be. So,

you need to be prepared to accommodate every sort of

communication need.

• Obstacles:

– Because inmates won’t know about the accommodations available or that he can ask for them, it’s crucial at this

stage that he is offered all accommodations without

having to ask.

29

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 91 of 114 - Page ID#: 4664
Step Two: Ready
• Readying staff is crucial to succeed at the task of initially screening all inmates for hearing problems.
• For this step, think of what staff are involved in the initial screening, what they need to know, and what physical tools they need to be successful.
–What did you come up with?
30

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 92 of 114 - Page ID#: 4665
Step Two: Ready
Medical staff conduct initial screenings—make sure they know: • To screen all incoming inmates. • How to obtain and use a VRI laptop. • Next steps for inmates who are deaf or hard-of-
hearing:
– offer deaf/h-of-h identification cards – offer a pocket amplifier (if useful) – schedule for additional screening/evaluation/audiology
services if appropriate – note deaf/hard-of-hearing alert in the EMR – report that inmate is deaf/hard-of-hearing to the ADA
coordinator
31

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 93 of 114 - Page ID#: 4666
Step Three: Arrange
Next, arrange: prepare in advance so that equipment and processes are in place. What needs arranging for initial screening?
32

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 94 of 114 - Page ID#: 4667
Step Three: Arrange
• Is the VRI laptop available when medical needs it?
• Is there a splitter, to facilitate use of the laptop at the same time as another computer?
• Is internet bandwidth sufficient? • Etc.
33

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 95 of 114 - Page ID#: 4668
Step Four: Track
What would be useful to track the progress of everything you arranged?
34

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 96 of 114 - Page ID#: 4669
Step Four: Track
• Check in with the medical staff regularly—make sure that the screenings are happening as they are supposed to, that new medical staff are properly trained, and that they can access the technology that they need to access (e.g., amplifiers and VRI laptops).
• This step makes sure that everything is happening the way you anticipated in Step One (Consider), as you readied for and arranged in Steps Two and Three
• Initial screenings have a recordkeeping and reporting component. (This is specified in the Settlement Agreement.) Add all reported deaf/hard-of-hearing inmates to your tracking list and include them in your reports to the settlement monitor.
35

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 97 of 114 - Page ID#: 4670
Step Five: Evaluate
How can you best evaluate the effectiveness of the initial screening? • What are good sources of feedback?
– Records – Staff – Other
36

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 98 of 114 - Page ID#: 4671
Step Five: Evaluate
• Ask medical staff what they think is working well; what could be improved.
• Run a check of the EMR and find all deaf/hardof-hearing inmates. Are there any you didn’t hear about, or didn’t hear about promptly? Why not?
• Gather information to figure out why any mistakes happened and evaluate how you can fix the process.
37

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 99 of 114 - Page
CREATE CIDo#: 46m72 pliance:

Example 2 Summary

• Consider: Goals, Needs, Obstacles

– Medical staff will identify all deaf and hard-of-hearing

inmates, offer them immediately necessary auxiliary

aids and services (amplifiers, identification cards, alert

in computer system), and communicate their presence

to the ADA Coordinator.

– The needs of inmates will vary and there won’t be any way to know, for any particular inmate, what they

might be. So, you need to be prepared to

accommodate every sort of communication need.

Make a plan.

– Because inmates won’t know about the

accommodations available or that he can ask for

them, it’s crucial at this stage that they be offered all

accommodations without having to ask.

38

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 100 of 114 - Page
CREATE CIDo#: 46m73 pliance:

Example 2 Summary

• Ready medical staff to screen all incoming

inmates, to use a VRI laptop, and to take next

steps.

• Arrange: E.g., is the VRI laptop readily available,

appropriately equipped?

• Track:

– Are screenings happening as they should; do new medical staff know the requirements? Are amplifiers
and VRI laptops being used as appropriate?

– Make sure inmate list stays up to date, and provide to settlement monitor.

• Evaluate: Check in with medical staff; cross

reference with EMR

39

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 101 of 114 - Page ID#: 4674
Example 3: Getting Hearing Aids
• A second example of how you can CREATE compliance with the Settlement Agreement: Prompt provision of necessary hearing aids.
40

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 102 of 114 - Page ID#: 4675
Step One: Consider
• Consider, for provision of hearing aids to an inmate who needs them
– Goals: What is your desired outcome? – Needs: What are the communications needs of
the inmates? – Obstacles: Are there obstacles to success?
41

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 103 of 114 - Page ID#: 4676
Step One: Consider
• Goals:
– Prompt (within 60 days) provision of necessary hearing aids
• Communications Needs:
– Need for effective communication at an audiologist
• Obstacles:
– Difficulties with scheduling, payment, transport.
42

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 104 of 114 - Page ID#: 4677
Step Two: Ready
• Readying staff is, as always, crucial.
• Who is involved in hearing aid provision? What do they need to know?
43

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 105 of 114 - Page ID#: 4678
Step Two: Ready Ready staff: Most importantly, train
staff on the requirement that getting hearing aids should take no more than two months.
44

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 106 of 114 - Page ID#: 4679
Step Three: Arrange
Next, arrange: prepare in advance so that equipment and processes are in place.
What needs arranging for hearing aid provision?
45

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 107 of 114 - Page ID#: 4680
Step Three: Arrange
• Someone needs to come up with an efficient system to schedule prompt audiologist appointments and payment, and arrange all transportation.
• If the inmate is transferred to a new institution at any point during the process, communicate with the new prison so that the process continues without interruption.
46

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 108 of 114 - Page ID#: 4681
Steps Four & Five: Track & Evaluate
What would be useful to track and evaluate the progress of everything you arranged?
47

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 109 of 114 - Page ID#: 4682
Steps Four & Five: Track & Evaluate
• The key to hearing aid progress is case management: tracking progress, and evaluating and solving problems.
• You should maintain a document tracking each inmate’s progress through the process of getting a hearing aid. This will be reported to the Settlement Monitor every quarter.
• Check in with medical every week or two to update the document and resolve any procedural hurdles.
48

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 110 of 114 - Page ID#: 4683
Steps Four & Five: Track & Evaluate
Suppose after checking in with medical and/or the inmate, you find out that the inmate has missed an audicus testing appointment because he was in administrative segregation. What should you do now?
49

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 111 of 114 - Page ID#: 4684
Step Five: Evaluate
• Re-Consider: Was this a problem you anticipated?
– If yes, why were you unable to prevent it? – If no, what caused it and how can it be prevented in
the future?
• Re-Ready:
– Re-train staff to resolve the problem.
• Re-Arrange:
– Make sure the appointment is promptly rescheduled and expedited.
50

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 112 of 114 - Page
CREATE CIDo#: 46m85 pliance:
Example 3 Summary
• Consider:
Goals, Communications Needs, Obstacles
– Prompt (60 days) provision of hearing aids
– Probably, audiologists can manage the communications needs of inmates.
– Scheduling, payment, transport are all complicated and slow.
51

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 113 of 114 - Page
CREATE CIDo#: 46m86 pliance:
Example 3 Summary
• Ready medical staff to know about the 60 day goal, and the tracking obligations.
• Arrange: A system for audiologist scheduling, payment, etc.
• Track:
– Make sure tracking sheet stays up to date, and provide to settlement monitor.
• Evaluate: Use the tracking sheet to evaluate if the system is working, solve problems as they arise.
52

Case: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA Doc #: 99-3 Filed: 12/16/20 Page: 114 of 114 - Page ID#: 4687
Questions?
• If you are wondering what is required, go back and read the Settlement Agreement and the Settlement Monitoring reports.
• Reach out to Margo Schlanger, the Settlement Monitor. Adams.settlement.monitor@gmail.com.
53

 U.S. District Court Eastern District of Kentucky (Frankfort) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT-EBA

Adams et al v. Commonwealth of Kentucky et al Assigned to: Judge Gregory F. Van Tatenhove Referred to: Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins Cause: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

Date Filed: 01/01/2014 Date Terminated: 06/24/2015 Jury Demand: Both Nature of Suit: 555 Prisoner Petitions (Prison Condition) Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Special Master
Settlement Monitor Court Appointed pursuant to Consent Judgment on 6/24/2015 @ Docket Entry #81

represented by Margo Schlanger 625 S. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109 734-615-2618 Email: margo.schlanger@gmail.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
Oscar Adams Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated

represented by Camille Bathurst Belzley, Bathurst & Bentley P.O. Box 278 Prospect, KY 40059 502-292-2452 Email: camillebathurst@aol.com LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Deborah M. Golden Washington Lawyer's Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs 11 Dupont Circle, N.W. Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 202-319-1000 Fax: 202-319-1010 Email: deborah_golden@washlaw.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Elliot Mincberg Washington Lawyer's Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs 11 Dupont Circle, N.W. Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 202-319-1000 Fax: 202-319-1010 Email: elliot_mincberg@washlaw.org LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Gregory Allen Belzley Belzley, Bathurst & Bentley P.O. Box 278 Prospect, KY 40059 502-292-2452 Email: gbelzley3b@gmail.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Hannah Lieberman Washington Lawyer's Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs 11 Dupont Circle, N.W. Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 202-319-1000 Fax: 202-319-1010 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kristen M. Echemendia Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP - DC 2001 M Street NW Washington, DC 20036 202-682-7000 Fax: 202-857-0940 Email: kristen.echemendia@weil.com LEAD ATTORNEY

ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kristen M. Echemendia (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Patrick J. McCarthy Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP - DC 2001 M Street NW Washington, DC 20036 202-682-7240 Fax: 202-857-0940 TERMINATED: 02/04/2014 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ralph Miller Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP - DC 2001 M Street NW Washington, DC 20036 202-682-7000 Fax: 202-857-0940 Email: ralph.miller@weil.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Sarah M. Goodman Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP - DC 2001 M Street NW Washington, DC 20036 202-682-7000 Fax: 202-857-0940 Email: sarah.goodman@weil.com LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
W. Sutton Ansley Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP - DC 2001 M Street NW Washington, DC 20036 202-682-7018 Email: sutton.ansley@weil.com LEAD ATTORNEY

Plaintiff
Michael Knights Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated

PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Zachary C. Garthe Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP - DC 2001 M Street NW Washington, DC 20036 202-682-7000 Fax: 202-857-0949 Email: zachary.garthe@weil.com LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Camille Bathurst (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Deborah M. Golden (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Elliot Mincberg (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Gregory Allen Belzley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Hannah Lieberman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kristen M. Echemendia (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Commonwealth of Kentucky

Kristen M. Echemendia (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Patrick J. McCarthy (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/04/2014 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ralph Miller (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Sarah M. Goodman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
W. Sutton Ansley (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Zachary C. Garthe (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Department of Law 200 E. Main Street 11th Floor Lexington, KY 40507

Defendant Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet
Defendant Kentucky Department of Corrections
Defendant J. Michael Brown Individually

859-258-3500 Fax: 859-258-3466 Email: jhenning@lexingtonky.gov TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Angela T. Dunham Office of Legal Services-KY Justice & Public Safety Cabinet 125 Holmes Street Second Floor Frankfort, KY 40601 502-564-3279 x 220 Fax: 502-564-6686 Email: angela.dunham@ky.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant LaDonna Thompson Individually
Defendant Kimberly Potter-Blair Individually
Defendant Paula Holden Individually
Defendant Deputy Commissioner Jim Erwin Individually

Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Angela T. Dunham

Defendant Randy White Individually
Defendant Gregory Howard Individually
Defendant Clark Taylor Individually
Defendant Aaron Smith Individually

(See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant Kathy Litteral Individually
Defendant Steve Haney Individually
Defendant Gary Beckstrom Individually
Defendant Alan Brown Individually
Defendant Janet Conover Individually

represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant Joseph Meko Individually
Defendant Don Bottoms Individually
Defendant Warden Ravonne Sims Individually
Defendant Steve Woodward Individually
Defendant

J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Bobby Underwood Individually
Official Defendant J. Michael Brown in his official capacity as Secretary of the Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet
Official Defendant LaDonna Thompson in her official capacity as Commissioner of the Kentucky Department of Corrections
Official Defendant Kimberly Potter-Blair in her official capacity as Deputy Commissioner of Support Services of the Kentucky Department of Corrections
Official Defendant Paula Holden in her official capacity as Deputy Commissioner of Community

represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015

Services of the Kentucky Department of Corrections
Official Defendant Deputy Commissioner Jim Erwin in his official capacity as Deputy Commissioner of Adult Institutions of the Kentucky Department of Corrections
Official Defendant Randy White in his official capacity as Warden of the Kentucky State Penitentiary
Official Defendant Gregory Howard in his official capacity as Warden of the Luther Luckett Correctional Complex
Official Defendant Clark Taylor in his official capacity of Warden of the Kentucky State Reformatory

LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Official Defendant Aaron Smith in his official capacity as Warden of the Kentucky State Reformatory
Official Defendant Kathy Litteral in her official capacity as Warden of the Bell County Forestry Camp
Official Defendant Steve Haney in his official capacity as Warden of the Blackburn Correctional Complex
Official Defendant Gary Beckstrom in his official capacity as Warden of the Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex
Official Defendant

Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Alan Brown in his official capacity as Warden of the Green River Correctional Complex
Official Defendant Janet Conover in her official capacity as Warden of the Kentucky Correctional Institute for Women
Official Defendant Joseph Meko in his official capacity as Warden of the Little Sandy Correctional Complex
Official Defendant Don Bottoms in his capacity as Warden of the Northpoint Training Center
Official Defendant Warden Ravonne Sims in his official capacity as Warden of the Roederer Correctional Complex

represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address)

Official Defendant Steve Woodward in his official capacity as Warden of the Western Kentucky Correctional Complex
Official Defendant Bobby Underwood in his official capacity as Personnel Branch Manager of the Kentucky Department of Corrections

TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Angela T. Dunham (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
J. Todd Henning (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/11/2015 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Movant Carl J. Perry, Jr.

represented by Carl J. Perry, Jr. 224339 KENTUCKY STATE REFORMATORY 3001 W. Highway 146 Inmate Mail/Parcels LAGRANGE, KY 40032 PRO SE

Date Filed 01/01/2014
01/01/2014

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand referred to Judge PSO. ( Filing fee $400; receipt number 0643-2835510), filed by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights. (Attachments: # 1 Summons, # 2 Case Assignment, # 3 Civil Cover Sheet)(AKR) (Entered: 01/02/2014)
2 Summons Issued as to J. Michael Brown, Commonwealth of Kentucky, Jim Erwin, Paula Holden, Gregory Howard, Kentucky Department of Corrections, Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, Kimberly

01/01/2014 01/03/2014 01/06/2014 01/06/2014 01/06/2014 01/14/2014 01/14/2014 01/14/2014 01/14/2014 01/14/2014 01/14/2014

Potter-Blair, Clark Taylor, LaDonna Thompson, Randy White; Summons issued and returned to counsel electronically. (AKR) (Entered: 01/03/2014)
Case no longer referred to PSO, per Judge's chambers. (AKR) (Entered: 01/03/2014)
Conflict Check run. (AKR) (Entered: 01/03/2014)
3 NOTICE TO ATTORNEY Camille Bathurst by Clerk re: L.R. 83Attorney Admission procedure w/ a copy of L.R. 83 and Attorney Admission Application & ECF Registration Form. (Attachments: # 1 Attorney Data Form)(AKR) (Entered: 01/06/2014)
4 NOTICE TO ATTORNEY Deborah Golden by Clerk re: L.R. 83Attorney Admission procedure w/ a copy of L.R. 83 and Attorney Admission Application & ECF Registration Form. (Attachments: # 1 Attorney Data Form)(AKR) (Entered: 01/06/2014)
5 NOTICE TO ATTORNEY Patrick McCarthy by Clerk re: L.R. 83Attorney Admission procedure w/ a copy of L.R. 83 and Attorney Admission Application & ECF Registration Form. (Attachments: # 1 Attorney Data Form)(AKR) (Entered: 01/06/2014)
6 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney, Patrick J. McCarthy, by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Belzley, Gregory) Modified text (description) on 1/14/2014 (CBD). (Entered: 01/14/2014)
7 MOTION for Ralph Miller to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights ( Filing fee $95; receipt number 0643-2845486) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Miller affidavit, # 2 Proposed Order)(Belzley, Gregory) (Entered: 01/14/2014)
8 MOTION for Sarah M. Goodman to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights ( Filing fee $95; receipt number 0643-2845504) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Goodman affidavit, # 2 Proposed Order)(Belzley, Gregory) (Entered: 01/14/2014)
9 MOTION for Kristen M. Echemendia to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights ( Filing fee $95; receipt number 0643-2845527) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Echemendia affidavit, # 2 Proposed Order)(Belzley, Gregory) (Entered: 01/14/2014)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: re 6 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney, Patrick J. McCarthy, by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights (CBD) (Entered: 01/14/2014)
Attorney Update. Attorney Ralph Miller,Sarah M. Goodman,Kristen M. Echemendia for Oscar Adams added. Ralph Miller,Sarah M.

01/14/2014 01/14/2014
01/16/2014 01/16/2014 01/16/2014 01/16/2014 01/24/2014

Goodman,Kristen M. Echemendia for Michael Knights added. (CBD) (Entered: 01/14/2014)
BAR STATUS Check completed as to Ralph Miller, Sarah M. Goodman, Kristen M. Echemendia re 7 MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice, 8 MOTION to Appear, 9 MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice. (CBD) (Entered: 01/14/2014)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: re 7 MOTION for Ralph Miller to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights ( Filing fee $95; receipt number 06432845486), 8 MOTION for Sarah M. Goodman to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights ( Filing fee $95; receipt number 06432845504), 9 MOTION for Kristen M. Echemendia to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights ( Filing fee $95; receipt number 0643-2845527) (CBD) (Entered: 01/14/2014)
10 ORDER: 1. Plaintiff's Mtn (R. 6 ) is DENIED without prejudice; 2. Plaintiffs are ADVISED to consult L.R. 83.6 and resubmit this mtn in compliance with that rule. Signed by Judge Gregory F. Van Tatenhove on 1/16/2014. (AKR)cc: COR (Entered: 01/16/2014)
11 ORDER: 1. The Mtn for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Ralph Miller (R. 7 ) is GRANTED; 2. Ralph Miller is admissted pro hac vice to represent Plaintiffs Michael Knights and Oscar Adams in this case. Signed by Judge Gregory F. Van Tatenhove on 1/16/2014. (AKR)cc: COR, Ralph Miller via US Mail w/ECF Registration form (Entered: 01/16/2014)
12 ORDER: 1. The Mtn for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Sarah M. Goodman (R. 8 ) is GRANTED; and, 2. Sarah M. Goodman is admitted pro hac vice to represent Plaintiffs Michael Knights and Oscar Adams in this case. Signed by Judge Gregory F. Van Tatenhove on 1/16/2014. (AKR)cc: COR, Sarah Goodman via US Mail with ECF Registration form (Entered: 01/16/2014)
13 ORDER: 1. The Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Kristen M. Echemendia (R. 9 ) is GRANTED; and, 2. Kristen M. Echemendia is admitted pro hac vice to represent Plaintiffs Michael Knights and Oscar Adams, in this case. Signed by Judge Gregory F. Van Tatenhove on 1/16/2014. (AKR)cc: COR, Kristen Echemendia via US Mail with ECF Registration form (Entered: 01/16/2014)
14 AGREED MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer by J. Michael Brown, J. Michael Brown, Commonwealth of Kentucky, Jim Erwin, Jim Erwin, Paula Holden, Paula Holden, Gregory Howard, Gregory Howard, Kentucky Department of Corrections, Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, Kimberly Potter-Blair, Kimberly Potter-Blair, Clark Taylor, Clark Taylor, LaDonna Thompson, LaDonna Thompson, Randy White,

01/24/2014
01/29/2014 01/31/2014 02/03/2014 02/03/2014 02/04/2014 02/10/2014
02/10/2014

Randy White (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Dunham, Angela) Modified text to better describe on 1/24/2014 (AKR). (Entered: 01/24/2014)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: re 14 AGREED MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer by J. Michael Brown, J. Michael Brown, Commonwealth of Kentucky, Jim Erwin, Jim Erwin, Paula Holden, Paula Holden, Gregory Howard, Gregory Howard, Kentucky Department of Corrections, Kentucky Justice. (AKR) (Entered: 01/24/2014)
15 ORDER: The parties having submitted an Agreed Motion, this Court hereby grants the Defendants in this cause an additional two weeks (14 days) to file an Answer to Plaintiffs' Complaint. Defendants' Answer is now due on February 10, 2014. Signed by Judge Gregory F. Van Tatenhove.(AKR)cc: COR (Entered: 01/29/2014)
16 Mail Returned as Undeliverable. Mail sent to Patrick J. McCarthy re 12 Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice, 13 Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice, 11 Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice returned marked "Return to Sender, Unable to Forward". (AKR) (Entered: 01/31/2014)
17 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Adams affidavit, # 2 Exhibit Knights affidavit, # 3 Proposed Order)(Belzley, Gregory) (Entered: 02/03/2014)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: re 17 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights . (AKR) (Entered: 02/03/2014)
18 ORDER: Patrick McCarthy is hereby granted 17 permission to withdraw as counsel for Plaintiffs. Signed by Judge Gregory F. Van Tatenhove on 2/4/2014.(CBD)cc: COR (Entered: 02/04/2014)
19 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand by J. Michael Brown, J. Michael Brown, Commonwealth of Kentucky, Jim Erwin, Jim Erwin, Paula Holden, Paula Holden, Gregory Howard, Gregory Howard, Kentucky Department of Corrections, Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, Kimberly Potter-Blair, Kimberly Potter-Blair, Clark Taylor, Clark Taylor, LaDonna Thompson, LaDonna Thompson, Randy White, Randy White.(Dunham, Angela) (Entered: 02/10/2014)
Attorney Update. Attorney J. Todd Henning for J. Michael Brown,J. Todd Henning for J. Michael Brown,J. Todd Henning for Commonwealth of Kentucky,J. Todd Henning for Jim Erwin,J. Todd Henning for Jim Erwin,J. Todd Henning for Paula Holden,J. Todd Henning for Paula Holden,J. Todd Henning for Gregory Howard,J. Todd Henning for

02/10/2014 02/12/2014 02/12/2014 03/10/2014 03/10/2014 03/11/2014 03/11/2014 03/12/2014
03/14/2014 04/08/2014

Gregory Howard,J. Todd Henning for Kentucky Department of Corrections,J. Todd Henning for Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet,J. Todd Henning for Kimberly Potter-Blair,J. Todd Henning for Kimberly Potter-Blair,J. Todd Henning for Clark Taylor,J. Todd Henning for Clark Taylor,J. Todd Henning for LaDonna Thompson,J. Todd Henning for LaDonna Thompson,J. Todd Henning for Randy White,J. Todd Henning for Randy White added. (AKR) (Entered: 02/10/2014)
***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review & scheduling: 19 Answer to Complaint. (AKR) (Entered: 02/10/2014)
20 ORDER FOR MEETING AND REPORT: (Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 3/24/2014). Signed by Judge Gregory F. Van Tatenhove on 2/12/2014. (Attachments: # 1 Magistrate Consent Form)(AKR)cc: COR (Entered: 02/12/2014)
***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: 4 Notice to Attorney, 3 Notice to Attorney - no response received as of this date. (AKR) (Entered: 02/12/2014)
21 JOINT REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting. (Belzley, Gregory) (Entered: 03/10/2014)
***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: 21 Joint Report of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting. (AKR) (Entered: 03/10/2014)
Clerk's Note re 4 Notice to Attorney Deborah Golden: Clerk verified this date that counsel was admitted to the EDKY 3/25/1999 as Deborah M. Golden. Counsel is to disregard the Notice 4 . (CBD) (Entered: 03/11/2014)
Clerk's Note: re 3 Notice to Attorney, Clerk has been advised that an application is pending as to this attorney. (AKR) (Entered: 03/11/2014)
22 INITIAL DISCLOSURES by J. Michael Brown, J. Michael Brown, Commonwealth of Kentucky, Jim Erwin, Jim Erwin, Paula Holden, Paula Holden, Gregory Howard, Gregory Howard, Kentucky Department of Corrections, Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, Kimberly Potter-Blair, Kimberly Potter-Blair, Clark Taylor, Clark Taylor, LaDonna Thompson, LaDonna Thompson, Randy White, Randy White.(Dunham, Angela) (Entered: 03/12/2014)
23 INITIAL DISCLOSURES by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights.(Miller, Ralph) (Entered: 03/14/2014)
24 SCHEDULING ORDER: DISCOVERY 1. (a) parties exchange R26(a)(1) info by 3/14/14; (b) R26(e) supplementation due in accordance with

07/29/2014 07/30/2014 07/31/2014
08/13/2014 08/13/2014 08/13/2014 08/13/2014 08/14/2014

same; (c) R26(a)(2) expert witn reports due from Plf by 8/1/14; and Dft by 10/1/14; (d) All fact discovery due by 11/1/2014. (SEE order for completeness) DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS (a) Plf have to & including 10/1/14 to file mtn to join add'l parties & amend pleadings. (b) Dft have to & including 11/1/14 to file mtns to join add'l parties & amend pleadings. (c) All dispositive motions due by 1/1/2015. STATUS CONFERENCE set for Wednesday, 11/5/2014 at 11:00 AM in the Courtroom of the US Courthouse in FRANKFORT, KY. Case referred to Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins. Signed by Judge Gregory F. Van Tatenhove on 4/8/2014.(AKR)cc: COR, diary (Entered: 04/08/2014)
25 JOINT MOTION for Extension of Time by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights of Pretrial Deadlines Motions referred to Edward B. Atkins. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Miller, Ralph) (Entered: 07/29/2014)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Atkins for review: re 25 JOINT MOTION for Extension of Time by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights of Pretrial Deadlines. (AKR) (Entered: 07/30/2014)
26 ORDER: that the Joint Motion for Extension of Pretrial Deadlines [Record No. 25] is GRANTED. The following deadlines shall apply to this civil action: (1) Rule 26(a)(2) reports from expert trial witnesses are now due: i. From Plaintiff by MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 2014; and ii. From Defendant by FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 31, 2014. (2) All fact discovery shall be completed by MONDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2014. (3) The remainder of the Courts original Scheduling Order [Record No. 24] shall remain unchanged and in full force. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 7/31/2014.(AKR)cc: COR (Entered: 07/31/2014)
27 MOTION for Zachary Garthe to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights ( Filing fee $95; receipt number 0643-3019229)Motions referred to Edward B. Atkins. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Garthe Affidavit, # 2 Proposed Order)(Belzley, Gregory) (Entered: 08/13/2014)
28 MOTION for Elliot Mincberg to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights ( Filing fee $95; receipt number 0643-3019232)Motions referred to Edward B. Atkins. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Mincberg Affidavit, # 2 Proposed Order)(Belzley, Gregory) (Entered: 08/13/2014)
Attorney Update. Attorney Zachary C. Garthe for Oscar Adams,Zachary C. Garthe for Michael Knights added. (AKR) (Entered: 08/14/2014)
Attorney Update. Attorney Elliot Mincberg for Oscar Adams,Elliot Mincberg for Michael Knights added. (AKR) (Entered: 08/14/2014)
BAR STATUS Check completed as to Zachary C. Garthe re 27 MOTION for Zachary Garthe to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Oscar Adams, Michael

08/14/2014 08/14/2014 08/14/2014 08/15/2014 08/15/2014 08/18/2014 08/19/2014
08/19/2014

Knights ( Filing fee $95; receipt number 0643-3019229). (AKR) (Entered: 08/14/2014)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: re 27 MOTION for Zachary Garthe to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights ( Filing fee $95; receipt number 06433019229). (AKR) (Entered: 08/14/2014)
BAR STATUS Check completed as to Elliot Mincberg re 28 MOTION for Elliot Mincberg to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights ( Filing fee $95; receipt number 0643-3019232). (AKR) (Entered: 08/14/2014)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: re 28 MOTION for Elliot Mincberg to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights ( Filing fee $95; receipt number 06433019232). (AKR) (Entered: 08/14/2014)
29 ORDER: that Zachary C. Garthe is hereby admitted pro hac vice to appear before the Court on behalf of the Plaintiffs for all purposes in this case. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 8/15/2014. (AKR)cc: COR, papercopy to Z. Garthe w/ECF registeration form (Entered: 08/15/2014)
30 ORDER: that Elliot Mincberg is hereby admitted pro hac vice to appear before the Court on behalf of the Plaintiffs for all purposes in this case. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 8/15/2014. (AKR)cc: COR, papercopy to E. Mincberg w/ECF registeration form (Entered: 08/15/2014)
31 MOTION for Leave to File by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights Motion for Approval of Content and Mailing of Notices Motions referred to Edward B. Atkins. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Notification Letter, # 2 Exhibit B - Proposed Order)(Miller, Ralph) (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/20/2014: # 3 Certificate of Service) (AKR). (Entered: 08/18/2014)
NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY TO Ralph Miller re 31 MOTION for Leave to File by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights Motion for Approval of Content and Mailing of Notices; attorney failed to provide a certificate of service with pleading. Each pleading must have a certificate of service. Within 7 calendar days, prepare a pleading entitled "Notice of Filing" (with a certificate of service), file the Notice using the event "Notice of Filing," attach the certificate of service, and create a link to the related docket entry. cc: COR (AKR) (Entered: 08/19/2014)
32 NOTICE OF FILING by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights re 31 MOTION for Leave to File by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights Motion for Approval of Content and Mailing of Notices (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of

08/29/2014 08/29/2014 09/02/2014
09/02/2014 09/16/2014 09/16/2014 09/16/2014 09/16/2014

Service of Motion for Approval of Content and Mailing of Notices)(Miller, Ralph) (Entered: 08/19/2014)
33 JOINT MOTION for Extension of Time by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights Second Joint Motion for Extension of Pretrial Deadlines Motions referred to Edward B. Atkins. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Miller, Ralph) (Entered: 08/29/2014)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Atkins for review: re 33 Second JOINT MOTION for Extension of Time by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights Second Joint Motion for Extension of Pretrial Deadlines. (AKR) (Entered: 08/29/2014)
34 ORDER: that the Joint Motion for Extension of Pretrial Deadlines [Record No. 33] is GRANTED. The following deadlines shall apply to this civil action: (1) Rule 26(a)(2) reports from expert trial witnesses are now due: i. From Plaintiff by TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2014; and ii. From Defendant by TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2014. (2) All fact discovery shall be completed by MONDAY, DECEMBER 8, 2014. (3) The remainder of the Courts original Scheduling Order [Record No. 24] shall remain unchanged and in full force. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 9/2/2014. (AKR)cc: COR (Entered: 09/02/2014)
Set/Reset Deadlines: Discovery due by 12/8/2014. (AKR) (Entered: 09/02/2014)
35 ORDER: that Plaintiffs' Mtn for Approval of Content and Mailing Ntc (R. 31 ) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE with leave for counsel to submit a memo in support of the Court's legal authority or duty to approve the contents of a precertification mailing to putative class members. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 9/16/2014. (AKR)cc: COR (Entered: 09/16/2014)
36 MOTION for Extension of Time to File by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights to File Expert Report of Dennis Cokely Motions referred to Edward B. Atkins. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Belzley, Gregory) Motion Withdrawn per Order of Court 39 . Modified on 9/17/2014 (AKR). (Entered: 09/16/2014)
37 MOTION to Withdraw 36 MOTION for Extension of Time to File by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights to File Expert Report of Dennis Cokely by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights Motions referred to Edward B. Atkins. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Belzley, Gregory) (Entered: 09/16/2014)
38 DISCLOSURES Plaintiffs' Designation of Experts by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights. (Attachments: # 1 Expert Report of Richard Ray, # 2 Exhibit Ray Exh. A, # 3 Exhibit Ray Exh. B, # 4 Exhibit Ray Exh.

09/17/2014 09/17/2014 09/30/2014 10/01/2014

B.1, # 5 Exhibit Ray Exh. B.2, # 6 Exhibit Ray Exh. B.3, # 7 Exhibit Ray Exh. B.4, # 8 Exhibit Ray Exh. B.5, # 9 Exhibit Ray Exh. B.6, # 10 Exhibit Ray Exh. B.7, # 11 Exhibit Ray Exh. B.8, # 12 Exhibit Ray Exh. B.9, # 13 Exhibit Ray Exh. B.10, # 14 Exhibit Ray Exh. B.11, # 15 Exhibit Ray Exh. B.12, # 16 Exhibit Ray Exh. C, # 17 Exhibit Ray Exh. D, # 18 Exhibit Ray Exh. E, # 19 Exhibit Ray Exh. F, # 20 Exhibit Ray Exh. G, # 21 Exhibit Ray Exh. H, # 22 Exhibit Ray Exh. I.1 part 1 of 2, # 23 Exhibit Ray Exh. I.1 part 2 of 2, # 24 Exhibit Ray Exh. I.2 part 1 of 2, # 25 Exhibit Ray Exh. I.2 part 2 of 2, # 26 Exhibit Ray Exh. J, # 27 Exhibit Ray Exh. K, # 28 Exhibit Ray Exh. L, # 29 Exhibit Ray Exh. M, # 30 Exhibit Ray Exh. N, # 31 Exhibit Ray Exh. O, # 32 Exhibit Ray Exh. P, # 33 Exhibit Ray Exh. Q, # 34 Exhibit Ray Exh. R, # 35 Expert Report of Dennis Cokely, # 36 Exhibit Cokely Exh. A, # 37 Exhibit Cokely Exh. B, # 38 Exhibit Cokely Exh. B.1, # 39 Exhibit Cokely Exh. B.2, # 40 Exhibit Cokely Exh. B.3, # 41 Exhibit Cokely Exh. B.4, # 42 Exhibit Cokely Exh. B.5, # 43 Exhibit Cokely Exh. B.6, # 44 Exhibit Cokely Exh. B.7, # 45 Exhibit Cokely Exh. B.8, # 46 Exhibit Cokely Exh. B.9, # 47 Exhibit Cokely Exh. B.10, # 48 Exhibit Cokely Exh. B.11, # 49 Exhibit Cokely Exh. B.12, # 50 Exhibit Cokely Exh. B.13, # 51 Exhibit Cokely Exh. B.14, # 52 Exhibit Cokely Exh. B.15, # 53 Exhibit Cokely Exh. B.16)(Miller, Ralph) (Entered: 09/16/2014)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Atkins for review: re 37 MOTION to Withdraw 36 MOTION for Extension of Time to File by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights to File Expert Report of Dennis Cokely by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights , 36 MOTION for Extension of Time to File by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights to File Expert Report of Dennis Cokely. (AKR) (Entered: 09/17/2014)
39 ORDER: that Plaintiffs' Mtn to Withdraw Mtn for Ext of Time to File Expert Report 37 is GRANTED. Plaintiffs' Mtn for Ext of Time to File Expert Report 36 is hereby withdrawn. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 9/17/2014. (AKR)cc: COR (Entered: 09/17/2014)
40 MOTION for Leave to File by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint Motions referred to Edward B. Atkins. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Proposed First Amended Complaint, # 2 Exhibit B - Response to Interrogatories, # 3 Proposed Order)(Miller, Ralph) Modified att. description on 10/1/2014 (CBD). (Entered: 09/30/2014)
NOTICE OF DOCKET MODIFICATION TO R. Miller re 40 MOTION for Leave to File First Amended Complaint by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights; Error: attachments were insufficiently described as "Exhibit A," "Exhibit B." Entry by attorney; Correction: the Clerk renamed the attachments. Attachments must be adequately described. Example:

10/01/2014 10/01/2014
10/01/2014 10/03/2014 10/08/2014

Exhibit A (incorrect); Exhibit A Affidavit of John Doe (correct). No further action required by counsel. cc: COR (CBD) (Entered: 10/01/2014)
41 ORDER: that the Plaintiff's Mtn for Leave to File First Amended Complaint (R. 40 ) is GRANTED. The Amended Complaint (R. 40-1) shall be filed in the record. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 10/1/2014. (AKR)cc: COR (Entered: 10/01/2014)
42 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT against Gary Beckstrom, Gary Beckstrom, Dan Bottoms, Dan Bottoms, Alan Brown, Alan Brown, J. Michael Brown, J. Michael Brown, Commonwealth of Kentucky, Janet Conover, Janet Conover, Jim Erwin, Jim Erwin, Steve Haney, Steve Haney, Paula Holden, Paula Holden, Gregory Howard, Gregory Howard, Kentucky Department of Corrections, Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, Kathy Litteral, Kathy Litteral, Joseph Meko, Joseph Meko, Kimberly Potter-Blair, Kimberly Potter-Blair, Ravonne Sims, Ravonne Sims, Aaron Smith, Aaron Smith, Clark Taylor, Clark Taylor, LaDonna Thompson, LaDonna Thompson, Bobby Underwood, Bobby Underwood, Randy White, Randy White, Steve Woodward, Steve Woodward, filed by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights. Filed per Order 41 (CBD) (Entered: 10/01/2014)
Clerk's Note re 42 Amended Complaint: The Clerk notes an Amended Complaint was filed; however, no summons were provided to the Clerk for issuance. If you desire summons to be issued, the forms are available on the Courts website, www.kyed.uscourts.gov. A summons may be issued by presenting the prepared summons to the Clerk for issuance on paper or by electronically filing a Notice of Filing with the prepared summons as an attachment within 7 calendar days. (CBD) (Entered: 10/01/2014)
43 NOTICE OF MANDATORY ECF DIRECTED TO Elliot Mincberg, a non-registered attorney re 41 Order on Motion for Leave to File had to be MAILED TO a non-registered attorney, which is in direct violation of this court's General Orders re: Mandatory ECF. Failure to comply will result in this matter being submitted to the Chief Judge. cc: COR (Attachments: # 1 ECF Registration Form)(CBD) (Entered: 10/03/2014)
44 NOTICE OF FILING by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights re 42 Amended Complaint,,, (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Summons to Aaron Smith, # 2 Exhibit B - Summons to Kathy Litteral, # 3 Exhibit C - Summons to Steve Haney, # 4 Exhibit D - Summons to Gary Beckstrom, # 5 Exhibit E - Summons to Alan Brown, # 6 Exhibit F - Summons to Janet Conover, # 7 Exhibit G - Summons to Joseph Meko, # 8 Exhibit H - Summons to Don Bottoms, # 9 Exhibit I - Summons to Ravonne Sims, # 10 Exhibit J Summons to Steve Woodward, # 11 Exhibit K - Summons to Bobbie Underwood)(Miller, Ralph) (Entered: 10/08/2014)

10/08/2014 10/09/2014 10/09/2014 10/10/2014 10/28/2014
10/30/2014 10/30/2014

Attorney Update. Attorney Kristen M. Murphy for Oscar Adams,Kristen M. Murphy for Michael Knights added. (AKR) (Entered: 10/09/2014)
45 Summons Issued as to Gary Beckstrom, Gary Beckstrom, Don Bottoms, Don Bottoms, Alan Brown, Alan Brown, Janet Conover, Janet Conover, Steve Haney, Steve Haney, Kathy Litteral, Kathy Litteral, Joseph Meko, Joseph Meko, Ravonne Sims, Ravonne Sims, Aaron Smith, Aaron Smith, Bobby Underwood, Bobby Underwood, Steve Woodward, Steve Woodward; Summons issued and returned to counsel electronically. (AKR) (Entered: 10/09/2014)
46 NOTICE TO ATTORNEY Kristen M. Murphy by Clerk re: L.R. 83Attorney Admission procedure w/ a copy of L.R. 83 and Attorney Admission Application. (Attachments: # 1 Attorney Data Information Form, # 2 Attorney Ntc Part 2-ECF form, # 3 Attorney Admission Packet, # 4 Attorney PHV)(AKR) (Entered: 10/09/2014)
Clerk's Note re 46 Notice to Attorney to Kristen M. Murphy: Counsel called to advise that a name change has occured and that counsel is admitted/registered as Kristen M. Echemendia. Clerk has re-linked the case to this profile, counsel is advised that all future pleadings should be signed with this name and counsel may disregard the Notice 46 sent 10/9/2014. (CBD) Modified typo on 10/10/2014 (CBD). (Entered: 10/10/2014)
47 ORDER: The Status Conference currently scheduled for Wednesday, 11/5/14 in Frankfort, KY, is CONVERTED to a TELEPHONE CONFERENCE with the Court on the same date and at the same time, 11/5/2014 at 11:00 AM, to be held in LONDON, KY. To join the teleconference, the parties are directed to call AT&T Teleconferencing at 1-877-336-1280 and enter Access Code 2086161 (followed by #), and, when requested, enter the Security Code 09170 (followed by #), and; 2. Furthermore, the parties will consult regarding whether the above stated conference is still appropriate in light of the developments in this case following entry of the Court's original scheduling order. If it is determined that the conference need be continued, then the parties are to file such a motion seeking leave to continue as soon as is practicable. Signed by Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove on 10/28/2014.(AKR)cc: COR, London diary (Entered: 10/28/2014)
48 MOTION to Dismiss for failure to state a claim by Bobby Underwood, Bobby Underwood (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Affidavit)(Dunham, Angela) (Entered: 10/30/2014)
49 ANSWER to 42 Amended Complaint,,, by J. Michael Brown, J. Michael Brown, Commonwealth of Kentucky, Jim Erwin, Jim Erwin, Paula Holden, Paula Holden, Gregory Howard, Gregory Howard, Kentucky Department of Corrections, Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet,

10/30/2014 11/07/2014
11/07/2014
11/12/2014 11/13/2014 11/13/2014

Kimberly Potter-Blair, Kimberly Potter-Blair, Aaron Smith, Aaron Smith, Clark Taylor, Clark Taylor, LaDonna Thompson, LaDonna Thompson, Randy White, Randy White.(Dunham, Angela) (Entered: 10/30/2014)
50 MOTION to Dismiss for failure to state a claim by Gary Beckstrom, Gary Beckstrom, Don Bottoms, Don Bottoms, Alan Brown, Alan Brown, Janet Conover, Janet Conover, Steve Haney, Steve Haney, Kathy Litteral, Kathy Litteral, Joseph Meko, Joseph Meko, Ravonne Sims, Ravonne Sims, Steve Woodward, Steve Woodward (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Exhibit Response to Interrogatory No. 2)(Dunham, Angela) (Entered: 10/30/2014)
51 MINUTE ENTRY ORDER FOR TELEPHONE CONFERENCE held on 11/5/2014, before Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove: 1. Parties arc directed to submit an agreed order establishing proposed deadlines, including proposed dates for a final pretrial conference and trial no later than seven (7) days from today's date. Upon receipt of the agreed order the Court will enter a scheduling order. 2. The Court will notify Magistrate Judge Edward Adkins of the parties' request for a settlement conference. The settlement conference shall be scheduled by subsequent order of the Magistrate Judge. (Court Reporter SANDY WILDER.) Signed by Gregory F. Van Tatenhove. (AKR)cc: COR (Entered: 11/07/2014)
52 ORDER: this matter shall be set for a TELEPHONE CONFERENCE on Thursday, 11/13/2014 at 10:00 AM. The parties shall be prepared to discuss dates they will be available for a settlement conference, the number of participants, and the preferred location of the settlement conference. The parties shall access the conference by calling AT&T Teleconferencing at 1-877-336-1839; entering the access code 4162817 (followed by #); and when requested, entering the security code 0001 (followed by #). Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 11/7/2014.(AKR)cc: COR, pikeville diary (Entered: 11/07/2014)
53 Proposed Agreed Order/Stipulation by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights. (Miller, Ralph) (Entered: 11/12/2014)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: re 53 Proposed Agreed Order/Stipulation Proposed Scheduling Order by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights. (AKR) (Entered: 11/13/2014)
54 MINUTE ENTRY ORDER FOR TELEPHONE CONFERENCE held on 11/13/2014, before Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins: that the parties shall reconvene for a follow-up TELEPHONE CONFERENCE on Wednesday, 11/19/2014 at 3:00 PM. The parties shall access the conference by calling AT&T Teleconferencing at 1-877-3361839; entering the access code 4162817 (followed by #); and when requested, entering the security code 0001 (followed by #). (Court

11/13/2014 11/13/2014 11/14/2014 11/14/2014 11/14/2014 11/14/2014
11/20/2014

Reporter None Required.) Signed by Edward B. Atkins. (AKR)cc: COR, pike diary (Entered: 11/13/2014)
55 MOTION for W. Sutton Ansley to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights ( Filing fee $95; receipt number 06433087745)Motions referred to Edward B. Atkins. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ansley affidavit, # 2 Proposed Order)(Belzley, Gregory) (Entered: 11/13/2014)
Attorney Update. Attorney W. Sutton Ansley for Oscar Adams,W. Sutton Ansley for Michael Knights added. (AKR) (Entered: 11/14/2014)
BAR STATUS Check completed as to W. Sutton Ansley re 55 MOTION for W. Sutton Ansley to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights ( Filing fee $95; receipt number 0643-3087745). (AKR) (Entered: 11/14/2014)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenahove for review: re 55 MOTION for W. Sutton Ansley to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights ( Filing fee $95; receipt number 06433087745). (AKR) (Entered: 11/14/2014)
56 ORDER: that W. Sutton Ansley is admitted 55 pro hac vice to appear before the Court on behalf of the Plaintiffs for all purposes in this case. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 11/14/2014. (AKR)cc: COR, Atty Ansley w/ECF Registration Form (Entered: 11/14/2014)
57 SCHEDULING ORDER: Parties shall exchange R26(a)(1) info by 1/12/15. R26(a)(2) expert reports due from Plf by 3/3/15; and from Dft by 4/30/15. Discovery due by 6/2/2015. Amended Pleadings/Join Add'l Parties motions due by 6/2/2015. Dispositive Motions due by 7/31/2015. Plfs Responses due by 1/15/2015 to DE 48 & DE 50 . Dfts Replies due by 1/29/2015 to DE 48 & DE 50. FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE set for Monday, 11/9/2015 at 11:00 AM in the Courtroom of US Courthouse in FRANKFORT, KY. Pretrial Filings due 7 days prior to final p.t. conference. JURY TRIAL set for Monday, 11/23/2015 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom of US Courthouse in FRANKFORT, KY. Extensions of Time by motion prior to expiration of deadline in question and upon showing of good cause (SEE Order for completeness). Signed by Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove on 11/14/2014.(AKR)cc: COR, diary (Entered: 11/14/2014)
58 MINUTE ENTRY ORDER FOR TELEPHONE CONFERENCE held on 11/19/2014, before Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins: (1) Parties' request for settlement conference is GRANTED, and a ( SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE set for Tuesday, 1/27/2015 at 9:00 AM at the KY State Reformatory ("KSR") in LaGrange, KY. (2) On or before WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 2014, defense counsel must file a

11/26/2014

report with the Court detailing how the parties will be able to communicate during the settlement conference with Plaintiff Michael Knights, who is currently housed at the Kentucky State Penitentiary in Eddyville, Kentucky. Defense counsel's report should also detail the Department of Correction's requirements for access to the KSR facility (e.g., picture I.D., prohibited items) in order to facilitate an efficient entrance into the facility for all parties; (3) Defense counsel is ordered to ensure that Plaintiffs' counsel has access or a means to communicate with both named Plaintiffs, Oscar Adams and Michael Knights, throughout the day of MONDAY, JANUARY 26, 2015 so that Plaintiffs may adequately prepare for the settlement conference; (4) Counsel are directed to have their respective client and/or representative, fully authorized to negotiate and approve a settlement in this matter, present (physically or by electronic transmission) at this conference. The parties attention is directed to Lockhart v. Patel, 115 F.R.D. 44 (E.D. Ky. 1987). Telephone calls from the conference beyond those necessary for communication with Plaintiff Michael Knights may not be made for the purpose of obtaining authority for any offer or counteroffer to settle, or to approve a proposed settlement, and any party requesting or requiring such will be considered in violation of this Order; (5) By no later than TUESDAY, JANUARY 13, 2014, counsel shall submit to the undersigned separate, confidential statements which shall specify their respective settlement positions. Each statement is to be furnished only to Magistrate Judge Atkins and not to the other side. The statements shall not be filed with the Clerk of the Court or the presiding judge. Said statements shall be transmitted by email (atkins_chambers@kyed.uscourts.gov) and shall not exceed a total of ten (10) pages; (6) In their respective statements, counsel shall make a candid assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of both sides, an appraisal of issues such as liability, and the anticipated economic cost of further preparation and litigation of this matter through trial. (7) The Magistrate Judge requests that bona fide settlement negotiations commence as soon as practicable and be conducted as often as necessary prior to the settlement conference. Compliance with this requirement will be satisfied only when, prior to the conference, the parties communicate regarding an offer to settle, and counter- offer. (8) Finally, the Court acknowledges that the parties discussed the possibility of submitting a new agreed scheduling order in this matter and the Court denying without prejudice the parties' previously-submitted agreed order [R. 53]. However, the record reflects that the parties' previously submitted scheduling order has already been adopted by the Court [R. 57]. Accordingly, the Court refers the parties to R. 57 (Court Reporter None Required.) Signed by Edward B. Atkins. (AKR)cc: COR, diary (Entered: 11/20/2014)
59 STATUS REPORT by Gary Beckstrom, Gary Beckstrom, Don Bottoms, Don Bottoms, Alan Brown, Alan Brown, J. Michael Brown, J. Michael

12/01/2014 12/02/2014 12/03/2014 12/05/2014
01/27/2015

Brown, Commonwealth of Kentucky, Janet Conover, Janet Conover, Jim Erwin, Jim Erwin, Steve Haney, Steve Haney, Paula Holden, Paula Holden, Gregory Howard, Gregory Howard, Kentucky Department of Corrections, Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, Kathy Litteral, Kathy Litteral, Joseph Meko, Joseph Meko, Kimberly Potter-Blair, Kimberly Potter-Blair, Ravonne Sims, Ravonne Sims, Aaron Smith, Aaron Smith, Clark Taylor, Clark Taylor, LaDonna Thompson, LaDonna Thompson, Bobby Underwood, Bobby Underwood, Randy White, Randy White, Steve Woodward, Steve Woodward. (Henning, J.) (Entered: 11/26/2014)
***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Atkins for review: 59 Status Report (filed as mediation report). (AKR) (Entered: 12/01/2014)
60 JOINT MOTION for Order by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights Joint Submission of Proposed Scheduling Order Motions referred to Edward B. Atkins. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Miller, Ralph) (Entered: 12/02/2014)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: re 60 JOINT MOTION for Order by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights Joint Submission of Proposed Scheduling Order. (AKR) (Entered: 12/03/2014)
61 AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER: parties have submitted an Agreed Proposed Scheduling Order 60 IT IS ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: 1. Ddl to exchange information required by Rule 26(a)(1) is EXTENDED TO 2/13/2015. 2. Ddl by which Plaintiffs shall file their response memorandum to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 48 and to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 50 is EXTENDED TO 2/13/2015. 3. Ddl by which Defendants shall file their reply memorandum to Plaintiffs' response memorandum to both Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 48 and to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 50 is EXTENDED TO 2/27/2015. 4. A party must file a motion to request modification of any aspect of this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 12/5/2014.(CBD)cc: COR (Entered: 12/05/2014)
62 MINUTE ENTRY ORDER FOLLOWING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE held on 1/27/2015, before Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins: this matter came before the Court for a settlement conference, the parties appeared with counsel, and resolved all remaining issues in the action. IT IS ORDERED: (1) All deadlines in this case are CANCELLED; and, (2) On or before March 27, 2015, the parties shall file into the record their agreed order dismissing the case. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 1/28/2015. (Court Reporter None) (CBD)cc: COR (Entered: 01/28/2015)

03/25/2015 03/27/2015 03/27/2015
03/30/2015 03/30/2015 04/10/2015

63 JOINT MOTION for Order by all parties FOR A STATUS CONFERENCE AND TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE TO FILE AGREED ORDER DISMISSING THE CASE Motions referred to Edward B. Atkins. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Miller, Ralph) Modified text/filers on 3/26/2015 (CBD). (Entered: 03/25/2015)
64 ORDER: In view of parties' JOINT MOTION for FOR A STATUS CONFERENCE AND TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE TO FILE AGREED ORDER DISMISSING THE CASE 63 Court ORDERS 1. this matter set for TELEPHONE CONFERENCE on 4/3/2015 at 10:30 AM 2. the deadline for the parties to file into the record their agreed order dismissing the case is set for April 27, 2015. (Parties to follow call in instructions.) Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 3/27/2015.(CBD)cc: COR, Pike Diary Modified typo on 3/27/2015 (CBD). (Entered: 03/27/2015)
65 MOTION to Amend/Correct 64 Order, Terminate Motions, Set Hearings,,,,,, by Gary Beckstrom, Gary Beckstrom, Don Bottoms, Don Bottoms, Alan Brown, Alan Brown, J. Michael Brown, J. Michael Brown, Commonwealth of Kentucky, Janet Conover, Janet Conover, Jim Erwin, Jim Erwin, Steve Haney, Steve Haney, Paula Holden, Paula Holden, Gregory Howard, Gregory Howard, Kentucky Department of Corrections, Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, Kathy Litteral, Kathy Litteral, Joseph Meko, Joseph Meko, Kimberly Potter-Blair, Kimberly Potter-Blair, Ravonne Sims, Ravonne Sims, Aaron Smith, Aaron Smith, Clark Taylor, Clark Taylor, LaDonna Thompson, LaDonna Thompson, Bobby Underwood, Bobby Underwood, Randy White, Randy White, Steve Woodward, Steve Woodward Motions referred to Edward B. Atkins. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Dunham, Angela) (Entered: 03/27/2015)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Atkins for review: re 65 MOTION to Amend/Correct (Re-Schedule Telephone Conference) 64 Order Set Hearings,,,,,, by Gary Beckstrom, Gary Beckstrom, Don Bottoms, Don Bottoms, Alan Brown, Alan Brown, J. Michael Brown, J. Michael Brown, Commonwealth of Kentucky, Janet Conover. (AKR) (Entered: 03/30/2015)
66 ORDER: TELEPHONE CONFERENCE is RESCHEDULED to Friday, 4/10/2015 at 10:30 AM. Counsel shall access the conference by calling AT & T Teleconferencing at 1-877-336-1839; entering the access code 4162817 (followed by #); and when requested, entering the security code 0001 (followed by #). Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 3/30/2015.(AKR)cc: COR, diary (Entered: 03/30/2015)
67 MINUTE ENTRY ORDER FOR TELEPHONE CONFERENCE held on 4/10/2015, before Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins: the parties

04/27/2015 04/27/2015 04/30/2015 05/05/2015 05/06/2015 05/07/2015
05/08/2015

SHALL FILE an agreed order of dismissal or a status report outlining which settlement issues remained unresolved on or before 4/247/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 4/10/2015. (CBD)cc: COR (Entered: 04/10/2015)
68 JOINT STATUS REPORT by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights. (Miller, Ralph) (Entered: 04/27/2015)
***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Atkins for review: 68 Joint Status Report (CBD) (Entered: 04/27/2015)
69 ORDER: THAT the parties SHALL FILE a finalized settlement agreement or a joint status report addressing all issues set out in the parties' Rule 26(f) discovery conference on or before FRIDAY, MAY 8, 2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 4/29/2015.(AKR)cc: COR (Entered: 04/30/2015)
70 UNOPPOSED MOTION for Extension of Time to Finalize Settlement by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights Motions referred to Edward B. Atkins. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Miller, Ralph) Modified caption text on 5/6/2015 (CBD). (Entered: 05/05/2015)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Atkins for review: re 70 UNOPPOSED MOTION for Extension of Time to Finalize Settlement by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights (CBD) (Entered: 05/06/2015)
71 MOTION for J. Todd Henning to Withdraw as Attorney by Gary Beckstrom, Gary Beckstrom, Don Bottoms, Don Bottoms, Alan Brown, Alan Brown, J. Michael Brown, J. Michael Brown, Commonwealth of Kentucky, Janet Conover, Janet Conover, Jim Erwin, Jim Erwin, Steve Haney, Steve Haney, Paula Holden, Paula Holden, Gregory Howard, Gregory Howard, Kentucky Department of Corrections, Kentucky Justice and Public Safety Cabinet, Kathy Litteral, Kathy Litteral, Joseph Meko, Joseph Meko, Kimberly Potter-Blair, Kimberly Potter-Blair, Ravonne Sims, Ravonne Sims, Aaron Smith, Aaron Smith, Clark Taylor, Clark Taylor, LaDonna Thompson, LaDonna Thompson, Bobby Underwood, Bobby Underwood, Randy White, Randy White, Steve Woodward, Steve Woodward Motions referred to Edward B. Atkins. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Henning, J.) Modified text on 5/8/2015 (CBD). (Entered: 05/07/2015)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: re 71 MOTION for J. Todd Henning to Withdraw as Attorney by Gary Beckstrom, Don Bottoms, Alan Brown, Alan Brown, J. Michael Brown, J. Michael Brown, Commonwealth of Kentucky, Janet Conover, Janet Conover, Jim Erwin, Jim Erwin, Steve Haney (CBD) (Entered: 05/08/2015)

05/11/2015
05/11/2015 05/15/2015 05/18/2015
05/18/2015 05/18/2015 05/18/2015

72 ORDER: (1) The Motion to Withdraw [R. 71] is GRANTED. (2) J. Todd Henning is hereby WITHDRAWN as counsel of record on behalf of Defendants Gary Beckstrom, Tim Stevens, and Shawn McKenzie and electronic notifications to Mr. Henning are hereby terminated. (3) Defendants Gary Beckstrom, Tim Stevens, and Shawn McKenzie will continue to be represented in this matter by Angela T. Dunham with the Department of Corrections, Office of General Counsel, P.O. Box 2400, Frankfort, Kentucky 40602. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 5/11/2015. (AKR)cc: COR (Entered: 05/11/2015)
73 ORDER: THAT Plaintiffs motion (R. 70 ) is GRANTED; the parties SHALL FILE a finalized settlement agreement or a joint status report addressing all issues set out in the parties' Rule 26(f) discovery conference on or before FRIDAY, MAY 15, 2015. No further extensions are likely to be granted. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 5/11/2015. (AKR)cc: COR (Entered: 05/11/2015)
74 MOTION for Extension of Time by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Finalize Settlement Agreement and Notice of Pending Settlement Motions referred to Edward B. Atkins. (Echemendia, Kristen) (Entered: 05/15/2015)
NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY TO Kristen Echemendia re 74 MOTION for Extension of Time by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Finalize Settlement Agreement and Notice of Pending Settlement; attorney failed to submit a proposed order as an electronic attachment to the motion. Entry by attorney. Within 7 calendar days, prepare a pleading entitled "Notice of Filing" (with a certificate of service). Using the event "Notice of Filing," file the Notice and attach the proposed order, and create a link to the related Motion. cc: COR (AKR) (Entered: 05/18/2015)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Atkins for review: re 74 MOTION for Extension of Time by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Finalize Settlement Agreement and Notice of Pending Settlement. (AKR) (Entered: 05/18/2015)
75 ORDER: Plaintiffs motion 74 is GRANTED; the parties SHALL FILE a finalized settlement agreement or a joint status report addressing all issues set out in the parties' Rule 26(f) discovery conference on or before TUESDAY, MAY 19, 2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 5/18/2015. (CBD)cc: COR (Entered: 05/18/2015)
Set/Reset Deadlines:Joint Status Report re Settlement due by 5/19/2015. (CBD) (Entered: 05/18/2015)

05/19/2015 05/19/2015 05/20/2015 05/27/2015 05/29/2015 06/01/2015 06/22/2015 06/24/2015

76 NOTICE of Settlement with REQUEST for Telephone Conference by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A Settlement Agreement Between Defendants the Commonwealth of Kentucky et al. and Plaintiffs Oscar Adams and Michael Knights)(Miller, Ralph) Modified text on 5/19/2015 (CBD). (Entered: 05/19/2015)
***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Atkins for review: 76 Notice of Settlement with REQUST for Telephone Conference (CBD) (Entered: 05/19/2015)
77 ORDER: re 76 Notice of Settlement, TELEPHONE CONFERENCE set for Tuesday, 5/26/2015 at 11:00 AM. Counsel shall access the conference by calling AT & T Teleconferencing at 1-877-336-1839; entering the access code 4162817 (followed by #); and when requested, entering the security code 0001 (followed by #). Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 5/20/2015.(AKR)cc: COR, Pike diary (Entered: 05/20/2015)
78 ORDER: that on or before FRIDAY, MAY 29, 2015, the parties may each submit a motion or they may jointly submit an agreed order explaining their position on whether the Court should retain jurisdiction of this matter for the limited purpose of ensuring compliance with the terms of the parties' settlement agreement. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 5/27/2015.(AKR)cc: COR (Entered: 05/27/2015)
79 MOTION for Order (Consent Judgment) by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights . (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A. Settlement Agreement Between Defendants the Commonwealth of Kentucky et al. and Plaintiffs Oscar Adams and Micheal Knights, # 2 Proposed Order for Consent Judgement)(Miller, Ralph) Modified removing referral and adding text to better describe pleading on 6/1/2015 (AKR). (Entered: 05/29/2015)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: re 79 MOTION for Order (Consent Judgment) by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights. (AKR) (Entered: 06/01/2015)
80 ORDER: the parties shall submit to a TELEPHONE CONFERENCE on 6/24/2015 at 01:30 PM. To join the teleconference, the parties are directed to call AT&T Teleconferencing. Signed by Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove on 6/22/2015.(CBD)cc: COR, D (Entered: 06/22/2015)
81 CONSENT JUDGMENT: 1.The Department, any person or entity under the Department's control, and all of the Department's officers, assigns, successors in interest, predecessors in interest, parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, licensees and employees are enjoined and restrained, for the duration of the Settlement Agreement (see Sections 1. and XVII.!), from directly or indirectly breaching any terms of the Settlement Agreement.2.This Court will retain jurisdiction over the Parties to enforce

06/24/2015
02/04/2016 12/05/2016 01/03/2017 05/31/2017
06/01/2017

the Consent Judgment and Permanent Injunction pursuant to Section XVLB. of the Settlement Agreement.3.Pursuant to Section XV. of the Settlement Agreement, the Court appoints Margo Schlanger to serve as a Settlement Monitor to monitor the implementation of the Settlement Agreement. Pursuant to Section XV.B. of the Settlement Agreement, the Settlement Monitor will provide semi-annual reports to the Court and to the Parties concerning the status of Defendants' compliance with the Settlement Agreement or report to the Court pursuant to any schedule hereafter set by the Court.4.Except as provided herein, all claims alleged in the Complaint are dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Section XVLB. of the attached Settlement Agreement and all pending motions are withdrawn. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove on 6/24/2015. (Attachments: # 1 Settlement Agreement)(AKR)cc: COR (Entered: 06/24/2015)
82 MINUTE ENTRY ORDER FOR TELEPHONE CONFERENCE held on 6/24/2015 before Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove: 1) The Motion for entry of the Consent Judgment [DE 79 is GRANTED. 2) The Court will retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the Consent Judgment as set forth in Section XVI.B of the Settlement Agreement. Signed by Gregory F. Van Tatenhove. (Court Reporter Georgene Scrivner.) (CBD)cc: COR (Entered: 06/24/2015)
83 ORDER: the Court DIRECTS the Clerk to file this report in the record. Signed by Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove on 2/3/2016. (Attachments: # 1 First Semi-Annual Report)(AKR)cc: COR (Entered: 02/04/2016)
84 ORDER: the Court DIRECTS the Clerk to file this report in the record. Signed by Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove on 12/5/2016. (Attachments: # 1 Second Semi-Annual Report FINAL, # 2 Report Appendices FINAL)(AKR)cc: COR (Entered: 12/06/2016)
85 ORDER: On the Courts own motion, the clerk is directed to establish a CM/ECF filing user account for Margo Schlanger, in her capacity as the Settlement Monitor in the above styled case. Signed by Judge Gregory F. Van Tatenhove on 1/3/2017.(CBD)cc: COR, SKV (Entered: 01/03/2017)
86 THIRD STATUS REPORT Semi-Annual Report by Settlement Monitor. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix App. 1, Settlement Agreement (with numbered paragraphs), # 2 Appendix App. 2, ADA staff computer based training, # 3 Appendix App. 3, ADA coordinator training, # 4 Appendix App. 4, Site visit report, with exhibits, # 5 Appendix App. 5, Recommended forms, # 6 Appendix App. 6, April 2017 reporting request)(Schlanger, Margo) (Entered: 05/31/2017)
***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: 86 Third Status Report-Semi-Annual Report by Settlement Monitor. (AKR) (Entered: 06/01/2017)

06/27/2017 06/29/2017
07/26/2017 11/02/2017 11/12/2017 11/13/2017 11/28/2017 11/29/2017 12/04/2018
12/05/2018 04/23/2019

87 MOTION to declare Breach of Agreement and for Enforcement of Agreement re 81 Consent Judgment by Carl J. Perry, Jr., pro se. Motions referred to Edward B. Atkins. (Attachments: # 1 Envelope)(CBD) Modified text on 6/29/2017 (CBD). (Entered: 06/29/2017)
IMPORTANT NOTICE - PRIVACY RULES and REDACTION POLICY: F.R.Civ.P. 5.2 requires that personal identification information must be partially redacted from documents filed with the court. Click here for more information on the rules. It is the sole responsibility of counsel and the parties to comply with the rules requiring redaction of personal data identifiers. cc: COR, Carl Perry Jr. via US Mail (CBD) (Entered: 06/29/2017)
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Atkins for review: re 87 MOTION to declare Breach of Agreement and for Enforcement of Agreement re 81 Consent Judgment by Carl J. Perry, Jr, Pro Se. (AKR) (Entered: 07/26/2017)
88 ORDER: Plffs' Mtn to Declare Breach of Agreement and Enforce Settlement 87 is DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins on 11/2/2017. (AKR)cc: COR, paper copy to Carl Perry via US Mail (Entered: 11/02/2017)
89 FOURTH STATUS REPORT Semi-Annual Report by Settlement Monitor. (Schlanger, Margo) (Entered: 11/12/2017)
***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: 89 Semi-Annual Status Report (CBD) (Entered: 11/13/2017)
90 FOURTH STATUS REPORT Semi-Annual Report (Corrected/Revised) by Settlement Monitor. (Schlanger, Margo) (Entered: 11/28/2017)
***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: 90 Fourth Status Report-Semi-Annual Report(Corrected Revised). (AKR) (Entered: 11/29/2017)
91 FIFTH STATUS REPORT Semi-Annual Report by Settlement Monitor. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix App. A: Self-Audit Report, # 2 Appendix App. B: Site Visit Report, # 3 Appendix App. C: Self-Report Form, # 4 Appendix App. D: KyDOC audiology memo)(Schlanger, Margo) (Entered: 12/04/2018)
***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: 91 Fifth Status Report (SCD) (Entered: 12/05/2018)
92 SIXTH STATUS REPORT Semi-Annual Report by Settlement Monitor. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Appendix A, B, C)(Schlanger, Margo) (Entered: 04/23/2019)

12/24/2019
12/26/2019 05/27/2020
05/28/2020 06/30/2020 06/30/2020 07/01/2020 07/01/2020 07/20/2020 08/03/2020 08/03/2020

93 SEVENTH STATUS REPORT Semi-Annual Report by Settlement Monitor. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit KDOC Action Items List, # 2 Exhibit KDOC Responses, # 3 Exhibit KDOC Institution Responses, # 4 Exhibit Institution Self-Audit Spreadsheets)(Schlanger, Margo) (Entered: 12/24/2019)
***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: 93 SEVENTH STATUS REPORT (CBD) (Entered: 12/26/2019)
94 EIGHTH STATUS REPORT (semi-annual) by Settlement Monitor. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Information Request Memo (Feb. 12, 2020), # 2 Exhibit Spreadsheet Responses to Information Request, # 3 Exhibit Medical Request Forms, one with and one without accommodations language, # 4 Exhibit GRCC Job Request Form, # 5 Exhibit Device Vendor Information, # 6 Exhibit Videophone and VRI Evaluation Interview Questions (Memo to Ky DOC))(Schlanger, Margo) (Entered: 05/27/2020)
***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: 94 Eighth Status Report (SCD) (Entered: 05/28/2020)
95 JOINT STATUS REPORT by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights and Defendants. (Belzley, Gregory) Modified on 6/30/2020 (SCD). (Entered: 06/30/2020)
***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: 95 Joint Status Report (SCD) (Entered: 06/30/2020)
Attorney Update. Attorney Hannah Lieberman for Oscar Adams,Hannah Lieberman for Michael Knights added. (CBD) (Entered: 07/01/2020)
96 NOTICE TO ATTORNEY Hannah Liberman by Clerk re: L.R. 83Attorney Admission procedure w/ a copy of L.R. 83 and Attorney Admission Application (Attachments: # 1 Data Form)(CBD) (Entered: 07/01/2020)
97 Mail Returned as Undeliverable "Return to Sender Vacant Unable to Forward". Mail sent to Hannah Lieberman at address listed in 95 Joint Status Report re 96 Notice to Attorney. (SCD) (Entered: 07/20/2020)
98 NOTICE OF FILING AMENDMENT TO SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT by Oscar Adams, Michael Knights. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Amendment to Settlement Agreement)(Belzley, Gregory) Modified on 8/3/2020 (SCD). (Entered: 08/03/2020)
***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: 98 Notice of Filing AMENDMENT TO SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT (SCD) (Entered: 08/03/2020)

PACER Service Center Transaction Receipt

PACER Login:

11/02/2020 12:53:44

CRClearinghouse:2563377:0

Client Code:

Description: Docket Report

Search Criteria:

Billable Pages:

30

Cost:

3:14-cv00001-GFVTEBA
3.00


On January 1, 2014, deaf and hard of hearing inmates in the Kentucky prison system filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky against the Commonwealth of Kentucky and the Kentucky Department of Corrections, alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and the First Amendment. Plaintiffs claimed that they were denied access to telecommunications and denied interpretative services for religious services, job training, disciplinary hearings, public announcements, educational and vocational training effectively excluding them from many governmental services. The parties reached settlement which was entered by the court in a consent decree in June, 2015. A monitor was appointed, who will submit a  semi-annual report during the five-year term of the settlement. The settlement includes provision of services and accommodations through a qualified interpreter and communication technologies, staffing, and training. 