synopsis: an evaluation of system-provided
library services to state correctional centers in Illinois

robert f. ensley
institutionalized services, consultant
illinois state library
springfield, illinois

Introduction

Interest in state institutional services was first stimulated by the amendment of the Library Services and Construction Act in 1965 which required the State Library to develop service to residents of state institutions. The State Library commissioned a study of Illinois state institution libraries which recommended that each institutional department establish and operate a centralized library program.

In the late 1960s a new approach to state institutional services was begun in several states. Illinois chose to adapt this approach. Essentially it involved the provision of local library service to state institutional residents with funding from the state via the State Library.

A literature review revealed the paucity of published studies and reports on library service in state institutions. What had been published is well annotated in the full report.¹

A comparison of Illinois' service structure to other states' shows the uniqueness of the Illinois program. No other state was found with a program similar enough for comparison.

The State Level

The State Library consultant was more involved in the program in its early years. It was pointed out that at that time the consultant had a full time assistant and he spent about one-half of his time on institutional services and that the decline in staffing has resulted in a shift from a pro-active to reactive approach by the State Library consultant to this program.

Problems identified at the state level for which the State Library has responsibility were: lack of adequate statewide policies and guidelines, lack of regularly scheduled continuing education for institutional library workers, lack of annual site visits to libraries including annual evaluations, lack of standardized budgeting and expenditure reporting by systems, lack of direct statutory authority, and no advisory committee.

Problems identified for the Department of Corrections were: an inconsistent relationship with the State Library, inadequate security for library programs, no orientation program for librarians, lack of support for funding, inadequate training for inmate law library clerks, involvement of librarians on publications review committees, inadequate long-range planning with the State Library and lack of library access for inmates in community correctional centers.

Problems identified for the IDOC school district were: lack of coordination of media centers and the libraries, and no ESEA or other grant support given to libraries.

An analysis of the "Illinois State Library and Illinois Department of Corrections Joint Statement on Library Service" concluded that some clarifying language as well as some major content changes should be made. It was also suggested that the joint statement be renegotiated periodically.

The report recommended that contracts be negotiated annually between the State Library and the library systems specifying services to be performed and renumeration. It was also suggested that a formal contract between the State Library and the Department of Corrections be considered with funding for the legal collections from the IDOC and funding for general, school, and academic library services from the State Library.

An analysis of the funding history for the program 1975-1983 showed that the per-capita expenditure per inmate for libraries went from $52.74 to $32.36. In FY 1982 the appropriation was $1,325,259. The amount needed to meet the American Library Association/American Correctional Association standard of 2 percent of total operating costs would be $5,170,000. To meet the materials budget standards would take $1,400,000. To meet standards for staffing would require $1,302,000.

1. Report prepared by principal investigator Rhea Joyce Rubin and funded by an LSCA Grant.

29

The factors used by the State Library in estimating funding needed for FY 1984 were found to be appropriate although the dollar amounts applied to those factors were far short of that necessary to provide services which would meet standards.

The System Level

There is a wide variety among the ways systems administer this service. Coordinators should deal with no more than four institutions. Some programs should be coordinated on an inter-system basis. Very little resource sharing occurs among institution libraries. Cooperative collection development is not practiced. Audiovisual collections are very inadequate. Very little use is made of institutional collections by other libraries with the exception of the Stateville law library which provides legal reference service for the Bur Oak Library System. Very little prerelease information is provided in library collections. Institutional staff and administrators are not adequately involved in planning the library program.

The Institution

Administrative staff at institutions are more reactive than involved in library programs. Many administrators knew the State Library consultant. Most thought their libraries were adequate. A combination of ignorance, disinterest, and disagreement has resulted in adversarial relationships between librarians and administrators in many institutions. Only 22 percent thought they had a good relationship with their librarians. Seventeen out of twenty-two librarians felt the administrators were uncooperative.

Most inmates interviewed listed lack of access as their most serious problem. Access is more of a problem in maximum security institutions. Seventy-three percent of residents in maximum security institutions use the library. Ninety percent in minimum security use the library. Of that 90 percent about 31 percent use the library 1-4 times a month. Only 7 percent of inmates in protective custody or segregation units use the library.

Access is restricted by a variety of causes from institutional staff getting even to gang threats. One inmate reported bribing library staff with cigarettes to gain more frequent access to the library. Most access problems stem from movement systems within each institution.

Related to access is the lack of adequate materials once a visit to the library is achieved. Ethnic materials are in very short supply. Legal collections sometimes are better than general library collections. Rules for using library materials are often too restrictive and prevent good service.

Seventy percent of all inmates interviewed use the library once a month or more. Sixty-four percent said they would use the library more often if possible. Sixty-eight percent had not completed high school. Of those enrolled in classes (47 percent) forty-eight percent used the-library as part of their course work. The longer a person was incarcerated the less often he used the library — less than one year 56 percent — one to three years 29 percent — more than three years 5 percent. Education and age were also factors in library use.

Staffing levels vary greatly among the libraries, but none were meeting ALA/ACA standards. The presence of a professional librarian at the institution made a noticeable positive impact on the libraries.

Pay equity is a complex and major morale problem. The department of corrections pay scale for librarians is $16,272 - $20,664, the school district $17,185-$22,037 (for equivalent teaching positions), department of mental health $15,048 - $25,128, and the state library $13,417 - $20,388. Many of the system employed librarians were making $10,000 to $12,000. Pay parity was found to be a significant issue.

Performance evaluation of librarians is another issue. Institutional administrators are frustrated at not being consulted or otherwise involved in the librarian's performance evaluations.

Pay equity for inmate library clerks is another problem, especially since they are transferred frequently among the institutions. They are not always well trained.

Most of the libraries were inadequately housed. Very few had an inviting appearance. Only 5 adult and 2 juvenile center libraries have the required number of books. None of the collections appeared to be "well selected." General library development has suffered most from inadequate funding. Legal collections have suffered least.

30

The library services provided institutional staff were "most disappointing." Most of the librarians were disinterested in serving staff. Where staff collections did exist they were usually inaccessible.

Youth centers present special problems and needs. More of their residents are in school programs causing school needs to dominate the library program. Libraries are more likely to be misused by the institution as holding centers in juvenile facilities. Costs per resident in youth facilities are almost twice that per resident in adult facilities.

Eighteen of the twenty-one libraries do not have a library advisory committee as required by standards.

Library Outreach

Three areas of concern are addressed in this chapter: (1) the need to study the users within the correctional center, (2) the role of collection development to reflect the user's information and reading needs and wishes, and (3) the importance of lifelong learning and the role of the library for formal and informal learning.

The investigators found that the collections presume "at least a twelfth grade reading level and above average motivation for their use." The prison residents "have an average reading level of 7.6 for the adults and 4.9 for the juveniles." The collections need careful adjustment to be of interest and support identity development for users with various developmental needs and multi-cultural backgrounds. For the most part collections were not geared to inmate needs or interest.

Most inmates need and will respond to one-to-one service. Direct, personal service is essential for adults with multiple problems and histories of disappointment.

Very few outreach services or programs were identified. One youth center occasionally brought in outside guests to conduct programs in the library. Legal skills classes were offered in some adult libraries. Some bibliographies and new book lists were available. One used video programming shown on TV sets in the cells to promote the library.

The library, if it had carefully selected book collections that go beyond the limits of traditional materials, and through assistance in using the library as a community information center for lifelong learning, could realize its potential as a recreational and learning instrument. It could, "transform the present prison of oppressiveness, idleness, and predation into an institution in which hope is no longer a stranger."

The Legal Framework for Prison Libraries

There is a constitutional and statutory responsibility to provide prisoners with access to the courts. One way to do this is by providing law libraries of scope, depth, and service adequate to meet this requirement. This is the method chosen by Illinois.

This means that collections must contain certain basic materials identified by the courts, inmates unable to do their own legal research must have assistance, adequate hours of access must be provided and policies must not present undue burdens for inmates in using the collections and filing court documents. This chapter reviews a number of court cases which further define this service.

Court cases have not directly mandated the provision of general library services but the courts have issued decisions requiring that First Amendment rights not be prohibited.

General Comments and Recommendations on the Law Libraries

Only two law libraries were housed in appropriate space. All are heavily used. Sixty percent of residents interviewed in maximum, 47 percent in medium, and 58 percent in minimum security facilities reported using the law libraries.

Very few of the librarians had any expertise in legal reference service. The quality of this service fluctuates with the coming and going of inmate clerks whose expertise also varies. Because of the lack of expertise most librarians do not supervise this service but leave it up to the inmate clerks.

Since Illinois has chosen this method for inmates to access the courts it is necessary that the quality of the service be competent. Training for inmate clerks and librarians on a consistent basis is imperative. The selection process for hiring inmate law clerks could be improved by employing procedures used to hire employees on the outside.

Most of the collections meet most of the standards established by the courts and the American Association of Law Libraries. Many collections exceed the minimum requirements in certain areas. A problem occurs in book selection due to the lack of expertise of the librarians. Newly published law books are most difficult to select due to a lack of published guidelines for that purpose. This report outlines some basic selection guidelines. Another problem is a lack of understanding by the librarians about how various legal reference materials are kept up-to-date.

31

Many of the libraries do not meet standards for hours open. A common problem is the lack of hours accessible to inmates on work assignments. The library can set hours more appropriate to serve all inmates. Each library should have a civilian notary of the public on its staff to facilitate the flow of inmate prepared documents to the courts.

Standard policies and procedures for photocopying legal materials is needed. Typewriters, legal forms, paper, and envelopes are also essential to access the courts and their availability should be consistent.

Legal services to inmates in segregation units are significantly different from services for other inmates. If direct use of the library is not possible, an equivalent alternative should be available. Because the prison law libraries are the state's primary means of fulfilling a fundamental constitutional obligation, it is closely scrutinized by the courts. More direction for this activity of the library program is needed from the IDOC and the State Library.

Reflections

The mission of library service in corrections needs review in keeping with the trend away from rehabilitation as a mission of corrections. More emphasis should be placed upon the right to read. Residents of correctional centers have the same rights to information and to reading materials as do any other citizens. Their punishment is the loss of their freedom, not the loss of their right to read.

Reentry into the community is part of the new corrections approach. The libraries should do more to facilitate this process. More emphasis needs to be placed on building collections of job preparation materials, community resource files, survival skills information, clipping files, and urban newspapers. A bridge between the prison library and the public libraries must be established. Public libraries need assistance in preparing to serve ex-offenders.

The Illinois plan of service to state institutions is ideal for stressing the prisoner's right to read and for reentry preparation. The major problems identified in the study—access, personnel, substandard collections, services to isolation and segregation — are evident in correctional center libraries throughout the country. Additional problems are poor communications, loose accountability, and a lack of statewide policies. The promise inherent in the Illinois plan is still valid. It has more potential for success than any other approach.

The strengths of the Illinois plan are: (1) the integrity of the library program is independent of the Department of Corrections, (2) it is a public library service, (3) the diversity of the library systems, and (4) the direct relationships possible with public and other libraries outside through the systems.

Summary of Major Recommendations

These recommendations are not listed in order of priority. They are also not fully explained here; for information on each, and on all other recommendations, see the text of the report.

Section 1

Major Recommendations for ISL

1.  Funding for general library services to residents and staff should be appropriated to the ISL rather than to the DOC. In other words, the current method of funding should be continued, with some refinements. (Chapter 2, Section 7)

2.  An amendment to the Illinois Revised Statutes, Chapter 128, Section 107 (on powers and duties of the ISL) and an amendment to the library system act should be enacted to give the ISL a clear mandate to provide general library services to institution residents. (Chapter 2, Section 1)

3.  An ISL Advisory Committee on Institutional Library Services should be established to advise the ISL on policies and programs. It should consist of no more than nine persons representing the DOC, library systems staff, correctional center residents, and library system trustees. (Chapter 2, Section 1)

4.  If the proposed library systems rule 81-113.8 is not approved (to allow the ISL to develop and monitor statewide policies for the institutional program), contracts between the ISL and the library system should be considered in lieu of the current grants program. (Chapter 2, Section 6)

5.  An agreement for system-provided library service to institutions between the ISL and the IDMHDD should be signed; but services based on it should not begin until it is funded separately from the current correctional institutions services. (Chapter 2, Section 3)

32

6.  Contingency — emergency — funding formulas should be developed during FY 1984, for use in case of a decrease in the level of appropriations. (Chapter 2, Section 7)

7. The Joint Statement of the DOC and the ISL should be rewritten. (Chapter 2, Section 5)

8.  Civilian institutional library staff and institutional services coordinators should meet twice a year for continuing education programs coordinated by the ISL. One annual meeting might be for all civilian employees; the other arranged according to security and age classifications of the institutions. (Chapter 2, Section 1)

9.  Statewide policies on photocopying, emergency procedures, restitution for library materials, salary equity, performance evaluations, security, and other issues should be developed and implemented with the approval of the DOC per suggestions in this report. (Chapter 2, Section 1; Chapter 4, Section 4)

10.  A mailing of minutes, articles, bibliographies, legislation, and other items should be made by the ISL to all institutional library staff at least semiannually. (Chapter 2, Section 1)

11.  Site visits by the ISL Consultant for Institutionalized Services, with the DOC Chief Librarian and Law Library Advisor, should be conducted annually, and result in a written evaluation of the library based on ALA/ACA Standards. (Chapter 2, Section 1)

12.  Standard forms for budget requests and planning, for narrative and statistical reporting, and for annual financial statements should be prepared and distributed to the library systems. (Chapter 2, Section 1)

13.  A job evaluation study of correctional library civilian positions should be done to determine a fair minimum pay based on the relative worth of the jobs involved. (Chapter 4, Section 4)

14.  Job titles, position descriptions, application, and evaluation forms should be made uniform statewide for civilian positions. (Chapter 4, Section 4)

15.  A statewide uniform pay scale for resident clerks should be determined. (Chapter 4, Section 4)

16.  A statewide minimum pay scale for civilian employees should be adopted. (Chapter 4, Section 4)

17.  A course on legal collection management should be developed and video taped for dissemination to all law libraries.* (Chapter 7, Section 2)

18.  A bank of legal research training materials should be developed for use by all institutions.* (Chapter 7, Section 5)

19.  Access problems should be a priority for discussion with the DOC; solutions should be formalized in writing. (Chapter 4, Section 2)

20.  Law librarians should have in-depth training in legal research.* (Chapter 7, Section 2)

*lf the DOC appoints a Law Library Advisor (recommendation 2 of Section 2), this topic should be handled by that person; if not, then by the ISL.

Section 2

Major Recommendations for DOC

1.  A professional librarian should be hired as the DOC Chief Librarian, with responsibilities parallel to those of the ISL Consultant for Institutionalized Services. This is in accordance with the SERD Report and the original Joint Statement of the DOC and ISL (Chapter 2, Section 2)

2.  A law librarian (preferably with law and library degrees) should be hired as the DOC Law Library Advisor to supervise development, maintenance, and use of the law libraries and the training of law clerks and residents. (Chapter 2, Section 2; Chapter 7, Section 5)

3.  A study of the security needs of the libraries in each security level of institution should be done, in cooperation with the ISL, to ensure that the libraries receive the needed security attention at each institution. (Chapter 2, Section 2)

4. An intensive basic training, followed by intermittent classes on institutional and security concerns, should be provided to all civilian library staff working in correctional institutions. (Chapter 2, Section 2)

5.  Legislation based on the Joint Statement should be actively supported to ensure a legislative mandate for general library services to residents and staff through ISL and the library systems. (Chapter 2, Section 1)

6.  The DOC should absorb the costs of the law libraries and their services in the correctional centers, including the costs of legal materials photocopied for indigent residents. (Chapter 2, Section 2)

33

7.  The Publications Review Committee should be completely severed from library activities. (Chapter 2, Section 2)

8.  An annual projection report should be provided to the ISL and the library systems. (Chapter 2, Section 2)

9.  School District 428 should be kept a distinct agency, not officially involved with the general library services provided through the library systems. (Chapter 2, Section 4)

10.  Weekly, optional trips to the local public library should be arranged for community correctional center residents to encourage their continued use of library resources during the transition from incarceration to freedom. (Chapter 2, Section 2)

11.  A photocopy procedure whereby residents purchase cards or tokens from the commissary should be adopted. Indigents should receive the cards or tokens from the DOC when pauper status has been determined. (Chapter 1, Section 1; Chapter 7, Section 4)

12.  Site visits by the DOC Chief Librarian and the DOC Law Library Advisor, with the ISL Consultant for Institutionalized Services, should be conducted annually, and result in a written evaluation of the library based on ALA/ACA Standards. (Chapter 7, Section 5)

13.  Agreements between each correctional center and the corresponding library systems should be discussed and signed annually. (Chapter 3, Section 4)

14.  The use of ultrafiche law materials should be considered. (Chapter 7, Section 5)

15.  The feasibility of using a computerized legal research system should be reevaluated periodically. (Chapter 7, Section 5)

16.  The use of the library as a substitute teacher or a holding area should be discontinued in the youth centers. This is in accordance with the Joint Statement of the DOC and ISL. (Chapter 4, Section 8)

17.  Access problems should be a priority for discussion with the ISL; solutions should be formalized in writing. (Chapter 4, Section 2)

18.  Statewide policies on evaluation, photocopying, emergency procedures, restitution for lost library materials, salary equity, censorship, donated books, access to professional materials, and security should be discussed and implemented in cooperation with the ISL (Chapter 2, Section 1; Chapter 4, Section 4)

19.  Library hours should be scheduled to accommodate a variety of inmate schedules and to allow a minimum of ten hours per week per inmate for legal research in addition to general library use time. (Chapter 7, Section 4)

20.  A careful search for library materials and equipment should be included in the procedures used for transferring or releasing inmates. (Chapter 2, Section 2)

Section 3

Major Recommendations for the Library Systems

1.  All correctional centers should have professional librarians. If this is not possible at this time, circuit librarians might be used. (Chapter 4, Secton 4)

2.  A statewide minimum pay scale for civilian library staff should be adhered to. Until this scale is determined by a job evaluation study, the average salary statewide might be used, with the understanding that no one is to be paid less than his/her present salary. (Chapter 4, Section 4)

3.  A statewide uniform pay scale for resident clerks should be determined and adhered to. (Chapter 4, Section 4)

4.  Annual budget request forms — signed by the system directors, warden, librarian, and library coordinator — should be submitted to the ISL six months prior to the beginning of the fiscal year. (Chapter 2, Section 1)

5.  A financial report should be filed annually within two months of the close of the fiscal year. In addition, narrative and statistical reports should be submitted annually. (Chapter 2, Section 1)

6.  Library staff members in the institutions should be rotated with staff at the system headquarters or member libraries. (Chapter 4, Section 4)

7.  Bur Oak and Corn Belt Library Systems should each have two institutional services coordinators. Cumberland Trail and Lewis and Clark should share one for their four institutions. River Bend, Starved Rock, and Illinois Valley should share one for their three institutions. These arrangements will allow the coordinators to spend one day each week at each facility. Inter-system contracting might be used for coordinators' services. (Chapter 3, Section 1)

34

8.  Cooperation in collection building, film services, materials rotation, continuing education, programming, and other resources sharing ideas should be pursued among the systems. (Chapter 3, Section 2)

9. A method for sharing correctional center materials with system member libraries should be developed, and periodicals, received by correctional centers should be included in union lists. (Chapter 3, Section 3)

10.  Agreements between each center and the corresponding library system should be signed annually. (Chapter 3, Section 4)

11.  Continuing in-service training for law clerks and legal research classes for residents should be made available, perhaps through video tapes. (Chapter 7, Sections 2 and 4)

12. A full-time civilian library employee should serve as a notary public in each correctional center library. (Chapter 7, Section 4)

13.  A statewide policy on photocopying, including a provision for free photocopying for indigents, should be adhered to by all library systems. (Chapter 2, Section 1; Chapter 7, Section 4)

14.  Library hours should be scheduled to accommodate a variety of inmate schedules and to allow a minimum of ten hours per week per inmate for legal research, in addition to general library use time. (Chapter 7, Section 4)

15.  Resident advisory committees should be established in all institutions. (Chapter 4, Section 9)

16.  Library programming should be a major thrust in library services. (Chapter 5, Section 3)

17. All CC libraries should have ample civilian staff as per Standards. (Chapter 4, Section 4)

18.  Institutional librarians should have frequent opportunities for meeting and discussion. (Chapter 4, Section 4)

19.  DOC and library system on-site supervisors should complete an annual "courtesy evaluation" of the institutional librarian. (Chapter 4, Section 4)

20.  Standardized application, testing, and evaluation forms should be used for resident clerk positions. (Chapter 4, Section 4)

21.  Staff libraries should be given higher priority than they receive now. (Chapter 4, Section 7)

Suggestions for Further Research

1.  What is the impact of library service on the lives of the inmates?

2.  Does the provision of library service in prison lead to lifelong library use?

3.  Would improved local public library-institutional library cooperation facilitate continuing library use by ex-offenders?

4.  What is the effect of legal research training for inmates?

5.  What factors are associated with the use of prison libraries?

6.  What would be the effect of improved training for librarians?

7.  What would be the effect of rotating librarians on the library community's acceptance of prison library services? On the turnover and burnout rate of prison librarians? On the quality of library services provided to prisoners and staff?

35