Miss marine who served as Deputy Assistant attorney for operations and management in the office of Justice Programs for the u. S. Department of justice, and dr. Greta el goodwin, and justice for the you it is the custom of the subcommittee swear in all witnesses, and at this time i will ask you to please stand and, raise your right hand. Do you let the record reflect the witnesses answered in the affirmative. And the whole truth, so help you god . Let the wreckage of the witnesses answered in the affirmative. We will be using a timing system today. Your written testimony is entirely printed in the record, and we will ask you to limit your oral testimony to five minutes. We will hear from you first, thank you. You may proceed. You will need to turn that microphone on. Thank you. Is it on no, can you hear me . Yes, thank you. Thank. You thank you making and distinguished members of the subcommittee. Im grateful for the opportunity to speak to you today about the work in the department of justice to implement the death and custody reporting act, and they ways that we work with our state, local, and tribal partners to improve the conditions of incarceration. But deaths in custody is a and legitimate justice system. There are no more solemn responsibilities than the protection of life, and designed to help us obtain the and fulfilling this responsibility. Since the original statute was enacted more than two decades ago, the department of justice, through its office of Justice Programs has worked hard to collect data and jailings and this committee appreciates that is a major undertaking to gather this information for 66 states and territories who for thousands of prisons, local jails, and Law Enforcement agencies. We firmly believe that it is well worth. The effort. While the name is unquestioned by the department, the current process deserved to be reevaluated. For many years following the enactment in 2000, our bureau of justice since his six all told, the justice reported which we have provided a wealth of information and causes of deaths, characteristics of where the deaths occurred. Since 2013, an update to the enactment was occurred, the new law expanded the original and added a steady agreement using agreement on how to perhaps of greatest consequence, the attorney general gained the discretion to under the edward burn through the jag program, we provide over 273 million annually in funding for general purposes. Law enforcement activities throughout the nation. This last requirement posed a dilemma, as the federal Statistical Agency was per bag for any purpose other than statistics or research. Though the 2013 was wellintentioned, it has negative consequences for the state and local connections. For one, since it requires two have the department receive all information centrally from states, we can no longer collected from states as we once did. Second, the can actually has the potential to punish states and local agencies that comply with the law. For example, local agencies declined to report to their state, that states reporting to the department of justice will be incomplete, even though that state may submit all of the data it received, it can still suffer the funding penalty. Furthermore, since the grants passed through the local jurisdictions, even the local agencies that fully report their information would feel the effects of penalty applied to their state. Finally, we can no longer assign the collection to vijay s, which had achieved a nearly 100 Response Rate while in its administered program. We are working hard to obtain the comprehensive reporting from states, and provide to improve reporting. We are developing new methods to develop state compliance, and develop feedback for reporting. In the meantime, we are looking to congress to help us programmatically improve the quality of the data, and we have a proposal for how to do that. For instance, we are asking to from local agencies, and open sources in order to enable us to restrict the funding penalty to non restricted agencies, instead of applying it statewide. We are now proposing a new program to help better equipped agencies across the countrys the death in custody reporting act is one of the many vital tools in restoring the final the department provides tens of millions of dollars in resources to states, local communities, and tribes to improve the way that incarcerated people are treated, and to support efforts in arrest related deaths to and programs focused on building Law Enforcement and community trust. Examples of that work are provided in my written testimony. We look forward to developing new challenges, and i thank you very time. I am happy to take any questions you may have. Thank you. Doctor goodwill, you are recognized for your opening statement. I appreciate your opportunity to discuss the actions the doj has taken to address the Data Collection and reporting requirements in the death and custody reporting act of 2013. And, it accentuates the doj studying and used the Data Collected from states. As already discussed, it was enacted in 2014 to ensure, and to encourage the study of deaths in custody. Federal agencies and states that received certain federal funding are required to foot to the doj. The doj is required to study the federal and instate data, exam how the information can be used to reduce deaths in custody in 2015, the doj began collecting data on the death of custody in federal Law Enforcement. As of fiscal year 2020, the doj reported the 2700 deaths occurred in federal custody. While the agency collected the same information at the state and local levels, it is not actually recorded on these deaths. The doj began collecting information with us from states on death and custody about three years ago. Agency officials told us that they plan to continue to collect state data, but have not said whether or how they will use the information to a death the doj cites missing and or incomplete data from states as one of the reasons why they have not yet studied the state information. We have found similar concerns when we examine the data. For example, of the 47 states that have submitted data, only to have submitted all of the required information. Some states did not account for all deaths in custody. Using publicly available reports, we have identified nearly 1000 deaths that have occurred during the fiscal year 2021 that states did not report to doj. Four states did not report any deaths, yet we found that at mid east hundred and 24 deaths have occurred in those states. Doj has noted that it is a top priority to improve the quality and completeness of state reporting. In 2016, the agency acknowledged the department with would help improve the quality of the data, and they have a goal to ensure states comply. However, as of this month, september 2022, doj still has not determined whether states have complied. While doj collect data from states, they do not require doj to publish state data. The agency has no plans to do so. Importantly, as dojs collection efforts began, it discontinued a longstanding program that collected and published data on deaths of people in the mortality and correctional institutions program. Doj had used this data to publish reports, and provide statistical information on deaths in correctional institutions. This published information researchers, and the public to view and study the data. While the mortality and correctional institutions report was made publicly available, the report was not available to the public. This lack of transparency would be a great loss in the publics understanding of the deaths in custody. Given that 1. 5 Million People were incarcerated in state and federal prisons in local jails at the end of 2020, statistics on death and custody are a valuable research in the criminal justice system. Doj has made some progress towards addressing what it calls a profoundly important issue, but significant work remains. Right now, doj and states are expanding resources to compile National Data sets that may not be studied or published, potentially missing an opportunity to inform practices to help reduce death in custody. We are Encouraging Congress to consider whether it should be amended to ensure the doj uses the data that it collects from states for recurring studies for the public. And to help enhance the quality of the data we are chair on stuff, and Ranking Member johnson, this concludes my remarks, im happy to answer any questions. Thank you for your presence here today. I want to begin with dr. Goodwin, just by making sure that it is clear what you have found. I think in some ways, the most powerful and alarming piece of data that your team unearthed at the request of the subcommittee is that in 2021, you found nearly 1000 deaths in state or local facilities that the department did not capture. You found them through a review of sources, is that correct . That is correct, senator. The way that that 1000 deaths breaks down, the way that breaks out is 141 of those deaths that were discovered in state correctional facilities, and so how did we get there . We basically used public avila some states when they are doing their annual statistical reporting, they provide that information. We went through and did, as you know, an analysis that we could to get to the 141. The remaining deaths, 649 deaths, we used publicly available data and we used a couple of data bases that collect information when it or when a death happens in custody. Thats how we arrived at the nearly 1000 deaths. For the most part, a lot of this, it was publicly available data. One thing that i forgot to add, for the 341 deaths, it was publicly available data, and we had access to some of the dick right rapper and tried to get some rapper. Of the 1000 deaths uncounted last year alone, i want to this is not a political or partisan issue, the the decline in the apartments ability to collect High Integrity data has unfolded over several administrations, this is not a partisan issue. You have been working with the office of Justice Programs for 20 years, and leading operations in management for the last seven, correct . I have been at the office of the Justice Programs for 32 years. I have been part of the Leadership Team since february 2014, as the Deputy Assistant overseeing our business operations. Thank you. Our uppers is responsible for the the office of Justice Programs, viewer of justice assistance at this time is overseeing the reporting from states, that is correct. Thank you. As we have discussed, 1. 5 Million People are incarcerated in state prisons or local jails. Thousands die every year. Why is it important, in brief, please, for the reporting on deaths in custody . The department shares the goals, chairman, to improve the data that has been reported. The quality, the completeness of the data. This data is extremely important, and it is critical to understanding deaths in custody, understanding the relationship between deaths in custody and college policy practices. A state jail, Law Enforcement agencies. Here are reports from congresses about this purpose of dcra. It would bring, quote, a new level to the nations correctional institutes. It would provide and it would bolster public confidence, and would quote, bring additional transparency. Would you agree that these are among the purposes of this Data Collection . The department agrees that there is critical value, in all of these data, to collect the data from the state to analyze the data, to prevent findings, so that we can better understand deaths in custody. So that we can determine whether there are strategies to reduce deaths in custody. Thank. You our bureau of justice assistance, a Component Agency within the justice program, those that are tuned in across the country will have to indulge and tolerate some acronym chaos here, but the bureau of justice assistance to started collecting state and local data in 2019. The bureau of justice statistics, or vijay s, who previously collected this data, with success, analyzed the data that the in 2020, and produce the internal report in may of 2021. They identified some significant issues that vijay a did not capture in any state in the 11 states. Or any jail deaths in the district of columbia. Then from october to december of 2019, vijay a missed 192 deaths. Where these results the concerning to the department of justice . The department of justice over the two or three years that we have been collecting data, we have seen underreporting from states, and under dcra 2013, states having to collect data from their local agencies, and they are essentially reporting to vga. The states are reporting great challenges. I think that the dojs report will show this, and we have heard the same thing from our states. The states have no leverage to compel the local agencies to report the data. Thank you, i appreciate that issue on the state and local level. When vgs, your statistical office, having reviewed the First Quarter of collection under vga, reported to own the that vga missed state president s, and 11 and then from october to december that first period when vga was undertaking this collection, over 192 deaths, was that concerning . Surely that was concerning. Youre transferring from one agency to another, and the prior agency was not telling you that it was working. Was that concerning . It is very concerning. As the underreporting, and it is widespread across all of the states. Its not just in certain areas. Thank you, it was concerning. In response to those findings by vgs, what did the department of justice due to repair and improve its Data Collection methodology, so this problems would not persist . The current administration, the Current Department was focusing on fixing the problems that we have, and obstacles that we have observed with reporting under dcra 2013. We are presenting legislative proposals to amend dcra so that we can address issues that we were believe are contributing to the underreporting. Having states serve as the central repository, and the central reporter is certainly contributing to the you will have to forgive me. We are trying to understand with precision what unfolded within the department that led to a significant decline in the integrity of the data that the department was collecting. And so i am looking for a precise answer to a very particular question. In the first few months when vga took this over from vgs, vgs continued collecting. And then they call it with vgs, your statisticians, the folks that specialized in this, they raised a big red flag. They said that what vga is doing is not working. My question is, in response to that specific information, that warning, what action was taken to improve vga methodology . Not broad, what action was taken . Thank you for the question. Its important to describe when vgs was collecting the data, they were able to go directly to local agencies, local correctional institutes, jails, and collect those data under dcra 2013. They were presented with and working with the states central reporters, which is a significant contributor to the underreporting and incomplete data. Vga has worked with a training provider, providing direct Technical Assistance to the states, to review their data that is coming in. Identifying ways that they can improve it. We have provided trainings to the states, and we have provided oneonone technical insistence with states to help them think through their Data Collection strategies to identify areas where there is under reporting we do not have unlimited time here, im not getting a precise answer to that question. I will yield now to Ranking Member johnson, and i will return for a second round in a moment. Thank you. Can you bring your microphone a little closer to your mouth . I want to know how many people are working on this throughout the department of justice. The primary function is grant making and so, okay, how many people are working on providing this data . How many people . Is it ten, three, doesnt how many people . I dont know the answer. I will go back and look at how many people are i want to know how many people are working with the bureau of justice statistics, i want to know how many people are in the assistance. How many people missed goodwin, when you say publicly available records, what are you talking about . Are you talking about the institute of research, are you talking about reports, the states own governments that have published, and you are able to tap into those things . Its a little bit of both. For some states, they may report their deaths, and that information shows up at the end of the year insist they went through those state information. Basically, we did a Google Search to see what we could find. How many people did you have to take a look at this . Two. You had two people . Over what length of time. From made a september. May 2022 to september 2022. Okay. Was not about five months . Yeah. So you had two people, and with two people working for a few months you determined that we were missing close to 1000 death reports because you found them with open source reporting, basically . A lot of it was open source reporting. A lot of it was publicly available data and some of the databases that do collect its information, the non doj databases either you know approximately how many deaths occur in custody within state local deals every year . Unfortunately we do not. Just ballpark. And not looking precise right now. Im talking about ballpark. Is there a couple thousand . Bjs says in 2019 in local jails there was 1200 deaths i got that local. What about states . About 4200. Why do you combine state and federal and non state and local . It is not a trick question. It is a question, out of curiosity. Because we normally separate federal and then you have state and local. You did it the other way, why . Local jails its a different type of facility then federal and state prison. Isnt state prison different than federal prison . Correct. So, you probably got a couple of files, 2 to 3000 prisoners dying in custody and state and local prisons. I thought it was interesting as i was going through, it i assumed it would be state and local but it kept saying local. It is only a local. Why did you issue this report talked full of information, by the way, statistics on just local . Why didnt you combine it with state . I am sorry. Senator johnson, what are you referring to . Again, the whole purpose of dicra its to determine the deaths in custody and state and local jails, correct . Correct. So when you publish a paper on deaths, mortality 3000, 2019, why did she only do local . Why did you do state and local. Because that was the whole purpose of dicra . In 2019 bjs did publish state and federal deaths. Okay. We are combination. I think my pointer out here is that we are talking about a pretty manageable amount of information here with just a little bit of dedication from now i have 117,000 people in the department of justice, a bill that was passed in 2000, and reauthorized in 2013. So obviously realized congress wanted this information. You are collecting some of it, and then you kind of stopped. I heard the explanation that when Congress Passed the reauthorization they tied it to funding in there is a penalty there, so all of a sudden the bureau of justice and statistics couldnt handle that. That is bureaucratic. I got the. But it wouldnt seem like it would be that big of a heavy lift to have one or two people, we will find out, i really do want to know how many people in bjs were working on providing this information and how many people in bja were charged with that. You would have thought that a meeting or two, you could have combined your efforts and said this is what we did, and you ought to do the same thing which is what the chairman is trying to get at. Where was the breakdown here . Where was the breakdown . It seems like bjs was able to collect this information and all of a sudden, for whatever bureaucratic impediment, they had to turn it over to bja, what was so hard about a pretty smooth handoff . This department is focused on fixing and improving the Data Collection, so we are focused on how we can you have been focusing in how many years . Do you utterly failed. Literally, you utterly failed. This is not that hard. Two people over a few months got better statistics than the department of justice for how many years . We dont even know what states were reporting state and local, we werent even able to answer that question from staff. What is the impediment from getting information from states . You have 50 states, you have a couple people, put them on at full time, they Start Talking to the states. You go this information is missing over the course of 22 years, i would have thought this information gathering process would have been pretty well honed, and these reports would have just been automatic. You could probably put one person on it part time. My point, what is wrong with bureaucracies . I mean, why cant they accomplish just the simplest of tasks . And why wont you be transparent and honest with why you are not able to do it . I guess i am not asking for answers to these things, just rhetorical questions. Do you have any response . I do. The response that i gave in my oral statement and that i have tried to reiterate here is that dicra 2013 provides for a different recording structure. That recording structure has left the states with little to no leverage or incentive to get the information from local agencies and Law Enforcement agencies. Didnt they actually increase the incentives . They attached funding to it and there is a penalty of not receiving funding if they did not get i dont think that it wasnt 2000, and i think that that was part of the issue with reauthorization, wasnt it . They actually put penalties to it . It seems like they are far more successful with the prior law. The penalties that are currently in dicra 2013 have unintended consequences. If a state is reporting everything that they are receiving from local agencies, and it is incomplete, they would potentially be found in noncompliance. And their state funding would be cut even though they would be working in good faith i will say it doesnt surprise me that congress screwed something up here. And we maybe got to take a look at that. But we need to fully understand it first, exactly what is happening, so how are we collecting it under bjs, how are we collecting it under bja, we need transparency, we need some help, this should not be that difficult to get this answer. This shouldnt be that difficult to fix to try to get the death reports. Quite honestly, i would want more information. I want the stories. Were you listening to the witnesses in the first panel . I was not able to join the hearing, but i did look at the victims list, and those are very heartbreaking, heartbreaking stories. What i would suggest you do is you go back to the department of justice, if you have anyone involved in this process, get a clip of the testimony, and i think that might just incentivize you to get on this case and get this information. Senator, we are proposing fixes, legislative changes to dicra 2013 so that the department can be in a better position and have the ability to i come from the private sector. I have this fix in about ten minutes. The fact that it has taken new years is beyond comprehension, honestly. But we are going to have to do with the government way i guess, but we have got to get to the bottom of this, okay . Miss chairman. Thank you, mr. Johnson. Dr. Goodwin, why is that important to have a full and accurate accounting of death and custody data . Senator, i will go back to the Previous Panel when you ask them. And i would like to add on to the conversation, when we think about collecting these types of statistics, there are people at the end of these statistics. They are not just numbers. We are talking about people, and we are talking about people and their families. Collecting this information is useful to policy makers. First, it is useful to doj to help them better understand what is happening that might be causing these deaths. One modifications might need to be made, what changes might need to be made, is their training, what needs to happen in the correctional institutions to ensure that there are not any deaths . Once that happens, informing the policy makers. What needs to happen if there needs to be a change in policy, what needs to happen to ensure that these deaths dont keep occurring . Thank you dr. Goodwin. According to your analysis of dojs data from last year, we already discussed nearly 1000 deaths that your team was able to identify through open sources uncounted in the doj data. Is it also the case, my understanding is that 70 of the death and custody records produced by states to the department were incomplete. And 40 of those records did not even include a description of the circumstances of death, is that correct . That is correct, senator. Under dicra, there are certain types of information that are supposed to be reporting. One, they race, ethnicity, gender of the individual who is deceased, the location of the death that happened, what was occurring during that time, there are a number of different elements, shall we say, that should be reported to dicra, under dicra, when they are making reports about what happened. When we looked at the data, as you said, 70 had x amount, 40 had x amount, that is a concern as well. I would also like to add, senator, that nearly 1000 deaths but we found, we believe that is an undercount. We were doing a very quick, but thorough analysis based on what was available to us. But we are mindful that some of that information might not have been reported anywhere, or might have been misreported. So we do believe that that is a undercount. That is why we are calling on doj to do what they can to ensure state compliance with dicra, so that we can have a more accurate picture of what is happening in these correctional institutions. Luscious crystallized those findings. I am so grateful for you and your staff to undertake analysis at our request for reporting this analysis, for your professionalism, for your hard work, i want to condenses down to the key facts that the public needs to hear. You found nearly 1000 deaths last year alone, uncounted by doj, and you believe it is likely a significant undercount. 70 of the records they did correct where incomplete, and 40 of the records did not even include the description of the circumstances of death. That is correct. Panel one, professor armstrong, discussed how we cannot effectively intervene to remedy facility level abuses with conduct, or conditions, or health units. The kinds of things that we need to hire some unless we know where the problems are yes, we do. If you dont understand in 45 of the records collected, and again, putting aside nearly 1000 records that were not collected at all. Putting that aside, when 40 of the records did not even include a description of the circumstances of death, that the purpose of this collection to yield insight for policy, said that we can intervene and save lives is undermined . It was enacted to deal with, and men and minimize deaths in custody, and part of that once you have the data, you have some idea of what might need to be done. Some states might be doing some really good things with some states, we just dont know, because that data is not being collected. I would also like to add that even if the data were collected, what we found in our conversations with the doj, they dont have any plans to publish the data. The data would be collected, and what would be done with it is in question. Thats a good segue. Let me ask you about that. Why has the doj ceased to publish this data after 20 years of making this information public . Isnt there an obvious and vital Public Interest in transparency here . Thank you for that question. It provides the state report the data, and the department will use that data to analyze the data, and study the data, to determine how we what strategies we can use to reduce deaths, as well as the relationship between policies, procedures, management actions, relating to these deaths. And so yes, we strongly agree that we must strengthen how we collect data under dcra, and so i think that our data is aimed at fixing this. My question is why they seized the publication of this data, when it fulfills such a data thank you for the question. I think that it is important to talk about that. From two perspectives, won a legal perspective as well as a data perspective, from the data perspective up, as we hear and agree with the dj oh, there is significant and a reporting. Providing that data would be misleading, it would not provide a full picture of what is happening in deaths and custody. I just want to make sure and hear what you are saying, and the public is what you are saying. You say that you ceased to publish that data because you know log have complete and accurate data, correct . The department is working with the states who are a central part of that data to collect that data. The states are to collect that data from local agencies and local Law Enforcement. The states are challenged collecting that data, and we are working with the states through Technical Assistance. We are looking at open sources to identify those deaths that the state is not reporting. Going back to the states and working with them to improve their Data Collection. And so the doj has seized the publication of this data because the data is no longer of sufficient completeness, accuracy, and integrity to publish it. That is the first reason, you are going to see give a second reason. The second reason would be the data under dcra 2013 has been collected to analyze and study, and we are currently doing that. They institute of justice is undertaking a multi year effort to review the data, as well as looking at other sources of data to be able to provide findings, relationships between deaths and custody, policies, practices, of institutions. Lets discuss that report. I understand that what you are telling us is is no longer being published because of concerns about the accuracy of the collection of the data, the completeness of the collection of the data. You mentioned the broader report mandated by congress in dcra 2013, correct . Dcra 2013 provides that the data analyzed and studied, correct. And decorative required the justice report the congress that report to congress. I want to again, and im going to pivot for a moment in dr. Goodwin, and get respect to why this important this is a mandate that the Congress Gave to the department to take the data that is being collected, and then investigated for insights. That could yield solutions to reduce the incidence of death and custody, correct dr. Goodwin . That is correct. When we last spoke with doj in august of 2022 they told us that they had not yet started studied the data to determine how that information could be reduced for deaths in custody. It looks like that is happening now. Thank you. Miss henneberg, the law require that report to be issued to congressman later than summer of 2016. December of 2016. The department has not yet issued that report, correct . Correct. We are now almost six years past the deadline, right . The department values that data, and we are studying it, and we are very eager to get the findings so that we can understand, better understand deaths in custody, and reduce deaths in custody that can be prevented. So miss, the regular data has stopped because now with bja collecting, the data is not good enough to publish. We have established that. But this failure to report to congress predates that transition, back in 2016 when this report was due, bjs was still running the collection. And still running the analysis. So there is no excuse here that the data is not good enough, because he bjs was doing a pretty good job by most accounts of collecting that data. Why is this report now six years late . Am i correct that the department did not even award a contract to a contractor to produce this report until september of 2021, is that correct . That is correct for one piece of the study, correct. So the department did not award of contract to produce this study, and again, we are talking about studies, and contracts, and mandates. Lets bring this back to human beings. We are talking about a study whose purpose is to look at data about people dying in prisons and jails. And if policy makers at the department of justice, and the congress, the insight and wisdom based on that data to prevent those deaths, to fulfill an urgent humanitarian purpose. That is why Congress Gave that mandate to the department. And what you are telling me is that not only is the report now six years late, but the department did not retain a contractor to produce that report until five years after it was due. Why . Senator, thank you for that question, and it is a good question. Bja began collecting the data in the fiscal year of 2020. So october of 2019. And data needed to be collected to study. That is what dicra 2013 it is calling for. Collect the data and then study the data so that we can understand this. But it was due in 2016. How about, lets be forwardlooking here, can you give us a date certain when congress will receive this report that is now six years overdue . There are two parts of that study. One, we do have a draft. The first part, it is discussed in our report that we put out last week that will be available, we are estimating by the end of the calendar year of 22, and the other is a multi year effort by an aj that is not only using data that has been collected under dicra 2013 but also other sources that the data element, and data being collected under dicra 2013 is insufficient to meet the purposes of the study, and the scope of the study. So we are expecting about in 2024. Eight years late. Thank you miss henneberg. Miss henneberg, as i mentioned in my opening remarks, i am grateful for your testimony here today. I am here to work with the department to get this right because ultimately, getting this right is what matters. Because lives are on the line. This isnt about shuffling paper, and having these kinds of exchanges in the senate. This is about the americans who are locked up, many of them pretrial detainees who have been convicted of no crime, who are dying every year, in many cases preventability. They are not being counted. There causes of death are no longer being collected. The locations of death are no longer being collected. And the fact that when we do not get the information that we have tasked you with producing, and the insight and analysis that we have tasked you with producing, until six or eight years after the deadline, that has cost human lives. That is why this matters. And i am surely here to work with you and your colleagues if legislation is what is required, lets legislate. But i am sure that you can understand, henneberg it, and your colleagues can understand that for the department to come eight years after a law is enacted and say you have determined that you cannot implemented successfully, eight years have now gone by where people have been dying. And i know from my brief time here that when executive Branch Agencies decide they really need something, they make us aware immediately of what they really need. Eight years have gone by since this law was enacted. And now we are hearing that you cannot carry out your mission. That you cannot collect accurate and complete data. That you can come plead the data you have because it is not accurate and complete. That you cannot produce rusty six years late report on what you have learned about saving lives in prisons and jails because at least in part, the data is not complete. I just have to note in 2018, the office of the Inspector General warned that the methodology doj was undertaking was likely to fail. Here is what the office of the Inspector General said without complete information about deaths in custody, the department will be unable to achieve dicra thes primary purpose. To examine how dicra data will be used to examine deaths in custody. This is 2018 the office of the Inspector General. Your internal watchdog also wrote, we found the department does not have plans to submit a required report that details results of the study on dicra data. Four years ago the office of the Inspector General warning the methodology is not going to work. Warning that the report is not going to be produced. The Inspector General also said what dr. Goodwin has said today. Quote, we believe that not releasing dicra Data Analysis limits the utility of the Data Collection effort and the departments ability to use the data to increase public transparency about deaths in custody and take steps to reduce their number. Then again in 2021. Your status, the bureau of justice statistics are warning that the methodologys are going to fail. We have all of those documents. But it was not fixed. And again, it years after the law is passed you are telling us we need legislation. All the while people have been dying. Where is the urgency . Chairman ossof, i can assure you that the department understands the value of this data that we understand the critical nature of having the data to know more about those in custody. We value the purposes of the dicra 2013, and previous dicra 2000, and what it is intended to do. We are faced with a statute that provided that the states collect the data and we were following that approach. States directly be the central reporters. We have now proposed legislative fixes, the department is committed to fixing this. This current administration, this department is focusing on fixing what we have observed the last couple years with dicra reporting. I appreciate that miss henneberg, and i want to know that President Biden issued an executive order on may 25th calling for the department to release its plan for full implementation and compliance with dicra. That was noted. We have received some of the preliminary information. We have got to get this right. We are going to wrap up this hearing in just a moment but we have got to get this right. Dr. Goodwin, i am so grateful to you for the analysis an investigation that you undertook in response to our subcommittees inquiry. And miss henneberg i appreciate your testimony today. There is no doubt that this has been poorly managed within the department of justice. That of a result, the congress and the department have been unable to take steps that could have saved lives. But as i said, i am here to work with you to fix this as soon as possible because it must be fixed. It must be fixed. I will just close with this. And this brings us back to be experiences of the americans we heard from in the first panel. Jonathan, matthew, two americans who were sitting in jail pretrial detainees convicted of no crime died in the custody of their own government who died preventively in the custody of their own government. And there are thousands more. And tens of hundreds of thousands of family members who have experienced what our two Witnesses Today experienced. There is an ongoing humanitarian crisis. In americas prisons and jails. People are dying every week in americas prisons and jails. Many of them, prevent blame. I hope that you leave this hearing, fully committed to tasking your entire team with the urgency, warranted by a crisis that is taking lives. Dr. Goodwin, i thank you for supporting our efforts to bring transparency to this important issue. And with that, this hearing is adjourned. Cspan is your unfiltered view of government. We are funded by these companies and more, including media com. The world change but mediacom was ready. Schools and businesses went virtual and we powered a new reality because we are built to keep you ahead. Media supports cspan as a Public Service along with these other providers, giving you a front row seat democracy. Next, russian president Vladimir Putin gives a televised address calling on russian citizens with military experience to join the fight in the war against ukraine. He also talked about declang