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