Thank you distinguished members of the subcommittee. And and the ways we work with our state, local partners to improve the conditions of incarceration. We believe that gathering data about custody is a noble and necessary step towards a transparent and legitimate justice system. Theres no more solemn responsibility than life and helping us obtain information we need to assist state and federal authorities in fulfilling this responsibility. Since the original statute was enacted more than two decades ago, the department of justice through its office of Justice Program has worked to collect data in prisons and jails during arrest. And i know the committee appreciates, its a major undertaking to gather this information from 56 states and territories to in turn rely on reports from thousands of prisons, local jails and Law Enforcement agencies, but we firmly believe that its well worth the effort. While the need for reporting by the department, the current process deserves to be reevaluated. For many years, following the enactment in 2000, our bureau of justice collected data called for it which continued to do when the law expired six years later. And all told, there were 40 reports on the topic and which we have provide add wealth of information and causes of death and characteristics where the deaths occurred. And then in 2013, an update it was introduced and the new law expanded the original dcra hahnemann dated and added a study requirement using the data and the greatest consequence, reduce funding to noncomplaint states under the edward burn justice assistance program. Through the jag program ojp provides over 300 million annually in funding for general purposes, Law Enforcement and criminal justice activities throughout the nation. And this last requirement posed a dilemma as a federal Statistic Agency and theyre prohibited from using its data for any purpose other than statistics or research. Though dcra of 2013 was wellintentioned it was negative consequences, for one, since it requires the department to receive all information central and and through states, we can no longer collect from agencies as we once did. Secondly, the penalty provided under dcra2013 has the potential to finish states and local agencies that comply with the law. If, for example, they decline for the states, that is incomplete, even though the state may submit the data that they received, it could suffer the funding penalty. Furthermore, since these grants passed the states local jurisdictions, even the local agencies that fully report their information which feels the effects of the penalty applied in their states. Finally, we can no longer assign js. Which achieved nearly 100 Response Rate for the programs. And working hard to achieve more comprehensive reporting for states, and we continue to provide training and assistance to states to improve reporting and we are developing new methods for assessing state compliance and provide feedback for reporting. In the meantime, we look for congress to help us programmatically and we have a proposal how to do that. For instance, were asking to collect data directly from local agencies and sources and enable us to restrict to noncompliant agencies instead of applying it statewide. Were also proposing a new Grant Program to help better equip agencies across the country to collect and report on deaths in custody. The death in custody reporting act is one of the many vital tools in restoring the full integrity of our justice system. The department provides tens of millions of dollars in resources to states, local communities and tribes, to improve the way incarcerated people are treated and to support efforts to reduce arrest related deaths through Law Enforcement training and programs focused on training Law Enforcement and community trust. Examples of ojps work are provided in my written testimony. We look forward to meeting you with the challenges and i thank you for your time and happy to take any questions you may have. Thank you, miss henneberg, dr. Good win, youre recognized for your opening statement. Chair ossoff and Ranking Member johnson, i appreciate the opportunity to discuss the actions doj has taken to address the Data Collection and reporting requirements in the death in custody reporting act of 2013, dcra. And the extent to which doj has collected and used. As discussed dcra was enacted in 2014 to encourage the study and reporting of deaths in custody. Federal agencies and states that receive certain federal funding, are required to report this information to doj. Doj, is to study the federal and state data, examine how the information can be used to reduce deaths in custody, and reported findings to the congress. In 2015, doj began collecting data on deaths of people in the custody of federal Law Enforcement. As of fiscal year 2020, doj reported 2700 deaths in federal custody. While the agency collects the same information at the state and local level, its not actually reported on these deaths. Doj began collecting information from states on death in custody about three years ago. Agency officials told us, they plan to continue collecting state data, but they have not said whether or how they will use the information to address deaths in custody. Doj cites missing and or complete missing data from states as one of the reasons why they have not studied the state information. We found similar concerns when we examined the data. To for example, of the 47 states that submitted data, only two submitted all the required information. Some states did not account for all deaths in custody. Using publicly available reports, we identified nearly a thousand deaths that occurred during fiscal year 2021 that states did not report to doj. Four states did not report any deaths. Yet, we found that at least 124 deaths had 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 that determining state compliance with dcra would help improve the quality of the data and they have a goal to help ensure states comply with dcra. However, as of this month, september, 2022, doj still has not determined whether states have complied. While doj collects data from states, dcra does not require doj to publish state data and the agency has no plans to do so. Importantly, after dojs dcra Data Collection began, it discontinued a longstanding program that collected public data on death of people in state and local correctional institutions. The mortality and corrections institutions program. The doj used these data to publish reports to provide statistical information on deaths in correctional institutions. This published information allowed congress, researchers and the public to view and study the data. While the mortality and correctional institutions report was made publicly available, the dcra report may not be available to the public. This lack of transparency would be a great loss in the publics understanding of deaths in custody. Given that 1. 5 Million People were incarcerated in state prisons and local jails at the end of 2020, statistics on death in custody are a valuable resource for understanding mortality in the criminal justice system. Doj has made some progress toward addressing what it calls a profoundly important issue, but significant work remains, because right now, doj and states are expending resources for the data sets that may not be studied or published, potentially missing opportunities for inform practices to help reduce deaths in custody. We are Encouraging Congress to consider whether dcra should be amended to ensure that doj uses data that it collects from states for row curing studies and reporting to congress and the public. And to help enhance the quality of the data, we are recommending that doj develop a plan to determine state compliance with dcra. Chair ossoff and Ranking Member johnson, this concludes my remarks. Im happy to answer any questions you have. Thank you, dr. Good win and miss henneberg for your opening remarks and for your presence here today. I want to begin, dr. Goodwin, just by making sure that its clear what you found. I think in some way its the most powerful and alarming piece of data that you and your team unearthed at the request of the subcommittee is that in 2021, you found nearly 1,000 deaths in state or local facilities, that the department did not capture and you found them through a review of open sources, is that correct . Thats correct, senator. So, the way that 1,000 deaths kind of breaks out and actually, its 990, but we say nearly 1,000. The way that breaks out nearly 341 of the deaths that we discovered were in state correctional facilities so how did we get there . So we basically used publicly available data and some states will, when theyre doing annual statistical reporting we did a thorough analysis as we could to get to the 341. Then the other the remaining deaths. 649 deaths, again, we used publicly available data and used a couple of data bases that collect information on deaths that happened when someone is placed under arrest or when someone, when a death happens in custody and so, thats how we arrived at the nearly 1,000 deaths. So, but for the most part, a lot of this was publicly available data. One more thing i forgot to add. For the 341 deaths, that was publicly available data and we had access to some of the dcra records and we went through and tried to do some matching. Thank you, dr. Goodwin, nearly 1,000 deaths uncounted last year alone. Ms. Henneberg, i do want to, first of all, point out, you know, this is not a political or a partisan issue. The cascade, the debacle, the decline in the departments ability to collect and produce High Integrity data has unfolded over several years and multiple administrations. This is not a partisan issue. And we appreciate your presence here today to help us sort through these issues. Youve been working at the office of Justice Programs for 20 years and leading operations in management for the past seven, correct . I have been at the office of Justice Programs for 32 years, i have been part of the Leadership Team since february of 2014 as the Deputy Assistant attorney general for operations and management overseeing our business offices, correct. Thank you, and your office is responsible for the implementation of dcra, correct . The office of Justice Programs, our bureau of justice assistance at this time is overseeing the reporting from the states, thats correct. Yes, thank you, ms. Henneberg, as weve discussed 1. 5 Million People were incarcerated in state prisons or local jails, thousands die every year. Why is it important in brief, please, for the department to study and report on deaths in custody . The department shares the your goals, chairman, ossoff, to improve the data thats being reported. The accuracy, the quality, the completeness of the data, this data is extremely important. Its critical to understanding deaths in custody, understanding the relationship between deaths in custody and the policies and practices of the state jail, Law Enforcement agencies. I agree, ms. Henneberg. Here are quotes from bipartisan members of congress, representatives and senators about the purpose of dcra. It would bring a new level of accountability to our nations correctional institutions. Openness in government, it would bolster public confident and trust in our judicial system. Quote, bring additional transparency. Do you agree that these are among the purposes of this Data Collection . The department agrees that there is critical value. All of these data to collect the data from the states to analyze the data, to present findings so that we can better understand deaths in custody, so we can determine whether the strategies to reduce deaths in custody. Thank you, miss henneberg. The bureau of justice assistance, a Component Agency within the office of Justice Programs, and those who are tuned in across the country, will have to indulge and tolerate some acronym chaos here, but the bureau of justice assistance started collecting state and local death data in 2019. The bureau of justice statistics, or bjs. Which briefly collected the data, in fact, two decades collected this data with success and analyzed that that the bureau collected in 2020 and produced a report in may of 2021. It identified some significant issues that bja did not cap any prison deaths in 11 states or any jail deaths in 12 states and the district of columbia. From october to december of 2019, bja missed at least 592 deaths. Were those concerning to the department of justice . The department of justice over the two, three years we have been collecting the data. Weve seen the underreporting from states. Under dcra2013, states are having to collect data from their local agencies and they are centrally reporting to bja. The states are reporting great challenges. I think jaos report will show this and weve heard the same thing from our states. The states have no leverage to compel the local their local agencies to report the data. Thank you, ms. Henneberg, i appreciate your take on the state and local issue. My question is a specific one, if you will, please. When bjs, your statistical office, having reviewed the First Quarter of collection undertaken by bja, reported to omb and to the department that bja had missed state or prison deaths, state prison deaths in 11 states, jail deaths in 12 states, from october to december of that first period when bja was undertaking this collection and missed 592 deaths, was that concerning . Surely that was concerning. You were transitioning from one agency to another. The prior agency was telling you, its not working. Was that concerning . Its very concerning that there is the underreporting, and its widespread across all of the states. Its not just in certain areas. Okay, thank you, ms. Henneberg, it was concerning. So, in response to those findings by bjs. What did the department of justice do to improve the collection methodology so those problems wouldnt persist. The current administration, the Current Department were focusing on fixing the problems that we have and the obstacles that we have observed with reporting under dcr 2013. Were presenting proposals to amend dcra so we can amend issues that we believe are contributing to the underreporting, having states serve as the central repository and the central reporter is certainly ms. Henneberg, youll have to forgive, but we are trying to understand with precision what unfolded in the department that led to a significant decline in the integrity of the data that the department is collecting. So im looking for a precise answer to a particular question. In the first few months when bja took this over from bjs. Bjs continued collecting and they compared data sets. And bjs, your statisticians, folks who specialize in this, they raised a big red flag saying what bja is doing is not working. My question is in response to that specific information, that warning, what action was taken to improve bjas methodology, not generally, not fixes now, what action was taken then . Thank you for the question. I think its important that to describe when bjs collecting the data, they were able to go directly to local agencies, local correctional institutes, jails, and collect that data under dcra 2013. Bja was presented with working with the states as central reporters, which is a significant contributor to the underreporting and the incomplete data. Bja has worked with a training provider, provider direct Technical Assistance to the states, to review their data that is coming in, identifying ways they can improve it. We have provided trainings to the states. We have provided oneonone Technical Assistance with the states to help them think through their Data Collection strategies, to identify areas where there is underreporting, so that we can. Ms. Henneberg, we dont have unlimited time here and im not getting a precise answer to that question. Ill have to circle back, im going to yield now to Ranking Member johnson and return for a second round in a moment. Thank you. Ms. Henneberg, can you bring your microphone a little closer to your mouth . So i want to know how many people are working on this within the department of justice. Our bureau of justice assistance is a grant making agency so their primary function is grant making. They have no, no, so okay. How many people are working on providing this data . How many people . Is it 10, is it three dozen . How many people . I do not know the answer. I will go back and we can look at how many people are working. So i want to know how many people were working in the bureau of justice statistics and then i want to know how many people in the assistants, okay, i want to know how many people. Ms. Goodwin, when you say you got publicly available record, what are you talking about, death certificates or reports published and tapped into those. I will say senator, a little bit of both. For some states when they report their deaths, that information shows up in, like an end of the year annual statistical supplement. So we went through, and we basically did a Google Search to see what we could find. How many people did you have jao take a look at this. Two. Two people over what length of time. From may to september, may 2022, to september 2022. Okay, so, whats that, about five months . Do my fingers. So, you have two people and with two people working for a few months, you determined that we were missing, close to a thousand death reports, were you able to find them as open source reporting basically . Thats correct, a lot was open source reporting and a lot of it publicly available data and some of the data bases that do collect the information, the nondoj data bases. Do either of you know approximately how many deaths occur in custody within state and local jails every year . Unfortunately, we do not. I mean, just ballpark . Nothing precise right now, im talking