* Office of Executive Inspector General…

On June 13 and 21, 2019, the Office of Executive Inspector General (OEIG) received complaints alleging that after [IDOC Employee 1] ticketed an inmate for sexual misconduct, Lt. Adrian Corley required [IDOC Employee 1] and another employee to draw a picture of the incident on a fictitious IDOC form, which was then distributed and shown to other IDOC employees.1 The complaints alleged that following this incident, Pontiac Correctional Center staff harassed [IDOC Employee 1] and treated him differently based on his sexual orientation.

The evidence gathered in this investigation revealed that Lt. Corley created a fictitious IDOC form that was used to conduct pranks and haze newer employees at IDOC. In this instance, Lt. Corley’s intended target was his subordinate, [IDOC Employee 1], who had been working at IDOC for [Identifying Information Redacted]. On October 26, 2018, [IDOC Employee 1] encountered an inmate who put his genitals through the cell bars and was masturbating towards [IDOC Employee 1]. After [IDOC Employee 1] wrote the inmate a sexual misconduct ticket, Lt. Corley directed [IDOC Employee 1] to draw a picture of the incident and sign his name to the fictitious IDOC form. Unbeknownst to [IDOC Employee 1], this fictitious IDOC form was not part of IDOC protocol but instead was done for Lt. Corley’s and others’ amusement. The fictitious form was shared with an extensive number of other IDOC employees, including other Lieutenants, Majors, Assistant Wardens and the Warden, without anyone taking any timely action to stop the dissemination or correct the wrongdoing. In the months following the widespread dissemination of the form at Pontiac, [IDOC Employee 1] experienced numerous incidents of harassment, including anti-gay slurs, prank calls at work, graffiti with sexual connotations about him, and one incident in which a coworker pressed his body against [IDOC Employee 1]’s.

[IDOC Employee 1] repeatedly reported the harassment he experienced, to high-level managers at Pontiac, as well as to IDOC administrators. Although [IDOC Employee 1]’s written submissions detailing the prank and subsequent harassment were referred to IDOC’s Office of Affirmative Action, and specifically stated that [IDOC Employee 1] believed he was being harassed based on his perceived sexual orientation, Affirmative Action elected not to open an investigation, on the basis that no covered class had been established. While [IDOC Employee 1]’s complaints were pending with Affirmative Action, he was reassigned to duty in the towers, and the harassment continued. On multiple occasions he requested a hardship transfer to another IDOC facility, but those requests were denied, and he ultimately left IDOC employment.

Based on this investigation, the OEIG found that Lt. Corley and other Pontiac managers engaged in conduct unbecoming of IDOC supervisors; [IDOC Employee 1] was subjected to a hostile work environment at Pontiac, for which IDOC is responsible; a Pontiac Correctional Officer sexually harassed [IDOC Employee 1], the Warden mismanaged Pontiac Correctional Center, and the Affirmative Action Administrator committed misfeasance by failing to investigate [IDOC Employee 1]’s harassment complaints.

* The higher-ups helped create this culture…

Regarding the culture at Pontiac, Maj. Wheat agreed that some hazing is done to test [Identifying Information Redacted] and see what they are made of and build camaraderie, and added that the “teasing never ends.” […]

Maj. Cooper said that hazing has been going on at Pontiac for years, but that the incident with the Fictitious Form went “above and beyond” the “everyday” hazing because Lt. Corley took the time to create a form. He said that it was inappropriate for Lt. Corley to direct [IDOC Employee 1] to complete the Fictitious Form. When asked if, as a higher-ranked officer than Lt. Corley, he had a duty to report the inappropriate conduct, Maj. Cooper said, “I’d probably say we all have a duty to do that.” However, Maj. Cooper said he never had any discussions with Lt. Corley about the impropriety of his actions, other than that the group in the Shift Commander’s office on October 26, 2018 might have told Lt. Corley that he was stupid. Maj. Cooper said he did not recall Warden Kennedy attempting to stop the spread of the Fictitious Form. […]

Asst. Warden Ruskin said she did not know who [IDOC Employee 1] was at that time, and that when she saw the Fictitious Form she laughed and thought it was funny that [Identifying Information Redacted] would fall for a prank like that.

Asst. Warden Ruskin said that news of the prank “went like wildfire,” and that it was “probably considered the most epic prank in Pontiac history.” […]

Asst. Warden French said that he thought the Fictitious Form was just a prank, but that in hindsight he should have talked to Lt. Corley or imposed discipline. […]

In her interview, Warden Kennedy recalled seeing the Fictitious Form for the first time in a text message when she was at a sporting event on a Saturday, and believes she may have received the text message from Asst. Warden Ruskin; she said she did not recall any dialogue about the image at that time.56 She acknowledged in her interview that it was not an official IDOC or Pontiac form. However, Warden Kennedy said she did not pay too much attention to it when she received it, and said that it “probably struck [her] as funny” because of the exaggerated male genitalia on the image.

* It wasn’t funny to the employee…

[IDOC Employee 1] told OEIG investigators that after the Fictitious Form was circulated throughout Pontiac, he experienced multiple harassing incidents at work, and that he submitted multiple incident reports and memoranda about them. He also submitted multiple requests to transfer to another facility, based on hardship. […]

[IDOC Employee 1] said that on one occasion, when he was leaving at the end of a shift, he was between the locked Gate 3 doors waiting for them to open, when [IDOC Employee 27] approached him from behind on [IDOC Employee 1]’s left side. He said [IDOC Employee 27] said, “hey [IDOC Employee 1]” in a lower- toned voice, then pressed his torso against the left side of [IDOC Employee 1]’s body, and touched his ([IDOC Employee 27]’s ) genitals against [IDOC Employee 1]’s left hand. [IDOC Employee 1] said [IDOC Employee 27] whispered, “do you want to draw this one?” into his ear. [IDOC Employee 1] said that this contact was unwelcome and unwanted, and that he immediately moved away from [IDOC Employee 27] . He said that another officer was also waiting for the gate to open, and asked [IDOC Employee 27] why he was standing so close to [IDOC Employee 1], and then [IDOC Employee 27] moved away from him.35 [IDOC Employee 1] described another incident, in which he heard someone shout from the East Catwalk, “[IDOC Employee 1]’s a fag,” so that inmates and other employees would have been able to hear; [IDOC Employee 1] said he did not see the person, but recognized the voice as [IDOC Employee 27] ’s. […]

[IDOC Employee 1] said that after he filed complaints against Lt. Corley, he was segregated from other Pontiac staff and inmates by being continuously assigned to Tower 21. He said that while he was working in Tower 21, he received many harassing telephone calls, which he said sounded like were [IDOC Employee 27] ’s voice. OEIG investigators obtained copies of [IDOC Employee 1]’s multiple incident reports dated November 24, 2018. The reports stated that [IDOC Employee 1] had received multiple calls that day in Tower 21, including calls in which the callers asked, “Are you done fingering your b*tthole yet?,” referred to him as a “f*ggot *ss b*tch,” and said, “I’m not f*cking with you.” […]

[IDOC Employee 1] also described several incidents of graffiti at Pontiac, which contained sexual references to him. He said he observed that someone had written on a refrigerator in Tower 20: “[IDOC Employee 10] wants [IDOC Employee 1] to call him and do butt stuff,” and that the name “[IDOC Employee 10]” was crossed out and “[IDOC Employee 21]” was written in. [IDOC Employee 1] said he saw [IDOC Employee 21] standing in front of the refrigerator, and then a short time later he observed that the name “[IDOC Employee 21]” had been crossed out and “[IDOC Employee 10]” was written in again. [IDOC Employee 1] said that he also observed that someone had written on the West Tower wall: “[IDOC Employee 10] wants to eat [IDOC Employee 1]’s tiny little butt hole.”

Investigators obtained copies of [IDOC Employee 1]’s two incident reports, which were dated March 18, 2019, described each incident of graffiti, and indicated that [IDOC Employee 1] observed both incidents on that date. The OEIG also obtained copies of photographs taken of the graffiti. The incident reports and the photographs were consistent with [IDOC Employee 1]’s description of the graffiti incidents in his interview.

* IDOC’s Office of Affirmative Action Administrator Fernando Chavarria was no help at all…

Mr. Chavarria said that as a result of [IDOC Employee 1]’s refusal to name a covered class in the interview, he made the decision to refer the complaint to Internal Affairs. Mr. Chavarria initially said that a complainant had to say the “magic words” in order for Affirmative Action to open an investigation, that is, the complainant had to tell him that he or she is in a specific covered class or is alleging sexual harassment.

Except, the employee’s statement included the phrase “sexual orientation.” And then there was this…

Mr. Chavarria was asked if he reviewed [IDOC Employee 12]’s report of her interview of [IDOC Employee 1], documenting that [IDOC Employee 1] had stated, among other things, that:

• on one occasion, [IDOC Employee 27] got “real close” to [IDOC Employee 1] and asked “Do you want to draw this one?”;
• [IDOC Employee 1] heard someone yell “[IDOC Employee 1] is a f*g” from the East Catwalk, and received calls referring to him as a “f*ggot *ss b*tch”; and that
• he felt like a target because of his perceived sexual orientation, and that he felt harassed and that it was making a hostile work environment.

Mr. Chavarria said that he did not catch the above statements in [IDOC Employee 12]’s interview report and memorandum to him, and added, “bad one on me”; however, he said he still would have needed [IDOC Employee 1] to want Mr. Chavarria to use that information as a covered class.

* From the Inspector General’s analysis…

Prisons are already difficult and dangerous working environments, where staff face challenges posed by inmate misconduct on a daily basis. It is entirely unacceptable that staff at Pontiac Correctional Center also suffer mistreatment at work by their own coworkers and supervisors, due to the unprofessional working environment that flourishes there.

* The warden…

As Warden, Teri Kennedy was responsible for setting a professional tone at Pontiac, and promoting a working environment that ensured that all of her staff could successfully meet the significant challenges of their jobs. Instead, she turned a blind eye to a culture where pranks and sexual jokes were commonplace, and that apparently allowed virtually the entire upper management at the facility to think such behavior by some staff at the expense of others was acceptable.

* Affirmative Action Office…

Even accepting Mr. Chavarria’s erroneous view that an Affirmative Action investigation is not warranted unless a victim explicitly states “magic words” such as “sexual orientation,” the information provided to his office did exactly that. Affirmative Action should have opened and conducted an investigation to determine whether [IDOC Employee 1]’s allegations were substantiated, but Mr. Chavarria failed to do so. Nearly six months elapsed between Warden Kennedy’s initial referral of [IDOC Employee 1]’s complaints to Affirmative Action on November 28, 2018, and [IDOC Employee 11]’s reopening of her investigation after Mr. Chavarria declined to open an Affirmative Action investigation, and during that time [IDOC Employee 1] continued to experience harassment at Pontiac. It is difficult to understand what purpose the Office of Affirmative Action serves if its staff do not recognize allegations received of harassment based on a covered class or are allowed to ignore such allegations unless a victim verbally states the “magic words.”

* Recommendations…

Based on these findings, the OEIG recommends that Lt. Corley, Asst. Wardens French and Ruskin; Majs. Cooper, Prentice, Shelton, and Wheat; [IDOC Employee 27]; and Warden Kennedy be disciplined up to and including discharge, along with any other personnel IDOC determines to have engaged in similar misconduct regarding these incidents. The OEIG further recommends that IDOC remove Mr. Chavarria from his role pertaining to Affirmative Action matters, and train all Office of Affirmative Action staff on their obligations under the Administrative Directives. The OEIG also recommends that IDOC implement written procedures or formal practices governing hardship transfer requests.85 Finally, the OEIG recommends that the current Pontiac administration take any and all necessary steps to promote a professional working environment and culture for all staff who work there, and to ensure that any future similar misconduct is immediately addressed and eradicated.

A house cleaning is most definitely in order here. And, by the way, I only hit the high points. There’s more.

I have asked the governor’s office for a response.

*** UPDATE *** From IDOC…

“This behavior is entirely unacceptable and IDOC took the most severe disciplinary action possible against involved employees, including senior leadership. This included terminating multiple employees. IDOC takes this matter extremely seriously and has brought in new leadership at Pontiac and retrained the affirmative action unit on conducting thorough investigations to build an inclusive and supportive environment for all employees moving forward.”

Background:

Ruskin-terminated 3/16/2021
French-terminated 3/16/2021
Prentice – Pursued termination, Discharge reversed via the grievance process; retired in lieu of return on 10/31/2021
Shelton- Pursued termination, Discharge reversed via the grievance process; served 25 day suspension
Chavaria- served 30 day suspension; resigned 8/31/2021
Kennedy- retired prior to termination 12/31/2020
Wheat – Retired prior to discipline 6/30/2020
Cooper – Pursued termination; Retired 11/30/2021

The affirmative action unit investigates harassment and discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. They also investigate sexual harassment and evaluate requests for reasonable accommodations. Additional trainings served to reinforce knowledge and skills related to conducting investigations in as thorough a manner as possible.