Coleman, et al v. Schwarzenegger, et al
Filing
7456
ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 2/4/2022 APPROVING the 2021 Program Guide Update; REFERRING the parties' dispute over the 5 policies omitted from the 2021 Program Guide Update to the Special Master for consideration as to whether the substantive provisions of those policies are, or should be, reflected in the list of Continuous Quality Improvement Tool (CQIT) indicators currently under review as part of the 29th Monitoring Round; APPROVING the 2021 Compendium Up date; ORDERING the court gives final approval to Paragraph 15 of the parties' stipulation regarding the use of Therapeutic Treatment Modules (TTMs) in inpatient settings, see Stipulation and Order, ECF No. 7392, at 6, and the parties' agree ment over the use of TTMs in inpatient settings, which the court otherwise previously approved on December 9, 2021, ECF No. 7392, with the provisions regarding TTMS referred to the Special Master for consideration as to whether they are, or should be , reflected in the list of CQIT indicators currently under review during the 29th Monitoring Round; ORDERING the court will give final approval to a list of CQIT indicators by the end of this year following submission of the Special Master's 29t h Monitoring Round Report; ORDERING the court anticipates that final approval of a list of CQIT indicators will replace the need for annual updates to the Program Guide and the Compendium and, therefore, the parties' obligation to file further annual updates to the Program Guide and the Compendium is discontinued unless or until further order of the court; and DENYING 7411 Motion and 7412 Motion, that are mooted by this order. (Henshaw, R)
Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-DB Document 7456 Filed 02/07/22 Page 1 of 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
RALPH COLEMAN, et al.,
12
Plaintiffs,
13
14
15
v.
No. 2:90-cv-0520 KJM DB P
ORDER
GAVIN NEWSOM, et al.,
Defendants.
16
17
18
On August 3, 2020, the court ordered the parties, on an annual basis, to jointly file an
19
updated Program Guide and updated Compendium of Custody Related Remedial Measures
20
(Compendium) (hereafter Annual Update). August 3, 2020 Order, ECF No. 6806, at 17. At the
21
same time, the court provisionally approved an update process, directed that it be followed for
22
one year, and directed the parties to file with the 2021 Annual Update a joint submission on the
23
efficacy of the provisionally approved update process. Id. at 15, 17. After receiving two
24
extensions of time, ECF Nos. 7292, 7322, the parties filed the joint submission and the 2021
25
Annual Update on September 29, 2021. ECF Nos. 7332, 7333.
26
As the court previously has expressed to the parties, it is not clear the provisionally
27
approved updating process was ever followed and, in any event, it became apparent some time
28
ago the process was unworkable. See Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings (RT of 10/7/21 Status
1
Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-DB Document 7456 Filed 02/07/22 Page 2 of 4
1
Conference and Hearing on Motion to Strike), ECF No. 7345, at 13:19-22. Moreover, the one
2
year test period for the provisional process for updates has expired by the express terms of the
3
court’s order providing for the provisional process in the first place, and that process is no longer
4
in effect. Id.; see also ECF No. 7342.
5
The Program Guide and the Compendium are of course “‘[t]he primary court-approved
6
remedial documents in this action.’” See July 1, 2021 Order, ECF No. 7216, at 2. The court has
7
“approved several additional remedial plans in aid of the primary remedies, including ‘a court-
8
ordered mental health staffing plan, see ECF Nos. 3613 at 2 (court order) & 3693 (staffing plan),
9
regular mental health bed projections, see ECF No. 3629, and concomitant planning for and
10
building of necessary mental health beds and clinical treatment space, see, e.g. ECF No. 3556,’”
11
id. at 3 (quoting July 9, 2019 Order, ECF No. 6214, at 2). In so doing, the court repeatedly has
12
stressed that “‘defendants’ development and implementation of an improved quality improvement
13
process is fundamental to ending federal court oversight in this action.’” ECF No. 7216 at 3
14
(quoting ECF No. 6846 at 10 (internal citation omitted)). The quality improvement process is
15
comprehensive, distilling elements of the Program Guide, the Compendium and the other
16
remedial measures. The court has written extensively about the years of effort to focus
17
implementation of these remedies. See, e.g., ECF No. 6846, passim. Those years of effort have,
18
since late 2012, included work on development of a continuous quality improvement tool (CQIT),
19
“a comprehensive tool that, once finalized, defendants will . . . use as part of a process to ‘self-
20
monitor’ the key components of the remedy in this action.” Id. at 10 (citing ECF No. 5439 at
21
108).
22
In July 2019, “the court held that remedial planning in this action was complete, opening
23
the door to updating and finalizing CQIT.” ECF No. 7216 at 2 (citing ECF No. 6214 at 17-18).
24
A year later, the court issued a detailed order to “provid[e] a compilation and synthesis [and]
25
avoid the need for revisiting the contours of the established and comprehensive remedy in this
26
case.” ECF No. 6846 at 29. In that order, the court “identifie[d] CQIT’s ‘key indicators’ as the
27
functional equivalent of ‘benchmarks’ that . . . signify the material provisions of the Program
28
Guide and the Compendium that must be durably implemented at a degree of compliance the
2
Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-DB Document 7456 Filed 02/07/22 Page 3 of 4
1
court will confirm in a subsequent order.” Id. at 28; see also ECF No. 7216 at 4 (“The ‘key
2
indicators’ in CQIT ‘signify the material provisions of the Program Guide and the Compendium
3
that must be durably implemented’ in order to satisfy the Eighth Amendment.”). Most recently,
4
in July 2021, the court provisionally approved a list of CQIT key indicators and ordered the
5
Special Master to “test and monitor the functionality and efficacy of” those indicators during his
6
Twenty-Ninth Monitoring Round and to report his findings to the court in his Twenty-Ninth
7
Round Monitoring Report. ECF No. 7216 at 14. The Twenty-Ninth Monitoring Round is
8
underway now. The court anticipates the Special Master will file the Twenty-Ninth Round
9
Monitoring Report this Fall and the court will shortly thereafter give final approval to the list of
10
11
CQIT key indicators.
As the foregoing demonstrates, the impending completion of the list of key CQIT
12
indicators will pave the way for full implementation of the material provisions of the court-
13
ordered remedy in this case as necessary to meet the requirements of the Eighth Amendment.
14
Maintaining the focus on these indicators also will achieve judicial and case management
15
efficiencies.
16
For the foregoing reasons, after consideration of the September 2021 Annual Update, the
17
parties’ joint submission, in camera discussions as requested by the parties relating to Program
18
Guide updating, review of the record and good cause appearing, the court HEREBY ORDERS as
19
follows:
20
1.
21
2. The parties’ dispute over the five policies omitted from the 2021 Program
The 2021 Program Guide Update is APPROVED;
22
Guide Update is referred to the Special Master for consideration as to whether
23
the substantive provisions of those policies are, or should be, reflected in the
24
list of Continuous Quality Improvement Tool (CQIT) indicators currently
25
under review as part of the Twenty-Ninth Monitoring Round;
26
3. The 2021 Compendium Update is APPROVED;
27
4. The court gives FINAL APPROVAL to Paragraph 15 of the parties’
28
stipulation regarding the use of Therapeutic Treatment Modules (TTMs) in
3
Case 2:90-cv-00520-KJM-DB Document 7456 Filed 02/07/22 Page 4 of 4
1
inpatient settings, see Stipulation and Order, ECF No. 7392, at 6, and the
2
parties’ agreement over the use of TTMs in inpatient settings, which the court
3
otherwise previously approved on December 9, 2021, ECF No. 7392, with the
4
provisions regarding TTMS referred to the Special Master for consideration as
5
to whether they are, or should be, reflected in the list of CQIT indicators
6
currently under review during the Twenty-Ninth Monitoring Round;
7
5. The court will give final approval to a list of CQIT indicators by the end of this
8
year following submission of the Special Master’s Twenty-Ninth Monitoring
9
Round Report;
10
6. The court anticipates that final approval of a list of CQIT indicators will
11
replace the need for annual updates to the Program Guide and the Compendium
12
and, therefore, the parties’ obligation to file further annual updates to the
13
Program Guide and the Compendium is DISCONTINUED unless or until
14
further order of the court; and
15
7. Defendants’ January 4, 2022 motion, ECF No. 7411, and defendants’
16
January 6, 2022 motion, ECF No. 7412, are mooted by this order and therefore
17
are DENIED.
18
DATED: February 4, 2022.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?