that warden's philosophy, and the philosophy of his staff, one man cannot do it all, his staff needs to be on board, is inspirational. i want to make a note on some of the -- senator carper: i would like to listen to you for the rest of the morning, but i would like for you to hold it right there, then we will come back to you in the second round. one of the things that attracted to me to a program was the guy who developed that and implemented it in delaware was from ohio state. it came out of columbus, ohio. it worked pretty well. mr. dillard, same question. one great example. piper has given us one, give us

one as well. mr. dillard: i feel like the work is on the offenders themselves. when i met a lifer who rated difference in my life, throughout my prison sentence i realized how the older inmates tried to encourage the younger ones. i still feel like you cannot leave formerly incarcerated citizens out of the equation. mr. ofer: i will give two quick examples. there are states that have reduced the risk of solitary confinement without the risk to staff and to inmates. in colorado, 2011 placed 7% of

its incarcerated population in solitary confinement. in 2011, colorado place solitary confinement at 7%. today, it's about 1%. we have seen a dramatic decrease in the use of solitary by banning the use of solitary against people with mental illness. the second example is bail reform. what we've done in new jersey and what other states are looking at -- we had 10,000 people sit in jail awaiting their trial because they cannot afford a few thousand dollars in bail. we have completely revamped that system. now, your bail is determined by your risk assessment and not whether you are a poor or rich. that change will lead to three quarters of the 10,000 fewer people sitting in jail.

before this reform, the average time a person sat in jail awaiting their trial with 314 days. people presumed innocent until proven guilty being treated like guilty. this is a phenomenon all over the country. this is one of the ways we can dramatically reduce our jail population in the united states. senator carper: i talked about moral imperative we have in this country -- we also have a fiscal imperative. the deficit is still substantial. hence the need to find out what is working, do more of that, find out what is not working and do less of that. >> you mentioned my name -- i said that jails -- we jail people to punish and to deter. i also fully mentioned the mission statement of the bureau of prisons, to ensure defenders are actively participant programs that will assist them in becoming law-abiding citizens

when they returned our communities. i strongly hope that our goal is they are human repair shops. senator booker. senator booker: solitary confinement -- can you please describe this? i've had these conversations with friends and others -- people think solitary confinement as a result of someone doing something wrong in prison. why is solitary confinement so commonplace? prisoners are doing things wrong in prison? mr. oder: you've seen a dramatic increase in the use of reliance -- and reliance on solitary -- we do a terrible job tracking, but there is consensus that it is used in response to overcrowding. prison officials are overwhelmed

and they are sending people to the hole. we have examples from new jersey, around the country of people being sent to solitary for things like talking back. at a new jersey state prison in trenton, an inmate in 2013 was a clerk at the library and he wanted to leave the library to go bring some legal papers to one of the other inmates. a corrections officer said you cannot leave. the facts here are disputed, but the worst facts -- mr. washington said mother f'er to the corrections officer. what was the punishment? 90 days in solitary confinement. those are examples we see all across the nation.

senator booker: we know the people are being sent to solitary for many different reasons. some of them have to do with administrative issues and the like. does it work in terms of affecting the behavior of -- is there any productive value in the bureau? oder: some people are sent to solitary for administrator reasons. that is a loaded term. the bureau of prisons and other prisons commonly call solitary administrative segregation. it sounds harmless but it is solitary. people are sent there for really minor reasons. some reasons are for protective custody. the lgbt community faces

harassment from other inmates. they will be sent to involuntary protective custody to protect them from inmate violence, yet they are being punished. we see this happening all the time. the bureau of prisons, according to -- you asked if it actually works. there was an independent review that was released to the public in february of this year by cna that looked at solitary practices in our federal prisons and look at this question -- does inmate behavior change following solitary? their response was absolutely no. senator booker: can we have that report in the record? i want to say that not only lesbian and gay, but transgender -- oder: the report, it looked at the disciplinary record 12 months before being sent to

solitary and 12 months after coming out of solitary. we found virtually no change whatsoever. senator booker: let's get to the consensus of medical experts. what is the damage, the trauma, the effect on an individual being in solitary confinement? i've talked to numerous inmates who have experienced that length of more -- what is the damage done to someone in general and someone who already has a mental health challenge? mr. oder: to use an example that is contemporary -- i think of climate change. there are certain people who deny the science. there is consensus in the scientific community. a consensus about climate change and consensus -- senator booker: please don't talk about climate change. oder: there is consensus in

the scientific community about the harms of solitary confinement. it exacerbates the pre-existing conditions. mental illness that existed before is exacerbated. it produces mental illness and physical illness. anxiety, depression, hypersensitivity to stimuli, bipolar disorder. the list is long and long and i'm happy to provide the committee with citations. senator booker: that would be helpful. i want to say it's extraordinary that you are here with your testimony about what the experience of actual people behind bars -- that is extraordinary. i would like to drill down on something often not talked about, but what's happening as a result of overcrowding. dan barry was converted into a low security men's facility.

you were close to your family. i'm wondering what impact does being in prison in close proximity to love ones has? if you could just hit on those issues really briefly. ms. kerman: proximity to home, family and community is overwhelmingly important for both men and women confined to prison or jail. senator booker: the majority of women in prison have children. the majority of prison people are the number one breadwinners for the family. ms. kerman: absolutely. most of those mothers are the mothers have minor children. who experience a seismic impact when their mothers are incarcerated because a lot of those moms are single moms.

the opportunity to touch your children, to hold your children, to be reassured that their mother or parent is ok is incredibly important to parent and child. the opportunity to see your own parents or family members, to maintain ties to the community to which you will almost inevitably return. the vast majority of people in prison are coming home from prison. those lifelines to the outside community are incredibly -- we cannot overstate how important they are. to public safety, to people safe return home -- when you cut those lifelines by making visits difficult by placing people far from their families or by making

prisons inaccessible in other ways, by making phone calls exorbitantly expensive or many jokes have no contact visits through glass -- jails have no contact visits through glass, those lifelines are cut and the person incarcerated is much less likely to have family support, safe and stable housing, access to networks which might help them gain employment, all of which are primary concerns for successful reentry. that is true whether you are talking about men or women. when we are talking about female prisoners, we know the three things that drive women plus involvement in crime and incarceration are substance abuse, mental illness and that overwhelming experience of violence. sexual violence or physical violence. 80% or more in the system report that happening to them before they were incarcerated. the problem with incarceration,

prisons and jails are harsh places by design. is that for prisoners who have experienced significant trauma like rape, childhood sexual abuse, domestic violence -- many of the commonplace correctional practices are very reminiscent of some of those abuses. that creates a serious, serious challenge in terms of regular engagement with female prisoners. in terms of their rehabilitation. senator booker: thank you for that. senator johnson: thank you, senator booker. we didn't lose bipartisan agreement. we by and large agree that there has been change. >> and vaccines work? is that correct? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i was the attorney general in

north dakota. most of the drug task forces were under my jurisdiction. it was at a time when there was a growing concern in 1992 with the drug problem and more and more violent crime -- as a result, we saw incarceration rates skyrocket because of desperation. i will tell you this -- we constantly treat the symptoms but never treat the disease. that's where we are today, talking about how do we treat the symptoms and not how do we treat the disease. i will tell you a story about a wise man -- i did a juvenile justice project. we made it easier to transfer kids into the adult system. i traveled around the state of north dakota with a prison warden. he was a very wise guy. you could interview every prisoner who came into the

prison system and he would sit down and he would say tell me about your life. as we talked, they would say my parents were divorced at 11 and i went to live with my grandma. in his opinion, that prisoner was 11 years old emotionally. that's where we get stuck. a lot of this is related to trauma, a lot of this is related to not understanding trauma and we exacerbate by not only not treating the trauma, but engaging in behaviors that further the trauma, whether its isolation from family, isolation from any human contact at all. let's be honest about the task society has imposed upon the bureau of prisons. none of this should be any judgment on the bureau of prisons. we have given them an impossible task. they have to maintain some level of security. they are as desperate for

solutions as what they can be -- talking about things that are way downstream. we are not here talking about things that are upstream. the juvenile justice system is led by a lot of very enlightened people at the department of justice. it has begun a transformation into trauma informed and trauma-based therapy. looking at what we can do to treat trauma, how can we basically prevent a lot of abuse and a lot of abuses self-medication. a lot of addiction is chemical -- i get it. a lot of it is self-medicating for the trauma that has been experienced in people's lives. i would like to know how we could design the system of prevention so that we do not see more people -- what would you

like to see in communities that would prevent the kinds of outcomes that we are seeing right now in the bureau of prisons? ms. kerman: there is a tremendous amount of recognition that substance abuse and mental health problems contribute to people's bad choices and breaking the law. a significant commitment to handle those health problems in the public health system as often as possible rather than -- >> of the women you worked with and were incarcerated with, how many of them were given a choice of drug court or some kind of intermediate intervention? ms. kerman: that is very rare in the federal system. much more common in state

systems or county systems. there is a program in new york called justice home where women facing at least a year of incarceration, when the district attorney and judge are able to agree, they stay at home with their children and face a set of accountability measures but also get the mental health interventions, substance abuse interventions parenting classes, vocational training, what is very -- whatever is specific to their case to get better outcomes. in york, it costs $60,000 a year to incarcerate somebody. that program costs $17,000 a year. if we threw in the cost of foster care, the cost would amount to $129,000 a year. mr. dillard: thank you for your observation.

trauma informed care is truly something that is needed if we are going to be preventive. i can use myself as an example of someone who had trauma's at the age of 12-13 years old. when i was diagnosed, i had been severely depressed most of my life. one reason i self medicated was illegal drugs -- had i been diagnosed, maybe i could have been given legal drugs and avoided the criminal justice system. the fact is, we never look at the cause, we just look at the effect. many, many, many of these women and men who i've encountered have tremendous traumas. we are working as a pure organization to help them work through that. to avoid walking around as

hurting people because we know hurt people hurt people. if we do not address those early on, further down the road after recidivism, we are still going to be paying a much higher cost. mr. ofer: i will give a perspective informed by the fact that i spend a lot of my time in newark, new jersey. a city that is plagued by poverty. in certain communities, there is violence. what i see in newark and a lot of urban areas across new jersey and across the country, the only agency available in that municipality to address social needs -- the agency primarily available is the police department. to me, that is the root cause of the problem. you have well-meaning police officers, well-meaning city

officials that literally have no one else to go to if there is minor misbehavior happening on the street that is minor. i will criticize divergent programs. while they are certainly better than sending someone directly to jail or prison, my reaction is this person should not have been in the criminal justice system in the first place. we need to build up the resources of municipalities and states to have other agencies to go to when they are interacting with people with mental illness or drug addiction problems. >> the stigmatization of that label is something you will carry the rest of your life. it will prevent you from getting student loans, from getting a job. it is with a great deal of care that we should ever take that

next step because we are in fact relegating that person to a certain quality of life for the rest of their life. especially given the age of the internet where we can find out anything about anyone. i wanted to make a broader point that we are here to talk about what we are going to do about high incarceration rates. we cannot look at this problem without looking at the broad scope of services provided and how we can work more effectively for prevention. senator ayotte: i want to thank all of you for being here. like my colleague -- we were both attorneys general in our states. one of the things i have worked on as an ag was reentry programs. i'm a strong supporter of the second chance act in supporting its real authorization. i saw it from attorney general

context where even people who were incarcerated for serious crimes, we did not give them any path for success going forward because they came out, they had a substance abuse problem, the underlying issue was never dealt with, no job, no place to live -- put your self in those shoes then i dare say that all of us would not be able to put it back together. i saw that your focus is really on reentry programs. we saw it in our state get some momentum and then fizzle. i wanted to get your thoughts on reentry type programs and what more we could do to make them more effective to try to end this cycle and get people on to

productive lives. mr. dillard: reentry is a crucial point. if there is planning done and individuals are given different options. i know the federal system, six months in a halfway house is something i went through that was beneficial to me. i was able to obtain employment and save some money. to be able to rent a room when i was done with my federal time. what i am saying today is young men are coming out of our state and county systems homeless. 17, 18 years old who can't live with their mother because they have been told you cannot go there because subsidies are

connected to their housing and they are couch surfing with those who are not doing so well for the antisocials that had an influence in them being placed in the criminal justice system. in the very first place. housing initiatives are huge. we are working on solutions in the region i'm working in, nonprofits and state-based organizations are engaging with us in providing housing and an affordable rate. preparation is huge. individuals have to identify certain things while in custody in order to have a paradigm shift that this cannot be an option. i had a client tell me that

committing a new crime was not his first option. it was not his first choice, but it was his very last option. i know the troubling times he was in, sleeping on park benches, could not go to the shelter for various reasons. he committed a new crime. it was not his first choice, his very last option. the reentry process along with all the barriers, mentoring or connections with organizations that hire formerly incarcerated -- we are ambassadors. i look at us as being those who can help them through those trying times and pivot points of reentry.

mr. ofer: this is an oversight hearing on the bureau of prisons and the independent reviews that i keep referencing to look at this question of the bureau of prisons practices on reentry programming. here is its finding in one sentence. there is no formal bureau-wide reentry program. inmates have limited access to reentry programming. the bureau does not do a good job in reentry programming. 2000 people a year in the federal bureau of prisons go from solitary back to community -- many of them don't know the exact number because the bureau does not track it come are sent directly from solitary back to communities. that is a terrible practice that needs to stop immediately. there needs to be a focus on reentry programming in the federal bureau of prisons. senator ayotte: thank you.

i wanted to ask you, one of the things we are saying -- i saw this when i was ag as well. we are seeing on a devastating scale in our state, opioid and heroin addiction. i've been working on legislation call to the comprehensive addiction recovery act. i'm hoping we will take this issue up here -- i hope the second chance act -- there was some discussion you had about this idea of alternatives. what would you do as you think about this issue? how many people did you encounter that had addiction issues that were underlying why they were in prison? i fully agree -- we cannot arrest our way out of this. this is a public health crisis.

ms. kerman: thank you. what's happening in new hampshire is also happening in ohio and all over this country in terms of huge spikes in deaths from heroin. >> it is heartbreaking. ms. kerman: it is devastating. it is fundamentally a public health question first and foremost. the intersections with the criminal justice system should be secondary as we continue to see crime rates very low. violent crime rates very low. people who sell drugs are breaking the law. remembering that intervening in that addiction cycle is the most important thing and cannot be a couple with a jail cell. we see a lot of people trying lots of different things. i am not a doctor or an expert in addiction, but we see safe harbors in places like

massachusetts. they have tried innovative approaches to getting folks the medical health they need and having that be the primary concern rather than incarceration. when we look at states like new york, new jersey, california, the states that have reduced their prison populations the most and have simultaneously continued to enjoy huge declines one of the things we have seen is a hugetates decline in prosecutions incarceration of people for low-level drug offenses. a recognition that those -- that public disorder is a reflection of the health problem. that is the way to tackle it. >> senator baldwin. senator baldwin: thank you. first of all, i want to thank our panelists -- what a

tremendous opportunity for us to hear from you and interact with you. i wanted to join the thanks for holding this hearing. also to the ranking member -- as you said in the outset, this is a very big and very complex issue. i hope we will have additional opportunity -- i'm glad that you are recognizing this committee's role in that discussion and i hope we can keep that up. there's a number of things i wanted to touch on. i heard the ranking member talking about upholding the models in states that are working. i love to brag about my state, but in this case, i'm just going to share some of the statistics about racial disparities in the incarcerated population in our state.

in wisconsin, african-americans constitute 6% of the state population. 35% of those incarcerated in state prisons are african-american. according to a recent study from the university of wisconsin in milwaukee, 13% of wisconsin's african-american men of working age were behind bars. almost double the national average of 6.7%. the figures were particularly shocking and dismal for milwaukee county were 50% of african-american men in their 30's had served time in prison. 45% of the inmates at our federal correctional facility are african-american and 9.3% are hispanic. i hope as we continue to work on this complex issue that that will be on our minds. i just wanted to mention -- i

previously -- i was never attorney general. i practiced law in a small general practice firm at the very beginning of my career. mostly general practice. a couple of times, took misdemeanor public defender cases. i was becoming involved in county politics, state-level legislative office at this time when i felt like i saw the precursors of what we are seeing now being debated. i had the honor of serving as chairwoman of the corrections committee in the state legislature for one term.

i took our committee to prisons for tour's, visits, conversations with people who work there, people who were inmates there. we had legislative hearings in the prisons, we went to the intake facility -- one of the minimum-security prisons, medium security prisons, women's prisons and visited work release facilities. the legislature was talking about should we allow private prisons to be built and run in wisconsin. should we contract with other states to deal with our overflow issues and have them house are wisconsin prisoners? the counties were doing the same thing because some of the jails of the county level were overflowing. the substantive criminal justice debate at the time, three strikes you're out, limitation of -- elimination of parole. new crimes being created.

there was a love debate about the elimination of prison-based vocational programs, mandatory minimums were a big topic. -- there was a lot of debate. you could see all of this in the future. now that feature has come and it is not going to be overnight that we figure out what missteps we had and how we deal with this in a saner way. i have a couple of questions -- i'm hoping you will be willing to submit some answers in writing. you mentioned that women are the fastest-growing prison population right now. i remember years ago when i was visiting the women's prison in wisconsin, and seemed to me there were gender differences in how they dealt with certain issues.

we talked a lot about solitary confinement. is there a gender difference in how these issues are dealt with in women's prisons? for example i remember being , concerned about over medication of women to deal with behavioral issues as opposed to placement in solitary confinement. this is something we should still be looking at. ms. kerman: we should absolutely be looking at these of solitary confinement in men's and women's prisons. i echo the testimony that solitary confinement is often used not for the most serious infractions like an assault but rather for very low level infractions. women are overwhelmingly likely to be incarcerated for a nonviolent crime and are very unlikely to use violence while they are incarcerated. women's distilleries -- facilities do not struggle with violence.

solitary confinement is overwhelmingly used as a punitive measure. female prisoners are disproportionately likely to suffer from mental illness. one of the tragic things that solitary confinement is that mentally ill people have a more difficult time following the rules of a prison. you cease-fire sanctions -- spiraling sanctions which land them in solitary confinement. a regularly healthy person placed in solitary confinement for 10 days, after 10 days will start to significantly terry -- deteriorate. let alone a mentally will person. -- mentally ill person. >> let me ask a quick question about reentry. access to vocational and

educational programming. you can feel free to elaborate after-the-fact in writing. i know i have such limited time. i recall the restriction of any sort of public funds for individualized financial aid assistance to those in state prisons because that was something i was looking at closely. i believe that has continued over time and we have additional restrictions once a person is back in the community, they want to seek additional vocational or higher education generally. it makes it possible for financial aid. you talked about people emerging burdened with debt not related to higher education.

tell me about the options for people to secure post high school education upon release. mr. dillard: i've seen more opportunities opening up for individuals post release. at one time, there was student loans -- i'm happy to hear that the pell grant is going on within the federal system. i'm so happy to hear that because individuals prior to 1994 came out with associates degrees and went on to achieve bachelors and masters. the fact is, 98% of those who get a bachelors or higher degree never returned to prison. that is something we cannot ignore. we should support as far as higher education within the system. >> we do have a second panel. we could keep going on.

this has been fascinating. i want to thank this panel -- we talked before hand, the purpose of every hearing is to define the problem and alter reality so we commit -- you've accomplished that goal big-time. >> we have sold with fear of solitary confinement -- it might be good to pick one of those articles and hold another hearing. >> i was just going to get there. this is just a first of a series of hearings. we have a mission statement for this committee. pretty simple to enhance the economic and national security of america. this issue touches both. we have tried to find the areas of agreement. we've seen that there is a great deal of bipartisan agreement that what we are going just does not work, not because of a lack of effort by our next panel of

witnesses -- i encourage you and your organization to continue to press for this and work with those of us who want to solve this problem -- your points on solitary confinement are dead on and we need to fix that. mr. dillard, god bless you for having turned your life around and taking your circumstance and offering that to your fellow man to help other people find redemption. and ms. kerman, your unintended celebrity, you have done an excellent job of raising these issues -- i've spoken to my staff -- i like your answer to the question in terms of what are alternatives. from my standpoint, a rigorous dose of community reparation, those types of programs, community service is the appropriate for people who

have committed crimes -- we do need punishment and deterrence, but you just might heal in those programs and find that far more effective way of dealing with these issues than locking somebody up and seeing the results of women not working. i want to thank everybody here on this panel. i want to continue to work with you and numbers of the committee on bipartisan basis -- this is a first of a series of very important hearings. thank you very much. i will call for the next panel. if you have time, i would love to have you stay and listen to our next panel as well. but you do not need to feel obligated to.

>> it is the condition -- if you would rise and raise your right hand. these were the testimony you give before thi committee -- this committee will be the whole truth to help you got -- so help you god? mr. samuels as a director of the federal bureau of prisons and was appointed on december 21, 2011. he previously served as assistant is the director of the correctional programs division where he oversaw all inmate management and program functions. he was also responsible for enhancing agencies reentry initiatives. mr. samuels: good morning. i thank you for your time and focus. i'm pleased to discuss and operations of the federal bureau of prisons and on behalf of our very 9000 dedicated correctional workers across the country who are on the job 24 hours a day, seven days a week to support the

bureau's public safety mission. we provide offenders programs to become law-abiding citizens. we protect society and reduce crime. we faced significant challenge. the bureau does not control the number of offenders into our -- the number of offenders who enter our system or the length of their stay. we are required to house all federal offenders sent to prison while maintaining safety, security and effective reentry programs. we house offenders convicted in a variety of offenses. many serving long sentences and many with extensive test drug offenders make up almost half of our population. in addition, we have many individuals convicted of weapons, sex and immigration offenses to include individuals convicted of international and domestic terrorism. the bureau is the largest clerk --

corrections agency in the nation. our agency began to expand rapidly in the 1980's, due largely to the nation's war on drugs. from 1980 to the present we , experienced and a full increase in the size of our inmate population. crowding in federal prisons reached 40% systemwide and even higher at medium and high-security prisons were the more violent offenders reside. the tremendous growth of publishing outpaced staffing resources. our ability to effectively supervise prisoners and provide inmate programs depends on having sufficient numbers of staff available at our prisons. recently, population pressures abated slightly. 2014, we saw the first decline in inmate population in 34 years.

we protect declines to continue for the next couple of years. crowding will remain a challenge. staff safety and the safety of the public and the defenders we -- and offenders we house is the highest priority. every day, our staff puts the safety of the american people above their own communities secure. -- to keep communities secure. two staffers were killed in line of duty -- eric williams was killed on figuring 25th and the -- on february 25 and the next day, another was murdered. these tragedies are powerful reminders of the brutal dangers our staff face. to enhance safety the bureau has , taken advantage of technology for contraband detection and perimeter security. we are requiring the use of

protective vests. we increased our staffing and high-security institutions during evenings, weekends and holidays. we have been proactive in addressing concerns regarding the use of restrictive housing -- since 2012, we substantially reduced the number of inmates in special management units -- less than 7% of population is in restrictive housing. very few inmates are housed without another individual in the cell. our focus is to ensure inmates are placed in richard of houses -- in restrictive housing for the right reasons and for the right amount of time. we created new secure mental health in his this units -- mental health units and i high-level of supervision to protect them. we look forward to making additional reforms. we have a saying in the bureau that reentry begins the first day of incarceration. we review issues related to criminal behavior, including substance abuse, education and mental health. we offer numerous programs to target their needs and prepare

them to transition successfully to their communities. many of our programs have been proven to reduce recidivism. such as the drug treatment program, vocational educational programs. we have programs for mentally ill offenders, including those with a history of trauma. we also have programs for offenders with cognitive and -- impairedness. we provide programs to help offenders deepen their spiritual faith. the bureau relies on a network of community-based facilities, residential reentry centers are halfway houses and home confinement. community placement helps offenders readapt to the community insecure housing, jobs, medical care and more. chairman johnson, ranking member harper, members of the committee, this concludes my formal statement. i'm proud of the work my staff

does to keep americans safe. i thank you for your time and focus on the important issue of federal corrections. >> our next witnesses michael horvitz. -- michael horowitz. the inspector general for the department of justice. the office of the inspector general has identified special areas increasing safety and , security risk for inmates and management of the passionate release program. mr. horrowitz: the justice department faces two interrelated crises in managing the federal prison system. prison costs continue to rise while federal prisons remain significantly overcrowded. in the era of tight budgets, this path is unsustainable. since 2000, the bureau of prisons budget has nearly doubled.

and now counts for 25% of the department's discretionary budget. the vop has more than any other component. trailing only the fbi. 61%th care costs the bop a increase since 2006. recent oig report, we found the number of inmates aged 55 and older increased by 25% from 2009-2013. by contrast, the competition of -- the population of inmates under age 50 decreased by 1%, including 29% decrease for under age 30. this demographic shift is notable because aging inmates cost more to incarcerate. institutions lack appropriate

staffing levels to address the needs of the aging inmate population. for example while social workers , are are qualified to assist aging inmates, we found that the physical infrastructure can not house adequately aging inmates and the bop has not conducted a nationwide review of their institutions since 1996. it does not provide programming opportunities addressing the needs of aging inmates. we also concluded that based on their lower rates of recidivism, certain aging inmates could be viable candidates for early release. a program that congress has authorized area however, -- authorized. however we found that in just , over one year following the attorney general's announcement of an elderly compassionate release program, the department is only released two elderly inmates pursuant to it. we found that be a peace program had been poorly managed and

wasn't lamented inconsistently. the bop expanded their release program and has modestly increased number of inmates released under it. in our two thousand 11 review, -- in our 2011 review, the department's international -- the department rejected 97% of transfer requests and transfer less than 1% of inmates to their home countries to complete their sentence. we concluded the department needed to make a number of improvements in the program, including ensuring that accurately determined whether inmates are eligible for the program and we are completing a follow-up to that report. another area where costs have increased substantially is for private contractors, which is largely used to house inmates, many of the

40,000 non-us national inmates. the budget for contract facilities is over $1 million -- over $1 billion and the proportion of federal inmates housed in country prisons has increased from 2% in 1982 about 20% in 2013. in addition to addressing rising costs, the department must continue to address efforts to ensure the safety and security of staff and inmates. prison overcrowding represents the most significant threat to safety and security of staff and inmates with federal prisons at 30% over rated capacity. in every one of its agency financial reports since 2006, the department has identified prison overcrowding as they -- as a programmatic material weakness. yet, the problem remains unresolved today. in addition to overcrowding, the unlawful introduction of contraband presents a serious

threat to safety and security. the unauthorized use of cell phones has proven to be a particularly significant risk. in the gao has reported that the number of cell phones confiscated more than doubled from 2008-2010. additionally, sexual abuse in prison remains a serious safety and security issue. in addition, we recently reported on the permits efforts to implement and comply with the prison rape elimination act. finally, a significant management challenge for the department has been measuring the success of its prison programs. an essential building block to achieving performance based management is having reliable data. an issue that has proven to be a challenge for the department and the bop. a conference of approach to the collection analysis -- an analysis of data of how programs

are reducing incarceration rates, deterring crime and improving public safety will help the department focus its resources and make strategic investments. thank you for the continued support for our work and i will be happy to answer any questions. >> mr. samuels, let me start with you. first of all i do , not envy your task. i want to thank you for your service. which has been long-standing. according to your bio, you began as a correctional officer in march of 1988. we have all quoted statistics here that in the 1980's the prison population was 25000 and it is now over 200,000. can you give us your perspective in terms of what all has happened, what you have witnessed over your career? mr. samuels: thank you, senator. from my perspective, having joined the agency as a correctional officer in 1988

, around that time the euros -- the bureau's population was 60,000, when you look at the bureau prisons and go back to 1940's to 1980, the bureau population remained flat. in 1980, the primary target for discussion, we as an agency had 24,000 coming into the federal system. we had less than 9000 employees, 41 institutions and we were able to operate the entire bureau of prisons for $330 million. when you look at the increase in 1980 to 2013, we were at more than 800% as far as the growth of the population. our staffing did not keep pace with that growth. with our mission, where we are tasked with anyone and ended -- anyone and everyone who is

admitted and placed in the care of the bureau of prisons, we have a job to do, significant job. it takes staff to do the work that is required. >> from your perspective, you have been there -- what drove that dramatic increase in prison population? mr. samuels: the war on drugs in the early 1980's had a significant drive on the growth of the population. as a result, having more offenders coming to the system. we have a long-standing practice within the euro of prisons -- the bureau of prisons going back to the 1930's that our reentry efforts are always in play and that is to ensure we are providing rehabilitation. but the challenges associated with what we have to do is we have to protect the inmates and the staff in our facilities. the driver has been the war on drugs. >> has there been any legitimate increased due to a crackdown on violent crime?

we just appropriately cracked down on that? we did not become a more criminal society. we are always arresting those people convicting and putting them in jail. mr. samuels: in regards to violent offenses, the department through prosecutorial efforts, there is a mixture of individuals without violence and those with violence. it is safe to say that we have a very violent offense in a population to include a significant amount of gang members. we have more than 21,000 security threat group members who pose a significant threat to the public. senator if we are talking about : gang violence, is that also being driven by drugs?

mr. samuels: it can be driven by drugs. the gangs and those associated with that activity is part of the structure. senator let me stick with : director samuels and let me ask the questions in terms of -- why haven't we been more proactive in terms of these programs being reauthorized? is there a risk aversion there? who was to be responsible for releasing some of you to the public that will commit another violent crime? can you speak to why we have not taken advantage of this programs more robustly? mr. samuels: my authority is very limited. when you look at taking advantage of the various programs that are being referenced. with compassionate release, we as an agency did a thorough review ae