Opinion ID: 778366
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Staffing Levels

Text: 81 The best substantiated of all the alleged deficiencies is the small number of mental health staff members at the Prison. The bulk of the evidence in the record suggests that Defendants have failed to respond to the independent monitors' requests for an increase in staffing. Nonetheless, the district court found that the existing level of staffing, while not optimal, has not resulted in an unconstitutionally low level of mental health care. Because the court's findings of adequate mental health care are not clearly erroneous, Plaintiffs failed to meet their burden of demonstrating a violation of the Eighth Amendment. 82 The district court found that outpatient services appear to meet the needs of the inmates. It noted that patient requests for mental health services are reviewed and triaged by the next business day, and are addressed substantively within four days. Similarly, it found that triage groups allow inmates to have contact with a mental health professional on a non crisis basis one weekday after the request is submitted and that outpatient services include group counseling in a number of areas. The court also noted that inmates with Axis I diagnoses 8 may receive individual counseling. Finally, the court found that one staff member is assigned as the Prison's crisis counselor each day and that outpatients requesting crisis assistance are seen immediately by mental health staff. 83 With respect to inpatient mental health services, the district court found that group counseling is provided on a weekly basis to prisoners housed in the special mental health Treatment and Evaluation Center. It also found that prisoners in this unit are provided with a treatment plan and that their medications are monitored by the Prison psychiatrist and other staff members. The court noted that, in crisis situations, Defendants maintain a one-to-one watch system, and that inmates who are perceived to be a risk to themselves are placed in a close observation area. 84 The evidence in the record supports each of the district court's findings. In addition, many of those testifying noted that, in general, Defendants are meeting the basic mental health needs of the prisoners. Thus, the low staffing levels at the Prison do not constitute an Eighth Amendment violation.