Contracts that could generate millions of dollars for the state and provide video visitation for inmates are poised to be signed this week, Arkansas Department of Correction spokesman Cathy Frye said Monday.
The Board of Corrections unanimously approved the two contracts -- one for the telephone services for both the prison as well as the Department of Community Correction, and another to provide the video visitation services for the prisons -- at its April 6 meeting.
"We are excited to be signing the telephone contract. Getting to this point has been a long, protracted process," said Dina Tyler, the deputy director of the Community Correction Department. "We think we have ended with a contract that meets our needs and will serve inmates and their families as well."
Securus Technologies was awarded the contract in October 2014 -- beating out three other bidders -- but has been in negotiations with the correction system since that time.
In January, the state was sued by the correction system's former telephone provider, Global Tel*Link Corp., claiming that the evaluation committee did not assign points to the individual requirements of the request for proposals that would allow a third party to assess the review.
Pulaski County Circuit Judge Morgan Welch has yet to rule on a motion from Global Tel*Link for a temporary restraining order and mandatory injunction to keep the prison system from signing a new contract until the lawsuit is resolved.
When asked what effect the lawsuit has on the Securus contract, Frye said she "cannot comment on pending litigation."
The Securus Video Visitations would be limited to 30-minute sessions and cost an inmate $12.99 plus taxes, fees and surcharges. Securus included a contract option that allows it to offer promotional pricing for as low as $5 per session and to extend the duration of visitation sessions.
The board's approval of the contract, however, was contingent upon the chief legal counsel for the Arkansas Department of Correction, Jim DePriest, negotiating a few contract points, including the commission the prison system will receive from video-system revenue.
DePriest told the board that the installation of the video portion of the contract would require an initial investment of about $3.65 million by Securus. It would take the company about three years to recoup that investment.
Under the proposed contract terms, the prison system agreed to take a smaller commission on voice calls -- going from 79 percent to 73 percent -- and would forgo video commissions until Securus recoups the full amount of the installation expense. After that commitment is met, the prison would receive a 20 percent commission on video calls, DePriest said.
The audio commission for the Community Correction Department would remain at 79 percent.
Frye said Monday that there have been "no significant changes" to the contract since the April 6 meeting.
"We agreed to the cut in audio commissions and to forgo the video commissions because the other option would have been to strongly push inmates into using video visitation instead receiving in-person visits from their families," Frye said.
"Because this is such new technology, many of the companies providing it are pressuring correctional facilities to strongly encourage video visitation. That's what you're seeing at some of the county jails around the state. Those facilities have either limited or cut off in-person visitation entirely to ensure that the video-visitation venture can support itself, bring in revenue, or both."
The previous contract with Global*Tel link paid a 45 percent commission. Both providers charge a $3 connect fee and 12 cents per minute.
Revenue from telephone calls in fiscal 2014 -- which covers the period from July 1, 2013, to June 30, 2014, was $1,237,607 for the Department of Correction and $299,770 for the Community Correction Department.
The video-visitation system -- which would be installed in a pod of kiosks that provide privacy for the inmates -- will allow for inmates' family members or attorneys to visit from their home or office using using a webcam and microphone. The system works much the same way as popular webcam services like Skype.
The telephone system would allow for the monitoring and recording of inmate calls but also allow for private, nonrecorded calls for attorney-client conversations or other approved private calls.
Correction Department Director Wendy Kelley told the board that while in-person visitation will not be eliminated, the video visitation would reduce the number of visitors to the prisons, resulting in the need for fewer guards and less contraband being smuggled into the prisons.
"I just see it as a win-win situation," Kelley said.
Tyler said the Community Correction Department opted not to go with video visitation because it wants to evaluate all its options.
"We don't have the economy of scale that [the prison system] has, so we really need to explore everything," Tyler said. "That system is just a little too rich for us. So we are going to take our time and make sure that when we do choose a video-visitation vendor that we have done the very best we could for everyone."
Only a handful of county jails around the state use video visitation -- in Hempstead, Jefferson and Miller counties. The state's largest county jail, however, does not offer the service.
"There is usually a pretty quick turnaround for our inmates here," Pulaski County sheriff's office spokesman Capt. Carl Minden said. "The jail averages about 26,000 bookings a year, and most of them don't stay long enough to even require visitation."
Lt. Heath Ross of the Hempstead County jail said the video-visitation system there -- which was set up in February -- has cut down on the number of in-person visitors to the jail.
There is a kiosk in each of the eight pods at the jail, as well as four kiosks in the public visiting area. The inmates remain in the pods whether the family is visiting via a computer or smartphone from home or from the jail's visitation area.
"This saves on the manpower needed to get them out and move them," Ross said. "It makes for a much smoother transition."
The video visitation has also allowed the jail to increase visitation time to "anytime" within reason, with the exception of meal times.
The Jefferson County jail installed video visitation about two years ago, resulting in a significant reduction in traffic to the facility, said jail spokesman Maj. Tyra Tyler.
"The inmates like it better than the phone system because they can physically see someone and their reactions," Tyler said.
"If your child has a report card they want to show off, they can put it up to the monitor for their mom or dad to see. That means a whole lot versus talking on the telephone. Even though mom or dad might not be physically there, the video means they can still be in the home."
Frye said Kelley and the Board of Corrections have remained adamant that the prison system would rather sacrifice commissions -- for both audio and video services -- than to discourage or see a decrease in in-person visitation at the units.
"We are implementing video visitation in an effort to help families who are unable to travel to our prison units, many of which are located in remote and rural areas. We don't, however, want to see it replace actual visits to our facilities," Frye said.
"We see this technology as another means for helping inmates maintain a bond with their families and children. This is important because we know that strong family bonds translate into a stronger support system when an inmate leaves prison and re-enters his community. We do not, however, want it to become a replacement for face-to-face visits."
State Desk on 04/14/2015