DOC’s Falcon Reform Plan Moves Into Implementation, but Public Measures of Progress Remain Limited

Wisconsin Department of Corrections officials say a major outside review of the adult prison system has moved from recommendations to implementation work at six institutions. For people incarcerated in Wisconsin and their families, the stated goals are consequential: more consistent visiting practices, increased recreation and out-of-cell time, changes to restrictive housing, better alignment between custody classifications and bed assignments, and improvements in medical and mental-health operations.

But the most important question is still unanswered in public: what has changed in practice, at which institutions, and how will DOC measure whether conditions have actually improved?

According to DOC’s Falcon Initiative page, the department hired Falcon, Inc. in November 2024 to conduct what DOC calls a comprehensive independent review of its adult prison system. Falcon examined correctional operations, mental health and medical practices. The review included document requests, 28 workshops, visits to 15 facilities, and interviews with wardens, frontline staff, people incarcerated in DOC custody and advocates, according to the agency.

The resulting 137-page Falcon report, issued in October 2025 and published by DOC, identified systemwide concerns alongside areas the consultants described as progress. The report’s recommendations focused on correctional practices, restrictive housing, bed management, staffing, medical care, mental health and data management.

In February 2026, DOC entered a second contract with Falcon to continue implementation work, the department says. DOC’s public Falcon page identifies six institutions for this focused effort, though the agency’s page does not name them in its text. Wisconsin Examiner reported in July, based on contract records it obtained, that the facilities are Columbia, Green Bay, Redgranite, Stanley, Taycheedah and Waupun correctional institutions. Beyond the Sentence could not independently review the underlying second-contract documents before publication.

DOC says Falcon’s work at the six sites began with a March leadership summit, followed by the selection of initiative managers in April. The department says site visits occurred in May and June. Its public description says work remains ongoing, including policy development and alignment, data-driven decision-making, and technical support from Falcon experts.

The plan matters because several of its stated objectives address daily conditions that incarcerated people and families routinely experience. Under “correctional practices,” DOC lists increased communal meals in maximum-security settings, increased and more consistent recreation and leisure activities, completion of staff training, and consistent visiting practices. These are listed as objectives, not as completed policy changes or enforceable guarantees. DOC has not posted a facility-by-facility public scorecard showing how much recreation, programming, communal dining or visiting access has increased under the initiative.

Restrictive housing is another central area. DOC says the implementation work aims to track restrictive-housing use and placement criteria, increase out-of-cell time, improve multidisciplinary reviews, develop alternatives for people with serious mental illness, improve observation-placement standards and create more consistent property incentives.

Those goals respond to significant findings in Falcon’s own report. The report found that 872 people were in restrictive housing on the last day of March 2025, representing 3.8% of DOC’s prison population. It concluded that the five-year restrictive-housing trend was essentially flat: 915 people, or 4.0% of the population, were in restrictive housing in March 2019. The report also stated that people in restrictive housing should receive at least two hours outside their cells each day.

The Falcon report further raised concerns about people with mental-health needs in restrictive housing and about the placement of observation cells, including suicide-watch cells, inside restrictive-housing units. It reported that people on observation status typically could not have therapeutic items, visits, phone calls or recreation. Wisconsin Watch and Wisconsin Public Radio independently reported on those findings in November 2025, including DOC’s acknowledgment that most observation cells for people on suicide watch were located in prison restrictive-housing units, although the agency said no specific statewide policy requires that location.

The consulting report also documented crowding and bed-management problems. As of January 2025, it found that male DOC facilities were operating at 130% of design capacity overall, while women’s facilities were operating at 166% of design capacity. The report said crowding can leave people housed at security levels that do not match their classifications, such as people classified for medium security remaining in maximum security while awaiting movement.

DOC’s current implementation objectives include aligning bed capacity and custody assignments across the Division of Adult Institutions and establishing more consistent criteria for cell assignments within facilities. Again, the public initiative page identifies the goal but does not provide current data showing whether transfer delays or classification-placement mismatches have declined.

Staffing remains an underlying issue. Falcon’s report found substantial turnover and a large number of newer employees whose training occurred while normal prison operations were disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic. DOC lists staffing improvements among the recommended focus areas, including recruitment, retention and resource allocation. Yet the agency’s current Falcon page does not publish vacancy figures, retention results or facility-specific staffing targets connected to the implementation work.

For incarcerated people and families, the distinction between an objective and an accomplished change is important. A plan to make visiting practices more consistent is not the same as a published statewide visiting standard. A goal to increase out-of-cell time is not the same as data documenting actual hours out of cell. A commitment to improve observation placements is not proof that suicide-watch practices have changed.

DOC has publicly identified important areas for improvement and has made the Falcon report available to the public. That level of disclosure is meaningful. But a credible reform process requires more than a list of goals. DOC should publish regular, facility-level implementation updates showing what policies have changed; which institutions are participating; how many people are in restrictive housing; average out-of-cell time; access to visits, phones, recreation and programming; staffing levels; medical and mental-health vacancies; and the number of people awaiting appropriate custody placement.

Until those measures are available, the public can document that DOC is pursuing a broad implementation initiative. It cannot yet independently verify the scale, consistency or lived impact of the changes DOC says it is working toward.

Beyond the Sentence will continue to monitor DOC policy postings, facility notices, population data, public-records releases and accounts from incarcerated people and families for evidence of how the Falcon implementation effort is unfolding inside Wisconsin prisons.