BPH Chief Executive Officer Scott Wyckoff speaks about confidentiality
For a lifer, it is scary to prepare for a Board of Parole Hearings (BPH) interview when you have confidentials in your Central File. What is the correct way to address this matter? To better prepare for BPH, Chief Executive Officer of BPH Scott Wyckoff answered questions posed by incarcerated individuals during the BPH Townhall on, Jan. 23, 2026.
Q: Why are confidentials addressed in BPH if the incarcerated person did not receive an RVR infraction, classification hearing, segregation hearing, or STG validation?
A: The BPH is required to look at all your documents from medical, mental records, [Medical Assisted Treatment] and confidential information as evidence for decision-making. BPH works independently from [California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation]. If someone did not receive an RVR [Rules Violation Report] because of confidential information, it is still relevant and reliable to someone’s risk assessment. There might be underlying behavior that BPH needs to explore, especially if it leads to misconduct. BPH has received extensive training in this area and has background as being former prosecutors, attorneys, or law enforcement.
Q: Is the BPH aware of informants’ misuse of “confidential information” to impact an individual’s liberty? For example, lying and fabrication of claims due to retaliation or manipulation of the system for transfers, etc.
A: Yes, BPH is aware of the misuse of confidential information, especially on issues of sexual assault. Offenders will receive a 10-day notice before BPH. You will have an opportunity to address confidential information. BPH understands there are two sides to the story and it’s not always the whole truth. If you disagree, you can request an investigation, and interviews will take place. Correctional officers and inmates will be interviewed. BPH is also aware of “peer opposing letters.” These letters are investigated and the problem is the opposing party uses false names. Therefore, no action can be taken.
Q: If a confidential allegation is unsubstantiated or unfounded, why is it not then removed from the file to prevent incarcerated persons from having to be held accountable and answer to fabricated information that oftentimes they are unaware of? This becomes a situation where the commissioners/panel can either perceive it as deceptive, deflecting, etc.
A: BPH has no authority to remove confidential information from the central file. If your findings or investigation were not reliable, it may impact BPH decisions. BPH is trained. Grants and denials are also reviewed by the board of BPH. If you disagree with your denial, contact BPH and request to review transcripts.
