Back to top

All Library Items

  • Prison Inmates' Prerelease Application for Medicaid: Take-up Rates in Oregon

    Prison Inmates' Prerelease Application for Medicaid Cover
    Prison Inmates' Prerelease Application for Medicaid: Take-up Rates in Oregon

    "People leaving prison often return to the community lacking health insurance and thus access to appropriate health care. Many have mental illness, substance abuse, and other health issues that need treatment and compound reintegration challenges. Left untreated, they are at risk of falling into a cycle of relapse, reoffending, and reincarceration. Providing Medicaid coverage upon release has the potential to improve continuity of care that may interrupt this cycle. This report examines whether efforts to enroll people in Medicaid prior to their release from prison are successful in generating health insurance coverage after release. Urban Institute (Urban) researchers analyzed data from Oregon’s pre-Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid program to determine the extent to which released prisoners successfully gained coverage" (p. 1). The results from this study my help your state in ensuring continuity of care for newly released offenders.

    Document
  • By the Numbers: Parole Release and Revocation Across 50 States

    By the Numbers Cover
    By the Numbers: Parole Release and Revocation Across 50 States

    "Parole decision-making functions as a crucial mechanism channeling people in and out of prison. This report combines multiple data sources and, for the first time, provides an overview of the movements between prison and parole for each state, focusing on the decision points of parole release and parole revocation. This information allows for a comprehensive picture of each state, both as a snapshot and longitudinally. For each state, information is presented on prison and parole rates over time, the percentage of prison admissions that are due to people on conditional release, the percentage of hearings by the parole board that result in parole being granted, the rate of re-incarceration for parolees, and the percentage of parolees who exit parole due to an incarceration versus a successful completion of supervision" (website).

    Document
  • Veterans Treatment Courts: A Second Chance for Vets Who Have Lost Their Way

    Veterans Treatment Courts cover
    Veterans Treatment Courts: A Second Chance for Vets Who Have Lost Their Way

    "This white paper is based on a series of interviews, buttressed by personal observations, of key players in half a dozen jurisdictions where Veterans Treatment Courts have been operating with marked success. Neither graphs nor charts nor a plethora of statistics are employed to illustrate the protocols and practices of these therapeutic courts. Instead, proponents and practitioners intimately involved in the founding and operation of these courts relate how they are “the right thing to do” for combat veterans who commit certain crimes that are associated with the lingering legacy of their wartime experiences. They describe, in often exquisite detail, what their roles are and how they have come to embrace the concept that these courts, which use a carrot-and-stick approach to rehabilitate rather than overtly punish veteran defendants, represent what one of the individuals responsible for the introduction of the first of these diversionary courts has called “the most profound change in the attitude of our criminal justice system towards veterans in the history of this country” (p. iii).

    This publication is comprised of fifteen chapters: so, you're (thinking of) starting a veterans treatment court; nobody returns from a combat zone unaffected, unscathed, unchanged; PTSD by any other name … can still wreck lives; a brief history of veterans treatment courts; Judge Robert Russell—"godfather" of the veterans treatment court movement; Buffalo Veterans Court—they're number one; the "top ten" components of a veterans treatment court; the mentor program—helping vets through the labyrinth; in the beginning—first set up your game plan; role of the players; Judge Marc Carter—what justice is; elements of the process; Michelle Slaterry—maven for research; success stories—in their own words; and questions and answers.

    Document
  • Improving Responses to People with Mental Illnesses at the Pretrial Stage: Essential Elements

    Improving Responses to People with Mental Illnesses at the Pretrial Stage Cover
    Improving Responses to People with Mental Illnesses at the Pretrial Stage: Essential Elements

    "This report introduces essential elements for responding to people with mental illnesses at the pretrial stage, including decisions about pretrial release and diversion. These elements encourage data collection not only to help individual communities, but also for future researchers who are dedicated to these important questions."

    Document
  • First-Episode Incarceration: Creating a Recovery-Informed Framework for Integrated Mental Health and Criminal Justice Responses

    First-Episode Incarceration Cover
    First-Episode Incarceration: Creating a Recovery-Informed Framework for Integrated Mental Health and Criminal Justice Responses

    "This report, modeled on promising approaches in the mental health field to people experiencing a first episode of psychosis, outlines a new integrated framework that encourages the mental health and criminal justice fields to collaborate on developing programs based on early intervention, an understanding of the social determinants that underlie ill health and criminal justice involvement, and recovery-oriented treatment."

    Document
  • No News Is NOT Good News: The Role of PIOs in Jails [Internet Broadcast]

    No News Is NOT Good News cover
    No News Is NOT Good News: The Role of PIOs in Jails [Internet Broadcast]

    Public Information Officers (PIOs) play a vital role in the local jail. The public’s perception and/or misperception of jail operations can influence public safety, funding, elections, and numerous other factors. Responding to media inquiries regarding crisis situations is just one of the many roles of the PIO. Building positive rapport with the media, telling your story, engaging the community and conveying your mission are priority tasks for a PIO.

    Topics discussed during this broadcast include: Importance of a proactive community-minded approach to communicating your mission, vision and values; Characteristics of effective PIOs in contemporary media markets; Strategies for being the active voice of your jail and telling your story by engaging the media; Approaches for engaging the community with your jail’s mission; Opportunities for promoting a healthy work / life balance for PIOs; How you can build positive relationships and create rapport with your local media. Presenters will also share recommendations and resources.

    This broadcast answers the following questions: Why is a comprehensive, proactive communication strategy necessary for jails? What are characteristics of an effective PIO in contemporary media markets? How do you build positive relationships and create rapport with your local media? How do you address the media’s needs and speak their language? How do you successfully pitch positive stories to the media? How do you build equity with your community so that you are not defined by crises or negative events? What is the importance of understanding your community’s demographics and values? What are some tools and strategies for engaging and connecting directly with your community? How do you effectively convey your message to the community? What steps can you take to promote a healthy work/life balance for PIOs? How can you find additional resources and ideas for enhancing your jail’s comprehensive communication strategy? What are the advantages to working with your community proactively to inform, educate, and gain support for your jail? What are the benefits of actively engaging the media in telling your stories? How do you leverage data to support your agency’s message? How can your agency use social media to promote your mission?

    Video
    Streaming Video
  • Reducing Recidivism in Massachusetts with a Comprehensive Strategy

    Reducing Recidivism in Massachusetts with a Comprehensive Strategy Cover
    Reducing Recidivism in Massachusetts with a Comprehensive Strategy

    "This policy brief offers fodder for the state’s Justice Reinvestment leaders as they contemplate the changes necessary to increase the system’s focus on recidivism reduction and achieve results" (p. 2). Sections of this brief cover: key findings; the high cost of recidivism in Massachusetts-- incentive to reform, post-release supervision, step downs, and sentence length; evidence-based reentry strategies—post-release supervision, transitional housing, employment services, substance abuse and mental health, and multiservice reentry; collateral sanctions and criminal records in Massachusetts; how much reentry programs can reduce recidivism; conditions of confinement and recidivism risk; state reentry efforts—comprehensive reentry models (in Minnesota, Michigan, and Maryland), and funding reentry initiatives (justice reinvestment in Arkansas, Hawaii, South Dakota, and pay-for-success financing—California, Massachusetts, New York, and Oklahoma); justice reinvestment and effective supervision; and a five-part reentry plan for reducing recidivism in Massachusetts.

    Document
  • Reentry Annotated Bibliography

    Reentry Annotated Bibliography cover
    Reentry Annotated Bibliography

    "Reentry refers to the transition of offenders from prisons or jails back into the community. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs more than 650,000 people are released from state and federal prisons annually. Another 9 million cycle through local jails. Research by the Bureau of Justice Statistics published in 2006, has shown that more than two-thirds of state prisoners will be rearrested within three years of their release and more than half (56.7%) are re-incarcerated. The number of offenders and the likelihood of their re-incarceration have made reentry a priority for policy makers and criminal justice researchers and practitioners. Breaking the cycle of reoffending and re-incarceration has many important implications for public safety and policy. High rates of recidivism mean more crime, more victims, and more pressure on an already overburdened criminal justice system. The costs of imprisonment also wreak havoc on state and municipal budgets. In the past 20 years state spending on corrections has grown at a faster rate than nearly any other state budget item. The U.S. now spends more than $85 billion on federal, state, and local corrections. Because reentry intersects with issues of health and housing, education and employment, family, faith, and community well-being, many federal agencies are focusing on the reentry population with initiatives that aim to improve outcomes in each of these areas" (p. 3). This annotated bibliography addresses issues surrounding the reentry of offenders into the community. Entries are organized according to: reentry websites; reentry in general; reentry by category for jails, prisons, victims of crimes, community and family support, education, employment and housing, health and safety, and special populations; and resources with earlier publication dates.

    Document
  • Fines, Fees, and Bail: Payments in the Criminal Justice System That Disproportionately Impact the Poor

    Fines, Fees, and Bail Cover
    Fines, Fees, and Bail: Payments in the Criminal Justice System That Disproportionately Impact the Poor

    "As the use of fixed monetary penalties has increased, many observers have raised concerns about the equity, legality and efficiency of these regressive payments. At the same time, meaningful reforms could increase equity without sacrificing deterrent impacts of these payments or the goal of supporting criminal justice operations … [This document examines] the use and impact of fines, fees and bail, and highlight[s] potential options for reform" (p. 2). Sections cover: what fines, fees, and bail are; fines and fees—rising criminal justice budgets have motivated growth in these, the use and size of fees have increased over time, fines and fees are regressive payments that disproportionately impact the poor, fines and fees impose large financial and human costs on poor offenders, collection of fines and fees is often inefficient, reforming fines and fees could potentially increase both equity and efficiency; and bail—the use and size of bail bonds has increased over time, leading to increased pretrial detention of defendants leading to increased pretrial detention of defendants, bail assignments are regressive, leading to pretrial detention of the poorest rather than the most dangerous defendants, pretrial detention of low risk offenders is costly to taxpayers and defendants, and a number of bail reform options could both increase fairness and reduce pretrial misconduct.

    Document
  • Selecting and Using Risk and Need Assessment

    Selecting and Using Risk and Need Assessment Cover
    Selecting and Using Risk and Need Assessment

    "The purpose of this document is to provide Drug Court staff with a concise and current overview of important issues relating to offender risk assessment and to provide a list of recommended contemporary risk instruments. Numerous risk scales are currently used in the United States … to assess static risk factors and criminogenic needs (dynamic risk factors that are related to the client’s propensity for criminal behavior), of which substance abuse is but one. Almost all of these are applied to predict risk post-adjudication" (p. 1). This publication focuses on those recommended and promising risk and needs instruments best for drug courts. Sections of this document include: risk assessment-an overview for drug courts; advantages, limits, and usage or risk assessment approaches in contemporary practice; issues for drub courts to consider in selecting risk instruments; selection criteria and overview of risk assessment instruments; best practice guidelines for integrating risk and clinical measures; summary of recommended and promising risk and need assessment instruments; summary of recommended purpose-specific risk assessment instruments; ten principles for using risk assessment; description of recommended risk instruments—Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions (COMPAS), Level of Service-Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI), Post Conviction Risk Assessment (PCRA), the Ontario Domestic Assault Risk Assessment (ODARA), and the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide-Revised (VRAG-R); promising risk instruments—Ohio Risk Assessment System (ORAS)—Pretrial Assessment Tool (PAT) and Community Supervision TOOL (CST), and the Risk and Needs Triage (RANT).

    Document
  • What Works? Short-Term, In-Custody Treatment Programs

    What Works? Short-Term, In-Custody Treatment Programs Cover
    What Works? Short-Term, In-Custody Treatment Programs

    "Assessing the effectiveness of in-custody treatment programs is essential in the correctional system to appropriately allocate resources and reduce offender recidivism rates. With California passing AB 109, “2011 Public Safety Realignment”, it becomes imperative to understand the characteristics and principles of effective rehabilitation programing. Treatment programs that follow the core principles of the Risk-Needs-Responsivity model are found to be effective and to significantly decrease recidivism rates … The main question is whether jail treatment programs can be effective given the short duration of most jail terms. The transitory population in jails makes it difficult to provide continuous and effective treatment, further indicating the importance of analyzing the effectiveness of short-term, in-custody treatment programs. The authors reviewed the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy, education and vocational programs, substance and alcohol abuse treatment, faith-based, and mental illness treatment programs" (p. 3). Sections following an executive summary cover: effectiveness of in-custody treatment programs-- risk-needs-responsivity (RNR) model, and characteristics and principles of effective treatment programs; cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT); educational and vocational programs; substance and alcohol abuse; faith-based programs; and mental illness.

    Document
  • Prison Guards and the Death Penalty

    Prison Guards and the Death Penalty Cover
    Prison Guards and the Death Penalty

    This is an excellent primer on how correctional officers are deeply impacted by working on death row. It is essential reading for corrections professionals, policymakers, and the public. Sections of this paper include: introduction; guards on death row; interactions with prisoners; guards at executions; and conclusion. "Like murder, execution inflicts emotional and psychological damage on those linked to it. This can begin with anticipatory trauma when a court sets an execution date and the impact can remain even years after an execution. Prison guards, who most closely interact with condemned prisoners on a daily basis, are particularly affected, including and especially those acting as executioners. The death penalty compounds the anxiety and depression to which prison guards are already especially vulnerable (over a quarter of all US prison employees suffer from depression36 – three times the level in the general US population). Given such negative aspects to the work, executing nations use enticements and punishments to keep guards in execution service … Alternatively, they may try to dissuade guards from quitting by using ridicule, bullying or demotion: one guard was given "weird duty, weird hours" after asking to be removed from the execution team, while others reported being threatened with lower paying, lower status jobs. The exposure of guards to executions and anticipated executions should therefore be a matter of serious concern to prison administrations, which have a responsibility towards the wellbeing of their staff. The unacknowledged stress experienced by guards on death rows and execution teams risks dangerous mental health consequences for them and those around them. The simplest (and best) solution would be to remove the cause of the problem and abolish the death penalty" (p. 3).

    Document
  • Declines in Youth Communities and Facilities in the 21st Century

    Declines in Youth Communities and Facilities in the 21st Century Cover
    Declines in Youth Communities and Facilities in the 21st Century

    "A major reduction has taken place in the number of teenagers committed to juvenile facilities in this century. At a time of increasing calls to cut the number of incarcerated adults by 50 percent over 10 years, the juvenile justice system has already attained this goal. Moreover, the decline has taken place without harming public safety" (p. 1). Information provided in this report includes: "Figure 1. Juvenile Facilities and Placements, 1997-2013"; "Table 1. Juvenile Commitment Changes by State, 2001-2013"; "Table 2. Juvenile Commitment Rates by State, 2013"; "Figure 2. Youth Commitment Changes by State, 2001-2013"; "Figure 3. Youth Commitment Rate per 100,000 by State, 2013"; racial and ethnic disparities; "Table 3. Black/White Commitment Rates per 100,000 Juveniles, 2011"; one in three juvenile facilities have closed since 2002; "Figure 4. Number of Juvenile Offenders by Size of Facility, 1997-2013"; "Figure 5. Percent of Juvenile Offenders by Size of Facility, 1997-2013"; and concluding remarks. "Reductions in juvenile offending combined with common-sense policy changes have led to large reductions in the number and percentages of teenagers in large state facilities and generally in confinement … Confinement should be used sparingly and briefly, and only as a last resort. For serious offenders, a successful program should be intensive and address teenaged aggression, focusing on rehabilitation to keep them in confinement only as long as they are a threat to public safety" (p. 6-7).

    Document
  • Arts Infusion Initiative, 2010-15: Evaluation Report

    Arts Infusion Initiative, 2010-15 Cover
    Arts Infusion Initiative, 2010-15: Evaluation Report

    "In 2010, an ambitious model for social change emerged in Chicago that aimed to connect detained youth and those at risk for incarceration (“at-risk youth”) to rigorous and engaging arts instruction, infused with social and emotional learning goals. Dubbed the Arts Infusion Initiative, the Chicago Community Trust (“the Trust”) spearheaded and funded this five year, $2.5 million demonstration while earning cooperation from the local detention facility, public school system, community policing office, and community arts program leaders to integrate arts programming into youths’ school and after school environments. Since its launch, the Arts Infusion Initiative has served more than 2,000 youth at an average annual cost of $700 per teen, linking them to high performing arts instruction associated with significant increases in social and emotional learning. This report marks the first large-scale evaluation of the Arts Infusion Initiative which was designed to: (1) assess the degree to which the project, as an emergent model for social change, was achieving its intended purposes and (2) generate actionable information for promoting effective Arts Infusion practices while redirecting those that have been less effective" (p. 3). Six chapters comprise this evaluation: introduction; importance of the Arts Infusion Initiative; components of the Arts Infusion Initiative; evaluation methods; seven key findings; and recommendations for promising practices. Two of the key findings are: Arts Infusion youth participants had statistically significant improvements in their social and emotional learning skills; and Arts Infusion programs were successful in "exposing at-risk youth "to new skills and technologies, providing confidence building experiences that opened their minds to a positive future" (p. 5).

    Document
  • Environmental Scan 2015

    Environmental Scan 2015
    Environmental Scan 2015

    “Beginning in the late 1990’s, the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) Information Center began scanning social, economic, and corrections issues to inform the development of programs and services offered by NIC. This report, now in its 10th edition, has continued to evolve into a popular tool that corrections practitioners also use to inform their work in jails, prisons, and community corrections. Because there are many issues beyond what is addressed in this environmental scan that will potentially influence corrections, this report is intended to give a broad overview of selected current and anticipated trends and not intended to be comprehensive. The method for selecting articles, reports, and other materials was based on a scan of popular magazines, newspapers, and websites as well as corrections-specific publications. As part of the ongoing work of the Information Center in supporting the work of corrections practitioners, staff regularly monitors reports and publications from state, national, and independent sources. The report is arranged starting with global and broader influences on corrections and moves to specific corrections issues. Each section of the report gives an overview of the topic followed by corrections-specific trends and developments in this area” (p. 3). Sections of this report are: introduction; international developments; demographic and social trends; the workforce; technology; public opinion; the economy and government spending; criminal justice trends; corrections populations and trends; and mass incarceration.

    Document
  • Video Visitation: How Private Companies Push for Visits by Video and Families Pay the Price

    Video Visitation Cover
    Video Visitation: How Private Companies Push for Visits by Video and Families Pay the Price

    This publication explains how video visitation negatively impacts the families of inmates. "While prison advocates have long anticipated the technology that would allow for video visits as a way to increase communication between incarcerated individuals, their family, and community members, it was always envisioned as a supplement to in-person visitation. The reality of incarceration is that many individuals are assigned to units in rural communities, far away from their loved ones, burdening mostly low-income families with travel and lodging expenses far beyond their means. When one’s family does not have a vehicle, lives hundreds of miles away, and simply cannot afford the trip, a visit via video would be welcomed. But advocates always envisioned a choice for families with incarcerated loved ones as to whether or not they would make those sacrifices in order to support them – a choice that should be left in the hands of those with the most stake in the matter. Video-only visitation policies strip away that choice; they are simply another outgrowth of the idea that offering services to prisoners and their families can be commercialized" (p. 2). Sections of this publication include: introduction—significant expense and skyrocketing costs, disruptions to family bonding, removal of management tool, usage difficulties due to digital divide, and privacy violations; the benefits of in-person prison and jail visitation; growing restrictions on in-person visitation at the county level; whether limiting in-person visitation will decrease violence and contraband—a case study of Travis County, Texas—once in-person visitation was eliminated disciplinary infractions and incidents, inmate-on-inmate assaults, and inmate-on-staff assaults have increased significantly; money, money, money; conclusion; and four recommendations.

    Document
  • Managing the Elderly in Corrections

    Managing the Elderly in Corrections Cover
    Managing the Elderly in Corrections

    "The elderly offender is still treated as distinctly marginal and remains more or less peripheral to policy and advocacy within most correctional jurisdictions. Where innovative practices have emerged, it is typically because of the local efforts of determined correctional professionals, often in partnership with the voluntary sector. Despite their increasing numbers, elderly offenders have not yet attained visibility as a national or international policy issue in corrections" (p. 18-19). This document discusses issues impacting the managing of senior inmates and offers suggestions on how to meet those challenges. Sections address: the scope of the problem; what is causing this problem of the graying of the prisoner population; the aging prisoner population—significant consequences and possible responses; managing the health care needs of the elderly prisoner; coping and adaptation to prison life for the elderly; types of stressors for the elderly in corrections; supporting the terminally ill and dying elderly in prisons; duties regularly performed by inmate caregivers; reintegration of the elderly offender back to the community; and a framework for best practice programming for the elderly offender. Appendixes include: "'True Grit': Description of a Model Correctional Program for the Elderly Offender"; and "UNODC Recommendations: Handbook on Prisoners with Special Needs".

    Document
  • Administrative Segregation in U.S. Prisons [Executive Summary and Report]

    Administrative Segregation in U.S. Prisons [Executive Summary and Report] Cover
    Administrative Segregation in U.S. Prisons [Executive Summary and Report]

    "Administrative segregation, the preferred term among correctional administrators, refers to both a classification and a type of unit. There are at least three distinct types of segregation: administrative segregation, disciplinary segregation, and protective … Any of these types of segregation might involve a regimen of solitary (or near solitary) confinement. Importantly, it is the increased use of solitary confinement, not segregation per se, that troubles those with concerns about contemporary correctional practice, and it is solitary confinement that has received the most attention in the research literature … Within the limited empirical knowledge base in this area, researchers have not always agreed on the areas of research that warrant review and evaluation, or they have been unable to draw conclusions from studies employing various methodologies. Further, for many researchers studying solitary confinement the practice raises not only empirical questions, but also moral and ethical concerns. In a literature base replete with highly charged emotions, interpreting the evidence base, and separating evidence from strongly held beliefs have become difficult. This paper attempts to describe the research in enough detail that the reader can reach his or her own conclusions around the current state of administrative segregation" (p. 1, Executive Summary). Sections comprising this report include: introduction; brief history of administrative segregation; contemporary use of administrative segregation; issues related to use of solitary confinement—juveniles, control of gangs, and mental illness; court decisions and consent decrees; the utility and effects of administrative segregation--violence; the psychological and behavioral effects of solitary confinement; the future of administrative segregation; and conclusion. Appendixes include: Table A1—Administrative Segregation in the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP); Table A2—Percentage of Custodial Population (Both Sexes) In Administrative Segregation (Ad Seg) and Restrictive Housing; and Table A3—Goals and Intended Impacts Associated with Supermax Prisons.

    Document
  • Building Brighter Futures: Tools for Improving Academic and Career/Technical Education in the Juvenile Justice System: A Pennsylvania Example

    Building Brighter Futures: Tools for Improving Academic and Career/Technical Education in the Juvenile Justice System Cover
    Building Brighter Futures: Tools for Improving Academic and Career/Technical Education in the Juvenile Justice System: A Pennsylvania Example

    "Across the country, students in the juvenile justice system are struggling in school. Research suggests that many enter the juvenile justice system well behind grade-level. In the absence of thoughtful programming, once they enter the juvenile justice system, they may fall further behind. Too many end up dropping out of school upon return to their communities. This publication examines one particular initiative that has shown great success in combating this problem—the Pennsylvania Academic and Career/Technical Training Alliance (PACTT)—and provides suggestions for replication in juvenile justice programming across the country. It also sets forth ideas for collecting data to measure the success of initiatives like PACTT and embedding in policy the general reform principles PACTT identified" (p. 5). The following parts are contained in this toolkit: introduction—the national context, and launching a project; PACTT practice components—creating a rigorous and relevant academic program, supporting students in career-readiness, seamless transitions and effective re-entry, and tracking data to serve individual students, improve programs, and inform policy; complying with the law and pursuing policy change; and conclusion. Tools included are: "Tool I: PACTT Components Checklist";" Tool II: A Checklist for Policies that Support PACTT Principles"; "Tool III: PACTT Data Logic Model" by Michael Norton and Tracey Hartmann; "Tool IV: PACTT Data Measures" by Norton and Hartmann; Tool V: Digest of Key Federal Laws"; :Tool VI: Desk Manuals on PACTT for Career and Technical Education Specialists and for Academic Specialists" by the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services Bureau of Juvenile Justice Services; "Tool VII: Sample PACTT Affiliate Agreement"; "Tool VIII: PACTT Employability/Soft Skills Manual" by Pennsylvania Academic and Career/Technical Training Alliance (PACTT); and "Tool IX: Federal Policy Recommendations" by Juvenile Law Center, Open Society Foundations, Pennsylvania Academic and Career/Technical Training Alliance, the Racial Justice Initiative, and the Robert F. Kennedy Juvenile Justice Collaborative.

    Document
  • U.S. Prison Population Trends 1999-2014: Broad Variation Among States in Recent Years

    U.S. Prison Population Trends 1999-2014 Cover
    U.S. Prison Population Trends 1999-2014: Broad Variation Among States in Recent Years

    "Our comparative analysis of U.S. Prison Population Trends 1999-2014 reveals broad variation in nationwide incarceration trends. While 39 states have experienced a decline since reaching their peak prison populations within the past 15 years, in most states this decline has been relatively modest. In addition, 11 states have had continuing rises in imprisonment. These developments suggest that while the recent national decline in the prison population is encouraging, any significant decarceration will require more sustained attention. In this regard, 12 states have produced double-digit declines for some period since 1999, led by New Jersey (31%), New York (28%), Rhode Island (25%), and California (22%). Notably, these states have achieved substantial reductions with no adverse effect on public safety. Among states with rising prison populations, four have experienced double-digit increases, led by Nebraska and Arkansas, whose respective prisons populations grew by 22% and 18% since 2009. Despite sharing in the national crime drop, these states have resisted the trend toward decarceration" (website).

    Document
  • Parents Behind Bars: What Happens to Their Children?

    Parents Behind Bars Cover
    Parents Behind Bars: What Happens to Their Children?

    "Children do not often figure in discussions of incarceration, but new research finds more than five million U.S. children have had at least one parent in prison at one time or another—about three times higher than earlier estimates that included only children with a parent currently incarcerated" (p. 1). This is an excellent report examining the prevalence of incarceration amongst parents and the associated consequences for their children. Sections of this report include: overview; key findings and implications; background; results for who experiences parental incarceration, children with an incarcerated parent are more likely to experience additional adverse events, and what other aspects of child well-being are related to parental incarceration, after accounting for other confounding influences; discussion; and implications. Appendixes include three tables showing children with an incarcerated parent by select measures, measures for children younger than six, and measures for youth ages 6-17; and "Programs Serving Children with Incarcerated Parents" which provides a description of the program, location, and website. "We need effective programs to mitigate the harm associated with having an incarcerated parent. Although in-prison training programs focused on parenting skills are common, few are focused on meeting the needs of children directly during the time parents are in prison" (p. 9).

    Document
  • Jobs after Jail: Ending the prison to poverty pipeline

    Jobs after Jail Cover
    Jobs after Jail: Ending the prison to poverty pipeline

    "In many states and cities, both public and private employers can include a question on application materials requiring applicants to disclose whether or not they have a conviction record. While there is growing momentum to “Ban the Box,” in most cases these efforts only ban the box for public employment … On average, states have 123 mandatory bans and restrictions for would-be workers with felony convictions per state from employment in occupations or industries, from obtaining certain types of occupational licenses, and/or from obtaining certain types of business or property licenses. 10 states have more than 160 of these regulations, including 248 in Texas, 258 in Illinois, and 389 in Louisiana. Only nine states have fewer than 75 regulations" (p. 5). This report describes the barriers that individuals with criminal records face when they look for high-paying jobs ensuring a degree of economic stability. Sections following an executive report include: introduction; background; national findings; profiles for 16 states and Washington, DC regarding their restrictions for individuals with felonies and controlled substance convictions; recommendations; and conclusion.

    Document
  • Tribal Healing to Wellness Courts: The Policies and Procedures Guide

    Tribal Healing to Wellness Courts Cover
    Tribal Healing to Wellness Courts: The Policies and Procedures Guide

    "Tribal Healing to Wellness Courts, also known as drug courts, have proliferated within Indian country during the last two decades. The drug court model, beginning within state courts, was later adapted for tribes to better allow for the diversity of cultures, languages, needs, governance structures, and laws. Essentially, a Tribal Healing to Wellness Court, like a state drug court, integrates substance abuse treatment with the criminal justice system to provide substance-abusing offenders judicially supervised treatment and transitional services through the use of intense supervision, sanctions and incentives, and drug testing in a non-punitive setting. Healing to Wellness Court is the coming together of agencies and systems that do not traditionally interact. Agencies have different goals, priorities, and structures. It is therefore essential for the Wellness Court to have its own strong foundation. By documenting the structure and procedures of the Wellness Court, the policies and procedures manual aids in securing the long-term future of the Court … A policies and procedures manual is a necessary tool to successfully implement and operate a Tribal Healing to Wellness Court. From the court’s outset, a policies and procedures manual, adopted through the formal tribal governmental process, can officially establish the Healing to Wellness Court (Wellness Court) and describe the type of court. Upfront designations assist in determining whether a participant is appropriate for the Wellness Court. A policies and procedures manual describes the target population, such as adult, juvenile, or parents involved in dependency court, also known as family Healing to Wellness Court. The manual also documents the agencies, team member roles, and services that will be provided to the target population by team members" (p. 1, 3). This manual is comprised of thirteen chapters: the big picture and target population; entry into Wellness Court and Team and participant rules; Team roles and responsibilities; treatment and phase systems; the judge and Wellness Court staffing and hearings; probation, case manager, or other supervision; alcohol and drug testing; data tracking and evaluation; wellness team; appendices to Tribal Policies and Procedures Manual; Participant Handbooks; statutory provisions; and agreements.

    Document
  • Promising Practices in Pretrial Diversion

    Promising Practices in Pretrial Diversion Cover
    Promising Practices in Pretrial Diversion

    'The goal of this monograph is to inform criminal justice practitioners and state and local policy makers of: Promising and emerging practices in the pretrial diversion field; The state of pretrial diversion and major issues and findings within the field; and The challenges and opportunities facing diversion practitioners' (p. 4). Sections of this publication include: introduction; pretrial diversion'an overview; promising and emerging practices in pretrial diversion; and conclusion. An appendix highlights selected pretrial diversion programs.

    Document
  • 2015 NIC Learning and Performance Symposium: Innovations in Training and Learning Delivery Proceedings

    2015 NIC Learning and Performance Symposium Cover
    2015 NIC Learning and Performance Symposium: Innovations in Training and Learning Delivery Proceedings

    The National Institute of Corrections' 2015 Learning and Performance Symposium activities focused on the single most important need identified by participants of the inaugural 2104 Learning and Performance Symposium - Forty Forward. During the needs assessment process of NIC’s first learning and performance symposium, practitioners said their single most important need is for innovations in training and learning delivery.

    2015 Symposium activities focused on innovations in training and learning delivery included: presentations by corrections professionals representing various agencies on ways they are implementing innovations in learning and training delivery; breakout session in discipline specific groupings (prisons, jails, juvenile justice and community corrections) to discuss innovations, barriers, resources and potential solutions related to improving learning and training delivery; opportunities for professionals from local, state and federal corrections agencies in all disciplines to network and share ideas and resources related to innovations they are trying out or implementing within their agencies; [and] presentations focused on research-based strategies followed by discussions focused on different approaches to implementation.

    This Proceedings Document sequentially highlights all the key content and activities of the two-and-a-half day 2015 NIC Learning and Performance Symposium attended by 138 corrections professionals from all disciplines including prisons, jails, community corrections and juvenile justice.

    Content includes: Day 1 - Symposium Overview Page; Activity: Write Your Personal Motto for Learning and Performance; Activity--3 Questions - What are you looking for? Why are you at the Symposium? What will you do to get what you want?; Presentation: Strategic Thinking/ Problem Solving Training Delivery; Activity: Force Field Analysis of Training Transfer - Driving Forces vs. Restraining Forces Page; Activity: Conceptual Thinking - Build an Inter-relational Diagraph Page; Activity: Creative Thinking - Inventing & Innovating - Build and “Sell” an Innovative Training Tool; Breakout Session: Innovations, Barriers, Resources and Solutions; Activity: Set a Training Goal. Identify Barriers, Receive Peer Coaching; Day 2 - Presentation: NIC Learning Delivery Innovations; Presentations: From the Field - Learning Delivery Innovations (13 Presentations); Presentation: Training Truths - Engagement and Practice; Presentation: Virtual Response as an Engagement Tool; Activity: The Value of Practice; Guided Practice: Strategies Application; Training Design Tools; Activity: Hunting for the Good Stuff; Day 3 - Next Steps; Activity: What If?; Activity: Lead the Charge! Carry the Flag!; and Activity: Town Hall Discussion. 

    Document
  • Screening and Assessment of Co-occurring Disorders in the Justice System

    Screening and Assessment of Co-occurring Disorders in the Justice System Cover
    Screening and Assessment of Co-occurring Disorders in the Justice System

    "This monograph examines a wide range of evidence-based practices for screening and assessment of people in the justice system who have co-occurring mental and substance use disorders (CODs). Use of evidence-based approaches for screening and assessment is likely to result in more accurate matching of offenders to treatment services and more effective treatment and supervision outcomes … Key systemic and clinical challenges are discussed, as well as state-of-the art approaches for conducting screening and assessment. The monograph also reviews a range of selected instruments for screening, assessment, and diagnosis of CODs in justice settings and provides a critical analysis of advantages, concerns, and practical implementation issues (e.g., cost, availability, training needs) for each instrument" (p. 1). Two parts follow an executive summary. Part I-- Key Issues in Screening and Assessment of Co-occurring Disorders in the Justice System: prevalence and significance of co-occurring disorders in the justice system; defining co-occurring disorders; importance of screening and assessment; opportunities for screening and assessment; defining screening and assessment; developing a comprehensive screening and assessment approach; key information to address in screening and assessment for co-occurring disorders; enhancing the accuracy of information in screening and assessment; and special clinical issues. Part II—Instruments for Screening and Assessing Co-occurring disorders: key issues in selection; comparing screening instruments; recommended instruments for assessment and diagnosis of co-occurring disorders—screening instruments for substance use, screening instruments for mental disorders, screening instruments for co-occurring mental and substance abuse disorders, screening and assessment instruments for suicide risk, screening and diagnostic instruments for trauma and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), screening instruments for motivation and readiness for treatment, assessment instruments for substance use and treatment matching approaches, assessment instruments for mental disorders, and assessment and diagnostic instruments for co-occurring mental and substance use disorders.

    Document
  • Presidential Memorandum -- Limiting the Use of Restrictive Housing by the Federal Government

    Presidential Memorandum -- Limiting the Use of Restrictive Housing by the Federal Government Cover
    Presidential Memorandum -- Limiting the Use of Restrictive Housing by the Federal Government

    "A growing body of evidence suggests that the overuse of solitary confinement and other forms of restrictive housing in U.S. correctional systems undermines public safety and is contrary to our Nation's values … a final report [was] transmitted to me [President Obama] on January 25, 2016 (DOJ Report and Recommendations Concerning the Use of Restrictive Housing) (the "DOJ Report") at https://justice.gov/restrictivehousing, that sets forth specific policy recommendations for DOJ with respect to the Federal Bureau of Prisons and other DOJ entities as well as more general guiding principles for all correctional systems. As the DOJ Report makes clear, although occasions exist when correctional officials have no choice but to segregate inmates from the general population, this action has the potential to cause serious, long-lasting harm. The DOJ Report accordingly emphasizes the responsibility of Government to ensure that this practice is limited, applied with constraints, and used only as a measure of last resort. Given the urgency and importance of this issue, it is critical that DOJ accelerate efforts to reduce the number of Federal inmates and detainees held in restrictive housing and that Federal correctional and detention systems be models for facilities across the United States." Directions for the swift implementation of the DOJ Report's recommendations for addressing the overuse of solitary confinement in correctional and detention systems in the United States are organized into to three sections: Sec. 1--Implementation of the DOJ Report; Sec. 2-- General Provisions; and Sec. 3--Publication.

    Document
  • Pulse Check: Restorative Justice

    Pulse Check: Restorative Justice Cover
    Pulse Check: Restorative Justice

    "Restorative justice [RJ] is a theory of justice that emphasizes repairing the harm caused by criminal behaviour. It is best accomplished through cooperative processes that include all stakeholders. This can lead to transformation of people, relationships and communities" (Center for Justice & Reconciliation). This webinar will provide: a brief overview of RJ principles and practices—traditional justice and RJ philosophies, RJ practices at a glance; findings from relevant research-- New Zealand Model, Durham NC Dispute Settlement Center, conferencing, law enforcement and prosecution, courts, and recidivism and RJ, and summary of RJ research findings,; reasons for adopting restorative justice—needs/wants of victims, what's in it for crime victims and services providers, law enforcement, prosecution, defense, judiciary, corrections, elected officials, and for all involved, top assets, and top obstacles.

    Document
  • Measuring Subsequent Offending in Juvenile Probation

    Measuring Subsequent Offending in Juvenile Probation Cover
    Measuring Subsequent Offending in Juvenile Probation

    This report presents the results from a 2014 review of 13 states that provided recidivism research on their websites regarding youth who had been placed on probation. Sections cover: system structure limits research capabilities; reports describe a variety of populations; measures of re-offending impact recidivism rates; individual characteristics add context to analysis; and different tracking periods result in various recidivism rates. The table "Reported Measures of Subsequent Offending in Juveniles Adjudicated to Probation" shows data according to state, juvenile probation population, marker event)s) (i.e., re-arrest, referral, re-adjudication and/or conviction, return to supervision, and commitment and/or incarceration), and tracking details (i.e., maximum follow-up in months, and source of data source). "Careful attention to how youth fare during and after supervision will help policymakers, agency administrators, and probation chiefs make informed decisions that improve practices related to youth on probation" (p. 4).

    Document
  • Supporting Second Chances: Education and Employment Strategies for People Returning from Correctional Facilities

    Supporting Second Chances Cover
    Supporting Second Chances: Education and Employment Strategies for People Returning from Correctional Facilities

    "This brief highlights strategies for strengthening education and employment pathways for youth and adults returning from correctional facilities and notes key questions that new research should answer. It also explores barriers to employment for people with criminal records—whether or not they have been incarcerated—and potential policy solutions" (p. 1). Sections cover: barriers to finding work; whether prison education works; adults need education and training to find jobs after prison-reentry education must begin behind bars, after release, reentry specialists help ex-offenders find housing and jobs, growing number of cities and states "Ban the Box" on job applications, and policy recommendations to help increase successful reentry; youth prison programs need attention and policy recommendations for youth; and where to go from here.

    Document
  • Proceedings of the NIC Chief Jail Inspectors Network Meeting, September 2015

    Proceedings of the NIC Chief Jail Inspectors Network Meeting, September 2015 Cover
    Proceedings of the NIC Chief Jail Inspectors Network Meeting, September 2015

    Participants represent state agencies that have responsibility for inspection and auditing of local correctional facilities. Some agencies have oversight for juvenile as well as adult corrections or for any agency with sworn officers. Meeting topics: "Session I: Hospital Security Detail" by Mark W. Radcliff; "Session II: Conducting Effective Audits/Inspections" by Larry Reid; "Session III: Objective Jail Classification" by Shannon Herklotz and Jackie Semmler; "Session IV: Legal Issues"" by Carrie Hill; and "Session V: Network Activities."

    Document
  • Successful Parole and Probation Practices

    Successful Parole and Probation Practices Cover
    Successful Parole and Probation Practices

    This program interviewed four directors of state parole and probation agencies who were attending a conference at the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) in Washington, DC. These directors share what works to achieve successful case completions while also protecting public safety.

    Video
  • Women in Detention: A Guide to Gender-Sensitive Monitoring|Second edition

    Women in Detention: A Guide to Gender-Sensitive Monitoring|Second edition Cover
    Women in Detention: A Guide to Gender-Sensitive Monitoring|Second edition

    Individuals who want an up-to-date understanding of gender-responsive issues and all those who work with female offenders should read this document report. "It outlines the risks faced by women deprived of their liberty of being subjected to torture and ill-treatment and measures that can be taken to reduce such risks. The main focus of the paper is the situation of women in detention in the criminal justice system, though the discussion is in many cases equally relevant to women deprived of liberty in other contexts, such as psychiatric institutions and immigration detention facilities.” (p. 2). Sections contained in this document include: introduction to gender-specific treatment; why monitoring bodies should look at this issue; concepts—gender and gender mainstreaming, and discrimination and violence against women; risk factors and measures to reduce risk—certain contexts which heighten risk, certain times that heighten risk, certain policies and practices that heighten risk or cause physical or mental suffering, and certain categories of women who are at heightened risk (girls, victims of human trafficking and sex workers, women with mental healthcare needs, and other groups); and the qualities monitoring bodies need to engage in this endeavor.

    Document
  • World Prison Population List|Eleventh Edition

    World Prison Population List|Eleventh Edition Cover
    World Prison Population List|Eleventh Edition

    "This eleventh edition of the World Prison Population List gives details of the number of prisoners held in 223 prison systems in independent countries and dependent territories. It shows the differences in the levels of imprisonment across the world and makes possible an estimate of the world prison population total. The figures include both pre-trial detainees/remand prisoners and those who have been convicted and sentenced. The information is the latest available at the end of October 2015" (p. 1). There are more than 10.35 million people incarcerated throughout the world with the most being in the United States--more than 2.2 million. Seychelles has the highest prison population rate in the world with 799 per 100,000 of its total population. It is followed by the United States (698), St. Kitts & Nevis (607), Turkmenistan (583), and U.S. Virgin Islands (542). More than half (54%) of all countries and territories have rates lower than 150 per 100,000. There has been an increase in the female population since 2000, with the male population increasing 18%. Five tables follow a list of key points from this world population list. Each table shows countries divided into subgroups, prison population total, dates of recorded figure, estimated national population, prison population rate, and source of prison population total. The five tables are: Africa—Northern, Western, Central, Eastern, and Southern; Americas—North, Central, Caribbean, and South; Asia—Western, Central, South Central, South Eastern, and Eastern; Europe—Northern, Southern, Western, Central and Eastern, and Europe/Asia; and Oceania.

    Document
  • Prisons and Disasters

    Prisons and Disasters Cover
    Prisons and Disasters

    "Prisons are not prepared to respond to and recover from natural and manmade disasters. However, prisons must take appropriate actions to save lives and safeguard their at risk populations during disasters, because they are legally responsible for the welfare of prisoners. Disasters can lead to a violation of prisoners’ constitutional and statutory rights and pose several types of injury (physical, emotional, mental, health), as well as public safety risks. There is a broad spectrum of concerns when responding to and recovering from disasters at prisons. Specific concerns include the standards of care for prisoners, the dispersion of prisoners, records management, and staffing shortages. Other problems include shortfalls in the resources required to continue essential functions at correctional facilities and the resources necessary to carry out protective action decisions (i.e. decisions made in a timely manner to protect public health and safety) during the response and recovery phases. These concerns are especially significant because many prisons throughout the nation house thousands of prisoners, which can make the emergency response and recovery process much more challenging. This study seeks to better understand why prisons are unprepared, it demonstrates why prisons should be included in emergency preparedness planning, and it identifies what policy and planning recommendations, as well as corrective actions need to be made to ensure prisons are integrated into the emergency management process" (8-9). Three "papers" comprise this dissertation. Paper1—Understanding why Prisons are Unprepared to Respond to and Recover from Disasters: introduction; legal rights of prisoners; gaps in the law; and conclusion. Paper 2—Assessing the Needs of Prison Capabilities during Disasters: introduction; study design; results—response rate, facilities surveyed regarding experience with disasters, emergency management departments, influenza specialty care units, and policy, trainings and other resources, and caveats; discussion; conclusion and next steps. Paper 3—Recommendations for Improving Disaster Preparedness in Prisons: introduction; seven recommendations; and conclusion.

    Document
  • Creative Ideas for Institutional and Community Corrections Agencies to Partner with Crime Victim Assistance Organizations and Agencies to Promote 2016 National Crime Victims' Rights Week: Serving Victims. Building Trust. Restoring Hope.

    Creative Ideas for Institutional and Community Corrections Agencies to Partner with Crime Victim Assistance Organizations and Agencies to Promote 2016 National Crime Victims' Rights Week Cover
    Creative Ideas for Institutional and Community Corrections Agencies to Partner with Crime Victim Assistance Organizations and Agencies to Promote 2016 National Crime Victims' Rights Week: Serving Victims. Building Trust. Restoring Hope.

    "From the creation of Victims Committees at ACA (1987), APPA (1991), and APAI (1992) and the establishment of the National Association of Victim Assistance in Corrections (NAVAC, formerly known as NAVSPIC) and the National Institute of Corrections Network of Post-Conviction Victim Service Providers, the field of corrections has recognized the importance of enforcing victims’ rights in the post-sentencing phases of their cases, and providing services and support to the victims and survivors of the offenders whom they detain and supervise.

    "This document marks the first time that the leading national correctional agencies and organizations and their respective victim/survivor-related Committees have joined together on a project that we hope will enhance and promote corrections-based victim services. Outreach to our respective members contributed to these creative ideas about how correctional agencies can partner with victim assistance organizations to promote 2016 NCVRW in six categories: 1. Correctional clients’ fundraising for victim services; 2. Victim/survivor awareness and programming; 3. Correctional staff education; 4. Direct victim and community support; 5. Educational programs; [and] 6. Media relations and public awareness" (p. 1).

    Document
  • Zero Tolerance: How States Comply with PREA's Youthful Inmate Standard

    Zero Tolerance: How States Comply with PREA’s Youthful Inmate Standard Cover
    Zero Tolerance: How States Comply with PREA's Youthful Inmate Standard

    "Despite the strong language provided in the Prison Rape Elimination Act, state laws vary widely as to the regulations and parameters for housing youth in adult prisons. In fact, some states have no regulations or parameters governing the treatment of youth sentenced as adults at all. While some states have fully removed youth from their prison systems?—?Hawaii, West Virginia, Maine, California, and Washington?—?the overwhelming majority of states allow youth to be housed in adult prisons. In fact 37 states housed youth under 18 years of age in their state prisons in 2012. The PREA requirements have become the emerging standard of care for the housing of youth in adult facilities, yet the majority of states still permit the housing of youth in adult facilities, often times with no special housing protections. Once youth are sentenced in adult court to an adult prison term, few jurisdictions have enacted safeguards to protect their physical, mental and emotional health. Additionally, programs and behavioral responses in adult facilities rarely are adjusted to meet the needs of adolescent populations … This report explores how states house youth under 18 in prisons in the new age of PREA compliance and enforcement. Furthermore, this report highlights national trends in juvenile arrests, crimes, and incarceration of children in the adult system. With evidence of the decreasing number of youth entering the adult system, the recommendations focus on how states can successfully remove all youth from adult prisons" (p. 1). Sections of this report include: introduction; federal laws protecting youth in custody—federal laws on youth housed with adults; state laws protecting youth in custody--state statutes, regulations, and policies on housing youth in adult prisons; incarceration rates and offenses of youth in adult prisons—incarceration rates, and use of the adult criminal justice system compared to the rate of youth involved offenses; how youth end up in the adult justice system—pathways; disparities in the system—racial and ethnic disparities in prison, California case study, and young female populations; conditions and consequences of confinement—sexual abuse and suicide in adult prisons, staff concerns, and solitary confinement, and the relationship between incarceration and recidivism for youth; and recommendations to policymakers. An appendix provides the language of state statute laws, and regulations.

    Mixed Media
  • Who Pays? The True Cost of Incarceration on Families

    Who Pays? The True Cost of Incarceration on Families Cover
    Who Pays? The True Cost of Incarceration on Families

    This report expertly "reveals that the costs of incarceration run deeper than budget line items and extend far beyond the sentences served. Whether behind bars or returning home, people who have experienced incarceration are a part of families – whether chosen or blood related – to whom them contribute and by whom they are supported. Families pay both the apparent and hidden costs while their loved ones serve out sentences and for a long time after. Our research found that families struggle to afford exorbitant financial costs while also dealing with intense emotional and physical trauma when a loved one is taken away." Sections following an executive summary include: introduction; the true costs of the punitive criminal justice system—challenge of meeting basic needs (i.e., court fees and fines, challenges to building economic stability (i.e., employment, education, public benefits, and housing), challenges to maintaining relationships and family stability (i.e., costs of maintaining contact, family separation, and parent-child relationships), and challenges to health during incarceration and beyond (i.e., health impacts of incarceration); recommendations—restructure and reinvest, remove barriers, and restore opportunities; and conclusion.

    Document
  • Practical Implications of Current Domestic Violence Research for Probation Officers and Administrators

    Practical Implications of Current Domestic Violence Research for Probation Officers and Administrators Cover
    Practical Implications of Current Domestic Violence Research for Probation Officers and Administrators

    "This booklet looks at the recent research on intimate partner violence and analyzes what it reveals that probation officers and administrators should know to do their jobs better in terms of completing PSI [presentence investigative report] for defendants convicted of intimate partner violence, supervising abusers on their caseloads, and dealing with the victims of these abusers on probation and victims who have also ended up on probation caseloads. Although much of the research is not focused directly on probation, what it tells us about abusers, victims and the responses of law enforcement, prosecutors, and courts directly bears on probation. Other research reviewed looked specifically at probation’s response to IPV [intimate partner violence]" (p.2). Sections cover: what the research has to tell probation officers and administrators about probationers convicted of IPV or defendants awaiting sentencing reports; what the research has to tell probation about IPV victims; what the research has to tell probation about effective court criminal responses to IPV defendants; what the research has to tell Probation about effective supervision of IPV probationers; what does the research tell Probation about batterer intervention programs; and what the research has to tell probation about their role in responding to IPV.

    Mixed Media
  • Using a Prevention, Trauma-Informed Framework when Implementing PREA

    Using a Prevention, Trauma-Informed Framework when Implementing PREA Cover
    Using a Prevention, Trauma-Informed Framework when Implementing PREA

    "This video training series was designed to provide an important foundation for understanding trauma, the implications of trauma on the behaviors of inmates while in confinement, and how correctional administrators and practitioners can use this information to support successful PREA implementation and ultimately provide a safer environment for inmates and staff … Through considering the role that past and present trauma plays in building safe – and particularly sexually safe – environments, correctional administrators and staff training directors can support staff in efforts to more fully meet a facility’s mission and make everyone safer … the material contained in this video series will provide an opportunity for staff in confinement facilities to learn and be thoughtful about the benefits of a trauma-informed approach in correctional settings. " (p. 2).

    This training program contains five models and one documentary. Module One—An introduction to the Series. Using a Prevention, Trauma-Informed Framework when Implementing PREA (7 minutes): Andie Moss introduces you to need for understanding the role of trauma in implementing PREA. Module Two--What Is It Important To Understand Trauma When Implementing PREA? (15 minutes): Dr. Joan Gillece, a pioneer in implementing a trauma-informed approach, will explain what trauma is and how it influences PREA implementation. Module Three--Understanding the Neurobiological Effects of Trauma When implementing PREA (12 minutes): the neurobiological impact of trauma is explained by Dr. Brian Sims. Module Four--Implementing PREA Standards with a Trauma Focus (26 minutes): A panel of clinicians and practitioners from the Dorchester County Detention Center on Maryland’s Eastern, hosted by Andie Moss, provides examples on how to implement the PREA standards "through a trauma-informed lens in adult confinement settings … [these concepts are easily transferable to juvenile facilities". Module Five--Practical Solutions to Challenging Situations (10 minutes): The implementation of a trauma-informed approach in a jail is discussed by Alisha Salisbury, Warden Steve Mills, and PREA officer and investigator Lt. Robert Fitzgerald from the Dorchester County Detention Center. This "module will provide some creative examples for policymakers and practitioners to consider as they begin or continue to implement a trauma-informed approach". Healing Neen: Trauma and Recovery (25 minutes): this film shows how one woman benefited from trauma-informed care that helped her to take a journey from trauma, through the criminal justice system, to healing.

    Web Page
  • Confabulation in Correctional Settings: An Exploratory Review

    Confabulation in Correctional Settings: An Exploratory Review Cover
    Confabulation in Correctional Settings: An Exploratory Review

    This article addresses a little understood issue in corrections—confabulation. "Confabulation can be described as a disruption in normal memory function, whereby the individual unintentionally distorts or fabricates imaginary or non-experienced events without intent to deceive or lie … In other words, individuals who inaccurately integrate incorrect information into their memory and/or subsequently present such information as fact are demonstrating confabulation … Individuals who confabulate are unaware of the falsehood of their statements" (p. 1). Sections of this review include: introduction and overview; diagnostic comorbidity; diagnostic clarification—confabulation and malingering, delusions, or lying; confabulation within correctional settings and important reminders for correctional staff to keep in mind, confabulation in the criminal justice system and possible consequences, clinical considerations, and suggested approaches, and conclusion. "Although confabulation can create significant issues within clinical and forensic settings, the rate of its actual incidence is unknown … Inmates who confabulate may create significant challenges for correctional staff. As a result, correctional professionals are strongly encouraged to understand the risk factors associated with confabulation within offender population" (p. 5).

    Document
  • A Cycle of Incarceration: Prison, Debt, and Bail Practices [Webinar]

    A Cycle of Incarceration: Prison, Debt, and Bail Practices [Webinar] Cover
    A Cycle of Incarceration: Prison, Debt, and Bail Practices [Webinar]

    "Building on the Administration¹s commitment to criminal justice reform, the convening will bring together federal officials, state legislators and judges, advocates and academics to discuss criminal justice system practices that too often contribute to the cycle of poverty and create significant barriers to reentry. Co-hosted by the Department of Justice, the convening will provide a collaborative environment to discuss and share ideas on how State and local stakeholders across the United States can implement common sense reforms so that financial obligations imposed by the government do not lead to unnecessary involvement in the criminal justice system or exacerbate poverty." Critical issues addressed during this meeting include: the increasing use of fines, fees, and bail; the disproportionate impact on low-income individuals and families; fines and fees—an ineffective way to raise funds for incarceration costs. This website provides access to both versions of this White House convening, transcript of Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch, report from the President's Council of Economic Advisors on Fees, Fines, and Bail, a National Journal article about the event, and background materials.

    Webinar
  • You've Got Mail: The Promise of Cyber Communication in Prisons and the Need for Regulation

    You've Got Mail article screenshot
    You've Got Mail: The Promise of Cyber Communication in Prisons and the Need for Regulation

    "As with most aspects of life, communications options for incarcerated people are in flux due to technological changes. For practical, political, and technical reasons, communications methods have evolved more slowly in prison than in the outside world, but change is nonetheless here. New technologies such as video visitation and electronic messaging have the potential to improve quality of life for incarcerated people and help correctional administrators effectively run secure facilities. Yet the promise of these new services is often tempered by a relentless focus on turning incarcerated people and their families into revenue streams for both private and public coffers. The lucrative market for prison-based telephone service has received substantial attention since 2012, when the Federal Communications Commission reinvigorated a long-stagnant regulatory proceeding concerning rates and business practices in the ICS market. Although the focus of the FCC proceeding has thus far been on telephone service, ICS is not just limited to voice calls — there are emerging technologies with which a growing number of prisons and jails are experimenting." This is a great report about the technology offenders can use to communicate with people outside a correctional facility and the problems associated with such use. Sections comprising this report are: communication options behind bars--traditional communication channels (i.e., in-person visiting, phone calls, postal communication, and electronic messaging—inbound-only systems, and two-way systems); an overview of the industry-- general ICS providers, commissary operators, financial service firms, specialty companies, procurement practices, revenue and fee structures, end-user pricing; overview of messaging services—benefits of electronic messaging, drawbacks, character limits, and diffusion of accountability; unknowns—protection of data, ownership of contents, and protection of attorney-client privilege; recommendations for the Federal Communications Commission, state legislatures and public utility commissions, and correctional administrators.

    Document
  • Transforming Prisons, Restoring Lives: Final Recommendations of the Charles Colson Task Force on Federal Corrections

    Transforming Prisons, Restoring Lives: Final Recommendations of the Charles Colson Task Force on Federal Corrections Cover
    Transforming Prisons, Restoring Lives: Final Recommendations of the Charles Colson Task Force on Federal Corrections

    "After decades of unbridled growth in its prison population, the United States faces a defining moment. There is broad, bipartisan agreement that the costs of incarceration have far outweighed the benefits, and that our country has largely failed to meet the goals of a well-functioning justice system: to enhance public safety, to prevent future victimization, and to rehabilitate those who have engaged in criminal acts. Indeed, a growing body of evidence suggests that our over-reliance on incarceration may in fact undermine efforts to keep the public safe. Momentum is strong for a new direction, for a criminal justice system guided by proven, cost-effective strategies that reduce crime and restore lives. But translating this impulse for reform into lasting change is no small challenge. This report provides both an urgent call to action and a roadmap for reforming the federal prison system, which, with 197,000 people behind bars, was the largest in the nation as 2015 drew to a close. By adopting the recommendations detailed here, and committing sufficient resources to ensure their effectiveness, we can reduce the federal prison population by 60,000 people over the coming years and achieve savings of over $5 billion, allowing for reinvestment in programs proven to reduce crime. Most important, these proposed reforms and savings can be achieved through evidence-based policies that protect public safety. Such savings will not only bring fiscal responsibility to a policy area long plagued by the opposite tendency, but will also free critical funds the US Department of Justice (DOJ) needs for other priorities, such as national security, state and local law enforcement, and victim assistance. And just as critically, these reforms will make our communities safer by ensuring we send the right people to prison and that they return to society with the skills, supervision, and support they need to stay crime free" (p. ix). Sections comprising this report include: the transformation of the federal corrections system—who the U.S. Bureau of Prisons (BOP) is, federal sentencing reform in the 1980s, the abolition of parole and the increase in time served, policy changes driving BOP growth, consequences due to growth, and the new path; Recommendation 1—Reserve Prison for Those Convicted of the Most Serious Federal Crimes; Recommendation 2—Promote a Culture of Safety and Rehabilitation in Federal Facilities; Recommendation 3—Incentivize Participation in Risk-Reduction Programming; Recommendation 4—Ensure Successful Reintegration by Using Evidence-Based Practices in Supervision and Support; Recommendation 5—Enhance System Performance and Accountability through Better Coordination across Agencies and Increased Transparency; and Recommendation 6—Reinvest Savings to Support the Expansion of Necessary Programs, Supervision, and Treatment.

    Document
  • The Reentry of Formerly Incarcerated Persons: Key Accomplishments, Challenges, and Future Directions; A Report on the National Reentry Symposium: Promising Practices and Future Directions

    The Reentry of Formerly Incarcerated Persons Cover
    The Reentry of Formerly Incarcerated Persons: Key Accomplishments, Challenges, and Future Directions; A Report on the National Reentry Symposium: Promising Practices and Future Directions
    Recognizing the importance of effective reentry practices at the federal, state, and local levels, in September 2015, the U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP), and the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) co-sponsored the National Reentry Symposium: Promising Practices and Future Directions.Throughout the two-day session, federal and state representatives from each of the BOP’s six national regions met as teams to discuss methods to enhance federal and state collaborative efforts within their regions.The culmination of the Symposium was the development of regionally based reentry action plans designed to reduce the likelihood of recidivism through improved coordination and collaboration and the delivery of enhanced evidence-based programs and services. This report is a summary of that meeting. 
    Document
  • Sexual Victimization Reported By Juvenile Correctional Authorities, 2007–12

    Sexual Victimization Reported By Juvenile Correctional Authorities, 2007–12 Cover
    Sexual Victimization Reported By Juvenile Correctional Authorities, 2007–12

    This report presents national estimates of non-consensual sexual acts, abusive sexual contacts, staff sexual misconduct, and staff sexual harassment reported by correctional authorities in state juvenile correctional systems and local and private juvenile correctional facilities from 2007 to 2012. The report also examines substantiated incidents, including characteristics of victims and perpetrators, location, time of day, nature of injuries, impact on the victims, and sanctions imposed on the perpetrators. Companion tables in the Survey of Sexual Violence in Juvenile Correctional Facilities, 2007 – 2012 Statistical Tables include counts of allegations and substantiated incidents of sexual victimization for each state juvenile correctional system, juvenile correctional facility in Indian country, and sampled locally and privately operated juvenile correctional facility. Data are from BJS's Survey of Sexual Violence (SSV), which has been conducted annually since 2004. Highlights: In 2012, juvenile correctional administrators reported 865 allegations of sexual victimization in state juvenile systems and 613 in local or private facilities and Indian country facilities; The number of allegations per year has fluctuated in state juvenile systems and the rate more than doubled, from 19 per 1,000 youth in 2005 to 47 per 1,000 in 2012; In locally and privately operated facilities, the number of allegations dropped from 2009 to 2011 and then began to rise in 2012. Based on 2-year rolling averages, the rate in 2012 was 13.5 per 1,000 youth, up from 7.2 per 1,000 in 2010; From 2007 to 2012, nearly 9,500 allegations of sexual victimization of youth were reported in state or local and private facilities--Fifty-five percent involved youth-on-youth sexual victimization and 45% involved staff-on-youth sexual victimization; Upon investigation, 25% of the allegations of youth-on-youth sexual victimization and 10% of the allegations of staff-on-youth sexual victimization were substantiated during the 6-year period.

    Web Page
  • Survey of Sexual Violence in Juvenile Correctional Facilities, 2007–2012 - Statistical Tables

    Survey of Sexual Violence in Juvenile Correctional Facilities, 2007–2012 - Statistical Tables Cover
    Survey of Sexual Violence in Juvenile Correctional Facilities, 2007–2012 - Statistical Tables

    This report presents jurisdiction- and facility-level counts of allegations and substantiated incidents of nonconsensual sexual acts, abusive sexual contact, staff sexual misconduct, and staff sexual harassment reported by juvenile correctional authorities from 2007 to 2012. Facilities include state juvenile systems, juvenile facilities in Indian country, and sampled locally and privately operated juvenile correctional facilities. These tables accompany Sexual Victimization Reported by Juvenile Correctional Authorities, 2007–12, which provides national estimates and rates of sexual victimization and an in-depth examination of substantiated incidents (website). In 2012, juvenile correctional administrators reported 865 allegations of sexual victimization in state juvenile facilities. Of these, 104 were substantiated based on follow-up investigation. More than half (61%) of all allegations involved staff sexual misconduct or staff sexual harassment directed toward a juvenile or youthful offender. Administrators of state juvenile correctional facilities reported slightly more than 4,900 allegations from 2007 to 2012, including 906 allegations of nonconsensual acts, 1,235 allegations of abusive sexual contact, 2,307 allegations of staff sexual misconduct, and 474 allegations of staff sexual harassment (p. 1).

    Mixed Media
  • FACT SHEET: Department of Justice Review of Solitary Confinement

    FACT SHEET: Department of Justice Review of Solitary Confinement Cover
    FACT SHEET: Department of Justice Review of Solitary Confinement

    "In July 2015, the President announced that he had asked the Attorney General to review “the overuse of solitary confinement across American prisons.” Since that time, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has undertaken a thorough review to determine how, when, and why correctional facilities isolate certain prisoners from the general inmate population, and has now developed concrete strategies for safely reducing the use of this practice, also known as “restrictive housing,” throughout our criminal justice system. That review led to a Report to the President setting out Guiding Principles that would responsibly limit the use of restrictive housing at the federal, state, and local level, as well as specific recommendations for policies that the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) can implement for federal prisons. The Report identifies ways to further humane and safe conditions for both inmates and the correctional officers charged with protecting them. [January 25, 2016], the President announced that he is adopting the recommendations in the Report, which is now available at http://justice.gov/restrictivehousing and will be directing all relevant federal agencies to review the report and report back on their plan to address their use of solitary confinement. “Guiding Principles” For All Correctional Systems. The Report sets out more than 50 Guiding Principles, which cover a range of important reform areas including the use of the restrictive housing as a form of punishment, the appropriate conditions of confinement in restrictive housing, and the proper treatment of vulnerable inmate populations, such as juveniles, pregnant women, LGBTI inmates, and inmates with serious mental illness. These principles are informed by the best practices developed by the Association of State Correctional Administrators (ASCA) and the American Correctional Association (ACA) … New Policies Addressing BOP’s Use of Restrictive Housing. In recent years, the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) has reduced its use of restrictive housing by 25 percent without compromising the safety of its correctional officers and its facilities. The Report makes concrete recommendations that will accelerate this trend and change the conditions for thousands of inmates through a multi-pronged strategy."

    Web Page
  • U.S. Department of Justice Report and Recommendations Concerning the Use of Restrictive Housing [Final Report, Appendixes, and Guiding Principles]

    U.S. Department of Justice Report and Recommendations Concerning the Use of Restrictive Housing Cover
    U.S. Department of Justice Report and Recommendations Concerning the Use of Restrictive Housing [Final Report, Appendixes, and Guiding Principles]

    There is no doubt that "there are occasions when correctional officials have no choice but to segregate inmates from the general population, typically when it is the only way to ensure the safety of inmates, staff, and the public and the orderly operation of the facility. But as a matter of policy, we believe strongly this practice should be used rarely, applied fairly, and subjected to reasonable constraints. The Department believes that best practices include housing inmates in the least restrictive settings necessary to ensure their own safety, as well as the safety of staff, other inmates, and the public; and ensuring that restrictions on an inmate’s housing serve a specific penological purpose and are imposed for no longer than necessary to achieve that purpose. When officials determine that an inmate must be segregated from the general population, that inmate should be housed in safe, humane conditions that, ideally, prepare the individual for reintegration into both the general prison population and society at large. The stakes are high. Life in restrictive housing has been well-documented—by inmates, advocates and, on occasion, correctional officials themselves. In some systems, the conditions can be severe; the social isolation, extreme. At its worst, and when applied without regard to basic standards of decency, restrictive housing can cause serious, long-lasting harm. It is the responsibility of all governments to ensure that this practice is used only as necessary—and never as a default solution. But just as we must consider the impact on inmates, so too must we consider the impact on correctional staff. These public servants work hard, often for long hours and under difficult conditions, and we must protect them from unreasonable danger. Correctional officers need effective tools to manage the most challenging inmates and protect the most vulnerable. We do not believe that the humane treatment of inmates and the safety of correctional staff are mutually exclusive; indeed, neither is possible without the other. In recent years, numerous correctional systems have succeeded in safely reducing the number of inmates in restrictive housing, including the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Over the past four years, the total number of inmates in the Bureau’s restrictive housing units has declined by nearly a quarter. Under the leadership of its outgoing Director, Charles E. Samuels, Jr., the Bureau has also developed a range of progressive alternatives to restrictive housing—and has done so while supporting and enhancing staff safety. This Report includes a number of additional policy proposals that would help continue the downward trends in the Bureau’s restrictive housing population, while also ensuring that those placed in segregation receive the support and rehabilitative services they need" (p. 1-2). This report is divided into three parts. Part One—Restrictive Housing in the Federal Bureau of Prisons: overview of restrictive housing in the United States; Special Housing Units (SHU); Special Management Units (SMU); USP Administrative Maximum (ADX); Bureau Inmates Requiring Special Considerations; Inmates with Serious Mental Illness (SMI); Inmates with Medical Needs; Young Adults (Age 18-24 at Time of Conviction); Juveniles (Under 18 at Time of Adjudication); and Audits of the Bureau's Restrictive Housing Programs ()CAN Audit, GAO Audit, and BOP Internal Audits). Part Two—Restrictive Housing in Other Correctional and Detention Systems: United States Marshals Service (USMS); Restrictive Housing in the States; Federal Support for State and Local Efforts; Federal Civil Rights Enforcement; and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Part Three—Guiding Principles and Policy Recommendations: Guiding Principles; Policy Recommendations for the Bureau of Prisons, National Institute of Corrections (NIC), and the U.S. Office of Justice Programs (OJP)—Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), and the National Institute of Justice (NIJ); and Additional Policy Recommendation for Diverting Inmates with Serious Mental Illness from Incarceration. Documents making up the appendix are organized into Federal Bureau of Prison's Program Statements, Institution Supplements, audits and reports, and other documents.

    Web Page
  • Time-In-Cell: The ASCA-Liman 2014 National Survey of Administrative Segregation in Prison

    Time-In-Cell Cover
    Time-In-Cell: The ASCA-Liman 2014 National Survey of Administrative Segregation in Prison

    "By facilitating cross-jurisdictional comparisons of the rules and practices that surround administrative segregation, this Report both reflects and supports ongoing efforts to understand its impact, reevaluate its use, and limit or end extended isolation … Calls for significant reductions in the use of isolation come from all quarters and, importantly, from the chief operating officers of prison systems. But without a baseline, it is not possible to know the impact of the many efforts underway to reduce or eliminate the isolation of prisoners and to enable prisoners and staff to live and work in safe environments, respectful of human dignity. Time-in-Cell provides one measure, to use as a baseline to assess whether the changes hoped for are taking place, such that the number of persons held in such settings and the degrees of their isolation are substantially diminishing" (p. iii). This report is divided into eight sections: the parameters and concerns about administrative segregation; the 2014 Limon-ASCA Survey; the use of administrative segregation; the demographics of administrative segregation—2011, 2014; living in administrative segregation—degrees of isolation; the administration of ad seg; reconsidering administrative segregation; and revising the use of administrative segregation—lessening the numbers in and the degrees of isolation.

    Document

Pages