This paper expertly describes the Healing Corrections Framework. "The Healing Corrections Framework focuses on the nuts and bolts of the organizational cultures of jails and prisons, how they work, and ways to transform them. It assumes that the primary vehicle for transforming corrections is through meeting the needs of correctional staff to better equip them to work with each other and with those they supervise in jails, prisons, or the community. The logic of this is simple; the work of corrections is done by correctional workers and to change the way corrections works, correctional workers must change how they do their jobs. This will require correctional staff at all levels to communicate with each other and with people under their supervision in more constructive and compassionate ways. In the Healing Corrections framework, “how things are done,” especially how roles and expectations are continuously defined and redefined among the actors within a system, is the working definition of culture" (p. 5). Topics discussed in this document include: capacity versus opportunity; cultural context; cultural fragmentation of systems, the key concept of the Framework, versus coherence; development of the Healing Corrections Framework—its empirical foundation in the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) Prison Culture Project, and the Norval Morris Project, and cycles of engagement and interaction; the Healing Corrections Framework which dialogue as cultural change; Healing Corrections and "mass incarceration"; American culture and American Justice; talking about punishment; and gazing into the abyss. This website provides access to the paper and the presentation slides.
This brief explains why “it is imperative that jurisdictions use an effective case management process that includes a strong community handoff component, particularly at the moment of release, and that ensures continuity of care between in-jail and community-based programs and services … [and] presents the Transition from Jail to Community (TJC) initiative’s approach to case planning and community handoff” (p. 1). Sections of this publication cover: the TJC initiative and model--a triage approach to interventions; the TJC case management approach; TJC case management principles; development of the case plan; referral process—inventorying available programs and services, and creating a seamless referral process; establishing continuity of care—jail “in-reach,” and consistency of programming and services; information sharing; and role of probation/community corrections.
This report presents "state-level estimates of the number of inmates confined in local jails at year end 2013, by sex, race, and Hispanic origin. This report provides information on changes in the incarceration rate, average daily population, admissions, expected length of stay, rated capacity, percent of capacity occupied, and inmate-to-correctional officer ratios. It also includes statistics, by jurisdiction size, on the number of inmates confined to jail and persons admitted to jail during 2013. It features a special section on the 12 facilities that functioned as jails for the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Highlights: From 1999 to 2013, the number of inmates in local jails increased by 21%, from 605,943 to 731,570 [while] During this period, the growth in the jail population was not steady, as the jail confined population peaked in 2008 at 785,533 then declined to its 2013 level; The adult jail incarceration rates changed slightly between midyear 1999 (304 [per 100,000 adult U.S. residents]) and yearend 2013 (310 [per 100,000 adult U.S. residents]); Nearly half (46%) of all local jail inmates were confined in jurisdictions holding 1,000 or more inmates in 2013, down slightly from 50% in 2006; Between 1999 and yearend 2013, the female inmate population increased by 48%, from approximately 68,100 to 100,940. The male inmate population increased by 17%, from approximately 537,800 to 630,620; [and] The juvenile population (persons age 17 or younger) held in adult jail facilities in 2013 (4,420) decreased by more than half from its peak in 1999 (9,458).
These proceedings are divided into two parts: Day One—introductions and overview, NIC Information Center, National Sheriff’s Association update, American Correctional Association Jail Standards update, Iowa, Minnesota, and Indiana standards and inspections, U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) update, and “Suicide Prevention: Current Research, Policies and Procedures, and Legal Trends; and Day Two—legal issues in today’s jails, Prison Rape Elimination Act, “Surviving in Hard Times: Marketing the Jail Inspection Process, and evaluation/close-out. Presentation slides, handouts, and additional information are contained in the attached appendixes.
Proceedings from the 11th annual two day Chief Jail Inspectors' Meeting are presented. Topics discussed include: meeting overview and highlights; introduction; ACA CORE Standards update; NSA Committee update; federal agency update; New Jersey Information System; Ohio report—changes ahead for Ohio jails; data collection; construction trends; alternatives to incarceration; Justice Policy Institute article—“Jailing Communities”; doing everything with nothing; NIC update; Jail Transition/Reentry to Community; Corrections Community; round table/small group planning; and evaluation and closeout.
"To determine if a structural intervention of providing one condom a week to inmates in the Los Angeles County Men’s Central Jail MSM [men who sex with men] unit reduces HIV transmissions and net social cost, we estimated numbers of new HIV infections (1) when condoms are available; and (2) when they are not … The discounted future medical costs averted due to fewer HIV transmissions exceed program costs, so condom distribution in jail reduces total costs." (p. 2695).
A comprehensive reference that provides guidance in the provision of health services to inmates is presented. This manual contains the following chapters: introduction; historical overview -- the movement to improve correctional health care; legal considerations in the delivery of health care services in prisons and jails; ethical considerations and the interface with custody; the organizational structure of correctional health services; staffing considerations; health care delivery system model; programming for special health needs; women's health needs and services; health promotion and disease prevention; planning correctional health facilities; data management and documentation; improving the quality of correctional health care; cost considerations -- financing, budgeting, and fiscal management; and conclusions and future issues. Appendixes provide: Health Summary for Classification; sample organizational structure charts; coverage factor calculation summary; comparative analysis of health care standards in prisons and jails; sample health record forms; matrix for special health needs; sample mental health policies; NCCHC's "Position Statement on the Administrative Management of Inmates With HIV-Positive Test Results or AIDS"; sample clinic/infirmary equipment list; sample quality improvement policy and guidelines; cost-comparison tables; and about the NCCHC.
"This report presents "statistics on persons supervised by adult correctional systems in the United States at yearend 2014, including offenders supervised in the community on probation or parole and those incarcerated in state or federal prison or local jail. The report describes the size and change in the total correctional population during 2014. It details the downward trend in the correctional population and correctional supervision rate since 2007. It also examines the impact of changes in the community supervision and incarcerated populations on the total correctional population in recent years. Findings cover the variation in the size and composition of the total correctional population by jurisdiction at yearend 2014. Appendix tables provide statistics on other correctional populations and jurisdiction-level estimates of the total correctional population by correctional status and sex for select years. Highlights: Adult correctional systems supervised an estimated 6,851,000 persons at yearend 2014, about 52,200 fewer offenders than at yearend 2013; About 1 in 36 adults (or 2.8% of adults in the United States) was under some form of correctional supervision at yearend 2014, the lowest rate since 1996; The correctional population has declined by an annual average of 1.0% since 2007; The community supervision population (down 1.0%) continued to decline during 2014, accounting for all of the decrease in the correctional population; [and] The incarcerated population (up 1,900) slightly increased during 2014."
"This study is the first to examine the participation of county jails in pretrial release. The report identifies the pretrial status and risk level of the county jail population and variations across counties of different population sizes. Further, this research analyzes the challenges that county jails face with their pretrial and overall jail population. The study details to what extent county jails use community based programs to release pretrial detainees from confinement in jail and supervise them in the community. In addition, the research examines the presence of other county policies and practices that may result in the release of the pretrial population from jail. This report provides a first step in understanding the role of counties in pretrial release" (p. 7). Sections following an executive summary include: introduction; key terms; Finding 1—the majority of the jail population is pretrial and low risk; Finding 2—counties are caught between courts' decision-making and increases in the jail population and jail costs; Finding 3—some county jails supervise pretrial detainees outside of confinement; and conclusion.
This guide provides jail administrators the necessary information they need to effectively perform their jobs. Chapters comprising this publication are: introduction; the jail administrator’s leadership role; recruiting, hiring, and promoting staff; training staff; supervising staff; determining the number of inmates one officer can supervise effectively; rotating housing unit staff assignments; ensuring that officers interact with inmates; addressing the isolation of the housing unit officer; decisionmaking using the principles of direct supervision; assessing direct supervision operations and outcomes; annotated principles of direct supervision; and strategies for managing a direct supervision housing unit.