Back to top


This issue includes: Foreword, by Richard Geaither, National Institute of Corrections Jails Division; You Can Do It: Putting an End to Pharmacy Cost Increases, by Mike Kalonick, Milwaukee County Sheriff's Office, Detention Bureau; Accreditation for Adult Local Detention Facilities: Moving from Process Measures to Outcome Measures, by Bob Verdeyen, American Correctional Association; Got Training? Training as a Strategic Management Tool for Performance Enhancement, by Tom Reid, National Institute of Corrections Academy, and Connie Clem, NIC Information Center; The Sheriff's Office as a Community Resource in a Hurricane, by Michael L. Wade, Henrico County Sheriff's Office; Inmate Access to Legal Resources & Materials - How Do We Provide Inmates Access to the Courts? by Mark S. Cacho, Orange County Corrections Department; Urban County Issues in New Jail Planning, Design, and Transition, by Barbara Krauth with Michael O'Toole and Ray Nelson; Harris County Sheriff's Office Teams with Community College to Train Inmates, by Jim Albers, Harris County Sheriff's Office; Mission Creep and the Role of the Jail in Public Health Policy, by Donald Leach, Lexington/Fayette Urban County Government; Multnomah County Model Partnership for Custody and Health, by Timothy Moore, Multnomah County Sheriff's Office, and Gayle Burrow, Multnomah County Health Department; Strategic Planning: A 10-Step Approach, by Barry L. Stanton, Prince George's County Department of Corrections, and B. Jasmine Moultri-Fierro

LJN Exchange Cover

This issue contains: “Foreword” By Richard Geaither; “An Interview with NIC Jails Division Chief Virginia Hutchinson” by Connie Clem; “Applying New Vulnerability Assessment Tools in Hennepin County” by Mike Wresh; “Controlling Inmate Population Size: A Case Study of 20 Years of Success” by Marilyn Chandler Ford; “The Criminal Registration Unit: Hillsborough County’s Answer to an Unfunded Mandate” by Jimmy Compton and David M. Parrish; “No Vacancies? Osceola County Finds Keys to Attract and Retain Officer Staff” by Denis Dowd; “Managing Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Intersex Inmates: Is Your Jail Ready?” by Donald L. Leach II; “Evidence-Based Practice in Los Angeles County Corrections: A Top-5 List of Real-World Foes” by Brian Center; “Community Reentry Programs: Their Impacts on Offenders and Recidivism Rates” by Tony M. Wilkes; “Creative Partnerships That Support Inmate Reentry Programs: Involving Public, Private, and Nonprofit Organizations” by Charles Walters and Lilya Wagner; and “Milwaukee’s Secure Detention Facility—Five Years Into Operation” by John Husz.

LJN Exchange cover image

This 3-hour program, originally broadcast on May 3, 2006, will help agencies build a proactive communication strategy for working in partnership with the media and the public. An agency's communication plan is as essential to its operations as its emergency preparation. Too often, an agency's first contact with the media is reactionary and after the fact. When the media contacts an agency concerning various situations and circumstances, individuals and agencies often find themselves on the defensive facing a barrage of questions and inquiries. The objectives of this broadcast are to help participants: Understand the role of the media and the "public's right to know." Develop strategies and techniques to work effectively and succinctly with the media. Develop a comprehensive communication plan. Build a working relationship with the media, legislature, and local public interest organizations.

Making the Media Work for You in the 21st Century  Cover

“The significant challenges faced by those leaving jail and the high price of continued offending underscore the importance of capitalizing on jail contact to link individuals with services both while in the jail and as they return to the community. However, providing supportive interventions in jail settings is extremely challenging. While a number of innovative practices exist, there is much progress to be made in the design of services that can support people as they leave jail and return home” (p. 5). The effectiveness of the Los Angeles County Jail to provide reentry services to individuals being released is evaluated. Other jails can find valuable suggestions for improving their own jail reentry services by reading this report. Sections of the technical report include: executive summary; introduction; profiles of interviewees in jail custody; reentry service delivery and engagement including the Community Transition Unit (CTU); operations and efficiency; coordination between the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department (LASD) and other agencies and organizations; and conclusion. Some of the 11 recommendations to maximize the efficiency of reentry services provided by the jail are: expand awareness of the CTU to potential clients; integrate risks and needs assessments into reentry services; individualize reentry service plans; and strengthen the ties between the jail and community-based providers. You can download the technical report, summary report, and/or fact sheet at this website.

Making the Transition: Rethinking Jail Reentry in Los Angeles County Cover

"This manual will help jails both to understand risk and its implication for jails and to develop a formal, effective risk management program that uses all of the jail's basic resources (i.e., human, financial, property, partners, and reputation" (p. v). Chapters following an introduction are: understanding risk and its implications for jails; jail risk management issues and strategies; developing a risk management program; and organizational investments for managing risk. Appendixes provide recommended resources, worksheets (Risk Register, Risk Control Implementation Schedule, and Risk Control Action Plan), and evaluating financing options.

Managing Risk in Jails Cover

"Meaningful use is the linchpin of the Medicare and Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs, established under the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act to provide incentive payments to eligible providers that adopt and demonstrate “meaningful use” of certified EHR [electronic health record] technology. Providers demonstrate meaningful use by “attesting” to certain criteria for different stages of meaningful use … This article provides an overview of the meaningful use landscape, emphasizing the applicability of meaningful use to health care provided in jails, as well as exploring the benefits and difficulties of participating in this program for jail health care providers. It also describes the steps that jail health care systems must pursue in order to participate in meaningful use" (p. 1). Sections of this paper cover: issue introduction; what meaningful use is; benefits of meaningful use for correctional health services; obstacles to jail participation in meaningful use; correctional institutions participating in meaningful use; steps toward eligibility; impact of meaningful use on correctional health systems; and concluding observations.

Meaningful Use and Corrections: Unknown Opportunities Cover

This Memorandum of Agreement (MOM) addresses the practices of the Juvenile Court of Memphis and Shelby County (JCMSC) in its administration of juvenile justice and conditions of confinement for detained youth. Agencies involved in detaining youth should read this document in order to evaluate their own practices and deal with deficiencies that may exist. This document is divided into eight parts: introduction; definitions; substantive remedial measures—due process, DMC and equal protection, and protection from harm in the detention facility; community outreach; technical assistance; implementation and monitoring; enforcement and termination; and general provisions regarding policies and procedures and reporting requirements. “On April 26, 2012, the United States issued its Report of Findings, which concluded that there was reasonable cause to believe that JCMSC failed to protect the constitutional rights of Children appearing before it on delinquency matters by failing to provide constitutionally required due process, administer justice in a non-discriminatory manner, and provide reasonably safe conditions of confinement. JCMSC immediately responded by expressing its intention to thoroughly address each of the United States’ conclusions and to promptly correct any deficiencies in the areas of due process and conditions of confinement. Any deficiencies in the equal protection accorded to Children appearing before JCMSC will be addressed; however, JCMSC sought to maintain non-discriminatory practices in its administration of justice. JCMSC has actively pursued and participated in multiple efforts to reduce disproportionate minority contact (“DMC”) for several years” (p. 3).

Memorandum of Agreement Regarding the Juvenile Court of Memphis and Shelby County Cover

"Presents national and state-level data on the number of inmate deaths that occurred in local jails and state prisons, the distribution of deaths across jails, and the aggregate count of deaths in federal prisons. The report presents annual counts and 14-year trends between 2000 and 2013 in deaths in custody. It provides mortality rates per 100,000 inmates in custody in jail or prison; details the causes of death, including deaths attributed to homicide, suicide, illness, intoxication, and accidental injury; describes decedents' characteristics, including age, sex, race or Hispanic origin, legal and hold status, and time served; and specifies the state where the deaths occurred. Data are from the Bureau of Justice Statistics' Deaths in Custody Reporting Program, initiated in 2000 under the Death in Custody Reporting Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-297). Some highlights include: local jail inmate deaths increased 1%, from 958 deaths in 2012 to 967 deaths in 2013; suicides in local jails increased 9%, from 300 suicides in 2012 to 327 in 2013; deaths in prison increased from 3,357 in 2012 to 3,479 in 2013, reaching the highest number since the prison data collection began in 2001--total number of deaths increased 4% between 2012 and 2013; Illness-related deaths accounted for 89% of all deaths in prison in 2013.

Mortality In Local Jails And State Prisons, 2000–2013 - Statistical Tables cover

<p>Anyone interested in the history of the National Institute of Corrections' Jails Division (since its creation in 1976) will find this article very interesting. Topics covered include: jail administration training programs and networks, documents and DVDs, and technical assistance; inmate behavior management training, documents and DVDs, and technical assistance; new jail planning technical assistance and training and documents and DVDs; and jail standards and inspections.</p>

This report “does more than simply present a calculation of suicide rates. It presents the most comprehensive updated information on the extent and distribution of inmate suicides throughout the country, including data on the changing face of suicide victims. Most important, the study challenges both jail and health-care officials and their respective staffs to remain diligent in identifying and managing suicidal inmates” (p.vii). Five chapters follow an executive summary: introduction; national study of jail suicides—20 years later; demographic findings of suicide data; special considerations; and conclusion. The majority of victims (98%) used hanging as their method of suicide, with 32% of all suicides occurring between 3:01 P.M. and 9 P.M., 2 to 14 days following arrest (27%).

National Study of Jail Suicide: 20 Years Later Cover


Subscribe to Jails