"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.
This innovatively designed report is an excellent examination of how a prison could become more sustainable and save costs. "Institutional establishments with long-term residents, such as prisons, which use a significant amount of resources can reduce their energy, food and water costs by using sustainable practices. These practices can help reduce the costs of prisoner housing and eventually lower costs to tax payers. This project focuses on a hypothetical retrofit of the Wilmot Department of Corrections (Wilmot D.O.C.) prison facility in Tucson, AZ." Sections of this report include: introduction; literature review—solar power, wastewater management, on site food production, and rehabilitation; case studies—Colorado Correctional Industries, ASPC Lewis, Sidwell Friends Middle School, New Orleans Parish, Disney's Living With the Land, Sustainable Prisons Project; site analysis; design—layout, greenhouses, constructed wetlands, composting fields, and workshops; and conclusions.
"When governments justify the necessity to segregate and/or isolate terrorist inmates from mainstream prisoners, they commonly raise concerns about their prisons becoming schools for terrorism. Yet, these concerns are often based on limited information about prisoner radicalization, potentially resulting in the mismanagement (both financially and psychologically) of terrorist inmates in many countries. This article challenges contemporary research on prison radicalization and recruitment by highlighting several factors that may hamper these activities to demonstrate why some prison regimes and their programmes for housing terrorist inmates face a greater risk than others. In contrast to other studies, this article concludes that the radicalization and recruitment of mainstream prisoners by terrorist inmates under certain prison conditions is not necessarily a given outcome" (p. 74). Sections of this article include: abstract; introduction; prison case studies—the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, the Philippines, Indonesia, and Pakistan; radicalization and the prison environment; ad conclusion. "This article has provided an alternative perspective to contemporary discussion on prison radicalization, which appears to over-state the threat by viewing all prisons as ‘schools’ or ‘universities’ for terrorism. However, by examining a cross-section of correctional systems, this article has identified several factors that challenge common perceptions about the schools or universities for terrorism theory. It concludes that prison radicalization and recruitment for Islamist militant groups are more the exception than the rule and, when prison radicalization has occurred, the chances of these inmates then being recruited into a terrorist group are slim. In addition, once released, the relationship between these individuals committing acts of terrorism and their time in prison is tenuous at best" (p. 95).
This paper is the fourth in the National Institute of Corrections justice-involved veteran compendium project. It illuminates programs in prisons across the country whose goal is to prevent recidivism by justice-involved veterans, and by so doing improve the safety of law enforcement officers, correctional officers, inmates, and the public. It illustrates the design/development, implementation, and sustainment of initiatives taken by corrections officials who have set up specialized housing—in pods, dorms, units, wings, or floors—and programming for military veterans.
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.
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 is an excellent article explaining how the values and social structures of a U.S. prison affect a correctional officer's discretionary responses to situations involving mentally ill inmates. Sections of this article cover: prisons as local moral worlds and the construction of illness categories; correctional officers, "people work", and mentally ill inmates; the research context—Pacific Northwest Penitentiary (PNP); research methods; institutional policy and relationships between staff and inmates; the institutional illness category of the "mentally ill inmate" and knowledge about mental health; correctional officers' responses to mentally ill inmates—observation, flexibility and discretion in enforcing the rules, and trust and respect during an inmate's help-seeking request; and a discussion of this analysis. "Officers’ discretionary responses to mentally ill inmates included observations to ensure psychiatric stability and flexibility in rule enforcement and were embedded within their role to ensure staff and inmate safety. Officers identified housing, employment, and social support as important for inmates’ psychiatric stability as medications. Inmates identified officers’ observation and responsiveness to help seeking as assisting in institutional functioning. These findings demonstrate that this prison's structures and values enable officers’ discretion with mentally ill inmates, rather than solely fostering custodial responses to these inmates’ behaviors. These officers’ responses to inmates with mental illness concurrently support custodial control and the prison's order" (p. 1).
"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."
Religious programming issues are discussed. Topics briefly covered include: what is the practice of religion in corrections today; the reality of conversion; the role of the chaplain and religious program and how it relates to the agency's mission; recruitment, training, and supervision of chaplains; legal issues and religious programming -- constitutional issues and statutory changes; the interplay of religious programming and other correctional functions programs; working with religious volunteers; innovative approaches to religious programming; and action steps.
In order to enable correctional administrators to anticipate further improvements in objective classification, this bulletin provides a summary of current critical classification issues. Topics briefly discussed include: re-evaluation of existing prison classification systems; external and internal classification; classification systems for women inmates; identification of high risk and special management inmates; the use of classification for reentry and inmate transition programs; the impact of longer prison terms; using classification for planning purposes; and the need for on-going research and evaluation of classification practices.