DOCSLIB.ORG

Master Planning and Programming Study for the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (ODRC) and the Ohio Facilities Construction Commission (OFCC)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Master Planning and Programming Study for the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (ODRC) and the Ohio Facilities Construction Commission (OFCC) In July 2014, CGL, in conjunction with Miles- McClellan, was selected as the preferred consultant to undertake this Statewide Master Planning and Programming Study for the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (ODRC) and the Ohio Facilities Construction Commission (OFCC). We are pleased to submit our report which establishes the spatial, capital, and operational basis for facilities, programs, and services to meet the strategic needs of ODRC through the ten-year planning horizon. The Master Plan articulates a clear vision of the level of need for incarceration and community-based alternatives matched with the State’s funding requirements and financial priorities. The solutions formulated by this study effort are: • informed by data, • shaped by best practices, • supported by consensus of key stakeholders, and • both strategic and sensitive to fiscal realities and choices. On behalf our consulting team, we appreciate the confidence entrusted in us by ODRC and OFCC for this important project to help guide the future direction of rehabilitative and correctional services in Ohio. STEPHEN A. CARTER, AICP Project Principal-in-Charge ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study would not have been possible without the cooperation and assistance of the staffs of both the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (ODRC), and the Ohio Facilities Construction Commission (OFCC). We are most appreciative of the excellent direction and support provided by – Gary Mohr - Director, ODRC Jenny Hildebrand - Chief, Bureau of Construction, Activation, Maintenance and Sustainability, ODRC William J. Ramsey - Chief of Planning, OFCC All individuals who participated in the study process are gratefully acknowledged for their integral efforts to help ensure the success of this master planning project. OFCC Staff ODRC - Institutional Staff Robbyn Hoffman Jerry Spatny Melanie Drerup Charlie Adams Mark Hooks Steve Sroufe John McCready James Adkins Jared Hutt Amber Stanley Valerie Montoya Moses Bellamy Wanza Jackson Kim Stokes Russ Bewsey Bill Jamison Kelly Storm ODRC-OSC Regional Staff Tara Bisang Justin Johnson Josh Suerdieck Ed Banks Joyce Born Ingrid Jones Robert Swackhammer Jim Bates Rick Bowen Nancy Jones-Frye Derek Thompson Gayle Bickle Charles Bradley Bennie Kelly Jerri Vansky Sam Cappelli Helen Brooks Chris LaRose Dustin Ward Rebecca Casto David Brown Matthew Lemaster Randon Watson Annette Chambers-Smith Roni Burkes Rosa Lemaster Jeffrey Wheelbarger John Chin Brian Byorth David Less Bob White Jennifer Clayton Joe Caimona Jeff Lisath Jeff White Scott Clayton Dusty Camp Robin Long David Williams Rona Dorsey Melissa Cantoni Erin Maldonado Elizabeth Wright Scott Flowers Tobey Carpenter Leah Marquis Rob Yochum Chris Galli Alice Chambly Jeff Martin Robert Hawkes Melissa Cheers Kelly Mason CBCF's Stuart Hudson Sherry Clouser Jeff Matthew Rob Blower, NEOCAP Rawvial Hunter Emma Collins Shelia McNamara Brent Burk, WORTH Todd Ishee Mal Corey Dwayne Mick Anne Connell-Freund, Oriana Denise Justice Tom Dearth Chris Minney Monda DeWeese, SEPTA Robin Knab JC Dehart Tom Mockabee Peg Elmquist, WORTH Brian Kowalski Jessica Dennis Aaron Mohr David Ervin, West Central Vinko Kucinic Lizabeth Dilley Rochelle Moore Mike Flannery, MCBCF Kathleen Lamb W Dirk Prise Phil Morris Eugene Gallo, EOCC Brian Martin William Dunahay Bryan Mosier Jeremy Harvey, RCCC Bill Mason Jamieson Duval Brian Niceswanger Bud Hite, CTF, Lucas City Tereasa Moorman Jamison Kristin Edwards Ryan Ochmanek Jake Jones, NEOCAP Leah Morgan Phillip Elms Sheri Oliver Don Nickerson, Lorain Medina Mike Mouser LaShann Eppinger Mick Oppy Craig Prysock, SRCCC Scott Neely Virgill Flannery Larry Parker Molly Robbins, Franklin Co. Bryant Palmer Jay Forshey Trent Patterson Josh Saunders, STAR Leslie Piatt George Frederick Ashley Patton Craig Shumaker, West Central Norman Robinson Dale Friel Jon Pence Patrick Sikorski, SEPTA Kelly Sanders Linda Garrick David Pennington Jeremy Simpson, CCA Kevin Stockdale Chris Geyer Brian Pugh Diane Taylor, CCC William Tanner Christopher Geyer Richard Pugh Lisa Titus, RCCC Steve Vandine Vincent Giammarco Deb Rable Denny Van Arsdale, Monday Shelly Viets Sandy Gladding Stephen Ratcliff Scott Weaver, SEPTA Ed Voorhies Shawn Gruber Douglas Richard Carl Williams, NWCCC Roger Wilson Heather Hagan Myeisha Sancho Brad Wise Margaret Hardy Robyn Schaffer Brian Wittrup Darcy Hawke Matt Schweyer Stephen Young Angela Hill Sheila Scott Buffy Andrews, OCSEA Leon Hill John Sexton CGL Project Team Stephen Carter - Principal-In-Charge CGL Staff Consultants Jared Altobello Diane Williams - Program Planning, Community Corrections Karl Becker Miles-McClellan - Cost Estimating Robert Goble Cassandra Johnson Ryan Meador Chris Monsma April Pottorff Stacey Wiseman ODRC STRATEGIC CAPITAL MASTER PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................................................................... ES-1 SECTION 1 – The Evidence Basis POPULATION PROJECTIONS ....................................................................................................................................... 1-1 Status Quo Custody Level Prevalence .............................................................................................................................................. 1-4 Status Quo Custody Growth by 2025 .............................................................................................................................................. 1-5 An Alternative Future ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1-6 SPECIAL NEEDS CATEGORIES ...................................................................................................................................... 1-8 Geriatric Capacity Need ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1-8 Mentally Ill Capacity Need ................................................................................................................................................................. 1-9 Medical Bed Capacity Needs ............................................................................................................................................................. 1-10 Short Sentenced Inmates....................................................................................................................................................................... 1-10 The 2025 Alternative Future ............................................................................................................................................................... 1-11 Considering Custody Prevalence ........................................................................................................................................................ 1-11 SYSTEM CAPACITY ....................................................................................................................................................... 1-13 Total System Shortfall Prevalence ..................................................................................................................................................... 1-14 Special Needs Shortfall ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1-14 Geriatric Inmate Capacity ................................................................................................................................................................... 1-15 SECTION 2 – The Strategic Initiatives DRIVERS OF ODRC CHANGE ....................................................................................................................................... 2-1 Reduce the Number of Inmates ........................................................................................................................................................... 2-3 Expand Community Corrections .......................................................................................................................................................... 2-5 The Potential for the Twelve and Under Population ................................................................................................................ 2-5 Organization of Ohio Community Corrections .......................................................................................................................... 2-6 Legislation and Executive Orders Impacting Community Corrections Decisions ................................................................ 2-7 Recommendation for Community Corrections ............................................................................................................................ 2-8 Implementation .................................................................................................................................................................................. 2-9 Stakeholder Education and Agreement .....................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CIIC: Review of Assault Data
    CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION INSPECTION COMMITTEE REPORT: REVIEW OF ASSAULT DATA FROM THE OHIO DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION AND CORRECTION REGARDING OHIO PRISONS Presented and Submitted by CIIC Staff February 23, 2006 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION………..……………………………………………………………………….3 SUMMARY…………………………………………………………………………………….…4 I. INMATE ON STAFF ASSAULTS…………………………………………………8 A. Total Assaults 1. January 1, 2005 to December 15, 2005 2. November 2004 through October 2005………………………………10 B. Physical Assaults ………………………………………………………………12 1. January 1, 2005 to December 15, 2005 2. Southern Ohio Correctional Facility 1997 to December 28, 2005…………………………………………………...14 C. Harassment Assaults…………………………………………………………...15 1. January 1, 2005 to December 15, 2005 2. Southern Ohio Correctional Facility 1997 to December 28, 2005…………………..……………………………….17 D. Inappropriate Physical Contact Assaults…….………………………………18 1. January 1, 2005 to December 15, 2005 2. Southern Ohio Correctional Facility 1997 through December 28, 2005……………………..…………………………….19 E. Sexual Assault…………………………………….……………………………20 1. January 1, 2005 to December 15, 2005 2. Southern Ohio Correctional Facility 1997 through December 28, 2005……………………….…………………………..22 II. INMATE ON INMATE ASSAULTS……………………………………………..23 A. Total Assaults 1. November 2004 through October 2005 2. January – June 2005………………………………………………….25 B. Physical Assaults……………………………………………………………….27 1. January through June 2005 2. Southern Ohio Correctional Facility 2001 through October 12, 2005…………………………………………………….29 C. Harassment Assaults…………………………………………………………...32
    [Show full text]
  • Towards a Public History of the Ohio State Reformatory Veronica Bagley University of Akron, [email protected]
    The University of Akron IdeaExchange@UAkron The Dr. Gary B. and Pamela S. Williams Honors Honors Research Projects College Spring 2018 Towards a Public History of the Ohio State Reformatory Veronica Bagley University of Akron, [email protected] Please take a moment to share how this work helps you through this survey. Your feedback will be important as we plan further development of our repository. Follow this and additional works at: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/honors_research_projects Part of the Oral History Commons, Public History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Bagley, Veronica, "Towards a Public History of the Ohio State Reformatory" (2018). Honors Research Projects. 750. http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/honors_research_projects/750 This Honors Research Project is brought to you for free and open access by The Dr. Gary B. and Pamela S. Williams Honors College at IdeaExchange@UAkron, the institutional repository of The nivU ersity of Akron in Akron, Ohio, USA. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Research Projects by an authorized administrator of IdeaExchange@UAkron. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Towards a Public History of the Ohio State Reformatory Veronica Bagley The University of Akron Honors Thesis Spring 2018 Bagley 2 Abstract This Honors Project is a combination of a written Honors Thesis and my own work for The Ohio State Reformatory Historic Site (OSRHS), and is being submitted to The University of Akron in pursuit of an undergraduate degree in history. I completed archival work for my internship at OSRHS as a part of my Certificate in Museum and Archive Studies.
    [Show full text]
  • DEATH ROW INMATE INSTITUTION INFORMATION Last Update 07/21 (Doc
    DEATH ROW INMATE INSTITUTION INFORMATION Last update 07/21 (Doc. No. 357872) ADAMS, Stanley (DR2) 420-071 CCI ELMORE, Phillip (DR1) 458-539 CCI AHMED, Nawaz (DR1) 404-511 CCI ESPARZA, Gregory (DR3) 179-450 CCI ALLEN, David (DR1) 246-920 CCI FITZPATRICK, Stanley (DR1) 419-722 CCI APANOVITCH, Anthnoy (DR2) 182-824 CCI FORD, SHAWN (DR3) 671-786 CCI AWKAL, Abdul (DR3) 267-328 CCI FRANKLIN, Antonio (DR2) 363-374 CCI BALLEW, Tyrone (DR3) 261-875 CCI FROMAN, Terry (DR1) 736-209 CCI BATES, Glen 708--325 HCJC FRY, Clarence Jr. (DR1) 510-923 CCI BAYS, Richard (DR3) 325-266 CCI GAPEN, Larry (DR2) 413-724 CCI BEASLEY, Richard (DR1) 640-970 CCI GARRETT, Kristofer 766-290 OSP BELTON, Anthony (DR3) 659-445 CCI GILLARD, John G. (DR2) 185-473 CCI BETHEL, Robert (DR1) 455-970 CCI GOFF, James (DR1) 317-302 CCI BONNELL, Melvin (DR3) 204-019 CCI GRATE, Shawn (DR1) 751-645 CCI BRINKLEY, Grady (DR3) 436-028 CCI GROUP, Scott (DR3) 375-170 CCI BRINKMAN, George (DR2) 764-906 CCI HALE, Jr., Delano (DR1) 490-551 CCI BRYAN, Quisi (DR2) 399-595 CCI HAND, Gerald (DR1) 449-014 CCI CARTER, Cedric (DR3) 262-433 CCI HANNA, James (DR1) 152-169 CCI CARTER, Sean 356-659 WCI HENDERSON, Jerome (DR1) 186-271 CCI CASSANO, August (DR1) 145-242 CCI HENNESS, Warren (DR2) 287-375 CCI CEPEC, Steven 679-701 OSP HILL, Danny L. (DR1) 189-528 CCI CHINN, Davel (DR3) 214-241 CCI HILL, Genesis 250-830 WCI CLINTON, Curtis (DR2) 650-400 CCI HOFFNER, Timothy (DR1) 315-988 CCI COLEMAN, Timothy (DR1) 328-139 CCI HUGHBANKS, Gary (DR3) 362-032 CCI COLEY, Douglas (DR3) 361-444 CCI HUNDLEY, Lance (DR2) 751-708 CCI CONWAY III, James T.
    [Show full text]
  • OPERS Disability Activity Report 2021
    Ohio Public Employees Retirement System MEMO To: The Honorable Mike DeWine, Governor, State of Ohio The Honorable Rick Carfagna, Ohio Retirement Study Council The Honorable Kirk Schuring, Ohio Retirement Study Council The Honorable Susan Manchester, Chair, House Family, Aging and Human Services Committee The Honorable Steve Wilson, Chair, Senate Financial Institutions and Technology Committee Ms. Bethany Rhodes, Director and General Counsel, Ohio Retirement Study Council From: Karen Carraher, Executive Director Ohio Public Employees Retirement System Date: March 1, 2021 Re: 2019 – 2020 Disability Report pursuant to ORC Section 145.351 The following is a summary of the 2019-2020 Ohio Public Employees Retirement System Disability Activity Report as required by Section 145.351 of the Ohio Revised Code. Attached is a detailed disability experience report for each employer. Disability Summary Year 2020 Percent of Disability Employer Group/ Year Start Submitted Granted Denied Canceled Year End Recipients to Classification Type (In Process) (In Process) Active Members STATE 75 278 155 13 96 89 7.36% LOCAL 166 413 289 18 149 123 5.57% LAW/Public Safety 21 43 36 1 7 20 19.59% Total 262 734 480 32 252 232 6.58% Experience Versus Annual Actuarial Assumption Employer Group/ 2020 Percent Granted 2020 Granted Most Recent Annual Classification Type to Active Members to Active Members Actuarial Disability (actual %) (actual #) Assumption (as %/#) STATE 0.15% 155 0.37% (380) LOCAL 0.16% 289 0.32% (586) LAW/Public Safety 0.43% 36 0.82% (66) Total 0.16%
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2013
    Message from the Director Dear Colleagues and Stakeholders, I am pleased to present you with the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction’s 2013 Annual Report. This document showcases a number of different initiatives and agency accomplishments achieved in 2013. Last year was our first full year of implementing the number of violence reduction efforts, and I am pleased about the progress that has been made. In 2013, overall violence within our prisons was reduced by 7.3 percent. While this reduction is significant, I still believe there is a lot of work yet to do. Violence reduction will continue to be a priority of this agency and I look forward to working with staff to develop strategies to continue to reduce the number of violent incidents in our facilities. Erasing the lines between prisons and the community remains a key initiative of this agency, and has gradually become a way of doing our business. This approach is important as we work to reduce offender recidivism and crime in Ohio. By eliminating the abrupt changes for an offender transitioning to the community from prison, we are helping to stabilize what has historically been a difficult change. Our success as an agency is defined by the rate an offender returns to prison, and I am pleased that Ohio’s 2013 offender recidivism rate is at a record low of 28.7 percent, significantly lower than the national average. Ohio continues to be the national leader in many areas of corrections and the innovative approaches we are taking to address some of our major operational challenges will only strengthen our role.
    [Show full text]
  • STATE of OHIO Execution DEPARTMENT OF
    Case 2:04-cv-01156-GLF-MRA Document 607-1 Filed 11/30/09 Page 1 of 11 SUBJECT: PAGE 1 OF 11 STATE OF OHIO Execution NUMBER: 01-COM-11 RULE/CODE REFERENCE: SUPERSEDES: ORC 2949.22; 2949.25 01-COM-11 dated 05/14/2009 RELATED ACA STANDARDS: EFFECTIVE DATE: November 30, 2009 DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION AND CORRECTION APPROVED: I. AUTHORITY This policy is issued in compliance with Ohio Revised Code 5120.01 which delegates to the Director of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction the authority to manage and direct the total operations of the Department and to establish such rules and regulations as the Director prescribes. II. PURPOSE The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for carrying out a court-ordered sentence of death. III. APPLICABILITY This policy applies to all individuals involved in carrying out a court-ordered death sentence in accordance with all applicable policies, administrative regulations and statutes. IV. DEFINITIONS Critical Incident Debriefing Team - A group selected by the SOCF Warden, and including the Religious Services Administrator available to assist any persons involved in the execution process. A psychological debriefing process is available via DRC clinical staff and others to recognize stressors associated with executions and to work through them with affected staff as follows: • Worker’s own experiences of the execution including reactions and perceptions. • Review any negative aspects and feelings. • Review any positive aspects and feelings. • Relationships with workers and/or family. • Empathy (sharing) with others. • Disengagement from execution experience. • Integration of this experience into the professional work role for a positive future contribution to the overall team effort.
    [Show full text]
  • Mansfield Correctional Institution 2011 Inspection Report
    CIIC Report: Mansfield Correctional Institution 1 Mansfield Correctional Institution March 21-22, 2011 Adam Jackson, Report Coordinator CIIC Report: Mansfield Correctional Institution 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE SECTION I. INSPECTION PROFILE AND INSTITUTION OVERVIEW ..........................4 A. INSPECTION PROFILE ......................................................................................4 B. INSTITUTION OVERVIEW ...............................................................................5 C. COST SAVINGS INITIATIVES ..........................................................................5 D. INMATE POPULATION .....................................................................................6 1. Security Threat Groups .............................................................................7 E. STAFF DEMOGRAPHICS ..................................................................................7 1. Staff Focus Group ......................................................................................8 SECTION II. CRITICAL CONCERNS AND POINTS OF PRIDE ......................................10 SECTION III. CIIC STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS .........................................................14 A. ATTEND A GENERAL MEAL PERIOD .........................................................14 B. ATTEND AN EDUCATIONAL OR REHABILITATIVE PROGRAM ........14 C. EVALUATE THE INMATE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE ...........................14 SECTION IV. KEY STATISTICS .............................................................................................16
    [Show full text]
  • Handbook for the Families, Friends, Supporters and Mentors of Northeast Ohio Offenders
    John R. Kasich Gary C. Mohr Governor Director OHIO DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION AND CORRECTION Handbook for the Families, Friends, Supporters and Mentors of Northeast Ohio Offenders Todd Ishee Northeast Regional Director INTRODUCTION In an effort to better serve the citizens of Ohio, the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (ODRC) has undertaken the mission “to reduce recidivism among those we touch”. In a collaborative effort, our dedicated volunteers, mentors, community partners, staff, offenders and families have designed this handbook to help make the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction system more easily understood and accessible. If you are a family member or friend of a person incarcerated or on supervision, understandably your relationship with that individual may be going through a difficult transition period; however, your support and encouragement is irreplaceable in providing hope and a reason for change to your loved one. Included in this resource material are just some of the many wonderful organizations providing family support as well as opportunities to participate in events or programs beyond visitation. These events and programs are designed to encourage pro-social behavior and healthier life choices for your loved ones enabling them to return home and empowering them to become productive members of our Ohio communities. The specific sections for each institution and Adult Parole Authority region, along with the section on Reentry, will give more specific information concerning organizations and opportunities. It is our hope that our community partners, volunteers, mentors and the many organizations that come alongside to support and work with our department will find this book a valuable resource in their efforts to educate the public and minister to the families and friends of those incarcerated.
    [Show full text]
  • COVID-19 Information | UPDATED: 3/31/2020
    COVID-19 Information | UPDATED: 3/31/2020 COVID-19 Testing Tested Pending Positive Negative 25 3 0 22 Prisons where people are being tested: Dayton Correctional Institution (DCI) – 1; Grafton Correctional Institution (GCI) - 1; Lebanon Correctional Institution (LECI) - 1 COVID-19 Isolation | Isolation separates sick people with a contagious disease from people who are not sick. Number of People in Isolation 3 Prisons where people are in isolation: Dayton Correctional Institution (DCI) – 1; Grafton Correctional Institution (GCI) - 1; Lebanon Correctional Institution (LECI) - 1 COVID-19 Quarantine | Quarantine separates and restricts the movement of people who were exposed, or potentially exposed, to a contagious disease to see if they become sick. Institution Units in Total Number of Housing Type Quarantine People in (cell, open bay, Quarantine combo) Allen Oakwood Correctional Institution 0 0 0 Belmont Correctional Institution 0 0 0 Chillicothe Correctional Institution 0 0 0 Correctional Reception Center 0 0 0 Dayton Correctional Institution 0 0 0 Franklin Medical Center 2 6 Cell Grafton Correctional Institution 0 0 0 Lake Erie Correctional Institution 0 0 0 Lebanon Correctional Institution 0 0 0 London Correctional Institution 0 0 0 Lorain Correctional Institution 0 0 0 Madison Correctional Institution 0 0 0 Mansfield Correctional Institution 0 0 0 Marion Correctional Institution Full institution* 2538 Combo Noble Correctional Institution 0 0 0 North Central Correctional Complex 0 0 0 Northeast Ohio Correctional Center 0 0 0 Northeast
    [Show full text]
  • CIIC Inspection Committee Report: Investigator Data Review
    CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION INSPECTION COMMITTEE REPORT: INVESTIGATOR DATA REVIEW PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY CIIC STAFF June 6, 2006 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I. Introduction……………………………………………………………… 6 II. ODRC Policy 09-INV-04: Institutional Investigator…………………… 8 III. 2004 Chief Inspector Annual Report Summary………………….…… 11 IV. Initiated Investigations…………………………………………………… 12 Table 1. 2004 Top Ten Institutions by Initiated Investigations…… 12 Table 2. 2003/2004 Comparison of Initiated Investigations……….. 13 Table 3. 2004 Initiated Investigations by Subcategory……………… 14 V. Drug Investigations………………………………………………………… 15 A. Positive Urinalysis……………………………………………………… 18 Table 4. 2004 Top Ten Institutions by Positive Urinalyses………… 19 Table 5. 2003/2004 Comparison of Positive Urinalyses……………… 20 B. Drugs (Other)…………………………………………………………… 21 Table 6. 2004 Top Ten Institutions by Drug Investigations: Other… 21 Table 7. 2003/2004 Comparison of Drug Investigations: Other…… 21 C. Drugs (Inmate/Visitor)………………………………………………… 22 Table 8. 2004 Top Ten Institutions by Drug Investigations: Inmate/Visitor………………………………………………… 22 Table 9. 2003/2004 Comparison of Drug Investigations: Inmate/Visitor……………………………………………… 23 D. Drugs (Staff/Inmate)…………………………………………………. 23 Table 10. 2004 Top Ten Institutions by Drug Investigations: Staff/Inmate………………………………………………… 23 Table 11. 2003/2004 Comparison of Drug Investigations: Staff/Inmate………………………………………………… 24 E. Drugs (Mail/Packages)…………………………………………………. 25 Table 12. 2004 Top Ten Institutions by Drug Investigations: Mail/Packages……………………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • SOCIOLOGY and GIS: Mapping Across Disciplines LESSON PLAN
    SOCIOLOGY and GIS: Mapping across Disciplines LESSON PLAN . Title of Lesson Mapping the Growth of Ohio’s Prisons and Prison Population Author Dana Johnson, Associate Professor, Sinclair Community College Time Required 75 minutes Materials Compass rose Map legend Cones and Placeholder Markers Appendix A: Map of Ohio Preparation: Prior to this lesson, instructor should be familiar with prison population, specifically, the growth of the prisons and the prison population since the 1980s (what policies led to the buildup of prisons?). Also, instructor should be familiar with the demographics of the prison population (gender, race, age). Recommended readings are identified in the section noting additional sources. Journal articles are available through scholar.google.com. Websites are noted when applicable. ________________________________________ Objectives Students will learn how to pose spatial questions on the topic of prison population by: • Tracking the expansion of Ohio prisons over time • Identifying locations of where prisons are located in Ohio • Comparing how Ohio prisons may replicate national prison trends. • Considering the reasons if/why/how prison populations have changed over time. Essential Questions • How can we use the maps to visualize where the buildup of prisons in Ohio and consider why they were built in specific rural/urban locations? • How can maps be used to question and understand policies? National Geography Standards • How to use maps and other geographic representations, geospatial technologies, and spatial thinking to understand and communicate information. • The characteristics, distribution, and migration of human populations on Earth's surface. 30 June 2020 1 Instructional Process 1. Review rules of learning with the Giant Map. No shoes, writing utensils, or sliding on the map.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Rept;Jrt
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. Annual Rept;Jrt Fiscal Year 1991 IJ.,/9 -9S Mfr v to o~ to LO * Governor George V. Voinoviclz Lieutena1lt Gove1'llor Mike DeWine Director Reginald A. Wilkinsoll Assista1lt Director Thomas J. Stickrath The Director 1 Table of Organization 2 Accountability 4 Professionalism in Action 6 Department Administration 10 Prison Management 14 The Prisons 18 Corrections Beyond the Fence 36 By the Numbers 38 Directory 59 Acknowledgements 61 156046 U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice , ' 'i " This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated In this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the National Institute of Justice. Permission to reproduce this copyrighted material has been gr~~ Department of Rehabilitation and Cbrrection to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permission of the copyright owner. •• The Mission TheOhi~; riepart~ent of~eh#Ri#i~ti6~,~~~C ;., ",' '...... " ' - ',:' > \~'",: ~ .,t; , .~. Correction IS (tesP~.h#ble,fO~~B~tiihit~~';~riri~\lr~~i~i.~~\' " ','" .... i"<:,', :{)':; adult 6ffenc1erS,llutU, tbeitJ~galr~lehse'fr6n1 . ", - .. ; ,': ;' - "" ~ ~,':: ". " . '. :,'. l , '-<,<i,e .: .Ohio Leadership 'I Governor George v. Voinovich Lieutenant Governor Mike De Wine W e can look back on Fiscal Year 1991 (FY91) as a challenge well met. The Voinovich/DeWine Administration entered office and gave the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (DRC) greater access to the executive branch through the newly created Criminal Justice Cluster headed by Lieutenant Governor Mike DeWine.
    [Show full text]