If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. c

u.s. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics

Correctional Data Analysis Systems

Prepared for Bureau of Justice Statistics U.S. Department of Justice Under Grant No. 78-SS-AX-0046

by Charles M. Friel Harriett J. Allie Barbara L. Hart James B. Moore

Criminal Justice Center Sam Houston State University Huntsville, Texas 1980

76940 U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice 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 granted by Public Domain U S Dept. of Justice to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS).

Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permis­ sion of the copyright owner.

'. v.S. Department of Justice Bareaa of Justice Statistics Benjamin.H. Renshaw, III Acting Director

of the demand information requests received ages was conducted. using criteria which are eJohn D. Spevacek by the nation's correctional institutions and relevant to the correctional environment. National Institute of Justice Preface to determine the impact of these requests Some agencies have developed useful au­ The authors also wish to thank the ad­ on correctional resources. A second objec­ tomated technologies for resolving the de­ ministrators of each of the nation's, 52 cor­ One oftne most critical resources in con­ tive was to determine the procedures used mand information problem. Since these rectional systems and their staffs, who pro­ This document was prepared for the Bu­ temporary corrections is information. by various correctional agencies in process­ technologies could be transferred to other vided subitantial assistance in identifying reau of Justice Statistics, United States Many of the nation's correcti.onal insti.tu­ ing demand information requests and iden­ correctional environments, a critique of the nature of the demand information phe­ Department of Justice under Grant Num­ tions are as comp'lex and rapIdly growI~g tify those with a high potential for transfer. transfer technology was conducted. Included nomena and procedures and technologies ber 78-SS-AX-0046, awarded to the Crimi­ as many of our cities. Correctional admm­ The information and technologies pre­ in this analysis is identification of the key for £esolving the problem. . nal Justice Center of Sam Houston State istrators must receive, classify, house, sented in this report shDuld prove useful to issues to be considered in the successful The project benefitted greatly from a University, Huntsville, Texas. Points of clothe, feed, educate, treat, and rehabilitate the correctional administrator struggling transfer of correctional technology. Check­ number of correctional lawyers who assist­ view and opinions stated herein are those hundreds of thousands of prisoners every with the demand information problem. A lists of critical issues and questions were ed in the development of the Correctional of the authors and do not necessarily rep­ year. To do this in the most efficient, hu­ d/.;,.~iled analysis of the demand informa­ developed to assure that adequate consid­ Case Law Demand Information Model. resent the official position or policies ofthe mane and cost-beneficial manner requires tion problem is presented, identifying the eration is given to all the key elements in Richard Crane did an outstanding job in United States Department of Justice or infor:nation: information for managing, sources of such requests and the nature of the transfer decision including hardware, developing the concept of the Correctional the information required. In addition, use­ software, documentation, performance, Sam Houston State University. planning, monitoring, evaluation, and re­ Case Law Model-researching cases, devel­ The Bureau of Justice Statistics author­ search. ful infotmati.on is provided on the kinds of and user concerns. oping the case summaries and identifying izes any person to reproduce, publish, trans­ In addition to the internal need for in­ analytic capabilities required to satisfy mOst Finally, a number of the transferable trends . .::>ther attorneys who provided in­ late, or otherwise use all or any part of the formation, corrections finds itself deluged demand information requests. technologies now used by correctional agen­ valuable assistance include Rolando del copyrighted material in this publication, with demands for information from exter­ Since the demand information requests cies in processing demand information re­ Carmen ofthe CriminalJustice Center, Rob­ with the exception of those items indicating nal organizations and individuals. Federal emanating from the courts are some of the quests are identified and described. Inter·· ert DeLong of the Texas Df!partment of that they are copyrighted by or reprinted agencies frequently request statistical in~or­ 'most critical ones received by the correc­ ested correctional administrators may find Corrections, and Leonard P(!ck of the Of­ with permission of any source other than mation for inclusion in national publica­ tional administrator, an extensive analysis that many of these technologies can be eafJi­ fice of Attorney Gener.al, State of Texas. of correctional case law was conducted. ly transferred and substantially reduce ';he Seth I. Hirshorn of the University of the Criminal Justice Center. tions. State legislatures are interested in the impact of changes in statutory and proce­ Hundreds of cases were identified and cat­ costly and time-consuming problem of han­ Michigan was extremely helpful in prepar­ dural law on the number and types ofindi­ egorized on the basis of common jurispru­ dling demand information requests. ing the comparative analysis of report gen­ viduals within the correctional system. dential elements. Twenty areas of correc­ The authors wish to express their appre­ eration and statistical software packages, Copyright 1980 Governors frequently request statistical in­ tional case law are described, with summary ciation to the many individuals who con­ and Mitchell Joelson and Lance Wilson of The Criminal Justice Center formation pursuant to budgetary requests. statements about the courts' rulings abstract­ tributed to the CDAS Project. The CDAS the Minneapolis Crime Pr.evention Center Sam Houston State University With the evolution of correctional case la w, I ed. Analysis of these case law summaries Advisory Council was most helpful in clari­ provided a number of practical suggestions the couits increasingly require administra­ led to the development of trend statements fying the initial objectives of the project about the transfer of demand information tors to produce voluminous amounts of I suggesting the likely direction offuture court and critiquing various observations and technologies from one correctional institu­ information needed in civil litigation. !! decisions. An information requirements conclusions. The Advisory Council mem­ tion to another. These external demands for information 1 analysis was then conducted to determine bers included: Special appreciation is extended to Ber­ are becoming a perplexing problem for the the specific data elements that should be -Tom G. Crago nard Shipley of the Bureau of Justice Sta­ administrator since the volume and variety ,II included in any correctional information Colorado Department of Corrr;ctions tistics. Mr. Shipley served as contract moni­ of requests seem to be increasing every year. system to assist the agency in defending -Rolando del Carmen torfor the project and was extremely helpful While many states have developed sophis­ 'I itselfin civil litigation or to show compliance Criminal Justice Center throughout all phases of the research. ticated computer systems to satisfy internal with existing court orders. Sam Houston State University Personnel of the Texas Department of management needs, these systems are not To better understand how agencies deal -Michael A. Hagstad Corrections were most. helpful throughout necessarily responsive to external demands with the demand information problem, 17 D. C. Department of Correr;tions the project, especially Lonnie Eslick, Di­ for information. Even with the most ad­ [I correctional systems were studied to deter­ -Terrell Don Hu~to rector of Data Processing and Ron Taylor, vanced automated capability, many agen­ mine how they receive, process, and respond Commissioner, Virginia Department of Cor- Assistant Director for Treatment. cies find that they must manually compile 1 to requests. These field visits suggested rections The authors are also deeply indebted to detailed statistical information if they are many ways that correctional institutions -Allen H. Lammers Nancy Walker, who prepared the final re­ to satisfy demand requests in a timely and j might improve their demand information SEARCH Group, Inc. port and provided the vital secretarial and accurate manner. processing and also indicated the types of -Michael O. Lowther administrative support so necessary in bring­ Cognizant ofthis ever-growing problem, technologies currently used by some cor­ Oklahoma State Planning Agency ing the project to a successful conclusion. the Bureau of Justice Statistics awarded a 'II rectional agencies that could be transferred -Bill Mullan Finally, the authors are particularly grate­ grant to the Crimim,ll Justice Center at Sam 1 to others. For instance, one of the most Nebraska Legislature ful to W. J. Estelle, Jr., Director of the Houston State University to investigate the { useful technologies in dealing with demand -Laurel Rans Texas Department of Corrections, who pro­ nature of the demand information prob­ 1 requests is report generation and statistical Illinois Department of Corrections vided considerable practical insight on deal­ lem and identify technologies that coul~ be analytic software. Because of the potential -Amos E. Reed ing with the demand information problem utilized in resolving this difficulty. The I utility ofthese technologies for corrections, Secretary, North Carolina Department of and the adage that" ... for a new tech­ CDAS Project (Correctional Data Analy­ an extensive analysis of existing report gen­ Corrections nology to be useful to a correctional man­ sis Systems) was designed with several pur­ j eration and statistical packages was initiat­ -Bernard Shipley ager it must either increase effectiveness or poses in mind. The first objective was to ed and a comparative analysis ofthese pack- Bureau of Justice Sta,tistics reduce cost." identify the frequency, source, and content iii

ii ------_-__-.- _____i ______- , I

Correctional agencies, 9 Contents 6. Systems transfer technology Universities/students, 10 Appendixes for contemporary corrections, 38 Citizens/professionals/media, 10 A. Topics covered in the on-site 7.7 Computerized master index, Research and consulting Key concepts for system transfer, 38 Oregon Division of Corrections, 50 Documentation, 38 visits, 62 Preface, ii organizations, 1i) B. Case law compendium, 63 7.8 Computerized index to volume Institutes/councils/public Standards, 39 C. Frequency distribution of institutional on rules, interest groups, 10 Performance evaluations, 39 Chapters characteristics, 92 Oregon Division of Corrections, 51 The analytic structure of System design for transfer- 7.9 Activity report, Minnesota demand information requests, 10 ability, 39 1. Correctional data analysis systems: Users, 39 Exhibits Department of Corrections, 52 Goals and objectives, 1 3. Correctional case law Systems to be transferred, 40 Evolution of demand infonhafion Programs transfer, 40 3.A Correctional case law demand Tables requests, I demand information model, 12 information model, 14 The model, 12 Data transfer, 40 CDAS goals and objectives, 2 5.A Report generation assessment 2.1 Content categories of demand Summary and trend statements, 12 Administrative procedure CDAS methodology, 2 transfer, 40 criteria, 36 information, 6 Field survey, 2 Case law compendium, 13 Systems transfer considerations, 41 5.B Statistical package assessment 2.2 Source categories of demand Demand information and correctional Information needs, 13 Rules of evidence, 13 Hardware, 41 criteria, 36 information, 9 case law, 3 Software, 42 Report generation and technology 5.C Summary of findings, 36 3.1 Directory of major issue areas: 4. Demand information: State Documentation, 42 5.D Report generator software Correctional case law demand transfer, .3 Performance, 43 CDAS products, 4 of the art, 17 packages, 37 information model, 13 Policy considerations, 17 Users, 43 Demand information in corrections Summary, 43 5.E General-purpose statistical 4.1 Comparison to the 'access to (Chapter 2), 4 Procedural techniques, 17 packages, 37 information systems with the Routing, 18 Correctional case law demand 7. Transferable demand 6.A Hardware, 41 utilization of automation in information model (Chapter 3), 4 Consolidated request model, 18 6.B Software, 42 Preliminary sorting model, 18 information technologies, 45 responding to ad hoc requests, 20 Demand information: State of the art 6.C Documentation, 42 Individualized response model, 18 Reports designed for ad hoc 4.2 Size of popUlation compared with (Chapter 4), 4 response, 45 6.D Performance, 43 technical obstacles, 23 Report generation and analysis Logging, 19 Routing and logging models, 48 6.E User, 43 4.3 Size of popUlation compared with techl1ology (Chapter 5), 4 Control of information releases, 19 Administrative organization, 19 Automated policy indexing system, 50 6.F Bibliography, 44 personnel obstacles, 23 Systems transfer technology for Statistical analysis and report contemporary corrections Technology, 20 4.4 OBSCIS memberships and techno­ Hardware, 20 generation software, 51 Figures logical obstacles, 23 (Chapter 6), 4 Model data bases, 52 Transferable demand information Software, 20 4.5 Software and the use of automation Litigation and automated data 2.1 Cross-tabulation of two inmate technologies (Chapter 7), 4 Agency data base, 21 for response, 23 Personnel, 21 processing, 57 factors, 11 Summary and recommendations Transfer experience, 57 4.6 Information system access and use (Chapter 8), 4 Quantitative analysis of processing 3.1 Correctional case law demand of automation, 24 capabilities, 22 information model, 13 Population, 22 8. Summary and recommendations, 58 5.1 Typology of software packages, 26 2. Demand information in corrections, 5 Nature of the problem, 58 5.1 Data base/software interface, 25 5.2 Software packages available in Methodology, 5 OBSCIS mem_bership, 23 Extent of the problem, 58 6.1 Computer components involved departments Of corrections, by Content of demand information Use of automation in resPOnse in transfer, 40 process, 23 Source, content and analytic jurisdiction, 1979, 27 inquiries, 6 structure of demand 6.2 Hardware-dependent components Inmate inquiries, 6 Summary, 24 5.3 Software packages available or in information requests, 58 of transfer, 40 Demographic characteristics, 6 Policy, 24 use in departments of corrections, Procedure, 24 The courts and demand information, 58 6.3 Elements ofprogram(s) 1979,27 Charges and sentences, 7 A model system, 58 transfer, 40 Inmate status, 7 l\dministrative organization, 24 5.4 Report generator comparisons Technology, 24 OBSCIS as a solution to the demand 6.4 Transfer of data, 40 Impact/effects on inmates, 7 -file creation and managcment, 28 Personnel, 24 information problem, 58 6.5 Matrix 'for system transfer Institutional programs, 7 5.5 Report generator comparisons Demand information administrative considerations, 43 Agency policies and procedures, 8 policy,59 -programming, 29 5. Report generation and 7.1 Population report, Oregon Administrative and fiscal Automating agency policy, 59 5.6 Report generator comparisons information, 8 analysis technology, 25 Corrections Division, 45 Automating program descriptions, 59 -analytic capabilities, 29 Generalizations about the Available software, 25 Computers: Problems and solutions, 59 7.2 A portion of the "fact sheet" contents of requests, 8 Report generators, 26 5.7 Report generator comparisons­ Statistical packages, 32 Software needs, 59 from the Texas Department of output, 30 Sources of demand information Communication problems, 60 Corrections, 46 inquiries, 8 Conclusions, 35 5.8 Report generator comparisons­ Dirty data, 60 7.3 Demand information request form Governmental agencies, 9 training and Support, 30 Use of computers in litigation, 60 used by Minnesota 5.'9 Report generator comparisons­ State executive agencies, 9 Tec,hnology transfer as a future Social service agencies, 9 Department of Corrections, 48 acquisition and costs, 30 solution, 60 7.4 Example of output from the Federal government, 9 Personnel turnover, 60 5.10 Statistical package comparison The legislature, 9 automated logging system, Negotiation of demand information -file creation, editing, and The judiciary, 9 requests, 61 Georgia Department of Offender management, 32 Summary, 61 Rehabilitation, 49 5.11 Statistical package comparison 7.5 Heading from the "Information -analytic capabilties, 33 Request Log," South Carolina 5.12 Statistical package comparison Department of Corrections, 48 -output, training, and support, 33 7.6 Heading from the log of the 5.13 Statistical package comparison director's correspondence, -hardware compatibility and California Department of costs, 34 iv Corrections, 49

" v

" ~----~--~--.-~ ... , " t

."".---~~.,,--~-~ ___ ... ______._ .. _. _____... ~---t=~"""~"',~, "-,,-~_ c

siderable public attention. Thus, many de­ Chapter 1 mand information requests are received. To satisfy all requl!sts is a time-consuming and laborious process. To refuse to respond is to alienate interested parties. Where do you draw the line? Who is a legitimate in­ quirer and who is not? How much of th,e Correctional data analysis systems: agency's limited resources can be dedicated Goals and objectives to answering such requests? Should the agency's information system be redesigned and upgraded so that it can respond to demand information requests in a more timely and efficient manner? If this were done, is the pattern of demand information requests received now typical of those that might, be received five years from now? Is Consider some of the requests for infor­ concerned professlona~ organizations, and the source of inquiries predictable? Can we mation that come across a correctional ad­ otlier correctional institutions. Some can determine what the future topics ofinquiry ministrator's desk. be answered quickly by forwarding a copy might be? In short, can we anticipate the of the agency's annual report. Others re­ unanticipatable? Dear Sir: Our depart men t is currently upgrading its cor­ quire information that is not routinely kept rectional education and vocational training pro­ by correctional agencies and require; hun­ Evolution of demand grams. Would you be so kind as to share with us dreds, even thousands, of man-hours to InfQrmation requests the following items of information ... compile. Some inquirers, such as t~e gov­ ernor, the legislature, the courts, have both In times past, corrections was one of the Dear Sir: Our research center is conducting a study on a need to know and right to demand such most isolated components of the criminal the effectiveness of prerelease programs on the information. In other cases, however, it is justice system. In fact, until recently we did inmates' adaptation when released from prison. difficult to determine whether the time and not even conceive of the justice process as a Could you provide us with the following infor­ expense in preparing a response is truly system. Correctional institutions were usu­ mation ... justified. ally constructed, in rural areas and were Civil Action File Number 24-137B For purposes of discussion, these unan­ both physically and mentally out of the Alvarez vs. Thornberry ticipated requests for information have been public's eye. Of course, even then correc­ TO: Commissioner Wilson Thornberry called demand information requests. The tional administrators received an occasional Commissioner pf Corrections thing that sets them apart from other re­ demand information request, but certainly State Department of Corrections quests for information is that thcy are un­ nothing like the num ber and variety received You are hereby commanded to appear in the anticipated and usually emanate from sources today. It might be fair to say that correc­ XXXth U. S. District Court on the fourteenth outside the correctional institution. tions has undergone a r~volution in the last day of March, 1980, at 9:00 A.M. to testify on The correctional agency itself is a great 15 years or so. No longer an isolated ap­ behalf of the defense in the above entitleCl action consumer of information. The administra­ pendage ofthejustice system, corrections is and bring with you certified copies of the follow­ tor, unit managers, and program directors now the object of considerable concern and ing medical records including ... routinely require information for monitor­ controversy in many corners of society. Dear Sir: ing, planning, and evaluation. Their infor­ The rapid increase of crime and delin­ As an interested citizen, I would like some mation needs are relatively easy to identify, quency in the 1960s made crime a primary facts and figures on the Department of Correc­ usually documented, and frequently an in­ politicai issue. In 1965, President Johnson tions. In particular, I am interested in ... tegral part of the agency's information sys­ created the Commission on Law Enforcement Dear Sir: tem. What bedevils correctional adminis­ and the Administration of Justicel and man­ The Department of Human Resources is cur­ trators, however, is responding to the dated that this Commission look into all rently conducting a survey of the various treat­ unanticipated requests that emanate from aspects of the problem of crime and justice ment programs offered in federal and state cor­ outside the institution. Even the most clev­ and develop appropriate recommendations. rectional institutions. Could you please provide erly designed correctional information sys­ Their report on corrections was not partic­ this office with ... tems cannot anticipate every conceivable ularly flattering and it drew the field of Dear Sir: request. Generally, systems are designed to corrections from its bucolic setting into the Attached is a questionnaire that several of my meet the perceived and anticipated infor­ light of public concern.2 As crime increased, colleagues and I designed to assess morale prob­ mation demands which emanate from with­ so did arrests, and correctional populations lems among correctional employees. Would you in the institution. What is particularly frus­ expanded rapidly. J Controversy developed please distribute the attached questionnaires to trating for a correctional administrator who over how prisons should be administered your staff and also share with us information expended significant resources in the de­ or whether prisons should exist at all. Debates on ... velopment of an information system, is to ensued over custody versus treatment, recid­ Dear Sir: , have it come to a standstill when unantici­ ivism rates, design and operation of prison I will soon introduce the attached bill (S.243) pated demands are received from the legis­ facilities, and ultimately led to the complex amending the state's parole eligibility law. Would lature, the governor's office, and other and continuing controversy over prisoners' you have your staff assess the impact of this important inquirers. Frequently, these re­ rights. legislation on your current inmate population quests do not fit the design configuration of and ... Probably a ripple effect of the civil rights ,existing correctional information systems movement of the early 60s, increasing num­ These and thousands of other requests and, to respond in a timely and reliable bers of inmates complained to the federal for information are received every year by fashion, correctional agencies must assem­ courts about their care and treatment. In­ the nation's prison administrators. Some ble the information by hand, a time-con­ terested federal judges began to hear these ofthem are frivolous and poorly conceived suming and labor-intensive activity. cases, and over the past 10 years there has demands for information. Others are legit­ Contemporary corrections finds itself in been a greater evolution in correctional ju­ imate requests that come from the legisla­ an informational dilemma. Correctional risprudence than occurred within the first ture, the governor's otTice, the courts, institutions are currently the focus of con- 194 years of our history.

" ,

2 Correctional data analysis systems

As a result of these and other social fac­ requests and identify analytic technologies how are these various functions organized Correctional data analysis systems: Goals and objectives 3 tors, contemporary corrections is clearly in which would assist correctional agencies in within the department? Table 1 -Alabama -Minnesota the limelight of public concern and this satisfying these requests. More specificallY, -What kind of human and technical re­ mar.ization of~~pellate cases affecting cor­ concern has brought on an onslaught of the objectives of the project were to sources does the department have to respond Demand infor­ -California -Nebraska rectional admlmstration. demand infor.nation requests from widely -Identify the frequency, source, and con­ to demand information requests? mation problem -District of Columbia -New Mexico -A Case Law Summary in which cases in­ varying sources covering almost every con­ tent of the demand information requests -Are requests and replies centrally logged High Low -Federal Bureau of -Ohio volving common elements are grouped to­ ceivable topic. And unfortunately, as the received by correctionar agencies. and filed so that one can statistically enu­ Prisons -Oregon gether and summary statements abstracted. number, source, and content of these re­ -Determine the impact of these requests merate the frequency, source, and content Technological Hi9h~ -Florida -South Carolina -Based upon these summary statements, Sophistication quests increase, the capability of correc­ on con'ectional resources. of these requests? LOW~ -Georgia -Texas Case Law Trends were abstracted indicat­ tional administrators to respond declines. -Identify and describe the procedures used -To what degree is automation used in re­ -Louisiana -Virginia ing the likely direction offuture court deci­ by correctional agencies to respond to de­ sponding to demand information requests? -Maine -Wisconsin sions . . ?ver a 3-m?nth period the project staff CDAS goals and objectives mand information requests. -Is it necessary to use outside resources to Using preliminary information, each state -Identification ofthe basic information that a!I.17 mstitutions. The purpose of -Ide,ntify existing correctional procedures respond to these requests such as the data was placed in one of four categories as vlslt~d ~orrectional institutions ought to maintain As the philosophic and social currents of and technologies used in dealing with de­ processing facilities of a nearby university? follows: ~he Sl te V~Slt was to co~firm the preliminary m order to defend themselves in civil suits thc,times have changed, the correctional mand information requests which have a -What administrative, fiscal, or technical pe IOformatlOn gathered during the telephone involving current jurisprudential issues or -!r A: Fairly sophisticated analytic capa­ survey on the nature of the demand infor­ cOn1~unity has not been idle. Over the past potential for transfer to other correctional resources are most needed to increase the bility yet encounters problems with demand to show compliance with existing court or­ 10 years, for example, significant progress agencies. agency's capacity to respond to demand information requests. mation problem, the source and content of ders. has been made in the development of cor­ -Identify informational procedures and tech­ information requests? pe reques.ts, and na.ture of the analytic proce­ This research on the body of correctional -!r B: R~la~ively limited analytic capa­ ?ures m responding to deml\l)d rectional information and statistical systems. nologies outside corrections which are ca­ In addition to trying to understand the bility and slgmficant demand information m~olved case law was initiated by inquiries on the Probably the most important development pable of resolving the problems created by nature of the problem and the t(:chnologies problems. mformatlOn requests, In addition the site LEXIS and West Law Systems. With the was the design and implementation of the demand information requests which could be needed to resolve it, each agency was asked visits provided a first-hand opportunity to aid of several correctional law experts, nu­ -Type. <;:': Relat.i.vely sophisticated analytic understand the various ways in which cor­ Offender-Based State Correctional Informa­ transferred into the correctional environ­ to submit examples of at least 10 demand capability and little probleiu with demand merous cases were identified, summarized, tion System (OBSCIS) designed by SEARCH ment. information requests. In some cases, agen­ information. ' rectional agencies receive, route, process, and trend statements abstracted. These trend Group, Inc., and promulgated by the Na­ cies were able to send the last 10, but more pe and respond_~o demand information requests. statements were shared with several attor­ -!r D: R~latively limited analytic capa­ !he staff enjoyed an opportunity to exam­ tional Criminal Justice Information and CDAS methodology commonly, agencies agreed to s,end copies bility and little problem with demand in- neys involved in correctional litigation who Statistics Service of the Law Enforcement of the next 10 requests they recei ved. In all, formation. ' me various administrative, human, and tech­ assisted in identifying the kinds ofinforma­ nological resources used to respond to re­ Assistance Administration (LEAA), now The first step in understanding the de­ 543 examples of demand information re­ After considering all four types of cor­ tion that should be maintained by a correc­ 4 quests and identify those that had potential the Bureau of Justice Statistics. OBSCIS is mand information problem involved a re­ quests were submitted by all 52 of the na­ rectional environments, it seemed worth­ tional institution under each area of cor­ for transfer to other correctional institu­ a management and information system de­ view of the literature. This was a rather tion's correctional systems. These requests while visiting Types A, B, and C institutions. rectional case law. tions. Appendix A contains a list of the signed to provide correctional administra­ fruitless undertaking since little has been were subsequently analyzed to determine It seemed wise to visit Type A institutions of information sought during the fie1.d tors basic information on the inmates under written on the subject. The few articles on their source, the nature of the information since even with fairly sophisticated analytic k!~ds Report generation and VISitS. technology transfer their care. This system includes the follow­ the topic suggest that demand information solicited, and the types of analytic proce­ techn?logy, th~ystill appeared to have prob­ ing eight modules of information: is a new rather than perennial problem in dures that would be required in answering One of the early discoveries in the CDAS lems m handhng demand information re­ Demand Information an" correction .. ' -Admissions information corrections spurred on by the relatively re­ the inquiry. quests. This could be because the number case law projec~ was that II primary difficulty in re­ -Assessment information cent public interest in the care and treat­ The demand information requests received spondmg to demand information requests of req?~sts received ~xceeded their analytic One of the most serious aspects of the -Institutional information ment of offenders. S Virtually no information are called examples, not a sample. Since capablhty or that their information systems was s.oft~ar~, not data base. Interestingly, -Parole information was found on the incidence of th !;>roblem, most correctional agencies do nOlt maintain demand information problem involves those a plurahty If not a majority of demand although sophisticated, were never designed requests which emanate from the courts. -Movement status information nor on the source or content ot demand a centralized chronological log of demand to resolve unanticipated requests for infor­ information requests can be satisfied with -Legal status information information requests. information requests, it was not possible to mation. ' Although not the most frequent source of OBSCIS data elements. The problem that -Management and research information The paucity of the literature suggests that acquire a scientific sample of the requests demand information requests, those that most correctional agencies encounteril, hav­ . r:yp,e l! locations, where analytic capabil­ do eman~te from t~e courts are probably -National reporting information. if one is to understand the problem, it is received by agencies throughout the United Ity IS h.ml~ed but demand information prob­ ing flexible software which will allow them While OBSCIS has proved to bean effec­ necessary to go where the problem exists­ States. Instead, the best that could be achieved ;the most Important mformational requests to query hierarchical files, collect informa­ lems slgmficant, would be instructive in un­ 'pl.aced upon the correctional institution. tive informational tool for correctional namely, correctional institutions. Therefore, was to ask for the last ten or next ten re­ derstanding the types of techilOlogies that tion on c.:ertain prisoners with certain char­ managers, it does not necessarily resolve a letter was written to the administrator of quests received. Thus, generalizations made iVlrtually all correctional systems in the acteristics and display this information in could be developed or transferred which United States are now involved in one or their demand information problem. Inter­ each state correctional system plus the ad­ about the source, content, and analytic is­ ji would help reduce the impact of the prob­ cross-tabulations which can be immediate­ estingly enough, it is not that OBSCIS does ministrators of the Federal Bureau ofPris­ sues involved in satisfying demand infor­ more civil suits, and to effectively defend ly understoOd by an unsophisticated inquir­ I~m. Type C institutions, those with sophis­ the agency in such litigation, large volumes not contain the correct data elements: on ons and the Department of Corrections of mation requests must be made with caution I ticated analytic capability and little diffi­ ~r. The obvious answer to this problem lies the contrary, the problem is extracting the the District of Columbia. The letter explained since they are not based upon a random of unanticipated information must be com~' m report generation software which has culty in resolving demand information re­ piled. Because of the unique effect which data in a format that fits demand informa­ the purpose of the project and asked each sample drawn from the popUlation of all quests, would be likely environments in basic descriptive statistical capability. As a tion requests. For example, most correc­ administrator to identify the one individual demand information requests. the correctional case law revolution has result, the CDAS project undertook an ex­ which transferrable technologies might be h?d on corre.ctional administration, a sig­ tional agencies can provide information on within the institution responsible for or most found. Presumably, these institutions had amination and evaluation of existing report the age, race, and sex of those individuals familiar with the demand information prob­ Field survey mfi~ant portion of the CDAS project was ge~efRtion packages including both pro­ designed their information systems in such dedicated to understanding the impact of under their care. What perplexes many sys­ lem. To better understand how agencies pro­ a way that they can efficiently dispose of pnetary ones and those in the public domain. 'tems'is when the inquirer requests a fre­ As responses were received, telephone the courts on the demand informa tion pro­ It was aiso discovered in the telephone cess demand information requests and to such requests. cess. , quency distribution of all prisoners involved calls were made to the designated individu­ assess existing technologies involved in the It was decided not to visi t Type D institu­ survey and site visits that some states had in disciplinary actions by age, race, and sex. al in each of the nation's 52 correctional process, site visits were planned with rep­ Experience with OBSCIS and other cor­ developed potentially transferable proce­ tions since they received few demand in­ rectional information systems indicates that Again, while OBSCIS can provide some organizations. The p~rpose of these tele­ resentative correctional agencies. Priortele­ formation requests and had little technology dures and technologies for dealing with de­ information on the flow of offenders through phone inquiries was to gather basic infor­ phone conversations and agency annual these systems were never designed to an tici­ mand information requests. With correc­ ~o o~er .for fut~re transfer. Simply put, such pate the impact of correctional case law on the institution, it is not designed to couple mation about the demand information prob­ reports suggested that the fifty-two correc­ mstltutlOns did not have a demand infor­ tional popUlations escalating and budgets inmate data with fiscal data facilitating lem. Discussions were conducted along the tional systems varied in both the number of correctional administration. However, it is constrained, the future development of cor­ mation problem apd therefore had not felt currently extremely important to ask the answers to such questions as what is the following lines: demand information requests received and rectional information systems may be more . the need to develop specialized procedures question: "What are the current and ex­ differential cost of housing minimum ver­ 4!How are requests for demand informa­ the level of technological sophistication dependent upon technology transfer than and technologies to resolve the' issu~. pected trends in correctional case law and sus maximum security prisoners, or the cost tion received by the institution? Are they available to satisfy them: To' determine stand-alone development. Having classified the fifty-two con'ection- what impact do these trends have on the benefits ofplacing different kinds ofinmates routed on a subject specific basis to differ­ which WOUld be the most fruitful to visit, al systems into these four types and consid­ Since transfer is more easily said than in certain kinds of treatment or educational ent individuals-or is one person responsible each system was classified on the basis of design of current and future correctional done, the <:!:DAS project conducted an anal­ eri~g g~ographicallocation, inmate popu­ information systems?" programs? for answering all the demand information the magnitude of its demand information latIOn Size, and other institutional variables ysis of the state of the art of technology The purpose of CDAS, the Correctional requests? problem and the sophistication of its in­ . To answer this question, the CDAS pro­ transfer within corrections. The objectives the following locations were selected fo; Ject set out to develop a Correctional Case Data Analysis Systems Project, was to iden­ -Since demand information requests may fOf1llational technology, using the following site visitation: of this investigation were to determine the Law Demand Information Model. The ele­ tify current and future demand information involve resear<:h, planning, evaluation, and matrix. critical elements involved in the transfer of ments of this model include' data processing seotions of the institution, systems within the correctional community -The development of a Cas~ Luw Compen­ and to develop a checklist of critical ques­ dium. containing the 'identification ,and sum- tions covering the administrative, person-

Ji ------_.-.. ------~------

assist administrators in the operation and 4 Correctional data analysis syste,ms . Chapter 2 management of their agency. The answer nel, hardware, and software issues that must formation should be useful in defending Chapter 7-Tranaferable demand to this question. determines the data ele­ be considered if system transfer is to be the agency under existingjudicial standards Information technologies ments that must be included in an informa­ successful. or in showing compliance with existing court In the process of examining the demand tion system's data base. Only after such orders. information procedures used in various cor­ Demand information in corrections data elements lire identified can an ·auto­ CDAS products rectional systems, successful procedures and mated system be developed to collect, store, technologies were discovered which seem and retrieve the information needed by the Chapter 4-Demand Information: agency. The remaining chapters present the re­ State of the art to have a high probability of successful sults and recommendations of the CDAS transfer to other correctional institutions. The OBSCIS experience emphasized the This chapter presents the results of the fact that determination of the appropriate project. Presented below is a summary of telephone and field surveys. Essentially, it Chapter 7 identifies and describes transfer­ the material provided in each chapter. able technologies which can be used for data elements depends upon recognizing describes the state of the art within the the real-world needs of the information correctional community in processing de­ routing and logging demand information Chapter 2--Demand Information requests, automating agency policy state­ consumer. Experience has shown that sys­ In corrections mand information requests. Demand infor­ tems developed around data elements iden­ mation processing is viewed systematically ments, improving statistical and report gen­ Prior to the 1960s, cdrrections was a rela­ Not infrequently, an administrator is asked tified by experts or other persons removed This chapter presents qualitative and quan­ and recommendations are made on how eration software, improving data bases, us­ tively autonomous appendage of America's from the day-te-day operation of the sys­ titative information on the source, content, agencies can best receive, log, process, and ing data processing in civil litigation, and to explain conflicting information pro­ justice system. Little public attention was duced by his own staff, simply because it tem have failed to provide the kind of and analytic issues involved in the demand respond to demand information requests. experience gained by states which have trans­ given to the management and treatment of was either gathered differently or processed answers actually needed. information requests received by correction­ Interestingly, no correctional agency was ferred correctional information systems. al institutions. The results indicate that found which had a model system for resolv­ incarcerated felons. There were no "pris­ by different people. Without a systematic oner's rights" or court monitoring of pris­ Methodology While demand information requests are re­ ing demand information problems. Some Chapter a-Summary accounting of information requests, it is and recommendations on conditions. The myriad of programs in­ ceived from a variety of inquirers, most were found which had developed particu­ difficult to prioritize inquiries so that more cluded under the umbrella ofrehabilitation tend to be governmental agencies, many of larly good procedures for part of the pro­ The results' of the entire project are sum­ service is given to those having the greatest In the case of demand information, a had not yet developed, and community cor­ them being other correctional institutions. cessing problem. These procedures are de­ marized in Chapter 8 and a number ofspe­ impact upon the agency. Corrections, there­ consumer is the person or agency who asks rections was an insignificant part of the fore, has been forced into a reactive posi­ the correctional agency a question. In order In addition, the results suggest thai the scribed and recommendations developed. cific recommendations are presented which institutional framework. In short, correc­ tion in which responses to future informa­ to identify the data elements which could most frequent kind of request involves the In addition, a number of weaknesses in should prove helpful in developing analytic tions was generally a self-contained entity tion demands, which could have been provide such consumers with satisfactory frequency of inmates with specific charac­ existing demand information processing capabilities for dealing with demand infor­ which operated in relative isolation and anticipated and prepared for, are not devel­ answers, the CDAS project collected exam­ teristics. Interestingly enough, most of these systems are identified, such as lack of ac­ mation requests, as well as operating proce­ had little impac~ outside its own walls. oped. ples of questions actually directed at the il1quiries can be satisfied by systems con­ countability for processing demand infor­ dures for receiving, routing, and monitoring However, changes in American ,§ociety All of these conditions suggest the need correctional community on a day-to-day taining basic OBSCIS data elements. An­ mation requests, problems created by data such requests. In addition, recommenda­ other frequent kind of demand involves and the criminal justice system over the for developing information systems which basis. It was felt that such real-world ex­ bases which are not complete, timely, and tions are presented for future information­ requests for copies of an agency's policies past two decades have catapulted correc­ are responsive to demand information in­ amples, while nbt constituting a necessarily accurate, inaccessibility of statistical and al development which, if initiated, should and procedures or descriptions of their vo­ tions into the limelight of public concern. quiries. The basic problem in developing valid sample, would provide a more con­ report generation software, the absence of significantly enhance the analytic capabili­ cational, educational, or treatment programs. This increased interest in corrections is such a system is to define the relationship crete perspective on demand information. good logging and routing procedures, and ties of the correctional community. probably due to a number of factors. At between the questions asked and data avail­ Unfortunately, few correctionlll agencies Of particular interest was the kind of so forth. analytic procedures that would be required one level, the growing complexity of pro­ able. Once this relationship is determined, maintain a log oftlte information demands The results of various statistical analyses References in answering demand information requests. grams and services within corrections has it is possible to answer more specific ques­ made by external consumers. Furthermore, are presented, indicating the relationship I The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society, A Report In addition to simple lists of programs or of the President's Commission on Law Enforcement broadened its interaction and interdepen­ tions involved in systems development: few agencies havt only one person or de­ between the nature of the demand informa­ policies, most of the required analytic pro­ and the Administration of Justice, U.S. Government dence upon other state agencies, both op­ -What can be answered with the informa­ partment responsible for processing exter­ tion problem and degree of technological cedures are simple descriptive statistics. Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1967. erationally and in terms of competition for tion on hand? nal inquiries. sophistication, population size, personnel 2 Task Force Report: Corrections, A Report of the Cross-tabulations involving frequencies, per­ limited resources. The increased emphasis -What inquiries cannot be answered? As a consequence, a letter was sent to the resources, and other administrative and tech­ President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the centages, proportions, and averages were Administration of Justice, U.S. Government Printing on accountability witnessed among all gov­ -What would we have to do in order to director of each of the 50 state correctional nological considerations. the most frequently requested statistical enu­ Oflice, Washington, D.C., 1967. ernment agencies has produced new de­ satisfy inquiries for which there is no ready agencies, the District of Columbia Depart­ l Prisoners in State and Federal ltlstitutions on De­ mands for documentation in corrections. ment of Corrections, the Federal Bureau of merations. Higher order inferential statis­ cember 31. 1971, 1972. and 1973, National Prisoners information? tical techniques which are frequently found Chapter 5-Report generation Soaring crime rates have placed .new bur­ -Is it cost beneficial to gather the data we Prisons, and the National Prisoners Statis­ and analysis technology Statistics Bulletin, National Criminal Justice Informa­ in commercially available statistical pack­ tion and Statistics Services, LEAA, U.S. Department of dens on corrections and raised public COIl­ currently. don't have, given who is asking tics Program of the Bureau of Justice Sta­ ages far exceed the analytic requirements Since it was found that report generation Justice, May, 1975. cern about more effective rehabilitation. the questions and why they want to know? tistics, asking them to identify those indi­ contained in most demand information re­ technology could significantly enhance an • SEARCH Group, Inc., OBSCIS: Offender Based The "due process" revolution and demise -What is the most economical and efficient viduals usually responsible for processing agency's capability in dealing with demand State Corrections Information System. Volume I. The quests. OBSCIS Approach. SEARCH Group Inc., Sacramen­ of the "hands off" doctrine have increased way to answer the important questions? demand information requests. Typically information requests, Chapter 5 presents to, California, 1975. judicial interest and intervention into the those charged with this responsibility were Chapter 3-Correctlonal case law an overview and critique of existing report , The term "demand information" was coined by the prison system. t Finally, pressure for stan­ The most popular and successful infor­ either data processing or research and de­ demand Information model generation and statistical software packages. authors of Corr!ctions, A Report of the National Advi­ dardization from the judiciary, legislature, mation system utilized by the correctional velopment personnel. The person or depart­ These technologies are identified, described, sory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and The Model presented in this chapter Goals, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, and various professional organizations has community is the Offender-Based State Cor­ ment identified by each correctional admin­ should be very useful to correctional ad­ and compared with respect to a variety of U.So Department of Justi~e, 1973. See also Harland caused a greater sharing and dissemination rections Information System (OBSCIS) .. 2 istrator was then asked to submit a list of ministrators, correctional attorneys, and cor­ criteria relevant to correctional information Hill, Corrections, American Justice Institute,Sacramen­ of information. Since 1975, the OBSCIS model has been the last 10 demand information inquiries rectional information specialists. The Case systems. to, California, 1972; Manual of Standards for Adult As a consequence of the broadened in­ incorpora ted in to 34 state correctional agen­ they had received. Only 10 inquiries were Correctiona/Institutions, Commission on Accreditation Law Compendium identifies and summar­ for Corrections, American Corrections Association, terest in all facets of corrections, adminis­ cies and provides administrators with rou­ requesll!d from each department because izes dozens of appellatt; cases which direct­ Chapter6-Systems transfer technology Rockville, Maryland, 1977. (Standard Nun,ber 4117.) trators are being forced to dedicate increas­ tine operational reports describing the sta­ most agencies had to compile the listing of ly affect correctional administration. Cases for contemporary corrections ing amounts of time and effort to meeting tus and movement of inmates within their inquiries as the requests were received. The with common legal elements are grouped This chapter presents and critiques the the external demands for information. institutions. For the majority of agencies, list of inquiries finally obtained included together and summary statements of the concept oftechnology transfer within a cor­ However, the general absence of any sys­ the OBSCIS system provides the primary both a description of the inquiry and its underlying jurisprudence are presented. rectional context. Since transfer must take tematized response to these information data base against which most demand in­ source. Twenty different summary areas of c9rrec­ into consideration hardware, software, doc­ demands creates problems. Many agencies formation inquiries are currently satisfied. In all, 543 usable information requests tional case law are abstracted and trend umentation, performance, and user issues, do not have specific personnel charged with In adgition to being a successful opera­ were obtained. The cm1tent of these inquir­ statements are presented, suggesting the an attempt has been made to identify the the responsibility for answering demand tional information system for corrections, ies ranged from complex enumerations of likely direction of future court decisions. critical issues under each of these categor­ information requests. The result is frequent­ OBSCIS identifies a number of critical ques­ inmates with various characteristics, or at Of particular value to both correctional ies. These lists of critical issues and ques­ ly a duplication of effort in which the same tions which must be answered in order to certain stages of their sentence, to simple administrators and data processing person­ tions can be used by a manager to determine information is compiled each time a new successfully establish any information sys­ statements concerning policy and pro­ nel is an identification of the kinds of in­ the likelihood of successfully transferring inquiry is submitted. This lack of quality tem. One of the more important questions grams. Some of the inquiries dealt with formation that should be incorporated in information technology from one correc­ control also increases the chance of error·. is what kind of information is needed to financial aspects of running a correctional an ag'mcy's information system, which in_o tional institution to another. ----~---..---

Demand information in corrections 7 6 Correctional data analysis systems As a result "l this observation, and the inmate management and many automated standards in anticipation offuture demand agency while others requested impact state­ information system is: what are the types of scription of the behavioral, psychological, onsite interviews with data processing per­ information systems have the capacity to information requests in this area. ments or required the agency to complete a analytic techniques which are needed to medical, or situational effects of various sonnel, it was concluded that inquiries con­ produce such information in their normal formal survey instrument. satisfy the demands of most users? If a correctional processes upon inmates. The cerning inmate demographic characteristics course of operation. The problem, as far Institutional programs The type of inquirer also varied widely majority of the most important iqquiries unit of analysis across all of these inquiries are of three types. The majority of these re­ as demand information inquiries are con­ Beyond those inmate inquiries which cen­ from the governor's office and legislators can be satisfied by simple frequencies and was the inmate, rather than a program, quests involve standard data elements such cerned, appears to be in maintaining sen­ tered specifically upon inmates as the unit to high school students. A number of in­ percentages, then it would be unnecessary policy, or process. as sex, age, and race. Such inmate descrip­ tence computation records in such a way of analysis, inquiries involving institution­ quirers appeared frequently in the sample, for an agency to buy sophi&ticated and ex­ tors typically mirror those data elements that inaividual sentence lengths can be al programs represented the second most implying that the consumer required cor­ pensive software package~. Perhaps demand Demographic characteristics maintained at the core level of most OBSCIS easily turned into aggregate totals. frequent category of requests. Inquiries of rectional information in the normal course information systems ne'ed only descriptive The most prevalent type of inmate in­ systems. The second type of requests in­ this type wanted to know what kind of of his activities. Others obviously repre­ statistical software to s21tisfy most requests. quiry involved a count of inmates with a volves topical issues which impact correc­ Inmate status programming was offered in the agency, sented one-time requests. particular demographic characteristic or tions on a temporary basis, such as the A third area of inmate inquiries involved what these programs consisted of, flOW they The example inquiries also appeared to Content of demand combination of characteristics. Such fac­ number of incarcerated Vietnam veterans. the enumeration or d,escription of inmate were operat~d, and how effective they were. vary considerably in terms of the time criti­ information inquiries tors as age, sex, ethnic background, educa­ Because of the infrequency of such ques­ status. Inmate status cuts across a number Programs which were the focus of interest cal nature of the information request. Sev­ tionallevel, and other general background tions, it appears as though these inquiries of contextual levels, from the number of covered a broad range, from treatment, eral requests from legislatures involved ,~ necessary first step in the development descriptors were typi!:al of those character­ could be satisfied more economically by a escapes to a description ofinmate medical training, and educational programs, to min­ impact statements concerning bills which of any information system is to identify the istics most often the focus of concern. Illus­ manual enumeration of inmates, made at needs. The common thread that binds these isterial services, prison industries, volunteer were under consideration. Some requests type of questions which such a system will trative of this category were inquiries con­ the time of the request, rather than by inquiries together is that they all deal with services, restitution programs, and commu­ from consumers such as the jUdiciary in­ be required to answer. From an analysis of cerning the number of female inmates or recording such information on an ongoing inmate behaviors or needs typically con­ nity-based operations. In short, inquiries ask­ volved information on policies or proce­ the questions actually asked, systems may the percentage of certain minorities in an basis. Finally, the third type of inquiry ap­ sidered by an agency in making assignments, ing about the type, nature, or operation of dures which related to issues of current be developed which require only a minimum agency. Others asked about inmates with a pears to be cyclical in nature and occurs allocating privileges, or taking disciplinary either specific correctional services or cor­ litigation and concerned court cases having of data to satisfy a majority ofinformation combination of characteristics such as "the every so many years as a result of various action. Examples of inmate status inquiries rectional programming in general were cate­ a significant impact on the agency. Many of requests. number of incarcerated minority women I: social cycles. For example, inquiries con­ involved the number and types of discipli­ gorized as institutional program requests. with a high school education." the inquiries, however, concerned topics of In an attempt to identify those areas of I.. cerning women in prisons, the number of nary infractions (along with their charac­ The inquiries within this group were di­ casual interest or required data which ap­ information which are inost often the focus A majority of these inmate characteris­ urban vs. rural inmates, and the death pen­ teristics and trends), the degree of drug vided into four subcategories, (I) general peared to involve research, counseling and of inquiry, the examples of demand infor­ tics are the same as data elements usually alty were identified through interviews with abuse in prison, and the extent of violence program types, (2) specific content of pro­ treatment programs. mation requests obtained from the 52 cor­ maintained as part of an OBSCIS data base. I data processing personnel to be of interest among prisoners. Again, the majority of grams/services, (3) count or flow ofinmates From a preliminary review of the exam­ rectional systems were organized into cate­ Along with an inmate's identification num­ I, on a cyclical basis. Inquiries involving these data elements needed to answer these in­ by programs and, (4) evaluation of pro­ ples of information requests, it appeared as gories on the basis of the type ofinformation ber, his or her sex, age, face, and so forth topics inundate corrections at certain times, mate status inquiries are designed in the grams. The first of these subcategories, are important in planning, managing, and though the inquiries could be organized requested. These categories were developed 1I . with long lapses of disinterest intervening OBSCIS model, although many states have general program types, simply asked for a and categorized into three substantive by inductively sorting each of the requests logging the movement of inmates. The fact between periods of high demand. After not implemented these specific modules as listing and brief explanation of the types of areas. It was felt that such a categorization into "like" groups until a reasonable num­ that many of these inmate descriptors are I identifying cyclical topics through a moni­ yet. programs offered by an agency. In most would facilitate a firmer understanding of ber of categories of similar questions were already maintained by agencies using toring of information requests, agencies may cases, inquirers were satisfied by sending those data elements which should be main­ obtained. The results of this analysis are OBSCIS suggests that data elements in the be able to anticipate high demand periods ImpacVeffects on inmates them an annual report or other standard tained by a correctional agency to satisfy presented in Table 2.1. As can be seen, OBSCIS model will satisfy' alarge propor­ and collect data in anticipation of such in­ The final subcategory of inmate inquir­ document produced by the agency. most demand information requests. The there are four primary areas of inquiry: (1) tion of demographic inquiries. quiries. Otherwise, these particular data ies involved questions concerning the impact Inquirers interested in specific content of first level of organization involved the con­ inmate inquiries, (2) institutional programs, In addition to inquiries about demograph­ elements would not be maintained as part and effect of various correctional programs programs/services differed from general tent of the inquiries. It was hypothesized (3) agency policies and procedures, and (4) ic characteristics, other requests sought of their information systems. and processes upon inmates. Information program inquirers in that they identified that the broad array of inquiries could be administrative/fiscal inquiries, with each information about such factors as military requests such as th(. iate of recidivism by the program in which they were interested, n:duced to a limited number of categories area having a number of subcategories. service, number of dependents, and women Charges and sentences specific program or the impact of various but stilI requested only general information including all requests involving the same These categories represent relatively inde­ in institutions. Inquiries based upon these The second broad area of inmate inquir­ types of sentencing were typical of ques­ about the program's operation. Mosrofthe data elements. By reducing the inquiries to pendent contextual areas, while each ofthe factors appeared to be of a more transient ies involved charges and sentences. Infor­ tions within this category. time, these inquiries were satisfied by an categories, an estimation could be obtained subcategories reflects a more sensitive break­ nature and focused upon topical issues. For mation requests in this area required one of The majority of these inquiries identified annual report. However, since many of of those questions which could be satisfied down in terms of similar data elements. example, many agencies were asked the two response formats. First, many requests the particular program in which they were these inquiries emanate from the legislature by existing data and those which required numbe:- of Vietnam veterans they had in asked for an enumeration of inmates incar­ interested, but failed to specify the type of or other important inquirers, it may be ad­ the development of new data. Such a classi­ Inmate Inquiries custody. In checking with institutions on cerated on a particular charge, serving a impact statement they required. Most in­ visable to have each program manager de­ fication could also provide information on The largest category of requests centered this question, it was found that there had certain type of sentence (determinate vs. quirers simply appeared interested in whe~ velop a short description of each program's the data which were most frequently the on inmate inquiries. Inmate inquiries were bef:n little previous interest concerning Viet­ indeterminate), sentenced on a certain date, ther the program was having a "good" goals, operation, and effectiveness. These center of inquiry. defined as any question which asked for an nam veterans and that the present interest or sentenced from a particular county. These effect upon .the inmates. For example, a "program briefs" could then be maintained In addition, the tequests were categorized enumeration of inmates possessing certain was being generated by a single agency at inquiries were typically satisfied by the typical inquirer would ask about the im­ so that future requests could receive a more on the basis of the inquirer. The rationale characteristics, or which requested a de- the federalleveI: standard inmate data base and required no pact of vocational education programs on personalized, rapid and satisfactory underlying this classification was that it is calculations Dr atypical programming. The inmates. Of those inquirers who did indi­ response. important for a correctional agency to know second type of charges and sentences in­ cate the type of impact or effect in which The third area of inquiry under institu­ the type of inquirers requesting informa­ T"able 2.1 quiry involved such information as the time they were interested, most asked about re­ tional programs focused on the count or tion. If the majority of inquirers ha ve both .Content categories of demand information served vs. the time remaining for certain cidivism rates. flow of inmates by programs. These inquir­ a need and right to know, then an informa­ Primary content Category inmates, the number eligible for early re­ Unfortunately, most correctional systems ies focused on the number of inmates pro­ tion system might be designed to satisfy categories operational lease, straight release vs. parole, and the do not maintain systematic data concern­ cessed through a program within a certain these requests, providing quick and accu­ definition SlJbcategor~es amount of time served by offense. These ing the impact of correctional processes on time frame (flow). Although the unit of rate responses. On the other hand, if the Inmate Inquiries Questions In which the unH of count • Demographic characteristics inquiries differed from the first group in inmates. Although this type of inquiry was count used to answer these inquiries was is Inmates and asks for an enumeration • Charges and sentences tbilt a satisfactory ,answer required specific least frequent among the inmate inquiries, inmates, the emphasis of the question was majority ofinquiries are frivolous, the cost/ of Inmates posseSSing a certain • Inmate sentences benefit of designing a special information characteristic • Impact effects on Inmates calculations. Although the information need­ the developing emphasis on program ac­ clearly on the effectiveness or efficiency of system may be questionable. Institutional Inquiries requesting the kinds of • Program ~pes ~eneral) ed to answer these more complex inquiries countability as exemplified in zero-based the program. programs programming offered In an InstHution, • Content 0 spec Ic was usually maintained as part of the in­ budgeting and current debate over the ef­ Most of these inquirers were satisfied by Finally, the inquiries were assessed in what these programs consist of, or programs/services terms of the type of analytic processes typi­ what is the effectiven~ss of the programs • Count or flow of Inmates mate data base, an appropriate answer fectiveness of treatment may be, expected to the data base typically maintained in an cally required to produce a satisfactory by programs sometimes necessitated special programm­ influence the frequency with which impact! OBSCIS system. However, some calcula­ • Evaluation of programs answer. Analytic processes can range from ing. In many instances, the calculations re­ effect inquiries !\re directed at the correc­ tions, occasionally requiring novel compu­ Agency policies Inquiries concerning the stated policies of • Operation of Institution simple frequency counts and the calcula­ and procedures the instftutlon or stated procedures • Management of Inmates quired to answer these questions were com­ tional community. In view of the fact that ter programming, were necessary. As a re­ tion of percentages to complex processes practiced by the institution plex due to many factors, such as good time most of these inquiries failed to identify a sult, it may be advisable for an agency to involved in higher order statistical analysis Administrative/ Inquiries centering on administration • Fiscal which impacts sentence length. However, specific impact or effect; agencies are well maintain a count and flow summary of in­ fiscal Inquiries structure or the wayan InstHution's budget • Administrative mates within each ofits programming areas, and modeling. One important question, Is allocated sentence calculation is an integral part of advised to develop their own evaluatien therefore, ~n devel<;>pin.g a ,cost bt:neficial. :.···, I. , 8 Correctional data analysis systems Demand information in corrections 9 if it does not already do so. Such an ongo­ ever, an observation which iS'explored fur­ therefore be capable of cross-indexing ty inquirers, an agency could put its money ing enumeration wo~ld n?t. on~y sat~sfy the ther in Chapter 3 notes that the. compre­ (cross-tabulating) inmate variables. into the software and data gathering efforts Table 2.2 growing number of Inqumes In thiS area, hensive development of agency policy across frequent~y -The majority of inquiries can ~hich selectively served the most impor­ Source categorIes clf demand Information but would also form a basi~for developing all facets of its operations is essential in be satisfied by data elements prescnbed In tant consumers. 'satisfactor;y responses to the last category prot~cting the, administrators in civil.suits the OBSCIS model. Source Category Of course, before an agency can priori­ category definition N Percent of institutional program inquiries, namely brought against them by inmate.s. Most -In addition. to the questions which are tize the consumers of demand information, Internal of these suits are filed on the baSIS of tht: Information requests originating from 77 evaluation of programs. .. asked on a regular basis, many topical in­ it must identify who is asking the questions within the agency 14.2 Although evaluation of program inquir­ Federal Civil Rights Act (42 U.S.C.A., Governmental quiries are received such as ~he numb~r of and how frequently each inquirer submits a information requests submitted by either ies were less frequent than others focusing 1983). In order for an administrator to avoid Vietnam veterans, and cyclical questIOns Executive a State or Federal governmental agency 29.9 request. In addition, most administrators Le~islature 47 8.6 on correctional programming, the type of per~::;"lal concerning women in prisons or the death liability which may result from would like to know who is interested in Ju iciary 25 4.6 inquirer asl\ing these questions rrequently these "1983" suits, it must be shown that he penalty. Possibly, one-shot inquiries can be Sociai services 22 4.0 their agency anyway. Insights along these Federal 40 was in a position to significantly Impact the acted in "good faith" by following the stated processed manually while the cyclical in­ 7.4 lines may greatly assist an administratOl' in Correctional agencies 29 5.3 agency. For example, the, legislature ~nd rules and regulations of the agency. If an quiries might be anticipated and prepared Requests received from another adult or defining the political environment in which juvenile correctional agency 104 19.1 other governmental agencies base fun~lng agency does not have a policy governing for through a good demand information he must operate. Universities/ information requests received from and policy decisions on the stated effective­ the area in which an action is taken by logging system. students 74 13.6 In order to determine both the identity of ,I> an academic institution ness ofa particular program. Furthermore, an administrator, he may be held personally -Because of the apparent interest in both Citizens/ demand information consumers and the fre­ Requests received from individuai citizens 44 much federal funding is dependent upon program evaluation and the impact of pro­ professionals/media or media representatives involved in such 8.1 liable. It is therefore important that policies quency with which various. consumer groups answers to questions concerning the eval­ areas as radio, teleVision, magaiines, be developed and stated for as many fa.cets gramming upon inmates, and in vie~ ?ft~e ask questions, the demand information ex­ and newspapers uation of correctional programs. ofinstitutional management and operatIOns continuing demand for accountab!Il~ In amples were assessed in terms 'of the source Research and Professionai inquiries received from the public sector, all programs and services consulting organii!ations private organizations 37 6.8 The inquiries classified in this categ~ry as possible. A good exan:tple of a compr~­ of each inquiry. The assumption underly­ usually specified the criterion upon which hensive package of policy statements IS offered within a correctional agency should Institutes/councils/ Requests received by any group ing this assessment was that the inquirers public interest groups 44 have an ongoing evaluation mechanism built not mentioned above 8.1 they were evaluating a program. Of thOlse found in the Oregon correctional system, could be reduced to a few categories in in so that the efficiency and effectiveness inquirers who did define criteria, most fo­ where an index of all policies, procedures, which the type of data requested and the and rules is maintained on a computer so ofinstitutional programming may be mon­ cused on such things as program costs per impact of the consumer on an agency were inmate served (cost/capit~), the number of that they are immed!lltely accessible. It ":lay itored and reported. their differential impact upon corrections similar within each group. The results of th~s enumeration did not include the many also be advisable for an agency to review -Each program in an agency should have a and the type of questions asked. Social ser­ inmates served as compared to the number this categorization are presented in Table informal requests for information which in need of service, the effect of the program reque§ts for policy statements on var~o,us brief description of its goals, methods, and vice agencies needed to know the extent to 2.2.- As can be seen, there are six primary are internally processed as a consequence issues as they are received so that policl~s level of service ready for dissemination. Such which the corTectional popUlation was grow­ on inmate behavior, good time, and atti- inquiry categories, with each category re­ of ongoing litigation. may be developed in those areas where their a small effort by each program chief would ing. For example, the number of inmates tude. . , flecting inquirers who asked similar ques­ The vast majority oflegal questions pro­ In view of the fact that correctIOns IS absence becomes obvious. A general rule payoff in public relations and service to eligible for parole, early release, or com­ tions having approximately the same impact duced by civil suits brought against an increasingly being called upon to substan­ should be: if an inquirer asks for a policy in inquirers. munity placement and their impact on com­ on an agency. agency by inmates are processed from with­ tiate its activities through formal program a critical area which does not exist, develop -The count of inmates in institutional pro­ munity services were typical of questions in the agency by the att.orney general's cor­ evaluations, it appears advisable for admin­ one. grams and the rate at which inmates pass asked. Some agencies included in this cate­ Governmental agencIes rectional representative or the correctional istrators to develop evaluative criteria for through programs should be recorded on gory were state departments of education, Governmental agencies produced the larg­ agency's own legal staff. Although these all aspects of institutional programming. Administrative and fiscal Information an ongoing basis for each program or ser­ mental health, welfare, and so forth. est number of external information requests demands for information are not direct in­ The evaluative criteria which appeared to A final broad category into which the vice offered. obtained in this study. Specifically, almost quiries from an outside agency, they are be of most interest in the examples gathered demand information examples were sorted -All facets of institutional operations should Federal government 30 percent of all requests came from a source nevertheless the consequence ofjudicial in­ in this study were cost/inmate, number involved administrative/fiscal information be covered by a written policy statement. The federal government was the next most within either the state or federal govern­ tervention into corrections. The impact of served/number in need, and degree to which requests. Inquiries concerning administra­ Such statements would not only satisfy the frequent inquirer. Examples ofthose agencies ment. Because this general category of in­ this intervention on correctional adminis­ program goals are met. If this ty~e i~for­ tive issues included such things as the types considerable demand for policy informa­ within the federal system that requested quirers was so large, and because the dif­ tration has been so great that the resources mation were developed and maintained of staff positions within the ~g~ncy, ~he tion from outside consumers, but would information were the U.S. Parole Commis­ ferent branches of government have varying of an entire research department may be along with count an~ flow enu~eratio~s, organization and structure of livl~g .umts, also help protect agency personnel from sion, LEAA, the National Prisoner Statis­ degrees of impact upon a correctional agency, dedicated to answering one suit (as recently an agency would have httle trouble In provid­ facility construction, and a de~cnp!lOn ,of personal liability as the result of civillitiga­ tics Program of the Bureau of Justice governmental agencies were further divided witnessed in a Texas class action suit: Ruiz ing an immediate and satisfactory response the administrative hierarchy. Fiscal inquir­ tion. Statistics, the Bureau ofIndian Affairs, and into five subcategories. et al. v. Estelle). Because ofthe tremendous to most inquiries in this area. ies were characterized oy such things as the Departments of Labor, Education,and informational demands that the judiciary salaries for various positions, the levei of Health and Human Services, Information State executive agencies places upon corrections, an entire section Agency polIcies and procedures budget support and types o~ fundin~, a cost Sources of demand demands by federal agencies 4sually in­ The most frequent consumers among of this report has been dedicated to outlin­ A third broad area of inquiry involved breakdown by inmate, medical services ex­ volved an aggregate count of inmates at information inquiries governmental agencies were those in the ing an information model which may form agency policil!s and procedures. Inquiries penditures, and overtime compensation .. certain times throughout the year or counts executive branch. Typical consumers from the 'basis of a successful correctional re­ in this category were divided into two types; Most of these inquiries were easily satis­ In a time of diminishing resources and of inmates having a particular attribute, within the executive branch consisted of sponse to information demands emanating (1) questions concerning the .opera~ion of fied by information typically maintained. belt tightening on the part of ~any cor~ec­ such as being a veteran. law enforcement agencies, youth commis­ from Iitig1!tiQn (see Chapter 3). the institution and (2) those involving the However it is interesting to note that the tional agencies, a successful informatIOn sions, various administrators at the COUllty management ofinmates. Inquiries focusin.g most inquiry within this category system must not only be eff~c!ive, it must The !egislature fre~uent level, offices of budget and planning, and Correctional agencies on institutional operations concerned poh­ involved a cost breakdown by inmate. do so in the most cost-beneficial way pos­ At the state level, inqumes from the the governor's office. The type of inquiry A second major source of demand in­ cies covering such things as the prison li­ sible. Ideally, an agency would prefer to legislature typically involved either impact typically made by these consumers dealt formation request" was other correctior.:d brary, telephone use, program evaluation GeneralIzations about the satisfy all the inquiries it receives. However, statements concerning the effect of various with planning or budgetary information. agencies. Apparently, the need to communi­ methods, good time calculations, anri cell conilent of requests if the budget dictates that only limited funds changes in la w or policy on corrections or a Many of these questions involved the rate cate and share information among correc­ assignments. In addition, many of tHese 'In concluding the content analysis of are available for responding to external in­ description of programs and budget alloca­ at which inmates moved through various tional agencies is considerable (see Table inquiries requested only general informa­ demand information inquiries, several gen­ formation demands, then an information tions. Although questions from this branch levels of incarceration, the cost ofincarcer­ 2.2). Almost all correctional agencies stud­ tion such as agency goals and objectives, eral observations and suggestions may be system must be designed so that eith~r of government were less frequent than oth­ ation per capita, the provisions of various ied had themselves been a consumer of de­ impact statements on rule~, ?r asked ,for made. the most frequent inquirers, or those w~th er branches, the impact of their inquiries programs, and the number of inmates be­ mand information. any policy manuals or statistical pub~l~a­ -The most frequent type ofinqui~ involv~s the greatest impact on an agency be giv­ upon corrections is usually more significant. coming eligible for parole. Correctional agencies produced a diffuse dons which the agency produced. Inqumes the enumeration of inmates With c~rt~1n en priority. array of information requests. A significan t concerning the management of inmates co\'­ characteristics. Furthermore, the maJonty A system with this capacity would need The judiciary Social service agencies number involved policy statements or a de­ ered a broad range of issues such as personal of these inmate-based inquiries are con­ to identify and maintain the ki~d of i.nf~r­ Finally, the judiciary produced a limited Social service agencies comprised thc scription of procedures covering specific searches, disciplinary procedures, grievance cerned with inmates having a combination mation typically requested by high pnor~ty number of inquiries which usually focused second largest consumer group within the areas. Other requests concerned the com­ procedures, and hair length. . of characteristics such as (1) minority sta­ inquirers. It would also need .the capacity on either the need for legal services among government sector. Although social service position, cost, and impact of'various pro­ The vast majority of the agency policy tus, (2) veterans who were ... , (3) s~n­ to provide the fastest response time for those inmates, or information demonstrating com­ agencies are typically under the adminis­ grams. Finally, a number of inquirers asked and procedure inquiries were usually satis­ tences for murder ... , etc. InformatIOn who have the greatest impact upon the pliance with a particular judicial mandate. tration of the executive branch, these agen­ forinmate charact(;:ristics and counts. Many fied by existing agency publications. How- systems responsive to these inquiries must agency. Finally, by identifying high priori- Although the frequency ofjUdical requests cies were categorized separately because of of these questions appeared to center on included in the sample was relatively small, issues of current interest in correctional case law. ,

---1 1 10 Correctional data analysis systems ~ Demand information in corrections 11 As a consequence of pressures for stan­ demic community were more likely to submit toward standardization of correctional poli­ H was apparent in only two content areas. dardization which are being placed upon their request in the form of a pre-structured cies and procedures. The first, and by far the largest category of Drug offense Non -drug offense the corrections community, correctional ad­ questionnaire. This type of response for- In concluding this analysis of the sources Ii demand information involved inmate inquir­ Number of veterans Number of veterans ministrators will find it increasingly neces­ mat was in ma17,y cases more difficult for an of demand information, a number of ob­ ies. Inmate inquiries were defined as those Veteran incarcerated for a Incarcerated for sary to share information among themselves. agency to handle because it forced correc- servations may be made. II requests which focused on inmate charac­ drug offense non-drug offense Evidence forthis is witnessed in the present tional personnel to conform their response -Beyond the information requests generat­ 1 teristics, sentence calculations and beha v­ Numbar of non-veterans Number of non-veterans I Non-veteran Incarcerated for a rate of information sharing which now oc­ to the specific structures assumed in the ed internally, the most frequent consumers j Incarcerated for ior. The factor which was common among drug offense non-drug offense curs among agencies. Unfortunately, the survey instrument. of demand information are government all these requests was that inmates, rather present way in which these information Another observation resulting from the agencies. Specifically, the executive branch I than programs, policies, or administrative Figure 2.1_ Cross-tabulation of two Inmate factors transactions take place is haphazard and analysis of academic inquiries was that the and social service agencies make up the actions, were the units of count. The sec­ unreliable. Administrators having a ques­ closer the inquirer was to the actual opera- majority of such inquirers. ond category of inquiry which necessitated tion wonder whom to ask. Many solutions tion of an agency, the better his inquiry -Information requests produced by theju­ statistical analysis involved program eval­ more typical and allowed the agency to -There appears to be little need to maintain to common problems remain undiscovered mirrored the response capabilities of that diciary as a result of ongoing litigation are uation in terms of cost/capita, inmate needs provide the answer in whatever form avail­ sophisticated analytic packages capable of because there is no systematic way in which agency. For example, inquiries from the typicaIly processed internally. Inquiries from served, and the effects of programming on able. On the other hahd, inquiries specify­ to share information. academic community frequently requested~ this source have a significant impact on an inferential analysis to satisfy most inquir­ behavior. The remaining inquiries, which ing a closed time frame require an agency ies. The need to share information in correc­ information which would be either difficult agency and therefore receive priority over focused on such content categories as insti­ to cross tabulate the difference between -Of those inquiries necessitating an analytic tions suggests the necessity of developing or impossible for an agency to develop. all other requests. The need for responsive tutional programs, agency policy and pro­ inmates entering and ending a process within some centralized information sharing sys­ This situation is probably attributable to information systems in this area is so great I process, only two statistical techniques were cedures, and the majority of administrative specific time intervals. For example, how required in order to provide a satisfactory tem. From an analysis of the inquiries in the fact that some academicians have little that a model for developing a data base inquiries, required no analytic processes in many inmates entering vocational training the present study, such a clearinghouse experience with the actual data resources designed to serve judicial information de­ I, answer: order to produce a satisfactory response. since 1978 have complered the program? would need to disseminate information in and operations of a correctional agency. mands is presented in Chapter 3. (1) The frequency or proportion of in­ From an analysis of those inquiries which Besides stock and flow issues, the other mates having a certain characteristic. two primary areas. First, the sharing of On the other hand, consumers such as gov- "The need to share information among cor­ centered on inmates, it was observed that a statistical procedures involved in requests policy statements among correctional agen­ ernmental agencies or other correctional rectional agencies themselves is consider­ (2) A cross-tabulation of inmates hav­ satisfactory response typically involved either were frequencies and cross tabulations. ing two or more characteristics. cies would not only facilitate the standardi­ agencies typically requested information able. Specifically, this need involves policy a statistical count of inmates with certain Frequency requests centered on a single -Across all the content areas discussed in zation promulgated by professional groups which was part of an operational correc- statements and solutions to common prob­ characteristics at a single point in time (stock attribute and merely asked for the number the first part of this chapt~r, only inmate and demanded by the courts, but would tional data base. Apparently, the more op- lems. As a result, it is suggested that a enumerations), or an enumeration of inmates of inmate possessing this characteristic. also assist in filling the policy gap in opera­ erational interaction an inquirer has with national clearinghouse for correctional in­ inquiries and program evaluations required who had entered a particular correctional Cross-tabulation requires an enumeration any analytic processing. The rest of the tional areas which lack formal guidelines. corrections, the more his questions parallel formation sharing be established. process and completed that process (flow of inmates having two or more attributes. inquiries were satisfied by policy statements, This would reduce the likelihood of correc­ the information generally maintained and -The farther an inquirer is removed from enumerations) within a certain period of For example, questions such as the number tional administrators being found person­ Llsed by a correctional agency. the day to day operations of a correctional program descriptions, or other records nor­ time. Examples of stock enumerations in­ of sex offenders in therapy, or the number mally maintained by an agency. ally liable because they acted in bad faith agency, the less his inquiry tends to match volved such things as the number of in­ of veterans incarcerated for drug-related - Many inquiries require an enumeration of because of a lack of policy to substantiate CJtlzens/professlonals/medla information typically maintained in a cor­ mates in an institution, the number of vet­ crimes reflect two inmate factors which have the number of inmates processt:d through a their actions. Secondly, the sharing of nov­ A fourth group of consumers involved rectional data base. For example, the most eraQs incarcerated, inmates anticipating a to be cross-tabulated in order to identify program in a specified period of time. el solutions to common problems would interested citizens, professional groups and com plex questions generally came from the certain release date, and the number eligi­ those inmates of concern. not on Iv enhance correctional decision mak­ the media. Inquiries from these groups rep­ academic community which frequently lias ble for early release. Requests centering on As seen in Figure 2.1, the answer to any References ing, bu-t would also go a long way toward resented a broad array of information re­ little operational interaction with corrections. stock enumerations were most frequently question produced from a cross-tabulation insuring that administrators use the "least quests. The type ofinquirers included within I Krantz, Sheldon. The Law of Corrections and Pris­ satisfied by a frequency distribution of in­ analysis is in the form of frequencies or oners' Rights in a Nutshell. St. Paul, Minnesota: West restrictive means available" when infring­ this category were attorneys, psychuiogists, mates or by the proportion of inmates in percentages. Each cell in the cross-tabula­ Publishing Co., 1976. ing upon any of the inmate righ ts guarded The analytic structure of demand librarians, and inmate families. In addition, question relative to some larger group. An. tion matrix indicates the number ofinmates 2 SEARCH GroupInc. OBSCIS: Offender Based State by federal courts. For example, the Virgin­ inquiries were received from newspapers, information requests example of this latter type of request was Corrections Information System. Volumes 1-8, (Sac­ having both characteristics labeled in the ramento, California: SEARCH Group Inc., 1975-1980. ia Department of Corrections has a port­ television stations and networks, magazines, the proportion of all veterans incarcerated margins. Although cross-tabulation analy­ able mini-camera crew which they send to and other public information sources. After defining the types of information for drug-related offenses. Considering the sis is the basis for such statistical tests of which are required by the user of a system, any unusual incident involving inmate dis­ Many of these requests centered on topics number of requests which asked for this' significance as Chi Square and measures of turbances. They have found that the pres­ of current concern to the public such as and after the data base containing this in­ form of reply, it would appear that correc­ association such as the Phi Coefficient, the ence of this camera team not only inhibits escapes, death sentences, and correctional formation is organized, the final step in 11 tional information systems ought to have sample of inquiries revealed little need to further violence, but also provides an in­ programming. The majority of these were designing an efficient information system is the capacity to compute the ratio between go beyond the simple enumeration of cell disputable record of each incident in the easily handled by information already on to identify the analytic processes needed to the number ofinmates with particular char­ frequencies. satisfy the demands of inqllirers. Ideally, Ii event that the actions taken during the in­ hand, such as an unnual report. acteristics and the larger inmate popUlation The most common form of cross-tabula­ cident lead to a civil suit by an inmate. an information system should be able to to which these smaller subsets belong. tion requested in the sample involved more Solutions like this need to be shared, and a Research and (!onsultlng grganizatlons ansWer the questions asked of it with a i In addition, stock inquiries also involved than two factors. In fact, several inquiries minimum of custom programming. If the nlltional clearinghouse would fadll tate this Information requests from consulting I inmate counts in terms of bounded lengths required as many as four or five attributes goal. organizations and organized research proj­ typical inquiry received by an agency in­ of time. For example, how many assaults to be cross-tabulated at one time, compli­ volves relatively simplistic frequency distri­ ects composed the next most frequent cate­ II or escapes ha ve occurred over the past year? cating the development of the response. Universities/students gory ofinquirers. These consumers generally butions and percentages, it would not be This type of inquiry requires the capacity to For example, a question asking for the num­ The third category of demand informa­ submitted requests concerning inmate char­ cost beneficial to maintain an expensive cross tabulate inmate characteristics with ber of black veterans who were drug ad­ software package capable of producing tion inquirers involved universities and acteristics, inmate counts, needs assessments, time. dicts and were convicted for crimes of students. This group of consumers was dichot­ higher order statistical analyses. ~ and programming characteristics. A few of Requests which concerned the flow of . violence requires a simultaneous search omized in terms of the sophistication of these inquiries also involved questions on To address this third step in systems de­ II ,/1 inmates through a particular process or across four factors in order to identify the their inquiry. A large number of requests operational procedures, institutional man­ sign, the sample inquiries were assessed in program typically require the ability to sub­ appropriate inmates. terms of the analytic processes required to were submitted by students and concerned agement and various policy statements. tract the number of inmates entering a pro­ Although a computer program for such descriptive topics such as prisoners on death produce satisfactory answers. An analytic 11 I, cess from those completing the process. For an analysis would not involve a great deal process was defined as a statistical proce­ row, the daily routine of inmates, how cor­ Institutes/councils/public II example, of all the inmates' entering a pro­ of complexity, all attributes under question Interest groups dure by which data is organized, manipu­ rections rehabilitates, and so forth. Inquir­ gram, how many finished, were released, would probably need to be maintained in a Finally, a small number of requests were lated and reduced in order to derive the Ii ies from faculty and university researchers, I.: reclassified, or were otherwise terminated? single data file. This observation points out received from institutes, councils, and pub­ answer to a specific question. The assessment on the other hand, typically involved statis­ The time frames specified in these requests the advantage of having a single inmate lic interest groups. These inquiries general­ of analytic processes involved sorting the tical enumerations of inmate characteris­ were either open and unspecified or closed master file on which all identifying factors tics, and a variety of rather complex ques­ ly involved institutional policy and appeared requests into groups which reflected sim­ and confined to specific dates. For exam­ can be maintained. to suggest comparative studies among var­ ilar statistical procedures. tions dealing with inmate behavior, program ple, inquiries with an open time frame would This analysis of demand information re­ ious correctional agencies_ It may be that Among the many information requests evaluation, and management dc;cision mak­ ask how many of those who started a pro­ quests suggests several generalizations about ing. Furthermore, inquirers from the. aca- these requests were a product of the trend sampled, the necessity of statistical analysis cess completed it. An open time frame was required analytic capability: ------,~------~,

Correctional case law demand information 13 Chapter 3 information demands precipitated by this case law revolution. More specifically, and discussions with a number of lawyers there appear to be four fundamental ques­ handling correctional litigation. The in­ tions which the courts ask in deciding any 1. Summary 2. Trend formation needs involve policy statem~nt~, case involving corrections: Statements Statements records, and documentation of actions, Correctional case law demand -Has a constitutionally protected right services, and facilities which would typical­ been violated by the correctional agency? ly be required to show a compelling inter­ Information model* - What is the agency's justification for such est. Again, this part of the model is in­ a violation? Correctional tended to provide an exemplary format -Can the agency prove that its interest is Case Law Model upon which correctional administrators, compelling enough to justify the invasion data processors, and lawyers can develop of the prisoner's rights? an information system responsive to both -Is there any other way in which the agency cur-rent and future demands of the court. could protect its interests and yet minimize 3. Information 4. Case Law or avoid the violation of the prisoner's NeeCis Compendium Rules of evidence A primary concern in the development off" doctrine. l Under this doctrine, the rights? of any effective information system is that courts operated on several assumptions. These four questions have a number of . .ofcourse, in developing such a system, it it satisfy those inquiries most critical to the First, it was.common practice to assume implications for correctional administra­ must be kept in mind that the documenta­ tion of information must conform to the survival and operation of the agency. The that while a suspect was entitled to his con~ tors who wish to move from a reactive to a FIgure 3.1. CorrectIonal caHlaw demand InformatIon model analysis of demand information presented stitutional rights before and during the trial, proactive stance in regard to jUdicial inter­ rules of evidence which govern the admis­ in Chapter 2 indicates that the correctional upon conviction he lost many of the rights vention. In response to the first question, sibility of evidence in a 'court of law. As community is inundated by inquiries from he once had. Secondly, the courts acknowl­ correctional administrators must be aware mary statements and trends statements are intended to assist administrators in concerns the type of information suggested both the public and private sectors. Some edged that since corrections was designed of the current posture of the court toward across each of 20 major issue areas in cor­ preparing for informational demands by in the model, the most important aspect of ofthese inquiries were intended to satisfy a to benefit the prisoner, correctional admin­ inmates' rights and the conditions, policies, rectional case law as outlined in Table 3.1. the courts before they develop. the rules of evidence appears to be the bus­ 5 student's curiosity while others influenced istrators would know what was best, not and actions which might lead to litigation. The issue areas which underlie the model iness records rule. This rule specifies the legislation. However, of .all the various only for the prisoner, but for the institu­ Furthermore, administrators must be able were identified by reviewing available doc­ Case law compendium conditions under which agency records and groups which demand information of cor­ tion. Finally, the courts confirmed that to anticipate trends in correctional case law umentation concerning correctional case The third part of the model, appearing in documentation must be presented. Specifi­ rections, none has a more significant im­ whatever was given to an offender was a so that the orderly development of an agen­ law and by consulting with a number of Appendix B, is a compendium of correc­ cally, the business records rule states that a pact nor makes any greater demand upon privilege, not a right, and as such could be cy's operations can precede any manage­ attorneys who regularly defend correction­ tional appellate cases which represent the witness producing records in court must be an agency's resources than the judiciary. given subject to certain conditions and tak­ ment by court order. An adequate response al agencies. courts' decisions across the various. issue able to show: Over the past decade, the federal courts en away for almost any reason. Historically to the second and third questions necessi­ The summary statements encapsulate areas in correctional law and upon which -The ag(;l1cy maintained records in the have increasingly intervened into almost the courts consistently maintained this po­ tates the development of documentation contemporary jurisprudence on current the summary statements and trend state­ normal and regular course of business, and every aspect of the correctional process. As sition because they did not want to impair concerning an agency's actions, services, issues in correctional case law. They are ments are built. The'compendium provides that the records produced are a part of a consequence, corrections has been called the ability of prison officials to carry out and facilities. Even if an agency is unable to designed to allow administrators to briefly a more detailed enumeration of the court's those regularly kept. upon to produce mountains of documenta­ their varied and complex penological re­ avoid infringing on an inmate's rights, it review the current status of litigation and posture on specific issues. Within each issue -The entries in the records are made at or tion in an attempt to meet the court's in­ sponsibilities. may oftentimes be able to substantiate and modify their decisions so that any major or area, the leading cases are cited and their about the time that the transaction takes quiries about the way in which inmates are However, in the 1960s various attitudi­ defend its actions if a "compelling state unsupportable conflict with the courts holdings abstracted. place. housed and managed. The critical nature of nal changes in American society precipitat­ interest" can be shown. Finally, the show­ might be avoided. The statements are based -The entries are made from reports, mem­ these information demands is evidenced by ed what has been termed the "due-process ing that an infringement of an inmate's upon: Information needs oranda, or other documents prepared by the fact that a failure to respond to chal­ re:volution. "2 This vigorous concern for in­ rights is the minimum necessary to serve -An exhaustive review of appellate court The final, and possibly the most useful someone who actually had knowledge of lenges from the court not only invites "man­ dividual rights opened the door for judicial the needs of corrections requires that ad­ decisions involving correctional agencies, part of the model is the section on informa­ the transaction. agement by court order," but exposes cor­ intervention into every facet of the criminal ministrators be aware of alternative solu­ administrators, prisoner rights conflicts, etc. 3 tion needs which was designed to help cor­ -The records produced are the original rec­ rectional administrators to personal liability. justice system. For the correctional com­ tions which might be available. This means - Extensive tracking of all cases to deter­ rectional agencies respond to the question ords, though photographic reproductions Furthermore, the inability to successfully munity, the demise of the "hands off" doc­ • that a vehicle is needed through which cor­ mine whether precedents set in older cases of what information ought to be retained to have generally been submissible. defend itself injures the public image of trine resulted in a number of landmark de­ rectional agencies might share the best so­ have subsequently been overruled by more indicate that its policies and procedures A recognition of the constraints placed up­ corrections and impairs its ability to main­ cisions which dictated that: lutions to common problems. recent cases. 4 " ... are compelling enough to justify the on an agency in responding to judicial de­ tain a credible relationship with other groups - Prisoners have certain fundamental rights. -Advice of a number of correctional law­ invasion of a prisoner's rights." In essence, mands for information emphasizes the need with which it must interact. Finally, the -Certain practices, procedures, facilities and The modet yers familiar with contemporary correction­ this part of the model is a requirements for corrections to anticipate these demands volume and importance of judicial infor­ lack of correctional resources abridged these al case law and the informational needs of analysis for a correctional law information and develop information in an orderly and mation demands so greatly absorb the re­ rights. In order to enhance a correctional agen­ correctional administrators. system. As seen in Exhibit A, the informa­ accurate manner, as a consequence of the sources of an agency when it is involved in -Correctional officials did not make an cy's response to these four fundamental The trends statements enumerate a num­ tion needs enumerate those data elements normal course of business. Finally, it should litigation that its ability to satisfy other adequate showing that valid correctional questions, a four-part correctional case law ber of observations as to how the courts which would typically be needed by an at­ be noted that even though an agency can inquirers is significantly diminished. concerns justified such various abridgements model has been developed (see Figure 3.1). might be expected to move in any particu­ torney to successfully defend an agency show a compelling state interest and justify To a large extent, corr.ectionS' failure to of these fundamental rights. This model is desigp.ed to illustrate the lar issue area in the near future. These trend within any particular issue area of correc­ its actions, it must also evidence that its anticipate and develop the evidence neces­ -Changes had to be made in accordance types of information which an agency statements were developed from the sum­ tional case law. These information needs actions are the least restrictive method of sary to offer a viable defense for its actions is with the mandate of the courts' opinions. should maintain in order to either avoid or mary statements, together with case dicta, were developed from a review of discovery violating an inmate's rights. In order for an due to the rapid and often unpredictable The consequence of these decisions is that successfully res:;ond to a challenge from footnotes and dissents, and discussions with requests, an analysis of active defenses to agency to be aware of the optimum solu­ evolution of correctional case law. Prior to correctional agencies must bear the burden the court. This model reflects current con­ attorneys in the field. The trends statements correctional suits in the various issue areas, tions to its problems, and be able to show the 1960s, the federal courts refused to of proof in showing that either they have ditions and needs based upon past appel­ that there is no better course of action, accept jurisdiction over prisoner complaints not violated a constitutional right or that late court decisions. corrections must develop a vehicle through on the basis of what was called the "hands they did so only in response to a "compel­ Table 3.1 which it can share information. Optimally, Summary and trend statements DIrectory of major Issue areas corrections should have a natiqnal clearing­ ling state interest." In addition, when a correctIonal case law demand InformatIon model • Much of the m~terial presented in this chapter and fundamental right is involved, the agency The first and second components of the house through which agencies can share in the Case Law Compendium (Appendix B) resulted must establish that any restriction on an model are designed to help correctional j, I. Court access Xl. Isolation the best solutions to common problems. from consultation with a number of correctional law 11. Access to counsel XII. Search & seizure Such a clearinghouse would also serve to specialists including Richard Crane, Attorney at Law, inmate is the minimum necessary to ade­ administrators avoid litigation altogether. I- 111. Media access XIII. Conditions of confinement Louisiana Department of Corrections; Dr. Rolando del quately serve a compelling state interest. To do this, administrators need to know IV. Receipt of publications XIV. Staffing enhance the standardization of correction­ Carmen, Associate Professor, Criminal Justice Center, V. Correspondence XV. Work/Idleness/exercise al policy and management, as is currently After a decade of balancing the needs of what is happening across all areas of cor­ I VI. Visitation XVI. Rehabilitation Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, Texas; Rob­ 1 being attempted by the American Correc­ corrections and the rights of inmates, pat­ rectional case law and more importantly, j V11. Telephone access XVII. Grievance procedures ert DeLong, Counsel, Texas Department of Correc­ VIII. Transfers XVIII. Discipline tional Association and the Law Enforce­ tions; and Leonard Peck, Attorney at Law, Special terns in correctional jurisprudence have what is going to happen. In Exhibit 3.A, at IX. Religion XIX. Race and sex discrimination Assistant to the Attorney General, State of Texas. begun to emerge and one can anticipate the the end of this chapter, are presented sum- X. Administrative segregation XX. Civil rights actions ment Assistance Administration through the Correctional Standards Project. Hope- I, , 12 l

'-if.; ,

Correctional case law demand information 15

another. However, transfers within the XI. Isolation B. Medical care 14 Correctional data analysis systems same Institution to a segre~tion unit do require due process. (See ctlons X and Summary Summary stllution on notice regarding the allor­ author of the leller must be given an XIX). Inmates are entltied to due process pro- Courts wlli not second guess medical fully, the combination of such a national ney/client relationship, mall from attor­ opportunity to appeal the decision to Trends tectlons before placement In Isolation. Iso- staff, but will Intervene where there Is clearinghouse, along with the proactive de­ neys may be opened and Inspected, but someone other than the original decision lation Is cruel and unusual punishment If a deliberate Indifference to medical velopment of correctional law information no read, only In the Inmate's presence. maker. It Is permissible to Inspect letters • Same due process required for trans- the deprivations and/or length of con- needs by either medical or Inmates have the right to see their attor­ between Inmates and private Individuals fers from ~rlson to mental hospital or from finement are shockIng to the conscience. non-medical staff. systems as outlined in the present model neys at reasonable times and In such a there bac to prison. for contraband. This may be done outside Trends Trends will satisfy the demands created by litiga­ manner as to permit private communica­ the Inmate's presence. • Motivations for transfers being reviewed tion between them. • Review of dietary restrictions during Iso- tion and put correctional administrators Trends (e.~., to stop jailhouse lawyers). • Medical personnel/Inmate ratios. Trends • ffect of transfer on Inmate being con- lation. • Review of adequacy of mental back in full control of their agencies. • Intrusions Into Inmate's right of free sldered. • Length and conditions of solitary are heallh care. • Access to legal assistance groups speech must be the least necessary to • Inmates have no right to transfers. being closely linked. • Preventive medicine (regular (ACLU, etc.) governed by same rules as accomplish a legitimate govemment Information needs • Deprivation of clothing Is looked upon physicals, etc.), References access to allorneys. interest. unfavorably. . • Dietary needs. • Visits attorneys' employees • Mall lists and restrictions on the number • Department regulations on Intra-state • Visiting priVileges while In SOlitary. • Special facilities for physically I Krantz, Sheldon. The Law of Correc/ions and Pris­ br. (paralega, law students, Investigators) of letters a prisoner can write are being set and Inter-state transfers. handicapped. fillers' Righ/s in a NUlshell. St. Paul, Minnesota: West govemed by same rules as attorneys. • Criteria for placement In every unit Information needs aside. lillormation needs Publishing Co., 1976. (See also Krantz, CasesalldMale­ • Contact visits required. • Delays in delivering mall to inmates are within system. • Regulations govemlng placement In sol- rials on ri,e Lall' ofCorrecliolls and Prisoners' Rig/lis. St. • Outgoing mail sealed. being scrutinized. • Guidelines for selection to special pro- Ita~. " Medical staffing pallems. Paul, Minnesota: West Publishing Co., 1973.) Information needs • Some minimum free postage Is re­ grams or units \wOrk release, etc.), • ecords of hearings Including evidence • Hospital procedures, Including 'Ibid. quired. • Reasons for ndlvldual transfars. relied on and reasons for placement In " ~uarantlne of persons with contagious • Rules govemlng allorney correspon­ • Emergency transfer procedures. Isolation. Iseases. l Potts, James L. and Bronstein, Alvin J. Prisoners' • Review of censorship decisions. dence and viSiting. • Reading of outgoing mall coming under • Log showing duration of confinement • Sick call rrOCedures. SelfHelp Liligalion Manual. The National Prison Proj­ • List of members of state and local bar. and number of Inmates sharing cell. • Indlvldua medical and dental criticism. IX. Religion ect or the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation. • Record of all attorney visits (date & • Prohibition or censorship of inmate-to­ • Plans detailing cell size and conditions. records for each Inmate. Lexington, Massachusetts: Lexington Books, 1976. Inmate visited). inmate correspondence being upheld. Summary • Any special rules not appllceble to gen- • Emergency procedures and • Record of all abuses of attorney's visit­ eral prison population. records of emergency treatment. 'Ibid. Information needs Restrictions of Inmates' re"illous freedom > Stuckey, Gilbert, EVidencefor Ihe Law Enforcemenl Ing or correspondence privileges (particu­ • Statistics showing numbers of larly regarding Introduction of contra­ • Department regulations on general cor­ ma~ only be lustllied ~ showing a com- Inmates treated, type of medical Officer. New York: McGraw-Hi:l Book Co., 1974. band). pellng state nterest. enerally, Institu- XII. Search and seizure respondence. tional security and economic consldera- problem, etc. • Procedures for handling of mali. Summary • Records of any special treatment tions are teco~nlzed by the courts as • Procedures for securing postage Searches of cells and personal belong- programs. Exhibit 3.A III. Media access and/or stationery by indigents. sufficient IUSti cation for Infringing on In- • Inventory of medically-related Correctional case law demand mate's re Iglous freedom. Religions must Ings and pat-down searches of Inmates Summary • Records of yearly expenditures for may be conducted at any time. Search eqUipment. information model postage and stationery by institution. be treated equally within the prison. Some means of communication between warrants are not necessary, Strip C. Physical conditions • Records detailing any censorship and Trends searches may routinely be performed prisoners and the press muet be available, appeals therefrom. 1 Summary I. Court access but neither Inmates nor the media are • Review of regulations restricting hair after contact visits. • Records of contraband discovered length and beards where regulations ere Courts will look at the totall~ of the Summary entitled to specific personal"lnterviews. passing through the malis. In conflict with sincerely held religious Trends conditions of confinement. ven The press has no greater right of access • Records of disposition of contraband. I though one thing standing alone (e.g., beliefs. • Probable cause necessary before con- The right to an individual and meaningful to a prison than does the general public. access to the courts Is guaranteed to I • Religiously motivated dietary requlre- ductlng strip and body cavity searches. Inadequate plumbing) might not be prisoners under the due-process clause of Trends VI. Visitation ments are being recognized. • Receipts for confiscated property. cruel and unusual punishment, the total effect of the living conditions cen the U.S. Constitution. While officials main­ • Privileged correspondence similar to Summary • Security considerations which curtail re- • Presence of Inmate during search of tain some discretion in how meaningful allorney/inmate mail. 1 !!Ptlous activities are being closely re- possessions. rise to constitutional levels. access will be provided, it Is clear that • Rules seiling forth standards to be Visitation may be regulated when rea­ eWed. • Privacy during strip searches. Trends inmates are entitled to communication to applied when Interviews are requested. sonably related to legitimate prison inter­ • Notice to Inmates regarding what ac- ests. However, any regulation must be I, , Information needs • ClothlnO mus\ be laundered and from the courts free of institutional r' tions will subject them to strip searches. Interference. Officials are required to han­ Information needs applied in a uniform manner. There is no • Department regulation poliCies re rell- • BOdr cavity searches by medlcel per- regularly and must be consistent with dle such correspondence expeditiously. • Rules governing correspondence and constitutional right to conjugal visits. glous activities, Including appearance sonne only. thecllmate. codes and handling of special dlet!lry • Regular cleaning schedule. Trends visiting by media. Trends Information needs • Rules setting forth criteria for permilling f ' needs. • Proper Insect and rodent control. • Right to send sealed correspondenc" individual interviews and group press con­ • Requiring advanced approval of poten­ • Breakdown of Inmate population by re- • Regulations govemlng searches. • Every cell to have toilet and hot and to judges and to have incoming corre ferences. tial visitors is permissible. liglon. • Records of all contraband seized and cold water. spondence inspected only in inmate's • Records of all press access. • Suspension of visiting privileges as • Record of religious services provided, manner In which It was found. • Beds must be off the floor and of presence. • Records of all abuse of correspondence punishment is being closely scrutinized. Including payments to chaplains or part- • Records of reasons for conducting nonflammable material. • Where law library is utilized to provide or visiting privileges. • Contact visitation, particularly for pre­ time ministers. non-routine strip searches. • 30 foot candles for cell lighting. access to the courts, scrutiny of contents • Records of security problem created by trial detainees. • Record of problems created by partlcu- • Copies of receipts given Inmates for Information needs • Review of visiting hours and number of lar religious groups or Individuals, seized property. of library, its availability to inmates, par­ media access. • All architectural plans, particularly ticularly those in segregation un~s, visitors allowed permilled. • Record Qf reasons for denying any re- • Disposition of all property seized. • Review of visiting room conditions. ~: IIglously motivated request. for heating and ventilation systems. amount of time library Is open, number of • Minors to be permilled to visit parents. • Policies regarding ViSitS by religious or • Staffing pallerns of maintenance books inmate can request, etc. IV. Receipt of publications XIII. Conditions of confinement personnel. • Review of adequacy of altemative legal Informalion needs spiritual advisors. Summary A. Overcrowding • Maintenance records. assistance programs-law school clinics, • Department regulation on visiting­ • Housekeeping regulations. in particular. Censorship of publications must be re­ X. Administrative segregation Summary • Review of arbitrary reassignment of lated to legitimate institutional interests. including frequency and number of vis­ • Records of housekeeping supplies "jailhouse lawyers." Requiring that publications be received itors. Summary Double ceiling is not per se purchased. only from publishers is permissible. In­ • Records of persons denied visiting. If the transfer to administrative segrega- unconstitutional, but courts look at • Records of articles of hygiene Information needs stitutions may not censor publications • Records of problems caused by indi­ many factors In detennlnlng whether (soap, toothpaste, etc.) purchased vidual visitors. tion amounts to a "grievous loss," the and furnished Inmates. • Department and Institutional rules on merely because they are critical of prison insliMlon must provide due process Institution Is unconstitutionally inmate/court correspondence, Incuding administration. • Records of visitors received by each safeguards, Including notice of the rea- overcrowded. Square footage • Pest control contracts or records. postage allowances. prisoner and date of visit. standards adopted by various groups • Fire marshall's reports (at least Trends • Aecotds of approved visitors. sons for the transfer, a hearing before an yearly). • Department and institutional rules on impartial fact finder and a limited rl9ht to do not constitute constitutional inmate-provided legal assistance, library • Regulation regarding censorship must • Records of special visits. minima. • State health office reports (at least present documentary evidence an call bl-monthly). hours, access to library, etc. be specific. witnesses. Trends • Clear statements oullining alternative • Requiring evidence to show that sexu­ D. Food services VII. Telephone access Trends • Square footage Is just one factor to legal assistance p~ograms. ally oriented material will cause problems Summary • Ust of all law books and legal subscrip­ in the institution. Summary • Review of reasons for placement In l::a considered, others are: time spent tions (records should Include efforts at • limitations on amount of reading mate­ There is no clearly established right to administrative segregation. It 1 cell, conditions of cell, age of Prison officials are required to provide keeping library current and replacement of rial in cell Is valid. telephone calls for convicted prisoners. • Periodic review of Inmates to determine buildings, amount of violence and a well-balanced meal containing lost or damaged books). • Inmate entitied to notice of and appeal Telephone calls may be momtored (ex­ when they should be released. number of disciplinary Infractions. sufficient nutritional value to preserve I • Desl~n or rated capacity not Inmate's health. A trained dietician • Certification of adequacy of law library from censorship decisions. cept calls between inmate and his allor­ • Criteria for release. by law librarian or law professor. f : controll ng In determining should regularly review menus and Information needs ney). ! I • Exercise privileges. overcrowding. • Records of reasons for transferring or 1 " Infonnation needs food pregaration. ~ecial diets disciplining jailhouse lawyers. • Rules governln.9 Incoming publications, Trends Information needs ordered y the me Ical staff must be including disposition of unacceptable pub­ provided. • Records of allempts to abuse law li­ • Permilling at least emergency calls. • Written rules giving notice to Inmates • Dally population figures by housing brary access or privileged communica­ lications. • Regular telephone access for pre-trial regarding actions which will cause trans- Trends tions. • Records of any problems caused when detalnees. fer to administrative segregation. ul1ils. • Square footage In each housing • Providing for special dietary needs • Records of all inmales seeking legal particular publications are allowed Into Information needs • Written procedures for hearings. assistance and the help provided to them. Institution. ! • Records of hearings, Including evl- unit. based on religious beliefs. • Records of publications censored and • Department regulation regarding In­ dence relied on and reasons for sentence • Tima spent In cell/dorm each day. • Re~ular examinations of food • Records detailing reasons for any • Desirable and maximum capacity of breach of privileged communications by reasons therefore. mate use of telephone. Ii Im~sed. handl ng personnel (free personnel the Institution. • Logs showing calls mOOe by Inmates. • rillen criteria for release. Institution by hOUSI~ unit. and Inmates). .' • Records of any abuss of telephone • DIScipline and vlo ~nce figures by • R~ulllr Ins~eCtions of sanitary • Budget figures for law-related books 1 • Procedures for reviewing Inmates In month. and supplies. V. Correspondence privileges (obscene calln, threats, etc.). r I administrative segregation. condi Ions In od preparation areas. • Conditions In segregation units (space, • Review of amount of time Inmates Summary 11. AccE.sS to counsel VIII. Transfers f sanitary facilities, exercise, etc.). ar~ given to eat. Mall between Inmates and tho:;o on the • An~peclal rules appllceble to segrega- Summary outside may be censored If It furthers Summary tion, t not other areas of the prioon. The right of an Inmate to communicate security, order, or rehabilitation within the Inmates are not entitled to hearings or with his attorney is clearly recognized. Institution. If officialS' censor or withhold other procedural due process when they J Provided the allorney has placed the In- mail, the Inmate must be notified and the are transferred from one prison to 1 I L •

16 Correctional data analysis systems Chapter 4 each regulation, the correctional agency must develop policy guidelines for the dis­ Information needs XIX. Race and sex discrimination semination of information. An excellent . Exhibit a.A (continued) Summary Correctional case law demand • Job breakdown by titie and type of skill required. Work and rehabilitation programs and example of such policy is the "Criminal Information model • Individual inmate Institutional wor/( housing units must be racially integrated Demand information: Justice Information-Privacy and Security records, including reasons for job unless there is a rational basis for not Cookbook" developed by the New Mexic'o changes. dOing so. Male and female prisoners must State of the art • Review of dining locations (cell vs. • Regulations contrOlling indoor and receive similar treatment. 'Criminal Justice Department. dining hall). . outdoor exercise. • Review of dietary restrictions In • Inventory of exercise and athletic Trends Another common problem for which most solitary confinement, Including equipment. . • Integration of mUltiple occupancy cells. agencies have a written policy concerns number of meals. a day. • Job assignments by lot. communication with the media. The trust l[1formatlon needs • Inter-racial visiting cannot be prohibited. ~Vi. Rehabilitation • Women prilloners entitled to lost by inaccurate, conflicting reports from • Dally menus. • Health reports on food handlers. Summary educational and vocational training corrections is difficult to restore. To elimi­ • Sanitation reports for food Courts have not found that inmates have a programs of a range and quality A major objective of the CDAS project few have formulated policies and procedures nate confusion and ensure accuracy, most preparation areas. right to rehabilitation or treatment comparable to men. involves an assessment of how demand re­ to govern the total response process. The • Procedure for handling special programs during incarceration. However, • II state provides minimum security agencies have policy which specifies the diets. facilities, work release, etc. for male quests are processed in the correctional com­ Oregon Division of Corrections is one agen­ manner in which information can be re­ as part of the totai conditions of an prisoners, women are entitled to similar • Complete reports of any suspected Institution, they often consider existence munity. The assessmenf includes a descrip­ cy which does have extensive written policy leased to the media. However, one correc­ food poisoning Incidents. of such programs In deciding whether the opportunities. • Review of privileges given to members tion of how the process functions and major. concerning all correctional activities includ­ tional administrator commented that any­ E. InmatEo safety institution Is violating the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. of different ethnic groups. problems encountered by correctional agen­ ing the demand information process. The one in that agency could release information Summary Information needs Trends cies as they attempt to respond to requests. existence of such policies provides consis­ to the media as long as it was the truth and Prison offiCials must exercise • pally raclai breakdowns for housing sufficient control and supervision to • Review of reasons for deh'ting Inmate Literature related to demand information tent response throughout the agency to such did not involve popUlation projections or the right to participate in avaliable units. protect Inmates against physical • Monthly raclai breakdowns of work and is sparse. The data for this assessment was, questions as who has Ilccess to correctional budget projections for the next year. Open, assaults. Inmates cannot be used to programs. rehabilitation programs. therefore, collected by a telephone survey information, what resources can the agen­ guard other Inmates. Employees may • Seiectlon of inmates for programs must • Selection criteria for housing, work, and free-flowing communication between the not use unnecessary or excessive be on non-discriminatory ballis. rehabilitation programs. of each correctional agency and site visits cy afford to expend on demand informa­ agency and the media is admirable but it • Requiring basic education courses. force against Inmates. • Monthly breakdown of work ana to seventeen agencies. The site visits ampli­ tion requests, and what is the most effective has some dangers. What an administrator Information needs rehabilitation programs by sex. Trends fied preliminary information collected by and efficient means of response? may believe to be the truth may in fact be • Description of available programs. • Budget expenditures for work and • Review of classification system to rehabilitation programs by Institution (to telephone and gave the project staff the Many agencies recently have become incomplete or out of date, leading to the ensure separation of potentially • Selection criteria and reasons for show that women prisoners are getting violent from non·vlolent. removal from program. proportional funding). opportunity to directly observe the demand painfully aware of the impact that informa­ release of inaccurate information or to in­ • Assignment of only minimum • Portion of budget spent on information process. The staff was particu­ tion requests have on staff time and finan­ rehabilitation. formation which conflicts with that released security Inmates to dormitories. cial resources. Administrators of many agen­ • Annual review of each prisoner'S • Number of persons participating daiiy XX. Civil rights actions-administrators' larly interested in the wisdom acquired by by another administrator in the agency. classification. and yearly. defenses & liability the correctional agencies as they experi­ cies are currently reviewing the problem in Written policy directing the demand in­ • Review of shakedown procedures. enced successes and failures in demand in­ an effort to develop Jormal policy and pro­ • Review of guard·ta-guard and Summary formation process results in response con­ prisoner-to-guard communication XVii. Grievance procedurlls Prison officials will not be held liable In formation processing. cedural statements which will improve the sistency. In the correctional community, systems. Slimmary prisoners' civil rights actions unless 1) the There are many questfons which could efficiency of the process and reduce the however, much of the response process is Information needs officials knew or reasonably should have Inmates need not exhaust administrative known that their actions would violate the be asked in an assessment of demand in­ workload., For example, even though the informally understood by agency person­ • Classification criteria and remedies, Including Institutional grievance Inmate's constitutional riphts, or 2) the formation responsiveness. Major questions Minnesota Department of Corrections procedures. procedures, before filing suit In federal officials acted with maliCIOUS Interest to nel and has evolved over time rather than • Clear statements regarding types of court alleging constitutional right cause a constitutional deprivation. addressed in this chapter include the fol­ prides itself on never turning down a re­ having been planned. Requests are intui­ violations. Inmates to be housed In each housing Negligence or medical malpractice alone lowing: quest for lack of data, the agency's admin­ tively routed. The respondent ma.y be the unit. Trends will not support a claim for damages under • Reports of any use of force by the Civil Rights Act (42 U.S.C. 1983). -What is the purpose of policy in the de­ istrators find it necessary to formulate policy best qualified to answer the request or he employees or Inmates, Including • Congress Is considering legislation (H.R. 10) which would require exhaustion Trands mand information process? to control the influx of requests. Agencies may be simply the least busy at that mo­ statements by examining doctor. of Ilrievance procedures before prisoner • Record of all shakedowns, • Attorneys' fees may be awarded to - What are the common procedural elements with lesser response capabilities have even ment. including Items confiscated. civil rights' actions can be filed. prisoners' attorneys even where prison in responding to a demand information re­ a greater 'leed for such policy. Similarly, response priorities are often Information needs officials were in good faith. quest? For some agencies, even though requests • AppOintment of attorneys for prisoners based on SUbjective judgments or past ex­ XIV. Staffing • Grievance procedures. -What is the impact of the inter-organiza­ represent a significant probiem, the addi­ • Records of handling of all grievances. In civil rights cases. perience, rather than policy. Procedures Summary • Statistics on types of grievance • Where the loss !s minor, prisoners may tional and intra-organizational relationships tional task of developing policy cannot be such as these, which depend on experience handling and their resolution. be required to exhaust administrative Sufficient numbers of employees to remedies prior to filing civil rights action. on the demand information process? imposed upon the already overworked ad­ and intuition, risk breaking down when protect life and property must be hired. • Lack of financial resources is no - What technology is currently being used ministration. The Department of Correc­ key staff changes occur. Without agency Prison guards must receive adequate defense to civil rights action. training. Employment must be on a ·XVIiI. Discipline and what are the major technological ob­ tion in Tennessee has over 5,000 institu­ policy, units within an agency may have Information needs raCially non-discriminatory basis. Summary stacles in the response process? tionalized inmates but no computer. The differing or even opposing interpretations Trends Sefore an inmate can lose good time or be Note: Depending on the allegations contained in the lawsuit, any of the -What are the personnel needs affecting task of manually responding to a request of the needs and priorities of the process. • Requiring affirmative hiring programs to placed In Isolation or administrative segregation he Is entilled to a procedurally information detailed in the previous the demand information process? which requires a manual check of the rec­ The result is inconsistent information pro­ reduce racial disparity. sections might be needed. • Equal job opportunity for women. correct hearing, including advance notice In order to present the demand informa­ ords is formidable. A few correctional duction. Policy which specifies the response • Psychological examinations of of the charges, right to present evidence • Documentation of communications of tion process in a manageable format, the agencies, usually those with a very small prospective employees. In his own !)ehall, and written reasons for legai developments to prison official. proced.ures is the best protection from the • Review of staffing pattems. the action taken against him and the • Reports on all unusual occurrences process has been divided into five facets. inmate popUlation and a correspondingly inefficiencies of duplicated responses and evidence relied upon. Some form of within the prison, especially those which These facets include (1) policy considera­ small staff are either (1) forced to ignore all Information needs assistance must be provided to illiterate involve possible violation of laws or wasted time. Policy is also the best defense, • Employee Interview records showing Inmates. Institutional regulations by employees. tions, (2) procedural techniques, (3) admin­ but the most critical requests, or (2) actual­ against charges of arbitrary and capricious race, sex, and reasons for not hiring. Trends • Documentation of disciplinary actions istrative organization, (4) technological ly do not receive requests in sufficient num­ action. • Records of staffing pattems. taken against employees who violate • Statistics on dally absence. • Review of the neutrality of the hearing inmate rights. applications, and (5) personnel patterns. bers to be considered a problem. These • Records of all training programs, officer(s). By examining the parts of the process the agencies have not considered demand in­ Proc:edural techniques including curriculum and attendees. • Due process protection when minor losses are involved. different capabilities of correctional agen­ formation policy a pressing need. • Written rules and specific penalties cies are more ;easily described and under­ With the exception of Oregon, other Procedural techniques in demand infor­ XV. Work/ldleness/exerclse must be provided every Inmate. • Appropriateness of penalty imposed, stood. agencies with demand information policies mation include the mechanics of process­ Summary inciuding iength of time assigned to generally have policy statements only for ing and the record keeping involved in pro­ Inmates are entitled to some minimal isoiatlon. amount of exercise. They are not, • Review of use of inmate informants. two demand information concerns. These ducing a response. Key procedural elements however, entitled 10 meaningful jobs Information needs Policy considerations are privacy and security issues and/orcom­ for achieving control of the process and during their Incarceration. • DiSciplinary rules and procedures. munication with the media .. Privacy and efficiency in response production are rout­ Trends • IJI individual disciplinary reports, Demand information requests have only security regulations complicate the response ing and logging. These two elements com­ • Inmates must be given opportunity to including statements of the evidence recently emerged as a significant adminis­ process. Federal, state, local and agency plement and impact each other. The effec­ work. relied on and reasons for penalty • Inmates entitled to 3-5 hours of outdoor imposed. trative task for corrections requiring a state­ regulations may all affect how an agency tiveness oflogging depends partly upon the exercise each week. • Statistical breakdown of dlscipllnRry ment of policy for control. Most correctional can respond and what information can be routing model of the requests; yet efficient • Review of recreational programs and infractions, by rule, housing unit and eqUipment availabie to inmates. penalty Imposed. agencies have recognized the problem but released. In order to insure compliance with routing cannot be established without a 17 .- ~ " ! •

Demand information: State of the art 19

whether it satisfies agency standards or con­ cult with the widely dispersed arrival lo­ policy statements and training should ad­ 18 Correctional data analysis systems forms to agency priorities. cations of the individual response routing dress the following: resource allocation must be compiled from m.odel. An exception may be an extremely -Who can speak for the agency. knowledge of arrivals provided by the log. -The dissipation of agency resources is minimized by the delegation of the response various departments. Logging small agency with a self-contained staff. -Importance of and methods for verifying -Efficiency of the process is threatened by The log of demand information requests Other factors, besides routing, which af­ the accuracy of the information. Routing task to specific departments. -The opportunity for recording and log- errors in forwarding, and by the possibility minimally provides a record of the receipt fect the logging procedure are agency poli­ -Complete understanding of all regulations If the agency is to have control of the of two or more locations compiling re­ of the request, the subject of the request cy and the source of the request. Agency governing privacy and security. response process, established routing pro­ ging the requests is maximized. . -Duplication of response created by Iden­ sponses for identical or similar requests. and date received. It may also include the policy may indicate that log records will be -Compliance with agency policy and state cedures are necessary. Routing increases Examples of this type of routing can be date the response is due, the individual re­ maintained at all arrival locations or, in the regulations. efficiency by the systematic physical han­ tical requests sent to various sectors of the agency is prevented. seen in the Geol'gia, Indiana, Florida, and sponsible for the response, and the data absence of an agency policy, a specific re­ -Guidelines for informing administrators dling of the request. Duplicate requests sent ColoradO correctional agencies among required for the response. There are several ceiving location may have its own policy of information releases. to various sections of an agency are threats Disadvantages of consolidated others. The Georgia Department of Of­ advantages which accrue to the correction­ for logging requests. Examples of specific Realizing the potential for miscommuni­ to the efficiency of the response process. fender Rehabilitation, for example, speci­ al administrator when an adequate log of records are those kept by data processing cation and the serious consequences of it, The problem creates the irrita ting and cost­ request model -The model may not be practical for very fies three primary, respondents: the public requests is maintained. for billing purposes, or those records df several correctional agencies have delegat­ ly situation of two or more staff members information office, the director of institu­ -As the record of ad hoc requests the log media communications maintained by the ed certain critical information functions to each devoting time and agency resources to small correctional agencies nor efficient for extremely large agencies whose "central" tions, and the research and evaluation of­ provides the data for all analysis, planning public information office insuring consis­ specific offices or individuals. Legislative compile the same response. Many times fice. Inquiries are distributed to these three and evaluation of the demand information tent news releases to all media. Even tele­ liaison and media contact are the most com­ these duplicate requests are not discovered office is spread over several sites. -The success of the model depends upon offices according to the subject of the in­ process and its impact on the correctional phone requests from the media may be monly recognized communications posi­ until requisitions for identical data from quiry and the type of response re~uired. agency. recorded. Offical requests from the gover­ tions. Of the 17 agencit!s visited, approxi­ different agency sections reach the data the centralization of all requests at one or two designated points. For some agencies The Indiana Department of CorrectIon al­ ClThe log serves as an index to past responses. nor's office or the legislature often merit mately 60 percent had identified public processing department. If no routing pro­ this model is too restrictive to function with­ so routes requests according to the nature Some inquiries may be answered in full or recording when other sources do not. information officers and approximately 25 cedures are established, then decisions must in the normal operating procedures of their of the subject, for example: in part by data already compiled for similar percent had the position bf legislative liai­ be made independently for each request. -Requests concerning the adult authority, requests. Control of Information releases son. The California Department ofCorrec­ The routing methods utilized by most agency. . -The model assumes the presence of a poh- inmate appeals, etc., are routed to the ex­ -The log provides a list of the consumers of The procedural elements discussed thus tions, Virginia Department of Corrections, correctional agencies can be summarized ecutive director. correctional information and what the top­ far, routing and logging, have concentrated and the Federal Bureau of Prisons have by the following three models: (I) consoli­ cy which specifies a centr~1 auth~ritrwhich makes assignments, estabhshes pnontles and -Requests concerning education, programs, ics of interest are. on the arrival patterns of requests to cor­ both positions (Congressional liaison in the dated request model, (2) preliminary sort­ insures the cooperation of all departments. transfers, etc. are routed to the classifica­ The log provides the key to an analysis of rectional agencies; however, there is also a case of the latter). Whether or not an agen­ ing model, and (3) individualized response tion and treatment director. demand information impact on the agency. problem with information disseminated cy has a full-time legislative liaison may be model. In general, these models refer to Several correctional agencies which prac­ tice this model or similar forms of consoli­ -Requests from the inmates and response Without a log the drain on the agency's from the agency. Responses to demand in~ partlya function of the calendar of the state routing the external requests coming to the to denials are routed to work release. resources from such requests cannot be formation requests are seldom subject to legislature. If the legislature meets fol' a agency. Requests originating within the dated request routing are Maryland, Mass­ achusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, and -Juvenile inquiries are routed to youth au- identified. Plans for controlling the requests review or administrative control. Responses specified number of days every other year, agency also require routing fo~ efficiency South Carolina. thority. ' or attempts to include them in the agency's may vary widely in quality and may not a full-time liaison position may not be justi­ but, with the requester present, mIscommun­ -General information requests are routed budget are nothing more than guesswork. conform to agency standards. It can be fied. Other agencies may have specified cer­ ication and errors are less likely to occur. Preliminary sorting model to research and statistics. The log also serves as the basis of an e~tremely embarrassing to the correctional tain individuals to be responsible for those In this model the arrival locations are index for demand information requests. An agency for information to be released which functions when the need arises, but, their Consolidated request model Individualized re:;ponse model index allows the agency to locate past re­ is in some way inconsistent with its goals. usual position within the agency may be This model is a formalized method of not designated until the requests are prelim­ inarily sorted by the addressee. Requests In this model ad hoc requests are infor­ quests whose responses are reu~ble for Common problems with information re­ researcher, administrative assistant, etc. routing requests. Requests received throu~h­ mally processed and they are generally t.he similar requests. Without a log of requests leases may include: out the agency are first routed to a desig­ are then routed to three or four locations at,;~ording to the content of the request and/ responsibility of the addressee. The recIp­ imd responses the administrator must treat -Violation of privacy and security regula­ nated location regardless of content. After ient may respond directly or forward the each request as uniq\.ll!. Nearly every agen­ tions Administrative organization preliminary consolidation, requests are or the source of the request. Requests for policy or those from the governor or legis­ request to another individual whom he ~e­ cy maintains copies of the major requests -Errors routed to the appropriate respondent. The Iieves is qualified to respond. Often an m­ and responses, but these are usually filed -Incomplete data The administrative relationship between responsibility for producing a timely re­ lature are routed to the chief administrator or his assistant; inquiries which entail fig­ dividual with time available or with more chronologically by arrival date and not in­ -Conflicts with other information the correctional agency and state govern­ sponse may be assigned to th~ r~spond~nt ures and statistics are directed to the re­ experience in the agency becomes ~~e per­ dexed. Use of the file depends on the mem­ -Untimeliness of information. ment and the relationship of the correc­ or may be retained by the ongmal deSIg­ son charged with the task of complhng the ory of one or two individuals as to the The news media may call several members tional agency to its data processing facility nated location. The latter is especially ap- . search department; requests from the media are usually routed to the public informa­ response. In a small agency where several existence of a similar request and its re­ of the staff to obtain information or to raises some questions concerning the im­ propriate if the efforts of several different tion office even if the request requires data operational functions are blended into one sponse. obtain interpretations or comments on pact of these relationships upon the de­ agency units are necessary to complete the mand information process. from other sources. department, the staff members may. share As important as the logging is to the previously publicized information. It is not request. It is not unusual for a response to the response task in an effort to equahze the agency, it also has some disadvantages: uncommon for the agency's representatives -Is an agency more responsive to demand require information from a combination of Advantages ofpreliminary work burden. -Staff time and effort is required to main­ to differ in their interpretations ofthe data. information requests if it is (I) operating agency sections, i.e., administration, re­ sorting model tain an adequate log for future use. For example, the number of inmates in an under the umbrella of another department search, and data processing. -The routing process in this model elimi­ Advantages of indiYidualized -To be totally effective, a log must be main­ institution may be different for food service or (2) operating as a separate department in If the model is strictly observed, requests nates one step of the consolidated request response model tained by all recipients of inquiries. than for the administration, with numer­ the state government? which are addressed to specific offices and/ model, that of initially centralizing the re­ -The individual 'Ilethod of response is pos­ -Requests received and answered by tele­ ous inmates out on work release, furlough, -Is an agency more responsive to demand or personnel would be forwarded to the quests arrival. sibly the most flexible and the most easily phone, though numerous, are frequently or for court appearances. information requests if the data processing designated arrival location to be recorded -Many agency staff members prefer to make adapted to the various types Ol administra­ brief and troublesome to record. Some problems occur when staff members service is (1) totally in-house, (2) shared but and routed. In practice, however, if a spe­ routing decisions individually rather than tive organizations found in corrections. -Many agencies have no routing procedures are unaware of agency policy. For exam­ with no limits on access, or (3) shared but cific question is correctly addressed to a refer all requests to a central location. They -This model is common in, but not con­ established or are using routing models of ple, in one agency a bureau chiefs opinion with limits on access? particular individual such as a warden ~f believe they have sufficient information fined to, smaller agencies whose request preliminary sorting 'and individualized re­ (expressep to the media) regarding the lo­ Many correctional agencies are adminis­ an institution, he will probably answer It about the various tasks and functions of volume does not support the need for for­ sponse which restrict log maintenance. cation of a new facility proved to be at tered under the umbrella of another depart­ rather than forward it to the designated the agency to be able to forward requests malized routing procedures. Logging effectiveness and expediency are variance with agency policy on the location ment. Is the agency's ability to respond to location only to have it routed back to him. correctly. closely tied to the agency's routing model. of new facilities. Another embarrassing sit­ ad hoc requests impeded by this adminis­ Examples of designated arrival locations Disadvantages of individualized Under the first model, consolidated request uation occurs when the administration is trative organization? Divisional agencies are the Assistant to the Director, the Public Disadvantages ofpreliminary response model model, logging is a natural accompaniment ignorant of certain news releases to the me­ were compared to departmental agencies Information Office, Research Department, sorting model -Control. and efficiency are reduced unless to the centralization of the requests arrival. dia. on the technical and personnel obstacles to or Correspo1,ldence Secretary. -Control over the demand information the agency is very small and has continuous With the two or three designated arrival Monitoring each response or information demand information processing. No appre­ process is d.iminished by the decentrali~ed open communication among perso.nnel. locations in the preliminary sorting model, release may not be practical, but standardi­ ciable differences between the two forms of arrival locations. There may be confUSIOn -The agency administrator has little opppr­ logging procedures must be carefully for­ zation is needed. Clear policy statements. organization were detected. Apparently the about who has the respon'sibility for the tunity to review the contents of a response mulated to include all ad hoc requests and and training for personnel could help pro­ responsiveness of the agency is internally Advantages of the consolidated or to.select the respondent. request model response and setting priorities. to insure an interchange among the loca­ vide this standardization. At a minimum, based. -Knowl~dge of the complete scope of ad -The agency also has questionable 'com­ tions. Comprehensive logging is very diffi- -The agency maintains tight control oyer mand over the execution of the response·_· the demand information process. hoc requests for plairning, budgeting and Demand information: State of the art 21 20 Correctional data analysis systems ever, the statistical requirements for most entire data base consumes a great deal of Agency data base , .. ,- ... -"" output reports is not complicated. Cross­ CPU time ..Two hundred to four hundred The organizational relations'hip between Table 4.1 Data base obstacles to the demand in­ the correctional agency and its data pro­ Comparison of the access to lnformadon systems with the tabulation of two or three factors is most dollars per run was a common estimate for formation process are primarily incomplete cessing service \I IS defined as: (1) totally percentage use of automation In responding to ad hoc requests frequently requested, but even this simple a single SPSS application. records and errors in the data. If the errors If A few administrators are forced to take in-house, (2) shared but no access limita­ Access statistical analysis can present a problem. are in the data before the agency receives it, tions, or (3) shared with access restrictions. the agen,cy writes its own statistical pro­ exceptional measures to obtain statistical then, obviously, there is very Ii ttle that the Shared Manual Access to data processing was found to be a Percentage In-house Shared, grams, the benefit is custom-tailored soft­ information for their agencies. In an at­ agency can do about it. However, errors with IimJlatJons factor affecting the response capability of Use no limitations ware, but. the price is highly trained per­ tempt to develop a substitute for SPSS, can occur in the collection stage at admis­ 2 0 sonnel with time to design new programs the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and dlso an agency (see Table 4.1). Access restric­ High 4 11 sions. Errors can occur during data tions included such problems as no pro­ 5 0 and modify existing ones. Correctional Corrections has developed two programs­ entry. Accurate recording and coding of Moderate 3 4 grammers and/or system analysts within 0 agencies typically report a shortage of tech­ an Extract program and a CrossTab pro­ the data during data entry is critical. 1 1 7 the agency, no interactive terminals within Occasional nically trained personnel so if special pro­ gram. With these two programs, the agency Errors and incomplete data significantly 1 3 9 the agency, c.ommunication difficulties due None 1 gramming is required to respond to each can extract and compare variables required reduce the reliability of the information. 17 9 to the remoteness of the information sys­ Totals 9 17 request, the result can be no output at all in demand information requests. These two Users lose faith in the information system. tem from corrections, and the high costs in from data processing or output that is so programs more efficiently satisfy most of The loss of confidence by the staff com­ long in production that its usefulness has the agency's statistical needs than the SPSS time and money for using the system. The cal capacity of the agency's automated data pounds the problem of obtaining complete -Most agencies prefer on-line capability to evaporated. package which, although available, is on a in-house system is assumed to have no ac­ processing system. The correctional agen­ and accurate data. Correcting errors already directly update and manipulate their data Other agencies purchase proprietary pack­ separate computer in the state data center. cess limitations, although there are.a few cies chosen for site visits exhibited varying in the data base with a disillusioned staff is bases. Interactive terminals within the cor­ ages in order to have analytical capability. The Missouri Division of Corrections al­ instances of inter-departmental problems degrees of technological capability. aformidable task which several correctional rectional agency connected to the state da­ The most popular statistical packages in­ so has difficulty utilizing statistical pack­ which have restricted the use of the infor­ Technological capacity of an agency was agencies have faced. Of the agencies visit­ ta center may be very expensive or may not clude SPSS, with 30 correctional agencies ages. When this agency r.equires statistical mation system in some specific situations. categorized according to: (1) hardware, (2) ed, the Oregon Division is one which has be possible at all depending on the relative reporting access to it, and SAS with 5 agen­ output, the programming must be modified The idea of a shared central computer software, and (3) agency data base. The had some success in revitalizing their data location of the agency and the center. cies reporting access. When an agency re­ and punched on cards in order to be re­ for state agencies was originally intended study revealed a number of obstacles, par­ base. The Ohio Department. of Corrections -If a correctional agency operates through ports the availability of analytical pack­ ceived by the computer with analytical to streamline data processing use within ticularly with respect to data base:: and is currently conducting a similar "cleaning" a central data center and has no technical ages, it is misleading to assume that the capability. In Maryland, the Department the state. In the 1960s when the potential software which limited the response capa­ of their data base. personnel within the agency to assist with agency does in fact have easy access to the of Public Safety and Correctional Services applications of automated data ?rocessing bility of automated information systems. systems planning and programming, com­ package or makes use of its analytical abili­ must also rework its programs, strip the were realized, many state flgencles wanted The following discussion will include the munications between the agency and the ty. Thirty-four correctional agencies report identifiers from the data, copy to tape and their own computel·. The cost and the di­ major technological obstacles encountered Personnel center may decline. Agency personnel may the availability of analytical packages (such take it to a university. At least two agencies versity of data processing installations by the correctional community. proved so great that centraliz~d data p~o­ not know data processing requirements, as SPSS, SAS, Data Analyzer), but fully admitted to enrolling staff members in lo­ Personnel limitations reported by correc­ and center personnel may not understand 50 percent of those agencies have difficulty cal universities as a means of gaining access tional agencies are categorized as an insuf­ cessing facilities were establIshed to m­ Hardware corrections' particular needs. Requests and using the software. There are several rea­ to university computers and analytical ficient number of staff (10 agencies) and, crease efficiency and to coordinate the data The limitations ofthe computer hardware printouts must be transmitted and/or trans­ sons for this. software. Louisiana Department ofCorrec­ inadequacies in the management of the processing activities of various depart­ appear to be whether or not the agency has ported between locations; erro.rs a~e mu~h -The analytical software package is housed tions and Alabama Board of Corrections demand information process (10 agencies). ments. Many states' regulations prohibited a computer. The size of the computer or more likely, and turnaround time IS agam on a different computer froin that which both report access to SPSS but Louisiana Thirty-two agencies reported no personnel departments and agencies from purchasing who manufactured it was not reported as a increased. stores the correctional data base. The com­ has no individual yet trained to use the problems. or utilizing any computer other than the technological restriction in the demand in­ designated central state computer. . . -Turnover is very high and state data center puters may be adjacent in a state data cen­ package. In Alabama, the package and the The complaint of insufficient staff may personnel are often inexperienced. formation process. ter but have no interface so that a tape of trained personnel are located in the Statis­ also be a symptom of Inadequate technol­ The centralized computer concept, which At the time the data were coilected, nine -Priorities in a state data center usually the data must be made and transferred to tical Analysis Center. ogy, especially in software applications. If was originally an economy measure, now correctional agencies had manual informa­ place the state's administrative functions the second computer. One concludes that practical statistical a staff member must manually go through increases the cost and decreases the effec­ tion systems. The status of several of the ahead of corrections' needs. -The computer with the analytical pack­ analysis is a serious problem for many cor­ inmate records to obtain the data, the agency tiveness of data processing for some correc­ manual systems is changing. The Wyoming -Correctional agenc;-.s with several institu­ ages available may be in another location rectional agencies. The extra time and ex­ may report that there is insufficient staff to tional agencies. There are several reasons . State Board of Charities and Reform ex­ tions may find that distributive processing blocks or miles away, adding transporta­ pense required to take advantage of sta­ process the request. Many ad hoc requests for this development. pected to be utilizing the state central data (each institution with a minicomputer con­ tion to the problem. tistical packages can significantly restrict which require m~nor computations effort -The price of computer hardware has de­ processing facilities by mid-1980. The New nected to the central office) is nlore effec­ -The issue of privacy and security must be the use of those resources. Those few re­ are monumental tasks for agencies with a creased to such an exten t that the purchase Hampshire Department of Prisons and the tive. Each institution then has immediate considered when transporting correctional quests which merit the extra effort involved manual information system. For example, ofa computer is no longer beyond the bud­ South Dakota State Board of Charities and access to data for determining woric assign.. data to other computers. Correctionalagen­ in using a sta tis tical package may include a con.sider the question of how many inmates gets of many agencies. Corrections are planning the implementa­ ments, counts, etc., and in the event of cies frequently report a university as their request from the legislature which impacts convicted of drug-related offenses are vet­ -The capacities of automated systems have tion of the Offender-Based State Correc­ technical problems affecting the telephone source of analytical capability but, without the agency's budget, or requests from the erans. If the data elements of veteran status increased so that some agencies can oper­ tions Information Systems (OBSCIS). lines (connecting the' institutions with the computer security, identifiers must be attorney general who is assisting in the le­ and offense are computerized, the response ate effectively with a minicomputer, further Kansas, also an OBSCIS member, became central office), the on-site usages of data stripped from the data. gal defense of the agency. is a simple comparison of the two. decreasing the purchafie price. operational with an IBM 34 (mini) in July, processing can continue. .., -The corrections data base may have a In addition to statistical analysis, anoth­ Even though technology may relieve some -The cost of prog:amming and software 1979. Nevada 1'arole Commission is a Agencies who reported access hmltatlOns structure which does not permit the direct er software need of correctional agencies is staff shortages, the problem oflimited qual­ has increased. Agencies which are restrict­ member of the OBSCIS system but has no to data processing also reported a much application of analytical programming. For software which can generate a report di­ ified and experienced personnel is very real ed to the state data center for their program­ automated inmate information system. ming and systems work are also restricte.d lower percentage use of automation in re­ example, many correctional files are hier­ rectly for a consumer. Many agencies must in the correctional community. Correctional from entering competitive markets for theIr sponding to ad hoc requests compared with archical, but SPSS can process only flat decode the computerized output to make it agencies are handicapped in offering com­ agencies whose information systems were Software programming needs. Slightly mor'! than 20 percent of correc­ files. In these instances, the data must be meaningful to non-technical personnel. petitive technical and administrative posi­ in-house or agencies with no access prob­ There is technology available-report gen­ -When the central computer b;:'eaks down, tional agencies report programming limita­ modified to permit the use ofthe analytical tions. Although administrative offices may lems. Agencies with access limitations also package. eration-which can reformat the coded be in a major city, institutions are frequent­ ali agencies sharing the facility are affected. tiohs which restrict ~he ag.;ncy's ability to -Many state data centers have become reported more technical obstacles in de­ -The use of such packages requires trained output to make it intelligible for the lay­ ly located in rural areas away from the mand information proc'!ssing than do oth­ produce ad hoc information. The actual overloaded as computerized information percentages of agencies with inadequate personnel. The correctional agency may not man. An example of a report generator larger urban labor pool. Pay is regulated by er agencies. Table 4.1 illustrates the reb­ now in use in approximately eight correc­ the state government and may not be com­ has multiplied for each of the agencies in­ software may be larger because symptoms have skilled staff experienced in the soft­ tionship between access to and useofautomation. tional agencies is MARK IV, a package petitive with similar positions in private volved. Turnaround time from the data of that problem include an overworked staff ware application even if the agency has center increases as efficiency decreases. and unanswered requests for information. direct access to the package. Th;: problem is developed by Informatics, Inc. The Virgin­ business or industry. Frequent turnover ia Department of Corrections in particular further compounds the problem ofinsuffi­ -As agencies have turned more of their Many administrators and staff, not recog­ more acute when the corrections agency is effectively using MARK IV. Another re­ cient agency staff. Correctional agencies operations over to automated systems, nizing what appropriate programming can must rely on the availability of knowledge­ Technology port generator is Easytrieve, a product of frequently have technology which is tem­ programming needs have become more so­ do for the agency, believe the difficulty to able staffin other agencies or the state data phisticated. There is a greater dem~nd ~or center. Pansophic Systems, Inc. Easytrieve is used porarily unused due to lack of trained staff. The ability of a correctional agency to be inadequate staffing. technically trained personnel which In­ The most common software need for -Packages are generally expensive to oper­ by approximately eight correctional agen­ Formal training relating to information respond to demand information requests ate. To run an SPSS program against an cies, including Oregon and Nebraska. processing is lacking for correctional per- creases the cost and may further delay the corrections is analytical programming; how- ! . depends a great deal upon the technologi- I turn around time. f i f

I·i .. ---~'---"<-"'~"' ---.- -,- .~- -.-~.::~ "'::::-'~~::-:::=:::::.:.::::::-::::::::::'.::::::.::' ::::::::;::;::::::"~:::::::;:~~. ~·==-:':::="~,","=-="""'r"""-.""~~~;.o,-",,,,-~.-:.;;;:,:;;-,:;;_"~r:::::.~:;;~.::.:::::::;' .. ::;;~:_':::;':,...::~-;;'::,:,'C:::::'~":;:".'-=::-/.:::.;_~;r~:;:..:.:t.::.;:;;:;-_

22 Correctional data analysis systems Demand information: State of the art 23 sonnel. Training f. r new staff is seldom stand particular capabilities or limitations "Lack ofleadership and knowledge among Agencies were classified as small, medi­ Table 4.2 provided. Newly hin d staff founder by trial ofa computerized system. As a result these those responsible for systems and compu­ um, large, and very large according to the Size of population compared with technological obstacles and error or they attempt to learn from administrators may incorrectly blame the ters following popUlations: already overworked senior personnel. state data cent~r or others for errors which -Inadequate definition of the duties Small ::; less thau 1000 (13 agencies) Technological obstacles State regulations may, rohibit paying two result from poor internal coordination. -Weak staffing of the computer installa- Medium = between 1000-3000 (14 agen­ cies) Size of agency None Data base or Programming Automation Totals persons for one position so a departing The advent of automated information tion systems problems needed employee may not train a new employee systems in the correctional community brings -Overemphasis on accounting types of Large = between 3000-10,000 (15 agen­ Small even for a short time sir.·~e both cannot be more than faster and easier clerical report­ applications at the expense of other vital cies) 5 5 1 2 13 paid simultaneosuly. Frequent turnover ing. Automation offers the potential of functions Very large = over 10,000 (10 agencies). Medium 5 4 3 2 14 defeats most training efforts. The Depart­ completely new strategies for dealing with -Lack of consideration for the human ele­ The results suggest that popUlation size Large 2 3 7 3 15 ment of Corrections in Connecticut has problems and for improving the operation ment in ADP does not appear to be a major obstacle in Very large 6 4 0 0 10 particularly tough competition for compu­ of correctional facilities. With computers -Imbalance between supply and demand the demand information process; however, ter programmers from the many insurance the techniques of simulation, linear program­ of competent personnel there is a relationship between the size of Total 18 16 11 7 52 companies based in that state. An indivi­ ming, PERT (program evaluation review -Frequent lack of cooperation, sometimes the agency and the technological obstacles dual with little or no programming expe­ techniques), and advanced statistics are outright hostility between management and in accessing the automated information rience can obtain a job in corrections and among the new tools available for correc­ those manning the computer installation. system of the agency. All agencies expe­ Table 4.3 acquire experience which qualifies him for tions. An administrator unacquainted with rience difficulties with data base and sys­ Size of population compared with personnel obstacles a better paying position with the insurance novel solutions made possible by automa­ Quantitative analysis of tem problems but medium and large Personnel obstacles companies. tion has difficulty escaping the traditional processing capabilities agencies report more limitations in pro­ Management of an information system is bounds of problem-solving. These admin­ gramming (see Table 4.2). The increased Size of agency None Training and Insufficient Totals difficult. To function successfully the sys­ istrators fail to understand the power of the The first section of the chapter reviewed size of the agency may indicate a need for management staff tem must be the result of a coordinated computer to transcend conventional uses the demand information capabilities of the additional software capability, which the Smail 10 2 1 13 effort of all sections of the correctional ofinformation and they may react in one of seventeen correctional agencies visited by very large agencies have already obtained. Medium 9 3 2 14 Personnel obstacles, :,articularly the com­ agency. To ensure this coordinated effort, the following ways. the project staff. The diversity ofthe strengths Large 7 3 5 15 each section must be included in the plan­ plaint of insufficient staff, appeared more -The computerized system is forced to fit and weaknesses is not unexpected given the . Very large 6 2 2 10 ning and evaluation of the information sys­ the scope and format of traditional report­ variability among the systems which com­ often in large agencies than in other agen­ tem. Too many ad.ministrators just view the ing systems. prise the American correctional communi­ cies. This complaint may be the result of Totals 32 10 10 52 computerized output and believe they are programming limitations reported by these -Data collection and report production is ty. This diversity of ability does, however, seeing the total information system when agencies. Administrators in these agencies mUltiplied in terms of quantity of data, not raise some obvious questions concerning actually there are many steps to the mfor­ may feel the need for more staff in order to quality of information. . the relationship between the demand infor- Table 4.(, mation process. The responsibility for these accomplish manually what their software is Some administrators mistrust the auto­ mation processing capability of an agency OBSCIS memberships and technological obstacles processing steps, ranging from data collec­ failing to provide. Table 4.3 shows that mated system and insist that manual rec­ and certain of its institutional characteris­ tion to information dissemination, is spread training and management needs appeared ossels Member ords be maintained to duplicate the in­ tics. For example, do larger institutions have over various departments of the agency to be equaily divided among agencies of Technological obstacles Operational Developmental No formation. Other administrators, in an effort more obstacles in demand information pro­ complicating the job of overall coordina­ different sizes. to take advantage of the reported capacity cess than do smaller ones? Do members of None 9 4 5 tion. of the computer, confuse the quantity of the OBSCIS community (Offender Based Data base or systems The distance between data collection and oasels membership problems 6 5 5 the data collected with the benefit of the State Corrections Information Sygtem) have data dissemination, besides complicating Membership in the OBSCIS community Progranlmlng 6 3 2 information produced. Unfortunately, the fewer response problems than those agen­ the coordination of the information pro­ does not appear to solve all of the techno­ Automation Needed 1 0 6 planning and careful consideration of which cies using other informations systems? cess, also reduces the cQmmunication be­ logical problems involved in producing re­ data elements and which reports are neces­ To answer questions of this nature var­ Totals 22 12 18 tween the locations. Misunderstanding and sponses to ad hoc inquiries. Some readers sary may be omitted. The data processing ious hypotheses were proposed concerning even resentment among the sections of the may be surprised by this apparent deficien­ system can consume agency resources to a the relationship between the response ca­ agency may result. There are several prob­ cy in the OBSCIS system because the tech­ OBSCIS members (6 operational, 3 devel­ far greater extent than it benefits the agen­ pability of an agency and other institution­ Table 4.5 lems which contribute to the discord of the nological potential of OBSCIS is well known. opmental) (see Table 4.4). cy. Reports can inundate an agency and al characteristics. Analyses were performed I Software and the use of automation information system. Field personnel seldom However, it should be noted that OBSCIS never be read. on the fifty-two correctio.lal agencies in­ for response see applications of the data which they col­ cluded in the study. For a review of the is designed as an operational reporting sys­ Use of automation In It is interesting to note that problems in response process Existence of software lect and if no reinforcement is provided for frequency distribution of various agency tem and is not designed for producing non­ the correctional community concerning the Use of automation Yes No accurate and complete data collection, the standard reports or statistical applications. One question raised in the study involves automated data processing system are not characteristics see Appendix C. input is likely to become perfunctory. Re­ If an agency implements all eight modules the extent to which automated information High: more than 70% 17 0 unique to corrections. J. Rose in The Cy­ The characteristics analyzed in this chap­ I search staff and other agency personnel ter include: of the OBSCIS package, many responses to systems are utilized in responding to de­ Moderate: 30%-70% 10 2 bernetic Revolution I reports pitfalls of au­ frequently request additional data not real­ -Population demand information requests would be mand information requests. During the Occasional: izing the staff effort required to gather the tomated data processing for business and available, but the responses would come telephone survey, corrections personnel es­ less than 30% 7 2 industry which are nearly identical to those -OBSCIS membership None 1 13 info(mation. Some data collection forms -Use of automation in response p'rocess. from standard reports, not from special timatc;d how many of the rt!sponses to ad are revised so often that neither the field in corrections. Most of Rose's observations data manipUlations. In addition the reader hoc requests were supplied by automated Totals 35 17 personnel filling them out nor the data en­ relate to management and personnel and should note that the full potential of systems (either from special computer runs try personnel have the opportunity to be­ include the following: Population OBSCIS technological advances is yet to be or from available reports which had been tomation in the response process than do come familiar with the forms. The opposite - Lack of understanding ofthe role of A.D.P. The index of inmate popUlation size was realized by many correctional agencies. produced from the automated system). These agencies who have access limitations. Ac­ may occur with the continued use ofa form in a modern company the number oflnstitutionalized adult males Nearly one-third of the OBSCIS states are estimates are understandably rough but they cess problems greatly reduce the use of data that is outdated and inappropriate. -a computer is purchased for status reported in the 1979 edition of the Ameri­ still in developmenta!.stages and not yet do indicate the importance of data process­ processing in the demand information pro­ The administrator must recognize his ob­ -personnel believe their job security can CorrectionalAssociationDirectory. The Ii-lily operational. OBSCIS agencies with ing in the response process. cess (see Table 4.6). ligation to provide the necessary leadership is threatened number of adult males was selected as the only the Basic OBSCIS (admissions, move­ It is not surprising that the use of auto­ A strong relationship exists between in­ and supervision for the information system. -ignorance as to the computer's po­ index of the inmate popUlation for several ment, national reporting) are very limited mation appears to be related to the exis­ formation system access and technological The correctional administrator may have tential reasons: in responding to ad hoc requests. tence of analytical software in the agency. obstacles. Agencies reporting no technolog­ some difficulty fulfilling his role as leader -Concentration on computer hardware with­ -Some correctional agencies are responsi­ Of the 16 correctional agencies who re­ Agencies with statistical packages or in­ ical obstacles appeared to be those with because of the technical processes involved out adequate consideration of ble for juveniles as well as adults. ported technical obstacles with their data house statistical programming use automa­ in-house data processing or those with no in the information system. Most correction­ -the software . -Some agencies must supervise comntunity bases or system structures, 11 were members ted systems more than do agencies without access limitations to a shared information al administrators have social science/cor­ -the design of the system corrections as well as institutions. of OBSCIS (6 operational and 5 in devel­ this capability. This relationship is present­ sy~tem. Of the 18 agencies reporting no rections backgrounds. They may not have -servicing of the installation -The few women incarcerated do not rep­ opmental stages). Of the 11 agencies who ed in Table 4.5. technological obstacles in their automated been exposed to the technological language -periodic review of the costs resent it significant portion of the total reported programming limitations, 9 were Agencies whose access to data process­ system, only two agencies shared data pro­ of data processing or they may not un dei- -proper staffing popUlation. . ing facilities is not restricted use more au- cessing facilities and had access limitations. ~ --~- ---~ ------~--

24 Correctional data analysis systems ChapterS The principal objectives of this analysis of existing report generation and statistical software were to: Tablu4.6 Informatlbn system access and use of automation eIdentify software currently on the market , which meets correctional criteria. Access Report generation and analYSis technology:. 'ePerform a comparative analysis of report In-house Shared: no Shared: Manual generation software. Use of aut.omatlon access limitations access limitations with ~mltatlo_!1s system eperform a comparative analYSis -of statis­ High: greater than 70% 4 11 2 0 tical analysis software. Moderate: 30-70% 3 4 5 0 The first section is an overview of the f Occasional: less than 30% 1 1 7 0 I I\ specific software assessed in this study. A None 0 1 3 10 1 I typology of software is used to organize the Totals 8 17 17 10 software packages described. This section 1 I also summarizes software packages used by state cprrectionill agencies. Technology Summary Iif The information collected in the telephone The state ofthe art in analysis and report The neit section focuses on a compari­ 1 I The results of this assessment show the Demand information processing in correc­ survey and site visits revealed that even generation technology indicates that the son of selected report generator packages, state of the art of demand information pro­ tions is hindered by a lack ofanalytical soft­ I though a majority of correctional agencies purchase and use ofcommercial or proprie­ while the third section compares selected cessing to be one of change and diversity ware and by deficiencies in the agency's data I do have some automated capability, the tary packages is more cost effective than general-purpose statistical packages. Assess­ throughout the correctional community. The base. I systems were developed to provide routine having a special program written for each ment criteria are specified and the major Many agencies lack adequate program­ I response process is rapidly evolving as cor­ '{ reports only and are less than responsive to special report required. advantages and disadvantages of each pack­ rectional agencies are recognizing and at­ ming or easy. access to the software avail­ I demand informa tion requests. These infor­ age are discussed. able elsewhere in the state system. Of some I This chapter presents an assessment of tempting to solve the probiems created by j mation systems tend to be inflexible when In preparing this study of report genera­ demand information requests. For purposes 34 correctional agencies reporting the avail­ i presented with ad hoc or demand informa­ computer software relevant to the demand tion and statistical software, Susan Wool­ of organization and to insure a thorough ability of analytical software, approximate­ tion inquiries due to a variety of reasons. information data processing requirements dridge's excellent guide entitled Software of correctional agencies. The issues and assessment, the demand information pro­ ly 50 percent must make special arrange­ ~,{ The most common constraints include: Selection was most useful. l It contains a cess was examined according to the major ments to actually use the software. The eThe data base configuration does not meet problems of software development are ones step-by-step discussion of the process of factors which impact the process. These data base file structure may prevent the input specifications of proprietary packages. that are, perhaps, on the agendas of most acquiring software in a nontechnical and factors include policy, procedure, adminis­ application of some types of software and eThe data processing personnel are unfa­ EDP managers. Correctional decisionmak­ easy-to-follow manner. The development trative organization, technology, and per­ limit the exploitability of the automated II miliar with the use of statistical software ers-besieged by demands for information of the report generator section is based, in sonnel. The maj or findings in each area are system. The data base may contain errors packages. about inmates, prisons, costs, effectiveness part, on the surveys and reports published II of programs arid efficien~y of operations­ as follows: and omissions rendering it unreliable for .\ ! epersonnel or funds are unavailable for by the DataPro Research Corporation.2 producing information. ! I writing special programs to answer each demand data from their analysts and pro­ Their feature report entitled "User Ratings Policy demand information request. . grammers. Typically, the information re­ of Proprietary Software" is based on user Very few correctional agencies have poli­ Personnel 1'1 Many demand information requests are quired either does not.exist or exists in a ratings of over 1900 software packages. cy governing the complete demand informa­ Personnel limitations affecting the demand i for lists of a subset ofthe population, iden­ form which is difficult, if not impossible, to The section on Statistical Packages drew tion process. information process include: (1) lack oftrained I tifying those individuals meeting a variety use. The software considered in this chap­ heavily on the report of Ivor Francis en­ Policy is a critical element in establishing personnel. (2) lack of formal training pro­ of changing parameters or characteristics. ter has either been used by a state correc­ titled A Comparative Review of Statistical consistent agency response. Policy docu­ vided by the correctional agency. and (3) Other requests require some single statisti­ tional agency or, based on their attributes, Software.3 Francis presents a comprehen­ ments the agency's commitment to regula­ lack of coordination in the management of cal manipulation usually far less sophisti­ should be considered for use. This includes sive assessment of 45 statistical packages. tions and standards. It also provides guide­ the automated information system. !.l cated than the range of functions available software packages which have been found This report is a sourcebook on statistical lines for the role of staff and administration Some reported personnel shortages could I on many commercial proprietary packages. satisfactory in the development, main­ software capabilities replete with sample be alleviated if the agency had more and 1 tenance and analysis of correctional bases in the response process. I Data processing personnel frequently have output from each of the packages and an easier access to technology. Other short­ I neither the time nor the statistical expertise and in generating reports that are respon­ excellent bibliography. t sive to the decisionmaker's needs. Procedu~e ages are caused by the rapid turnover of to write from scratch programs to produce technical personnel in corrections and the 1 i The key elements to procedural control of thes~ statistical manipulations on such an The purpose of the chapter is to describe the Available software the response are adeqll(:te logging and rout­ absence offorma.l training for personnel in 11 ad hoc basis. Over the past few years much relative attributes of selected software pack­ ing of requests. the agency. j-l money has been spent to develop sophisti­ ages which appear to meet the requirements Over the past decade the computer en­ Log records furnish the correctional A s_uccessful automated information sys­ cated information systems that are largely of demand information requests submitted vironment and market has been one of the administrator with data regarding the tem requires the coordinated effort of near­ II unresponsive to the changing, ad hoc de­ to correctional agencies. These software most volatile and difficult to administer in number and kind of requests which the ly all sections of the correctional agency. mands for specific information. This is packages, both report generation packages the public sector. Results have not kept agency receives. The records also serve as Supervision of the system is difficult be­ .Ll primarily due to data base configurations and statistical analysis packages, are com­ pace with the funds spent for development cause (1) the input and output ofthe system indicators of the resources used in the re­ ! 1 and software requirements rather than the pared with respect to correctional needs and maintenance. sponse process. Routing the requests to an are removed from each other and, (2) be­ selection of data elements. Figure 5.1 illus­ and assessed as to their transferability and Battle stories of enormous investments cause most correctional managers are not iI appropriate respondent allows for control trates a sol~tion. utility. without results abound. Many of the prob- of information dissemination, eliminates familiar with the technical abilities and lim­ L lems in the past centered on hardware. duplicate response efforts, minimizes the itations of system. However, computer hardware has steadily dissipation of agency resources and in gen­ improved in quality, reliability and, gener­ Reference II11 eral fosters greater efficiency. STAT PKG ally, decreased in cost. Software problems I Rose, J. The Cybernetic Revolution. New j have been at the core of many stories of York: Barnes & Noble, 1974. I Adml~lstratlye organization 1 abandoned systems-the failure ofprograms A shared data processing system can in­ ! to meet expectations, new applications not crease costs and decrease effectiveness of ! available when promised, insufficient pro­ automation for some agencies. 11 gram documentation, insufficient resources Correctional agencies sharing computer I REPORT for programming needs. While many of these facilities may experience limitations in ac­ -I GENERATOR issues have been dealt with, .projections of cess and use of the system. Those agencies I, with access limitations are forced to reduce • Much of the material presented in-this chapter was prepared by Seth I. Hirshorn, Ph.D., Associate Profes­ their use of automation in demand infor­ i=lgure 5.1. Data base/software Interface sor, Interdisciplinary Studies, Public AdminIstration. mation processing, and generally face more University of Michigan, Dearborn. technological obstacles when the system is utilized. I 25 \ ! " 1.1 II : U -·4~ 26 Correctional data analysis systems

future data processing costs invariably point increas.e in hardware expenditures of only specifically, the software packages used for Report generation and analysis technology 27 20 percent. 4 statistical analysis. These include such pack, to the escalating price of software devel­ Table 5.2 opment and programming, generally, as a In this section an overview of proprietary ages as the Statistical Package for the Social Software packages available, departments of corrections, by jurisdiction, 1979 Table 5.3 major issue confronting the EDP manager. software packages is presented. This over­ Sciences (SPSS) and the Biomedical Data Software packages available or in use Siale RG Stat pack For example, in a statewide survey of local view is organized into two parts. F::u(, the Package (BMD). Exhibit E is a list of such Custom NoEDP No Information departments of corrections, 1979 ' governments in Massachusetts, software general categories of software are defined, statistical packages. This list also includes Alabama SPSS· X Report generators N Percent of 52 expenditures increased by over 175 percent and the report generators and statistical the vendor of the package to contact for Alaska Easytrieve SPSS Arizona SPSS X • MARK IV 8 15% between 1976 and 1978 compared to an packages currently in use in correctional further information. Most of these statisti­ Arkansas SPSS· • Easytrieve 8 15% X • Golden Retriever 2 agencies are identified. Second, lists oftht: cal packages were developed in a university California MARK IV·/ ADABAS 4% SPSS· X • Others 15% environment, are well documented, and Colorado ORW/OLP SPSS· ~ report generators and statistical packages, X 26 Connecticut Easytrieve SPSS (at Univ.) some of which are examined in depth in have proven capabilities. While they vary Delaware STA T packages Table 5.1 D.C. X Percent of 52 specific sections of this chapter, are pre­ in terms offunctional emphasis, most have X • SPSS 30 15· 58% 29%· Typology of software package!> Florida MARK IV SPSS • SAS 6 sented. a wide range of data analytic capabilities. Georgia X 12% Golden Retriever • Others ....§. 12% Operating support programs To facilitate the discussion, Table 5.1 Some of these systems are interactive, e.g., Hawaii MARK IV SAS/Cross tabs X 42 1. Operating systems presents a typology of software based on SCSS, MINITAB II and SAS 7.5, but most Idaho X Percent of 52 illinois Easytrieve SPSS· -IBM OS, DOS (Operating the software's generality of use. This typol­ are batch-oriented. In preparing Exhibits Indiana X No automation 10 19% System, Disk Operating ogy follows the categorization developed in A and B many quality systems were ex­ Iowa X System) SPSS • In use Software Selection by Wooldridge. While it cluded. The choices made were based on Kansas Source: See Table 5.2. -Burroughs MCP, NDL, MCS (Master X Control Program, Net- Kentucky MARK IV SPSS is not comprehensive, it gives some exam­ considerations of the needs of EDP and Louisiana X work Definition research staffs in corrections, reported ca­ SAS/SPSS· X Language, Message ples for each category. Maine Easytrieve SPSS·/IO SCORE process for selecting a new software pack­ Maryland X Control System) Operating support programs are ma­ pabilities of the software, prior software X age for statewide use in 1977. Their prod­ NOS, KRONOS (Network Massachusetts SPSS -CDC chine-oriented and are frequently referred assessment results and availability of the Michigan X uct was especially useful in suggesting a Operating System, Time; Reporter X to as "system software." These include the package. Minnesota format and specific criteria. sharing option named for Asl-st 3PSS X Greek god of TIme) widely known and used operating systems The telephone survey of state departments I .M!sslssippi Golden Retriever The criteria are divided into six main M,ssouri SPSS, SAS, MINI-TAB X 2. Compilers developed by computer manufacturers such of corrections reveals that 30 percent use a SPSS· groups: (I) file creation and management· /' Montana CulpriVMARK IV SPSS/BMD/TPL -FORTRAN (Formula Translator) as IBM's OS and DOS and CDC's NOS. report generator and that Easytrieve and • I (2) programming; (3) analytic capabilities; -COBOL (COmmon Business Nebraska Easytrieve SPSS Compilers for Fortran, Cobol and other Mark IV are preferred (see Tables 5.2 and Nevada-- (4) output; (5) training and support· and Oriented Language) X -BASIC (Beginners All-purpose programming languages are a second type 5.3). In contrast, 65 percent have access to New Hampshire (6) acquisition and costs. Most of th~ spe­ Symbolic Instruction New Jersey MARK IVIDYL 200 X Code) of operating support program. A second statistical packages with SPSS the most cific criteria in each group are stated as a New Mexico Easytrieve SPSS -RPG (Report Program category of software is designed specifically frequently used, although less than half New York standard of minimum performance; e.g., it Generator) SPSS X to aid the programmer in performing such actually use the package. Most departments North Carolina SAS (at Univ.) should be able to handle up to 10 input files North Dakota X 3. Assemblers still rely heavily on custom programming tasks as editing and documenting pro­ Ohio X (Exhibit A, Section 1.5). Jargon and tech­ Prcgrflmmer aids I SPSS·/CROSS-TABS grams. Utility programs are a third type of for their report generation needs because Oklahoma ~ical references have been kept to a min­ 1. Debugging aids I SAS/SPSS· (at Univ.) X software. They support data handling such data base configuration is incompatible with Oregon Easytrieve SPSS Imum, and ellch criterion has been made as -Burroughs CANDE (C-ommand AND Pennsylvania Edit language as performing sorts and merges of files, packages; a package is housed in a different I. Rhode Island X explicit and concrete as possible. 2. Flowcharting producing output, and provide support to computer; personnel are not trained in the X Once the criteria were devr.ioped, a list South Carolina SAS/SPSS programmers a wide range of applications. use of the package; or there are insufficient South Dakota X of seven report generators was prepared for X 3. Documentation aids The fourth type of software is divided personnel. Only 10 of the 50 states reported Tennessee comparisons. This list consists of most re­ Texas Data Analyzer X 4. JCL generators into two major groups: (1) data base man­ no automation. X port generators in use in correctional Utah SPSS Utilities agement systems (DBMS) and (2) report Part of the explanation for the wide X agencie~; report generators of sufficiently Virginia MARK IV SPSS 1. Ale and Record Handling generators. DBMS are comprehensive soft­ availability ofSPSS is its use in undergrad­ Vermont generalized scope to be of interest to cor­ X 2. Output Production Washington RPG SPSS ware systems designed to construct, main­ uate curriculums around the country and West Virginia X rectional agencies; and those which had Generalized file processors X tain and access a data base. Examples of the excellent documentation and user's Wisconsin RPG/MARKIV SPSS·WISTAB e~tablished reputations as indicated by Wyoming X 1. Data base management systems DBMS include IDMS, ADABAS and IMS. guides available. Another factor contribut­ X either EDP managers in corrections or ac­ -Cullinane IDMS (Integrated Data Report generators differ primarily in their ing to its widespread use is its compatibility Federal Bureau Easylrieve SAS/SPSS/BMDP cording to user surveys such as the Data­ Management System) Data Text -Burroughs OMS II (Data Manage­ functional scope from DBMS. Most report with most hardware environments and its X Pro survey. All of the systems reviewed are ment System II) generators are capable of handling single comparative" ease of use. The telephone • Restricted l.'~cess or unable to use, good; however, they do vary in interesting -IBM IMS (Information files, while DBMS manages an'entire data survey data indicate that, in terms of level and significant ways. Most of the systems Management System) base that may consist of over a hundred of development, most state correctional have been modularized so that, for exam­ -UNIVAC OMS 1100 (Data established by data processing technicians no technical personnel available within the Management System for files, As will be described in a later section, agencies have yet to automate fully their and catalogued in a computer library, would ple, a statistics package may be purchased 1100 Series Computers) agency and the use can reduce cost where however, many report generators are, to­ data base and that important software and added to the basic package. In this -Software Ag ADABAS allow personnel other than computer pro­ all access must be through a centralized day, fully capable of many common data decisions are ahead. The following discus­ comparison, while such options are noted D 2. Report generators grammers or analysts to request and run data processing department on an hourly base management tasks in addition to pro­ sion of report generators and statistical it is the basic system which is being -Informatics MARK IV ~peci.al retrieval programs using their own billa ble basis. com~ -Pansophlc Easytrieve viding a full range of report production packages may guide the administrators' pared. mqulry parameters. Report generators also There has been an enormous growth in -Burroughs Reporter II features. Examples offrequently used report discussions in terms of the capabilities The report generator assessmen t criteria -Program serve as work horses to enable data pro­ number and quality of report generators Products Data Analyzer generators are Mark IV, Culprit, and Easy­ sought as well as provide information on can be used to guide evaluation and discus­ cessing technical personnel to produce more ?ver the past few years, as well as an emerg­ -Applications trieve. Most of these systems have been the characteristics of some of the leading sion when a report generator is being con­ Software ASI-ST special request reports in much less time mg consensus as to the criteria by which specifically developed for business envi­ packages. than custom programming. sidered for purchase. Even when all com­ Application software they may be evaluated. One measure of the ronments and for IBM compatible hardware. puter facilities are controlled by a central 1. Statistical packages A report generator is especially useful to consensus is the increasing similarities in While most hardware vendors have devel­ Report generators or administrative data processing depart­ -SPSS, Ino. SPSS (Statistical correctional agencies.in that it facilitates performance of the packages. The criteria Package for Social oped their own report generators, e.g., ment, correctional users may request the use of established data bases, reduces time !n A were developed by review­ Sciences) Burroughs' 'Reporter,' there are a number The name given to software packages Exhibi~ (I) purchase of a report generator and should -SAS Institute SAS (Statistical Analysis to prepare special reports making nonstan­ of packages developed and marketed by designed to produce formatted ad hoc re­ mg th.e, literature on this technology for be aware of its features ifnontechnical per­ System dard information available to administra­ capability statements and evaluative crite­ -Burroughs Infostats/statistlcs software vendors, e.g., Dylakor Software ports from a data base with minimal in­ tors. o~.a more timely basis. Frequently, sonnel are to be trained in its use. ~UCLA BMDP (Blc-Medlcal ria; (2) i,nterviewing EDP and research per­ Systems' Dyl-260. Exhibit 0 is a list of struction is "report generator." These soft­ statistiCianS, research analysts and assis­ Tables 5.4 through 5.9 present an assess­ (Un Iv. of Calif. Programs) ~onn:l m sev~ral correctional agencies to at Los Angeles} such packages, including the company name ware packages have been developed to allow ment of each report generator considering tants can, with little training, use these ~dentl~Y a bas,lc set of requirements; and (3) 2. Other Application software and address. nontechnical access to computerized fileS. the correctional environment, an analysis packages freeing data-processing techni­ mtervlews With software developers. The The last software category involves all They are highly sophisticated languages with cians for new development. The use of such of the content of demand inquiries and the Source: Adapted from Susan Woodridge, Soft­ St~t~ .of Minnesota, Information Systems ware Selection (Philadelphia: Auei'bach Pub­ general purpose application software and, detailed file descriptions which, after being capabilities of the packages. ' a package can also allow an agency access DlVlslOn, developed a similar set of require­ Mshers,19i"3), pp.3-10. to its computerized records when there are The tables are organized in a manner ments for a report generator as part of their consistent with the criteria identified in 28 Correctional data analysis systems Report generation and analysis technology 29 Exhibit A. The last section of the criteria- summer of 1979 when this survey was per­ tiple input files. Frequently a report must Table 5.5 Report generator comparlilona: programming 6.0 Acquisnion and costs-concludes the formed. Indeed, many additional systems be prepared that involves a half dozen comparison. may be fully qualified for inclusion. Second, data-times (variables) located on six differ­ The procedure used to determine the this type of assessment encourages aggre­ ent files. For example, the data required 1. Command 2. Data 3. Temporary 4. Error 5. Macros 6. DMBS relative strengths and weaknesses of each gation and the development of a single for a particular report may be stored in Language Fields Fields Messages package included telephone interviews with indicator. Without an understanding of the part in separate files such as admissions, representatives from each of the software relative importance of each criterion within population, release, movement history, dis­ Dyl-260 companies and a review of the documenta­ a par~icular agency and appropriate weight­ ciplinary records, and p'rogram participa­ 3 3 3 3 2 IMS, IDMS tion and operating characteristics of each ing, such an indicator may confuse issues tion. These must be reformatted and merged DLT, TOTAL package. Once these ratings had been de­ more than it clarifies. Finally, arbitrary by a separate run if the repor.t generator DBOMP veloped, states using each of the packages judgments ultimately were the basis for does not access multiple files. Programming Mark IV were contacted and, independently, assessed these particular criteria and ranks. Another around a system which permits only a sin­ 3 3 3 3 2 IMS, IDMS, the package which they used. The ratings independent reviewer under similar circum­ gle input file may be time consuming and TOTAL, rep.orted in Tables 5.4 through 5.9 reflect stances would, hopefully, closely replicate costly, if not impractical. Data Analyzer adjustments made as a result of correctional - the results reported. and Culprit are report generators that pro­ ADABAS It user insights. Finally, a three-point scale appears from this assessment that these vide maximum flexibility in this regard. Data Analyzer 3 3 3 1 was selected to rate the software in which a report generators are excellent at produc­ It should be noted that the report gene­ 2 IMS, IDMS, "three" represents totally satisfied; a "two" ing IIst-type output and for simple variable rator software packages were compared as DLI, TOTAL, represents only partially satisfied; and a table construction. The generation of com­ to features and cost at their lowest or DBOMP "one" means no or little capability in the plex tables with percentages, however, is stripped models. Correctional agencies which Easytrieve 3 3 specific area. problematic for most ofthe systems reviewed, indicated a heavy use of these packages 2 3 3 IDMS, IMS Three words of caution in using this and, clearly, data analytic tasks beyond realized cost benefits in excess of expecta­ TOTAL information should be noted. First, the addition, subtraction, multiplication, and tions and could therefore purchase many Culprit 3 software development field is intensely dy­ division is not what these systems were de­ optional functions which increased their 3 1 3 3 Most DBMS namic. For example, a brief conversation signed for. However, most have an add-on abilities. The Virginia Department of Cor­ Asi-st 3 with one developer with whom the criteria at extra cost such as Reporter's Infostats, rections reported great satisfaction with 3 3 3 3 Most DBMS were reviewed resulted in an effort on their that provides a full range of basic analytic MARK IV and a cost savings over previous Reporter 3 part to fully meet the criteria. In other functions such as crosstabs, frequencies report production. This agency purchased 3 3 3 2 DMS words, these rankings represent a snapshot and percentages which would eliminate the a deluxe model as did the Ohio Adminis­ of sprinters in mid-stride. need for a separate analysis package. trative Services Department. The Ohio The current state of development of each Another area of divergence with these Youth Commission also reported satisfac­ system may be quite different from the systems is their capability in handling mul- tion with ease of use, cost efficiency, and

Table 5.6 Table 5.4 Report generation comparisons: analytical capabilities Report generator comparisons: file creation and management 1. Math 2. Descriptive 3. Compute I-' I-' I-' I-' 4. Frequencies 5. Tables 6. Logic 7. Round I-' N W U1 -..J CD ID 0 I-' N W . . . ."" . .'" ...... Statistics Trunck

~tIl tIl~ ~l'j I-t :;:~ H~ til t'l 8 no 8<: o fi' Qlit' ~ rt ...... ::s III .... ::s .... (1) 0. (1) :TllJ Dyl-260 2 i'l '"' III 2 2 2 ,., n 0. '"' I-' 1-''0 ::s I-' HI I-' 0 0 .... Ul (1) rt 2 3 3 :3'"' ::sIII :3 0 .... !: (1) (1) !: .... (1) o (1) (1) !: rt rt o III (1)III '"'.... 0. PI n Ul rt '0 Ul ~ rtlll (with Auditor (with III 0.'"' rt !: :3'"' Ul ....'"' Ul :3 0- !: I-' III rt (1) I-' Auditor) '"'0. iil rt '< ::s (1) '"'(1) rt :--. rt I .... 0 Mark IV 2 2 2 2 0 ::s .. 2 3 3 I ::I (with Graphics) (with 2 2 Graphics) Dyl-260 3 3 3 3 (8 max) 3 3 3 2 3 (with 2 3 Data Analyzer 3 2 3 3 Auditor 2 3 3 (2-way MARK IV 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 only) (with Easytrieve 2 Auditor) 1 2 2 1 3 2 (with prograrn- (with pro- Data Analyzer 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 (No round) (6 max-- rning logic or grarnrning with Pan Audit) logic or option up, Pan Audit) to 100) Culprit 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 Ea::y trieve 3 3 3 2 1 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 (No Percents) (2 max) Asi-st 2 2 2 1 2 3 2 C'1I1pr it 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 (256 max) (Counts (No round) only) Asi-st 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 Reporter 2 2 2 1 1 3 2 Rl'porter 2 2 1 2 1 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 2 (with " (with Info- (with (No round) not (4 max) (Info- stats) Infostats) cards) stats) Infostats) --~-~---

Report generation and analysis technology 31 Table 5.9 Report generation comparison: acquisition and costs * Hardware Compatibilities Price Dyl-260 - • IBM 370, 360 or equivalent License $8400

Renewal $20 Lease $1500/yr OS DOS • IBM 370, 360 or equivalent License Mark IV • Univac 9030, 9040,9060, 9080 $20,000 $15,000 Renewal $ 1,600 $ 1,600 Data Analyzer • IBM 370, 360 or equivalent OS DOS License $18,000 $16,000 Renewal $ 1,000 $1,000 • IBM 370, 360 or equivalent OS Easytrleve • Univac DOS License $18,500 $14,500 • VS9 Renewal $ 1,850 $1,450 • IBM 370, 360 or equivalent Culprit License $20,000 • Univac Renewal • Honeywell $ 2,000 Asl-st • IBM 370, 360 or equivalent License $20,000 Renewal $ 2,000 Reporter • Burroughs CMS System License $ 2,000 Renewal $ 200 - . Lease $ 183/month 1-,• All. prices quoted are for the basic package wlttiout options as of September 1979.

range of ability while another agency which purchased the basic system has not realized such satisfactions. Before any report generation software package is purchased it is wise to talk with a user who is performing the functions needed by correctional agencies. In summary, this survey and co,mparison of report generators indicates: Table 5.8 . I I d ort Report generation comparisons: tra n ng an supp -They are heavily tied to IBM compatible environments. -Some are linked to data base management l. Training 2. EDP Knowledge 3. Manuals 4. TA 5. Train systems. Availability -Most have add-on statistics modules. -Agencies using some of these packages Dyl-260 2 days Not needed 2 2 Yes are generally satisfied with their performance, indicating an increased efficiency in pro­ ducing nonstandard reports, and, generally, Mark IV 1 day Not needed 3 2 Yes improved access to the data base. (Audio -These same agencies, however, continue Cassettes) to rely on custom programs for many pro­ duction reports, although ov.er a period of Data Analyzer 3 days Useful 1 2 Yes years these are likely to be phased out and replaced with report generator routines. Easytrieve 2 days Not needed 2 3 Yes -The missing link to greater utilization of available report generation software is a culprit 3 days Useful 2 3 Yes reformatting interface between the software and various data base configurations. Asi-st 3 days Not needed 2 3 Yes -While adequate documentation to use the packages exists, frequently agency person­ nel do not ha ve sufficient copies or training Reporter 2 days Not needed 3 2 Yes in their use.

" -1 _,-_,,_-~c~_,=====:,,=c_":_-:"';;:.=_. !

32 Correctional data analysis systems Report generation and analysis technology 33 Statistical packages technical references and jargon have been Table 5.11 minimized and most criteria are similarly Statl.tlcal package comparlaon: an.tfllCilI CIIPlbIlH," The content analysis of demand infor­ stated as a minimum performance standard I-' I-' I-' I-' to.) ..., .... mation requests revealed that many responses and all are made as explici t and concrete as I-' w ~ VI 0\ co o I-' w ~ required manipulation and computation of possible...... '" . . ."" . . data rather than just lists. It is much easier A three-point scale was again used to rate i ;H~ Package rt 11 ::s fWrtO to compile statistics with canned statistics each of the selected packages. The same ::r III I 11 ::J caveats in using and interpreting the crite­ ... ·0 software packages than to have a computer g o I programmer write a custom program to ria and ratings discussed in the previous rt 11.... produce the information. There is a fairly section apply to these criteria and ratings. o large range of statistical packages available The ratings are presented in Tables -5.10 on the market today whh:h could be readily through 5.13 and are organized to parallel the organization of the criteria in Exhibit B. used in corrections. BMDP-77 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 2 2 A procedure and reporting format sim­ The most frequent uses of statistical ilar to that used in the report generator packages in correctional agencies were for DA'l'ATEXT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 2 2 2 section was developed to compare II dif­ cross-tabulations, scatter-plots, frequencies and desCriptive statistics. The major prob­ ferent statistical packages. The assessment M!NITAB II criteria are identified in Exhibit B. These lems users r.eported with these packages 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 1 2 have been divided into five major groups: (I) were in creating input files, the difficulty of tile creation, editing and management; (2) working with system JCL and, particularly, OMNITAB 78 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 2 1 3 1 analytic capabilities; (3) output; (4) train­ the lack of familiarity with the capabilities ing and support; and (5) acquisition and of the packages and the opportunities its OSIRIS IV 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 ..'j 1 2 costs. As with the report generator criteria, availability created. P-STA1' 78 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 'j 2 2 2 1 1 SAS 76.5 3 I 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 3 2 J, SPSS (7.1) 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 3 1

SCSS 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 2 1 1 2

I! SOUPAC J 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 j Table 5.10 I Statistical package comparison: file creation, editing and management Table 5.12 Statistical package comparllon: output, training and support to.) VI 0\ ..., co .I-' . .w .~ . . . t1jtzj II-j fIlO Otzj fIltzj Htzj 1. Stat .... III III I-' rt .... ::J .... i~ 0. .... 2. EDP 3. Docu­ rtI'D 11 I-' HI I-' ::J I-' .... I-' N rt .... I'D package 1. Output Training Training mentation 4. I'D III III ~ o I'D rtI'D II Maintenance PAckage .... liS I'D 11 to .... fIl HO' rt C I'D ::J I-' I:: m I-' t5 rt '0 I'D ~, rt III 11 C Itl .... rt BMDP-77 1 2 2 3 rt' o .... 2 ::J o J ::J r DATATEXT 3 2 3 2 3 BMDP-77 3 1 2 1 2 2 3 I MINITAB II 1 3 3 3 3 DATATEXT 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 I 2 1 OMNITAB 78 1 3 3 3 3 1 1 MINITAB II 1 2 1 1 2 OSIRIS IV 2 2 3 3 3 1 OMNITAB 78 3 2 1 3 2 3 P-STAT 78 -3 3 3 3 3 II OSIRIS IV 3 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 -\ S1\S 76.5 3 3 3 3 3 !1 P-STAT 78 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 SPSS (7.1) 2 2 3 3 3 IJ SAS 76.5 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 sess 2 2 3 3 !1 3 SPSS (7.1) 3 3 1 2 2 2 2 2 tl SOUPAC 2 2 2 2 3

sess 1 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 SOUPAC 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 ~ tl

tl,~ Pi 3 ! 34 Correctional data analysis systems !I 1 I Report generation and analysis technology 35

TableS.13 - IBM370TSOandCMS $tatlstlcal package comparison: hardware compatibility and costs· I Annual lease: $4000 - DEC20 Hardware compatibility Price - CDC Discounted to $1500 fortax- - Xerox exempt organizations. SCSS -IBM360/3700S,OSNS • Univac 1100 The' yearly license fee ior BMPD is - Univac -IBMDOS • Univac 70/90 $500 for universities; $1 000 for - DEClO Discounted to $1 000 for degree- - CDC • Hitachi governments and non-profit organiza­ granting institutions. - Honeywell • Fujitsu tions; and $1500 for all others. The - IBM 360 mod 75 with MVT-OS BMDP-77 - PDP-l0 • Riad20 fee includes program source modules, r Cost$160f;:,rinitiai copy, - CDCCYBER 175with NOS (includes 2 manuals, instruc- - PDP-ll • ICL System 4 load and/orobJect modules ~f request­ i SOUPAC - HP-30oo II Telefunken ed), and installation instructions on all ;1 tions for installation) • Burroughs magnetic tape. It also inciudes malnte­ $85 for updEltes when desired nanceandonecopyoftheBMPD-77 I I manual. ! 'Primary source of informatIon for this section was Ivor Francis. A Comparative Review of Stat/stlcal Software. International Association for Statistical Computing, 1979. First Year Renewal Annuallease price , 1 U.S. Univer- sities $750 $300 DATATEXT • IBM 370, 360 Not-for-prooli "I organizatlons $1000 $400 and non-U.S. f universities Stlrvice bureaus (special arrangement) All others $1500 $600 'j , I • IBM 360 models 3(1 and up J Conclusions • IBM 370 models 115 and up • Univac 1100 series • DEC system 1Oand 20 There will be a predictable increase in • PDP-l1 the use of the types of software discussed MINITABII • CDC 3000, 6000, and Cyoor serie Lease-$200/yr. in this chapter over the next few years if • Burroughs a Xerox Sigma 7 and Sigma 9 personnel are able to get training in their • Hewlett-Packard 3000 use. This will be due to increasing demands • Harrisn for timely and accurate data and to de­ • PRIME 300 and 400 creasing funds. Using an elaborate data • NCR Century 200 • Honeywell 1 base only to produce standard operational. ! ; reports is not a cost-efficient utilization of • IBM • Burroughs I ' resources. • Univac • Xer.ox 1 OMNITAB78 at RCA $1500 one-time charge 'I The consequences will be significant in • PDP terms of an agency's ability to more fully re­ • CDC • GE • Honeywell Ij spond to demand information requests in the cost-effective manner possible. However, One-time charge } • iBM 360/40, AMDAHL470 \1/6 j II CDC60ooseries,CYBER70 New users Previous the process of integrating such software OSIRIS IV • Siemens $1200 $600 Commercial into the decision making, data and com­ • Univac 1100 installations I pute~ environments of the agency should .DECPDP-l0 800 400 Academic, not be ignored; it has been, in some agen­ governmental I installations cies, a painful and costly one. But other 400 200 ICPSR instal­ agencies ha ve used the software so effective­ Iftions ly that more reports are being generated at r------i a reduction of monthly data processing • IBM3eo-37~' • XO:O SIGMA 7 Initial Each !I : year renewal 1 i costs. Virginia recouped the purchase cost • CECCYBER • Univ~c 1106/1108 j I • DEC 10/20 • BurrolJ§tls 6700 ys;:r in savings in a matter of months. The key is • Burroughs 6700 • Honeywell 6000 Annual lease proper utilization through planning and P-STAT78 • Honeywell 600 Degree processing. • Sigma7l9 granting j i • Univac 1106/1108/1110 institutions $1000 $ 500 Exhibit C summarizes some of the major • IBM - OS, VS, TSO, VM-CMS DOS-VS Others - 5000 2000 findings of this report. They are offered Dot • CDC - NOS, SCOPE 3.4 t as conclusions but rather as impressions • DEC - LINK 10 OVERLAY r------~ t i about the state of this art as it relates to • IBM 360/370 and $3500 for first year; $1500 for I : correctional agencies. SAS76.5 each year thereafter for plug-compatible mainframes commercial organizations; r References $750/$30010r eduuational ~ organizatIons tl I Wooldrige, Susan. Software Selection (Philadelphia: I' Auerbach Publishers, Inc., 1973). • Burroughs 83700, B38oo, B4800 II 2 DataPro Research Corporation. "User Ratings of 6700,7100,7800 ! I Proprietary Software" (Detran, N.J.: Feature Report • CDC 6000 series • IBM 360, 370 1,1 009-200-001, December 1978). See also Herbert L. CYBERseries • ICL2900series Perpetual license 11 C!epner. "User Ratings of Software Packages, "Dalarna­ .. DEC System 10,20 ICL4-75 ann'uai mainiEifjr(1ce (optiol1al) /lon, December 1978, pp. 163-227. SPSS(7.1) • DEC PDP 11 • ICL 1900 j J Francis, Ivor. ed. A Comparative Review of Statis­ • Facom 23D-60n5 • Interdata 7/32 Academic Non-profit Commercial tical Software, International Association for Statistical • Harrisn 8/32 $1000 $1500 $1500 Computing, A Section of the International Statistical • HP200D-3OO0 • Prime4OO,500 600 800 2090 institute. Exhibition of Statistical Program Packages • Hitac 8700, 8800 • Slemans 4004, 7000 fl New Delhi, 1977. ' • Honeywell 60/6G/XX • TeletunkenTR4400 11 • Ahern, Francis D. and Hirshorn, Seth 1. "EDP 6000,600 • Univac Series 70,90 Indicators: the Case of Massachusetts." A Paper pre­ \ • Univacl100series -r ,II sented at a meeting of the American Society for Public .'Xerox Sigma 86ries I Administration, Baltimore, April 4, 1979, p. 14. t Ii ,(I Ii J I! c ----~--- -~--

A I .1 ..B!!P..ort..~generation and analysis technology 37' j 36 Correctional data analysis ~ystems I • Analysis has historically been oriented to prep­ 12. QDMS aration of theAnnual Report; with automation, Quodata Corporation 3.5 It should be able to produce multi-way 1.7 It should be capable of edit runs. research Is now .more project-oriented. 196 Trumbull St. hierarchical tables, Including: . \ Exhibit S.A 1.8 Command language should be logically 2.0 Reportge(lerators Hartford, Ct. 06107 R.port generator a..... m.nt crlt.rla structured and use English-like state­ (203) 728-67n • counts • Most report generators are excellent at produc­ • percentages ments. 13. Qulck/ob • means, standard deviations. ing lists; some are excellentfortables; and a few Systems Support Software, Inc. 2.0 Analytic cepabllltles prcvide statistical capabilities without significant 5230 Springboro Pike 1.0 File creation and ma'nagement 3.6 should be capable of selecting subsets It 2.1 It should be able to perform the following "add-ons." Dayton, Ohio 45439 based on logical operators (e.g., less than, 1.1 It should be able to handle data In any arithmetic procedures: add, subtract, mUl­ • Two capabilities are, perhaps, most critical in (513) 435-9514 equal to, greater than, or, and, not, etc.). standard form (packed, display, binary, tiply, divide, exponentiate. the corrections' environment: (1 ) being able to 14. Ramls" 3.7 Results should be rounded and/or trun­ handle multiple Input files; and (2) the treatment of Mathematica Products Group fioating pOint, etc.). 2.2 It should be able to calculate the following cated. missing or Invalid data. A great deal of variation P. O. Box 2392 1.2 It should be able to handle data in any statistics: among report generators exists in these regards. Princeton, N.J. 08540 record form (variable-length, variabie­ 4.0 Output • Most report generators are inlerfaced with the block; fixed-length, undefined, etc.). • mean, median, mode (609) 799-2600 4.1 The following output fomlats should be • standard deviation, variance ieadlng DBMs; few are linked 10 statistical appli- 15. SIR 1.3 It should be able to handle all storalle available: • minimum, maximum, range cation packages. . (ScientifiC Information Retrievai System) • Agencies with RGs have had, generally, pOSi­ media (disc, tape, cards, etc.). • list-type output • percentiles. Scientific Information Retrieval, Inc. 1.4 It should be able to define and file complex tive experiences, although still relying on custom P.O. Box 1404 • tabular output 2.3 It should be able to perform a compute programming for many production reports. data structures (matrices, vectors, variable • multiple lines for page headings statement, Including the use of a numeric Evanston, illinois 60204 by case, case by varillb!e, hierarchical). • variable length row and column headings or procedural constant. 3.0 Statistical packages 1.5 It should be able to tlandle up to 10 input • def.ault options on page numbering, line 2.4 It should be able to produce frequency • ThEire is an Increasing reliance on statistical files. control and column spaCing. distributions, histograms and bar charts. packages, particularly SPSS, for compiling de­ Exhibit S.E scriptive statistics. 1.6 It should be able to define and build a file 4.2 Output labels should bEl flexible in terms of 2.5 It should be able to produce mUlti-way G.eneral purpose statl.stlcal packages by location, size and characters used. hierarchical tables, Including: • Statistical packages are most frequently used In departments of corrections for cross­ 4.3 It should be capable of outputting iape, • adding records • counts tabulations, scatter-grams, and frequencies. diSC, or card files. 1. BMDP 77 • deleting records • percentages • means; standard deviations. • Majordlfficulties reported in ufJlng such pack­ (Biomedical Computer Programs) • selecting records 4.4 Output should be understandable and pub­ ages Include: (1) creating Input filos; (2) lack of Health Sciences Computing Facility • merging records lishable without editing and retyping. 2.6 It should be capable of selecting subsets familiarity wHh package's capabilities; and, (3) sys­ University of California based on logical operators (e.g., less • matching records 4.5 It should interface with statistical software temJCL. Los Angeles, CA 90024 • sortlnll records (e.g., SPSS, SAS, BMDP, etc.). than, equal to, greater than, or, and, not, • Certain statistical packages are more efficient 2. DATA-TEXT (versloI13.4) • updating a file. etc.). and less expensive with large data sets. The DATA-TOO PHOJECT 4.6 Multiple output files and reports should be 1.7 It should maintain information on the form generated by one pass through the Input 2.7 it should be capable of stepWise regres­ 5995 Sepulveda Bivd. and content of files (I.e., dictIon9.ry, glos­ file. sion, have a wide variety of residual piots Suite 301 sary, etc.). available and present standard summary Culver City, CA 90230 5.0 Training and support ExhlbltS.D 1.8 It must access files without their modifica­ statistics. 3. MINITABII tion. 5.1 It shOUld require a maximum of one week's 2.8 It should be able to perform an analysis of Report generator softwal'e packages· T. Ryan and B. Ryan training to learn. variance and covariance, and probit and Department of Statistics 1.9 It should have controls to prevent unau­ 1. Asl-st logit an"Jyses. PennsyllJanla State University thorized access to data (e.g., keywords, 5.2 Users should not have te. ~o;,w ·-'~l-, As­ Applications Software, Inc. 215 Pond Lab . etc.). sembler language, Fortran, etc., to lo;i:'l it. 2.9 It sho"ld be able to perform mUlti-way 21515 Hawthorne Blvd. University Park, PA 16802 1 .10 It should be capable of edit runs. 5.3 Manuals should Include: contingency table tests including the use Torrence, California 90503 (814) 865-1595 of log-linear models. (213) 540-0111 4. OMNITAB 78 (version 5.14) 1.11 It should be capable of test runs on part of • explanation of features 2.10 It should be able to perform factor, dis­ 2. Oyi-~60 bttice of Standard Referenco Data the data (e.g., n records every Kth record, a • detailed sample programs Dylakor Software Systems, Inc. • a step-by-step learning guide Criminant, and cluster analysis as well A323 Physics Building random sample). 16255 Ventura Blvd. National Bureau of Standards • an index as multidimensional scaling. 1.12 It should provide automatic and complete Suite 808 Washington, D.C. 20234 • detailed documentation for EDP person­ 2.11 It should be capable of performing time data checks for input errors, Including: nel •. Encino, California 91436 5. OSIRIS IV series analysis. (213) 955-0150 Institute for Social Research • range checks 5.4 Technical assistance to diagnose and 2.12 It should provide a variety of non­ 3. bata Analyzer P. O. Box 1248 • wild code checks soive programming problems should be parametric test statistics. Program Products, Inc. Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 • logic checks between items. available. 95 Chestnut Ridge Rd. 6. P-STAT78 2.13 it should have graphics capability. 1.13 It should be capable of 5.5 Training should be provided. Montvale, N.J. 07645 P-STAT,lnc. 2.14 It should have two and three step least (201) 391-9800 P.O. Box 285 • recording 6.0 AcquiSition and costs squares estimation of linear and non­ 4. Culprit Princeton, New Jersey 08540 • weighting linear equations. Cullinane Corp. • creating new variables. 6.1 Installation time should be iess than one 7. SAS 76.5 week. 3.0 Output 20 William St. SAS Institute, Inc. 2.0 Programming W~lIesley, Ma. 02181 P. O. Box 10066 6.2 Identify current or planned hardware com­ 3.1 Output labels should be flexible in terms of 2.1 Command language should be logically (617) 237-6600 Raleigh, NC 27605 pat!billties. location, size and characters used. structured and use English-like state­ 5. I:asytrieve 9. SPSS ments. 6.3 Identify special software/hardware require­ 4.0 Training and support Pansophlc Systems, Inc. SPSS, Inc. ments. 709 Enterprise Ave. 444 North Michigan Avenue 2.2 Data fields should be addressable as 4.1 It should be usable by anyone who has Oak Brook, Iii. 60521 Suite 3300 either numeric or alphanumeric. 6.4 Identify cost options for using the software. had one college level statistics course. (312) 986-6000 Chicago, illinois 60611 2.3 It should provide redefinable work fieldS 4.2 It should be usable by anyone who has 6. Mark IV 10. SOU PAC and temporary fields. These should: had one college level EDP course. Informatics, Inc. StatIsticai Services/Computing Software Products Division 4.3 Documentation should include a user's Services Office • permit a variable number of decimal ExhlbltS.S 21050 Vanowen St. 84 Commerce West guide, an introductory text, a system places; Statistical package aSllessment criteria Canoga Park, Ca. 91304 University of Illinois • permit the rearrangement and redefini­ guide anll explanation of statistical (213) 887-9121 Urbana, Illinois 61801 tion of data as necessary; methods. 1.0 File creation, editing and management 7. Reporter 11. TPL • permit assignment 01 a name; 4.4 Package should be maintained and un­ Burroughs Corporation Commissioner of Labor Statistics • not require file space. 1.1 It should be deSigned to han-dle a 30,000 dergo continuioJ update. Burroughs Place Bureau of Labor Statistics 2.4 Error messages should be explained in the record data set. 5.0 AcqUisition and co ~ts Dalroit, MI. 48232 441 G Street N.W. output and documented In a manual. 1.2 It should be able to handle data in any 1313) 972-7269 Washington, D.C. 20212 5.1 Identify current. and planned hardware 2.5 It should facilitate the us,? of: standard format or record form. 8. Batch Query \S/3), GIS compatibilities. IBM Corporat on 1.3 it shOUld hi; :wls to define and file complex • macros 5.2 Identify cost of acquiring the package. Data Processing Division • production reports. data structures (mstrices, vectors, vari­ 1133 Westchester Ave, able by case, case by varillble, hierarchi­ White Plains, New York 2.6 It should interface with data base man­ cal). agement systems, such as ADABAS, TO­ I Exhibit S.C (914) 696-1900 TAL, IMS, IDMS, DLI. 1.4 It should provide automatic and complete Summary offlndlngs 9. Datatrieve data checks for input errors Including: l Digital Equipment Corporation 3.0 Analytic capabilities 146 Main St. • range checks 1.0 General 3.1 It should be able to perform the following c. Maynard, Ma. 01754 • wild code checks • There has been a substantialincrease in the (617) 897-5111 arithmetic procedures: add, subtract, mUl­ • logic checks between items. tiply, divide, exponentiate. quantity and quality of report generation software 10. I:xtracto 1.5 it should maintain information on the form In the marketplace d'Jring Ute past five years. Optipro, Inc. 3.2 It should be able to calculate the following and content of files (i.e., dictionary, glos­ • The market has been dominated by IBM­ P. O. Box 615 statistics: sary, etc.). compatible software. StockExchange Tower • mean, median, mode • The market has not been responsive to mld­ Montreal, Quebec H4Z 1J8 1.6 It should be able to define and build a file and mini-systems. • standard deviation, variance by: Canada • minimum, maximum, range • Correction agencies have little history with this (514) 845-8107 • percentiles. • adding records partlculartechnology. 11. POISE • deleting records • EDP priorities In correction agencies are first, The Poise Co. Inc. 3.3 It should be able to perform a compute • selecting records operations; second, management reporting; and statement, including the use of a numeric 210 N. Nevada St. • merging records third, research and analysis. The consequences or procedural constant. Roswell, NM 68201 • matching records are: 1) little need for an on-line capability; 2) or­ (505) 623-8554 3.4 It should be able to produce frequency • sorting records ganization of data making access difficult; 3) data distributions, histograms, and bar charts. • updating a file. elements captured are different. ------~--~

r! Systems transfer technology for contemporary corrections 39 I Several articles are einerging concerning ferent computer architecture, configuration other machines is performed on a trial and pl'Ocedure for reporting and correcting these Chapter 6 the transfer issue in the various trade publi­ and user preferences error basis with "quick and dirty" modifi­ problems is required. cations. An international seminar to dis­ -Include successful benchmark test runs cations being made to get the transferred cuss software portability was.also held at -Cite experience of other installers and system "up and running." The second ap­ Users Systems transfer technology the University of Kent at Callterbury dur­ known installations with similar transfer proach, predictive, attempts to determine Perhaps the most important and often for contemporary corrections· ing 1976.2 experience the range of machines on which the sys­ least considered factor in the transfer of Most of the work on system transfer is -Include lists on program optimization and tem(s) may run, uses prior experience in correctional systems is the user of such sys­ being done at either a conceptualltheoreti­ 11 debug aids. transfer to determine appropriate languages tems. Regardless of what other parameters cal level or a very system~specific level. Few, Ii The above documentation elements should and language subsets, then develops the are considered in the development ofa sys­ if any, articles discuss ~pecific concepts that be viewed as a minimum requirement. Most system for a range of machines or families tem or program, it is necessary to consider must be addressed when one is attempting computer specialists recommend at least 25 of machines. The Basic OBSCIS Software its potential use and mode of use by per­ to move a program or system of programs percent of the system development effort be Package is an example of the predictive sons for whom it is intended. It is necessary from one user environment to another. devoted to the creation and update of doc­ approach. This predictive approach can: to design the system to be flexible enough fi umentation. provide greater reliability, efficiency and to suit a range of users' needs, habits, and Reinvention of the wheel is very common at I' In the past several years corrections has OBSCIS system. Design and programming the transfer stage. Yet program transfers :: felxibility. In essence, the corrective approacn preferences. undergone several changes in philosophy, was done under the direction of SEARCH are as inevitable as death and taxes. 3 Standards faces new problems each time a new im­ A correctional information system is not operation and administration. A common Group, Inc. to operate on a Xerox com­ As with many computer and information Problems during transfer can be 'mini­ plementation is made whereas the predictive created to keep the data processing depart­ trend underlying these past, current and puter independent of any state specific system concepts, the notion oJ system trans­ mized when standards are followed in the approach strongly emphasizes advanced ment fully employed, but to serve the agen­ rt: future trends is the need of correctional requirements. SEARCH then transferred fer means different things to different peo­ }! creation of the system and its documen­ planning, building a program using only cy's users at various levels. Source infor­ administrators, legislators, the press, and the system to a Data General minicom­ ple. The system designer has one view, the Ii tation. Documentation standards include standard features of a common language, mation comes from intake ~mits, institutions, other interested persons and groups to ob­ puter, still operating as a test file with ficti­ programmer has a second, the data base I PRIDE, FIPS, and other standard forms. and being aware of the target machine's program and treatment units, and counse­ tain accurate, reliable and timely informa­ tious data. The first live transfer was done manager has a third, the user has a fourth, PRIDE stand for PRofitable Information characteristics. lors. 9utput information should also go tion regarding the entire range of correc­ by the Iowa Department of Social Services the hardware designer a fifth, and the DP Ii by DEsign through phased planning and The design of the system must consider back to sources as operational data as well tional issues. To meet this increasing need Division of Adult Corrections in 1978, on manager has yet another. An attempt to I, control and is a copyrighted documenta­ the following five categories: hardware struc­ as to regional and central administration as for information, many corrections admin­ an IBM-360 system. Since then versions of develop a definition of system transfer to tion system of M. Bryce and Associates.4 tures that most profoundly affect the archi­ management information. There is little istrators and departments have turned to the Basic OBSCIS Software Package have satisfy all of these groups would be impos­ I FIPS is the Federal Information Process­ tecture and operation ofthe software system; enthusiasm for accurate input if the only the utilization of computer and informa­ been implemented in Kansas, Connecticut, sible. However, for the purpose of the pres­ ing Standards Publications, a product of operating systems; storage; manipulation,' output is an annual report published 3 to 6 tion system technologies. Alaska, and South Dakota. ent discussion, system transfer will be de­ the U.S. Department of Commerce, National and protection of information; languages months after the reporting period. The us­ An added complication is the concern The objective of this cha pter is to provide fined as the process whereby software and Bureau of Standards. 5 and their translators; and building and ers to be involved in the development pro­ for more cost effectiveness throughout the corrections administrators with a brief back­ software related materials are transferred l The use of standard languages ANSI measuring the performance of the system.9 cess should include records management, public sector. Thus a critical issue in cor­ ground on the theory of systems transfer from one hardware installation to another. (American National Standards Institute) Control of errors must pe considered in classification, counselors, program and treat­ rections concerns the most cost effective and on specific issues that should be consid­ Most computer professionals will argue that standard COBOL (COmmon Business Or­ the design phase as it pertains to the hu­ ment personnel, security, wardens and su­ way to use computer and information sys­ ered by those considering system transfer. universal transferability is an unobtainable iented Language), FORTRAN (FORmula man element-elements such as the human perintendents as well as central office ad­ tem technology to provide the increasingly This chapter reviews pertinent literature objective. However, a degree of software I TRANslator), and BASIC (Beginners All­ factor in keyboarding, providing opr.rator ministration. complex and voluminous amount of in for­ on system transfer and attempts to pull transferability between most hardware COIl­ purpose Symbolic Instruction Code) are of feedback on the screen or terminal, forms A system designed for contemporary use mati on required for both internal and exter­ together the key concepts which are rele­ figurations is obtainable and is determined I utmost importance to facilitate transfer. The design for ease of filling out the written should at least be able to serve the present nal consumption. vant to the problems posed when an admin­ by the number, extent and complexity of E:ODASYL standards for data base man­ form and subsequent keyboarding, etc.!O users. The best plans may go astray because One of the highest costs for any installa­ istrator wishes to transfer software from changes necessary in the software. agement systems are also important.6 The actual techniques used to develop the people who are to use the system have tion using computer technologies is the one installation to another. These problems This section presents the key concepts Other standards include those for flow code for transportable systems should fol­ not been considered or consulted. An ana­ amount of time, personnel and money spent include consideration of such things as the concerning successful system transfers. The charts, program testing, and implementa­ low the well-known standards for structures, lyst defines the task to be accomplished, a in the design and development of software physical environment, hardware, software, closer a system comes to these concepts the tion. The use of standard languages and logically separated and modularized pro­ designer decides how the results will be for specific applications. One method to purchase or development of systems, per­ higher the probability for a successful sys­ procedures provides a common base with grams. An additional method of "separa­ achieved, and the user is concerned with help keep the design and development costs sonnel, consideration of the performance tem transfer. However, an exact prediction which to begin a transfer project. Parties on tion structuring" is common to well-designed what the system will do, what kind of re­ to a manageable and acceptable level is to outcomes, etc. of successful system transfer is very diffi'­ each of the transfer process have a common transferable systems.! t Separation structur­ ports will be received, what kind of input is transfer software and systems of software The remainder of this chapter is divided cult, if not impossible, to obtain .. A later frame of reference on which to base their ing refers to the logical and physical isola­ needed, what it will cost, what training is from one installation to another. An early into four sections. The first section presents section of this chapter will present a de­ communication. tion of components which are, or could be, needed, what to do if the system fails, etc. example of correctional information systems a review of the key concepts in the systems tailed list of specific considerations for sys­ machine dependent. These logical and phy­ The "what" must be communicated with the transfer was a system developed by the Illi­ transfer Ii terature. The second presents a tem transfer. Performance evaluation sical separations help the installer locate user and a written description of user needs nois Department of Corrections. This sys­ typology of systems to be transferred. The The concepts discussed below include: Closely related to standards in gathering and isolate potential problem areas. agreed upon, system objectives specified, tem was modified and installed in the Ohio third section presents a categorization of -Documentation information for design, programming, and Careful planning for maintenance, cor­ and efficiency estimated. Department of Corrections and later by the the factors which must be considered in a -Standards implementation is the concept of perform­ rections, and extensions after successful de­ The best way to guarantee success of Ohio Youth Commission. This table driven transfer project. Finally, the summary com­ -Performance evaluation ance-performance evaluation and per­ livery is essential for the transfer process. implementation is to involve the user at reporting system has subsequently been in­ bines the previous two sections to give the -System design for transferability formance monitoring. 7 A standard set of Designers and installers of portable soft­ each stage of the development process with stalled in the South Carolina Department corrections administrator a guide to the -User. tests should be exercised at the host instal­ ware are familiar with a common constraint par,ticular emphasis given to positively in­ of Corrections where it is in operation to­ critical questions to ask when a transfer lation and again at the user installation to of portable software, namely, uncovering forming the user about the system and its day. This transfer of software is not, how­ project is being considered. Documentation assure performance at the time of transfer. hitherto unknown bugs as the receiver uses impact. This process of education must fo­ ever, without problems (e.g., cost overruns, Many professionals believe that good To assist in performance monitoring after the software. These undiscovered bugs sur­ cus on several, if not all, levels of manage­ incompatibilities with existing hardware and Key concepts for system documentation is the primary key to suc­ transfer, these tests should be available to face in the new-environment because trans­ ment and operation including people sup­ software, time consuming installation and transfer cessful system transfer. Good documenta­ the user for use a t any time should malfunc­ portable software tends to use more memory, plying the information through the written inability to use and understand the outputs). tion should: tioning occur at the user site. external references, macroprocesses or util­ forms, technicians,' operators, programmers, The Basic OBSCIS Software Package is There is a growing interest among com­ -Be complete ity programs previously unused in the new people using reports, and higher manage­ another example of transferable software puter professionals relating to transfer of -Be concise System design for transferability operating system. Patches made in the soft­ ment. Education can be in the form ofsem­ for a correctional information system.! This software system's and their components -Be understandable Another key element in transfer to sys­ ware by the receiver to affect compatibility inars, training manuals, self-study courses, system was designed to provide three core among different hardware configurations. -Contain step by step instructions for. in- tem(s) is the system design. At least two with the new environment frequently bring demonstrations, hands-on training and dis­ level modules of the eight modules in the This concern is based upon economic (high stallation and execution major approaches to the design of transfer more technical problems to light or cause cussions. cost oftransfer), hardware (the rapid growth -Contain flow charts depicting overall log­ systems exist: corrective an0 predictive.8 additional hidden bugs. Consequently, de­ An added ingredient in the system transfer • Much of the information presented in this chapter of new hardware developments), network­ ic and specific information flows The corrective approach e~~entially de­ tection of the problem is often very diffi~ process is that there are at least two distinct was provided by Mitchell Joelson and Lance Wilson of velops a system for one machine without cult. Portable software will also have prob­ users or sets of users. Those who have the Minesota Crime P!evention Center, MinneapoIis .. Min­ ing (networks of computers and data bases) -Refer to nonstandard locations (activities) nesota. and user (applications programs) issues. where changes.may be required due to dif- regard to other machines. The transfer to lems because no program is "perfect." A system and those to whom the system is ------.. ------~------

Systems transfer technology for contemporary corrections 41

40 Correctional data analysis systems municate this to the computer. This involves are essen tial.to insure proper upda ting of all Each of the forementioned categories in­ both manual operations and machine op­ data bases and to preserve their integrity. cludes a list of key questions whic;:h will enitions. Even if the data is gathered as a Data, once prepared by the input prepa­ serve as a guide for persons involved in byproduct of other computer equipment, ration group, can then go to the computer either the development of transferable sys­ sorting, editing, batching, control"and ver­ for processing. Specific procedures covering tems or in the transfer of an existing system I PEOPLE I COMPILER ASS?MBLERSI MACROPROCESSOR ification ~ay be needed. the handling of data must be given to the from one site to another. This guide will I PROCEDURES I Accuracy, validity, uniformity offormat, computer operator. These directions will provide the nontechnical user personnel with LOADERS TEXT IDEBUG ISEARCHING & timeliness, consistency in data acquisition, specify for each application what data is to reference material which, when met with I APPLICATION PROGRA~ EDITOR AIDS SORTING and close observance of deadlines are as­ be used for input, what conversion operations, satisfactory resolution, should prevent any pects that must be achieved through cleri­ if any, are n;'quired, and what input equip­ major errors of omission, development and DATA I I/O PROGRAMS FILE SYSTEM I SCHEDULE 1 LIBRARIES -I MEMORY DEVICE -1 I I cal and machine procedures. Special atten­ ment is needed. Methods to avoid using the implementation slow downs, or project tion must be given to providing forms, wrong input are needed-identification la­ hang-ups. supplies, and equipment at the time and bels, different colors for different media, Although an attempt was made to in­ Figure 6.1. Computercomponen,ts Figure 6.2. Hardware-dependent etc. Input handling procedures should spe­ clude as many elements as possible, no doubt Involved In transfer components oftransfer place needed. Personnel matters (e.g., mo­ rale regardingjob security) are very impor­ cify ways for maintaining protection of the some installations must add additional con­ tant during conversion to fa,cilitate limiting input data-forbid leaving input data in siderations which are site specific. Further, being transferred. An essential element for taining better operating performance from usually showing a repetitious internal struc­ the number of mistakes made in trying to accessible open trays where they can be the responses to these considerations must successful transfer is the communication the computer. Partitions within the library ture, called records, where the content per­ perform two jobs at the same time. removed, logging procedures for entering be evaluated by each site to determine the between these two user groups. For exam­ are usually unordered as are the programs tains to a particular subject area. The inmate In the area of input preparation most or leaving the data storage vaults. constraints they impose upon transfer to ple; personnel from the South Carolina within a partition. Examples of programs database could consist of the following files: standard operating practices require a clear The handling of output is in one sense their specific installation. Although desir­ Department of Corrections traveled to Ohio within the storage allocation partition would high security, medium security, work re­ separation of personnel responsibility. In simpler than input. The procedures depend able, it is virtually impossible to assign prior to see the system.in action. Later, personnel be memory' management functions, job lease or furlough eligibility. A block con­ correctional environments it is rare to find in part upon the form in which the data is to proi!abilities for successful transfer to each from Ohio checked results from South Car­ swapping, or linkage functions. Programs sists of an arbitrary number of records. The personnel associated with operating the be transmitted to the final user, e.g., output (or combinations of) the elements. olina for consistency. Here, "users" is taken are composed of phases. In large programs size of the block depends on the size of computer and also preparing the input. This in printed documents must have the car­ in the most general sense and is meant to each phase may be a program in itself. A internal memory. A record is the basic separation frequently results in an evasion bons removed and then burst and bound. Hardware include not only persons who only use the phase in the memory management program component of the file. A record is a set of of accountability for the quality of data On the other hand, the presentation of Hardware problems encountered during outputs but also those charged with the would be protection of memory. A module data that pertains to an individual instance submitted, a distrust of the accuracy of the output to the end user may involve sub­ transfer refer to differences in representa­ design implementation and maintenance of within the protection phase may emphasize of a topic. output, and eventually a corruption of the stantial training (or retraining) concerning tions due to different machine architectures the system at each end of the transfer. protection by software programming tech­ database due to "dirty data"-incomplete, the interpretation and use of the informa­ and different associated peripherals. Trans­ niques such as use of status words or use of Administrative procedure transfer inaccurate or inconsistent data. This is of tion. In some correctional agencies, reports fer is easier when the hardware is of the Systems to be transferred passwords. Another module may empha­ Transfer of administrative procedures major importance in proper utilization of were produced and stored, but the infor­ same manufacture and model, but still not size protection through hardware switches. refers to the transfer of procedures and/or mation was not used. Wh'en a question arose too difficult if the specification differences The systems components to be transferred an automated database. Modules arc combinations of routines methods relevant to the collection, process­ that could be answered from the report, are identified and documented. The key can be divided into three categories: pro­ Input control procedures cover three that togethe,r can direct the computer for ing, presentation and security of data/in­ someone else had to retrieve the data and transfer questions associated with hardware grams (or systems of programs), data, and major points: completeness, accuracy, and such a small group of operations that 'a formation and to the procedures developed prepare a special report. are presented in Exhibit A. administrative procedures. Figure 6.1 illus­ protection. The procedures for a smooth routine requires other routines to perform for the receiving, evaluating, prioritizing, functioning operation must include clear In most instances, users will be exposed trates the relationship of most computer a function. Within the protection software and processing of requests for information. environment components that can be in­ and complete directives for the clerical to new or at least differently formatted in­ module a routine will exist for checking For example, identification of the location procedures. These procedures involve jJrep­ formation than they are used to. Care must IExhIbit 6.A volved in a transfer. 12 legitimate passwords. Routines may be com­ of source information, where coding and Hardware Figure 6.2 describes the computer envi­ aration of a procedures manual giving pre­ be taken to ensure the appropriate use of posed of subroutines. Many times routines data entry are to be performed, the means cise directions on how each person or piece that information. In some instances a tem­ ronment involved with transfer illustrating and subroutines are considered synony­ and time frame for submission of data, I. Will the available hardware support the re­ of equipment is to operate in each situa­ porary liaison must be created to bridge quired those components that are dependent upon mous. However, a routine could be large verification, and error correction of input; the specific vendor hardware, operating tion-directions covering how to prepare between the DP and user personnel. A. Character set Oncfuding special charac­ enough so that it will have subroutines (e.g., the distribution of standard output or peri­ the input in the required content and for­ Finally, experience suggests that in many ters and control characters) system and other vendor supported soft­ an algorithm). A subroutine performs one odic reports; identification of restricted in­ B. The number of alphabetic characters per ware and peripheral equipment. mat, sorting, editing, converting the data, instances the administrative procedures as­ word and numberof characters/word function. Algorithms perform a specific task formation and those with access; method and such simple mechanical matters as how sociated with system transfers are very dif­ C. Collating sequence D. Double-precision arithmetic such as square root, absolute value, or of dissemination for ad hoc reports. Some It ficult to execute due to organizational en­ Programs transf~r to get forms and materials. is up to the E. Addressing scheme (byte vs. word, shift­ rounding a real number to a specified num­ of these require correctional agency policy correctional administrator to emphasize vironments (personnel, organization history ing,etc.) Transfer of programs (system software ber of decimal numbers. while others are the purview of the manual F. Floating-polntarithmetic or application software) can be viewed as accuracy in data collection and entry. A and inertia) and resource constraints. G. Proposed workload to satisfactorily gen­ of operations for the information systems. policy for accountability in all aspects of erate timely reports consisting of any of the following parts Data transfer The vehicle or media for transfer of data information processing is needed, followed Systems transfer considerations H. Machine base (octal, hexadecimal, arranged in a vertical hierarchy according Transfer of data can be viewed as con­ or software can be hard copy documenta­ binary-needed lor modifications and to their level of complexity. by procedures for verification and policy dumps) sisting of any of the following elements ar­ tion and/or machine readable form where­ implementation. The previous sections discussed the key I. Software ranged in a vertical hierarchy of com­ 1. Operations systems as the media for fransfer of administrative Procedures are needed for auditing. One concepts in system transfer and presented a 2. Programming languages Leve/ofcomplexity Loglcalorconceptual plexity. procedures is strictly hard copy documen­ effective procedure is to have one employee typology of approaches to transfer. This 3. Data base management system High Ubrary tation, as these procedures are implemented 4. Fllesandfilehandling Partition job be a check upon that of another. A section and the appended exhibits provide 5. Addressing and addreSSing scheme Program Level of complexity Logical or conceptual upon management and organizations, not second desirable audit procedure is to build a categorization and an itemization of the J. Physical characteristics for I/O devices Phases High Organization bank on machines. 1. Magnetlctape Modules Database audit trails into the system. In the prepara­ specific elements and key questions to con­ a. density Routine File A key area of administrative procedure tion of computer applications it is common sider before embarking upon a system trans­ b. 7 or 9 track tape 1 Subroutine Block transfer occurs when a correctional agency to provide for some in termediate results for fer project. Five categories of elements are c. cartridge Low Algorithm Record· cassette 1 is converting from a manual to a computer­ presented which cover the minimum ele­ Figure 6.3. Elements of program(s) Low Data Element audit purposes. Another audit procedure reel (size) transfer ized environment. The setup and capture requires that all data have been processed ments to be considered in the transfer deci­ d. character set {control characters, Figure 6.4. Transferofdata special characters) procedures for relevant, accurate and time­ and processed in a consistent manner. Aud­ sion. These elements should be dealt with e. bootstrap format (# of words in A program library is the largest and most The most inclusive grouping needs to ly data revolve around at least three areas: iting can also be performed by building by the full user group so that all aspects of BOOT BLOCK) inclusive grouping. An example of a pro­ include all databases of a correctional agen­ (1) the necessity to set up data acquisition f. labelformats into the program va,rious checks upon the the transfer problem are thoroughly consid­ g. parity gram library in system software would be cy which could be called the agency data­ and data preparation procedures, (2) the data to be processed and upon the process­ ered. The categories include: h. numbar of magnetic tape devices an operating system (also called master bank. Within the agency databank there necessity to set up files of information and, 2. Magneticdisc ing method of the computer. Checks such -Hardware issues a. removable disc pack control program or executive, e.g., IBM's will be several databases. For example, for (3) decisions about the method for change­ as hash totals, sequence checks, proof fig­ -Software issues b. character set (control characters, DOS-Disk Operating System or TSO-Time a corrections databank the following data­ over. ures, record counts, limit checks, break­ -Documentation issues special characters) Sharing Option; Burroughs MCP-Master c. bootstrap formats bases could exist: inmate database (current, To convert the input, specific methods points, checking numbers or check digits, -Performance issues d. parity Control Program or MCS-Message Control past), personnel database, finance database, must be developed to acquire the input da­ tape label checking, and record label checks -User issues. e. size of disc storage (megabyte) System). An operating system consists of a and facilities database. A database consists ta, to prepare the data (coding), to put the set of programs that assist the user in ob- of a number of files. A file is a set of data data into machine usable form, and to com- • ---,

Systems transfer technology for contemporary corrections 43 42 Correctional data analysis systems F. DBMS - operator and reference manual checkout, listings, documentation, and type of system to be transferred (pro grams, G. I/O devices - operator and reference assistance to the user forlile and pro­ 3. Terminals E. Error message handling to an I/O device 4· Vendor support manual gram conversion data, or proce~ures). a. screen size (compatible) a. Cost H. Debug routines-operator and reference B. Deliverable Items: A matrix indicating the type of system to b. cursor and screen addressing Error message In English and explanatory b. Is system aid available on site or manual documentation specified c. character set (control characters, F. File accessing methods must one de~end on phone calls I. Floating-point -operator and reference object code in use format be transferred and general considerations special characters) 1. Sequential c. What type 0 assistance Is given manual source code In user format for the transfer is presented in Figure 6.5. d. lower/upper case characters 2. Random for Installatlon J. Input preparation manual C. Deliverable medium: This matrix may be used as a guide to help e. end-of-ilOe, start of line conven­ 3. Indexed d. Is the vendor reliable and cQmrnit- K. Training (programmed text, etc.) manu­ magnetic tape (cartridge, cassette) tions 4. Other ted to s1!o:rt the SVSt6fTi als magnetic disc (disc pack, cassette) ensure that all relevant and appropriate f. erase characters G. Initialization of memory 5. Training an O(:umenfatlon III. listings (source) cards (80col.,51 col., 96 col.) issues have been considered before making g. full-page conventions H. File considerations: 8. Manuals A. Transferred program(s) other (1) are lines added at bottom and 1. Who performs all opens, closes, Q. Cburse available B. Library routlroes D. Cost (bundled software) a final decision regarding the transfer. a line pushed 011 top writes, rewrites, reads, recovers, de­ c. Are manuals accurate, complete, C. Utility routines . documentation from design The matrix may be used as a simple (2) /s the page erased and a new letes, creates, naming, renaming and up to date D. DBMS programs from host page started 2. Limitations: 6. Language Interface E. I/O devices personnel from host check-off to ensure that the area has been h. numberoflermlnals a. number of files open at a tlma a. Com~atlble with host language F. Debug routines updated software releases covered; the administrator may also wish 4. Printers and terminals for line printing b. concurrent use of 2 crlnore files ICO OL, FORTRAN, etc.) G. Floating-polntsoftware other to indicate problem areas through the use a. size form(s) aslnputorou\pu! 7. Staf reqUirements IV. Flowcharts E. Cost (bundled software) b. satisfactory generation of the c. file Identiiication a. What technical qualifications are A. System documentation of SUbjective probabilities for fiuccess. This number of parts/form d. lind offile conventions required of the data ~ase manager, B. Program programs matrix must be completed for each poten­ c. number of lines per page e. header and trailer labels users, and mana~ement V. Flledocumentation updated software releases d. number of characters per line 3. Protection 8. Physical characterlst cs of the com- VI. Decision tablos F. Frequencyofsoftware releases tial transfer site. e. character set (control characters, I. Input/output data puter G. Conversionlimplementation to be per­ To illustrate the matrix some examples a. Size memo~ required special characters) 1. Reformatting files required formed by the user are taken from the test installation of the f. carriage controls 2. Usable output format to meet user re­ b. Special har ware features re- Performance H. Operational benefits 5. Card readers quirements ~Ired Evaluating the performance of a trans­ 1. Fewerforms needed Basic OBSCIS Software Package in Iowa a. size of card accepted (80, 51, 96 3. All required data for Input Is available c. ftware required (operating sys- 2. Greater access to data and Informa­ as they fit the considerations of the exhib­ coil J. Text editor (for source editing) supports tem, library routines, etc'l ferred program or system includes assess­ tion d. Error message compatib lity with its. 13 b. code (Hollerith, binary) the rEl!1ulred character set (special char­ ing the impact of the transferred technology 3. F.aster processing of reports c. punch code-026, 029 acters) I/O devices I. Tangible benefits Under the headings Hardware/Program K. Appropriate interrupt handling K. Job control language M. SUPE0rt software on the organization in terms of costs, ben­ 1. Greater responslbilitles to govern­ 1. /0 devices required some exceptions which required changes L. Size memory 1. Length of password, user numbers, I efits, and general effectiveness. Evaluating ment and other requests for data account number 2. Utility routines (call and return com- 2. Facilitates better and more thorough M. Parity !I performance is an ongoing process. To as­ rather than checkoff were: N. Consoie switch settings 2. Runstreams executed from disc or ~atible) planning -Character set-(Exhibit A, LA.). The O. Time limits (satisfactory amount for loop­ tape 3. brary routines (call and return com- ~ sure receipt of a satisfactory performing J. Support services for proprietary software 3. Format for job stream (card and deck) gatlble) 1. Time (days, weeks,etc.)tofixa change from Xerox to IBM hardware ing before abort) product, Exhibit D cites considerations P. Wordsize L. Database Management (If the target sys­ 4. ebugroutines software problem would not recognize the character (") dou­ tem uses a DBMS, these considerations 5. Sort/merge routine 1 that should be observed during the transfer 2. Frequency of updated versions and are necessary. If not, the file considera­ 6. Floating-point arithmetic (software) supporting documentation ble quotation mark which had to be Software N. Operating system interface phase and aids to assure satisfactory per­ 3. Assistance from donor to recelverfor tions must be addressed.) 1. Performs I/O functions I: change!1 to (') single quotation mark. Programs transferred into a user envi­ 1. Services formance after completion of the transfer. writing programs Interfacing with the 2. Performs full opening, closing, re- transferred program -Addressing scheme-(Exhibit A, U.S).' ronment must be compatible with the soft­ a. Isthe security satisfactory­ writes, deletes, naming, renaming ware of the user's environment-operating security/privacy down to the file, 3. Handles local and permanent files The original design called for relative ad­ record, field level dressing method and even though the op­ system, utilities, database management sys­ b. Lockoutfeatures satisfactory (by 4. Modes OftaroteCtlon IExhibit 6.0 5. Blocking actorfortype/disc Performance erating system was supposed to support tem, text editing, file handling, etc. Exhibit password, account number, user 6. Initialization of memory Summary number) this feature, it did riOt. The addressing B emphasizes software characteristics that c. Utility routines available: 7. Compatible system calls from appllca- I. Standard tests available for execution tionprogram This chapter has attempted to provide an method had to be changed to an index must be analyzed when transferring a pro­ (1) Load and unload A. At time of delivery (2) Reorganize files B. Each time a change is made to the overview of systems transfer technology for method. gram. (3) RecclVery and ba~up Documentation software (4) Statistics for datI) base man­ C. For use any time the software Is malfunc­ persons who are not computer profession­ -Magnetic disc-(Exhibit A, I.J.2). Disc agement information Transferring a system requires complete tioning als but must be involved in decisions con­ space for on-line virtual memory instead of Exhibit6_B d. Is the query and report. generating al d accurate documentation. Documenta­ II. Expected output from standard tests (list­ cerning the transfer of systems between having a dedicated disc drive. . Sol'tware capability convenlent--doaslt ings) I have a natural language tion should not only stress 'the program III. Testprocedures/manuals installatiqns or the developmen t of a trans­ Under the headings Software/Program J. Will the available software support the re­ e. Is there a data glossary and dic­ being transferred but should also include: IV. Error reporting procedure ferable system. the changes made in OBSCIS were less a quired tionary available (S2000K has) to A. Standardized form for reporting errors A. Program size (bytes, instructions, words) prevent recompiling when compatibility with the user's software and B Software maintenance agreement (if In order to facilitate the transferability feature of getting the program to run than Programminq languages changes are made hardware environment; preparation of da­ necessary) of software developed under government for greater efficiency. Most size and memo­ 1. Standard COBOL ANSI COBOL f. Is there concurrent update and V. Performance monitoring contract for corrections installations, the ry constraints oflanguage compilers apply 1974, ANSI X3.23. 1974 (may specify Inquiry capability ta for input; and training or user personnel. A. CPU time to run the program with present ieveis of standardization lordillerent g. Does the system allow for multiple The type, kind, and amount of documenta­ amounts of data Law Enforcement Assistance Administra­ " when going from a large capacity computer feature) data bases to be open at one end tion transferred depends on the type of tion and related agencies have indicated the to a minicomputer. The Basic OBSCIS example: nucleus Level 2 h. What Is the number of keys al­ sort-merge Level 2 lowed software being transferred, i.e., proprietary Users software must .be written in standard lan­ package was first programmed on a mini, table-handling Level 2 i. Is error message handling satis­ vs_ non-proprietary. Exhibit C illustrates guages (COBOL, FORTRAN or BASIC) so compiler peculiarities were rare. The file etc. factory A key factor to guarantee success of 2. Standard FORTRAN (ANSI FOR­ j. Other support software P!O'llded: considerations of appropriate documenta­ implementation is to involve the user at and must follow the Federal Information access method and storage medium were TRAN 1966, ANSI X3.9, 1966) with (1! Sort/merge tion to assure portability of the technology_ each stage of the development and imple­ Processing Standards Publications (FIPS changed to take advantage ofincreased ca­ following extensions: blocked or un­ (2 Roating point arithmetic PUB) standards for documentation. pacity. This heading also covers job controi blocked I/O read and write random (3 etc. An example of documentation of a correc­ mentation of the transfer process. Exhibit and indexed files, etc. 2. Operation tions information system is the Basic OBSCIS E lists user concerns that need to be recog­ This chapter indicates there are more (and language (Exhibit B, K 1-3) which is spe­ 3. Other a. Operating system Interface Software Package Documentation which sometimes crucial) dimensions to transfer­ cific to both the hardware and operating B. Compiler pecularities (1l PerformsI/O functions nized to assure successful transfer of com­ 1. Lengeth of/dentifiers (2 Performs full opening, clos­ includes sections on Systems Guidelines, puter technology. ability. First are the concepts ofperformance, system configuration and to the specific 2. Length ofintegers (16 bit, 32 bit, etc.) ing, rewrites, deletes, nam­ Installation Guide, Operations Manual, system design and the user. Second is the site requi·rements. 3. How are arrays accessed Ing, and renaming 4. How are matrices stored (3) Handles local and permanent System Design Documentation, System Test IExhibltS.E 5. Are variables initialized files and Acceptance Plan, State Specific Docu­ User 6. Run-time checks (array size, string (4) Modes of protection ollered size) by the O.S. mentation, arid a section for user notes. I. Personnel required 7. Separate compilation - program may (5! Blocking factorfortape/disc Each implementing state prepares its own A. Operator be too large to compile on target ma­ (6 Is memory Initialized operations documentation. B. Programmer Transfer Considerations chine (7 Compatibility of system calls C. Input preparer (code and verify) 8. Execution of loops if range is out of from application programs II. Training required \1~ of Transfer order-is an error detected b. Complexity olthe Data Definition A. Operator kardware Software Documentation Performance User C. Linkage to the main program/system language and the Data Manipula­ B. Programmer tion language Exhibit6.C C. User of report 1. Extemal references satisfied . Documentation 2. Overlay structureforseparate pro­ 3. Physical control I D. Input preparer Program I grams a. How efficlentis the I/O; can page III. Satisfactory error control on Data a. tree or chain compatlbility size (program size) be changed I. Explanatlon of non-standard nomenclature A. Input data (editing for legitimate ranges, I b. compatible communicatfon be­ b. Mode ofinteraction (languages) etc.) Procedures 1 tween segements (1) Interactive II. Manuals B. Operator feedback D. Format for delivery to user site (2) Maximum number of users A. Operator manual C. Fill Identification (magnetic tape, disc, 1. Bootstrap (machine language (3) Concurrent use of one B. Reference manual. stacks of cards) software) database C. Installation/conversion procedures IV. Management 2. Cards (source, object, code compati­ D. Library routines-operator and referece A. Initial cost Includes cost of programs, Figure 6.5. Matrix for system transfer considerations ble) manum comp,lIations, conversion and complete 3. Tape (compatible labels) c. gn:l;:u:n~al E. Utility routines-operator and reference 4. Disc (compatlble labels) MOther manual -- _. -"---~-----'---

(-' '- I1 Ii 1 i

44 Co"ectional data analysis systems I Chapter 7 Data report. This 5-year report describes The matrix headings Documentatidn/Pro­ 10 Toellner, John, J. Toellner and Associates, "Per­ the average inmate population and the dis­ gram, Data, and Procedures all required IExhibit 6.F formance Measurement in Systems and Programming," tribution of funds spent each year includ­ Blbllogr.phy Ilffosystems (Vol. 24, December 1971). t specialized reformatting to cover Iowa user ing state funds, federal funds, and other II Hague and Brown, op. cit. Transferable demand speciJic requirements in altareas. Documen­ 1. Allen, ThomasJ., Manegingthe F/ojIVof Il Chapin, Ned, Computers, D. Van Nostrand Co. ! revenues. The report also gives the daily tation of a system to be transferred is the Technology,MITPrMS,19n. (New York, N.Y., 1911). I ' information technologies and yearly average cost per inmate, com­ key to successful transfer; Since the Basic 2. Brown, P. J., "PortablHty, RellebUity Seen as IJ In April 1918 the Iowa Department or Social Ser­ paring the percentage of state funds expend­ Ignored by Vendors," ComputerwOrld, May vices, Division or Adult Corrections, was selected by OBSCIS Software Package was designed 28,1975. LEAA and SEARCH Group, Inc. to become the first ed to total funds. The South Carolina De­ for transfer, the Data and Procedures sec­ 3. Brown, P. J., Softwaf8 Porlabllty, Cam­ test in a live environment of the Basic OBSCIS Software partment has found this particular report tions were left blank for user specification. ~~ University PI'l!SS, New York, N.Y., Package. This package had bCen prepared to perform so helpful in responding to ad hoc requests three modules or the OBSCIS Model and to allow ror I Under the matrix heading Performance/ 4. Chapin, Ned, Computers, D. Van Nostrand that the report has been described as Co., NewYork,N.Y., 1971. the insertion or state specific requirements. Details from Program, ~owa experienced much difficulty. 5. Hague, S. J. and Ford, Brian, "PortablUty­ the Iowa transfer experience arc given to illustrate the "chained to the desk" to insure accessi­ Data were impossible to measure for each Prediction and Correction," Softw8f8- matdx (Figure 6.5) in usc but the details arc simplified. t One objective of this project was to iden­ -Model dat'a bases bility. stage of the transfer because there was no PractJee and Experlenee, VoI.6,19'76. -Litigation and data processing Following similar tactics, the Oregon 6. Kluckas, William F., "Planning, People, Prac­ I tify useful procedures and technologies input data included in the original package lice Seen Key to Smooth Switch," Com­ which correctional agencies utilize in de­ -Transfer experience. Co'rrections Division analyzed the demand at time of delivery for benchmark runs. puterworld, July 12,1976. mand information proce.ssing. The purpose information requests it had received over a 7. Merten, Alan G., "Prc:'\lram Transfers 'Inevlt· ! However, such a set of test data now exists able as Death, Taxes, "Computerworld, of this chapter is to summarize some of Reports deSigned for 2-year period in order to detect patterns for modifications to the software and sub­ June14,1976. these technologies which can be transferred ad hoc response and similarities in requests. As a result, the 8. Patrick, Robert L., "Sixty Ingredients for Bet­ f sequent transfer installations. ter Systems," DetemetJon, Vol. 23, De­ to other correctional agencies, Oregon Division designed two monthly re­ The matrix headings User/Program, Data, cember19n. After conducting telephone conversations Correctional staff members who routine­ ports which provide response data for an Procedures proved to be the most critical 9. Tlistra, C. F., "Standards for Informatkm Sys­ with every state correctional agency and ly respond to demand information requests estimated 80 to 90 percent of demand in­ tems Manual," Joumal of Systems Manege­ I I ! considerations in the Iowa transfer project. ment, July 1978. visiting seventeen agencies, two conclusions find that many requests require the same formation requests. One report summarizes While training of technical personnel is nec­ 10. T08l1ner, John, T08l1ner, J. and Associates, regarding demand information processing data elements. These elements usually per­ the inmate popUlation according to the "Performance Measurement In Systems and essary in any transfer project, other users Programmlng,"lnfosyatems, Vol. 24, De­ t appear warranted. First, no single correc­ tain to the number of inmates incarcerated, county of commitment, ethnicity, crime frequently overlooked are more vital to cerriber 19n. tional agency has an ideal method for deal­ the cost of providing for inmates, the crimes type, drug and alcohol treatment, average 11. "Transportabllty Should Be Sese of Software project success. The system users must be Standards," Computerworl.d, December 13, V ing with the total demand information for which they have been convicted, inmate age, average sentence, and so forth. The thoroughly trained in the utilization of the 1976. I problem. Second, several agencies have demographic characteristics, etc. Because second report summarizes new commit­ input and output procedures of the system 12. URISA 1976, "Standards Key to Effective Technology Transfer," Computerworld, Ssp­ t developed useful procedures and technol­ of repeated requests for similar informa­ ments and paroled and discharged inmates or chaos results. Reports must provide op­ tember6,1976. ogies for resolving parts of the problem. tion, several correctional agencies have by county of commitment. One page ofthis erations and management with information 13. Warren, Jim C., "Software Portability: A Valuable and transferable technologies status report is reproduced in Figure 7.1. Survey of Approaches and Problems," found it expedient to compile very brief to aid in the decision process and the in­ CompCon, February 1975. were identified in the following areas: statistical reports wl)ich present the most The Texas Department of Corrections formation provided must be valid and ac­ 14. Wetherbe, James C., Systems Analysis for -Reports designed for ad hoc response commonly requested information. Avail­ produces several reports which are routine­ Computer·Based InformatJon Systems, If curate. User involvement throughout the Wes.t Publishing Co., 1979. -Routing and logging models ability of these reports has significantly ly supplied to inquirers. The Department project is essential. -Automated policy indexing system saved response time and money. found from experience that these reports Thus the key cpncepts involving system Reterence. -Statistical analysis and report generation The South Carolina Department of Cor­ provide answers to the majority of requests transfer are then: documentation, stan­ and eliminate many special computer runs. 1 SEARCH Group, Inc., Basic OBSCIS J:>/tware software rections produces a Population and Fiscal dards, performance evaluation, system de­ Package Documentation, Grant No. 16-55-99-6048 rrom sign, and the user. In order to develop a the Systems Development Division, National Criminal I system that has a high probability of being Justice Inrormation and Statistics Service, Law Enrorce· transferred to different environments with ment Assistance Administration (Washington: Depart· I ment or Justice, 1918). ( minimum amounts of change and frustra­ 2 Brown, P.J., Software Portability, Cambridge Uni- . ! 12117170 POPULATIUN AS OF 11/111179 H INsr PP 30TC06 PAGF 2 tion the system should be well documented; versity Press (New York, N.Y., 1971). j Crt4rru TO T 4L nAlA F T /I ;1 1 c CMI~E TY'E II C~I:~r. TKEAT~O ~REV10US AVERAGE ~ALE 1ST PREV AVER ~'anJf'C T AVAI L III Al HX C~ OT PEPS pnop STAT FE :lkUr. SEX DRUG ALe PkU It. Me COIIF. AGE r.OH~1 TH.ENT SFNT SERV use standard languages (e.g., ANSI J Merten. Alan G., "Program Transrers 'Inevitable 'Ii UKI, 6 28.5 4 2 9.5 4.7 COBOL), use good state-of-the-art pro­ as Death, Taxes .... Computerworld, (June 14, i916). f 5 1 4 2 I 1 2 2 3 3 " Bryce, M" and Associates, PRIDE: PRofitable In­ t LAN!; 41j1 441 3~'1 25 11 11 2 2 n4 1/,5 52 '2d 37 12 21 21 lH 9 60 194 26.5 42D 367 74 10.5 1. ft gramming practices (top down, structure, formation by DEsign through phased planning and II Nr. 7~ n 6~ 7 ~ 25 4', 9 H 4 33 23.6 75 67 h.O 1.1 separation structuring); use a predictive control. ! 1I N'I 1)7 131 122 3 t 2 2 ~8 66 9 3 8 1q 3 4 51 1 14 66 24.6 12R 109 H 6.5 1.2 system design approach; and consider po­ , U.S. Department or Commerce, National Bureau l 'ULI! 31 11 21 15 15 1 4 1 1 2 12 5 15 21.4 30 27 4 6.ft 1.4 of Standards FIPS PUB 38 Federal Inrormation Pro­ tential users and their requirements. M~RI 175 174 154 4 7 q2 70 Il ~ 22 61 3 36 77 24.1 170 13935 7.9 I.A cessing Standards Publication (February IS, 1916). I ~r.pn 1 1 2 15.0 2 1.5 J.ft Although there is a dearth of literature 6 i U.S. Department or Commerce, National Bureau 11 /IT 36.0 0.0 0.0 concerning system transfer, even more so of Standards Handbook 113, CODASYL, Data Descrip­ ~IILT Illb 11)95 6el 31~· 4233 1 14 665 336 q369 97 113 13 55 474 15 191491 21.3 1040 Rd3 l12 11.7 2.1 tion Language Journal or Development (1914) Report with respect to guidelines for noncomputer NFW' I 1 1 1 21.0 1 5~.0 1.7 professionals involved in the transfer of of the Conference on Data Description Languages, A DataBase Task Group. OSCI 0.0 0.0 0.0 rOLl( :.5 4~ 40 23 17 5 4 4 22 9 18 25.3 ~3 38 R.5 2.1 systems, this topic is becoming increasingly 7 Tilstra, C.F., "Standards for Inrormation Systems I ! popular as the notion of system transfer Manual'" Journal ofSystems Management (July 1918). SHF~ 37.0 1 1 10.0 1.4 becomes a potentially viable alternative to • Ha8ue, S.J., and Ford, Brian, "Portability-Predic· ! TILL 2#. .!l 12 12 Z 4 4 5 14 73.8 24 7.Z 4 10.5 1.4 tion and Correction'" Software-Practice and Experi­ U""T lOt' 0'_ 16 4 46 50 II 11 5 13 40 13 54 25.9' 106 96 12 6.1 1.3 "reinventing the wheel" at each installation. 1t . ence (Vol. 6, 1916). 22 ~. 5 A selected bibliography on systems transfer L, UNFl 2l 22 5 15 17 3 11 21.3 21 1.1 • Brown, P.J., "Portability, Reliability Seen as 18· 1 : UT 1 14.0 15.0 0.0 has been included in Exhibit F. nored by Vendors," Computuworld(May 28,1915). IIT ..\'I 31.0 15.0 1.8 L: WA • 26.6 16.6 0.6 '~UL 2ft.0 7.0 1.7 WASt n 1ft 6 1 11 9 7 3 Z 14 2 13 21.5 27 23 5.1 1.9 WASil 113 tll~ 1 4 58 46 9 . 6 14 54 16 52 23.8 107 93 20 10. J 1.9

IIfH~r 1 I 1 26.0 1 12.0 1.1

I Y.1,~·t 18 20 4 Z 15 6 15 21.2 40 32 10 R.3 1.2 I· 2 I 3128 2704 549 9.ft 1.R I fOT"~~ 333~ 3253 2Hh 3R') 13~ 97 5 19 1762 1195 2H 206 n4 479 lh6 194 1371 38 478 t486 26.5 r "~v~Rlr,r AGE HPRfHPlTS AGE AT kr,PlIRT OATE'''AVEUGE SENTOIl:E IS NUM8ER OF YEARS'''AVERAGE SEkVEO IS AVER_GE NUH8ER OF YEARS Figure 7.1. Population report, Oregon Corrections Division (reduced copy) " I! '1 45

1r· . ! 46 Correctional data analysis systems Transferable demand information technologies 47 f~ One report is the Fact Sheet. A portion of I this report is reproduced in Figure 7.2. ! The Fact Sheet includes the following summary data: OOHVIC11ONl .... ~ - Population characteristics ...... ,...... , ,.be.1 rw-o.y IIAISA I. number received eTems Department Y- 2. paroled • """'" ..... DalLu·F\. wara. 1.17. IflO M.tO '.1 HOUlton 5.lts 3. discharged It7I 4.11 7.0 San Antonio 1.721 4. population by sex of Corrections 1m 4.55 7.5 BeaIl!MOll.ora...... AuIIIur 77J 1973 4,33 6.1 AuIoIln _ 5. by age 1174 U. 5.V IllS UO U 0tIan ' ... 6. ethnic breakdown INMATE POPULATION 1171 7.45 U 7. IQ scores 1m UJ 1.4 MAJOR OFFENSES 8. number enrolled in various educa­ ,BaM em o.c:. n. 1m JlllPlMtlaa., tional programs POPULATION SUMMARY -Major offenses Y.... Reed," PareIe4 DIHII ...... -Convictions according to Standard Met- ...... BIII'IlIa.." 5.117 I$lt Rebay 1.a3 1t70 14.331 1.4111 I.m :31';' ropolitan Statistical Area s.J10 H~ide 2.151 111'1 I!,_ 7.1'" a.m UZ2 I>rup 12 lit 1m lUI. 6.734 3.121 1.- 1"0 -Prior confinement in the department 3•• Lareeny 1.71'1 1m 17.cm 1.511 3,116 7." &.loual"-ll 1.113 -Administrative divisions 1174 7._ 4.'1113"" J,.I7I IU33 FIII'III'7 I.n -Policy of the department. 1m I .... '.113 4.113 UDI Oilier .- UN 11.2:1 Other reports produced by the Texas 1m "717 ''- !,13J 3.M2 o.u U".AlIIIIIe 174 1m ... IU• "711 UII - • N.. Iaf..-Ie ...... lm ... 1.1II: M4 Department of Corrections include theAn­ ,.,...I...... 5EI'O'ENCE LEHC11f nual Report, the Annual Statistical Report, .,... "1m _ I,m ... ul JIOftaI. , ....J .. ~. II. 1m popoU'-., and 30 Years of Progress. The Annual Re­ ~~ N...... ,'_ '"- port is designed to reflect the administra­ INMATE POPULATION BY SEX Lea lhan I y.. r 10 C>4 tive and fiscal organization of the agency. , ..... CIA Dec. 31, 1m popuIallca, Leu lhan 2 yean 13 This report is produced for the Board of TwIaI '-thana,..... I.-• 1,)& c...... v_ ~ ...... 1Aa1ba.4~ UII 7 .• Corrections, the governor, and the legis­ Dec.J1 Lna Iha n 5,..,.. 1.0)1 464 1m 14.331 13.'111 533 Leu Ihan.)Un lature but is, of course, available to the Laalhan7y__ 1.457 IH'I 1.71 IS ••' IS •• 103 au J':'/ public. The Annual Statistical Report is a .,12 1S.7lt U.I30 591 Leu lhanl y-, 44C 1m 17.m 11,476 5t7 Lnallwlqly-. 1.040'" 4U comprehensive document presenting a sta­ 1974 11,133 11.211 IIZ2 Lnau..nl'~ 177 7'1 tistical summary of inmate demographics, 1175 11.135 11,23 70Ci 10-l4yeaIW ~.UI 153t those admitted to, released from, and con­ lt1I "711 1I,ItO m 15-1t,..,.. un ItO ItI'1 JI,. II..,., II. 20-3,..,.. 2.- la fined in the department during the current :IO-7tyeaIW 1.755 715 lOy_n ...... C':2 %11 calendar year. Examples of the information ur~ 2./irT 125 [Mia included in the Annual Statistical Report PRIOR CONFINEMENTS IN TI>C U.va,t,.!W liS 1\ are: lilaald on Dec. 31. 1m pcIpIIIation) ACE OF INMATES -Texas population compared to crime rate No. 01 ill.· t·..... fa..! a. Dec. SI. Ir.; ...... '-'.1 and inmate statistics c...n._ 1- PIll"Hlll P,,"", AI. S ...... ,__ ......

-Inmates per 100,000 population by Texas None Il,l2l 64.%2 .,. 71.33 lftIIlhaa 17 One 4._ - a: Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas ID.'" &a 14.11 )7-1' Two 2._ 8 •• U7 2CI-U 'oX -Summary of' inmate count by unit nor.. a4 U3 •8 Z2-2S I. " Flour .. 17 :. -Population summary l.a .It a-a FACT SHEET • LUI -Comparative. statement-inmate cost per "..... - -.. • • • ~. day -Inmates enrolled in the school programs -Inmates enrolled in the college programs -Inmate population by sex A portion oHhe"Fact Sheet" from the Texa. Department of Corrections (reduced copy) -Inmate population fluctuations by month Figure 7.2. -Offense breakdown ------~. -Rate of admission by major offense. The report entitled 30 Years of Progress traces the historical development of the Texas Department of Corrections from 1947 through 1977. It includes a list of the ad­ ministrators, board members, il.nd certain staff members involved in the department during this period. The report also chroni­ cles the development of programs and ser­ vices in the department and the buildings constructed during this period of time. Correctional agencies concerned with the increasing amounts of agency resources di­ verted to the demand information process may wish to analyze these excellent reports. These reports illustrate the data most fre­ quently requested and they depict formats for presentation of information. ------

Transferable demand information technologies 49 Correctional data analysis systems and comment selection. The system records Routing and logging models the title, up to 9 key words, 10 statements, ,dlll'II" I.• ,., •. ! '1, I, I f·,,· 'I, 'L I. "111 11 I fl', 'In.1 IlIf' IF- I, 111,lilli ,(to (II.• "lid' t' I; the author of the response, the time spent in Hi Many obstacles to generating responses preparation, the type and location of the 1','I'r 01 1:111,,"'; to demand information requests originate report, and the cost of compiling the re­ ,lrrLf' nl- IIn.1 ~Y: 1~11 in the mechanics of receiving and recording sponse. An example of the system's output 11;:'- "lIrl.1 f'PlJr.·Pid'l the requests. For example: fi,:- -F'POGPfil'l EIIHfiliC EIICIll is containecJ in Figure 7.4. r.t-'·1111.IOP 111' HOC·, !.11TH LlTHP -Duplicate requests are frequently received Several states have manual logging sys­ 1:2--I'II1JOP f.I1 HOC. 1,IITllotIT LET HP MII,IjCS01A WWm·£tH Of CorJUCTtllflS in separate unitsDf the agency and elicit CI-.. IHrIOP Ar, HOC. !.11TH LETTER tems for recording requests and correspon­ (Z--ll1tIOP 111' HOC'. Idllll[1I.rT LETTEP R(JsOIIrch .nd lr.torm;,t1on Sy.tcms duplicate response efforts. dence. The systems usually consist of a [J1--l:F'IEFIIIG WIIN'1"Y -A request routed to an inappropriate re­ [J2--PPE~E/lTI1T lOll columnar ledger with entries for basic in­ E I--l/I-F'ERSOII TI1LI< spondent must be reassessed and forwarded. E2--PHDlIE (I1LL formation items such as the date recdved, E3--LETTEP -An analysis and eVllluation of the demand source of request, description ofthe request E4--11EMO OOt.,______TI ..,____ Nome of Person MIlking Roque.t______~ ___ information process requires formal logging. F 1--F'I1I'IF'HLET and the individual to whom the request is FZ--IIEI.I:PfeF'EP CL IF'PIIfG Or9.nlz.tlon'______--<- __ Phon. No •• ______Key elements in an efficient response referred for response. F3--E:00V. process are routing and logging. "!:or the In addition to these basic entries, some F4--JOU~~L fePTJCLE Addrc5S,______~~------D.t. Due, ______F5--NOIIOGF'feF'H sake of efficiency and accountablhty the correctional departments add entries which Q --IS DIlLY lI;E[' FOP OI.rFUE I[JI and logging of the requests recei~ed. pu­ HOL[JIIIG UIJ[lER feCCESSIDII rIUI1E:EI< 79')510.06 For example, the log sheet us~d by the South I1UTHOR? plication of response efforts and misgUided Carolina Department of Corrections also Hill CI1RR use of agency resources must be avoided. USER:: OPGl1rll "feT I OIl? includes entries for the date the response )r'OOR There is a variety of routing and log­ USERS NI1ME7 was completed and the number of man hours > DI1VE EVArtS ging methods used throughout the correc­ consumed (see Figure 7.5). In the Califor­ TITLE? tional community. ,The Minnesota Depart­ r nia Department of Corrections the log of >REV1EI.I OF EVALUI1T101iS OF 'SCAPE"I1 STI of the demand information requests received F'UE:L1CATlDlI I1ATE? tially routed to one office in the research by the agency. California classifies its cor­ > I' STOP.I1GE LOCI1T1 OIi? section. A "Data Request Form" serves as respondence into approximately 15 subject >EVAIIS OFFICE the log record (see Figure 7.3). The person \ WBRI( PRcr'UCT areas with the log sheet recording the sub­ tIAil-HOLIPS? assigned to answer the request is usually a \ ject code number, designated respondent, >8:00 Oate,eo-.pleted,______Completed by'______member of the research staff unless there r;>UliS? date due and date mailed (Figure 7.6). Log >0 Appro.l""te Hours to Complete,______are others better qualified to respond. 1; sheets for the Maine Department of ~!:ental CDS]? In the Oregon Cbr.rections Division all >0.00 Health and Corrections are exceptionally KEY~IORD liUI1BER OOl? Ye' c:J requests for information requirin~ compu­ comprl!hensive. They record the date in, >SCAF:ED 5TRAI"HT ,Ne. Deck New Procedu ... S.ve KEYWORD NL'I'\E JUVElii LES ' mittee. The committee consists of all di­ KE~'ldor;:D IIUtIE:E"R 003? time spent in preparation, source of data, > ['ETERP.ENCE vision administrators, and together they comments, outsid.: contact people, and fold­ KE'([.IOP.[' NUtlE:ER 004? After Ccr;>letlon. Ple.se Return tor File cPU Tim.: >RfeHt.'AY STATE F'RISON decide policy issues involved in developing er number of response. KEYt"Or;'D rIUME:ER (O05? the response. Examples of these issues are: > IIU1ATE F'RO';PAMS These routing and logging models are I(EYIoIOR[' HUI'\E:ER 006? -Who will have access to the information? transferable to other correctional ,agencies > IIITERRCTIOU E:ET!.IEEN 1I11'IATES AilII _".lVEIIlI.ES -What is the priority of the request? EtlTRY TOO LOIIG--rAliT E~:CEED <'0 CHAF:ACTH'S with needs in those areas, although some TRY AGI~IN .• UUNG THIS MEASIJPHIG L1HE: -Whether or not a charge will be assessed elements of these models should be designed KE~'I,IOF'[' IIUI'1E:ER 006? Re.~arch for the information? to fit each agency's unique requirements. >IIEIJ JERSEY 04/04/79 Decisions by the committee promote The transferable elements of these routing KE'l''''OP[, NUr-rBEF" 0071 >L1FERS cooperation among the departments. These and logging methods, include: ' KEYI,IOPD tlllm:E"1< 0081 committee decisions relieve the data pro­ eRouting methods > AllY COI'lMEriTS ? (V N) cessing section of that responsibility and -routed to one office (Minnesoia) >Y help to ensure consistent and expedient ac- -routed to policy committee (Oregon) tions by the entire staff. . eLogging techniques The logging system used by the Georgia -automated log (Georgia) Department of Offender Rehabilitation is -manual recording (California, Maine, Figure 7.4. Example of output from the autol!/latod logging system, automated. The log, on a Univac 1100 Sys­ South Carolina) Figure 7.3. Demand Information request form used by the Minnesota Georgia Department of Offender Rehabilitation (reduced copy) tem, employs a key word search capability I: Department of Corrections (reduced copy) 1

'NFOIIMATION REQUEST LOG I········~ ...... ···· ... •.... · ...... ··..... ·..... ~· .... ~· .. ·····.... ·· .. ···...... OAT! IItCllVED ACTION fAllEN DArE COM~L£TED ....NHOU;;:.~ Dlte Received Prom ~t_ • Letter No. (tn.ate H.me • No.) ~~11_d ----~------~--~----~--~----~~~ Ii I: ii. I· 11 I Figure 7.6. Heading from the log ofthe Director's Corresp~nde"~e, California Department of Corrections (rBduced coPy) Figure 7.5. He.dlng from the "Information Request Log," South Carolina Department of Corrections (reduced copy) " 1 1I i Transferable demand information technologies 51 50 Correctional data anaiysis systems I 1 RI: tiN UM£ NIIV lHal:R jJ, l?1 J C:I'·Pr:-:. Tt I VI ~I!!~ OMEGON COHR[CTIOHS OIYISION FUIICT I(NAl S AFreCTED rAGE HAS TEA I N'O E ~ "'or RULES GENtRAL INS r • r I Eli) RFt.f AS" J411 wehl. r.f1VT. SHTUS PRr.C.~DlI~Al STAlfflWT hUMIN. SH,VI CF5 se~vl CES SF,P.VICFS lI;srCCT. r.1J~DFrr If'''~ Rl~UI'ro BY: ntl'F.CTIVE TYPF OF AC:r: SS W lC'IPL IFRllED YFS YFS YO:~ YE'j, I ~fCTI i YIS YF5 PfP·I. Aonp rF~ o vr INFlJI:fo\AT IU~I

,hQ~JtIIST~ATlDN UF I;On,) VE 5 AII!)P IF, I) ~CCf.SS TO COMPUTEHIZEn RIII.E 11<1: Pf~'l. !l;FOP"AT I ON 3 ADJI'T ItIN flF RULES U~J'JER YF.S YfS VF. S YFS HS YF,5 r EPH. AiJOPT(O f j T'tf 4DHIt..lI$lq,l\T IV e ACCUlmllNG PROCfOij~ES PRnCEOuRt STATEMENT t':» ICi;'HWES ACT (AI'\) Pf,G_kJlINr. CONT"OI. OF FUNDS .\prLIC.-, lIUN Alln F.:~"OlL~'F.1\'1 vrs yeS YFS IIF,P". h~U 'TEl) III Wt.i<(11. AND lJlIUIi THF."apy POl.TCY FAC lilT I~S FOR .0llK PELEASf ENHOLLEES C:.H~U'IIT\' C"~P:CII(lN5 vi! 5 YC$ rl t~q,t•• A(1~1::J T ~I) L r.e-'~ H:!J.S , F.S I .\I\l ;:>~H~T GF _PPLICHIUN aND f.NIIOLLMENT RULF.: 8 CC'IVl. MILL 1 ~ All IiIHAT c III YE S vr S YES PEril. Ai10PI~~ IN WOII~ "F.LFASF PIiOnRa" ~ '!f;UJ CAL r At I Ll T'I CLTSlllE '.1.'.1 tAf1tm' t:1~;S UIVISIU~ A"llt~T WAPI/INTO; Fu" PPOCEOUllt STATfM£NT P""S(IIIS UN CONn I TI ON_I. h r.(J~f'lLIIW5 UI~ IS I'J~ Yl:5 Y~ S Yl.!S VC 5 YF$ Vf-C; rEP'l. AOOPIEIl IV78 PfUAo;r '>TATUS. "F.IIUE<;T INli r';j1 L:lyr./C:O~ F F.C , I C'IS nl\'I~JI'fl LLll'lr '''H'S. ANn Ak~~~TING _NO '''I;LAllLN~I1If'S nFIAINlllf. PAIWL~ESI t.l PilOllATiONfllS 'I 10 [~5lr~'bfi~~~LI\?~it~D VI !; y.,~ VI; ~ PEr¥-. \')I10Tn 1)I7B

_II0ITS - F;HEPNAL ANII PROCEOURE STATEMENT II fill I:Jfn'\'ATJCf'.,', us YFS YCCj YI S H'S vrs r£u.,~. AllOP I E I) ilH.;JlutlF·"IUn lor C[!P,~EC I'l O'IS INHPNAL :;1<1 lSI Lrl I,CCCPJS I!Y J!'lllH S I~O PAR liES ~O~~ I~Pf_TS AND SUSPECTED PROCEDURE S TA Tf'MENT I I.I'TTER AO""S

~OI'.nOf OCCUPHION_L POlICY OUAI.IFICATIONS

I'IlIne.FT P"FPA~U ION ANO POI.ICY Figure 7.S. Computerized Index to Volume on Rules, Oregon Division of Corrections (reduced copy) PP~"DI Will C, !,"OCt'S!. I F~ll.ij"fNS 5F~VICE!. I orVI<;IlIiol CIJO"lPHIVf. '~~.I~FNT WIIH CO~PE'TIONo; cies experiencing response difficulties to situations, the agency must make a tape of has developed a CROSSTAB program to OIVISION 11 policy. Obviously, the idea of assembling the data and transfer the tape to the ot\1er perform this cross tabulation function in CIOCUlATION OF II' 'TIOiol5 AULf' all policies into a single source and index­ facility. Another problem with commercial place ofa complete statistical package. This ~~ IN~_TFC; OH n' IN '1 ing policies by administrative area is wise. packaging is that the file structure of the program is frequently used with the data Cl)Uk'CTIO~S urVI_,c,1 ,"CILITIF.!'> II In addition, the system concepts are trans­ agency data base may not fit the configura­ elements selected by the EXTRACT pro­ ,I ferable as are various aspects of the output tion requirements of the report generation gram. Data elements that are repeatedly design. or statistical software packages. In these used in analyses are extracted and stored 0.J instances the agency must manipulate the on a separate file for a limited time rather data before these packages can be used. than being extracted for each application . . Figure 7.7. Computerized Master Index, Oregon Division of Corrections (reduced copy) j Statistical analysis and report The extra cost of running commercial pack­ Both of these programs, the EXTRACT ! ~ J generation software ages is a further consideration. These re­ and CROSSTAB, are designed for use by Ii source packages are technically available in nontechnical personnel from remote termi­ t i Automated policy indexing agencies have been slow to develop and published and bound in separate volumes. 1 Statistical analysis and report generation tnl! correctional community but practically nals. The programs are interactive and easy system document policies and procedural rules. The A computerized master index of all policy I technologies are frequently required to re­ the use of them is very restricted. to use. lack of formal policy statements and the statements includes an alphabeti<:allisting spond to demand information requests. To To counteract restrictions imposed by The Georgia Department of Offender The content analysis of demand infor­ resulting inconsistency of administrative of each policy and its status as either a letter meet these programming needs, correctional commercial packages and to reduce costs, Rehabilitation is operating an in-house de­ mation requests discussed previously indi­ procedure ,has ca;lght the critical eye of the of agreement, agency rule, policy, or pro­ I agencies either design in-hollse statistical agencies have supplemented in-house pro­ veloped report generation package-Golden cates that requests concerning agency policy courts, bringing about charges of arbitrary cedure. This index also includes the date of and report generation packages or acquire gramming by designing complete retrieval Retriever. In addition to performing the constitute the third most frequent request and capricious action on the part of correc­ last revision so the staff member answering commercial packages to perform these func­ packages, or refining the applications of functions of a report generator, such as received by correc1ional agencies. There are tional administrators. the request can check the currency of the :....1 tions. the commercial packages. For example, the retrieving the necessary data elements from two problems in responding to such requests: In some correctional agencies, particu­ policy. . j1 Unfortunately these programming re­ Ohio Department of Corrections has de­ the data base and formatting the report, -The policy in question may not exist in larly administratively large and complex An index for each volume (i.e., policy, ~f sources do not solve all software problems veloped in-house an EXTRACT program Golden Retriever outputs the computer time written form. agencies, it is difficult for the respondent to rules, etc.) has also been computerized and I] in responding to ad hoc requests. In-house for retrieval and listing. The program ex­ and cost for each application of the pack­ -The person answering the request may be f~lIy infcnned about the policies o'r all this index indicates whicq areas of agenry programs are limited by the ability of the tracts those data elements from the data­ age. Knowledge of the time and cost in­ not be fully informed about all the agency's agenc~'{ se(:tions. The respondent rna)' not administration are affected by each direc­ 1] agency staff to design and maintain software. base that are needed for the response so volved in the response is essential for plan­ policies. know,if a I,pecific policy exists, if the'I;; is a tive. The index includes the date the policy Also, in-house programs are usually designed that other analyses may be performed on ning and managing a demand information Many agencies are ill-prepared to respond formal statclnent of it, if the statement is or rule becomes effective. In this case, Ore­ I for a specific function and are less general­ only those selected elements rather than process. The Georgia package, designed to ~1 izable to the range of capabilities required operate on the Univac 1100 series, is re­ to questions about their policies. Until re­ current, who is responsible for enforcing gon's computer is used like a word proces­ 'I against the total datebase. This procedure cently, some correctional agencies were ex­ the policy and who is affected by the policy. sor for agency policy. The system allows for demand information processing. rtduces the computer time necessary for stricted to a single file structure and a fixed empt from state laws requiring formal policy The Oregon Corrections Division has quick and easy index updating and provides Commercial packages also have limita­ the analysis and saves the agency time and length recqrd. It is used daily in the Geor­ dev"!lopment (review through public hear­ developed an automated policy index sys­ printed copies of all indices for distribution tions. Correctional agencies may report money. gia Department for special runs and for ing,legislative committees, etc). This exemp­ tem which sig~ificantly expedites the pro­ throughout the agency. Examples of the that such packages are available when ac­ Sophisticated statistical analysis packages some standard reports. tion has been recently revoked in many cess of responding to policy requests. This output of the Oregon automated policy in­ tually access to them is through an outside such as SPSS and SAS are not cost benefi­ Other agencies using MARK IV, a com­ such states (e.g., Wisconsin) and these agen­ system is a good candidate for transfer to dexing system are provided in Figures 7.7 agency. Access may be via the state data cial when the most frequent applications mercial report generation package, have cies are now faced with the task of formu­ other institutions. In Oregon, all correction­ and 7.8. center or the computer facilities of a univer­ are limited to cross tabulations of two or taken advantage of its capacity for accom­ lating formal policy statements for all aspects al policies, procedures, rules and letters of Various aspects of this automated policy '-' sity. To make use of each package in these three data elements. The Ohio Department modating mUltiple requests in one compu- of agency operations. Other correctional agreement governing administration are indexing system are transferable to agen- '. , itJ ------~ ---

52 Correctional data analysis systems Transferable demand information technologies 53 ter run. Up to 256 sets of logic can be processed in one pass ofthe data base. Nine follOWing explanation of these four areas evaluation design includes con­ nomic, or the rehabilitative ob­ different reports can be formatted from one 'INmODUCTION is intended to be brief and general., sideratioo of the Centers' assist­ jectives towards which they set of logic inputs and multiple files can be ooce to crime victims, the na­ were directed. In late 1976 the coordinated. The Virginia Department of Program' evaluation research focuses on ture of community attitudes "Free Venture" model was devel.,. Corrections combines a'll information re­ the proce~ end outcome of activities generated by the Centers,' the 'Oped to rectify this problem. It sponsored by the department which are need for the Centers, end the quests into two MARK IV computer runs The primary mission of ihe Minnesota is 00 attempt to structure and Department of Corrections 1:1 to protect intended to produce desired changes in desirability of establishing new operate prison industries in a per week and has significantly reduced the the public. In order fa Occomplish this offenders. Program evaluation research Centers.~ mooner which resembles their analysis costs ofthe agency.The Ohio Youth mission, the department is committed to contributes to the improvement of cor­ free world counterparts as close­ Commission makes similar use of MARK the development end administration of rectional programs.r' Two reports, "legislative Re­ ly as possible. Since '1977 LEAA IV. They estimate that MARK IV is used in policies end programs that will both con­ port~Crime Victim Crisis Cen­ has provided Minnesota with over 90% of their special requests. trol offenders' inappropriate behaviors Policy analysis focuses on the selection ters, 1979" ond ''Crime Victim funds to implement the model in ond assist offenders in functioning as law~ and evaluation of alternative strategies to Crisis Centers/Research Re­ certain shops. In October, 1978 achieve department gools. Policy ooalysis Modei data bases abiding citiZens. These policies and pro­ port," (March I, 1979) ore avail­ the research division in the De­ grams deal with bOth juvenile and adult c(Jn also help to identify issues that must able. A final report will be portment of Corrections was a­ offenders in institutions as well as in the b,e addressed by departmental policy and completed by December, 1981.~ warded a two year LEAA grant The quality of an agency's data base is community. to evaluate the effectiveness of current to research the program. . The determined by the amount of data collected policies •• 2. Sex Offender Treatment Pro­ purposes of the project are twa/ and the accuracy of the data maintained. To achieve its mission, the department's gram Evaluation." fold: (f) descriptive: what The data base of the Minnesota Depart­ administafors must make rational choices Fact Finding consists of the activities type(s) of inmates are attracted ment of Corrections has both data element in the areas of policy, programming end !nvolvea in re~ponding to requests for The Deportment of Corrections to ond/or selected for participa- breadth and is highly reliable. Demand in­ menagement. Rational decision making mformation necessary for reports, ploo­ initiate;

The "Actl.vlty Report" from the Minnesota Department of CorrectIons describing the research and Information system~ [reduced copy) Figure 7.9. ~------~ Transferable demand information techilOlogies 55 54 Correctional data analysis systems r Two new projects will be initiated during 87 counties of the State. Mimesota low CMIS Data Bose Filesl. the next six months., (Chopter 241.06) requires that this In­ maintained by the Department of Incarceration assigned by the Technical Assistance: formatien be recorded, orgenlzed, ond re­ Moster Index File .. of Corrections. Information bocrd, ond the numbers ond I. Community Corrections Act ported for each individual on a co.. used in making initial classifica­ types of departures made from Not all research activity engaged in by Evaluation:' ordinated statewide basis. The Infor­ The purpose of the Master tion ond relclassification de­ the guidelines •. the Deportment of Corrrections is done mation Systems Unit was established to Index File is to' provide a cisions will include the inmate's directly by the Research Unit. The Re­ A new Community Corrections perform these information functions means of recording and prior criminal conviction history, The purpose of the project is to search Unit has the responsibility of re­ Act evaluation will go beyond quickly, accurately, ond economically. maintaining historical nome prior incarceration history, dis­ provide en ongoing monitoring of viewing all research activities under the the current impoct study. The Informatien Systems provides modern identification data on of­ ciplinary record during prior in­ the Minnesota Corrections Boord management of other Deportment of Cor­ study may oddress such issues as communication, information processing, fenders. carcerations, commitment of­ decisions end the extent to rections units and, when necessary, ren­ costs, social control, equal­ and doto. storage for institution, field ser­ fenses, and disciplinary record which they adhere to the guide­ dering odvice and technical assistance. ization formula, ond the impoct vices, end community programs. Coordi­ Identification File during the current incorceration,.' lines. The study also provides Technical assistance can toke the fol­ on state end local correctiOnal nation is provided with state agencies, dota on the expected time in­ lowing forms: reviewing end advising on facilities. Current staff will be ond other state end federal criminal jus­ The identification file con­ The projt'Ct is funded by the No­ mates will serve. These dota are research gools ond methodology, helping involved in the project while ef­ tice dota systems. The Information Sys­ tains information regarding tional Inst itute of Corrections useful for projecting future design data collection forms, performing forts are mode to obtain od­ tems Unit provides the means ond tech­ on offender's status, living and Is sch!'duled for completion changes in institutional popu­ data processing, and assisting in data ditional funding., nical stoff to:;' and work aSsignments, hear­ In p!'Cember, 1979. A pre­ lations." anal ysis.; ing actions end demograph­ liminary report d!'scribing the 2. Institutional Usage Aid operational units pion sys­ ics. structure of the classification The study is ongoing, ond reports Research review and technical assistance tems to meet their needs. system ond the appropriate de­ are currently available on Target are provided in the following contexts: This study will develop a pion for Offense File. cision criteria has been pro­ Release Date (TRD) decisions in the integrated use of the de­ Analyzf! current systems end duced •. 1977 end 1978, end on guideline Major studies and evaluations of cor­ partment's correctional in­ needs The offense file contains in­ departures for these some years. ' rectional programs are occasionally fund­ stitutions.; formation regarding the 2. Community Corrections Impoct ed by the deportment by grant or sub/ Design new approaches to meet sentence(s) end offense(s) Study' 4. Populatien Analysis-,: controct and conducted by outside firms Other smaller scale projects will identified needs for which a specific of­ or ogencies. The Research Unit will re­ be developed to meet de­ fender has been committed •. The Impoct Study involves the Populatien Analysis covers a view research components of such grants partment needs.;' Assure the systems meet user collection ond onalysis of data variety of both longlterm ond and sublcontracts for measurability of needs-. Visitor File on sentencing patterns in the short/term projects. It is de­ gools ond objectives, appropriateness of district ond juvenile courts of signed to ~id decisionlmakers in research methodology, and potential use­ I Modify end enhance systems as The visitor file contains in­ formation on offender's visi­ counties participating in the the deportment in planning for fulness of any research findings. One .~ECO~DSMANAGEM[NT needs change Community Corrections' Act effective utilization of re­ such project currently in progress is the tors, ond those individuals which was passed by the Min~ sources. Population projection Maximum Security Prison' Transition Responsiollity for maintaining central re­ Train operating stoff in system banned from visiting. nesota Leg:slature in 1973. The studies ore completed (Ild dis­ Study funded by the Notional Institute of cords rests with the Records Unit of the operation end use data on sentencing patterns are seminated as needed for plon­ Corrections., Department of Corrections. The chief Chronological File collected for the purpose of pro­ ning. Demographic profiles of clientele using Ihis data are Department Pion for future modification end viding decision/makers with in­ the institutional populations may The departm::n~ also has the respon­ of Corrections stoff, low enforcement enhancements as new tech­ The chronological file con­ formation on the extent to which be produced periodically to sibility under t~le r:.:Immunity Corrections agencies, and state and federal agencies .. nologies become available tains information On move­ any changes in the proportions of examine such foctors as race and Act (CCA) of re"iewing and monitoring ment and actions taken re­ odult and juvenile offenders age configurations ond their im­ local CCA unit research plans end activ­ Records Management is designed to coor­ Assure systems function ef- gordlng on off ender • The committed to state institutions pact upen the various . in­ i.ties •. ' dinate, standardize, and systematize the ficiently ond effectively chronological file reflects can be attributed to par­ stitutional programs either being storage, retrieval, retention, and dispos­ these events In chron­ ticipation in the Community offered or considered ..' ological order.~ All units within the deportmmt may tion of records maintained within the Corrections Act. Further the state correctional system. It also deter­ Systems Management dota provide information d, eny request assist once in developing surveys 2. Jails end Lockup Systems Fact Findin£; or questionnaires or may r('quest dota mines the most economical and effective chang~s in local sentencing pat­ methods of records control.; Systems monagement is the ongoing su­ terns., The Research Unit responds to data re­ processing services. In the post, the ~e­ pervising end maintenance of an operating The jails ond lockup system con­ quests primarily from other units in the search Unit has helped Per-sonne I ond tains data on each individual Community Services as well as the insti­ Records are managed and maintained in system. This includes modifications to The Impact Study is an ongoing Deportment of CorrectiOl'~. Examples of odult and juvenile booked end tutions with special projects. The Re­ computerized, microfilmed, ond' manual the system ond accomponylng docu­ project. An interim report was data recently requested include: the files for the Corrections Management In- mentation updating procedures and re­ confined at approximately 165 produced in 1977, and graphs and number of inmates at, SRM under the age search Unit helps the Victim Services local correctional facilities. formation System (CMIS), Criminal Jus- I lated trai~Ing tables on sentencing patterns are of twenty lone who do not hove a high Division ond the Serious Jwenile Offend­ Data are entered on site using er Program. Technical assistance is also tice Reporting System (CJRS), Computer- • periodically l.9Idated.: school diploma; the number of incarcer­ ized Criminal History (CCH), end County The following systems are currently the state Criminal Justice Net­ ated veterans; the current agent for of"' being provided to the correctional indus­ work.: tries program., Jwenile Court Report (CJC), systems. active:. 3. Parole Decision/Making: fenders released from Minnesota cor­ The Unit maintains complete and up/tal rectional institutions •. 3. County Juvenile Cour,t System, Future Plens, dote records for ready information re­ I. Offender Tracking System, The Parole DecisionlMaking trieval. All data are maintained in ac­ Study involves the collection of The statewide County Juvenile If the Information requested Is not cur­ Research octivities also include planning cordance with Minnesota statutes gov­ The Corrections Management In­ information on the use of the rently available on the computerized Cor­ erning records retention, disposition, oc­ formation System (CMIS) Is on Court System gathers in­ ~arole decision/making guide­ rections Management Information System future research. Proposals may be de­ formation from counties re­ v~loped to onswer questiens posed by De­ cess, and dissemination. online data base system. Data lines ~parole "matrix") used by (CMIS), the ~!'search Unit may also col­ ore entered into terminals for garding individuals receiving dis­ the Minnesota Corrections Boord lect data from inmate bose files end other partment of Corrections odministrators to I positions from County Jwenile aid in planning for new focilities or pro­ .{ trQ1smlssion to a central co~ in determining parole eligibility. sources. Examples include data on incar­ _tNfORMA TION SYSTEMS puter where they. are im­ Courts. . This information includes the gra.ms, or to assess the impoct of past cerated women offenders (requested for policy changes. Pions may include pro­ mediately available for use.· tabulation of risk and severity planning purposes) and the monthly segre­ More than 2000 pieces of information levels of inmates receiving a jects to be dOne by the current research gation report, which tabulates inmates' stoff Q1d resources or, for larger. studies, about offenders in the seven Mimesota new odmission hearing, months days in segregation •. The Unit also re­ correctional focllttles are generated each sponds to numerous national surveys sent may in oddition involve outside funding sources. day. Information Is also generated by the t~ the deportment.

Figure 7.9. (continued), .. ------

--',I I

56 C01rectional data analysis systems Transferable demand information technologies 57 Litigation and automated These examples represent only a cursory sure disaster. A predisposition in either di­ look at the role which data processing plays rection negates the realism of the transfer I. Uniform Parole Reporting. data processing 4. Community Corrections System 2. Inmate programs will monitor in litigation efforts. The most common le­ and interferes with its success. Correctional the placement md performmce The Community Corrections Sys­ The Deportment is required 00- of individual offenders in insti­ Civil litigation in corrections has created gal issues for which the computer is invalu­ staff should be fully informed about the tem contains information on ac­ nually to report parole data to tution programs. a great nec:d for iilformation. Adequate in­ able involve comparisons of inmate demo­ transfer to reduce the fear of change but tivities regarding individuals the Notional Council on Crime formation can ease the litigious- demands graphic and legal characteristics. Examples overly optimistic promises should be supervised by Community Cor­ and Delinquency. Currently a 3. Field. st'rvlce reporting will eo­ on an agency in two ways. First, informa­ are such items as the length of sente'nce, avoided. rections Act units., mCl1ual procedure, is being uti­ Yer the coseloods., categorIes of tion can be used to prevent or remedy situa­ housing and job assignments and parole re­ To a void these problems the correctional lized to meet these require­ supervision, due dotes for pro­ tions which could be grounds for law suits, leases by the age, sex, race, offense, and administrator anticipating the transfer of a gress reports on cases assigned 5. Criminal Justice Communication ments. An CI1alysis is being done especially civil rights cases challenging the county of conviction of the inmates. product to his agency should learn about Network Interfaces· to study the possibility of using a to state agents, CCA cO!Jnty a­ computerized method •. gents, and nonlCCA county conditions of confinement. Second, infor­ For purposes of transfer, the correction­ the transfer process in addition to learning A. The Minnesota Criminal agents., mation can assist in defending the agency al community will want to note several about the product. It may be helpful to Justice Information System 2. Notional Prisoner Statistics Re­ aga.inst allegations of wrongdoing. features of the Texas model utilizing data these administrators to contact other cor­ (CJIS) provides a means to porting, 4. Interstate Compact reporting The number of lawsuits in corrections processing for litigation needs: rectional agencies who have experienced exchange informatk., state­ will accou'nt for offenders from has reached such proportions that most -Concept of the model-extensive use of the transfer process. Some of those transfer wide on crime CI1d crim­ The deportment is required 00- other state and federal juriS­ agencies do not enjoy the lpxury of being automated records to prevent litigation and efforts have been highly successful, others inals. It also maintains di­ nually to report data on ad- dictions., able to prevent ligitation. Some of these defend the agency before the courts. have been only marginally successful; how­ rect compufer interfaces missions md releases to Notional cases are frivolous and are dismissed with­ -Team approach to meeting litigation de­ \!ver, the experiences gained in these transfer with both the Notional 5. Count control tracks the loco:. Prisoner Statistics. An malysls tion of inmates at aH times dur­ out going to trial but others represent a mands-attorneys, researchers and data efforts is highly transferable in itself. Agen­ Crime Information Center Is being conducted to determine (NCIC) and the Notional ing the day and furnishes reports potential cost to the state of millions of processing personnel. One assistant attor­ cies with such experiences include: if using a cO'l1puterlzed method to support counts by the stoff •. ney general is also a computer specialist. -The Mississippi Department of Corrections Low Enforcement Tele­ Is feasible •. dollars. In all cases, and especially in those communications Network with "high stakes," it is crucial that the The researchers are familiar with the in­ has transferred Golden Retriever, a retriev­ 6. . Discipline reporting will record (NLETS), enobling in­ 3. Inmate Classification correctional agency be represented by the formational form and content needs of at­ al software package developed by the staff formation access by local, ond maintain information on in­ best possible defense. Yet, even the best torneys as well as with the contents of the of the Georgia Department of Offender mate disciplinary reports, hear­ state, CI1d federol low en­ The Deportment has requested attorney is powerless without information. agency's various data bases. Rehabilitation. The package is operating forcement agencies., ings, penalties, md appeals.! system support to develop 00 ob­ The Texas Department of Corrections is -Technology-Data Analyzer, a proprie­ on IBM 370 hardware. jective method for determining ~ystem Enhancements,1 one correctional agency in which informa­ tary report generator and analysis package -The Louisiana Department of Correc­ B. The CrimInal JustIce Re­ the security level at which on porting System (CJRS) or­ tion production is recognized as essential in allows the insertion of Fortran program­ tions' system is a modification ofCRISYS, offender will initially CI1d sub­ System enhancement is the result of a ming at 1610gic points. The package can be ganIzes the collection of sequently be supervised. satisfying the legal needs of the agency. In a package originally developed for Wash­ statewide criminal justice cooperative effort between users of the the Texas Department the data processing used for simulation modeling, as well as for ington, D.C. system CI1d those responsible for the man­ data for the Uniform Crime 4. Industry Accounting., section is an integral member of the legal extracting and analyzing data. Computer -The South Carolina system is adapted Reports (UCR), Com­ agement of the system. As users define team. The Texas Department is exception­ output may be used directly as court ex­ from the original Ohio System. That sys­ new needs, the needs are malyzed, md. puterIzed Criminal History The Deportment has developed a ally large, over 27,000 inmates, and is in­ hibits. tem, (now abandoned by Ohio Department (CCH), the State Judicial enhancements designed and implemented private industry/Free Venture to satisfy the needs., volved in over 600 civil cases at anyone of Corrections but stilI utilized by the Ohio Information System (SJIS), work program for inmates. An the Correction Management time. There is very little information that Transfer experience Youth Commission) is table driven with automated industry accounting The following enhancements are currently this agency could furnish about its popula­ master file, indexes, and chained push­ Information System (CMIS), system is needed to provide and Local Criminal Justice in design CI1d will be implemented in the tion without the aid of a computer. The transfer process is not as simple as down files. mCl1agement with timely md ac­ third quarter of 1979 .. Information Systems curate reports to control the in­ For example, an issue subject to recent physicallY moving a product or a concept -The New Mexico Department of Correc­ (LCJIS). As a component of dividual work programs •. II litigation was the charge that overcrowded from one correctional agency to another. tions and Criminal Rehabilitation has this communication net­ I. Identification, demographics,.of­ fense, and chronological re­ conditions increased disruptive behavior of The process itself requires special consid­ adapted a portion of a former Arkansas work, the Deportment of Systems Design, Corrections is charged with sponse screens are being changed the inma tes. With the assistance of counsel, eration for the transfer to be successful. system but the transfer there does not ap­ to improve readability. ~ the research department and data process­ Transfer process details such as cost, time proach the turnkey operation as that in the responsibility of re­ Systems design begins upon completicn of porting, through the CJRS, ~ ing section examined the disciplinary reports required, staff capabilities, the degree of South Carolina. the system malysis. It defines the final 2. A caseworker code will be added of inmates living under various conditions modification required, the documentation -The Virginia Department of Corrections the' ocfions token regarding system in detail md creates the necessary ~ individuals in the state's to the offender index report. of croWding. The analysis included a com­ available and staff expectations are often is using an adaptation of the JUSTICE methods CI1d procedures under which the This report will then become a correctional system •., system will operate. ~ parison of the number of disciplinary re­ misestimated. The administration must not system from IBM but the modifications to daily, onlline report •. ports accordil)g to the popUlation density only consider the technical compatibility of the system have been extensive. Systems Analysis, I The following systems, which will soon 3. Visitor subsystem responses md of each cell block in each institution. The the agency, but also the staff expertise re­ -The Ohio Department of Corrections has become integrated ports of the Correc­ results indicated that the number of disci­ quired for transfer. For example, the hard­ the unusual experience of rebuilding an au­ Systems Analysis is the study and eval­ reports are being expanded.;' tions MCI1agement Information System ore ·1 plinary reports was related to the age of the ware and data base file structure ofthe host tomated system after their original auto­ uation of information needs Cind re­ in the design stage:, quirements and the design of a system to 4. The CMIS operating manual is ! inmates and not to the density of the popu­ agency must be congruous with the corre­ mated system (an extensive one) was can­ being updated, and a CMIS ad­ meet those needs. Projected benefits, I. Health core will record md re­ lation. sponding specifications of the transferring celled due to many problems. Oregon has costs, and time schedules are included in ministrative procedures manual Other issues addressed by the agency's agency. experience in renovating an information port on mental md physical is being written •. the malysis., health assessment and treat­ I counsel with the assistance ofthe data pro­ The degree of modification necessary to system and restoring the confidence of ments. Basic features include cessing section include: achieve compatibility must be calculated in users after the original system had failed to The deportment is currently engaged in quontificatial'l of health care - Records maintained by the Texas Depart­ terms of cost, staff time and staff ability. produce. Administrators can benefit from four system analysis studies: uniform needs, unit scheduling, .outside parole reporting, notional prisoner sta­ ment of Corrections showed that the parole Obviously, personnel transferring the prod­ the lessons learned in Ohio and Oregon service reporting, and detection board was not discriminating according to uct must be knowledgeable, but personnel particula'rly with respect to establishing tistics, inmate classification, and industry of epidemiological trends. accounting., race in granting parole to inmates. who will work daily with the transferred priorities among the data elements to be -The computerized information system au­ items must also be well trained. Unexpect­ included in the system. tomatically reports when the racial balance ed complications such as additional modi­ of inmates assigned to jobs exceeds certain fications, inadequate documentation, mis­ specified limits. This insures compliance communications, and turnover can wreck with a consent decree. the most carefully planned timetable. -Personnel records are used to reply to In addition to the requirements of com­ lawsuits involving equal employment op­ patibility, the agency transferring the prod­ portunity issues. uct must also be psychologically prepared -Other states' correctional agencies frequent­ for the liew product, concept, etc. It is not ly request information from the Texas De­ unusual for staff members to expect transfer Figure 7.9. (continued) partment to aid in their own defense efforts. results to be either a miraculous cure or Summary and recommendations 59 have the greatest impact on the future ad­ nately, the OBSCIS package does not pro­ Centralizing the agency's policies in Chapter 8 ministration of the correctional system. The report generation packages at the state da­ recent revolution in correctional jurispru­ vide flexible analytic software so that an written form and indexing them in the ta center. These packages could greatly dence is having a critical effect on both the operator can search out inmates with certain computer has the added advantage of pro­ benefit corrections but the vendor-provided design and operation of correctional infor­ characteristic~ and present them in a cross­ viding an efficient way of modifying exist­ training usually goes to the state data cen­ tabulation involving two, three, or more ing policies and introducing new ones, dis­ ter and, it was found in a number of in­ Summary and recommendaijons mation systems. It is obvious that agencies need to include judicial information require­ variables. In short, OBSCIS does not pro­ seminating policy information rapidly stances, that the correctional agency was ments in the design of information systems vide much analytic capability and virtual­ without ambiguity, and provides a cost­ ignorant that these software packages even if they are to protect themselves from litiga­ ly no report generation capability. effective response to policy demand infor­ existed. tion, defend themselves in suits, or show mation requests. As the cost of computer hardware de­ compliance to court orders. It is not uncom­ Demand information clines and the transferability of correction­ mon to find correctional agencies under administrative policy Automating program al software increases, a future possible solu­ court order wasting one or several man-years descriptions tion may be the purchase of minicomputers in developing compliance reports which Considering the impact that the demand by correctional agenciea formerly involved could be quickly and efficiently prepared information problem has on correctional Many of the inquiries from other cor­ in shared systems. This possibility will not The purpose of the CDAS Project was sistent with other information released by through the use of automation if proper institutions, it is surprising to find that rectional agencies involve questions about only enable correctional administrators to tW.lfold: to describe the nature of the de­ the agency. This has at times created em­ compliance planning had taken place im­ agencies have not developed more stream­ agency programs. Typically, they want to more effectively safeguard the security and mand information problem and to identify barrassing si tuations for the administrator, mediately after the suit was concluded. lined procedures for handling external re­ know whether the agency has a certain kind privacy of their systems, but will.probably transferable technologies which can assist and sometimes creates an aura of doubt The Correctional Case Law Demand In­ quests. A few agencies have highly central­ ofprogram, how many inmates are involved, increase the use of automated information in alleviating this difficulty. about the competence of the agency and formation Model presented in this report ized procedures wherein all demands for its cost, administrative characteristics, and in correctional decision making. The materials presented in the foregoing the trustworthiness ofthe information which should provide substantial insight into de­ information are first received, classified, criteria used to evaluate its effectiveness. If chapters deal with a wide variety of obser­ it releases. termining the kinds of' information that and prioritized, and where some degree of an agency only has a few programs, bro­ vations, problems, issues, procedures, and ought to be retained in an agency's infor­ quality control can be exercised. At the chures describing these characteristics may Software needs technologies. This chapter summarizes much Source, content and analytic mation system so that they can adequately other extreme are highly decentralized pro­ suffice. If the number of programs is 'Iarge of this information and offers recommen­ structure of demand Information and expediently respond to the demand in­ cedures where requests may be received at and subject to frequent modification, au­ Fortunately, most correctional agencies dations for correctional administrators, data requests formation requests from the courts. any level of the system and quality control tomating brief descriptive information about retain the offender data needed to respond processing managers, and researchers which is virtually absent. each program may be a wise choice. Not to most inmate-specific demand informa­ Without centralized processing of demand only will it provide uniform and efficient should enhance their capability to deal with An analysis of S43 examples of demand A model system tion requests. What they lack is analytic information requests with appropriate log­ responses to program requests, but it will software. demand information phenomenon. information requests suggests that the ging and routing, the agency loses its ca­ also be useful to the agency itself in moni­ There are anum ber of excellent commer­ source, content, and analytic structure of After surveying all 52 correctional sys­ pability to le,\rn from past experience; the toring program activity, fiscal planning, and cial report generation packages available, Nature of the problem these inquiries is fairly predictable. Almost tems in the United States and studying sev­ agency cannot: Emalyze prior requests nor evaluation. twenty percent of requests are received enteen in detail, no model system for hand­ but these generally require access to flat Demand information refers to those un­ forecast future ones. Administrators are from sister agencies desiring information ling demand information requests was iden­ files. Other limitations of some of these anticipated ad hoc requests that correctional strongly encoura.ged to review the demand about policies, procedures, programs, fi­ tified. Some systems deal with the problem Computers: problems packages are that they are difficult to use, agencies receive either from within the agen­ information problem within their own agen­ nances, and related administrative infor­ better than others, but none has developed and solutions require extensive training, and possess more cy or from the outside. The feature that sets cy, identify procedures for centralizing llie mation. Almost one in three are received a complete system which is a good candi­ analytic capability than is necessary in most these requests apart from other kinds of receipt, logging and routing of requests, In theory, computers should be helpful from other governmental agencies, typical­ date for transfer to sister institutions. correctional environments. Instead, what demands is their unanticipated nature. and introduce quality control proc~dures ip resolving the management information ly requiring frequency information about The failure of a plurality of correctional is needed is utility software which will al­ Although any unanticipated request is a to assure that requests are responded to in a and analytic needs of correctional agencies. the number of inmates with specified char­ systems to dealeffectively with the problem low the compression of hierarchical files problem in designing information systems, timely and accurate manner. Administrators In fact, they sometimes produce as many acteristics. Although some requests deal probably originates from the fact that de­ into a flat file which can be fed into a report those that emanate from outside the cor­ must also insure that the information re­ problems as they solve. Where the compu­ with topical issues of passing interest or mand information phenomena is rather generation package with basic descriptive rectional institution are the most perplex­ leased is not inconsisten t wi th agency policy ter is located, access to software, personnel topics of recurring interest, the content of recent and we are only beginning to under­ cflpabilities. ing for correctional managers. Normally, or prior releases, and that the analytic most requests seems to follow predictable stand its scope and impact on the correc­ turnover, training, administrative support, Most correctional information systems requests that emanate from within the in­ capabilities of the agency are dispersed in patterns including cross-tabulation of in­ tional community. Some states that have quality of data base, and a number of other use hierarchical files in which information stitution are sensitive to existing informa­ the most cost beneficial and efficient man­ mates possessing certain characteristics experienGed a greater demand are rapidly factors determine whether the computer will about inmate characteristics, prior crimi­ tional capabilities; those from without fre­ ner. Without such sound policy and admin­ and examples of the agency's policies, pro­ developing technologies al'd procedures to be a solution or an albatross. nal record, sentenchg information, and so quently are not, and therein lies the prob­ istrative supervision, agencies are likely to The results of the CDAS study indicate forth is retained. WHen a request requires cedures, and programs. resolve the problem which should, in the lem. Surprisingly, the analytic structures of near future, provide exemplars for other waste valuable resources, provide untimely that correctional systems that have their searching multiple files to identify different The fundamental questions addressed in and haphazard responses, and diminish both own computer seem to do a more effective most requests are simple. Many simply re­ states interested in resolving the difficulty. kinds of inmates with differen t characteris­ this study concerned whether the source of quest a copy of the agency's policy in some their credibility and effectiveness with ex­ job in providing both routine management tics, most correctional software comes to a such external requests can be identified, the area of administration or a description of a CSSCIS as a solution to the ternal constituencies whose favor and sup­ reports and responses to demand informa­ 'halt. To respond to such requests, many content anticipated, and the analytic capa­ program, in which case no analytic tech­ demand Information problem port are critical in the future development tion requests. Systems whose computer ac­ correctional institutions have to write cus­ bilities for resolving the requests designed of the agency. nology is necessary. The vast majority which cess is through a state data processing center tom programs to extract the information in advance. The answer to all three ofthese require some analytic capability can be sat­ Certainly the most common approach to seem to be less successful. This is not to needed for a particular request. As the questions appears to be yes, and consider­ isfied by the use of descriptive statistics the design of correctional information sys­ Automating agency policy imply that shared access is not good, but number and complexity of requests increases, ing the magnitude of the problem, it be­ such as frequency distributions, cross-tab­ tems is OBSCIS. As a solution to the de­ that it complicates the process and frequent­ the amount of custom programming must hooves correctional information architects A substantial number of demand requests ulations, pie charts, and other simple pro­ mand information problem, it has both ly reduces capability. increase as well. Staff shortages being a to give careful consideration to these issues cedures. It is rare to receive an inquiry which assets and liabilities. The good news is involve information about agency policy. Shared computer access through another perennial problem in corrections, the prac­ in designing future systems. requires higher order statistical techniques, that the data elements recommended in The wise administrator will find great fu­ state agency creates a number of problems. tice of custom programming to answer in­ ture benefit in automating agency policy Frequently, the correctional agency is de­ dividual demand requests will be a short­ Extent of the problem and when such inquiries are received, they the OBSCIS data base meet or exceed most are usually not from a source responsible requests for descriptions of inmate popula­ for several reasons. Developing an auto­ pendent on the staff of another agency for lived and expensive solution in the future. mated policy index will require that all programming and analytic services. The What is needed today in most correctional Most correctional administrators, data for making critical decisions about the op­ tions. eration and future development of the cor­ Where OBSCIS falls short is in provid­ agency policies be identified, documented, correctional agency has little control over information enyironments is utility software processing managers, and researchers indi­ centralized, and indexed. This is a smart the assignment of personnel or in setting that would allow the compression of in­ rections system. ing the analytic software needed for com­ cated that the demand information prob­ thing to do in its own right since a plethora priorities for systems to be developed. Yet, mate files into a usable flat file and the lem is real, frustrating, and not likely to go piling the information contained in a typical OBSCIS data base. The analytic reports of undocumented policies leads to incon­ it is sometimes difficult for the correctional development of a highly transferable re­ away in the near future. Many agencies The courts and sistency in administration, arbitrariness in agency to justify programmers and analysts port generation package which would pro­ lacking a streamlined procedure for deal­ demand Information produced by the basic OBSCIS software are useful in providing managers routine decision making, and may lea ve the admin­ on its own staff sinc('\, in theory, it is sup­ duce frequency distributions, cross-tabula­ ing with these requests find that their re­ istrator vulnerable to civil suits involving posed to receive these services from the tions, pie charts, and other fundamental Although inquiries fUlm the judiciary are information useful fot general administra­ sponses to such inquiries are frequently accusations of arbitrary and capricious state's data processing center. Correctional descriptive statistics. not the most frequent in number, they can tion, planning, and monitoring. Unfortu- incomplete, untimely, and at times incon- management. staffs lack training in the statistical and

S8 " ,

Summary and recommendations 61 60 Correctional data analysis systems f this perennial problem in corrections, for Communications problems. and errors. While many software systems iden­ ceive some training in rules of evidence to the issue is primarily financial. tify inappropria te codes, not many systems better understand how to convert statisti­ A common problem in many correction­ have editing logic that will identify inconsis­ cal information into evidentiary exhibits I Negotiation of demand al environments is the la~k of good com­ tencies among various data elements. for use in the courtroom. Similarly, lawyers Informatlor- requests munications between management and data Another problem is that those c~arged involved in correctional litigation would derive great benefit from a more thorough processing. Most correctional administra­ with collection of the data are frequently in Many ofth'e inquiries recei~ed by correc­ tC1rs are not trained analysts and have little a different administrative division than those understandi'ng of the nature of the data­ I tional agencies are vague and subject to or no background in data processing. They responsible for its storage and analysis. bases retained by correctional institutions negotiation. A number of data processing know that they need and want information, Personnel in the intake section who gather and the limits of these data bases when used managers and researchers indicated that but th-ey frequently express these needs in much of the inmate infotmation rarely uti­ for statistical or analytic purposes. they frequently contact the inquirer to de­ broad generalities. Analysts and data pro­ lize computerized reports from the· data termine if they would be satisfied with in­ cessing managers find it difficul t to in ter­ processing section. Not being a user of au­ Technology transfer as formation configured in a somewhat dif­ pret the information needs of their own to mated data, the incentives necessary to a future solution ferent way. These negotiations frequently managers. For instance, an administrator assure timely and accurate information are result in tailoring the request to fit existing may request information on the impact ofa frequently absent. When the data processing The development of a correctional infor­ capabilities or data that has already been change in the state's parole law, but not manager receives inaccurate or incomplete mation system is an arduous, expensive, produced for another purpose. In fact, it is indicate the areas of impact with which he information" it is usually bureaucratically and time-consuming process. Since many frequently found that the inquirer would be is concerned. Lacking analytic software, complicated to change intake procedures of the problems faced by correctional man­ satisfied receiving the annual statistical re­ the data processing manager may need to to assure the recording of reliable informa­ agers are comparable, transfer of existing port of the agency as opposed to an answer develop custom programming to produce tion. Many data processing managers simply technologies seems to be a viable substitu­ to his original request. the information. This takes time and raises have to work with whatever data they get, tion for developing many redundant sys­ This phenomena suggests that a correc­ doubts in the administrator's mind as to and have little control over its timeliness, tems from scratch. While technology trans­ tional agency would be wise to study the the capability of the agency's data process­ accuracy, or completeness. However, when fer may be more of an art than a science, patterll of demand information requests it ing facilities. Having not specified his re­ they produce reports using this informa­ limited experience within the correctional receives lind prepare a comprehensive an­ quest in great detail, the information finally tion, it is they who are usually held respon­ community suggests that there is great po­ , nual statistical report which would satisfy produced may not meet his needs, creating sible for the inadequacy of the data base. tential and cost benefit to transferring sys­ most inquiries. A number of states have further dissatisfaction. Data processing per­ It is imperative that correctional manag­ tems. developed such reports and indicate that sonnel become frustrated because they can­ ers closely coordinate the activities of those Several states have gained valuable expe­ they greatly reduced the special program­ not get a more definitive statement of man­ who gather the data and those responsible rience transferring correctional information ming that used to be required to handle agement needs and suffer what they think for its storage and analysis. It is incumbent systems such as the basic OBSCIS package. many demand requests. The production of to be undue criticism. upon the correctional administrator to as­ Where failures have occurred, they seem to such a statistical report, along with an ef­ Technologies need to be developed to sure that appropriate audit procedures are emanate from anlgnorance of the array of fort to negotiate with inquirers as to exactly enhance the quality of communication be­ installed. Erroneous, incomplete, oruntime­ issues that must be considered in the transfer what information would satisfy their requests, tween managers and data processing per­ Iy information must be identified and some decision. While analysts may give intense can radically reduce the scope and perplexity sonnel. One suggestion would be the de­ estimates of the relative accuracy of the consideration to certain technological as­ of the demand information problem. velopment of a dictionary of management data be derived so that the limits of its pects of the transfer, not enough has been reports that could be produced from of­ reliability can be taken into consideration given to the managerial, procedural, and Summary fender based da tao If such a dictionary con­ when it is used for management purposes, user aspects of the transfer problem. A tained the formats of various output reports planning, monitoring, or evaluation. number ofthe issues identified in the chap­ The results of the CDAS Project suggest that could be produced, and if these were The development of highly transferable ter on transfer technology should prove that the demand information problem is key-word indexed by data element, a man­ edit and auditing procedures would be very useful to correctional managers who, while real, predictable, and solvable. The keys to ager could select the output format that useful to the correctional community since technologically unsophisticated, must make resolving the problem are the development rilOst closely meets his needs and thereby it is not likely that the use of correctional the final decision on whether the transfer of of formalized procedures for handling re­ give explicit direction to the data process­ data bases can exceed the limits of their an information system will.take place. As quests, the development of automated ana­ ing manager. The crp.lltion of such a dic­ relia bili ty. correctional budgets diminish and the ca­ lytic procedures to expedite the production tionary would have great benefit for cor­ pacity to recruit and hold technically quali­ of information, and the use of prior requests rections because it could be easily transferred Use of computers fied people declines, correctional managers as a requirements analysis to forecast the from one institution to another and would In litigation may well find that the most efficient and nature of future requests. These steps will provide developmental objectives for enhance­ cost-beneficial way to advance information not only insure an enhanced capability for ments of OBSCIS and other transferable Automated information systems are an systems will be to take advantage of the dealing with demand information requests correctional information systems. extremely useful resource in correctional successes of other institutions through tech­ originating from the outside, but will have litigation. Considering the number of suits nology transfe-r. the indirect result of improving informa­ Dirty data currently pending against correctional in­ tion for internal consumption as well. stitutions, it is surprising that more correc­ Personnel turnover Unreliable data is like contaminated wa­ tional administrators have not made greater ter; it's there, but it isn't potable. Inmate use of data processing in defending the Undoubtedly, one ofthe major constraints data bases in many correctional institutions agency or in showing compliance to court on the development of good information contain incomplete, untimely, and incorrect orders. Probably one of the reasons that systems is the problem of recruiting and information. Knowing that the data base is correctional lawyers have not used much retaining qualified programmers and sys­ "dirty," data processing managers are fre­ automation is that correctional systems lack tems analysts. Many states find that their quently reluctant to produce reports based flexible analytic software which is respon­ salary structure is simplY not competitive. upon such unreliable data. The result is the sive to the demand information requests Some recruit and train relatively inexperi­ costly acquisition and storage of informa­ associated with litigation. Development of enced personnel only to find that they re­ tion whose inaccuracy restricts its use. utility programs to derive compressed data sign to take positions in the private sector A number of factors contribute to the bases and the use of statistical and report once they have gained a little experience. poor quality of correctional data bases. Few generation packages should greatly enhance Correctional information systems and their correctional agencies have taken the time the utility of correctional systems. benefit to the institution will not proceed to develop good editing logic to scan in­ It would also be helpful if research per­ unless a qualified technical staff can be re­ coming data and identify inconsistencies sonnel and data processing specialists re- tained. There are no technical solutions to Appendix B chief social worker at the jail confiscated Appendix A his legal papers thereby interfering with the prisoner's access to the courts. Welch v. Evans, 402 F. Supp. 468 (E.D. Va. 1975) Failure of prison officials Case law compendium to send petition to court violates right to Topics covered in the on-site visits access of court. Lingo v. Boone, 402 F. Supp. 768 (N.D. Calif. 1975) Unintentional failure to copy pleadings did not deny access to court. Threats to take action against inmate un­ less litigation against institution is termi­ nated does state claim for violation of civil rights. Owen v. Shuler, 466 F. Supp. 5 (D.C. Ind. 1977) It is acceptable to delay the de­ Field studies were conducted in 17 of the 9. Analysis ofthe agency's current data I. Court access gregation Units" was found to infringe an livering of a prisoner's mail as long as the processing facilities including hardware, nation's correctional systems. The purpose A. Regulating communications inmate's access to the courts, therefore delay is not unreasonable. of these field studies was to analyze the software, and data base. with courts: mall regulations could not be enforced, in that context. Where a temporary prison policy of 10. Estimates of the extent to which au­ impact of demand information requests on 1. Inspection of mail from Procunier v. Martinez, 94 S.Ct. 1800 checking legal mail for contraband was tomated procedures are used in the pro­ agency resources, determine how agencies inmates to Court (1974) Outgoing general cOrl'espondence adopted, it did not deny prisoners access to process demand information requests, and cessing of demand information requests. may not be censored unless it threatens the courts where the facts showed that the identify technologies that could be trans­ 12. If the agency's data processing re­ ExParteHull, 316 U.S. 546 (1941) A institutional sec:urity, order, or rehabilita­ mail was opened in the presence of the ferred within the correctional community sources are in another state agency, identi­ state and its officers may not abridge or tion. inmates and was not read,' censored, or which would resQlve these difficulties. fication of problems in access and use of impair an inmate's right to apply to a fed­ copied. Listed below are the points of inquiry these facilities. eral court for a writ of habeas corpus. Ac­ 2. Providing materials and postage and analyses performed in each of the 17 13. A description of those technologies cess to the courts is a basic constitutional for communication with court Rite locations. that managers, researchers, and data pro­ right. Morganv.LaValle, 526 F.2d 221 (2nd 1. Analysis of the administrative organ­ cessing personnel feel would most facilitate HUdspeth v. Figgins, 584 F.2d 1345 Cir. 1975) Prohibition against receipt of B. Regulation of legal materials ization of the correctional agency. the handling of demand information requests. (4th Cir. 1978) The state may not threaten postage stamps, if true, would be suspect. 1. Regulating possession of 2. Flow diagram and critique of the 14. The impact of current litigation on or punish a prisoner for seeking court re­ Nickens v. White, 536 F.2d 802 (8th legal materials current process used in receiving, routing, the processing of demand information re­ lief. Prisoners have a right to access to the Cir 1976) Exclusion of stationery supplies Younger v. Gilmore, 404 U.S. 15 processing, and responding to demand in­ quests. , courts. catalogue did not deny access to the courts. (1971) Connects right of access to courts formation requests. 15. Whether or not the agency uses its " Jones v. Diamond, 594 F.2d 997 (5th Ty/er v. Woodson, 597 F.2d 643 (8th with the right of access to legal materials 3. Analysis of quality control procedures data processing resources to defend the Cir. J979) Outgoing mail to licensed attor­ Cir. 1979) A prisoner successfully stated a and law libraries. agency in litigation or to demonstrate used to determine the accuracy, timeliness, neys, courts or court officials must be sent cause of artion where he alleged that the Taylor Y. Sterrett, 532 F.2d 462 (5th and completeness of correctional data bases compliance with existing court orders. .unopened. Incoming mail from such sources chief social worker at the jail confiscated Cir. 1976) Upheld narrowly drawn regula­ and the quality of the reports produced. 16. Examples of the standard and spe­ may be opened only in the presence of the his legal papers thereby interfering with the tions controlling the amount oflaw books 4. A description of how the agency logs cial reports produced by the agency which inmate. prisoner's access to the courts. and other legal materials in a resident's cell. demand information requests including con­ could be used in responding to demand Guajardo v. Estelle, 580 F.2d 748 Twymanv. Crisp, 584F.2d 352(10th Hatfieldv. Bailleaux, 290 F. 2nd 632 sideration of date received, source of re­ information requests. (5th Cir. 1978) Prison officials may not Cir. 1978) Prisoners do not have an unlim­ (1961) cert. denied 368 U.S. 862 (1961) In­ quest, content of request, analytic proce­ 17. Statistical information on the agency open or read letters addressed to the courts, ited right to free postage in order to have an m.ates were not denied access to courts dures involved in responding to the request, and its inmate popUlation. attorneys, or parole or probation officers. access to the courts. ReasonabJe regulations through regulations which controlled and unit assigned to develop the response, etc. 18. Description of the agency's current Taylor v. Sterrett, 532 F.2d 462 (5th may be imposed. limited the times and places inmates could 5. Criteria used to set priorities on de­ security and privacy standards and whether Cir. 1976) An inmate has a First Amend­ A prisoner does not have the protected right engage in legal research and preparation of mand information requests. any of these standards can strain the dis­ ment right to petition the government for to a typewriter. legal papers. Test is whether void regula­ 6. Policy statements governing the re­ semination of in for mati'on and response to redress of grievances without interference Lock v. Jenkins, 464 F. Supp. 541 t'ions are implemented for purposes of in­ ceipt and processing of demand informa­ demand information rel{.;.csts. from prison officials. (D.C. Ind. 1978) A pretrial detainee had stitutional controi. and discipline. tion requests. 19. Examples of demand information Marsh v. Moore, 325 F. Supp. 392 no constitutional right to a typewriter as Battlev. Anderson, 457 F. Supp. 719 7. Estimates of direct and indirect costs requests recently received by the agency as (D. Mass. 1971) Institution does n(:lt have connected with his right of access to courts. (D.C. Okla. 1978) Where prison officials involved in responding to demand infor­ well as identification on the common sources the right to open general outgoing mail and Bijoel v. Benson, 404 F. Supp. 595 arbitrarily limited the amount oflegal ma­ mation requests. of demand information within their state. inspect it in the presence of the inmate for (S.D. Ind. 1975) Inmate does not have a terials an inmate could keep in his cell, it 8. The location, size, and working rela­ 20. Communications problems between contraband. right to a typewriter. was a d.enial of meaningful access to the tionships among the various departments administrators requesting information and Taylor v. Perini, 413 F. Supp. 189 Taylor v. Peril/i, 413 F. Supp. 189 courts. within the agency responsible for handling data processing people responsible for pre­ (N.D. Ohio 1976) Outgoing privileged mail (N.D. Ohio 1976) Postage to court must be Boston v. Stanton, 450 F. Supp. 1049 demand information requests including data paring management reports. cannot be read by administration and must paid. (W.D. Mo. 1978) The petitioner did not processing, research and evaluation, fiscal be sent sealed. Incoming privileged mail prove by the evidence that the refusal of planning, and so forth. may be opened and inspected for contra­ 3. Delay of mail prison' officials to sell him certain periodi­ band in presence of inmate. Johnson v. Avery, 393 U.S. 483 (1969) cals handicapped him in his ability to pre­ Coleman v. Crisp, 444 F. Supp. 31 It is fundamental that access of prisoners to sent a pro se legal action. (W. D. Okla. 1977) A prisoner's right to the courts for the purpose of presenting Branstedv: Wolke, 455 F. Supp. 489 access to courts was not violated by delay their complaints not be denied or obstruct­ (D.C. Wis. 1978) Prisoners in jail were not in the mailing of correspondence to a fed­ ed. entitled to their: demands for paper, type­ eral judge which did not include any legal Martin v. Wainwright, 526 F.2d 938 writer, court decisions, statute books and documents or filings. (5th Cir. 1976) Allegations of interference other items because the county would have Rudolph v. Locke, 594 F.2d 1076 (5th with outgoing legal mail states a claim. provided attorneys for them if requested. Cir. 1979) A prison regulation providing Tyler v. Woodson, 597 F.2d 643 (8th Wilson v. Wittke, 459 F. SUpp. 1345 that "absolutely nothing will be allowed to Cir. 1979) A prisoner successfully stated a (D ..c. Wis. 1978) Where a pretrial detainee go from one inmate to another in the Se- cause of action where he alleged that the in county jail was represented by counsel,

63 62

" 64 Correctional data analysis systems Appendix B. Case law compendium 65

he had adequate access to the courts. There­ rection officials establish a law 'ibrary if vate consultation rooms for counsel inter­ ·B. Accels to alternative legal III. Media access Guajardo v. Estelle, 580 F.2d 748 fore, he was not deprivedrof his rights by a adequate alternate means are made avail­ views ordered. assistance (5th Cir. 1978) Limitation of sexually ob­ jailer who refused to allow him access to able. In addjtion to Titles 18,28, an'd 42 of Payne v. Superior Court, 553 P.2d 1. Regulation of inmate legal counsel scene material is not limited by the judicial legal materials. the U.S.C.A. and a manual on prisoners' 565, 132 Cal. Rptr. 405 (1976) Jndigents (jail house lawyer) A. Accels to media by Inmate definition of Obscenity; Non-obscene ma­ Williams v. Martimucci, 276 N.W. civil rights, the court believed the following have a limited right to the appointment of Johnson v. Avery, 393 U.S. 483 (1969) Pellv. Procunier, 417 U.S. 817 (1974) terial that encourages deviate, criminal sex­ 2d 876 (Mich. App, 1979) The failure of , to be necessary for use by inmates: Federal coun~el and to appear in civil matters at Unless residents have access to adequate Saxbe v. Washington Post Co., 417 ual behavior may also be censored. prison administrators to deliver copies of Rules of Criminal Procedure, Federal Rules least where such is. necessary to defend professional legal assistance, the correction­ U.S. 843 (1974) There is no right to any face Prison officials may control bulk mailing, certain documents contained in a prison­ of Evidence, Federal Rules of Appellate against an action. al agency may not prohibit residents from to face contact between the press and a but otherwise may not place a numerical er's file to a prisoner did not violate the Procedures, Crimes and Criminal Procedure People v. Baker, 151 Cal. Rptr. 362 consulting "jailhouse lawyers" for advice specific inmate as long as alternative lines restriction on mail received by inmates. prisoner's'right to them because the pris­ published by West Publishing Company, (Cal. App. 1978) A prisoner does not have and assistance. of communication are open. This applies to Before a publication can be denied to a oner did not pay the $3.00,processing fee Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, judiciary the right of privacy guaranteed to a non­ Stevenson v. Reed, 530 F.2d 1207 state as well as federal prisons. prisoner, prison administrators must re­ and was not on the institution's current list and Judicial Procedure published by West incarcerated citizen, except when consult­ (5th Cir. 1976) Where access to adequate Procullier v. Martinez, 416 U.S. 396 vie~ the particular issue and make a specif­ of indigents. Publishing Company; Brickey's Kentucky ing with his attorney in a room designated law library and jailhouse la wyer is provided, (1974) Inmates are free to correspond by ic determination that the publication is Criminal Law, Black's Law Dictionary or for that purpose. An inmate may not com­ no constitutional obligatiQn to provide coun­ mail with media representatives. harmful to the prisoner's rehabilitation. 2. Access to prison law libraries its equivalent; Kentucky Penal Code, plain of being tape recorded, even if the sel at state expense. Nolan v. Fitzpatrick, k 451 F.2d 545 Prisoners are allowed to appeal the deci­ Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817 A K.R.S. Chapters 500-534; Kentucky Rules recording was unknown to him at the time. Buise v. Hudkins, 584 F.2d 223 (7th (1st Cir. 1971) Inmate's right to send letters sion. plan establishing a circulating central law of Criminal Procedure. The case also in­ In re Brindle, 154 Cal. Rptr. 563 (Cal. Cir. 1978) The transfer of the only jailhouse to the press can be limited only with respect Pittman v. Hutto, 594 F.2d 407 (4th library is sufficient. "Paid" counsel need cludes a copy of the Metropolitan Correc­ App. 1979) By refusing to allow a public lawyer to another facility violated the in­ to letters which would contain contraband Cir. 1979) An inmate's rights were not vio­ not be supplied in addition to law library tional Services Department Law Library defender to see.inmates, the Department of mates' rights to access to the courts. or a plan of escape or which were used as a lated by the censoring of one publication of access. (This is already a Supreme Court Loan Program policies and procedures. Corrections exceeded its authority. The Matter o/Green, 586 F.2d 1247 (8th device for evading prison regulations. aF! inmate's magazine. Officials may refuse decision). Burrascano v. Levi, 452 F. Supp. Department may not oversee the indepen­ Cir. 1978) A prisoner who was found to be Guajardo v. Estel/e, 580 F.2d 748 to approve if they sincerely believe that the Williams v. Leeke, 584 F.2d 1336 1066 (D.C. Md. 1978) (2.) An isolated inci­ dent statutory function of the public de­ engaged in numerous frivolous petitions to (5th Cir. 1978) 24 Cr. L. 2034 Letters to issue could be disruptive of prison order (4th Cir. 1978) Prisoners should have direct dent in refusing to allow a',1 inmate to go to fender's office. the court was prohibited from writing any attorneys and media must be sent unin­ and had a reasonable belief for those views. access to a law library. Severe restrictions the law library does not violate an inmate's more writs for other inmates. spected. Incoming mail may be opened in C%ne v. Manson, 409 F. Supp. 1033 on library time can only be justified if constitutional safeguards. 3. Regulating communication with Corpus v. Estelle, 409 F. Supp. 1090 the presence of the inmate, inspected, but (D. Conn. 1976) While the specific criteria trained research assistants are available to counsel's staff (S.D. Tex. 1975) Affirmed 551 F2d 68 (5th not read. . for pUblication censorship may fall within assist the prisoner's research efforts. Re­ Procunier v. Martinez, 416 U.S. 396 Cir. 1977) Regulation prohibiting jailhouse one of the : a. security, b. order, c. rehabili­ strictions on library use may be justified II. Counsel access (1974) Officials must allow visits by law lawyer's assistance in civil rights case is B. Access to Inmate by media tation categories, these general institutional where the inmate is a security risk. Howev­ students or by 6ther para-professionals invalid. The burden is on the state to prove Saxbe l'. Washington Post Co., 417 interests are either tao vague and/or over­ er, a jail plan to restrict misdemeanants (such as investigators) who are working for adequacy of alternatives to jailhouse law­ U.S. 843 (1974) As long as alternative ave­ broad. Regulations must be drawn more access to legal material for 45 minutes at a A. Regulating communications attorneys. yer assistance. nues of communication with the media specifically if they are to be upheld. time, three days a week, is unconstitution­ 1. Mail regulations Phillips v. Bureau 0/Prisons, 591 F.2d Green v. Wyrick, 414 F. Supp. 343, which allows media -access to any sources Boston v. Stanton, 450 F. Supp. 1049 al. Not every "small jail" is required to Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 966 (D.C. Cir. 1979) The refusal of admit­ 20 Cr T •• 2272 (W.D. Mo. 1976) Jailhouse of information available to the public are (W. D. Mo. 1978) The petitioner did not have a law library, provided that the in­ (1974) Prison officials have right to open tance to federal prisons to paralegals who lawye, enjoined from assisting others for open, restrictions on media access to speci­ prove by the evidence that the refusal of mates have other meaningful access to legal mail from attorneys and inspect it for con­ constitute a threat to prison security while failure to follow court rules. fic prisoners may be denied. prison officials to sell him certain periodi­ assistance. traband in presence of inmate. granting it to those who do not, does not Mitchell v. Carlson, 404 'F. Supp. Houchins v. KQED, 22 Cr.L. 4108 cals handicapped him in his ability to pre­ Twyman v. Crisp, 584 F.2d 352 (10 Taylor v. Sterrett, 532 F.2d 462 (5th violate the rights of those excluded. The 1220 (D. Kan. 1975) Prohibition against (1977) The media possesses no greater right sent a pro se legal action. Cir. 1978) The restricted access to a prison Cir. 1976) Although still an unsettled issue, unsuccessful applicant must be notified of jailhouse lawyer in one institution from of access to prisons than does the general Jackson v. Ward, 458 F. Supp. 546 law library is not per se denial of access to this court held that mail from attorneys the factual basis for denial with an oppor­ communication with "client" housed in pUblic. (D.C.N. Y. 1978) State correction officials courts. A prison library is only one factor. cannot be read. Reasonable regulations on tunity to rebut the decision based on the another institution does not deny access to Guajardo v. Estel/e, 580 F.2d 748 must make a substantial showing that a Gilmore v. Lynch, 319 F. Supp. 105 correspondence with attorneys are permis­ facts. courts. (5th Cir. 1978) A privilege exists for mail publication poses a real threat to order, (N.D. Cal. 1970) Affirmed 404 U.S. 15 sible. Such regulations may require that Reed v. Evans, 455 F. Supp. 1139 Craig v. Hocker, 405 F. Supp. 656 between inmates and identifiable members security, or rehabilitation programs of the (1971) Prisoner~ have a right of access to an the attorney first identify himself in a signed ,D.C. Ga. 1978) A paralegal was not en­ (D.C. Nev. 1975) Prison Officials must al­ of the media. Such mail must be treated in prison before they may prohibit any publi­ adequate law library to assist them .ingain­ letter or that the inmate supply prison offi­ titled to enter a state prison unless he/she low jailhouse lawyers to assist other pris­ the same manner as attorney mail. cation from the facility. ing access to the courts. cials wi th the name and business address of was employed by an attorney. This action oners and must also provide adequate law Main Road v. Aytch, 565 F.2d. 54 Evans v. Fogg~ 466 F. Supp. 949 Mingo v. Patterson, 455 F. Supp. 1358 his attorney. was not held to deny the inmate's right of library. (3rd Cir. 1977) Prison regulations that per­ (D.C.N.Y. 1979) It was no denial ofa pris­ (D.C. Colo. 1978) A prisoner is entitled to access to the courts. Baker v. Crisp, 446 F. Supp. 870 mit prisoners individual interviews with the oner's rights when he was not given a par­ use the prison law library in order to pre­ 2. Visitation with counsel Johnson v. Ward, 401 N. Y.S. 2d 445 (W.D. Okla. 1978) The fact that a prisoner press but deny group press conferences are ticular law book since he did receive it pare his civil rights action. Rhem v. McGrath, 326 F. Supp. 681 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.-1978) A prisoner's medical fired his court appointed attorney in favor valid. Allowing the Superintendent of the within a matter of days. Bellv. Wolfish, 99S.Ct.1861 (1979) Burrascano v. Levi, 452 F. Supp. 1066 (1971), modified 507 F.2d 333 (2nd Cir. records need not be furnished to law stu­ j of the services of a fellow prisoner "writ Philadelphia prisons to determine whether (D. Md. 1978) Denying an inmate access to 1974) Prisoners entitled to private commun· dents representing an inmate and the re­ writer" prevents him from asserting in a a press interview would constitute a clear A "publisher only" rule is valid. Rhem v. McGrath, 326 F. Supp. 681 the prison law library on one isolated occur­ ication with attorney, whether by mail fJr quest thereof should be signed by an attor­ I habeas corpus petition that he was dt'-,ied and present danger to an institution or its ence does not constitute an actionable face to face. ney of the prisoner's legal services admitted the effective assistance of counsel. inhabitants is consitutionally permissible. (1971) Modified 507 F.2d 748 (2nd Cir. constitutional infringement. United States v. White, 295 F. Supp. to practice. I 1974) Censorship of publications and other Hohman v. Hogan,,458 F. Supp. 669 893 (1968) No deprivation of right to coun­ I 2. Access to assistance such as Civil C. Access to particular books, types ofincoming mail is permitted as long (D.C. Vt. 1978) Access of prisoners to the sel established by showing that crowded 4: Attorneys' fees and responsibility Liberties Union periodicals, etc., by Inmate as performed in a reasonable manner and courts must be adequate, effective, and conditions existed during visits and that Hutto v. Finney, 437 U.S. 678 (1978) Nolan v. Sea/ali, 430 F. 2nd 548 United States v. O'Brien, 391 U.S. with a legitimate purpose in mind. meaningful. A state is required to provide privacy as between counsel and prisoner The Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards I (1970) In absence of some countervailing 367 (1968) In order to justify restrictions, Sostre v. Otis, 330 F. Supp. 941 prisoners either with adequate law librar­ was at a minimum. Act of 1976 has removed the state's lIth interest, a state cannot prevent an inmate a sufficiently important purpose m1,lst be (S.D.N.Y. 1971) Prison officials must pro­ ies, or legal ~..>sistance, not both. Crllz v. Beto, 391 F. 2d 235,19 Cr.L. Amendment immunity to retroactive mon­ 1 from seeking legal assistance from any bona shown. vide due process hearing prior to refusal to 2093 (S.D. Tex. 1976) Damages awarded etary relief of the form of attorney's fees. fide attorneys working in or outside of Procunierv. Martinez, 416 U.S. 396 admit publications to prison. 3. Content of prison law library against Director of Department of Correc­ Minns v. Paul, 542 F.2d 899 (4th Cir. organizations. (1974) Applies to censorship ofpublications Boundsv. Smith, 430 U.S. 817 (1976) tions for denying attorneys access to clients 1976) Attorney appointed by Court to I material. For state to censor, it must show Enumerates books required for library. and clients access to attorneys. undertake provision of legal services to in­ that censorship furthers one or more insti­ Stover v. Carlson, 408 F. Supp. 696 Giampetruzziv. Malcolm, 406 F. Supp. mates in general is acting under color of I tutional concern of security, order, rehabil­ 4 (D. Conn. 1976) Adequate law library need 836 (S.D.N. Y. 1975) Must permit more than state law, but is immune from suit for fail­ , itation. not have a complete collection of federal one attorney to visit an inmate at any given ure to provide services to particular inmate. Bell v. Wolfish, 99 S.Ct. 1861 (1979) cases and statutes. time. "Publishers only" rule, and the prohibition Fluhr v. Roberts, 460 F. Supp. 536 Mitchell v. Untreiner, 421 F. Supp. 1 against the receipt of packages do not vio­ (D.C. Ky. 1978) It is not required that cor- 886 (N.D. Fla. 1976) Construction of pri- I late any constitutional guarantees. i! I

..11I Appendix B. Case law compendium 67 66 Correctional data analysis systems Jordan v. Wolke, 450 F. Supp. 213 Parker v. Cook, 464 F. Supp. 350 Atkinson v. Hanberry, 589 F.2d 917 IV. Correspondence Worley v. Bounds, 355 F. Supp. 115 Marcera v. Chinland, 595 F.2d 1231 (B.D. Wis. 1978) Non-contact prison vis­ (D.C. Fla. 1979) If a prisoner is denied his (5th Cir. 1979) Absent a right or justifiable (W.D.N.C. 1973) Held unconstitutional for (2nd Cir. 1979) Pretrial detainees were en­ itors may only be subjected to "pat-down" righ t to use the telephone during the period expectation created by state law, the transfer A. From Inmate a prison official to intercept, fail to deliver titled to relief in their action challenging a examinations and metal detector searches of administrative segregation, he has not of a state prisoner to a less desirable institu­ Procunier v. Martinez, 417 U.S. 817 or to photocopy without good cause any policy of denying them contact visits in a of their persons. been denied his right to communicate with tion within a state prison system does not (1974) Censorship of inmate mail is justi­ inmate mail to legislators, executive offi­ county jail. The considerations of cost, ar­ Non-contact visitors of pretrial detainees counsel because mail privileges satisfy that amount .to a violation of constitutional fied when based on legitimate institutional cers, administrative bodies or other public chitecture, or administrative convenience need not present identification nor be on right. rights. interests of security, order, and rehabilita­ officials. were not sufficient to justify regulations the pretrial detainee's visitor list before see­ People v. Myles, 379 N.B.2d 897 (III. Garlandv. Polley, 594 F.2d 1220 (8th tion. Davis v. Balson, 24 Cr. L. 2117 (ND denying contact visits for pretrial detainees. ing the prisoner. App. 1978) Monitoring ofjail phones where Cir. 1979) A prisoner stated a cause of ac­ Feeley v. Sampson, 22 Cr.L. 2453 Ohio 1978) 24 Cr. L. 2117 Mail censorship White v. Keller, 588 F.2d 913 (4th The prison rule which forbade individuals a sign is present is legal. A phone main­ tion when he alleged that his rights had (1st Cir. 1978) The district court improperly standards as set forth in Procunier v. Mar­ Cir. 1978) A prisoner and members of his who themselves had been pretrial detainees tained for prisoners' use ·does not include been violated by a prison transfer because ordered the Rockingham County Jail to tinez, are applicable to patients involun­ family and friends did not have their rights within the past six months from visiting the same right of privacy as the public at of his filing of a suit against prison officials. stop opening detainee's outgoing mail ab­ tarily committed to a state hospital for the violated when visitation was restricted af­ other pretrial detainees was improper. large. Mingo v. Patterson, 455 F. Supp. 1358 sent a search warrant. criminally insane. Due process standards ter the prisoner was found in possession of We~son v. Johnson, 23 Cr. L. 2366 State v. Fischer, 24 Cr. L. 2087 (N.D. (D.C. Colo. 1978) The transferring of a Watts v. Brewer, 588 F.2d 646 (8th are applicable to institutional punishment. contraband immediately following visits. (Colo. Sup. 1978) The state must provide Sup. Ct. 1978) A jailor may eavesdrop on prisoner between county jails does not vio­ Cir. 1978) Prison authorities have a special Hopkinsv. Collins, 411 F.Supp. 831 The visitors did not have the right to a contact visitation facilities and opportuni­ an inmate's telephone conversation with ·late any of his rights. and compelling interest in the regulation of (D. Md. 1976) A Wo(fJtype hearing required hearing before visitations were restricted. ties to pre-trial detainees where security his wife. Fletcherv. Warden,467 F. Supp. 777 communications between inmates of differ­ by court on exclusion of mail. . Jones v. Diamond, 594 F. 2d 997 (5th considerations permit. (D.C. Kansas 1979) In the absence of a ent prison institutions. Cir. 1979) Suspension of visitation privi­ Wesson V. Johnson, 579 P.2d 1165 VIII. Transfers state or federal statute or practice condi­ Burrascano v. Levi, 452 F. Supp. 1066 V. Receipt of publications leges as a form of punishment is not a con­ (Colo. 1978) Since some areas in the county tioning prisoners' transfers to another in­ (D.C. Md. 1978) As a matter of law, a stitutional violation. jail were suitable for contact lIisitation and A. Intrastate transfers stitution upon misconduct, a prisoner has communication is not libelous merely by Bellv. Wolfish, 99S.Ct. 1861 (1979) U.S. v. Hearst, 563 F.2d 1331 (9th because the number of additional person­ Meachum v. Fano, 427 U.S. 215 (1976) no federal due process right to a hearing reason of accusing one of being a criminal A "publisher only" rule for mail does not Cir. 1977) Upheld use in criminal trial of nel that was necessary would not create too Absent a state law or practice which condi­ prior to transfer. informant. violate any constitutional rights but is a statements made by inmate to visitor which harsh a financial burden upon the county, tions the transfer of inmates between insti­ United States ex reI. Snyder v. Peo­ Farmer v. Loving, 392 F. Supp. 27 rational response by officials to the obvious were picked up as part ofjailhouse practice the pretrial detainees in the county jail tutions upon proof of serious misconduct pi'!.. State o/Illinois, 442 F. Supp. 75 (N.D. (W.D. Va. 1975) For inmates to be allowed security problem of preventing the smug­ of monitoring and recording all prisoner­ were entitled some form of contact visita­ or the process clause in and of itself does Ill. 1977) Where a state prisoner was con­ to send to whomever they wish including gling of contraband in books sent from the visitor conversations. tion program. not entitle an inmate to a factfinding hear­ tined within the territorial limits of the fed· other inmates may be outside presen t state outside. Lock v. Jenkins, 464 F. Supp. 541 Holdman v. Olim, 581 P.2d 1164 ing prior to his transfer from one penal eral district at the initiation of his habea£ of the law. A regulation against the receipt of (D.C. Ind. 1978) Contact visitation is not (Hawaii 1978) A prison rule requiring fe­ institution to another, even if the condi­ corpus action, the fact that he was subse­ Valentine v. Gray, 410 F. Supp. 1394 packages from the outside does not deprive constitutionally required at prison. male visitors to wear a brassiere while with­ tions of the recipient institution are sub­ quently transferred to another facility out­ (S.D. Ohio 1976) Inmate has no right to pretrial detainees of their rights consider­ Tate v. Kassulke, 409 F. Supp. 651 in the confines ofthe prison does not violate stantially less favorable to him than those side the district did not deprive the court of conduct business by mail ing the fact that packages are easily used (W.D. Ky. 1976) Limitations on number of the Constitution. existing in the institution from which he jurisdiction. Guarjardo v. Estelle, 580 F.2d 748 for the smuggling of contraband. visitors or prohibitions on children as vis­ Cooper y. Lombard, 409 N. Y.S .2d 30 was transferred. Vice v. Harvey, 458 F. Supp. 1031 (5th Cir. 1978) Rules requiring prior ap­ Jones v. Diamond, 594 F.2d 997 (5th itors held to be invalid. (N. Y.A..D. 1978) Jails must provide a pro­ Vitek v. Miller, 23 Cr. L. 3046 (U.S. (D.C.S.C. 1978) A prisoner may be trans­ proval before an inmate can begin corre­ Cir. 1979) The sending of packages to pris­ Ambrose v. Malcolm, 440 F. Supp. 'gram of contact visitation for pre-trial de- 1978) The district court's grant of relief to a ferred to another institution for adminis­ spondence with a free society individual, on inmates may be prohibited. 51 (S.D. N. Y. 1977) The visiting time al­ tainees. • prison inmate concerning his transfer to a trative or disciplinary reasons if there is no and imposing restrictions on the number of Guajardo v. Estel/e, 580 F.2d lowed to inmates at a detention facility may Lewellyn v. State, 592 P.2d 538 (Ok­ mental hospital is vacated and remanded state law giving the prisoners a reasonable letters an inmate can write are unconstitu­ 748 (5th Cir. 1978) Limitation of sexually not be reduced solely because of the change la. App. 1979) Where an incarceration order to the district court for a determination of expectation that they will remain where tional. obscene material is not limited by the judi­ to the contact system. included that a prisoner be afforded reason­ mootness in light of the inmate's acceptance they are confined. When loss of good time cial definition of obscenity; Non-obscene Giampetruzzi v. Malcolm, 406 F. able visitation privileges for witnesses in of parole. on segregated confinement accompany a B. To inmate material that encourages deviate, criminal Supp. 836 (S.D. N.Y. 1975) Cannot stop his behalf, the requirement that the wi tness­ Montayne v. Haymes, 427 U.S. 236 transfer, the prisoner has a right to a Procunier v. Martinez, 416 U.S. 396 sexual behavior may also be censored. segregation prisoners from receiving visi­ visitor leave at 9:00 P.M. was not prejudi­ (1976) No due process is necessary for an hearing. (I974)Requires that limitations on 1st Amend­ Prison officials may control bulk mailing, tors. cial to his defense and was within the dis­ inter-institutional transfer where the trans­ Lamb v. Hutto, 467 F. Supp. 562 ment rights be "no greater than is necessary but otherwise may not place a numerical Fennell v. Carlson, 466 F. Supp. 56 cretion of the prison officials. fer statute gives the Commissioner of Cor­ (B.D. Wis. 1978) A prisoner does not have or essential for the protection of the partic­ restriction on mail received by inmates. (D.C. Okla. 1978) An inmate at a federal Robertson v. Oregon State Peniten­ rections complete discretion. Note that the a' right to counsel at a prison transfer hear- ular government interest involved." Outgoing letters may be read. Letters con­ correctional institution had no protected tiary. Corrections Division, 582 P.2d 32 (Ore. court only considered statutes, not the ef­ ing. If mail is read, (1) A written notice cerning plans for violating prison rules or right to be visited by another inmate .. App. 1978) Where only extensive discus­ fect of regulations. Perrote v. Percy, 444 F. Supp. 1288 of the reason the letter was read or cen­ containing graphic presentation of sexual Visiting procedures are solely within the sion followed an inmate's suggestion that Daigle v. Hall, 564 F.2d 884 (1st Cir. (B.D. Wis. 1978) Because a prisoner's eligi­ soted must be given to the sender and the behavior that is in violation of state law scope of prison discipline and security; the inmates should strike by refusing to 1977) To trigger due process guarantees bility for a work/study release program inmate; (2) The sender has a right to appeal ! may be prohibited. therefore are subject to the broad discre­ leave a visiting room, no conspiracy existed a prisoner complaining of an intraprison depended upon his having minimum secur­ the decision. Publications may not be censored because tion of prison officials. in violation of the prison regulations. transfer must show some righ t or justifiable ity classification, he should have been af­ Guajardo v. Estelle, 580 F.2d 748 they contain criticism of prison authorities Imprisoned Citizens Union v. Shapp, expectation rooted in stated law that he will forded a hearing before he was transferred (5th Cir. 1978) Prison rules which permit or advocate use of a prison grievance pro­ 451 F. Supp. 893 (B.D. Pa. 1978)Tbe denial VII. Telephone access not be transferred except for misbehavior to a maximum security institution. censorship of mail containing escape plans, cedure, but may be censored if they show of conjugal visits does not constitute cruel or on the occurrence of other specified Gomes v. Moran, 468 F. Supp. 542 plans for disruption of the prison, or plans how to make explosives, weapons, or drugs, and unusual punishment. Feeleyv. Sampson, 570 F.2d 364(1st events. (D.C.R.I. 1979) It is a violation of an in­ for the entering of contraband, are permit­ or are designed to achieve the breakdown Owens-EI v. Robinson, 457 F. Supp. Cir. 1978) The particular formula for regu­ C%ne v. Manson, 594 F.2d 934 (2nd mate's constitutional rights to transfer him ted. of prisons through riots or strikes. 984 (D.C. Pa. 1978) Jail inmates have no lating telephone use shOUld be left to jail Cir. 1979) A prisoner's transfer to another for engaging in constitutionally protected Fordv. Schmidt, 577 F.2d 408 (lOth constitutional right to contact visits. officials. institution may violate his rights provided speech. Cir. 1978) cert. den. 99 S.Ct. 199 A prison VI. Visitation Palmigiano v. Travisono, 317 F. Supp. Hillv. Estelle, 537 F.2d 214 (5th Cir. state law has created some reasonable ex­ Rust v. State, 582 P.2d 134 (Alaska mail policy was not unconstitutional because 776 (D.R.I. 1970) Total isolation of offender 1976) The denial of telephone call privi­ pectation that he will not be transferred 1978) A sentencing court lacks authority to of prison regulations pertaining to stamp Feeleyv. Sampson, 570 F.2d364(lst from outside world cannot be justified. leges to inmate violated no constitutional except for misbehavior or other specified order the Division of Corrections to place coupons and prohibiting the transfer of Cir. 1978) There is no constitutional guar­ Limiting the time and number of personal right. events . an offender in a particular institution. . property between inmates. antee to contact visits. visits has been upheld as long as rules are Martinez v. Evans, 22 Cr. L. 2531 United States ex reI. Schuster v. Her­ People v. Johnson, 594 P.2d 601 (Co­ Barnesv. Virgin Islands, 415 F. Supp. Prison officials will be given further oppor­ uniformly applied. (D. Colo. 1978) Petitioner's complaint old, 410 F.2d 1071 (2nd Cir.1969) cert. den. lo. 1979) Under the statute the sentencing 1218 (D.V.I. 1976) Court forbids the impo­ tunity to initiate a visitation rule. Jordan v. Wolke, 450 F. Supp. 1080 which alleges that he contracted an infec­ 396 U.S. 847 (1969) Where adult resident is - court had a right to transfer a prisoner siticm of any length limitation on incoming (D.C. Wis. 1978) Pretrial detainees in a tious boil in his ear after using telephones transferred to a mental facility he must be from a community correctional facility to a letters. county jail filed suit seeking relieffor over~ to communicate with visitors while in pris­ accorded the same proceaural rights reformatory, but did not have the authority crowding and lack of visitation. It was held on does not state a claim upon which relief as a free citizen who is involuntarily com­ -to increase the length of the original sen­ that the prohibition of contact visitati'on can be granted under 4? U.S.C.A. - 1983. mitted to such a hospital. tence. was unjustified for either financial or secur­ ity reasons.

"-,- ~-- 'f -- ---' ---~-- --~--,---~------~------.-----

Appendix B. Case law compendium 69 68 Correctional data analysis systems Jones v. Bradley, 590 F.2d 294 (9th MOlllayne v. Haymes, 427 U.S. 236 Murphy v. Fe'!ton, 464 F. Supp. 53 Pierson v. Phend, 379 N .E.2d 442 B. Interstate transfers Johnson v. Anderson, 420 F. Supp. Cir. 1979) An' inmate, a self-proclaimed (1976) Due process is required if the inmate (D.C. Pa. 1978) Even though a prisoner (Ind. 1978) Inmate transfers 'from a dor­ 845 (D. Del. 1976) Failure to hold disciplin­ pastor,was not denied his riglits when pris­ has a "right or justifiable expectation" of was denied his due process rights by not mitory outside the prison walls to a dor­ Rebideau v. Stoneman, 575 F.2d 31 ary hearing after an emergency transfer to on officials denied him the use of the pris­ not going to segret;ation "except for mis­ having a proper hearing for being placed in mitory inside, do not viol'l,te any prisoner (2nd Cir. 1978) Since suitable tteatment solitary because of believed double jeopardy on chapel to conduct study sessjons. Efforts behavior or upon the occurrence of. other an administrative segregation unit, the of- ' .,rights. Prison officials may effect this change programs were unavailable in VermoITt, the problems renders him liable. The failure to' , to provide reasonable opportunity for an specific events." This "expectation" has ficials were entitled to a good faith defense. for any reason. prisoner was 'legitimately transferred to hold a hearirig cannot be justified on basis inmate to' pursue his religious faith must be been found in state statutes, unwritten Negron v. Ward, 458 F. SUpp. 748 State v. Grimme, 274 N.W.2d 331 an ollt-of-state institution. that hearing would have resulted in guilty evaluated in light of the state's legitimate practices. (D.C.N.Y. 1978) The superintendent of a (Iowa 1979) A prisoner was denied his rights Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 finding. , interest in prison security. Sweetv. South Carolina Department state prison hospital was held liable when when he was removed from a drug treat­ (1974) Appears to enforce the view that Jordan v. Arnold, 408 F. Supp. 869 SaMarion v. McGinnis, 284 N.Y.S. o/Corrections, 529 F.2d 854, (4th Cir. 1975) he decided to keep patients in a jail ward ment facility and sentenced to prison with­ certain minimal procedures are required (M.D. Pa. 1976) Prison administrator en­ 2d. 504 (Sup. Ct. 1967) Right ,to attend a Placement ofinmate in solitary confinement for punitive reasons instead of for treat­ out an evidentiary hearing. for this type of transfer. titled to move an inmate to segregation religious meeting even though the particu­ for safety does not require due process. me.nt reasons. Ladetto v. Commissioner 0/ Correc­ Wakinekona v. Doi, 20 Cr. L. 2090 without affording a prior hearing (but af­ lar prisoner is not a formal member of the United States v. Chatman, 584 F.2d Parker v. Cook, 464 F. Supp. 350 tion, 385 N.E.2d 273 (Mass. App. 1979) No (D. Hawaii, 1976) The transfer of an inmate fording a subsequent hearing) if he is pres­ sect. 1358 (4th Cir. 1978) It was not unreason­ (D.C: Fla. 1979) A prisoner's right to avoid prisoner has a right to be transferred from a from Hawaii to the mainland is a disciplin­ ently dangerous or violent as demonstrated able to put an inmate in confinement, after a segregation from the general prison popu­ penal institution to a facility offering a pro­ ary punishment requiring a disciplinary, by objective standards, otherwise give prior 2. Right not to do that which is hearing, for sending a threatening letter to lation during the period of an administra­ gram of drug rehabilitation. hearing in conformity with Wolff. . hearing. against one's religious beliefs a judge. tive investigation entitles him to at least Johnson v. Ward, 409 N.Y.S.2d 670 Capitan v. Cupp, 356 F. Supp. 302 Matter o/Lindner, 408 N. Y.S.2d 920 Jihaadv. Carlson, 410 F. Supp. 1132 Cunningham v. Jones, 22 Cr. L. 2315 notice in writing and an opportunity to be (N.Y.A.D. 1978) A prisoner may not have (D.C. Ore. 1972) aff'd 485 F.2d 679 (3rd (N.Y. Sup. 1978) Before an inmate can be (E.D. Mich. 1976) Prison may not force (6th Cir. 1977) A rema,nd is ordered to heard. a choice in the facility where he is to be Cir. 1973) The transfer of a convicted per­ transferred from a prison facility tv a men­ Muslim prisoners to handle pork. Regula­ ascertain whether the one meal served to a If a prisoner is denied his right to use the confined. An inmate member of an inmate son to another state cannot be accomplished tal health facility, court-l'l'lpointed doctors tion of beards must meet compelling state prisoner in segregation each day was nutri­ telephone during the period of administra­ grievance committee may not be trans­ without granting a due process hearing. must examine the inmate and the court interest test when based on religious grounds. tionally sufficient. tive segregation, he has not been denied his ferred to another facility unless the transfer Cook v. Hanberry, 596 F.2d 658 (5th must review those findings. Miller v. Carson, 401 F. Supp. 835 Walker v. Little, 22 Cr. L. 4229 (7th . right to communicate with counsel because is necessary to protect the facility or its Cir. 1979) A prisoner was not entitled to a (M.D. Fla. 1975) aff'd 563 F.2d 741 (5th Cir. 1977) cert. den. U.S. (1978) Conditions mail privileges satisfy that right. personnel. In this instance, a prior hearing transfer to another federal prison. He failed IX. Religion Cir. 1977) Diet served violated 1st Amend­ imposed upon inmates who were transferred Spain v. Procunier; 408 F. Supp. '534 must be held absent an emergency. to allege that practices of allegedly cruel ment on religious grounds. to segregation at their request were so un­ (N.D. Calif. 1976) Classification to segre­ People ex rei. SUfian v. Bertholf, 416 and unusual punishment were continued or A. establishment of religion Theriault v. Silber, 453 F. Supp 254 reasonable as to constitute cruel and unus­ gation must comply with procedural due N.Y.S. 2d 173 (N.Y. Sup. 1979) Juveniles, that there was any threat of such continued Cruz v. Beto, 405 U.S. 319 (1972) (W.D. Tex. 1978) The "Church of the New ual punishment, and prison officials asserted process. as well as adults confined, have no right to treatment. Upheld right of a Buddhist inmate to prac­ Song," founded by an inmate, does not qual­ ignorance of the conditions in the segrega­ Brown v. State, 573 P.2d 876 (Ariz. not be transferred from one facility to an­ tice his religion comparable to opportunity ify as a religion entitled to First Amendment tion facility will not serve as a defense. 1978) One may not legitimately waive his other within the state. Juveniles, by statute C. State-Federal transfers afforded other prisoners adhering to more protections, and even if it did, prison offi­ Bono v. Saxbe, 450 F. Supp. 934 two-for-one credits under statutory provi­ however, must be given the reasons for a Sisbarro v. Warden, Massachusetts orthodox religions. cials could legitimately deny the founder (E.D. Ill. 1978) Prisoners placed within the sions by seeking protective custody when transfer to a more secure facility. State Penitentiary, 592F.2d 1 (lstCir.1979) Theriault v. Silber, 453 F. Supp. 254 the privileges of a prison chaplain. "control unit" are entitled to receive a writ­ he is in fear for his life. Richards v. Czarnetzky, 414 N. Y.S.2d Even though a pl'isoner had been transferred (W.D. Tex. 1978) The "Church of the New Wright v. Raines, 457 F. Supp. 1082 ten notice of the disciplinary hearing, im­ Dunn v. Jenkins, 377 N.E.2d 868 796 (N.Y.A.D. 1979) The transfer of in­ numerous times during his prison term, Song," founded by an inmate, does not (D.C. Kan. 1978) A regulation that requires partial decision making, and immediate (Ind. 1978) The classification of inmates mates from one institution to another is such transfers 'between state and federal qualify as a religion entitled to First Amend­ all inmates to be clean shaven except for and subsequent periodic review of the final into groups according to behavior which ordinarily an administrative matter and a prisons did not violate his constitutional ment protections, and even if it did, prison sideburns and mustaches is unconstitutional disposition. occurred prior to the passage of a new prisoner has no right to select the facility to rights. officials could legitimately deny the found­ to the extent that it prevents a religious Hooker v. Arnold, 454 F. SUpp. 527 good-time credit law was not violative of which he is to be confined. Lono v. Fenton, 581 F.2d 645 (7th er the privileges of a prison chaplain. A free­ group from practicing its sincere beliefs. (D.C. Pa. 1978) Persons confined in prison the constitutional prescriptions against ex Mattero/Lindner, 408 N.Y.S.2d 920 Cir. 1978) A state prison inmate may be form, non-structured religion created by administrative segregation must have peri­ post facto laws. (N.Y. Sup. 1978) Before an inmate can be transferred to a Federal prison to receive the prisoner was not a religion protected by C. Religious correspondence odic review oftheir confinement. The prison State v. Kyle, 271 N. W.2d 689 (Iowa transferred from a prison facility to a men­ specialized care not available in state insti­ the First Amendment. Neal v. Georgia, 469 F.2d 446 (5th must have a valid reasonfor the segregation. 1978) A prisoner's rights are not violated tal health facility, court-appointed doctors tutions. Cir. 1972) Prisoner has right to correspond It is not a valid reason to segregate a pris­ , when he is assigned to a certain cell house mus't examine the inmate and the court United Stat'es v. Eisenberg, 469 F.2d B. Free exercise of religion with his religious leader. oner merely because inmate was on hold­ in prison upon his return follOWing an es­ must review those findings. 156 (8th Cir. 1972) cert. den. 410 U.S. 992 1. Right to do that which is in accord over status. cape.. Ramirez v. Ward, 408 N. Y.S.2d 833 (1973) No due process hearing required. with one's religious beliefs. X. Administrative segregation Hossv. Cuyler,454F. SUpp. 51 (D.C. Griffin v. Raines, 585 P.2d 620 (Kan. (N.Y.A.D. 1978) the Department of CQr­ Capitan v. Cupp, 356 F. SUpp. 302 McDonald v. Hall, 579 F.2d 120 (lst Pa. 1978) This case contains a list of ap­ App. 1978) A state penitentiary inmate who rections has the power to determine the (D. O.re. 1972) aff'd 485 F.2d 679 (3rd Cir. Cir. 1978) The decision of the corrections Wright v. Enomoto, 462 F. Supp. 397 proved criteria which allow for continued has requested protective custody may re­ proper correctional facility for the inmate. 1973) Due process hearing must be held officials not to provide Catholic group reli­ (N.D. Calif. 1978) State prison officials were administrative confinement. move himself from protective custody at It can also transfer inmates to other facili­ before transfer. gious services in the departmental segrega­ enjoined from transferring prisoners from Jordan v. Robillson, 464 F. SUpp. 223 any time. tie tion unit can be v.alidly justified on safety the general prison populations to maximum (D.C. Pa . .\979) Even though a prisoner When a prisoner requests protective cus­ The classification of an inmate as a Central D. Emergency transfers reasons. security housing for "administrative" rea­ was locked up mistakenly when a prison tody, it is an administrative decision to re­ Monitoring Case does not bar the inmate (An "emergency condition" justifying a Kahane v. Carlsoll, 527 F.2d 492 (2nd sons, without first providing: (1) a written disturbance broke out, the action taken was move prisoner to a protective custody wing from being.. eligible for temporary release transfer without a hearing has been defined Cir. 1975) Orthodox Jew entitled to diet notice of reasons, in detail, not more than not a viola tion of his rights because prison with fewer privileges. programs or transfer to a medium or low as a condition which indicates a present or complying with religious laws. 48 hours after the transfer; (2) a fair hearing authorities had taken reasonable action in The criteria for administrative segregation security institution. The prisoner does have impending disturbance which might over­ Teterud v. Burns, 522 F.2d 357 (8th within 72 hours, unless the inmate requests response to the disturbance. should be clearly explained to the inmate a right to respond and object to the classifi­ tax the control capacity of the prison.) Cir. 1975) Hairstyle part of Native Ameri­ additional time; (3) representation by coun­ Kelly v. Brewar, 525 F.2d 394 (1975) affected. cation, and appeal the decision. Id.;King v. Higgins, 370 F. SUpp. 1023 (D. can religion and prison officials cannot force sel substitute when the prisoner is illiterate Records must show "criterion and stan­ Consideration should be given for an in­ Ruther/ord v. Oregon State Peniten­ Mass. 1974) As soon as possible after the a practitioner thereof to cut his hair. or the issues complex; (4) an opportunity to dards" used in segregation decision. mate's "good behavior" while in adminis­ tiary Correctivns Division, 592 P.2d 1028 transfer, the inmate is entitled to a due Cooper v. Pate, 382 F.2d 518 (7th present witnesses and evidence unless it pre­ Records must show, (1) what was wrong, trative segregation. (Ore. App. 1979) There is no constitutional process hearing. Cir. 1969) Right to assemble in a group for sents an undue hazard to institutional (2) how to get out. Falkenstein v. City 0/ Bismark, 268 right to a judicially reviewable hearing be­ Patterson v. Walters, 363 F. Supp. religious services upheld. safety or correctional goals, and (5) a writ­ Imprisoned Citizens Union v. Shapp, N. W.2d 787 (N. Dak. 1978) The prisoner's fore a prisoner is transferred from one in­ 486(W.D. Pa.1973) Whenever an inmate is Chapman v. Pickett, 586 F.2d 22 (7th ten decision, including references to evi­ 461 F. Supp. 522 (D.C. Pa. 1978) The deci­ suicide was reasonably foreseeable so as to stitution to another. However, if a state law transferred under a court order for medical Cir. 1978) A prison official was immune dence relied upon and reasons for con­ sion to use observation cells is strictly up to incur liability upon the city of his wrongful speaks to the matter, those provisions con­ or psychological reasons, there is' no viola­ from liability for punishing a prisoner for finement. prison department officials and not the death stemming from the city's failure to trol. tion of his rights. refusing to handle pork on religious grounds courts. Confinement in these cells, howev­ adequately observe and supervise the dece­ Watson v. Whyte, 23 Cr. L. 2411 (W. during a kitchen clean up. The right of the er, would be cruel and unusual punish-ment dent while confined in isolation. Va 1978) An inmate's transfer to a prison prisoner to I;efuse was not clear at the time if for a lengthy period or if conditions in the The city of Bismark is not only liable for that more severely limits his freedom of of the inciden t. cells are allowed to deteriorate. compensatory damages stemming from the movement requires a due process hearing.

" --~------' • ~ 70 Correctional data analysis systems f I Appendix B. Case law compendium 71 wrongful death of an inmate who commit­ Giampetruzzi v. Malcolm, 406 F. XII. Search and seizure I alcohol and therefore no rights of the in­ O'Brien v. Moriarty, 489 F.2d 941 imposed upon inmates who were trans­ ted suicide, but also liable for punitive Supp. 836 (S.D.N. Y. 1975) (N. Y. City Jail) I mate were violated by not strip searching (1st Cir. 1974); Pugh v. Locke 406 F. Supp. ferred to segregation at their request were damages. Classification to segregation is a grievous Bell v. Wolfish, 99 S.Ct. 1861 (1979) him. 318 (M.D. Ala. 1976) Prisoners may not be so unreasonable as to constitute cruel and Duncan v. Oregon State Correction­ loss requiring procedural due process (1) Pre-trial detainees have no right to be pres­ People v. Valenzuela, 589 P.2d 71 subjected to punitive conditions which bear unusual punishment, and prison officials alInslilution, 580 P.2d 1047 (Ore. App. written notice of hearing and reasons, (2) ent or watch room searches. Room searches I1 (Colo. App. 1978) Searches of inmates are no reasonable relationship and are not nec­ asserted ignorance of the conditions in the 1978) A preliminary placement of a prison­ right to present witnesses, (3) unbiased are a reasonable security measure and do permissible even if made without probable essary to achieve legitimate correctional segregation facility will not serve as a er in a segregation and isolation unit pend­ hearing body, (4) limited right of confron­ not infringe the detainee's right to privacy. cause, provided such searches are not done goals. defense. ing subsequent disciplinary hearings is not tation and counsel, (5) written decision, (6) Body cavity searches are not unreasonable cruelly or are not accompanied by any in­ Hite v. Leeke, 564 F.2d 670 (4th Cir. Cotton v. Hutto, 577 F.2d 453 (8th reviewable by the court. 30 day review of classification. and do not violate the constitution. They tent to harass, humiliate, or intimidate the 1977) Even though cells were originally Cir. 1978) By not providing a prisoner with The prisoner was not prejudiced by a disci­ Imprisoned Citizens Union v. Shapp, can be conducted on less than probable inmate. planned and designed for single occupan­ the proper tub facilities for his colostomy plinary order placing him in segregation 451 F. Supp. 893 (E.D. Pa. 1978) The con­ cause as long as they are not conducted in Body cavity searches are permissible unless cy, the assignment of inmates to double condition, the resulting pain amounted to and isolation for one year since this time ditions within the "glass cage" cells at the an abusive manner. Requiring inmates to it can be demonstrated that such searches occupancy did not constitute cruel and un­ cruel and unusual punishment by prison was credited against his sentence. State Correctional Institution at Hunting­ expose their body cavities for visual inspec­ bear no reasonable relationship to the re­ usual punishment where each cell contained authorities. Penrod v. Cupp, 581 P.2d 934 (Sup. ton constitute a serious threat to the physi­ tion as a part of a strip search conducted quirement of maintaining security. 05 square feet in area. Battle v. Anderson, 564 F.2d 388 (lOth Ct. Ore. 1978) Habeas corpus is available cal and mental well-being of the prisoners after every contact visit with a person from State v. Martinez, 580 P.2d 1282 Cook v. Hanberry, 596 F.2d 658 (5th Cir. 1977) The Eigh th Amendment protects to an inmate to test the lawfulness ofcondi­ confined there. outside the institution is constitutional ev­ (Hawaii 1978) Where the defendant was Cir. 1979) A prisoner was not entitled to a prisoners from "an enviornment where de­ tions of imprisonment such as segregation Conditions in the maximum security cell en in the absence of probable cause. aware of the prison's policy of conducting transfer to another federal prison. He failed generation is probable and self-improvement or isolation in situations where other pro­ blocks at Graterford Prison and Dallas Bell v. Manson, 590 F.2d 1224 (2nd strip searches on those who wish to visit the to allege that practices of allegedly cruel unlikely because of the conditions existing cedural remedies are not swift enough. Any State Correctional Institution do not consti­ Cir. 1978) When strip searches of pretrial prison, her consent to the strip search will and unusual punishment were continued or which inflict needless suffering, whether restraint in addition to that of sentencing is tute cruel and unusual punishment. detainees after court appearances are used, be implied and the search itself is not un­ that there was any threat of such continued physical or mental," 564 F.2d at 393. subject to relief through the writ. The conditions in the administrative and the state has the burden of proving a com­ reasonable. treatment. " Bono v. Saxbe,450 F. Supp 934 (E.D. punitive segregation units at the Muncy pelling necessity of such searches for prison People v. Elkins, 377 N .E.2d 569 (III. Freedom from cruel and unusual punish­ III. 1978) The use of closed-front cells in the XI. Punitive isolation (solitary State Correctional Institution do not consti­ security. App. 1978) The warrantless search of the ment is not freedom from otherwise lawful prison's "control unit" violated the consti­ confinement) tute cruel and unusual punisQment. HuY/ey v. Ward, 584 F.2d 609 (2nd defendant's cellblock for drugs and wea­ incarceration. The prisoner only has the tutional prohibition against cruel and un­ (;,S. ex rei. Hoss v. Cuyler, 452 F. Cir. 1978) Anal and genital searches of pris­ pons was not unreasonable. right to be free from that mistreatment oc­ usual punishment. Mawhinney v. Henderson, 542 F.2d Supp. 256 (D.C. Pa. 1978) Solitary confine­ oners are prohibited unless there is proba­ Although the defendant was in custody curring within the confines of his incarcera­ ;rhe placement of a prisoner within the 1 (2nd Cir. 1976) Transfer to isolation cell ment does not fall into the category of un­ ble cause to justify the necessity of such when ajail officer asked him to identify his tion. "control unit" cannot be justified solely is disciplinary for which Wo(ffdue process acceptable punishment per se. searches. bank, Miranda warnings were not required Gates v. Collier, 349 F. Supp. 881 :upon the type of offense he was convicted must be accorded. Segregation of a prisoner must be imposed U.S. v. Lilly, 576 F.2d 1240 (5th Cir. since such was merely a routine and prelim­ (1972) aff'd 501 F.2d 1291 (5th Cir. 1974) of nor the possibility of escape since all United States v. Chatman, 584 F.2d as a prevention of violence and prison se­ 1978) Body cavity searches are not unrea­ inary inquiry. Prohibition of Eighth Amendment against prisoners represent that possibility. 1358 (4th Cir. 1978) It was not unreason­ curity rather than merely for punishment sonable, per se, but once undertaken there is Woodfox v. Phelps, 23 Cr. L. 2376 cruel and unusual punishment is not limit­ U.S. ex rei. Hood v. Cuyler, 452 F. able to put an inmate in confinement, after a for misconduct. a burden on the government to show that (La. D. 1978) Anal searches of prisoners ed to specific acts directed at selected in­ Supp. 256 (D.C. Pa. 1978) Deference is tra­ hearing, for sending a threatening letter to Wide discretion is vested in the judgment of the sear,eh is furtherance of a legitimate may only be conducted when an inmate mates, but is equally applicable to general ditionally granted to prison officials deci­ a judge. prison officials to use segregation as a prop­ penological need which could not have been returns from a contact visit with outsiders conditions of confinement that may prevail sions by the federal courts when assessing Finney v. Arkansas, 505 F.2d 194, er administrative tool for a lengthy or even satisfied by less intrusive means. .or is transferred from the general popula­ at a prison. whether the actions of prison officials con­ 208 (8th Cir. 1974) Required prisoners in an indefinite period of time. This case suggests; reasonableness for a tion to the segregation unit. Newman v. Alabama, 559 F.2d 283 stitute cruel and unusual punishment. "isolation" not be "deprived of basic ne­ An inmate in segregated confinement sta­ search can be established' State v. Bishop, 392 A.2d 20 (Me. (5th Cir. 1977) cert. den. 438 U.S. 915 ImprisonedCitizens Union v. Shapp, cessities including light, heat, ventila.tion, tus should be provided with guidelines and 1. Through information suggesting speci­ 197~) Marijuana is included as "contraband" (1978), modified 438 U.S. 781 (1978) "Ifthe 451 F. Supp. 893 (E.D. Pa. 1978) The con­ sanitation, clothing, and proper diet." factors to be considered in. his release de­ fic cause to search a given inmate. '.vhen pOS5eS&cu by a person in custody. State furnishes its prisoners with reason­ ditions within the "glass cage" cells at the Finney v. Mabry, 458 F. Supp. 720 termination. Medical and psychological 2. Through creating the general expecta­ Statev.Kerns,271 N.W.2d48 (Neb. ably adequate food, clothing, shelter,sanita­ St-ate Correctional Institution at Hunting­ (D.C. Ark. 1978) The court issued a decree opinion should also be considered in as­ tion among the inmates that searches may 1978) Prisoners are subject to reasonable tion, medical care, and personal safety, so ton constitute a serious threat to the physi­ that no inmate would be confined in puni­ sessing an inmate's behavioral adjustment. take place in given circumstances. search and seizure without notice as longas as to avoid the imposition of cruel and cal and mental well-being of the prisoners tive segregation for anyone disciplinary The inmate is entitled when reviewed to United States v. Henderson, 565 F.2d it relates to a legitimate institutional need. unusual punishment, that ends its obliga­ confined there. action for more than 30 consecutive days. know what good and bad I;onduct during 900 (5th Cir. 1978) A prisoner has the right tions under Amendment Eight. ". Laaman v. Helgemoe, 437 F. Supp. Wright v. Enomoto, 462 F. Supp. 397 segregation is taken into consideration on to remain silent during a search of his per­ XIII. Conditions of confinement The Constitution does not require that 269 (D.N.H. 1977) "Even though no sin­ (D.C. Cal. 1976) When a prisoner is trans­ the decision for or against Irelease. son by prison guards. ~ prisoners, as individuals or as a group, gle condition of incarceration rises to the ferred from the general prison population Falkenstein v. City of Bismark, 268 Carroll v. Sielaff, 514 F.2d 415 (7th A. Application of the be provided with any and every amenity level ofa constitutional violation, exposure to maximum security, this impairment of N.W. 2d 787 (N.D. 1978) Damages were Cir. 1975) Taking of persona.! property by Eighth Amendment which some person may think is needed to the cumulative effect of prison condi­ liberty requires the opportunity to appear awarded in an action for the suicide of ajail prison staff may state a claim under 1983 Greggv. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976) to avoid mental, physical and emotional tions may subject inmates to cruel and un­ before a decision-making body. He also has inmate. It was held the suicide was the re­ suit. I The Eighth Amend ment proscribes the "un­ deterioration," 559 F.2d at 291. usual punishment," 427 F. Supp. at 322-32. the right to receive a written statement of sult of being in "the hole" for an extended Holder v. Claar, 459 F. Supp. 850 necessary and wanton infliction of pain is Williams v. Edwards, 547 F.2d 1206 "The touchstone is the effect upon the im­ reasons for the decision to punish him, ad­ period of time. It was further found that (D.C. Colo. 1978) Inmates have legal pro­ not limited to specific acts directed at se­ (5th Cir. 1977) Although a constitutional prisoned. Where the cumulative impact of vance notice of the charges against him, an punit.ive damages were recoverable because tection against the unjustified taking of lected individuals, but is equally pertinent question does not necessarily arise merely the conditions of incarceration threatens In, opportunity to present witnesses and evi­ of the reckless disregard of the prisoner's personal property by prison officials pro­ to general conditions of confinement that because offailure to comply with state law, the physical, mental, and emotional health dence, and if the inmate is illiterate or the rights. vided that the property belongs to the in­ may prevail at a prison," 501 F.2d at 1300- lack of compliance with state norms can be and well oeing of the inmates and/or issues are complex, counsel substitute to Gordon v. Oregon State Penitentiary, mate. 01. significant in making a finding of constitu­ creates a probability of recidivism and fu- help him prepare his defense. Corrections Division, 582 P .2d 19 (Ore. App. Palmigidno v. Travisono, 317 F. Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86 (1958); tionality. State fire and sanitation codes ture incarceration ... imprisonment Poindexter v. Woodson, 357 F. Supp. 1978) The court affirmed the holding of a Supp. 776 (D.R.I. 1971) Right to be free Holt v. Sarver, 309 F. Supp. 362 (E.D. reveal the minimum standards ofhabitabil­ under such conditio:ls ... contravenes the 443 (D. Kan. 1973) cert. den. 433 U.S. 846 ' prisoner in isolation for nine days, al though from unreasonable searches and seizures is I Ark. 1970), aff'd 442 F.2d 304 (8th Cir. ity by which the state purposes to govern Eighth Amendment's proscription against (1975) Emphasis was placed on physical the disciplinary committee violated its own one of the rights retained by prisoners. 1971) The Eighth Amendment prohibits itself and provide a valuable index of what cruel and unusual punishment." deprivations, lack of food, hygiene, clothing rules by confining him over seven days Christian v. Owens, 461 F. Supp. 72 I practices and confinement in conditions that is minimal for human habitation in the Cooper v. ·Lombard, 409 N. Y.S.2d 30 and bedding. without finding that the inmate constituted (D.C. Va. 1978) The administratrix of a are shocking to the conscience of reason­ public view. The district judge did not err in (N.Y.A.D.1978)Jail conditions do not have Berch v. Stahl, 373 F. Supp. 412 a threat to the security of the institution. dl!ceased jail inmate brought a civil rights ably civilized people. requiring the prison to comply with state to be of equal quality to state correctional (W.D.N.C. 1974) Court concerned not on­ action against jail authorities for failing to Weems v. United States, 217 U.S. fire and sanitation codes; 547 F.2d at 1214. facilities. ly with lack of privacy and sensory depriva­ properly search the inmate. As a result the 349 (1910); O'Brien v. Moriarty, 489 F.2d Walker v. Little, 22 Cr. L. 4229 (7th State v. Werner, 242 S.E.2d 907 (W. tions. prisoner shot himself with a gun. It was' 941 (1st Cir. 1974) A prisoner may not be Cir. 1977) cert. den. (U.S. 1978) Conditions Va. 1978) Punitive practices such as floor held that strip searches were not in accord­ subjected to a punishment, taking into con­ time, bench time, and soli tary confinemen t ance with existing practices for persons sideration the conditio.ns of confinement, In juvenile facilities are cruel and unusual arrested for driving under the influence of which is disproportionate to the offense for punishment. which it was imposed. " 1 --~--~----

r:

! ! 72 Correctional data analysis systems Appendix B. Case law compendium 73 \ B. Courfs remedial power ! to punish those inmates who had commit­ - Chapman v. Rhodes, 434 F. Supp. Pugh v. Locke, 406 F. Supp. 318 termining how many square feet of living factors include: (a) additional area provided ted serious offenses while confined. 1007 (S.D. Ohio 1977) Double ceiling in (M.D. Ala. 1976); aff'd 559 F.2d 283 No space are allocated to individual inmates. (day rooms, corridors, etc.), (b) amolint of s..wann v. Char!otte-MeckJenburg Board Chapman v. Rhodes, 434 F. Supp. ceHs designed for one person and contain­ more than one prisoner to a cell and each Regard must be had to the quality of the time spent away from cell, (c) mUltiple ceIl­ of£ducatiqn, 402 U.S., 1, 15 (1971) "Once a 1007 (S.D. Ohio .1977)(LucasvilJe) In a new ing 63 square feet of space is unconstitu­ shall have a minimum of 40 square feet of living quarters and to the length of time ing (deprivation of privacy). right and it violation have been shown, the institution where the 63-foot-square cells tional. But, Court tloted that inmates are space. In SIX months inmates pla<;ed in iso­ which inmates must spend in their living Burks v. Walsh, No. 75-CV-149 C scope of the district court's equitable pow­ were designed for one, double ceiling was not entitled to private living quarters. lation shaH be afforded at least 60 square quarters each day ... " 410 F. Supp. at (W.D. Mo., November 3, 1978) (Missouri ers to remedy past wrong is broad, for improper. Ga,tes v. Collier, 423 F. SUpp. 732 I feet. 254. The question of overcrowding involves State Penitentiary). The penitentiary is not breadth and flexibility are inherent in equit­ . Palmigiano v. Garrahy, 443 F. Supp. Trigg v. Blanton, No. A-6047 (Da­ a determination of not only the total popu­ unconstitutionally overcrowded as a whole able remedies." (N.D. Miss. 1976) aff'd 548 F.2d 1241 (Miss­ 956 (D.R.I. 1977) Rhode Island State Pris­ \ vidson Co., Tenn., Chancery Ct., August lation but also ofits distribution. The court in view of the large amount of acreage, the Procunier v. Martinez, 416 U.S. 396, issippi State Prison) " ... 50 square feet on System. No more than one prisoner in of living space per inmate is the minimal 23, 1978) (Tennessee State Prison System) imposed maximum popUlation limits on inmates' relative freedom of movemen t and 405 (1974) See' also, Campbell v. Beto, 460 any ceH with less than 60 square feet, and, - The court ordered single ceIling in ceHs the two prisons in question here and also the many activities available to them, but it F.2d While state prison officials enjoy wide acceptable requireinent to conform with in dorms, at least 75 square feet per prison­ the Consti tution." wi th less than 60 square feet of floor space. required that individual unit capacities set must also be considered how inmates are discretion in the operation of state penal I I'r. Johnson v. Lark, 365 F. Supp. 289 forth in a report filed with the court not be distributed. Design capacity is not a consti­ institutions, " ... a policy of jUdicial re­ Rodriguez v. Jimenez, 409 F. Supp. 2. Standards to be used in determining exceeded except in emergency' situations. tutional limitation on the number of pris­ straint cannot encompass any failure to take (E.D. Mo. 1973) (St. Louis City Jail) No ! 582(E.D.P.R.1976)aff'd551 F.2d 877 (5th more than two prisoners per 5X8 foot cell. overcrowding Stewart v. Gates, 450 F. Supp. 583 soners who may be housed, nor do various cognizance of valid constitutional claim." Cir. 1977) (San Juan Jail) Every inmate I Valvano v. Malcolm, '520 F.2d 392 (C.D. Ca. 1978) There is no specific square professional associations' minimum square Newman v. Alabama, 503 F.2d 1320, Johnson v. LeVine, 450 F. Supp. 648 entitled to 70 square feet of living space (D. Md. 1978), aff'd in part and rev'd in (2nd Cil'. 1975) Confinement in pre-trial footage requirelJlent to meet constitutional footage standards constitute constitutional 1332 (5th Cir. 1974) cert. den. 421 U.S. 948 (housing area only) as court limited entire detention facilities above rated capacities standards. Some of the courts which have minima. Each housing unit must be evalu­ (1975) In reordering a state prison system part, 588 F.2d 1378 (4th Cir. 1978) Double popUlation to 231 inmates; population at ceIling in 40-square-foot cells is unconstitu­ creates a restrictive and deplorable living held otherwise were concerned with anti­ ated not only in terms of cell size but also to bring its system into compliance with the time of order was 580. environment constituting an intolerable quated structures that were unsatisfactory with reference to the inmates' ability to Constitution, the Court has the power to tional. Dormitorie~ which provide approx­ Jordan v. Wolke, 460 F. Supp. 1080 imately 55 square feet of living space per I violation of the detainees' constitutional in many respects; or inmates were confined move outside their cells and to participate fashion relief "coterminous with the scope in programs. (D.C. Wis. 1978) Prison officials were per­ inmate and 80 square feet of living space \, rights. virtually day and night. Herejail is of mod­ of the constitutional violations." manently stopped from holding more than Crowe v. Leeke, 540 E.2d 740 (4th ern construction and inmates have several - Holt v. Sarver, 309 F. Supp. 362, per inmate (including recreation area) 'are D. Medical care two pretrial detainees in a 90-square-foot not unconstitutional. Standards adopted by Cir. 1976) (South Carolina Correctional daily breaks out of their cells. (Finding21.5 385; aff'd 442 F.2d 304 (8th Cir. 1971); See 1. General cell. The minimum area for one detainee is groups of penologists do not constitute I Institution) Confinement of three protec­ square feet to be adequate.) also Wyatt v. Aderholt, 503 F.2d 1305 (5th 45 square feet. I tive custody inmates in a 63-square-foot ceH West v. Edwards, 439 F. Supp. 722 Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976) Cir. 1974) " ... the obligation of the Re­ constitutional minima. The court declined Battle v. Anderson, 564 F.2d 388, to find that confinement of a single inmate with two beds for all but a few hours a week (D.S.C. 1977) (Kirkland Correctional In­ reh. den. 429 U.S. 1066 (1976) Deliberate spondents to eliminate existing unconstitu­ 395 (10th Cir. 1977) After noting that "min­ does not violate the Eighth Amendment. stitute, South Carolina) Placement of three indifference to the medical needs of prison­ tionalities docs not depend upon what the in a 40 square foot cell is unconstitutional, imum space to call one's own is a primary even though the ACA recommends 60 square The number of inmates who may be safely inmates in a 66 square foot cell, where the ers violates the 8th Amendment. Mere neg­ Legislature may do, or upon what the Gov­ _psychological necessity" and referring to assigned to a cell is within the sound discre­ prisoners have access to day rooms and ligence is insufficient for liability. Indiffer­ ernor may do, or, indeed, upon what Re­ feet. the Am~<';can Public Health Association tion of prison administrators. other areas; does not violate the Eighth ence may be manifested by prison doctors spondents may actually be able to accom­ Jones v. Wittenberg, 330 F. Supp. Standard~, court upheld district court's 707 (N.D. Ohio 1971); aff'd 456 F.2d 854 HUe v. Leeke, 564 F.2d 670 (4th Cir. Amendment. in their response to the prisoner's needs or plish, if Arkansas is going to operate a order of 60 'square feet for cells and 75 1977) After noting that they were dealing In reference to allegations of prison over­ by prison guards in intentionally denying Penitentiary system that is countenanced (Lucas County, Ohio Jail) No more than square feet for dormitories. two inmates per ceH except in extreme with a new 12 miIlion dollar facility where crowding, the court will include as "living or delaying access to medical care or inten­ by the Constitution of the United States." Detainees ofBrooklyn House ofDe­ prisoners had a wide range of movement space" areas outside individual cells that tionally interfering with the treatment once Payne v. Day, 440 F. Supp. 785 (W.D. emergencies when this may be exceeded for tention v. Malcolm, 520 F.2d 392 (2nd Cir. no more than 24 hours. (Cell size unknown) and where there were no other aggravating are within the prisoner's access. prescribed, 429 U.S. at 104-105. Okla. 1977) Federal prisoners are required Carson v. Miller, 370 So.2d 10 (Fla. 1975) Double ceIling (two inmates in 5X8' Laaman v. Helgemoe, 437 F. Supp. conditions, court approved two prisoners Todaro v. Ward, 565 F.2d 48 (2nd to exhaust their administrative remedies cell) found to be unconstitutional even ab­ in 65-square-foot rooms. 1979) The Department of Offender Reha­ Cir. 1977) The medical records produced within the Bureau of Prisons before bringing 269 (D.N.H. 1977) (New Hampshire State sent other conditions which might impose Prison) The New Hampshire prison is not Newman v. Alabama, 559 F.2d 283 bilitation did not comply with the statutory by prisoners incarcerated at the Bedford a suit challenging the conditions of their substantial or additional hardships on in­ (5th Cir.1977) cert. den.438 U.S. 915 (1978), duty to prescribe "standards and require­ Hills Correctionak Facility showed that ex­ confinement. overcrowded and, although the cells do not mates. meet minimum space requirements, each modified 438 U.S. 781 (1978) Court's order ments" governing the prison housing ca­ isting medical treatment afforded at the in­ of 60 square feet per man, the court could pacities . stitution was insufficient. C. Overcrowding . Ahrens v. Thomas, 434 F. Supp. 873 man has one to himself. 437 F. Supp. at 306. (W.D. Mo. 1977) modifie'd 570 F.2d 286 Cell size is a factor to be weighed in deter­ not agree that "design" standards, without Burks v. Walsh, No. 77-4008 CV-C West v. Keve, 571 F.2d 158 (3rd Cir. 1. Doubl~ ceIling a!1d square (W.D. Mo. Nov. 1978) (Missouri State Pen­ (8th Cir. 1978) (Platte County, Mo. Jail) A mining recreation and exercise requirements. more, amount to a per se constitutional 1978) A prisoner's complaint alleging that footage requirements itentiary) Double ceIling in 47.18 square densfty 10-12 square feet of space per in­ M.C.I. Concord Advisory Board v. limitation on the number of prisoners who various prison officials were deliberately foot cells and triple ceIling in 59.2 square Bell v. Wolfish, 99 S. Ct. 1861 (May mate was unconstitutional. Court ordered Hall, 447 F. Supp. 398 (D. Mass. 1978) may be housed in particular facility. "Those indifferent to his medical needs or that the foot cells is cruel and unusual punishment. 1979) Double bunking does not deprive at least 70 square feet of cell space. (Massachusetts Correctional Institution at who design prisons are not vested with either official" deliberatelY delayed needed medi­ Double ceIling in general popUlation units pretrial detainees of their liberty without Ambrose v. Malcolm, 414 F. Supp. Concord) Double ceiling in one unit where the duty or the power to prescribe constitu­ cal attention is not barred by the doctrine with 65 and 109 square foot cells was up­ due process. A particular restriction is val­ 485 (S.D.N.Y. 1976) The correct standard the inmate's stay is temporary and where tional standards as to prison space." While of official immunity nor the lIth Amend­ held, but was found unconstitutional in id as long as it is reasonably related to a for determining constitutionally acceptable the prisoners may remain outside their cells design standards of existing facilities may ment. legitimate nonpunitive governmental ob­ levels for prison population is the rated six hours a day does not violate the Eighth be used as :,: tool for determining constitu­ three units with 47 square foot cells. Dou­ Deliberate indifference includes post-oper­ jective. ble ceIling in the 59 square foot diagnostic capacity ofthe institution and notthe num­ Amendment. Confinement in other units tional capacity, trial judge is not bound by ative treatment and although prisoner has Hite v. Leeke, 564 F.2d 670 (4th Cir. ber of infractions (presumably indicative of was found unconstitutional on the basis of this in determining capacity. unit cells was approved, despite the amount been provided with a pain reliever such as 1977) Even though cells were originally tension or aggression) per man at varying the totality of t,he living conditions there: Williams v. Edwards, 547 F.2d 1206 of time spent in the cells, since inmates are aspirin, this may not constitute adequate housed there for only short periods of time planned and designed for single occupan­ popUlation levels. double ceIling in rooms designed for single (5th Cir. 1977) The functions and charac­ medical care. cy, the assignment of inmates to double Court required 75 square feet of space. occupancy,lack of adequate fresh air,plumb­ teristics of each building should be taken (1 to 5 weeks). Triple ceIling there and in Gates v. Collier, 501 F.2d 1291,1302 the 76 square foot cells of the administra­ occupancy did not constitute cruel and un­ Anderson v. Redman, 429 F. Supp. ing, lighting, ventilation, and the dearth of into account in arriving at the capacity of (5th Cir, 1974) " ... the adequacy of con­ usual punishment where each cell contained 1105 (D. Del. 1977) Minimum to which vocational and recreational facilities, 447. each. A simple mathematical calculation of tive and punitive segregation units, howev­ ditions of confinement of prisons-such as er, was held to be cruel and unusual pun­ 65 square feet in area. inmate was entitled was 60 square feet of Nelson v. Collins, 455 F. Supp. 727 total square feet of space divided by a stan­ medical treatment, hygienic materials, and Johnson v. Levine, 588 F.2d 1378 (4th floor space and 500 cubic feet of space, but (D. Md. 1978), aff'd in part and rev'd in dard of square feet per man may not neces­ ishment under the circumstances. Double physical facilities-is clearly subject to 8th ceIling in the latter two units was upheld by Cir. 1978) Double ceiling and other results because of the construction and arrange­ part, 588 F.2d 1378 (4th Cir. 1978) (Mary­ sarily be appropriate or practical. Amendment scrutiny." the court, which said that their use as a ofsubstantial overcrowding amounted to a ment of the dormitories, inmates must have land Penitentiary and the Maryland Recep­ Finney v. Hutto, 410 F. Supp. 251 Hurst v. Phelps, 579 F.2d 940 (5th means of discipline -makes the administra­ constitutional violation. The court ordered at least 75 square feet of floor space. (Court tion, Diagnostic and Classification Center) (E.D. Ark. 1976), aff'd 548 F.2d (8th Cir. Cir. 1978) A claim for denial of medical tion's practices with regard to them "par­ that the overcrowding be eliminated. halted the use of dining rooms, library and Double ceIling under the circumstances (44 1976), aff'd 437 U.S. 678 (1978). (Arkansas treatment may exist where prison officials ticularly deserving of judicial deference." Burks v. Walsh, 461 F. Supp. 454 television rooms for the housing of in­ square feet cells designed for single occu­ state prison system) "The question of whether prevent an inmate to be taken to a doctor's Jordan v. Wolke, 450 F. Supp. 1080 (D.C. Mo. 1978) Double ceiling of prison mates). pancy) held to violate the Constitution. The a prison is overcrowded to the point of appointment, based on the f.;lct that he is a (E.D. Wisc. 1978) (Milwaukee County, inmates in a 65-foot cell in administrative cells are much smaller, the facility is much unconstitutionality involves more than de- safety risk. Wisc. Jail) "Design Capacity" is only one segregation was held to be tolerable in light older, and prisoner movement is much more of the fact that the commol! areas of the restricted than in Hite v. Leeke. factor which must be weighed. Additional unit were clean and the unit was used only ____------""'11..------·. -

74 Correctional data analysis systems Appendix B. Case law compendium 75 Hancock v. Unknown United States Sweet v. South Carolina DOC, 529 tional hospitals must meet the minimum of inmates in medically harmful jobs, did Williams v. McKeithen, Docket No. maladroitly operated 'emergency' refertal Marshall, 587 F.2d 377 (8th Cir. 1978) A F.2d 854 (4th Cir. 1975) Where two medi­ standards of the Joint Commission on Ac­ not violate the Eighth Amendment. 71-98 (M.D. La. 1975) (Unreported), afrd system also present grave constitutional prisoner's claim of cruel and unusual pun­ cal technicians visited protective custody creditation of Hospitals. All inmates shall Boycev. Alizaduh, 595 F.2d 948 (4th 547 F.2d 1206 (5th Cir. 1977) Purchase of problems." ishment was dismissed because he failed to three times a day to receive complaints and have access upon demand to timely treat­ Cir. 1979) An error of judgment or inad­ three fuJ.ly-equipped ambulances was Rodriguez v. Jimenez, 409 F. Supp. give specific facts that would have shown provide medication, prison met constitution­ ment by a licensed physician. An effective vertent failure to provide adequate medical ordered. 582,597 (1976) afrd 551 F.2d 877 (5th Cir. any deliberate indifference to his serious al standards for medical care. system for the review of health personnel care to a prisoner will not support a consti­ Newman v. State ojAlabama, 349 F. 1977) "Medical records shall be established medical needs. Newman v. State oj Alabama, 503 competence and ofthe quality and quantity tutional violation. Only where there is de­ Supp. 278, (M.D. Ala. 1972) modified 522 and maintained for every inmate showing Cole v. Multnomah County, 592 P.2d F.2d 1320 (5th Cir. 1974) cert. den. 421 of the care provided inmates shall be estab­ liberate indifference to serious medical needs F.2d 171 (5th Cir. 1975) cert. den. 421 U.S. at least the date of each examination or 221 (Ore. App. 1979) Correction officials U.S. 948 (1975) The paramount concern lished. of an inmate will the conduct of a physician 948 (1975) The unavailability of eyeglasses treatment, the medical findings and the were not held liable to an inmate due to a regarding the quality of medical care in the be held to be a constitutional violation. and prosthetic devices is cited. medication or treatment administered." suicide attempt in failing to furnish medical Alabama prison system is insufficient staff­ b. Around-the-Clock Staffing Laaman v. Helgemoe, 437 F. Supp. Finney v. Arkansas Board oJCorrec­ Williams v. Edwards, 547 F.2d 1206 attention when the officials were not rea­ ing. Mitchell v. Untriener, 421 F. Supp. 269 (D.K'.H. 1977) The systematic absence tions, 505 F.2d 194 (1974) Thelack of basic (5th Cir. 1!177) Conditions were held un­ sonably aware of the inmate's propensity. Gates v. Collier, 349 F. Supp. 881 886 (N.D. Fla. 1976) (Escambia County, of complete routine physical examinations, x-ray and emergency serVices is cited. constitutional. The climate laboratory had Aripa v. Department oj Social and (1972); afrd 501 F.2d 1291 (1974) Medical Fla. Jail) Twenty-four-hour medical care blood tests, syphilis tests, and other pre­ Gates v. Collier, 349 F. Supp. 881 no written policy concerning testing pro­ Health Services, 588 P.2d 185 (Wash. 1978) staff for a 1,700-man prison in Mississippi for inmates of Esc ambia County Jail (Fla.) ventive medical measures endangers the en­ (1972) afrd 501 F.2d 1,291 (5th Cir. 1974) cedures, safety procedures or equipment Where the Department provided a basic must consist of at least three full-time doc­ is required. tire prison community. The order required, Hospital and equipment was ordered brought . quality control. The pharmacy's control of alcohol treatment program at a state prison tors, two full-time dentists, two full-time Battle v. Anderson, 376 F. Supp. 402 among others: prompt medical examination up to standards for state licensing ofhospi­ medication and needles and syringes was which consisted of a variety of treatment trained physician's assistants, six registered (E.n. Okla. 1974) Nursing care 24 hours-a­ and medical history by a physician upon tal. inadequate; no records of the dispensing of components, inmates' claims for more com­ nurses or licensed practical nurses, one day, seven days a week is required for a commitment; annual reexamination; min­ Norris v. Frame, 585 F.2d 1183 (3rd drugs or of adverse drug reactions were prehensive and individualized treatment medical records librarian, and two 'medical 900-man jail. imum staff and dispensation of medications Cir. 1978) There is no constitutional right kept. No reports, records or statistical in­ were deemed inappropriate. clerical personnel. Barnesv. VirginIslands,415 F. Supp. only by appropriately trained staff; emer­ to methodone. No pretrial detainee or citi­ formation was maintained, and the lab's Costello v. Wainwright, 397 F. Supp. Johnson v. Levine, 450 F. Supp. 648 1218 (1976) Twenty-four-hour emergency gency medical care available at all times zen can compel the state to provide him equipment was not adequately calibrated. 20 (M.D. Fla. 1973) afrd 525 F.2d 1239 (5th (D. Md. 1978), afrd in part and rev'd in care and regular visits 'by physicians are with at least one member of the medical with the drug. Cir. 1974) The institution has an affirma­ part, 588 F.2d 1378 (4th Cir. 1978) The new required. staff always present in the infirmary; a sick Cotton v. Hutto, 577 F.2d 453 (8th g. Preventive Medical Procedures tive duty to establish a medical care system prison hospital and its staffing are adequate Goldsby v. Carnes, 365 F. Supp. 395 call procedure under which the need for Cir. 1978) By not providing a prisoner with Alberti v. Sheriff oj Harris County, that will meet the medical care needs of the to meet constitutional standards (two doc­ (1973) (Jackson County, Missouri) modi­ care is determined by a member ofthe med­ the proper tub facilities for his colostomy 406 F. Supp. 649 (1975) Incoming inmates inmates. Failure to establish such a system tors on the premises 20 hours per week per fied 429 F. Supp. 370 (W.D. Mo. 1977) ical staff; an intercom system in the infirm­ condition, the resulting pain amounted to must be screened for communicable diseases. is a violation of the Eighth Amendment. doctor and eleven registered nurses). Officials entered into a consent order re­ ary; and regular inspection of the medical cruel and unusual punishment by prison Rogriguez v. Jimenez, 409 F. Supp. Sconiers v. Jarvis, 458 F. Supp. 37 Williams v. McKeithen, Docket No. quiring one registered nurse to be on duty facility by the State Department of Public authorities. 582,597 (1976) Afrd 551 F.2d 877 (5th Cir. (D.C. Kan. 1978) Giving medical treatment 71-98 (M.D. La. 1975) (Unreported), afrd from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday through Health. 1977) Every individual confined to jail should to an inmate who objects may be necessary 547 F.2d 1206 (5th Cir. 1977) State officials Friday and sufficient physician assistants Miller v. Carson, 401 F. Supp. 835 e. Sanitary Facilities/Segregation be given a physical examination within 24 to protect him and/or other inmates from in Louisiana must provide the following to provide 24-hour medical coverage. (1975) afrd 563 F.2d 741 (5th Cir. 1977) oj COlltagious Diseases hours of admission. the possibility of harm. medical staff for a prison of approximately Miller v. Carson, 401 F. Supp. 835 Leaving the ultimate decision of who is to Gatesv. Collier, 349 F. Supp. 881 (1972) Newmall v. Alabama, 503 F.2d 1320 McCormick v. City oJWildwood, 439 2,600 inmates: four full-time doctors, one (1975) In a 400-man jail, a physician or receive medical attention in the hands of a afrd 501 F.2d 1291 (5th Cir. 1974) Unsani­ (5th Cir. 1974) cert. den. 421 U.S. 948 (1975) F. Supp. 769 (D. N.J. 1977) A jailer's duty psychiatrist, two dentists, one psychologist, licensed physician's assistant must be on non-medical correctional officer is totally tary conditions, particularly in the TB Physical exams are required once every two to provide reasonable medical care is non­ 11 physician assistants, one dental assis­ call 24 hours a day. inadequate. Ward allowing some inmates with serious years. delegable and the duty attaches as soon as tant, three registered nurses, one x-ray tech­ But see: Jones v. WrNenberg, 330 F. Supp. contagious diseases to mingle with the gen­ Collins v. Schoonfield, 344 F. Supp. thdndividual is placed in his <;ustody. nician, one pharmacist, one laboratory tech­ Coxson v. Godwin, 405 F. Supp. 1099 707 (N.D. Ohio 1971) afrd 456 F.2d 854 eral population were cited as reasons for a 257 (1972) Although expert medical witness­ A prisoner is under no duty to obtain his nician, and two medical records technicians. (1975) Medical care is adequate without a (6th Cir. 1972) Prescription of medication finding of unconstitutional facilities. es indicated that intake physicals are ad­ release by paying a fine so that he may seek The use of inmates and other non-profes­ full-time nurse or infirmary, but attendance by jail nurse is prohibited. Newman v. State ojAlabama, 349 F. visable, court could not say that the lack of medical treatment. sional personnel to perform medical pro­ at the institution must be sufficient to meet But see: 278 (M.D. Ala. 1972) modified 522 F.2d same amounted to cruel and unusual pun­ Coleman v. Crisp, 444 F. Supp. 31 cedures must be discontinued. all problems of the inmates, not just those Palmigiano v. Garrahy, 443 F. Supp. (5th Cir. 1975) cert. den. 421 U.S. 948 (1975) iShment. (W.D. Okla. 1977) A prisoner's allegations Williams v. Edwards, 547 F.2d 1206 who can be fitted into a particular period of 956 (D.R.I. 1977) Deficiencies cited by the Glaring unhygienic conditions, including Laaman v. Helgemoe, 437 F. Supp. concerning inadequate medical care did not (5th Cir. 1977) Conditions were held un­ time. court: lack of laboratory testing capability the potential for contagion caused by non­ 269 (D.N.H. 1977) The systematic absence evidence a deliberate indifference by state constitutional. The major medical unit serv­ (no centrifuge, electorcardiogram, or equip­ segregated sanitary facilities for the general of complete routine physical examinations, prison officials, therefore, no recovery may ing the prison was not accredited, and it c. Medical Procedures Performed ment for elementary blood, urine, VD, and ward population and hepatitis and tuber­ blood tests, syphilis tests, and other pre­ be had. was operated for extended periods without by ProJessional Medical Staff other tests); lack of emergency equipment culosis ward populations were condemned. ventive medical measures endangers the In re Coca, 149 Ca. Rptr. 465 (Cal. a resident physician. Only two ofthe medi­ Brown v. McGowan, 445 F. Supp. for treatment of coronary problems; admin­ Hamiltoll v. Schiro, 338 F. Supp. entire prison community. The sick call pro­ App. 1978) The Department of Corrections cal staff were licensed to practice m'edicine, 468 (D.C. Colo. 1978) The plaintiff prison­ istration ofpotentially harmful medications 1016 (E.D. La. 1970) Lack of isolation' or cedure used is inadequate because it allows was found to have violated civilized stan­ and there were no registered nurses. Many er was not denied his constitutional right to without a physician's order; and lack of quarantine areas for those with contagious decisions concerning access to health care dards of decency because of their indiffer­ positions involving delivery of medical care medical treatment merely because the pris­ written procedures for response to emer­ disease was, together with other conditions, to be made by nonmedical personnel. The ences to a prisoner's serious medical con­ were filled by untrained inmates; two-thirds on physician disagreed with his contention gencies and potential epidemics. The court unconstitutional. court ordered premedical examinations and dition. of these inmates had no more than an eighth that he needed an ankle operation. ordered defendants to bring, the health care But see: medical history by a physician upon com­ grade education. Todaro v. Ward, 431 F. Supp. 1129 delivery system into compliance with the Chapman v. Plageman, 417 F. Supp. mitment; annual examination; a sick call 2. Elements of a constitutional Hines v. Anderson, 439 F. Supp. 12 (S.D.N. Y. 1977), afrd 565 F.2d 48 (2nd minimum standards of the American Pub­ 906 (1976) Removal of TB patients from procedure under which the need for care is medical care delivery system (D. Minn. 1977) In regard to the Minnesota Cir. 1977) The prison health care delivery lic Health Association, the U.S. Public general population as discovered and test­ determine~ by a member of the medical a. Sufficient Medical Personnel State Prison, the medical staff shall consist system was held unconstitutional because Health Service, and the State Department ing all other inmates in the unit for the staff; an intercom system in the infirmary; Campbell v. Beto, 460 F.2d 765 (5th of a full-time physician on daily, weekend, access to primary care physicians was de­ of Health. disease was sufficient to satisfy the courts and regular inspection of the medical facili­ Cir. 1972) The use of unlicensed persons to and "on-call" duty. nied or substantially delayed by initial screen­ d. Adequacy oj Quality and Quantity that prison conditions did not constitute ty by the State Department of Health. diagnose ailments and prescribe medicine Battle v. Anderson, 376 F. Supp. 402 ing procedures and by inadequate record­ ojMedical Equipment and Supplies cruel and unusual punishment. is unconstitutional. (E.D. Okla. 1974) One full-time dentist is keeping. The system's delivery offollow-up Newman v. State ojAlabama, 349 F. 3. Mental health care McCray v. Sullivan, 509 F.2d 1332 not adequate for a 900-man facility. laboratory services and medical appointments Supp. 278, (M.D. Ala. 1972) modified 522 J. Recordkeeping and Organization Bowring v. Godwin, 551 F.2d44(4th (5th Cir. 1975) Prison policy of sending a Trigg v. Blanton, No. A-6047 (Dav­ was also unconstitutionally carried out, F.2d 171 (5th Cir. 1975) cert. den. 421 U.S. Newma1l v. Alabama, 503 F.2d 1320, Cir. 1977) The' inmate "is en.titled to psy­ medical assistant to visit punitive isolation idson Co., Tenn., Chancery Ct., August 23, unnecessarily prolonged pain and created 948 (1975) Serious shortages of medication 1331, (5th Cir. 1974) cert. den. 421 U.S. 948 chological or psychiatric treatment if a to determine which inmates would be able 1978). The court or,dered that health care risk of dire consequences. Delays in admin­ and use of anachronistic and precarious (1975) Disorganized lines of therapeutic re­ physician or other health care providet·, to see the doctor is constitutional. be provided in facili ties in compliance with istration of admission physical examination, medical techniques will not be tolerated. sponsibility resulting in treatment prescribed exercising ordinary skill and care at the state and local statutes and regulations per­ where they did not result in introduction of Miller v. Carson, 401 F. Supp. 835 by doctors not being administered by med­ time of observation, concludes with reason­ taining to environmental sanitation and infections into the pop'..1lation or placement (1975) afrd 563 F.2d 741 (5th Cir. 1977) ical subordinates, the ill-conceived system able medical certainty: (1) that the prison­ safety in civilian medical facilities. Institu- Antiquated equipment is inadequate. for referrals to the prison hospital, and "the er's symptoms evidence a serious disease or c

76 Correctional data analysis systems Appendix B. Case law compendium 77 injury; (2) that such disease or injury is Nelson v. Collins, 455F. Supp. 727 or who are mentaJly retarded. Confinement curable or may be substantially alleviated; (D. Md. 1978) Prisoners placed in isolated of prisoners with psychological problell1s The living conditions constitute cruel and 3. Personal hygiene Burbankv. Thompson, No. 76C.4471 and (3) that the potential for harm to the confinement because of aberrant behavior in cell used for disciplinary segregation was unusual punishment. "Specifically, lack of Presion v. Thompson, 589 F.2d 300 (N.D., III. May, 1978) Defendants agreed sanitation throughout the institutions-in prisoner by reason of delay or the denial of rl~sulting from mental illness are entitled to prohibited. (7th Cir. 1978) The court beld that the Dis­ to provide each inmate with a bed off ofthe care would be substantial." prompt and adequate psychiatric assistance: living areas, infirmaries, and food service­ trict Court did not r.rr.,"~1~I(f it ordered a floor, clean mattresses; linp.lo­ American Correctional Association. The Tor each prisoner to household cleaning ditions whi(;l, fall far below minimum pub­ and mattresses off the floor, and the same health: for example, because of the over­ gists engaged in diagnosing and treatin~ court ordered that information on each implements and supplies, sanitary food lic health standards. The court ordered that toilet articles as the general popUlation. burdening of toilet facilities and of the sew­ individual inmates by conventional methods inmate concerning any special needs aris­ storage and preparation and employment each building be brought into compliance Anderson v. Redman, 429 F. Supp. age treatment plant. of individual psychotherapy. The court or­ ing from psychological disturbance or men­ of a qualified SlInitation or environmental with the minimum standards of the U.S. 1105 (D. Del. 1977) Among the conditions Burbank v. Thompson, No. 76 C. 4471 dered the lliring on a full-time basis of one tal retardation be obtained in th,: classifi­ health officer. Public Health Service and the American in the receiving unit cells found to violate (N.D. Ill., May 1978) Defendants agreed to or more psychiatrists or psychologists for cation process and required that defendants Holt v. Sarver, 442 F.2d 304 fl971) Public Health Association, as well as local the inmates' rights were filthy mattresses place inmates only in cells with properly the purposes indicated, with provision of hire an adequate number of mental health Jail rrquired to have a supervised daily health ordinances and regulations. which were never sterilized. functioning sinks and toilets, and to repair adequate facilities for their work. professionals to diagnose, treat and care program of cleaning of cells, including Burrasiano v. Levi, 452 F. Supp. 1066 Battle v. Anderson, 376 F. Supp. 402 malfunctioning plumbing as quickly as pos­ Jackson v. Peele, 22 Ci'. L. 2445 (D. for prisoners with mental health problems. mopping and scrubbing. (D. Md. 1978) A prisoner's complaints (E.D. Okla. 1974) The court condemned sible. "Necessary to the accomplishment of D.C. 1978) Prisoner-patiehts are entitled to Establishment of a program for treatment Hamilton v. Schiro, 338 F. SUpp. about the lack of cleanliness and leaking isolation conditions making personal hy­ the foregoing is a capital improvement the benefits of confinement in the lenst re­ of drug abuse under the direction of a phy­ 1016 (E.D. La. 1970) Mattresses must be ceilings in the prison dining facilities pre­ giene impossible because of lack of neces­ program designed to replace all plumbing strictive alternative, thus a mental hospital sician was ordered. replaced on an annual basis. srmts no cognizable claim for damages. sary materials and/or inability to properly fixtures currently installed in the cells ..... may not routinely impose more restrictive Trigg v. Blanton, No. A-6047 (Dav­ Ahrens v. Thomas, 434 F. Supp. 873 Evans v. Fogg, 466 F. Supp. 949 dispose of body waste and enjoined use of Battle v. Anderson, 447 F. Supp. 516 conditions of confinement on prisoner-pa­ idson Co. Tenn., Chancery Court, August (W.O. Mo. 1977) modified 570 F.2d 286 (D.C. N.Y. 1979) A State prisoner's con­ these cells. (E.D. Okla. 1977), atrd 564 F.2d 388 (10th tients than it does on [hose patients who 23, 1978) Adequate psychological, psychi­ (8th Cir. 197.8) Jail must be cleaned on a finement in a refuse-strewn cell for 24 hours Palmiginao v. Garrahy, 443 F. Supp. Cir. 1977) Water :1nd sewage facilities must were civilly committed. atric and counseling services. are not pro­ daily basis and necessary cleaning supplies and in a flooded cell for 2 days \:id not 956 (D. R.I. 1977) Only cold water is avail­ meet the requirements of state and federal Johnson v. Levine, 450 F. Supp. 648 vided to inmates in need of such care. The mu~t be furnished the impates. Permitting amount to a deprivation of his rights. (This able in cells, although minimum health law. Every cell must have a washbowl with (D. Md. 19 78) atrd 588 F.2d 1378 (4th Cir. court ordered defendants to provide ade­ infestation of insects is an Eighth Amend­ condition was as a result of the prisoner's standards require hot water. Every cell must hot and cold running water and a toilet. 1978) The court ordered the closing ofspe­ quate care, treatment and counseling lor ment violation. An adequate insect control cwn acts). have a working toilet and hot and cold Burrasiano v. Levi, 452 F. Supp. 1066 cial confinement unit for inmates with psy­ inmates who have mental health problems program is ordered implemented. running water. Every inmate shall be pro­ (D. Md. 1978) A prisoner's complaints chological problems because conditions in Pugh v. Locke, 406 F. Supp. 318 vided with a clean mattress, clean bed lin­ about thr. lack of cleanliness and leaking the unitin ,their totality did not meet consti­ ceilings in the prison dining facilities pre­ (M.D. Ala. 1976) atrd 559 F.2d 283 (5th I ens, towels, and soap. tutiona! standards. Cir. 1977) cert. den. 98 S. Ct. 3144 (1978) I sents no cognizable claim for damages. I • 1 Appendix B. Case law compendium 79 78 Correctional data analysis systems r vegetable, one fresh yellow vegetable and delays and a decline in the quality of the psychological examinations are rarely pro­ Frazier v. Wi/son, 45lJ F. Supp. 11 Ahrens v. Thomas, 434 F. Supp. 873 dangerous conditions in industrial shops, one serving of meat or protein-provided reports relied on. The court based its deci­ vided; no plan is developed for each inmate (E.D. Tenn. 1978) The prison superintend­ (W.D. Mo. 1977) modified 570 F.2d 286 and the court found that no safety signs I meat substitute" was too restrictive. "A sion on state law without implying it found and no intelligent overall plan is possible; ent's decision to cut off the water supply to (8th Cir. 1978) Health officials are to in­ were posted and no safety instructions were well-balanced meal containing sufficient no federal constitutional violation. Defen­ inmates are overclassified because of lack the petitioner's ct!1I for 6 hours was justified spect jail regularly. given inmates working in the shops. nutritional value to preserve health, is all dants were ordered to implement the statu­ of space, and victims and predators are not by his threats to plug up the commode and Laaman v. Helgemoe, 437 F. Supp. Battle v. Anderson, 447 F. Supp. 516 that is required." tory classification system even though the separated, except by the crude method of flood the jail. 469 (D. N.H. 1977) (New Hampshire State (E.D. Okla. 1974) and 457 F. Supp. 719 Pugh v. Locke, 406 F. SUpp. 318 result will be a reduction in popUlation ca­ voluntary protective custody. Defendants Prison) Entire facility to be maintained in (E.D. Okla. 1978) Serious fire hazards were (M.D. Ala. 1976) atrd 559 F.2d 283 (5th pacity. were ordered to reclassify all inmates, using 5. Lighting/heating/ventilation accordance with the standards of the New found with no plan or possibility of putting 1977) cert. den. 98 S. Ct. 3144 (1978) Each Campbellv. McGruder, 416 F. SUpp. personal interviews and other pertinent in­ Hampshire Department of Public Health out a majo'r fire: wooden buildings, no fire Palmigiano v. Garrahy, 443 F. Supp. inmate who requires a special diet for rea­ 100 (D. D.C. 1975) modified 580 F.2d 521 formation and to assign each inmate to and officials should arrange for inspection hydrants, water lines too small to supply 956 (D. R.I. 1977) Lighting found to be sons of health or religion shall be provided (D.C. Cir. 1978) Officials must establish suitable housing and programs, with annu­ of entire facility, not less than once every the amount of water needed in case of a inadequate for reading safety. Minimum a diet to meet his individual needs. classification system which will make it al review of his classification. Classification six months. fire. The court ordered the remaining wood­ standard required 30 foot-candles. Court Landman v. Royster, 333 F. Supp. possible to determine which inmates require of inmates is essential to the operation of Williams v. McKeithen, Docket No. en dormitories closed, the electrical systems noted th11t inadequate lighting increases 621 (E.D. Va. 1971) A bread and water diet maximum security confinement. an orderly and safe prison; it is a prerequi­ 71-98 (M.D. La. 1975) (Unreported); Wi/­ to be in compliance with applicable state tension and fatigue among prisoners and is inconsistent with minimum standards of Gates v. Collier, 349 F. Supp, 881 site for the rational allocation of whatever Iiams v. Edwards, 547 F.2d 1206 (5th Cir. regulations, and the closure of certain cell­ guards. respect for human dignity and violates the (1972) A racially nondiscriminatory classi­ programs opportunities exist within the fa­ 1977) The state shall submit a plan for the houses in about three years or at earlier Court found that the present heating sys­ 8th Amendment. fication system conforming generally to/ cility. regular and periodic inspection of all facili­ dates if replacement funds had not been tem did not provide minimally adequate Barnesv. Virgin Islands, 415 F. Supp. with classification standards of the Ameri­ Pugh v. Locke, 406 F. SUpp. 318 ties at Louisiana State Penitentiary by the appropriated and the ground breaking for heating. Court stated that the minimum 1218 (D.V.I. 1976) The institution is or­ can Correctional Association must be es­ (M.D. Ala. 1976) atrd 559 F.2d 283 (5th State Fire Marshal and the ~late Depart­ construction had not occurred by those would be 65 degrees. dered to provide an adequate diet meeting tablished. 1977) cert. den. 98 S. Ct. 3144 (1978) The ment of Health. dates. Rhem v. Malcolm, 371 F. Supp. 594 all known medical and religious needs. Gates v. Collier, 349 F. Supp, 881 classification system must be able to ascer­ Gates v. Collier, 349 F. Supp. 881 Trigg v. Blanton, No. A-6074 (Dav­ (S.D. N.Y. 1974) atrd 507 F.2d 333 (Man­ (N.D. Miss. 1972), atrd, 501 F.2d 1291 (5th tain the physical and mental health require­ (1972) atrd 501 F.2d 1291 (5th Cir. 1974) idson Co. Tenn. Chancery Court, Aug. 2. Standards and inspections hattan House of Detention) Court found Cir. 1974) The court ordered establishment ments of each inmat~; aged, infirm and Electrical wiring in most units is in a bad 1978) Among the most serious of the envi­ Holt v. Sarver, 442 F.2d 304 (1971) that extremes of noise (at least that of New of a program for the classification and as­ psychologically disturbed or mentally re­ state of repair and adequate fire fighting ronmental hazards which violate the in­ Kitchen equipment, food storage and sani­ York subway system) and heat ~nd inade­ signment of all inmates, conforming gener­ tarded inmates who require transfer to a equipment is lacking. mates' rights are those involving fire safety: tation should meet minimum standards for quacy of ventilation and inability to see the ally to American Correctional Association more appropriate facility or require special absence of fire evacuation procedures in restaurants. Personnel working in kitchen Jutside world unnecessarily burdened the standards. The Court of Appeals affirmed, treatment; those for whom transfer to a 7. Fire safety some facilities; lack of staff awareness of should meet restaurant help requirements. health of prisoliers. noting the state's duty to provide protec­ pre-release, work release or other commu­ Williams v. Edwards,. 547 F.2d 1206 such procedures throughout the system; Laaman v. Helgemoe, 437 F. Supp. Gates v. Collier, 349 F. Supp. 881 tion against assaults and its failure to clas­ nity based prograhl would be appropriate. (5th Cir. 1975) Among the totality of cir­ cells which must be unlocked individually 269 (D.N.H. 1977) Kitchen staff must meet (1972) atrd 501 F.2d 1291 (5th Cir. 1974) sify inmates according to the severity of The classification system fails to segregate cumstances which violate the 8th Amend­ in emergencies; use of polyurethane mat­ applicable public health standards. Heating facilities are inadequate to heat the their offense. the violent from their victims and to sepa­ ment were fire and safety hazards, which tresses. Defendants ordered to comply with Mitchell v. Untreine'r, 421 F. Supp. inhabited areas. Broken windows are stuffed Fitzgeraldv. Procunier, 393 F. SUpp. rate the physically or mentally ill from the present an "immediate threat to the life and building and safety ordinances and regula­ 886 (N.D. Fla. 1976) No person can han­ with rags to keep out the cold, wind and 335 (N.D. Cal. 1975) Written record of general population. The court ordered im­ safety" of both inmates and staff. tions. dle food unless they have been medically rain. classification decisions with full explanations plementation ofa classification system which Pugh v. Locke, 406 F. Supp. 318 Nelson v. Collins, 455 F. Supp. 727 screened. Pugh v. Locke 406 F. Supp. 318 of reasons therefore is required. gives due consideration to the inmate's age, (M.D. Ala. 1976) atrd 559 F.2d 283 (5th (D. Md. 1978) Plans for fire and other Campbellv. McGruder, 416 F. Supp. (M.D. Ala. 1976) atrd 559 F.2d 283 (5th Cardaropoli v. Norton, 523 F.2d 990 offense, prior record, health care require­ Cir. 1977) cert. den. 98 S. Ct. 3144 (1978) emergencies have been developed. The pos­ 100 (D. D.C. 1975) modified 580 F.2d 521 Cir. 1977) cert. den. 98 S.Ct. 3144 (1978) (2d. Cir. 1975) Classifying as "special of­ ments and rehabilitation needs, provides The electrical systems are totally inade­ sible failure to fully inform low-level per­ (D.C. Cir. 1978) Medical examinations must Inmate living quarters are inadequately fender" is grievous loss requiring due pro­ methods of identifying the specially disabled, quate, and exposed wiring poses a constant sonnel of these plans should be rectified. be provided for all food handleps, inmate heated and ventilated. Insufficient lighting cess consisting of: (1) 10 day notice including and includes an annual review of each in­ danger to the inmates. The danger posed by polyurethane mattresses and civilian, at least once every 30 days and results in eye strain and fatigue. The court factual basis for decision; (2) reasonable mate's classification. Only minimum cus­ Laaman v. Helgemoe, 437 F. SUpp. has been recognized and they are being . more often if medically required. required: all institutions to be adequately opportunity to respond; (3) written deci­ tody inmates may be assigned to dormi­ 269 (D.N.H. 1977) Inviolate conditions in­ replaced. Williams v. McKeithen, 547 F.2d heated, lighted and ventilated. sion and right to employ counsel in com­ tories. Classification of all prisoners must volved a partially combustible physical 1206 (5th Cir. 1977) Regular inspection of plex cases. be reviewed annually. Battle v. Anderson, 447 F. Supp. 516 plant, inadequate fire protections, lack of F. Foo1 services kitchen and food service by public health (E.D.01

Appendix B. Case law compendium 81 80 Co"ectional data analysis systems Williams v. Edwards, 547 F.2d 1206 may be necessary to effectuate the right to a officials took prop~r steps to protect his wc;aker prisoners and to identify the medic 3. StatllnX· Turk v. Nevada State Prison, 575 (5,th Cir. 1977) The totality of conditions reasonably safe environment. The court safety. cal, educational and treatIVent needs of the Forts v. Ward, 22 Cr. L. 2338 (2nd P.2d 599 (Nev. 1978) The failure of a cor­ violated the Eighth Amendment. There ordered defendants to make reasonable ef­ State v. Reese, 272N. W.2d 863 (Iowa prisOners entering the system. Cir. 1977) An evidentiary hearing should rectional officer to search work-release pris­ were-too few guards to protect inmates from forts, including classification, housing and 1978) There is a defense of necessity for an . Brooks v. Wainwright, 439 F. Supp. have proceedeu district court's injunction oners, upo~ their re-entrance to prison, one another through supervision or wea­ monitoring, to segregate prisoners who en­ escape from a prison. It is available jf a 1335 (M.D. Fla. 1977~ A prison inmate is prohibiting New York prison officials from . coupled with additional deviations from pons confiscation. Easy inmate access to gage in violence. prisoner is faced with specific threat of not deprived of due process by virtue of assigning male correctional officers to cer­ duty, was sufficient to justifiably compel unsupervised machinery contributed to wide­ Palmigiano v. Garrahy,443 F. Supp. death, forcible sexual attack, or substantial changes in his custodial classification al­ tain areas within a women's prison. his termination from employment. spread possession of weapons. 956 (D. R.I. 1977) The unconstitutional bodily injury in the immediate future. It is a legedly made because he advocated the Williams v. Edwards, 547 F.2d 1206 Chapman v. Rhodes, 434 F. SUpp. "The number of guards necessary to assure level of violence results from lack of ade­ necessity that there was no time for com­ formation of a prisoners' union. (5th Cir. 1977) "The number of guards nec­ 1007 (S.D. Ohio 1977) An inmate-to-guard a constitutional level of inmate safety must quate classification, the facility's physical plaint to the authorities or the courts or Coppola v. United States Attorney essary to assure a constitutional level of ratio of seven-to-one is acceptable. bear some reasonable relationship to the layout (blind, unguardable corners), an in­ there exists a history of futile complaints. General, 455 F. Supp. 15 (D.C. Conn. 1977) inmate safety must bear some reason.able total number ofinmates." The evidence for adequate number of guards, the idleness of There must be no threat offorce or violence A prisoner successfully challenged his clas­ relationship to the total number of inmates ... 4. Shakedowns the' proper staff-inmate ratio may be pro­ the inmates, and untreated drug addiction toward prison personnel or other innocent sification as a Central Monitoring Case be­ The evidence for the proper staff-inmate Williams v. McKeithen, 547 F.2d vided by examining the kinds of facilities, among the prisoners. Defendants were or­ persons in the escape. The escapee must im­ cause he was not given proper notice or ratio may be provided by examining the 1206 (5th Cir. 1977) Court required shake­ their capacities and purposes, and the num­ dered to reclassify all prisoners, to assign mediately report to proper authorities when allowed to know or contest the reasons kinds of facilities, their capabilities and downs of all inmates and aU living and ber of guards required for security in each, each prisoner to housing and programs he has attained safety from the immediate behind his classification status at the time purposes, and the number of guards required working areas at least daily. or by reference to ratios at other institu­ suitable to his securi ty and other classifica­ threat. of the decision. for security in each, or by reference to ra­ Hamilton v. Landrieu, 351 F. Supp. tions where the level of prison violence is tion, to provide protective custody prison­ Prison officials must take reasonable pre­ Dolph v. Crisp, 446 F. Supp. 1179 tios at other institutions where the level 549 (E.D. La. 1972) The quality and quan­ acceptable or by learned studies. The court ers programs equivalent to those ordered cautions in order to ~:')Vide a safe con­ (E.D. Okla. 1978) Although the plaintitrs ofprison violence is acceptable or by learned tity of shakedowns/searches of inmates and upheld the order requiring the presence of to be provided other prisoners, and to es­ finement environment for prisoners. A pris­ freellom of movement was more restricted studies. The court upheld the order requir­ their quarters and examination of the phys­ two guards in open dormitories at all times. tablish programs for the treatment of drug oner should be safe from gang rapes and by his reclassifiction to "medium security" ing the presence of two guards in open ical plant both interior and exterior must Finney v. Arkansas Board of Correc­ abuse under the direction of a physician. beatings, and from intenti':mal placement from "trusty" status, the reclassification dormitories at all times. be increased. tions, 505 F.2d 194 (8th Cir. 1974) atrd 437 Pugh v. Locke, 406 F. Supp. 318 in situations where an assaclt of one type or did not constitute a "grievous loss" suffi­ Smith v. Sullivan, 553 F.2d 373 (5th Pugh v. Locke, 406 F. Supp. 318 U.S. 678 (1978) The entire trusty system (M.D. Ala. 1976) atrd 559 F.2d 283 (5th another is likely to occur. cient enough to invoke due process protec­ Cir. 1977) Jail guard must visit each in­ (M.D. Ala. 1976) atrd 559 F.2d 283 (5th must be dismantled. On remand the district 1977) cert. den. 98 S. Ct. 3144 (1978) Rob­ Trigg v. Blanton, No. A,-6047 (Dav­ tions. mate-occupied area once an hour and one 1977), cert. den. 98 S. Ct. 3144 (1978) Fre­ court found that the prison is not unconsti­ bery, rape, extortion, theft, and assault are idson Co., Tenn. Aug. 1978) The level of Mickens v. Winston, 462 F. Supp. guard must be present on each floor at all quent shakedowns and frisks of inmates tutionally unsafe. The state is not an insur­ everyday occurrences among the general violence is excessive and results from an 910 (D.C. Va. 1978) Racial segregation is times. and enforcement of prison rules designed er of the inmate's safety, but must use inmate population so that some inmates inadequate classification system with fail­ unconstitutional within prisons, save for Williams v. McKeithen, 547 F.2d 1206 to reduce violence required to end "jungle ordinary care to protect them, which it is prefer the inhuman conditions of prison ure to separate various types of prisoners, the necessi ties of prison security and disci­ (5th Cir. 1977) Court ordered a minimum atmosphere ... doing here, the court found. isolation cells. . widespread idleness resulting from the ab­ pline. of 950 correctional officers for prison of Doe v. Lally, 467 F. Supp. 1339 (D.C. The court ordered defendants: to make sence of adequa ie jobs and prograins, over­ Minns v. Shapp, 457 F. Supp. 247 3,900. Two guards are required in dorms at 5. Communications Md. 1979) Since prison ofI:icials were un­ reasonable efforts, including classification crowded and poorly maintained buildings, (D.C. Pa. 1978) State prison officials should all times as a means of controlling homo­ Williams v. McKeithen, 547 F.2d 1206 doubtedly aware of homosexual activities and monitoring, to segregate violent inmates; an ineffective locking system, the layout of assess the security risk of each inmate on sexuality and weapons possession by (5th Cir. 1977) Adequate communications in prison and still allowed prisoners to move to assign only minimum custody inmates to the physical structure which makes adequate ohi,~'~tive (measurable) factors. inmates. equipment for each correctional officer so about within the institution freely, this dormitories; to establish regular procedures, . surveillance and intervention impossible, Polizzi v. Sigler, 564 F.2d 792 (8th Ahrens v. Thomas, 434 F. Supp. 872 that they have an immediate way to com­ bordered on gross neglect. Under these including frequent shakedowns and frisks inadequately trained guards, and use of Cir. 1977) The classification of prisoners as (W.D. Mo. 1977) modified 570 F.2d 286 municate with and seek assistance from conditions, if a prisoner is raped; officials of inmates returning from outside, to re­ multi-occupancy housing. The prevalence "special offenders" upon their entrance in­ (8th 1978) There must be adequate staff to other correctional officers in the event of an may be denied immunity from a victim's duce inmate weapon possession; to enforce of violence is evidenced by the number of to the federal prison system constitutes an protect against assaults of all types by in­ emergency Was ordered. civil rights action. regulations designed to prevent violence; to inmates in voluntary protective custody and infringement upon their liberty interests, mates. O'Bryan v. County o/Saginaw, Mich., Peoplev. Fellman,405 N.Y.S.2d 210 station guards inside living areas at all times, the acknowledged failure of most inmate thereby requiring some form of procedural Alberti v. Sheriff of Harris Co., 406 437 F. Supp. 582(1977) An effective method (N. Y. Sup. 1978) The possibility that ho­ with the exception of isolation cells, where victims to report incidents of violence. protection. F. Supp. 649 (1975) One guard for every 30 for inmates to summon guards was required mosexual defendants might be subjected to a guard must at all times have visual and The court ordered that all dormitories, Williams v. Stacy, 468 F. Supp. 1206 inmates is inadequate. Court suggested that to be devised and implemented. physical and sexual abuse in prison does voice contact with residents; to cease using multiple occupancy cells and shower facili­ (D.C. Va. gnn A prisoner contested his one for every 20 inmates might be adequate. People v. Estrada, 155 Cal. Rptr. 731 not prohibit their incareration. prisoners to guard or exercise authority over ties used by more than one prisoner at a hearing before the institution classification Holt v. Sarver, 442 F.2d 304 (1971) (Cal. App, 1979) Incarcerated persons have Holt v. Sarver, 300 F. Supp. 825 other prisoners; and to keep accurate rec­ time be under continuous surveillance and committee after he circulated a pe'tition At. least two guards must be on duty on no reasonable expectation of privacy with (E.D. Ark. 1969) and 309 F. Supp. 362 ords of incidents of violence. that within a year only minimum security which referred to prison guards as "Nazis" each floor-oat least one of whom must at respect to their conversations. Jailhouse (E.D. Ark. 1970) atrd 442 F.2d 304 (8th Nelson v. Collins, 455 F. Supp. 727 prisoners be housed in other than single and "maniacs" and warned that the situa­ all times be on patrol of the cell blocks. monitoring is related to a prison objective Cir. 1971) If inmates are confined in open (D. Md. 1978) The incidence of assaults is occupancy cells. tion could develop into "another Attica." Gates v. Collier, 349 F. Supp. 881 ofinstitutional security but is not limited to barracks, the state has a constitutional du­ greater as a re~ult of double celling. 7. Unreasonable force/Guard brutality The court held that the potential to create (1972) atrd 501 F.2d 1291 (5th Cir. 1974) that. ty to provide guards. The use of inmate Burbankv. Thompson, No. 76 C. 4471 serious security problems justified the ac­ Trustee system which allowed inmates to "trusties" must be limited and under su­ (N.D. Ill., May 1978) Reasonable security Gates v. Collier, 501 F.ld IJ91 (5th tion of holding the hearing and it did not exercise unchecked authority over other 6. Assaults by other inmates pervision and eventually phased out. from physical attacks must be provided. Cir. 1974) Instances of physical brutality in abridge the prisoner's rights. inmates was patently unconstitutional. Gates v. Collier, 349 F. Supp. 881 Reports that prisoners are frequently as­ Schaal v. Rowe, 460 F. Supp. 155 the record include administering milk of Dunn v. Jenkins, 377 N.E.2d 868 (Ind. Hamilton v. Landrieu, 351 F. Supp. (N.D. Miss. 1972) atrd, 501 F.2d 1291 (5th saulted and raped and that no adequate (D.C. Ill. 1978) Prisoners are entitled to magnesia as punishment, turning the fan means exist to protect inmates from assaults 1978) The classification of inmates into 549 (E.D. La. 1972) At least one guard Cir. 1974) Defendants have subjected in­ protection from assaults from other prison­ on inmates while naked and wet, handcuf­ clearly confirm the district court's findings groups according to behavior which occurred must patrol each floor in the immediate mates to cruel and unusual punishment by ers. Even if a pr.ison official is negligent in fing inmates to the fence for long periods of of Eighth Amendment violations. prior to the passage of A new good-time area of every person detained on a 24-hour not providing adequate protection against preventing an act of violence of one inmate time, and shooting at and around inmates. Johnson v. LeVine, 450 F. Supp. 648 credit law was not violative of the constitu­ basis. assaults, through failure to classify them toward another, it is not necessarily a fail­ Holt v. Hutto, 363 F. Supp. 194 (E.D. tional prescriptions against ex post facto Hamilton v. Love, 328 F. Supp. 1182 and segregate the violt,:nt from the nonvio­ (D. Md. 1978) atrd 588 F.2d 1378 (4th ure to protect inmate's rights. Instead, an Ark. 1973), modified, 505 F.2d 194 (8th laws. (E.D. Ark. 1971)(Little Rock Jail) Jail per­ lent and by use without supervision of in­ 1978) An increase in the number of violent inmate must show a definite failure to pro­ Cir. 1974) Force is properly used by prison Ramirez v. Ward, 408 N.Y.S.2d 833 sonnel must work.no more than an eight­ competent and untrained inmate "trusties" incidents was attributed by the court to vide for security to that particular inmate. personnel in self defense, in breaking up overcrowding. Double ceiling increases the (N. Y.A.D. 1978) The Department of Cor­ hour shift. to guard other inmates. Defendants were An isolated incident is not usually enough fights between inmates, in compelling obe­ risk of sexual assaults, and its elimination rections has the power to determine the Rhem v. Malcolm, 507 F.2d 333 (1974) ordered to adopt procedures designed to proof to succeed in this claim. dience to lawful orders where milder mea­ will improve security. proper correctional facility for the inmate. Where deprivation of rights to be free of control and eliminate possession of wea­ State v. Sparks, 255 S.E.2d 373 (N.C. sures fail, in protecting state property, and Laaman v. Helgemoe, 437 F. Supp. A classification of an inmate as a Central mistreatment by custodians flows from in­ pons by inmates, to isolate violent prison­ 1979) A defendant in a first degree murder in preventing escapes and recapturing es­ 269 (D. N.H. 1977) The percentage of in­ Monitoring Case does not bar the inmate adequacy of staffing the shortage must be ers, to relieve trusties of custodial duties prosecution moved for assurance of pro­ capees. In general, the degree of force used mates in involuntary protective custody is from being eligible for temporary release remedied; the alternative is the release of and assign civilian guards to replace them, tection from abuse and injury after he had has been in reasonable proportion to the three times greater than the average in oth­ programs or transfer to a medium or low those held in custody. and to establish a classification system con­ been assaulted and stabbed by other prison violence displayed by the inmates involved, securi ty institution. The prisoner does have forming generally to American Correctional er institutions and is indicative of uncon­ inmates. Evidence showed that he was not although there have been instances of use trolled violence. Classification procedures subject to any official harassment and that a right to respond and object t:o the classifi­ Association standards. of unnecessary force on recaptured escap- cation, and appeal the decision. .. ----

•.'-'1

Appendix B. Case law compendium 83 afforded convicted inmates. At least one Adams v. Mathis, 458 F. Supp. 302 member of society. However, there is grow" 82 Correctional data analysis systems hour of outdoor recreation daily. (D.C. Ala. 1978) Pretrial and posttrial de­ ing recognition of the inmate's right not to afforded an opportunity to work at a useful Jones v. Wittenberg, see also, Barnes Barnes v. Government of Virgin Is­ tainees must be provided with adequate be incarcerated in conditions which are ees who no longer pre§ented any danger to job. No prisoner shall be idle or in a status v. GovernmentofVirginIslands,415 F. SUpp. lands, 415 F. SUpp. 1218 (D. V.I. 1976) One outdoor recreation. counter-productive to rehabilitation and in­ their captors. Since all incidents involving whereby he has to wait longer than 14 days 1218 (D.V.I. 1976) Psychological hour per day of outdoor exercise required. Bono v. Saxbe, 462 F. Supp. 146 crease the probablity of recidivism. This use of force by guards do not result in exa~s designed to disclose gross defec~ ~hlch for a job assignment. Stewart v. Gates, 450 F. SUpp. 583 (D.C. Ill. 1978) Exercise in groups of four right not to be confined in conditions which disciplinary proceedings against the in~at:, Barnes v. Government of Virgin Is- would interfere with proper functIOning as (C.D. Ca. 1978) Allowance to general pop­ was not necessary for persons confined in a cause degeneration is one of degree, and the court recommended that all such mCI­ lands, 415 F. SUpp. 1218 (D. V.I. 1976) ulation of jail of two hours and twenty control unit at a federal penitentiary. Lim­ the extent of the state's affirmative duty to dents be investigated immediately after their jailor required. "Each inmate shall be assigned a meaning­ Taylor v. Perini, 413 F. SUpp. 189 promote rehabilitation depends on other occurrence and that the investigation in­ ful job based on his abilities and interests, minutes of outdoor exercise per week was iting group exercise to groups of 2 was (N .D. Ohio) (Marion Corre~t~onal Institu.te) sufficient. sufficien t. conditions. The state has a duty to provide clude the inmate's version of the event. All candidates for staff pOSitIOns to receive and according to institutional needs". opportunities to overcome the degenerative Bailie v. Anderson, 376 F. Supp. 402 Gray v. Levine, 455 F. SUpp. 267 Bailie v. Anderson, 376 F. SUpp. 402 'psychological exams designed to disclose (E.D. Okla. 1974) Confinement to cell for aspects of the particular prison. The court (E.D. Okla. 1974) Use of chemicai mace (D.C. Md. 1978) Prison officials ho or­ XVI. Rehabilitation any propensity for racism, sadism, bru­ :-v periods up to a year without any opportun­ required that each prisoner be given the and tear gas as a punitive measure rather o~ dered a general lockup as a secunty mea­ tality and to assist in selecting candidates ities for physical exercise, work or educa­ Newman v. Alabama, 559 F.2d 283 opportunity to work at a useful job. No than as a control device violates the Eighth sure during a work stoppage strike, did n?t most likely to have a helping, client-service tion programs violates the Eighth Amend­ (5th Cir.1977) modified 438 U.S. 781 (1978) prisoner shall be removed from a job to Amendment. Such chemical agents may violate prisoners' rights because they ~Id ment. A penal system cannot be operated in such. nonworking status without due process only be used to prevent escapes .and .riots orientation. not confine inmates who expressed a Will­ Holt v. Sarver, 442 F.2d 304 (1971) Al! inmates must be afforded reasonable a way that it impedes an inmate's ability to procedures. Every prisoner shall have the and where there is actual and Immment Complet.ion of a programmed instructi?n ingness to work time outside their cells daily for the pur­ attempt rehabilitation or simply to avoid opportunity to participate in educational threat of health or bodily harm; reasonable Haworth v. State, 592 P.2d 820 (Ha- course prepared by the U.S. Bureau ofPns­ pose of exercise or other form of recrea­ physical, mental or social deterioration. and recreational programs and to learn a precautions to minimize injuries must be waii 1979) Due to the special relationship ons for jail officers and administrators re­ tion. When weather perrnlits, the inmates McCray v. Sullivan, 509 F.2d 1332, skill marketable in New Hampshire. between a state and a prisoner, the State is undertaken. shall be allowed outdoors during at least 1335 (5th Cir.1975) cert. den. 423 U.S. 951 Barnes v. Government of Virgin Is­ Fowler v. Vincent, 452 F. Supp. 449 quired for employment. under a duty to take reasonable care in part of this exercise period. "Failure of prison authorities to provide a lands, 415 F. Supp. 1218 (D. V.I. 1976) (D.C.N. Y. 1978) A suit by a prison inmate protecting the prisoner from phys~cal har~ B. Training Pugh v. Locke, 406 F. SUpp. 318 rehabilitation program, by itself, does not "Though having inmates spend their days against a guard held that the guard's as­ which results from his own neglIgence m Miller v. Carson, 401 F. SUpp. 835 (M.D. Ala. 1976) afI'd 559 F.2d 283 (5th constitute cruel and unusual punishmt'nt." in a state of institutionally induced numb sault on the prisoner was unprovoked and the course of his work duties. (M.D. Fla. 1979) atf'd 563 F.2d 741 (5th Cir. 1971) cert. den. 98 S. Ct. 3144 (1978) Newman v. Alabama, 559 F.2d 283 lethargy may rpake the task of corrections unnecessary to maintain order. Trigg v. Blanton, No. A-6047 (Da­ Cir. 1977) Officials must devise a complete Adequate equipment and fadlities shall be (5th Cir.1977) modified 438 U.S. 781 (1978) officials much easier, this cannot pass con­ Hernandez v. Lallimore,454 F. Supp. vidson County, Tenn. Aug. 1978) The forced provided to offer recreational opportuni­ "If the State furnishes its prisoners with stitutional muster if rehabilitation is to have 763 (D.C. N.Y. 1978) An training program. idleness by plaintiff's failure to provide an alle~ed ass~ult Pugh v. Locke, 406 F. SUpp. 318 ties to every inmate. Each institution shall reasonably adequate food, clothing, shel­ any meaning as a viable goal of a correc­ upon a prisoner by a federal pnson offIcer adequate amount of constructive activity (M.D. Ala. 1976) aff'd 559 F.2d 283 (5th employ a recreation director with a bache­ ter, sanitation, medical care, and personal tions system." Court went on to order that could be brought to trial under the Federal unconstitutionally contributes to the cum­ Cir. 1977) cert. den. 98·S. Ct. 3144 (1978) lor's degree or equivalent training in physi­ safety, so as to avoid the imposition of every inmate be given the opportunity to ulative impact of the totality of the condi­ Torts Claims Act. Appropriate and effective training programs cruel and unusual punishment, that ends its participate in basic education programs, Lamb v. Hutto, 467 F. SUpp. 562 cal education. Inmates in isolation shall be shall be provided all staff members employed tions of confinement. allowed at least 30 minutes outdoor exer­ obligations under Amendment Eight. The work release or vocational training. (D.C.E.D. Va. 1979) assaults. and Verb~1 within the Alabama penal system. cise per day. Constitution does not require that prison­ Alberti v. Sheriff of Harris Co., 406 threats made by prison officials to a prison­ Exercise Goldsby v. Carnes, 429 F. SUpp. 370 B. Laaman v. Helgemoe, 437 F. SUpp. ers, as individuals or as a group, be pro­ F. Supp. 649 (1975) Adequate vocational er do not give rise to a constitutional viola- Sinclair v. Henderson, 331 F. Supp. (W.D. Mo. 1977) All staff must receive an­ 469 (D. N.H. 1977) The court ordered that vided with any and every amenity which and educational programs are required. 1123 , 1131, (E.D. La. 1971) (Louisiana tion. nually 40 hours oftraining including courses prisoners be given "in a meaningful and some person may think is needed to avoid Mitchell v. Untreiner, 421 F. SUpp. McCargo v. Mister, 462 F. Supp. 813 State Penitentiary) "Confinement for long effective manner" opportunities to partici­ mental, physical, and emotional deteriora­ 885 (N.D. Fla. 1976) Basic and remedial (D.C. Md. 1978) The use of chemical agents in psychology. periods of time without opportunity for p~te in outdoor and indoor sports and rec­ tion." education courses, including remedial read­ such as tear gas and mace should be strictly regular outdoor exercise does, as a matter reation year round and that defendants Holt v. Sarver, 442 F.2d 304 (8th . ing are :required. limited to circumstances presen ,the XV. Work, idleness and of law, constitute cruel and unusual pun­ have a recreation director, id. at 330. Pris­ Cir. 1971) Confinement in otherwise unex­ Palmigiano v. Garrahy, 443 F. Supp. utmost degree of danger and loss Vl con- exercise ishment ..." 956 (D. R.I. 1977) "Viewed as a part of the Ahrens v. Thomas, 434 F. Supp. 873 oners in isolation shall be allowed 30 min­ ceptional penal institution is not unconsti­ trol. utes of physical exercise daily; adequate tutional simply because it does not operate dehabilitating conditions that prevail ... , Spain v. Procunier, 408 F. SUpp. 534 A. Work and Idleness (W.D. Mo. 1977) modified 570 F.2d 286 exercise is to be afforded prisoners during school or provide vocational training or the near.. total absence of meaningful reha­ (N.D. CaI.1976) Use oftear gas chen:i- Newman v. Alabama, 559 F.2d 283 (8th Cir. 1978) Total lack of outdoor rec­ a~d the initial classification and orientation pe­ other rehabilitation programs; but absence bilitativf: programs or recreational activity cal agents against individual pns?ne!s m (5th Cir. 1977) modified 438 U.S. 781 (1978) reation ann exercise facilities and pro grams riod. of affirmative program of training and re­ constitutes a failure ... of constitutional their cells is unjustified and unconstitutIOnal There is no constitutional requirement that is unconstitutional. Palmigiano v. Garrahy, 443 F. Supp. habilitation may have constitutional signifi­ dimension." The near-total absence of mean­ absent a clear and present danger of riotous prisoners be assigned meaningful jobs based Taylorv. Sterrett, 532 F.2d 462 (1972) 956 (D. R.I. 1977) The court ordered de­ cance where in, absence of such programs. ingful rehabilitative programs is a clear vio­ on skill and interest. An outdoor areas for exercise and a "reha­ proportions. fendants to establish recreational programs Battle v. Andersoll, 564 F.2d 388 lation of defendants' statutory duty. The Drake v. Airhart, 245 S.E.2d 853 (W. Bijeol v. Nelson, 579 F.2d 423 (7th bilitative program of recreation" required. wi th sufficient resources and staff so that (10th Cir. 1977) While inmate does not court, therefore, did not reach the question Va. 1978) Handcuffing the defendant to cell Cir. 1978) A jail may validly require a pre­ Rhem v. Malcolm, 507 F.2d 333 (1974) every inmate has an opportunity to partici­ have a right to rehabilitation, he is entitled whether convicted adult inmates have a bars was not unwarranted since he had de­ trial detainee to perform general housekeep­ The 50 minute per week opportunity for pate on a regular basis. to be confined in an environment which constitutional right to rehabilitation in an stroyed jail property and was generally ing duties up to two hours per day. exercise did not meet constitutional stan­ Burbankv. Thompson, No. 76C.4471 does not result in his degeneration or which institution that otherwise comports with Durso v. Rowe, 579 F.2d 1365 (7th danis; difficulty of providing space for exer­ disruptive. (N .D. Ill. May 1978) Each inmate from the threatens his ·mental and physical well minimum constitutional standards. How­ Cir. 1978) The removal from a work release cise in urban institution was unacceptable general population must have access for being. ever, defendants' failure to provide ade­ XIV. Hiring and training program without prior notice or hearing is as justification for the deprivation imposed a violation of a prisoner's rights. one uninterrupted hour each day to an ex­ Pugh v. Locke, 406 F. SUpp. 318 quate rehabilitation programs has a consti­ of staff on the inmates. (M.D. Ala. 1976) afI'd 559 F.2d 283 (5th tutional dimension: the inmates' excessive Garlandv. Polley, 594 F.2d 1220 (8th Alberti v. Sheriff of Harris Co., 406 ercise yard or other facility outside of 'lis cell, and a recreation director with a bache­ Cir. 1977) cert. den. 98 S.Ct. 3144 (1978) If idleness was major cause of the violence Cir. 1979) It is permissible to refuse to al­ F. Supp. 649 (1975) Inmates are entitled to A. Hiring lor's degree or equiv,alent training in rec­ the State furnishes prisoners with reason­ and terror pervading the prison in violation low inmates to join with others in a busi­ one hour outdoors, three times a week. Pugh v. Locke, 406 F. SUpp. 318 reation or physical education shall be em­ ably adequate food, clothing, shelter, sanita­ of the Eighth Amendment. (M.D. Ala. 1976) aff'd 559 F.2d 285 (5th ness while incarcerated. O'Bru.~ v. County ofSaginaw, Mich., Pugh v. Locke, 406 F. SUpp. 318 ployed. tion, medical care and personal safety, so Carterv. Rapone, 394A.2d 1092 (Pa. Cir., 1977) Cert. den. 98 S. Ct. 3144 (1978) 437 F. SuP.\~. 581; fE.D. Mich 1977) Combi­ (M.D. Ala. 1976) afI'd 559 F.2d 285 (5th James v. Wallace, 406 F. SUpp. 318 as to avoid the imposition of cruel and Cmwlth. 1978) The court would not con­ Affirmative hiring program needed to re­ nation of ca:isthenics one-half hour per day 1977) cert. den. 98 S. Ct. 3144 (1978) Each (M.D. Ala. 1976) afI'd 559 F.2d 283 (5th unusual punishment, that ends its obliga­ sider a complaint that a prisoner was ex- ~ duce the racial and cultural disparity be­ with opportunlL), ~'(Jt more extensive outdoor inmate shall be assigned to a meaningful Cir. 1977) cert. den. 98 S. Ct. 3144(1978) tions under Amendment Eight. . c1uded fr~m certain rehabilitation programs tween the staff and the inmate population. exercise when weather permits would be job and have the opportunity to participate Order employment of a recreational offi- Laaman v. Helgemoe, 437 F. Supp. in a state prison because the condi tions and , Miller v. Carson',4(H F. SUpp. 835 constitutional. 269 (D. N.H. 1977) Thus far no court has privileges of his confinement are under the in basic educational programs and voca­ Mitchell v. Untreiner, 421 F. Supp. cer. (M.D. Fla. 1975) (Jacksonville, Jail) atf'd Spain v. Procunier, 408 F. SUpp. 534 recognized federal constitutional right to cqntrol of the Bureau of Corrections. tional training programs designed to teach 886 also see, Campbellv. McGruder, 416 F. 563 F.2d 741 (5th Cir. 1977) Officials must (N.D. Calif. 1976) Inmates in segregation rehabilitation in the sense that an individu­ Aripa v. Department of Social and devise psychological tests to determine marketable skills. Supp. 100 (D. D.C. 1975) m.odified. 580 'Laaman v. Helgemoe, 437 F. Supp. entitled to one hour of outdoor recreation al has a positive right to leave a peniten­ Health Services, 588 P.2d 185 (Wash. 1978) whether employee is suitable for employ­ F.2d 521 (D.C. Cir. 1978) Pretnal detamees 269 (D. N.H. 1977) Every prisoner shall be five days each week. tiary equipped to function as a law abiding Where the Department of Social and Health ment in detention facility. have the same right to daily exercise as is

" - -- " .. ------~---'------~------

·84 Correctional data analysis '~'rtems ality of a statutory scheme where maximum Services provided a basic alcohol treatment need not credit the time spent on probation' Appendix B. Case law compendium 8S program at a state 'prison which consisted against a probation violator's sentence, penalties for escaping from various correc­ Qf a variety or.treatmttnt components, in­ does not constitute a violation of equal tional institutions were unequal. include: (0 written notice of charges at Finney v. Mabry, 455 F. Supp. 756 tion be imposed for punitive reasons only. mates' claims for more comprehensive and protectiop. Cooper v. Lombard, 409 N. Y.S.2d 30 least 24 hours prior to' hearing; (2) a hear­ (D.C. Ark. 1978) Prison disciplinary offi­ Any disciplinary proceeding which denies a individualized treatment wert< denied as in­ McCrayv. Bennett, 467 F. Supp.187 (N.Y.A.D.1978)Jail conditions do not have ing must be held in which the inmate may cials have a duty to collect written state­ pretrial detainee the benefits of ajail policy appropriate. (D.C. M.D. Ala. 1979) Where prisoners ate to be of equal quality to state correctional present a defense; (3) must be a written ments from witnesses whose presence is must apply due process standards under segregated for purposes of inter-institution­ facilities. stat'ement by fact finders as to evidence requested by the charged inmate if they WoljJv. McDonnell. XVII. Race and sex al discipline and some are released from . Trivento v. Commissioner ofCorrec- relie~ upon and reasons for disciplinary know or should know that any of those Swarez v. Wainwright, 363 So.2d 833 discrimination segregation before term and others are re­ tions, 380 A.2d 69 (Vt. 1977) State statutes action. witnesses wiII not be able to attend the (Fla. App. 1978) It was not necessary for tained longer than term, prisoners are de­ that allow good time reduction on sentences Feeley v. Sampson, 570 F.2d 364 (1st hearing. the discipline committee to call all the wit­ A. Racial Discrimination nied equal protection. for those in custody of the Commissioner Cir. 1978) Pretrial detainees do not have An inmate charged with a rule violation nesses requested by the prisoner in view of Jones v. Diamond,594 F.2d 997 (5th Owens-El. v. Robinson, 442 F. Supp. of Corrections but not for persons in cus­ the righ t to counsel in disciplinary proceed- has no right to confront informants against the possible risk of retaliation against in­ ings. . Cir. 1979) Racial segregation in bull pens is 1368 (W.D. Pa. 1978) Where pretrial detain­ tody ofthe Commissioner of Mental Health him or even to know ofinformant's identity. mates and officers who were witnesses to a unconstitutional, even if inmates have the ees and convicted persons are comingled are constitutional. McKinnon v. Patterson, 568 F.2d 930 High prison officials may not order verdicts prison disturbance. Informing the prisoner freedom to choose which of two bull pens in their cell assignments, the constitutional {2nd Cir. 1978) Due process required 24 of guilty or suggest cl!rtain punishments of information contained in the reports of they wish to occupy. common denominator must be the rights of XVIII. Grievance procedures hours advance written notice of charges to to members of the discipline committee. the incident was sufficient. Edwards v. Garrison, 529 F.2d 1374, the pretrial detainees. inmates who face up to two weeks of disci­ A written statement by the committee must State ex rei. Armisteadv. Phelps, 365 (4th Cir.1976) cert. den.424 U.S. 950(1976) California Correctional Officers As­ Finney v. Hutto, 410 F. Supp. 251 plinary confinement, and must be pursuant be given to the inmate and must include the So.2d 468 (La. 1978) This case reviews the The use of a racial designation in the insti­ sociation and Correctional Series, Inc. v. (E.D. Ark. 1976) aff'd 457 U.S. 678 (1978) to a hearing. reasons and evidence relied upon in reach­ proper process for administrative review of tutional numbering system requires strict Board of Administration of the Public Em­ A requirement of the exhaustion of a state McKinnon v. Patterson, 22 Cr. L. ing their decision. discipline proceedings in Louisiana. scrutiny. ployees' Retirement System, 143 Cal. Rptr. grievance procedure before commencing a 2060 (2nd Cir. 1977) cert. den., 22 Cr. L. Telephone calls to .staff members are not State v. Walls, 356 So.2d 75 (La. Martin v. Wainwright, 526 F.2d 938 125 (Calif. App. 1978) The discretion of the civil rights suit hinted at. 4193 (U.S. 1978) Since there is'no basicdif­ enough. If testimony is needed for the App. 1977) Unless it is shown to be arbi­ (5th Cir. 1976) Refusal to permit individu­ Board of Administration ofthe Public Em­ Nickens v. White, 461 F. Supp. 1158 ference between "keeplock" and "solitary," discipline hearing those persons should be trarily or capriciously made, a prison offi­ als of a race different from the inmate on ployees' Retirement System in approving (D.C. Mo. 1978) Inmates in a minimum a prisoner facing a potentiai two-week stay present. cial cannot be found to be civilly liable in his visiting list states a claim under the 14th or rejecting separate medical health insur­ security prison may be prohibited from cir­ in keeplock for disciplinary reasons is en­ Green v. Nelson, 442 F. Supp. 1047 damages for sentencing a prisoner to five Amendment. ance plans is not limited by the California culating grievance petitions by prison rules. titled to 24 hours advance written notice of (D. Conn. 1977) Disciplinary committees days solitary confinement and a loss of 12 Inmates ofNebraska Penal and Cor­ statute granting certain correctional, parole The rule against petitions is necessary to the I;narges. The imposition of " keep lock" are under an obligation to summon all staff days of good time for violation of a disci­ rectional Complex v. Greenholtz, 567 F.2d and probation officers the same status as ensure prison security against the dangers for a period of up to 2 weeks constitutes a members who are called as witnes;Florida State Prison had no right to organ­ rive at a decision without the likelihood of had no constitutional right to fully cross­ outcome orthe hearing. 910 (D.C. Va. 1978) Racial segregation is N.W.2d 161 (Iowa 1977) The duties of a ize and bargain collectively. arbitrary action. examine his accusers and no unlimited righ t State v. Kerns, 271 N. W.2d 48 (N"b. unconstitutional within prisons, save for Correctional Officer II are of such a nature Baxter v. Lewis, 421 F. Supp. 504 to call witnesses. 1978) Prison disciplinary hearings do not the necessities of prison security and disci­ that they prohibit females from exercising XIX. Disciplinary methods (W.D. Va. 1976) There is no right to ap­ Williamsv. Stacy, 468 F. Supp.1206 require that the same rights be afforded the pline. them, therefore, no sex discrimination was pointment of counsel at institutional disci­ (D.C. Va. 1979) A prisoner contested his prisoner as in a criminal prosecution. demonstrated in rejecting the plaintiff's Bell..,. Wolfish, 99 S.Ct. 1861 (1979) plinary hearings and no right to have rea­ hearing before the institution classification Allen v. Oregon State Penitentiary. B. Sexual dlscrlmlnatlon/ application. The test of whether regulations or practices sons stated for not calling witnesses. committee after he circulated a petition Corrections DiVision, 576 P.2d 831 (Ore. Equal protection Dodson v. State, 377 N.E.2d 1365 are punishment depends upon whether they Bills v. Henderson, 446 F. Supp. 967 which referred to prison guards as "Nazis" App. 1978) The unsupported assertion of Chesimardv. Mulcahy, 570 F.2d 1184 (Ind. 1978) A male convict has no i'ight to are rationally reiated to a legitimate, non­ (E.D. Tenn. 1978) The failure to provide and "maniacs" and warned that the situa­ an informant is suffiCient to base the im­ (3rd Cir. 1978) A woman prison_. was not be sentenced to a woman's penitentiary. punitive governmental purpose and whether inmates a limited written record of a hear­ tion could develop into "another Attica." position of a disciplinary sanction by the denied her constitutional rights While being Jennings v. State, 389 N.E.2d 283 they appear excessive in relation to that ing wherein orders were entered placing The court held that the potential to create disciplinary committee. temporarily incarcerated in solitary confine­ (Ind. 1979) Different treatment of good time purpose. Security and order are non-puni­ them in segregation and depriving them of serious security problems justified the ac­ Bishop v. Oregon State Penitentiary, ment in an all male facility. for "lifers" and "non-lifers" does not vio­ tive objectives for pretrial detainees or con­ good time deprived them of due process. tion of holding the hearing and it did not Corrections DiVision, 581 P.2d 122 (Ore. Paprskar v. Estelle, 566 F.2d 1277 late the rights of either. Sentencing and victed inmates. Bonov. Saxbe,450F.Supp. 934 (E.D. abridge the prisoner's rights. App. 1978) The prison disciplinary com­ (5th Cir. 1978) A system whereby state pris­ treatment classification is a benefit given Baxter v. Palmigiano, Enomoto v. III. 1978) Prisoners placed within the "con­ Wilson v. Superior Court ofLos An­ mittee did not,abuse its discretion in deny­ oners are incarcerated in ajail does not in by the State and the State only needs to Cluchette, 425 U.S. 308 (1976) Inmate not trol unit" are entitled to receive a written geles County, 148 Cal. Rptr. 30, 582 P.2d ing the prisoner's request to undertake a itself represent a denial of equal protection show a reasonable basis for the classifica­ entitled to 5th Amendment privilege against notice ofthe disciplinary hearing, impartial 117 (Cal. 1978) Jail privileges cannot be lie-detector examination. where good time is concerned. tion. self incrimination at disciplinary hearings. decision making, and immediate and sub­ taken away without cause. Cause may be Duncan v. Orego1/ State Correction­ United States v. Shead, 22 Cr. L. Slale v Freemen, 574 P.2d 950 (Kan. Need not permit private counsel. Need not sequent periodic review ofthe final disposi- either for security or for discipline but may al Institution, 580 P.2d 1047 (Ore. App. 2372 (10th Cir. 1977) The fact that the 1978) Statutes which deny the possibility of give reasons for denial of cross-exami­ tion. . not oCcur without notice and a hearing. 1978) A preliminary placement ofa prison­ United States Parole Commission must, probation or parole for a select class of nation. Craig v. Hocker, 405 F. Supp. 656 The only exception is in an emergency, but er in a segregation and isolation unit pend­ with some exceptions, award credit for the crimes are constitutional. Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 (D. Nev. 1975) Minor infraction requires even then notice and hearing must be given ing subsequent disciplinary hearings is not time served on parole against a parole vio­ Carter v. State, 381 A.2d 309 (Md. (1974) Due process hearing required where notice and an opportunity to respond be­ to the inmate as soon as practical. It should reviewable by the court. lator's sentence. While a sentencing judge App. 1978) Under the circumstances, the action may result in loss of good time and fore imposition of punishment. Major in­ never exceed 72 hours. The prisoner was not prejUdiced by a disci­ defendant lacked standing to challenge on possibly in those that might result in soli­ fractions require WoljJ due process. Notice and hearing of a restriction of an plinary order placing him in segregation equal protection grounds the constitution- tary confinement. Procedural requirements inmate's privileges must be afforded within and isolation for one year since this time 72 hours and at no time may such a restric- was credited against his sentl!nce. l Appendix B. Case law compendium 87 86 Correctional data analysis systems in respect to the correspondence of inmate Maldonado v. Garza, 579 F.2d 338 Battle v. Anderson, 594 F.2d 786 Goodspeed v. Oregon State Peniten­ in violation t~fthe prison regulations. Even Phillips v. Gathright, 468 F. Supp. mail, precludes the contention that the (5th Cir. 1978) Wide latitude must be af­ (10th Cir.1979) The conditions and treat­ tiary, Corrections Division, 580 P.2d 1060 though a prisoner advocated an inmate 1211 (D.C. Va. 1979) A prisoner was pun­ officials knew or should have known that forded to a prisoner's pro se pleadings so as ment of inmates are not dependent on the (Ore. App. 1978) The defendant was not strike, no conspiracy was found because ished for keeping a 2 V2-foot-long stick in their actions would violate a constitutional to avoid a motion to dismiss. willingness or financial ability of a state to prejudiced by the failure of the disciplinary there was no agreement by other inmates. his cell. He alleged that his rights were right. Negligence alone wiII not support a Mitchell v. Beaubouef, 581 F.2d 412 provide decent institutions. Courts, how­ committee to contact a witness who would Without agreement, there can be no con­ violated because others kept more danger­ claim for damages in federal court under (5th Cir. 1978) U.S. App. Pndg. In civil ever, should allow the least drastic means have offered testimony relevant to a charge spiracy. ous instruments, therefore his punishment Section 1973, the Civil Rights Acts. rights actions challenging the conditions of to be utilized in correcting constitutional which was subsequently dismissed. Stone v. Oregon State Penitentiary, was discriminatory. The court held that Nadeau v. Helgemoe, 581 F.2d 275 prison confinement, a prisoner docs not deficiencies. Gordon v. Oregon State Penitentiary, Corrections Division, 579 P.2d 874 (Ore. punishment is not arbitrary simply because (1st Cir. 1978) Where a Civil Rights suit have to first go through all the state's ad­ Campbell v. McGruder, 580 F .2d 521 Corrections Division, 582 P.2d 19 (Ore. App. App. 1978) A report of the defendant's vio­ others escape it. Prison discipline measures was a necessary and important factor in ministrative remedies. (D.C. Cir. 1978) Pretrial detainees general­ 1978) The court affirmed the holding of a lation of institutional rules was inaccurate are only arbitrary if they are based on illicit achieving improvements in prison conditions, Willett v. Wells, 469 F. Supp. 748, ly retain more rights than convicted pris­ prisoner in isolation for 9 days although and subsequent disciplinary action should reasons or no reasons at all. attorney fees may be awarded, notwithstand­ (D.C. Tenn. 1977) afrd 595 F.2d 1227 (6th oners. This may justify more judicial con­ the disciplinary committee violated its own be applied accordingly. Drake v. Airhart, 245 S.E.2d 853 ing the alleged good faith of prison offi­ Cir.) A state prisoner brought a civil rights trol than with sentenced inmates. rules by confining him over 7 days without Storms. v. Oregon State Penitentiary, (W.Va. 1978) Unless there is a clear abuse cials. action for money damages against 11 peri Newman v. State ofAlabama, 466 F. finding that the inmate constituted a threat 581 P.2d 979 (Ore. App. 1978) An inmate of discretion of treatment or discipline, McKinnon v. Patterson, 568 F.2d 930 sons, most of which were officials of Ten!. Supp. 628 (D.C. Ala. 1979) Where no effort to the security of the institution. should be afforded an opportunity to sup­ courts will ordinarily not interfere. Each (2nd Cir. 1978) cert. den. 434 U.S. 1087 nessee. The court held that the prisoner was made to come within compliance of a Hale v. Oregon State Penitentiary, plement the record of a disciplinary pro­ case must be decided on its own facts. In (1978) Where prison officials proved that failed to state any cause of action and court order to remedy the Alabama prison Corrections Division, 577 P.2d 531 (Ore. ceeding. this case handcuffing an inmate to the cell they acted reasonably and in good faith, therefore relief was denied. The Federal conditions, the court appointed the gover­ App. 1978) The failure of the Superinten­ Baker v. Wilmot, 410 N.Y.S.2d 184 bars was not found to be an infringement of they were entitled to official immunity from District court had no duty to appoint an nor as temporary 'receiver in order that he dent to enter his order modifying a disciplin­ (N. Y.A.D. 1978) The purpose of a require­ his constitutional rights since his escape a prisoner's civil rights action. attorney to represent the indigent prisoner be duty-bound and authorized to execute ary committee's order placing a prisoner in ment of written statements of reasons re­ attempts and disruptive behavior necessi­ McAllister v. Garrison, 569 F.2d 813 in the civil rights action. Such appointment the standards set in the court order. The segregation requires the reversal of the dis­ lied upon for disciplinary action taken against tated restraint for his and other prisoners' (4th Cir. 1978) cert. den. 436 U.S. 928 is discretionary with the court. case includes a description ofthe violations ciplinary committee's order. prisoners is to provide a basis for court protections. (1978) A prisoner need not be afforded a Chapman v. Pickett, 586 F.2d 22 (7th and sets forth the corrections to be made. Hartlieb v. Oregon State Correctional review of actions of prison authorities. Watson v. Whyte, 245 S.E.2d 916 hearing before he is removed from assign­ Cir. 1978) A prison official was immune Hamilton v. Covington, 22 Cr.L. 2487 Institution, 584 P.2d 314 (Ore. App. 1978) Where a prisoner failed to keep possession (W. Va. 1978) An evidentiary hearing is re­ ment to the inmate advisor program, even from liability for punishing a prisoner for (W.D. Ark. 1978) A prisoner's 1983 action A prison may not require a prisoner found of linen issued to him by' taking it to the quired before the state may increase either though the reasons for the removal may refusing to handle pork on religious grounds based upon the absence of a jailor during a guilty of assault to pay for his own medical shower rooms, there was enough evidence a prisoner's sentence or severity of his con­ have some implication for a later grant of during a kitchen clean up. The right of the fire in the facility is not blocked by the biIIs. The prisoner injury was not "damage to support an order that he pay fOf ~jle loss finement whenever such change is a result parole. prisoner to refuse was not clear at the time­ quasi-legislative nature ofthe county's "Qt'lor­ to institution property" within the prison if it. of misbehavior. Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147 (4th of the incident. . urn Court," which is responsible for the regulations allowing for restitution. Crudo v. Fogg, 415 N.Y.S.2d 897 State ex reI. Klinke v. Wisconsin De­ Cir. 1978) cert. den. 99 S.Ct. 464 (1978) Secret v. Brierton, 584 F.2d 823, (7th administration of the jail. Hignite v. Oregon State Penitentiary, (N.Y.A.D. 1979) Minimum requirements partment ofHealth and Social Services, 273 District court judges should exercise re­ Cir. 1978) Prisoners must exhaust adminis­ Holder v. Claar, 459 F. Supp. 850 Corrections Division, 576 P.2d 798 (Ore. of due process were not met in a discipline N.W.2d 379 (Wis. App. 1973) The mere straint in dismissing prison inmates' pro se trative remedies if reasonable prior to filing (D.C. Colo. 1978) Inmates have legal pro­ App. 1978) The imposition of two weeks of hearing; therefore the matter was remitted fact of drinking is insufficient for a finding 1983 complaints and, when necessary, ex­ Section 1983 Civil Rights. Actions when tection against the unjustified taking of segregation by the disciplinary committee for further proceedings. of intoxication in a prison discipline hear­ amine the facts alleged to see whether the the claim for relief alleges deprivation of personal property by prison officials pro­ will be reversed since the committee failed Dunne v. Reid, 402 N.Y.S.2d 923 ing. plaintiff could allege additional facts in property without due process, and the mon­ vided that the property belongs to the in·­ to produce the results of a urine test which (N. Y. App. 1978) Because a prisoner was order to maintain the cause of action. etary value of the tangible personal proper­ mate. could have cleared or affirmed the charges subjected to an anal search in the presence XX. Civil rights actions Loe v. Armistead, 582 F.2d 1291 (4th ty is of no great monetary value. Marioneaux v. Colorado State Peni­ brought against the prisoner. of others in violation of the internal prison and defenses Cir. 1978) U.S. App. Pndg. A pretrial de~ Cotton v. Hutto, 577 F.2d 453 (8th tentiary, 465 F. Supp. 1245 (D.C. Colo; Penrodv. Oregon State Penitentiary, regulations, he was entitled to expungement !ainee who alleges that Federal Marshals Cir. 1978) The Warden is not liable in cer­ rado 1979) An inmate's minimum rights may Corrections Divisions, 581 P.2d 124 (Ore. of the disciplinary action upon his record. Bellv. Wo/fish,99S.CL1861 (1979) and local officials displayed deliberate indif­ tain cases for the wrongful acts of his em­ be created by the State, in which case pris­ App. 1978) The court is not empowered to Hurley v. Ward, 402 N.Y.S.2d 870 The test of whether regulations or practices ference to a broken arm he suffered while in ployees in suits under the civil rights statute. on officials are held to comply with those collaterally review prior disciplinary orders (N.Y. App. 1978) A prisoner was entitled to are punishment depends upon whether they custody states a cause of action for dam­ DeShields v. United States Parole higher standards. to determine their validity andjustification. expungement of the disciplinary proceed­ are rationally related to a legitimate, non­ ages against the marshals and officials. Commission, 593 F.2d 354 (8th Cir. 1979) Mingo v. Patterson, 455 F. Supp. l358 Preston v. Oregon State Penitentiary, ings brought against him since he was not punitive governmental purpose and whether Strader v. Troy, 571 F.2d 1263 (4th Parole examiners were entitled to a good­ (D.C. Colorado 1978) Federal Courts have 583 P.2d 9 (Ore. App. 1978) A discipline afforded the opportunity to choose the em­ they appear excessive in relation to that Cir. 1978) Since the plaintiff did not allege faith immunity in a denial of parole deci­ a policy of deferring to officials of penal hearing board may use evidence of unnamed plo) '~ that will assist him in the proceed­ purpose. Security and order are non puni­ that he would have been paroled had the sion. Liability will not hold unless they institutions so long as conduct of officials is informants on an assault charge, if the in­ ing, no employee with direct knowledge tive objectives for pre-trial detainees or parole board not considered prior uncoun­ demonstrated iII will, malice, discrimina­ not of such character that is shocking to formation from different sources justifies was interviewed by the.hearing officer, and convicted inmates. Federal Courts are lim­ seled criminal convictions in determining tion, or othc;r wrongful reasons in their general fairness. the inference of truthfulness of the infor­ because no record of the evidence relied ited in their intervention into institutions his eligibility for parole, his complaint must parole decision. Montoya v. Tanksley, 446 F. Supp. mants. upon by the fact finder was supplied to the to the issue of whether there are constitu­ be treated as an action under the civil rights Ronneiv. Butler, 597 F.2d 564(8th Cir. 226 (D. Colo. 1978) The prisoner's com­ Melton v. Oregon State Correctional inmate. tional violations. statute rather than one for habeas corpus. 1979) Prison officers are entitled to a good plaint which alleged that prison officials Institution, Corrections Division, 580 P.2d Rodriguezv. Ward, 407N.Y.S.2d 731 DiMarzo v. Cahill, 575 F.2d 15 (1st Cook v. Hanberry, 592 F.2d 248 (5th faith immunity in suits brought under the refused to allow the plaintiff to attend any 572 (Ore. App. 1978) The prison disciplin­ (N.Y.A.D. 1978) The court ordered a new Cir. 1978) cert. den. 58 L.Ed2 320 (1978) Cir. 1979) Freedom from cruel and unusual Civil Rights Act. A prisoner who had to religious services, enjoy outdoor exercise, ary committee order recommending that discipline hearing because of lack of evi­ A Commissioner of Corrections was liable punishment is not freedom from otherwise undergo rabies shots after he was bitten by or to provide sanitary conditions was suffi­ the defendan t serve 30 days in isolation and dence and improper records. for any and all unconstitutional practices lawful incarceration. The prisoner only has a bat did not state a cause of action against cient to state a viable cause of action. suffer forfeiture of 426 days of statutory Romano v. Ward, 409 N.Y.S.2d 938 that may exist in county facilities, which he the right to be free from that mistreatment the shift captain who was negligent by Coppola v. United States Attorney good time was justified in that his miscon­ (N. Y. Sup. Ct. 1978) Prison discipline pro­ does not operate, by virtue of statutes re­ occurring within the confines of his incar­ flushing the bat down a toilet before it was General, 455 F. Supp. 15 (D.C. Conn. 1977) duct constituted a hazard to human life and ceedings in New.York State afford prison­ quiring him to promulgate and enforce ceration. tested for rabies. A prisoner successfully challenged his clas­ health. ers greater protections than those ordered minimum standards. Fielder v. B,!sshard, 590 F.2d 105 Tyler v. Woodson, 597 F.2d 643 (8th sification as a Central Moni toring Case be­ Nicklin v. Oregon State Correctional by the United State Supreme Court. Pris­ Procunier v. Navarette, 434 U.S. 555 (5th Cir. 1979) In a civil rights suit based on Cir. 1979) A prisoner successfully stated a cause he was not given proper notice or Institution, 593 P.2d 1268 (Ore. App. 1979) oners are entitled to assistance by prison (1978) State prison officials enjoy qualified cruel and unusual punishment, a prisoner cause of action where he alleged that the allowed to know or contest the reasons be­ The court held that a Prison Discipline officials and have the right to know about immunity from an inmate's 42 U.S.C.S. 1983 must show that prison officials acted with a chief social worker at the jail confiscated hind his classification status at the time of Committee improperly denied a prisoner's all information given by witnesses. action alleging interference with his out­ conscious or callous indifference to his his legal papers thereby interfering with the the decision: request for an investigation of the charges Commonwealth v. Vasquez, 389 A.2d going mail unless (1) the officials knew or serious medical needs. Mere negligence, prisoner's access to the courts. Phillips v. Collins, 461 F. Supp. 317 against him before rendering a decision. 111 (Pa. Sup. 1978) A hearing which lasted reasonably should have known that their neglect, or medical malpractice is insuffi­ Johnson v. Duffy, 588 F.2d 740 (9th (D.C. III. 1978) A county jail inmate brought Robertson v. Oregon State Peniten­ five minutes and consisted solely of the actions would violate the inmate's consti­ cient. Cir. 1978) A prison official cannot rely on a a civil rights action against a judge. The tiary, Corrections Division, 582 P .2d 32 (Ore. testimony of one witness and at which the tutional rights or (2) the officials "cted with Johnson v. Wells, 566 F.2d lO16 (5th defense of good faith in a civil rights action inmate's claim was that he had not received App. 1978) Where only extensive discus­ defendant's counsel said nothing in support malicious intent to cause a constitutiOnal Cir. 19'/8) cert. den. 435 U.S. 970 (1978) if his actions show that a valid law was not proper treatment for his mental problem sion followed an inmate's suggestion that or defense of his client was not sufficient to depr,ivation. Parole officials are immune from suit for followed by him and resulted in the denial and had been confined to a jail rather than the inmates should strike by refusing. to meet the prisoner's due process rights. The fact that in 1972 clearly established 1st damages under the Civil Rights Act. of a prisoner's rights. a hospital. It was held that the inmate failed leave a visiting room, no conspiracy existed and 14th Amendment rights did not exist, r ,.• ",

1" 1 II Ii

r I j t

'""", \, ':7 -l J I'• I ,88 Correctional data analysis systems l Appendix B. Case law compendium 89 to-state a claim upon which relief could be Jordan v. Robinson, 464 F.Supp. 223 pay the $3.00 processing fee and was not on . , Owens v. Oakes, 568 F.2d 355 (4th versed, he is entitled to credit the "dead granted. (D.C. Pa. '1979) Even though a prisoner the institution's current list of indigents. 1 Hanks v. Wainwright, 360 So.2d 783 Clr. 1978)· No deprivation of civil rights time" spent in the state prison against his i Lock v. Jenkins, 464 F. Supp. 541 was locked up mistakenly when a prison Papenhauser v. Schoen, 268 N. W:2d (Fla. App. 1978) The forfeiture of the de­ occurted where the loss of prison privileges federal sentence. (D.C. Ind. 19n) Intervention by Federal . disturbance broke out, the action taken was 565 (Minn. 1978) Members oftheMinnesota f and good conduct time were well within fendant's "good time" without notice or courts in administration of prisons must be not a violation of his rights because prison Parole Board are shielded by the doctrine Bills v. Henderson, 446 F. SUpp. 967 hearing, subsequent to his conviction for f. accepted limits of punishment under North (E.D. Tenn. 1978) Inmates are not entitled limited to correction of conditions violat­ authorities had taken reasonable action in of discretionary immunity as against an ac­ Carolina procedure. escape and pursuant to statuto:-y provisions ing clearly established constitutional rights. response to the disturbance. tion brought by a plaintiff who was raped to punitive damages nor restoration of good did not violate due process. ' Granville v. Hogan, 591 F.2d 323 time merely because they wefe not afforded Blake v. Hall, 469 F. Supp. 1025 , Murphy v. Fenton, 464 F. Supp. 53 by a prisoner' who was paroled to a state Rushing v. State, 355 So.2d 501 (Fla. (5th Cir. 1979) Parole violators forfeit their a written record of the hearing wherein (D.C. Mass. 1979) Inmates alleged that they (D.C. Pa. 1978) Even though a prisoner hospital and subsequently escaped. I App. 1978) A sentence should specifically good time credits and time spent on condi­ orders were entered placing them in segre­ denied their civil rights as a result of fire was denied his due process rights by not LaFrance v. Ward, 408 N. Y .S.2d 573 f tional release. set forth the period of time to be credited gation and depriving them of good time . hazards, lack of cleanliness, infestation by , having a proper hearing for being placed in (N. Y.A.D. 197~) A prisoner must exhaust . I Bayless v. Estelle, 583 F.2d 730 (5th against one's sentence. insects and rodents, poor plumbing facili­ an administrative segregation unit, the of­ all available administrative avenues before State v. Layman, 573 P.2d 909 (Ariz. . Williams v. Stqte, 370 So.2d 1164 Cir. 1978) cert. dis. 99 S.Ct. 2065 (1979) App. 1978) Defendant was entitled to cred­ ties and inadequate recreational and/or ficials were entitled to it good faith defense. seeking court relief. II, ! (~Ia. App. 1979) Statutes which allow gain Where a prisoner is entitled to considera­ it the time previously spent in jail as a con­ rehabilitative programs in prisl)n. The court Smith v. Robinson, 456 F. SUpp. 449 Falkenstein v. City 0/ Bismark, 268 time for good conduct and extra good time I ! tion for good time credit it does not neces­ dition of probation against the maximum held these charges were sufficient to state a (D.C. Pa. 1978) Prison officials were quali­ N.W.2d 787 (N. Dak. 1978) The prisoner's allo\'''mces are meant to reward those pris­ sarily follow that he is entitled to such credit. sentence for his conviction of burglary. cause of action against the Massachusetts fiedly immune from a suit brought when suicide was reasonably foreseeable so as to ;oners who have made an effort to conduct Award of good time is not mandatory, but In re EWing, 14.4 Cal. Rptr. 229 (Cal. Acting Commissioner of Public Health who they refused to allow an inmate to use an incur liability upon the city for his wrong­ i ! depends upon a prisoner's good conduct. t.hemsel~es in a proper manner during in­ ! I App. 1978) Where an arrest is followed by a was charged with overseeing the Depart­ outside savings account. ful death stemming from the city's failure I ! carceratIOn. Lazard v. United States, 583 F.2d parole hold, the defendant is entitled to ment of Health. Jefferson v. Southworth, 22 L. to adequately' observe and supervise the Wright v. State, 355 So.2d 870 (Fla. Cr. 176 (5th Cir. 1978) When a prisoner's re­ credit the time spent in custody during Fowler v. Vincent, 452 F. Supp. 449 2532 (D.R.I. 1978) Defendant prison offi­ decedent while confined in isolation. I J App. 1978) The defendant was entitled to lease is revoked because of his violation of those proceedings against a subsequent (D.C.N.Y. 1978) A suit by a prison inmate cials must submit a plan within five days The city of Bismark is not only liable for conditions, the United States Parole Com­ sentence. credi~ ,for the .time spent in custody as a against a guard held that the guard's as­ that will allow for specific timetables in compensatory damages stemming ffom the condItIOn of hl~ probation, even though it ~ission h.as authority to forfeit his good­ In re Stinnette, 155 Cal. Rptr. 912 sault on the prisoner was unprovoked and implementing various improvements in the wrongful death of an inmate who commit­ time credit as well as credit for time spent was subsequently revoked. II (Cal. App. 1979) It was held that there was unnecessary to maintain order. service of meals, recreation time, consulta­ ted suicide, but also liable for punitive on condition of release. Wright v. WaInwright, 359 So.2d 11 no denial of equal protection for the state Hernandez v. Lattimore, 454 F. Supp. tion facilities, vocational training, visiting damages. II (Fla. App. 1978) The state may revoke a . Arsber!'y v. Sielaff, 586 F.2d 37 (7th refuse to retroactively apply good beha v­ 763 (D.C.N.Y. 1978) An alleged assault frequency, and shower opportunities. Penrod v. Cupp, 581 P.2d 934 (Sup. ~o prisoner's good-time without notice or hear­ Clr. 1978) Pnsoners do not enjoy an enti­ lOr and participation credits toward a pris­ upon a prisoner by a fec/eral prison officer Vest v. Lubbock County Commission­ Ct. Ore. 1978) Ijabeas corpus is available ing after the prisoner effectuates an escape tlement to earn good time under the la ws of oner under the Determinate Sentencing could be brought to trial under the Federal ers, 444 F. Supp. 824 (N.D. Texas 1977) to an inmate to test the lawfulness of condi­ II Illinois . from prison. Law. Such punishment-lessening statutes Torts Claims Act. The plaintiff inmates, who proved UI)con­ tions of imprisonment such as segregation . 1 People v. Bailey, 371 N.E.2d 1266 Hubbert v. United States Parole Com­ are to be utilized prospectively only. Rosati v. Haran, 459 F. Supp. 1148 stitutional deprivations in the conditions of or isolation in situations where other pro­ "!ission, 585 F.2d 857 (7their. 1978) Good (Ill. ~pp. 1?78) A court may not deny one II In re Wolfenbarger, 142 Cal. Rptr. (D.C.N.Y. 1977) The Bureau of Prisons' a county jail, failed to show bad faith on cedural remedies are not swift enough. Any time only reduces time to be spent in prison credIt for time served on periodic impris­ 745 (Cal. App. 1977) The Penal Code amend­ consideration of the contents of an inmate's part of the prison officials in order to re­ restraint in addition to that of sentencing is and does not reduce the term of a sentence onment and probation where the crime ments that permit credit for time spent in a pre.sentence investigation report to decide cover monetary damages. subject to relief through the writ. including time to be spent on parole. ' took place prior to· the enactment of the II "work furlough facility, halfway house re­ on custody classification did not violate the Christian v. Owens, 461 F. SUpp. 72 Bass v. Cuyler, 387 A.2d 964 (Pa statute which authorizes the powerto deny. Hamilton v. United States, 464 F. habilitation facility, etc." are applicabl~ to inmate's rights, even though the contents (D.C. Va. 197~) The administratrix of a Comwlth. 1978) The Commissioner of the Supp. 210 (D.C. Fla. 1979) Good time and People v. Jones, 376 N.E.2d 454 (Ill. sentences imposed prior to the effective were challenged by the inmate. deceased jail inmate brought a civil rights Bureau of Corrections is immune from suit App. 1978) The defendant was entitled to in~ustri~1 goo~ time are dependent upon a date of the a.nendments where judgement Torres v. Taylor, 456 F. Supp. 951 action against jail authorities for failing to alleging negligence in the release of a pris­ pnsone~ s contmued good behavior. It may credit the time he spent in jail prior to trial I' is not ~nal. The t~i~1 court erred in failing (S.D.N.Y. 1978) A federal prisoner must properly search the inmate. As a result the oner on a weekend furlough during which . be forfeited at any time prior to the term of against the six-month sentence he received to conSIder the petitIOner's motion for back Sue for an alleged assault and battery under prisoner shot himself with a gun. ,It was time the prisoner murdered the plaintiffs custody and parole. a~ a condition of probation, even though time credit solely because the period relat- the Federal Torts Claims Act, not as a "con­ the pre-trial jail time was spent because his held that strip searches were not in accord­ husband. Gregg v. Wyrick, 449 F. SUpp. 969 ed to "drug program time." stitutional tort" under the Bivens doctrine. ance with existing practices for persons Jackson v. Hendrick, 22 Cr.L. 2356 ii (W.D. Mo. 1978) Since the petitioner was bail bond was revoked for the commission People v. Sage, 153 Cal. Rptr. 533 Wright v. Ward, 462 F. Supp. 344 arrested for driving under the influence of (Pa. Comm. Pleas 1977) The mayor of Phil­ gui!ty of first degree murder, he was not of a new crime while on bail. (Cal. App. 1979) Credit for work time and (D.C.N.Y. 1978) Under New YorR state alcohol and therefore no rights of the in­ adelphia, the Commissioner of Public Wel­ entitled under Missouri law to credit the People v. Vahle, 376 N.E.2d 766 (Ill. good time may be earned during periods of App. 1978) The defendant was not entitled law, state prisoners have no right to a prior mate were violated by not strip searching fare, and other officials are held in con­ time spent incarcerated prior to trial against presentence detainment. hearing before being designated as a '~.cen­ him. tempt for failure to implement changes in I his subsequent sentence. . ~o credit the time spent incarcerated pend­ . People v. Schuler, 142 Cal. Rptr. 798 tral monitoring case." Rust v. State, 582 P.2d 134 (Alaska, Philadelphia detention facilities as agreed l' mg the revocation of his probation against Craig v. Hocker, 405 F. Supp. 656 (Calif. App. 1977) Under California Law J. B. Taylor v. E. P. Perini, 455 F. 1978).A prisoner suffering from dyslexia upon one year ago. 1 (D. Nev. 1975) When good time is taken by his sentence. f the defendant was entitled to credit the tim~ Supp. 1241. (D.C. Ohio 1978) In a case has a right to treatment if a medical author­ Ziegler v. Miliken, 583 P.2d 1175 a ~oard.separate from the disciplinary com­ Dunn v. Jenkins, 377 N.E.2d 868 (Ind. spent in custody from the date of his arrest involving complaints about prison condi­ ity determines that he has a serious disease (Utah, 1978) The courts exercise restraint ~l11ttee, It must hold a separate Wolff hear­ 1978) Inmates that are serving determinate I to the day he was originally sentenced in­ tions, the court set out conditions negotiat­ or defect, that such disease or defect is cur­ and will not usually interfere in the man­ II mg. terms begun prior to the effective date of a ~ c1 uding the time spent in prison pursua~t to ed between the parties. An agreed upon able or subject to substantial alleviation, agement or administration of internal pris­ Carey v. Garrison, 452 F. Supp. 485 new good time statute may have their good an initial ineffectual gUilty plea, against his time credit evaluated by the old formula. order was entered with respect to mail, law and that delay or denial of care would work on affairs. Petitions to courts must appear l! (N.D.N.C. 1978) An individual sentenced new sen tence. library, receipt of printed material, disci­ substantial harm on him. to involve a basic right. to death and then later resentenced to life Jennings v. State, 389 N.E.2d 283 State v. Fiore, 396 A.2d 144 (Conn. plinary procedures, job 'assignments and Martinez v. State, 149 Cal. Rptr. 519 imprisonment is entitled to credit the time (Ind. 1979) Different treatment of good time S~per. 1978) The court was wrong when it grievances. The compromise reached was (Cal. App. 1978) The Department of Cor­ spent incarcerated prior to trial against his for "lifers" and "non lifers" does not vio­ XXI. Miscellaneous IIt directed that no "good time" credit could for the parties only and does not represent rections was sued by the father of a 15-year­ sentence. late the rights of either. Sentencing and be given for the period an inmate spent at a a judicial determination of practices or old girl who was kidnapped, tortured, and A. Time credIt treatmen t classification is a benefit given Dolph v. Crisp, 446 F. Supp. 1179 drug treatment hospital. Good time credit standards required by the Constitution of murdered by a prisoner they had paroled. Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539 (E.D. Okla. 1978) The plaintiff's loss of the by the State and the State only needs to the United States or of the State of Ohio. 1\ is an administrative function and is decided show a reasonable basis for the classifica­ Even though the parolee was classified as (1974) Due process hearing required where opportunity to earn good-time credits, al­ by prison authorities. Gahagan v. Pennsylvania Board of an untreatable mentally disordered sex of­ action may result in loss of good time. Pro­ because the warden placed letters in tion. ~.l I~gedly Bretti v. Wainwright, 360 So.2d 1299 Probation and Parole, 444 F. Supp. 1326 fender with a recommendation of no parole, cedural requirements include: (1) written hIS file containing false information con­ Campbellv. State, 575 P.2d 524 (Kan. 11 (~Ia. App. 1978) Good time and extra good (E.D. Pa. 1978) Absent an allegation that governmental immunity was applicable to notice of charges at least 24 hours prior to c rning drug trafficking, did not deprive 1978) One is not entitled to credit the time I ;t 7 time cannot be forfeited wi thout notice of a members of the prison board knew of the the officials. Official acts are privileged if hearing; (2) a hearing must be held in which hIm of a co?stitutionally protected right. spent incarcerated against another convic­ hearing. The Division of Corrections may complained of conduct of subordinates and they are done within the scope of official the inmate may present a defense; (3) must .J Kincade v. LeVi, 442 F. SUpp. 51 tion for an unrelated offense. '"j not forfeit the good time earned by an es­ acquiesced or participated in them, the ac­ duties. be a written statement by fact finders as to (M.D. Pa. 1977) Because the defendants Polsgrove v. Kentucky Bureau o/Cor­ "¥ capee without affording notice and a hear­ tion brought against them must be dis­ Williams v. M artimucci, 276 N. W.2d evidence relied upon and reasons for disci­ indigency prevented him from obtaining a rections, 559 S. W.2d 736 (Ky. 1977) Because ing when the state decides to nolle prosses missed. 876(Mich. App. 1979) The failure of prison plinary action. release after his state conviction was re- , the charge of escape. Kentucky law provides that pre-institutional Hooker v. Arnold, 454 F. Supp. 527 administrators to deliver copies of certain custody time is treated as "time served in (D.C. Pa. 1978) Wardens are not protected documents contained in a prisoner's file to I by absolute immunity. They must rely.on a prisoner did not violate the prisoner's !, the qualified defense of good faith. right to them because the prisoner did not ~f ] I t !;J ,

90 Correctional data analysis systems prison," the defenda, t was entitled to "good Wycoff v. Vitek, 266 N.W.2d 211 Commonwealth v. Broden, 392 A.2d Appendix B. Case law compendium 91 time credit" for the Jays spent in custody (Neb. 1978) Good time reductions in one's 858 (Pa. Super. 1978) Good time credit was cause his prospective bride was suspected Johnson v. Levine, 450 F. Supp. 648 prior to the commence ~nt of his sentence. sentence are subject to forfeiture and noth­ not allowed for time spent on parole where of smuggling contraband into the prison. . Miller v. Carson, 563 F.2d 741 (5th 2~17(D.Md.1978)atrd588F.2d 1378 (4th Chalifoux v. Com. :sioner, 377 N .E.2d ing can compel an institution's chief execu­ parole was later revoked as a result of tech­ Mu. rman v. Ward, 408 N.Y.S.2d CIr. 1977) "The trial court erred in order­ <;:Ir. 1978) The Maryland House ofCorrec­ 923 (Mass. 1978) MassaL .usetts is under no tive officer to provide for restoration of nical violations. (N.Y. Sup. 1978) The state may deny an ing that the ombudsman have permanent ~54 tlOns is unconstitutionally overcrowded obligation to credit the time spent by the forfeited or withheld good time credits. Gaito v. Pennsylvania Board ofPro­ ~nmate.'s request to enter into marriage while ?ffice : . '. Court ordered permanency is an The con~itions of the Special Confinemen~ defendant in a Californil:' institution against Millardv. Perrin, 391 A.2d 886 (N.H. bation andParole, 392 A.2d 343 (Pa. Cmwlth. Incarcerated if the inmate is not a "lifer." IntrusIOn Into state administration ofpris­ ~rea within the facility compel its discon­ a Massachusetts senten ~. 1978) When deciding whether it is legal to 1978) The requirement that "street time" ons beyond the necessi ties of the case." In re Lynch, 389 N.E.2d 91 (Mass. treat prisoners differently in the application credit be forfeited by a convicted parole C. Evidence tinuance as soon as arrangements can be made to transfer the inmates elsewhere. .Ahrens v. Thomas, 434 F. Supp. 873 App. 1979) A prisoner did not forfeit all of good time, that different treatment must violator is legal. United Statesv. Bailey, 574 F.2d 637 (8.th CIr. 1977) modified 570 F.2d 286 (8th O'Bryan v. County of Saginaw 437 good time deductions by escaping from further some rational and stated interest of Gasper v. Commonwealth Board of (D.C. Cir. 1978) The defendants were en­ CIr.. The trial court's prescription of F. Supp. 582 (E.D. Mich. 1978) The Sagi­ 1~78) confinement because when such escape oc­ the state. Probation and Parole, 388 A.2d 1139 (Pa. speCIfIc standards for the future construc­ titl~~ to pr~s.ent evidence relevant to speci­ naw County Jail officials received their fi­ curred, he should already have been released State v. Allen, 383 A.2d 138 (N.J. Cmwlth. 1978) A prisoner is not entitled to fic JaIl condItIons during their trial for escape tIOn and operation of a county jail consti­ nal ?rder to impl~ment specific changes on parole but for errors in computing his Super. App. 1978) One is not entitled to the time spent incarcerated on a dismissed even though the defendants failed. to turn tuted an unpermissible intrusion into the and Improvements In the overall conditions good time deductions. credit the time spent in custody pending sentence credited against two earlier and themselves over to authorities after effec­ affairs of state prison administration. of the jail. Unconstitutional deprivations in rePatten, 369 N.E.2d 1041 (Mass. the disposition of charges in one county later sentences for different crimes: tuating their escape. Newman v. State ofAlabama, 466 F. stemming from the conditions of the facili­ App. ~977) Good conduct credits which against a subsequent conviction obtained Howell v. State, 569 S. W.2d 428 State v. Franklin, 570 P.2d 96 (Ore. SUpp. 628 (D.C. Ala. 1979) Where no effort might be earned subsequent to an unsuc­ in a different county even though a detainer (Tenn. 1978) Good and honor time affect ty were found there in an earlier related 1977) Theposscssion of marijuana was not decision. was made to come within compliance of a cessful prison escape are not subject to for­ was lodged against him from the second only the flat release date of the prisoner. enough tr convict a prisoner under the con­ cour~ ~rder to remedy the Alabama prison Gates v. Collier, 454 F. Supp. 567 feiture ~ecause of the escape. county during that time. Parole eligibility is not effected. condItIOns, the court appointed the gover­ traband statute. Evidence was necessary to (D.C. Miss. 1978) The court ordered the l(ina v. Superintendent, Massachusetts Midgley v. Smith, 407 N.Y.S 2d 283 Trivento v. Commissioner of Correc­ nor as temporary receiver in order that he show that a danger is related to its use not closing of two camps of a state penitentiary Correctzonallnstitution, 382 N.E.2d 1079 (N.Y. A.D. 1978) The'Time Allowance tions, 380 A.2d 69 (Vt. 1977) State statutes be duty-bound and authorized to execute ~ts possession. Evidence of a possible da~ger which aged buildings could not be adequate­ (Mass. 1978) Good conduct time cannot be Committee cannot rescind good time and that allow good time reduction eJn sentences IS not enough to support a conviction. the s.tandards set in the court order. The maintained. Prisoners have protected earned while on parole. extend the period of incarceration. It can for those in custody of the Commissioner I~ case InclUdes a description ofthe violations Sta~e v. Dauzat, 364 So.2d 1000 (La. rIghts to a decent prison environment. People v. Risher, 260 N. W.2d 121 only consider how much good time it will of Corrections but not for persons in cus­ A prIso.ner has no right to belongings and sets forth the corrections to be made. !97~) Gates v. Collier, 423 F. SUpp. 732. (Mich. App. 1977) Where one is released on grant a prisoner, thereby shortening the tody ofthe Commissioner of Mental Health In hIS cell whIch are required for evidence. Pugh v. Locke, 406 F. SUpp. 318 Atrd 548 F.2d 1241 (5th Cir. 1977) After, bond pending sentencing for an assault length of incarceration. are constitutional. Ala. 1976) atrd 559 F.2d 283 (5th A warrant is not necessary in order to seize January 1, 1977, no prisoners can be aC'-·. (~.D. conviction and is subsequently incarcerated People '!!x rei. Lawrence v. New York Woods v. Whyte, 247 S.E.2d 830 such material. CIr .. 197?), cert. den. 98 S.Ct. 3144 (1978) cepted for whom the defendents are unable in a juvenile facility for another unrelat­ State B-Jard of Parole, 414 N.Y.S.2d 230 (W.Va. 1978) The, purpose of good time is, Rodriguezv. Ward,407N.Y.S.2d731 T~rIty-mne ~ember Human Rights Com­ ed offense, he may not credit that time (N. Y.A.D. 1979) Even though good time to improve prison discipline. It does not to provide constitutionally adequate facili~ . (N. Y.A.D. 1978) The court ordered a new ties (50 square feet.) ~Ittee appoInted to monitor imple~enta­ against his original sentence. credit must be earned and is not automatic, apply to parolees, but only to the prison discipline hearing because of lack of evi­ tI.on ~f court order, inspect prisons, inter­ Owens-El v. Robinson, 22 Cr. L. 2444 Williamsv. Warden, MichiganReform­ the forfeiture of such credit may only fol­ popUlation. The loss of parole, itself, was dence and improper records. VIew Inmates and inspect records review (W.D. Pa. 1978) The overall conditions of atory, 279 N.W.2d 313 (Mich. App. 1979) Iowa hearing. established to accomplish good behavior plans for engage Doe v., SWinson, 20 Cr. L. 2272 the Allegheny County Jail violate the in­ ~mplementation, i~depen­ A prisoner's good time was ordered restored Vogler v. Smith, 407 N.Y.S.2d 310 ! for the parolee popUlation. Parole revoca­ dent speCIalIsts, employ full time staff con­ (E.D. Va. 1976) In determining that th~ mates' constitutional rights and changes because the warden had not properly issued (N.Y.A.D. 1978) A prisoner who is recap­ : tion does not entitle one good time credit sheriff violated standards of supervision sultant at same pay as commissioner of i shall be made in a wide spectrum of areas. rules governing the forfeiture of good time. tured after escape is entitled to credit for for time spent on parole. t- which resulted in the sexual assault of an corrections and take any action reasonably ~ York County v. Commissioner Indus­ The "guidelines" that he issued were held time served in local custody from the date Woodring v; Whyte, 242 S.E2d 238 1 inmate, the court looked at: necessary to accomplish its functions. ; trial Board ofDepartment ofLabor and In­ unsatisfactory under the requirements of of his arrest until the date he is returned to (W.Va. 1978) The statute providing for ! 0) expert testimony Ta!lor v. Perini, 446 F. Supp. 1184 dustry, 401 A.2d 885 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1979) the statute, ' the Department of Corrections. allowance of good time credit to prisoners (2) National Standards known to defen­ (N.D . .ohIO 1977) The evidence demonstrat­ An, order of the Industrial Board requiring Post v. Ruth, 354,;S"ci:'2d 1111 (Miss. Arnoldv. Adult ParoleAuthority, 372 is to be applied prospectively, and is man­ dant ed that the officials of the Marion Correc­ the county to vacate its prison for viola­ 1978) The application o{a;go_od time statute N.E.2d 585 (Ohio 1978) A prisoner is not datory. (3) State statutes and regulations were in full compliance tions of the Fire and Panic Act was upheld ti~nal Institutio~ to the defendant that wasrn force at the entitled to time credit earned under prior State ex rei Hauser v. Carballo, 261 (4) Local jail operating manual WIth many portIOns of a previous court [ because the r.ounty failed to sustain its time he was admitted to the penitentiary, convictions, where he is subst:quently con­ N.W.2d 133 (Wisc. 1978) A mandatory re­ ?rder directi?~ the implementation of changes rather than the statute that was in force at victed under the habitual offender statute. lease parole violator must be given a due D. Extraordinary remedies burden ofproviding that f1fe watchers would In the condItIOns of that facility. t, be adequate substitutes for smoke detec­ the time of his sentence, was not an ex post Melton v. Oregon State Correctional process hearing pri.9r.to the forfeiture of his 1. Closing of facilities Ahrens v. Thomas, 434 F. SUpp. 873 facto application. good time credit .. 1 ti~n and sprinkler systems in the county Institution, Corrections Division, 580 P.2d L . Rhem v. Malcolm, 507 F.2d 222 (2nd prIson. (W.D .. Mo. 1977) modified 570 F.2d 286 Spencer v. Basinger, 562 S. W.2d 350 572 (Ore. App. 1978) The prison disciplin­ \ CIf. 1974) Court cannot require voters to (8th CIr. 1978) Pan'!l appointed to deter- (Mo. 1978) The defendant was entitled to ary committee. orda recommending that B. Civil disabilities .! mine compliance wnh order. make available resources needed to meet 2 . Monitorillg Df compliance credit for jail time served prior to the date the defendant serve 30 days in isolation and Rutherfordv. Pitchess, 457 F. SUpp. J constitutional standards of confinement Palmigiano v. Garrahy, 443 F. Supp. of judgment imposing his sentence. suffer forfeiture of 426 days of statutory 104 (D.C. Cal. 1978) Prisoners retain all but it can and must require release of per~ Alabama v. Pugh, 559 F:2d 283 (5th 9?6 (D. ~U: 1977) Master appointed and Statev. Stamps, 562S.W.2d354(Mo. good time was justified in that his miscon­ their rights that are not inconsistent with sons held under such conditions, at least C.ir. ~91.8) remand 438 U.S. 781 (1978) The gIVen unlImIted access to facilities, records, 1978) A convicted felon is entitled to credit the legitimate functioning of a correctional [.; ?IStrICt court was too intrusive in appoint- files and personnel. duct constituted a hazard to human life and , where c~rr.ection of them is not brought for jail time accumulated before judgment health. , institution. 1 about WIthIn a reasonable time. Ing a human rights committee to monitor Blaney v. Commissioner of Correc­ Holland v. Hutto, 450 F. SUpp. 194 j state's compliance with a previously tion, 372 N.E.2d 770 (Mass. 1978) A trial even where the sentence imposes confine­ Penrodv. Oregon State Penitentiary, I: Williamsv.McKeithen, 547 F.2d 1206 ~he (W.D. Va. 1978) The decision of the Direc­ Imposed various changes court milY give explicit directions concern­ ment to a city jail and not to the custody of Corrections Division, 581 P.2d '.24 (Ore. I' (5th Cir. 19:7) Defendants are enjoined , ~e~ree ~oncerning and condItIOns In a state penal institution. ing -the continued classification of protec- the Division of Corrections. App. 1978) An order recommending the tor of the Virginia Department of Correc­ from acceptIng any new prisoners except State v. Blazek, 259 N. W.2d 914 forfeitu're of 45 days of good time is not tions to deny a prisoner's request to remarry I : escapees and parole violators until prisoner Newman v. Alabama, 559 F.2d 283 tive cu.st~dy inmates and may order the (5th Cir. 1977) remand 438 U.S. 781 (1978) CommISSIOner of Correction to file quar­ (Neb. 1977) Where one is sentenced with invalid for the failure of the record to dem­ was not :lrbitrary nor violative of due pro- popul.ation is no greater than the design . the statutory maximum term for an offense, onstrate supporting material relating to the cess. ,J.: capaCIty of the facility. :'P~ison ~fficials cannot be expected to stay terly reports stating the progress made to­ Hetherington California State Per­ In lIne WIth so numerous a committee (39 wards attaining the proper standard of he must be credited with the time spent prisoner's prior disciplinary matters. v. . Batflev.Anderson,564F.2d388(IOth sonnel Board, 147 Cal. Rptr. 300 (Calif. people), at the same time constantly con- treatment. inc'arcerated before trial. Stormsv. Oregon State Penitentiary, Cu. 1977) Commencing August. 1977, de­ U fronted with the spectre offederal contempt' Trigg ·v. Blanton, No. A-6047 (Da­ Stalev. Kerns, 271 N.W.2d48 (Neb. Corrections Division, 581 P.2d 979 (Ore. App. 1978) A statute banning ex-felons from fendants shall reduce population of state becoming "peace officers" is constitution­ of court. Better approach is to name one ' Tenn., Aug. 1978) A spe­ 1978) When a prisoner loses good time be­ App. 1978) In an appeal for loss ofstatutory penitentiarr at the r~te of 100 inmates per: v~dson Co~nty, cause of a disciplinary proceeding, it does al. monitor for each prison 'involved with full cIal master IS to be named by the court from good time, the transcript of a discipline ~onth untIl populatIOn is reduced to 800 ~tot constitute double jeopardy. committee's 'findings are necessary for ,the In re Cairafa, 143 Cal. Rptr. 848 I' mmates. authority to' observe and to repo~t his ob- names submitted by the parties. Funds for (Calif. App. 1978) A prisoner's right to H ~ervations to the Court, but no authority to him and his staff,.to be provided 'by the court's review of t~e case. Hamilton v. Landrieu,351 F. Supp. marry was impermissibly infringed by .the ; Intervene in daily prison operations." Mon- . defendants. I 549 (E.D. La. 1972) No prisoner shall be itors may be paid reasonable compensation. Department of Corrections actions to tem­ incarcerated in the present main facility , P?rarily prohiQit him from marrying be- to be recovered from the state as a part of after March 1, 1975. the reasonable costs, of the litigation.

\1 Ii W a

AppendixC

Frequency of distribution of institutional charac­ NCJ-76940 teristics of the nation's 52 correctional systems NCJRS REGISTRATION

- ;-' ... The National Criminal Justice ~ference Service (NCJRS) abstracts documents published ill the criminal justice field. Persons who are registered with the Reference Service receive announcements of documlillts in their stated fields of interest and order forms for free Adult male population Hardware rllanufacturer Information System Access . copies of Bureau of JUstice Statistics publications. Ifyou are not registered with the Reference Service, and wish to be, please provide your name and mailing address below and check the appropriate box. Size Number Percentage ManufaclurfJr Number Percentage Access Number Percentage 27 51.9% In-house 17.3% Small: less than 1,000 13 25.0% IBM 9 Univac "'~' 7 13.5% Shared- Name Medium: 1,000-3,000 14 26.9% Burrougf,s 3 5.8% no access limitations 17 32.7% Te...-mone Large: 3,000- 10,000 15 28.8% Other 5 9.6% Shared- ( ) 0 P...... nd me a Extra large: None 10 19.2% access limitations 17 32.7% NCJRS regl.t,·allon more than 10,000 10 19.2% Manual 9 17.3% Number and .treet form;

0 Plea.e ..nd me!~ City State ZIP Coda ;;;pori' iI.ted below. Geographic region S'oftware-SPSS Obstacles - Personnel Region Number Percentage SPSS Number Percentage Obstacle Number Percentage (Fold har.) Northwest 8 15;4% Yes 30 57.7% None 32 61.5% North Central 9 17.3% No 22 42.3% Training -management 10 19.2% Northeast" 19 36.5% Insufficient staff 10 19.2% U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Southwest 5 9.6% Bureau of Justice Statistics South Central 4 7.7% Wa.hlngton. D.C. 20531 PLACE Southeast 7 13.5% STAMP " The Federal Bureau of Prisons was geographi­ HERE cally listed in the northeast due to the location of the Central Office.

Volume of demand Information­ level of computertechnolo(lY Software-MARK IV Obstacles - technology Volume-technology Number Percentage MARK IV Number Percentage Obstacle Number Percentage

HI~hvolume- Yes 8 15.4% None 18 34.6% Igh technology 14 26.9% No 44 84.6% Data base- User Services Department 2 High volume- system limitation 16 30.8% low technology 20 38.5% Programming limitations 11 21.2% Nati.onal Crimimil Justice Reference Service Low volume- Computer need recognlzed_ . 7 13.5% high technology 12 23.1% - Bureau of Justice Statistics Low volume- low technology 6 11.5% U.S. Departmen~ of Justice Box 6000 Rockville; Maryland 20850 Hardware size Software-EASYTRIEVE Percentage use of automation Size Number Percentage EASYTRIEVE Number Percentage Percentage Number Percentage Large systems 33 63.5% Yes 8 15.4% High: greater than 70% 17 32.7% Minisystems 4 7.7% No 44 84.6% Moderate:30%-70% 12 23.1% Combination systems Occasional: (Fold hera) f" ~ (large and mini) 5 9.6% less than 30% 9 17.3% Manual systems 10 19.2% None 14 26.9%.

. , Ifyou wish to receive copies of any of the Bureau ofJustice Statistics Reports listed on the reverse side, please list them below.

Software - other Request locations Other Software Number Percentage Specified Location Number Percentage Yes 23 44.2% Entry locatlons- No 29 55.8% d~slgnaied 28 53.8% Entrylooatlons- .not deslgn!!ted. 24 46.2%

oascis Member I,. ·OBSCIS Membership Number Percentage 1: Operational 22 42.3% Nota Member 18 34.6% Developing Member 12 23.1%

92 " ,

Bureau of Justice Statistics Reports Applications of the National Crime State and Local Probation and Parole-Systeml, Survey Victimization and Attitude Data: NCJ-41335 Single copies are available at no charge" Irom the Public Opinion About Crime: The Attitudes State and' Local Prosecution and Civil Attorney National Criminal Justice Relerence Service, Box of Victims and Nonvictims in Selected Systems, NCJ-41334 6000, Rockville, Md. 20850. Multiple copies are lor Cities, NCJ-41336 National Survey 01 Court Organization: ule by the Superintendent 01 [lO'cuments, U.S. Local Vlcllm Surveys: A Review of the 1977 Supplement to State Judicial Systems, Government Printing Office, WeJlhlngton, D.C. Issues, NCJ-39973 NCJ-40022 20402 •. *The Police and Public Opinion: An Analysis *1975 Supplement to State Judicial Systems, of Victimization and Attitude Data from NCJ-29433 Nations! Crime Survey: 13 American Cities, NCJ-42018 1971 (full report), NCJ-11427 Criminal Victimization In the United Slatal An Introduction to the National Crime Staie Court Model Statistical Dictionary, (annual): Survey, NCJ-43732 NCJ-62320 Summary FlndirlQs of 1978-79 Changes in Compensating Victims 01 Violent Crime: State Court Caseload Statistics: Crime and of Trends Since 1973, NCJ- Potential Costs and Coverage of a National The State of the Art, NCJ-46934 62993 Program, NCJ-43387 Annual Report, 1975, NCJ-51885 A DeS';ription of Trends from 1973 to 1978 Rape Victimization In 26 American Cities, Annual Report, 1976, NCJ-56599 NCJ-66716 NCJ-55878 A Cross-City Comparison 01 Felony Case 1978 iiinal report), NCJ-66480 Crime Against Persons In Urban, Suburban, Processing, NCJ-55171 19T1', NCJ-58725 and Rural Areas: A Comparative Analysis of 1976, NCJ-49543 Victimization Rates, NCJ-53551 1975, NCJ-44593 Criminal Victimization In Urban Schools, Trends In Expenditure and Employment Data 1974, NCJ-39467 NCJ-56396 lorlhe Criminal Jusllce System, 1971-77 *1973, NCJ-34732 Restitution to Victims 01 Personal and (annual), NCJ-57463 The Cost 01 Negligence: Losses from Household Crimes. NCJ-72770 Expenditure and Employment Data lor the Preventable Household Burglaries, Criminal Justice System (annual) NCJ-53527 1979 advance report, NCJ·73288 The Hispanic Victim: Advance Report, 1978 Summary Report, NCJ-66483 NCJ-67706 . Myths and Realities About Crime: A 1978 final report, NCJ-66482 Intimate Victims: A Study of Violence Amo:1g Nontechnical Presentation of Selected 1977 final report, NCJ-53206 Friends and Relatives, NCJ-62319 Information from the National Prisoner Crime and Seasonality, NCJ-64818 Statistics Program and the National Crime Criminal Victimization 01 New York State Survey, NCJ-46249 Residents, 1974-77, NCJ-66481 Justice Agencies In the U.S.: Summary Report of the National Criminal Victimization of California Resldenb, Justice Agency List, NCJ-65560 1974-77, NCJ-70944 Indicators 01 Crime and Crlml~al Justice: National Prisoner Statistics: Quantitative Studies, NCJ-62349 Dictionary 01 Criminal Justice Data Terminology: Criminal Victimization Surveys In 13 Capital Punishment (annual): 1979, NCJ-70945 . Terms and Definitions Proposed for Interstate American cities (summary report, 1 vo!.), and National Data Collection and Exchange, NCJ-18471 Prlsollers In State and Federal Institutions on NCJ-36747 Boston, NCJ-34818 December 31: Buffalo, NCJ-34820 1979, NCJ-73719 CinCinnati, NCJ-34819 >lI< Offender-Based Transaction Statistics: New Oaklend, NCJ-34826 *Census 01 Prisoners In State Correctional Directions in Data Collection and Reporting, Pittsburgh, NCJ-34827 Fascilltles, 1973, NCJ-34729 NCJ-29645 San Diego, NCJ-34828 Census 01 Jails and Survey 01 Jail Inmates, Sentencing of California Felony Offenders, San Francisco, NCJ-34829 1978, preliminary report, NCJ-55172 NCJ-29646 *Washington, D.C., NCJ-34830 Profile 01 Inmales 01 Local Jails: Socio­ Crime-Specific Analysis: Public Attitudes About Crime (13 vols.): demographic Findings from the 1978 Survey * The Characteristics of Burglary incidents, Boston, NCJ-46235 of Inmates of Local Jail~, NCJ-65412 NCJ-42093 Buffalo, NCJ-46236 >I< The Nation's Jails: A report or. the census An Empirical Examination of Burglary Cincinnati, NCJ-46237 of jails Irom the 1972 Survey of Inmates of Offender Characteristics, NCJ-43131 Houston, NCJ-46238 Local Jails, NCJ-19067 *An Empirical Examination of Burglary Miami, NCJ-46239 Offenders and Offense Characteristics, Milwaukee, NCJ-46240 NCJ-42476 * Minneapolis, NCJ-46241 Sources 01 National Criminal Justice New Orleans, NCJ-46242 Statistics: An Annotated Bibliography, Oakland, NCJ-46243 Uniform Parole Reports: Parole In the United States (annual): NCJ-45006 Pittsburgh, NCJ-46244 1979, NCJ-69562 Federal Criminal Sentencing: Perspectives San Diego, NCJ-46245 1978, NCJ-58722 of Analysis and a Design for Research, San Francisco, NCJ-46246 NCJ-33683 1976 and 1977, NCJ-49702 Washington, D.C., NCJ-46247 Variations in Federal Criminal Sentences: A N6t1onal Survey 01 Parole-Related * Criminal Victimization Surveys In Chicago, A Statistical Assessment at the National legislation Enacted During the 1979 Detroit, Los Angeles, New York, and Level, NCJ-33684 Legislative Session, NCJ-64218 Phlladalphla: A Comparison of 1972 and Federal Sentencing Patterns: A Study of 1974 Findings, NCJ-36360 Characteristics 01 the Parole Population, 1978, Geographical Variations, NCJ-33685 Criminal Victimization Surveys In Eight NCJ-66479 Predicting Sentences In Federal Courts: Tije American Cities: A Comparison of 1971172 Feasibility of a National Sentencing Polity, and 1974/75 Findings-National Crime NCJ-336!36 Surveys in Atlanta, Baltimore, Cleveland, Children In Custody: Juvenile Detention and Dallas, Denver, Newark, Portland, and St. Correctional Facility Census Louis, NCJ-36361 1977 advance report: * Criminal Victimization Surveys In the Census 01 Public Juvenile Facilities, Nation's Five Largest CIties: National NCJ-60967 Crime Panel Surveys in Chicago, Detroit, Census of Private Juvenile Facilities, Los Angeles, New York, and Philadelphia, NCJ-60968 1972, NCJ-16909 1975 (final report), NCJ-58139 * Crimes and Vlr.tlms: A Report on the Dayton/ 1974, NCJ-57946 San Jose Pilot Survey of Victimization, 1973, NCJ-44777 NCJ-013314 *1971, NCJ-l.3403 *U S GOVERN!1ENT PRINTlNa OFFICE: 1981 341-233/1875

*out of stock but available on interl ibrary loan