DOCSLIB.ORG

~ F,Il~Al;-Rle[PO~Rf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
~ F,Il~Al;-Rle[PO~Rf If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. ,r~ Jay Farbst.tn " AsSOc~ltes, Inc. with Richard Wener National Institute of Corrections .. Prison Division United States De~rtment of Justlc. ~ Washfngton~ DC ~ Grant' GG-1 ' 9 \\ A Comparlson\of "Direct" and "Indirect" Supervision O'tt correct~~r'Facnltles ':-, - ~ f,il~Al;-RlE[PO~rf Juno 1,1989 .,~ • Jay Farbsteln & Associates, Inc. with Richard Wener 120820 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 c;owi§BIaC material has been gr(j.(lteQbl: • • ~Ub~lC DOmaln/NIC U.S. Department of Justlce 10 the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permis­ sion of the ~t owner. National Institute of Corrections .. Prison Division United States Department of Justice Washington, DC Grant 1# GG .. 1 A Comparison of "Direct" and "Indirect" Supervision Correctional Facilities June 1,1989 PROPERTY OF NIC Information 1Centar RECEtVEO SEP 3 m • • National Institute of Corrections Page 0.1 - 1 Evaluation of Direct Versus Indirect Supervision Correctional Facilities Contents CONTENTS Page Contents 0.1 - 1 List of Tables 0.1 - 3 List of Figures 0.1 - 6 Acknowledgements 0.1 - 7 PART I: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction and Summary 1.1 - 1 PART II: MAIL OUT SURVEY 11.1 MaiJout Survey: Methods 11.1 -1 11.2 Mailout Survey: Findings 11.2 -1 PART III: CASE STUDIES 111.1 case Study Methods 111.1 -1 111.2 Overview of case Study Sites 111.2 - 1 111.3 case Study Findings: Physical Environment Survey 111.3 -1 111.4 case Study Findings: Behavioral Tracking 111.4 - 1 111.5 case Study Findings: Questionnaires 111.5 -1 111.6 Case Study Findings: Interviews 111.6 - 1 PART IV: CONCLUSIONS IV.1 Conclusions IV.1 -1 PART V: REFERENCES V.1 References V.1 -1 (Continues on next page) -f:----~. I( National Institute of Corredions Page 0.1 - 2 Evaluation of Direct Versus Indirect Supervision Correctional Facilities Contents ATTACHMEN-TS (bound In separate volume) Page Data Tables Inmate Survey Means for Jails A-2 Inmate Survey Means for Prisons A-4 Staff Survey Means for Jails A-6 Staff Survey Means for Prisons A-8 Inmate and Staff Interview Writeups Pima County Jail: Inmate Interview A -11 Pima County Jail: Staff Interview A-14 Roanoke City Jail: Inmate Interview A-19 Roanoke City Jail: Staff Interview A - 20 Ross Correctional Institution: Inmate Interview A - 22 Ross Correctional Institution: Staff Interview A-24 Leiber Correctional Institution: Inmate Interview A - 27 Leiber Correctionallnstittrt!on: Staff Interview A-29 Riverfront State Prison: Inmate Interview A - 31 Riverfront State Prison: Staff Interview A-34 Northern State Prison: Inmate Interview A-37 Northern State Prison: Staff Interview A -40 Data Gathering Instruments Mailout Survey Section A: Administrator Questionnaire A -43 Mailout Survey Section B: Facility and Program Information A- 51 Physical Environment Survey A- 63 Staff Survey A-72 Inmate Survey A -82 Staff Interview Questions A- 92 Inmate Interview Questions A-93 National Institute of Corrections Page 0.1 - 3 Evaluation of Direct Versus Indirect Supervision Correctional Facilities List of Tables TABLES Page Table 11.1-1 Scales Used in Analysis 11.1 - 2 Table 11.2-1 Scales That Show Significant Differences Between Direct 11.2 -3 and Indirect Supervision Facilities Table 111.3-1 Direct and Indirect Supervision Facilities 111.3 -1 Table 111.3-2 Crowding in Surveyed Housing Units 111.3-2 Table 111.3-3 Overall Crowding at Case Study Sites 111.3 -2 Table 111.3-4 Cell Size 111.3 -3 Table 111.3-5 Services in Housing Unit 111.3 -3 Table 111.3-6 Services Out of Housing Unit 111.3 - 4 Table 111.3-7 Total Services at Institution 111.3 -4 Table 111.3-8 Accessible Areas or Items in Dayroom 111.3 - 4 Table 111.3·9 Hard Versus Soft Dayroom Environments 111.3 - 5 Table 111.3-10 Comfort of Environment 111.3 - 5 Table 111.3-11 Percentage of Cells With 1 Occupant 111.3·6 Table 111.3-12 Percentage of Cells With 2 Occupants 111.3 - 6 Table 111.3-13 Number of Room Fixture and Furniture Items 111.3-6 Table 111.3-14 Hard Versus Soft Room Environments 111.3 -7 Table 111.3-15 Control of Cell Environment 111.3 -7 Table 111.3-16 Staffing and Supervision of Facilities 111.3·8 Table 111.3-17 Ease of Surveillance 111.3-8 Table 111.3·18 Security Leva I 111.3 - 9 Table 111.3·19 Clsanliness 111.3 - 9 Table 111.3-20 Condition of Facilities 111.3 -9 Table 111.3·21 Correctional Facility Costs (in Dollars) 111.3 -10 Table 111.4·1 Who Initiated Interaction, by Site 111.4 • 2 Table 111.4-2 Total Interactions. Staff- and Inmate-Initiated Interactions 111.4 - 2 National Institute of Corrections Page 0.1 ·4 Evaluation of Direct Versus Indirect Supervision Correctional Facllltle. List of Tables \. TABLES (cont'd.) Page Table 111.4-3 Staff-Initiated Interactions 111.4 -3 Table 111.4-4 Inmate-Initiated Interactions 111.4 -3 Table 111.4-5 Purpose of Interaction, by Site 111.4 - 4 Table 111.4-6 Location of Interaction, by Site 111.4 -4 Table 111.4-7 Quality of Interaction, by Site 111.4-6 Table 111.4-8 Quality of Interaction, by Who Initiated 111.4 -6 Table 111.4-9 Duration of Interaction, by Site 111.4 -6 Table 111.5-1 Number of Completed Surveys 111.5 -1 Table 111.5-2 Research Team's Rating of Supervision Style 111.5-1 Table 111.5-3 Inmate Rating of Supervision Style 111.5·2 Table 111.5-4 Beds/Room for Survey Respondents 111.5 - 2 Table 111.5-5 Background of Respondents: Inmate Sex 111.5 -3 Table 111.5-6 Background of Respondents: Inmate Age 111.5 - 3 Table 111.5-7 Background of Respondents: Inmates' Time in Institution 111.5 - 3 Table 111.5-8 Background of Respondents: Staff Sex 111.5 -3 Table 111.5-9 Background of Respondents: Staff Age 111.5 - 4 Table 111.5-10 Backgl'ound of Respondents: Staff Education 111.5-4 Table 111.5-11 Background of Respondents: Staff Time Worked at Site 111.5 - 4 Table 111.5-12 Background of Respondents: Staff Position 111.5 - 4 Table 111.5-13 Scores for Inmate Surveys: Direct and Indirect Supervision Jails 1II.5 -5 Table 111.5-14 Scores for Staff Surveys: Direct and Indirect Supervision Jails 111.5 - 6 Table 111.5-15 Inmate Survey Data for Jails: How well Correctional Officers Protect 111.5 - 7 Inmates Table 111.5-16 Inmate Survey Data for Jails: Speed of Correctional Officers Response 111.5 - 7 National Institute of Corrections Page 0.1 ·5 Evaluation of Direct Versus Indirect Supervision Correctional Facilities List of Tables TABLES (-cont'd.) Page Table 111.5-17 Inmate SUlvey Data for Jails: How Much Vandalism 111.5-7 Table 111.5-18 Inmate Survey Data for Jails: How Crowded is Facility 111.5-7 Table 111.5-19 Staff Survey Data for Jails: Risk of Sexual Assault 111.5-8 Table 111.5-20 Staff Survey Data for Jails: How Sate is Correctional Officer in Unit 111.5-8 Table 111.5-21 Staff SUrvey Data for Jails: How Crowded is Facility 111.5 -8 Table 111.5-22 Scores for Inmate Surveys: Direct and Indirect Supervision Prisons 111.5-9 Table 111.5-23 Scores for Staff Surveys: Direct and Indirect Supervision Prisons 111.5 -10 Table 111.5-24 Inmate Survey Data for Prisons: How Friendly is Correctional 111.5 -11 Officerllnmate Contact Table 111.5-25 Inmate Survey Data for Prisons: Number of Correctional 111.5 -11 Officer/Inmate Fights Table 111.5-26 Types of Open-Ended Survey Comments, by Facility 111.5 - 12 National Institute of Corrections Page 0.1 - 6 Evaluation of DIrect Versus IndIrect SupervIsIon Correctional FacilitIes List of Figures FIGURES-- Page Figure 11.2-1 Means For Selected Scales and Items 11.2 - 2 Figure 111.2-1 Contra Costa County Main Detention Facility Plan 111.2 - 16 Figure 111.2-2 Axonometric of Contra Costa Housing Unit 111.2 - 16 Figure 111.2-3 Dayroom, Contra Costa County Main Detention Facility 111.2 -17 Figure 111.2-4 Pima, AZ, County Jail Plan 111.2 -18 Figure 111.2-5 Dayroom, Pima, AZ 111.2 -18 Figure 111.2-6 Correctional Officer Station Pima, AZ 111.2 - 19 Figure 111.2-7 Plan, Roanoke, VA, City Jail 111.2 -20 Figure 111.2-8 Dayroom, Roanoke, VA, City Jail 111.2-20 Figure 111.2-9 Correctional Officer Station, Roanoke, VA, City Jail 111.2 - 21 Figure 111.2-10 Plan, Ross Correctional Institution, Chillicothe, OH 111.2 - 22 Figure 111.2-11 Dayroom, Ross Correctional Institution, Chillicothe, OH 111.2 - 23 Figure 111.2-12 Officer Station, Ross Correctional Institution, Chillicothe, OH 111.2 - 23 Figure 111.2-13 Plan, Riverfront State Prison, NJ 111.2 - 24 Figure 111.2-14 Dayroom, Riverfront State Prison, NJ 111.2 - 25 Figure 111.2-15 Correctional Officer Station, Rive,iront State Prison, NJ 111.2 - 26 Figure 111.2-16 Plan, Northern State Prison, NJ 111.2 - 27 Figure 111.2-17 Dayroom, Northern State Prison, NJ 111.2 - 28 Figure 111.2-18 Plan, Lieber Correctional Institution, SC 111.2- 28 Figure 111.4-1 Location of Interactions by Facilities 111.4- 5 Na1ionallnstitute of Corrections PageD.1 -7 Evaluation of Direct Versus Indirect Supervision Correctional Facilities 0.1 Acknowledgements 0.1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report was prepared under Grant Number GG-1 from the National Institute of Corrections, U.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2018 Complete Streets Case Study Camden, New Jersey
    2018 Complete Streets Case Study Camden, New Jersey Prepared by: Prepared for: The New Jersey Bicycle and Pedestrian Resource Center New JerseyThe Complete New Jersey Streets CaseDepartment Study: Camden City| 1 at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey of Transportation About This report was written by Charles Brown, MPA, James Sinclair, Lisa Cintron, and Sam Salvesen of the Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center (VTC) at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey. The Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center (VTC) is a national leader in the research and development of innovative transportation policy. Located within the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers University, VTC has the full array of resources from a major research university on transportation issues of regional and national significance. The New Jersey Bicycle and Pedestrian Resource Center (BPRC) assists public officials, transportation and health professionals, and the public in creating a safer and more accessible walking and bicycling environment through primary research, education, and dissemination of information about best practices in policy and design. The Center is supported by the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT) through funds provided by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey 33 Livingston Avenue, Fourth Floor New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901 Acknowledgments The authors would like to extend special thanks to Valeria Galarza, Meishka L. Mitchell, Kathy Cullen, and Linda Schneider, of Cooper’s Ferry Partnership, for their invaluable insight into the history and implementation of Complete Streets in the City of Camden.
    [Show full text]
  • Camden Health Element
    --------­ JANUARY 2021 CAMDEN HEALTH DRAFT HEALTHY CLEAN ACCESS TO MOBILITY & ACTIVE SAFE & COMPLETE HOUSING & EDUCATION & FOOD ACCESS ENVIRONMENT HEALTHCARE TRANSPORTATION NEIGHBORHOODS HOMELESSNESS EMPLOYMENT New York City • dDELAWARE VALLEY DVRPC's vision for the Greater Philadelphia Region is a prosperous, innovative, equitable, resilient, and 0.,.,YIPC sustainable region that increases mobility choices PLANNING COMMISSION by investing in a safe and modern transportation system; that protects and preserves our natural resources while creating healthy communities; and that fosters greater MD opportunities for all. • Baltimore DVRPC's mission is to achieve this vision by convening the widest array of partners to inform and facilitate data-driven decision-making. We are engaged across the region, and strive to be leaders and innovators, exploring new ideas and creating best practices. TITLE VI COMPLIANCE / DVRPC fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 7964, the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 7987, Executive Order 72898 on Environmental Justice, and related nondiscrimination mandates in all programs and activities. DVRPC's website, www.dvrpc.org, may be translated into multiple languages. Publications and other public documents can usually be made available in alternative languages and formats, if requested. DVRPC's public meetings are always held in ADA-accessible facilities, and held in transit-accessible locations whenever possible. Translation, interpretation, or other auxiliary services can be provided to individuals who submit a request at least seven days prior to a public meeting. Translation and interpretation services for DVRPC's projects, products, and planning processes are available, generally free of charge, by calling (275) 592-7800. All requests will be accommodated to the greatest extent possible.
    [Show full text]
  • February 2009.Pdf
    CAMDEN COUNTY BOARD OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS MEETING FEBRUARY 19, 2009 - 7:00 P.M. LAWNSIDE PUBLIC SCHOOL 426 CHARLESTON AVENUE, LAWNSIDE, NJ The meeting was called to order by Freeholder Director Louis Cappelli at 7:00 p.m. The Director asked the Clerk to call the roll and the following Freeholders answered to their name: PRESENT: CREAM, GRECO, NASH, RIPA, RODRIGUEZ, CAPPELLI ABSENT: MCDONNELL The Director stated that adequate notice of this meeting has been provided in accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act. The Director asked everyone to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. The National Anthem was performed by Ms. Clark of the Lawnside Public School. The Director announced that if requested, the County has large print agendas for the visually impaired. She said if you require large print, please see the Clerk. Director Cappelli welcomed everyone. He said we are very pleased tonight to be in the historic Borough of Lawnside. He said it is the usual practice of the Board of Freeholders to hold our meeting each month in one of our municipalities outside the County Seat of Camden so that all members of the public will have full access to the meetings of the Board. PRESENTATIONS The Director said as is our tradition we are going to ask the Mayor and members of Council to come forward for a presentation. He called upon Freeholders Nash and Rodriguez to come forward as well. The Director said Mayor Bryant is unable to be here this evening but three members of Council have joined us and we will make presentations to them tonight.
    [Show full text]
  • DIRECTORY of STATE PRISON LIBRARIANS 1991 PREPARED by MARYLAND CORRECTIONAL EDUCATION LIBRARIES BALTIMORE, MARYLAND If You Have
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. '.~< \ DIRECTORY OF STATE PRISON LIBRARIANS 1991 • PREPARED BY MARYLAND CORRECTIONAL EDUCATION LIBRARIES BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 133209 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 tilis 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 Marvland Correctional Education Libraries to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permis­ sion of the copyright owner. If"you have suggestions for improving the Directory of state Prison Libraries, or if you find errors, omissions or would like a copy of the Directory, please notify: " Ms. Brenda Vogel, Coordinator Correctional Education Libraries Maryland State Department of Education 200 W. Baltimore Street/7th Floor Baltimore, MD 21201-2595 (301) 333-2241 (For a copy of the Directory, please include a stamped, self-addressed 13 x 10 envelope with $ .65 in postage - Library Rate.) • • .. • FOREWORD The Directory of State Prison Librarians has been developed for the purpose of improving communication between the often isolated librarians working in • state correctional libraries and to serve as a resource and networking aid. It includes the names, addresses, telephone numbers and employing agencies of librarians working in adult and juvenile correctional libraries. This Directory began as a project of the ASCLA Library Service to Prisoners Forum of the American Library Assoc,iation.
    [Show full text]
  • Offenders in Nj Correctional Institutions Average Daily Population During
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. r.: DEPARTMENT OFCORRECTfON8, STATE OF NEW JERSEY WILLIAM H. MUVEfl. ,90'-4MIS810NER .. l-----~---~--·- .~----,.-----~---------.. ~-----~------- ! 118305 U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly as receiverJ from the person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated in tilis document are those of the authors and do not necessarily • r, represent the official position or policies of the National Ins!'Me of Justice. Permission to reproduce this copyrighted material has been granted by New Jersey Department of Corrections to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permis­ sion of the copyright owner. c OFFENDERS IN N.J. CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS AVERAGE DAILY POPULATION DURING ~FISCAL 1988 '.J DIVISJONOF POLICY"AND PLANNING OFFICE OF POLICY ANALY8UJ AND .PLA"tNIN6 MARCH 10,1"', o r:,: TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .......................................... 1 Fiscal 1984 - 1988 .................................... 2,3 Fiscal 1988 Average Daily Population By Institutional Complex: Prison Complex ........................................ 4.5 Youth Correctional Complex ............................ 6 Adult Pre-Release Centers. and Contract Halfway Houses............................... 7 Juvenile Complex ...................................... 8 Juvenile Community Residential and Day Programs.....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Emergence of a Mid-Atlantic Twin City: Camden's Strategy to Extend
    Philadelphia Real Estate Council White Paper by Jack Gordon Emergence of a Mid-Atlantic Twin City: Camden’s Strategy to Extend Philadelphia’s Central Business District 2016 Mid-Atlantic Real Estate Research Fellowship June 17, 2016 © 2016 The Philadelphia Real Estate Council Emergence of a Mid-Atlantic Twin City: Camden’s Strategy to Extend Philadelphia’s Central Business District By Jack Gordon he city of Camden, New Jersey was an industrial powerhouse during the late-1800s until the mid-1900s. The city’s access to both the Cooper and Delaware Rivers positioned Camden as an attractive location for shipyards, factories, and a variety of reputable Tcompanies. 1 The city was home to a flourishing economy where citizens were gainfully employed and development was prosperous. Today, Camden is notorious for its struggling economy, high unemployment, and crime; a current reputation as a result of more recent events. The city began to decline in the Jack Gordon is a junior at 1970s as tensions in the city grew.2 The population declined when businesses Pennsylvania State relocated and violence increased. The ruins of an industrial powerhouse are University’s Smeal College apparent with deteriorating buildings throughout the city. of Business where he majors in Risk Investors observing the conditions within Camden are reasonably concerned Management Real Estate. about crime. Infamous for having the highest murder rates in the country, During his time, Jack has Camden is consistently among the poorest and most dangerous cities.3 participated in various Investment in a failing and crime ridden city is not favorable, for it poses high real estate intensive risk and low return potential.
    [Show full text]
  • REENTRY COALITION of NEW JERSEY Reentry Coalition of New Jersey
    REENTRY COALITION OF NEW JERSEY Reentry Coalition of New Jersey IMPACT OF COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS IN NEW JERSEY REDUCING PRISON POPULATION, INCARCERATION COSTS & RECIDIVISM Date: 12/20/2017 Kevin McHugh, Executive Director REENTRY COALITION OF NEW JERSEY IMPACT OF COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS IN NEW JERSEY: REDUCING PRISON POPULTION, INCARCERATION COSTS & RECIDIVISM INTRODUCTION NEW JERSEY PRISON SYSTEM IN CRISIS Over the past two decades, community 1980 – 1999 corrections programs have played a vital role in reducing the prison population and the New Jersey’s the prison population grew by 359 percent from 1980 to 1999 increasing costs of incarceration in New Jersey. At the same time, they have contributed to a from less than 7,000 inmates to its peak of marked improvement in public safety as 31,493 inmates in 1999. The rapid growth of evidenced by significant reductions in New Jersey’s prison population was accom- offender recidivism rates and dramatically panied by a corresponding explosion in state lower crime rates. This report chronicles the spending on corrections. During this same evolution of New Jersey’s community-based period NJ Corrections budget grew from programs from a response to prison $92.3 million to $845.7 million.¹ overcrowding to a highly successful and cost effective prisoner re-entry and public safety Reflecting a national trend, New Jersey’s pris- strategy. on population growth was fueled by the ‘get tough on crime’ philosophy and the institu- tion of mandatory minimum sentences for select crimes, including violent and drug crimes. *Data retrieved from US Bureau of Justice Statistics ¹ Manual for the Operation of Adult Drug Courts in New Jersey, July 22, 2002 Page 2 REENTRY COALITION OF NEW JERSEY IMPACT OF COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS IN NEW JERSEY: REDUCING PRISON POPULATION, INCARCERATION COSTS & RECIDIVISM Major changes in New Jersey’s sentencing laws that contributed to prison population growth included: 1981, Graves Act required a mandatory minimum sentence for offenses committed with a firearm.
    [Show full text]
  • Boardagenda 2018-02-21.Pdf
    DELAWARE RIVER PORT AUTHORITY & PORT AUTHORITY TRANSIT CORP. BOARD MEETING Wednesday, February 21, 2018 9:00 a.m. One Port Center Board Room Camden, NJ John T. Hanson, Chief Executive Officer DRPA BOARD DELAWARE RIVER PORT AUTHORITY BOARD MEETING Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 9:00 a.m. One Port Center, 11th Floor, Board Room Camden, New Jersey ORDER OF BUSINESS 1. Roll Call 2. Public Comment 3. Report of the CEO – February 2018 4. Report of the CFO 5. Approval of January 17, 2018 Board Meeting Minutes 6. Monthly List of Previously Approved Monthly List of Payment of January 2018 7. Monthly List of Previously Approved Purchase Orders and Contracts of January 2018 8. Approval of Operations & Maintenance Committee Meeting Minutes of February 6, 2018 9. Adopt Resolutions Approved by Operations & Maintenance Committee of February 6, 2018 DRPA-18-010 Contract No. CB-31-2016(R), Commodore Barry Bridge Painting Phase 2 – Pennsylvania Approach Span DRPA-18-011 Capital Project Contract Modification DRPA-18-012 Contract No. PATCO-57-2016(R), Woodcrest Parking Lot Rehabilitation DRPA-18-013 Auto Parts Contract for DRPA and PATCO DRPA-18-014 One (1) 2018 Elgin Broom Bear Street Sweeper DRPA-18-015 Two (2) 2018 Aerial Equipment Trucks DRPA-18-016 Four (4) 2018 Swap Loaders DRPA-18-017 Two(2)2018FordF-150SuperCabTrucks Two (2) 2018 Ford F-250 Crew Cab Trucks Two (2) 2018 Ford F-350 Crew Cab Trucks One (1) 2018 Ford F-550 Regular Cab Truck Two (2) 2018 Ford Escapes DRPA-18-018 Federal Transit Administration Section 5307/5340 Grant Application DRPA-18-019 Federal Transit Administration Section 5337 Grant Application (State of Good Repair) DRPA-18-020 PARTSWG Regional Public Security Awareness Project, Phase VII DRPA-18-021 Haddon Township Earth Day Event at the Westmont Station Parking Lot 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Funds Federal Funds
    FEDERAL FUNDS FEDERAL FUNDS 10. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 40. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 49. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES, PLANNING, AND REGULATION Account No. (thousands of dollars) 02--3320 Animal and Plant Disease Control . ( 160) 04--3340 Dairy and Commodity Regulation . ( 103) 06--3360 Marketing Services . ( 205,301) 07--3360 Commodity Distribution . ( 1,400) Total Appropriation, Agricultural Resources, Planning, and Regulation . 206,964 Total Appropriation, Department of Agriculture . 206,964 22. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS 40. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 41. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT Account No. (thousands of dollars) 06--8015 Uniform Construction Code . ( 19) 02--8020 Housing Services . ( 184,695) Total Appropriation, Community Development Management . 184,714 50. ECONOMIC PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND SECURITY 55. SOCIAL SERVICES PROGRAMS Account No. (thousands of dollars) 05--8050 Community Resources . ( 36,153) 15--8051 Women’s Programs . ( 1,287) Total Appropriation, Social Services Programs . 37,440 Total Appropriation, Department of Community Affairs . 222,154 26. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS 10. PUBLIC SAFETY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE 16. DETENTION AND REHABILITATION 7025. SYSTEM--WIDE PROGRAM SUPPORT Account No. (thousands of dollars) 13--7025 Institutional Program Support . ( 12,078) Total Appropriation, System--Wide Program Support . 12,078 7040. NEW JERSEY STATE PRISON Account No. (thousands of dollars) 08--7040 Institutional Care and Treatment . ( 48) Total Appropriation, New Jersey State Prison . 48 H-1 FEDERAL FUNDS 26. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS 7050. EAST JERSEY STATE PRISON Account No. (thousands of dollars) 08--7050 Institutional Care and Treatment . ( 260) Total Appropriation, East Jersey State Prison . 260 7060. BAYSIDE STATE PRISON Account No. (thousands of dollars) 08--7060 Institutional Care and Treatment .
    [Show full text]
  • Section Iii-A Seven-Year Capital Improvement
    Section III-A Seven Year Capital Improvement Plan SECTION III-A SEVEN-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FISCAL 2010 – 2016 Department of Agriculture Department of Children and Families Department of Corrections Department of Education Section III-A, Page 1 Section III-A Seven Year Capital Improvement Plan Section III-A, Page 2 Section III-A Seven Year Capital Improvement Plan Fiscal Year 2010 7 Year Agency Summary of Capital Requests and Recommendations General Fund * Amounts Expressed in Thousands (000's) FY 2010 Total 7 Yr Request Request Request Request Commission DEPARTMENT Program FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 - 2016 Recommendation Department of Agriculture $3,050 $3,050 $0 $0 $0 $50 Department of Children and Families $14,630 $2,945 $2,015 $2,050 $7,620 $240 Department of Corrections $1,612,146 $211,661 $690,406 $496,635 $213,444 $16,775 Department of Education $12,403 $1,880 $2,026 $4,322 $4,175 $400 Department of Environmental Protection $1,413,146 $287,826 $424,374 $401,421 $299,525 $88,622 Department of Health and Senior Services $16,100 $16,100 $0 $0 $0 $7,300 Department of Human Services $394,575 $185,770 $51,615 $47,820 $109,370 $8,375 Department of Law and Public Safety $13,375 $13,375 $0 $0 $0 $5,230 Juvenile Justice Commission $81,756 $17,200 $12,323 $13,639 $38,594 $5,200 Department of Military and Veterans Affairs $27,285 $7,702 $4,530 $5,578 $9,475 $175 Rutgers, The State University $1,220,893 $164,787 $227,027 $268,027 $561,052 $0 University of Medicine and Dentistry $1,760,201 $629,708 $342,291 $222,897 $565,305 $0
    [Show full text]
  • Camden, Referred to by Poet Walt Whitman As “A City Invincible,1”Was Once a Major Manufacturing and Shipbuilding Hub Along the Delaware River
    C AMDEN: RISING ABOVE THE FLOODWATERS he city of Camden, referred to by poet Walt Whitman as “a city invincible,1”was once a major manufacturing and shipbuilding hub along the Delaware River. At its peak in 1950, TCamden’s population stood at 125,000. Today, Camden is the 12th largest city in New Jersey at 77,000 people. The exodus of businesses and residents has strained the municipal tax base to the point where the city has difficulty providing even basic services. Neglected water and sewer systems in the city, some of which date back to the late 19th and early 20th centuries, have exacerbated the An abandoned factory once used by regular problems of an old combined sewer and stormwater system. Silt and the RCA Corporation to make the debris are accumulating in sewer lines, reducing capacity to a fraction of what Victrola phonograph has been it was originally and causing backups and flooding across the city. An influx of redeveloped into The Victor, luxury loft apartments with ground-floor new businesses would help to generate the tax revenue necessary to maintain restaurants and retail. and upgrade these systems; however, the city faces an unfortunate catch-22 if flooding and sewer backups cause businesses to seek other locations. Despite these challenges, the city is starting to see sparks of revitalization. The downtown waterfront has been transformed into an entertainment district, featuring a minor league ballpark, aquarium, concert venue, market-rate housing and new office buildings. Local anchor institutions Rutgers-Camden, Rowan University and the Cooper University Hospital have made tremendous efforts to revitalize the areas around their campuses.
    [Show full text]
  • Cooper-Grant / Central Waterfront
    CONNECTING COMMUNITIES: A COOPER-GRANT/CENTRAL WATERFRONT NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN UPDATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thank you to the residents, workers, business and institutional representatives, and stakeholders of the Cooper-Grant neighborhood, Downtown and the Central Waterfront area. Your invaluable insight, time and continued commitment to improve the neighborhood for all has helped make this Plan Update possible. STAKEHOLDER MEETING PARTICIPANTS INTERVIEW PARTICIPANTS Andrew Bush, Cooper Health Cynthia Primas, IDEA Center Shaneka Boucher Nick Cangelosi, The Michaels Group Katherine Puccio, EMR Nick Cangelosi Stephen Dottavi, EMR Dana Redd, CEO Rowan University/ Erin Crean Caren Fishman, Executive Director, Rutgers-Camden Board of Directors Raymond Lamboy Camden Special Services District Michael Venuto, DRPA Engineering Sgt. Dekel Levy Greg Gamble, Rutgers University Curt Voss, Live Nation Nichelle Pace Raymond Lamboy, LAEDA Steven Weinstein, Rowan University Dana Redd Barbara Lazzaro, NJ Transit Dr. Edward Williams, City of Camden Sonia Rivera Perez Government and Community Relations Department of Planning Scott Schreiber Sgt. Dekel Levy, Camden County Jennifer Young, Verizon Nyeema Watson Police Department Vince Nicoletti, Adventure Aquarium COOPER-GRANT COOPER’S FERRY PLANNING TEAM NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PARTNERSHIP _INTERFACE STUDIO Jonathan Latko, President Joseph Myers, Vice President & COO Scott Page Bryon Yoder, Treasurer Brian Bauerle, Vice President Stacey Chen Benjamin Saracco, Volunteer Maria G. Gonzalez Rausell Jessica Franzini, Executive
    [Show full text]