The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: Changing Prison Management: Strategies in Response to VOI/TIS Legislation Author(s): Susan Turner ; Laura J. Hickman ; Judith Greene ; Terry Fain Document No.: 198622 Date Received: January 2003 Award Number: 98-CE-VX-0023 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Changing Prison Management Strategies in Response to VOIDIS Leg is1 at ion Susan Turner, Laura J. Hickman, Judith Green(?, and TlerryFain DR U-2721 -NIJ December 2001 Prepared for the National Institute of Justice Criminal Justice Program The RAND unrestricted draft series is intended to transmit results of RAND research. This draft has not been formally re- viewed by the RAND quality assurance process. However, it has been reviewed by the client and revised in light of the reviews. This version is suitable for transmission to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service. RRND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. ThisThe document research is described a research in reportthis report submitted was supported to the U.S. by Department grant #96-CE-VX-O023from of Justice. the National Institute of Justice, withfunds transferred-frum the This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressedCorrections are those Program of the author(s)Office,Ofice and do of Justicenot necessarily Programs, reflect United the officialStates Deparfnzenf uf Justice. Points of view are those of the authors and do not - - P,-. , ., . position or policies of the U.S. Department. of Justice. --I:-:-- -~-*l-- hr-Ll'--nl lerC:t,rto 04 Lrrat;rp nl thp cnmp&ovq proprnm ()ff,-o PREFACE The Federal Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, as amended, provided for federal Violent-Offender Incarceration and Truth-in-Sentencing (VOI/TIS) incentive grants to the states and U.S. territories. These grants are to be used to increase the capacity of state correctional systems to confine serious and violent offenders. Congress and the U.S. Department of Justice agreed to devote some of the committed funds intended for these grants to evaluating the actions they support. This evaluation addresses the impacts of recent sentencing practices on changes in correctional management and the expanded use of privatization, as a complement to RAND'S national evaluation of the implementation and early outcomes of VOI/TIS incentive grants to states. RANDls evaluation tracked and documented changes in sentencing changes, classification, health care, programming, professionalism of correctional employees, and costs. Information on prison management was collected at a national level and through state-level case studies in seven states (California, Florida, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, and Washington). In addition, detailed case studies of privatization were conducted in three of the seven prison management case study states--Florida,North Carolina, and Texas. This report is one in a series of RAND studies on the impact of truth-in-sentencing and other "get tough" policies on state and local corrections. Other reports for interested readers include: Susan Turner, Terry Fain, Peter W. Greenwood, Elsa Chen, and James Chiesa, with Stella Bart, Judith Greene, Daniel Krislov, Eric Larson, Nancy Merritt, and Albert Hyun Yoon (20011, National Evaluation of the Viol en t offender Incarcera tion/Truth- in- Sent encing Incentive Grant Program, DRU-2634-NIJI Final Report to the National Institute of Justice. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. - iv - Susan Turner, Peter Greenwood, Elsa Chen, and Terry Fain (1999), "The Impact of Truth-in-Sentencing and Three-Strikes Legislation: Prison Populations, State Budgets, and Crime Rates," Stanford Law and Policy Review, Volume 11 : 1. Joan Petersilia, Susan Turner, and Terry Fain (19991, Profiling Inmates in Los Angeles County Jail: Risks, Recidivism, and Release Options, DRR-2136-NIJt Final Report to the National Institute of Justice. Nancy Merritt, Susan Turner, Peter Greenwood, and Terry Fain (iggg), Implementation and Impact of Violent Offender and Truth - in -Sentencing Legislation: How Counties Respond to the Challenge, DRR-2110-NIJJFinal Report to the National Institute of Justice. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. -v- CONTENTS Preface .............................................................. iii Figures ............................................................... ix Tables ................................................................ xi Summary ............................................................. xiii Introduction .................................................. xiii VOI/TIS Incentive Grants ....................................... xiv Methodology .................................................... xvi Findings ...................................................... xvii Limitations of the Current Study ........................... xvii National Analyses of Prison Management Trends .............xviii Prison Management Case Study Interviews ...................xviii Privatization Case Studies .................................. xix Conclusions ................................................... xxiv Acknowledgments ......................................................xxv I . BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION ........................................ 1 Allocation of VOI/TIS Funds ...................................... 2 I1 . REVIEW OF PRISON MANAGEMENT ....................................... 5 Early Release .................................................... 8 Classification ................................................... 9 Crowding ........................................................ 10 Health Care ..................................................... 12 Programming ..................................................... 14 cost of Corrections ............................................. 15 I11 . REVIEW OF PRIVATIZATION......................................... 17 Research on Cost Comparisons .................................... 19 Comparison of Correctional Services ............................. 21 Summary ......................................................... 25 IV . POTENTIAL IMPACT OF VOI/TIS ON PRISON MANAGEMENT AND PRIVATIZATION .................................................... 26 Early Release ................................................... 26 Classification .................................................. 27 Crowding ........................................................ 28 Health Care ..................................................... 29 Programming ..................................................... 30 cost of Corrections ............................................. 31 Privatization................................................... 32 V . METHODS OF THE STUDY .............................................. 33 National Data Sources ........................................... 33 Corrections Yearbook ......................................... 33 American Correctional Association (ACA) Survey of State Correctional Officials ..................................... 34 National Analyses ............................................ 34 Prison Management Case Studies .................................. 38 This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. vi . In-Depth Privatization Case Studies ............................. 39 VI . NATIONAL TRENDS IN PRISON MANAGEMENT .............................. 42 VOI/TIS Impact on Prison Operations: Findings from the National VOI/TIS Evaluation ......................................... 42 Historical Trends in Prison (Management Issues ...................48 Long Sentences ............................................... 48 Special Populations .......................................... 50 Inmate Classification ........................................ 52 costs ........................................................ 52 Crowding ..................................................... 53 Safety ....................................................... 54 Grievances ................................................... 56 Staff Response ...............................................57 Health Care .................................................. 59 Inmate Programming ........................................... 59 Summary of National Trends ..................................