As one of the cornerstones of corrections, security takes many forms. From technological innovations to policy and procedures, making prisons and jails safe for both staff and inmates continues to be a top priority in agencies nationwide. With this, however, comes new challenges in how to provide this type of environment.

Terrorism
Since September 11th, the field of corrections, like the rest of the world, has taken a closer look at its vulnerability to terrorism. From refining emergency operation procedures to taking a closer look at who occupies a facility's cells, all agencies are engrossed in the same guessing game: What's next?

While no one can be sure of this answer, it is certain that the turn of the century was a critical starting point for corrections to prepare for the unknown.
"Y2K awakened us to our potential vulnerability through MIS," says Lester Wright, M.D., Deputy Commissioner/Chief Medical Officer for the New York State Department of Correctional Services. "We worked long and hard to prepare for Y2K and January 1, 2000 came and went and the world didn't end, but we were ready and we learned some things."

Just as Y2K familiarized us with potential technological disaster, September 11th awakened the country to the theology of terrorism and its threat to the U.S. As the events of that day unraveled, many corrections facilities pondered evacuations, transfers and other actions to protect staff and inmates.

Wright was among a panel of experts who tackled the issue of how corrections can prepare for terrorism at the American Correctional Association's 2002 Winter Conference last week in January.

In addition to awareness of threats from outside the prison walls, corrections agencies are also keeping their eyes peeled for terrorist acts originating right in their own facilities.

"What I deal with more is [inside threats of terrorism], maybe not to the scale of Osama bin Laden, but certainly Timothy McVeigh," says Johnny Creed, Assistant Secretary for Adult Services for the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections. "I think of McVeigh a lot more than I do of bin Laden when I think of problems for corrections."

Creed advised participants of the ACA workshop to think of the things inside their facilities that, when combined, could be used as bomb-making material. Similar to the substances used by McVeigh, which included fertilizer and other ingredients for the bomb that blew up the federal building in Oklahoma City, inmates can get their hands on the right combination of items to produce a deadly weapon.

"We have inmates with access to these things, even though we have ACA accreditation and good controls, but we still have inmates with this access," he says. "Don't think you don't have inmates who know [how to make bombs with everyday materials]."

Creed says that in preparing for outside incidents a key is ensuring staff can do their part to prevent an in-house disaster.

Newton E. Kendig, M.D., Medical Director for the Health Services Division of the Federal Bureau of Prisons was also on hand to talk about some of the issues the FBOP is currently considering in preparing for terrorism. Kendig structured his talk around the CDC's response plan for bioterrorism, released in 2000, which focused on five categories: prevention, surveillance, diagnosis, response and communication.

"As far as prevention is concerned, I think the first thing we need to do is look at all the possible vulnerabilities within our institution and how terrorism can reach us," said Kendig. "It can be in multiple ways. It could happen more directly, from an inmate being the target, or the inmate targeting someone else in the community, or our staff could be a target, so we need to think about all the potential ways we could be affected by terrorism."

Gangs/STGs
One of the more difficult populations to manage in a correctional setting includes members of a security threat group. Not only do gang members differ region by region, but also each gang member reacts differently to incarceration. These are just some of the reasons why some states have begun to manage these inmates based on their individual behavior, backed up by good intelligence.

"I don't think anyone has developed a formal program to get them to change their minds. What they are waiting for is the gang member to make the initial commitment that they want out of the gang. Each department develops their own questions to make sure the individual is serious [and] they are not trying to con the system," said Ed Cohn, Executive Director of the National Major Gang Task Force.

Cohn said most departments have their own formulas for working with these individuals and minimizing gang activity behind bars. Nevertheless, gang intelligence experts across the country do share some ideas about what works.

"It's not breaking down the gang but breaking down the individual. Hopefully it will make an impact on the group," said Daryl Vigil, Security Threat Group Manager for the Colorado Department of Corrections and an Executive Board Member of NMGTF.

In order to get a better picture of gang problems and operations in correctional systems across the nation, the NMGTF recently sent surveys to adult prisons in the United States as well as Guam, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and Canada earlier this year. In addition, the organization sent out surveys to nearly 40 of the largest jails in the nation.

With an overall response rate of 77.9 percent, the group obtained valuable input on how big the issue of gangs/STGs in corrections really is.

"Twelve years ago when I started working in this area, I took a pad and paper with me and took copious notes of everything - this wasn't easy," says Lina Presley, NMGTF Executive Board Member and Director of Operational Support Services in the Indiana Department of Corrections. "There is just not enough paper to seriously take notes on every group created."

As proof of this, the prison and jail officials who completed the survey identified over 1,600 STGs in their systems with a total estimated membership of 113,627 inmates.

"I think the first thing that caught our eye was the increase in the numbers of these groups," adds Cohn. "We have to be aware of what's coming in from the community and being established in our prisons and jails, because it's a combination of the two."

The results of the survey, to be published in early 2003, are broken down into four categories: statistical information, incidents of violence from these groups (in 2001), management strategies/tools and STG identification practices in corrections.

With the large number identified from prisons and jails, Presley says the survey shows the field of corrections is paying attention.

"We haven't won the battle by any means, but we've crossed over a few hills," she says. "We're getting statistics back, therefore people have awakened to the fact [that gangs exist] in prisons across the nation."

Supermax
Security vs. sanity. Extended control vs. prolonged deprivation. Correcting behavior vs. breeding psychosis. Protecting others from harm vs. preserving political office.

No matter the different elements of the debate for and against supermax prisons, these facilities are becoming more of a reality across the nation. With agencies either dedicating entire, freestanding facilities or separate, isolated units of existing institutions as places for hard-to-manage inmates, there is definitely a move in the field of corrections to separate these individuals from general population. The motivation to do this, however, is one of the key points of debate.

"There's no question over the last five or six years that [supermax] conditions have multiplied wildly," says Chase Riveland, former head of corrections departments in Washington and Colorado. "I think [this is so] because it is 'fadish' and because it has become a political thing, like boot camps were [in the past]. I think that in corrections, some folks get caught up in the 'political attractiveness web."

Some inmate advocate groups even say that in some states, the drive to create supermax facilities comes directly from politicians and not those who are running the prisons on a daily basis.

"We think this is the latest round in the insane bidding war among politicians to see who can be [tougher] on crime than the next guy," says David Fathi, Staff Attorney for the ACLU's National Prison Project. "[There has] always been a small number of violent, difficult-to-manage prisoners [who have] always been successfully managed in administrative segregation [units] or maximum-security prisons, so there is no need for the proliferation of supermax [facilities]."

During his eight-year tenure as director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Ron Angelone oversaw the opening of two supermax facilities in the state, Wallens Ridge and Red Onion State Prisons. As a staunch supporter of this kind of incarceration, Angelone says politicians don't direct the creation of supermax facilities.

"[In corrections], we serve the citizens of the state, especially the elected governor," says Angelone, who resigned from the DOC in May. "If political concerns are made, there is no pressure. You try to match what you want to do with what your elected officials want to do, even though it may not be the same."

At the same time, he adds that politicians make decisions based on their constituents, so if the public wants tougher sanctions for criminals, that's what they will endorse.

"It is not the whim of politicians [to create supermax facilities] as the ACLU might say," adds Angelone. "I've never seen the ACLU run a prison, so I don't know how they can determine what is good and what is bad [for corrections]. You have to have an environment to protect staff and others incarcerated who don't want to die at the hands of a predator."

This need, he says, is just another part of the "holistic picture of the correctional system." As day reporting and diversion centers are needed, so are places to put those violent inmates who present a threat to others around them and possibly themselves.

"[Supermax] facilities are vital institutions used by correctional professionals to keep a well-balanced, safe, humane system for the overwhelming number [of inmates] who never [get to] a supermax prison," says Angelone.

Streamlining Operations
Corrections agencies nationwide are tightening their belts in order to provide the same level of custody and care, as the funds to do so diminish. With numerous states facing economic uncertainty, administrators in our nation's prisons and jails are struggling to maintain their mission of public safety, and sometimes must alter the ways they perform their duties.

"[Budget cuts] are something correctional administrators need to plan for or anticipate," says Charles Ryan, Deputy Director of Deputy Director of Prison Operations for the Arizona Department of Corrections (ADC). "[They] shouldn't wake up in the morning and look at the newspaper to see that they'll be experiencing budget cuts and not have prepared at all."

While the ADC had enough time to prepare, budget cuts in the past year have impacted both inmates and staff in the department's 13 facilities.

After prioritizing what offender programming could be suspended or eliminated, the ADC decided to terminate outside and professional contracts in substance abuse and religious services. This fiscal year, officials are emphasizing volunteer services in these areas, including representatives from Alcoholics/Narcotics Anonymous and area churches.

While this budget-conscious move was a direct hit on inmate services, the cutback also affects staff, says Ryan.

"The larger concern we have is an increased level of idleness [for inmates]," he says. "There's more tension among the population and more stress on the employees because inmates are not kept busy or engaged in [this programming]."

Budget shortfalls in Arizona not only resulted in the reduction of services for inmates, but also staff shortages throughout the ADC. In order to preserve a high level of security and service in their facilities, wardens, deputy wardens and other employees from the department's Central Office were asked to work security posts on an on-call basis in January.

"The ADC has a rule to use compensatory time and can mandate employees to work double shifts to protect the public - but this causes poor morale," says Charles Goldsmith, Warden of the Arizona State Prison Complex - Eyman and one of the many administrators who worked security posts. "[Having others perform these duties] was not a political move, but the best way to show that great leaders lead by serving as role models. Before we mandated employees to work [these shifts], administrators would work first. Employees could depend upon the fact that there were others on the posts with them."

Besides giving correctional officers a much needed rest and choice to work overtime, this response to staff shortages created a more positive relationship between all employees. By being front and center, many administrators took the opportunity to open up additional avenues of dialogue with their staff on the issues their agency faces.

Back to A Look Back at Corrections in 2002