LISTENING TO THE EXPERTS: A NATIONAL STUDY OF CORRECTIONAL ADMINISTRATORS' RESPONSES TO PRISON OVERCROWDING

• NCJ Number: 144237
• Journal: Criminal Justice Review Volume: 18 Issue: 1 Dated: (Spring 1993) Pages: 12- 25
• Author(s): M S Vaughn
• Date Published: 1993
• Length: 14 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Survey
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Earlier version of article presented at a meeting of the American Society of Criminology, 1990, Baltimore

Annotation

This research project examined administrative responses to overcrowding in adult correctional facilities in order to identify factors that correctional administrators felt contributed to overcrowding.

Abstract

Questionnaires were mailed to correctional commissioners in all 50 States in the summer of 1990. Persons who returned the questionnaires held various posts, including deputy director, administrative assistant, research advisor, and planning official. Officials in 48 States believed their institutions suffered from overcrowding; 23 States were under some type of court order to reduce overcrowding. Overall, 8.76 factors were identified as contributing to overcrowding, and most officials linked overcrowding to increased sentence length, the drug problem, and public pressure to get tough on crime. Each State adopted approximately eight responses to alleviate overcrowding. Of administrative responses, 38 percent were related in some way to increasing the operational capacity of adult institutions. Nearly all States had initiated construction programs to build new prisons or to increase the number of cell blocks; 42 States were double or triple bunking, 29 States were converting nonprison properties into correctional use, and 27 States were creating additional bed space in existing prison facilities. Prison directors in only 12 States, however, reported that administrative responses reduced overcrowding. In response to a qeustion on which inmates should be eligible for alternatives to incarceration, respondents in 45 States answered that property offenders should be eligible for these alternatives. When asked to rate justifications for punishment (deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, and retribution), respondents generally cited incapacitation as the average citizen's primary objective but indicated that incapacitation should not be a primary concern if prisons are to become less crowded. Policy implications of administrative strategies to reduce prison overcrowding and punishment philosophies are discussed. 40 references and 4 tables