Test and Evaluation of Hand-Held Cell Phone Detection Devices

• NCJ Number: 249104
• Author(s): Joe Russo; John S. Shaffer
• Date Published: 2015
• Length: 161 pages
• Grant Number(s): 2010-IJ-CX-K003
• Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
• Publication Format: Document; Document (Online)
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research); Report (Grant Sponsored)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Access is restricted to public safety officials. To obtain a copy of this report, send an email to [email protected] from a legitimate government agency/law enforcement agency email address (no Yahoo, Gmail, etc.).

Annotation

This study examined the performance and utility of four handheld cell phone detection devices in operational scenarios within a correctional setting.

Abstract

Contraband cell phones within jails and prisons represent a significant and growing concern among correctional administrators. This particular form of contraband can seriously undermine the security of the institution, negatively impact public safety and be challenging to locate once introduced. To help meet these challenges various technological approaches are being developed and marketed to correctional agencies necessitating the need for independent evaluation. Researchers were aided by the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections which provided access to the State Correctional Institution at Chester as the testing site. The devices tested employed radio frequency detection (RFD), non-linear junction detection (NLJD) and ferromagnetic detection (FMD). Each device was subject to a battery of tests to include baseline testing in a generic environment and two operational scenarios (individual cell search and foot patrol around inmate housing unit). Target cell phones included both smart phones and "burner" phones using both the GSM and CDMA protocols. Each target was hidden in one of four vessels and in various configurations (on - active call, on - passive mode and off). Each device was evaluated on its ability to detect the presence of the phone (true alarm rate and false alarm rate), the range of detection and the time required to detect the phone. The tests revealed the strengths and limitations of each technology. Subsequent to the formal testing period the devices remained available to facility staff to continue independent evaluation and the study also captures their feedback as to the usability of each device and how helpful it would be in the detection of contraband cell phones. The study notes that a multi-layered approach that includes sound policies, procedures, practices and proven technology solutions continues to be the recommended best practice for combatting contraband cell phones in correctional facilities.