America’s Mass Incarceration Problem Can Prison Contractors Actually Be Part of the Solution?
Executive Summary
2
America’s Mass Incarceration Problem Can Prison Contractors Actually Be Part of the Solution?
MTC Institute Copyright © 2017 Principal Authors: Danny Jasperson and Karin Rueff
Comments are appreciated and should be directed to: Danny Jasperson, Director, MTC Institute 500 North Marketplace Drive P.O. Box 10 Centerville, UT 84014 [email protected]
Suggested citation: MTC Institute (2017). America’s Mass Incarceration Problem: Can Prison Contractors Actually
Be Part of the Solution? Management & Training Corporation, Centerville, UT.
America’s Mass Incarceration Problem: Can Prison Contractors Actually Be Part of the Solution? consists of a
two-part full report and an executive summary:
Part I explores the policies that led to mass incarceration in America, the role of correctional facilities in
criminal justice reform, and ways in which contract prisons can be used as a tool for reversing the
incarceration trend.
Part II highlights the efforts of MTC correctional facilities to promote a culture of safety and
rehabilitation, citing interviews with government partners, community members, and men and women
who have served time in MTC correctional facilities.
To see the full report, click here
3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY It’s difficult to dispute the fact that the US has an incarceration problem. Over the last 45 years, the
incarceration rate has more than quadrupled, making the US prison population by far the largest in the world.1
With re-arrest rates as high as 55 percent,2 millions cycle through the corrections system multiple times without
having the underlying issues that put them in contact with the system in the first place fully addressed.
HOW DID WE GET HERE? CAUSES OF MASS INCARCERATION
What led to such a reliance on incarceration and failings in rehabilitating those that have violated our laws?
Some have tried to blame mass incarceration on contract prison operators, claiming that the pursuit of profit
has filled prisons and thwarts reform efforts. This simplistic view fails to account for the tough-on-crime
mentality and decades of public policy decisions at all levels of government that have contributed to
exceptionally high use of incarceration in the US (see figure 1).
Figure 1 Timeline and visual representation of the rise in the US incarceration rate: 1970 to 2015
Figure 1 notes: The green area chart plots annual changes in the incarceration rate of state and federal prisoners from 96 per 100,000 in 1970
to 458 per 100,000 in 2015, as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
While no single policy, practice, or entity is fully responsible for mass incarceration, tough-on-crime sentencing
policies throughout the 70s, 80s, and 90s—including determinate sentencing, mandatory minimums, truth in
sentencing, and three strikes—have all been found to play a role.3 In the 1990s and early 2000s, a 50 percent
increase in the number of prosecutors nationally4 led to a 40 percent increase in admissions to prison.5
0
500
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
US
inca
rcer
atio
n r
ate
per
10
0,0
00
1972US incarceration rate at 102 per 100,000; begins
30-year trend of 6% average annual growth
Mid 70sRise of determinate
sentencing
1980sRise of mandatory
minimum sentencing laws
1990sRise of truth in
sentencing and three strikes laws
1990- 2007Number of US
prosecutors grows by 50%
1994-2008Admissions to prison
grows by 40%
2000sStates begin enacting
less rigid and less severe sentencing laws
2007-2008US incarceration rate
peaks at 506 per 100,000
20153% drop in US
incarceration rate -largest since 1968
4
Behind the tough-on-crime policies was a shift in the philosophy of corrections from rehabilitation to
punishment and deterrence. This philosophy became solidified in 1974 when the results of a comprehensive
study on rehabilitation appeared to show that “nothing works” in rehabilitation.6
THE ROLE OF PRIVATE CONTRACTORS IN INCARCERATION
Starting in the 1980s, severe overcrowding and unconstitutional prison conditions prompted some states and
the federal government to contract for the construction and operation of prisons. 7 Government correctional
agencies retained full oversight of contract prisons, which must adhere to the same standards as publicly run
prisons. Contract prison use peaked in 20128 and today, only eight percent of US prisoners are housed in
contract prisons.9
Critics have claimed that “the private prison industry helped to create the mass incarceration crisis.”10 The truth
is, even if all state and federal prison contracts were cancelled today, America would still have the largest prison
population in the world and all of the problems associated with mass incarceration would still exist.
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? REVERSING THE MASS INCARCERATION TREND
Public opinion on punitive criminal justice policies has
been changing and there are currently bipartisan efforts at
all levels of government aimed at reversing the
incarceration trend. 11 Policies that prioritize prison space
for those who commit the most serious offenses have
allowed governments to reduce prison populations
without compromising public safety.12 As a result of these
policy changes, the incarceration rate dropped three
percent in 2015—the largest decrease since 1968.13
The Role of Prisons is to Rehabilitate
The primary roles of prisons in the mass incarceration era
were to protect the public, punish offenders, and deter
crime. Prisons now have a small but important role to play
in reversing mass incarceration, but this requires a change
in focus and purpose from punishment to rehabilitation.
Four decades of correctional research has shown that “there is sufficient evidence to reject the nothing works
mantra.”14 Corrections agencies have the greatest influence over the rehabilitation of incarcerated men and
women. The way correctional staff interact with inmates, the security and care they provide, and the programs
and opportunities they provide are an essential part of rehabilitation. All correctional facilities—both publicly
run and contract prisons—should promote a culture of safety and rehabilitation through:
Strong leadership, training, and professional development for staff
Access to high-quality, accredited medical care for all incarcerated people
Evidenced-based programming to reduce recidivism
Family and community connections to assist with successful transitions
Paul McAfee (right) credits the staff and programs at MTC’s Diboll Correctional Center with helping him turn his life around. Read Paul’s story in Part I of America’s Incarceration Problem: Can Contractors Actually be part of the solution?
5
Contract Prisons Can Be Part of the Solution
Ending mass incarceration will require comprehensive criminal justice reforms at all levels of governments. MTC
supports many of the current reform proposals to safely reduce the prison population, such as alternatives
sanctions for low-level offenses. While the role of contract prisons in the criminal justice system is small, they
can play an important part in reform:
Contract prisons that promote safety and rehabilitation can be a part of the solution to mass
incarceration by preparing incarcerated men and women to return to society and stay out of prison.
Part II of America’s Mass Incarceration Problem: Can Prisons Contractors Actually Be Part of the Solution
highlights the efforts of MTC correctional facilities to promote a culture of safety and rehabilitation,
citing interviews with government partners, community members, and men and women who have been
incarcerated in MTC-operated correctional facilities.
Contracting for prison performance can encourage more rehabilitative practices in prison, improve
safety and security, reduce recidivism, and spur innovation in corrections.
Contracting for performance involves defining
specific measurable outcomes and tying
incentives to those outcomes. Both public
agencies and private operators could compete
for prison contracts. This approach would
require governments to see correctional
contracts not as merely purchasing space for
prisoners, but as purchasing correctional
services that will improve the lives of men and
women involved with the criminal justice
system and reduce the need for prison space.
1 National Research Council. (2014). The Growth of Incarceration in the United States: Exploring Causes and Consequences. Committee on Causes and Consequences of High Rates of Incarceration. (p. 1) J. Travis, B. Western, and S. Redburn, Editors. Committee on Law and Justice, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. 2 U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. (April 22, 2014). 3 in 4 Former Prisoners in 30 States Arrested within 5 Years of Release. Retrieved from https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/rprts05p0510pr.cfm 3 National Research Council (2014). (p. 101) 4 Pfaff, John F. (2017). Private Prisons, Public Spending. In Locked In: The True Causes of Mass Incarceration and How to Achieve Real Reform (p. 129). New York: Basic Books. 5 Ibid (pp. 72-73) 6 Przybyiski, Roger. (2008). What Works. Effective Recidivism Reduction and Risk-Focused Prevention Programs. (p. 35) Prepared for the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice. Retrieved from https://cdpsdocs.state.co.us/ccjj/Resources/Ref/WhatWorks2008.pdf 7 McDonald, Douglas; Fournier, Elizabeth; Russell-Einbourn, Malcolm; and Crawford, Stephen. (1998). Private Prisons in the United States: An Assessment of Current Practice (p. 8). Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates Inc. 8 Geiger, Abigail. (April 11, 2017). U.S. Private Prison Population Has Declined in Recent Years. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/11/u-s-private-prison-population-has-declined-in-recent-years/ 9 U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. (December 2016). Prisoners in 2015. Appendix Table 2: Prisoners under the jurisdiction of state or federal correctional authorities held in the custody of private prisons and local jails, December 31, 2014 and 2015. (p. 28) Retrieved from https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p15.pdf 10 Shapiro, David. (2011). Banking on Bondage: Private Prisons and Mass Incarceration. (p.8). New York, NY. American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved from https://www.aclu.org/banking-bondage-private-prisons-and-mass-incarceration 11 Baker, Thomas (August 25, 2015). Most Americans Support Rehabilitation Compared to ‘Tough On Crime’ Policies. LSE US Centre. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2015/08/25/most-americans-support-rehabilitation-compared-to-tough-on-crime-policies/#Author 12 Eisen, Lauren-Brooke and Cullen, James. (June 2016). Update: Changes in State Imprisonment. (p. 1). New York University School of Law, Brennan Center for Justice. Retrieved from https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/UpdateChangesinStateImprisonment.pdf 13 U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. (December, 2016). Prisoners in 2015 (p. 1). Retrieved from https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p15.pdf 14 Przybyiski (2008). (p. 35-36)