Materials used during this training program addressing staff sexual misconduct with youth are available at this website. Participants of this course will be able to: define and understand the scope and impact of PREA (Prison Rape Elimination Act) in juvenile settings; understand the links between law and policy in eradicating the sexual abuse of juveniles under correctional supervision; understand the significance and impact of organizational and institutional culture on eliminating sexual violence in juvenile facilities; identify critical management and operational issues that affect staff sexual misconduct with youth in custody; identify an operational training plan and elements of training; recognize the legal implications of staff sexual misconduct with youth in custody; and develop a systematic approach to addressing sexual assault in juvenile settings.
This guide is part of "Future Force: A Guide to Building the 21st Century Community Corrections Workplace". This is an internal culture assessment tool used to score your agency's leadership, professionalism, quality of work life, daily operations, personnel development, and communications.
This article focuses on the “use of jail exit surveys as an effective data-collection tool for creating [a] picture of the characteristics of women in contact with the local jail.” (pg. 1) Sections of this bulletin are: introduction; how one jurisdiction used data to inform responses to women offenders; reasons for conducting a jail exit survey; what a jail exit survey entails; tips for getting started; designing a jail exit survey; understanding jail exit survey information; comprehensive listing of major data elements to include in a jail exit survey; and lessons learned. A sample questionnaire is also included.
Description: The purposes of this law are: to protect crime victims’ rights; to eliminate the substantial backlog of DNA samples collected from crime scenes and convicted offenders; to improve and expand the DNA testing capacity of federal, state, and local crime laboratories; to increase research and development of new DNA testing technologies; to develop new training programs regarding the collection and use of DNA evidence; to provide post-conviction testing of DNA evidence to exonerate the innocent; to improve the performance of counsel in state capital cases; and for other purposes.
Ombuds receive complaints and questions concerning people within an entity or the functioning of an entity. They work for the resolution of particular issues and, where appropriate, make recommendations for the improvement of the general administration of the entities they serve. Ombuds protect: the legitimate interests and rights of individuals with respect to each other; individual rights against the excesses of public and private bureaucracies; and those who are affected by and those who work within these organizations.
Government, academia, and the private sector are answering demands for fairness and
responsiveness by establishing ombuds. Ombuds receive complaints and questions concerning the administration of the establishing entity. However, the basic authorities of these persons called ombuds and the independence, impartiality, and confidentiality with which they operate vary markedly. An ombuds works for the resolution of a particular issue and, where necessary, makes recommendations for the improvement of the general administration of the entity. To be credible and effective, the office of the ombuds must be independent in structure, form, and appearance. The ombuds’ structural independence is the foundation upon which the ombuds’ impartiality is built. The ombuds must conduct investigations and inquiries in an impartial manner, free from initial bias and conflicts of interest. Confidentiality is a widely accepted characteristic of ombuds, which helps ombuds perform the functions of the office. Without these Standards, individuals may be reluctant to seek the ombuds’ assistance because of fear of personal, professional, or economic retaliation; loss of privacy; and loss of relationships. This Resolution and the Standards for the Establishment and Operation of Ombuds Offices are appropriate now to ensure that ombuds can protect individual rights against the excesses of public and private bureaucracies. Practical and political considerations may require variations from these Standards, but it is urged that such variations be eliminated over time.
This article addresses definitions of staff sexual misconduct with offenders, myths and realities of sexual misconduct in corrections, national developments that have affected staff sexual misconduct with offenders, state laws prohibiting staff sexual misconduct with offenders, critical issues for community corrections, actions agency administrators can take address and prevent staff misconduct and investigations.
Congress enacted the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP) Act (Pub. L. No. 93-415, 42 U.S.C. § 5601 et seq.) in 1974. This landmark legislation established OJJDP to support local and state efforts to prevent delinquency and improve the juvenile justice system. On November 2, 2002, Congress reauthorized the JJDP Act. The reauthorization (the 21st Century Department of Justice Appropriations Authorization Act, Pub. L. No. 107-273, 116 Stat. 1758) supports OJJDP's established mission while introducing important changes that streamline the Office's operations and bring a sharper focus to its role. The provisions of the reauthorization took effect in FY 2004 (October 2003).
Description: Tools to assess an organization and implement strategies to prevent staff sexual misconduct in a jail setting are provided. The following sections comprise this document: introduction; using this guide; how to know if an agency needs a policy -- what staff sexual misconduct is, definitions, red flags, and writing policies and procedures; and agency triage -- administrative and management practices, security and supervision, investigations, and inmate programming.
Anti-fraternization policies of the Idaho Department of Corrections. This document states that “it is the policy of the Board of Correction that employees, volunteers, contractors and agents shall maintain only a professional relationship with offenders and ex-offenders, family members of offenders and ex-offenders, inmate visitors, and anyone residing in the last known or same household as the offender or ex-offender”. Includes definitions as well as explanations of procedure, applicability, prohibited activities, notifications of relationship to an offender, investigation and consequences for violations.
This document contains the code of ethics and conduct for employees of the Arlington County Sheriff’s Office. Policy, definitions and procedures are included.
Changes since 1996 in state laws and agency policies and procedures regarding sexual misconduct are reported. Sexual misconduct is defined as “sexual behavior, contact, or relationships between correctional staff and inmates/offenders” (p. 1). Sections cover: an introduction; legislative actions; litigation; agency strategies for addressing staff sexual misconduct such as policies, training, investigation processes, and apprising inmates of sexual misconduct issues; incidence and outcomes of sexual misconduct; respondents’ views on the problem; and concluding remarks. Overall, there has been considerable activity to address this problem.
Women now represent a significant proportion of all offenders under criminal justice supervision. Numbering more than 1 million, female offenders make up 17 percent of all offenders, or one in every six offenders, under some form of correctional sanction. The vast majorities (85 percent) are under community supervision and are typically on probation. The total number of women under correctional control increased 81 percent from 1990 to 2000, while the number of men increased 45 percent.
The increase in the number of women under correctional supervision has called attention to the status of women in the criminal justice system and to the particular circumstances they encounter. The first step in understanding women offenders in the criminal justice system is to understand gender-based characteristics. In addition to offense and demographic characteristics, the specific life factors that shape women’s patterns of offending should be looked at when dealing with women offenders.
Fifty-three departments of corrections responded to a survey regarding sexual misconduct by correctional staff, defined as sexual interactions between staff and inmates. Responses are summarized and tabulated in areas including: legislation; litigation; DOC policies; agency response to sexual misconduct; staff training; and prevention.
Governs the transfer of Oregon Department of Corrections' youth to Oregon Youth Authority