3 observations about improving corrections

I have been a trainer for 30 years, at the conference, civilian/programs, basic jail officer, and jail in service levels. I enjoy it in retirement, and have never ceased to learn something new from the jail staff people who attend my presentations.

One of the main topics that I have taught frequently is inmate manipulation, especially since the publication of my book The Art of the Con: Avoiding Offender Manipulation 2nd Edition (American Correctional Association, 2009). I am not saying that I am an expert, but working in a jail around inmates for over 27 years gives one experience and insight into how criminals incarcerated in jails think and act. The corrections field changes rapidly with new studies, data and equipment being introduced every year, as well as new case law and standards form state correctional boards, federal agencies, and the American Correctional Association.

Recently, I was a guest of the New Jersey American Correctional Association (NJACA) at the invitation of corrections veteran Anthony Gangi. Three observations that I would like to make as a result of this wonderful experience are as follows.

1. We must reduce the instances of manipulation
Corrections has had a rough year, due to the New York prison escape that captured the nation’s attention last summer. A few years before the Baltimore jail scandal resulted in a lot of media attention.

Many citizens — good tax paying citizens — were most likely thinking: “What the hell are we paying taxes for to keep these bad people locked up?”

These incidents, as negative as they were, illustrated the importance of training all staff — sworn and non-sworn — about the most effective weapon that an incarcerated inmate has. It is not a shank or homemade weapon. It is the tool of manipulation — getting staff to do favors, have sex or smuggle in contraband.

2. All staff — sworn and non-sworn — must have training that digs deeper into staff roles and duties
It is not enough to train, for example, kitchen staff and programs staff in the rules about not bringing anything in for inmates. The topic that must be addressed more deeply is why the inmate would make a request and why it is important for all persons in the facility that this action does not occur.

As a result, all staff training — both sworn and non-sworn — should include the culture of the inmate how they get people to enable them, how they get through life by cheating, stealing, etc.-and why they commit crimes. The first things that went through my mind when I heard about the female civilian being involved with the New York prison escape was: “How in depth was her training?” and “Was her training ‘glossed over’?”

She is not blameless — she made a decision to help these inmates-but after such an embarrassing incident, corrections trainers and supervisors should take a look and ask “How deep does our training go”?

3. Cross perspective training should also discuss in depth a simple term: we
We will watch out for each other no matter what the job is or what our duties are. We (supervisors, trainers, line officers and civilians) will act as supports if we think a staff member is stressed out.

Finally, we all want to go home safely at the end of our workday. Sworn staff should inform non-sworn staff that we are here to make you safe. Non-sworn staff — particularly mental health, chaplains, educators, substance abuse counselors, and volunteers — should say we appreciate what you COs do, and by assisting inmates that want to be helped, we can make the climate of the facility more positive.

We are all better off if supervisors and trainers — with their counterparts on the civilian side — train more in depth about the culture of the inmates, the roles and duties that all staff have, and strive to help each other if the stress is too much.

If we do not, the inmates win.

It was a great experience in New Jersey. I would like to extend a sincere thank you to New Jersey ACA, Sherry Sandler, Anthony Gangi, and panelists.