A model-based approach was used to develop performance measures from inmate misconduct data to compare public and private prisons. The performance measures indicated the impact of different prisons upon raising or lowering the probability of inmate misconduct. Data for all misconduct and for two categories of misconduct, violent and drug, were generated for the 36-month period between January 1999 and December 2001 for all prisons within the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and one low-security private prison under contract to BOP. The private prison performed within the lower range of performance for low-security prisons within BOP.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArchambeaultW. G., & DeisD. R. (1996). Cost effectiveness comparisons of private versus public prisons in Louisiana: A comprehensive analysis of Allen, Avoyelles, and Winn Correctional Centers. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University.
2.
ArmstrongG. S., & MacKenzieD. L. (2003). Private versus public juvenile correctional facilities: Do differences in environmental quality exist?Crime & Delinquency, 49, 542–563.
3.
AustinJ., & CoventryG. (2003). A second look at the private prison debate. The Criminologist, 28(1), 3–9.
4.
BlumsteinJ. F., & CohenM. A. (2003). The interrelationship between public and private prisons: Does the existence of prisoners under private management affect the rate of growth in expenditures on prisoners under public management?Alexandria, VA: Corrections Corporation of American and Association for Private Correctional and Treatment Organizations.
5.
BrittonD. M. (1997). Perceptions of the work environment among correctional officers: Do race and sex matter?Criminology, 35, 85.
6.
CampS. D. (1999). Do inmate survey data reflect prison conditions? Using surveys to assess prison conditions of confinement. Prison Journal, 79, 250–268.
7.
CampS. D., & GaesG. G. (2001). Private adult prisons: What do we really know and why don't we know more? In ShichorD. & GilbertM. (Eds.), Privatization of criminal justice: Past, present and future (pp. 283–298). Cincinnati: Anderson.
8.
CampS. D., & GaesG. G. (2002). Growth and quality of U.S. private prisons: Evidence from a national survey. Criminology and Public Policy, 1, 427–449.
9.
CampS. D.GaesG. G.Klein-SaffranJ.DaggettD. M., & SaylorW. G. (2002). Using inmate survey data in assessing prison performance: A case study comparing private and public prisons. Criminal Justice Review, 27, 26–51.
10.
CampS. D.GaesG. G.LanganN. P., & SaylorW. G. (2003). The influence of prisons on inmate misconduct: A multilevel investigation. Justice Quarterly, 20, 501–533.
11.
CampS. D.GaesGerald G., & SaylorWilliam G.. (2002). Quality of prison operations in the federal sector: A comparison with a private prison.”Punishment & Society4, 27–53.
12.
CampS. D.SaylorW. D., & HarerM. D. (1997). Aggregating individual-level evaluations of the organizational social climate: A multilevel investigation of the work environment at the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Justice Quarterly, 14, 739–761.
13.
CampS. D.SaylorW. D., & WrightK. N. (1999). Creating performance measures from survey data: A practical discussion. Corrections Management Quarterly, 3, 71–80.
14.
CrantsD. R.III. (1991). Private prison management: A study in economic efficiency. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 7, 49–59.
15.
GaesG. G.CampS. D.NelsonJ., & SaylorW. G. (2004). Measuring prison performance: Government privatization and accountability. Lanham, MD: Alta Mira Press.
16.
GaesG. G.CampS. D., & SaylorW. G. (1998). Appendix 2: Comparing the quality of publicly and privately operated prisons: A review. In McDonaldD.FournierE.Russell-EinhornM., & CrawfordS. (Eds.), Private prisons in the United States: An assessment of current practice (pp. 1–38). Boston, MA: Abt Associates Inc.
17.
General Accounting Office. (1996). Private and public prisons: Studies comparing operational costs and/or quality of service. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.
18.
GoldsteinH. (1995). Multilevel statistical models. New York: John Wiley.
19.
HardingR. W. (2001). Private prisons. In TonryM. (Ed.). Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 28, pp. 265–346). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20.
HartO.SchleiferA., & VishnyR. W. (1997). The proper scope of government: Theory and an application to prisons. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112, 1127–1161.
21.
HeinrichC. J., & LynnL. E. (2000). Means and ends: A comparative study of empirical methods for investigating governance and performance. Journal of Public Administration and Theory, 11, 109–138.
LincolnJ. R., & ZeitzG. (1980). Organizational properties from aggregate data: Separating individual and structural effects. American Sociological Review, 45, 391–408.
24.
LoganC. H. (1990). Private prisons: Cons and pros. New York: Oxford University Press.
25.
LoganC. H. (1992). Well kept: Comparing quality of confinement in private and public prisons. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 83, 577–613.
26.
McDonaldD. C.FournierE.Russell-EinhornM., & CrawfordS. (1998). Private prisons in the United States: An assessment of current practice. Boston, MA: Abt Associates Inc.
27.
MooreA. T. (1998). Private prisons: Quality corrections at lower cost. Los Angeles: Reason Public Policy Institute.
28.
NelsonJ. (1998). Appendix 1: Comparing public and private prison costs. In McDonaldD.FournierE.Russell-EinhornM., & CrawfordS. (Eds.), Private prisons in the United States: An assessment of current practice (pp. 1–34). Boston, MA: Abt Associates Inc.
29.
PerroneD., & PrattT. C. (2003). Comparing the quality of confinement and cost-effectiveness of public versus private prisons: What we know, why we do not know more, and where to go from here. The Prison Journal, 83, 301–322.
30.
PrattT. C., & MaahsJ. (1999). Are private prisons more cost-effective than public prisons? A meta-analysis of evaluation research studies. Crime & Delinquency, 45, 358–371.
31.
RaudenbushS. W., & BrykA. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
32.
RaudenbushS. W.BrykA. S., & CongdonR. T. (2001). HLM for Windows 5.0: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
33.
SAS International. (2002). SAS 8.02. Cary, NC: SAS International.
34.
SaylorW. G., & WrightK. N. (1992). Status, longevity, and perceptions of the work environment among federal prison employees. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 17, 133–160.
35.
SegalG. F., & MooreA. T. (2002). Weighing the watchmen: Evaluating the costs and benefits of outsourcing correctional services. Los Angeles: Reason Public Policy Institute.
ThomasR. C.GookinK.KeatingB.WhitenerV.WilliamsR. M.CraneR., & BroomC. (1996). Department of Corrections privatization feasibility study. Olympia: Legislative Budget Committee, State of Washington.
