In order to illustrate the arguments, an empirical descriptive analysis of two private prisons and five structurally equivalent state]run prisons in Ohio was conducted, documenting heterogeneity in resources, staff climate, and inmate behaviors. The discussion and analyses emphasize how comparability across private and public corrections should not be assumed. Comparisons should focus on organizations with similar infrastructures and systematically assess client needs and programming, client behavior, staff climate, and a diverse set of outcomes that bear directly and indirectly on clientsf well]being. In so doing, researchers can better set the bar that privatization is supposed to reach or exceed. They can also conduct more credible impact assessments. Cost]savings, for example, do not necessarily occur when contracted services do not match those offered through public corrections or when clientele differ significantly between a private and a public organization. (publisher abstract modified)
Downloads
Similar Publications
- Study of Government-Subsidized Housing Rehabilitation Programs and Arson - Analysis of Programs Administered in New York City, 1978-1981 - Executive Summary
- Substance Abuse Intervention Division (SAID): New York City Department of Corrections' Drug Treatment Program for Women Offenders
- Illinois Treatment Alternatives for Special Clients (TASC) and Selected Drug Abuse Treatment Programs for Women