Constructing a new correctional facility is a complicated task, even for small and mid-size counties, where government structures are fairly simple and communities are close-knit.  But, for large urban jurisdictions, building a jail is an even bigger job.

With large jails in mind, the National Institute of Corrections' Jails Division and consultants Michael O'Toole and Ray Nelson entered into a cooperative agreement to determine how NIC could better aid highly populated jurisdictions in planning and designing new correctional facilities.

According to O'Toole, former Chief of the NIC Jail Center, NIC has had resources in place for small and mid-size counties building new facilities for nearly 25 years, but this is not the case for large jails, which require different strategies for building.

"The question that we had was [are] there any kinds of strategies or any kinds of pieces we could develop that would take the same kind of information [that existed for the smaller counties] and put it in a useful form for larger jurisdictions," said O'Toole.

According to Richard Geaither, Correctional Program Specialist for NIC Jails Division, it is important for NIC to begin developing resources that target large jails in particular.

"The more we get them to think about the [construction] process [and] what it is, I think we can be of some benefit to them," Geaither said.  "We may just need to do things differently."

To begin exploring this issue, the consulting team sent questionnaires to members of the Large Jail Network (LJN), which is sponsored by the NIC Jails Division.  It was created a decade ago as a way for corrections personnel who operate jails with average daily populations of over 1,000 inmates to share information. 

The questionnaires identified those of the 150-plus members of the LJN who had recently completed jail construction projects or were in the process of planning them.  The issues that these jurisdictions said they encountered during jail construction were the basis of recommendations O'Toole and Nelson made in a new report.

Mission Statements and Functional Programming

According to the report, one of the most crucial problems for jurisdictions was the fact that they did not develop adequate mission statements for the facilities to begin with, which points to the broader issue of a lack of pre-architectural planning. 

The pre-architectural planning process is essential in order to end up with a product that meets an agency's needs, O'Toole said.  During the planning phase, it is essential to make decisions about functional programming, or how you plan to conduct business in your facility, he added.

"Look at an architect [or] a designer as a problem-solver.  If you don't articulate the problem, which is your functional programming, [to him, then] his chance of solving the problem gets slimmer and slimmer," O'Toole said.  "The idea is you want to sit down and have some kind of thought-out narrative statement about what you're going to do, how much of it you're going to do and how you want to do it.  [And] somebody has to tell that story to the architect," he added.  "They don't have a crystal ball."

Contracting for Consultant Services

Aside from a deficit in pre-architectural planning, the large jurisdictions that were surveyed also indicated that they had difficulty finding consultants for their building projects and did not know how to evaluate or effectively manage them.

"One of the things that came out, which was sort of serendipitous, [was that] people had trouble with consulting services," O'Toole said. 

According to O'Toole, some people from large jurisdictions indicated that they were unaware of how to access consultants and that they had trouble developing performance-based statements of work for the projects for which they were seeking consulting services.

While many large jurisdictions have purchasing departments that are responsible for actually doing the legwork to contract for consultants, O'Toole points out that the burden of creating the statement of work for the project falls on the agency or department that is building the new jail.

"The interesting thing [is that purchasing personnel] may be experts in the process, but they are not experts in what it is they're contracting for," O'Toole said.  "It's up to the agency, really, to develop the meat of the statement of work."

Site Evaluation and Site Selection

Another aspect of the building process that the report identifies as problematic for some jurisdictions is site evaluation and selection.

According to O'Toole, it is necessary to determine the criteria for selecting a site for a new jail.  Then, sites should be evaluated based on those factors and determined to be workable or non-workable.

"Site selection is political and site evaluation is technical," O'Toole said. 

After the technical evaluations take place and viable sites have been identified, then the bureaucrats who will be making the political decision of where to construct the new correctional facility have a pool of locations from which to choose, he added.

"You may not get your favorite site, but at least you know you're going to get a workable site," O'Toole said.   "If it just stays a free-for-all from the get-go [and] everything [stays] in the mix, you can very well get sites that are either unworkable or just outrageously costly."

Schematic Reviews

With pre-architectural planning completed and a site selected for a new jail, a schematic review, or the re-evaluation of the architect's first set of drawings, should be an agency's next step to ensure that the design supports the functional program.  Survey responses indicated that nearly 20 percent of the jurisdictions that had completed or were in the midst of construction projects did not reevaluate the original design.

"It's sort of hard to be doing a schematic review if you haven't done the pre-architectural programming," said O'Toole, noting the importance of the planning step.  "If you've done pre-architectural programming, what you are saying [during the review process] is how well does this design facilitate what it is we think we want to do here," he said.  "Without that, it's like having one foot - you just hop."

During this stage, agencies should be discussing operational issues and making decisions about budgets and staffing, O'Toole said.  At this point, people can determine whether or not they can afford to run the type of facility they are about to build, he added.

If agencies find that their expectations for their functional programming in their facility were a bit unrealisitic, they can also make changes to their design during the schematic review. 

But most importantly, the schematic review is a chance for large jurisdictions to keep a handle on their construction projects, from both the design and operational sides.
"A lot of these things are missed opportunities for jurisdictions to maintain control over their [construction projects]," O'Toole said.  "What we found [is that] jurisdictions that maintain control are a lot happier with the product."

Transition Teams

Of all of the issues identified by survey respondents, jurisdictions had the least problems with transition teams.  However, the report indicates that other stumbling blocks that agencies encountered during their construction projects can be logically attributed to transition team issues.

"I think that the transition starts with the pre-architectural programming," O'Toole said.

Because the transition process should start so early, he said, most agencies are already behind the curve when they create transition teams some time during the construction process. 

Maintenance Programs

Agencies also fall behind when it comes to facility maintenance, O'Toole said.
 
"A jail runs 24-7 [and] most public buildings run [from] nine to five, Monday through Friday, so just the normal wear and tear on a jail as compared to a regular public building is four to fives times as much," O'Toole said.  "Maintenance and upkeep really have to start the day you open the door."

According to O'Toole, although he believes that most are proprietary at this time, several computerized maintenance systems have been developed for correctional facilities.

"There are a lot of systems now that you can put in place to start off with really good maintenance," O'Toole said.  "You can really extend the life of your system and save yourself a lot of money."

This is an important point agencies should remember when starting fresh with a new facility, he said.

Recommendations

To help agencies prepare for issues like facility maintenance and pre-architectural planning when they are embarking on jail construction projects, the report makes several recommendations to NIC about how they can provide additional resources to large jurisdictions.  Among those suggestions are many monographs, detailing the purpose and importance of processes like creating functional narratives schematic reviews.

But, those recommendations can be tweaked or disregarded altogether by the members of the LJN who have actually taken on the task of building a new jail and know best what they need to guide them through the process, O'Toole pointed out.

"We're at best peeking into their world," O'Toole said.  "They have a better sense of their worlds and collectively a better sense of what works and what doesn't in their jurisdictions."

Still, all of the issues identified in the report are important considerations for building new jails in large jurisdictions, according to O'Toole.  It is vital for the facility's design to facilitate its operations in order for the jail to function well, he said.

"The definition of an efficient facility is where your design and operations are congruent," O'Toole said.  "Once you start to try and operate differently than your design, the only way you can overcome those inconsistencies is by adding staff and you become staff inefficient," he said.  "You operational plan and your design have to develop side by side."

Resources:

To view a summary of the report, go to http://www.nicic.org/pubs/2004/019689.pdf

Michael O'Toole maotoole@aol.com

Richard Geaither (800) 995-6429 ext. 139 or rgeaither@bop.gov