NCJ Number
165237
Journal
Federal Probation Volume: 60 Issue: 2 Dated: (June 1996) Pages: 49-53
Date Published
1996
Length
5 pages
Annotation
This article analyzes enabling legislation from States that are currently using private correctional initiatives.
Abstract
The authors review the similarities and differences in State legislative acts in four broad areas: contractor qualifications, operational services required of contractors, treatment services required of contractors, and issues of power and authority. Enabling legislation was reviewed in all of the 21 States with such legislation. Regarding contractor qualifications, eight States -- Arizona, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and West Virginia -- show a consensus that requires independent contractors to have qualifications to enter into contract with the State. Four States -- Alaska, Florida, Minnesota, and Texas -- address the qualification issue by stating within their respective legislation that contractors must have the minimum qualifications similar to other State agencies and facilities; however, they fail to specify or list these minimum requirements. Nine States do not specify what qualification standards are required. Within the area of operational and treatment services required of private contractors, four States require that private contractors meet the same standards as if they were being provided by the States. Ten States do not specify any required services. Overall, the research shows that few States have made significant progress toward correctional privatization. It is also apparent that there is little coordination between States in the development of a uniform set of standards, requirements, or regulations to aid privatization planning. The authors offer recommendations to facilitate a transition to partial privatization and to standardize services in the future. They recommend the development of uniform State legislation, uniformity among the contractors themselves, and uniform standards for contractors. They also recommend the formation of a committee or consortium to coordinate and facilitate cooperation between States, as well as the performance of additional studies to address each of the areas detailed in the other recommendations. 4 tables, 6 references, and a list of enabling legislation