Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 10:30 pm
Time: 10:30 pm
Results for correctional management
3 results foundAuthor: Argentina. Chief National Cabinet of Ministers Title: Public Policies for Health Care in Prison Settings Summary: The Argentine Republic throughout the 1994 reform of the National Constitution has incorporated with constitutional hierarchy by the article 75, clause 22, international instruments of Human Rights, which are part of the constitutional body. The National Government takes as an essential axis in its policies the promotion and assurance of Human Rights in prison settings and guarantees the dignity of persons deprived of their freedom and other rights that act as their support, such as the right of life, of physical integrity and of health care. In this constitutional frame, it has been a concern not only the protection of health, but also the support of a policy that insures the highest possible level of physical and mental health (art. 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights), which would provide, in a prison setting, the same quality of health that the rest of the community have (principle of universality and equivalence). At first stage, it was crucial to consider health in prisons as a public policy and necessary for the Ministry responsible for the Public Health to assume the responsibility and dictate the protocols by which prevention and assistance in prisons must be guided. Moreover, coordination must exist among the different government agencies to guarantee the right to health care, as well as social inclusion of inmates. Therefore, on the 29th.July 2008, the Ministries of Justice, Security and Human Rights, Health and the Scientific Consultant Committee for Control of Illegal Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances and Complex Crimes (nowadays depends on the Chief of Cabinet of Ministers), they signed the framework agreement of cooperation in order to coordinate and improve the prevention, treatment and rehabilitation, throughout the implementation of programs, activities and plans on integral policies for health care and social inclusion (education, work and social development). On the one hand, in order to modify the health penitentiary paradigm and guarantee health post-penitentiary mechanisms for the people deprived of their freedom, the creation of "Inter-Ministerial Office for the Social Inclusion of People on Freedom Situation" has been proposed, which coordinates the different Ministries involved. On the other hand, being Argentina a federal country, on 29th December 2009, it was signed an Agreement for Cooperation and Assistance in Prisons, of which the Chief of the Cabinet Ministers, the Ministry of Justice, Security and Human Rights, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Social Development and the Provinces of Salta, Mendoza, Tierra del Fuego and Buenos Aires; the Committee on Public Policies for Prevention and Control of Transnational Illegal Drug Trafficking, Organized Crime and Corruption was the technical consultant. Finally, this change of state policies, that is that Ministry of Health is the one who establishes the strategies for assistance and prevention in prisons, through coordinated actions with the Ministries of Justice, Social Development, Work and Education, enabling the access of persons deprived of their freedom to health, in accordance with the obligations assumed by our country by the International Covenants of Human Rights. Details: Buenos Aires, Argentina: Chief National Cabinet of Ministers, 2010. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 23, 2011 at: www.jgm.gov.ar/archivos/jgm/public_policies_health_prison_en.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Argentina URL: Shelf Number: 121113 Keywords: Correctional ManagementInmatesPrison Health Care (Argentina)Prisoners |
Author: Cebula, Nancy Title: Achieving Performance Excellence: The Influence of Leadership on Organizational Performance Summary: Leadership is a very important component of higher performing organizations. This book presents a breadth and depth of information about leading others and describes what leaders need to excel at and what up-and-coming leaders need to know as they prepare themselves for leadership positions. Taking a balanced approach to leadership allows correctional leaders to influence different people and diverse stakeholder groups in differing situations. Good leaders know when they need to manage rather than lead and how these two activities differ. “Leadership That is Transforming” discusses a key concept for correctional leaders. The intersection of transformational leadership and command-and-control organizational structure is discussed in depth, using the Army’s reliance on transformational leadership concepts as presented in one of their field manuals and through military doctrine. Correctional leaders who master the navigation of these seemingly contradictory concepts are those who are able to lead their organizations to higher performance, develop staff who are able to perform effectively in the complex correctional environment, and encourage innovation while managing risk. Two case studies are presented to show how leaders use collaboration to create buy-in and commitment to change; how important leadership is when changing the fundamental structure of an agency, moving from micromanaging to empowering staff; and how this changes outcomes, especially for the supervised population. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Corrections, 2012. 100p. Source: Internet Resource: accessed June 28, 2012 at: http://static.nicic.gov/Library/025338.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://static.nicic.gov/Library/025338.pdf Shelf Number: 125373 Keywords: Correctional AdministrationCorrectional ManagementManagement Skills |
Author: Metcalf, Hope Title: Administrative Segregation, Degrees of Isolation, and Incarceration: A National Overview of State and Federal Correctional Policies Summary: This report provides an overview of state and federal policies related to long-term isolation of inmates, a practice common in the United States and one that has drawn attention in recent years from many sectors. All jurisdictions in the United States provide for some form of separation of inmates from the general population. Prison administrators see the ability to separate inmates as central to protecting the safety of both inmates and staff. Yet many correctional systems are reviewing their use of segregated confinement; as controversy surrounds this form of control, its duration, and its effects. The debates about these practices are reflected in the terms used, with different audiences taking exceptions to each. Much of the recent public discussion calls the practice “solitary confinement” or “isolation.” In contrast, correctional facility policies use terms such as “segregation,” “restricted housing,” or “special management,” and some corrections leaders prefer the term “separation.” All agree that the practice entails separating inmates from the general population and restricting their participation in everyday activities; such as recreation, shared meals, and religious, educational, and other programs. The degree of contact permitted — with staff, other inmates, or volunteers — varies. Some jurisdictions provide single cells and others double; in some settings, inmates find ways to communicate with each other. The length of time spent in isolation can vary from a few days to many years. This report provides a window into these practices. This overview describes rules promulgated by prison officials to structure decisions on the placement of persons in “administrative segregation,” which is one form of separation of inmates from the general population. Working with the Association of State Correctional Administrators (ASCA), the Arthur Liman Program at Yale Law School launched an effort to review the written policies related to administrative segregation promulgated by correctional systems in the United States. With ASCA’s assistance, we obtained policies from 47 jurisdictions, including 46 states and the Federal Bureau of Prisons. This overview provides a national portrait of policies governing administrative segregation for individuals in prisons, outlines the commonalities and variations among jurisdictions, facilitates comparisons across jurisdictions, and enables consideration of how and when administrative segregation is and should be used. Because this review is of written policies, it raises many questions for research – about whether the policies are implemented as written, achieve the goals for which they are crafted, and at what costs. Information is needed on the demographic data on the populations held in various forms of segregated custody, the reasons for placement of individuals in and the duration of such confinement, the views of inmates, of staff on site, and of central office personnel; and the long-term effects of administrative segregation on prison management and on individuals. Without such insights, one cannot assess the experiences of segregation from the perspectives of those who run, those who work in, and those who live in these institutions. Details: New Haven, CT: Liman Public Interest Program at Yale Law School, 2013. 64p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 6, 2013 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2286861 Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2286861 Shelf Number: 129265 Keywords: Administrative SegregationCorrectional AdministrationCorrectional ManagementPrisonersSolitary Confinement |