Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 3:15 am
Time: 3:15 am
Results for prison contraband (canada)
1 results foundAuthor: Johnson, Sara Title: Assessing the Impact of Enhanced Drug Interdiction Activities at Kingston Penitentiary: A Pilot Study Summary: Beginning in January 2009, Kingston Penitentiary introduced substantial changes to its drug interdiction activities under a three-phased Drug Interdiction and Contraband Eradication (DICE) initiative. Some of these changes included the introduction of random drug interdiction "blitz" days, changes to the protocol for community gatherings at the institution, enhanced enforcement of urinalysis policy/procedures and educating visitors and inmates about the effects of drugs in a prison setting. The aim of the DICE was to maintain a safe environment for both staff and inmates through the coordination of activities to stop the introduction of drugs into the prison. The purpose of the current report was to examine the operational impact of the DICE activities with respect to alcohol, drug and security-related measures, as well as visiting practices. In order to achieve this, pre- to post- DICE comparisons were conducted on a variety of variables including contraband/unauthorized items seized, drug dog search results, urinalysis results, institutional incidents and attendance at visits and community gatherings. In addition, where possible, the same indicators were examined over a similar timeframe at another maximum security institution in the Ontario region (Millhaven Institution) that was not subjected to enhanced interdiction activities. While a slight decrease in the rate of positive results for random urinalysis testing was observed at Kingston Penitentiary pre- to post-DICE, a large decline in the refusal rate was noted (24% to 11%). This decrease followed a strict enforcement of the CSC policy that positive test results and refusals to provide urine samples are subject to equal disciplinary consequences, modifications to correctional plans, employment opportunities, and visits. In addition, a shift in the type of drugs for which offenders tested positive was observed pre- to post-DICE, with fewer inmates testing positive for THC and cocaine metabolites and more testing positive for Opiates A and Methadone metabolites1. Increases in the number of alcohol/drug-related incidents also occurred after the implementation of DICE. Regarding contraband items, an increase in seizures for all types of alcohol/drugs and alcohol/drug-related paraphernalia was observed following the augmented searching that occurred through the DICE initiative. The exceptions were brew/alcohol and cannabis, which remained stable. The results also suggested that there were broader operational impacts of the increased searching. For example, there was an increase in the number of weapons seized pre- to post-DICE3. The combined effect of all of the elements of the DICE initiative may be reflected in other results. For example, the number of institutional incidents related to disciplinary problems showed a large decline, from a monthly average of 37.4 to 16.64. In addition, the number of institutional incidents and disciplinary charges involving fights and assaults5 increased from a monthly average of 6.2 pre-DICE to 8.3 in the post-DICE period. During the same timeframe, no changes in the number of requests for protective custody were observed. The results for visiting practices pre- to post-DICE were mixed. When accounting for visits that were cancelled, there was only a marginal decrease (3.4%) in the number of visits that occurred following the implementation of DICE in comparison to the pre-DICE period. However when examining the number of inmates and visitors attending community gatherings, these numbers declined by 41% for inmates and by 51% for visitors pre- to post-DICE. Furthermore, the percent of visits that were denied increased three-fold and the percent of special visits (i.e., noncontact visits or designated seating visits) increased five-fold. The percent of visits that were suspended did not change pre- to post-DICE implementation. Taken together, these results suggest some positive impacts of the DICE initiative in relation to drug trafficking and drug use, as well as additional positive operational impacts such as an increase in the seizures of weapons and a decrease in institutional incidents related to disciplinary problems. However, possible negative post-DICE consequences include an increase in fights and assaults and an increase in positive urinalysis results for Opiates A and Methadone. It should be noted that many of these results also occurred at the comparison site, Millhaven Institution, but often to a lesser degree. Therefore the findings at Kingston Penitentiary may not have been a result of the impact of the DICE initiative alone. The findings of this study should be interpreted with caution due to methodological shortcomings (i.e., lack of a controlled research design, inconsistent recording of information, and small number of observations for some variables). As a result of these limitations, it is suggested that the next step for research in this area would be to conduct a study implementing increased drug interdiction activities in a more controlled and monitored manner at multiple sites, with measurement occurring prior to, during, and following implementation. Details: Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada, 2010. 70p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Report No. R-232: Accessed September 27, 2014 at: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/lbrr/archives/cn21418-eng.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Canada URL: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/lbrr/archives/cn21418-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 133427 Keywords: Drug DetectionDrug InterdictionPrison Contraband (Canada)Prisoner MisconductUrinalysis |