Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 25, 2024 Mon
Time: 9:08 pm
Time: 9:08 pm
Results for prison rape elimination act (prea)
3 results foundAuthor: U.S. Department of Justice Title: Initial Regulatory Impact Analysis for Notice of Proposed Rulemaking -- Proposed National Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape Under the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) Summary: In the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA), Pub. L. No. 108-79, codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 15601-15609, Congress directed the Attorney General to promulgate national standards for enhancing the prevention, detection, reduction, and punishment of prison rape. In doing so, Congress understood that such standards were likely to require federal, state, and local agencies (as well as private entities) that operate inmate confinement facilities to incur costs in implementing the standards. Given the statute’s aspiration to eliminate prison rape in the United States, Congress expected that some level of compliance costs would be appropriate, and indeed necessary, to foster a zero tolerance approach to prison rape. Nevertheless, Congress insisted that PREA’s aims be balanced against a sensitivity to the “budgetary circumstances” that often challenge the ability of correctional and law enforcement agencies to make major changes to their operating procedures. 42 U.S.C. § 15605(a). In mandating national standards, Congress thus instructed the Attorney General not to adopt any standards “that would impose substantial additional costs compared to the costs presently expended by Federal, State, and local prison authorities.” 42 U.S.C. § 15607(a)(3). This statutory obligation of cost-consciousness requires that the Department investigate the PREA standards’ costs and benefits before implementing a final Rule. Moreover, separate and apart from what PREA itself requires, under Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as amended without substantial change by Executive Order 13258, the Department is required to conduct an Initial Regulatory Impact Analysis (IRIA) to assess the benefits and costs of its proposed rule.1/ Similar requirements are found in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 601-610. Such an analysis must include an assessment of both the quantitative and qualitative benefits and costs of the proposed regulation, as well as a discussion of potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives. The purpose of an IRIA is to inform stakeholders in the regulatory process of the effects of the proposed rule. This IRIA is divided into seven parts. Parts I through IV identify and, where possible, quantify the benefits of reducing prison rape and sexual abuse. Specifically, we estimate the monetary value to society of reducing the prevalence of prison rape and sexual abuse by 1% from the baseline level. This allows us to determine what percentage reduction would need to ensue in order for the expected benefits of the standards to break even with their expected costs. We also take into account an unquantified amount representing the numerous nonmonetizable benefits of reducing prison rape and sexual abuse. Part V then identifies and estimates the costs associated with implementing and complying with the PREA standards. Part VI evaluates the reasonableness of the proposed standards in light of these costs and benefits. Part VII offers some concluding observations. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, 2011. 69p. Source: Internet Resource: Docket No. OAG-131- RIN 1105-AB34: Accessed April 11, 2011 at: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/programs/pdfs/prea_nprm_iria.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/programs/pdfs/prea_nprm_iria.pdf Shelf Number: 121294 Keywords: Prison RapePrison Rape Elimination Act (PREA)Sexual Assault |
Author: Hastings, Allison Title: Screening for Risk of Sexual Victimization and for Abusiveness: Guidelines for Administering Screening Instruments and Using the Information to Inform Housing Decisions Summary: The National Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape (Standards) under the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) require corrections agencies, as part of their prevention efforts, to screen individuals for their risk of sexual victimization or sexual abusiveness and to use the information to inform housing, bed, work, education, and program assignments. To help agencies achieve compliance with the Standards, Vera's Center for Sentencing and Corrections, in conjunction with the National PREA Resource Center has developed guidelines to screen for risk of sexual victimization and for abusiveness, including questions to be asked of inmates, residents, and detainees, and the best use of the information from the screening to inform housing decisions. These guidelines are based on reviews of screening tools and consultations with national classification experts, corrections practitioners, technical assistance providers, and researchers. Details: New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2013. 9p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 21, 2015 at: http://www.vera.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/prea-screening-guidelines.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.vera.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/prea-screening-guidelines.pdf Shelf Number: 135324 Keywords: Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA)Prison ViolenceRisk AssessmentSex Offenders (U.S.) |
Author: Campaign for Youth Justice Title: Zero Tolerance: How States Comply with PREA's Youthful Inmate Standard Summary: The United States' extraordinary use of adult correctional facilities to house youth presents numerous concerns, including serious, long-term costs to the youth offender and to society at large. Science and research conducted over the last 20 years confirm what common sense tells us: kids are different. Adolescent development and adolescent brain research have prompted leaders across the country to start looking at our juvenile justice system through a developmentally appropriate lens.1 Such a perspective equally applies to the treatment of youth who would be eligible for adult prison sentences. In light of the decline of youth arrests and youth crime, coupled with the requirements of the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) the housing status of the 1200 youth under 18 years of age in the adult prison must be investigated. Each state has its own unique prison system, so in order to determine the housing status of youth we gathered information on each state's statutes, policies, and practices for housing the shrinking - and at times - invisible, population of youth in adult prisons across the country. Despite the strong language provided in the Prison Rape Elimination Act, state laws vary widely as to the regulations and parameters for housing youth in adult prisons. In fact, some states have no regulations or parameters governing the treatment of youth sentenced as adults at all. While some states have fully removed youth from their prison systems - Hawaii, West Virginia, Maine, California, and Washington - the overwhelming majority of states allow youth to be housed in adult prisons. In fact 37 states housed youth under 18 years of age in their state prisons in 2012. The PREA requirements have become the emerging standard of care for the housing of youth in adult facilities, yet the majority of states still permit the housing of youth in adult facilities, often times with no special housing protections. Once youth are sentenced in adult court to an adult prison term, few jurisdictions have enacted safeguards to protect their physical, mental and emotional health. Additionally, programs and behavioral responses in adult facilities rarely are adjusted to meet the needs of adolescent populations. To further complicate matters, nine states have a lower age of court jurisdiction which allows more youth under 18 to enter the adult criminal justice system automatically. Where the age of juvenile court jurisdiction ends at 15 or 16 years of age, state prison systems grapple with housing even younger youth and at high rates. For instance, on any given day New York houses approximately 131 youth under 18 in its state prisons while Georgia houses nearly 100 youth under 18. The dearth of policies to safely house youth under 18 in adult prisons requires further examination and should encourage policymakers to investigate alternatives to practices that put children in harms way. As state and local policymakers grapple with budget and resource allocations, removing youth from adult prisons should be a part of that calculation. This report explores how states house youth under 18 in prisons in the new age of PREA compliance and enforcement. Furthermore, this report highlights national trends in juvenile arrests, crimes, and incarceration of children in the adult system. With evidence of the decreasing number of youth entering the adult system, the recommendations focus on how states can successfully remove all youth from adult prisons. Details: Washington, DC: Campaign For Youth Justice, 2015. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 3, 2015 at: http://www.campaignforyouthjustice.org/images/pdf/Zero_Tolerance_Report.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.campaignforyouthjustice.org/images/pdf/Zero_Tolerance_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 137434 Keywords: Juvenile InmatesJuvenile Justice SystemsJuvenile OffendersPrison Rape Elimination Act (PREA)Youth in Adult Prisons |