Effectiveness of the Direct Supervision System of Correctional Design and Management

• Author: Richard Wener
• DOI: 10.1177/0093854806286202
• Published date: 01 June 2006
• Date: 01 June 2006
• Subject Matter: Articles

392

EFFECTIVENESS OF THE

DIRECT SUPERVISION

SYSTEM OF CORRECTIONAL

DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT

A Review of the Literature

RICHARD WENER

Polytechnic University

The direct supervision system of correctional management and design was first used in adult

detention facilities in 1974. Since then, it has been adopted by hundreds of prisons and jails

and accepted as best practice by professional associations and accrediting organizations in

corrections. Research assessing its success has taken the form of detailed case studies, com-

parisons among different facilities, and comparisons within the same facility or system over

time. Overall, reports have been consistent in finding that direct supervision has led to reduced

assaults and other serious incidents, and lower costs. Findings on the quality of working envi-

ronments for staff are positive but mixed. Methodological issues and recommendations for

future research are considered.

Keywords: direct supervision; jail; prison; architecture; evaluation; violence; assault; vandalism;

stress

One of the most striking correctional reforms of the late 20th

century has been the development and dissemination of the

direct supervision (DS) model of design and management (Wener,

2005). DS was dramatically different from traditional approaches in

which the officers kept order mainly through the use of visual sur-

veillance and hard barriers (referred to herein as non-DS systems

[NDS]).1DS was a proactive management system intended to prevent

negative inmate behavior before it occurred (Nelson, 1983a).

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, Vol. 33 No. 3, June 2006 392-410

DOI: 10.1177/0093854806286202

© 2006 American Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

CJB286202.qxd 4/5/2006 5:02 PM Page 392

DS decentralized administrative, classification, and case manage-

ment functions to small living units and normalized the environment

by using commercial grade furniture and fixtures, as well as

noninstitutional colors and materials. The job of the correctional

officer became one of supervising inmates through direct contact,

outside of officer stations. The principles of DS call for disseminat-

ing a clear management philosophy and providing intensive staff

training and supervision (Bogard & Pulitzer, 1990; Davis, 1987;

Nelson, 1990).

Several writers have suggested this model works because it

addresses the social and psychological needs of inmates and staff

by assuring personal safety, providing privacy for inmates, making

it clear the officer is in charge of the living area, and setting posi-

tive behavioral expectations (Bottoms, 1999; Gettinger, 1984; Wener,

2000; Wortley, 2003). Others, however, wondered if claims of suc-

cess were supported by hard data (Wells, 1987). Now, more than

30 years after the opening of the first DS jails, there are many anec-

dotal commentaries and more than three dozen research reports,

including case studies as well as cross-sectional and longitudinal

comparative studies, which have attempted to assess the impact of

this design and management system. These studies have most often

focused on operational issues, including the quality, safety, and secu-

rity of the housing environment; the cost of construction and opera-

tion; and support for management and staff functions.

OPERATIONAL ISSUES

Safety and security. A number of managers and designers have

commented on improved staff and inmate safety and reduced incidents

through use of DS (Conroy, 1989; Heuer, 1993; Kilbre, 1991; Mueller,

1998; Nelson, 1976, 1983b; Pellicane, 1990; Wallenstein, 1987). Staff

and inmates felt the threat of assault was lower at the Chicago and

New York Metropolitan Correctional Centers (MCCs)—the first jails

built specifically to use DS with adults—than at other jails (Wener

& Olsen, 1980). The New York MCC was perceived as much safer

than the traditional Wayne County Jail, where inmates felt that fight-

ing was a problem and risk of attack was very high and unpre-

dictable (Wener & Olsen, 1980).

Wener / DIRECT SUPERVISION 393

CJB286202.qxd 4/5/2006 5:02 PM Page 393