The Use of Restrictive Housing on Gang and Non-Gang Affiliated Inmates in U.S. Prisons: Findings from a National Survey of Correctional Agencies

Abstract

Gangs present serious challenges to the management and order of prisons. Restrictive housing is viewed by correctional officials as one of the few effective responses to gangs, yet public officials and advocates continue to push for reductions in its use. Some evidence suggests gang affiliates are overrepresented in restrictive housing, although this research is limited to a few prison systems, and the reasons for this relationship remain speculative at best. This study examined the relationship between restrictive housing and gang affiliation based on administrative data gathered from 39 correctional agencies in 2016, collectively housing 73% of state prisoners. The relative risk of placement in restrictive housing was three times greater for gang affiliated than non-gang inmates. Over one-third of the inmates in restrictive housing were gang affiliated. While gang affiliates were overrepresented across all of the primary pathways into restrictive housing, the risk was greater for administrative purposes (6.3) than for disciplinary (3.1) or protective (2.6) purposes, although substantial variation existed across prison systems. The quest to reduce the footprint of restrictive housing in U.S. prisons cannot occur without accounting for one of the most difficult populations for correctional authorities to manage, that is, the 213,000 prisoners affiliated with gangs. The challenge will be greater in prison systems with larger custodial populations, a higher proportion of confirmed gang affiliates, higher rates of gang-related violence, and longstanding histories of gangs, where restrictive housing is more likely to be used disproportionately. Programs and practices aimed to reintegrate gang affiliates back into general population housing are deserving of research and evaluation owing to their implications for institutional and community corrections.

Keywords:

• Gangs
• gang members
• solitary confinement
• prisons
• correctional policy and practice

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 Restrictive housing refers to the practice of housing inmates in cells that are separate from the general population, over fixed or indeterminate periods, involving extended physical and social isolation. While there are many terms for this practice, including solitary confinement, restrictive housing is the umbrella term used by leading organizations to capture its various uses (American Corrections Association, 2014; Garcia, 2016).

2 The wholesale placement of gang affiliates in restrictive housing for indeterminate periods was the basis of the Ashker v. Governor of California class-action lawsuit alleging eighth amendment violations of cruel and unusual punishment, filed in 2012 and settled in 2015. We return to this point in this discussion section.

3 Given the aims of our paper we reviewed literature based in the United States. Although we are not familiar with research on this topic outside of the United States, the extent to which we could generalize such findings is questionable. We thank an anonymous reviewer for raising this point.

4 Respondents held positions that ranged from security threat group coordinators, operations chiefs, prison directors, and research analysts. The data collection process involved substantial correspondence with staff to determine the appropriate contacts, encourage participation, and clarify questions and responses to the survey. The results are nonetheless susceptible to the limitations of surveying correctional personnel and administrative data.

5 Twelve agencies were completely missing, 19 agencies had complete data, and 20 agencies contained partial data (missing 24%–55% of variables). Although missing patterns are randomly distributed according to a missing completely at random test (χ²(171, N = 51) = 182.69, p = 0.26) (Li, 2013; Little, 1988), missing data were multiply imputed using chained equations in the mi suite in Stata 13 (StataCorp, College Station, TX). Variables with complete data included BJS homicide and suicide rates, along with the 2015 custodial population. We generated five imputation data sets for incomplete data on suspected and confirmed gang members, and the count of inmates in restrictive housing for disciplinary, protective, administrative, and other reasons. Pooled parameter estimates were calculated using mi estimate and used for only Table 2—national-level estimates of gang affiliation and restrictive housing.

6 These values diverge slightly from what we reported in the data section on the number of prison systems (N = 39) and prisoners (983,211), owing to missing data on restrictive housing and gang affiliation in a single, but separate, prison system for the respective values.

7 Not all prison systems reported valid data for the confirmed and suspected gang affiliates, which is why the sum of confirmed and suspected gang affiliates is not equivalent to the total number of gang affiliates.

8 The share of inmates in restrictive housing who are affiliated with gangs is based on 34 prison systems with a custodial population of 771,265 inmates, of whom 122,734 were classified as gang affiliated. The valid data indicated that 17,401 of the 48,737 inmates in restrictive housing were gang affiliated, or 35.9%.

9 Of course, the sample sizes change from estimate to estimate, but we confirm similar patterns when relying only upon complete case data. It is also notable that the standard deviation suggests greater dispersion around the mean for administrative purposes than the others, a point we return to in the next section.

10 In addition to California, other incidents related have captured the national spotlight, including the execution of the executive director of the Colorado prison system, Tom Clements, on his doorstep by an affiliate of the 211 Crew who spent time in restrictive housing (Lin, 2017; Prendergast, 2014). Colorado has drastically reduced its use of restrictive housing (Raemisch, 2018), including ceasing the placement of gang affiliates based on their gang status.