Jail Standards and Inspection Programs, Resource - National ...

Inspections provide a level of accountabilityto reduce the potential for abuse.n Jails face significant liability exposure.The high-risk nature of jails and the substantialbody of case law involving jails combineto make them one of the highest liabilityrisks for local jurisdictions. The costs ofdefending lawsuits and paying judgmentsare tremendously high and may drain criticalresources needed to properly staff andoperate the jail. A standardized inspectionprogram can reduce the impact of litigationbecause it provides independent validationof an agency’s level of compliance withaccepted standards.n Jails are a low priority. As indicated in theintroduction, jails have historically been oneof the lowest priorities for public funding.Public officials are often reluctant to spendmoney on the jail unless compelled to do so.Jail standards and inspection programs canhighlight deficiencies and influence fundingauthorities to commit needed resources tothe jail. Active implementation of the standardsgives public officials an excuse to “dothe right thing.”n Standards bring consistency and fundamentalfairness to the governmentalfunction of locking people up. Conditionsand practices in states without standards orinspections can vary widely, depending onlocal circumstances and community expectations.An inmate may be treated quite differentlyin one jail than in another. Even withina jail, the way activities and functions arecarried out may vary significantly from shiftto shift. Regular inspections and the enforcementof standards bring internal and externalconsistency to jail operations and conditions.The result is a higher level of fundamentalfairness to inmates, local governments, andthe general public.Commonly Raised Objections to StandardsA variety of objections have been raised to jailstandards and inspection programs. Followingare answers to some of the most commonobjections.It will cost a lot of money to complywith standards.Jails are already legally responsible for doingmost of what jail standards would require. Thestandards simply translate these legal requirementsinto comprehensible guidelines that jailscan incorporate into policy and practice. Thecourts may not regularly send inspectors throughjails, but this does not mean that the protectionsafforded by the U.S. Constitution do not continueto apply to inmates. Meeting these requirementsis not inexpensive. However, just as thecosts of building roads, bridges, and buildings tocode are accepted as part of the cost of ensuringthe safety of those who will use them, the costsrelated to compliance with jail standards mustbe accepted as part of the cost of a functionalcriminal justice system. Rejecting the advantagesthat jail standards offer because of cost leavesjails and local jurisdictions open to much greaterliability in the future.They will set the jail up for lawsuits bydocumenting problems.Standards and inspections can document bothproblems and their correction. Actions taken byjail officials to identify and resolve deficienciesdemonstrate that they are acting in good faithand are not deliberately indifferent to the conditionsof the jail. As such, jail standards compliancereports often result in a summary judgmentin favor of the jail, precluding the case fromgoing on to trial.Small jails will not be able to comply.Being small does not exempt a jail from therequirements of the U.S. Constitution. Small