IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v66y2018icp39-47.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Managed access technology to combat contraband cell phones in prison: Findings from a process evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Grommon, Eric

Abstract

Cell phones in correctional facilities have emerged as one of the most pervasive forms of modern contraband. This issue has been identified as a top priority for many correctional administrators in the United States. Managed access, a technology that utilizes cellular signals to capture transmissions from contraband phones, has received notable attention as a promising tool to combat this problem. However, this technology has received little evaluative attention. The present study offers a foundational process evaluation and draws upon output measures and stakeholder interviews to identify salient operational challenges and subsequent lessons learned about implementing and maintaining a managed access system. Findings suggest that while managed access captures large volumes of contraband cellular transmissions, the technology requires significant implementation planning, personnel support, and complex partnerships with commercial cellular carriers. Lessons learned provide guidance for practitioners to navigate these challenges and for scholars to improve future evaluations of managed access.

Suggested Citation

  • Grommon, Eric, 2018. "Managed access technology to combat contraband cell phones in prison: Findings from a process evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 39-47.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:66:y:2018:i:c:p:39-47
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.10.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718917301775
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.10.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anthony V. Salvemini & Eric L. Piza & Jeremy G. Carter & Eric L. Grommon & Nancy Merritt, 2015. "Integrating Human Factors Engineering and Information Processing Approaches to Facilitate Evaluations in Criminal Justice Technology Research," Evaluation Review, , vol. 39(3), pages 308-338, June.
    2. Bouffard, Jeffrey A. & Taxman, Faye S. & Silverman, Rebecca, 2003. "Improving process evaluations of correctional programs by using a comprehensive evaluation methodology," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 149-161, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Burford, Gemma & Velasco, Ismael & Janoušková, Svatava & Zahradnik, Martin & Hak, Tomas & Podger, Dimity & Piggot, Georgia & Harder, Marie K., 2013. "Field trials of a novel toolkit for evaluating ‘intangible’ values-related dimensions of projects," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 1-14.
    2. Odendaal, Willem A. & Marais, Sandra & Munro, Salla & van Niekerk, Ashley, 2008. "When the trivial becomes meaningful: Reflections on a process evaluation of a home visitation programme in South Africa," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 209-216, May.
    3. Saunders, Ruth P. & Ward, Dianne & Felton, Gwen M. & Dowda, Marsha & Pate, Russell R., 2006. "Examining the link between program implementation and behavior outcomes in the lifestyle education for activity program (LEAP)," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 352-364, November.
    4. Leire Gartzia, 2021. "Gender Equality in Business Action: A Multi-Agent Change Management Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-29, May.
    5. Saunders, Ruth P. & Wilcox, Sara & Baruth, Meghan & Dowda, Marsha, 2014. "Process evaluation methods, implementation fidelity results and relationship to physical activity and healthy eating in the Faith, Activity, and Nutrition (FAN) study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 93-102.
    6. Arends, Iris & Bültmann, Ute & Nielsen, Karina & van Rhenen, Willem & de Boer, Michiel R. & van der Klink, Jac J.L., 2014. "Process evaluation of a problem solving intervention to prevent recurrent sickness absence in workers with common mental disorders," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 123-132.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:66:y:2018:i:c:p:39-47. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.