Corrections Final Exam Study Guide Electronic Monitoring as an Effective Correctional Strategy Electronic monitoring EM boom Jessica Lunsford Act Advances and improvements in technology Shift from Radio Frequency RF to Global Positioning Systems GPS Research has not kept pace Florida is appropriate for EM research for the following reasons 1 EM used for over 20 years for felony offenders 2 Several supervision types 3 EM population significant 2 392 on June 30 2009 Background of EM in FL EM authorized by the Florida Legislature in 1987 and the FDOC began using radio frequency RF in 1988 for offenders sentenced to community control commonly known as house arrest Active global positioning system GPS was the second EM technology implemented in Florida in 1997 Offenders monitored with active GPS are required to wear ankle bracelets that communicate with a larger device carried by offenders at all times called a monitoring tracking device MTD The MTD communicates with a satellite and transmits a signal to a monitoring center through a cell phone within the device The MTD has an LCD screen to display messages to offenders from supervising officers Officers are able to track the exact location of offenders on a computer screen to determine whether they have violated their conditions of supervision by entering prohibited areas Jessica Lunsford Act The EM program in Florida changed dramatically as a result of the Jessica Lunsford Act JLA passed in 2005 Jessica Lunsford was a nine year old Florida girl who was kidnapped raped and murdered by a previously convicted sex offender The JLA amended many offenses to make punishments more severe established more severe penalties for sex offenders who fail to register with authorities created mandatory electronic monitoring provisions for certain offenders and appropriated funding for EM Requires EM for prison releasees designated as sexual predators or for offenders who are over the age of 18 who violate certain statutes involving a victim under the age of 15 Florida Statute 948 11 titled Electronic Monitoring was amended to require probationers community controlees or conditional releasees who have a current or prior conviction for violent or sexual offenses to be monitored by a system that actively monitors and identifies the offender s location i e GPS technology Requires mandatory EM for sexual predators probationers and community controlees 18 years or older whose victims were under age 15 and who committed crimes on or after September 1 2005 or have been previously convicted of violating certain statutes Mandates that sex offenders or sexual predators 18 years or older who victimize persons under the age of 15 and have had a probation or community control sentence revoked are required to be placed on active GPS if the sentencing judge places the offender on community supervision In FY2005 06 the JLA appropriated 3 928 860 of recurring general revenue for the purpose of increasing the number of GPS units by 1 200 The cost of EM Radio Frequency RF is the least expensive form of EM at 1 97 per day in 2008 The cost only covers the services from EM provider in relation to the equipment not the extra staff time required GPS costs 8 94 per day with 1 00 of that daily cost for the Monitoring Center Annual cost of active GPS equipment and services provided is 3 263 The per diem equipment and vendor services costs for RF and GPS have declined between 2005 and 2008 The cost of imprisonment vs EM EM and is explicitly designed to divert offenders from a state prison sentence or to keep those who have post prison supervision from returning to prison In comparison to the cost figures of EM devices noted previously the average daily cost of prison operations per inmate was 55 09 per day or 20 108 per year in FY2007 08 This does not include the cost of constructing new prisons or expanding existing facilities which resulted in an expenditure of 107 441 753 in FY2007 08 FDOC Another way to compare the cost of EM relative to incarceration is that six offenders could be placed on active GPS or 28 could be on RF for one year relative to one inmate being housed in a correctional facility for one year These relative costs of using electronic surveillance to more closely monitor high risk offenders on community supervision versus housing them in state prison speaks to the importance of determining if EM is effective in preventing felons from absconding violating their conditions of supervision or committing new crimes and jeopardizing public safety Additionally it is possible to better identify those offenders who are high risk and would likely have been sentenced to prison but are low risk while under community supervision because of the electronic tether policy makers can possibly save taxpayers millions of dollars by avoiding the cost of the construction of new prisons and the high reoccurring cost of housing inmates Analytical results EM reduces the likelihood of failure under community supervision The reduction in the risk of failure is about 31 relative to offenders not placed on EM GPS has more of an effect on reducing failure than RF technology There is a 6 improvement rate in the reduction of supervision failures for offenders placed on GPS supervision relative to offenders placed on RF supervision EM supervision has less of an impact on violent offenders than on sex drug property and other types of offenders although there are significant reductions in failure rates for all of these offense types There are no major differences in the effects of EM supervision across different age groups There were no major differences in the effects of EM for different types of supervision Officers EM and Non EM caseloads EM cases do not make up the bulk of officers caseloads Almost 50 of the officers had two or few EM cases Officers had an average of 30 Non EM cases 25 had 15 to 25 Non EM cases 39 had 25 to 35 Non EM cases 14 had 45 or Non EM more Impact of EM on offenders significant others and children During the time of interview 23 of the offenders were married 39 were in a relationship 25 were single and 13 had been separated or divorced Of those who were married or in a relationship only 14 described their spouses partners as helpful supportive or understanding about EM 43 claimed that EM is an inconvenience and a burden to their partners and or negatively impacts their relationships EM had not impacted the relationships among 28 in this group while 15 said it had