Managing Prison Gangs: Identification, Monitoring, and Control

Introduction

Gangs in prisons are a growing problem. Often, when a person enters prison, they quickly find that failing to associate with a gang creates problems from all sides. Current gang members who enter prison are quick to locate their gang and affiliate with it. Young people entering prison for the first time learn rapidly that the fastest way to obtain protection from older, tougher inmates is to join a gang. These circumstances make gang-related problems a constant issue for prison administrators and guards. The management of gangs in prisons is a growing area of interest, and several methods are currently being implemented.

Gang Membership Statistics

As reported by 44 U.S. correctional systems surveyed, the percentage of known gang members ranges as high as 41.2 percent of the inmate population in Hawaii and as low as less than 1 percent in Delaware and Vermont. Of the U.S. reporting systems that maintain records of known gang members, the average percentage of gang members by ethnic background is as follows: black inmates, 41.9 percent — with a high of 99 percent in the District of Columbia and a low of 1 percent in Idaho; white inmates, 33.4 percent — with a high of 89.5 percent in New Hampshire and a low of 10 percent in New Jersey; Hispanic inmates, 20.3 percent — with a high of 62.7 percent in Texas and a low of less than 1 percent in Louisiana; and Asian inmates, 6.1 percent — with a high of 30 percent in Maine and a low of less than 1 percent in Connecticut, Louisiana, and New Jersey.

Additional gang member ethnicities include an average of 6.4 percent Native Americans, 99 percent Pacific Islanders in Hawaii, less than 1 percent Hispanics in Louisiana, and 0.25 percent Polynesians in Oregon. The location of the correctional system appears to be a major factor in identifying the ethnic backgrounds of its gang members (Gangs, 2004).

Identifying Gang Members in Prisons

There are many ways that correctional system workers identify inmates as gang members. The most common identifier is the type of clothing the inmate wears: 63.6 percent of the reporting systems use clothing style, 45.5 percent use shoe type, and 34 percent use hairstyle or haircut. Tattoos are used as an identifier in 90 percent of the cases, with 40 percent also reporting the type of jewelry worn (Gangs, 2004).

Additional identifiers include law enforcement identification, hand signs, graffiti, artwork, and — in Wisconsin — knife or gunshot wounds. Correctional Service Canada monitors all of the above identifiers (Gangs, 2004).

Monitoring Gang Activity

Monitoring gang activity in the prison system is important for several reasons, most notably because gang activity is typically linked to broader criminal enterprise. Noticeable areas of gang control vary among U.S. reporting systems, but gangs are primarily involved in drugs, as reported by 73 percent of systems. Contraband ranked second, reported by 59 percent of systems; gambling was reported by 36 percent; black market activities and extortion were each reported by 20 percent; alcohol-related actions by 14 percent; and control or strong-armed tactics by 11 percent. Protection, weapons, and theft each represented 5 percent of reported gang control trouble areas.

Washington, D.C. also faces the problem of gang members reselling canteen items; Maryland gangs are involved in prostitution; and Oregon has a problem with gang members charging other inmates yard fees. In an effort to restrict gang activities, separate control units are in place in 30 percent of U.S. reporting systems, while none of the Canadian reporting systems has such units (Gangs, 2004).

Gang activity throughout prison systems is most often tracked by computerized database. This ensures that an inmate known to belong to a particular gang is on record and can be tracked if he re-offends and moves to another facility or returns to the same one. Three systems also use regularly scheduled reports, incident reports, and intake interviews to track gangs. In Connecticut, Nebraska, and Tennessee, gang coordinators are present in the facilities. Utah uses a graduated point system to document gang activity before the information is officially validated and logged, and Delaware refers all cases of gang-related activity to its internal affairs section. Gang activity is not tracked in either New York, which has a zero-tolerance policy, or Virginia. Correctional Service Canada shares collected information with the offender, who may submit a written rebuttal before it is entered into a database (Gangs, 2004).

Staff members also continuously monitor and record suspected and actual gang activity while on duty. Staff make note of gang activity using incident reports in 39 percent of U.S. reporting systems, through regularly scheduled reports in 25 percent of systems, and by conferring with a higher-ranked staff member in 18 percent of systems. A number of systems additionally conduct investigations and interviews, hold staff briefings, and monitor inmate phone, mail, and email use. In Colorado, a threat-assessment report must be completed whenever gang activities are identified (Gangs, 2004).

Conclusion

Prison gangs are a problem across the nation. Inmates enter prisons already affiliated with gangs and seek out their organization for protection. Those who enter prison without gang ties quickly join one for the same reason. Gangs within prisons are heavily monitored and watched, but problems continue to occur. Fights, rivalries, and illegal activities are challenges that prison administrators face on an ongoing basis. Consistent diligence and firm responses to gang activity will help alleviate the problem over time.