Performance Measures Reference Guide – Institutions

The Florida Department of Corrections has identified six general areas of Institutional performance evaluation. The areas of evaluation include: Public Safety; Institutional Safety; Inmate Justice; Inmate Idleness and Achievement; Facility Management; and Community Impact. Across these areas of assessment, individual performance measures are utilized.

The "Institutions Quarterly Performance Scorecard" provides a snap-shot of Institutional change across two periods of assessment, using quarterly data when it is available. Where appropriate, Parent Institutions will be ranked according to their individual improvements on the performance measures, relative to the improvements of all other Parent Institutions.

Below are some important "Technical Notes for Users," followed by the "Performance Measures Reference Guide - Institutions."

Technical Notes for Users

Use of Parent Institution Data
Where applicable, Parent Institutions' data include that for the main unit as well as data for any and all satellite facilities falling under its supervision. Therefore, the missions of the main unit, and all satellite units under it, may impact performance data.

Reflexive Nature of Performance and Rankings
The data are refreshed quarterly, when they are available and where they are appropriate. Therefore, any major changes from one quarter to the next, which are seen by Parent Institutions and/or satellite facilities, have the ability to temporarily impact performance on one or more indicators. As a result, this may also impact rankings.

Use of Rankings
DOC has adopted a performance ranking process that recognizes the unique nature of each Florida prison. Rather than directly comparing Parent Institutions' performance, they are indirectly compared based on their changing performance across the periods of assessment. Parent Institutions are ranked based on the size and direction of their change, relative to that of all others. The ranking scale used is 1 to 49, with 1 representing the most improvement on the measure.

When a tie occurs, there will be a gap between the position awarded to the tying Institutions and the next position awarded. For example, if two Parent Institutions tie for third positioning, the rankings would be 1, 2, 3, 3, 5, 6, etc.

Ranking Adjustments and Performance Thresholds
When Institutions perform to the best of their ability in both periods of assessment, meaning there is no room for improvement, they receive the highest ranking (1). Institutions making a 100% improvement between assessments receive the next highest ranking behind those with no room for improvement.

Where appropriate, "Performance Thresholds" are applied and used to adjust rankings. Performance thresholds ensure that Institutions already performing within an acceptable range are ranked based on the size and direction of their change, relative only to other Institutions performing within the acceptable range.

Those meeting the threshold will always rank higher than those not meeting the threshold, regardless of the size and direction of their change.

Missing Data
Missing data have the ability to impact measured change in performance and the rankings on individual indicators. Some Parent Institutions will not have data on all measures, especially those measures which do not apply to the facility.