Florida Department of Corrections
Michael D. Crews, Secretary
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 48, 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.
Performance Measures Reference Guide – Institutions
| Performance Measure | Measure Details | Frequency | Change | Goal | Rank Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Safety | |||||
| Number of Escapes from a Secure Perimeter within the Quarter | Quarterly count of unauthorized absences from the secure perimeter of the Correctional Institution. A secure perimeter escape is defined as one initiated from inside the perimeter of a Correctional Institution other than a work camp, road prison, or work release center. | QUARTERLY | ABSOLUTE |  |
1 |
| Institutional Safety | |||||
| Number of Inmate-on-Inmate Homicides within the Quarter | Quarterly count of inmate-on-inmate homicides. | QUARTERLY | ABSOLUTE | |
1 |
| Percent of Non-Compliance on Unannounced Security Audits | Percent of security standards assessed on the two most recent Unannounced Security Audits, which were missed. Resource related standards have been excluded from these calculations. | TWO MOST RECENT AUDITS | ABSOLUTE | |
2* (<=3%) |
| Inmate Justice | |||||
| Rate of Inmate Appeals Classified as Healthcare Complaints (per 100 Inmates) | Quarterly rate of inmate appeals filed which were classified as healthcare complaints per 100 inmates. | QUARTERLY | ABSOLUTE | |
2** (<=0.7) |
| Inmate Idleness and Achievement | |||||
| Rate of Inmate Idleness (Inmates per Job Assignment) | Quarterly rate of inmates at the facility per every one job assignment available on the last day of the quarter. | QUARTERLY | ABSOLUTE | |
1 |
| Rate of GEDs Awarded (per 100 Inmates) | Quarterly rate of GEDs awarded per 100 inmates (based on the average daily population for the quarter). It compares the current quarter of this fiscal year to the same quarter of last fiscal year. | QUARTERLY | ABSOLUTE |  |
2** (>=0.75) |
| Rate of Vocational Certificates Awarded (per 100 Inmates) | Quarterly rate of vocational certificates awarded per 100 inmates (based on the average daily population for the quarter). It compares the current quarter of this fiscal year to the same quarter of last fiscal year. | QUARTERLY | ABSOLUTE | |
2** |
| Facility Management | |||||
| Electrical Usage (Kilowatt Consumption) | Quarterly total kilowatt consumption. Quarterly comparison by year. It compares the current quarter of this fiscal year to the same quarter of last fiscal year. | QUARTERLY | ABSOLUTE | |
1 |
| Value of Farming Production | Quarterly value of produce from inmate farm program. Quarterly comparison by year. It compares the current quarter of this fiscal year to the same quarter of last fiscal year. | QUARTERLY | ABSOLUTE | |
N/A |
| Community Impact | |||||
| Number of Inmates per Volunteer | Quarterly number of inmates (based on the average daily population for the quarter) for every one volunteer. | QUARTERLY | ABSOLUTE | |
2** (<=17) |
| Number of Volunteer Hours | Quarterly count of hours volunteers spent at the facility. | QUARTERLY | ABSOLUTE | |
1 |
Goal
Increase or Decrease or N/A
Rank Type
1 = Determined by the size and direction of the Institution's change, relative to that of all others.
2 = Determined by the size and direction of the Institution's change, relative to all others, and using a performance threshold which is indicated in ( ).
* Priority ranking is given to those meeting performance expectations in both quarters.
** Threshold is set at the statewide average for the quarter - across all institutions. The threshold should be adjusted quarterly.
