The Cell Phone Contraband Act of 2010 and BOP’s Process for Addressing Cell Phone Possession

In August 2010, the Cell Phone Contraband Act of 2010 was passed and  amended 18 U.S.C. BOP Telephone Rates Typically Are Less Than Other Correctional Systems’ Rates and Fund Inmate Wages and Recreation; Lowering Rates Would Decrease Costs for Inmate Calls but Could Reduce Revenue

BOP’s rates for inmate telephone calls typically are lower than selected  states’ and military branch systems that also use inmate telephone  revenue to support inmate amenities, and lowering rates would have  several implications. If BOP reduced inmate telephone rates, inmates would benefit  from the ability to make less expensive phone calls. However, lower rates  also could result in less revenue, lower profits, and therefore fewer funds  available for inmate wages and other amenities, unless BOP recovers  these funds through other sources. According to BOP officials, when  inmates have fewer opportunities for physical activity, idleness increases  and the risk of violence, escapes, and other disruptions also rises. BOP and Selected States Confiscated Thousands of Cell Phones in 2010 and Believe That Rising Inmate Cell Phone Usage Threatens Institutional Safety and Expands Criminal Activity

BOP and officials from most of the selected states we contacted reported  increases in the numbers of cell phones confiscated at prisons over the  last 3 to 4 years and cite cell phone use as a security concern. All of the  BOP officials, as well as officials from all eight of the states’ DOCs with  whom we spoke, cited cell phones as a major security concern, given the  potential the phones provide for inmates to have unmonitored  conversations that could further criminal activity, such as selling drugs or  harassing other individuals. BOP and Selected States Have Implemented Cell Phone Search and Detection Technologies, but BOP Could Evaluate Technologies Better and Increase Coordination

BOP and the eight selected states we contacted have taken steps to  address growing contraband cell phone smuggling and use in their  correctional institutions, but BOP could evaluate existing technologies  better to maximize its investment decisions. BOP has tested multiple cell  phone detection technologies; however, it has not developed evaluation  plans to measure the effectiveness of these tests. Moreover, BOP has  shared information with state agencies to some extent on strategies for  combating contraband cell phones, but BOP’s regional offices could  pursue more direct connections with states in accordance with relevant  BOP policy that encourages them to do so. Additional information on cell phone detection strategies tested or  deployed by BOP and selected state DOCs—as well as these officials’  perspectives on their utility—is deemed law enforcement sensitive and  not included in this report. At the regional level, we found that  BOP’s regional offices had limited coordination with states regarding  contraband cell phone issues. Agency Comments

We provided a draft of the sensitive version of this report to DOJ, and  also requested comments from the Department of Commerce, FCC, and  Department of Defense on nonsensitive draft excerpts related to these  agencies.
Why GAO Did This Study

The rates Bureau of Prisons (BOP) inmates pay to make phone calls generate revenue that funds inmate wages and other amenities; however, inmates' contraband cell phone use is growing. The Cell Phone Contraband Act of 2010 criminalized cell phone possession in federal prisons and mandated that GAO study related issues. In response to the mandate, this report addresses (1) how telephone rates for BOP inmates compare with other correctional systems and the implications of lowering rates; (2) the number of cell phones confiscated in BOP and selected states, and any reported impact; and (3) the extent to which BOP and selected states have taken actions to minimize cell phone smuggling, these actions' effectiveness, and how BOP has coordinated internal and state information sharing. GAO reviewed BOP's policies, procedures, and cell phone confiscation data (2008-2010). GAO also interviewed BOP officials within BOP's 6 regions and 4 of its 116 institutions--as well as officials from 8 state correctional departments--selected for their cell phone detection efforts or challenges faced. The results are not generalizable, but provide insights.

What GAO Found

BOP's rates for inmate telephone calls typically are lower than selected state and military branch systems that also use telephone revenues to support inmate activities; lowering rates would have several implications. Inmates would benefit from the ability to make cheaper phone calls, but lower rates could result in less revenue and lower profits, and therefore fewer funds available for inmate wages and recreational activities. According to BOP officials, when inmates have fewer opportunities for physical activity, idleness increases, and the risk of violence, escapes, and other disruptions also rises. BOP and selected states confiscated thousands of cell phones in 2010, and these entities believe that rising inmate cell phone use threatens institutional safety and expands criminal activity. All of the BOP officials, as well as officials from all eight of the state departments of correction with whom GAO spoke, cited cell phones as a major security concern, given the potential the phones provide for inmates to have unmonitored conversations that could further criminal activity, such as selling drugs or harassing other individuals. BOP and selected states have taken actions to address contraband cell phone use in their correctional institutions, but BOP could better evaluate existing technologies to maximize its investment decisions. BOP screens visitors and staff to detect contraband and has also tested multiple cell-phone detection technologies. However, BOP has not developed evaluation plans for institutional use to measure the effectiveness of these tests, which could help ensure that such tests generate information needed to make effective policy decisions. Moreover, while BOP has shared detection strategies with state agencies to some extent, BOP's regional offices have only had limited interaction with states, and could increase coordination and knowledge sharing to better identify and benefit from other strategies being used. This is a public version of a sensitive but unclassified - law enforcement sensitive report that GAO issued in July 2011. Information that the Department of Justice deemed sensitive has been omitted.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that BOP's Director formulate evaluation plans for cell phone detection technology to aid decision making, require use of these plans, and enhance regional collaboration with states. The Department of Justice concurred with GAO's recommendations.