C.O.R.E.S.T.A.R

 

SUMMARY
C.O.R.E.S.T.A.R.  (Correctional, Outcomes, Reentry, Ethics, Security, Treatment, and Accountability Review) was established in January of 2004.  C.O.R.E.S.T.A.R. defines areas of accountability and develops a system for the collection of timely and accurate data to evaluate the quality and effectiveness of programs and services and to measure performance. 

 

Goals and Objectives

The goals and objectives of C.O.R.E.S.T.A.R. are to further the Mission statement of the Philadelphia Prison System by:

 

• Utilizing data to manage our facilities and programs in order to increase efficiency, decrease costs, and to facilitate decision making across all Units and Divisions;

• Increasing intra-departmental understanding, cooperation, teamwork, and duplication of success;

• Creating opportunities for all staff to be exposed to, understand, and have input on System polices and procedures;

• Verifying and documenting sound correctional principles that heretofore have only been supported by considered opinion;

• Challenging long held principles of correctional management, and encouraging innovation, and new ideas;

• Increasing accountability across all Units and Divisions;

• Assisting the Commissioner, Deputy Commissioners, and the Chief of Staff in making decisions concerning the System, and advising the Managing Director and the Mayor;

• Solidifying the System's credibility with Center City administration, City Council, and the public, in order to obtain resources, influence policy, and raise the profile of the System.

 

At the monthly C.O.R.E.S.T.A.R. meetings executive and other senior staff discuss issues in their respective areas of responsibility, explaining variances in performance indicators, and acquire guidance on strategies to solve specific problems.  C.O.R.E.S.T.A.R. meetings focuses on problem solving, not blame placing. Performance measures presented on are inmate programs and services, budgetary issues, unfunded & leave data, professionalism and morale, restrictive movement, searches and contraband, use of force, and other specific performance measures and outcomes relative to facility operations.  The discussions provide an opportunity to assess institutional procedures.

 

The entire process allows the PPS to:

• Assist in decision-making;

• Demonstrate the impact of services on consumers;

• Demonstrate program effectiveness;

• Help to set performance goals;

• Help to allocate and prioritize resources based on performance; foster accountability, which is important in establishing the foundation and support that the PPS needs to carry out its work;

• Help to improve public relations and public trust by fostering accountability; and help to improve the morale of the PPS staff, many of who are motivated by a desire to serve people and to produce good result.

 

In addition, during FY2005 C.O.R.E.S.T.A.R. was able to assist the wardens of the Philadelphia Prison System in monitoring budgetary allowances and exercising cost saving efforts to reduce overtime expenditures and save the system $3.5 million dollars through innovative management practices. 

 

With the Use of Force information being disseminated back to our Managers, it has led to a reduction in use of force in problem areas. This was accomplished because the Wardens implemented additional training and supervision to improve staff effectiveness.  Managing use of force is critical, due to the possibility of injuries to staff and inmates and potential inmate lawsuits.

 

Trending staff leave types (Sick usage, Family Medical, Annual Leave, Vacation, Leave of Absence, Military, etc.) gives facility managers monthly and yearly views of what is occurring at their respective facilities.  Irregular spikes or anomalies can be addressed in a timely and efficient manner.

 

C.O.R.E.S.T.A.R. also reports inmate misconduct where the administration can measure the trends of violence within facilities, and where appropriate incorporate strategic methods to address potential problems.  The C.O.R.E.S.T.A.R. process has resolved more than 130 action items (pending action requiring follow-up) that were generated at the monthly meetings.