Corrections_Today_Spring_2025_Vol.87_No.1

NIJ UPDATE

Evaluation of body-worn cameras in the Loudoun County Adult Detention Center To address gaps in research, NIJ funded CNA to complete an evaluation on the use of body-worn cameras in the LCADC, a jail operat ed by the Loudoun County, Virginia, sheriff’s office. 15 The evaluation sought to answer three research questions: 1. How will the introduction

staff-resident relations. Overall, this research shows that body-worn cameras may help enhance safety and security; additional research is needed to understand the full impacts on staff and residents. Past research on body-worn cameras The majority of research on body-worn cameras has been on their use in law enforcement agen cies. 9 Although some studies have identified benefits, others show no impact and even negative effects. A 2020 systematic review of 30 methodologically rigorous stud ies showed no consistent effect on officer use of force, officer injuries, officer-initiated calls for service, traf fic stops, field interviews, or arrest incidents. 10 The inconsistent results warrant additional research to better understand when and how body worn cameras may be effective in law enforcement. While the use of body-worn cameras hold promise for the crimi nal justice system, their adoption and use in correctional facilities has gone virtually unstudied. 11 Of the research that exists, the majority of evaluations focus on correctional officer attitudes in New Zealand and Australia. 12 These studies col lectively found that body-worn cameras may enhance security and safety, but correctional officers expressed a number of reserva tions, such as skepticism about the ability of body-worn cameras to change the behavior of incarcerated individuals and concerns with foot age being used to monitor officer performance. 13, 14

housed maximum-, medium-, and minimum-security level men and women, and many individuals had a length of stay of two weeks or less. LCADC had 124 staff members, including 22 supervisors and 102 front-line deputies, who supervised a total of 12 units, including eight housing units (20 pods total) and four general units (medical, hall ways, intake, and transportation). CNA researchers used a randomized controlled trial — often considered the gold standard method for evaluating outcomes — to measure impacts. CNA researchers used a ran domized controlled trial — often considered the gold standard method for evaluating outcomes — to measure impacts. Randomized controlled trials involve randomly assigning study participants into treatment and control groups to establish causality between an in tervention and a defined outcome. 17 Randomized controlled trials are the preferred methodology when attempting to determine causal ity for several reasons, including their ability to compare outcomes between two groups — the treat ment and control groups — while controlling for intervening fac tors thereby ensuring changes in the treatment group outcomes are

of body-worn cameras in an adult jail affect the number of response-to-resistance events by deputies and the number of resident injuries associated with such events? 16

2. How will the introduction

of body-worn cameras in an adult jail affect organizational processes and efficiencies as measured by the time and resources expended to investigate and resolve re sponse-to-resistance events? 3. How will correctional deputies feel about the introduction of body-worn cameras, and how will these devices affect their perceptions of staff-resident relationships? To answer these questions, the CNA study team implemented a 12-month randomized controlled trial from November 2, 2020, to October 31, 2021, and collected data using a mixed-methods design. Dur ing this time, the LCADC had an average daily population of 222 indi viduals, the majority of whom were being held pre-trial. The facility

Spring 2025 | Corrections Today

17