Corrections_Today_Spring_2025_Vol.87_No.1

NIJ UPDATE

associated with any required insti tutional medical care, it is possible there could be cost savings. CNA researchers did not estimate the cost associated with each event or injury, but they did estimate that each $5,876 spent on the program was equal to one prevented response-to resistance events, while each $19,831 was equal to one prevented injury. There may be additional cost sav ings associated with improvements in evidence collection, enhanced transparency or accountability, and a reduction in possible lawsuits, although these were not estimated as part of this project.

Adobe Stock/Ivelin Radkov

CNA researchers also explored the impact of body-worn cameras on resident injuries as a result of response-to-resistance events. The presence of body-worn cameras in a unit was significantly associated with a 58% reduction in resident injuries during these events. Cost effectiveness The research team also examined whether using body-worn cameras was cost effective. Administrative data was used to measure costs associated with the body-worn camera program, which considered equipment and startup costs, initial training costs, and staff time necessary to administer the program and investigate response to-resistance events. In total, the body-worn camera program was estimated to cost $158,647 over the one-year study pe riod. 21 Equipment and startup costs accounted for nearly 70% of these costs ($106,155). The body-worn

cameras were the largest single ex penditure ($70,803 for 60 cameras). Initial training costs were $17,149. Although there were significantly fewer response-to-resistance events in units with body-worn cameras, there was a large increase in person nel time dedicated to investigating those events — specifically $536 per event in units without body worn cameras and $1,959 in units with body-worn cameras, totaling $35,343 in additional costs. This increase was driven by the need for extra hours for second lieutenants, who were primarily responsible for the investigations, which required a thorough review of all video evidence. However, prevention of response to-resistance events and resident injuries could help offset increased investigation costs. LCADC of ficials reported that no resident injuries in treatment units required offsite medical services. While they were unable to break down costs

CNA researchers determined that there was a statistically

significant reduction in response-to-resistance events when body-worn cameras were present.

Deputy perspectives The CNA study team surveyed LCADC deputies two months before implementing body-worn camera use (by randomly assign ing units), halfway through their use, and one month after their use. 22 Researchers wanted to understand what deputies thought about using body-worn cameras in their jobs. A total of 117 out of 124 (94%) par ticipated in the pre-implementation survey, 84 in the halfway-point

Spring 2025 | Corrections Today

19