Carceral-Ecologies / Carceral-ECHO-data

In this repo we are building tools to assess environmental compliance and enforcement in US prisons, jails and detention centers
GNU General Public License v3.0
7 stars 5 forks source link

Assessing registration of HIFLD identified prisons in MS #16

Closed shapironick closed 4 years ago

shapironick commented 4 years ago

In pursuit of better understanding the relationship between ECHO and HIFLD data re #1 we have been attempting to understand the following information in a Mississippi subset of the data.

  1. what percentage of OPEN prisons in HIFLD data are registered by the EPA in ECHO?

Our current answer for this subset just slightly less than 7%

  1. are some prisons not registered but should be? This also goes back to the question of when should a prison be listed in ECHO?

I'm uploading the data here: Mississippi Carceral Data Nov 16 update.xlsx

For more information about problems of prisons not being registered by EPA see this 2003 report: EPA_2003_Prison_Initiative_article_original.pdf

Facilities that have high populations but are unregistered include: USP YAZOO CITY FCI YAZOO CITY MEDIUM FCI YAZOO CITY LOW HINDS COUNTY RAYMOND DETENTION CENTER CI ADAMS COUNTY

We need to understand who much be registered to ECHO to answer # 2.

benmillam commented 4 years ago

I did some in depth searching for a handful of 'not found' prisons, and confirmed I couldn't find them in the EPA Facility Registry Service (FRS) data (although I did find a record that covers the YAZOO prisons.

I searched the FRS data via Python and manually using the FRS web query tool: https://www.epa.gov/frs/frs-query casting very wide nets (e.g. returning all facilities in Raymond, MS, or all facilities in MS with 'FARM' in the street address) and then visually inspecting aided by Ctrl+F in Chrome. Sometimes I Googled facility names to confirm HIFLD data and found it useful (e.g. it appears YAZOO LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH prisons are all at the same location).

shapironick commented 4 years ago

Thank you, Ben! I've updated the spreadsheet based upon your excellent research. Mississippi.Carceral.Data.Nov.19.update.xlsx

I've now re-specified question 1 to be: Open (non-federal) facilities and now the answer is just over 7%.

Now that this data is double-checked. @nathanqtran922 will be working on the specifics of when a facility should be registered. And then our letter should be mail-ready. Thanks again, Ben!

shapironick commented 4 years ago

I found two more registered facilities as part of Parchman. 1 is their chicken egg business and the other looks like its what runs all the prison industrial labor.

Mississippi.Carceral.Data.Nov.20.update.xlsx

shapironick commented 4 years ago

@nathanqtran922 has completed his (excellent) review of the inclusion criteria for inclusion in ECHO. its is posted here https://github.com/Carceral-Ecologies/Carceral-ECHO-data/blob/master/ECHO%20Inclusion%20Criteria.md

Here is a slight update to the spreadsheet above: just includes some links that were left out: Mississippi.Carceral.Data.Nov.20.update.xlsx

shapironick commented 4 years ago

I'll also say that Nathan's work indicates massive noncompliance, if there are not caveats to the law that we are not seeing.