How Georgia Prisons Classify Inmates by Risk

Georgia’s prison system struggles to classify its 50,000 inmates effectively, leading to overcrowding, violence, and missed rehabilitation opportunities. Misclassification often puts inmates in unsafe environments and hinders their recovery. The system uses risk levels – minimum, medium, close, and maximum – but outdated tools, overcrowding, and understaffing make it difficult to implement properly.

Key Issues:

Overcrowding: Facilities designed for fewer inmates force misclassifications.
Outdated Tools: Risk assessments lack mental health evaluations and personalized data.
Understaffing: Fewer staff means rushed or skipped evaluations.
Safety Risks: Misclassified inmates increase violence and gang activity.

Solutions:

Data-Driven Assessments: Use validated risk metrics for precise classifications.
Regular Reviews: Update inmate classifications quarterly or after major incidents.
Mental Health Screening: Include thorough evaluations to improve placements.
Staff Training & Funding: Invest in tools, training, and more classification specialists.

In 2024, 330 inmate deaths were reported, up from 265 in 2023, showing the urgent need for reform. Advocacy groups like Georgia Prisoners’ Speak are pushing for evidence-based changes to improve safety and rehabilitation outcomes.

What Is The Inmate Classification System?

Current Classification Methods

The Georgia Department of Corrections (GDC) relies on a system based on risk levels. However, issues like chronic overcrowding and staff shortages often disrupt proper inmate placements, making the process less effective.

Risk Assessment Criteria

The GDC considers factors like criminal history, behavior records, and potential threats to facility safety when classifying inmates. Critics argue that this approach misses important individual details, which can compromise both safety and rehabilitation efforts.

Security Level Categories

Minimum: Designed for inmates considered low-risk.
Medium: Intended for those with moderate risk, though overcrowding can complicate assignments.
Close: For inmates requiring higher levels of supervision.
Maximum: Reserved for extremely dangerous individuals or those with a high risk of escape.

While these categories are well-defined, their real-world application often falls short. We’ll delve deeper into these challenges in the next section.

Problems in Current System

Georgia’s inmate classification system has several issues that jeopardize both safety and the potential for rehabilitation. Data from the U.S. Department of Justice highlights some alarming trends that expose these shortcomings.

Prison Crowding Effects

With around 50,000 prisoners crammed into overcrowded facilities, the system is under immense pressure. This overcrowding leads to serious problems:

Inmates are often placed in the wrong security levels due to misclassification.
Cells designed for one person are being shared by multiple occupants.
Staff are stretched thin, weakening supervision and security measures.

The results are grim. Prison deaths have surged, climbing from 265 in 2023 to 330 in 2024, with 37 already reported in early 2025. These numbers paint a clear picture of how overcrowding compromises safety.

Outdated Assessment Tools

The tools used to assess and classify inmates are outdated, leading to poor outcomes. Limited mental health evaluations and outdated behavioral criteria result in misclassifications that affect both safety and rehabilitation efforts. A lack of personalized assessments forces a generic approach that fails to address individual needs.

Assessment Problem	Impact on Classification	Safety Consequence
Limited mental health screening	Misplacement of inmates with psychiatric needs	Higher risk of violence
Outdated behavioral metrics	Incorrect risk assessments	Inmates assigned to unsuitable security levels
Insufficient individual evaluation	Generic, one-size-fits-all approach	Reduced chances of effective rehabilitation

Safety and Recovery Risks

The combination of overcrowding and flawed assessment tools has created a dangerous environment. Key issues include:

Unchecked gang activity due to insufficient staffing, making it harder to separate and manage gang-affiliated inmates.
Poor access to medical and mental health care, leaving many prisoners without essential services.
Increased violence stemming from misclassified inmates.

These problems not only threaten the safety of inmates and staff but also make rehabilitation harder to achieve. Advocacy groups like Georgia Prisoners’ Speak argue that these classification failures lead to preventable safety risks. Addressing these issues will require a shift toward evidence-based reforms.

sbb-itb-7858f51

Ways to Fix Classification

Georgia’s prison system needs reforms backed by evidence to enhance safety and improve rehabilitation efforts.

Data-Driven Assessment

Using a data-driven approach can make classifications more accurate by:

Applying validated risk metrics
Standardizing scoring systems to minimize bias
Creating individualized risk profiles

These methods can help alleviate overcrowding issues.

Assessment Component	Current System	Data-Driven Solution	Expected Benefit
Risk Evaluation	Subjective judgment	Validated metrics	More precise classifications
Population Management	Generic placement	Strategic distribution	Less overcrowding in facilities
Security Measures	One-size-fits-all	Tailored protocols	Improved safety outcomes

It’s equally important to monitor inmate behavior consistently to ensure classifications remain accurate over time.

Regular Status Reviews

Regular reviews work hand-in-hand with data-driven assessments to address changes in inmate circumstances. These reviews should include:

Monthly behavioral assessments
Quarterly classification updates
Immediate evaluations after significant incidents

This approach allows for timely adjustments, helping to resolve safety concerns as they arise.

Mental Health Screening

Mental health evaluations should play a key role in the classification process. Advocacy groups like Georgia Prisoners’ Speak highlight how overcrowding and poor conditions worsen mental health challenges for inmates. Improvements should focus on:

Comprehensive screenings during intake
Ongoing mental health monitoring
Assigning housing based on mental health needs

Better mental health evaluations not only refine risk assessments but also support tailored inmate management, complementing the data-driven and regular review methods outlined earlier.

Making Changes Work

Implementing new classification methods in Georgia’s prison system comes with operational challenges that demand thorough planning and consistent effort.

Budget and Resources

The Georgia Department of Corrections (GDC) faces tight budgets and limited resources, which directly affect their ability to reform inmate classification. Here’s a snapshot of key challenges:

Challenge	2023	2024	Impact on Classification
Inmate Deaths	265	330	Reduced staff availability for assessments
Total Inmates	50,000	50,000	Overcrowding strains classification processes
Classification Staff	Limited	Further decreased	Delays in evaluations and reviews

To address these issues, funding is urgently needed for:

Risk assessment software
Additional classification specialists
Staff training programs
Mental health screening tools

Without proper funding, it’s nearly impossible to maintain the accuracy and effectiveness of data-driven assessments or train staff to implement new methods.

Staff Education Needs

For successful classification reform, staff training is critical. However, the current system faces hurdles like:

Lack of adequate staff, leaving little time for training
Limited understanding of modern assessment tools
A tendency to rely on outdated practices

Training programs should prioritize:

Using data-driven assessment tools
Implementing mental health screening protocols
Conducting regular status reviews
Improving documentation practices

Building staff expertise is a vital step toward introducing meaningful changes.

System Resistance

Even with better funding and training, resistance to change within the system remains a major obstacle. Deep-rooted practices make reform a tough sell.

To tackle this, the following strategies can help:

Transparency Initiatives: Clear reporting and accountability can foster trust.
Stakeholder Engagement: Open communication with staff, administrators, advocacy groups, and legislators ensures everyone is on the same page.
Phased Implementation: Pilot programs allow for testing and adjustments before rolling out changes across the board.

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has." – Margaret Mead (1901-1978)

Overcoming these challenges is essential for meaningful reforms in Georgia’s prison system.

Georgia Prisoners’ Speak Impact

Fixing classification issues in Georgia’s prison system demands clear oversight. GPS (Georgia Prisoners’ Speak) sheds light on these problems through thorough documentation and advocacy efforts.

Inmate Stories

GPS amplifies the voices of inmates, revealing problems like flawed classification processes, overcrowding, and safety concerns. For instance, inmate deaths climbed from 265 in 2023 to 330 in 2024, despite the prison population holding steady at 50,000. These firsthand stories bring much-needed attention to ongoing issues.

Public Information

Through detailed reports, GPS uncovers constitutional violations and unsafe conditions in Georgia’s prisons. Their findings often align with official investigations, adding credibility to their work and highlighting the gaps in risk assessments.

Reform Support

GPS plays a key role in pushing for change by equipping the public with tools and resources to advocate for reform. They focus on:

Direct Action Tools: An AI-driven platform that helps individuals contact legislators about classification reforms.
Evidence Collection: A comprehensive database featuring inmate accounts and reports that emphasize areas needing improvement.
Stakeholder Engagement: Facilitating connections between inmates, families, prison officials, and lawmakers to tackle classification issues together.