Breaking Down WV Inmate Packages: The Untold Side of West Virginia's Prison Policy

West Virginia's Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (DCR) has faced considerable scrutiny in recent years regarding its policies on packages sent to inmates. While the stated aim is to curb contraband and maintain institutional safety, critics argue the policy impacts inmate well-being, rehabilitation, and family connections. This explainer breaks down the complex issues surrounding WV inmate packages, exploring its history, current state, and potential future.

Who is involved?

The key players in this debate are:

• The West Virginia Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (DCR): Responsible for implementing and enforcing the package policy.


• Inmates: Directly affected by the restrictions on receiving packages.


• Inmate families and friends: Who provide support, often through sending packages.


• Advocacy groups: Organizations like the ACLU of West Virginia and prisoner support groups who advocate for policy changes.


• State Legislators: Who have the power to introduce and pass legislation affecting DCR policy.


• Vendors: Third-party companies that may be involved in providing permitted items.

What is the issue?

The core issue revolves around the types of items inmates are allowed to receive through packages. Historically, inmates could receive packages containing items like food, clothing, and personal hygiene products from family and friends. However, the DCR has progressively restricted these items, citing security concerns. The current policy often dictates that permitted items must be purchased through approved vendors, effectively eliminating the ability for families to directly send packages of their choosing.

When did these changes occur?

The tightening of package policies in West Virginia prisons has been a gradual process spanning several years. The shift accelerated noticeably in the mid-2010s, with a greater emphasis on vendor-only purchases for certain items. Specific dates are hard to pin down due to the policy evolving through administrative decisions rather than legislative action in many cases. However, anecdotal evidence and reporting suggest a significant shift toward more restrictive policies between 2015 and 2020.

Where is this happening?

The policy impacts all correctional facilities under the jurisdiction of the West Virginia DCR. This includes state prisons like Mount Olive Correctional Complex, Huttonsville Correctional Center, and Lakin Correctional Center (for women), as well as regional jails. The effects are felt by inmates and their families across the state, regardless of the specific facility.

Why is this policy in place?

The DCR's official justification for the stricter package policies is to reduce contraband entering prisons. Contraband, such as drugs, weapons, and unauthorized communication devices, poses a significant threat to institutional safety and security. By limiting the source of incoming items and controlling their distribution through approved vendors, the DCR aims to minimize the risk of contraband infiltration. They argue that vendor-supplied items are more easily inspected and tracked, reducing the potential for illicit substances or materials to be smuggled in.

Historical Context:

Historically, allowing packages from families was seen as a way to maintain connections with the outside world, which is vital for successful rehabilitation and reentry into society. It was also recognized as a means of supplementing the often-limited and sometimes inadequate resources provided by the prison system itself. However, concerns about contraband have consistently challenged this practice.

Nationally, there's a trend toward stricter prison policies, influenced by the war on drugs and rising concerns about prison safety. This trend has manifested in various ways, including restrictions on visitation, mail, and packages. West Virginia's policy changes are part of this broader national movement.

Current Developments:

Currently, the debate continues with advocacy groups raising concerns about the financial burden placed on families. Purchasing items through approved vendors can be significantly more expensive than sending comparable items directly. This disproportionately affects low-income families, making it harder for them to support their incarcerated loved ones.

There are also concerns about the quality and availability of items offered by approved vendors. Some families have reported issues with delayed delivery, inaccurate orders, and substandard products. This further undermines the intended purpose of the package policy, which is to provide inmates with essential items.

Recent reporting has highlighted the lack of transparency surrounding the selection of approved vendors. Questions have been raised about potential conflicts of interest and whether the vendor selection process is truly competitive and fair.

Data Points:

• A 2018 study by the Prison Policy Initiative found that restrictive package policies can negatively impact inmate mental health and increase recidivism rates.


• The Marshall Project has reported extensively on the financial burdens placed on families by vendor-only prison commissary systems across the country.


• While specific data on the effectiveness of WV's package policy in reducing contraband is limited, national studies suggest that these policies alone are not a guaranteed solution and can have unintended negative consequences.


• In WV, the current recidivism rate for inmates released in 2015 was 48.3%. Whether or not the package policy implemented at that time had a direct impact on the rate is difficult to ascertain.

Likely Next Steps:

Several potential developments could shape the future of WV inmate package policies:

• Legislative Action: State lawmakers could introduce legislation to regulate the DCR's package policies, potentially requiring greater transparency in vendor selection or mandating a certain level of access to packages from families.


• Litigation: Advocacy groups could file lawsuits challenging the legality of the current policies, arguing that they violate inmates' rights or place an undue burden on families.


• DCR Policy Review: The DCR could initiate an internal review of its package policies, taking into account feedback from inmates, families, and advocacy groups. This could lead to adjustments in the types of items allowed, the vendor selection process, or the overall approach to contraband control.


• Increased Transparency: Demands for greater transparency regarding vendor contracts and commissary revenue may lead to public disclosure of financial arrangements and operational procedures.


• Pilot Programs: The DCR could experiment with pilot programs that allow for limited packages from families under strict supervision, evaluating the impact on contraband and inmate well-being.

The issue of inmate packages in West Virginia is a complex one, balancing the need for institutional security with the importance of maintaining family connections and supporting inmate rehabilitation. The debate is likely to continue, with ongoing pressure from advocacy groups, families, and potentially the legislature, to find a more equitable and effective approach to managing inmate packages. The "untold side" of this issue lies in the ripple effect these policies have on families and the long-term impact on successful reentry into society.