Contraband continues to challenge correctional facilities, but the nature of the threat has changed. What was once weapons, drugs, or mobile devices has evolved into something far more complex. Today’s contraband is smaller, more potent, and easier to conceal, while the pathways used to introduce it into facilities are constantly changing. Recently, New York’s correction officers’ union called on the Governor to intervene directly in a growing crisis inside state prisons, citing increases in violence, contraband, and deaths.
For correctional leaders, the question is: are current detection strategies aligned with today’s risks?
Often, they are not.
A Changing Contraband Landscape
Contraband is no longer limited to easily identifiable items. Synthetic narcotics increase risk for staff and inmates. These substances can be highly potent in extremely small quantities, making them easier to transport and harder to detect.
A major development is drug-treated paper. Paper can be infused with narcotics and distributed in small amounts. Once dried, these substances are invisible and odorless, allowing them to bypass traditional detection methods.
Methods used to introduce contraband have diversified. Mail remains a primary vector, others now include drone deliveries, staff-assisted smuggling, and coordinated external networks, which contribute to an unpredictable threat environment. Legal mail processes, designed to protect confidential communications, can be exploited to introduce contraband.
This creates a gap between modern threats and existing detection capabilities.
The Limits of Conventional Screening
Most correctional facilities rely on a combination of visual inspection, manual handling, X-ray imaging, and canine units. These approaches remain effective for bulk items such as weapons or large quantities of drugs, but they were not designed to detect trace powders or drug-soaked paper.
X-ray systems are highly effective at identifying density differences. They are less effective when drugs are soaked into paper or in liquid or trace powder form. The large footprint, expense, and local radiation licensing and permitting make it burdensome to install in facilities. X-ray equipment requires approvals that can delay construction projects and add cost. Manual inspection adds inefficiencies and safety risks to screeners, particularly when dealing with unknown substances.
As synthetic narcotics have become more potent, even incidental exposure can have significant consequences. Correctional staff exposures have resulted in symptoms from dizziness to hospitalization and, in rare cases, have proven fatal. As a result, screening efforts are often misaligned with today’s highest risks.
Designing for Detection, Not Just Interception
Addressing today’s contraband challenges requires a shift in approach in how detection is managed within the design and operation of correctional facilities.
Detection should be an integrated system rather than a standalone checkpoint. This includes evaluating where and how screening occurs, how technologies are deployed, and how workflows support security, efficiency, and officer safety.
Mailrooms are often designed for throughput, not advanced screening. Retrofitting can be difficult when systems require specialized infrastructure such as shielding, ventilation, or safety controls. Perimeter security systems are not always fully integrated with internal screening processes, creating gaps.
Detection should be a key part of the facility’s overall security architecture, aligning layout, staffing, and technology to support consistent, scalable screening practices.
Emerging Technologies and New Capabilities
Advances in sensing and imaging technologies are addressing these limitations. Among these are systems capable of analyzing the contents of sealed items without requiring direct contact or manual handling.
Terahertz (T-ray) imaging, operates in a region of the electromagnetic spectrum that can penetrate common materials such as paper, plastics, and fabrics. This allows operators to examine the contents of sealed mail and packages in real time, without opening them.
Unlike X-ray systems, which produce static images based primarily on density, these systems generate live, dynamic imaging that reveals how materials behave in motion. This “4D” view, capturing depth as well as movement, allows operators to observe subtle indicators, such as shifting powders, moving liquids, or anomalies in drug-treated paper, that would otherwise remain hidden.
Because terahertz systems use non-ionizing energy, they don’t require radiation shielding, specialized licensing, or controlled environments. This makes it easier for them to integrate into existing areas without significant infrastructure changes.
These technologies also support operational efficiency. They enable rapid screening while reducing the need for manual inspection by allowing staff to identify potential threats before opening items. When designing new spaces, containment methods, such as downdraft tables and fume hoods, should also be considered to protect against the highly toxic nature of new drugs. T-ray technology can easily integrate with containment solutions to keep staff safe and lower exposure risks while maintaining the flow of communications.
T-ray solutions help facilities better balance security with operational and legal constraints. Legal mail protections, for example, limit how certain items can be inspected. Terahertz screening technologies that can screen sealed items without opening them offer a way to navigate these constraints while maintaining compliance.
Closing the Gap Between Threat and Capability
Contraband detection is not only a security issue; it affects safety and operational continuity.
Exposure to unknown substances, even small amounts, can pose serious health risks. Mailroom staff are on the front lines of this exposure. Recently, four officers were transported to the hospital after possible drug exposure at Uncasville prison. Reducing manual inspection and improving early detection significantly lowers these risks.
T-ray systems can integrate with smart building systems, enabling secure connections between internet-connected screening devices and facility security networks. This allows for real-time data streaming, as well as automated alerts and alarms across a connected facility. If a powder threat is detected, systems can send real-time mass notifications and shut down HVAC to help prevent widespread exposure, reducing the risk of staff hospitalization.
Another challenge is consistency in how potential threats are identified and handled. When detection relies on manual judgment, outcomes can vary across staff, shifts, and facilities. Technologies that provide visibility into the contents of sealed items help standardize decision-making and reduce uncertainty.
Planning for the Future of Facility Security
Contraband detection in correctional facilities is entering a new phase. Threats are more sophisticated, and the limitations of traditional approaches are clear.
For those involved in planning and operating correctional environments, the challenge is how quickly systems can adapt. This includes designing spaces and workflows that support advanced screening technologies, integrating detection into broader security systems, and adopting a layered approach.
The goal is stronger detection, safer staff, and more effective operations. Facilities that align detection capabilities with today’s realities will be better positioned to protect staff, maintain compliance, and operate efficiently in an increasingly complex environment.
Alex Sappok, Ph.D., is CEO of RaySecur.
