Six States were included in the study: Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, Maryland, and Washington. Between three and seven jails were selected in each of these States to serve as pilot sites. The I/PP was designed to determine what consequences deficiencies in the jails' health care delivery systems had on inmates' health status. This report includes both a description of the aggregate results obtained in the second year and a comparison of these findings with those of the first year study's. The report explains the study's methodology and the limitations of the data collected. The I/PP screening process was reapplied in the second year to determine whether any improvements had occurred in the pilot jails' health care delivery systems and if these improvements had improved inmates' health status. Comparisons of data from the first and second year indicated that, for the most part, this had happened. There were no significant reductions over time in the proportion of inmates who had never seen a physical, had a physical exam, or seen a mental health worker, regardless of whether it was in the community or at the jail. Significant reductions did occur in the proportion of inmates in accredited jails who had never seen a dentist and in the proportion who had never had their eyes examined. Significant reduction occurred in the proportion of inmates who reported being barred from obtaining medical services in accredited jails, although this was not true for access to dental and mental health services. Overall, the objective measures in the I/PP documented significant increases over time in the availability and adequacy of health care services in accredited jails and some significant improvements in the provisionally accredited jails. In addition, increasingly greater proportions of inmates' abnormalities were being identified and treated in the second year than in the first. On a subjective basis, though, inmates in the second year were no more satisfied with the health care delivery systems in their jails than were inmates interviewed in the first year. Tables, study data, and study instruments are provided. (Author summary modified)