Research aims were to obtain information on specific technologies and to identify areas of corrections practice for which new technologies could be developed or improved. A survey instrument was distributed in March 1995 to 218 Federal, State, and local correctional agencies, including 54 Federal and State agencies responsible for administering adult prisons, 80 large jails and jail systems, and 84 community corrections agencies. Responses were received from 148 agencies, and data were collected in security-related and non-security-related categories. Technologies receiving the highest ratings from at least half the agencies using them included magnetic card systems for identification and access control in jails, x-ray systems for contraband detection in jails, automatic personal distress alarms in adult prison systems, and distance technology for offender education and training in adult prison systems. Agencies offered recommendations for technology improvements that focused on durability, serviceability, and capacity to interface with other systems. In particular, agencies recommended the establishment of a uniform design for automated offender data systems, an upgrade to 24-hour location tracking of offenders under community supervision, and changes in fixed closed circuit television cameras to permit their manipulation by remote control. Unmet technology needs identified by agencies concerned information storage and retrieval, weapons detection, and voice technologies. Obstacles cited by agencies as inhibiting their adoption of new technologies included lack of funds, insufficient staff resources, and lack of information on available technologies. Appendixes contain technology tables, a list of agency contacts, and the survey instrument. Tables