Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 12:08 pm
Time: 12:08 pm
Results for correctional education
42 results foundAuthor: Brazzell, Diana Title: From the Clasroom to the Community: Exploring the Role of Education During Incarceration and Reentry Summary: This report surveys the current landscape of correctional education, discussing both the educational needs of people involved in the criminal justice system and the programs being provided to meet those needs. It reviews research on the effectiveness of correctional education; outlines the guiding principles for effective programming; discusses the issues involved in providing education in correctional settings; and identifies some potential responses to these challenges. The report closes by looking to the future and highlighting key issues and new directions in research, policy, and practice. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, Justice Policy Center, 2009. 50p. Source: Internet Resource; John Jay College of Criminal Justice Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 116495 Keywords: Correctional EducationRecidivism |
Author: Winterfield, Laura Title: The Effects of Postsecondary Correctional Education: Final Report Summary: Increasing educational proficiency has shown promise as one strategy for assisting inmates in finding gainful employment after release and ending their involvement with the criminal justice system. This report examines the effect of prison-based postsecondary education (PSE) on offenders both while incarcerated and after release. In three state, prisoners who participated in PSE were less likely to recidivate during the first year after release. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, Justice Policy Center, 2009. 42p. Source: Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 116311 Keywords: Correctional EducationEducationPrisoners |
Author: Robinson, Barbara Title: Education in Chains: Gaps in Education Provision to Children in Detention Summary: This report examines the right to education of children in detention in thirteen countries where Defense for Children International (DCI) has a presence and represents an ongoing collaboration between DCI's national sections and its International Secretariat. The report stems from DCI's participation in a special paper produced by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education on the theme of education for persons in detention. In preparation for his report, the Special Rapporteur consulted with governments, prisoners and non-governmental organisations (including DCI). The Special Rapporteur presented his findings to the Human Rights Council in June 2009, alongside a set of recommendations stressing the need to guarantee the right to education in detention, in legislation and in practice. The right to education of children deprived of their liberty Against a backdrop of poverty, social exclusion and exploitation, children in conflict with the law represent a particularly vulnerable group. However, instead of receiving care and protection, these children often face discrimination and denial of their social, cultural, economic and political rights. The evidence presented in this report highlights that many governments are failing to guarantee the right to education of children held in detention around the world. Key findings are as follows: - There were a number of examples where national legislation fails to establish provisions for the education of children in detention and where education is treated as an opportunity rather than a right; - In a number of countries, the State fails to provide any education whatsoever to children in detention; - Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are the sole providers of education to children in detention in many situations, or play a key role in enhancing existing provision; - The situation of children is often worse when they are held in pre-trial detention, where limited, lower quality or indeed no education is often provided; - It was evident that few efforts are being made to monitor and evaluate the quality and frequency of education in detention, and in particular participation rates among detained children. To help address these problems and protect the rights of vulnerable children, DCI endorses the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education (2009) and recommends a focus on the following goals: - States should use deprivation of liberty as a measure of last resort and for the shortest possible period of time. - Ensure education is framed as an inalienable right integrated in the national legislation, policies and strategies. - Systematically collect and publish data about the provision of education in detention. - Monitor and review the quality and quantity of education in detention and initiate plans to transfer responsibilities from non-governmental organisations to the state. - Avoid the use of pre-trial detention, regularly review its use and ensure conditions meet the same standards as other forms of detention. - Facilitate the participation of children in the development of educational programmes in detention. Details: Geneva: Defence for Children International, 2009. 53p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 25, 2018 at: http://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resource-attachments/DCI_Education_in_Detention_2009.pdf Year: 2009 Country: International URL: http://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resource-attachments/DCI_Education_in_Detention_2009.pdf Shelf Number: 117098 Keywords: Correctional EducationJuvenile DetentionJuvenile Inmates |
Author: Great Britain. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts Title: Meeting Needs? The Offenders Learning and Skills Service Summary: This report examines the work of the U.K.Learning and Skills Council for providing prisoners with basic skills and qualifications for employment. Details: London: The Stationery Office, 2008. 34p. Source: Forty-seventh Report of Session 2007-08. Report, toether with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Year: 2008 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 113401 Keywords: Correctional EducationEmployment of Ex-OffendersPrisoners |
Author: Klein, Steven Title: Correctional Education: Assessing the Status of Prison Programs and Information Needs Summary: Drawing on existing federal data sources, this report presents indicators on the scale and effectiveness of correctional education programs offered in federal and state prisons. Documenting trends in inmate access to instructional programs, the characteristics of participants and the outcomes of program participants, each indicator is intended to provide readers with an understanding of the status of correctional education programs today and the context in which they are evolving. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, 2004. 31p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2004 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 119116 Keywords: Correctional EducationCorrectional ProgramsInmates |
Author: Lichtenberger, Eric Title: Utilizing Post-Release Outcome Information To Measure the Effectiveness of Correctional Education Programs Summary: This paper provides correctional education administrators and research analysts with strategies for effectively collecting post-release outcome data and putting it to use both internally and externally. The paper highlights the approaches used by select states, as well as their outside evaluators and researchers, to measure the extent to which the programs meet post-release program goals and objectives. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, 2008. 36p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 119117 Keywords: Correctional EducationCorrectional ProgramsRecidivism |
Author: Bazos, Audrey Title: Correctional Education as a Crime Control Program Summary: This study compares the cost-effectiveness of two crime control methods - educating prisoners and expanding prisons. One million dollars spent on correctional education prevents about 600 crimes, while that same money invested in incarceration prevents 350 crimes. Correctional education is almost twice as cost-effective as a crime control policy. Additionally, correctional education may actually create long-run net cost savings. Inmates who participate in education programs are less likely to return to prison. For each re-incarceration prevented by education, states save about $20,000. One million dollars invested in education would prevent 26 re-incarcerations, for net future savings of $600,000. Details: Los Angeles: UCLA School of Public Policy and Social Research, Department of Policy Studies, 2004. 33p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2004 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 119115 Keywords: Correctional EducationCorrectional ProgramsCost-Benefit AnalysisRecidivism |
Author: Williams, Sarah Title: The City of Easton Weed and Seed Initiative: Evaluation 2008 Summary: This report is an evaluation and needs assessment of Easton Weed & Seed carried out between September snd November 2008. It includes background on the program and target neighborhood, a description of the Weed & Seed programs, the results of focus groups conducted with target residents and surveys of community residents. It concludes with overall impressions and recommendations. Details: Bethelmen, PA: Lehigh Valley Research Consortium, 2008. 23p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 119151 Keywords: Cognitive Behavioral TherapyCorrectional EducationCrime PreventionDelinquency PreventionDrug Abuse and AddictionJuvenile InmatesJuvenile OffendersJuvenile RehabilitationWeed & Seed Program |
Author: Gaes, Gerald G. Title: The Impact of Prison Education Programs on Post-Release Outcomes Summary: This paper reviews the evidence on the impact of correctional ecuction programs on post-release outcomes. Details: Unpublished paper presented at the Reentry Roundtable on Education, March 31 and April 1, 2008. 31p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 119130 Keywords: Correctional EducationCorrectional ProgramsRecidivismRehabilitation |
Author: Gorgol, Laura E. Title: Unlocking Potential: Results of a National Survey of Postsecondary Education in State Prisons Summary: As policymakers consider ways to increase educational attainment, generate future economic growth, and reduce public expenditures, educational opportunity for the incarcerated population should be a meaningful component of policy strategies. Designed to increase knowledge about how states are providing postsecondary education to incarcerated individuals, this brief rests on results of a national survey of state correctional education administrators (CEAs), presenting unique policy relevant information on the availability, administration, and funding of PSCE in state prison systems. A central purpose of the brief is to elevate the policy attention paid to postsecondary opportunity for incarcerated persons. Details: Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy, 2011. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue Brief: Accessed May 17, 2011 at: http://www.ihep.org/assets/files/publications/s-z/Unlocking_Potential-PSCE_FINAL_REPORT_May_2011.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.ihep.org/assets/files/publications/s-z/Unlocking_Potential-PSCE_FINAL_REPORT_May_2011.pdf Shelf Number: 121737 Keywords: Correctional EducationCorrectional ProgramsRecidivism |
Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Prisons Title: Resettlement Provision for Children and Young People: Accommodation and Education, Training and Employment Summary: Resettlement is one of the main tests against which the Inspectorate judges the health of a prison. This thematic review, commissioned by the Youth Justice Board, examines accommodation and education, training and employment (ETE) resettlement provision for sentenced young men aged 15 to 18 in young offender institutions. It reports on the work carried out in custody to prepare young people for release, using survey data as well as indepth interviews with 61 sentenced young men, their case supervisors and follow-up information on what happened to them on release. The heads of resettlement and learning and skills in each institution provide an establishment perspective. Ensuring that young people have suitable and sustainable accommodation and ETE on release from custody is a vital first step to reduce reoffending and enable young people to successfully reintegrate into the community. This is no small task – in our sample of 61 young men more than eight out of 10 (84%) had an accommodation and/or ETE need identified. In our survey almost half of young men said they were under 14 when they were last at school and 86% said they had been excluded at some point. All establishments had a strategy to drive forward resettlement work but in most cases these did not involve external agencies and had not been informed by a recent needs analysis of the population. The training planning process should be central to coordinating work to address young people’s individual needs, with targets set for a young person’s time in custody and plans for their release. We found from our fieldwork that several establishment case supervisors, who oversaw the training plan, had a good knowledge of the young people in their caseload. Most young men reported that training plan targets had been discussed with them, although less than two-thirds in our case sample knew what their targets were and only half said they had had a say in the targets set for them – this then had a real impact on whether they tried to achieve them. In custody, the range and quality of education and training provision was generally satisfactory and it was clear that, where possible, a young person’s preferences had been taken into account when allocating them to ETE. Most, although not all, young men said they were involved in some form of ETE at the time of interview and three-quarters said they had received or were working towards a qualification – 62% thought that these would be useful on release. Although it could often have been better tied to resettlement planning, at several establishments the use of release on temporary licence (ROTL) was improving, with some good quality work placements on offer. Case supervisors realised the importance of accommodation and ETE in resettlement work and reported that these issues were considered from the point of a young person’s arrival in custody. However, training planning targets often placed the onus only on the young person and did not specify what resources would be put in place or how they would be helped to achieve them. The main focus was on how they spent their time in custody and there were few long-term targets aimed at those responsible for ensuring plans were in place for their release. Establishments reported that this was the responsibility of youth offending teams (or social workers for looked after children). At the Heron unit at Feltham young people also had a resettlement broker who was involved in resettlement planning while young people were in custody, but who also offered intensive support to them for at least six months following release. Despite their key role, the attendance of social workers at training planning meetings for looked after children was poor. In contrast, relationships with community-based youth offending teams (YOTs) were well developed and YOT case managers normally attended training planning meetings. However, plans were not always finalised in time for the pre-release meeting which, understandably, worried young people and frustrated case supervisors. Two of the 61 young men interviewed said that not having accommodation had prevented their early release, but no establishments monitored this. It was not evident that discussions were taking place about whether accommodation arrangements set up at the point of release were suitable and sustainable. In our case sample, 61% of young men said they would be living with family on release and the majority were optimistic about it as they felt their family’s support was the key to their successful resettlement. Although establishments realised the importance of young people maintaining contact with family where appropriate and encouraged it, more structured work needed to be done to rebuild or maintain relationships while young people were in custody. This left two-fifths of our sample who required accommodation to be arranged for their release, which was a vital step before other release plans could be put in place. Case supervisors reported a range of barriers to finding suitable accommodation, including a limited supply of local authority housing and issues around the young person’s behaviour or offence. They also reported a range of barriers to arranging ETE for release, including limited availability in the community. At the time of interview, only 14 of the 48 young men who said they wanted to continue education had a place arranged. Worryingly, of the 42 young men who said they wanted to work (either full-time or part-time alongside education), only nine reported that they had a job arranged on release – and for seven of these it had been arranged through family, without help from the establishment or the YOT. Follow-up information was requested from case supervisors on what happened to the young men in our case sample on release and a month later, with information received for 41 and 37 of the young men respectively. Only 13 young men (32%) had both suitable accommodation (as assessed by case supervisors) and ETE on release. Two, including a looked after child, were forced to report as homeless. One in five were placed in accommodation assessed as unsuitable by case supervisors; this included three young men who had had to go into bed and breakfast lodgings – one was still there a month later – and two who were living with family where this was a cause for concern. Only a third of young men had an ETE placement arranged on release, only half of these were still attending a month later and only a fifth of those who had not got a placement on release had one confirmed a month later. Where ETE placements had fallen through, case supervisors felt this was due to unstable accommodation, a lack of family support, the young person’s lack of motivation or problems due to the timing of course start dates. A month after release six of the young men were in custody and one was ‘on the run’ – three of the young people who had returned to custody were looked after children. This report raises a key question – how effective is the resettlement work conducted in custody in terms of the actual outcomes for young people? This was not monitored by establishments and our follow-up information highlights the need to look beyond the gate in order to evaluate the effectiveness of resettlement work. Overall the outcomes for our sample were very disappointing. The Heron unit, although we can make no conclusions based on our small sample, seemed a promising initiative, as did the resettlement consortia, although the young offender institutions involved were not visited for this report. These are being formally evaluated and we look forward to seeing the results. Although our recommendations are to the Ministry of Justice, Youth Justice Board and National Offender Management Service we recognise that, to ensure all young people have suitable accommodation and ETE on release from custody, a joint approach with other government departments and external agencies is required. The starting point should be an acceptance that vulnerable young people released from custody are children in need. This would go some way toward focusing the joint effort that is needed to prevent them from returning to custody and becoming entrenched at an early age in a life of crime. Details: London: HM Inspectorate of Prisons, 2011. 118p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 28, 2011 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/inspectorate-reports/hmipris/Resettlement-thematic-june2011.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/inspectorate-reports/hmipris/Resettlement-thematic-june2011.pdf Shelf Number: 121879 Keywords: Correctional EducationCorrectional ProgramsHousing for Ex-OffendersJuvenile Offenders (U.K.)ReentryRehabilitationYoung Adult Offenders |
Author: Morissey, Michael E. Title: A Description of the Employment Patterns of Persons Released from Virginia's Correctional Institutions Between July 1, 1998, and June 30, 2002 Summary: The 35,882 former offenders released by Virginia’s Department of Corrections during the period of July 1, 1998, through June 30, 2002, are profiled using data provided by Virginia’s Department of Corrections and Department of Correctional Education as well as the Virginia Employment Commission. Demographic characteristics of recidivating and non-recidivating former offenders released during this period, with subgroupings to include gender, race, age, employment status, earnings, employment stability, and educational completion, as defined in the operational definitions of the study, are detailed, and the researcher’s observations are noted. Details: Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 2004. 110p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed August 17, 2011 at: http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-09082004-155317/unrestricted/Morrissey_Dissertation.pdf Year: 2004 Country: United States URL: http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-09082004-155317/unrestricted/Morrissey_Dissertation.pdf Shelf Number: 122421 Keywords: Correctional EducationEx-Offenders, Employment (Virginia)RecidivismRehabilitation |
Author: Evans, Michael Title: Tracking Washington State Offenders Pilot Study: Do Education Programs Affect Employment Outcomes? Summary: Substantial barriers to legal employment exist for former prison offenders after their release, such as finding a job with a livable wage and keeping the job are also more difficult due to their previous criminal histories and lower education levels compared to the general population. However, offenders participating in academic degree programs from Walla Walla Community College were employed at 25.5 percent level one year after release in 2009 compared to 15.7 percent of offenders with similar demographic characteristics, and recidivated at a lower rate (19.6 percent compared to 36 percent, respectively). Holding a job is an important signal that the individual is moving toward a crime-free life. Not only are these individuals working and crime-free, they are also taxpayers and consumers who help the local economies grow. Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State Department of Corrections, 2011. 13p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 16, 2011 at: http://www.doc.wa.gov/aboutdoc/measuresstatistics/docs/EmploymentEducation.docx Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.doc.wa.gov/aboutdoc/measuresstatistics/docs/EmploymentEducation.docx Shelf Number: 122759 Keywords: Correctional EducationEx-Offenders, EmploymentPrisoner Reentry (Washington State)RecidivismRehabilitation |
Author: Prisoners' Education Trust Title: Brain Cells: Listening to prisoner learners Summary: Being in prison is tough. Yet, it does offer opportunities for those prisoners who want to reform and find a path towards a crime-free life. One of the key areas of opportunity is in prison education. Learning new skills, acquiring new qualifications or knowledge can have a profound impact for those prisoners who engage in education. Education, as this report shows, changes prisoners and enables them to plan a different future for life after release. Providing education and training to meet the needs of all prisoners is extremely demanding. Prisoners come from all walks of life, have a variety of social and life experience and represent all races, cultures and religions. The age range in a prison classroom may vary from 22 to over 70. Some prisoners will have drug or alcohol dependency problems or mental health conditions. More than 50% of male prisoners and more than 66% of female prisoners have no qualifications at all. This might be the result of a traumatic home life, undiagnosed learning difficulties or social alienation. The end result is that many prisoners are likely to have been disproportionately disadvantaged in relation to education and learning before entering the prison system. There are severe problems in making prison education work. Some are the inevitable results of prison regimes which must give priority to security. Others arise from the current levels of overcrowding across the prison estate. Prisoners can be moved at short notice, classes or courses can be interrupted and the same curriculum is not always available at the next prison. Some learning records may not be transferred. Access to books, learning equipment and information and communication technology (ICT) varies from prison to prison. Most prisoners have little access to the telephone, no email communication with tutors and no internet access. Distance learning might be the right option, but it may not be possible to get funding to pay for it. Despite these problems, education happens in prisons and it does work. This report gives a snapshot of attitudes and activities and includes some very positive themes. Prisoners affirm strongly the support they receive from prison education staff. Many prisoners act in voluntary roles supporting other learners with many aiming to continue learning after release. This report also highlights the challenges facing education in prisons. In particular, the need to encourage prison officers in their support for prisoner learning, the need to ensure continuity of learning when prisoners are transferred and the need to make better use of ICT as a tool for learning. The findings in this report are important because they enable us to hear the voice and experience of prisoners themselves. Education cannot and should not be a passive transfer of knowledge. The participation and response of the learner is crucial to its success. So we need to hear what prisoners think and how they experience education inside, finding ways to work with them to make prison education as effective as it can possibly be. Prisoner voice should also be an essential element in framing policy about prisoner learning. They are in a position to give feedback on the effectiveness of present policy and their experience can point out the strengths and weaknesses of what is provided. This report is a contribution towards building a constructive, lively and robust account of how prisoners view education inside. Details: Surrey: Prisoners' Education Trust, 2009. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 7, 2012 at http://www.prisonerseducation.org.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/doc/Learning_Matters/BRAIN_CELLS._THE_REPORT.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.prisonerseducation.org.uk/fileadmin/user_upload/doc/Learning_Matters/BRAIN_CELLS._THE_REPORT.pdf Shelf Number: 124010 Keywords: Correctional EducationCorrectional ProgramsMentoringPrisoners (U.K.) |
Author: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills Title: Making Prisons Work: Skills for Rehabilitation - Review of Offender Learning Summary: Re-offending blights lives and communities, carrying personal, social and economic costs of between £9.5 billion and £13 billion a year. Enabling offenders to have the skills that will make them attractive to employers so that they can find and keep jobs on release or whilst serving a community sentence – becoming an asset rather than a burden to society – makes sense. Whilst our investment in giving offenders the skills they need to help them get and keep jobs is significant, it is a fraction of the prize on offer to all of us if we can prevent the creation of future victims of crime, with the associated economic and social costs, by cutting their reoffending. Skills for Sustainable Growth set out the reforms that will help bring renewed economic growth, improve people’s chances to achieve social mobility, secure greater social justice, and build the Big Society. It recognised that learners need help with support and information to make the right decisions about their future. For offenders, those decisions must be focussed on developing the skills and aptitudes that will secure employment, helping to put offenders on the right path. Breaking the Cycle: Effective Punishment, Rehabilitation and Sentencing of Offenders puts work for offenders at the centre of punishment and rehabilitation, both in custody and the community and, like Skills for Sustainable Growth, enables decision-making and accountability to move decisively away from the centre of government. Both documents put a premium on local-level autonomy and on local-level discretion. This review of offender learning takes us down the same path, setting out our view that we will achieve the most effective results by making offender learning an authentic part of the skills and employment systems that operate at that same local level. Details: London: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, 2011. 33p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 7, 2012 at http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/further-education-skills/docs/m/11-828-making-prisons-work-skills-for-rehabilitation Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/further-education-skills/docs/m/11-828-making-prisons-work-skills-for-rehabilitation Shelf Number: 124019 Keywords: Correctional EducationCorrectional ProgramsOffender Rehabilitation (U.K.)Vocational Education and Training |
Author: Texas. Legislative Budget Board. Title: Windham School District Evaluation Report Summary: The Windham School District (WSD) evaluated the post-release employment impact of Career and Technology Education (CTE) vocational training provided to ex-offenders during their incarceration. The study included those ex-offenders released from prisons and state jails from April 01, 2005 through March 31, 2006. This report examines the relationship between vocational training, employment, and earnings for nearly 40,000 exoffenders. The study indicates: Ex-offenders who completed vocational training while incarcerated were more likely to be employed than those who participated without completing training or those who did not receive vocational training; For all age groups and all levels of academic achievement, vocationally-trained ex-offenders exhibited higher employment rates than those who participated without completing training or those who did not receive vocational training; Vocationally-trained ex-offenders exhibited a higher average salary difference (from first quarter earnings to fourth quarter earnings) and higher average annual earnings than those who participated without completing training or those who did not receive vocational training; Overall, two out of three vocationally-trained ex-offenders who were employed earned income working in one or more occupations related to their vocational training; Vocationally-trained ex-offenders who worked in occupations related to their vocational training had a higher average salary difference (from first quarter earnings to fourth quarter earnings) than those working in unrelated fields; Vocationally-trained ex-offenders exhibited better job retention than those who participated without completing training or those who did not receive vocational training. In general, for all age groups studied, a higher percentage of vocationally-trained ex-offenders retained employment for three consecutive quarters compared to those who did not receive vocational training; Overall, ex-offenders who had attained a GED or high school diploma retained employment longer than those who had not; In the Prison/State Jail study group, ex-offenders with college degrees who completed vocational training gained employment at a higher rate than those with college degrees who did not receive vocational training; Industry certification and working in an occupation related to training appear to enhance job retention. Details: Texas: Legislative Budget Board, 2008. 51p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 22, 2012 at http://www.lbb.state.tx.us/PubSafety_CrimJustice/3_Reports/Windham_School_0208.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.lbb.state.tx.us/PubSafety_CrimJustice/3_Reports/Windham_School_0208.pdf Shelf Number: 124229 Keywords: Correctional EducationEmploymentEvaluative StudiesEx-Offenders (Texas)Vocational Education and Training |
Author: MacDonald, Stephen Title: Industry Recognized Certification: A Pathway to Reentry Summary: This report indicates that industry recognized certifications are effective in reducing recidivism by providing inmates with the skills and qualifications that industries look for in their employees; by providing a pool of skilled workers for industries, particularly in high-growth occupations; and can be an effective tool for correctional systems to increase the rate of successful reentry of inmates by providing a foundation upon which a released inmate can build and demonstrate to employers that they are ready to work in their field and add value to the business. Inmates who gain a certification increase the probability of gaining employment and reducing the risk of re-offending. Information is provided on the need for skilled labor, the need for certification, incorporating certifications into a correctional facility, currently available certifications, and possible certifications that will be available in the future. Details: Centerville, UT: MTC Institute, 2010. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 10, 2012 at Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 124422 Keywords: Correctional EducationEx-Offenders, EmploymentPrisoner ReentryVocational Education and Training |
Author: Davis, Lois M. Title: How Effective is Correctional Education, and Where Do We Go from Here? The Results of a Comprehensive Evaluation Summary: Each year, more than 700,000 incarcerated individuals leave federal and state prisons; within three years of release, 40 percent will have committed new crimes or violated the terms of their release and be reincarcerated. Although a number of factors impede the ability of ex-offenders to successfully reintegrate into communities and, thus, affect recidivism rates, one key factor is that many ex-offenders do not have the knowledge, training, and skills to support a successful return to their communities. Research, for example, shows that ex-offenders, on average, are less educated than the general population: 37 percent of individuals in state prisons had attained less than a high school education in 2004, compared with 19 percent of the general U.S. population age 16 and over; 16.5 percent of state prisoners had just a high school diploma, compared with 26 percent of the general population; and 14.4 percent of state prison inmates had at least some postsecondary education, compared with 51 percent of the general U.S. adult population. Moreover, literacy levels for the prison population also tend to be lower than that of the general U.S. population. This lower level of educational attainment represents a significant challenge for exoffenders returning to local communities, because it impedes their ability to find employment. A lack of vocational skills and a steady history of employment also have an impact, with research showing that incarceration impacts unemployment and earnings in a number of ways, including higher unemployment rates for ex-offenders and lower hourly wages when they are employed. Also, individuals being released to the community face a very different set of job market needs than ever before, given the growing role of computer technology and the need for at least basic computer skills. Given these gaps in educational attainment and vocational skills and the impact they have on ex-offenders, one strategy is to provide education to inmates while they are incarcerated, so that they have the skills to support a successful return to their communities. Historically, support for educational programs within correctional settings has waxed and waned over time as the nation’s philosophy of punishment has shifted from rehabilitation to crime control. Although there is general consensus today that education is an important component of rehabilitation, the question remains: How effective is it in helping to reduce recidivism and improve postrelease employment outcomes? The question is especially salient as the nation as a whole and states in particular have struggled with the need to make spending cuts to all social programs due to the recession of 2008 and its long aftermath. With funding from the Second Chance Act of 2007 (Pub. L. 110-199), the U.S. Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Assistance awarded RAND a cooperative agreement in 2010 to comprehensively examine the current state of correctional education for incarcerated adults and juveniles, where it is headed, which correctional education programs are effective, and how effective programs can be implemented across different settings. The study was designed to address the following key questions of importance to the field of correctional education: 1. What is known about the effectiveness of correctional education programs for incarcerated adults? 2. What is known about the effectiveness of correctional education programs for juvenile offenders? 3. What does the current landscape of correctional education look like in the United States, and what are some emerging issues and trends to consider? 4. What recommendations emerge from the study for the U.S. Department of Justice and other federal departments to further the field of correction education, and where are there gaps in our knowledge? What promising practices, if any, emerge from this review and evaluation? To address these questions, we used a mixed-methods approach. This report first presents a summary of the prior systematic literature review and meta-analysis of adult correctional education programs (Davis et al., 2013), which included studies completed between 1980 and 2011. It then presents two new sections: a systematic literature review of primary studies of correctional education programs for juveniles and a nationwide web-based survey of state correctional education directors. We conclude with a set of recommendations for moving the field forward. For purposes of our study, we defined correctional education for incarcerated adults as including the following: - Adult basic education: basic skills instruction in arithmetic, reading, writing, and, if needed, English as a second language (ESL) - Adult secondary education: instruction to complete high school or prepare for a certificate of high school equivalency, such as the General Education Development (GED) certificate - Vocational education or career technical education (CTE): training in general employment skills and in skills for specific jobs or industries - Postsecondary education: college-level instruction that enables an individual to earn college credit that may be applied toward a two- or four-year postsecondary degree. To meet our definition of correctional education, the program had to be administered at least partly within a correctional facility. Programs that also included a postrelease transition component remained eligible as long as part of the program was administered in a correctional setting. For the juvenile program systematic review, we define incarcerated youth as individuals under age 21 who are legally assigned to correctional facilities as a result of arrest, detainment for court proceedings, adjudication by a juvenile court, or conviction in an adult criminal court (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2013). We define correctional education as any academic or vocational education/CTE program provided within the correctional facility setting, regardless of jurisdiction. As with our adult review, we permitted eligible interventions for juveniles to include an aftercare (postrelease) component, but the interventions had to be delivered primarily in the correctional facility. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2014. 156p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 19, 2014 at: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR500/RR564/RAND_RR564.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR500/RR564/RAND_RR564.pdf Shelf Number: 132085 Keywords: Correctional EducationEmploymentEx-OffendersRecidivismReentryRehabilitation Vocational Education and Training |
Author: Stocks, Chad Lamar Title: The effects of prison program participation on recidivism of ex-offenders in Mississippi Summary: Correctional education research strongly suggests that an increase in inmates' education will reduce recidivism rates. This study utilized logistic regression techniques to investigate the effects of prison education program participation on recidivism and employment rates. Using this method made it possible to conclude that inmates who participated in prison intervention/educational programs were significantly less likely to recidivate. The purpose of this study was to identify to what extent the Mississippi Department of Corrections' (MDOC's) intervention/educational programs reduce recidivism. The pre-existing data used were historical information collected as part of a longitudinal study on Mississippi inmates since 2000. The data were transferred every quarter to the National Strategic Planning and Analysis Research Center (nSPARC) for management and analysis. Initial tests found that several variables had a relationship with recidivism. The findings in this study suggest that ex-offenders who completed an education/vocational program or completed a counseling program were 87% (p < 0.001), 9.9% (p < 0.005), respectively, less likely to recidivate than those ex-offenders who did not participate in any type of education or intervention program. The results also suggest that ex-offenders who enrolled in but did not complete an education/vocational program were l0% (p<0.005) less likely to recidivate than those ex-offenders who did not participate in any type of education or intervention program. Recommendations that result from these findings include an increase in the number and quality of intervention/educational programs in Mississippi prisons. Policies could be suggested and/or implemented that would reduce the number of people who violate the law upon their re-entry into society. Details: Mississippi State, MS: Mississippi State University, 2012. 108p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed December 8, 2014 at: http://media.proquest.com/media/pq/classic/doc/2747450151/fmt/ai/rep/NPDF?_s=ejRO4MrLTPhKEe69GURf%2FxyfWcc%3D Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://media.proquest.com/media/pq/classic/doc/2747450151/fmt/ai/rep/NPDF?_s=ejRO4MrLTPhKEe69GURf%2FxyfWcc%3D Shelf Number: 134287 Keywords: Correctional EducationEducationPrison ProgramsPrisoners (Mississippi)Vocational Education and Training |
Author: U.S. Department of Education Title: Guiding Principles for Providing High-Quality Education in Juvenile Justice Secure Care Settings Summary: Providing high-quality education in juvenile justice secure care settings presents unique challenges for the administrators, teachers, and staff who are responsible for the education, rehabilitation, and welfare of youths committed to their care. The United States departments of Education (ED) and Justice (DOJ) recognize that while these challenges cannot be overcome without vision, dedication, and leadership, there is also a critical need in the field for supportive resources grounded in the available research, practitioner experiences, and promising practices from around the country. The more than 2,500 juvenile justice residential facilities across the country need support from federal, state, and local educational agencies; the broader juvenile justice system (particularly the juvenile justice agencies that oversee facilities); and their communities to improve services for committed youths. The services provided to them in secure care facilities should be developmentally appropriate and focus on the youths' educational, social-emotional, behavioral, and career planning needs so that their time within a secure care facility is a positive experience during which they attain new skills and move on to a more productive path. Building on prior guidance from ED and DOJ, this report focuses on five guiding principles recommended by the federal government for providing high-quality education in juvenile justice secure care settings: I. A safe, healthy facility-wide climate that prioritizes education, provides the conditions for learning, and encourages the necessary behavioral and social support services that address the individual needs of all youths, including those with disabilities and English learners. II. Necessary funding to support educational opportunities for all youths within long-term secure care facilities, including those with disabilities and English learners, comparable to opportunities for peers who are not system-involved. III. Recruitment, employment, and retention of qualified education staff with skills relevant in juvenile justice settings who can positively impact long-term student outcomes through demonstrated abilities to create and sustain effective teaching and learning environments. IV. Rigorous and relevant curricula aligned with state academic and career and technical education standards that utilize instructional methods, tools, materials, and practices that promote college- and career-readiness. V. Formal processes and procedures - through statutes, memoranda of understanding, and practices - that ensure successful navigation across child-serving systems and smooth reentry into communities. Throughout this report, each guiding principle is accompanied by supportive core activities for consideration by agencies and facilities seeking to improve existing education-related practices or implement new ones. These principles and core activities are not an exhaustive list of responsibilities for either agencies operating secure care facilities or those providing educational services on facility grounds. Instead, both the guiding principles and the attendant core activities are ED's and DOJ's suggestions for creating environments conducive to the teaching and learning process, enhancing academic and social-emotional supports, promoting positive educational outcomes for all system-involved students, and lessening the likelihood of youths reentering the justice system. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2014. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 16, 2015 at: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/correctional-education/guiding-principles.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/correctional-education/guiding-principles.pdf Shelf Number: 135254 Keywords: Correctional EducationJuvenile Inmates (U.S.)Rehabilitation |
Author: Davis, Lois M. Title: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Correctional Education: A Meta-Analysis of Programs That Provide Education to Incarcerated Adults Summary: After conducting a comprehensive literature search, the authors undertook a meta-analysis to examine the association between correctional education and reductions in recidivism, improvements in employment after release from prison, and learning in math and in reading. Their findings support the premise that receiving correctional education while incarcerated reduces an individual's risk of recidivating. They also found that those receiving correctional education had improved odds of obtaining employment after release. The authors also examined the benefits of computer-assisted learning and compared the costs of prison education programs with the costs of reincarceration. Key Findings Correctional Education Improves Inmates' Outcomes after Release - Correctional education improves inmates' chances of not returning to prison. - Inmates who participate in correctional education programs had a 43 percent lower odds of recidivating than those who did not. This translates to a reduction in the risk of recidivating of 13 percentage points. - It may improve their chances of obtaining employment after release. The odds of obtaining employment post-release among inmates who participated in correctional education was 13 percent higher than the odds for those who did not participate in correctional education. - Inmates exposed to computer-assisted instruction learned slightly more in reading and substantially more in math in the same amount of instructional time. - Providing correctional education can be cost-effective when it comes to reducing recidivism. Recommendations - Further studies should be undertaken to identify the characteristics of effective programs in terms of curriculum, dosage, and quality. - Future studies should incorporate stronger research designs. - Funding grants would be useful in helping further the field, by enabling correctional educators to partner with researchers and evaluators to evaluate their programs. - A study registry of correctional education evaluations would help develop the evidence base in the field, to inform policy and programmatic decisionmaking. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2013. 85p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 26, 2015 at: http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR266.html Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR266.html Shelf Number: 129781 Keywords: Correctional EducationCorrectional ProgramsEx-Offender EmploymentRecidivismVocational Education and Training |
Author: Utah. Legislative Auditor General Title: A Performance Audit of Inmate High School Education Summary: Our office was asked to compare the effectiveness and efficiency of inmate high school education programs in Utah's jails and prisons. Educational services are provided by the adult education program of the school district where an inmate is incarcerated. Programs include adult high school completion (AHSC), adult basic education (ABE), and English for speakers of other languages (ESOL). In 2011, 21 local school districts provided educational services to 5,268 inmate students in 23 jails and 2 state prisons. The Utah State Office of Education (USOE) administers the adult education programs, including tracking student demographics, contact hours, and outcomes on a compute-based information system. Inmate High School Education Costs Were about $5.4 Million in 2011. This chapter identifies the cost of educating inmate students. There are two primary revenue sources for inmate high school education: (1) a portion of the Adult Education budget distributed based on a formula that considers the number of enrollees, contact hours, and outcomes (diplomas/GEDs, credits, and academic level gains); and (2) Corrections Education funds distributed only to the two school districts with prison programs, Canyons and South Sanpete. In 2011, school districts with prison programs received significantly more funds ($1330 per student) than districts with jail programs ($653 per student). Based on this inequity, we recommend that USOE consider modifying the distribution formula to ensure that school districts receive an equitable portion of the Adult Education funds. USOE should also develop a formula to provide some of the Corrections Education funds to jail programs with students who are prison inmates housed in jails on a contractual basis. Inmates Achieve Academic Benefits. In 2011, the 5,268 inmates enrolled in adult education were awarded 853 diplomas and 330 GEDs, while achieving 12,003 high school credits and 2,143 level gains. On average, these outcomes per student were equivalent for both jail and prison programs but prison programs chose to focus mostly on issuing diplomas instead of GEDs. Comparisons show that inmate programs achieved significantly more than students in traditional adult education programs. Impact of High School Education on Employment Is Unclear. The primary purpose of educating inmates is to enhance their opportunities for employment upon release, which in turn makes it less likely they will return to jail. However, employment rates are not effectively evaluated. One factor impacting employment rates is identifying the incarceration status of former students. Our limited evaluation shows that many former students are still incarcerated and not available to work. Since education is beneficial only when inmates will soon be available for employment, we recommend that inmate programs give priority to students who are likely to leave the correctional facility within five years of participating in the education program. We also recommend that USOE and the Utah Department of Corrections partner to further evaluate the employment benefits of inmate education. Monitoring Is Needed to Ensure Inmate Contact Hours Are Reasonable. Comparisons of contact hours per student and per outcome revealed that some programs used an excessive amount of contact hours to educate inmates. But these students did not always demonstrate much progress toward achieving their goals. We recommend that USOE establish guidelines for the number of contact hours that are reasonable in relation to a student's accomplishments. Many Contact Hours Are Used for Students Who Already Have Diplomas. Many inmate students with diplomas continue to receive adult education services. Administrative rules state that adults with a high school diploma are eligible to receive services if tests show their functional educational level is less than a post-secondary level. Many students qualify, including students who have just been awarded a diploma. Although USOE policies require that priority be given to students lacking a diploma, some of these students continue receiving thousands of hours of services with little gain. We recommend that USOE consider placing limits on the number of contact hours used for students who already have a diploma. Details: Salt Lake City: Utah Legislative Auditor General, 2012. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Report no. 2012-11: Accessed June 3, 2015 at: http://le.utah.gov/audit/12_11rpt.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://le.utah.gov/audit/12_11rpt.pdf Shelf Number: 129973 Keywords: Correctional EducationCorrectional ProgramsCosts of CorrectionsEducational ProgramsEx-Offender Employment |
Author: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Vocational and Adult Education Title: Community-based Correctional Education Summary: Although it is known that many persons under community supervision need and eventually want correctional education programs, little is known about the providers and characteristics of these educational programs. This report provides an overview of initiatives at the national and state levels supporting new approaches to community supervision and the types of education services available to those under community supervision. It is intended for adult education and criminal justice practitioners and administrators interested in establishing a community-based correctional education program or strengthening an existing program, as well as federal and state policymakers. The report outlines the characteristics of community-based correctional education programs, including their organizational structure, target population, curriculum, instruction, instructor preparation, and partnerships. It also describes the challenges of community-based correctional education, shares collected advice on how such services can be strengthened, and discusses implications for federal and state policy. The report is based on information gathered from discussions with representatives of 15 community-based correctional education programs in 10 states - Arizona, California, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, and Texas - chosen according to recommendations from researchers and practitioners in the field. In examining these community-based correctional education programs, this report provides insight regarding the following questions: The programs are listed in the box on this page. 1. What are federal and state policymakers and national organizations doing to support community-based correctional education programs? 2. What are the various organizational structures of community-based correctional education programs? 3. What target populations do these programs serve? 4. What curriculum and instructional approaches do community-based correctional education programs use and how do they prepare their instructors? 5. Who are their community partners? 6. What challenges do these programs face and how are those challenges being addressed? 7. What additional support do community-based correctional education programs need? Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2010. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 31, 2015 at: http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ovae/pi/AdultEd/cbce-report-2011.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ovae/pi/AdultEd/cbce-report-2011.pdf Shelf Number: 136640 Keywords: Community-Based ProgramsCorrectional EducationVocational Education and Training |
Author: Tolbert, Michelle Title: Educational Technology in Corrections 2015 Summary: Technology has transformed the way we approach most daily tasks and activities. It plays a role in how we apply for and perform on a job, communicate with friends and family, access government and other services, manage our finances, and purchase entertainment. Technology also enables our learning. Recognizing the positive impact technology can have on education, President Obama, with the support of the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Educational Technology, developed the National Education Technology Plan. It outlines how our education system could use advanced technologies to support student learning regardless of backgrounds, languages, and disabilities; instruction and the professional development of teachers; data collection and analysis; and program improvement (U.S. Department of Education 2010). A corresponding plan describes how these technologies can be applied to the adult education field and adult learners (Russell et al. 2015). As states, districts, higher education institutions, and other education providers implement these plans, education programs in correctional facilities are being left behind. The policies and practices of federal, state, and local corrections agencies, including the juvenile justice system, severely hinder the ability of correctional education programs to enable learning through technology. For example, according to a 2013 survey of state correctional education directors, although most states offer students limited use of computers in their prisons, less than half reported that one or more of their prisons provided students with off-line access to Internet content and even fewer allowed restricted Internet access (Davis et al. 2014). The primary concern about adopting educational technology in corrections is the potential for security breaches. Other reasons include, but are not limited to, insufficient resources and staff capacity to purchase, implement, maintain, and monitor advanced technologies. Despite these legitimate concerns, a sea change is occurring in corrections. As advanced technologies are integrated into other areas of correctional facility life (e.g., family communications via e-mail and video conferencing, and access to health and treatment services via telemedicine), a growing number of corrections agencies and facilities and their education partners are exploring ways to securely and cost-effectively increase access to educational technology. Specifically, they are cautiously adopting advanced technologies to • help prepare students to join our globally networked society by developing and improving their computer and digital literacy skills, making educational gains around the clock through computer-assisted instruction, accessing college courses, and preparing for employment; • provide students with access to online assessments (e.g., online high school equivalency tests and industry-recognized certification exams), and instructors and administrators with the ability to measure student progress for program improvement purposes; • expand the professional development resources available to instructors and equip them with technology-based instructional tools (e.g., open educational resources [OERs], learning management systems, and flipped classrooms) to enhance the classroom experience; • support an education continuum for incarcerated individuals through data sharing, and aligning prison-based education and training programs with those in the community; and • expand the reach of correctional education services to provide more incarcerated individuals with the knowledge and skills needed to obtain livingwage employment, become productive members of society, and exit court supervision upon release. In addition to strengthening correctional education services, advanced technologies can • help correctional education programs have a greater impact on recidivism rates. As documented by a recent meta-analysis of the effects of education on recidivism and postrelease employment outcomes for incarcerated adults, inmates who participated in correctional education programs were 43 percent less likely to return to prison than those who did not enroll (Davis et al. 2014). Advanced technologies could provide the means to expand correctional education services—to reach more students and to offer broader, more diverse curriculum—thereby further lowering recidivism rates. • ease the reentry process by allowing incarcerated individuals to prepare for release by researching employment opportunities; applying for jobs, financial aid, and benefits; enrolling in college; addressing outstanding legal issues; searching for and securing housing; and maintaining or developing personal relationships with their community support networks. Most, if not all, of these prerelease activities require some form of computer or telecommunication device and Internet access. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2015. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 31, 2015 at: http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ovae/pi/AdultEd/policybriefedtech.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ovae/pi/AdultEd/policybriefedtech.pdf Shelf Number: 136641 Keywords: Correctional EducationCorrectional ProgramsEducational ProgramsTechnologyVocational Education and Training |
Author: Human Impact Partners Title: Turning on the TAP: How Returning Access to Tuition Assistance for Incarcerated People Improves the Health of New Yorkers Summary: Turning on the TAP: How Returning Access to Tuition Assistance for Incarcerated People Improves the Health of New Yorkers set out to answer the question: How will providing college education to people in prison affect the health and well-being of those people, their families, and their communities? Our conclusion is that expanding access to college education for people in New York state prisons would benefit the overall health and well-being of the communities that formerly incarcerated people return to, as well as the individuals who receive the education, and their families. And yet, despite these benefits, funding through the state-s Tuition Assistance Program (TAP) - which provides grants to low-income New York residents to help them afford college - is unavailable to people who are incarcerated. This wasn't always the case. Until 1994, TAP and its federal equivalent, the Pell Grant Program, helped incarcerated people in prison enroll in courses offered by public and private colleges. Despite evidence of the benefits of correctional education, as part of the "tough on crime" wave that engulfed federal, state, and local policy-making in the early to mid-1990s, Pell and TAP grant eligibility was rescinded for people in New York State prison. After such funding was eliminated, in-prison college education programs in New York almost disappeared. Today, there are approximately 53,000 people in New York state prisons, 59% of whom have a verified high school diploma and could therefore be eligible for TAP funding if it were made available to them. Legislators in New York State are considering S975/A2870 (2015), a bill that would repeal the ban on incarcerated people receiving financial aid for college education through TAP. Should the legislation pass, people in prison would have increased access to educational resources and, ultimately, experience increased educational attainment. Data generated through the project shows how such legislation would be good for health and health determinants: The benefits of in-prison college education mean that when students return to the community, they engage in lower rates of crime and have a higher level of civic engagement when compared to other formerly incarcerated people returning to the community. College teaches critical thinking skills that help people better understand and take responsibility for the consequences of their actions. It also improves their chances of getting a job, reuniting with their families, finding their place in society, not committing new offenses, and not returning to prison. Benefits of in-prison college education include improved parenting behaviors, higher family income, increased likelihood that children and family members achieve higher levels of education, and reduced likelihood that children experience behavioral problems and get involved in the criminal justice system themselves. College education improves relationships and reduces conflicts, resulting in a safer prison environment. In-prison college education is a cost-effective investment in reducing crime and recidivism. Every $1 million spent on building more prisons prevents about 350 crimes, but the same amount invested in correctional education prevents more than 600 crimes. Data from existing college education programs surveyed through the project show that lack of resources is one reason that only one-third of prison applicants are accepted for college study. If tuition assistance funding was restored, existing programs would be able to enroll over 3,200 people a year. Based on such findings, the report makes a series of recommendations to ensure that such health benefits actually accrue - foremost among these is a recommendation to restore TAP funding for incarcerated people. Details: Oakland, CA: Human Impact Partners, 2015. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 16, 2015 at: http://www.turnonthetapny.org/docs/HIP_TAP_Report_final.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.turnonthetapny.org/docs/HIP_TAP_Report_final.pdf Shelf Number: 137300 Keywords: Colleges and UniversitiesCorrectional EducationCorrectional Programs |
Author: Giles, Margaret Title: Study in prison reduces recidivism and welfare dependence: A case study from Western Australia 2005-2010 Summary: Using a longitudinal dataset of prisoners in Western Australia, this paper describes the effectiveness of correctional education in improving post-release outcomes. The report shows that the more classes completed by prisoners the lower the rate of re-incarceration and the less likely they are to increase the seriousness of their offending. These, and other personal and societal benefits such as a reduction in welfare dependence, were positively associated with the number of classes prisoners successfully completed - that is, the more classes the inmate successfully completes, the less likely they are to reoffend and to access unemployment benefits. Much has been written about how correctional education contributes to post-release outcomes for ex-prisoners. In their systematic review of 50 studies of the effectiveness of correctional education, Davis et al. (2013) found that study in prison unequivocally reduces post-release recidivism and, on average, increases post-release employment. Unlike most earlier studies of the impact of correctional education on recidivism and employment, including the primary studies included in the Davis et al. (2013) meta-analysis, this study uses five years of linked prison history, correctional education and income support payments data. Improved employment and offending outcomes may better enable offenders to successfully reintegrate into their communities, and could produce cost savings into the future for justice authorities and social welfare services. This paper reports on the contribution of correctional education to reducing recidivism and welfare dependence (as a proxy for unemployment) for ex-prisoners in Western Australia. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2016. 9p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice no. 514: Accessed May 3, 2016 at: http://aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi514.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: http://aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi514.pdf Shelf Number: 138896 Keywords: Correctional EducationEx-offender EmploymentRecidivismRehabilitationUnemploymentVocational Education and Training |
Author: Coates, Dame Sally Title: Unlocking Potential: A review of education in prison Summary: Putting education at the heart of the prison regime 1. Education in prison should give individuals the skills they need to unlock their potential, gain employment, and become assets to their communities. It is one of the pillars of effective rehabilitation. Education should build social capital and improve the well-being of prisoners during their sentences. 2. Improved prison education can transform individual prisoners' lives, but it can also benefit society by building safer communities and reducing the significant financial and social costs arising from reoffending. The cost of current levels of reoffending has been estimated to be 9.5-13 billion per year1. 3. Recognition of the importance of education in prisons appears to have been lost. There are pockets of good practice, with examples of 'Outstanding' education provision, but these are isolated. There does not appear to be any systematic way for prisons and Governors to learn from one another. 4. Education is more than a service provided by OLASS providers in classrooms or workshops. All areas of the prison regime should be considered suitable for learning. My vision for prison education is holistic. It includes: - basic skills development in maths, English and ICT, through intensive courses, one-to-one support from other prisoners, or embedded in workshop or other work settings (e.g. kitchens and gardens); - high quality vocational training and employability skills that prepare individuals for jobs on release (e.g. through industrial work and training designed with and for employers); - Personal and Social Development (PSD), including behaviour programmes, family- and relationship-learning, and practical skills (e.g. parenting, finance, and domestic management); - proper support for the needs of prisoners with Learning Difficulties and Disabilities (LDD); - provision of arts, music and sport activities; - enterprise and self-employment support and training; - self-directed study; - learning facilitated by ICT, including distance-learning that can support qualifications from entry level up to degree level; - advice and guidance that ensures individuals make informed choices about education and future employment and career options; and 'through the gate' support so that individuals can continue to progress through education, training and employment on release, and therefore avoid reoffending. 5. The chapters of this report set out the approach I would like to see taken in seven key areas: - Chapter One covers my fundamental recommendation that Prison Governors, as leaders of a complex environment, should have autonomy in the provision of education, and be held to account for the educational progress of all prisoners; - Chapter Two discusses the need for a new 'people' culture in prisons to support leadership, build routes to attract new talent into working in prison, and ensure professional development for all staff. A large number of people are in contact with each individual prisoner day-to-day. They all have a responsibility to ensure that, in educative terms, every contact matters. This includes regional managers, Governors, the Senior Management Team in every prison, teachers, prison officers, prison instructors and peer mentors; -Chapter Three explains the personalised approach Governors should take in developing education. The offer must be meaningful for each learner, encourage personal responsibility, and meet the needs of those with learning difficulties and/or disabilities (LDD); - Chapter Four is concerned with raising aspiration. Education must offer a learning journey that enables educational progress that includes, where appropriate to the individual, industry-standard vocational qualifications and access to Higher Education; - Chapter Five sets out the case for change to be driven through improved ICT. Digital systems are crucial to enabling the delivery of high quality education to prisoners. If prisoners are, on release, to secure employment, continue to study, or otherwise contribute to society, they must be given the opportunity to use and improve their digital skills in prison; - Chapter Six explores what should happen to enable more prisoners to move into sustained employment and/or continue education on release; - Chapter Seven outlines the phased approach and timetable I believe should be taken to reform education. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2016. 80p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 18, 2016 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524013/education-review-report.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524013/education-review-report.pdf Shelf Number: 139067 Keywords: Correctional EducationCorrectional ProgramsPrisoner RehabilitationVocational Education and Training |
Author: Carroll, Catherine Title: A Prison within a Prison: The provision of ESOL education and training for prisoners and ex-prisoners Summary: The importance of education and training as a means of reducing re-offending is widely acknowledged and there is an emerging evidence base as to what the most effective strategies are (Lukklen and Johnston 2013). Increasingly, attention from all relevant groups has been focussed on particularly vulnerable groups in prison such as those with literacy and language needs (Gregory and Bryan 2011). One identified group that has received, thus far, very little attention with respect to specific policy or research are those offenders and ex-offenders with English as a second language. The Bell Foundation commissioned this short literature review of ESOL provision for offenders and ex-offenders in order to inform the Foundation's long term programme in this field. The focus of the review was to include data on prevalence of ESOL needs within this population, ESOL needs as a risk factor for re-offending, current practice for supporting offenders with ESOL needs, challenges to effective ESOL provision and recommendations for further research. 'A Prison within a Prison' is a literature review by the Centre for Education in the Criminal Justice System at the UCL Institute of Education, which looks at the ESOL provision in the custodial setting. The report concludes that: There is no national data available on the number of individuals in the criminal justice system with ESOL needs, making it difficult to plan for provision for this group. Delivering effective ESOL in the custodial setting is challenging, due both to a lack of knowledge about the target group and due to the frequent transfers and movement restrictions of prisoners. Having ESOL needs presents a very real challenge for prisoners' experience in prison and after release. Details: London: University College of London, Institute of Education; Cambridge, UK: Bell Foundation, 2015. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 19, 2016 at: https://www.bell-foundation.org.uk/assets/Documents/APrisonwithinPrison.pdf?1423048388 Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.bell-foundation.org.uk/assets/Documents/APrisonwithinPrison.pdf?1423048388 Shelf Number: 139106 Keywords: Correctional EducationCorrectional ProgramsForeign InmatesForeign PrisonersInmate RehabilitationVocational Education and Training |
Author: Delaney, Ruth Title: Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison Summary: With its July 2015 announcement of the Second Chance Pell Pilot Program, the U.S. Department of Education ushered in what could be a new era of expanded opportunities for postsecondary education in our nation's prisons. The Second Chance Pell Pilot makes students incarcerated in state and federal prisons eligible for need-based financial aid in a limited number of authorized sites-meaning postsecondary education is likely to become a reality for an increased number of the more than 1.5 million people in prisons nationwide. Research shows that-among other benefits to individuals, families, communities, and prisons-incarcerated people who participate in prison education programs are 43 percent less likely to recidivate than those who do not. This report offers lessons from the field on the implementation of these programs in corrections settings across the country. Details: New York Vera Institute of Justice, Center on Sentencing and Corrections, 2016. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 3, 2016 at: https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/making-the-grade-postsecondary-education-programs-in-prison/legacy_downloads/making-the-grade-postsecondary-education-programs-in-prison.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/making-the-grade-postsecondary-education-programs-in-prison/legacy_downloads/making-the-grade-postsecondary-education-programs-in-prison.pdf Shelf Number: 140146 Keywords: Correctional EducationCorrectional ProgramsPrisoner Educational ProgramsPrisoner Rehabilitation |
Author: Taliaferro, Wayne Title: From Incarceration to Reentry: A Look at Trends, Gaps, and Opportunities in Correctional Education and Training Summary: With record levels of men and women incarcerated—totalling 2.2 million—the United States places more people in prison at a higher rate than any other developed nation. That total also represents 20 percent of the world's prison population, which is disproportionately high considering that the U.S. makes up less than 5 percent of the world’s population. For low-income communities, the disparities are even more alarming. In 2014, the median annual income for people prior to incarceration was less than $20,000. Furthermore, Blacks and Latinos, who are disproportionately impacted by poverty, also have the highest rates of imprisonment and account for more than half of all prisoners. However, the context surrounding this crisis tells a much larger story, which is partly rooted in educational inequities. More than two-thirds of state prison inmates do not have a high school diploma. The roots of these disparities are complex. Pipelines to prison have historically been concentrated in low-income communities of color. From an early age, many youth in these spatially segregated communities experience economic and environmental injustices, underfunded and under-resourced schools, harsh school discipline policies, and exposure to crime and violence in ways that create diminished opportunities for economic and educational mobility. These realities are a deeper reflection of historic and present injustices ingrained in larger systems of governance. The criminal justice system often reinforces these embedded structures of inequality. Over-criminalization, implicit bias, harsh sentencing policies, and judicial and prosecutorial discretion disproportionately affect Black and Latino communities, having directly shaped the system of mass incarceration we know today. Together, these disparities create conditions of enhanced susceptibility to criminal justice system involvement for people of color that can be characterized as targeted and concentrated more than anything else. Although mass incarceration does not solely affect communities of color, they experience inequitable impacts from its pervasively harsh outcomes. Similarly, people of color suffer disproportionately from the collateral consequences imposed on individuals with a criminal record who return to society after serving their time in prison. Collateral and systemic barriers, such as disenfranchisement, legalized discrimination in housing and public benefits access, and biases in hiring, along with impediments to educational opportunities, make it especially difficult for returning citizens to gain employment, stability, and an overall fair chance upon reentry. These diminished economic opportunities contribute to the cycle of recidivism, resulting in three-quarters of returning citizens re-offending within five years. Taking this entire context into account, this report examines correctional education, as it is a critical aspect of the complex mass incarceration system that can make a real difference in reversing this vicious cycle. While correctional education and training is by no means a panacea for the grave injustices of this system, it can play an important role in improving the educational and employment trajectories of the returning citizens who face greatly restricted opportunities to participate in our economic mainstream.While the quality and accessibility of correctional education and training opportunities vary largely across states, as does the consistency of accessible and well-articulated education and training opportunities for returning citizens upon release, there is room for significant innovation and improvement. Doing so will require reforms across multiple systems to address these disparities. With that in mind, we focus on the state of correctional education funding streams, program offerings, and the continuum of education and training opportunities upon release. Details: Washington, DC: CLASP, 2016. 25p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 14, 2016 at: http://www.clasp.org/resources-and-publications/publication-1/2016.10.27_fromincarcerationtoreentry.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.clasp.org/resources-and-publications/publication-1/2016.10.27_fromincarcerationtoreentry.pdf Shelf Number: 146973 Keywords: Correctional EducationPrisoner ReentryPrisoner RehabilitationRacial DisparitiesVocational Education and Training |
Author: Akers, Kimberly Title: Factors Influencing the Completion of the GED in a Federal Correctional Setting: A Multiple Regression, Correlational-Predictive Study Summary: Correctional education's primary goal is to reduce recidivism and increase employment among ex-offenders. The Bureau of Prison's practical goal in its mandatory GED program is to maximize the number of inmates obtaining the GED in a given time period. The purpose of this research is to model the number of instructional hours an inmate requires to obtain the GED as a regression on socio-demographic and Bureau of Prison policy variables related to inmate conduct in education programs. This quantitative research uses multiple regression to produce and analyze the model. An archival random sample of GED graduates in a large federal correctional complex is selected, the model fit and diagnosed, and a hold-out sample tested for predictive reliability. Any conclusions regarding policy alternatives for the Bureau of Prisons will then be drawn. Such alternatives may lead to improvements in general criminal justice and in correctional education in particular. Details: Lynchburg, VA:Liberty University, 2013. 134p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed November 28, 2016 at: http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1730&context=doctoral Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1730&context=doctoral Shelf Number: 147911 Keywords: Correctional EducationCorrectional ProgramsFederal PrisonsRecidivism |
Author: Giles, Margaret Title: Prisoner education and training, and other characteristics: Western Australia, July 2005 to June 2010 Summary: Spending public funds on educating and training prisoners can generate a significant return on investment, because as this report argues, studying in prison can reduce costly recidivism and improve life outcomes for ex-prisoners. What are the costs of recidivism? Let's start with incarceration. Prisoners cost money - about $110,000 per prisoner a year. With over 4,000 prisoners in WA prisons at any one time and a turnover of 8,000 prisoners per year, incarceration is a costly business. In addition, there are policing and legal costs related to finding, charging and sentencing alleged offenders; as well as costs to the community in relation to property damage, insurance premium increases, lives lost and harm and trauma to victims of crime. Reducing recidivism alone can therefore bring about huge cost savings to the government and the community. Then there’s the cost of welfare dependence. In the short term, these include payments to families of incarcerated breadwinners and unemployment benefits for ex-prisoners; just two of the many different types of welfare payments administered by Centrelink. In the longer term, intergenerational welfare looms for an increasing number of disenfranchised, unskilled and unemployed workers, including ex-prisoners who are further disadvantaged by having a criminal record. Improving employability and reducing welfare dependence can therefore reduce demand on the public purse, as well as promote more productive lives. In Western Australia, considerable efforts have been made by the WA Department of Corrective Services (DCS) to reduce recidivism and improve individual and community outcomes. Internal reviews of offending behaviour by the Education and Vocational Training Unit (EVTU), which has provided courses and classes in Western Australia prisons for many years, show proportionately fewer repeat offences by ex-prisoners who studied in prison, compared with those who did not. Missing from these reviews however is the bigger picture. This research project demonstrates how studying in prison can lead to better labour market outcomes and reduced recidivism, and provides an evaluation of the resulting impact on welfare utilisation. This report is the first of three and summarises the prison training data. It indicates that the Western Australia prison population is diverse, and as can be seen from the class and course profiles, prisoners have varied education and training experiences. Details: Joondalup WA, Australia: Edith Cowan University, Centre for Innovative Practice, 2013. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 27, 2017 at: http://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1586&context=ecuworks2011 Year: 2013 Country: Australia URL: http://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1586&context=ecuworks2011 Shelf Number: 144920 Keywords: Correctional Education Ex-offender EmploymentRecidivism Rehabilitation Unemployment Vocational Education and Training |
Author: Cronin, Jake Title: The Path to Successful Reentry: The Relationship Between Correctional Education, Employment and Recidivism Summary: Nearly all Missouri inmates will be released from prison, but the majority of them will reoffend and return to prison. To combat this problem, prisons have implemented educational programs to help offenders successfully reenter society. Using data from the Missouri Department of Corrections, this study evaluates the impact of these educational programs in terms of post-prison employment rates and recidivism rates. The results show that inmates who increase their education in prison are more likely to find a full-time job after prison, and those with a job are less likely to return to prison. Details: Columbia, MO: Institute of Public Policy, Truman Policy Research, Harry S Truman School of Public Affairs, 2011. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Report 15-2011: Accessed February 18, 2017 at: https://ipp.missouri.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/06/the_path_to_successful_reentry.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: https://ipp.missouri.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/06/the_path_to_successful_reentry.pdf Shelf Number: 146683 Keywords: Correctional EducationEducational ProgramsEx-Offender EmploymentPrison EducationPrisoner ReentryRecidivism |
Author: Taliaferro, Wayne Title: Incarceration to Reentry: Education & Training Pathways in California Summary: The complexity of the social, economic, political, historical, and racial context that shapes the criminal justice system is extensive, and that context has implications for the limited opportunities available to individuals during and after incarceration, including in education and training. Historical investments in corrections and policies that prioritize punishment over prevention and rehabilitation have been unsuccessful in improving public safety and have greatly marginalized low-income communities and communities of color.1 Research has shown, however, that access to correctional education and training can significantly improve the outcomes of those returning to society. These positive outcomes are leading to increased federal and state momentum to improve postsecondary access for prisoners and lifting this issue higher on reform agendas. Nonetheless, the education and training needs of prisoners are far more complex than what can be met by traditional postsecondary education, and linking those needs to training that articulates to postrelease opportunities is essential for successful reentry. Building on the theme of continuity from incarceration to reentry, these briefs will highlight the continuous improvement stories of states that are moving toward this type of alignment. This brief will focus on California. Details: Washington, DC: CLASP, 2017. 11p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 7, 2017 at: http://www.clasp.org/resources-and-publications/publication-1/2017June_EducationandTrainingPathwaysfromIncarcerationtoReentry.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.clasp.org/resources-and-publications/publication-1/2017June_EducationandTrainingPathwaysfromIncarcerationtoReentry.pdf Shelf Number: 146761 Keywords: Correctional EducationEducational Programs Prisoner Reentry Vocational Education and Training |
Author: Pham, Duy Title: Incarceration to Reentry: Education & Training Pathways in Indiana Summary: Because the social, economic, political, historical, and racial context that shapes the criminal justice system is both complex and extensive, individuals who have been incarcerated face limited opportunities - particularly for education and training - both during and after incarceration. Historical investments in corrections and policies that prioritize punishment over prevention and rehabilitation have been unsuccessful in improving public safety and have greatly marginalized low-income communities and communities of color. Research has shown, however, that correctional education and training can significantly improve the outcomes of those returning to society. These positive outcomes are leading to increased federal and state momentum to improve postsecondary access for prisoners and are lifting this issue higher on reform agendas. Nonetheless, the education and training needs of prisoners are far more complex than what traditional postsecondary education can meet, and linking those needs to training that articulates to post-release opportunities is essential for successful reentry. Building on the theme of continuity from incarceration to reentry, these briefs will highlight the continuous improvement stories of states that are moving toward this type of alignment. This brief will focus on Indiana. Details: Washington, DC: CLASP, 2017. 14p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 20, 2017 at: https://www.clasp.org/sites/default/files/publications/2017/11/2017_incarcerationtoreentryindiana.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.clasp.org/sites/default/files/publications/2017/11/2017_incarcerationtoreentryindiana.pdf Shelf Number: 148272 Keywords: Correctional EducationEducational ProgramsPrisoner ReentryPrisoner RehabilitationVocational Education and Training |
Author: Southern Poverty Law Center Title: Destined to Fail: How Florida Jails Deprive Children of Schooling Summary: Florida prosecutes more children in the adult criminal justice system than any other state, and as a consequence, hundreds of children are held in adult county jails every year. In the majority of cases, the decision to prosecute a child as an adult is made by the prosecutor, without judicial review or an individual assessment of the child's potential for rehabilitation. As a result, children as young as 12 have been incarcerated with adults. Many have not been found guilty, but are merely waiting for their cases to be adjudicated. While imprisoned, children still have rights under state and federal law to access education - a critical factor in their future. And with good reason: The further they fall behind, the less likely they are to become productive members of society. Unfortunately, children in adult jails are being denied these rights as Florida's jails and school districts are not living up to their legal obligations. The educational services they provide to children held in adult jails are, in most cases, seriously deficient. For some children, the services are virtually nonexistent. Adult jails are simply not intended or equipped to house children. For this review, which began in 2016, the Southern Poverty Law Center submitted public records requests to school districts across the state, spoke with public defenders and advocates, examined data from the U.S. Department of Education Civil Rights Data Collection, and interviewed children who are or have been held in county jails in Florida. The findings are troubling: Many small jails (facilities holding fewer than 20 children in 2015-16) offer only GED courses to children, eliminating the opportunity for a child to pursue a high school diploma while awaiting trial. Some children receive only two to three hours per week of instruction in these small county jails. When they return to their neighborhood schools, they often do not receive credit for their studies, including the GED work. In large jails (facilities holding 20 to 130 children in 2015-16), children often receive educational services geared toward a high school diploma - though they don't all receive the legally required 300 minutes of instruction per day that is necessary for a total of 180 instruction days per year. At many small jails, students with disabilities receive limited - if any - educational services that are required by law because of their disabilities. At large jails, students' existing Individualized Education Programs (IEPs), which outline the services that a student with disabilities should receive, are sometimes altered - and even effectively closed out - leaving them without the services they deserve under the law. At many large and small jails, students with IEPs between the ages of 18 and 22 must be proactive and ask for the education services to which they are entitled. Consequently, they often do not receive them. Because county jails are not designed to accommodate children, there are multiple barriers that limit access to education. Small jails, in particular, do not have housing units for children, much less a space for classes. In such instances, children may be held in solitary confinement, which has been likened to torture. Lacking access to materials and teachers, children in solitary may simply receive worksheets that don't count toward school credit and without any writing instruments to complete them. Large jails, on the other hand, may have cell blocks for youth and space for classes, but these arrangements pose problems as well. Youth units, for example, are often for boys. As a result, girls under 18 are routinely held in solitary confinement or in medical or mental health segregation wings, which are not equipped for providing education. And as in small jails, children held in solitary confinement at large jails - whether for housing or discipline - are often left out of educational programming or provided with worksheets. In some counties, students are marked absent from the jail's classes for each day they are held in confinement. The solution to these problems is simple: Children don't belong in adult jails. Details: Montgomery, AL: SPLC, 2018. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 26, 2018 at: https://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/cr_ctaa_report_2018_web_final.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/cr_ctaa_report_2018_web_final.pdf Shelf Number: 149572 Keywords: Correctional EducationJailsJuvenile DetentionJuvenile InmatesJuvenile Offenders |
Author: Champion, Nina Title: Turning 180 Degrees: The Potential of Prison University Partnerships to Transform Learners into Leaders Summary: This report is based on travels to four countries: Belgium, Denmark, Poland and United States (California) to explore prison university partnerships. A typology of ten different models of collaboration is set out in the report: 1. Inside and outside students studying together in prison 2. Professors and former professors teaching/mentoring inside students 3. Outside students teaching/mentoring inside students 4. Inside students attending university on day release 5. Digital and distance learning 6. Pipelines to university after release 7. Staff professional development 8. Participatory research 9. Co-production and co-creation 10. Advocacy and activism The list above reflects the vast array of potential partnership approaches to meet different needs and to suit different establishments. Often these models overlapped, with learners gaining a variety of opportunities to engage with higher education. I visited new and emerging partnerships in Europe and longer-established partnerships in the United States. Meeting many alumni of these programmes in California, who were now community leaders influencing social change, led me to analyse the findings through the lens of leadership. Building on the concept of becoming 'assets to society', a stated outcome of prison education in England (MoJ, 2017), this report assesses the ways in which prison university partnerships build human capital and social capital. I use the Social Change Model of Leadership Development (Higher Education Research Institute, 1996) as a framework to define the individual, group and community values observed in these partnerships, showing how they have the potential to transform learners into leaders and affect change: As well as the benefits, this report outlines the challenges of prison university partnerships, in relation to five key themes: People, Logistics, Content, Resources and Impact. In conclusion, assessing the relevance to the UK, I call for universities to see people in prison as future change-makers and urge criminal justice organisations to focus on developing the leadership capabilities of people with lived expertise to drive social change, particularly at this time of 'prison crisis'. Universities should be at the heart of this movement offering opportunities both in custody and after release as part of their widening participation strategies. Prisons should support this by removing barriers to successful collaboration and by embracing partnership working. Details: Prisoners' Education Trust, 2018. 35p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 3, 2018 at: http://www.prisonerseducation.org.uk/data/Resources/Turning%20180%20Degrees%20FINAL%20VERSION.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.prisonerseducation.org.uk/data/Resources/Turning%20180%20Degrees%20FINAL%20VERSION.pdf Shelf Number: 150037 Keywords: Colleges and UniversitiesCorrectional EducationMentoringPrison EducationPrisoner Rehabilitation |
Author: Council of Economic Advisors Title: Returns on Investments in Recidivism-reducing Programs Summary: Crime imposes a significant burden on Americans' well-being and tax-financed resources. These costs are amplified by a cycle of crime that results in re-arrest rates for released American prisoners in excess of 50 percent. Rigorous and evidence-based prison reforms are proposed to break the crime cycle, thereby reducing future crime and lowering incarceration expenditures by facilitating more successful re-entry to the workforce upon prison release. In this policy brief, CEA reviews the evidence on the underlying factors that determine the value of such prison programs and provides estimates on their rates of return. There are numerous programs that have been tried in one form or another over many decades. We do not aim to cover the entire scope of prison reform programs but focus instead on three main categories: programs that address mental health, substance abuse, or education and that are delivered inside correctional facilities. 2 We find that there is great variation in the effectiveness across programs such that reallocation of budgets from poorly to well performing programs may both lower spending and improve results. In addition, CEA finds evidence that certain individual programs can reduce crime as well as reduce spending by lowering long-run incarceration costs. Programs that save at least one dollar in crime and incarceration costs for every dollar spent are deemed cost effective. More specifically, with a focus on rigorous studies of the programs that have been previously implemented, CEA finds that, on average, programs that address the prisoner's mental health or substance abuse problems may reduce the cost of crime by about $0.92 to $3.31 per taxpayer dollar spent on prison reform and long-run incarceration costs by $0.55 to $1.96, for a total return of $1.47 to $5.27 per taxpayer dollar. Despite these positive returns, there are many programs-such as those in which the primary focus is education-for which the evidence base is inconsistent and rates of return more uncertain. Given this uncertainty, CEA estimates by how much rates of recidivism would have to be reduced in order for the programs to break even given their costs. We calculate that educational programming needs only to achieve a modest impact on recidivism rates (about a 2 percent reduction) in order to be cost effective. Overall, increased investment in better evidence is needed to guide future investments into programs to reduce recidivism. Many programs, even if they are found to be cost effective may have small sample sizes or unique characteristics that may be difficult to replicate or scale up, and some studies with high-quality research designs are too dated to provide needed insight. Carefully designed, broad-based national programs that target a wide variety of offenders in conjunction with carefully designed empirical evaluations would improve the ability of policymakers to allocate criminal justice funds to achieve the greatest possible social benefits. Details: Washington, DC: The Council, 2018. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 23, 2018 at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Returns-on-Investments-in-Recidivism-Reducing-Programs.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Returns-on-Investments-in-Recidivism-Reducing-Programs.pdf Shelf Number: 150338 Keywords: Correctional EducationCost-Benefit AnalysisEvidence-Based PracticesJustice ReinvestmentOffender RehabilitationRecidivism |
Author: Ipsos MORI, Social Research Institute Title: Evaluation of prisoner learning: initial impacts and delivery Summary: Ipsos MORI, London Economics and Sheffield Hallam University were commissioned by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) 1 and the Ministry of Justice (MoJ)2 in March 2015 to undertake a process and impact evaluation of prisoner education. This included the impacts of prisoner education under Phase 3 (August 2009 - July 2012) and Phase 4 (introduced August 2012) of the Offender Learning and Skills Service (OLASS3 and OLASS4), as well as changes made to the service under OLASS4, encompassing: - new co-commissioning arrangements between the Skills Funding Agency (SFA)3 , Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS, formerly the National Offender Management Service (NOMS)) and prisons to facilitate greater local influence on learning; - modified governance structure, including the creation of Governance Boards covering regional Units of Procurement and the clustering of prisons within these areas, to oversee revised funding arrangements, build strategic partnerships, and facilitate more responsive commissioning; - new delivery arrangements, including a stronger emphasis on assessment of learning needs, an improved focus on vocational learning, and provision for learners with learning difficulties and/or disabilities (LLDD); - the delivery of the National Careers Service in prisons; - the Virtual Campus (VC) - a secure internet-based platform to support prisoners to conduct online learning and job search; - the introduction of mandatory English and maths assessments from summer 2014 for newly received prisoners on entry into the system, and; - the introduction of student tuition fee loans for higher education (HE) after September 2012 and Advanced Learner Loans4 for further education (FE) courses at Level 3 and 4, for eligible prisoners aged 24 and over from 2013/14. Details: London: HM Prison & Probation Service, 2018. 114p.; 76p. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Analytical Series: Accessed May 24, 2018 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/evaluation-of-prisoner-learning-initial-impacts-and-delivery Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/evaluation-of-prisoner-learning-initial-impacts-and-delivery Shelf Number: 150353 Keywords: Correctional EducationCorrectional ProgramsPrisoner RehabilitationVocational Education and Training |
Author: Great Britain. Ministry of Justice. Justice Data Lab Title: Justice Data Lab Experimental Statistics: Employment and benefits outcomes Summary: This analysis investigates the employment and benefits outcomes of offenders who received grants for distance learning through the Prisoners' Education Trust (PET) scheme, compared with a group of similar offenders who did not receive these grants. The findings are an extension of the original analysis conducted by the Justice Data Lab to assess the impact of PET on reoffending, which showed a significant improvement in reoffending rates for those supported by distance learning grants from PET (18%) compared with non-participants (25%). Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2018. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 30, 2018 at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/724450/Experimental_statistics_Employment_benefits_outcomes_final.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/724450/Experimental_statistics_Employment_benefits_outcomes_final.pdf Shelf Number: 150948 Keywords: Correctional EducationEducational Programs Employment Recidivism Unemployment and Crime |
Author: Great Britain. Ministry of Justice. Justice Data Lab Title: Re-offending Analysis: Prisoners Education Trust Summary: This analysis assessed the impact on re‐offending of grants provided through the Prisoners Education Trust to offenders in custody to complete a distance learning course or to purchase learning materials. The one year proven re‐offending rate for 3,085 offenders who received a grant through the Prisoners Education Trust was 19%, compared with 26% for a matched control group of similar offenders. Statistical significance testing has shown that this difference in the re‐offending rates is statistically significant ; meaning that we can be confident that there is a real difference in the re‐offending rate for the group who received a grant for this purpose. What you can say: This analysis shows that participating in an intervention provided by Prisoners Education Trust led to a reduction in re‐offending of between 5 and 8 percentage points. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2018. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 8, 2018 at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/459470/prisoners-education-trust-report.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/459470/prisoners-education-trust-report.pdf Shelf Number: 151056 Keywords: Correctional EducationEducational Programs Prisoner Education Prisoner Rehabilitation Recidivism Reoffending |
Author: Mer, Becky Title: Arts in Prison: Lessons from the United Kingdom Summary: From September 2010 to October 2011, I conducted research on arts in prison across the United Kingdom and parts of Europe. Admittedly, the phrase 'arts in prison' is a misnomer in the context of this research. The term ‘arts’ refers to a variety of art forms4 as well as multi-arts programs and issue-based programs that incorporate the arts. The term ‘prison’ is also limiting, as the research encompassed prisons, secure hospitals, immigration detention centres, community sentences, courts, probation, and programs with former prisoners. Concerning prisons, consideration was given to men’s, women’s, therapeutic, local, remand, training, open, closed, young offender, and ‘lifer’ prisons for people given life sentences. The research consisted of: o desk research of relevant literature o semi-structured interviews with 102 program staff, arts practitioners and education managers o visits to eighteen secure facilities o visits to four community justice programs, including Youth Offending Teams o attendance at government meetings, arts practitioner training, prison officer training, conferences, academic seminars, exhibitions, and performances In planning and conducting this research, a number of professional organizations’ research ethics codes were taken into account, including the British Society of Criminology and the Social Research Association. Prior to beginning research, I completed the Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI) Course in the Protection of Human Research Subjects through the Brown University Research Protections Office. Participants’ informed consent was obtained before interviews took place, and it was made clear to participants that they could end the interview and choose not to answer any questions at any time. It was also made clear to participants that their personal data was confidential and any information used in the report would remain anonymous. The vulnerability of participants was taken into account throughout the research, and, as far as possible, disturbance to participants was minimized. Details: s.l.: The Author, 2011. 82p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 14, 2019 at: https://theprisonartscoalition.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/artsinprison.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://theprisonartscoalition.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/artsinprison.pdf Shelf Number: 154972 Keywords: Arts in Prison Arts Programs Correctional Education |