Lois M. Davis

How Effective Is Correctional Education, and Where Do We Go from Here? The Results of a Comprehensive Evaluation.

More than two million adults are incarcerated in US prisons, and each year more than 700,000 leave federal and state prisons and return to communities. Unfortunately, within three years, 40 per cent will be reincarcerated. One reason for this is that ex-offenders lack the knowledge, training, and skills to support a successful return to communities. Trying to reduce such high recidivism rates is partly why states devote resources to educating and training individuals in prison. This raises the question of how effective - and cost-effective - correctional education is - an even more salient question given the funding environment states face from the 2008 recession and its continuing aftermath. The RAND team conducted a systematic review of correctional education programs for incarcerated adults and juveniles. This included a meta-analysis on correctional educations effects on recidivism and post-release employment outcomes for incarcerated adults, as well as a synthesis of evidence on programs for juveniles. The study also included a nationwide survey of state correctional education directors to understand how correctional education is provided today and the recessions impact. The authors also compared the direct costs of correctional education with those of reincarceration to put the recidivism findings into a broader context.

A National Picture of Prison Downsizing Strategies

Abstract Many states faced fiscal pressures on their corrections budgets as the country entered a deep recession in 2008. A 2011 survey by the Association of State Correctional Administrators (ASCA) asked corrections officials in all 50 states about changes in correctional facilities, focusing on closures, new facilities, and altering existing facilities as a response to budget pressures. States employed a combination of these strategies. Between fiscal year (FY) 2007–2008 and FY 2011–2012, 148 facilities were closed, 29 new facilities were opened, and 23 states added 22,740 beds to existing facilities, resulting in about a 19,000 net bed reduction overall. Closures did not necessarily appear to be related to fiscal pressures or always related to reductions in the prison population. Despite the Great Recession, correctional funding is still a large part of state expenses and many states’ correctional populations continue to grow.

Education for Incarcerated Juveniles: A Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT Based on screenings of 1,150 manuscripts, we synthesize evidence from 18 eligible studies of educational interventions implemented within juvenile correctional facilities. The studies include 5 intervention categories: remedial academic instruction, computer-assisted instruction, personalized academic instruction, vocational education, and GED completion. Effectiveness is measured in terms of 4 outcomes: academic performance in reading or mathematics, diploma completion, postrelease employment, and postrelease recidivism. Focusing on studies with the strongest basis for causal inference, we find positive and statistically significant effects for computer-assisted instruction in raising reading comprehension, and for personalized learning in improving diploma completion and post-release employment. These findings are driven by large and well-executed randomized trials of Scholastics Read 180 curriculum and Floridas Avon Park Youth Academy. Despite the limited research base, these studies suggest that it is possible to undertake rigorous research in juvenile facilities about programs that best improve the outcomes of young offenders.

Countywide Evaluation of the Long-Term Family Self-Sufficiency Plan: Countywide Evaluation Report

Abstract : The California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids Act of 1997 (CalWORKs) provided Los Angeles County (hereafter, the County) with a large stream of funds. The County Board of Supervisors (hereafter, the Board) instructed the Countys New Directions Task Force (NDTF) to develop a Long-Term Family Self-Sufficiency (LTFSS) Plan for CalWORKs recipients and the broader low-income population, with the purpose of selecting projects that would improve the capacity of families to become self-sufficient. Each of the projects was to: (1) have an adequate evaluation design to track achievement of measurable outcomes; (2) not duplicate existing services; (3) be culturally and linguistically sensitive; (4) not supplant existing funding; and (5) address a clearly documented need. To identify those projects and more broadly to guide the LTFSS effort, the NDTF adopted Mark Friedmans Results-Based Decision Making (RBDM) Framework (hereafter, the RBDM Framework). The NDTF effort resulted in the 46 projects known collectively as the LTFSS Plan that was approved by the Board on November 16,1999. The Chief Administrative Office (CAO) is the lead agency responsible for implementing the evaluation of the LTFSS Plan. The evaluation is taking place on two levels: the Countywide level and the individual projects level. The contract to evaluate outcomes at the county level was awarded to RAND by the Board after an open and competitive bidding process. In brief, this evaluation is not on the individual progress of 46 projects, but on the progress the County has made in achieving its goal of long-term family self-sufficiency. The contract stipulated that one deliverable would be an annual Countywide Evaluation Report. This document, which is the first of three such reports draws from three previous RAND reports produced under the contract.