By Michael Rocque, Grant Duwe, Valerie A. Clark

Identity or self-concept has long been theorized to explain rule-violating behavior. Life-course criminology scholarship has incorporated identity as a core concept explaining desistance or disengagement from crime over time. Individuals who transform their identities from anti to prosocial or who are ready to move away from their past selves are more likely to desist from crime. However, the role of identity, particularly the forms of identity that have been theorized to influence desistance, has been understudied with respect to prison behavior. Understanding the ways in which identity relates to prison misconduct may help inform prison programming as well as theoretical perspectives drawing on the concept. The purpose of this study is to explore how various forms of identity are related to future prison misconduct, controlling for past misconduct and a host of other theoretical variables, in Minnesota prisons. The results indicate that two forms of identity, replacement self and cognitive transformation, are related to general misconduct but not violent misconduct in survival models. For general misconduct, both forms of identity are associated with a reduction in the risk of new convictions. Implications for theory and practice are discussed

St. Paul: Minnesota Department of Corrections, 2025. 31p.

By Althea Gibson, Marc Rémond, Peta MacGillivray, Eileen Baldry and Elizabeth Sullivan

The NSW Co-Located Caseworker Program was established to support women in custody who have children involved in the child protection system. Under the program, child protection caseworkers are ‘co-located’ in NSW correctional centres. We undertook a mixed-methods evaluation of the program by analysing data from Corrective Service NSW’s Offender Integrated Management System and conducting 48 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders, including 25 women in custody. We concluded that the program is a well designed and much needed initiative of benefit to women in custody and their children. However, it could be improved by more coordinated case planning between Corrective Services NSW and child protection services and the increased availability of programs to help women in custody achieve their child protection related goals.

Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice no. 709, Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2025. 19p.

By Amnesty International

This report details how people accused of using drugs are subject to arbitrary detention in drug “treatment and rehabilitation” centres, in a continuation of the punitive approach to the Philippines’ “war on drugs”. Based on interviews with 56 people, 26 of whom were accused of using and/or selling drugs, this report investigates human rights violations – such as torture and other ill-treatment, forced or otherwise unreliable confessions, and violations of the right to health – that people endure before, during and after their compulsory stay in drug detention centres. The Philippine government must move away from punitive and harmful responses to drugs. Instead, it must adopt evidenced-based approaches that respect the dignity of all people and put health and human rights at the centre.

London: Amnesty International, 2024. 68p.

By Mardet Homans, Denise M. Allen & Yesenia Mazariegos

The use of Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT), and specifically buprenorphine, to address opioid use disorder (OUD) is considered the gold standard of care in the community (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration (SAMHSA), 2023). However, while support of its use in correctional settings is expanding, and there are national promising practice guidelines, it remains underutilized within jails and prisons in the United States (U.S.) (National Commission on Correctional Healthcare (NCCHC), 2018; Friedmann et al., 2012). The efficacy of MAT to reduce opiate withdrawal, curb cravings, and support positive health, behavioral health, and criminal justice outcomes, including reductions in overdose deaths and recidivism, has gained national attention from criminal justice advocacy groups and policymakers. Jails and correctional agencies have been taken to court over the provision of MAT for incarcerated individuals with OUD. And state and federal courts have ruled denial of MAT for incarcerated individuals with OUD violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (Legislative Analysis and Public Policy Association (LAPPA), n.d.). The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and California Correctional Health Care Services (CCHCS) are at the forefront of providing MAT in a correctional setting under the Integrated Substance Use Disorder Treatment (ISUDT) Program. The ISUDT Program begins at intake into CDCR with a substance use disorder (SUD) screening and assessment and linkage to behavioral interventions and MAT with a targeted focus on preparing CDCR residents for release. This paper seeks to document the provision of MAT in correctional settings since it is expanding rapidly within the U.S. and there is currently not a national inventory of programs or practices. In addition, this paper aims to document best practices and lessons learned from California and other correctional systems that can be used to guide expansion of MAT to justice-involved populations. Contained in the appendix of this report is a comprehensive review of information regarding the current availability of MAT in U.S. jails and prisons.

Key Findings • According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) less than 1% of the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) population received MAT in 2021. • Based on a review of publicly available information, it does appear that five states – Alabama, Mississippi, Nebraska, South Dakota, and Wyoming offer MAT in their correctional institutions. • A number of states have or are currently piloting MAT in corrections. • Besides California, only 14 states offer comprehensive MAT services at either intake and/or release in a considerable number of its jails and prisons. • Locating details regarding MAT provision on many state and local correctional websites is difficult or is missing altogether. This may present as a barrier to SUD treatment and discourage justice-involved individuals or their families from seeking MAT. • Overall, there is significant variability among states regarding the provision of MAT to incarcerated individuals.

Irvine, CA: Center for Evidence‐Based Corrections University of California, Irvine 2023. 18p.

By James Hess and Susan Turner

California Prison Industry Authority (CALPIA) is a self-supporting training and production program currently operating within the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). CALPIA provides training, certification, and employment to inmates in a variety of different fields. The goods and services produced by CALPIA are sold to the state and other government entities, which provides an economic benefit to the state. In addition to the vocational and economic aspect of the program, one of CALPIA’s missions is to reduce the subsequent recidivism of their inmate participants. In 2021, the Center for Evidence-Based Corrections prepared a report on the recidivism outcomes for individuals who had participated in CALPIA programs for at least six months (Hess and Turner, 2021). That report examined the effect of participation in CALPIA on the recidivism of CDCR inmates by comparing CALPIA participants with at least 6 months in the program and released between August 2014 and July 2018 with inmates who were accepted into the CALPIA program but were released before they could actively participate (i.e., the “Waitlist” group). That report found that participation in CALPIA was associated with reduced offending. CALPIA individuals had lower rates of arrests, conviction, and incarceration during a three-year follow-up than a Waitlist comparison group. Although the sample size for our analysis of Career Technical Education (CTE) was small, participation in this CALPIA program yielded lower recidivism rates than other CALPIA program participation. This report further analyzes the sample of individuals who participated in CALPIA programs by separating the CALPIA programs into thirteen different groups, placing similar programs together. Thus, it is a comparison within CALPIA programs only. The analysis strategy is the same as used in our previous report: we examine arrest, conviction and return to custody calculated at one-, two- and three-year post release for the individuals. Propensity score analyses were used to adjust for baseline differences in the groups. Our findings suggest that the enterprise programs perform about equally well with the exception of CTE, which appears to do slightly better than other enterprises. We also found a positive effect for CTE in our earlier report. Several other programs show patterns of higher or lower recidivism which are suggestive but not conclusive due to lack of statistical significance. We note that small sample sizes, using propensity score analyses, may have limited our ability to detect significant differences.

Irvine, CA: Center for Evidence‐Based Corrections University of California, Irvine 2023. 20p

By Jayne Price

This report forms part of PRT’s National Lottery Community Fund funded Building Futures Programme that, since 2020, has been exploring the experiences of people serving long-term prison sentences. The programme has defined its long-term cohort to include those men that will spend 10 or more years in prison and eight years or more for women. Based on consultation with 121 men and women aged 50 and over serving these sentences in 39 prisons in the UK, it provides insights into the age-specific experiences of this cohort. It aims to influence positive changes that would provide a more humane prison experience that recognises the distinct needs of this group. The prison population is ageing (around 17% of people inside are aged 50 and over). By July 2025 it is projected that the population aged 50 years and over will increase from 14,193 (November 2022) to 14,800. This shift is being driven by increased longevity amongst the general population as well as specific patterns of crime and sentencing. These trends are compounding pressures on a system that has been overcrowded every year since 1994 and where staff shortages continue to dog the system. These trends present significant challenges to the government, the prison system, those who live and work within it, and those responsible for providing services, including health and social care. These challenges include meeting human rights and equalities duties, such as the right to dignity and family life, and the right not to be discriminated against due to protected characteristics (including age and disability). These concerns have helped to drive an increase in research on the experience of older people in prison. For example, in 2020 the House of Commons Justice Committee published the findings of its inquiry into the ageing prison population. It found poor coordination between prisons, local authorities and social care providers; high levels of inconsistency in reasonable adjustments to meet the needs of those with disabilities; and a shortage of activities tailored for and accessible to older people in prison. The committee called for a national strategy for older prisoners, concluding that: “The greater needs of older prisoners and the challenges many prisons face in meeting these warrants a specific policy for the cohort.” PRT was one of many organisations to welcome the government’s commitment to produce such a strategy and its announcement in October 2020 that a steering group had begun to work on priorities that would include measures to ensure that older people in prison: • Are held in the most appropriate environments. • Can access a purposeful regime within prison. • Can access health and social care services equivalent to those within the community. • Are prepared for their release and resettled effectively. Findings The Older Offender Strategy is yet to be published. For this reason, our proposals are incorporated under our central recommendation that, as a matter of urgency, the government should publish a draft national strategy for rapid consultation and final publication before the end of the parliamentary year. These proposals are based on our consultation, and this report aims to ensure that the experiences, needs and ideas of older people with lived experience of prison can contribute to this positive change. Below we summarise key themes identified by participants. • Sentencing and adapting to prison life. For many participants, having already ‘lived a life’ minimised the feeling of ‘missing out’ and provided a sense of emotional maturity, which made adapting to the sentence easier than if it had happened at an earlier life-stage. However, this could also exacerbate people’s sense of loss. Having had independence, with the ability to make choices and have ‘normal’ responsibilities, the loss of autonomy was hard to accept. There were few opportunities to grieve this previous life, and respondents felt themselves becoming deskilled, disconnected, and institutionalised. • Relationships outside. Participants spoke about alternate lives continuing outside, with families and friends moving on without them. They talked about how having limited relationships with people on the outside impacted their motivation for leaving prison, and compounded feelings of loneliness and disconnection. Many had or expected to experience bereavements of loved ones whilst inside or have been/will be ‘deserted’ by family members unwilling to maintain their relationship. Some will leave prison with no friends or family to return to. Others are faced with the prospect of their own death in prison. • Purposeful activity. Many participants felt that education, behavioural programmes, and other activities were focused on the needs of younger people and/or were difficult to access. They reported few opportunities to engage with programmes aimed at the older prisoner cohort, and a high number of activities were based on employment, which was not always relevant to this group. Some wanted more opportunities to use the skills they had as a way of using their time purposefully, including peer mentoring or teaching roles that could benefit others. • Relationships inside. Despite the desire to provide support to younger prisoners, participants reported that the relationship between different age groups in prison could sometimes be strained. Older prisoners spoke of favouring a quieter, calmer environment, and being more compliant. The risk of elderly prisoners becoming vulnerable to intimidation and humiliation around their age-related health needs was also raised. • Health and wellbeing. Participants spoke about the importance of dignity around growing old in prison, particularly in relation to health and social care. For example, some shared instances of being unnecessarily cuffed when attending hospital visits. As participants age, the importance of these issues grows. From menopause to mobility-restricting conditions, participants faced a multitude of health concerns and faced barriers in getting the healthcare they required. They felt that their diet, physical space and day-to-day lifestyles (often sedentary and isolated) accelerated the onset of frailty and worsened health outcomes.

London: Prison Reform Trust, 2024. 52p.

By Claudia Vince and Emily Evison

Progression refers to the processes through which people in prison move through the system towards release. This includes engaging in formal programmes and interventions to reduce their risk levels, as well as spending time in different prison spaces, including lower security conditions. Often, progression and risk as concepts are conflated and many prisoners report feeling confused by what is being asked of them. For those serving long sentences, their route to freedom is determined by sentence progression. Therefore, progression is a key concern for people serving long and indeterminate prison sentences. Our previous work has highlighted some challenges faced by long-sentenced prisoners in the male estate, including how prisoners often feel confused and uncertain about how they are meant to progress, and to make positive, productive use of their time. Many prisoners we consulted with noted they spent years – and sometimes decades – feeling stagnant and stuck in the system, unable to engage in meaningful personal development.1 For women serving long sentences, opportunities for meaningful progression are consistently reported as a major concern. A lack of specialist spaces for long-termers, issues surrounding what programmes are available in each prison, and a lack of tailored support from staff mean many women are at a loss in how to progress through their sentence. Our third Invisible Women briefing will focus on the lived reality of how it feels as a woman to serve a long prison sentence, paying attention to the ways the prison service does – and does not – equip women to progress through their sentence towards release. The briefing is the result of long-term consultation work with our Building Futures Working Groups in HMPs Send and Bronzefield, ad hoc groups in HMP New Hall, responses to consultation questions from women in our Building Futures Network, and consultation with a woman now living in the community

London: Prison Reform Trust, 2024. 20p.

By Prison Reform Trust

With the advent of the 21st century, there has been increased emphasis on the ‘movement for public and service user involvement in human service education and research’, which constitutes ‘the knowledge base of the services and practitioners we may all need to turn to at particular times in our lives for help and support’ (Beresford & McLaughlin 2020). Terminology such as ‘service users’, ‘experts by experience’, and ‘people with lived experience’ are somewhat broad and contested (see Livingstone & Cooper 2004; Repper & Breeze 2007; McLaughlin 2009), and seek to describe individuals and groups who have first-hand experience of or have been in contact with a range of services (typically but not exclusively provided by the public sector) and have amassed expertise related to the impact of these services. This includes sectors such as physical and mental health, social care, education, as well as criminal justice, in particular prisons and probation. Inclusion of the perspectives of service users in the fields related to social work, health and mental health services increasingly constitutes embedded practice. The following report: • Provides a rationale for engaging service users in prison officer training. • Summarises key literature on what makes a high performing prison officer, with emphasis on the areas where the perceptions of staff, prisoners, policy makers and experts without lived experienced overlap. • Explores examples of service user involvement with staff training from the literature.

Literature searches were conducted using GoogleScholar and idiscover. While there has been a marked increase in literature related to service user involvement in research and evaluation practices, there remains a distinct deficiency in literature related to their involvement in the recruitment and assessment of staff. This is especially acute in the field of criminal justice, in which service users continue to complain of paternalistic or distrusting attitudes and tokenistic attempts at inclusion outside of programmes related to peer mentoring (Buck et al. 2020). Academic literature analysing service user involvement tends to approach the topic from the perspective of the experience of service user participation in research. Methods employed tend to be qualitative in nature, focus on storytelling, focus groups and interviews, with small samples, or take an autobiographic or semi-biographic approach. Outside the academic literature, the focus tends to be on positioning statements, statements of purpose, and advice and toolkits. Considering the absence of pertinent literature, this review draws on grey literature, including publications, studies, and reports in the fields of mental health and social care to demonstrate that a) meaningful inclusion of service users in staff recruitment and evaluation is possible, and b) that there are several methods pertinent to this area of research that exist within the broader literature

London: Prison Reform Trust, 2024, 45p.

By Eli Miller, Bryan D. Martin, and Chad M. Topaz

During the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, Mayor Bill de Blasio ordered the release of individuals incarcerated in New York City jails who were at high risk of contracting the disease and at low risk of committing criminal reoffense. Using public information, we construct and analyze a database of nearly 350,000 incarceration episodes in the city jail system from 2014—2020, paying special attention to what happened during the week of March 23—29, 2020, immediately following the mayor’s order. In concordance with de Blasio’s stated policy, we find that being discharged during this focus week is associated with a lower probability of readmission as compared to being discharged during the same calendar week in previous years. Furthermore, comparing the individuals discharged during the focus week of 2020 to those discharged during the same calendar week in previous years, we find that the former group was, on average, slightly older than the latter group, although the difference is not large. Additionally, the individuals in the former group had spent substantially longer in jail than those in the latter group. With the release of long-serving individuals demonstrated to be feasible, we also examine how the jail population would have looked over the past six years had caps in incarceration been in place. With a cap of one year, the system would experience a 15% decrease in incarceration. With a cap of 100 days, the reduction would be over 50%. Because our results are only as accurate as New York City’s public-facing jail data, we discuss numerous challenges with this data and suggest improvements related to the incarcerated individual’s age, gender, race, and more. Finally, we discuss the policy implications of our work, highlight some opportunities and challenges posed by incarceration caps, and suggest key areas for reform. One such reform might involve identifying and discharging low-risk individuals sooner in general, which might be feasible given the de Blasio administration’s actions during the early stages of COVID-19.

PLoS ONE 17(1): 2022, 20p.

By Pasangi S. Perera, Vanessa E. Miller,; Kate Vinita Fitch, et al

Since 2014, Medicaid expansion has been implemented in many states across the US, increasing health care access among vulnerable populations, including formerly incarcerated people who experience higher mortality rates than the general population. OBJECTIVE To examine population-level association of Medicaid expansion with postrelease mortality from all causes, unintentional drug overdoses, opioid overdoses, polydrug overdoses, suicides, and homicides among formerly incarcerated people in Rhode Island (RI), which expanded Medicaid, compared with North Carolina (NC), which did not expand Medicaid during the study period. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A cohort study was conducted using incarceration release data from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2018, linked to death records from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2019, on individuals released from incarceration in RI and NC. Data analysis was performed from August 20, 2022, to February 15, 2024. Participants included those aged 18 years or older who were released from incarceration. Individuals who were temporarily held during ongoing judicial proceedings, died during incarceration, or not released from incarceration during the study period were excluded. EXPOSURE Full Medicaid expansion in RI effective January 1, 2014. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Mortality from all causes, unintentional drug overdoses, unintentional opioid and polydrug overdoses, suicides, and homicides. RESULTS Between 2009 and 2018, 17 824 individuals were released from RI prisons (mean [SD] age, 38.39 [10.85] years; 31 512 [89.1%] male) and 160 861 were released from NC prisons (mean [SD] age, 38.28 [10.84] years; 209 021 [87.5%] male). Compared with NC, people who were formerly incarcerated in RI experienced a sustained decrease of 72 per 100 000 person-years (95% CI, −108 to −36 per 100 000 person-years) in all-cause mortality per quarter after Medicaid expansion. Similar decreases were observed in RI in drug overdose deaths (−172 per 100 000 person-years per 6 months; 95% CI, −226 to −117 per 100 000 person-years), including opioid and polydrug overdoses, and homicide deaths (−23 per 100 000 person-years per year; 95% CI, −50 to 4 per 100 000 person-years) after Medicaid expansion. Suicide mortality did not change after Medicaid expansion. After Medicaid expansion in RI, non-Hispanic White individuals experienced 3 times greater sustained decreases in all-cause mortality than all racially minoritized individuals combined, while non-Hispanic Black individuals did not experience any substantial benefits. There was no modification by sex. Individuals aged 30 years or older experienced greater all-cause mortality reduction after Medicaid expansion than those younger than 30 years.

JAMA Netw Open. 2024, 12 p.

By Christi M. Smith

The fact that the United States incarcerates more of its population than the rest of the industrialized world—and that racial and ethnic minorities are overrepresented in inmate populations—is common knowledge. Yet why we continue to over- incarcerate in light of a myriad of other strategies that appropriately respond to crime remains a mystery. Alternatives to incarceration are more cost-effective, efficient and provide better outcomes for accused law violators and communities. Alternatives also save precious law enforcement and judicial resources for more serious and violent offenders. The COVID-19 pandemic presented a unique opportunity for local jail administrators and their counterparts in the judicial process to pursue alternatives, as they were forced to critically analyze the need for pretrial confinement; reconsider length of stay upon conviction; and evaluate the appropriateness of returning to jail for bail, probation or parole violations. In conjunction with experience gained from the past 21 months of the pandemic, existing research demonstrates that it is time to reduce our overreliance on carceral strategies and address the factors that contribute to crime and non-compliance with judicial interventions. These evidence-based strategies can substantially reduce jail populations and the racial and ethnic disparities therein. Key Points: 1. COVID-19 disproportionately challenged local jail administrators who, compared to their state and federal prison counterparts, receive less physical, financial and medical support to manage a dynamic and constantly shifting inmate population that moves in and out of the community. 2. To mitigate viral spread inside of the jail and out into the community, criminal justice professionals worked quickly to reduce inmate populations using a variety of alternatives to incarceration for accused and convicted law violators. These alternatives disproportionately benefited white adults and highlighted the need for targeted strategies to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in the judicial process. 3. Crime rates did not increase during the time that alternatives to incarceration were used, thereby substantiating the benefits of utilizing various alternatives to incarceration to reduce jail populations, as well as racial and ethnic disparities in jail populations. Research indicates that these alternatives are more cost-effective, efficient and fairer than traditional judicial processing

R STREET POLICY STUDY NO. 250 January 2022, 8p.

By Diane Cheng, Arthur Rizer and Nila Bala

Marcus Bullock was 15 years old when he was sentenced to prison. He struggled with his time behind bars—missing his family, feeling disconnected from the outside world and losing hope. After he became depressed, his mother Sylvia promised to keep in touch daily. Her detailed letters and photos curbed Bullock’s loneliness and helped him envision life after prison. In Bullock’s words: “Little did I know, it would be my mom’s letters that saved my life.” Sylvia’s frequent communications gave him the strength to survive his incarceration, start a successful contracting business and launch Flikshop, a company that uses technology to help inmates stay connected with their families and loved ones. Bullock’s story demonstrates the importance of family connections for people who are incarcerated. In 2018, more than two million individuals were incarcerated in jails and prisons across the United States. However, the impact of incarceration is felt by millions more through the children, spouses, siblings, parents and other relatives connected to incarcerated individuals. Recent research suggests that nearly half of adults in the United States have had an immediate family member incarcerated for at least one night in jail or prison. Almost half of the inmates in federal prisons have minor children. Additionally, about one in 25 children (nearly 2.6 million) have a parent in jail or prison. Incarceration separates parents from their children, strains interpersonal relationships, harms mental and physical health and exacts deep financial costs to families. Further, incarceration has a disproportionate effect on communities of color and low income families. For example, Black adults are three times as likely as white adults to have a close family member incarcerated for more than one year. As Bullock’s story shows, positive family connections during incarceration are critical for an inmate’s wellbeing, their likelihood of successful re-entry after time served and the overall strength of their family. Technology can help families stay connected, but the cost, accessibility and quality of current options often pose barriers to meaningful interaction. The COVID-19 pandemic presents further challenges for family connection within correctional facilities, but also an opportunity to improve existing infrastructure via technology. If done right, improvements to both technological and non-technological options for family connection would ultimately benefit incarcerated individuals, their families and their communities at large

R STREET POLICY STUDY NO. 203 September 2020, 13p.