Prisons in the Unites States are rife with violence and not set up to address the underlying circumstances that can lead to criminal justice involvement, like addiction and lack of jobs, healthcare, and education. But as a new report by the Brennan Center documents, incarceration doesn’t have to be that way. Some correctional leaders are working with advocates to enact innovative reforms that can improve conditions in prison, increase corrections staff retention, and enhance post-release outcomes, contributing to better public safety. The report authors discussed their findings in an interview.
Why do prison conditions matter for people who are not incarcerated?
Most people likely don’t think deeply about what happens behind prison walls. Nor is that information easy to find. Prisons are black boxes, so it’s easy for people to remain ignorant about life behind bars. But they should care. Most of the people sent to prison — upward of 95 percent — return home to their communities after serving their sentences. With the average time served behind bars at 2.7 years, incarcerated people reenter society much sooner than many might think.
If we expect people to be productive, law-abiding, and contributing members of society after imprisonment, then the time spent there should help them achieve this goal. It would make sense, then, for incarceration to address the issues that very often contribute to the behaviors that led people to prison. Many of those behind bars, for example, might need help with a substance use issue or mental illness. They also may need help with educational attainment or vocational skill development so that they can be better positioned to find a job post release. Or they may need support to manage stress, anger, or other psychological factors that got them into trouble in the first place.
But for the most part, very few prisons provide this type of support to everyone in their custody.
What sorts of innovations does the report document? Do they share common principles?
Some of the reforms in our report focus on improving living conditions and reducing violence in prison. Others are aimed at improving health and staff resources for corrections or increasing education and vocational opportunities for incarcerated people. The through line in all these innovations is that correctional leaders rolled up their sleeves and decided to think outside the box.
Many of the leaders we spoke with mentioned how they approach the job with boldness. Because correctional directors are appointed by state governors, many in leadership hold their positions for an average of only three years, so they must race against the clock to maximize impact in a short period. To that end, these innovations reflect a focus on human dignity for both those who work and those who live in our nation’s prisons. They also come from a belief that systemic change can only happen when people working in prisons have genuine buy-in and are active participants in reform efforts. Many of the programs and policies in our report inspire and motivate corrections staff and people who are incarcerated to work together to improve these facilities.
For example, a corrections officer working with Amend, a physician-led nonprofit organization based at the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, relayed his experience: “I used to think success at my work was when nothing bad happens and . . . I was showing people who’s in charge. And now I realize that success at work is when somebody looks at me and says, ‘Thank you for helping me get into a program. Thank you for helping me reengage with my child. Thank you for helping me plan for my parole board meeting.’”
How widespread are prison reform efforts?
The changes are happening all over the country, in jurisdictions as varied as Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho, Indiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Washington. These include states run by Republicans and Democrats. And changes are happening in both rural and urban jurisdictions.
These efforts, for the most part, are geographically concentrated in the West, Midwest, and Northeast. Southern states have not embraced prison reform principles to the same extent, although our report does profile work taking place in South Carolina.
Florida, too, is starting to implement reforms geared toward young men who are incarcerated for short custodial sentences, which are not profiled in the report. However, we did visit these “short-sentence” units, which focus on education and substance abuse treatment that aims to ensure the young men in those units don’t return to prison for longer periods of time. We hope this kind of innovative thinking spreads further. That said, more work needs to be done in the South.
Some of these reforms are meant to help the people who work in prisons. Why is that important?
For decades, state prisons have struggled to recruit and retain full-time staff. Corrections officers typically work long hours for low pay in highly stressful environments. This leads to poor job satisfaction and elevated rates of post-traumatic stress disorder and suicide. The staffing shortage was exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic. Many correctional leaders noted that transforming the culture of prisons is difficult amid this ongoing crisis. Still, it is encouraging that the staff involved in these innovative projects saw how reforms could improve the health and safety of both corrections staff and those who are incarcerated, imparting an increased sense of worth and renewed hope.
Indeed, many of the programs in this report have shown that improving the prison environment, enhancing programming, and training staff to engage in constructive and meaningful relationships with people behind bars can reduce the stressors that drive people out of the corrections industry. Reducing workplace violence and easing the constant state of heightened vigilance are critical to improving mental and physical health for staff, which can lead to better treatment of incarcerated people. Pairing investments in resources for incarcerated people with employee wellness and training initiatives can build much-needed staff buy-in for reform processes that benefit everyone.
What does the data say about the efficacy of these reforms?
Initial data and research show promising results: decreased violence, reduced recidivism (the likelihood that people leaving prison will be convicted for criminal behavior again), and improved perceptions regarding in-prison culture and safety among staff and residents alike.
For example, descriptive data from the Maine Department of Corrections examining trends before and during statewide reforms shows promising declines in violence. In 2024, rates for reported assaults between residents dropped by 40 percent, while rates for assaults on staff dropped by 36 percent. Notably, staff use-of-force incidents decreased by 69 percent, which may indicate either successful de-escalation by staff or less disorderly conduct by residents. Data from several Michigan prisons suggests that their Vocational Village reentry program, which offers training tailored toward job openings in the state, in fields including construction, commercial driving, robotics, coding, and cosmetology, contributes to reducing recidivism. In 2019, program graduates had a recidivism rate of 16 percent, compared with the reported rate of 22 percent for people released from all Michigan corrections facilities.
In South Carolina, a recent randomized control trial study examined the Restoring Promise approach to centering human dignity and building supportive communities for both corrections staff and incarcerated young adults. The study found that young adults there were 73 percent less likely to be involved in violent incidents and 83 percent less likely to be in restrictive housing such as solitary confinement. Surveys conducted in several Restoring Promise units also reflected positive perceptions of safety and relationships. For example, results showed that most young adults reported feeling safe (95 percent) and said they were gaining life skills (89 percent). In staff surveys, corrections staff in these units reported that they enjoyed working with residents (100 percent), and that their time in the program prepared them to achieve success (96 percent).
In line with growing research, the early results of these prison innovations suggest that prisons can positively shape the way people will live both in prisons and in our communities.
Why are business and industry leaders interested in prison reform?
Approximately 450,000 people are released from federal and state prisons every year. Nearly 60 percent remain unemployed a year after release, and almost 70 percent are rearrested within three years of release. As a result, prison reforms are increasingly focused on rehabilitation and improving reentry outcomes. Many prioritize skill-building and self-improvement to help people secure jobs after release. Second-chance hiring of formerly incarcerated people also addresses a clear economic need to build a skilled, talented workforce to fill labor gaps.
For example, Michigan Department of Corrections Director Heidi Washington stressed that strong partnerships with businesses and industry leaders are fundamental to the success of Vocational Village. The Michigan Department of Corrections has partnerships with local businesses, including the Ford Motor Company and DTE Energy, a major electric and natural gas utility. These companies help develop the program by providing feedback on the curriculum and commit to hiring formerly incarcerated people. Hundreds of Michigan businesses have hired Vocational Villagers returning to their communities. In 2024, graduates of the Vocational Village program had a higher employment rate than the national average for all U.S. adults.
The Last Mile, as another example, partners with state corrections agencies, governments, and diverse businesses and funders to bring advanced technology training (e.g., coding, website development, and audio and video technology) into prisons. Programs also provide employment assistance. The Last Mile reports that more than 70 percent of program alumni secure jobs within six months of release, a critical factor in reducing recidivism.
If there’s such an appetite for reform, why is it so difficult to make and replicate significant changes?
Changing the culture of any institution is difficult. Corrections professionals will tell you it’s exceptionally hard in their field. Long-established policies and practices shape conventions in institutional behavior — and at the agency, facility, or unit level, these evolve slowly. These practices are still focused on prison management using a command-and-control approach, emphasizing security and discipline, not rehabilitation. Staff training and education still centers on teaching punitive techniques and disciplinary processes, rather than emphasizing skill-building in social and behavioral management. Even when explicit changes are made, they are often met with resistance. Institutional actors may continue to abide by obsolete, even unethical, norms or practices regardless of their inefficiency or unjustness.
All this can make it very difficult for new reforms to take root; and it can put pressure on their long-term sustainability. It also poses challenges for replicating or scaling piloted reforms. Additionally, there are more prosaic obstacles to prison reform. When prisons are understaffed, front line officers struggle to find the time or energy for additional training or changes, no matter how positive. When prisons are underfunded, experimental approaches will always take a backseat to critical programs such as food services and the provision of medical care.
Yet prison reform is popular. Recent polling reveals that Americans overwhelming support rehabilitative and educational programming and believe that prisons should be free from violence. Such investments can help people stay out of prison after their release, which would ultimately reduce costs and improve public safety.
