Center on Sentencing and Corrections

Making the Grade
Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison
Ruth Delaney, Ram Subramanian, and Fred Patrick

From the Director
The benefits of postsecondary education programs for
incarcerated students extend far beyond the knowledge
men and women gain through their academic endeavors
in prison. These programs not only make communities
safer by reducing recidivism, they create the potential
for individual transformation. They can also make our
prisons safer for those who live and work within them,
spur community renewal, and change the economic
trajectories of entire families. With the launch of the
federal Second Chance Pell Pilot Program—which is
making Pell grants available to students in a limited
number of state and federal prisons for the first time in
20 years—we are on the verge of realizing the academic
potential of thousands of students in prison. We are
poised to see in action all of the promise that college
education holds for these incarcerated men and women,
their families, and their communities.
But these results won’t come without the commitment
of college and corrections partners to offer courses in
prison that mirror in every way possible those offered
on campuses in the community. Colleges and prisons
must develop meaningful, quality postsecondary
education programs. The courses offered should award
students credits that are transferable to colleges in
the community. When people need developmental
instruction, those courses must move students into
credit-bearing courses as soon as possible, using best
practices regarding accelerated learning. Achieving

this involves careful planning and delineation of roles
and responsibilities, strong communication, and a
solid understanding of goals and concerns in facilities
and among students, college faculty, and correctional
staff. For college faculty teaching in prison and prison
administrators carving out space, time, and operational
support for students to learn, making college-in-prison
work requires ingenuity, flexibility, creativity, and a
willingness to push the envelope of what seems possible.
In other words, colleges and corrections partners must
bring their A game, including active listening; honest,
open, and ongoing communication; and a commitment
to analyzing and resolving problems. Systems change
through high-quality postsecondary education in prison
requires nothing less. To that end, this report provides
useful guidance, recommendations, and lessons learned
from diverse college-in-prison programs around the
nation. It aims to facilitate the robust development,
growth, and strengthening of high-quality student
success-oriented programs and partnerships with all the
well-known positive benefits to individuals, institutions,
and communities that flow from doing so.

Fred Patrick
Director, Center on Sentencing and Corrections
Vera Institute of Justice

About this report
Expanding Access to Postsecondary Education, a project of the
Vera Institute of Justice (Vera), aims to facilitate the implementation and
scaling up of quality higher education programs in prisons, and to assist
with the development of policies, procedures, and practices to increase
the participation of incarcerated individuals in these programs.
This report is one of a series Vera is publishing on selected topics in
postsecondary education. (The first publication was a fact sheet,
“Building Effective Partnerships for High-Quality Postsecondary
Education in Correctional Facilities,” which you can read at
www.vera.org/building-partnerships-fact-sheet.)
Through publications, webinars, an online resource center, discussions,
and more, Vera is providing expert information and technical assistance
to support the provision and expansion of postsecondary educational
opportunities in prison and post-release—to departments of corrections,
institutions of higher education, and to local, state, and federal policymakers.
For more information about Vera’s Second Chance Pell Pilot Program
technical assistance and the Expanding Access to Postsecondary Education
Project, contact Margaret diZerega, project director at Vera’s Center on
Sentencing and Corrections, at mdizerega@vera.org.

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

3

Contents
5	Introduction
6 	Why postsecondary education for incarcerated people matters
12	

Lessons from the field

12 		Developing college-corrections partnerships
18		Ensuring quality in postsecondary education programs
28		Supporting education post-release
35	Conclusion
36	Endnotes

4

Vera Institute of Justice

Introduction

W

ith 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.1 The Pell Grant program,
begun in 1972, provides need-based grants to low-income undergraduate
students. Until 1994, incarcerated students were eligible to receive these
grants, but the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of
1994 changed that, revoking eligibility of those held in state and federal
prisons and causing a significant decline in the number of postsecondary
education programs in prisons, as well as a drop in enrollments among the
incarcerated population.2
Now, with the launch of the Second Chance Pell Pilot Program
making incarcerated students eligible for these grants in a limited
number of authorized sites, postsecondary education is likely to become
a reality for an increased number of the more than 1.5 million people in
prisons nationwide.3 The express purpose of this effort is to test whether
financial aid increases access to high-quality postsecondary education and
influences academic and life outcomes. The pilot program, which is limited
to students in state and federal prisons, follows a 2014 announcement from
the U.S. Department of Education that cleared the way for students in
juvenile facilities and local jails to be eligible for Pell funding.4
The higher education community’s response to the opportunity to teach
students in prison has been overwhelming: to date, more than 200 colleges
have applied to participate in the pilot.5 In spring 2016, the Department of
Education selected a limited number of postsecondary education institutions,
in partnership with correctional facilities, to participate in this initiative.
Students’ outcomes will be evaluated to determine whether to recommend
restoration of Pell Grant eligibility in prisons on a permanent basis.6
Selected colleges and state or federal prisons will collaborate on developing
plans to offer courses, including working to recruit students and help them
complete financial-aid applications. The institutions must offer credit-bearing
courses that result in a certificate or degree. Colleges may also provide up
to one full year of remedial course work for students in need of academic
support. The Department of Education also encourages postsecondary

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

5

institutions to develop academic and career guidance plans, as well as plans for
providing reentry services to released students, in partnership with state or
federal facilities.7
Due to the complex nature of operating college programs in prison
settings, the success of the Second Chance Pell programs and the students
they serve depends on the quality of the partnerships between colleges and
corrections agencies. To support the implementation of new partnerships
and strengthen existing ones, this report compiles lessons from the field,
offering implementation guidance to programs seeking to develop, expand, or
enhance postsecondary educational programming in corrections settings.

Why postsecondary education
for incarcerated people matters
Tough-on-crime policies—including those that stripped or limited
prisoners’ access to vocational and educational programs—have done little
to reduce crime rates or stem the flow of people who return to prison after
they are released.8 In light of this, research about which programs and
practices help reduce the risk of reoffending has captured the attention of
policymakers and practitioners seeking strategies that safely decrease the
number of people who are housed in overburdened jails and prisons and
involved with courts and community supervision agencies.9 This includes
a body of emerging research indicating that postsecondary education helps
lower people’s risk of criminal behavior and improves the outcomes of
students, families, and communities more broadly, as well as being costeffective.

Incarcerated people need educational
opportunities
Incarcerated men and women report lower levels of educational attainment
than their counterparts in the community. On average, state prisoners have
completed only 10.4 years of schooling and those with more education are
incarcerated at lower rates.10 Not completing college, in particular, raises a

6

Vera Institute of Justice

Figure 1: Educational attainment of men in prison by race and ethnicity:
1972 and 2010
Less than high school
High school Diploma
Some College
40

Percentage incarcerated

35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

1972

2010

White

1972

2010

Black

1972

2010

Hispanic

Source: Jeremy Travis, Bruce Western, and Steve Redburn, eds., The Growth of Incarceration in the
United States: Causes and Consequences (Washington, DC: National Research Council, The National
Academies Press, 2014), 67.

person’s risk of incarceration. As Figure 1 shows, from 1972 to 2010 the proportion
of people behind bars who lacked college credentials increased significantly.11
Although men and women of all races who lack these credentials are more
likely to spend time in prison, the impact is most pronounced for black men. As
Figure 1 illustrates, a young black man in the United States without a GED or high
school diploma now has a one-in-three chance of spending time in prison.12
Despite the widespread educational needs among incarcerated people,
only 35 percent of state prisons report providing college courses, according to
recent data. And these programs serve just 6 percent of the total state prison
population nationwide.13 Access is much more limited than these numbers
suggest, because many of these programs are concentrated in a small number
of states. Thirteen states enroll 86 percent, or 61,000, of the incarcerated
students taking postsecondary education courses.14 In comparison to states
with lower enrollment, these states tend to have larger prison populations; focus
programming on short-term vocational and certificate courses; often provide more

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

7

Figure 2: Educational attainment of women in prison by race and ethnicity: 2009

Less than high school
High school Diploma
Some College

60

Percentage incarcerated

50

40

30

20

10

0
White

Black

Hispanic

Source: Stephanie Ewert and Tara Wildhagen, U.S. Census Bureau, Housing and Household Economic
Statistics Division, “Educational Characteristics of Prisoners: Data from the ACS” (paper presented at
the annual meeting of the Population Association of America, Washington, DC, April 1, 2011), 31.

robust academic programming; and are able to use public funds to support
programs. High-enrollment states also tend to have more open admissions
policies, considering fewer eligibility requirements when admitting students.

Postsecondary education promotes safer
communities
Students who participate in postsecondary education in prison commit
fewer crimes and fewer violations of community supervision after they are
released. A recent landmark study—the largest ever conducted on correctional
education programs in the United States—found that incarcerated people
who participate in prison education programs are 43 percent less likely to
recidivate than those who do not.15 This research included postsecondary and

8

Vera Institute of Justice

Incarceration rates among U.S. men ages 18-64
Among working-age men, incarceration rates are disproportionately high among blacks and Latinos and for men ages 20-34,
especially those who have had less education. Nationwide, 1 in 3 black men ages 20-34 who lack a GED or high school diploma
are incarcerated, compared to 1 in 8 white men and 1 in 14 Hispanic men.
18- to 64-year-olds

White: 1.1% or 1 in 87

Black: 8% or 1 in 12

Hispanic: 2.7% or 1 in 36

20- to 34-year-olds

White: 1.8% or 1 in 57

Black: 11.4% or 1 in 9

Hispanic: 3.7% or 1 in 27

20- to 34-year-olds without high school diploma or GED

White: 12% or 1 in 8

Black: 37.1% or 1 in 3

Hispanic: 7% or 1 in 14

Source: Original analysis for the Pew Charitable Trusts by Bruce Western and Becky Pettit, 2009. Adapted from Western and Pettit,
Collateral Costs: Incarceration’s Effect on Economic Mobility (Washington, DC: the Pew Charitable Trusts, 2010), 8,
https://perma.cc/D2BZ-MG7G. Note: These numbers differ from previous Pew reports, primarily because they pertain to working-age men
as opposed to all adults. Some percentages shown are more precise than the ratios (such as 1 in 9), which are rounded to whole figures.

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

9

other education programs. Although recidivism is defined in a number of ways,
including reoffending, rearrest, reconviction, re-incarceration, or parole violation,
the majority of analyzed studies used re-incarceration as its key outcome measure
for recidivism.16 Whatever the definition, this means fewer overall victims and less
rule breaking among people under post-release supervision, enabling probation
and parole agencies to concentrate resources on their highest-risk supervisees.
Recognizing this potential, the National Institute of Justice recently designated
postsecondary education as an evidence-based practice.17

Unlocking Potential: Pathways From Prison to Postsecondary Education Project
Unlocking Potential: Pathways from Prison to Postsecondary
Education (Pathways) is a five-year initiative led by the Vera
Institute of Justice. Pathways provides three competitively
selected states—Michigan, New Jersey, and North Carolina—
with incentive funding and technical assistance to expand
access to higher education for people in prison and those
recently released. The project, involving 15 colleges and
universities in partnership with 14 prisons, community
supervision agencies, and local reentry organizations, seeks
to demonstrate that access to postsecondary education,
combined with supportive reentry services, can increase
attainment of educational credentials, reduce recidivism, and
increase employability and earnings. In doing so, Pathways
builds on and complements the substantial body of empirical
evidence showing that increased educational attainment is
a critical factor in keeping people out of prison and helping

a

those who were incarcerated contribute to their families
and communities. Finally, by validating what works, through
independent evaluation of the pilot sites, Vera and its partners
hope to spur national replication and long-term public
investment. More than 1,000 students have enrolled since the
launch in 2012.
Given that the model encompasses in-prison and post-release
components, the project’s design encourages participating
states to create a continuum of education and reentry support
services, with success dependent on robust partnerships
among colleges, prison and parole officials, community and
business leaders, employers, and community-based service
providers. Each state is further supported by a national
advisory board made up of leaders in the field of higher
education, corrections, reentry, business, and research.a

The Pathways project is funded by five leading philanthropies: the Ford Foundation, the Sunshine Lady Foundation, the Open Society

Foundations, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Postsecondary education benefits
individuals, families, and communities
Those who take college courses find it easier to secure employment and establish
or strengthen positive relationships with family, friends, and associates when
they return home—key factors that research has shown are important in keeping
people crime-free. Moreover, with a 13 percent higher chance of obtaining
employment post-release and the likelihood of higher annual earnings than those
who did not participate in education programs while incarcerated, students are

10

Vera Institute of Justice

Return on investment for prison education
As compared to the costs of re-incarceration, the costs of prison education save about
$5 for every dollar spent.

Source: Lois M. Davis, Jennifer L. Steele, et al., 2014, 81.

not the only ones who come out ahead.18 Postsecondary education directly benefits
participants’ families and can potentially strengthen the viability of those communities
to which students return after their release—often economically disadvantaged, underresourced neighborhoods, many of which suffer from crime, high rates of drug use, low
rates of employment, and endemic poverty.19 Education generates other positive benefits
too. Children of incarcerated college students and graduates are more likely to seek
postsecondary opportunities themselves, extending the benefits of a college education to
another generation.20

Postsecondary education in prison improves
facility safety
Research shows that long before students return home, in-prison college programs
increase the safety and security of entire correctional facilities, affecting even incarcerated
individuals who are not participating in the programs and correctional staff.21 Corrections
administrators and staff report that students in college courses are better able to articulate
their needs and challenges to prison staff and that their leadership can be a calming
influence on other inmates.22 In addition, the desire to stay in a postsecondary education
program—or be eligible for it—creates a powerful incentive to avoid behavior that might
warrant a disciplinary infraction or other sanction that could bar participation.23

Education is cost-effective
Researchers examining the cost of providing educational programming found
that education is not only cost-effective, but may produce savings in the long run.
In comparison to the direct costs of re-incarceration, education offers an estimated
400 percent return on investment for taxpayers over three years, or $5 saved for
every $1 spent.24

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

11

The biggest barrier to providing college courses in corrections settings,
however, is the cost of doing so. From 2009 to 2012, states reduced funding
for prison education programs by an average of 6 percent.25 Academically
oriented programs were hardest hit, with 20 states reducing the number
of such course offerings, while vocational programming fared better,
expanding by about 1 percent during that period.26 A recent study found
that family and other private sources were the most commonly reported
source of funding for students taking college courses in prison.27

Lessons from the field
The following lessons from the field draw on research about the impact
of postsecondary education and on the experiences of practitioners
implementing these programs in corrections settings across the country,
including Pathways sites. Lessons are grouped into three main areas:
>> developing college-corrections partnerships;
>> ensuring quality in postsecondary education programs; and
>> supporting education post-release.
The sections below summarize common challenges and strategies
for success in each area and highlight examples and case studies from
programs across the country.

Developing college-corrections
partnerships
Building an effective partnership between colleges and prisons is the
most critical aspect of creating and sustaining a successful postsecondary
education program in a confinement setting. The quality of this partnership
influences many aspects of a prison-based program, from development to
operations to measuring outcomes. But developing a positive, sustainable
relationship is not always easy. Whether the impetus for a postsecondary
program comes from prison or college staff, these partners can take a
number of steps to foster strong working relationships.

12

Vera Institute of Justice

Develop and formalize commitment to shared goals
Corrections departments and educational institutions are driven by
different organizing principles or missions, and this means that colleges and
corrections staff may approach postsecondary programs with different goals
in mind. For example, corrections staff may be interested in educational
programs because they encourage better behavior in prison, as well as reduce
the risk of recidivism—for instance, by increasing the likelihood of post-release
employment. On the other hand, college staff may emphasize the academic value
of a program. Differing goals such as these can result in disagreement about
the type of academic program to offer (such as vocational training, associate’s
degrees, or bachelor’s degrees), how to measure outcomes, and which prisoners
to prioritize, given limited funding (for example, younger people, those who are
close to their release date, or those serving life sentences).

“Building an effective partnership
between colleges and prisons is the most
critical aspect of creating and sustaining
a successful postsecondary education
program in a confinement setting.”

Unless would-be partners agree on common goals and expectations, they
are more likely to view each other as adversaries than collaborators in the
development process. This increases the chance of challenges arising during
implementation. Thus, shared goal setting is a crucial element to launching a
program. The experience of existing programs suggests that partners who do
this early are more likely to identify and bridge what may seem like divergent
goals. Academic attainment and recidivism reduction are not mutually
exclusive, given that greater academic attainment is associated with decreased
rates of recidivism.

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

13

As part of their planning effort, partners should develop policies,
procedures, and processes that promote and strengthen the postsecondary
education program and revise those that may need to be updated. These
policies should be reviewed regularly in context of the specific needs
of the facility and participating college and corrections agencies. A
useful mechanism for hammering out these details is a memorandum
of understanding (MOU) or a similar commitment document. Program
partners may want to return to this document annually or as needed as the
program develops over time.

Partner Goals, Roles, and Responsibilities
With good communication, partners can develop data-collection
plans that take into account multiple project goals. Working with
Pathways sites in Michigan, New Jersey, and North Carolina,
for example, Vera developed data-​collection tools that sites use to
report academic accomplishments (such as the number of credits
accumulated and credentials earned) and corrections outcomes
(such as recidivism among released students).
At the development stage of the New Jersey Pathways
project, the New Jersey Scholarship and Transformative

Education in Prisons (NJ-STEP) program and the state
Department of Corrections agreed to an MOU detailing the
specifics of the program and its operations. The agreement
covers the facilities in which NJ-STEP will offer courses,
the target population, program components (including
case planning, recruitment, enrollment, class sizes, course
instruction, training, inter-facility transfer procedures for
participating students, tutoring and mentoring, use of
technology, and data collection). It also details the program
management and fiscal responsibilities of each partner.

Cross-train faculty and facility staff
When it comes to implementation, success of a program depends on more
than the faculty running the programs and teaching the classes. Frontline custody and control staff have significant influence on the day-to-day
operation of a college program in prison, and therefore its long-term success.28
It is the corrections officers who escort instructors and students to and from
classes, make determinations about materials and resources that can or cannot
be brought into a facility, and may be assigned to cover classrooms. Housingunit staff also play an important role, as they spend time with students when
they are not in class and make decisions about whether students have a quiet
space to study or access to educational resources outside the classroom.29
Without developing sufficient buy-in from facility staff, programs risk
pushback from them. Some programs have encountered resentment from
corrections staff when incarcerated students are offered something they
have never been afforded: the opportunity to attend college for free or at a

14

Vera Institute of Justice

discount.30 Some programs address this by offering college courses to staff as
well as incarcerated students or developing scholarship programs for family
members of staff (see “Focusing on Credentials” on page 26).31 Other programs
have reported that facility-based education staff—whom educators might
expect would be natural allies—can be unreceptive because college programs
may lie outside their core responsibilities and represent an additional burden
on their limited time and resources.32
Participating faculty may also pose challenges to collaboration. Because
correctional facilities are responsible first and foremost for the safety of inmates,
staff, and visitors, security concerns often supersede the rehabilitative, reentry, or
educational goals of college or vocational programs.33 Instructors may misinterpret
corrections staff’s adherence to facility rules as lack of support for the project,
potentially alienating people who may otherwise support the program and its goals.
Faculty are also unlikely to anticipate the number and extent of security
requirements and procedures both before and after walking into the prison
classroom, noncompliance with which may lead to confusion, frustration, and
increased workloads for facility staff.34 All course materials, for example, typically
must be reviewed by corrections staff in advance of the course start date, and
teachers may need to declare items they bring into facilities—such as thumb
drives, DVDs, and news clips—each time they arrive. Entering the facility can
also be a slow process; security checks and escorts take time, and if instructors
arrive during shift changes, longer delays may result. In addition, the complexities
of moving prisoners within facilities are likely to be foreign to new instructors.
Faculty who arrive late may find that students were not allowed to assemble in the
classroom because no instructor was present at the appointed time.35
Providing training and orientation sessions can overcome many of these
challenges and help establish strong lines of communication among faculty,
program administrators, and correctional leadership and staff. Training and
consultation should include the following components.
Corrections orientation for instructors

Prospective instructors for any prison-based program will need
comprehensive training delivered by college and corrections staff. This
training should communicate project goals, identify key partners and contacts,
provide a basic facility tour, cover prohibited materials and the processes for
securing approval of course materials, and include any required corrections
trainings (such as mandatory volunteer trainings and trainings on the federal
Prison Rape Elimination Act). Because many programs rely on adjunct or new
faculty every semester, these trainings must be given at the beginning of every

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

15

Ongoing Planning
After discovering that students were not able to earn credits
at the pace the Michigan Department of Corrections had
anticipated, the DOC instituted monthly planning meetings
with its partner, Jackson College. The partners redesigned
the program to ensure that Pathways students would leave
the facility with 30 Michigan Transfer Agreement college
credits. These credits are transferable to any public college
or university in the state. (Most enrolled students have 24-36
months of their prison sentence remaining.)

They continue to meet monthly to resolve various large and
small programmatic issues as they arise.
In New Jersey, NJ-STEP monthly planning meetings include
staff from STEP and the Department of Corrections. Topics
that are typically covered include planning for graduations,
resolving issues that arise at the facility and faculty level,
negotiating classroom availability within prisons, determining
course offerings, and addressing questions about allowable
materials, security concerns, and technological capability.

semester. Training of prospective instructors should cover the following
key areas:
>> procedures for entering facilities, including securing proper
identification and communicating with appropriate program or
corrections staff about arrival dates and times;
>> rules about restricted items and procedures for getting course
materials and other outside resources approved;
>> rules for interacting with students;
>> rules about access to technology and other resources; and
>> procedures to follow when requesting help or support from
corrections staff.
Program training for facility staff

Corrections staff should be trained on the goals and operations of any prisonbased college program. This will offer corrections leadership and college staff
an opportunity to build support for the program among facility personnel.
Existing programs have benefited by delivering briefing sessions that explain
the value of postsecondary education in a corrections context (for example,
reduced disciplinary issues and recidivism; increased staff and facility safety),
as well as program goals, expectations, and responsibilities. These messages
typically come across stronger when delivered by corrections leadership.

16

Vera Institute of Justice

Building a cooperative and supportive alliance
between instructors and corrections staff

Facility-based educational staff should be consulted during the development
and operation of any prison-based postsecondary education program. Many of
these staff already coordinate with community-based programs that operate in
prisons and have other experience likely to benefit program implementation.
Building partnerships with these staff will help to troubleshoot problems
and identify work-arounds, share resources, and create pathways from
other educational programs within a facility or system—such as high school
equivalency or adult basic education courses—to the postsecondary program.36

Ensure administrative capacity
Getting a program up and running requires a fair amount of administrative
capacity—and a point person on both the corrections and college sides can be
critical. These coordinators need to secure space in the facility for classes, select
courses, ensure proper clearances for faculty, identify students to participate, offer
placement tests, and perform other tasks. But the need for this type of support does
not end with the planning stages. Ongoing administrative capacity is necessary to
organize faculty trainings, manage scheduling and registration, and address various
issues as they arise during the course of the program.

Maintain relationships
Developing a leadership team and holding regular meetings can go far to resolve
challenges and support implementation. These meetings promote shared
ownership of project successes and difficulties and ensure that all partners’
voices are heard in planning discussions and in the process of inevitable
troubleshooting. Planning meetings should focus on major tasks associated with
implementation, such as admission procedures, instructor recruitment, space
allocation within facilities, and graduation planning. In addition to addressing
any challenges of implementation, recurring check-in meetings can serve as a
forum to evaluate project outcomes and discuss program changes or expansions.

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

17

Staffing for Prison Programs
In New Jersey, NJ-STEP staff provide administrative support
for operation of the program. Participating colleges also
have site coordinators that recruit faculty for the program,
facilitate security clearances with NJ-STEP and the New Jersey
Department of Corrections (NJDOC), and communicate with
participating faculty about training and other requirements.
During the second year of the program, the NJDOC also saw
a need for greater administrative capacity and created a new
position to oversee all postsecondary education programming
in the state’s prisons, with a particular focus on the Pathways
project operations.
In Central New York, the College-in-Prison Program at
Mohawk Correctional Facility has college and corrections
point people who coordinate operations. On the college side
at Mohawk Valley Community College (MVCC), the director
identifies and recruits faculty, manages day-to-day logistics
and planning, and manages program finances. On the
corrections side, the facility's education director identifies
participants and coordinates with the college to manage
students and class schedules. MVCC awards the credits
and degrees; members from MVCC, Hamilton College, and
Colgate University teach the courses. MVCC also houses the
New Directions Program, which helps enroll students who
are returning to the community after incarceration. New
Directions works with the Oneida County Reentry Task Force,
local jails, and area prisons to provide information about the
college to potential students, and, once they are registered,
offers supportive services to students to help them persist and
succeed in college.a
Also in New York, the nonprofit organization Hudson Link
for Higher Education in Prison provides college preparatory

and degree-granting courses at one women’s and four men’s
facilities, leading to an associate’s or bachelor’s degree. Six
participating colleges—SUNY Sullivan Community College,
Mercy College, Nyack College, Vassar College, Sienna
College, and Columbia University—partner with one or more
facilities. Hudson Link provides adjunct faculty salaries, a
prison-based academic coordinator, textbooks, and other
supplies; prisons provide classroom space; and the colleges
waive tuition and provide course credits, transcripts, degrees,
and registration services. Hudson Link also developed a
partnership with St. Francis College to help Hudson Link
students in the community complete their degrees at no cost
once they are released.b
In North Carolina, staff at the Department of Public
Safety had planned to provide support in the early stages
of development of the state’s Pathways project. But once
the program was in full swing, they found that ensuring the
quality of the programming and the relationships among all
partners required more of a time commitment than the original
staff could provide. The Department of Public Safety hired a
program coordinator to oversee project operations.
Lee College operates postsecondary education programs
in seven state prisons and one private prison in Texas. In
operation since 1966, the Lee College Huntsville Center has
more than 30 full-time employees, including a dean,
student services staff, administrative staff, technical support
staff, and academic and vocational instructors. The
program awarded 400 certificates and 87 associate of arts
degrees in the 2013-2014 academic year. Students pay for
programming through no-interest loans and a variety of other
financial supports.c

Morris Pearson, interview by Vera Program Associate John Bae, New York, April 19, 2016.
Sean Pica and Samuel Arroyo, interview by John Bae, New York, April 13, 2016.
c
Donna Zuniga, “Working Together, We Are Making a Difference,” Second Chance: The Story of the Lee College Offender Education Program,
February 2015; “Lee College Huntsville Center,” https://perma.cc/JE3L-K2BP.
a

b

Ensuring quality in postsecondary
education programs
To ensure that students are better able to gain admission to college
programs post-release, transfer credits, and be competitive with
other college graduates in the job market, the quality and content of
postsecondary education programming in prison should be equivalent in

18

Vera Institute of Justice

all material ways to that which is offered in the community. College faculty
must view the prison classroom as an important space where students
are challenged to think, question, learn, and grow, just as they would in a
classroom on any campus. The following are key areas for corrections and
postsecondary partners to consider in developing high-quality programming.

Create degree pathways
Those developing or operating programs should plan to offer only courses
that award credits transferable to colleges in the communities to which
incarcerated students return, developmental courses (ideally accelerated) that
directly prepare students for credit-bearing work, or both. Moving students
to credit-bearing course work faster minimizes the risk that they will be
removed from the program because of transfer to another facility or released
prior to earning college credits. It also ensures that scarce program dollars
go to transferable credit-bearing course work that students can apply toward
a degree or other credential. Critical to sites selected for the Second Chance
Pell Pilot, Pell grants are limited to the equivalent of six years of funding
per student and can support only one year of developmental course work.
Continued use of these grants requires keeping students on track so that they
can progress to credit-bearing course work.
Selecting which courses to offer each semester is important to students’
progress. When launching a program, administrators can use placement
test results to deliver the courses needed by the largest number of students.
Once a program is under way, however, course planning may become more
complex. New participants may join the program, resulting in a student
body with varying credit or developmental needs. If staff are expanding or
strengthening existing programs, they should look closely at current course
offerings, as they may not be degree-oriented or offer transferable credits.
Program administrators should examine existing articulation agreements and
map out course plans to build credits that allow students to progressively
attain certificates, licenses, associate’s degrees, and bachelor’s degrees—that is,
stackable credentials. (For more on articulation agreements, which govern the
transferability of credits between colleges, see “Articulation Agreements” on
page 20).

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

19

Articulation Agreements
Articulation agreements are formal binding arrangements
between two or more higher education institutions (which
include two- and four-year schools) that outline transfer
policies for specific academic programs and degrees and
provide guaranteed pathways for students transferring
from one postsecondary institution to another. In addition
to providing a smooth lateral transfer of credits between
postsecondary institutions when a student must change
colleges mid-degree, such agreements can also establish a
clear path from two- to four-year institutions and help students
avoid taking courses at the two-year institution that do not
satisfy their four-year degree requirements.a Without such an
agreement, students must apply for transfer credit individually
and a receiving institution must evaluate courses on an ad
hoc basis. This can result in a patchwork of courses accepted
for credit or rejected, and the possibility of having to retake
courses, a requirement that may delay students’ progress
toward degree attainment and create additional expenses.
Some statewide articulation agreements exist, allowing
students to transfer credits and degrees relatively easily
between higher education institutions within the state. The
three Pathways states have such agreements.

>>

New Jersey’s statewide articulation agreement was
established by the passage in 2007 of Assembly Bill
3968, commonly referred to as the Lampitt Law. This law
covers every public institution of higher education in the
state and allows for the seamless transfer of academic
credits toward a completed associate of arts or
associate of science degree from any public institution
of higher education in New Jersey to any other such
institution in the state.b The law also requires colleges to
establish policies and procedures for transferring credits
when associate’s degrees have not been completed.

>>

Michigan has a similar agreement, called the Michigan
Transfer Agreement. It allows for the transfer of credits
between participating community colleges and
baccalaureate institutions and includes private as well
as public institutions.c

>>

North Carolina has a statewide agreement, known as the
North Carolina Comprehensive Articulation Agreement,
between University of North Carolina schools and the North
Carolina Community College System. This agreement
applies to all 58 community colleges and all 16 institutions
affiliated with the University of North Carolina.d

 orma Montague, “Articulation Agreements: No Credits Left Behind,” Issues in Accounting Education 27, no. 1 (2012), 282.
N
New Jersey Assembly Bill No. 3968, https://perma.cc/B5RH-ACQ5.
c
Michigan Transfer Agreement, https://perma.cc/46C3-L38C.
d
Comprehensive Articulation Agreement, https://perma.cc/JGB8-2CDD.
a

b

Recruit qualified faculty
Prison-based programs should recruit instructors who have credentials and
experience equivalent to faculty on campuses in the community. Whether
adjunct or full-time, professors must have the experience and knowledge
necessary to provide equitable opportunities to students in prison. Ensuring
quality of instruction is critical to preparing students for degree completion
either pre- or post-release. In addition, colleges should consider evaluating
faculty who teach in prison facilities similarly to those who teach on campus.
Incarcerated student evaluations, for example, should be collected and filed
in the same way all other evaluations are handled.

20

Vera Institute of Justice

Ensure access to technology and other academic
supports
People developing college programs for incarcerated students should
also create a plan to provide academic support to these students outside
the classroom, such as access to computers and secure Internet research
technology, access to library and other research materials, tutoring, and
dedicated times and places for study.
In conjunction with offering formal development courses, programs can assist
students who are not yet ready for college-level courses by developing intensive
supports such as mentoring, tutoring, study halls, and increased access to library
resources. Prison-based programs may also experiment with expanding adult
basic-education services to deliver developmental course work, reserving scarce
postsecondary resources for credit-bearing courses.
Technology and computer skills

To prepare students for college and job opportunities post-release, program
administrators should help ensure that students have opportunities to
attain some technological and computer-skill competence. Although many
departments of corrections recognize this need, not all facilities or even all states
have prison computer labs.37 This is often due to insufficient financial resources,
lack of suitable facilities, and limited staff capacity to purchase, implement, and
maintain equipment and software, and monitor advances in technologies.38 Lack
of access to computers can have serious implications for an in-prison college
program—for example, in the administration of placement tests, which are
increasingly automated and computer-based rather than paper-based.
Some departments of corrections, however, are making strides in
improving computer and digital-literacy skills and providing students with
access to technology-based learning.39 Indeed, 39 states have a computer lab in
at least one of their prison facilities.40 Twenty-four states also offer Microsoft
Office certification as part of their vocational and career training programs.41
Some jurisdictions are also experimenting with new forms of technology.
The city of Philadelphia, for example, has introduced tablet technology in
its jails. Inmates have access to vocational and educational programming
through tablet-based programs.42 The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation
and Correction has also made tablets available to incarcerated individuals,
using them to provide adult basic education, GED, and postsecondary
education courses.43 Administrators of postsecondary education programs and
facilities may be able to learn from neighboring facilities or states that have
implemented such interactive technology successfully.
Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

21

Internet access

College and corrections partners should explore opportunities for providing
students access to the Internet. Although college courses increasingly
depend on students’ use of the Internet and library resources for academic
research, many departments of corrections limit or deny Internet access for
security reasons, and prison libraries are unlikely to stock the articles and
books necessary to support students’ course work. 44 Still, some corrections
agencies have significantly increased access to educational technology in
facilities in recent years, spurred in some cases by the new technological
requirements of the GED exam (see “Expanding Access to Technology in
Prisons” on page 23).
In practice, most typical security concerns can be addressed by using
firewalls and secure servers that limit the range of Internet sites to which
students have access. And for facilities ill-equipped to offer full Internet
access, local-area networks (LAN) and wide-area networks (WAN) offer

Program administrators must make plans
to address the necessary educational
supports, materials, and tools often taken
for granted in the free world.

special promise for building academic libraries, by pooling resources for
students in a single facility or across a prison system. LAN, available in 26
states’ prison systems, allows for controlled intranet access, and/or a storage
area network to allow for cross-facility access to expensive articles, education
resources, or databases for students.45 WAN, offered in 11 states’ prisons,
works similarly, but can link computer networks at multiple facilities across
a state or region.46

22

Vera Institute of Justice

Other curricular and extracurricular supports

Program administrators need to be aware of—and make plans to work around—
the significant logistical challenges that a prison setting poses, particularly
in delivering necessary educational supports and providing materials and
educational tools, many of which are taken for granted in the free world. For
example, holding office hours—a ubiquitous practice on college campuses—is
highly unlikely in prisons, given the restrictions on movement and schedules.
Professors who want to offer office hours to their incarcerated students
will likely have to build time into classes for students to privately discuss
assignments or other issues.
In other cases, a facility’s physical structure can pose difficulties. Although
some facilities may have enclosed classrooms, many others use repurposed
space with little to no soundproofing or insulation.47 Students in prison may

Expanding Access to Technology in Prisons
The New Mexico Department of Corrections fitted nine
facilities with lab space, computers, and a connection to a
secure stand-alone computer server that allows students to
access educational course work through the Moodle coursemanagement system. Based on a model offered at New
Mexico’s community college campuses and with the assistance
of an on-site facilitator, students take postsecondary courses
leading to an associate of arts degree through this closed
network system.a

fulfill the core general education requirements for all public
colleges and universities statewide. To help THEI meet its
stated goal of providing incarcerated students access to the
same technology campus-based students have, the Tennessee
Department of Correction secured funding for computer labs
equipped with 25 desktop computers, a laser printer, and a
smart board and projector.b Although students do not have
access to the Internet, the labs enhance their digital literacy in
preparation for release.

In North Carolina, Pathways students have controlled access
to the Internet and to local-area network (LAN) and wide-area
network (WAN) resources. Correctional officers now have
the ability to manage Internet-enabled computers remotely,
and can report and monitor the websites students visit. The
Department of Public Safety also installed security software
that blocks access to websites deemed inappropriate. These
tools ensure that in-prison education resembles courses taught
on campus as much as possible.

The Washington State Board for Community and Technical
Colleges is launching a program to provide prisoners access
to the learning management system used by all community
colleges in the state. Using kiosk Internet and tablet technology
in the eight participating prisons, students taking college
courses can access the system between classes to submit
assignments, communicate with faculty, and download course
content, readings, syllabi, and other materials that professors
post.c The system enhances courses for students and enables
instructors to use similar teaching strategies as those they use
on campus, making the transition between teaching in prison
and on campus smoother.

The Tennessee Higher Education Initiative (THEI) provides
course work to students in one men’s facility so that they can
Leslie Bradley, interview by Ruth Delaney, New York, April 27, 2016.
Julie Doochin, interview by Ruth Delaney, New York, April 6, 2016.
c
Brian Walsh, interview by Ruth Delaney, New York, January 19, 2016.
a

b

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

23

have difficulty finding a quiet place to study and often have limited access
to tools and resources such as computers, libraries, and tutoring services
that are commonly available on college campuses.48
Because of restrictions on the types of materials that can be brought
into correctional facilities, access to core course materials, such as typical
lab supplies for science courses (for example, chemicals, Bunsen burners,
and scalpels), may be limited due to security concerns. (See “Bridging
Academic and Security Requirements” on page 27.)

Celebrating achievements keeps
students invested in their education and
brings programs to the attention of outside
audiences.

Minimize the effects of inmate transfers or inmate release
College and university faculty and staff unfamiliar with corrections operations
may not anticipate the frequency with which incarcerated individuals are
transferred between facilities—or the importance of sentence length when
setting eligibility requirements for college programs. Collaboration with
prison education and security staff on these issues is critical to building an
effective college program. Incarcerated students may be moved, often with
little or no warning, for a wide range of reasons, including disciplinary
infractions, step-downs to lower-security facilities, and parole eligibility dates.
In some instances, incarcerated students may elect to leave if a transfer allows
them to go to a facility that offers opportunities to meet court-mandated
rehabilitative goals or is closer to family.
Yet to award academic credit to students, colleges must provide a set
number of contact hours. When students cannot complete a term—because
of facility transfers, housing reassignments, or releases—the result may
be lost credits, incomplete grades, or forfeiting money paid for courses. It
may also mean an end to academic progress if the student is moved to a
facility that does not have a postsecondary program or is released to the

24

Vera Institute of Justice

supervision of a parole officer who does not prioritize education.
Although corrections administrators are often unable or unwilling to
share information before a student is transferred from one facility to another,
good communication among prison education staff, custody staff, and college
coordinators can help minimize adverse consequences. College programs
should work with prison staff to create procedures that put a facility transfer
on hold. Such procedures could require notifications to prison education staff
and allow for review—absent a significant security rationale—prior to the
movement of an enrolled student.

Plan graduations and mark student achievement
Directors of college programs that operate in prisons have learned the value of
marking and celebrating student achievement through dean’s list ceremonies,
graduations, and recognition of other student milestones. These types of
events help keep students invested in their education and bring programs to
the attention of outside audiences.49 They also offer important opportunities
for students to share their achievements with friends and family, program
administrators, and facility staff. They also offer college and corrections program

Recognizing Students’ Achievements
Michigan’s Pathways project holds ceremonies after every
semester to recognize students who make the dean’s list. These
ceremonies have involved the Jackson College president,
provost, and faculty in full academic regalia, presenting dean’s
list certificates to students at the two Pathways prisons, just as
they do on campus in the community.
New Jersey’s Pathways project has awarded more than 20
associate’s of arts degrees to students in prison, a number
expected to rise to 100 by 2017. To mark these accomplishments,
NJ-STEP has held several graduation ceremonies for students
completing their degree in prison. Degrees are conferred by
the college president and faculty participate in the graduation
ceremony in full regalia, and events include a keynote speaker
a

and a student speaker. Students have been able to invite family
members, and the ceremony is typically followed by a reception
with refreshments and a photographer who takes individual and
family pictures.
New York’s Bard Prison Initiative held its 12th graduation in
January 2015, featuring Cardinal Timothy Dolan, archbishop
of New York, as a speaker and honorary degree recipient.
Cardinal Dolan, an influential conservative figure in the state,
congratulated program administrators, correctional staff, and
students in his remarks and praised the program as “a real
light in the darkness” in a statement released on his website
following the ceremony.a

Timothy Dolan, “Bard Prison Initiative,” https://perma.cc/DH9F-M3X9.

partners an opportunity to share their successes with institutional leaders, such
as college presidents and heads of departments of corrections, as well as with
funders and other supporters.

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

25

Focusing on Credentials
As part of the Pathways project, Jackson College in
Michigan offers accelerated developmental math courses
to incarcerated students. These courses are similar to those
on the college’s main campus, but have been adapted to
account for limitations of the prison—most notably, the lack
of appropriate technology to use placement-testing software.
All new students enroll in a three-week, rapid-review math
module designed for those who place into math courses
two levels below credit-bearing courses. More advanced
students also enroll, but serve as tutors to their classmates.
At the close of the rapid-review period, students are placed
immediately into 12-week, credit-bearing math courses or
the next level of developmental course work—or complete
an additional 12 weeks of course work at the same level,
depending on the instructor’s individualized assessment of a
student’s progress. Jackson College reports that 80 percent
of its incarcerated students move into higher-level courses
following the rapid-review module.
In Missouri, the Saint Louis University Prison Program
provides two program tracks: one for incarcerated people in
two Missouri state prisons and another for prison staff.a The
programs provide transferable credit-bearing courses that
lead to an associate’s degree. The goals for the two programs
are to prepare inmates for life after prison and to enable staff
to advance their careers.

In North Carolina, students in prison are limited to earning
an associate’s degree in applied sciences or a career and
technical education (CTE)-focused degree. This degree
includes course requirements that lead to CTE certificates
(with credits that are typically not transferable) as well
as core liberal arts courses that are also applicable to
academically oriented associate’s degrees and to bachelor’s
degrees. In developing its Pathways project, the Department
of Public Safety, Division of Adult Correction, examined its
existing postsecondary education program and found that
few course offerings were for core liberal arts courses and
many were not degree-oriented. Corrections and community
college officials designed the state’s Pathways program to
prioritize those core transferable liberal arts courses while
also offering the certificate-oriented courses, preparing
students to leave prison with a credential and transferable
course credits.
In New Jersey, NJ-STEP implemented a registration program
called Edvance to track student progress toward degrees
and plan future course offerings. Using Edvance, STEP staff
can track students by facility and examine individual and
group course needs, enabling them to offer courses that
serve the greatest number of students. Using this approach,
STEP has helped move students progressively toward degree
attainment. By the summer of 2016, STEP will have awarded
100 associate’s degrees to incarcerated men and women.

Rigorous Applications, Comparable Courses
In Maryland, Goucher College’s Prison Education Partnership
courses are taught by the same faculty and with the same
syllabus as those at Goucher’s main campus. Students must
complete a rigorous application process to gain admission to
the program, including proof of GED or high school diploma,
attendance at information sessions, interviews, a written
application, and a placement exam. Notably, students in prison
complete faculty evaluations at the close of each semester, the
records of which are included in faculty tenure files along with

26

Vera Institute of Justice

those completed by students at the main campus.b
At one of the women’s facilities in Washington State,
the Freedom Education Project at the University of Puget
Sound (FEPPS) offers credit-bearing courses that lead to
an associate’s of arts and science degree. With a goal
of providing education equivalent to that offered in the
community, the program draws on faculty from the University
of Puget Sound, Tacoma Community College, Evergreen

State College, University of Washington, and Pacific Lutheran
University.c FEPPS also runs a lecture series open to all women
at the prison and coordinated by participating faculty and the
student advisory council. It offers some aspects of a campus
experience within the prison and has proved to be an effective
way to engage new faculty and students in the program.
In Iowa, Grinnell College’s Liberal Arts in Prison Program
offers a yearlong series of courses designed to be equivalent

to a first year of college at the main campus. Incarcerated
students apply via a demanding application process, receive
credit for courses, and are tutored by student volunteers. To
ensure comparable course work, faculty from the college’s
main campus teach all accredited program courses. The
program also coordinates special events during the semester,
such as orchestra or theater performances at the prison that
are open to the public.d

Bridging Academic and Security Requirements
In California, the Prison University Project (PUP) has
developed lab science courses that use materials that can be
brought through security into the facility, including materials
for dissection. By creatively selecting from common labs
offered on community-based campuses, PUP offers science
courses that do not compromise student learning goals.
Successful dissection lab modules have included sheep brains
and cow eyes, which require only a serrated plastic knife.e
In Connecticut, Wesleyan University’s Center for Prison
Education serves students at one men’s and one women’s
facility. The center offers a number of academic supports,
including study halls supervised by college staff. There, students
have access to qualified undergraduate student tutors from the
main campus (typically high-performing juniors and seniors
recommended by their academic advisers) and to Wesleyanowned computers with off-line access to manually updated
academic journals. To meet the research requirements of
advanced course work, students in prison can also request
library materials and articles from program staff, who secure
the materials at the college library and deliver them to students.f

The Boston University Prison Education Project (PEP),
founded in Massachusetts in 1972, offers courses at
two state facilities, one for men and one for women. PEP
provides developmental and accredited courses that lead to
a bachelor’s degree in interdisciplinary studies. To provide
additional support, PEP partners with the Petey Greene
Program, a nonprofit organization that recruits, trains, and
coordinates volunteers who serve in jails and prisons as tutors
in adult basic education, high school equivalency, and study
skills. BU also offers a scholarship program for employees of
the Massachusetts Department of Correction.g
In North Carolina, students in the Pathways program are
typically kept off of potential transfer lists. In New Jersey,
NJ-STEP and Department of Corrections staff communicate
regularly about student transfers and on occasion have been
able to move a student to a facility where he could continue
course work—or return him to the original facility until the
end of a semester.

Julie O’Heir, personal e-mail to Vera Program Analyst Danny Murillo, New York, January 20, 2016.
Amy Roza, interview by Ruth Delaney, New York, January 29, 2016.
c
Tanya Erzen, interview by Ruth Delaney, New York, April 20, 2016.
d
Emily Guenther, “Seeking info on prison ed. program,” personal e-mail to Danny Murillo, New York, May 12, 2016.
e
Adam Williamson, interview by Ruth Delaney, New York, March 8, 2016.
f
Amy Roza, interview by Ruth Delaney, New York, January 29, 2016.
g
Tara Olivo, personal e-mail to Danny Murillo, New York, January 25, 2016.
a

b

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

27

College partners do not always appreciate or anticipate the
complexities of planning such a function in a corrections setting, so
collaborating with corrections partners is extremely important. At the
same time, corrections personnel may prioritize security concerns over
academic ones, making it important for college partners to ensure that
important aspects of graduation are included in the final plan, such as
allowing families to attend, ensuring college banners and seals can be
displayed within facilities, and that faculty can process in academic regalia.
Programs should plan graduation and student achievement ceremonies
well in advance, including a review of all relevant academic and prison
policies and procedures. It is important that partners discuss their
expectations about event procedures and requirements in detail.

Supporting education post-release
Students greatly benefit from academic support as they continue their college
education after they are released from prison. Stressors related to transitioning
from life in confinement to life in the community complicate the other barriers
students are likely to face, such as financial challenges, insufficient academic
preparedness, and a lack of social support. Along with wanting to continue
their education, these students are also often trying to do the following: 50
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

Find stable housing.
Meet the requirements of parole or other post-release supervision.
Find and maintain employment.
Reunify with family or other loved ones.
Secure health care.
Achieve financial stability.

Students’ educational attainment may suffer from the constraints of
post-release supervision requirements, some of which may last many years
and interfere with class enrollment and attendance. Requirements such as
mandatory meeting times with parole officers, curfews, and employment
requirements can make scheduling class or meeting degree requirements
difficult or even impossible. Because failure to meet these conditions can result
in a revocation from supervision and a return to prison, compliance with
the rules and conditions of release—as opposed to educational attainment—
becomes paramount. Failing or withdrawing from courses may cause students

28

Vera Institute of Justice

to lose motivation or confidence to continue school in the future, and may have
serious financial consequences. Students who begin but are unable to complete a
semester forfeit Pell Grant dollars, which are limited to six years per individual.
Students may also accumulate debt for incomplete or failed courses.
The staff of programs that work successfully with students after release
recognize the overwhelming nature of reentry and its impact on the pursuit of
academic goals, as well as college-based barriers to achievement. These programs
typically offer supports geared toward reentering students and connect them
with other services on college campuses, including peer mentoring, financial
counseling, legal support, housing assistance, and job counseling.

Provide supportive prerelease reentry planning
Prior to a student’s release, postsecondary program administrators, sometimes
in tandem with community-based reentry organizations, can work with an
individual to plan for reentry in a number of ways. Some examples include
assisting students in filling out federal financial aid forms, registering for
selective military service where necessary, and gathering transcripts from
current and previous academic institutions. It is also helpful to discuss academic
plans and college options in the community students are returning to, especially
helping them identify institutions to which their credits will transfer.

Incorporating the Voices of Incarcerated Students
Michigan and New Jersey Pathways programs include
prison-based student advisory boards that meet with
program administrators to discuss project goals and dayto-day operations. In New Jersey, student advisory boards
also deliver portions of the faculty training every semester.
Program directors note that incorporating students’ voices in
planning and ongoing quality improvement enhances their
educational experience.

In North Carolina, the Department of Public Safety conducted
focus groups of inmates in multiple facilities across the state to
develop its program structure in collaboration and partnership
with various community colleges. In one instance, students
raised concerns about lost wages due to their participation.
Program administrators decided to incorporate incentive
payments based on semester grades to help compensate for
students’ lost income.

Provide post-release admission and academic support
Formerly incarcerated students are likely to face barriers in applying to college
once they return home and may need extra supports once they are enrolled in
courses. More than 65 percent of colleges now screen for criminal conviction
during the application process, a practice that has been shown to discourage

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

29

Preparing Students for College in the Community
In 2015, the Education Justice Project of the University of Illinois
at Urbana-Champaign produced the Illinois Reentry Guide.
Written and developed by program alumni, the comprehensive
guide has three sections. The “Before You Leave” section covers
mental preparation for reentry, gathering vital documents,
and life basics. “Your First Weeks Out” focuses on securing
identification, health and well-being, and employment. “Setting
Up Your Life” covers education, finances, finding housing,
legal services, recreation and community support, voting and
citizenship, and more. The guide includes detailed information
about college enrollment and numerous appendices, including
directories of service providers and application forms for birth
certificates and Social Security cards.a
In New York, the Prison to College Pipeline, an initiative
of John Jay College of Criminal Justice’s Prisoner Reentry
Institute, provides college programming in six New York State
facilities. Students who meet eligibility criteria are interviewed,
and those who are selected are admitted into the degreetrack program, offered at the Otisville Correctional Facility.
Once there, they enroll in credit-bearing courses taught by
CUNY faculty. Upon release, students are invited to John Jay

College for a campus tour, to meet with professors and peers
who were part of the program on the inside, have access to a
scholarship fund, and are supported by the College Initiative,
a reentry project of the institute.b
In North Carolina, the Department of Public Safety offers
students at some prisons education release—also called
day release—to attend classes at a local college campus.
Through this program, students can develop relationships with
college-based faculty and staff, easing the transition to the
community once they are released.
In Washington, the State Board of Community and Technical
Colleges (SBCTC) offers incarcerated students access to
the learning management system used on its campuses (see
“Expanding Access to Technology in Prisons” on page 23).
Using this platform, the SBCTC is also developing a module on
post-release educational opportunities available to students
who use the system while in prison. The module includes
information on financial aid, college enrollment requirements,
campus locations, and academics, and features other tools
designed to help students enroll in college post-release.c

Supporting Formerly Incarcerated Students
In California, the City College of San Francisco’s Second
Chance Program offers services including supplies, vouchers
for textbooks, transfer assistance, and financial and academic
counseling for formerly incarcerated students attending the
school. Second Chance is funded by the state’s Extended
Opportunity Programs and Services, which was designed
to recruit and retain college students who are academically
underprepared or socioeconomically disadvantaged.
Police and sheriff departments, correctional agencies, and
program alumni refer formerly incarcerated students.d Also

30

Vera Institute of Justice

in California, Project Rebound in San Francisco has provided
academic and reentry assistance to students continuing or
beginning their education post-release since 1967. Services
include matriculation assistance, peer mentoring, financial
assistance, transportation, and legal advocacy. The program
also acts as a liaison between students and programs and
services on college campuses. The program has more than 100
participants and has counted several honors students among
its members in recent years.e

In New Jersey, the Mountainview Communities of NJ-STEP,
which operates on all three Rutgers University campuses,
assists students throughout the application process. Rutgers
University uses a common application, which includes
a check box for criminal histories. Students who contact
Mountainview before they apply go through a separate
application process Mountainview developed in partnership
with Rutgers. Mountainview staff work with students to collect
letters of support and write statements about their criminal
histories, then represent them at felony review hearings with
campus safety staff. Once admitted, students are eligible
for mentoring and tutoring from Mountainview, whose staff
helps connect students with campus-based services such as
mental health and substance use treatment, and financial
counseling. Mountainview also works closely with parole officers
and transitional housing staff regarding students’ academic
schedules.
In New York City, the College Initiative’s peer mentor program
supports the students in one-on-one and group settings
throughout the first two semesters of college in the community.
Peer mentors, who are College Initiative students or alumni, take
new students on campus tours and hold meetings with them at
least once a month. Peer mentors receive cash stipends, as well
as formal training on topics such as motivational interviewing
and mindfulness. The program also has a formalized evaluation
structure to support the mentors’ professional development. In
addition to giving students academic and mentoring support,

the College Initiative provides them with financial assistance
(covering the full cost of application fees) and scholarships and
connects them with a network of reentry service providers for
other needs such as employment, housing, and public benefits.f
The College and Community Fellowship (CCF) is a collegefocused reentry support organization in New York City for women
who are involved in the justice system. CCF conducts prerelease
outreach to students in jails and prisons, and, after their release,
provides tutoring, mentoring, and crisis intervention, as well as
workshops on career development, networking, financial literacy,
health awareness, and self-care. The organization reports that
just 2 percent of participants return to custody within three
years, as compared to New York State’s 30 percent three-year
recidivism rate for women.g
In North Carolina, the Department of Public Safety, which
oversees the Pathways program, is responsible for post-release
supervision. Prerelease reentry planning and supervision for
Pathways students after their release emphasize educational
attainment. The state’s Pathways reentry model also incorporates
county-based local reentry councils that help connect students
(and everyone leaving prison) with housing, job assistance,
transportation, and other services. The local reentry councils
provide navigators to assist Pathways students in enrolling in and
continuing school. The reentry councils hire navigators, students
who have returned home from prison and successfully continued
their education in the community.

Education Justice Project, Illinois Reentry Guide: 2015 Edition. (Champaign, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2015).
Katherine Schaffer, Prisoner Reentry Institute, interview by John Bae, New York, April 11, 2016.
c
Brian Walsh, interview by Ruth Delaney, New York, January 19, 2016.
d
Elizabeth Coria, interview by John Bae, New York, April 19, 2016.
e
Jason Bell, interview by Vera Program Associate Terrell Blount, New York, April 5, 2016.
f
Carlos Quintana and Jessica Jensen, interview by John Bae, New York, April 14, 2016.
g
College and Community Fellowship, “Who We Are,” www.collegeandcommunity.org/ccf/who-we-are/.
a

b

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

31

prospective students with criminal histories from applying (see “Guidelines
for Admissions Offices on Screening for Criminal History” on page 34).51
These questions may include requests for information or documentation that
can be difficult or impossible to supply. Dedicated college staff or reentry
organizations that guide students through the application process can help
prevent pre-application attrition, which is otherwise common.52 These staff
can work with admissions offices to determine whether documentation or
other requests related to criminal histories are realistic or achievable, assist
admissions or public safety personnel in interpreting the information collected,
and ensure that students’ narratives related to their experiences with the
justice system are factored into the process when appropriate.53
People developing college prison programs should plan to keep assisting
students in the community as they continue their education. This should
involve counseling students about enrolling in and transferring credits
to postsecondary institutions following release from prison, including
assistance in submitting college admissions applications and financial
aid forms, and referring students to support services on campus, such as
tutoring and mentoring. This support should also include direct referrals to
post-release reentry or basic services, such as substance use treatment and
other health care, housing, transportation, and transitional jobs.
As they progress toward their degrees, formerly incarcerated students
are likely to have questions about academic and career goals that college staff
may be ill-equipped to handle. Students with criminal histories often have
complex legal and financial questions about the impact of their convictions on
professional or occupational licensing eligibility (such as licensing for social
work, barbering, and certain occupations in the health care field) or their career
path more generally—areas of law that college administrators may be unfamiliar
with.54 These students may have attended college prior to incarceration or
while in prison, and may carry credits from numerous colleges that need to
be transferred to their degree-granting institution. Seeking assistance in these
matters may require students to divulge their criminal histories to college
staff, who may not be prepared to assist them. As a result, students can receive
incorrect information and may feel stigmatized or alienated by staff who react
poorly when learning about their conviction histories.

32

Vera Institute of Justice

Engage post-release supervision staff and college staff
Close collaboration between postsecondary program administrators and
corrections agencies on reentry planning can support students’ educational
persistence post-release. Program representatives, whether from the college or
the department of corrections, should explain partnership goals to the relevant
community-corrections staff, addressing supervision meetings and curfews
that interfere with class times, work requirements that undermine educational
goals, and other rules that can have a negative impact on academic persistence
and success. For example, rules that prohibit formerly incarcerated students
from interacting with each other discount research that peer support is vital to
adjusting to and successfully navigating the post-release college environment.55
Supporting postsecondary education during the reentry period is consistent
with research on successful completion of parole or probation and the likelihood
that participants will remain crime-free in the future. Research has shown that
an overreliance on intensive supervision interventions may get in the way of
activities known to reduce recidivism, such as jobs, school, parenting, and religious
observances.56 To support people who want to continue or begin postsecondary
education, parole officers or other supervising authorities should engage
supervisees in case planning, discussing educational, employment, and other postrelease life goals to develop a case plan that balances supervision requirements
with an individual’s aspirations.57 Research shows that this approach to case
planning and supervision reduces the number of violations, improves compliance
with supervision conditions, and better prepares people for success.58
Similarly, explaining the partnership goals to the relevant communitybased college staff can help identify champions on campus who can mentor
post-release students.

Build peer support networks
Understandably, once students are admitted, they will be more successful if
they are able to build positive relationships with peers on campus. Feeling
feared or unwanted on campus is likely to jeopardize the motivation to continue
their education.59 Developing peer networks on college campuses for formerly
incarcerated students can promote their success, affirm their identity, and provide
a means to connect with others who have faced similar challenges in returning
home and continuing their education. These networks can counteract negativity
from other students and faculty while building a strong, supportive community.
College staff, students, or a reentry support organization can help to organize these
networks, which may be formal or semiformal.

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

33

Guidelines for Admissions Offices on Screening for Criminal History
In 2014, three-quarters of college applicants confronted
application questions about past criminal involvement. The
number of colleges that request such information is increasing,
despite a lack of evidence suggesting that campus crimes are
committed by people who have a criminal history.a Requirements
to disclose criminal histories pose significant barriers for
students who have been involved in the justice system. One
recent study examining the effects of the criminal-history check
box in the State University of New York (SUNY) system found that

nearly two out of three people who disclosed a felony conviction
were denied admission.b In addition to documented rejections,
researchers have identified a “chilling effect” related to this
check box. For every applicant rejected by a SUNY Admissions
Review Committee, 15 people did not complete their application
after checking the felony conviction box.c Many students simply
do not submit their applications when they see the question,
assuming that the institution is unlikely to offer them admission.

Questions about criminal history discourage college applicants
In one 2015 study, for every applicant with a felony conviction who was rejected by a review committee,
15 people did not complete their application after checking the felony conviction box.
applications rejected

applications not
completed

1:15
Source: Alan Rosenthal, Emily NaPier, Patricia Warth, and Marsha Weissman, Boxed Out: Criminal History Screening and College
Application Attrition (New York: Center for Community Alternatives, 2015), 7.

Fortunately, in 2016, the U.S. Department of Education
(ED) released recommendations for colleges and universities
about this practice. The agency advises that postsecondary
institutions should consider whether gathering such
information furthers the institution’s goals related to creating
safe, inclusive, and diverse campus communities. For those
institutions that continue to collect information about
criminal history, the department recommends delaying the
request for such information until after a conditional
offer of acceptance has been extended to an applicant.
This builds on recommendations made by the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission regarding hiring
practices for people with criminal histories.

Recommendations by ED also advise colleges and universities that
continue to collect this information to narrow the focus of their
inquiries to only the information considered necessary. This means
asking only about convictions as opposed to arrests; setting a
statute of limitations of sorts or specific time parameters for
convictions; avoiding the use of ambiguous words; and, for
career-oriented programs, limiting requests for information to
conviction histories that may create barriers for licenses in the
program field. In addition, ED recommends that colleges and
universities give students the opportunity to explain the
information they submit and that institutions train their admissions
officers and counselors on how to respond to prospective students’
questions about providing criminal justice information, as well as
how to interpret the information they receive.

Seventy-five percent of applications feature these types of questions. See Rosenthal et al, 2015, 7.
This figure includes “felony application attrition,” the term typically used to describe the phenomenon in the reduction of numbers
between those who start an application and check the felony conviction box “yes” and the number of applicants who have satisfied all the
supplemental requirements to complete their application. To learn more about felony application attrition, see Rosenthal et al. (2015), 7.
c
Rosenthal et al., 2015, 20.
d
Marsha Weissman, Alan Rosenthal, Patricia Warth, Elaine Wold, and Michael Messina-Yauchzy, The Use of Criminal History Records in College
Admissions Reconsidered (New York: Center for Community Alternatives, Innovative Solutions for Justice, 2010) 36; Rosenthal et al., 2015, 21-25.
e
U.S. Department of Education, Beyond the Box: Increasing Access to Higher Education for Justice-Involved Individuals (Washington, DC: 2016).
a

b

34

Vera Institute of Justice

Conclusion
The three years of the Second Chance Pell Pilot Program offer an unprece­
dented opportunity to overturn the ban on Pell Grant eligibility for students
in prison. Securing this outcome depends on the successful implementation
of the pilot program and the temporary suspension of the ban at a limited
number of sites where the program is under way. With careful planning and
well-informed administrative oversight, the Second Chance sites have an
excellent chance of success. In addition, colleges and prisons can learn a great
deal from these sites’ efforts.
If the permanent reinstatement of Pell eligibility is to become a reality
for students in state and federal prisons, Second Chance Pell sites must do
more than run successful programs. They will need to cultivate champions
in diverse fields, including the business community, the academic and
higher education communities, and among policymakers, corrections
agencies, and community-based reentry organizations, as well as with
the general public. Active engagement with local media can do much
to build a track record of success in the eyes of potential champions.
Holding stakeholder briefings, engaging students on a college’s main
campus through events and volunteer tutoring opportunities, and inviting
potential supporters to graduation ceremonies can also garner support for
college-in-prison programs and ensure that a program’s positive efforts and
accomplishments are brought to the attention of policymakers and other
influential community members. In light of the successes of the programs
highlighted in this report, the Second Chance Pell sites should have no
shortage of positive stories to share as they roll out their programming in
prisons throughout the country.

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

35

Endnotes
1	
Starting in 1972, the federal Pell Grant provided need-based grants
to low-income undergraduate students, including students who were
incarcerated. With the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement
Act of 1994, however, federal legislators revoked incarcerated
students’ eligibility. Twenty years later, the U.S. Department of
Education’s new Second Chance Pell Pilot Program, announced
in July 2015, aims to reopen Pell Grant eligibility to incarcerated
students, making college a possibility for thousands of students in
prisons across the country. U.S. Department of Education, “Federal
Pell Grant Program,” https://perma.cc/R8GB-T4JQ; Inside Higher
Ed, “Colleges Embrace Pell Grant Expansion for Prisoners,” https://
perma.cc/SP9U-K4KP.
2	
Wendy Erisman and Jeanne Bayer Contardo, Learning to Reduce
Recidivism: A 50-State Analysis of Postsecondary Correctional
Educational Policy (Washington, DC: The Institute for Higher
Education Policy), x.
3	E. Ann Carson, Prisoners in 2014, (Washington, DC: Bureau of
Justice Statistics, 2015), 1, https://perma.cc/E3BC-VG5Y.
4	
See U.S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary
Education, Federal Pell Grant Eligibility for Students Who
Are Confined in Locations that Are Not Federal or State Penal
Institutions (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2014),
https://perma.cc/UD4E-Z5TA.
5	
Although an accurate, up-to-date count of prison-based education
programs is hard to come by, most surveys identify about 40
programs nationwide. A survey in 2003 cited 44 programs, while
a RAND study in 2014 found that 32 states offered postsecondary
education or college courses to adult inmates. The more than 200
applications submitted for the Pell Pilot program could represent
a significant increase in programming. Lois M. Davis, Jennifer L.
Steele, Robert Bozick, Malcolm V. Williams, Susan Turner, Jeremy
N. V. Miles, Jessica Saunders, Paul S. Steinberg, How Effective Is
Correctional Education, and Where Do We Go from Here? The
Results of a Comprehensive Evaluation (Santa Monica, CA: RAND
Corporation, 2014), xviii. https://perma.cc/
Q4RQ-DMZW. Erisman and Contardo, 2005, 14; Inside Higher Ed,
“Colleges Embrace Pell Grant Expansion for Prisoners.”
6	
The program also requires that participating institutions provide
educational programs that prepare students for high-demand
occupations from which they are not legally barred due to convictionbased licensing or other restrictions and to provide academic and
financial aid counseling about program completion before or after
release. The initiative prioritizes students who will be released within
five years of enrollment; it restricts Pell eligibility to those not otherwise
ineligible under other provisions of the law and to those who will be
released from prison in the future. See U.S. Department of Education,
“Notice Inviting Postsecondary Educational Institutions to Participate
in Experiments Under the Experimental Sites Initiative; Federal Student

36

Vera Institute of Justice

Financial Assistance Programs Under Title IV of the Higher Education
Act of 1965, As Amended,” Federal Register, August 3, 2015, https://
perma.cc/ WTJ7-Q3FH.
7	
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education,
2014.
8	
Higher incarceration rates may have contributed to the decrease
in crime rates, but most research suggests that this impact was
minimal. Jeremy Travis, Bruce Western, and Steve Redburn, eds.,
The Growth of Incarceration in the United States: Causes and
Consequences (Washington, DC: National Research Council, The
National Academies Press, 2014), 4. Prison populations increased
705 percent from 1972-2010; see Pew Charitable Trusts, Prison Count
2010 (Washington, DC: Pew Charitable Trusts, 2010), 1, https://
perma.cc/58RV-SMJY.
9	Inside Higher Ed, “New Projects, Laws Help Prison College Programs
Gain Steam,” (Washington, DC: March 24, 2015), https://perma.cc/
U2FT-H5SP.
10	
Bruce Western, From Prison to Work: A Proposal for a National Prisoner
Reentry Program, (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 2008), 6.
11	
Only 22 percent of those in prison complete any postsecondary-level
work before entering prison or during their sentence, as compared
to 51 percent of the general population. See Elizabeth Greenberg,
Eric Dunleavy, Mark Kutner, and Sheida White, Literacy Behind Bars:
Results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy Prison
Survey (Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S.
Department of Education, 2007), 27-28.
12	
On an average day in 2010, one-third of black male high school
dropouts in the United States were behind bars. In addition, 1 in 3
black men, 1 in 14 Hispanic men, and 1 in 8 white men without a GED
or high school diploma will spend time incarcerated from age 20 to
34. See National Academies of Science (2014), 67; and Bruce Western
and Becky Pettit, Collateral Costs: Incarceration’s Effect on Economic
Mobility (Washington, DC: Pew Charitable Trusts, 2010), 8.
13	
See Laura E. Gorgol and Brian A. Sponsler, Unlocking Potential: Results
of a National Survey of Postsecondary Education in State Prisons,
(Washington, DC: 2011), 2-3, https://perma.cc/CL7Y-CZHA; James J.
Stephan, Census of State and Federal Correctional Facilities, 2005
(Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2008), 5, https://perma.
cc/M4GS-8PJM.
14	These states are Arizona, Arkansas, California, Idaho, Indiana,
Louisiana, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas, Washington,
and Wisconsin. In comparison to states with lower enrollment, these
states have larger prison populations; focus programming on shortterm vocational and certificate courses; often provide more robust
academic programming; and are able to use public funds to support

programs. High-enrollment states also tend to have more open
admissions policies, considering fewer eligibility requirements when
admitting students. Gorgol and Sponsler, 2011, 11.
15	
This finding came out of a landmark meta-analysis of correctional
education programs, covering 30 years of research—the largest
ever completed. See Lois M. Davis, Robert Bozick, Jennifer L. Steele,
Jessica Saunders, Jeremy N. V. Miles, Evaluating the Effectiveness
of Correctional Education: A Meta-Analysis of Programs That
Provide Education to Incarcerated Adults (Santa Monica, CA: RAND
Corporation, 2013), 32, https://perma.cc/AVZ9-JZSG.
16	RAND looked at 50 studies, 34 of which used re-incarceration as the
outcome measure. The most frequently used time periods to measure
recidivism were one year (n = 13) and three years (n = 10). Davis et al.,
2013, 27.
17	The National Institute of Justice has included postsecondary education
in its database of evidence-based practices because research
clearly demonstrates that it reduces recidivism. However, little is
known about why it does so. As noted by researchers of correctional
education programs, more investigation is needed to answer questions
about dosage, program structure, and the impact programs have
on individual students. Further complicating the question of “what
works” in reducing recidivism, postsecondary education programs
include vocational and career training as well as liberal arts and other
academic programs that are often lumped together in studies that
measure impact. As researchers continue to examine programs and
evaluate outcomes, the reason for postsecondary education’s effects
will become clearer. See National Institute of Justice, “Postsecondary
Correctional Education (PSCE),” https://perma.cc/2FUQ-9SGY; Davis,
Steele, et al., 2014, 81-82.

20	Children of incarcerated parents are at a greater risk of incarceration
themselves, making the likelihood of reduced justice-system involvement
of particular relevance to this group. Correctional Association of New
York, Education from the Inside, Out: The Multiple Benefits of College
Programs in Prison (New York: Correctional Association of New York,
2009), 3, https://perma.cc/678G-979E; James Conway and Edward
Jones, Seven out of Ten? Not Even Close, (New Britain, CT: Central
Connecticut State University, 2015), 10-14.
21	Correctional Association of New York, 2009, 8-9.
22	Michelle Fine, Maria Elena Torre, Kathy Boudin, Iris Bowen, Judith
Clark, Donna Hylton, Migdalia Martinez, “Missy,” Rosemarie A.
Roberts, Pamela Smart, Debora Upegui, Changing Minds: The Impact
of College in a Maximum-Security Prison, (New York: Graduate Center
of the City University of New York, 2001), 21-22, https://perma.cc/
5LX2-MQEG; Correctional Association of New York, 2009, 8-9.
23	One study of three states found that students were less likely to
engage in interpersonal disputes in prison because staying in
college was more important. In this study, facility administrators
reflected that students have fewer conduct issues, making facility
management easier on the staff and safer for all prisoners. Laura
Winterfield, Mark Coggeshall, Michelle Burke-Storer, Vanessa
Correa, and Simon Tidd, The Effects of Postsecondary Correctional
Education (Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2009), 6-10, https://
perma.cc/H4ZJ-7KTG; Fine et al., 2001, 21-22.
24	Davis, Steele, et al., 2014, 81.
25	Davis, Steele, et al., 2014, xviii, 61.
26	Ibid., xix.

18	Davis, Steele, et al., 2014, xvi, 15.
27	Ibid., 68.
19	U.S. Census data indicate that the difference in median yearly
earnings between people with a high school diploma and those with an
associate’s degree is $10,313; with a bachelor’s degree the difference
is $21,893, although there is significant variation in this earnings gap
across states. It is estimated that by 2018, nearly two-thirds of all
jobs will require applicants to possess some level of postsecondary
education. Davis et al., 2013, 41-47; NCHEMS Information Center for
Higher Education Policymaking and Analysis, (“Wage and Earnings:
Difference in Median Earnings between a High School Diploma and
a Bachelors Degree,” https://perma.cc/ZM4J-MJ2E); Anthony P.
Carnevale, Nicole Smith, and Jeff Strohl, Help Wanted: Projections
of Jobs and Education Requirements Through 2018 (Washington,
DC: Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce,
2010), 13, https://perma.cc/WG66-29DE. Le’Ann Duran, Martha Plotkin,
Phoebe Potter, and Henry Rosen, Integrated Reentry and Employment
Strategies: Reducing Recidivism and Promoting Job Readiness (New
York: The Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2013) 2,
https://perma.cc/H4G5-UMW7.

28	
Researchers from the RAND Corporation identified this challenge
during Phase I of their evaluation of Vera’s Pathways project. Lois
M. Davis, Michelle Tolbert, Robert Bozick, Pathways from Prison to
Postsecondary Education Phase I: Implementation Study (Santa
Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2014), 37.
29	Ibid., 36-39.
30	Erisman and Contardo, 2005, 38-39.
31	
Michelle Fine, et al., 2001, 38.
32	Davis, Tolbert, and Bozick, 2014, 38.
33	Diana Brazzell, Anna Crayton, Debbie A. Mukamal, Amy L. Solomon,
and Nicole Lindahl, From the Classroom to the Community:
Exploring the Role of Education During Incarceration and Reentry

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

37

(Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2008), 27, https://perma.
cc/54WB-GEAN.
34	Erisman and Contardo, 2005, 38; Brazzell et al., 2008, 25-26; Davis,
Tolbert, and Bozick, 2014, 39.
35	In most facilities, a callout is a list published daily or on a frequent
basis that lists people who have scheduled appointments,
programs, events, meetings, or other activities, and is used by
correctional departments to manage prisoner movement.

perma.cc/JS5F-VY65; Jeremy Travis, Laurie O. Robinson, and Amy
L. Solomon, “Prisoner Reentry: Issues for Practice and Policy,”
Criminal Justice 17, no. 12 (2002); and Jeremy Travis, Bruce Western,
and Steve Redburn, eds., 2014, 195-197.
51	Center for Community Alternatives, The Use of Criminal History
Records in College Admissions Reconsidered, (Brooklyn, NY: 2014),
i. https://perma.cc/5ULQ-UJRH; Alan Rosenthal, Emily NaPier,
Patricia Warth, and Marsha Weissman, Boxed Out: Criminal History
Screening and College Application Attrition (New York: Center for
Community Alternatives, 2015), 10, https://perma.cc/YLG7-7B5N.

36	Davis, Tolbert, and Bozick, 2014, 45.
52	Center for Community Alternatives, 2014, v.
37	Davis, Steele, et al., 2014, 41-52.
53	Mukamal, Silbert, and Taylor, 2015, 26-29.
38	Michelle Tolbert, Jordan Hudson, and Heather Claussen Erwin,
Educational Technology in Corrections 2015 (Washington, DC: US
Department of Education, 2015), 1, https://perma.cc/Y3NU-7YN5.
39	
Ibid.
40	Incarcerated students have access to desktop computers in 39
states; to laptop computers in 17 states; and to tablet technology in
10 states. See Davis, Steele, et al., 2014, 41-52.
41	Ibid., xix, 60-61.
42	
Wylie Wong, “What It Takes to Bring Education Behind Bars,”
Biztech, December 2, 2014, https://perma.cc/FXL5-GHLL.
43	Stephen J. Steurer, “2015 CEA Leadership Forum,” Correctional
Education Association News & Notes, 38, no. 1 (2015), 1-2.
44	Gorgol and Sponsler, 2011, 13.
45	Tolbert, Hudson, et al., 2015, 6.
46	Ibid.
47	Davis, Tolbert, and Bozick, 2014, 36.
48	For example, correctional cultures often prioritize security over
other programming, and this can have a significant impact on the
academic climate. See Mukamal, Silbert, and Taylor, 2015, 37.
49	Fine et al., 2001, 36.
50	For more on the elements of successful reentry planning, see Joan
Petersilia, When Prisoners Come Home: Parole and Prisoner Reentry
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), 40-41, 112-123; Demelza
Baer, Avinash Bhati, Lisa Brooks, Jennifer Castro, Nancy La Vigne,
Kamala Mallik-Kane, Rebecca Naser, Jenny Osborne, Caterina
Roman, John Roman, Shelli Rossman, Amy Solomon, Christy Visher,
and Laura Winterfield, Understanding the Challenges of Prisoner
Reentry: Research Findings from the Urban Institute’s Prisoner
Reentry Portfolio (Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2006), https://

38

Vera Institute of Justice

54	National Reentry Resource Center, “Reentry Mythbuster on Federal
Student Financial Aid,” https://perma.cc/4PFW-H4CQ.
55	Standard parole requirements often include provisions barring
parolees from associating with known felons, a stipulation that
can be nearly impossible to adhere to, given that many offenders
have family members who are felons. Research on peer support for
formerly incarcerated students shows that this support improves
the likelihood that students will continue in school to complete their
degree. See Vera Institute of Justice, The Potential of Community
Corrections to Improve Communities and Reduce Incarceration
(New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2013), 11; Susan Sturm, Kate
Skolnick, and Tina Wu, Building Pathways of Possibility from
Criminal Justice to College: College Initiative as a Catalyst Linking
Individual and Systemic Change, (The Center for Institutional and
Social Change at Columbia Law School, 2011), 21-22.
56	Donald A. Andrews, “Enhancing Adherence to Risk-NeedResponsivity: Making Quality a Matter of Policy,” Criminology
and Public Policy 5, no. 3 (2006), 595-602; Peggy B. Burke, Parole
Violations Revisited: A Handbook on Strengthening Parole Practices
for Public Safety and Successful Offender Transition (Washington,
DC: National Institute of Corrections, 2004), https://perma.cc/
Q87G-ZF3T; National Research Council, Parole, Desistance from
Crime, and Community Integration (Washington, DC: National
Academies Press, 2007), https://perma.cc/5DMV-8DWG.
57	
Christopher T. Lowenkamp and Edward J. Latessa, “Understanding
the Risk Principle: How and Why Correctional Interventions Can
Harm Low-Risk Offenders,” Topics in Community Corrections, Annual
Issue (2004), 3-8, https://perma.cc/4B3H-G2J6.
58	Lowenkamp and Latessa, 2004, 3-8.
59	Current and formerly incarcerated students in California, for example,
reported that professors’ and students’ negative perceptions of them
affected their self-image and academic motivation. See Mukamal,
Silbert, and Taylor, 2015, 26.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Andre Bethea at the Bureau of Justice
Assistance and Lul Tesfai at the U.S. Department of Education for their
invaluable guidance in developing this report. We would also like to thank
Sean Addie, Vedan Anthony-North, Danny Murillo, Evan Zavidow, John
Bae, and Terrell Blount for their various help drafting the report; and Mary
Crowley and Margaret diZerega for their review and comments. A special
thank-you to Jules Verdone for her help and expertise in editing and to Carl
Ferrero for designing the report.
This report is supported by Grant No. 2014-DP-BX-K006, awarded by the
Bureau of Justice Assistance. Points of view or opinions in this document
are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official
position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

About Citations
As researchers and readers alike rely more and more on public knowledge
made available through the Internet, “link rot” has become a widely
acknowledged problem with creating useful and sustainable citations. To
address this issue, the Vera Institute of Justice is experimenting with the
use of Perma.cc (https://perma.cc), a service that helps scholars, journals,
and courts create permanent links to the online sources cited in their work.
Credits
© Vera Institute of Justice 2016. All rights reserved. An electronic version of this report is posted on Vera’s
website at www.vera.org/making-the-grade-report.
Cover photo © Jackson Citizen Patriot/Mlive.com
The Vera Institute of Justice is a justice reform change agent. Vera produces ideas, analysis, and research
that inspire change in the systems people rely upon for safety and justice, and works in close partnership
with government and civic leaders to implement it. Vera is currently pursuing core priorities of ending the
misuse of jails, transforming conditions of confinement, and ensuring that justice systems more effectively
serve America’s increasingly diverse communities. For more information, visit www.vera.org.
For more information about this report, contact Ram Subramanian, editorial director, Communications, at
rsubramanian@vera.org.

Suggested Citation
Ruth Delaney, Ram Subramanian, and Fred Patrick. Making the Grade: Developing Quality
Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison. New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2016.

Making the Grade: Developing Quality Postsecondary Education Programs in Prison

39

Bureau of Justice Assistance
U.S. Department of Justice

Vera Institute of Justice
233 Broadway, 12th Fl
New York, NY 10279
T	 212 334 1300
40
F	 212 941 9407

Washington DC Office
1111 14th St., NW, Ste 920
Washington, DC 20005
T	 202 465 8900
Vera Institute of
F	 Justice
202 408 1972

New Orleans Office
546 Carondelet St.
New Orleans, LA 70130
T	 504 593 0936
F	 504 581 3361

Los Angeles Office
707 Wilshire Blvd., Ste 3850
Los Angeles, CA 90017
T	 213 223 2442
F	 213 955 9250