The state prison system’s official title, “Department of Corrections,” was for decades nothing more than a euphemism, as was the official nomenclature for the system’s guards of “correctional officer.”

Opinion

Dan Walters
CALmatters Commentary

Fifteen years ago, the Department of Corrections became the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, supposedly signaling a new emphasis on reducing its revolving door culture.

The system expanded from about 20,000 inmates during Jerry Brown’s first stint as governor to more than 160,000 when he began his second governorship. And even though new prisons had sprouted up all over the state, they were overwhelmed by the sheer numbers of felons, leading to federal court orders to reduce overcrowding.

The system was focused on warehousing – such as filling prison gymnasiums with triple-tier bunks – and punishment, with only token efforts at “correction” via basic education, addiction treatment, job training and psychological counseling. Not surprisingly, very high percentages of inmates released from the system committed new crimes and returned.

Fifteen years ago, the Department of Corrections became the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, supposedly signaling a new emphasis on reducing its revolving door culture.

Prison Population Has Declined Sharply

Nothing much happened, however, until Brown returned to the governorship in 2011. He, along with a more liberal Legislature and penal reform groups pushed to reduce sentences, make parole easier, divert more felons into local jails and probation, and ramp up rehabilitation programs inside prisons – thereby, it was said, reducing prison overcrowding and “recidivism” by those returning to the streets.

“Our analysis of inmates released from prison in fiscal year 2015–16 did not find an overall relationship between inmates completing CBT (cognitive behavioral therapy) rehabilitation programs and their recidivism rates.” – State Auditor Elaine Howle

The prison population has declined sharply, down at least 50,000 inmates from its peak, but a new report from State Auditor Elaine Howle indicates that the department isn’t living up to its “corrections and rehabilitation” title.

“Our analysis of inmates released from prison in fiscal year 2015–16 did not find an overall relationship between inmates completing CBT (cognitive behavioral therapy) rehabilitation programs and their recidivism rates,” Howle told the Legislature, which ordered her study. “In fact, inmates who completed their recommended CBT rehabilitation programs recidivated at about the same rate as inmates who were not assigned to those rehabilitation programs.”

Why? She suggests that the corrections department adopted rehab programs without fully delving into what works and what doesn’t, saying that the department “has not revalidated the accuracy of the tools it uses to assess inmates’ rehabilitative needs since recent statutory changes caused a major shift in the state’s prison population. Another potential reason is that Corrections has not ensured that vendors provide consistent and effective CBT programs that have been proven through research to reduce recidivism.”

No One Doubts Difficulty of Turning Around Inmates

The audit continues in that critical vein on a number of points, to wit:

—“Corrections has neither consistently placed inmates on waiting lists for needed rehabilitation programs nor prioritized those with the highest need correctly.”

—“Corrections has neither developed any performance measures for its rehabilitation programs, such as a target reduction in recidivism, nor has it assessed program cost‑effectiveness.”

—“High staff vacancy rates and a failure to place inmates on program waiting lists has resulted in Corrections not utilizing all of its programs’ budgeted capacity. Although Corrections has expanded its rehabilitation programs to all 36 prisons, prison staff have not enrolled the maximum number of inmates in each rehabilitation class.”

No one doubts the inherent difficulty of turning around prison inmates – especially since those remaining behind bars after population reduction tend to be hardcore, often violent criminals.

If it’s essentially impossible, we shouldn’t pretend otherwise, wasting money on make-believe programs. If it is possible to significantly reduce recidivism – and Howle’s study found that some efforts have worked – then Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature should insist that they be implemented effectively, rather than allowing prison officials to just go through the motions.

CALmatters is a public interest journalism venture committed to explaining how California’s state Capitol works and why it matters. For more stories by Dan Walters, go to calmatters.org/commentary.

One Response

  1. Brian Baker

    Did you speak to anyone overseeing Rehabilitation in the CDCR Headquarters? Shannon Swain, or Brandy Buenafe are the obvious ones to speak to.

    As a former Prison Librarian at Pleasant Valley State Prison, I can attest to the quality of the educational and library programs there, and throughout the CDCR system. The teachers and instructors are dedicated to provide a quality education in a difficult arena, and the Librarians work hard to fulfill the intellectual interests of their community with legal materials, materials to support the educational programs, and fiction materials to allow the mind to escape the mundane existence found in prison.

    I know the inmates value the programs and the library, as they would tell me on a daily basis, and thank me for being there.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

We've got issues, and we're willing to share
(but only if you want them in your inbox).