University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Post-incarceration challenges: examining barriers to reentry post-release

(USC Thesis Other)

Post-incarceration challenges: examining barriers to reentry post-release

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content BARRIERS TO REENTRY 1
Post-Incarceration Challenges: Examining Barriers to Reentry Post-Release
by
Natalie Noravian
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2024
Copyright 2023 Natalie Noravian

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 2
Acknowledgments
This work is dedicated to my family and friends who have supported me throughout this
process with their endless cheerleading. I would also like to thank my dissertation chair and
committee members who have been so generous with their expertise, time, and care.
As we navigate challenging times, it is becoming increasingly important to relate to each
other and understand each other. I hope this work inspires readers to seek understanding and
commonality with others, giving others the grace we wish to receive.
“I hope that either all of us, or none of us, are judged by the actions of our weakest moments. But
rather, by the strength we show when, and if, we're ever given a second chance.”
-Ted Lasso

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 3
Table of Contents
List of Tables....................................................................................................................................5
Abstract............................................................................................................................................6
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study........................................................................................... 7
Context and Background of the Problem...................................................................................7
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions.........................................................................8
Importance of the Study.............................................................................................................9
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology........................................................... 9
Definitions................................................................................................................................10
Organization of the Dissertation.............................................................................................. 10
Chapter Two: Literature Review....................................................................................................10
Research Questions..................................................................................................................27
Overview of Design................................................................................................................. 27
The Researcher.........................................................................................................................29
Qualitative Methods.................................................................................................................29
Participant Stakeholders...........................................................................................................30
Instrumentation........................................................................................................................ 34
Data Collection Procedures......................................................................................................34
Data Analysis........................................................................................................................... 35
Trustworthiness and Credibility...............................................................................................35
Ethics........................................................................................................................................36
Chapter Four: Findings.................................................................................................................. 36
Challenges During Incarceration and Post-Release.................................................................37
Challenges and Shortcomings Throughout Incarceration..................................................38
A Stark New Normal......................................................................................................... 47
Opportunities Post-Release......................................................................................................57
A Shift in Mindset..............................................................................................................57
Education........................................................................................................................... 59
Mentorship......................................................................................................................... 62
Resources Post-Release........................................................................................................... 64
Family and Relationships...................................................................................................65
Organizations..................................................................................................................... 65
Summary..................................................................................................................................67
Chapter Five: Overall Discussion of Findings and Recommendations......................................... 69
Discussion of Findings.............................................................................................................69
Recommendations for Practice................................................................................................ 73
Recommendation 1: A Change in Resources While Incarcerated..................................... 73

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 4
Recommendation 2: A Focus on the Transition Period..................................................... 76
Recommendation 3: A Restorative Justice System........................................................... 79
Limitations and Delimitations..................................................................................................80
Recommendations for Future Research...................................................................................81
Conclusion............................................................................................................................... 82
References......................................................................................................................................84
Appendix........................................................................................................................................91

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 5
List of Tables
Table 1: Participant characteristics……………………………………………………………30

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 6
Abstract
This study sought to address the systematic barriers and post-release experiences of formerly
incarcerated individuals. Existing research shows that former prisoners encounter significant
challenges upon release, primarily due to exclusionary policies and practices. Post-incarceration
challenges include navigating health issues, addressing the impact on family, accessing
government aid, and maintaining housing. Institutional and societal factors, such as economic
disparities, limited access to healthcare, and societal stigmas, significantly contribute to these
challenges. This study aims to explore these factors to better understand the barriers and supports
in the journey of former prisoners reintegrating into society. The study's methodology was a
qualitative study complete with 25 semi-structured interview questions. Nine interviews were
conducted and purposeful sampling and snowball sampling were utilized to recruit participants.
Social cognitive theory was used to examine this issue. The findings confirmed there are
numerous barriers to reentry post-release, exacerbated by poor experiences in prison. The first
recommendation for addressing these issues is changing resources during incarceration, which
includes restructuring education and vocational programs, implementing rehabilitation and
mental health care, and setting inmates up for post-release success while they are incarcerated.
The second recommendation is to implement a restorative justice system. Despite the choices
that resulted in incarceration, individuals need more supportive options for navigating life
post-release and beyond.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 7
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study
Each year in the United States, over 700,000 individuals leave state and federal prisons
and reintegrate back into their communities (Davis, 2019). Unfortunately, about 44% of formerly
incarcerated individuals return to prison before the end of their first year out (World Population
Review, 2020). There are several contributing factors to recidivism centered around the
individual’s community and social environment (Couloute, 2018a). Former prisoners often have
difficulties obtaining jobs and housing, and face issues reconnecting with family and other social
supports (Redcross et al., 2010). This is a critical problem to address because formerly
incarcerated individuals are more likely to better adapt to life outside of prison, find
employment, and not return to prison if they are well supported by society (Couloute, 2018a).
Context and Background of the Problem
Formerly incarcerated individuals face a plethora of challenges during reentry
post-release. A primary concern for former prisoners is obtaining employment following release
and exclusionary policies and practices are responsible for the labor market inequalities they
face. (Couloute & Kopf, 2018). Many inmates are at a clear disadvantage when leaving prison
and returning to their communities due to low education which leads to a challenging path in
securing a job that provides a livable wage (Davis, 2019). A 2016 report by the National Center
for Education Statistics shows that 30% of prisoners in state and federal prisons in the United
States have not obtained a high-school diploma or General Educational Development. It is
important to take into account that an ex-offender faces a tougher road to finding a job and
reintegrating back into society due to a lack of education, and sometimes biases held by
employers, and this disadvantage can lead to an eventual return to prison (Rampey, 2016).
Additionally, Davis et al. (2013) found that not only is correctional education cost-effective when

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 8
it comes to reducing recidivism, but the likelihood of obtaining employment following release
rose by 13% for those who participated in prison education programs. Other issues for them
post-incarceration include navigating health issues, which they are more likely to have, facing
the negative impacts incarceration had on family members, obtaining certain government aid,
and maintaining housing (Stojkovic, 2007). Former prisoners who maintain steady employment
and have a good relationship with family members are less likely to renew their involvement in
criminal behavior following release from prison (Berg & Huebner, 2011).
Several institutional and societal factors contribute to these challenges faced by former
prisoners following release including economic disparities, access to health care, and commonly
held stigmas that are the central cause of social inequities (Feingold, 2021). These
socioeconomic factors play a vital role in influencing successful re-entry outcomes for the
formerly incarcerated (Li, 2018). This study will focus on these and other factors as a way to
understand the barriers and supports in a former prisoner's journey to reintegrate back into
society.
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
The purpose of this study is to examine the systematic barriers and post-release
experiences of formerly incarcerated individuals. The research questions that will guide the study
include:
1. What have been the experiences of formerly incarcerated individuals during
incarceration?
2. What have been the experiences of formerly incarcerated individuals in life
post-release?

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 9
3. What are the perceptions of formerly incarcerated individuals of the systemic barriers
and supports?
Importance of the Study
Incarceration can lead to several barriers for ex-offenders to reintegrate into society
including loss of social networks, formal education, job training, and experience (Schmitt &
Warner, 2011). Studies show that people with a criminal record face considerably lower chances
of being hired, even compared with other disadvantaged individuals, including welfare
recipients, high school dropouts, and unemployed people, (Holzer, 1996). Employment is a
strong contributor to reducing recidivism because it refocuses individuals’ time and efforts on
positive and purposeful activities, leading them to a path where they are less likely to become
involved in risky behaviors and to associate with people who are also making progressive
choices (Duran et al., 2013). Additionally, successful reintegration into the workforce allows for
safer neighborhoods and makes families of former prisoners safer and more stable (Duran et al.,
2013). In economic terms, successful reintegration and avoiding reincarceration leads to lowered
costs for taxpayers and grows contributions to the tax base for community services (Duran et a.,
2013). It is critical to consider the biases inmates will face after leaving prison and competing for
jobs, and the effects these will have on motivation and self-efficacy. These issues can lead to
recidivism if they are not addressed.
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
This problem is best examined using social cognitive theory. The theory helps us
understand how people motivate and regulate their behavior, and describes the interactional
influences of individual experiences, the actions of others, and environmental factors on
individual behaviors (Bandura, 2000). In this study, it will help guide a discussion about the

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 10
institutional and societal barriers formerly incarcerated individuals face following release, as
well as support. Mixed methods were used to gather information for this study. Formerly
incarcerated individuals were interviewed using semi-structured questions.
Definitions
The key terms in this study are given the following operational definitions.
● Formerly incarcerated individual: A person who was sentenced and has spent any
amount of time in jail or prison for an offense, violent or nonviolent.
● Parole: A type of conditional release from prison; as with probation, people released on
parole are supervised in the community.
● Probation: Allows a person to remain in the community under the supervision of a
probation officer, instead of incarceration.
● Recidivism: A person’s relapse into criminal behavior, after intervention has taken place.
● Reentry: The transition from life in jail or prison to life in the community.
Organization of the Dissertation
Chapter Two of this study will consist of a literature review of existing studies
surrounding this topic. This will be followed by methodology in Chapter Three and findings in
Chapter Four. Finally, Chapter Five will contain recommendations.
Chapter Two: Literature Review
The objective of this literature review is to examine the incarceration system in the
United States, evaluate the effectiveness of prison education and skill development programs,
and explore the labor market as it relates to formerly incarcerated individuals. This study first
takes a look at general statistics and background information about recidivism as well as
contributing factors. Additionally, types of education and skill programs in prison, their benefits,

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 11
and related outcomes are explored. Finally, a review of the types of issues individuals face after
leaving prison, particularly in the area of transition to the workforce.
Recidivism in America
Although jails and prisons intend to foster rehabilitation, many individuals cycle in and
out of jail without obtaining the support they need. Federal, state, and local governments in the
United States hold about 2.3 million people in prisons and jails and supervise another 5.1 million
people on parole or probation (Schmitt & Warner, 2011). Each year in America, over seven
million people are released from jail, and over 600,000 are released from prison (Dumont et al.,
2012). More than four in 10 offenders return to state prison within three years of their release
(Pew Charitable Trusts, 2011). An individual can return to prison for committing a new crime
that results in a new conviction or for a violation of their probation or parole for a past sentence
(Pew Charitable Trusts 2011). The prison population in America has dramatically increased in
recent history and it is estimated that about one-seventh of the United States population is
incarcerated (Wagner & Bertram, 2020). Wagner and Bertram (2020) found that one out of five
incarcerated individuals in the world is incarcerated in the United States.
A close look at recidivism statistics in the United States shows that in the year following
release, 45 percent of males recidivated and 35 percent of women recidivated (Alper et al.,
2018). Studies show that this gap narrows after one year (Alper et al., 2018). Furthermore, Alper
et al. (2018) found that Black and Latino prisoners are more likely to recidivate as compared to
White prisoners. The likelihood of recidivism was also higher for prisoners aged 24 or younger
(Alper et al., 2018). Additionally, this report, produced by Alper et al. (2018) of the Bureau of
Justice Statistics, demonstrates that there is a greater trend of recidivism for individuals who
were initially arrested for a violent offense, which includes include homicide, rape or sexual

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 12
assault, robbery, assault, and other miscellaneous or unspecified violent offenses. Prisoners who
were released for a property offense were most likely to be arrested (Alper et al., 2018). A
property offense refers to burglary, fraud or forgery, larceny, motor vehicle theft, and other
miscellaneous or unspecified property offenses (Alper et al., 2018).
According to Pew Charitable Trusts (2011), recidivism is a performance measure for
most prisons. Recidivism rates are a prime statistical indicator of return on correctional
investment (Pew Charitable Trusts, 2011). The United States spends over $182 billion to keep
people behind bars (Wagner & Rabuy, 2017). This figure includes everything from prosecution
to legal fees, costs to families, telephone calls, and food and utilities. Almost half of the $182
billion is spent on paying staff, who are major stakeholders in the system and, at times, prevent
reform (Wagner & Rabuy, 2017).
Although probation and parole are ostensive alternatives to remaining in prison, they
sometimes hurt formerly incarcerated individuals more than help them and are a key driver in
recidivism (Jones, 2018). Both probation and parole, or community supervision, can be revoked,
leading to an individual’s return to jail. It is estimated that 4.5 million individuals in the United
States are under community supervision (Jones, 2018). Severe inequalities are present in our
probation and parole systems, which set people up for failure with extensive supervision terms,
burdensome restrictions, and perpetual scrutiny which leads them back to incarceration (Jones,
2018). These restrictions and deep scrutiny include several low-level offenses, such as drug use
or breaking curfew, which normally do not lead to incarceration and are addressed via fines,
community service, or no action at all (Jones, 2018). Probation and parole systems repeatedly
create environments that make it incredibly challenging for formerly incarcerated individuals to
succeed in life after their sentence, and consequently guide them back into prisons and jails

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 13
(Jones, 2018). According to Jones (2018), only half of people who exit parole or probation do so
after successfully finishing their supervision sentences.
In looking at what contributes to recidivism, the strongest predictor by far is poverty
(Holtfreter et al., 2004). Forty-nine percent of individuals with two or more arrests per year have
incomes that are below $10,000 and 15 percent are unemployed (Jones & Sawyer, 2019). Low
educational completion also increases the probability of arrest, particularly multiple arrests, and
25 percent of formerly incarcerated individuals do not have a high school diploma, GED, or
college degree (Couloute, 2018b). Moreover, about 66 percent of individuals with multiple
arrests had no more than a high school education (Couloute, 2018b). Analysis by Couloute and
Kopf (2018) shows that formerly incarcerated individuals are unemployed at a rate of about 27
percent, which is far greater than the overall United States unemployment rates at any point in
history, including The Great Depression.
Other patterns when examining causes of recidivism include mental and physical health
issues. More than half of individuals arrested multiple times report a substance use disorder and
are also three times more likely to have a serious mental illness, and three times more likely to
report severe psychological distress, including depression and anxiety (Jones & Sawyer, 2019).
Additionally, individuals with multiple arrests are less likely to have healthcare access (Jones &
Sawyer, 2019). Jones and Sawyer (2019) found that individuals who were arrested and booked
more than once are over three times more likely to not have health insurance, compared to those
with no arrests in the past year, and somewhat more likely to not have insurance than people
arrested once. Studies show that individuals who are released from prison oftentimes are reliant
on shelters after their release, sometimes in the long term (Couloute, 2018b). This is another
contributing factor to not being able to receive proper assistance post-incarceration.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 14
One of the most troubling findings about recidivism is individuals with multiple arrests
disproportionately come from marginalized populations (Jones & Sawyer, 2019). Despite
accounting for only 13 percent of the general population, Black men and women make up 21
percent of people who were arrested once and 28 percent of people arrested multiple times
(Jones & Sawyer, 2019). According to Jones and Sawyer (2019), these numbers are “…partly
reflective of persistent residential segregation and racial profiling, which subject Black
individuals and communities to greater surveillance and increased likelihood of police stops and
searches.” When assessing recidivism statistics long-term, Jones and Sawyer (2019) found that
of people who were arrested and booked three or more times in one year, 42 percent were Black.
Effectiveness of Prison Education and Skill Development Programs
Correctional education is an essential element of rehabilitative programming available in
prisons, and incarcerated individuals are more likely to have below-average levels of educational
achievement (US Department of Education, 2021). The number of incarcerated individuals with
a college degree is much less than the national average, and this is a barrier when leaving prison;
the educational exclusion, in addition to an individual’s history of incarceration, race, and
gender, contributes to high rates of unemployment (Couloute, 2018a). These hurdles make
formerly incarcerated people feel unwelcome in institutions of higher learning, inhibit economic
integration, and are a major factor in the revolving door of release and re-incarceration
(Couloute, 2018a). Research by Linden and Perry (1983) found that in-prison education
programs are most likely to succeed if they are intensive if they create an alternative community
within the prison, and if they offer post-release services to these individuals. In examining if and
how prison education affects post-release outcomes, it is important to assess the types of

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 15
education and skill development programs offered in prisons, their benefits, and related
outcomes.
While educational opportunities vary widely from prison to prison, the United States
Federal Bureau of Prisons (n.d.) “…offer(s) opportunities for inmates to acquire literacy and
marketable skills so they can obtain employment after release” (para. 1). According to the
Bureau (2022), literacy classes, English as a Second Language, parenting classes, wellness
education, adult continuing education, library services, and instruction in leisure-time activities
are available at all institutions. Basic literacy programs for prisoners functioning below the
sixth-grade level and GED classes for prisoners interested in completing high school are offered
at most prisons (Prison Fellowship, n.d.). Vocational and occupational training programs are
centered around the particular needs of the inmates, labor market conditions, and institution labor
force needs (Federal Bureau of Prisons, n.d.). Inmates also have the opportunity to receive
on-the-job training via institutional job assignments and can work in Federal Prison Industries
(Federal Bureau of Prisons, n.d.).
Post-secondary education in vocational and occupationally related areas is also offered
(Federal Bureau of Prisons, n.d.). Occasionally, there are traditional college courses available,
however, it is the responsibility of inmates to fund these classes (Federal Bureau of Prisons,
n.d.). Many states contract with local schools and colleges to provide educational opportunities
for prisoners in a wide range of areas (Prison Fellowship, n.d.). These can be academic courses,
life skills education, and career and technology education (Prison Fellowship, n.d.). According to
the Prison Fellowship, “inmates are selected for participation based on their academic skills,
disciplinary record, level of custody, length of sentence, and program availability” (n.d.).
Post-secondary educational opportunities are available through contracts with local colleges and

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 16
universities for those prisoners who have already obtained a GED (Prison Fellowship, n.d.). A
prisoner may earn an associate degree and or Baccalaureate degree if they are accepted into a
program (Prison Fellowship, n.d.).
Select prisoners receive permission to take courses offered by colleges or universities for
credit (Prison Fellowship, n.d.). However, they are expected to pay tuition (Prison Fellowship,
n.d.). These individuals must keep up with class assignments and they receive coursework by
mail (Prison Fellowship, n.d.). Occasionally, prisoners receive permission to take free or
reduced-cost Bible courses offered by churches and other religious organizations (Prison
Fellowship, n.d.).
Life skills programs are non-credit courses intended to help prisoners learn to cope with
anger, move past criminal thinking, become goal-oriented and more responsible, cultivate
healthy relationships, and avoid substance abuse (Prison Fellowship, n.d.). Parenting classes and
recreational activities are offered to help develop skills and form healthy lifestyle habits (Federal
Bureau of Prisons, n.d.). Prisons have libraries that carry a wide range of genres of books,
magazines, newspapers, and other reference materials (Federal Bureau of Prisons, n.d.).
Prisoners are also given access to legal materials that allow them to conduct legal research and
prepare legal documents (Federal Bureau of Prisons, n.d.). Furthermore, prisoners are urged to
participate in 12-step programs such as Celebrate Recovery, Alcoholics Anonymous, and
Narcotics Anonymous, which are usually led by community leaders (Prison Fellowship, n.d.).
It is important to note that not all prisoners have the same educational opportunities
(Prison Fellowship, n.d.). For a majority of incarcerated individuals, in-prison college degree
programs remain inaccessible (Couloute, 2018a). Participation in college-level classes and
vocational programs is dependent upon several factors, including receiving approval from the

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 17
prison administration, passing entrance exams, and being able to pay all or part of the tuition
(Prison Fellowship, n.d.). Some prisoners qualify for partial scholarships and others are required
to pay full tuition (Prison Fellowship, n.d.). Unfortunately, the number of in-prison college
programs has become limited and are available in only a fraction of the number of facilities that
were offered 25 years ago (Couloute, 2018a). The number of in-prison college programs today is
minuscule compared to the estimated 350 nationwide programs active in the early 1990s
(Coloute, 2018a.). The 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act cut off federal
grant eligibility for prisoners and in-prison college programs dropped to as low as 12 in 2005
(Coloute, 2018a). Following the Second Chance Pell Pilot Program created by President Barack
Obama in 2015, which allowed a limited number of incarcerated individuals to receive Pell
grants, over 200 colleges across 47 states expressed interest in running educational programs for
prisoners (Green, 2020). Subsequently, in 2020, the Pell Grant ban was repealed and eligibility
for federal financial aid was reinstated for thousands of incarcerated individuals (Green, 2020).
While prisoners now have access to grants again, individuals who have been convicted of a drug
offense while having previously received federal aid, or who have involuntarily civilly
committed a sex offense, are ineligible for federal aid even after serving their sentences
(Couloute, 2018a).
According to the Couloute (2018a), research shows there are several notable benefits of
prison GED programs including higher post-prison earnings and reduced recidivism. They found
that almost 27% of formerly incarcerated individuals obtained a GED while they were in prison
(Prison Policy Initiative, 2022). Individuals who participate in postsecondary education programs
in prison are 48% less likely to be reincarcerated than those who do not (Gibbons & Ray, 2021).
Furthermore, the likelihood of finding employed post-release is 12% higher for individuals who

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 18
participate in any type of correctional education (Gibbons & Ray, 2021). These individuals are
also eligible for higher-paying jobs compared to those without a college education (Gibbons &
Ray, 2021). Education has the power to give people a voice, create opportunities for a better
future, and reinstate individuals’ self-esteem and social competence (Bender, 2018). Moreover,
prisons with college programs have the great benefit of having less violence among prisoners,
which creates a safer ecosystem for both prisoners and prison staff (Bender, 2018).
There are also economic benefits to consider. It is estimated that for every dollar spent on
correctional education, $4 to $5 is saved on reincarceration costs (Gibbons & Ray, 2021).
Additionally, a study found that $1 million spent on prison education prevents about 600 crimes
(Bazos &Hausman, 2004). The same amount spent on incarceration prevents only 350 crimes
(Bazos & Hausman, 2004). Research conducted by Esperian (2010), also found that funding
educational classes for inmates not only considerably reduces recidivism rates, but educating
felons eliminates the costs associated with long-term warehousing. While the plethora of
systematic issues within the criminal justice system will not be fixed by offering educational
programs to prisoners, it is a more beneficial use of tax money than continuously funding high
recidivism rates (Bender, 2018).
There is also a strong link between post-secondary education and the advancement of
racial equity, given the existing inequalities in K-12 education responsible for feeding
low-income Black and Latinx students into the school-to-prison pipeline (Gibbons & Ray, 2021).
Family and friends of formerly incarcerated individuals, who obtained college credentials in
prison, are inspired to pursue further education (Gibbons & Ray, 2021). Research shows these
types of educational opportunities can improve outcomes from one generation to the next
(Bender, 2018). Previously conducted studies show that children with parents who have college

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 19
degrees are more likely to complete college themselves, which can create social mobility for
families (Bender, 2018).
Path to Reintegration
When examining a formerly incarcerated individual’s path to reintegrating back into
society after prison, several issues must be looked at that affect their overall well-being and
therefore create challenges transitioning into the workforce. These individuals face a multitude
of obstacles following release including concerns with health, family, employment, housing, and
overall difficulties with adjusting to their new circumstances (Stojkovic, 2007). Health issues are
a big concern for formerly incarcerated individuals. They are at an increased risk of experiencing
health issues (Dumont et al., 2012). A 2012 study by Dumont et al. (2012) found that former
prisoners are 129 times more likely than the general public to die of a drug overdose, within the
two weeks following release from prison. Formerly incarcerated individuals are also at an
elevated risk of committing suicide after release (Clear, 2008). Furthermore, due to their criminal
history, formerly incarcerated individuals frequently struggle to secure housing and employment
(Dumont et al., 2012). Depending on the specific type of conviction, many people may lose
access to numerous state and federal benefits including education assistance, public housing,
food stamps, and their driver’s license (Chin, 2011). The United States Congress created
financial incentives for states to eliminate the option of public housing individuals with criminal
convictions, adding a bigger burden to their quest to reintegrate back into society (Chin, 2011).
There are also many felon disenfranchisement laws in the United States that place restrictions on
individuals with felony participants, barring them from voting and remaining a participant in the
political process (McDaniel et al., 2013).

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 20
It is clear that men and women who have been incarcerated are in worse physical and
mental health, compared to the general population. Data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics in
2005 shows that over half of all prisoners in America have mental health problems. Both men
and women who have been inmates are more likely to have high blood pressure, asthma, cancer,
arthritis, and other infectious diseases, compared to the general population (Dumont et al., 2012).
Adults 50 and over who are incarcerated are not likely to receive the proper care they need as
correctional facilities are not well equipped to handle the needs of this aging population and this
is particularly the case when it comes to mental health issues (Loeb & AbuDagga, 2006).
Coupled with the fact that former prisoners lose access to health care or are unable to seek
medical help, the health issues these individuals face post-release are difficult to navigate.
Not only must formerly incarcerated individuals confront issues with their family’s
perceptions and willingness to help post-release, but their families are also negatively impacted
by their incarceration in many instances and must deal with severe consequences. This is
especially the case with children of formerly incarcerated individuals, who are the most
vulnerable in a family to the effects of parental incarceration (Turney, 2014). Approximately 7%
of US children, over 5 million children, have faced the incarceration of a parent whom they lived
with at some point in time (Murphey & Cooper, 2015). Children of incarcerated individuals are
more likely to witness domestic abuse and substance abuse by their parents (Murphey & Cooper,
2015). These children are also more likely to reside with a parent who is mentally ill and later
more likely to live in poverty or become homeless (Murphey & Cooper, 2015). Studies have
shown that the children of incarcerated individuals exhibit higher rates of learning disabilities,
developmental issues, and aggressive behaviors (Turney, 2014). Furthermore, these children are

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 21
found to become up to five times more likely to enter the criminal justice system themselves as
compared to children of parents who have never been incarcerated (Dumont et al., 2012).
Employment becomes a daunting task to confront for formerly incarcerated individuals.
Over 90% of formerly incarcerated individuals recognize that finding stable employment after
release is the cornerstone of their long-term success (La Vigne & Kachnowski, 2005). According
to the Couloute (2018a), there is a 27% unemployment rate among formerly incarcerated people.
Apart from the preexisting stereotypes employers may hold against these individuals, some
policies prevent former prisoners from qualifying for various jobs. Felons are ineligible to obtain
the necessary security clearance for many government and federal contractor jobs (Chin, 2011).
In some cases, they are also barred from enlisting in the military (Chin, 2011). Formerly
incarcerated individuals are also, in some cases, ineligible for employment in federally regulated
industries, such as airlines (Chin, 2011). These systematic barriers created by policymakers
create an extra level of difficulty for formerly incarcerated individuals to reenter the labor
market.
Having a criminal record drastically decreases the probability of advancing in the job
application process (Hunt et al., 2018). People with criminal records have long been
marginalized within the labor market in the United States (Hunt et al., 2018). Given the negative
economic repercussions, federal, state, and local officials established policies to encourage
employers to hire formerly incarcerated individuals (Hunt et al., 2018), Even with these
incentives, transitioning back into the workforce and navigating employer attitudes is a challenge
for formerly incarcerated individuals (Hunt et al., 2018).
In 1983, Lundberg and Startz established two theories to explain why formerly
incarcerated people were not hired even though they possessed the necessary skills to obtain

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 22
employment. Their first set of economic discrimination theory explains that employers worry
their clients and employees will consider a formerly incarcerated person as high-risk, and this, in
turn, creates labor market gaps between equally skilled people (Lundberg & Startz, 1983).
Second, they pose that employers equate a criminal record to low productivity, not only in terms
of goods or products produced but also taking into consideration theft or harm, and this also
creates a labor market gap between persons with a criminal record and identically productive
people without a record (Lundberg & Startz, 1983). According to Bushway (2004), employers’
reluctance to hire formerly incarcerated individuals also stems from characteristics related to
reliability, an important factor to consider in hiring. Because having a criminal record signals low
reliability and stability to employers, they, unfortunately, place these limitations on all formerly
incarcerated individuals, regardless of an individual’s unique skill and background (Hunt et al.,
2018).
Although there are several types of educational opportunities offered in prisons, formerly
incarcerated individuals who take advantage of these opportunities still face barriers to applying
them post-release. For example, many higher education institutions continue to include questions
related to criminal history in their applications (Couloute, 2018a). The inclusion of criminal
history questions in college applications is a barrier for potential students and prevents some
from completing the application process (Couloute, 2018a). Even when prisoners acquire skills
relevant to further education or occupational licenses during their time in prison, license
restrictions that are based on criminal history sometimes invalidate their training (Couloute,
2018a). A prime example of this is people who learn legal skills as jailhouse lawyers are
ineligible to practice law in at least 11 states (Couloute, 2018a).

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 23
For an overwhelming number of formerly incarcerated individuals, education, skills, and
training impede transitioning into the workforce. A large majority of jobs in the labor market
require a high school diploma, specific work skills, or prior work experience (Holzer, 1996).
This is also the case for low-wage jobs, which require basic reading, writing, and math skills
(Holzer et al., 2002). According to Couloute (2018a), over half of formerly incarcerated people
hold only a high school diploma or GED. Additionally, formerly incarcerated individuals are
twice as likely to have no high school credential at all and are 8 times less likely to complete
college than the general public (Couloute, 2018a). With high school diplomas and GEDs holding
diminishing value in today’s job market, it has become nearly impossible for formerly
incarcerated job seekers to strive in an economy that progressively demands highly skilled and
credentialed workers (Couloute, 2018a).
Factors that Influence the Transition to Work Following Incarceration
Confronting reentry challenges includes examining several factors, some structural, that
contribute to the difficult transition to work post-release. The unemployment rate for formerly
incarcerated people is approximately five times higher than the unemployment rate for the
general United States population (Couloute & Kopf, 2018). Formerly incarcerated individuals
achieve economic stability when they find employment and this in turn lowers the risk of
recidivism (Berg & Huebner, 2011). The high unemployment numbers for these individuals are
not a reflection of their aspirations, but rather a public will, policy, and practice (Couloute &
Kopf, 2018).
A major determining factor in the transition back to work for formerly incarcerated
individuals is negative employer attitudes toward this group. According to Pager (2003),
individuals with a criminal record are less likely to be interviewed and hired compared to other

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 24
candidates who have equal levels of competence and employability characteristics but no
criminal record. Hunt et al. (2018) explain that statistical discrimination theory is one
explanation for this discrepancy; having a criminal record signals poor productivity and
reliability, which employers prescribe to everyone with a criminal record, regardless of whether
it is actually the case for a particular individual or not. Furthermore, although a former prisoner
may be technically qualified for a job, employers have taste for certain groups over others, a
theory referred to as taste-based discrimination by Gary Becker (1971). The most commonly
held employer biases are the stereotypical concerns associated with liability for employees’
actions and the thought that a criminal record is a proxy for a lack of integrity (Duran et al.,
2013).
A further look into the biases of hiring formerly incarcerated individuals suggests that
there is a greater inequity in these influential factors for certain minority groups. Couloute and
Kopf (2018) found for Black or Latino individuals, especially women, being a former prisoner
decreases chances for employment even more. There is intersectionality found in this study as
Black women, in particular, experience extreme levels of unemployment, while white men
experience the lowest (Couloute & Kopf, 2018). Although generally, Black women have higher
rates of full-time employment compared to Latinx or white peers, low rates of full-time
employment among formerly incarcerated Black women demonstrate that gender and race
function together in this context of reentry (Molina, 2017).
The hiring process itself is a major hurdle and leads to many inequities in hiring formerly
incarcerated individuals. Visher et al. (2008) found that restrictions on convicted persons
working in certain types of jobs impeded the job search process. This is due to factors such as
having to provide criminal history information prior to the interview process, which excludes

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 25
many job opportunities for formerly incarcerated individuals (Visher et al. 2008). It has also been
determined that having a source of identification at release, particularly one that is not associated
with the Department of Corrections, is an important factor that impedes the hiring process
(Visher et al., 2008). According to Hunt et al. (2018), a reduction in the amount of paperwork
involved in the application process would also benefit formerly incarcerated individuals as it is a
challenging task for them to complete.
Other determining factors to consider include unique individual barriers a former prisoner
may face. One explanation to take into account is that former prisoners are often concentrated in
a fairly small number of inner-city neighborhoods that lack resources to assist in the reentry
process (Redcross et al. 2010). Social skills are another key influential factor as incarceration can
weaken social skills needed for the labor market or diminish an individual’s social networks
associated with legitimate job prospects (Hagan, 1993). Moreover, a study done by Visher et al.
(2008) found that formerly incarcerated individuals who were older used any drugs post-release,
had a chronic health condition, or had a mental health condition had poorer employment
outcomes as it relates to the time it took to find employment. They also discovered that former
prisoners who were older, intended to commit crimes or take drugs following release, had
chronic physical or mental health conditions, or had minor children were less likely to remain
employed at the eight-month mark following release (Visher et al., 2008). According to Hunt et
al., (2018), dependable transportation is another factor to consider as employers are more likely
to hire a candidate who has a criminal record if they can ensure the individual has a reliable form
of transportation to and from a job site.
Conceptual Framework

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 26
Social cognitive theory is an appropriate framework to examine this issue of barriers
faced by former prisoners post-release. It helps us understand how people motivate and regulate
their behavior, and describes the influence of individual experiences, the actions of others, and
environmental factors on individual behaviors (Bandura, 2000). The theory focuses on the
reciprocal interactions between people, environment, and behavior (Bandura, 2000). Social
cognitive theory is suitable for assessing this problem because it helps us understand how social
forces influence individuals and groups. Furthermore, it helps examine how formerly
incarcerated individuals’ thoughts and feelings affect their behavior, and how their behavior can
change in certain social environments. Self-efficacy is a part of an individual’s journey in life
after prison. Social cognitive theory considers how both environmental and cognitive factors
interrelate in influencing human learning and behavior (Bandura, 2000).
The core concepts I examined in this study are barriers faced by formerly incarcerated
individuals during reentry, the effectiveness of prison programs, and the types of available
resources.
Summary
In summary, with over 40 percent of offenders returning to prison, recidivism is a major
issue to face (Pew Charitable Trusts, 2011). These trouble statistics show that individuals are
returning to prison and never receive the proper rehabilitation they need, resulting in jails that are
filled with people who require medical and social services (Jones & Sawyer, 2019). These
individuals who are jailed have considerably higher rates of social, economic, and health
problems (Jones & Sawyer, 2019). Arrest and incarceration of these individuals do not improve
public safety or address these individuals’ underlying needs (Jones & Sawyer, 2019). These
issues should not be addressed through the revolving door of incarceration and re-incarceration.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 27
These findings show there is a great need to place focus on reentry and reentry resources for
formerly incarcerated individuals.
Chapter Three: Methodology
This chapter outlines the methodology used for this study. The purpose of the study is to
examine the systematic barriers and post-release experiences of formerly incarcerated
individuals. The research questions will be laid out, followed by a brief overview of the design.
The research setting will be discussed next, as well as more information about the researcher.
Following, the data sources will be explored, including methods, participants, instrumentation,
data collection procedures, and data analysis. Finally, reliability, validity, and ethics will be
explored.
Research Questions
This study is aimed at answering the following research questions:
RQ1. What have been the experiences of formerly incarcerated individuals during
incarceration?
RQ2. What have been the experiences of formerly incarcerated individuals in life
post-release?
RQ3. What are the perceptions of formerly incarcerated individuals of the systemic
barriers and supports?
Overview of Design
The goal of this research is to understand the relationship between systematic barriers and
recidivism through an individual’s experience and perception. Therefore, only qualitative
research was used. According to Creswell and Creswell (2018), it is more appropriate to use a
quantitative approach when a researcher seeks to understand the relationship between variables.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 28
This makes qualitative research the most fitting choice to understand how various support
systems have impacted a formerly incarcerated individual and its correlation with experience
post-release. Formerly incarcerated individuals were interviewed for this study. Data for both
research questions was gathered via interviews that took place over video conferencing.
Research Setting
This study focuses on data obtained from interviews with formerly incarcerated
individuals. These individuals were reached through their participation with student groups for
formerly incarcerated individuals at two universities, as well as through participant
recommendations and outreach, or snowball sampling. The student organizations at the
universities were founded by formerly incarcerated students and allies. Their mission is to
challenge stigma and discrimination associated with past criminal convictions and build a
“Prison-to-School Pipeline” through the recruitment, retention, and advocacy of formerly
incarcerated students in higher education.
Eight men and one woman participated in the interviews and told their stories about their
experiences after returning home from prison. All participants spent time in prison and are now
reintegrating back into society. All participants sought educational and career opportunities at
some point post-release. Hearing the stories of these individuals is appropriate to address the
research questions because they shared their unique experiences in seeking education,
employment opportunities, and various other resources after release from prison. Moreover, they
shared their perceptions of barriers placed on them by society along with the challenges they
faced while incarcerated.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 29
The Researcher
I, the researcher, am a student at the University of Southern California’s Doctor of
Education in Organizational Change and Leadership. I have not been formerly incarcerated, and
do not have any close contacts who have formerly been incarcerated. I do not have an existing
relationship with any of the participants in this study. Important assumptions to note include my
postulation that individuals leaving prison are aiming to find work after returning home.
Additionally, I strongly believe all persons, regardless of circumstance, should have access to
education. These biases may affect the study due to the preexisting notion that interviewees are
set on not returning to prison and successfully reintegrating back into society. To mitigate these
potential assumptions and biases, I reviewed findings with peers to confirm conclusions are
sound and reasonable given the data collected, and to eliminate confirmation bias. Additionally, I
accounted for and ruled out alternative explanations for responses from participants.
Qualitative Methods
This study utilized one qualitative method, interviews, to collect data. All participants
were interviewed and asked the same base of twenty questions. This allowed for a flexible,
subjective way to gather data and give the participants ample opportunities for storytelling.
Interviews were conducted via online video conferencing, as preferred by the participant. All
participants chose to appear on camera, and all but one agreed to have the interview recorded.
Purposeful sampling and snowball sampling were used to recruit nine participants for this
study. Eight men and one woman participated. These participants all spent a certain amount of
time in prison and are now reintegrating back into society or have already successfully done so.
By selecting these individuals from these organizations, I ensured they had at least one
touchpoint with an organization aimed at assisting formerly incarcerated individuals with life

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 30
after prison in various ways. A $25 gift card was given to the sample group to participate in this
study. One individual declined the incentive.
Participant Stakeholders
The study’s nine participants were selected via a combination of purposeful sampling and
snowball sampling. They were identified as individuals who had been formerly incarcerated,
with no specific parameters around time served. Table 1 provides an overview of the
characteristics of the participants. Pseudonyms have been used to ensure participants’ anonymity
and confidentiality and reflect each individual’s authenticity. Each participant completed a
25-question interview via video chat. Specific questions about family, offenses, and time served
were not asked and are only mentioned if they were willingly addressed by the interviewee.
Table 1
Participant Characteristics
Name Gender Ethnicity Current Role
Christopher M Armenian Student
Lawrence M White/Latinx Aerospace Engineer
Hank M White
Criminal Justice
Professor
David M White Student
Roman M Latinx Student
Maddy F Unknown Student/Realtor

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 31
Greg M Latinx
Higher Education
Director
Mike M Latinx Student
Oliver M Black Student
Note. M is the abbreviation for Male, and F is the abbreviation for Female.
Christopher
Christopher was the first person interviewed in this study. He is an Armenian male and
was incarcerated twice between the ages of 15-25 for drug-related offenses. Christopher earned
his GED while incarcerated and continued to obtain a bachelor’s in psychology, and is currently
a law school student. He is also a Certified Addiction Treatment Counselor and has held a
research position at his university. He worked with a group at his university to engage and
educate the campus community about the prison-to-college pipeline. After law school, he hopes
to practice criminal law.
Lawrence
Lawrence is a White and Latino male. He received a 32-month sentence for a
drug-related offense and served 27 months. He is an astronautical engineer at a large aerospace
organization. Lawrence holds bachelor’s and master’s degrees in astronautical engineering.
Additionally, he created his non-profit and a business to aid formerly incarcerated individuals.
He describes his true passion as human space flight, but he also has a strong passion for STEM,
and mentors formerly incarcerated individuals interested in entering STEM fields. Lawrence

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 32
believes his outreach and willingness to have conversations have changed people’s perceptions
about what a formerly incarcerated person looks like.
Hank
Hank is a White male and was incarcerated in the 1970s for drug-related offenses. He is
currently a criminal justice professor at a university and also works for a state prison education
project. Hank pursued law school after incarceration, and also spent time as a social worker.
While in prison, Hank pushed the limits of the educational opportunities that were provided,
challenging the staff and decision-makers about the lack of effort to offer educational
opportunities to inmates. His determination translated to a new prison education system in his
state, and he continues to advocate for reform and address inequities for incarcerated individuals.
David
David is a White male. He was in prison for 16 months for a low-level offense. He likes
to think of himself, first and foremost, as a student. He is completing his undergraduate studies in
Sociology at a university and plans to pursue a Ph.D. David dropped out of school in 8
th grade,
took advantage of learning opportunities while incarcerated to earn a GED, and continued on to
community college upon his release from prison. He is part of a student group for formerly
incarcerated individuals at his university and hopes to conduct research about incarceration after
he completes his degrees.
Roman
Roman is a Latino male. He is a parent and a first-generation graduate. Roman is
currently a graduate student at a university, studying journalism, and he earned an undergraduate
degree in English. Additionally, he works for an institute, on campus, aimed at transforming
structural marginalization and inequality, and facilitates a class about belonging through his

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 33
university’s Department of Ethnic Studies. Roman’s goal is to help create a space on campus for
different voices, vulnerability, compassion, empathy, and safety. He currently conducts research
at the university’s Latinx research center and he considers himself a prison abolitionist.
Maddy
Maddy is the only woman who was interviewed for this study. She was incarcerated as a
juvenile, and as an adult, for a drug-related offense. Maddy is a parent and a current
undergraduate student at a university. She is also a realtor. Maddy currently mentors formerly
incarcerated youth who are on probation.
Greg
Greg is a Latino male. He was incarcerated for over 14 years, as a juvenile and as an
adult, and spent a few of these years in solitary confinement. He is currently the associate
director of a university group for formerly incarcerated students, which he was a co-founder of
during his time as an undergraduate student at the university. Greg earned a GED while
incarcerated, moved on to community college, transferred to a university, and earned a
bachelor’s in ethnic studies. He is currently a graduate student studying social and cultural
analysis of education.
Mike
Mike is a Latino male who spent 13 years in and out of prison for non-violent drug
offenses. He is working towards earning a bachelor’s degree in Sociology. He earned his GED
while in county jail, went to community college after he was released, where he also became a
certified mechanic and transferred to university, where he is now. Eventually, Mike hopes to get
a Ph.D. in Sociology and become a teacher or counselor for youth in the juvenile justice system.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 34
He founded a student club for the formerly incarcerated while at his community college, and he
is a member of a student group for formerly incarcerated individuals at his current university.
Oliver
Oliver is a Black male. He was sentenced to 6 years for an offense he continues to
maintain his innocence for. He served 5 years and 8 months of his sentence. Currently, Oliver is
an undergraduate student in electrical and computer engineering at a university and plans to
continue on and earn a master’s degree in engineering. He said he has had a passion for building
and designing since he was a child and has always had a vast imagination. Oliver co-founded an
organization for formerly incarcerated individuals interested in STEM.
Instrumentation
To gain a better insight into the experiences and perceptions of formerly incarcerated
individuals, semi-structured interviews were conducted. This allowed the participant to dictate
certain parts of the conversation and tell stories otherwise not derived from the interview
protocol. The interview protocol was designed to specifically link each question to a research
question, or both. There were twenty-five interview questions, with an opportunity to expand
each one with specific examples and other narratives. All questions are tied into the conceptual
framework, as they let us gain an in-depth understanding of participants’ social interactions,
experiences, and outside influences. Interview questions for this study can be found in the
appendix.
Data Collection Procedures
Interviews were conducted via an online video conferencing platform. The participants
were asked to choose the method best suited for them. Each interview lasted between 45 and 60
minutes. Responses were recorded via field notes and a recording device, and later transcribed.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 35
The recording helped capture a large amount of data while rough field notes aided with
transcription and pinpointing key aspects of the interview to revisit. Participants were asked to
give verbal consent prior to being recorded and were alerted that they would be able to receive a
transcript of the conversation.
Data Analysis
Before analysis, the gathered data was transcribed and prepared. All data was coded
using a priori codes and open coding, or concept-driven coding and data-driven coding.
Concept-driven coding is derived from research literature and previous studies (Gibbs, 2007).
Data-driven coding relies on the researcher’s observations of the social world (Gibbs, 2007).
During this process, categories emerged and themes and patterns were identified. Each theme
was studied to gain an understanding of participants’ experiences and perceptions. A codebook
was created to organize and accurately capture the emerging themes.
Trustworthiness and Credibility
To maximize the validity and reliability of this study, member checking was used.
Member checking entails sharing a brief summary with the participants to make sure the
interview was captured properly (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Member checking enhances
trustworthiness while exploring the credibility of results (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Furthermore, the interview protocol was created in such a way as to use several extra questions
with a vast variety of answer options to ensure competence. Additionally, by operationalizing the
questions, the constructs that were intended to be measured will be clear and well-defined, and
face validity will be established (Robinson & Leonard, 2018). Moreover, question stems and
response options were appropriately aligned with the conceptual framework and key themes
(Robinson & Leonard, 2018).

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 36
In terms of sampling, the participant group was drawn from two student group
organizations to aid formerly incarcerated individuals with reintegrating back into society. This
ensured that participants fall into the base group of formerly incarcerated individuals and also are
a person who has experienced the help of society during this journey. This does not necessarily
mean that their path hasn’t seen any turbulence and allowed for a variety of stories to be
integrated into this study.
Ethics
All participants in this study participated at their own will. An optional $25 gift card was
given to participants to incentivize participation. The purpose of the study, time commitment,
and general procedure were outlined during outreach and recruitment. Before recording the
interview, all participants were read the same consent and a verbal agreement was necessary to
gain permission to record. Participants were also given the option to review the final transcript
and add details if they felt necessary. Real names were not used in the study to ensure
confidentiality and safety. Interview data will be stored on a secured drive and will be carefully
destroyed within a year of the recording date. This study was done with the approval of the
University of Southern California’s Institutional Review Board.
Chapter Four: Findings
The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine the systematic barriers and
post-release experiences of formerly incarcerated individuals. The following research questions
guided the study:
1. What have been the experiences of formerly incarcerated individuals during
incarceration?

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 37
2. What have been the experiences of formerly incarcerated individuals in life
post-release?
3. What are the perceptions of formerly incarcerated individuals of the systemic barriers
and supports?
This chapter presents data from nine participants who were interviewed and asked 25
questions. The interviews provided a narrative about each individual’s life before incarceration,
snippets from their period of incarceration, and experiences while integrating back into society.
An overview of the participants was outlined in the methodology chapter of this study, followed
by a closer look into their respective backgrounds. Some participants did not disclose general
self-identifying factors found in Table 1 and in the methodology chapter.
The data is presented under common themes that are organized by challenges and
shortcomings during incarceration and post-release, opportunities post-release, and resources
post-release. Challenges During Incarceration and Post-Release will focus on the various
challenges participants reported, including general derailment due to time in prison, facing
stigmas and identity challenges, mental health and wellness, careers, and other roadblocks.
Opportunities Post Release will detail what the transition was like for participants, including
shifts in mindset, education, careers, mentorship, and new opportunities after prison. The final
theme, Resources Post-Release, will tell the findings of tangible resources and opportunities
post-release, including family and relationships, helpful organizations, and other resources.
Finally, a summary of the findings will be shared.
Challenges During Incarceration and Post-Release
Reentry is significantly informed by the time spent incarcerated and the critical barriers
that people who are formerly incarcerated face when they reenter into a new state of normal that

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 38
is starkly different than if they were not formerly incarcerated. In this section, challenges faced
during and post-release, as identified by the participants, are organized into themes that highlight
the shades of struggles that are similar or shared.
In response to the research question regarding the participants’ experience while
incarcerated, concerns around education and training; access to health and wellness care; and
immediate support at the moment of release were echoed across the various interviews.
Unsurprisingly, life after incarceration looked very different for the interviewees. While each
individual faced a unique set of difficulties, they all faced a wide range of challenges including
dealing with stigmas, mental health and wellness problems, career challenges, and other issues.
Challenges and Shortcomings Throughout Incarceration
The participants believed many of the issues they faced post-release stemmed from not
receiving proper resources and not being set up for success while they were incarcerated. All
study participants identified a variety of challenges regarding access to and quality of learning
and training programs, and are discussed in the section titled Barriers to Effective Education and
Training While Incarcerated. Barriers to receiving health and wellness resources were also
highlighted as a critical challenge described by several participants. Be it by the nature of how
they were denied access to physical, mental, and wellness services, or by the quality and
relevance of the care received, these barriers are inextricable with, while still separately
identified from barriers to effective education and training, and are discussed in the section titled
Barriers to Health and Wellness Treatment While Incarcerated. Some participants also spoke
about the shortcomings related to the moment of departing from prison which are discussed in
the section titled Limited Support Leaving the Incarcerated State.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 39
Barriers to Effective Education and Training While Incarcerated. Participants
recounted a very wide range of barriers to receiving effective education, from some prisons
completely lacking any learning programs to prisons that would offer insufficient or mismatched
programs. Beyond the availability and quality of programs, the participants identified other
factors that were particularly informed by interpersonal dynamics and culture of a facility, such
as the behavior of guards and social implications between inmates, and proved to inhibit their
ability to receive key resources that may have assisted with reentry.
Poor Quality and Mismatched Training. Many of the participants found the
opportunities to pursue their scholarly passions while incarcerated were lackluster.
Lawrence described that while he had access to materials, there was limited
accompanying instruction. Lawrence’s prison offered a few classes and they were given
textbooks and asked to read them on their own and occasionally turn in assignments. He says,
“They would give you maybe a textbook here and there and then you would have to kind of read
it on your own and turn in some paperwork. But very little face-to-face love.” There were also no
vocational education or skill-building opportunities for him to take advantage of while
incarcerated.
David, meanwhile, had limited access to materials and felt the instruction he received
was not substantive. Throughout his incarceration, David was offered minimal, subpar
educational programming and no access to a library or books during the time he was
incarcerated. An individual would come to the prison once and sit down with whoever cared to
participate. She would bring various packets of work, like math problems, with her and help
anyone who needed assistance. David described it as being unstructured and unprofessional, with

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 40
no milestone markers or end goal in mind. He said there were select people who were able to go
“beyond prison walls” to pursue classes, but this was rare and a big privilege.
Roman had a similar experience to David, and described the educational opportunities
available to him as not well structured and serving no true purpose. He was in lockdown for 23
hours of the day and was let out for one hour where he said he could get together with other
prisoners who were interested in reading books and watching movies, but with no specific
educational goal in mind. About the programming, Roman said:
They let us out for an hour. I mean, they called it school. We would read certain passages
out of books or watch movies and stuff, but it wasn’t like we could get any credentials or
a degree or anything from that.
Although there was a small bookshelf with books, the selection was limited and books were in
high demand, making them difficult to check out. Roman’s family had to bring books for him to
read, which he looked forward to. Roman was not offered any vocational classes and held an
unpaid job while incarcerated.
Participants also explained that even if vocational programs were available, they were
perceived as very limited, unhelpful, and even ulterior, to help the prison more than then inmate
Mike had participated in electrical class, but described it as a lackluster experience:
I took an electrical class but I didn’t learn much. The teacher was not very involved. He
mainly made us clean his shop. He showed us a little bit of this and that but nothing I
could take home with me.
Mike did not learn skills that he could apply after release. Another participant, Greg said he
perceived the skill-building programs they had access to as ways to make the inmates accomplish
maintenance tasks around the prison, instead of building usable skills. For example, they taught

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 41
inmates basic electrical and painting skills and then had them complete small projects around the
prison facility. He does not believe they were solid, transferable skills that could be applied upon
release. About this experience, he said, “They were teaching these people to be plumbers so they
could fix the plumbing in the prison, not so that they go home and become successful plumbers.”
There was also a blatant mismatch of educational resources with inmates’ needs and
grade levels. For Maddy, incarceration became a revolving door for her at the age of 14, and she
was never provided with any resources that she could use upon release to help create stability.
When she was incarcerated as a juvenile, she was given coloring pages to keep her busy, along
with single-digit addition and subtraction worksheets. Books were limited and outdated, with
missing pages, covers coming off, and no books that inmates found engaging. Some books were
second-grade-level reading.
Prerequisites and fees. Some participants found that there were barriers to enrolling in
classes offered. While Oliver’s prison offered classes, like a fiber optics class, only those who
had a GED or a clear plan for continuing education were able to participate. This made the
courses extremely limited to the general population, and not many people were able to take
advantage of these opportunities. Oliver was fortunate to be able to participate in the fiber optics
class after completing his GED while incarcerated, but described that the limitations placed on
inmates for these types of classes take away from the potential skill building and post-release
interest in fields to enter that can be developed while incarcerated. He said these types of classes
should be available to all inmates, to invoke a sense of passion and purpose.
When Christopher described his experiences in both state and federal prisons, he
mentioned that the state prison had significantly less educational programming and wellness and
leisure resources to offer. The vocational programs that were offered in the prison he was in had

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 42
limitations on who could participate. For example, if you received a short sentence or only had a
few months left to serve, you were unable to enroll in the classes. Essentially, they focused on
providing classes for those who were in prison for life or an extended period, leaving those with
relatively shorter sentences, who would have to soon return to society, with no opportunity for
learning.
Whether it be enforced or social, Maddy described that taking classes was considered a
privilege, and there were heavy rules and restrictions surrounding who could participate. Maddy
was sometimes told “That’s not a class for felons,” or “That’s not the class for people in your
position.”
Another significant barrier to accessing educational resources was the fees associated
with them, which for inmates, who do not have the liberty to seek preferred employment
arrangements or who may not have access to other financial means, proved especially difficult to
afford. Mike, for example, was excited to join a book club in prison that his cousin signed him
up for. He describes it as an escape from reality and it brought him joy. He was allowed to have
four books each month, and when the new books arrived, he had to give up the four books he
had. He attempted to share the four books he had completed with other inmates but was told he
had to either send them home or they would be destroyed. Postage to send the books home was
expensive, and not something he could afford. For the entire duration of Greg’s incarceration, he
did not see anyone take advantage of the educational opportunities they were provided with
because inmates were expected to pay for the classes out of pocket. These classes were not
offered at the prison but through a partnership with a local university, which came at a hefty
price for someone who was incarcerated.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 43
Further demonstrating how immense the barriers to affording resources were, some
participants reported how the employment opportunities available through their prisons were
insufficient for fulfillment and saving money. Mike held a job in the kitchen while in prison,
mainly washing dishes, but was paid eight cents an hour. While Lawrence held a job cleaning
trash at the ballpark while in prison, he explained that he was paid 32 cents an hour and claimed
that it was impossible to properly save up to buy anything with such little pay. Both Mike and
Lawrence specifically described their employment experiences as “slave labor.” As noted above,
Roman was not offered any vocational classes and held an unpaid job while incarcerated.
Interpersonal Relations. Dynamics between inmates and inmates with prison personnel
emerged as a relatively subtle, but common factor that would inhibit participants from receiving
effective education.
Several inmates reported racial segregation that would limit how they could navigate life
in prison, impacting what they could partake in and who they could associate with. Lawrence
described how the prison he was in was racially segregated:
Since I look White, even though I’m half Mexican, I ran with the Whites. The Mexicans
had their own thing, the Blacks had their own thing, and it’s all just racially segregated.
So, you’re not supposed to eat with any other race. You’re not supposed to play games
with any other race. It’s very militant and they always want you to be ready for war.
Similar to Lawrence’s experience, the leisure time activities in Greg’s prison were segregated.
Greg described a three-on-three basketball tournament that the Latinos organized, in which
participants had to pay $20 to participate. The segregation during these activities kept inmates
within their groups and did not allow them to socialize and interact with many others.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 44
Prison personnel also influenced participants’ experiences with accessing educational
resources. For Hank, he described how he was passionate about and committed to continuing
education in prison, but that this was looked down upon by the prison staff. Through a lucky
connection he made while incarcerated, he was eventually able to forge a path and started a new
program for incarcerated individuals to partner with the local university to continue their studies.
However, prison guards and other workers did not want him to continue pushing for educational
opportunities and found him to be a nuisance, saying, “This guy is really bugging us,” and
providing him with little support. He considers himself somewhat lucky and does not compare
himself to the general prison population. As he has continued mentoring formerly incarcerated
individuals and has stayed involved in activism and policy surrounding incarceration, he has
realized his opportunity was truly unique.
Mike also encountered prison staff who not only did not support his educational pursuits
but often impeded them. Mike said the correctional officers would often give them a hard time,
saying that classes were canceled and they were not let out of their cells. He believes the
correctional officers were not honest about this because they would have to personally escort
individuals who were in classes, and it was quite a long walk from the cells to the vocational
class areas. He describes:
They just did not want to escort us to the classes. Because the classes, you know, you had
to go through all kinds of gates, metal detectors, and all that. And for these correctional
officers, it was just too much.
Barriers to Health and Wellness Treatment While Incarcerated. Some experiences in
prison were not accompanied by sufficient health and wellness services. As this section is
dedicated to challenges faced during incarceration, participant experiences where they were not

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 45
met with needed health and wellness treatments are documented. However, this does not
preclude experiences not described below where participants did receive care.
Maddy actively sought several types of assistance while incarcerated, including substance
abuse treatment and mental health treatment. However, these programs were not available and
her requests for extra help were quickly denied. Some jails Maddy was in had no outdoor time,
leaving inmates with no access to physical wellness. Maddy described asking for mental health
resources as a negative, as after expressing depression or anxiety, inmates were deemed a risk
and placed in solitary confinement with no clothes and no bed. They were not given toilet paper,
towels, or soap. This led to many individuals staying in the facility with a fear of asking for help
from the prison guards or administrators because it would come with a consequence.
Several participants reported that there were no programs offered at all. Mike was not
offered any physical health, mental health, or wellness programs during his 13 years in prison.
Roman stated that mental health services were not offered or ever talked about. He described the
first moments, as he was being processed into jail, and having to go through strip searches. He
sees this as sexual abuse and a wrong experience to put every incarcerated person through.
Because David also found there were no mental health resources and poor physical health
resources at his prison, the inmates would put together makeshift workout equipment but would
have to be careful because it was easily confiscated. David describes:
It was not made clear to me what was going to happen to me upon release. Like, I didn’t
know anything about my parole or probation situation. I didn’t know what I would have
to be compliant with when I was released. I didn’t know the terms of my release. I didn’t
have a counselor, and nobody prepared me for what release was going to look like. In

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 46
fact, I had to do a residential treatment program upon my release, and that wasn’t made
clear to me until maybe a week or two before being released.
Upon reflection, David said it is obvious he was not set up for success in reentry. There were
many opportunities he feels the prison could have provided him to enhance his experience and
ensure he would avoid recidivism, but they failed in multiple areas.
Lawrence identified a major shortcoming of his experience was the lack of health care
and also poor living standards, as his addiction was the reason he ended up incarcerated.
Lawrence was in lockdown for 23 hours each day for the first eight months of his incarceration
and was allowed to shower three times each week. Most importantly, Lawrence said he was not
helped with rehabilitation, which could have had a positive effect on him upon release.
Limited Support Leaving the Incarcerated State. Mike faced a situation that was
unique and different from other participants. He was released early under California Assembly
Bill 109, which:
Allows for current non-violent, non-serious, and non-sex offenders, who after they are
released from California State prison, are to be supervised at the local county level.
Instead of reporting to state parole officers, these offenders are to report to local County
probation officers. (County of Los Angeles Probation Information Center, n.d.)
An underlying goal of this legislation was to control the prison population and reduce
overcrowding. Mike said he was one of the first ten people to be sentenced under AB 109 and he
ended up being released with no supervision, no parole, and no probation.
The only thing Maddy was offered upon release was a public transportation ticket to get
her home after leaving the facility. However, she said they did not take into consideration how
far the stations were from people’s houses, or if the services were running at the time of release.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 47
Overall, she said what the courts required to do after release did not coincide with what she had
to do to survive, and this made her transition extremely difficult.
Similar to other participants in this study, Roman was not offered any assistance or
preparation in navigating jobs post-release. Roman termed the whole process of incarceration as
dehumanizing.
A Stark New Normal
Every participant encountered challenges after incarceration as they tried to seek
employment, education, health care, and more. A Stark New Normal is focused on the various
challenges participants reported, including general derailment due to time in prison, facing
stigmas and identity challenges, mental health and wellness, careers, and other roadblocks.
Facing Stigmas and a New Day-to-Day. All participants described facing stigmas
post-release in different areas of their daily lives, from home life, to work, to school.
New Identities. When released, participants had to reckon with the reputation of their
crimes preceding them. Hank said that he had made quite a negative reputation for himself in his
city, as he was a gangster, selling drugs, and convicted of conspiracy to commit racketeering. He
described, “There’s a certain amount of fear that people have, like, you know, what is this person
capable of given that they’ve been living inside an institution?” People knew him on the streets,
and even after he was released, he knew there would be negative perceptions and hesitation to
accept the new person he had become.
Each participant recounted that such reputations, and also the label of being a formerly
incarcerated person, put them in situations where they would choose to not disclose their pasts,
which further entailed managing their fears about how others would perceive them and
proactively calculating the risk of being found out. Lawrence’s worries set in immediately after

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 48
release, as he started to ponder what people would think of him, especially as he tried to obtain
jobs. He said it felt like a “big burden or this big secret that I was holding and nobody knows in
my classes.” These worries played out during the start of his community college journey when
incarceration came up as a topic in one of his general education classes. When starting school,
Lawrence did not share about his felony or time incarcerated with anyone out of fear of
judgment. During one of Lawrence’s classes, a classmate shared dismay about criminals and
commented about prisoners “being sent to an island and staying away from society.” This was a
tough moment for Lawrence as he realized the stigmas he envisioned and worried about came to
life.
In speaking with Roman, most of his challenges upon release dealt with a sense of value
due to the stigma he faced. He explicated:
When you’re in jail or prison, you’re no longer a part of society. You’re deemed
unacceptable to society. And when you get out and you’re reintroduced to society, you, or
at least I, had to grapple with my own sense of value and self-worth. I have to check the
box now, every time I apply, that I have a felony. How is that going to affect things and
how is that going to affect where I work? And at that time, not having a degree or any
college, and having to check that box, and being reintroduced into a society where it’s
like I went to this whole other universe and now I’m back.
Roman found it tough to relate to people who didn’t share a similar experience. Post-release, he
had high hopes about reentering society and starting over and was disappointed to be welcomed
back with harsh stigma. While Roman was no longer confined in prison walls, he entered a
different type of prison where negative perceptions ruled his universe.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 49
Similar to other participants, Greg’s experiences while determining his education path
made him reflect on stigma and judgment against formerly incarcerated individuals. He did not
believe his conviction should be used to determine whether he would succeed in a certain career
field. About this inequity, Greg said:
Having a criminal history has nothing to do with, for instance, becoming a therapist.
These are not things that should continue to impact people’s careers after they come
home from prison and invest all this time. Formerly incarcerated students face way more
prejudice than non-formerly incarcerated students. I think that the choices that people
have made in the past continue to affect things and make things worse for them. And if
you can’t get access to employment opportunities, and move up on the socioeconomic
ladder, people are going to continue to struggle.
It pained Greg that poor choices made in the past are affecting people’s careers after they come
home from serving their sentence and in turn affecting social mobility. The lack of access to
educational or employment opportunities, and the inability to move up in society are going to
lead to a never-ending battle for formerly incarcerated individuals.
Relationships and Community. Participants found that their relationships to others, such
as relatives, school administrators, and classmates, were impacted by their incarceration.
Maddy’s relationship to her children and other family members deeply suffered because her
incarceration led to her losing contact with them. She had spent a considerable amount of time
away from her children during her sentence, which was largely disruptive and damaging to her
relationship with them. This is something she said she never got back. Due to her phone calls
being restricted, Maddy was unable to maintain a proper connection with her family members,
and these relationships were never repaired. She did not have money to place calls and her

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 50
family didn’t have money to accept collect calls. She also did not have access to most people’s
phone numbers while she was incarcerated. This created a huge disconnect and void in her life
and led to her not having anyone to reference for employers or housing. Maddy said:
I had no community; I had no community support. I had nobody to be connected to who
would have otherwise helped me get out of that position and stopped me from going back
and forth through that revolving door.
The time spent in prison took away from potential relationships Maddy could have built that
would have helped her form a positive life after release, particularly in networking for careers.
She said that the broken relationships with her family members still affect her to this day, and she
is disappointed that the prison system did not support her need to uphold connections, especially
with her children, while she was incarcerated.
Deciding to disclose their past experience as a formerly incarcerated person meant that
participants had to face how others would treat them. Upon release, Christopher decided to enroll
in community college. He entered the sessions with his academic counselor eager to come up
with a plan for completing his general courses, intending to transfer to a university to obtain his
bachelor’s degree. After sharing that he had a criminal record, Christopher sensed a clear change
in tone and attitude from the counselor. He says, “I felt judged and unwelcome, and I never went
back to see him after that.”
Lawrence, however, found that there was the potential to seek understanding with others.
He had been approached by a friend about sharing his story about his incarceration and life after
prison in the community college school newspaper. After pondering a bit, he took advantage of
the opportunity and was featured in the newspaper, openly sharing his story. Following the
release of the article, almost 30 people reached out to him and shared similar stories of addiction,

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 51
incarceration, and a rough post-release journey. It was heartwarming for him to see the
inspiration he gave others, and he felt it gave him the power to continue his academic pursuit. In
a way, what Lawrence thought to be a space where he had to hide his criminal background, he
found motivation in people receiving his challenging experience so positively. However, In his
current role at work, he had not told his colleagues about his felony. He did not have to disclose
it on his job application because it was past the cut-off period for mandated reporting, but he did
plan on sharing when he feels the time is right.
Housing and Basic Resources. Following the trauma of their release, depending on their
respective situation, participants faced a variety of issues obtaining and keeping housing and
having access to basic resources. All participants who mentioned housing insecurity as a
significant challenge depicted complex situations that were inextricable from other problems,
such as access to transportation, storage of personal possessions, hunger, or access to either
services or spaces for health and hygiene.
For David, everything was new after he was released from prison. Before incarceration,
he describes:
I was homeless. I was addicted. I had nothing going for me. Like, I was the lowest of the
low. Like rock bottom. And I was living like that for a few years before going to prison.
Just really addicted and doing desperate things.
Due to his reality before incarceration, David described everything as new and a challenge as he
attempted to reintegrate back into society. He had no means of transportation and faced
challenges finding housing. As he searched to rent a room, he was forced to disclose his criminal
record to prospective landlords or homeowners due to monthly parole visits. This was a major
difficulty for him and made landlords and homeowners apprehensive about accepting him as a

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 52
tenant. Additionally, David did not have access to healthcare and did not know how to navigate
choosing a general healthcare practitioner, as this was something he had never done before.
Similar to David, Oliver was homeless after prison and everything was new. He was
released into an insecure situation after prison. Oliver described:
When I was released from prison, I was pretty much homeless. I never really had a house
that I was living at even before I was incarcerated. I was just kind of staying with my
grandma. So I had to figure things out as I was moving along.
His family home was never somewhere he stayed much before incarceration, due to issues with
his mother, so he did not have a strong foundation. Oliver saved up all the money he made
working in prison to purchase a car. He would sleep in his car, keep his belongings in the trunk
of the car, and use the gym showers and lockers each day.
Mike was homeless after release. He slept in his car at night and attended his community
college classes during the day. After one of his teachers found out about this, she introduced him
to a dean of students who encouraged him to sign up for a physical education class, which
allowed him to have access to showers. He was also given a lock for a locker and was able to
take advantage of this accommodation as it was the only option he had. Mike also faced food
insecurities while he was homeless after release. Housing and food were major barriers for Mike
and he was happily shocked when the dean of students introduced him to this new opportunity
that somewhat improved his quality of life.
Careers. Stigmas for participants carried into different areas of their lives, particularly in
searching for careers. Not only were there general negative sentiments to deal with, but
participants had difficulty obtaining jobs due to government or organizational policies

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 53
surrounding individuals with a criminal record. Christopher, Lawrence, Maddy, Greg, and Oliver,
provided anecdotes from their first experience trying to obtain a job after release.
Participants found that, even when qualified and when employers were interested in them
as candidates, their criminal records made it difficult for them to secure or retain a position. For
Christopher, looking for work in construction and plumbing after his release was a great option,
as he already had the skills to do the job. However, he soon found that there were various permits
he would need to enter people’s homes to do work, and companies were hesitant to endorse him
due to his criminal record. This was a major hurdle for him in moving forward with this line of
work and jumpstarting his life after prison. Greg described a day he was excited to stumble upon
a career fair after he started attending community college. Through the fair, he applied to work at
an after-school program and was pleased to get an interview. The interview went exceptionally
well until the last question: “Do you have any felony convictions?” The interviewer seemed
deflated and even attempted to contact her supervisor to find a way around the policy, but was
not successful.
Even after being hired, Lawrence was eventually fired from his job at his community
college due to his record. He said he would not even apply to some jobs because he thought there
was no way he would get an offer, due to his record. Lawrence said, “I was worried about what
people would think of me trying to get a job as a felon.” Later, as a college student, he attempted
to become a sign language tutor, but was also denied due to his criminal record.
Oliver, who also faced stigma and discrimination following his release when applying for
jobs, even ended up taking legal action against the organization after he was heavily
discriminated against during the interview process. About stigma and employment policies,
Oliver described:

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 54
It’s super nerve-wracking because you can have all the credentials and experience in the
world but when that question comes up, it’s like everything goes out the window. I don’t
understand what they expect a person who has been convicted to do in society. You paid
your debt to society and all these things, but you’re still not accepted in society when you
get out. And it’s like the debt is never really repaid. It follows you everywhere. I missed
out on some really great opportunities because of that question.
As Oliver remarked, the combination of general stigma and workplace policies regarding
individuals with a criminal record poses a difficult challenge for those who are determined to
make positive changes during reentry after prison. Several participants faced similar challenges,
regardless of the type of work they attempted to obtain.
Being formerly incarcerated also impacted other facets of job searches, such as
scheduling, tending to professional networks, and acquiring technical skills, as noted by Maddy.
Her court requirements made it difficult for her to keep a job. She had obligations that limited
her schedule, and it proved to be a challenge asking employers to only schedule her during these
restricted times. She also found that the gaps on her resume were an issue, and this mentality
targets formerly incarcerated people and keeps them from having a fair chance at employment.
Additionally, Maddy felt her time incarcerated took away from making meaningful connections
that others around her were able to exhaust. She said, “I didn’t get to have all these internship
opportunities, or work on service projects, or other prospects that could help turn into a career.”
Her time in prison took away from forming meaningful relationships and building a strong
network. Her time in prison had also made her fall behind in technical skills as technology had
advanced by the time of her release. When applying for jobs, she describes:

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 55
I didn’t know how to use a computer or the Internet. No one taught me these things. No
one taught me the importance of these things. You know, back then, people wanted you to
have a paper resume. I didn’t have a printer to print out an actual resume. Now you need
a flash drive, something to save a resume on so you can work on it. That means your
computer needs to be upgraded to have certain specifications. You need Microsoft Word
and that’s not free. I had no way of getting a credit card at that time to pay for these
things.
The barriers kept Maddy from starting the journey to look for a job, and some of these
issues were not easily fixable due to her financial issues. Her time in prison set her back and kept
her from knowledge about commonplace things that others in society are exposed to daily.
Access Barriers. When asked about new roadblocks they were faced with post-release,
some participants shared issues that were unique to them or that they found particularly upsetting
due to their passions and beliefs.
For some participants, they identified the feeling of loss from being denied certain rights
as a formerly incarcerated individual. Christopher shared that one limitation he is now faced
with that he is unhappy about is having his gun rights taken away. Especially as a law school
student, and being familiar with the constitution and constitutional rights, he believed limiting
felons from owning firearms is unfair. The right to bear arms is important to him, and being
deprived of the right was a source of resentment. Lawrence also mentioned that he was upset that
his right to own a gun was taken from him, as was his right to vote. Greg also expressed interest
in getting his record expunged so he can gain access to a firearm. While not as upset about the
inability to own a gun, David described the loss he felt for being denied the right:

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 56
I was never interested in firearms, but several years later, just the fact that I cannot touch
a firearm or own a firearm in California, I really mourned the loss of this right that I had
never really wanted or appreciated.
As David describes, it is not necessarily that he wanted to own a gun, but that he was being shut
out of access that others have. In a way, being restricted from owning a firearm is symbolic that
his rights are different and less than.
In speaking about various barriers he encountered, Roman expressed that there was a type
of guilt that he carried with him about having to share his story. Any time he made a new
friendship or started a relationship, he felt obligated to share his experience. He always felt
unsure if the opposing person would accept or invalidate his experience. Roman also faced
difficulty answering the question about what he did. He has had to tell his story about his
incarceration many times, and he feels like it is a way for people to judge him or be entertained.
Furthermore, he felt as if telling these stories sometimes romanticizes incarceration and policing,
even normalizing them and making prison an acceptable choice for offenders.
Greg was faced with temptation when returning home. His brother and nephew were
headed in the wrong direction and were expecting him to come home and resume his life as it
was before going to prison. He said, “I didn’t really didn’t want to go back to my house. They
were looking forward to me coming home and being the same person and doing the same
things.” Greg was determined to stay away from the streets and be negatively influenced. His
mother also urged him to talk to his brother and nephew and encourage them to choose a better
path in life. Greg’s relationship with his brother and nephew suffered, but he stayed motivated
and his desire to make a better life for himself never faltered.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 57
Opportunities Post-Release
While the transition back into society was generally described as difficult by every
participant, they also shared various opportunities they encountered that helped ease the journey.
Each participant described the shift in mindset they eventually adopted, education and career
opportunities they took advantage of, the power of mentorship, and new opportunities they didn’t
have before incarceration.
A Shift in Mindset
Following release, several participants described a strong desire to never again be
incarcerated. For most, this led to a huge paradigm shift which led them to great opportunities.
Lawrence described that he became a “master of time” following his incarceration
experience. This was due to his method of making the time pass quickly. He had a plan each day
to wake up early, work out, and read. This straightforward mindset helped him remain
disciplined during reentry and is still a principle he applies today. Lawrence felt he was behind
and had lost time due to his incarceration. He was in his late 20s, living with his parents, and
barely starting community college, his clothes did not fit him, and he had to restart his life. He
was mad at himself for going to prison and questioned why he even ended up where he did, but it
sparked a fire in his soul. He told himself that he was going to give it his all, make a comeback,
pursue his dreams, and not let anyone pull him down. He believes his time in prison helped build
his core discipline and work ethic, and he came out of prison driven, focused, and ready.
For our interview, David had just arrived overseas for a study abroad program through his
university. He set the scene, telling me about his new living situation, how the sink was unusual,
the shower was not working, and how the accommodations were different for him. He then said
his prison experience prepared him for similar situations, where he feels like a fish out of water

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 58
but finds the instinct to quickly adapt to the changes around him. He reminds himself that he has
done this before, that he has adapted before, and that he is going to be okay. In general, David
said that his experience in prison has shifted his mindset:
The structure that I followed when I was in prison from self-programming with other
inmates, you know, like workout regimens. I find myself drawing from my lived
experience of accomplishment. Like, just going through that and enduring it and
overcoming it. And I think drawing upon that and remembering all of the hardships that I
had to experience and overcome, it helps me when I find myself running into challenges.
I just remember what I’ve been through, what I’ve overcome. And it’s kind of like telling
myself my own hero story when I find myself feeling anxious.
Overall, David went into release with a strong attitude and desire for transformation. He was
laser-focused on remaining compliant with the requirements set forth by his probation officer and
doing everything that was asked of him.
Similar to Lawrence and David, Roman feels incarceration shaped his mentality in
positive ways:
Incarceration really helped shape my work ethic in the sense that I can do anything. Now,
I have my freedom. I remember being in jail and thinking, I would work in a McDonald’s
for free right now if they gave me my freedom. And so, it’s helped me just be able to
jump through hoops.
Roman also embraced meditation as a way to help ease his transition. He practices breathwork
and grounding, and they are now very important components of his everyday life. He reminds
himself to stay present and stay within himself. Roman continues to see a therapist, and it has

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 59
helped him realize his window tolerance. He didn’t utilize therapy right away after release, but
he wishes he did as he finds it helpful.
Greg describes his prison experience as a learning experience. Whether negative or
positive, he has carried over many of the tools and skills he learned in prison and they have
allowed him to navigate and succeed in higher education. He explains:
As formerly incarcerated people, a lot of us are very good at navigating systems, right?
But we navigated those systems for the purpose of surviving. Now, we’re in higher
education, moving from surviving to thriving. And once you learn how to navigate a
system, that’s what happens: you’ll thrive.
Greg also had the opportunity to be a shining example for his brother and nephew, who had
found themselves on a poor path. When he was accepted to his undergraduate university, Greg
moved his brother and nephew with him. His brother eventually enrolled in community college,
transferred to a university earning two undergraduate degrees, and is currently applying for Ph.D.
programs. His nephew has found permanent work that he is passionate about, and Greg is proud
that he was able to positively influence him.
Education
Every participant named education as a huge catalyst to happiness, success, and meaning
for them post-release. It is one mentality each participant had in common: the power of education
to open doors. I was surprised to hear a few participants mention that they initially signed up for
community college so they could obtain money through federal financial aid. Although this was
the way they started, they eventually embraced the scholastic spirit and credit education with
getting them where they are today.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 60
Christopher earned his GED while in prison, finishing in the 99th percentile, went on to
community college, eventually transferred to a university to earn a bachelor’s degree, and is now
completing law school at the same university. He is passionate about pursuing criminal law and
helping others who are in similar situations to his. Being enrolled at a university allowed him to
bring other students together who were also formerly incarcerated. Along with a group of allies,
he established a club to do just that. It is a very big point of pride for him and he appreciates the
value of prison education and continuing education after incarceration.
For Lawrence, his passion for education helped him stay on track with his life
post-release. He said, “When I started school, I would be at the computer or in tutoring all day,
like 16-hour days. Time didn’t matter to me.” His education helped instill in him hard work, and
he focused on it with no distractions. Lawrence eventually transferred from his community
college and attended a university where he earned both his bachelor’s and master’s degrees. His
education also helped expose him to people who have helped him along the way and allowed
him to help others, particularly others in STEM.
Hank’s reentry story is built on the foundation of his education and his dedication to
obtaining a degree while incarcerated and upon reentry. He said he “didn’t want to spend his time
hanging out and being a well-skilled convict.” After completing studies while in prison, he took
the LSAT and began law school two months after release. He also found several mentors and role
models via the faculty he met in school. When I asked Hank about various barriers he faced
during reentry, he answered:
Yeah, all of those things were there, I mean, they were present. But, given the fact, and
again, this speaks to the value of education, once you get a leg up in that direction, things
are a little bit easier to access.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 61
Hank truly believes his education paved the way for a successful reentry. The opportunities that
came his way due to education snowballed, and it became clear to him what he was capable of.
Education made Hank feel like he was worth something outside of the real world.
Returning to school when he was 31 years old, Roman started community college and
then transferred to a university to earn his undergraduate degree in English. He is currently
working on a graduate degree in journalism. Roman said education has given him “language to
be able to express his feelings and emotions after being through so much in life.” He believes
education is something you can do for yourself. Roman has held many jobs where he has been
working for another person’s dream, another person’s goal, and another person’s vision.
However, education has helped him shape what he wants to learn and classes he wants to take,
and make connections that have led to job opportunities. He feels his educational journey is an
example for other formerly incarcerated individuals and that if he can do it, they can do it.
After release, Mike enrolled in community college and took every single automotive
class they had to offer within two years, intending to become a certified mechanic. He describes
a pivotal day that helped shape his education journey, “I opened up the online portal and the first
thing that popped up was the words ‘Dean’s List’. I thought I was in trouble. I had no clue what
it meant.” Much to his surprise, Mike made the Dean’s list. Since he was progressing so well, his
counselor encouraged him to stay and complete a degree. One of the first general education
classes he took was sociology. It had a huge impact on him and helped him understand his own
life experience. Mike became so engaged in his studies he earned three AAs, one being in
sociology. Eventually, he transferred to a university and is completing his bachelor’s degree in
sociology. Mike dreams of earning a Ph.D. in the future and teaching or counseling youth in the
juvenile justice system.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 62
Oliver said education saved his life. While the barriers he faced after release were
infinite, he is thankful for the position he is in because of his education. It has given him a
second chance at optimism. He said, “Being educated can really make you undeniable to
society.” This is a mentality he has embraced after his incarceration, and he feels that the power
of education is what will propel him to success after his turbulent life thus far.
Mentorship
The power of mentorship was a shared value among all participants. Whether they had a
strong mentor, or they were a mentor themselves, the impact mentorship had in their lives
brought positivity and meaning.
Participants were able to get connected to helpful resources during incarceration that
helped guide that during reentry. David’s connection with his residential treatment program
advisor blossomed into a wonderful mentor-and-mentee relationship. His mentor helped him sign
up for federal financial aid as soon as he was released. This helped David go straight from
obtaining a GED to being enrolled at a community college two weeks later. Greg had a mentor,
another inmate, who taught him how to survive. He also had mentors who encouraged him to
pursue education and be well-prepared for release. When asked by one of his mentors what he
wanted to do when he got home, Greg answered that he did not know yet but he just did not want
to come back. They continued to challenge him to think about how he was going to shift and be
prepared to avoid recidivism. Greg said these conversations played a big role in his release. Greg
was also a mentor after release, working with well-known justice and advocacy groups to aid
formerly incarcerated individuals in transitioning and enrolling in the community college system.
Greg had a particularly curious anecdote about mentorship, explaining that he now mentors two
men, who are older than him and he knew growing up in his neighborhood, who are on their

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 63
reentry journey. He helps connect them to people and organizations that can help with legal,
education, social, and mental health services. Helping them find resources is meaningful for him
and he reminds his mentees that they do not have to do it alone.
Oliver received great mentorship after release from another participant in this study. They
were incarcerated together and interested in the same fields of study. After seeing what a great
role model his mentor was, and how dedicated, focused, and determined he was to obtain a
degree and turn his life around, Oliver grew close with his mentor and they created a club
together to help others in a similar situation. His mentor handled academia well, obtained
scholarships, was heavily involved in the community, and did a lot of community service. He
said this individual redefined what academics meant to him. When I asked Oliver about
mentorship, he said it was his favorite question in my study. About mentorship in general, Oliver
describes:
Anyone who has had a mentor, and actually takes it seriously and has been blessed to
have a mentor come into their lives, knows the power of mentorship. And it’s amazing
what mentors can do for you. It’s a word that I found out late in life…I have had mentors
since I was released from prison… A lot of people don’t even know they’re my mentors.
Sometimes that’s just how it is. Having a person who has paved the way in a journey
you’re interested in going through. It’s epic.
Mentorship has been an integral part of Oliver’s post-release experience, and his desire to pay it
forward and mentor others shines through his excitement in describing his own organization that
he hopes to grow. The guidance he received from mentors thus far has been invaluable, and they
have helped him recognize his talents within himself.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 64
Participants continued to identify how valuable the experiences and support of other
formerly incarcerated people were to their own learning and growth. After speaking with
formerly incarcerated individuals at school, Lawrence was surprised to find that he was the only
person pursuing engineering. This persuaded him to start his own group, a foundation aimed at
providing mentorship and opportunities for formerly incarcerated individuals interested in
studying STEM. He currently mentors a few incarcerated individuals and hopes to be a positive
role model for them. Lawrence is working on creating a scholarship at his community college for
people returning from prison and pursuing STEM and plans to put proceeds from a coffee
company he is starting into his newly created foundation. He said mentoring and helping people
who are coming back from prison and changing their life is going to be a part of his life, forever.
Mike was another participant who founded a club at his community college to bring together
formerly incarcerated individuals. They supported each other through their education journeys
and provided each other with mentorship. This club helped him tremendously. One aspect he was
particularly grateful for was that able to form relationships with Labor Finders, a staffing and
temp agency, who helped him navigate finding jobs with what he describes as “felony-friendly”
organizations. Although he has moved on, he is still very passionate and involved in the club
today. Mike also joined a student group for formerly incarcerated individuals when he transferred
to his current university.
Resources Post-Release
Reentry provided a plethora of obstacles for participants, but some gratefully described
the positives they faced throughout their journey: resources via their family and friendships,
helpful organizations, and how accountability helps them stay motivated.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 65
Family and Relationships
In an earlier section, A Start New Normal, the loss of or strained relationships were
highlighted as challenges borne by some of the participants. Family and relationships, however,
also served as a resource for several participants. The commitment and involvement of
supportive people were recounted as helping ease the path to reentry.
For Lawrence, his top resource was his family. He credited them because, without them,
he did not think he would be where he is now. His parents provided him with steadfast support
throughout his incarceration, and after. They never gave up on him, and their constant care and
encouragement provided him with stability, making his transition much easier. Similar to
Lawrence, Roman’s relationship with his mom was key in his transition back to society. He
describes her as the most important thing when he was incarcerated as well. It provided him with
stability and support. After Roman was released, he said he spent a lot of time inside to help
detail with the trauma, and it helped him stay away from society and avoid things going wrong.
Greg found great support from his family as well. Upon release, his mother said he could live
with her and didn’t have to pay rent, on the condition that he went to school. He said it alleviated
pressure and he was fortunate he didn’t have to worry about providing for himself or contributing
to the household. Greg’s agreement with his mother was a catalyst for his education journey.
Organizations
As I had come across in my review of literature, participants found help while
transitioning back into society via various organizations that provided them with resources,
relationships, and stability.
Several participants listed the California Department of Rehabilitation (CDOR) as a
major positive component of their post-release journey. The California Department of

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 66
Rehabilitation works in partnership with consumers and other stakeholders to provide services
and advocacy resulting in employment, independent living, and equality for individuals with
disabilities (California Department of Rehabilitation, n.d.). Christopher was provided with help
from them getting a job and educational tuition and supply assistance. Oliver received aid and
guidance from the California Department of Rehabilitation as well.
Lawrence found great help from his probation officer. The parole office provided him
with lists of classes he could take advantage of and companies that were open to hiring
individuals with felonies. He found this particularly helpful for himself, and for other
incarcerated individuals, because most people are not sure about what they will do following
release and this provided some guidance and resources. Additionally, he was introduced to
scholarships and other financial aid while in community college and continued to apply for these
resources throughout his undergraduate and graduate studies. Lawrence was able to obtain food
stamps, help to pay for education supplies, and eventually had his undergraduate and graduate
degrees completely paid for after applying to almost 100 scholarships.
David was another participant who found success with his parole officers. He shifted his
mindset to embracing that the parole officer was there to help him. Thus, he welcomed all
opportunities that were referred to him and utilized everything the parole officer had to offer to
help him get reacclimated. They recommended housing for him which he took advantage of, and
this steady housing situation helped him dive into education at a community college. David also
found a local organization that helped with housing and other resources, providing him with a
security deposit and the first month’s rent. The rental assistance continued and decreased slightly
month after month and he was encouraged to take on more and more responsibility for the

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 67
payments. This facilitated process helped ease the transition for him tremendously until he was
able to be fully independent.
After Mike was abruptly released under AB 109 with no guidance or supervision, he
turned to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) for help. The ACLU “works in the courts,
legislatures, and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties
guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States”
(ACLU, n.d.). The ACLU was a big support system for Mike, helping him function in society.
They also visited him in prison and helped advocate for him as he faced inequitable conditions.
Mike also found support through The Good Samaritan Shelter, which provided him with
housing. He built a good rapport with them and would refer those in his student group who
needed help to the shelter.
Summary
The interviewees, each having experienced life after incarceration, faced a multitude of
challenges in their transition. Common difficulties included grappling with societal stigmas,
mental health issues, career obstacles, and inadequate support during their time incarcerated. The
shortcomings during incarceration were plenty, with participants citing a lack of guidance,
restricted access to education and vocational programs, and insufficient attention to overall
well-being and rehabilitation. The experiences varied, from limited educational opportunities in
state prisons to inadequate mental health resources. Participants highlighted racial segregation,
unsatisfactory vocational programs, and unstructured educational approaches. Post-release, they
encountered stigma in various aspects of life, such as education and employment. Housing,
mental health, and wellness also posed significant hurdles, with individuals facing difficulties
obtaining stable housing and coping with mental health challenges. Career prospects were

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 68
hindered by negative sentiments and organizational policies surrounding individuals with
criminal records. Additionally, unique challenges emerged, including the loss of certain rights
such as gun ownership and voting, technological barriers, and the strain on personal
relationships. Overall, the participants’ narratives depicted a stark and challenging new normal
after incarceration, marked by systemic deficiencies and societal prejudices.
While there were many challenges post-release, the participants encountered various
opportunities as well. Several individuals experienced a transformative change in perspective,
adopting positive mindsets and disciplined approaches to life. Education emerged as a common
catalyst for success, with participants highlighting the power of learning to open doors.
Mentorship plays a crucial role, with participants either benefiting from mentors or becoming
mentors themselves. The positive impact of mentorship is evident in various aspects of their
lives, from education to personal development. Additionally, the participants have created or
joined groups to support formerly incarcerated individuals, fostering a sense of community and
breaking down stigmas associated with incarceration.
Several participants expressed gratitude for the positive aspects of their journey
post-release. Family and friendships played a crucial role, with individuals highlighting the
unwavering support of parents, which provided stability during and after incarceration.
Mentoring relationships facilitated a smooth transition by helping with educational and career
opportunities. The importance of family extended to several participants, who found support and
stability through their relationships with their parents. Beyond personal networks, various
organizations played a significant role in securing jobs, educational assistance, and overall
navigation of societal reintegration.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 69
In the following chapter, the recommendations section will also introduce new findings as
they pertain to each theme.
Chapter Five: Overall Discussion of Findings and Recommendations
This chapter will dive deeper into the findings, connecting them to the literature reviewed
in Chapter Two and analyzing them using social cognitive theory. Additionally, this chapter will
discuss two recommendations for the problem of practice, which will be supplemented by the
participants’ experiences and recommendations. Finally, limitations and delimitations will be
discussed, followed by recommendations for future research.
Discussion of Findings
The findings in this study help inform the problem of practice by providing examples for
the hypothesis that there are a multitude of factors that negatively impact the reentry process for
formerly incarcerated individuals. This includes dealing with stigmas, mental health and
wellness issues, limited educational and vocational opportunities, and inadequate preparation for
reentry post-release. Many participants experienced challenges obtaining housing and careers
due to negative perceptions and policies surrounding individuals with criminal records. While
participants shared the challenges of reintegration into society after incarceration, they
highlighted opportunities such as a shift in mindset, education and career advancements, the
impact of mentorship, and newfound opportunities. Participants shared the numerous challenges
they faced during the reentry process but also reflected on positive aspects, including support
from family and friendships, assistance from helpful organizations, and the motivational impact
of accountability. Family played a crucial role in the success for some, ensuring basic needs were
met including housing and safety, as well as a level of accountability. Additionally, various
organizations played pivotal roles in providing resources, employment assistance, and advocacy

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 70
for individuals transitioning back into society. Ultimately, the findings highlight the need for an
improved system overall, and better resources and support during incarceration to enhance
post-release experiences.
After a review of the transcripts, including various iterations of coding, it was apparent
that society places a significant amount of barriers on formerly incarcerated individuals as they
navigate reentry. Each of the nine participants highlighted various struggles they faced during
and post-incarceration, but several common themes were found among these experiences. They
identified similar themes found in the literature review leading up to this research being
conducted, including inadequate prison programming, lack of mental and physical health
resources, and an emphasis on punishment over rehabilitation.
Statistics show that incarcerated individuals are more likely to have below-average levels
of educational achievement (US Department of Education, 2021). The participants in this either
did not complete high school and have a GED with no intentions of pursuing college, or had not
started a path toward higher education before incarceration. Linden and Perry’s (1983) research
found that in-prison education programs are most likely to succeed if they are intensive, create an
alternative community within the prison, and if post-release services are offered. The experiences
highlighted in this study fall in line with the aforementioned research, and the recommendation
of post-release preparation was a shared theme among participants.
The Federal Bureau of Prisons (n.d.) claims that vocational and occupational training
programs are centered around the particular needs of the inmates, labor market conditions, and
institution labor force needs. Additionally, they state inmates have the opportunity to receive
on-the-job training via institutional job assignments and can work in Federal Prison Industries
(Federal Bureau of Prisons, n.d.). However, participants in this study did not receive such

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 71
extensive opportunities. As identified in the findings, most educational and vocational
programming was targeted at individuals who were spending extended periods in prison.
Moreover, participants shared that the on-the-job training the prisons offered did lead to
institutional job assignments, but these skills were not transferable post-release and were
primarily used to complete projects around the prison. Furthermore, higher education classes
were inaccessible for participants, and those who had opportunities were asked to pay for the
tuition, which was not possible given their circumstances. This finding was also emphasized by
Couloute (2018a), as they found that in-prison college degree programs remain inaccessible for
most incarcerated individuals, and the Prison Fellowship (2022) confirmed that participation in
these programs was dependent on several factors including the ability to pay for tuition. These
were the types of hidden barriers preventing incarcerated individuals from having a fair
opportunity to take advantage of these programs.
The career challenges presented by participants coincided with the literature reviewed
about career issues faced by formerly incarcerated individuals. According to La Vigne and
Kachnowski (2005) over 90% of formerly incarcerated individuals recognize that finding stable
employment after release is the cornerstone of their long-term success. Eight of the nine
participants in this study identified several failed experiences entering the labor market and
maintaining employment following release, whether due to negative employer attitudes or
workplace policies surrounding felons. Dumont et. al (2012) found that due to their criminal
history, formerly incarcerated individuals frequently struggle to secure housing. This was the
case for many of the participants in this study who immediately faced housing insecurities. There
was also a clear connection to prior studies about the lack of proper mental and physical health
care provided to incarcerated individuals. The participants highlighted that our current system is

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 72
not properly equipped to address these issues and provide adequate care to inmates. Maddy’s
situation with losing communication with her children confirmed a study by Turney (2014)
which portrayed the negative side effects of parental incarceration, leaving children vulnerable.
Considering approximately 7% of US children have faced the incarceration of a parent whom
they lived with at some point in time, this is a critical issue to address (Murphey & Cooper,
2015).
Social cognitive theory helps us understand how people motivate and regulate their
behavior, and describes the interactional influences of individual experiences, the actions of
others, and environmental factors on individual behaviors (Bandura, 2000). In this study, the
institutional and societal barriers formerly incarcerated individuals face following release can be
examined through this lens. Self-efficacy was a significant part of the participants’ journey in life
after incarceration. Social cognitive theory considers how both environmental and cognitive
factors interrelate in influencing human learning and behavior (Bandura, 2000). Several
participants found themselves strictly regulating their behaviors post-release, and struggles while
incarcerated influenced the decisions they made during reentry. For example, the bleak thought
of returning to prison was enough to create a shift in mindset for participants and helped them
stay disciplined and motivated in their education and career journeys. The experiences they faced
during prison, coupled with the actions of others, and environmental factors, made an impact on
their behaviors. For some participants, expectations put on them by their families, mentors, and
probation officers provided accountability which helped regulate their behavior.
A few participants shared that they were able to stay rent-free with their families after
release, so long as they stayed in school, stayed away from drugs, and showed that they were
working on improving themselves. This demonstrates the impact their surrounding environment,

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 73
in this case, their families, had on their motivation and behavior. Additionally, wanting to shy
away from common stigma and make a good impression, some participants were hesitant to
share their background stories post-release as they embarked on their education and career
endeavors. These social forces during reentry influenced participants and changed their behavior
in certain environments. These examples highlight reciprocal interactions between people,
environment, and behavior, which are a core part of social cognitive theory.
It is important to note here that not all formerly incarcerated individuals are invited to
stay with relatives or friends post-release from prison. There may be good reasons for both the
formerly incarcerated and their family members not to create a situation that could cause harm or
trauma. The assumption that families take care of their own should be investigated if, in fact, it is
the best option in future research.
Recommendations for Practice
Three recommendations have stemmed from the data collected in this study which will be
further explicated. First, elevating prison and post-release experiences by providing educational
enrichment while incarcerated, mental health and rehabilitation opportunities, and tools and
skills to prepare for release. Second, a transition period that is structured and intentional, with a
goal of providing access and resources for formerly incarcerated individuals. And lastly, a
well-functioning restorative justice system.
Recommendation 1: A Change in Resources While Incarcerated
Each participant was asked a question about what they could have used during their time
incarcerated that would have helped with their post-release experience. While they had described
various shortcomings throughout the interviews, this question brought about specific ideas from
a former inmate’s perspective that are incorporated into this section. Additionally, some

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 74
individuals shared unique experiences and programs that were helpful throughout their journey
and made a positive impact, which are detailed in this section and referred to as good examples
to be widely adopted. A change in the way prisons operate in terms of programming for inmates,
resources while incarcerated, and solid plans and preparation for reentry will be beneficial for
formerly incarcerated individuals as they reintegrate back into society.
Education and Vocational Programs. Many participants voiced concerns about the lack
of thorough educational programming and vocational skill-building offered during their periods
of incarceration. For example, Roman looked forward to reading new books and had to have his
family provide them to him as they were not available in his prison. A study by Gordon &
Weldon (2003) found that “participation of the incarcerated in correctional education programs
appears to reduce recidivism. Education is a change agent. Incarceration is meant to change
attitudes. The combination of career and technical education along with incarceration for the
qualified inmate may help to increase the safety of society when the offender is released.”
Participants in this study echoed their sentiments as they expressed their dismay, and the
participants who were fortunate enough to receive these opportunities spoke highly of the
benefits it provided them upon release, it is clear that a different approach to educating
incarcerated individuals should be taken.
As described in my findings, a few participants could not take advantage of existing
education and vocational programming because it was a privilege reserved for those with long or
life sentences. In speaking with Mike, he pondered the effectiveness of having two programs;
one for individuals he called “lifers” and one for those with shorter sentences. Having two
intentional programs would provide a source of enrichment for individuals who would have to
potentially spend the rest of their lives in prison, while those who had a release date to look

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 75
forward to could spend their time incarcerated building useful skills to implement upon release.
Having academic counselors was an idea brought up by Greg as a way to help prisoners navigate
education as they prepare for release. This recommendation would help individuals, some of
whom are very eager to continue their education, to understand their options. David’s issues with
the programs that were offered at his prison being unstructured, inaccessible, and unprofessional
is another issue that should be explored. Meaningful educational programs with an end goal in
mind would be advantageous for incarcerated individuals. These recommendations would help
ease the burden of finding a job and give them a jumpstart as they reintegrate back into society.
Oliver’s experience taking a fiber optics class while incarcerated is a prime example of
the potential of good educational and vocational programming in prison. Coupled with a program
he was able to participate in that exposed him to lessons in entrepreneurship, he found himself
motivated to continue his education in STEM upon release. He reflected on these opportunities
as we spoke and credited these experiences as positive influences throughout his reentry journey,
and he continues to carry these lessons as he is completing his studies in engineering at a
university today. Compared to participants who did not have these opportunities readily available
during incarceration, Oliver was well prepared to embark on his academic journey upon release.
As Hank mentioned about his personal educational journey while incarcerated, “It’s empowering
to talk out and realize that you’ve accomplished something. It was empowering, and it kept me
from going back.” A well-structured, intentional education and vocational program that is open
to all, and encouraged by the prisons, will help develop valuable skills and knowledge for
inmates to apply post-release.
Rehabilitation. Drug and alcohol rehabilitation and mental health are major issues that
need fine-tuning in the incarceration system. Several participants criticized the absence of these

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 76
critical services, even as they openly asked for help. According to Armour (2012), the prevalence
of mental health issues for those in prison eclipses that of the general population. Yet, this is not
properly addressed during incarceration and leads to an even tougher post-release and,
sometimes, recidivism. Drug and alcohol treatment services were not offered, and these needs
were ignored by many participants in this study. It became clear that imprisonment itself is not
an adequate form of rehabilitation for those suffering from addiction, and interventions are
necessary.
As Christopher described his experience with recidivism, he pointed out that prison did
not stop his drug use. He relapsed post-release, and this was an issue as he was actively being
drug tested and would have to face his probation officer after a failed test. For Maddy, her basic
needs not being met in prison caused her to have severe mental health issues. She described
being scared to reach out for help while incarcerated because it came with consequences. She
said prison “didn’t come with a therapist or a professional person to help you. It came with a
guard who would put you in a place like the hole.” Maddy recounted the amount of inmates
walking around with several mental issues, battling trauma and severe psychological disorders.
In the current structure of the system, correctional officers cannot provide mental health
assistance to inmates. Prisons should invest in programs for mental health and rehabilitation to
create a better environment for those who are incarcerated and to set individuals up for success
post-release.
Recommendation 2: A Focus on the Transition Period
As I asked participants about early challenges they faced post-release, many cited the
lack of preparation as they were getting ready for release and during the transition period as a
contributing factor to the several difficulties they faced during reentry. More than four in 10

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 77
offenders return to state prison within three years of their release (Pew Charitable Trusts, 2011).
It is critical to set inmates up for success to avoid recidivism and ease their many burdens as they
reintegrate back into society. This includes the above-mentioned recommendations for changes
to educational opportunities and a greater focus on rehabilitation and mental health, but also an
investment into counselors who prepare incarcerated individuals during their last few weeks of
completing their sentences and returning home. These counselors can provide help by sharing
organizations and services that can be taken advantage of, felony-friendly organizations to look
for jobs, tips on college or vocational program enrollment, and general resources to be aware of
as formerly incarcerated individuals make their transition.
In describing the shortcomings in post-release planning as his sentence was winding
down, Lawrence said,
I think people should have a path. Just, you know, someone asking, ‘What do you want to
do?’ And kind of sit down and do a weekly thing, maybe something six months before
release to get you thinking about your life. Just kind of set things up because people get
out and they get dropped off back in their neighborhood and they don’t know what to do
with their life.
David echoed these sentiments, wishing he had an advisor to meet with regularly to keep him
informed about the process and what to expect once released. Details were not shared with him
about what release would be like, what type of transportation he would need, and what to expect
when facing parole. David went on to say that post-release,
These different organizations are like a patchwork system. They don’t communicate with
one another, so a lot of the time you’re trying to navigate these conflicting responsibilities
and obligations and commitments. So there are tools there, they just aren’t streamlined.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 78
That was a major challenge, trying to uphold your obligations to all of these
responsibilities.
Inmates are unable to do their research about necessities and requirements post-release, so they
are reliant on information that can be provided to them. Granting them a dedicated advisor and a
well-thought-out plan unique to their needs is a crucial step in preparing them for reentry into
society and improving the chances that their transition will be smooth. Certainly, the stressors
immediately post-release when people and circumstances on the other side of the wall have
changed are undeniable. The simple task of not knowing how to get from the prison doors to
point B, to where they might stay that night is enough to trigger even the most resilient
individual. If recidivism is to be taken seriously, properly setting up inmates for release should
be a prioritized goal.
Another common theme that arose with each participant was mentorship. Some
individuals found mentors through their educational experiences, careers, and even relationships
they kept with other inmates who were also released. This is another crucial aspect of the
transition period that can heavily influence the direction an individual takes, and the resources
they have access to. According to Tietjen et al. (2021), mentorship can help provide
encouragement, inclusion, and social capital for the formerly incarcerated. The support of a
mentor, especially one who has faced similar circumstances, can be beneficial during the
transition. It would be helpful for formerly incarcerated individuals if they were assigned
mentors to help guide them throughout the transition process. These mentors do not necessarily
have to have been incarcerated themselves but should possess the knowledge to help with
resources, both tangible and emotional. An official program could be established and maintained
by each state, as each state has differing rules and regulations, policies, and resources to offer.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 79
This would be beneficial in providing support for individuals navigating the wide range of
challenges found in this study and would ultimately help in reducing recidivism.
Recommendation 3: A Restorative Justice System
While the recommendations for improving opportunities while in prison above are strong
suggestions that have originated from this study, the ultimate recommendation is a restorative
justice system. Over $182 billion is spent each year to keep people behind bars in the United
States (Wagner & Rabuy, 2017). Almost half of the $182 billion is spent on paying staff, who are
major stakeholders in the system and, at times, prevent reform (Wagner & Rabuy, 2017). Taking
into consideration the aforementioned 40% of individuals who end up returning to prison, it is
apparent that the existing system is not efficient or effective, and not focused on rehabilitating
offenders, but instead, on punishment.
Restorative justice is a system of criminal justice that focuses on the rehabilitation of
offenders through reconciliation with victims and the community at large (Wilson, 2005). A
paradigm shift will be necessary to address how society responds to criminal behavior.
Transforming our current incarceration system to a well-functioning restorative justice system
will lead to meaningful, mutually satisfying solutions in the community. A restorative justice
system will also address the various types of dehumanization described by the participants in this
study, giving offenders a greater sense of dignity. As this study demonstrated, certain practices in
prison are ethically and morally unacceptable and cause physical and mental anguish, leaving
individuals with lingering psychological issues. Roman’s experience being strip searched during
his first few moments in prison felt violating and caused him great trauma. Maddy’s inability to
contact her children while incarcerated has left a void she has yet to fill. These examples of

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 80
routine practices paint a grim picture of our justice system that society should find concerning
and address.
A restorative justice system will shift the focus from the offender to the harmed parties,
allowing offenders to participate more than our existing system (Zehr, 2015). This is particularly
critical for those who are sentenced to prison due to drug addiction. As demonstrated in this
study, sending individuals to prison does not help with addiction, especially due to the lack of
rehabilitation resources provided while a person is incarcerated. This is a major deficiency
described by participants in this study that can also lead to recidivism. Sufficient effort should be
put into placing people with addictions into rehabilitation programs instead of sending them to a
cell and failing to address the issue at hand. Additionally, a restorative justice system is said to be
more cost-effective than the current system in place.
It is important to note that this recommendation does not imply that the offender does not
take responsibility for their actions. It simply measures results by how successfully the harm is
repaired, rather than spotlighting punishment (Zehr, 2015, p.21). Punishment should not be
applied as a means of changing behavior and a good system should focus on solving problems
and moving forward. Our current system creates more barriers for incarcerated individuals and
sets them on difficult paths even after they have served their time and successfully completed
parole and probation requirements. A restorative justice system is the reform we need that places
rehabilitation over retribution.
Limitations and Delimitations
Possible limitations of this study include the truthfulness of respondents and
self-selection bias. The truthfulness of respondents is an anticipated limitation as it is not a factor
that is easily controlled. It is possible participants were not willing or able to share or describe

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 81
certain details, especially due to legal circumstances. This may limit the rigor of data collection
because it is solely based on self-reporting. Because participants chose whether or not to
participate in this study, after receiving background information, there is a degree of
self-selection bias to take into consideration. This could mean that respondents who chose to
participate will not wholly represent the entire target population.
Delimitations include the number of interviews conducted and the interview protocol.
Due to various factors, while the goal was to interview 12-15 participants, nine individuals
participated in this qualitative study, and the data used to portray perceptions and beliefs is based
on their limited storytelling. The small sample size is a limitation as it potentially does not
exclusively describe the desired population of interest for the study. Additionally, only one
woman participated in this study, limiting data on women’s experiences while incarcerated. The
research questions chosen to examine the population were designed to allow the participant to
answer key points relevant to the study and overall framework and therefore could leave out
other concepts not covered by the framework chosen to analyze the data.
Recommendations for Future Research
Due to challenges in finding participants and the snowball method that was used to
recruit for this study, only one woman participated. Further research that focuses specifically on
women’s barriers post-release would be integral in understanding their incarceration experience.
The one woman in this study shared experiences that were different from the men, including the
challenges of being incarcerated as a mother with young children. Although other participants
had children, only the woman spoke at length about her children. Incarceration takes a unique
toll on women, as the justice system in the United States was fundamentally constructed by and
for men and is not outfitted to take care of women's distinct needs (Camhi, 2018). These unique

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 82
challenges can be further explored to help find solutions to meeting the needs of incarcerated
women in prison and through the reentry process.
Further research can help address this problem of practice including diving deeper into
the issues of parole and probation, and how they create a barrier for formerly incarcerated
individuals. Specifically, a look at the rapport between a parole or probation officer and the
formerly incarcerated individual would be important to analyze. Parole officers are a
fundamental part of the reentry experience (Chamberlain et al., 2017). Based on the experiences
of individuals in this study, this relationship could have either a very negative or positive effect
on the post-release experience. This is particularly important to investigate as a contributor to
recidivism.
Conclusion
This study showed that individuals transitioning from incarceration faced multifaceted
challenges, including societal stigmas, mental health issues, career obstacles, and inadequate
support during and after imprisonment. The shortcomings within the prison system encompassed
a lack of guidance, limited access to education and vocational programs, and insufficient
attention to overall well-being. Post-release difficulties included stigma in education and
employment, housing struggles, and hindered career prospects due to negative sentiments.
Despite these challenges, positive opportunities emerged, with education and mentorship playing
transformative roles. Participants expressed gratitude for family and friendships, emphasizing the
crucial support of parents and the positive impact of mentoring relationships. Some participants
initiated or joined support groups, fostering a sense of community and challenging societal
prejudices associated with incarceration, illustrating a complex journey marked by both
adversities and opportunities.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 83
By instituting the recommendations of enhancing educational, vocational, and
rehabilitation programs for inmates, focusing on a better transition period, and implementing a
restorative justice system that focuses on rehabilitation over punishment, we will have a
better-functioning society. It is clear that incarceration creates significant challenges for
individuals seeking to reintegrate into society, including the loss of social networks, formal
education, job training, and experience. Research reviewed in this study indicated that
individuals with a criminal record face substantial obstacles in securing employment, even more
than other disadvantaged groups. Employment can be identified as a crucial factor in reducing
recidivism, redirecting individuals toward positive activities, and deterring them from engaging
in risky behaviors or associating with negative influences. Successful reintegration is also linked
to safer neighborhoods and more stable families, contributing to a happier and healthier society
for all.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 84
References
Alper, M., Durose, M. R., & Markman, J. (2018). 2018 update on prisoner recidivism: A 9-year
follow-up period (2005-2014). Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of
Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/2018-update-prisoner-recidivism-9-year-follow-pe
riod-2005-2014
Armour, C. (2012). Mental health in prison: A trauma perspective on importation and
deprivation.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20182630
Bazos, A., & Hausman, J. (2004). Correctional education as a crime control program. UCLA
School of Public Policy and Social Research, Department of Policy Studies.
Becker, G. (1971). The economics of discrimination Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bender, K. (2018). Education opportunities in prison are key to reducing crime. Center for
American Progress. https://www.americanprogress.
org/issues/education-k-12/news/2018/03/02/447321/education-opportunities-prison-key-r
educing-crime
Berg, M. T., & Huebner, B. M. (2011). Reentry and the ties that bind: An examination of social
ties, employment, and recidivism. Justice quarterly, 28(2), 382-410.
Bushway, S. D. (2004). Labor market effects of permitting employer access to criminal history
records. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 20(3), 276-291.
California Department of Rehabilitation. (n.d.). Department overview.
https://www.dor.ca.gov/Home/DepartmentOverviews/PE342.html.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 85
Camhi, N. (2018, August 24). Women’s Experience Behind Bars. Brennan Center for Justice.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/womens-experience-behind-ba
rs
Chin, G. J. (2011). Race, the war on drugs, and the collateral consequences of criminal
conviction. Journal of Gender, Race & Justice, 6, 255–278
Clear, T. R. (2008). The effects of high imprisonment rates on communities. Crime and justice,
37(1), 97-132.
County of Los Angeles Probation Information Center. (n.d.). AB 109. Retrieved from
https://probation.lacounty.gov/ab-109/
Couloute, L. (2018a). Getting back on course: Educational exclusion and attainment among
formerly incarcerated people. Prison Policy Initiative.
Couloute, L. (2018b). Nowhere to go: Homelessness among formerly incarcerated people.
Prison Policy Initiative. https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/housing.html
Couloute, L., & Kopf, D. (2018). Out of prison & out of work: Unemployment among formerly
incarcerated people. Prison Policy Initiative, 1-14.
https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/outofwork.html
Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage publications.
Davis, L. M. (2019). Higher Education Programs in Prison: What We Know Now and What We
Should Focus on Going Forward. Perspective. Rand Corporation.Retrieved from
https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspective
Davis, L.M., Bozick, R., Steele J., Saunders, J., & Miles, J. (2013). Evaluating the Effectiveness
of Correctional Education: A Meta-Analysis of Programs That Provide Education to

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 86
Incarcerated Adults. Rand Corporation. Retrieved from
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR266.html
Dumont, D. M., Brockmann, B., Dickman, S., Alexander, N., & Rich, J. D. (2012).
Public Health and the Epidemic of Incarceration. Annual Review of Public Health, 33(1),
325–339. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031811-124614
Duran, L., Plotkin, M., Potter, P., & Rosen, H. (2013). Integrated reentry and employment
strategies: Reducing recidivism and promoting job readiness. The Council of State
Governments Justice Center.
Esperian, J. H. (2010). The effect of prison education programs on recidivism. Journal of
Correctional Education, 316-334.
Federal Bureau of Prisons. (n.d.). Education Programs. Retrieved from
https://www.bop.gov/inmates/custody_and_care/education.jsp
Feingold, Z. R. (2021). The stigma of incarceration experience: A systematic review.
Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 27(4), 550.
Gibbons, A., & Ray, R. (2021). The societal benefits of postsecondary prison education.
Gibbs, G. R. (2007). Thematic coding and categorizing. Analyzing qualitative data, 703, 38-56.
Gordon, H. R., & Weldon, B. (2003). The impact of career and technical education programs on
adult offenders: Learning behind bars. Journal of correctional education, 200-209.
Green, E. L. (2020, December 21). Financial aid is restored for prisoners as part of the stimulus
bill. The New York Times. Retrieved from
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/21/us/politics/stimulus-law-education.html.
Hagan, J. (1993). The social embeddedness of crime and unemployment. Criminology, 31(4),
465-491.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 87
Holtfreter, K., Reisig, M. D., & Morash, M. (2004). Poverty, state capital, and recidivism among
women offenders. Criminology & Public Policy, 3(2), 185-208.
Holzer, H. J. (1996). What employers want: Job prospects for less-educated workers. Russell
Sage Foundation.
Holzer, H. J., Raphael, S., & Stoll, M. A. (2002). Can employers play a more positive role in
prisoner reentry?. Urban Institute.
Hunt, P., Smart, R., Jonsson, L., & Tsang, F. (2018). Breaking down barriers: experiments into
policies that might incentivize employers to hire ex-offenders. Rand Corporation.
Jones, A. (2018). Correctional control 2018: Incarceration and supervision by state. Prison policy
initiative, 12(11). https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/correctionalcontrol2018.html
Jones, A., & Sawyer, W. (2019). Arrest, release, repeat: How police and jails are misused to
respond to social problems. Prison Policy
Initiative.https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/repeatarrests.html
La Vigne, N., & Kachnowski, V. (2005). Texas’ prisoners reflections on returning home.
Li, M. (2018). From prisons to communities: Confronting re-entry challenges and social
inequality. Tarrant Cares, Texas.
https://tarrant.tx.networkofcare.org/ps/library/article.aspx?id
Linden, R., & Perry, L. (1983). The effectiveness of prison education programs. Journal of
Offender Counseling Services Rehabilitation, 6(4), 43-57.
Loeb, S. J., & AbuDagga, A. (2006). Health‐related research on older inmates: An integrative
review. Research in nursing & health, 29(6), 556-565.
Lundberg, S. J., & Startz, R. (1983). Private discrimination and social intervention in competitive
labor market. The American economic review, 73(3), 340-347.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 88
McDaniel, M., Simms, M. C., Monson, W., & Fortuny, K. (2013). Imprisonment and
disenfranchisement of disconnected low-income men. Urban Institute.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey Bass.
Molina, A. (2017, September 30). For black women, finding work after prison has added
challenges. Press Enterprise.
https://www.pressenterprise.com/2017/09/29/for-black-women-finding-work-after-prison
-has-added-challenges/
Murphey, D., & Cooper, P. M. (2015). Parents behind bars: What happens to their children.
Pager, D. (2003). The mark of a criminal record. American journal of sociology, 108(5),
937-975.
Pew Charitable Trusts. (2011). State of recidivism: The revolving door of America’s prisons. Pew
Center on the States, Public Safety Performance Project.
https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/reports/2011/04/12/state-of-recidivis
m-the-revolving-door-of-americas-prisons
Prison Fellowship. (n.d.). Frequently asked questions about prison. Retrieved from
https://www.prisonfellowship.org/resources/training-resources/in-prison/prison-culture/fr
equently-asked-questions-about-prison/
Rampey, B. D., Keiper, S., Mohadjer, L., Krenzke, T., Li, J., Thornton, N., & Hogan, J. (2016).
Highlights from the US PIAAC survey of incarcerated adults: Their skills, work
experience, education, and training: Program for the international assessment of adult
competencies: 2014 (NCES 2016-040). Washington, DC: National Center for Education
Statistics, US Department of Education.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 89
Redcross, C., Bloom, D., Jacobs, E., Manno, M., Muller-Ravett, S., Seefeldt, K., Yahner, J.,
Young A. A., & Zweig, J. (2010). Work After Prison: One-Year Findings from the
Transitional Jobs Reentry Demonstration. MDRC. Indiana University-Bloomington:
School of Public & Environmental Affairs Research Paper Series No. 2011-03-04.
Robinson, S. B., & Leonard, K. F. (2018). Designing quality survey questions. Sage publications.
Schmitt, J., & Warner, K. (2011). Ex-offenders and the labor market. WorkingUSA, 14(1),
87-109.
Stojkovic, S. (2007). Elderly prisoners: A growing and forgotten group within correctional
systems vulnerable to elder abuse. Journal of elder abuse & neglect, 19(3-4), 97-117.
Tietjen, G., Burnett, J., & Jessie, B. O. (2021). Onward and upward: The significance of
mentorship for formerly incarcerated students and academics. Critical Criminology, 29,
633-647.
Turney, K. (2014). The consequences of paternal incarceration for maternal neglect and harsh
parenting. Social Forces, 92(4), 1607-1636.
US Department of Education (ED). (2023, October 12). Correctional education: Adult education
and literacy. Home.
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ovae/pi/AdultEd/correctional-education.html#1
Visher, C., Debus, S., & Yahner, J. (2008). Employment after prison: A longitudinal study of
releasees in three states.
Wagner, P., & Bertram, W. (2020). What percent of the US is incarcerated?. And other ways to
measure mass incarceration.Prison Policy Initiative.
https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/01/16/percent-incarcerated/

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 90
Wagner, P., & Rabuy, B. (2017). Following the money of mass incarceration. Prison policy
initiative, 25.https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/money.html
Wilson, J. (2005). Victim-centered restorative justice: An essential distinction. Crime Victims
Report, 9(4).
World Population Review. Recidivism rates by state 2020. (2020). Recidivism rates by state
2020. Retrieved July 20, 2020, from
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/recidivism-rates-by-state
Zehr, H. (2015). The little book of restorative justice: Revised and updated. Simon and Schuster.

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 91
Appendix
Protocols
Interview questions:
Tell me a little bit about yourself and what you do.
Did you seek educational opportunities in prison?
● Did you participate in GED or higher education programs, or any continuing
education?
● Did you participate in vocational programs?
Did you participate in wellness education programs?
Did you take advantage of library services?
What types of leisure-time activities were offered to you?
Did the prison offer any programs to help navigate jobs and careers post-release?
What was the impact of these programs in your life, post-release?
In what ways could your experience in prison have been enhanced to better prepare you for
release?
Did you draw from your training experiences in prison in your career after leaving prison?
Did you have any mentors?
What types of general challenges did you face after leaving prison?
● Family life? Health? Career?
Can you tell me a little bit about what the transition was like?
What societal barriers did you encounter after leaving prison?
How responsive was the system to your needs?
What types of employment challenges did you face after leaving prison?

BARRIERS TO REENTRY 92
In what ways did your training in prison help with facing societal challenges?
In what ways did your training in prison help with facing employment challenges?
Do you feel your education and training in prison was valued by potential employers?
What resources were most helpful?
Were there any particular organizations that you found helpful?
How long did you receive help from these programs?
Now that you have experienced life after prison, what tools can be added to help incarcerated
individuals navigate life after prison and avoid recidivism?
What would you say to someone who is formerly incarcerated and looking for work?
Would you become a mentor to a formerly incarcerated individual immediately following their
release?
What else is important for me to know?

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Education after incarceration: identifying practices in prison education programs that positively affect the persistence of formerly incarcerated men to continue education

PDF

Factors influencing the success of Black male faculty at a Predominantly White Institution

PDF

Understanding experiences of previously incarcerated Black men and employment: a mixed methods study of racial disparities amongst Black men with a prior history of incarceration

PDF

Employee motivation in corporations that experienced a leadership transition

PDF

Breaking barriers to leadership: what's the best solution?

PDF

Understanding teacher leadership styles in relation to student outcomes

PDF

A case Study of gender gaps in the legal profession

PDF

Black disabled lives matter: barriers to employment for African Americans with a disability

PDF

Beyond commitments: a qualitative examination of the persistent disparities faced by Black women in executive leadership roles post the 2020 crisis and beyond

PDF

Belonging in America: Black Muslim refugee women’s’ trials and triumphs in the workplace

PDF

The case for leader self-reflection in the workplace

PDF

Ambient anxiety within leadership teams and its impact on organizational efficiency in mental health organizations

PDF

Assessing mental health barriers faced by Air Force law enforcement veterans

PDF

Investigating the personal and organizational factors influencing the departure of female physicians from healthcare leadership roles

PDF

The underrepresentation of Black women in the senior executive service of the United States government

PDF

Social media and the decline of U.S. newspapers: the role of learning in digital media transformation

PDF

The barriers and challenges associated with mental health help-seeking behaviors of police officers in the United States: a descriptive study

PDF

Prescription for change: gender barriers impact on healthcare leadership equity

PDF

Understanding the critical role of parents in improving the identification and support of twice exceptional learners in the K–12 system

PDF

The experience of Eritrean refugee women in addressing their mental health needs

Asset Metadata

Creator Noravian, Natalie (author)

Core Title Post-incarceration challenges: examining barriers to reentry post-release

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2024-05

Publication Date 01/29/2024

Defense Date 01/10/2024

Publisher Los Angeles, California (original), University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag formerly incarcerated,incarceration,post-incarceration,recidivism,reentry

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Kim, Esther (committee chair), Hirabayashi, Kimberly (committee member), Krop, Cathy (committee member)

Creator Email n.noravian@usc.edu,nnoravia@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113814344

Unique identifier UC113814344

Identifier etd-NoravianNa-12637.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-NoravianNa-12637

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Noravian, Natalie

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20240130-usctheses-batch-1123 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu