University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Uncovering promising practices for providing vocational opportunities to formerly incarcerated individuals

(USC Thesis Other)

Uncovering promising practices for providing vocational opportunities to formerly incarcerated individuals

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

UNCOVERING PROMISING PRACTICES FOR PROVIDING VOCATIONAL
OPPORTUNITIES TO FORMERLY INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS

by

Elia Inglis Lawatsch

A Dissertation Proposal 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

August 2020

Copyright 2020 Elia Inglis Lawatsch

ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
There are a few individuals to whom I owe a debt of gratitude and I can say without a
doubt that I could not have done this without their support. First, I would like to thank all of the
employers who participated in my study, as well as all employers out there who strive to promote
equity in providing jobs to formerly incarcerated individuals. You are all helping to change a
seemingly broken system, and your feedback will continue to be invaluable.
I would like to thank my fellow cohort and faculty at the University of Southern
California, Rossier School of Education. The last several years have been some of the most
difficult of my life - personally, professionally, and academically. Not a day has gone by where I
have not felt embraced by my peers and faculty. The support has absolutely contributed to my
success in finishing this study, as well as graduating from this doctoral program.
I would also like to thank my committee, Dr. Courtney Malloy, Dr. Eric Canny, and Dr.
Kathy Stowe. Serving on a dissertation committee involves a long-term and in-depth
commitment to guiding and supporting someone’s process over multiple years. I appreciate all of
the feedback and support on my choice of such an important, yet underdeveloped topic, offering
insights and your individual expertise. To Dr. Malloy, my committee chair, I cannot tell you how
much I appreciate all of the long conversations about my topic, your constant enthusiasm and
encouragement, and catching all of the minute details that I overlooked. This process was made
so much smoother with your guidance and suggestions.
Lastly, I could not have come close to starting, nor completing, this dissertation and
doctoral program without the constant support of my husband, Frank Lawatsch. You have never
known me as a non-full-time student. For almost the last decade, you have constantly rooted me
on, listened to me whine with the utmost patience, made sure I ate a real dinner and slept at a
decent hour, and continued to tell me that I was going to get through this process. You now know

iii
more than I am sure you ever intended to about providing jobs to formerly incarcerated
individuals, and you never once told me I was boring you. I hope you love me just as much as a
full-time partner, without the constant commitment to an academic program.

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................. ii
List of Tables ................................................................................................................... viii
List of Figures .................................................................................................................... ix
Abstract ............................................................................................................................... x
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1
Introduction of the Problem of Practice ........................................................................... 1
Background to the Problem ............................................................................................. 2
Related Literature ............................................................................................................. 3
Importance of the Field Innovation .................................................................................. 4
Field Performance Goal ................................................................................................... 5
Description of Stakeholder Group ................................................................................... 6
Stakeholder Group for this Study .................................................................................... 6
Purpose of the Study and Questions ................................................................................ 7
Methodological Framework ............................................................................................. 8
Definitions ........................................................................................................................ 8
Organization of the Study .............................................................................................. 10
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .......................................................... 11
Context of Incarceration and Recidivism ...................................................................... 12
Incarceration Rates ..................................................................................................... 12
Recidivism Rates ........................................................................................................ 13
Impacts of Recidivation ............................................................................................. 15
Economic .............................................................................................................. 15
Social ..................................................................................................................... 16
Recidivism and Employment ..................................................................................... 17
Barriers to Employment ............................................................................................. 18
Employability ........................................................................................................ 18
Background checks and exclusionary hiring practices ......................................... 20
Employer attitudes, beliefs, and bias .................................................................... 20
Inclusive hiring practices and policy change ........................................................ 23
Work Readiness Certification Programs ....................................................................... 25
Successful Programs .................................................................................................. 26
Strategies for increasing FII participation ............................................................. 29
Strategies for increasing employer participation .................................................. 31
Challenges to Implementation of Work Readiness Certification Programs .............. 32

Clark and Estes’ Knowledge, Motivation, and the Organizational Influences

v
Framework ..................................................................................................................... 33
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences ........................... 34
Knowledge and Skills ................................................................................................. 34
Knowledge Influences ................................................................................................ 35
Hiring criteria ........................................................................................................ 36
Leveraging WRCP resources ................................................................................ 37
Awareness of biases and stereotypes .................................................................... 38
Motivation .................................................................................................................. 41
Expectancy value theory ....................................................................................... 42
Organization ............................................................................................................... 45
General organization theory .................................................................................. 46
Cultural models ..................................................................................................... 48
Organizational collaboration with a WRCP ..................................................... 49
Organizational trust and acceptance amongst staff ........................................... 50
Cultural settings .................................................................................................... 52
Education and training ...................................................................................... 52
Mentorship and ongoing support ...................................................................... 53
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge, Motivation,
and the Organizational Context ..................................................................................... 55
Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 61
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY .................................................................................... 63
Introduction to the Methodology ................................................................................... 63
Sampling and Recruitment ............................................................................................. 65
Participating Stakeholders ......................................................................................... 65
Interview Sampling Strategy, Criteria, and Rationale ............................................... 65
Criterion 1. Demographic Consideration .............................................................. 65
Criterion 2. Hiring Capabilities ............................................................................. 66
Criterion 3. Current Employment Practices .......................................................... 66
Interview Sampling Recruitment Strategy and Rationale .......................................... 66
Qualitative Data Collection and Instrumentation .......................................................... 66
Interviews ................................................................................................................... 67
Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 67
Interview Procedures ............................................................................................. 67
Data Analysis ................................................................................................................ 68
Credibility and Trustworthiness .................................................................................... 69
Ethics ............................................................................................................................. 72
Limitations and Delimitations ....................................................................................... 75
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND FINDINGS .................................................................... 76
Participating Stakeholders ............................................................................................. 76
Interview Participants ................................................................................................. 77
Results and Findings ...................................................................................................... 79

vi
Research Question 1 ................................................................................................... 80
Knowledge ................................................................................................................. 80
Declarative and conceptual knowledge about hiring qualities and criteria
for FII ..................................................................................................................... 80
Hiring criteria for non-FII and FII ...................................................................... 81
Recruiting and hiring process for non-FII and FII ............................................. 85
Barriers to employment for FII .......................................................................... 88
Procedural knowledge around how to leverage WRCP resources ......................... 93
Resources for FII staff provided by organization .............................................. 94
Resources for non-FII staff provided by organization ....................................... 94
Resources for FII staff provided by WRCP ....................................................... 95
Metacognitive knowledge about awareness of biases and stereotypes .................. 96
Organizational improvements for working with FII .......................................... 97
Employer shifts in beliefs and feelings since hiring FII .................................... 98
Additional knowledge needs and assets .................................................................. 101
Motivation ............................................................................................................... 103
Expectancy value theory ...................................................................................... 103
Benefits and value of hiring FII ....................................................................... 104
Employer experience in working with FII ....................................................... 110
Why employers partnered with a WRCP ......................................................... 111
Benefits of collaborating with a WRCP ........................................................... 112
Research Question 2 ................................................................................................. 114
Organization ........................................................................................................... 114
Cultural models: collaboration with WRCPs and trust and acceptance among
staff ...................................................................................................................... 114
Employer experience in collaborating with a WRCP ...................................... 114
Staff feedback on working with FII ................................................................. 116
FII feedback on working with organization ..................................................... 117
Staff adjustment and changes in behavior since working with FII .................. 118
Cultural settings: education and training for working with FII staff and WRCP
mentorship and ongoing support .......................................................................... 120
Organizational change for accommodating FII staff ....................................... 120
Training for FII and non-FII staff .................................................................... 123
WRCP mentorship and ongoing support for managers and non-FII staff ....... 124
Additional organizational needs and assets .......................................................... 126
Research Question 3 ................................................................................................ 128
Employer recommendations for potentially beneficial WRCP resources ........... 128
Employer advice on equitable hiring practices for FII ........................................ 134
Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 137
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................... 140
Introduction and Overview .......................................................................................... 140
Discussion .................................................................................................................... 140
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences ...................................... 143
Knowledge Recommendations ................................................................................ 144
Increasing declarative-conceptual knowledge of hiring qualities and criteria

vii
for FII .................................................................................................................. 148
Increasing declarative-factual knowledge of legal restrictions for hiring FII ..... 149
Increasing procedural knowledge around how to leverage WRCP resources .... 150
Increasing metacognitive knowledge around identification and mitigation
of biases and prejudices towards FII ................................................................... 151
Motivation Recommendations ................................................................................. 153
Increasing employer’s expectancy value in hiring FII ........................................ 155
Increasing employer’s expectancy value around hiring, training, and navigating
issues with FII staff through WRCP collaboration ............................................. 156
Organization Recommendations .............................................................................. 158
Increasing organizational culture of collaboration with a WRCP ...................... 161
Increasing organizational culture of trust and acceptance among staff .............. 163
Increasing organizational culture of providing education and training
relevant to working with FII ............................................................................... 164
Increasing organizational culture of mentorship and ongoing support
opportunities from WRCP .................................................................................. 165
Implications for Practice .............................................................................................. 167
Holistic Service Provision ........................................................................................ 167
Consulting FII for Designing WRCP Service Delivery ........................................... 169
Extended Service Provision Timeframes ................................................................. 170
Shifting WRCP Philosophies and Program Focus ................................................... 171
Youth Diversion Programming within WRCPs ....................................................... 172
Implications for Future Research ................................................................................. 173
Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 176
References ....................................................................................................................... 177
Appendix A: Interview Protocol ..................................................................................... 190

viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Knowledge Influence, Knowledge Type, and Knowledge Influence
Assessment ........................................................................................................................ 41
Table 2 Assumed Motivation Influences and Motivational Influence Assessment .......... 45
Table 3 Assumed Organizational Influences and Organizational Influence
Assessment ........................................................................................................................ 55
Table 4 Participating Employer Sample Demographics ................................................... 78
Table 5 Specific Hiring Qualities or Criteria for FII Applicants ...................................... 82
Table 6 Recruiting and Hiring Practices for All Staff ...................................................... 86
Table 7 Resources Provided to FII Staff by WRCPs ........................................................ 96
Table 8 Benefits and Value in Hiring FII ....................................................................... 105
Table 9 Benefits of Collaborating with a WRCP ............................................................ 112
Table 10 Desired Employer Mentorship and Support from WRCP ............................... 125
Table 11 Desired Employer Resources from WRCP ...................................................... 130
Table 12 Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations ........................... 146
Table 13 Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations ............................ 154
Table 14 Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations ........................ 159

ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Conceptual Framework: Interaction of Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation
within Organizational Models and Settings ...................................................................... 59

x
ABSTRACT
This study applies a combination of learning, motivational, organizational, and change theories
while utilizing the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework. This will allow for an
understanding of work readiness certification program (WRCP) support for employers in
providing vocational experiences to formerly incarcerated individuals (FII). The overall goal of
this study was to identify potential solutions for increasing gainful employment opportunities for
FII, which can lower rates of recidivism and promote public safety. With a qualitative methods
design, this study engaged 12 participating Northern California employers already employing
FII, in interviews, some of whom were already collaborating with WRCPs and some of whom
were in the process of doing so. This study identifies notable areas to address in WRCP design,
such as increasing buy-in from employers for providing vocational experiences to FII, and
engaging FII in “wrap-around” services designed to promote supportive rehabilitation through a
non-punitive lens. The domains for increasing employer buy-in for WRCP participation and
informing WRCP design for employers to consider include: (a) knowledge around identification
of desired characteristics for FII staff; (b) knowing how to leverage WRCP resources; (c)
awareness of biases and stereotypes towards FII; (d) perceived value in the importance of
employing FII; and (e) organizational influences around cultural models and settings for
promoting welcoming atmospheres for FII staff. Based on the interview findings, in conjunction
with a thorough literature review, this study outlines recommendations centered on promoting
educational and supportive experiences for employers while collaborating with WRCPs for
increasing employment opportunities for FII.

xi
Keywords: bias, criminal record, diversity, economic instability, employment, equity, formerly
incarcerated individual, incarceration, inclusion, jail, parole, prison, racism, recidivism, work readiness
certification program

1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Introduction of the Problem of Practice
This study is focused on offering solutions for increasing gainful employment
opportunities for individuals who have been formerly incarcerated in jail or prison. There are 12
to 14 million adults with criminal records in the United States (Harley, 2014). The National
Institute of Justice [NIJ] (2013) found that 60-75% of formerly incarcerated individuals (FII) are
unable to secure employment within the first-year post-incarceration period, which dramatically
increases rates of recidivism.
1
Creating systems for more inclusive hiring practices for FII can be
mutually beneficial for applicants, employers, and the economy (Alexander, 2013; Harley, 2014;
Petersen, 2015; Schmitt & Warner, 2010; Webster, Staton-Tindall, Dickson, Wilson, &
Leukefeld, 2014; Yang, 2017).
Employment is known to significantly reduce risks of recidivism for FII (Pager, 2003;
Young & Powell, 2015; Yang, 2017). Employers, policy makers, and other individuals involved
with incremental change in hiring practices for FII, can consider underlying causes, historical
context, and reflection. This can inform change initiatives to address the barriers to employment
for FII and the problematic nature of our country’s generally exclusionary hiring practices for
FII, which will be discussed at length in Chapter 2. This problem is important to address for
reducing recidivism rates, as well as promoting equitable hiring practices for FII. This study is
focused on learning more about how employers can collaborate with work readiness certification
programs (WRCP) to mitigate this issue.

1
The most recent federal data available is from 2013, as national reports on offender reentry are done sporadically.

2
Background of the Problem
Each year, on average, there are between 600,000 and 700,000 FII released from
incarceration (Carson & Golinelli, 2014; Cook, Kang, Braga, Ludwig, & O’Brien, 2015;
Farabee, Zhang, & Wright, 2014; Feeny, 2009; Sawyer & Wagner, 2019). Further, over 10,000
people are released each week from jails and prisons within the United States (Department of
Justice, 2017; Petersen, 2015; Yang, 2017). On average, 95% of people released from
incarceration will immediately seek full-time employment (National Reentry Resource Center
[NRRC], 2014). Statistically, less than half of FII will gain employment within the first year of
release (NIJ, 2013; Yang, 2017). When FII are unable to gain employment post-incarceration and
rates of recidivism increase, local, state, and federal economies are also impacted negatively
(Harley, 2014; Pager, 2003; Petersen, 2015; Schmitt & Warner, 2010; Yang, 2017). In 2016,
estimates suggested that the United States lost up to $87 billion in potential revenue as a direct
result of unemployed FII, through loss of potential income taxes and providing FII with safety
net social services, including food stamps and welfare benefits (Barber & Bucknor, 2016).
Hiring FII not only reduces financial costs associated with recidivism but can further
improve local and larger economies through increased tax revenue, as well as fill job positions
that address labor shortages (Pager, 2003; Yang, 2017; Young & Powell, 2015). Petersen (2015)
predicted an estimate of $26 million in savings to the United States economy for every 1,500 FII
who do not recidivate and gain employment (approximately $17,333 in savings for each FII).
This is a significant amount of money that could be put into public schools, rehabilitative
programs for FII and other marginalized populations, and/or increasing educational opportunities
for incarcerated individuals. Not only do recidivism rates increase when employers choose to
decline employment to FII, affecting FII and their families, but local economies are also

3
negatively impacted. For example, when a FII is unable to find employment, they may commit
crimes which increase costs of public safety measures, including arrest and prosecution (Dobbie,
Goldin, & Yang, 2016) and a FII is more likely to rely on social service programs for financial
assistance (Yang, 2017).
Related Literature
Upwards of 60-75% of FII remain jobless for up to a year after their release from
incarceration (NIJ, 2013). When FII are unable to obtain employment post-incarceration, they
are at higher risk for recidivism, as well as homelessness and poverty (Alexander, 2012; Carson
& Golinelli, 2014; Drucker, 2011; Hartney, 2006; NIJ, 2013; Pager, 2003; Petersen, 2015;
Schmitt & Warner, 2010; Wang, Mears, & Bales, 2010; Webster et al., 2014; Yang, 2017).
Employers are often reluctant to hire FII for a variety of reasons, including employer perception
that FII are immoral (Petersen, 2015), that hiring FII produces safety risks for other employees or
clients (Bumiller, 2015; Carter, 2009; Harley, 2014; Schmitt & Warner, 2010), or policy
restrictions that create legal liability for employers who hire FII (Alexander, 2012; Holzer,
Raphael, & Stoll, 2001). Further compounding the lack of hiring desirability for FII is the fact
that many incarcerated individuals will experience lapses in work history that span years to
decades. This may raise a red flag on job applications and exclude FII from practical job training
or other vocational experiences (Alexander, 2012; Harley, 2014; Petersen, 2015; Schmitt &
Warner, 2010; Yang, 2017).
Although there are several methods for addressing provision of vocational opportunities
for FII, work readiness certification programs (WRCP) have been found to be particularly
promising in increasing employment rates (Brown & Rios, 2014; Bushway & Apel, 2012; Cook
et al., 2015; Farabee et al., 2014; Feeny, 2008; Fitzgerald, Chronister, Forrest, & Brown, 2012;

4
Flatt & Jacobs, 2018; Formon, Schmidt, & Henderson, 2018; Harley, 2014; Koschmann &
Peterson, 2013; Newton et al., 2018; Raphael, 2011; Schnepel, 2016; Wifokk, Linhordst, &
Morani, 2012; Zweig & Yahner, 2011). There are different types of WRCPs, including prison-
based, parole-based, post-release community-based (Wifokk et al., 2012), and transitional, which
includes service provision during and after incarceration (Feeny, 2008). Some WRCPs only
target one need, like education or employment, while others target multiple needs, often referred
to as “holistic services” or “wrap-around services” in the topic-related literature. WRCPs that
provide holistic or wrap-around services may provide any or all of the following: (a) job search
and placement help; (b) substance abuse and addiction services; (c) therapy or other mental
health services; (d) job training; (e) education programming; (f) housing assistance; (g) technical
support with collaborating employers; (h) communication and other soft skill building; (i) coping
skills; (j) risk assessments and targeted interventions; (k) group workshops; (l) motivation
training; and/or (m) setting realistic expectations (Bushway & Apel, 2012; Flatt & Jacobs, 2018;
Mohammed & Mohamed, 2015). WRCPs can collaborate with employers to improve
employment outcomes and reduce the likelihood for recidivism for FII (Bushway & Apel, 2012;
Flatt & Jacobs, 2018; Formon et al., 2018; Mohammed & Mohamed, 2015; Visher & Travis,
2011). FII who participate in WRCPs are about 33% more likely to become employed and up to
26% less likely to recidivate than FII who do not participate in WRCPs (Flatt & Jacobs, 2018;
Formon et al., 2018), suggesting that increased innovations in employer and WRCP
collaboration can be beneficial for FII, employers, and society.
Importance of the Field Innovation
FII who gain employment are not only at lower risk for recidivism, but are more likely to
be housed, have access to reliable transportation, and are at lower risk for alcohol or drug relapse

5
and/or developing symptoms of mental illness, as well as lowers utilization rates of safety net
programs, a cost savings to taxpayers and promotion of public health (Amadeo, 2018; Formon et
al., 2018; NIJ, 2013; Petersen, 2015; Webster et al., 2014; Young & Powell, 2015). Increasing
employment opportunities for FII can also be a protective measure for society, by narrowing the
scope of social service program utilization, saving costs associated with incarceration, and
making society safer through lowered risk for recidivation (Petersen, 2015; Yang, 2017). If FII
remain at jobs for longer periods of time, hiring costs for employers will be reduced and time can
be saved on recruiting and training (Petersen, 2015).
Field Performance Goal
Preliminary research suggested that employers are often reluctant to hire FII (Alexander,
2012; Drucker, 2011; Harley, 2014; Pager, 2003; Petersen, 2015; Schmitt & Warner, 2010;
Yang, 2017). However, research has also suggested that WRCPs may create promising results
because they offer vocational experience immediately after release (Brown & Rios, 2014;
Bushway & Apel, 2012; Cook et al., 2015; Farabee et al., 2014; Feeny, 2008; Fitzgerald et al.,
2012; Flatt & Jacobs, 2018; Formon et al., 2018; Harley, 2014; Koschmann & Peterson, 2013;
Newton et al., 2018; Raphael, 2011; Schnepel, 2016; Wifokk et al., 2012; Zweig & Yahner,
2011). While participating in a WRCP, FII are placed into temporary positions with participating
employers, which often serve as a trial period, and afford them the opportunity to exhibit their
dependability and desirability for transitioning into permanent employment.
This study focused on examining the needs and assets required to accomplish the goal of
increasing the numbers of FII participating in a WRCP and receiving one-year temporary
positions designed to provide an opportunity to transition into permanent employment if all
conditions of the WRCP agreement were met. It is hypothesized that a WRCP specifically

6
designed for this population would lower risks of recidivism, reduce hiring and training costs for
participating employers, and promote public safety.
Description of Stakeholder Group
There are several stakeholders who would be involved in accomplishing the goal,
including employers, supervisors and case managers, FII and families. Employers would be
tasked with recruiting and hiring FII for temporary positions within their organizations. Further,
employers would also be involved in collaborating with a WRCP program for FII that provides
vocational experience, supportive wrap-around services, and creates responsibility for their FII
participants. Ideally, the temporary positions would turn into permanent, paid employment upon
completion of WRCP requirements. A second stakeholder group would involve supervisors and
case managers, who would be tasked with supervising and providing services to FII directly
related to successful completion of the WRCP and gaining permanent employment. A third
stakeholder group would be FII, who would be responsible for participating in WRCP activities
and requirements, as well as fulfilling responsibilities set forth by the employer. A fourth
stakeholder group would be the friends and family members of participating FII, who would
directly benefit from their loved one gaining vocational experience while working towards
permanent paid employment. Additionally, friends and family members would provide support
to FII and engage in WRCP programming involving social or familial support systems.
Stakeholder Group for this Study
Although a thorough analytic undertaking would necessarily involve all aforementioned
stakeholder groups, due to time and resource restrictions, only one stakeholder group was of
focus throughout this study: employers. Employers were the primary stakeholder group because
a successful WRCP would not be possible without buy-in and participation from the employers

7
that would agree to take on FII as temporary and potentially future permanent employees. While
FII, supervisors, and case managers would also be vital for a WRCP to thrive, a relationship
would first need to be developed with employers.
Research was conducted with Northern California employers who were currently
employing FII and who were already or in the process of collaborating with a WRCP. This
stakeholder group served as the experts to glean knowledge from, in order to ultimately come up
with recommendations for creating a new WRCP in Northern California. It was important to
collect information on successes, failures, or areas of improvement from this stakeholder group,
in order to create an innovative WRCP. This feedback contributed to identifying areas in which
WRCPs and employers could collaborate to increase the numbers of FII receiving vocational
training and other rehabilitative services that lead to higher employment rates and lower risks for
recidivism.
Purpose of the Study and Questions
The purpose of this study was to conduct a needs analysis in the areas of knowledge and
skill, motivation, and organizational resources necessary to accomplish the goal of increasing
numbers of FII participating in a WRCP and receiving one-year temporary positions designed to
provide an opportunity to transition into permanent employment if all conditions of the WRCP
agreement were met. The analysis began by generating a list of possible needs and then moved to
examining these systematically to focus on actual or validated needs. While a complete needs
analysis would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes, employers were the stakeholder
group of focus. The rationale for focusing on employers as the primary stakeholder group was
that their involvement and cooperation with the WRCP would be vital in providing vocational
opportunities to FII.

8
The questions guiding this study were:
1. What are the knowledge and motivation needs and assets related to increasing the
numbers of formerly incarcerated individuals participating in a WRCP and receiving
one-year temporary positions that are designed to provide an opportunity to transition
into permanent employment?
2. What are the organizational needs and assets related to increasing the numbers of
formerly incarcerated individuals participating in a WRCP and receiving one-year
temporary positions that are designed to provide an opportunity to transition into
permanent employment?
3. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions for
addressing identified needs?
Methodological Framework
The Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis is a systematic, analytical method that helps to
clarify organizational goals and identify the needs between the actual performance level and the
preferred performance level within an organization. It was adapted to study a potential for
innovation in the area of providing vocational training and other rehabilitative services that lower
recidivism risks for FII. Assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs were
generated based on personal knowledge and related literature. The needs were validated using
interviews, a literature review, and content analysis. Research-based solutions were
recommended and evaluated in a comprehensive manner.
Definitions
Bias: A preference or prejudice for or against an individual or group, which often produces
unfair treatment or exclusion.

9
Criminal Record: A written document of an individual’s previous criminal charges and
convictions.
Diversity: The condition in which people differ, involving all of the varying characteristics that
distinguish one individual or group as different from another, including race, gender, and cultural
identities.
Economic Instability: A state of a micro or macro community experiencing financial burden, as a
result of an event or circumstance.
Employment: A situation in which an individual is paid in exchange for labor.
Formerly Incarcerated Individual: An individual who has previously been incarcerated in a jail
or prison.
Equity: The condition in which all people experience impartial treatment, opportunity, and
access, while concurrently aiming to identify and mitigate barriers that have prevented equal
participation for certain individuals or groups.
Incarceration: A state in which an individual is confined from the public, typically in a locked
facility with limited rights and freedoms.
Inclusion: The conscious act of creating environments that allow for an individual or group to
feel welcome, respected, supported, and able to fully participate in.
Parole: A timeframe after someone is released from incarceration that is considered provisional
with guidelines and restrictions, which may result in further criminal conviction and
reincarceration if violated.
Racism: A belief system that involves bias, discrimination, or intolerance towards another race
and a belief that the race one identifies as belonging to is superior.

10
Recidivism: A situation involving FII committing another crime that results in arrest, conviction,
and/or reincarceration.
Work Readiness Certification Program: A program that works with a marginalized population in
gaining vocational experience, including life skills and interview preparedness, in order to make
them more desirable job candidates.
Organization of the Study
This study is organized into five chapters. Chapter 1 provided an overview of the study,
including an introduction to the topic being addressed, key ideas, stakeholders, and terminology
involved in discussing barriers for FII seeking employment post-incarceration. The global goals
and stakeholders, as well as the brief introduction of needs analysis, which was applied
throughout this study, was also introduced. Chapter 2 provided a review of the current literature
surrounding the scope of the study. Topics on barriers and negative impacts associated with FII
seeking employment post-incarceration, impacts of recidivism, economic and social instability
that results from recidivism, supports and interventions, and policy restrictions and inclusive
hiring practices was addressed. Chapter 3 detailed the assumed needs for this study, as well as
methodology when it comes to choosing participants, data collection, and analysis. Chapter 4
discussed the analyzed data and results, as well as provided an assessment of the results. Finally,
Chapter 5 introduced potential solutions and innovative techniques, based on data and literature,
for addressing the needs for increasing the numbers of FII participating in a WRCP and receiving
one-year temporary positions designed to provide an opportunity to transition into permanent
employment if all conditions of the WRCP agreement were met.

11
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

This literature review examines possible barriers and associated needs for formerly
incarcerated individuals (FII) seeking employment post-incarceration. The review begins with
historical and contextual background research on mass incarceration in the United States,
followed by a discussion of racial discrimination, which further perpetuates barriers for
employment post-incarceration. This is followed by an overview of literature on risk factors and
barriers for FII associated with employer hiring attitudes, bias, and other exclusionary practices
utilized by employers when considering hiring FII. Next, the review will present an in-depth
discussion of economic and other detrimental impacts to micro and macro economies as a result
of recidivism and prohibiting FII from gaining employment post-incarceration. This section
includes:
• Current research on systemic bias and exclusionary hiring practices involving FII
• Considers studies that have shown promising outcomes for FII who have engaged in a
work readiness certification program (WRCP) with employers.
• Discusses more inclusive hiring practices that could prove beneficial economically,
personally, and promote public safety.
Following the general research literature, the chapter turns to the Clark and Estes (2008) Gap
Analytic Conceptual Framework, and specifically, knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences on an employer’s ability to collaborate with a WRCP that provides vocational training
to FII.

12
Context of Incarceration and Recidivism
Incarceration Rates
The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world, a direct result of Mass
Incarceration, a unique phenomenon to the United States that took significant precedence in the
1970s within criminal justice policies and procedures (D’Amico, 2014; Raphael, 2011). The
United States, on average, incarcerates over five times as many individuals than all other
countries with comparable crime rates, sophistication in industrialization, and economies (Carter,
2009; Wagner & Walsh, 2016). Both the rates of incarceration and lengths of sentences for
adults in the United States have increased exponentially over the last several decades, with no
apparent decline or signs that a decline is expected in the near future (Raphael, 2011; Schmitt &
Warner, 2010; Wifokk et al., 2012). Between 1970 and 2010, there was a 1000% increase in
populations of incarcerated individuals (Carter, 2009; Drucker, 2011; Raphael, 2011; Wifokk et
al., 2012). As of 2012, there were approximately 1,570,400 individuals incarcerated in the
United States, which is about 716 out of every 100,000 people (D’Amico, 2014; Newton et al.,
2018). For over the last decade, estimates have consistently indicated that 1 in every 100 adults
are in jail or prison in the United States (Derzis, Meyer, Curtis, & Shippen, 2017; Schmitt &
Warner, 2010). About 1 in 5, or 65,000,000 adults, have a criminal record (Petersen, 2015).
Estimates are that 11.3% of males born in 2001 in the United States will be incarcerated as
adults, versus only 3.6% of males born in the United States in 1974 (Schmitt & Warner, 2010).
While there are several theories as to why this dramatic incline has occurred, some
predominant theories are important to note. Policy changes during the 1970s involved attention
to increased drug arrests and lengthened sentencing, which now account for about one-third of
all individuals incarcerated (D’Amico, 2014; Raphael, 2011). It has been suggested that during

13
the 1980s, prisons and policy makers shifted their concern for incarcerated offenders from
rehabilitation to retribution (Kjellstrand & Eddy, 2011; Travis, 2005). Additionally, since the
1980s, there has been a hyper-focus on removing individuals from society who are perceived to
pose a threat, specifically targeting individuals who identify as African American or belonging to
another racial minority. More recently, mandatory minimums in sentencing requirements and
aggressive policies like “three strikes you’re out,” have also significantly increased sentences for
many individuals (Travis, 2005). Current estimates indicate that 40% of incarcerated individuals
identify as African American and 20% as of Latino descent. The United States currently has
more African American individuals incarcerated than there were enslaved during the 1850s
(D’Amico, 2014). Further, it is interesting to note that the incline in Mass Incarceration rates
have coincided with increased participation in civil rights movements (Drucker, 2011).
Recidivism Rates
Along with increased rates of incarceration, paralleling increased rates of recidivism have
occurred since the 1970s, which has resulted in significant percentages of FII remaining
unemployed post-incarceration (Visher & Travis, 2011). With increased incarceration rates, it
follows that increased FII are reintegrating into society annually (Schmitt & Warner, 2010).
About 3% of adults who are considered able to work are incarcerated at any given time (Flatt &
Jacobs, 2018) and on average, 95% of FII released from incarceration will immediately seek full-
time employment (NRRC, 2014). Statistically, 60-75% of FII will not be able to gain
employment within the first year of release (NIJ, 2013). Estimates are that within three years of
post-incarceration release, two-thirds of FII will recidivate (Brown & Rios, 2014; Carter, 2009;
Feeny, 2008) and at least 40% of those individuals will be re-incarcerated (Carter, 2009;
Koschmann & Peterson, 2013; Yang, 2017).

14
The research suggested that specific subgroups of FII are more likely to recidivate. Risk
factors for recidivism include: (a) age; (b) gender; (c) race; (d) gang association; (e) substance
abuse; (f) antisocial or negative behavior patterns; (g) association with social groups that
encourage criminal behavior; (h) increased length of incarceration time; (i) multiple
incarcerations; (j) living in communities that do not provide post-incarceration rehabilitative
services; (k) living in communities without sufficient access to social services, inadequate public
transportation options, or that are experiencing job shortages; and/or (l) lack of social support
(Wifokk et al., 2012). Young male offenders between the ages of 18-28 who identify as African
American are most likely to recidivate (Yang, 2017; Zweig & Yahner, 2011). Further, African
American males are more likely to be re-incarcerated than white or Latino males (Yang, 2017),
which can in part be explained by institutional racism (Alexander, 2012). Finally, lower
educational attainment levels increase risk for recidivism (Wifokk et al., 2012; Yang, 2017).
The type of crime committed also contributes to increased risks for recidivism. FII who
were incarcerated previously for a property crime are more likely to recidivate than FII
previously incarcerated for drug or violent offenses. Further, FII who have committed and been
incarcerated more than once are more likely to recidivate (Wifokk et al., 2012; Yang, 2017;
Zweig & Yahner, 2011). Lack of job availability can also increase the likelihood of recidivation
(Wang et al., 2010). Counties experiencing increased vacancies in hourly-wage, low-skill jobs
who are willing to hire FII are expected to have lower recidivism rates than counties that do not
(Yang, 2017). FII released into poorer communities are more likely to recidivate than FII
released into wealthier communities (NIJ, 2013). For individuals who are unable to gain
employment, risks for recidivism increase exponentially; estimates are that 60-75% of FII will
not obtain a job within a year of post-release (NIJ, 2013; Yang, 2017).

15
Impacts of Recidivation
Economic. When FII are unable to gain employment post-incarceration, not only are they
at risk for recidivating but also face potential homelessness and other detrimental situations. In
the United States, FII face many roadblocks while re-integrating into society, including
employment, which place the individual and society at economic risk (Petersen, 2015). Other
economic impacts may include: loss of income from a parent who is incarcerated; increased
familial reliance on social services for non-incarcerated family members, including TANF and
welfare benefits; increased spending on homeless shelters and other agencies who are operating
as a result of needs related to recidivism; and, increased allocation of funds to state budgets
(Visher & Travis, 2011).
Not only do recidivism rates rise when employers choose to decline employment to FII,
impacting FII and families, but local, state, and federal economies are also affected negatively
(Schmitt & Warner, 2010). Economic impacts may involve wasting tax payer dollars on
arresting, prosecuting, and incarcerating FII and increased costs on promoting public safety
(Amadeo, 2018; Graffman, Shinkfield, & Hardcastle, 2008). In fact, estimates claim that in 2016
the United States lost up to $87 billion in potential revenue as a direct result of FII who were not
employed because of loss in potential income taxes and providing FII with safety net social
services, including food stamps and welfare benefits (Barber & Bucknor, 2016). Additionally,
state prisons utilize the second highest amount of government spending behind Medicaid
(Koschmann & Peterson, 2013). As of 2009, the United States spends $50 billion a year
(approximately 1 in every 15 general fund dollars) on corrections, which does not include the
costs of arresting, prosecuting, and social services associated with recidivism (Visher & Travis,
2011).

16
It costs more to incarcerate someone than it does to provide community supervision or
rehabilitative programming (Raphael, 2011; Yang, 2017), which could support FII in gaining
employment, a hallmark of reduced recidivism rates (Bushway & Apel, 2012; Feeny, 2008; NIJ,
2013; Petersen, 2015; Webster et al., 2014). Hiring FII can improve local and larger economies,
as they occupy job positions that remain unfilled, handle labor shortages, and contribute to their
community through paying taxes (Young & Powell, 2015). Petersen (2015) estimated $26
million in savings to the United States economy for every 1500 individuals who do not recidivate
and gain employment. This is a significant amount of money that could be put back into public
schools, rehabilitative programs for FII and other marginalized populations, and/or to developing
new economies (Formon et al., 2018; Petersen, 2015). With a 2019 estimated budget deficit of
$985 billion (Amadeo, 2018), increased inclusive hiring practices for FII could benefit local and
national economies significantly. From an economic standpoint, the problem of exclusionary
hiring practices for FII is important to address because funding for public resources and other
initiatives could expand if recidivism rates decreased as a result of more FII experiencing stable
employment (Harley, 2014; Petersen, 2015; Wang et al., 2010; Yang, 2017).
Social. While often intertwined with economic impacts of recidivism, social
consequences of recidivism can be quite detrimental to FII, their family members, and the larger
community. Recidivism can cause further victimization, involves a threat to public safety, and
perpetuates negative feelings about FII. When FII are unable to obtain employment, they are
more likely to recidivate, which also increases crime in many neighborhoods (Graffman et al.,
2008). As a result, recidivism decreases public safety, as crimes committed by FII may involve
victimization and an increased demand on law enforcement (Carter, 2009; Graffman et al., 2008;
Koschmann & Peterson, 2013; Raphael, 2011). When FII recidivate and spend additional time

17
incarcerated, family separation occurs, causing negative emotional or social impacts for the
family members and increased stress for the custodial parent who remains at home (Koschmann
& Peterson, 2013). For some families, homelessness and increased reliance on shelters or other
social service providers ill-equipped to work with families of incarcerated individuals may also
occur if the incarcerated parent was the primary source of income (Visher & Travis, 2011).
Communities are also socially impacted when FII recidivate and are re-incarcerated, as there is
less civic participation, primarily seen with voting, lost connections through various community
organizations or groups, particularly if the FII was involved in their communities, and increased
public health issues (Visher & Travis, 2011). The culmination of social impacts resulting from
recidivism also decreases positive feelings towards FII by the community, which diminishes the
likelihood of successful reintegration into society (Graffman et al., 2008).
Recidivism and Employment
As jobs are an immediate priority for most FII post-incarceration, it is important to
address barriers associated for FII in gaining employment upon release (Lattimore, Steffey, &
Visher, 2009). On average, 95% of FII will immediately look for employment upon release
(NRRC, 2014). Further, employment has shown to significantly reduce risks of recidivism
(Bushway & Apel, 2012; Feeny, 2008; NIJ, 2013; Petersen, 2015; Webster et al., 2014). While
there are other risk factors for recidivism, employment appears to be one of the most significant
factors in successful post-incarceration community reintegration (Feeny, 2008; Webster et al.,
2014). There are ways to combat this problem: educating employers on actual risks versus
perceived risks in hiring FII; banning employers from inquiring about criminal records until later
in the hiring process after an extensive in-person interview with the applicant takes place
(Harley, 2014); assessing the nature of the crime committed; and establishing time limitations for

18
disqualifying applicants on the basis of their criminal record (Petersen, 2015). A more labor-
intensive and innovative approach involves WRCPs, where FII are able to receive vocational
training at participating organizations and are afforded the potential of permanent employment.
Barriers to Employment
Employability. A significant set of obstacles for FII reintegrating into society post-
incarceration include barriers specific to employment prospects. Compounding barriers to
employment, other obstacles involve tradition, employer attitude, societal prejudice and racism,
and the structure in which the United States relies on exclusionary norms for FII (Alexander,
2012). A FII’s criminal record may represent the most significant barrier to securing
employment; it has been estimated that over 30% of FII will never obtain permanent
employment post-incarceration (Newton et al., 2018). A criminal record automatically
disqualifies FII from many sectors of the workforce, including childcare, medical, security, and
government sectors. Further, a criminal record may preclude FII from obtaining necessary
licensing in a number of professional fields (Agan & Starr, 2017; Carter, 2009; Feeney, 2008;
Holzer et al., 2001; Snodgrass, Jenkins, & Tate, 2017; Swensen, Rakis, Snyder, & Loss, 2014;
Uggen, Vuolo, Lageson, Ruhland, & Whitham, 2014).
While incarcerated, individuals are removed from the traditional workforce, creating a
lapse in work history, as well as diminishing opportunities for vocational training or other job
experiences (Feeny, 2008; Harley, 2014; Visher & Travis, 2011). FII also lose access to
developing employment “soft skills” while incarcerated, which includes social or customer
service experience, interviewing aptitude, and overall confidence in one’s vocational capabilities
(Harley, 2014; Raphael, 2011; Schmitt & Warner, 2010; Wifokk et al., 2012). Other barriers for
FII associated with gaining employment include: (a) lack of training and resources for probation

19
officers tasked with assisting FII to gain employment; (b) decline in health and mental wellbeing
as a result of being incarcerated, as well as pre-existing physical issues or cognitive impairments;
(c) higher rate of lower educational achievement; (d) history of addictions; (e) identification as a
racial minority; (f) age; (g) higher probability of lack of resources (e.g., limitations in finances,
transportation, or housing); (h) less likely to have familial or social support; and (i) required
documentation (i.e., governmental identification) to secure employment. Such forms of
identification are often revoked at the time of incarceration (Brown & Rios, 2014; Carter, 2009;
Farabee et al., 2014; Feeny, 2008; Harley, 2014; Holzer et al., 2001; Latessa, 2012; Newton et
al., 2018; Pager, 2003; Raphael, 2011; Schmitt & Warner, 2010; Snodgrass et al., 2017; Swensen
et al., 2014; Thompson & Cummings, 2010; Webster et al., 2014; Wifokk et al., 2012; Yang,
2017; Zweig & Yahner, 2011).
The existing literature disproportionally focuses on some barriers, evidencing a limited
exploration of educational achievement and health-related issues. Pertaining to barriers
associated with education, only 30% of FII possess a high school diploma and 50% are
considered illiterate (Feeny, 2008; Holzer et al., 2001). Specific to drug or alcohol treatment,
75% of FII require treatment (Feeny, 2008). Common pre-existing health issues for FII include
Hepatitis C (15-20%) and AIDS/HIV (2-3%), which often go improperly treated during
incarceration (Feeny, 2008; Holzer et al., 2011). Further, at least 30% of FII have a mental or
physical disability (Derzis et al., 2017).
Racially discriminatory hiring practices, including those that exist independently of
criminal records, have created additional barriers for many FII when seeking employment
(Alexander, 2012). Individuals who identify as a racial minority are at higher risk for remaining
unemployed. FII presenting with physical and cognitive disabilities, in addition to belonging to a

20
racial minority, are at greatest risk for remaining unemployed post-incarceration (Alexander,
2012; Harley, 2014; Holzer et al., 2001; Pager, 2003; Petersen, 2015). The United States
incarcerates more individuals than any other country and disproportionately houses individuals
who identify as belonging to a racial minority or who experience a disability, leaving these
populations most vulnerable to remaining unemployed and potentially recidivating.
Background checks and exclusionary hiring practices. As of 2015, 80-90% of
employers, including non-profits, government agencies and public or private sector companies,
utilize criminal background checks during the hiring process, which eliminates many otherwise
appropriate candidates (Bumiller, 2015; NIJ, 2013; Peterson, 2015). Employers who require
background checks are 50% less likely to call back applicants with criminal records and are
typically less likely to hire FII (NIJ, 2013). While background checks may diminish risks for
employers from hiring potentially problematic employees, background checks often assimilate
all crime types as being synonymous with each other, which can make it as difficult for someone
convicted of a minor drug charge to gain employment as it is for someone convicted of murder
or a more serious crime (Alexander, 2012). When employers are willing to make exceptions for
individuals with criminal records, other discriminatory practices may be deployed, making
working conditions for FII potentially more difficult. For example, employed FII make an
average of 10-40% less money than non-FII in the same positions and companies (Harley, 2014;
Holzer et al., 2001). Petersen (2015) claimed that most employers are more likely to hire welfare
recipients, individuals without a high school diploma or GED, or individuals with little-to-no
work history, than FII who may be higher qualified for the position otherwise.
Employer attitudes, beliefs, and bias. Some employers are willing to hire FII; however,
the majority of employers are still reluctant to consider hiring someone with a criminal record or

21
known criminal history. While not all employers demonstrate overtly prejudicial hiring practices,
many employers still exhibit concern when considering hiring FII. These concerns may include:
(a) staff or customer safety; (b) trustworthiness; (c) lack of appropriate skills to do the job
adequately; (d) type of crime committed; (e) fear of business victimization; (f) unreliable or poor
work ethic; (g) policy or legal liability; (h) commission of criminal acts at work; and (i)
questions about a FII’s morality (Blumstein & Nakamura, 2009; Bumiller, 2015; Carter, 2009;
Feeny, 2008; Harley, 2014; Holzer et al., 2001; Petersen, 2015; Raphael, 2011).
Although there is limited research on employer attitudes toward hiring FII, there are
several noteworthy studies. Graffman et al. (2008) surveyed 596 employers and found that only
12% were willing to hire FII. Further, employers were less likely to hire FII with multiple
convictions and were more likely to hire FII with college degrees or that completed a WRCP.
Another study by Schmitt and Warner (2010) found that only 40% of employers claimed they
would hire FII with non-violent criminal records. In 2014, Uggen et al. conducted an
experimental study where they matched pairs of white and African American males to apply for
the same “entry-level” jobs, both disclosing an arrest that did not result in conviction or
incarceration on their application. Results showed that 50% of white males got a call-back; only
40% of African Americans received additional consideration. Uggen et al. (2014) conducted
employer interviews after the application process and found that 48 of the 100 agencies involved
were willing to participate in the interview. They found that the majority of employers admitted
to discriminating against applicants with criminal records, some with the added caveat that it was
only against felony records and one manager indicated that if the applicant was forthright and
described the situation “professionally,” they would be willing to give them a chance. They also

22
found that 60% of employers said they would be more likely to hire FII with misdemeanors than
with felony charges.
Although the United States continues to become more diverse, racial and ethnic
discrimination are still common in recruitment and hiring decisions (Young & Powell, 2015),
which arguably mirrors disproportionate rates of incarceration for different racial or ethnic
groups (Alexander, 2012). In 2014, African Americans represented 13.2% of the total United
States population, but comprised about 38% of total incarcerated people (Carson & Sabol, 2012;
United States Census Bureau, 2014). The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC) mandates that “discrimination on basis of race, color, religion, sex (including
pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information” is prohibited.
However, there is no mandate that protects individuals with criminal records (Young & Powell,
2015), leaving African Americans or individuals who identify as belonging to a racial minority,
particularly vulnerable to employment discrimination (Alexander, 2012). Seeing as FII lack a
federally protected status against employment discrimination, some employers have the
opportunity to legally utilize prejudice under the guise of adhering to policies like the EEOC
(Avery, McKay, & Wilson, 2008; Crandall & Eshleman, 2003; NIJ, 2013).
Estimates for call-back rates for FII applicants substantially vary dependent on race.
Research has shown that white males are considered the most job desirable candidates, while
African American and Latino individuals are least desirable (Alexander, 2012; Avery et al.,
2008; Pager, 2003; Petersen, 2015). Stoll, Raphael, and Holzer (2004) performed a study that
found call-back rates for white male FII were 17%, while only 5% for African American male
FII. Another study conducted in New York City involved submission of 15,000 fictitious
applications (all male, early 20’s, with or without criminal records) to various employers. Half of

23
the applications disclosed drug or property crimes while the other half disclosed no criminal
history. Other aspects of identity (African American, white, High School diploma, GED, gaps of
1+ year in employment, or no gaps) were randomly assigned. The researcher reported that
employers called back 60% of applicants with no criminal record, 8.5% of applicants with
convictions, and 13.6% of applicants without convictions, but an arrest. Both drug and property
crimes were treated the same. They also found that employers in mostly white neighborhoods
called back less applicants than employers in neighborhoods with more diversity (Agan & Starr,
2017). As long as the United States’ federal laws remain intact, racial discrimination against
African American individuals with criminal records is allowable and remains prevalent, making
reintegration and employment prospects considerably more difficult for FII (Alexander, 2012).
Inclusive hiring practices and policy change. WRCPs and other assistance programs
for FII have gained momentum in the last decade. Possible reasons include incentives, in the
form of tax breaks, financial awards and grants for employers willing to hire FII, and policy
initiatives (Wifokk et al., 2012). The Work Opportunity Tax Credit, available in California,
provides employers with up to a $9,600 tax credit for hiring individuals who belong to “targeted
groups,” which includes FII (California Employment Development Department [CEDD], 2018;
Carter, 2009; Whitlock, 2017). Another government program that incentivizes employers to hire
FII is the Federal Bonding Program, created by the United States Department of Labor, which
attaches a $5000 bond to each FII hired to cover any costs if a crime or other damage causing
financial loss occurs at the workplace by FII (Carter, 2009). There are also financial initiatives
aimed at WRCPs or other community-based organizations working with FII. The Second Chance
Act, enacted in 2008, provides federal grants to agencies providing wrap-around services to FII,
including: job skills training; substance abuse treatment; housing; family programs; mentoring

24
and other therapeutic services; and, focusing on reducing recidivism rates (Wifokk et al., 2012).
In 2008, $165 billion in grants were awarded to programs focused on successful reentry for FII
(Koschmann & Peterson, 2013). In addition, policy initiatives, including “Ban the Box,” a policy
in 24 states as of 2016, preventing employers from legally inquiring about a criminal record on
job applications, have increased employment rates for FII (Doleac & Hansen, 2017).
It is important to note that there are employers who willingly hire FII without monetary
or policy initiatives (Bumiller, 2015; Colombo, 2019; Pager, Western, & Sugie, 2009). Bumiller
(2015) interviewed employers hiring FII and found the primary motivation for hiring FII was
their willingness to work hard and complete difficult job duties or tasks. Other motivations
discussed were employers relying on common sense and their own judgment, a desire to provide
a second chance and opportunity for rehabilitation, and that FII are physically strong and capable
of doing manual labor. Bumiller (2015) also found that employers felt proper training can
mitigate any risks associated with a FII’s criminal history and that by hiring FII they were
promoting community safety, as well as potentially lowering recidivism rates. It was also noted
that the majority of employers willing to hire FII were independent, small business owners
(Bumiller, 2015).
On the micro level, there are several other methods employers could utilize in order to
promote more inclusive hiring practices for FII. First, employers could differentiate crime type
during the application process. For example, instead of excluding all individuals with a criminal
conviction, they could consider whether the crime was violent, involved financial or other job-
relevant circumstances that could impact job performance, and sentencing outcomes (Uggen et
al., 2014). Similarly, an employer could consider how long ago the crime was committed, which
would take recidivism and recent history into account (Petersen, 2015). A third suggestion might

25
involve employers conducting interviews prior to discussing criminal records, in order to
consider their positive qualities, skills, and personality traits of the applicant first (Harley, 2014).
Gaining employment post-incarceration is incredibly difficult as it involves social,
emotional, and physical barriers further compounded by bias and prejudice involved in hiring
practices (Carter, 2009; Kjellstrand & Eddy, 2011; Raphael, 2011; Webster et al., 2014).
However, studies have shown that recidivism rates decrease significantly when FII have steady
employment post-incarceration (NIJ, 2013; Petersen, 2015; Webster et al., 2014). In fact, a
Chicago non-profit found that 52.3% of unemployed clients recidivated within a year of post-
incarceration, while only 16% of employed clients recidivated during the same time period
(Petersen, 2015). The longer FII go without committing another crime also decreases risk of
recidivism, which can be boosted if employed (Blumstein & Nakamura, 2009). By not
emphasizing successful rehabilitation for FII, through inclusive hiring practices and policy
change that prohibits employers from discriminating against FII, recidivism rates and detrimental
economic impacts will continue to increase (Alexander, 2012).
Work Readiness Certification Programs
As WRCP completion has shown to increase employment rates for FII, it is vital for
WRCPs to engage both FII and employers in programming (Graffman et al., 2008). Successful
WRCPs have key design elements that promote engagement amongst FII and employers,
including: working with barriers associated with FII; a focus on creating relationships with
employers and building trust amongst employers and FII; facilitating collaboration; motivating
participants through high quality jobs and engaging employers in providing meaningful
experiences at the workplace; and, outreach aimed at recruiting FII and employer participation
(Feeny, 2008). Engaging with FII and employers beyond initial service provision, through

26
follow-up engagement and prolonged service provision for up to two years, has also shown to
have higher success rates than short-term WRCPs (Cook et al., 2015).
Successful Programs
WRCPs that utilize transitional models (Feeny, 2008) and provide long-term, wrap-
around services, often beginning while FII are still incarcerated and continuing for several
months or years post-incarceration, are shown to be most effective in reducing recidivism rates
and increasing employment (Cook et al., 2015; Feeny, 2008; Flatt & Jacobs, 2018; Koschmann
& Peterson, 2013; Raphael, 2011). Several studies within the last 15 years (2005-2020) have
shown promising results for increased employment and lowered recidivism rates for FII who
have engaged in wrap-around WRCPs. According to Feeny (2008), FII who complete a wrap-
around WRCP are 17% less likely to recidivate than FII who do not participate in a WRCP.
A study conducted by Brown and Rios (2014) involving a WRCP called Florida Ready to
Work, found that FII who completed the WRCP had a 14% lower recidivism rate than those in
the control group who did not participate in WRCP services. For participants with a GED or
higher level of education, recidivism rates were further reduced to 18.3%. They also found that
97% of FII who participated in WRCP services increased math grade levels and 100% increased
reading grade levels, which alone made them more desirable job candidates. Services provided
included: math and reading classes; job searching and vocational training; communication skill
training; substance abuse treatment; mental health treatment; family reconciliation engagement;
and, spiritual guidance upon request.
Another commonly cited WRCP that continually demonstrated reductions in recidivism
rates was the Center for Employment Opportunities (CEO) in New York, which found that
participants, on average, experienced 10% lower recidivism rates than FII who did participate.

27
CEO programming occurred during a 40-hour week, with four days of job placement and one
day of training. Programming services included: life skills training; vocational skills workshops;
tailored intervention plans with a job coach; on-site supervision to assist employers; parenting
classes; peer support meetings; substance abuse treatment; mental health services; and, other
services, as needed (Bushway & Apel, 2012; Newton et al., 2018; Zweig & Yahner, 2011).
Cook et al. (2015) conducted an evaluation of a WRCP called the Milwaukee Safe Street
Prisoner Release Initiative with 236 FII participants with histories of violence or gang affiliation.
The program started six months prior to release and continued for a year after release. Primary
services provided included: job searching and readiness skills; family reunification; community
reintegration assistance; substance abuse treatment; and, life skills. The researchers discovered
that 81% of participants secured a job upon completion of the WRCP, whereas only 49% of the
control group obtained employment. They also found arrest rates were lower for participants
(22%) than non-participants in the control group (26%).
Farabee et al. (2014) conducted a study of a WRCP in California with 217 FII
participants. They provided three 40-hour weeks of job training, followed by job placement,
ongoing support, and job preparedness. A unique facet of this program was that graduates were
able to receive supportive services for life, which included interview techniques, resume
building, soft skills training, or job-specific training. They found that graduates had higher and
more long-term employment rates, as well as lowered recidivism rates, showing the benefits of
prolonged services.
Another unique program, Project Re-Connect in Missouri, provided wrap-around services
and a $3,000 stipend to fund transportation, food, and other essential items. In 2008, out of 108
FII participants who completed the program, there was a 7.4% recidivism rate versus a 20.3%

28
recidivism rate for the control group. They also found that participants who did recidivate were
less likely to have completed high school and more likely to have substance abuse issues, making
a connection of education and addiction as risk factors for recidivism (Wifokk et al., 2012).
Several program evaluations have found that focusing on attitude and long-term
individual change are beneficial for FII rehabilitation, as well as job obtainment and reduced
recidivism rates. Fitzgerald et al. (2012) conducted a study on a program called OPTIONS,
which offered job readiness, education skills, and other wrap-around services, but also focused
heavily on therapeutic services, including cognitive behavioral therapy, goal setting, relaxation
techniques, modeling, and improving self-esteem and self-efficacy. They found participants who
completed the WRCP had increased levels of hope and self-efficacy, were more adept at problem
solving and coping, performed well in their jobs, and concluded that more WRCPs should be
designed around similar models.
Research has also shown that WRCPs that provide rehabilitative centered interventions
and supportive corrective actions, rather than punitive or negative punishment enforcing actions,
including boot camp models or electronic monitoring, are more beneficial and have higher
success rates than programs that use more traditional punishment or detriment-focused models
(Koschman & Peterson, 2013; Visher & Travis, 2011). Further, Wifokk et al. (2012) advocated
for WRCPs to focus on long-term behavioral change designed around learning and personality
styles of participants. While FII who complete a WRCP may still experience prolonged
unemployment and recidivism, research suggested that the most effective WRCP models focus
on long-term service provision to FII (while incarcerated or immediately upon release), that
tailor programming to each participant.

29
Strategies for increasing FII participation. Securing employment opportunities and
obtaining job readiness skills are often a primary priority for FII upon release. These not only
provide financial security, but also aid in societal reintegration, forming social relationships and
supports, engaging with community, and producing a higher sense of self-worth, all hallmarks of
lowered recidivism rates. Lattimore et al. (2009) surveyed 1697 FII immediately post-
incarceration, concerning their priorities. 80% of respondents claimed a job was their top
priority, and 82% shared job training was their top priority. In comparison, housing, food, and
health care were only a top priority for less than 60% of respondents.
WRCPs not only assist in lowering recidivism rates through job placement, but also
provide daily activity for FII (Bushway & Apel, 2012), which aids their rehabilitation in
additional ways, including social connections and engaging with positive influences. FII who
enroll into a WRCP within three months post-incarceration have the highest success rates
(Bushway & Apel, 2012). Newer WRCPs are utilizing strength-based approaches, where staff
are trained to focus on traits or skills that FII participants innately possess that can be developed
into job-marketable skills, rather than focusing on detriments. This approach also involves
encouragement of building support networks, practicing soft skills, challenging negative beliefs,
promoting self-esteem, and immediately focusing on barriers for job placement, like housing or
transportation, at the beginning of WRCP participation (Thompson & Cummings, 2010).
There were best practices suggested throughout the literature for successful FII
engagement in WRCP design. Visher and Travis (2011) suggested best practices for WRCP
engagement, which included: (a) starting service provision while FII are still incarcerated and
continue post-release; (b) providing individual and group mental health services; (c) focusing on
behavioral modification, including modeling, positive reinforcements, treatment plans, and group

30
support; (d) focusing on internal, individual long-term change; and (e) engaging the community.
It was predicted that WRCPs utilizing these best practices will decrease recidivism rates overall
by 20% (Visher & Travis, 2011). Other best practices suggested within the reviewed literature
included: (a) setting realistic expectations and placing FII at job sites they will likely thrive in;
(b) knowing what policies or restrictions are in place that may impact FII; (c) providing FII with
their rap sheet so they know what might come up in a background check and prepare them to
honestly discuss criminal history with employers during the application process; (d) having
highly trained, specialized staff; (e) developing skills for their specific job interests, including
coping skills and anger management tactics that will help them keep jobs; (f) focusing on family
reunification; (g) conducting needs assessments and appropriate service referrals; (h) providing
parenting classes; (i) offering long-term substance abuse treatment; (j) assisting in obtaining
reference letters that can attest to the FII rehabilitation and writing a “letter of explanation,”
explaining criminal history and rehabilitation, which can be attached to their application; (k)
mentoring, where staff build trust through supportive, non-judgmental practices with patience
and repetition; (l) motivational interviewing, where patient and practitioner discuss goals for
behavior change through four principles: empathy, supporting self-efficacy, allowing for
reluctance, and allowing for divergence; (m) engaging with non-punitive, flexible support; (n)
maintaining constant communication amongst staff; and (o) helping prepare FII for release while
still incarcerated, involving services such as release preparation documents or plans for housing
and transportation (Carter, 2009; Cook et al., 2015; Farabee et al., 2014; Harley, 2014;
Koschmann & Peterson, 2013; Latessa, 2012; Snodgrass et al., 2017; Raphael, 2011; Whitlock,
2017).

31
Strategies for increasing employer participation. Engaging employers in WRCP
collaboration has shown to increase employer commitment, promote participant success, lower
recidivism rates, and increase the likelihood of permanent employment upon completion for FII
(Nally, Lockwood, Ho, & Knutson, 2014; Swensen et al., 2014). A focus group conducted by
Bushway and Apel (2012) found that 90% of employers were willing to hire FII that completed a
WRCP, showing an opportunity for increased employment and lowered recidivism rates for FII
engaged in a WRCP. It is important for employers to feel comfortable hiring and working with
FII. By engaging employers in a WRCP, it is possible to alleviate concerns and promote their
interest in hiring FII. Engagement strategies may involve on-site training and ongoing support
for employers to troubleshoot challenges that emerge while hosting FII. Further, WRCP staff are
vetting FII before placing them with an employer, which could provide the employer with
increased assurance and trust (Bushway & Apel, 2012; Swensen et al., 2014).
Best practices for employer engagement are: (a) creating positive relationships between a
WRCP and the employer prior and during collaboration with FII; (b) figuring out specifics needs
of employers that FII can fill; (c) providing marketing materials and documents to employers on
advocating for FII as an untapped resource that will benefit the employer; (d) being aware of and
educating employers of financial incentives that may be available to them for hiring FII; (e)
encouraging employers to meet with applicants in person, interact and hear their stories, prior to
forming judgments from a criminal record; and (f) educating employers on lowered safety and
recidivism risks for FII who have gone a significant amount of time without recidivating (Harley,
2014, Koschmann & Peterson, 2013; NIJ, 2013; Petersen, 2015). There are also opportunities
where a WRCP can educate employers on unique qualities of working with FII that may be

32
advantageous. For example, FII are more likely to stay in jobs longer than non-FII, which could
cut down on hiring and training costs for employers (Petersen, 2015).
While there is limited public information about which employers hire FII, there are job
sectors that are known to regularly hire FII, which include: administrative support; waste
management; food or hospitality services; manufacturing; construction; retail; temporary help;
and, social services (Flatt & Jacobs, 2018; Formon et al., 2018; Nally et al., 2014; Yang, 2017).
Of those, FII tend to keep jobs the longest in construction and manufacturing sectors (Nally et
al., 2014). Construction and manufacturing sectors are most likely to hire FII and small,
independently owned businesses are more likely to hire FII than larger businesses or
corporations (Feeny, 2008). Further, FII employed in construction and manufacturing sectors
have the lowest rates of recidivism. This is likely due to these sectors paying 33-100% higher
wages than other sectors known to employ FII (Schnepel, 2016). Employers most willing to hire
FII are more likely to hire FII with drug charges or non-violent criminal histories than other
types of crimes (Holzer et al., 2001). When creating a WRCP and recruiting employers, it could
prove beneficial to initially focus recruitment on job sectors more willing to hire FII, who could
serve as ambassadors for WRCPs.
Challenges to Implementation of Work Readiness Certification Programs
WRCPs are found to be least effective in lowering rates of recidivism and increasing
employment for FII when they only provide short-term support, either while the FII is still
incarcerated or post-release, and only target one or few barriers to re-integration and stable
employment (Formon et al., 2018; Newton et al., 2018; Wifokk et al., 2012). Brown and Rios
(2014) found that WRCPs that only provide skill-building in areas including job searching,
literacy, or industry specific skills, are witnessing higher rates of recidivism and less job

33
obtainment for FII than multiservice programs. Further, short-term WRCPs are less effective
than long-term WRCPs. Most FII who complete programs that last less than one year are more
likely to recidivate than FII engaged in WRCPs that provide ongoing support and services
beyond one year (Bushway & Apel, 2012; Cook et al., 2015; Lichtenberger, 2012). Newton et al.
(2018) conducted program evaluations on 12 shorter-term programs that either provided services
while FII were incarcerated or shortly after. They found that programs offering singular or
limited services had less significant reductions in unemployment and recidivism rates than
programs offering long-term, wrap-around services. They concluded that FII who participate in
WRCPs that provide long-term, wrap-around services are not only more likely to be employed,
but are also more likely to find rewarding jobs and make a higher hourly wage than those who
participate in shorter-term WRCPs.
Clark and Estes’ (2008) Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational
Influences Framework
Clark and Estes (2008) provide a conceptual framework for identifying and clarifying
organizational and stakeholder performance goals and determining needs impeding successful
goal completion. Utilizing this framework, strategies for overcoming roadblocks associated with
delays or outright lack of goal completion can be developed and implemented. Within this
framework, there are three influences examined that may directly impact overall performance
gaps or needs: knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO). Knowledge influences
involve stakeholders knowing what facts or procedures are necessary for goal completion.
Motivation influences involve stakeholder inspiration to begin, continue, and work towards goal
accomplishment (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). Finally, organizational influences involve
elements of workplace settings and norms, policies or processes in place, and organizational

34
culture, all of which may impact the stakeholder’s performance and goal accomplishment. The
KMO influences are presumed necessary for individual stakeholder and organizational goal
achievement (Clark & Estes, 2008).
For this study, the KMO framework (Clark & Estes, 2008) was utilized to identify
possible needs that impede FII from obtaining employment post-release, which consequently,
increases risk of recidivism (Feeny, 2008; NIJ, 2013; Wang et al., 2010; Webster et al., 2014).
Further, utilization of the KMO framework assists in creating innovative strategies and solutions
that WRCPs can implement for more holistic and rehabilitative programming for FII. The
following sections discuss assumed KMO influences surrounding employer engagement with
WRCPs in providing employment opportunities to FII.
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
Knowledge and Skills
Employers need to possess specific knowledge in order to achieve the global performance
goal. While some knowledge may be innate or previously mastered, there is specific knowledge
that may be new to employers involved in collaboration with a WRCP in order to narrow the
likelihood of potential performance needs. Performance problems or “gaps” involve situations or
instances when an employee may lack the necessary skills or knowledge, motivation, or
organizational policies and materials needed to satisfactorily complete the given task at hand
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Through training and educational opportunities, employers have the
opportunity to mitigate any identified performance gaps or needs, which would ideally increase
individual and organizational goal completion, as well as overall job performance (Clark &
Estes, 2008).

35
Knowledge Influences
In order to achieve the desired global performance goal, employers need specific
knowledge and skills. The collaboration between employers, their prospective organizations, and
the WRCP would involve matching FII with participating employers for one-year temporary
positions, while concurrently receiving supportive services that aid in job retention,
rehabilitation, and lowering risk for recidivism from the WRCP. The temporary position may
turn into permanent paid position if the WRCP is successfully completed.
Krathwohl (2002) asserted that there are four types of knowledge: factual, conceptual,
procedural, and metacognitive. Factual knowledge involves distinct singular components,
meaning knowledge tokens that are likely unchanging (Krathwohl, 2002). An example of this
could be knowing that a screen, internal hardware, a mouse, and a keyboard, are all elements of a
computer. Conceptual knowledge is more sophisticated in nature and involves cataloguing
several facets of information into groupings or relationships (Krathwohl, 2002). An example of
this could be knowing there may be several different ways to send an e-mail from one’s
computer, including from a desktop application, navigating through a web browser, or using
voice-command software. While each method may involve the same outcome, conceptual
knowledge involves an understanding of several different potential routes one could take to
complete the task at hand. Conceptual and factual knowledge are considered declarative in
nature, as they both provide concepts and facts, or “the what” of knowledge. Procedural
knowledge involves knowing how to complete a task in a straightforward, seemingly objective
manner (Krathwohl, 2002). An example of this could be knowing how to turn on a computer,
with knowledge of cords that need to be plugged in, what button to press to power the computer
on, etc. Lastly, metacognitive knowledge is an internal process involving reflection and

36
awareness of one’s own cognitive operations, preferences, or biases, and knowing why they may
utilize some processes over others contextually when navigating completion of a particular task
at hand (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011). An example of this is one’s awareness of how
computers work and having self-awareness that one’s actions may alter a computer’s processing,
like turning it on or off, what preferences they have when operating a computer, and knowing
they have power to manipulate computer operations through different actions they take using the
mouse or keyboard. In order to achieve the desired global goal, reviewed literature will be
assessed in relation to three of the four aforementioned knowledge influences, including
declarative-conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive.
Hiring criteria. Employers must know what qualities and criteria they are looking for
when they consider hiring FII. This particular knowledge type is declarative-conceptual.
Swensen et al. (2014) suggested that employers should be clear in their hiring criteria prior to
forming a partnership with a WRCP so employee matching can be more effective. Hiring needs
may be involved in establishing what types of qualities or criteria an employer may want to
consider when establishing parameters for taking on FII as temporary or permanent employees.
While some desired characteristics for employees are preference-based, employers need to be
aware of legal restrictions within certain industries that pertain to FII. For example, many
licensing boards prohibit individuals with certain criminal records from gaining licensure
(Brown & Rios, 2014; Carter, 2009; Harley, 2014; Schmitt & Warner, 2010; Snodgrass et al.,
2017; Thompson & Cummings, 2010). These policies would be important for employers to be
aware of, so as not to jeopardize their own businesses, risk public or employee safety, or waste
time or resources (Swensen et al., 2014).

37
There are some specific challenges that are more likely to apply to FII in determining
what qualities or criteria employers want to have in place for prospective employees when
collaborating with a WRCP. Some of these challenges include: (a) undeveloped communication
skills; (b) impaired cognitive abilities; (c) lack of job training or experience; (d) likelihood of
high school or lower education level; (e) lapses in work history (Batastini, Bolanos, Morgan, &
Mitchell, 2017); (f) inadequate or no housing and transportation; (g) institutional racism or bias
(Alexander, 2012); (h) legal standing; (i) lack of vital resources, like food or clothing; and/or (j)
lack of interviewing skills or confidence (Harley, 2014). While WRCPs can assist FII in
overcoming some of these barriers, these barriers should be considered when developing initial
criteria and informing realistic expectations for hiring qualities and criteria.
Leveraging WRCP resources. Employers must know how WRCPs work and how to
leverage the resources provided by the WRCP within their organizations. The specific type of
knowledge involved in awareness and utilization of WRCP resources is procedural. In this
context, procedural knowledge allows employers to know what skills or resources to utilize to
accomplish a successful collaborative relationship with the WRCP (Krathwohl, 2002).
Swensen et al. (2014) asserted that “collaboration and community support” (p. 18) are
both necessary for mitigating risks of recidivism for FII and increasing public safety.
Furthermore, additional collaborative efforts are needed for individuals with disabilities or other
impediments that make them increasingly less desirable job candidates. While employers can
work directly with FII during participation in the WRCP, the WRCP can also engage in
collaborative efforts aimed at promoting completion of the program year and transitioning FII
into full-time employment with the same employer. The WRCP can help FII on their short and
long-term plans, including treatment plans if they have substance abuse issues, assistance in

38
obtaining a General Education Development (GED) certificate or other educational pursuits,
housing and transportation resources, and/or addressing mental or physical health needs (Cook et
al., 2015; Flatt & Jacobs, 2018; Harley, 2014; Mohammed & Mohamed, 2015; Visher & Travis,
2011).
Specific to vocational interventions, the WRCP can help with resume building, interview
workshops, job searching skills, advanced job training to assist at their intern site, social support
building, self-efficacy skills, and how to manage finances (Bushway & Apel, 2012; Carter, 2009;
Farabee et al., 2014; Flatt & Jacobs, 2018; Snodgrass et al., 2017; Thompson & Cummings,
2010; Whitlock, 2017). The WRCP can also help support initiatives for employers to consider
for eliminating criminal record disclosure requirements on applications or diminishing its
relevance as a disqualifying factor (Harley, 2014). A WRCP can also act as a liaison between the
FII and employer to address emergent issues with the goal of maintaining a working
collaborative relationship (Thompson & Cummings, 2010). Employers are central in FII
participation and completion of a WRCP, as a main requirement of WRCP participation is
working with an employer and gaining vocational experience.
Awareness of biases and stereotypes. The specific type of knowledge involved in
employers’ self-awareness of their own biases and stereotypes is metacognitive. In this context,
metacognitive knowledge allows employers to identify and self-reflect on their own attitudes and
beliefs about hiring FII. Through their own metacognitive knowledge, employers will have the
ability choose whether to incorporate training, education, direct exposure, or other methods of
mitigating their negative conceptions of this population into their hiring practices.
Employers should be aware of their own biases and stereotypes when it comes to hiring
FII, which can be mitigated through training and education. Bias and preconceived negative

39
beliefs about FII is considered a significant causative factor in low hiring rates post-incarceration
(Batastini et al., 2017). Many FII find it increasingly difficult to gain employment post-
incarceration, as many employers are reluctant to hire FII due to stigma and bias (Carter, 2009;
Pager, 2003; Raphael, 2011; Schmitt & Warner, 2010; Swensen et al., 2014). Further, employers
exhibit both overt and covert bias when it comes to hiring attitudes with regards to FII
(Thompson & Cummings, 2010). This not only impedes many FII from obtaining employment,
but also lowers self-esteem and confidence, further decreasing the likelihood of gaining
employment (Agan & Starr, 2017). It is estimated that roughly 60% of employers would decline
hiring someone with a criminal record. This percentage increases when the individual is not
white (Batastini et al., 2017). Some common stereotypes or fears that employers exhibit when it
comes to considering hiring FII include expectations that they may commit the same crime or
new crimes again in the future, staff and client risk exposure, and damaged reputation (Blumstein
& Nakamura, 2009; Harley, 2014; Thompson & Cummings, 2010; Swensen et al., 2014). Mayer
(2011) claimed that one’s experiential learning can lead to change, so it is expected that
employers can utilize metacognitive knowledge to reflect on biases or stereotypes, as well as
reluctance to work with this population, and become open to training and education to mitigate
these negative feelings or perceptions.
There are suggestions for training and education that can help employers change or adopt
more inclusive hiring practices, which can help to eliminate bias and stigma. Swensen et al.
(2014) suggested that employers meet with applicants who have criminal records in-person and
allow FII to explain their past within the context of rehabilitative measures taken, rather than
eliminate them on their application alone. Further, if employers are engaged in collaboration
with a WRCP, ample face-to-face contact during the program year will be provided, which can

40
lower stigma and increase the likelihood of permanently hiring FII (Batastini et al., 2017). In
addition, training that specifically covers bias reduction in hiring practices can prove beneficial
in reducing the negative stigma associated with FII (Batastini et al., 2017).
Table 1 presents the three perspective knowledge influences with their corresponding
knowledge types (declarative-conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive) in columns 1 and 2. In
column 3, knowledge influence assessment types are discussed, which would be utilized in order
to assess whether the knowledge influence is indeed present with the paired knowledge type. For
reference, the global performance goal is also listed.

41
Table 1
Knowledge Influence, Knowledge Type, and Knowledge Influence Assessment

Motivation
Clark and Estes (2008) asserted that there are three facets involved in evaluation and
solving performance problems: knowledge, motivation, and organization. Motivation is what
allows one to start a task and stay on track towards goal completion (Pintrich, 2003). Rueda
(2011) argued that individuals are likely to be more motivated when they believe in their own
Global Performance Goal
The global performance goal is to increase the numbers of FII participating in a WRCP and
receiving one-year temporary positions that are designed to provide an opportunity to
transition into permanent employment if all conditions of the WRCP agreement are met.
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type
(i.e., declarative
(factual or
conceptual),
procedural, or
metacognitive)
Knowledge Influence
Assessment

Employers must know what
qualities and criteria they are
looking for when considering
hiring FII.

Declarative-
Conceptual

Interviews with employers who
already hire FII.

Employers must know how a work
readiness certification program
(WRCP) works and how to
leverage resources provided by the
WRCP.

Procedural

Interviews with employers who
already hire FII and are working
with a WRCP.

Employers must be aware of their
own biases and stereotypes that
could be mitigated through training
and education specific to hiring
FII.

Metacognitive

Interviews with employers who
already hire FII and are working
with a WRCP.

42
ability to complete a task, that they expect outcomes will be successful, and that they possess
high levels of self-efficacy. It follows that when employees are motivated, they often perform
better, complete tasks more efficiently, and exert more effort to meet organizational goals (Clark
& Estes, 2008).
Whether employers can successfully reach the stakeholder goal of onboarding FII from
the WRCP depends on their motivation to collaborate and take associated risks of engaging with
FII, and possible future employees. As motivation is tied to someone’s desire to start or finish a
task or goal (Rueda, 2011), it is likely that unmotivated employers will not agree to engage with
FII or start a collaboration with the WRCP in the first place. Therefore, it will be important to
consider motivation when approaching employers to form collaborative partnerships with the
WRCP.
Expectancy value theory. The specific type of motivation involved in whether
employers will see value in hiring FII is expectancy value theory (EVT). EVT describes two
factors of motivation and considers whether one feels they are capable of doing the task
(expectancy) and whether they want to do the task or find it important (value) (Eccles, 2006;
Rueda, 2011). EVT surrounds the subjective considerations in one’s motivation being driven by
the ability to weigh potential positive over negative consequences, and their ability to envision
self-satisfaction, as well as exerting the energy to increase skillsets.
Employers need to feel they are capable of hiring FII and navigating collaboration with a
WRCP, as well as possess the skills and willingness to take on this new project. Employers must
expect that by integrating FII into their organizations, that they will hone existing skills, become
more adept at collaborating with external agencies like a WRCP, and overall be more well-

43
rounded leaders as a result of working with this population. Additionally, employers must also
feel that they have the emotional, financial, and time resources to commit to hiring FII.
Employers also need to see the value in hiring FII. There are four main types of value:
intrinsic; utility; attainment; and, cost. Intrinsic value involves someone’s perceived enjoyment
in completing a task. Utility value involves one’s belief that completing a task is important for
the larger project or goal at hand. Attainment value is internally connected to how someone
believes they will become more adept or skilled as a result of completing the task and is
connected to feelings of self-worth. Finally, cost value is associated with the belief that the task
is important to complete, despite potential emotional, energy, or time costs it may involve
(Eccles, 2006).
Intrinsically, it could be that employers feel an emotional or personal connection to hiring
FII and gain satisfaction through the process of integrating FII into their organizations. They may
also experience positive feelings associated with providing a second chance and accomplishment
through fulfilling moral or ethical obligations they innately possess. They may also identify
value in providing jobs to FII, as they feel this is part of their civic responsibility. In areas where
entry level or jobs are hard to fill, hiring FII can also help boost local economies and promote
agency growth (Petersen, 2015). Further, some studies have found that FII are more likely to stay
in jobs longer than FII, making the argument that employers could save money on recruiting,
hiring, and training costs (Petersen, 2015). These factors can all increase satisfaction for
employers hiring FII.
In situations where organizations are financially stressed or are in need of additional
funding resources, hiring FII may produce financial utility value in the form of tax breaks
specific to hiring members of marginalized populations or stipends from the WRCP. The

44
economic burden on local, state, or federal governments to pay associated fees with recidivism,
including prosecution, incarceration, or investigative resources, reliance on social services, and
loss of economic output, is significant, and may impact employers and their communities
(Graffman et al., 2008; Koschmann & Petersen, 2013; NIJ, 2013; Petersen, 2015; Schmitt &
Warner, 2010; Yang, 2017; Young & Powell, 2015). When employed, FII are less likely to
recidivate, which not only promotes public safety, but saves the community revenue through tax
dollars that would otherwise be spent on incarceration and legal proceedings (Formon et al.,
2018; Swensen et al., 2014). In some states, including California, employers also receive tax
credits for hiring FII through the Federal Work Opportunity Tax Credit program, in increments
of up to $9,600 per employee (CEDD, 2018).
Employers may identify the attainment value in hiring ex-offenders. They may identify
value in the ability to increase their existing skillsets to become better leaders through training
and collaboration with a WRCP, as well as experiencing and troubleshooting any unique
challenges that come up with FII. Lastly, employers may perceive associated cost value by
employing FII, and believe that any time, financial, and other resource commitments are going to
be outweighed by the positive impacts of hiring FII. Employers may envision the positive
impacts of hiring FII and keep this in mind when navigating any setbacks or situations that may
otherwise cause them to question the effort involved in hiring FII.
Employers need to feel confident in their ability and identify the value in collaborating
with a WRCP in providing vocational opportunities to FII. It may be important to show
established research and studies to employers involving positive outcomes associated with hiring
FII enrolled in a WRCP. The literature suggested employers are more likely to hire FII who
complete a WRCP, highlighting the positive impacts WRCPs have on employer perception in

45
working with this population (Bushway & Apel, 2012; Formon et al., 2018; Graffman et al.,
2008; Nally et al., 2014; Swensen et al., 2014). Swensen et al. (2014) found that individuals
involved in a WRCP were more likely to receive services assisting with housing, transportation,
and other restorative programs that support FIIs’ reliability as employees. WRCPs can also assist
in providing positive feedback to employers and help navigate needed areas of improvement in a
constructive manner. If employers experience increased value through training and other positive
influences pertaining to working with FII, they are more likely to collaborate with a WRCP and
hire FII for permanent employment.
Table 2 illustrates the assumed motivation influence (expectancy value theory) with
corresponding motivational influence assessments in columns 1 and 2. For reference, the global
performance goal is also listed.

Table 2
Assumed Motivation Influences and Motivational Influence Assessment

Organization
In order for an organization to introduce positive change or a new effective initiative, it
must create a conducive environment and culture (Clark and Estes, 2008). In order for employers
Global Performance Goal
The global performance goal is to increase the numbers of FII participating in a WRCP and
receiving one-year temporary positions that are designed to provide an opportunity to transition
into permanent employment if all conditions of the WRCP agreement are met.
Assumed Motivation Influences

Motivational Influence Assessment

Expectancy value theory- Employers need to see
the value in hiring FII.

Interviews with employers regarding their
expectancy and value for working with
WRCPs and hiring FII.

46
to collaborate with a WRCP and provide internships or temporary paid positions to FII,
organizations must create safe and supportive settings. Further, organizations must address any
cultural models or settings, including policies, procedures, beliefs, values, and norms that
currently exist within their organizations which are not in alignment with positively engaging
FII.
General organization theory. Organizational culture encompasses how an organization
may conduct itself, including perceived values, performance, behaviors, goals, emotions, beliefs,
assumptions, or general processes developed and internalized over time (Berger, 2014; Schein,
2017). Members from all levels of an organization, including staff, leadership, and board, may
consciously or unconsciously be aware of the organizational culture, in terms of shared values,
norms, and overall image (Clark & Estes, 2008; Schein, 2017). How a culture develops and
maintains itself within an organization can effectively encourage learning, empowerment, and
overall positive change. Alternatively, an organization’s culture may facilitate resistance,
burnout, or decline in individual or collective performance (Clark & Estes, 2008; Schein, 2017).
Leaders should be aware of organizational culture and consider methods for creating a culture
encompassing values of shared learning, trust, productivity, and collaboration amongst
individual members of the organization (Berger, 2014; Clark & Estes, 2008; Kezar, 2001).
Organizations with cultures that encourage learning, flexibility, and adaptability are often
considered more successful and innovative (Senge, 1990; Schein, 2017). Further, organizations
that possess these qualities may encourage individual and collective inquiry, open
communication from all levels of staff, and provide a variety of platforms to accommodate
different personality and communication styles, team building, and collaboration (Buckingham
& Coffman, 1999; Kezar, 2001; Rath & Conchie, 2009; Schein, 2017; Senge, 1990). With global

47
economic and social innovation, organizations open to and encouraging of change initiatives,
which may be entirely new to an organization or an augmented policy or procedure, should
prioritize effective leadership through communication, training, and support (Clark & Estes,
2008).
There are suggestions for best practices and effective methods that organizational leaders
can utilize when initiating change within their organization. For leaders to encourage and enact
organizational change, they must first believe in the initiative or change itself, before they can
expect or encourage buy-in from staff. Employers must be aware of the need for change or
innovative new practice or policy and be able to communicate this need to staff. Langley et al.
(2009) suggested that goal development should involve justification through data and ongoing
analytics to measure whether the change has been positive and desired outcomes were met.
Without leadership implementing strategies for informing and developing staff commitment to
change, staff buy-in will be increasingly more difficult (Langley et al., 2009).
When developing a change initiative within an organization, goals should be developed,
along with plans or methods for attaining them, which may involve new knowledge development
through specialized training, engaging staff with the necessary skills for goal completion, and
encouraging motivation (Clark & Estes, 2008). Employers who want to integrate FII into their
organization need to be aware of the current organizational climate and interact with it
effectively for change development. This can be done through a focus on interpersonal
relationships, encouraging collaboration amongst staff, allowing for input from non-management
staff, open and constant communication and transparency, and understanding what needs or gaps
exist that may be impeding staff performance or cooperation during this change initiative
(Berger, 2014; Schneider, Brief, & Guzzo, 1996). Employers must understand employee

48
motivation, culture, and staff strengths, as well as create a balance between internal and external
forces (Buckingham & Coffman, 1999; Kezar, 2001; Rath & Conchie, 2009) when considering
onboarding FII in collaboration with a WRCP.
The existing culture will be paramount in whether effective change occurs and employers
who can work with existing norms, values, and beliefs embedded within the culture will likely
see more impactful change than employers who do not. Creating an organizational setting that
provides clear guidelines and expectations, training, ongoing education, mentorship, and other
continued support is also conducive to increased collaboration and performance (Bakker &
Demerouti, 2008; Berbary & Malinchack, 2011; Buckingham & Coffman, 1999; Clark & Estes,
2008; Fernandez et al., 2015; Kezar, 2001; Langley et al., 2009; Rath & Conchie, 2009; Shaufeli,
Bakker, & Salanova, 2006), and will likely increase inclusivity for FII. Organizational culture
can be considered and assessed using two intertwined facets: cultural models and cultural
settings. The following sections discuss cultural models and cultural settings within the context
of employer collaboration with WRCPs in providing vocational opportunities and training to FII.
Cultural models. Cultural models involve beliefs, emotions, or values collectively held
within an organization (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). They are often considered invisible,
shared, and developed over time. Most individuals within an organization have internalized their
organization’s cultural models and may be unaware of the facets embedded within common
practices (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Cultural models can be identified through
observation of behaviors, rules, or shared assumptions of a group (Schein, 2017). Cultural
models are sometimes viewed as negative, in that the norms or accepted behaviors collectively
impede performance, develop group negativity, and may impede positive change. Some
examples of detrimental cultural models include: cultures of unfair or unequal treatment amongst

49
staff; acceptance of laziness, nonparticipation, or dishonesty; and/or, allowing resistance to
change, negative attitudes, or lack of collaboration (Clark & Estes, 2008). Leaders and
organizations that want to facilitate positive cultural models can encourage collaboration, create
safer and trusting atmospheres, model desired behavior or attitude changes, encourage and
support staff individually and collectively, and engage in team building activities (Bakker &
Demerouti, 2007; Berbary & Malinchak, 2011; Buckingham & Coffman, 1999; Clark & Estes,
2008; Fernandez et al., 2015; Kezar, 2001; Langley et al., 2009; Rath & Conchie, 2009; Schein,
2017; Shaufeli et al., 2006). Employers can be cognizant of and encourage cultural models
within their organizations that promote increased vocational opportunities for FII.
Organizational collaboration with a WRCP. In order for employers to accomplish the
goal of increasing FII gaining temporary employment within their organizations, they must
create an internal collaborative cultural model to effectively collaborate with the WRCP. WRCP
models that have shown to successfully engage employers and FII utilizing collaboration as a
key element of programming (Feeny, 2008; Harley, 2014; NIJ, 2013; Swensen et al., 2014).
Further, collaboration can ensure participant success, increase employment, reduce recidivism,
and increase employer commitment to working with the WRCP and FII (Harley, 2014;
Koschmann & Peterson, 2013; Nally et al., 2014; NIJ, 2013; Petersen, 2015; Swensen et al.,
2014).
Not only will organizations have to collaborate with the WRCP, but likely so will middle
management and line staff who will directly work alongside or supervise FII placed within their
organization. Employers, as leaders within the organization, can assist in promoting a
collaborative environment and shifting any negative influences that may be creating a non-
collaborative cultural model within the organization. Knowing the role of the WRCP, what

50
training and supportive resources are available, and identifying specifically what staff roles and
assignments will be in terms of working with FII in their organizations will aid in successful
collaboration. When teams or individual staff have experts they can call upon for skill building
or support, motivation for collaboration and contribution to organizational goals can be increased
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Receiving support and expert guidance from the WRCP can facilitate
organizational collaboration as well as increase motivation and performance. Further,
collaboration with external agencies who share similar purposes and common goals can increase
team building (Schein, 2017). It is possible that if employers assist in creating a more
collaborative cultural model within their agencies, that collaboration with the WRCP can also
increase team building, effectiveness, and capabilities throughout the organization as a whole
(Bolman & Deal, 2013).
Organizational trust and acceptance amongst staff. In order for the organization to
accomplish the goal of onboarding FII within their organizations, it must create a cultural model
that revolves around trust and acceptance amongst staff. Organizational change, in this case the
possibility of creating space for FII to work within an organization, will not likely happen
without a cultural model that encourages trust and respect (Buckingham & Coffman, 1999;
Kezar, 2001; Rath & Conchie, 2009). Further, employees within the organization matched to
work alongside or supervise FII should have the appropriate skillsets, motivation to participate,
and understand the expectations of their role in working with FII. Buckingham and Coffman
(1999) suggested focusing on building a culture that employees want to be a part of. This may
include motivating, encouraging, listening, and setting clear expectations and goals to meet the
emotional and physical needs of staff that assist in building trust.

51
Organizational trust is built on clear, consistent and specific communication and feedback
that either practices reinforcement or corrective needs (Berger, 2014; Stone & Heen, 2014). A
WRCP that is designed around building trust between employers, organizations, and FII is
shown to be more successful in increasing FII employment rates (Carter, 2009; Cook et al., 2015;
Farabee et al., 2014; Feeny, 2008; Harley, 2014; Koschmann & Peterson, 2013; Latessa, 2012;
Snodgrass et al., 2017; Raphael, 2011; Whitlock, 2017). Poor or lack of leadership from
employers may lead to distrust, employee resistance, feelings of fear or underappreciation,
increased silence, and reduced communication and engagement in general (Agocs, 1997;
Duhigg, 2016; Korsgaard, Brodt, & Whitener, 2002; Morrison & Milliken, 2000).
In organizations where trust and acceptance are not already part of the cultural model,
employers can start to shift the negative space. This can be done by verbally acknowledging and
supporting employees, creating safe spaces for open communication from all levels of staff and
communication styles, showing respect, and treating everyone equally. Additionally, cultural
models of trust within an organization increase productivity, communication, engagement, and
staff effectiveness (Agocs, 1997; Duhigg, 2016; Korsgaard et al., 2002; Morrison & Milliken,
2000). In order for staff and other stakeholders to buy in to onboarding FII as employees into
their organizations, trust and acceptance will be important for employers to establish and
maintain. Working with FII may be a new experience for many employers and staff and may be
met with hesitation or reluctance. Engaging organizations in trainings that include equity,
diversity, and inclusion (EDI) efforts can help facilitate an organizational cultural model that
promotes humility, decreases unconscious bias, and is more inclusive, which will benefit
collaboration with the WRCP and engaging FII (Abramowitz & Blitz, 2005; Bradshaw &
Fredette, 2012; Holyino, 2008; Stevens, Plaut, & Sanchez-Burks, 2008).

52
Cultural settings. Cultural settings are considered visible, physical representations of
cultural models that appear within an environment at a given time (Gallimore & Goldenberg,
2001). Cultural settings may include an office building, employers, employees, or their work
assignments, and considers the why and how their work assignments are conducted and
completed (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Schein, 2017). Similar to cultural models, cultural
settings may be positively or negatively impacting the organization. Some examples of positive
cultural settings include: organizational and individual goals present; incentives and rewards;
objective, clear, and consistent feedback from managers; or, low staff turnover. Some negative
cultural settings include: lack of organizational strategic plan; lack of education and training
opportunities or development; lack of managerial or other support; or, lack of resources. Staff
need certain resources, or cultural settings, in order to feel a sense of wellbeing in their job,
which impacts motivation and engagement. These resources may include: managerial and social
support; sense of belonging; autonomy; empowerment; and clearly understanding their roles and
expectations (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Berbary & Malinchack, 2011; Fernandez et al., 2015;
Shaufeli et al., 2006).
Education and training. In order for organizations to accomplish the global goal, they
must create a cultural setting that provides education and training relevant to working with FII.
While employers will need the appropriate training and skillsets to collaborate with the WRCP,
staff who work alongside or supervise FII will as well. Before employers can expect their staff to
buy in to the prospect of engaging FII in the organization, employers should increase knowledge
on working with FII first, through education, analyzing data, and developing a plan for this new
initiative in their organization (Langley et al., 2009). In addition, employers should focus on
creating a cultural setting that encourages empathy and harmony within the team, which can be

53
accomplished through training (Buckingham & Coffman, 1999; Kezar, 2001; Rath & Conchie,
2009).
Training focused on bias reduction can be beneficial to employers and their organizations
in reducing stigma or fears associated with working with FII (Batastini et al., 2017). There may
also be specific skillsets that staff need in order to engage with FII, which employers should
provide through training, motivational support, and skill building initiatives. Training and skill
building also promotes collaboration, trust, and team efficiency, a potential benefit to the
organization beyond working with FII (Clark & Estes, 2008). Employers must be cognizant of
how integrating FII may impact the rest of the organization, and be prepared to provide trainings,
ongoing support, transparency, and other services as needed, which the WRCP can assist in
providing.
Mentorship and ongoing support. In order for organizations to accomplish the
performance goal of onboarding FII within their organizations, it must create a cultural setting
that provides mentorship and ongoing support from the WRCP in effectively working with FII.
For employees to be effective and grow, they need mentorship, communication, ongoing support,
encouragement, and validation (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Berbary & Malinchack, 2011;
Fernandez et al., 2015; Shaufeli et al., 2006). For an organization to effectively work with FII,
employers should ensure that WRCPs are not only there to provide mentorship for FII, but also
to those within the organization that work alongside or supervise FII.
As issues come up within the organization involving working with FII, employers should
listen and be consistent in providing feedback (Buckingham & Coffman, 1999), as well as call
upon the WRCP to provide mentorship or support as needed for creating a cultural setting that
allows employees to feel safe and accepted. Organizations with designated teams, which will

54
likely be the majority of organizations involved in hiring FII, need feedback, communication,
and support from each other and those involved with greater expertise (i.e., the WRCP) (Alper,
Tjosvold, & Law, 2000; Harvey, 1988). Teams who feel other members have required skills to
finish a product work more effectively. When teams have experts to call upon for skills or other
support, they are more motivated to collaborate and contribute. Getting feedback and support
from the WRCP should help alleviate fears or concerns, as well as de-escalate or prevent
potentially detrimental situations involving FII (Berger, 2014; Stone & Heen, 2014).
Table 3 illustrates the two cultural model influences and two cultural setting influences
with their corresponding organization influence assessments in columns 1 and 2. For reference,
the global performance goal is also listed.

55
Table 3
Assumed Organizational Influences and Organizational Influence Assessment

Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge,
Motivation, and the Organizational Context
A conceptual framework serves as the structural culmination of the components of a
research problem, theoretical background, beliefs, and expected outcomes, which guides the
design elements of a research project (Maxwell, 2013). The purpose of the conceptual
Global Performance Goal
The global performance goal is to increase the numbers of FII participating in a WRCP and
receiving one-year temporary positions that are designed to provide an opportunity to
transition into permanent employment if all conditions of the WRCP agreement are met.
Assumed Organizational Influences

Organizational Influence Assessment

Cultural Model Influence 1: The organization
needs a culture of collaboration with a
WRCP.

Interviews with employers that discuss
current collaboration efforts internally and
when working with external partners.

Cultural Model Influence 2: The organization
needs a culture of trust and acceptance
amongst staff.

Interviews with employers that discuss
current level of trust and acceptance among
staff and FII.

Cultural Setting Influence 1: The
organization needs to provide education and
training relevant to working with FII.

Interviews with employers that assesses
education and training modalities currently in
place that are effective and determine what
needs still exist for leveraging resources
from the WRCP and services for
collaborating with FII.

Cultural Setting Influence 2: The
organization needs to provide mentorship
and ongoing support opportunities from the
WRCP in effectively working with FII.

Interviews that discuss feelings of support
within the organization in general, as well as
specific support and mentorship
opportunities from the WRCP.

56
framework is to serve as a roadmap, through narrative and visual representations, which show
the main components of a research study, the theories that inform the components, and how the
components fit together to guide the study processes (Maxwell, 2013). The primary components
of a conceptual framework include the researcher’s knowledge and experiences, existing
literature, empirical research, and thought experiments (Maxwell, 2013). The conceptual
framework assists in informing how the researcher will collect data and from whom, and what
methods or instruments will be utilized. It serves as a planned route, starting point, and
expectations for where the researcher will end up and how they will get there along the way,
utilizing literature, the researcher’s lived experiences, and hypothetical outcomes (Maxwell,
2013).
The conceptual framework that guided this innovative study utilized relevant research on
providing vocational opportunities through a WRCP to FII and considered what influences exist
that lead to employer collaboration with a WRCP. This conceptual framework integrated the
Clark and Estes’ (2008) Gap Analytic model, utilized interactions between knowledge,
motivation, and organization influences as necessary to minimize any performance gaps or needs
and obtaining the global field goal. The conceptual framework served as a roadmap for
identifying and creating conditions that would support and enable the stakeholders (i.e.,
employers) to successfully complete the global field goal of providing internships or temporary
paid positions to FII within their organizations and successfully engaging in collaboration with a
WRCP. Utilizing previous research from experts in the field, the researcher can utilize methods
and best practices from previous studies and program evaluations in identifying appropriate
methods of the global field needs of employers engaging with FII within their perspective
organizations. Further, the KMO influences discussed previously were integrated as interacting

57
influences which culminate to assist employers in completing the desired outcomes of successful
global field goal accomplishment.
In conjunction with the conceptual framework, this research study was informed by a
theoretical worldview, a philosophy held by the researcher in regard to acquisition of knowledge
and reality (Maxwell, 2013). A researcher’s worldview integrates their perspective into research
design with a consideration of beliefs or assumptions that guide influence and actions (Creswell,
2018). Researchers must be aware of and transparent about their worldviews, as worldviews will
have an influence on the study’s design, methods or tools selection, data interpretation, and
ultimately, what findings and suggestions are discussed for potential implementation (Creswell,
2018; Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
This study was designed utilizing a transformative worldview. Individuals that hold a
transformative worldview are often concerned with empowering historically marginalized
individuals or populations, believe strongly in social justice, and advocate for more equitable
access to services and treatment for oppressed populations (Creswell, 2018). Research studies
designed around a transformative worldview consider political, social, historical, and other
oppressive factors relevant to their area of investigation or change agenda; they primarily focus
on the needs or gaps in services for those being treated less equitably than other members of
society (Creswell, 2018; Mertens, 2010). Topics of interest may include inequity for
marginalized individuals or groups in terms of race, gender, ethnic background, social status,
LGBTQ+ status, or belonging to a marginalized social group (Mertens, 2010). For this study, the
marginalized social group of focus was FII.
Researchers who hope to create positive change for marginalized groups may hold a
transformative worldview. They seek to identify oppressive or unequitable societal factors and

58
address mitigating actions or devise change strategies that promote access or equitable treatment
for their group of focus (Creswell, 2018; Mertens, 2010). Transformative research identifies
exclusionary or oppressive practices towards certain populations, creates awareness and
suggestions for change, and can be a call of action for allies or other change leaders to create
more equitable environments, policies, or programs to serve the marginalized groups of focus
(Creswell, 2018). The researcher aims to identify historical or current oppressive practices that
further exclude the group of focus, what oppressive dynamics are involved, and utilize relevant
literature to design and implement change models that promote inclusive hiring practices or
policies (Creswell, 2018; Mertens, 2010).
The conceptual framework for this study suggested that the assumed influences –
knowledge, motivation, and organizational – must work together to enable employers to
successfully complete the global field goal. Figure 1 below illustrates the conceptual framework
for this study.

59
Figure 1
Interaction of Stakeholder Knowledge and Motivation within Organizational Models and
Settings.

60
This figure illustrates the simultaneously converging relationships of factors that
influence employer willingness to collaborate with a WRCP in providing internships or
temporary paid positions to FII. It was assumed by the researcher that employers have
understood and integrated the requisite knowledge and motivational influences that encourage
trust and acceptance among staff and a willingness to work alongside FII. The green circle
represents the three knowledge influences: qualities and criteria for hiring FII through
declarative-conceptual knowledge (Harley, 2014; Krathwohl, 2002; Swensen et al., 2014);
methods of collaboration with a WRCP through procedural knowledge (Feeny, 2008; Harley,
2014; Krathwohl, 2002; NIJ, 2013; Swensen et al., 2014; Thompson & Cummings, 2010); and,
awareness of biases or stereotypes against FII, which could be resolved via training or education
through metacognitive knowledge (Batastini et al., 2018; Krathwohl, 2002; Thompson &
Cummings, 2010; Swensen et al., 2014). The double-pointed blue arrow represents simultaneous
interaction between knowledge and motivation influences. The red circle represents the
motivation influence: employers seeing the value in hiring FII through expectancy value theory
(Bumiller, 2015; Eccles, 2006; Petersen, 2015; Rueda, 2011).
It is assumed that once employers understand and integrate the knowledge and motivation
influences, they can then create organizational models and settings encouraging of and
supporting FII as part of the organization, represented by the single-pointed arrow leading down
to the blue circle. Integrating knowledge and motivation influences allows employers to create a
cultural model that embodies collaboration, trust, and acceptance (Buckingham & Coffman,
1999; Clark & Estes, 2008; Kezar, 2001; Rath & Conchie, 2009; Schein, 2017; Senge, 1990).
Further, employers can create a cultural setting that provides education and training relevant to
working with FII and encourages ongoing support and mentorship from the participating WRCP

61
(Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Berbary & Malinchack, 2011; Clark & Estes, 2008; Fernandez et
al., 2015; Shaufeli et al., 2006). It is expected that once knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences are integrated, employers can accomplish the global field goal (Clark
& Estes, 2008), represented by the single-pointed blue arrow pointing to the yellow box, which
contains the global field goal.
This study aimed to understand how knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences intertwine to enable employers to successfully complete the global field goal. Thus,
Figure 1 illustrates the influences that must be in place prior to successful goal completion.
Further, the conceptual framework depicted offers the expected outcome theory that if
knowledge and motivation influences interact simultaneously to lead to established
organizational cultural settings and models, that conditions will be set for employers to
effectively engage with and achieve the global field goal.
Conclusion
This innovation study sought to identify necessary resources for employers to reach the
goal of onboarding FII for one-year internships or temporary paid positions, in collaboration with
a WRCP with the opportunity to transition into permanent employment if all conditions of the
WRCP were met. To inform this study, this chapter reviewed literature related to engaging with
FII as interns or temporary paid employees while collaborating with a WRCP. The literature
review outlined associated barriers for employment for FII post-incarceration, social and
economic impacts of recidivism, and employer attitudes and biases in terms of hiring practices
for FII. The literature review also discussed strategies for more inclusive hiring practices and
rehabilitative measures that can be provided by a WRCP to promote increased vocational
opportunities for FII and organizational support. The literature review process informed the

62
narrowing of assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences directly associated
to achievement of the goal. The knowledge influences included declarative-conceptual (i.e.,
qualities and criteria employers must know when considering hiring FII), procedural (i.e.,
employer collaboration with a WRCP), and metacognitive (i.e., employer awareness of biases
and stereotypes specific to hiring FII). The motivation influence included expectancy value in
terms of employers perceiving the value in hiring FII. Finally, the organizational influences
included cultural models of collaborating with a WRCP, as well as developing a culture of trust
and acceptance amongst staff, and a cultural setting which included education and training
relevant to working with FII and ongoing mentorship and support opportunities from a WRCP.
Chapter 3 describes the study’s methodological approach for validating the outlined influences.

63
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
Introduction to the Methodology
The Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis is a systematic, analytical method that helps to
clarify organizational goals and identify the gaps between the actual performance levels and the
preferred performance levels within an organization. It was adapted to study a potential for
innovation in the area of providing vocational training and other rehabilitative services that lower
recidivism risks for formerly incarcerated individuals (FII). Assumed knowledge, motivation,
and organizational needs were generated based on personal knowledge and related literature. The
needs were validated using qualitative interviews, literature review, and content analysis. This
study utilized the gap analysis framework through a qualitative design. Research-based solutions
were recommended and evaluated in a comprehensive manner.
Research involves utilization of methodological processes with the purpose of creating
applicable information (McEwan & McEwan, 2003). The research in this study involved the
primary stakeholders, employers, and aimed to gain insight on two facets of employer
involvement in hiring FII and collaborating with a WRCP. First, understanding employer bias
and beliefs about working with FII, in general, was important for understanding a more holistic
picture and potential employer willingness to work with a WRCP. Second, gaining insight from
employers who were already or are in the process of collaborating with a WRCP, and who were
already hiring FII, informed suggestions for innovations that a WRCP could consider
incorporating into a future model. Ultimately, this study intended to identify best practices that
could be readily utilized by employers collaborating with a WRCP in providing vocational
opportunities for FII. This study’s research questions were descriptive, meaning they were

64
focused on processes, which according to Creswell (2018), can be used in three different types of
research methods: qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods.
To clarify effective practices in working with marginalized populations and addressing
barriers, Creswell (2018) suggested implementing a qualitative approach. In considering the
research questions and goals involved in this study, it was determined that a qualitative method
was most appropriate. In order to glean a rich and detailed data set, the researcher aimed to
conduct interviews with employers in a naturalistic setting (Creswell, 2018; McEwan &
McEwan, 2003; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The researcher acted as the primary instrument
throughout this qualitative study, utilizing interviews with employers, to answer the research
questions and promote accomplishment of the field goal through an inductive approach
(McEwan & McEwan, 2003; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The questions that guided the needs analysis that addressed knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organization resources and solutions for this stakeholder group included:
1. What are the knowledge and motivation needs and assets related to increasing the
numbers of formerly incarcerated individuals participating in a WRCP and receiving
one-year temporary positions that are designed to provide an opportunity to transition
into permanent employment?
2. What are the organizational needs and assets related to increasing the numbers of
formerly incarcerated individuals participating in a WRCP and receiving one-year
temporary positions that are designed to provide an opportunity to transition into
permanent employment?
3. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions for
addressing identified needs?

65
This chapter begins with a description of the participating stakeholders and proceeds with
an explanation of methods utilized, specifically, the sampling criteria for the qualitative
interviews in this study.
Sampling and Recruitment
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder group of focus for this study included employers from various
organizations in Northern California. The goal of engaging 12 employers who were willing to
participate in the qualitative study within Northern California was met (for more information
about the participants, see Chapter 4). This study sought to develop a sample of employers who
were already employing FII and were currently engaging with or in the process of engaging with
a WRCP that reliably represented the entire employer population of Northern California. The
sampling included employers from small, privately owned businesses, non-profits, and
community-based organizations. The qualitative interviews in the study were conducted in
English, as the researcher was monolingual English speaking. As the study involved assessing
employer hiring beliefs and practices of FII within their organization, it was a requirement for
participating employers to have hiring, firing, and decision-making duties within their
organizations.
Interview Sampling Strategy, Criteria, and Rationale
Criterion 1. Demographic Consideration. The employers involved in this study needed
to work within Northern California. To ensure a more generalizable sample, regional proximity
was determined. All employers involved also needed to speak English, as the researcher was
monolingual English speaking.

66
Criterion 2. Hiring Capabilities. As the interviews were designed to collect data
concerning employers who were currently hiring FII, employers involved in this study needed to
have hiring capabilities. To assure accurate interview responses, the employer sample had to
possess the power and freedom to hire or terminate employees within their organizations.
Criterion 3: Current Employment Practices. All employers interviewed had to be
currently hiring FII and either collaborating with or were in the process of collaborating with a
WRCP already. The interviews were aimed toward gaining insight on best practices, motivations
for hiring FII, and possible strategies for WRCP development and coordination.
Interview Sampling Recruitment Strategy and Rationale
The sample of employers was determined utilizing a combination of purposeful sampling
methods. The researcher first utilized simple random sampling by compiling a database of
employer contacts gathered from five websites that identified Northern California employers
known to hire FII. The researcher used randomizing software to select employers to contact. In
order to mitigate risk of selection bias, the researcher only contacted organizations that they had
no previous contact or affiliation with. Due to limited employer response, the researcher then
utilized convenience sampling by reaching out to agencies within a known network who hire FII,
followed by nonrandom snowball sampling, where the researcher requested contacts or referrals
for potential participants from employers who were already interviewed or approached to be
interviewed for this study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Qualitative Data Collection and Instrumentation
The qualitative method of data collection chosen for this study was interviews. This
method provided the researcher with a rich and in-depth understanding of the knowledge,
motivational, and organizational needs and assets related to increasing the numbers of FII

67
participating in WRCPs and receiving temporary or paid positions from employers. Qualitative
interviews were chosen in order to gain a deeper understanding, provide more meaning, glean
insight from the perceptions and beliefs of participants, and collect information from participants
in a naturalistic setting. This section discusses the interview method and how it was utilized for
collecting data.
Interviews
Interview Protocol. The interview questions were designed to assess participants’
beliefs, worldviews, and hiring practices, with a focus on assessing knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences that may be impacting behaviors and policies around hiring FII (See
Appendix A). The researcher utilized an interview guide approach, where questions were written
ahead of time but remained open-ended in a semi-structured format, thus adapting to the flow of
the interview (Johnson & Christensen, 2015; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). There was allowance for
flexibly wording the questions, asking questions out of order, or asking probing follow-up
questions, which allowed the researcher to clarify or expand upon participants’ initial responses
(Creswell, 2018; Johnson & Christensen, 2015). The questions were designed utilizing previous
research and existing protocols on hiring FII and collaborating with WRCPs. The interview
protocol was evaluated by peers, department professors, and members of the dissertation
committee, to clarify the content of questions and their relevance to the research objectives. The
researcher incorporated probing questions to improve rapport and the quality and expanse of
participants’ responses.
Interview Procedures. In order to glean additional insight into the research questions
beyond the reviewed literature, the researcher conducted 12 interviews with employers, utilizing
a protocol that consisted of 29 questions written ahead of time, that lasted an average of 46

68
minutes each. All interviews were in an open-ended and semi-structured format, which were
adapted to the flow and needs of the interview. During the interviews, the researcher asked
unique probing or follow-up questions, depending on participant responses, and took liberties of
skipping or augmenting questions, if needed, in order to clarify or add more meaning to
participant responses. The data collection took place over a one-month period. Five interviews
took place at the employer’s place of work. The remaining seven interviews were conducted over
Skype and FaceTime, due to distance or scheduling conflicts, and in a rare occasion of technical
difficulty, a phone interview was conducted.
All interview protocols were written and conducted in English. The researcher utilized a
hand-held digital recording device to document each interview. It was placed on the table to
demonstrate that the interaction was being recorded. For remote interviews utilizing electronic
software, the researcher periodically reminded participants that their responses were being
recorded. During the interviews, the researcher also took written notes on significant themes or
points, which were later referenced to clarify or ask for more elaboration.
Data Analysis
In order to glean meaning from the data collected during the qualitative interviews, the
researcher conducted data analysis utilizing several tools and strategies at the conclusion of the
interview process. Following each interview, the researcher reviewed the recordings to ensure
they were complete and audible prior to their transcription. After verifying the accuracy of each
transcript, the audio content was deleted to maintain confidentiality of participants. To further
improve the accuracy of the transcripts, the researcher engaged in member checking with the
participants, asking for clarification around certain responses or for participants to define
particular phrases.

69
The interview transcripts were then manually coded in multiple phases utilizing margin
notes and eventually placed into an Excel spreadsheet system. The first phase of coding involved
an open-ended coding strategy, where significant or noteworthy phrases or quotes were
highlighted and margin notes on the transcripts were taken (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). After the
initial open-coding phase was complete, the researcher reviewed the transcripts again and
performed axial coding, where themes and initial open-codes were categorized into groups that
directly related to the research questions, literature, and conceptual framework. The researcher
then developed a codebook in an Excel spreadsheet system. This process captured all of the
transcript axial codes and categories from the various interviews categorized in one place.
Separate tabs were created in the codebook for organizing data sets into the following categories:
Knowledge; Motivation; Organization; and, Direct Quotes (to be contextually analyzed in
depth). This codebook served as a valuable method for organizing data and identifying emerging
themes across the participant responses and achieving saturation.
Credibility and Trustworthiness

This study acknowledged that the researcher, as a primary instrument throughout the
qualitative study, possessed inherent bias and power (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In order to
minimize potential negative impacts that inherent bias or power dynamics could have had on the
study, the researcher utilized several methods in order to increase credibility and trustworthiness
in all phases of the study, as well as reflected on biases and assumptions. In addition to adhering
to ethical guidelines, policies, and procedures, establishing trustworthiness within a collaborative
relationship between researcher and participant not only promotes wellbeing for participants
involved in a study, but also impacts the overall credibility of the study (Lawrence-Lightfoot &
Hoffman Davis, 1997; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2015; Tolman & Brydon-Miller, 2001).

70
The credibility of a study is directly tied to how trustworthy the researcher is (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). One’s trustworthiness can be identified through the researcher’s meticulous
attention to detail and honesty throughout a study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). While there are
published guidelines and parameters set forth by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) and other
professional research entities, the researcher’s own ethical tenets and values also play into the
credibility and trustworthiness of a study. This can include self-awareness of the researcher’s
positionality within the study, how one treats all participants with respect and dignity, and
always aiming to limit any participant exposure to risk or vulnerability while also maintaining
informed consent (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Confidentiality and informed consent were ensured
at the beginning of and during the interviews, in order to increase participant comfort and the
likelihood of honest and thorough responses to interview questions (Creswell, 2018; Rubin &
Rubin, 2012).
The interview protocols and researcher engagement within the study were designed
intentionally to increase the credibility of the study. Reflexivity, or how the researcher’s
trustworthiness impacts the study or is impacted by it, is vital for increasing credibility during a
study; this includes self-awareness of biases, assumptions, perspectives, and worldview, both
prior to and during research engagement (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
researcher was transparent about their reflexivity within the study and forthcoming about how
their position may have interacted with the study, as well as how they would resolve anything
that could have come up, particularly with participants during interviews. This provided context
as to how the researcher came up with certain conclusions or interpretations of data, as well as
how they behaved in a given situation (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell). It was a priority for

71
the researcher to be aware of their innate power in the participant-researcher dynamic, and to
avoid any misuse of this power throughout the interviews (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
In terms of data, it was important for the researcher to remain cognizant of how data was
selected to be included in the study findings, and to include data even if it did not support the
expected outcomes of the study. Selectively choosing data that may impact the overall
conclusions of a study in the way a researcher desires is biased and reduces credibility (Maxwell,
2013). Once the interviews concluded, the researcher looked for repeated trends and findings,
showing data saturation (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Researcher conduct during interviews was taken into consideration to increase credibility
and trustworthiness as well. During interviews, sensitive topics often come up, which may cause
the participants discomfort. When a researcher knows how to effectively navigate these
situations during an interview, including knowing when to stop probing further, moving on to a
different subject, and reminding the participant that they have informed consent and can stop at
any time, the study will be more credible as a result from increased participant trust (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). It is also important for researchers to maintain boundaries and only intervene
when necessary, which maintains trustworthiness (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). For example, if a
participant is showing clear signs of distress, it is important to refer them to a therapist or other
trained service provider, rather than intervene and take on a therapeutic role, transitioning out of
the researcher role. As the researcher for this study was trained in providing therapeutic services,
particular attention and restraint was practiced during the interviews, and appropriate referrals
were prepared to provide to participants, if needed. No referrals were made within this study.
The researcher is not the only player involved in increasing credibility and
trustworthiness of a study. Peer review, where colleagues or a dissertation committee read the

72
study before it is finalized or submitted for publication can increase credibility (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). The researcher engaged in peer review with colleagues in the doctoral program,
professors, and their dissertation committee both during the study and before submission for final
review. The researcher also engaged in member checking, where in some situations where there
were questions or quotes to clarify, the researcher provided participants with the initial
interpretation of the interviews and allowed the participants to review and confirm whether their
perspective was accurately captured or needs to be modified before finalizing any conclusions
(Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This not only increased accuracy but allowed for the
researcher to become aware of biases or assumptions that may have caused them to interpret the
data incorrectly and to avoid making the same mistake again later (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016).
Ethics
In order to maintain ethical conduct and integrity throughout this study, the researcher
considered and prioritized ethical policies, approaches, and wellbeing of participants. As this
study involved human participants, the researcher sought and obtained approval from the IRB at
the University of Southern California. The IRB is primarily concerned with ensuring informed
consent of participants, maintaining confidentiality, protecting participants from exposure to
unnecessary risks or harm, and ensuring potential benefits to society outweigh risks as a result of
the study (Glesne, 2011; Maxwell, 2013; Rubin & Rubin, 2012). To document informed consent,
all participants signed consent forms that summarized the terms of confidentiality, voluntary
participation, and retraction of consent without repercussions at any time. The researcher
obtained permission to audio record the interviews and made transcripts available upon request.
All data was stored on a password protected computer and was destroyed shortly after the

73
study’s conclusion. There was no discussion of data or involved study participants with
individuals not involved in the study. Additionally, names or descriptive characteristics were
changed to protect confidentiality in the final report. Finally, respondent validation for the
interviews was employed to ensure authenticity and eliminate potential misinterpretation
resulting from researcher bias (Maxwell, 2013).
Within the researcher-participant relationship, there is an innate power dynamic that
researchers have an ethical responsibility to be cognizant of, as well as take precautionary tactics
to eliminate potential issues while building trust (Maxwell, 2013; Patton, 2015). Empathy is
important for considering how the participant may be affected during the study and considering
how the researcher’s conduct and attitude may be perceived by participants (Maxwell, 2013).
Additionally, adhering to the study’s design and intended plan helps maintain study integrity and
limits potential risks for participants (Glesne, 2001; Stake, 2005). Wellbeing was prioritized
throughout the design of interview questions, and during the interviews by holding them in a
neutral place that was comfortable for participants, explaining the purpose of the research and
keeping participants informed, and reminding participants about the voluntary nature of their
involvement (Merriam, 2016; Patton, 2015).
Throughout this study, the researcher remained aware of their positionality framed within
the study context, specifically relating to participants and study outcomes. The researcher
employed empathic behavior, considered their own innate positions of power and privilege as a
white, educated, middle class, female, adhered to the study plan, and engaged in cultural
humility to establish trust and prioritize participant wellbeing. Additionally, in order to mitigate
potential negative situations resulting from the researcher’s positionality, the researcher
consulted with their dissertation committee, and discussed issues concerning power, privilege,

74
bias, stereotypes, or other assumptions that could have put the study integrity and participant
wellbeing at risk (Glesne, 2011). To establish trust, ideological beliefs relating to this study were
shared with participants. As the researcher in this study believed in the rehabilitative efficacy of
employing FII, this was disclosed to participants prior to interviews. While it was not anticipated
that this study posed significant risk to participant wellbeing, as the researcher was not tied
directly to any participant through organizational membership, employment, or had financial
interest in study outcomes, the researcher remained cognizant of potential issues that may have
arisen during the study (Maxwell, 2013). Although a trained social worker with experience in
providing mental health and clinical services, the researcher did not intervene or interject during
interviews for therapeutic purposes. In order to mitigate this potential risk, the researcher had
referrals for mental health and other services on hand during interviews to disseminate to
participants, if deemed appropriate (Patton, 2015).
While there was no monetary incentive for participation in this study, which was
disclosed to avoid potential feelings of coercion to participate, the researcher was aware of the
importance of making participants feel a reciprocal relationship existed within the study. The
researcher engaged in active listening, showed interest in participant responses, and ensured
participants that their feedback was important for not only this study, but for increasing long-
term positive outcomes for stakeholders involved in this study (Glesne, 2011; Maxwell, 2013).
The researcher also sent participants personalized thank you cards at the conclusion of the study
to show appreciation for their time dedicated to the study.

75
Limitations and Delimitations
There are limitations and delimitations the researcher was cognizant of as this research
study was developed. Limitations involved components of the study that were not within the
realm of the researcher’s control. Some limitations identified in the study were:
• The respondents may have had past experiences related to incarceration or criminal
justice involvement that may have impacted how they responded during interviews,
potentially involving omission or untruthful answers.
• Although no differences in participant responses were identified that directly related to
organization size or type of organization (i.e., non-profit or for-profit), the sample size
within this study varied significantly, between staff sizes of 4-900. This could have
potentially impacted generalizability.
• The study was dependent on the truthfulness of respondents.
Delimitations involved decisions made by the researcher that may have had implications on
the study. The delimitations identified for this study included:
• Data collection only involved one type of respondent: employers.
• Data was only collected through one type of qualitative method: interviews.
• The study was conducted prior to any innovative solution being implemented, to best
inform potential implementation design and execution. It is thus not an evaluative study.

76
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
This innovation study sought to identify the resources and conditions necessary for
increasing vocational experiences and opportunities for formerly incarcerated individuals (FII).
One method for this included participation in WRCPs and receiving one-year temporary
positions that may transition into permanent employment if conditions of the WRCP agreement
were met. A qualitative interview method was employed with participating employers in
Northern California to learn about their needs and assets in the areas of knowledge, motivation,
and organization, related to increasing vocational opportunities for FII. This chapter first
describes the participating stakeholders in the study, then discusses the findings and results. The
research questions guiding this study were:
1. What are the knowledge and motivation needs and assets related to increasing the
numbers of formerly incarcerated individuals participating in a WRCP and receiving
one-year temporary positions that are designed to provide an opportunity to transition
into permanent employment?
2. What are the organizational needs and assets related to increasing the numbers of
formerly incarcerated individuals participating in a WRCP and receiving one-year
temporary positions that are designed to provide an opportunity to transition into
permanent employment?
3. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions for
addressing identified needs?
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder group of focus for this study were employers in Northern California who
were already employing FII. Of the 12 employers, four were already collaborating with a WRCP,

77
three were in the process of forming a collaborative agreement with a WRCP, and the remaining
five had not yet started working with a WRCP but showed interest in the collaborative
opportunity. This study aimed to develop a sample of employers who represented the population
of Northern California employers already hiring FII. As this study was focused on employing
FII, all employers within the interview sample were in senior level management or ownership
roles with hiring and firing capabilities.
Interview Participants
The sample of employers interviewed represented various sized organizations from
unique sectors, consisting of staff sizes between 4-900 staff members. Table 4 describes the
following demographic features of the sample population: participant name; participant job title;
type of industry; organization description; length of time since hiring FII; total staff count; total
FII staff count; and, percentage of FII representation in total staff count. In instances where FII
staff were not tracked or the respondent did not know, “unknown” was noted within the table.
Additionally, there were instances where employers shared they currently had no FII on staff, but
had previously. Finally, all participant names are represented by a pseudonym, in order to protect
participant confidentiality.
The type of industry varied across sectors. Half (50%) of employers fell within the non-
profit human services sector, while the remaining six employers fell within for-profit industries,
including apparel production, food and hospitality, construction, farming, janitorial and cleaning,
and beauty/hair. The length of time since the employers’ developed policies and procedures
allowing for FII employment within their organizations varied, from always being part of
organizational operations up to as recently as one year. Half of the employers had been hiring for
more than 10 years while the other half had all changed operational policies around hiring FII

78
within the last 10 years. In terms of total staff count, numbers ranged from 4-900 total staff
members. Within the total staff counts, total number of FII staff also had a large range, between
0-225 total FII staff members. Finally, the percentage of FII staff members within the total staff
count ranged from 0-44%. Four employers did not specifically track FII staff.

Table 4
Participating Employer Sample Demographics

Participant
Name

Participant
Job Title

Type of
Industry

Organizational
Description

Length
of time
since
hiring
FII

Total
Staff
Count

Total FII
Staff
Count

% of FII
in total
staff
count

Jane

Production
Manager

Apparel
Production

Manufactures
and sells
outdoor biking
apparel

Always

20

0

0%
Olive

CEO Non-Profit
Human
Services

Focuses on
employment
and training to
move clients
towards self-
sufficiency

44 years 300 Unknown Unknown
Alice

Senior
Director

Non-Profit
Human
Services

Homeless
shelter that
ensures clients
achieve success
and housing
needs

At least
2.5 years
250 84 34%
Lola

Corporate
Director of
HR

Food &
Hospitality
Restaurant
management
group of 10
local businesses

At least
5 years
900 Unknown Unknown
Chuck

Owner Construction Privately
owned tiling
and remodeling
services

1 year 4 0 0%

79

Participant
Name

Participant
Job Title

Type of
Industry

Organizational
Description

Length
of time
since
hiring
FII

Total
Staff
Count

Total FII
Staff
Count

% of FII
in total
staff
count

Poppy

Program
Director

Non-Profit
Human
Services

Provides job
and life skills
support to folks
with disabilities

15 years

150

Unknown

Unknown
Henry

General
Manager

Farming Diversified
locally
distributed
organic farm

At least
4 years
15 Unknown Unknown
Simon

Director of
Marketing

Non-Profit
Human
Services

Turns
donations into
jobs and
training

At least
30 years
750 225 30%
Alex

Co-Owner Janitorial &
Cleaning

Cleaning
company for
homes and
businesses

Always 3 0 0%
Nora

Owner Beauty &
Hair
Salon &
education
center

3 years 25 1 4%
Lee Director of
Re-Entry
Services
Non-Profit
Human
Services

Community
thrift store &
resource center

6.5 years 16 7 44%
Sarah

Director of
Youth
Justice

Non-Profit
Human
Services
Shelter,
resources, &
education for
youth

20 years 65 4 6%

Results and Findings
This section reports on the results and findings from the interviews as they related to the
research questions and the conceptual framework, focused on knowledge, motivation, and

80
organizational influences. A discussion of additional observations within each influence type will
be also presented, followed by a summary.
Research Question 1
What are the knowledge and motivation needs and assets related to increasing the
numbers of formerly incarcerated individuals participating in a WRCP and receiving one-year
temporary positions that are designed to provide an opportunity to transition into permanent
employment?
Knowledge
Declarative and conceptual knowledge about hiring qualities and criteria for FII.
Overall, the majority of employers (10 of 12) interviewed shared that they have the same hiring
qualities and criteria, as well as recruiting processes, for all staff. This indicated that employers
may have knowledge regarding the hiring criteria for FII, yet it did not seem to be uniquely
tailored to the barriers for employment that FII deal with post-incarceration. Knowledge around
barriers for FII, including legal restrictions pertaining to certain industries or professional
licenses, are important for employers to be aware of. A few employers interviewed mentioned
legal restrictions, but the majority did not, suggesting further employer development around
barriers to employment for FII is needed. To become more knowledgeable around unique
barriers for FII, which can inform desired hiring qualities and criteria specific to FII, employers
may look to WRCPs to provide education and support on this topic, to avoid potentially
exclusionary hiring practices.
In terms of the specific knowledge needs and assets identified in the interviews, the
following will be further discussed below: hiring criteria for non-FII and FII; recruiting and
hiring process for non-FII and FII; and, barriers to employment for FII.

81
Hiring criteria for non-FII and FII. As noted in Chapter 2, employers should know
what qualities and criteria they are looking for in FII candidates. Ten of the 12 employers
interviewed shared that they have the same hiring criteria for all staff, and that they look for the
same skillsets and knowledge for FII applicants as they would for any other applicant. Some
employers shared specific qualities or criteria that they look for in FII applicants, as illustrated in
Table 5. Five employers discussed they expect FII staff to work as hard as any other staff. Four
employers shared they would only hire FII applicants who discuss learning from past experience.
Two employers shared they expect FII applicants to be honest about their criminal history. One
employer discussed how they would not hire a FII applicant who made excuses or blamed others
for their past behavior. One employer discussed a preference for FII applicants that enjoy
providing customer service and are professional. Finally, one employer shared they would only
hire FII applicants open to being patient during the process of building trust with the employer.

82
Table 5

Specific Hiring Qualities or Criteria for FII Applicants

Desired Qualities for FII Applicants

Number of Employers with Response

They possess the same skillsets or
background as all other staff

10
They work as hard as anyone else

5
They have learned from their experience

4
Honest about criminal history

2
They do not make excuses or blame others
for past behavior
1

They enjoy providing customer
service/professionalism

1
They are patient and open to building trust
with employer
1

In explaining hiring criteria for FII applicants, Jane shared, “Our company wants to hire
anyone that is qualified and seems like they will work hard and is reliable…we hold everyone up
to the same standards.” Sarah, an employer from the non-profit sector, shared similar sentiments,
“There is no differentiation between someone that has a criminal background from someone that
doesn’t. The expectation is that you have a job to do and we expect you to perform at the same
level as everybody else.” Both Jane and Sarah discussed similar expectations for all applicants.
Within the subset of employers interviewed who felt there was no difference in hiring
criteria for FII or non-FII staff, two clarified by sharing personality characteristics they would
look for specifically if they found out an applicant was also a FII. One employer, Chuck,

83
discussed having the same expectations for all staff, but added for FII staff specifically, that he
requires a period of trust-building between him and the FII staff. Chuck shared:
Well, my expectations would be that they can complete the task that they have been hired
to do…but it is just going to take a time period where our trust grows between
each other, where they don’t feel like, “You are just treating me this way because I am a
felon,” and I share that I am really not…I don’t want to treat you any differently than
someone that wasn’t, but because I have a client base I have to deal with and helping you
to grow back into a road you can be successful on, there just has to be a time period of
overlap of marrying the two together, to have success for both of us down the road.
Chuck elaborated that building trust not only serves as a benefit for both himself and the FII
staff, but also helps alleviate concerns for his clients.
Another employer, Lee, discussed the type of attitude he looks for in FII applicants,
despite the general hiring criteria being the same for all applicants. Lee shared:
I think for the most part, is attitude, being willing to understand that we’re here to help
and also understand that we are trying to offer people a hand up, not a handout, so that
goes both ways…At the end of the day, taking the program into consideration, this is still
a workplace, and we need to focus on that 100%.
Lee discussed the desire of providing a second chance to FII applicants by extending a job
opportunity, in order to promote equity throughout their organization.
The two employers interviewed who look for unique qualities and criteria for FII
applicants shared they expect FII applicants to be honest about their criminal history. Poppy
discussed situations when FII applicants were untruthful about their criminal backgrounds during
the interview process:

84
I would say in my experience, employers will hire people with criminal backgrounds as
long as they know exactly what it was, and the person is very open about it. They tell you
exactly what happened and say, “This is what happened, and this is where I am right
now.” If anybody tries to cover it up or is a little clandestine about it, then forget about it.
Just forget it. The employer is going to say, “No thank you.”
For Poppy, if FII applicants are dishonest about their criminal history and how that has impacted
their current situation, then it would result in a denial of employment.
The other employer interviewed who shared unique hiring criteria for FII, Alice, added
thoughts on learned experience, as she finds this important for her organization and clients they
serve. Alice shared:
It is very important for us to hire individuals who have lived experience…We want you
to be honest and if we find something with the criminal record or background check, we
just want to know and will work with you. I wouldn’t hire someone who tells me, “I went
to prison or jail and it wasn’t my fault and I didn’t learn anything; it was a waste of time,
and I hate the judicial system.” I would just want to see some type of learning.
Alice wants FII applicants to not only be open and honest about their criminal history, but who
can share how they have learned and grown from that experience, serving as an asset to her
clients and organization.
A few respondents mentioned legal restrictions and concerns around hiring FII. One
concern centered around physical proximity of FII staff. For example, there is concern when a
FII who is required to register as a sex offender might be applying to work where there are
children onsite. Other concerns centered around contractual agreements or organizational

85
liability, by creating a context where FII are in a situation that may directly put a client or other
staff member in potential danger and put liability on the organization.
Of particular interest were the criteria not mentioned by employers interviewed. The
literature suggested that employers might consider lapses in employment or little work history,
lower education levels, impaired cognitive abilities, and lack of other vital resources when
determining whether to hire FII (Batastini et al., 2017; Harley, 2014). During the interviews,
employers did not mention any of these criteria or concerns.
Recruiting and hiring process for non-FII and FII. Similar to knowing what types of
criteria employers look for in FII staff, as noted in Chapter 2, employers should have a clear
picture of recruiting and hiring processes for FII, and whether they differ from procedures for
recruiting and hiring non-FII. More than half of employers interviewed (seven out of 12) shared
that recruiting and hiring processes were no different for FII staff than for non-FII staff. Table 6
outlines responses related to recruiting and hiring practices for the seven employers who shared
that recruiting and hiring practices were the same for all staff. All seven employers interviewed
require an application and interview process for all staff. Six of the seven employers primarily
utilize online job postings and job boards to recruit applicants. Six employers do not conduct
background checks. Three employers rely on word of mouth for recruiting new staff. Two
employers do not require drug testing of applicants. One employer requires questions about
conflict resolution and an aptitude/skills test. Finally, one employer does not ask about criminal
history at all during the recruiting and hiring process.

86
Table 6

Recruiting and Hiring Practices for All Staff

Recruiting & Hiring Practice

Number of Employers with Response

Application and interview process

7
Online job postings/job board

6
No background checks

6
Hires by word of mouth

3
Does not require drug testing 2

Questions about conflict resolution

1
Aptitude/skills test

Does not inquire about criminal history
1

1

As mentioned, there were five employers interviewed who shared that their organizations
have different recruiting and hiring processes for FII than for non-FII applicants. For two
employers, once they become aware that an applicant is a FII, they look at the crime type and
length since the crime was committed. If the crime type is related to the job the FII application is
applying for, they will not be hired. For example, one of the employers directly works with
families; when crimes involve children, FII applicants are not hired. The other employer’s
organization delivers products involving direct access inside client homes; when crimes involve
any history of theft, the FII applicants are not hired. The last employer, Alex, discussed a recent
change, involving extended interviews with open discussions, he made to his recruiting and
hiring process, specifically to benefit FII applicants. Alex shared:

87
I have made the interview process longer…So, if they have a criminal background, they
seem to appreciate the opportunity to explain why it is there and how it would affect us to
work with them. And it allows us to ask questions to allow them to feel
like it is less about who they were and more about who they are.
For Alex, previous interviews with FII applicants left out potential opportunities to allow the FII
applicant to candidly discuss their past. Alex felt this retracted from the experience of feeling
heard and validated by the situation. This was remedied by in-depth engagement during the
hiring process.
The remaining two employers interviewed discussed situations where the hiring and
recruiting process varies for FII applicants, specifically around required criminal background
checks. Both of these employers have parameters in place for FII applicants, where an exception
may be made on a case-by-case basis with upper management involvement. For Alice, if
someone shares that they have a criminal record, then either she or the CEO will ultimately
decide whether to grant an exception. Alice shared:
It [the recruiting and hiring process] is the same, except if someone has a criminal record.
Like for someone with a violent assault, then it has to go through a different process; we
have to talk to the CEO about the case, why we feel they should be hired, something like
that. Right now, I get to make the decision who gets hired, but I wouldn’t be able to do
that if someone had a violent offense.
For Alice, violent offenses would have to be cleared through the CEO first, but she has the
discretion to hire a FII with a history of a non-violent offense.
While Alice shared that the process differs slightly by crime type, the other employer,
Sarah, discussed situations when individuals who fail the background check may enter into a

88
formal appeals process, regardless of crime type. Sarah shared, “Yes, it [the recruiting and hiring
process] is the same for everyone. But there is also a process if you fail to appeal the decision.
So, we have had staff that have gone through that appeals process with management and been
cleared.” With the exception of the appeals process, the hiring and recruiting process remains the
same for all applicants.
Based on employer responses during the interviews, respondents had some knowledge of
their own recruiting and hiring practices for FII. However, additional knowledge involving best
practices and utilizing strength-based approaches for onboarding FII staff, as discussed in
Chapter 2, need further development. It is possible that employers did not discuss best practices
for hiring FII because they were not aware of any, which could be mitigated by collaborating
with a WRCP, as well as discussing hiring practices with employers who have been successfully
hiring FII for a long period of time. In addition, utilizing strength-based approaches when
recruiting and hiring FII staff is a process that must be learned through training. As most
employers interviewed were not yet working with a WRCP, this may also explain why
employers did not discuss this topic during the interviews.
Barriers to employment for FII. Overall, interviewees seemed knowledgeable about
some general barriers discussed within the literature for FII to gain employment. However, in
terms of discussions of barriers during the interviews, many employers focused more on
discussing how they work to either mitigate or uphold these barriers rather than discussing the
actual barriers impacting FII. Concerning knowledge around awareness of specific barriers for
FII in gaining employment, three employers discussed some barriers they identified for FII
related to employment. For example, Nola discussed how the criminal justice system did not
properly prepare her FII employee for coming back into the workforce. Nola shared:

89
The problem I had was with the entire system and the fact that he had been set up for
failure by the system from jump street because he was a male going into a female
dominated world and he had no idea how to actually compete in one…I think the system
didn’t set him up for success in even just getting out and being in today’s world, just
technology alone…I feel like we know when the release date is supposed to be, so why
aren’t we moving these people into a different sector, and teaching them what is going on
in the world and help them be able to adjust?
For Nola, the frustration was not with her FII employee, but rather with the lack of needed
training and support while still incarcerated, to prepare him for returning to the workforce and
reintegrating back into society.
Another employer did experience difficulties with his FII employee, due to a lack of
necessary resources, specifically transportation, which the literature suggested is a predominant
barrier to employment for FII (Amadeo, 2018; Formon et al., 2018; NIJ, 2013; Petersen, 2015;
Webster et al., 2014; Young & Powell, 2015). Alex shared:
I feel like transportation was kind of significant. It seems like someone who is FII may
have some reduced resources in the beginning…And I think that sometimes the problem
isn’t that the employee himself isn’t reliable, so much as his ability to be able to get to
work, so making sure that these kinds of gaps are filled with the resources they need just
to make sure they can do the work they have been asked to do.
For Alex, the difficulties were not necessarily with the FII employee, but the system in which
that FII employee is still stuck in and the barriers involved.

90
Lee discussed the plight that many FII face when trying to find a job post-incarceration.
He values working for an organization that can and will hire this population, despite associated
barriers. Lee shared:
When they have gone to other places, and they’ve applied to jobs, they’ve gotten to the
point where they have been offered a job, pending the background screening, and then the
background screening comes in, and the job falls out from under them. So, the biggest
part is just knowing they are going to start working regardless of their background, where
they can go to a place where they can’t get over that initial block of what is stopping
them from working.
Lee understood that many FII will experience several rejections when looking for a job before
finding an employer that will give them a chance.
As mentioned, the majority of discussions with employers interviewed around barriers for
FII centered around how employers address these barriers in their own recruiting and hiring
practices. Only two of the 12 employers interviewed said there were no barriers for FII to gain
employment within their organizations. Jane shared, “I don’t care what your past is. Everyone
deserves an equal chance.” Adding to that sentiment, Lola shared that her management team also
believes everyone deserves a second chance and that they remove barriers for employment for
FII by not conducting background checks. Lola explained:
It is the philosophy of the management group to give people second chances and
opportunities. We don’t do background checks…I am aware of certain people, with
individual stories, because they disclose them to us and share those struggles, but it is not
something we require people to disclose…There is a really strong labor market right now,

91
so having access to labor is difficult, so we are pretty open. We will give people the
opportunity and what they do with it is on them.
In order to hire FII staff, Lola’s organization removed any barriers to employment. Additionally,
an incentive for her organization to remove barriers for FII applicants involved an additional
advantage of having a larger candidacy pool.
Of the remaining 10 employers interviewed, identified employment barriers for FII
applicants varied. Six employers shared that it would be a case-by-case situation. One employer
shared you would need a high school diploma, which applies to all applicants, but could be a
potential barrier specifically for FII applicants. The three remaining employers cited barriers
specific to a FII applicant’s criminal history. One employer, Alex, shared that having a criminal
history, specifically a felony charge, does not automatically disqualify someone, but may impact
that individual if compared to other non-FII applicants. Alex shared, “[In terms of barriers],
yeah, absolutely. I think that the application itself, when a person has to check whether they have
a felony record, it certainly is going to, like other qualifications, affect how they compare to
other applicants.” For Alex, a felony charge does not automatically disqualify a FII candidate,
but if compared to a non-FII candidate of equal skills, the FII would likely not get the job, thus
being a barrier to employment for FII applicants within his organization.
For other employers interviewed, specific crime types result in disqualification from
employment because of the clients they serve or industries they work in. One employer, Olive,
whose non-profit has a retail component, would likely not hire someone with a recent theft
conviction. Olive shared:
So, for our organization, there really isn’t anybody in our midst that isn’t exposed to a
high, I’ll say temptation from theft, if that is their thing. So, if someone, for example,

92
were released in the last 6-12 months for a burglary or a theft, or embezzlement, or
something like that, that would lead me more towards a denial.
Olive’s sentiments were that in a retail environment, anyone with a history of and existing
proclivity towards theft may likely give into temptation with stealing, which is a risk she would
not take.
Lee, another program director who works in a non-profit that serves children and
families, shared a prohibition against FII applicants with histories of committing sex crimes. Lee
shared:
The only thing [barrier] that we have would be with registered sex offenders. They are a
population that we currently do not serve here and would not be able to be hired at our
location and it is partially because we do employ and have contracts with vulnerable
populations, and hiring someone with a 290-offense would or could put them in violation
of their parole just by being around some of the other people that we serve.
Unlike some of the other employers interviewed who were solely concerned with client safety,
Lee cited some other points of rationale for excluding FII applicants with histories involving
sexual misconduct, or 290-offenses, as he describes. Lee discussed legal mandates for
organizational contracts involving protection of vulnerable populations receiving services. It is
interesting to note that his organization would also decline working with clients with this type of
criminal history for the same reason. Additionally, Lee mentioned that a 290-registrant working
within their organization could be in potential danger themselves, with the possibility of
violating parole for being in proximity of a person belonging to a vulnerable population that they
are prohibited from coming into contact with. In this sense, this barrier is not only a protective
measure for Lee’s organization but could be for the FII applicant as well.

93
Based on responses from the employers interviewed, the few employers who work in
organizations with relevant legal or other liability concerns, seemed to understand the laws and
regulations pertinent to their situations, aligning with policies outlined in Chapter 2. However,
the rest of the employers interviewed did not discuss legal restrictions pertinent to FII and
employment, suggesting they may not be aware of these restrictions. Awareness of legal
restrictions for FII in terms of employment are important for employers to know, in order to
mitigate risks of putting their organizations into jeopardy (Swensen et al., 2014).
Procedural knowledge around how to leverage WRCP resources. Resources provided
by employers involved in this study were limited for both FII and non-FII staff. One way to
alleviate inadequate resources is through partnering with a WRCP. As only four employers
within this study were already collaborating with a WRCP, there lacked a robust set of responses
amongst employers in terms of how to leverage WRCP resources. It is not surprising that these
four employers had the most extensive procedural knowledge around what WRCP resources are
available and how to effectively access them, as they have been given information and trainings
around resource provision by the WRCPs they partnered with. In order to promote employer
participation with WRCPs, increased knowledge about WRCP offerings and identifying ways in
which to access these resources is needed for employers. In addition, awareness of limitations of
WRCP resources can help inform employers on increasing resource provision for FII by their
own organizations. The general responses from employers interviewed suggested that limited
resources exist for their FII staff, whether provided by their own organization or a WRCP. In
addition, several employers wished that additional resources could also be provided to their non-
FII staff.

94
In terms of specific knowledge needs and assets identified in the interviews, the
following will be further discussed below: resources for FII staff provided by organization;
resources for non-FII staff provided by organization; and, resources for FII staff provided by
WRCP.
Resources for FII staff provided by organization. During the interviews, employers
revealed that limited resources were offered to their FII staff. Provision of essential resources for
FII while employed can increase the likelihood of employment retention and reduce risks of
recidivism (Cook et al., 2015; Feeny, 2008; Flatt & Jacobs, 2018; Koschmann & Peterson, 2013;
Raphael, 2011). Some resources that employers could provide FII staff include: enroll FII staff
for services with a WRCP; conduct trainings to increase skill development; or, provide emotional
support (Lattimore et al., 2009; Nally et al., 2014; Swensen et al., 2014). Seven of the 12
employers interviewed do not provide specific resources to FII staff, with three employers
clarifying that FII staff receive the same general benefits as other staff. Of the five employers
who shared they provide specific resources to FII staff, two employers discussed soft skills
training for FII staff, and the other three employers explained they assist with housing, food,
transportation, other subsidies, and referrals to supportive services when they cannot provide the
service themselves. Two employers also provide drug/alcohol services onsite for FII staff and
mental health referrals. Finally, one employer has been able to provide tattoo removal funding
for qualifying FII staff.
Resources for non-FII staff provided by organization. Similarly to FII staff, few
organizational resources provided to non-FII staff were discussed during the interviews. Five of
the 12 employers shared they provide resources for non-FII staff that promote effective working
relationships with FII staff. Two employers provide managerial support, listening, and empathy,

95
while two employers provide basic training for working with FII staff. The last employer
provides more intensive training, specifically with management, around working with employees
with barriers, which includes FII staff.
Resources for FII staff provided by WRCP. As only four employers interviewed were
currently working with a WRCP, there were limited resources to report that the WRCP provides
their FII staff. Table 7 illustrates the WRCP resources currently being provided to the four
employers in contractual collaborative agreements with WRCPs. All four of the employers who
were currently collaborating with a WRCP discussed how FII staff were receiving job skills
training, financial support, or other subsidies from the WRCP. Two employers discussed how
they assist FII during the onboarding process with filling out paperwork and providing targeted
employment orientations. Two employers indicated that their WRCPs provide life skills training
to FII staff, in terms of balancing work and personal life. One employer stated that their FII staff
receive case management services from the WRCP. One employer shared their FII staff gets
legal assistance from the WRCP. Finally, one employer discussed how their FII staff receive
assistance with necessities, including housing, clothing, food, transportation, and other benefits.

96
Table 7

Resources Provided to FII Staff by WRCPs

Resources Provided

Number of Employers with Response

Job skills training

Financial support/subsidies

Onboarding orientation/paperwork

Life skills training

Case management

3

3

2

2

1

Legal assistance

1
Housing/clothing/food/transportation/benefits

1

The services provided by WRCPs for FII staff mentioned by these four employers were
standard WRCP services discussed within the literature. While fairly limited in scope, no
services mentioned were out of the normal operating agreements between WRCPs and
participating employers. From the feedback of these four employers, the WRCPs they were
collaborating with are likely more limited in scope and are not providing extensive wrap-around
services. It is possible that they are working with WRCPs that have additional service offerings,
but these employers were not aware of the additional resources, nor had the knowledge necessary
for leveraging them.
Metacognitive knowledge about awareness of biases and stereotypes. During the
interviews, employers were asked about any biases or stereotypes that they may have previously
or currently hold towards FII. In addition, employers were asked about any supports or trainings

97
personally utilized in supporting their work with FII. They were also asked about adjustments
they may have made within their organizations, all of which could serve the purpose of
mitigating biases or stereotypes. Several employers reflected on how their previously held
negative beliefs about FII were challenged and dispelled after working with FII, as well as some
techniques utilized for mitigation, including organizational improvements. This suggests that the
employers interviewed possess metacognitive knowledge around their awareness of biases and
stereotypes. In terms of utilizing trainings to mitigate biases and stereotypes, only one of the 12
employers shared they had. However, a few other employers shared that they would like to get
training for themselves and/or their managerial staff to help break down negative beliefs or
biases held about this population. Education and training potentially conducted by a WRCP
could further inform how employers identify and mitigate biases and stereotypes.
In terms of specific discussions around metacognitive knowledge, the following will be
discussed further below: organizational improvements for working with FII; and, employer shifts
in beliefs and feelings since hiring FII.
Organizational improvements for working with FII. Some employers took a minute to
engage in self-reflection concerning how their individual organizations could improve in
providing supportive atmospheres for FII staff, which could further increase metacognitive
knowledge. Alice discussed her feelings around her organization’s exclusionary hiring process,
in terms of access on their website. Alice shared:
Yeah, we could definitely make our application process more inclusive. If you go to our
website, and go into the careers and job postings tab, they are a little intimidating. You
know the difference between Apple and Microsoft, kind of where Apple is very
minimalist and friendly to the eye and where Microsoft is really old school? I feel our job

98
postings are like that, too old school and official. The wording of them, they are really
long, and no one is going to read that.
Alice felt that the way in which jobs postings are formatted and written on their website may be a
potential barrier to applicants, and to simplify the language and visual presentation of jobs
postings, may create more inclusive hiring practices.
Other areas of identified organizational improvement included: provide more supportive
services to FII staff; offer basic life skills training; increase training for non-FII staff in working
with FII staff; expand leadership willingness to hire FII staff; expand organizational outreach to
general public to promote hiring FII staff; change policies and practices that promote longevity
and success for FII staff; and, generally be more patient with FII staff.
Employer shifts in beliefs and feelings since hiring FII. Many employers interviewed
discussed at length how hiring FII created positive shifts in their beliefs or feelings towards FII,
showing a strong presence of metacognitive knowledge within the sample of employers. There
were no instances where employers shared negative feelings towards FII resulting from working
alongside FII.
A few employers interviewed realized after working with FII that societal and media
portrayals of FII were not correct and that not all FII should be viewed as synonymous. Chuck
shared, “You can’t put everyone in the same box because they committed a crime. Some of them
genuinely become reformed and some of them do want to move back into the work population
again and want to contribute to society again.” Chuck’s previous inclination to view all FII as the
same was challenged, and now focuses on individualized efforts for working with each FII staff.
Simon also had a similar experience around how his beliefs and feelings changed towards
FII after working with them. Simon shared:

99
You can’t really judge a book by its cover. At the end of the day, you hear about some of
these crimes from newspapers, but you know, then you meet people and they are actually
just people who have made mistakes, whether its drug addiction, that desperate people do
desperate things. And so, I think I have gotten more compassion.
For Simon, the media had previously tainted his view of FII, and now he realizes that why FII
committed crimes in the first place is not so straightforward, resulting in feeling more positively
towards this population.
Another employer, Henry, also experienced a philosophical change in the way he thought
about FII, particularly in terms of providing employment opportunities. Henry shared:
Someone who has something on his record, is trying to get a job, and the ability to get a
job obviously provides them a path toward the kind of life I like to lead, so you know,
obviously, you want to help someone to do that, so I would just say it has forced a
deepening of my thinking about it.
Through a willingness to hire FII, Henry developed an expanded sense of empathy, as he could
appreciate that FII were striving for the kind of life that Henry has already been privileged with
leading.
Another employer, Alice, used to be scared to work with anyone who was FII, but after
working alongside FII, that feeling has completely dissipated. Alice shared:
Oh my god, yah. Oh yah. Well, because I have always worked with the chronically
homeless population, before I started working with them [FII] around ten years ago, I
would be afraid to work with anyone that had a record. Now they are the people I want to
work with the most.

100
Alice had a tantamount turnaround in her beliefs and feelings towards FII. Not only does she no
longer fear working with FII, but she specifically seeks out FII staff.
Some employers not only felt a shift in feelings towards FII, but towards the criminal
justice system itself. Nola shared:
Hiring FII has changed me and how I look at programs for rehabilitation. It has made me
look at the system a little differently…And what is lacking in our system is where we can
help people be more successful in coming out and having a trade or something they have
learned while incarcerated.
In hiring FII, Nola has been able to take a more intimate look at the criminal justice system, and
particularly, how FII are prepared for release while incarcerated. Nola felt that FII should get
more support and training while incarcerated in order to be fully prepared for release and
reintegration into the workforce.
Chuck also discussed feelings towards the criminal justice system resulting from working
with FII that he felt very passionately about during the interview. Chuck shared:
The more I start reading about how crazy our justice system is and the way they treat
convicted felons, it seems like it is very unfair that they are almost all put into one bucket
and treated the same way, so, I could be wrong, but someone that has a manslaughter
conviction and someone who has a DUI, and correct me if I am wrong, but they are kind
of put into the same bucket and treated the same way, because it is a felony…Unpacking
the situation and after you get more information about this person and the crime they
committed, then you can sit down with it all and make a better decision.

101
For Chuck, who previously held beliefs about felony charges as a singular representation of that
individual, without considering the context around the situation or what type of crime it was, no
longer felt that way after employing FII.
A commonality in discussions with the employers interviewed was how their negative
beliefs and previously held stereotypes about FII dissipated after working with them.
Specifically, previous fears about safety, perceived untrustworthiness, unreliable work ethics,
and other liabilities were facets of belief systems held by employers prior to working with FII,
which aligned with common concerns employers hold about hiring FII within the literature
(Blumstein & Nakamura, 2009; Bumiller, 2015; Carter, 2009; Feeny, 2008; Harley, 2014; Holzer
et al., 2001; Petersen, 2015; Raphael, 2011). While trainings and education were significant
methods discussed within the literature for mitigating biases and stereotypes about FII, working
alongside FII was a more common experience for the employers interviewed, suggesting the
importance of promoting equity and inclusion, while dispelling negative beliefs through direct
exposure.
Additional knowledge needs and assets. During the interviews, some employers shared
relevant knowledge information that fell beyond the purview of the initially assumed knowledge
influences, which will be discussed in this section.
Although only one employer interviewed had completed bias reduction training, other
employers suggested additional trainings they felt would be helpful for overcoming biases or
stereotypes. One employer, Lee, discussed the possibility of arranging training around trauma-
informed care. Lee shared:
Employers would do well in investing in a form of training for their management level
staff…Let’s say our goal is to have more employers hire folks with criminal backgrounds

102
and to remove that barrier from the equation, you would succeed more in doing that, by
doing what is called trauma-informed care in your way of thinking, so that you can
address the mindset of individuals that are going to be supervising those individuals that
are coming in, so they have a wider scope of understanding. That goes a long way for an
individual who is trying to transition into the workplace.
Lee felt that employers who are trained in providing trauma-informed care, a modality for
working with clients who have experienced trauma that focuses on safety, support, and
empowerment, rather than retribution, would serve managers well if they utilized this training for
promoting equitable treatment for FII staff.
Another employer, Chuck, identified his need for some training specific around
interviewing FII applicants. Chuck shared:
I would like to get more education on how the process works so that I am better prepared
to ask specific questions. What I mean is some of them might get defensive…it is
working with asking the right questions that are sensitive and that doesn’t sort of feel like
I am putting them into a separate box. Because, you know, the system just put them in
that box. Now they are out of that box, and we don’t want to put them back into that box.
Chuck realized that receiving training on effectively engaging FII applicants during the interview
process could allow for him to alleviate risks of additional negative experiences for FII.
In summary, employers interviewed did possess knowledge around hiring criteria for FII,
barriers to employment for FII, and awareness of their biases and stereotypes. Additional
knowledge around barriers to employment for FII, which could inform more extensive policy
development around hiring criteria for FII, would likely increase the ability for employers to
successfully hire and retain FII. What needs more significant development in terms of employer

103
knowledge involves WRCP resources and the skills for understanding how to leverage WRCP
resources. There could be mitigating reasons as to why it was so difficult to recruit employers for
participation in this study in Northern California that were already collaborating with a WRCP.
Some potential reasons include lack of WRCPs within Northern California, inadequate media or
outreach efforts to employers in Northern California by WRCPs, or undesirable WRCP service
offerings for employers in the areas in which the WRCPs operate. Regardless, additional
knowledge development around WRCPs and their potential utilization for increasing
employment opportunities to FII, is needed for employers. If the knowledge needs were filled,
the literature and conceptual framework suggested that the field goal would be more
accomplishable.
Motivation
Expectancy value theory. As discussed in Chapter 2, expectancy value theory (EVT)
can inform an employer’s motivation in terms of perceived capability of performing a task and
whether they find it valuable (Eccles, 2006; Rueda, 2011). Applied to this study, employers need
to see the value in hiring FII, as well as collaborating with a WRCP for support. As discussed in
Chapter 2, the four types of value include: intrinsic; utility; attainment; and cost. Determining if
and what types of value existed for employers involved in this study was assessed during
discussions around motivations for employing FII, as well as the many benefits and positive
interactions employers interviewed had experienced in working with FII. Employers interviewed
shared responses that indicated they see all four types of value in terms of employing FII.
In terms of value, the following will be discussed further below: benefits and value of
hiring FII; employer experience in working with FII; why employers partnered with a WRCP;
and, benefits of collaborating with a WRCP.

104
Benefits and value of hiring FII. Every employer interviewed discussed the benefits of
hiring FII, indicating all four types of value in their responses. In fact, the most robust and
longest responses, on average, sprang from this question. Table 8 illustrates the numerous
benefits for hiring FII that were identified by the participants. Every employer interviewed
shared that hiring FII expands their candidate pool of qualified applicants. Ten of the 12
employers discussed the value in providing FII with the same employment chances as everyone
else. Seven employers felt it is the right thing to do for the community. Seven employers
discussed how FII are motivated by job opportunities and often share their appreciation for being
given the job. Six employers discussed how everyone deserves a second chance. Four employers
identified the benefit of reduced recidivism rates when FII are employed. Four employers shared
FII are often more loyal and stay with their job longer than non-FII employees. Four employers
appreciated the lived experiences of their FII employees, which aid in connecting to clients who
are also FII. Three employers shared the financial benefits that come with hiring FII staff. Three
employers asserted that it feels good to provide this opportunity to FII applicants. Two
employers disclosed that they were FII themselves, adding value to providing employment to this
population. Finally, one employer discussed the value of hiring FII in terms of providing
validation to the FII applicant through employment.

105
Table 8

Benefits and Value in Hiring FII

Benefits/Value

Number of Employers with Response

Larger candidate pool/organizational growth

12
FII getting same chance as everyone else

10
Right thing to do for the community

7
FII are motivated by and thankful for
opportunity

7

Everyone deserves a second chance 6

Reduces recidivism 4

FII more loyal/higher retention rates

4
FII lived experience for client benefit

Financial incentives for employer
4

3

Feels good to provide opportunity 3

I am a FII myself 2

Validation for FII

1

Employers overwhelmingly shared that a benefit of hiring FII is that they add to a larger
candidate pool of applicants, indicating utility and attainment value. Simon shared how hiring
FII has also provided his organization with positive data showing the success rates of hiring FII,
which has opened up other opportunities, like grant funding:

106
The main benefit is getting a lot of good workers. We benefit from people [FII staff] that
have been given an opportunity to do well and now we are getting the benefit within our
organization…That has provided more access to grant funding and things like that
because of our success.
For Simon’s organization, not only do FII benefit from the opportunity, but his organization was
able to grow through a larger workforce and gained access to additional funding and other
opportunities as a result of the success his organization had with hiring FII.
Providing a second chance or the feeling that everyone deserves an equal chance was one
of the most common responses from employers interviewed, indicating intrinsic value amongst
these employers. One employer, Simon shared:
I think that it [hiring FII to provide equal chances] is part of the mission. They were
trying to address generational poverty, people dealing with drug addiction, people being
homeless. There is a lot of crossover for people dealing with that and having
incarceration as part of their history, so we are naturally going to deal with some of that.
Simon has identified a coincidence in terms of FII also experiencing homelessness and addiction,
so providing jobs to FII has become a default facet of their hiring practices.
Another employer, Chuck, dug a bit deeper in his personal feelings about providing a
second chance to FII through employment within his organization:
Like, looking at, you know, stories I have heard from other situations on where people
have a record from the past that has come back to haunt them a little bit, but are pretty
much good people, but they are just stuck in being part of the system and hiring them
gives them a chance to move into a job.
Chuck felt that by providing a second chance, you are not only helping a FII applicant

107
move towards stability but are moving the FII applicant away from an oppressive system that
does not typically provide such opportunities, indicating utility value.
Other employers interviewed discussed increased loyalty and determination with their FII
staff, indicating attainment value. Alex shared that one of his previous FII employees was one of
his hardest working employees. Alex shared:
I would say so far what I have seen is a greater willingness to work hard. I think Jimmy
[pseudonym] was one of my hardest working employees; he was very strong and
motivated. He seemed to like, I would describe it as his particular interest was almost like
a factory floor, the idea of constantly moving, constantly working, at a repetitive task.
For Alex, his FII employee was a very dedicated and methodical worker in his approach to
completing tasks, a benefit for his organization.
Some employers interviewed shared more about the larger societal benefits, including
reduced rates of recidivism, also indicating attainment value, as well as utility value. Henry
shared:
Well, obviously recidivism is its own problem and working against that by hiring FII has
its own virtue. Obviously, there is a benefit for the person getting hired, anyone getting a
job is desirable, otherwise they wouldn’t be applying, and it is extra hard for them
because of all sorts of concerns, plus unrelated unfounded ones.
For Henry, not only does he see the societal benefit of reduced recidivism, but also experiences
the merit in providing an opportunity for someone despite all of the barriers and challenges
attached to having a criminal record when seeking employment opportunities.

108
Other employers interviewed also shared the sentiment of personal benefits for hiring FII,
indicating intrinsic value. Nola discussed creating an opportunity for FII to experience positivity
when applying to work for her. Nola shared:
I think the benefit is non-judgment. I think the benefit is giving them the opportunity to
know that there are people out there who don’t care what their past is and care more
about where they are going now. So, I think the benefit of hiring someone is compassion,
really…There is a benefit for the person doing the hiring and there is a benefit to the
actual individual.
Nola identified a mutual benefit between her organization and the FII applicant and determined
existing value in treating someone with compassion and dignity while reintegrating into society.
In similar terms, Alex discussed the benefit of validation when a FII gets a job, “There
are a number of benefits. I think that number one, I think that ensuring a person feels validated,
that they are contributing to society; if that is something they want to do, being able to support
that is significant.” Alex identified a mutual benefit in providing validation for the FII applicant
and the opportunity to provide that validation as the employer.
Other employers discussed benefits for clients that FII employees serve because of the
natural bond they may feel as both having lived experience within the criminal justice system,
also indicating intrinsic value. Sarah shared:
The benefit of hiring FII is primarily their lived experience. To me, there is nothing better
than somebody being able to say, “I have been there, I have done that, I know what that
feels like. You know, I know when nobody believes you, I know what that feels like, and
being forced to obey all these rules and regulations that you don’t agree with, I know
what that fees like.”

109
For Sarah, witnessing the connection formed between her FII staff and clients was not only
beneficial to the client and organization, but brought her personal satisfaction as well.
Other employers also discussed personal satisfaction in hiring FII. Olive shared her
thoughts on this, “The benefit comes from, for me anyway, it comes from knowing that I have
done something good…So being able to open the door and be able to make the opportunity
available, I think is a benefit to my community.” Like other employers interviewed, Olive
identified multiple benefits in terms of value in hiring FII. Olive experienced personal
satisfaction out of doing what is right for not only the FII applicant, but for her community, and
she personally felt the moral push to do this.
For some employers, the value in hiring FII was deeply personal. Lee discussed how his
desire to expand organizational operations to include FII staff was due to his own lived
experience as a FII. Lee shared:
I myself am an individual with lived experience, and as part of the leadership team, I was
able to give some unique insight about individuals that are transitioning from jail or
prison. Actually, I firmly believe that if an individual shows up to a job interview or a
program, that they have already made a decision to try something different, and all we are
doing is providing an opportunity for them to take that through and grow…I think that
makes getting people to understand that at the leadership level, explaining it in that
fashion, has been able to open up a lot of eyes and got us over that initial fear.
Lee’s experience as a FII not only inspired him to encourage his organization to start hiring FII
but facilitated the process of alleviating fears of leadership.
Based on employer responses during the interviews, it sounds as if the respondents
possess similar perceived values as those outlined within the literature. Intrinsically, many

110
employers felt the emotional connection to hiring FII and experienced satisfaction by providing
second chances. In terms of utility value, financial resources provided to organizations that hire
FII, increased employer willingness to hire FII. In terms of attainment value, some respondents
felt that hiring FII has expanded their leadership skillsets and are looking to WRCPs and other
educational supports to increase their supervision skills specifically for this population. Finally,
in terms of cost value, several employers discussed the resource commitments of hiring this
population as outweighed by the positive impacts it has had at an individual and organizational
level. Of particular interest was the criteria rarely mentioned by employers interviewed,
specifically, how only three employers discussed financial incentives for hiring FII within their
organizations, as it was a predominant theme within the literature (Carter, 2009; CEDD; 2018;
Koschmann & Peterson, 2013; Wifokk et al., 2012).
Employer experience in working with FII. All 12 employers interviewed discussed
positive feelings around working with FII, showing that intrinsic value has motivated all
employers who participated in interviews. Five of the 12 employers shared that working with FII
is just like working with anyone else and that they do not treat their FII staff any different than
non-FII staff. Olive shared, “They [FII] aren’t going to walk in with whatever movie version you
have of a criminal. They look just like the rest of us, they behave just like the rest of us, for the
most part.” Olive believed FII are no different than anyone else in terms of seeking employment
and commented on the perceived falsity of the stereotypes that exist concerning this population.
Some employers shared more in-depth responses regarding their experiences working
with FII. Sarah shared her thoughts on the character traits she has witnessed in FII staff she has
hired, “They are incredibly passionate, eager, wanting to learn, and so it has not been a bad thing,
you know. Their lived experience certainly adds to the incredible experience that they have and

111
their knowledge base.” Sarah identified value in hiring FII applicants, and that her FII staff have
contributed positively to her organization.
The remaining employers shared fairly consistent feedback about their experience
working with FII, including that FII are very caring, can teach us [employers] through their
unique experiences, are very humble and willing to admit past mistakes, are hardworking and
motivated, are appreciative for the chance they have been given with this job opportunity, and
that employers enjoy watching FII staff grow in confidence and skillsets as they become
acclimated to their new jobs.
Employers clearly felt an emotional connection to hiring this population and touched on
the likelihood of FII employees being loyal and hardworking. Interview responses covered all
four types of value contained within EVT and it is suggested employers have already identified
the value in hiring FII.
Why employers partnered with a WRCP. All four of the 12 employers interviewed who
had existing WRCP partnerships shared their rationale for partnering with a WRCP, which
revolved around WRCP resource provision for mitigating limitations of organizational resource
provision. This suggested that a driving motivation for WRCP partnerships primarily involved
utility value, as economic resources for serving FII can be limited, and government grants or
other funding streams that WRCPs can assist in providing organizations can alleviate financial
burdens for employers (Graffman et al., 2008; Koschmann & Petersen, 2013; NIJ, 2013;
Petersen, 2015; Schmitt & Warner, 2010; Yang, 2017; Young & Powell, 2015). Two of the
employers shared it was for financial reasons, as they were receiving grants or subsidized
employment reimbursement from their WRCP for employing FII staff. One employer shared
WRCP collaboration was an embedded part of their organizational mission. Finally, one

112
employer shared that their particular WRCP offers mental health support through a cognitive
behavior therapeutic model, which aligned with organizational goals.
Benefits of collaborating with a WRCP. Attainment value appeared to be a primary
driving motivation for employers when discussing benefits of WRCP collaboration, as they
identified several areas in which a WRCP could enable them to become stronger leaders in
supporting FII. All 12 employers interviewed shared feedback on the benefits of collaborating
with a WRCP, as illustrated by Table 9. Eleven employers discussed the benefit of WRCP
training provision. Nine employers discussed increased access to a larger candidate pool, as
WRCPs can help provide qualified FII applicants. Five employers discussed financial resources
that a WRCP could provide. Four employers discussed the benefit of WRCPs vetting potential
FII staff. Finally, four employers shared that WRCPs can provide managerial support for
working with FII staff.

Table 9

Benefits of Collaborating with a WRCP

Benefit

Number of Employers with Response

Training

Access to larger candidate pool

Funding/monetary incentives

Vetting FII staff

Managerial support

11

9

5

4

4

113
Employers elaborated on the perceived benefits of WRCPs. Lee discussed the benefits of
WRCPs preparing FII for employment through job preparedness training:
So oftentimes someone who is rough around the edges and what not, when you work with
social enterprises that are doing the work already, they have done some of the hard
stuff. They are teaching people soft skills, resume writing, how to act in a workplace,
how to punch in, all of these critical things that maybe an employer doesn’t have the time
to teach someone, but also, they give the support to staff.
Lee identified a benefit of WRCP collaboration in terms of WRCP ability to front-load general
training applicable to many jobs at various organizations, a benefit to his future FII staff and the
organization as well, while saving time and other training resources.
Sarah also discussed the training benefits that a WRCP could provide to her FII staff:
For the readiness piece, we always find that invaluable for the young people we work
with before they are going into a job, so I imagine that it would be the same for an adult,
in that they have the basic knowledge of having a good work ethic, and that comes along
with the job readiness piece, so sure, that would just be an added bonus.
Sarah’s organization works with youth impacted by the criminal justice system. Her staff assist
youth clients with job preparedness. Sarah felt a WRCP could mirror this service provision
model for potential FII staff.
Employer responses aligned with the literature and conceptual framework in terms of
identified value in WRCP collaboration. However, it is interesting to note that almost half of the
employers shared the benefit of managerial support WRCPs could provide for increased
leadership efficacy, specifically around navigating staff challenges, but none of them had yet
sought out this support. In addition, while the literature asserted that financial incentives and

114
available funding are a driving motivation for employers to collaborate with a WRCP, very few
employers discussed the financial benefits during the interviews. This suggested that this sample
of employers may be more in need of human resource and other leadership skill-building support
than financial assistance from a WRCP, which could inform how WRCPs are designed within
Northern California and increase collaboration efforts between WRCPs and employers.
Research Question 2
What are the organizational needs and assets related to increasing the numbers of
formerly incarcerated individuals participating in a WRCP and receiving one-year temporary
positions that are designed to provide an opportunity to transition into permanent employment?
Organization
Cultural models: collaboration with WRCPs and trust and acceptance among staff.
During the interviews, there were few discussions regarding collaboration between employers
and WRCPs, as well as collaboration amongst staff. This is likely due to only four of the 12
interviewees having collaborative relationships with a WRCP at the time of the interviews. It
may also attest to the importance of WRCPs in promoting conversations and actions around
collaboration at all organizational levels.
In terms of cultural models, the following will be discussed further below: employer
experience collaborating with a WRCP; staff discussions prior to onboarding FII staff; staff
feedback on working with FII staff; and, FII feedback on working with the organization.
Employer experience collaborating with a WRCP. As only four of the 12 employers
interviewed were currently collaborating with a WRCP, there was not a lot of feedback
concerning employer experience in collaborating with a WRCP, but all feedback was generally

115
positive. Lee discussed how effective communication with the WRCP led to an increased staff
size:
So, we have had a great line of communication, a great working relationship with our
contractor [WRCP]. In the initial opening up of our program, there has been some back
and forth about how the program would go, but over the past 5 or 6 years, we have
grown about 300%...We have been able to create more opportunities for more
individuals, so the relationship has been really strong and working with them has been
able to work out the majority of any kinks.
For Lee’s organization, the collaborative relationship with the WRCP not only allowed for
organizational growth at a tremendous rate but allowed for FII to more quickly obtain
employment
Another employer, Olive, discussed the overall positive experience in collaborating with
a WRCP, despite minor challenges:
For the most part, it [collaborating with a WRCP] has been good. Occasionally, we have
had some philosophical challenges. Again, you have heard me say over and over now, we
are going to treat everyone the same, or as close as possible, and sometimes we get
pushback that they [WRCP] want their folks to be treated differently, or more leniently,
and that is just not something we are going to subscribe to. My expectation is you are
going to work like every other employee is, and if I have an attendance problem with a
non-justice or with a justice background, I am going to treat them the same, and just
because you were justice involved, I am not going to be like, “Oh, it is okay for you not
to do it, and everybody else has to.” We just don’t work that way.

116
Olive has had some experiences involving the WRCP requesting preferential treatment for
clients they serve that are also employees at Olive’s organization. This goes against Olive’s
philosophy of treating everyone the same.
With such limited feedback from employers on their experience collaborating with a
WRCP, it was difficult to definitively say whether employer responses aligned with the literature
or conceptual framework. However, it appeared WRCP support has been present for the
employers who are in collaborative relationships with WRCPs already, which has allowed for
organizational growth and FII integrating more seamlessly.
Staff feedback on working with FII staff. Providing staff with opportunities to give
feedback can assist in facilitating increased trust and acceptance amongst staff (Berger, 2014;
Stone & Heen, 2014). As most employers shared that they do not engage in discussions with
non-FII staff prior to onboarding a FII staff member, it is not surprising that there was little
discussion concerning staff feedback on working with FII staff. Four of the 12 employers
interviewed shared that when staff provided feedback, it was positive and involved enjoyment
working alongside FII team members. The other three employers shared feedback from staff that
was negative, involving safety concerns, lack of trust, and overreactions.
One employer discussed specific staff feedback that had to do with the type of crime
involved in the FII’s history. Lola shared, “Mostly, it is fear around that person’s trustworthiness
and their individual safety around that person. Especially for people who have convictions that
are of a violent or sexual nature.” For Lola’s non-FII staff, when they found out someone they
worked with was a FII, they exhibited strong feelings, and reacted more harshly when it involved
a FII with a more serious criminal history.

117
Beyond Lola’s insight, employers interviewed shared little on this topic, suggesting it
was not a significant issue for the majority of their organizations. Additionally, fear around a
FII’s background was typical for non-FII staff, which aligned with the literature (Blumstein &
Nakamura, 2009; Bumiller, 2015; Carter, 2009; Feeny, 2008; Harley, 2014; Holzer et al., 2001;
Petersen, 2015; Raphael, 2011).
FII feedback on working with organization. During the interviews, there was limited
discussion around direct feedback from FII staff. Of the six employers interviewed who had
received feedback from FII staff, only one employer discussed negative feedback, involving
feelings of isolation and mistreatment by other staff once their criminal history came to light.
The remaining five employers interviewed discussed positive feedback from FII staff, involving
appreciation for being given a chance, feelings of belonging and being respected by others, that
their past is not interfering with the present because of this job, that they are motivated by the
structure of this job, and that their lived experience is beneficial to clients and the organization.
Sarah discussed positive feedback received from FII staff, “You know, most times they
[FII staff] love it. Because they are working with young people, they have an opportunity to
hopefully engage them, and impact some of the decisions, and again, the lived experience just
adds to that component.” Sarah witnessed positive interactions between FII staff and clients and
attested to unique experiences FII hold that are beneficial to everyone involved.
Lola discussed her organization’s culture, which promotes feedback involving job
longevity and satisfaction from her FII staff. Lola shared:
In general, we have a lot of programs that are designed to help anyone go from a low-
level or entry-level position and move up to management roles in a very transparent way,
where we really lay out the path and that has been very motivating and positive. I can

118
think of a certain person, where that was a very positive and motivating opportunity,
because they could see themselves growing beyond their current role and into something
new, where they had sort of lost their momentum and opportunity due to incarceration.
Lola created an organizational culture that fosters motivation for FII staff, propelling their
rehabilitation and careers as a result of a clearly laid out promotional infrastructure that they can
choose to interact with.
There may be a variety of reasons why FII staff did not share feedback with their
employers about their experiences working within the organization, which may include a lack of
organizational trust and acceptance, directly impacting FII staff upon hiring. Employers and
WRCPs can work together to encourage increased trust and acceptance with staff through
encouragement, listening, setting clear expectations, and providing emotional support
(Buckingham & Coffman, 1999). It appeared that some of the employers interviewed had
experienced a lack of trust and acceptance within their organizations, as identified through direct
feedback from FII staff. This became more apparent during discussions with employers around
non-FII staff behavior, as seen in the following section.
Staff adjustment and changes in behavior since working with FII. Employers that
foster trust, show staff appreciation, promote open communication, and provide staff
opportunities for engagement, will likely have more success at building trust and acceptance
among staff (Agocs, 1997; Duhigg, 2016; Korsgaard et al., 2002; Morrison & Milliken, 2000).
As discussed further below, these types of cultural models may have been lacking for some of
the employers interviewed. Six of the 12 employers interviewed shared that nothing has changed
with their staff since their organization started hiring FII. Of the remaining six employers, three
employers shared that staff embodied positive behavioral changes in relation to how they

119
interacted with FII. Alternatively, the other three employers shared that they witnessed
challenging behavior patterns with their non-FII staff towards FII staff. Of the three employers
who experienced challenging staff behavior, two employers cited that staff had safety concerns
and suspicions and the other employer said they witnessed gossip and exclusion.
Lola discussed both positive and negative behavior witnessed with her non-FII staff:
The challenge for us tends to be when staff groups…I have seen instances where
staff have been remarkably positive and respectful when that person is reintegrating and
judges them for the work they have presented, but I have also seen the opposite happen,
where that person is no longer welcome because their past is uncovered.
Although Lola witnessed some positive experiences with non-FII staff in terms of their behavior
towards FII, in some instances, her FII staff became alienated from non-FII staff once their
background history was uncovered.
For the few employers who shared that there were no non-FII staff behavior changes,
they explained that this was likely because staff are not made privy to information about whether
someone has a criminal background or not, as it is confidential information. Olive explained her
thoughts on this:
It is none of your business what their background is, just as you don’t know who is
standing behind you in the grocery line, you don’t have to know everything about your
coworker. You just have to have an expectation that we are all going to be professional,
and we are all here working for the same good.
Olive expects her staff to mind their own business when it comes to a coworker’s personal
history, regardless if they are a FII, and further, if this knowledge were to surface, reactions
should not deter from professionalism.

120
It appears that cultural models of trust and acceptance were missing for some of the
employers involved in this study. There were issues with exclusionary behavior amongst non-FII
staff towards FII staff, including gossip and alienation. This type of behavior is not only
detrimental to the organization as a whole, but can lead to quicker turnover for FII staff and
places them at risk for recidivation and other detrimental situations. In addition, while suggesting
that staff “mind their own business,” this may be counterproductive to increasing trust and
acceptance amongst staff. Closing off communication channels and not allowing staff the space
to share their concerns, further drives away from a healthy cultural model, and leads to negativity
and decline in collaboration (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Cultural settings: education and training for working with FII staff and WRCP
mentorship and ongoing support. To effectively work alongside FII staff, education and
training for non-FII staff should be involved. WRCPs can support employers in creating a
cultural setting that provides these types of educational and training opportunities to staff.
Employers involved in this study reported that there were not many opportunities for non-FII
staff to receive training around working with FII staff, but many employers discussed the need
and desire for it.
In terms of cultural settings, the following will be further discussed below: organizational
change for accommodating FII employees; training for FII and non-FII staff; WRCP mentorship
and ongoing support for managers and non-FII staff.
Organizational change for accommodating FII staff. While several employers
interviewed discussed adjusted organizational policies for accommodating FII staff, education
and training were not predominant themes discussed. Four of the 12 employers interviewed
shared that no organizational changes were made for accommodating FII when they started

121
hiring this population. Responses from the remaining eight employers who did change
organizational practices for accommodating FII staff, discussed changes involving policies.
Some employers created more restrictive policies for increased client or staff safety, while other
employers created less restrictive policies to allow for more FII staff to be hired.
Olive’s organization created a more restrictive policy, in terms of security protocols and
building access for FII staff. Olive shared:
Probably the biggest one [policy adjustment to accommodate FII staff] for us involves
registered sex offenders. We have 20 separate worksites, so even within a worksite, we
often have multiple departments, so we manage very tightly and secure the information
about who is where, so we don’t ever take the risk. For example, we occasionally offer a
teen program, so we won’t put a teen program where there is a sex offender working.
Although Olive’s organization will hire FII who have committed any crime type, for FII with a
criminal history involving sex offenses, there will be restricted access within buildings where
vulnerable populations are present.
Chuck’s organization also created a more restrictive hiring policy, involving an extra
interview requirement for FII applicants, to further assess whether they will be a good fit for the
organization. Chuck shared:
So, it’s going to be an extra interview, to get deep into the details so that we are both
comfortable and we both know exactly what we’re getting ourselves into and moving
forward. Like we don’t know if it is a mental health issue that created the situation where
they became a felon or if it was just bad luck that caused them to become a felon. So, we
have to look at the mental health background part of was it just that they were young and
dumb and that they are completely in a better space and place in their life now.

122
For Chuck to feel comfortable hiring FII, he integrated an extra interview to allow further
communication and to get a sense of what circumstances may have led them to having a criminal
record.
Other employers discussed transitioning into a more flexible, less restrictive approach
concerning policies or programmatic changes when they decided to start hiring FII. Lola
discussed how organizational operations were adjusted, allowing for tailored approaches in
accommodating FII staff:
As an organization, we are very aware that people who come to work for us come as they
are, with whatever baggage, issues, prior training, bad experiences, good experiences,
and so, as an organization, we have a management philosophy that centers around the
individual and customizing our approach to that individual…So, obviously people who
are FII, there may be some additional challenges they have to overcome that our
managers have to help address.
Although Lola’s organization now provides a supportive tailored approach to all staff,
management became particularly aware of unique needs FII staff may have.
Another approach a few employers interviewed discussed regarding less restrictive hiring
policies involved augmenting or getting rid of background checks, including drug testing
requirements, allowing for increased numbers of FII to gain employment. Lee’s organization
removed the background check requirement entirely. Lee shared:
So, creating an opportunity for folks to start working regardless of their background
was one of the major changes we had to make, which took some different going back and
forth with the senior leadership team with how effective that was going to be or if it was
going to be a security issue or create other issues onsite. But we have been able to roll it

123
out and have no major incidents.
For Lee’s organization, although removing the background check spurred safety concerns from
senior leadership, no serious issues resulted, and allowed for increased FII staff counts.
Other organizations did not remove the background check entirely but augmented some
screening requirements within their employment policies. Simon shared how some of their
policies changed revolving around hiring FII:
I think there is obviously a background screening process that might have been changed.
I think some of our policies regarding people getting fired right away for policy
violations, there is a little more flexibility…We have a new drug policy in terms of
hiring, in that we no longer drug test before hiring.
Simon’s organization took a less punitive approach with new FII staff, diminishing the likelihood
of employment termination based on policy violations. Additionally, drug testing requirements
were removed during onboarding process, which was beneficial to FII as well.
Generally, the employer responses were in alignment with the literature, as responses
revolved around programmatic changes, removing barriers, such as the background check or
restrictive hiring policies, and more effective communication practices. However, specific
provision of education and training that focused on working with FII staff were absent,
suggesting this was a prevalent need for employers to fill, which could be more effectively done
through a WRCP, involving WRCP staff expertise and additional resources.
Training for FII and non-FII staff. In terms of provision of initial onboarding training,
the majority of employers (eleven of 12) shared that they provide the same initial training to all
staff, regardless if they are FII. Only one employer discussed a slightly different protocol for FII
staff, where they engage in a short-term “screening” process for the first few weeks of

124
employment, as his organization experienced challenges with front-loading training, following
by some FII staff quitting shortly after. Simon shared:
What we were doing, was training some people [FII]…And what happened, two, four, six
weeks down the road, maybe they quit for a variety of reasons…Some of them are not
ready for full-time employment, so we have now kind of put in a screening process, a
front-end kind of leaning…Those who get through the first few weeks demonstrate they
are worth investing training and some other resources in.
Simon’s organization made adjustments to ensure FII employees want to stay and receive in-
depth training, saving time and effort for everyone involved. This was contradictory to what the
literature asserted, as the literature pointed to the likelihood of increased job longevity for
someone who is FII. Increased training at the beginning of employment can assist in promoting
security and feeling supported by the organization, which is something that was identified as a
need for the employers involved in this study (Buckingham & Coffman, 1999; Kezar, 2001; Rath
& Conchie, 2009).
WRCP mentorship and ongoing support for managers and non-FII staff. WRCPs can
provide ample support to organizations in a plethora of ways, but mentorship and ongoing
support for managers is a facet that can increase communication and positive organizational
settings (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007; Berbary & Malinchak, 2011; Fernandez et al., 2015;
Shaufeli et al., 2006). None of the 12 employers interviewed had personally sought mentorship
or supportive services from a WRCP. However, some employers identified several mentorship or
support opportunities they would like to receive from a WRCP. Table 10 illustrates these
identified needs. Eight employers discussed how training for effectively working with FII would
be beneficial. Five employers wanted more support from WRCPs for their non-FII staff. Five

125
employers wanted to learn how to better communicate as a team. Three employers discussed a
need for increased support around providing or obtaining mental health services for staff. Two
employers specifically discussed wanting training on trauma-informed care, while two other
employers desired training for increasing empathy and compassion. Two employers wanted to
learn more effective communication techniques for increasing leadership skills. Finally, one
employer wanted more managerial support from a WRCP.

Table 10

Desired Employer Mentorship and Support from WRCP

Desired from WRCP

Number of Employers with Response

Training on effectively working with FII

Support for non-FII staff

Help us communicate better as a team

Ongoing support with mental health

Trauma-informed care training

8

5

5

3

2

Empathy/compassion training

2
More consistent leadership communication
techniques

Managerial support

2

1

In terms of what employers interviewed identified as potential resources a WRCP could
provide, responses aligned with the literature. It was interesting that only one manager expressed

126
an interest in receiving managerial support from a WRCP, despite being highlighted within the
literature. The responses from employers interviewed suggested that employers have identified
several areas in which WRCPs can support their organizations in embracing more supportive
atmospheres, which may create more positive organizational settings for both FII and non-FII
staff.
Additional organizational needs and assets. During the interviews, some employers
responded with relevant information that fell beyond the purview of the initially assumed
organizational influences, which will be discussed in this section.
Nine of the 12 employers interviewed shared that their organization has not changed
since hiring FII. This was contrary to the expectations set forth in the beginning of the study
around anticipated organizational change for employers interviewed after integrating FII into
their organizations. The three employers who discussed some organizational change, commented
on organizational growth, managers becoming more diverse in leadership style, increased
services for FII staff, and additional specific training around working alongside FII. While there
was not a lot of elaboration on this topic, one employer, Lee, discussed significant change within
FII staff, which he credited to more extensive staff training and organizational strategizing. Lee
shared:
There has been tremendous, tremendous change. With the staff I have on my team now…
Not just in the workplace, but I have seen this turnaround where some of them are
starting to get involved in community events, and stepping up as leaders within their
individual communities, which is tremendous. The opportunity right now for individuals
who have a background, and not just a background, but who have overcome that
background, I think across all industries, is booming. When I do training

127
with my folks, I focus on how to change that perspective, and put it to work.
Lee’s FII staff have been promoted into leadership roles within his organization and community.
Additionally, hiring FII created more inclusive training techniques, another benefit to the
organization.
In summary, employers interviewed needed significant development around creating
organizational cultural models and settings conducive to employing FII staff. During the
interviews, employers discussed little to no training opportunities for FII, as well as specific
trainings for non-FII staff that promote effective working relationships with FII staff. In addition,
feedback from FII and non-FII staff varied in terms of positive and negative reactions concerning
relationships amongst staff after FII were integrated into the workforce. This suggested that trust
and acceptance was lacking for the employers’ organizations involved in this study, and needs
further development, which a WRCP could alleviate through more extensive provision of
targeted trainings and offering additional support. What showed more promising results during
the interviews was the fact that many employers made concerted efforts to change organizational
practices to allow for more FII to be hired, and several methods were efficacious. In addition,
although most employers within the study were not yet working with a WRCP, they understood
potential supportive services a WRCP could provide and elaborated on what specific services
could be beneficial to their perspective organizations. Therefore, per the literature and conceptual
framework, employers could increase trust and acceptance within their organizations, as well as
supportive environments for FII staff, through training provision and collaboration with a
WRCP.

128
Research Question 3
What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions for
addressing indentified needs?
Employer recommendations for potentially beneficial WRCP resources. Although
only four employers within this study were already collaborating with WRCPs, each employer
elaborated on identified services and supports that a WRCP could provide their organization, as
illustrated in Table 11. Most employers interviewed discussed several things they felt a WRCP
could provide to FII staff, non-FII staff, or a combination of both. Six employers discussed a
need for more training for non-FII staff centered around working effectively with FII staff. Six
employers discussed the need for WRCP training and support for individuals while incarcerated,
to prepare them for job placement and reintegration into society. Three employers wanted
funding from WRCPs to support hiring FII staff. Three employers would like basic resources to
provide all staff, that may be inexpensive, but necessary items for employees to be comfortable
at work. Three employers discussed the potential of a WRCP vetting FII candidates and being
involved in job placement. Three employers desired WRCP assistance for FII staff with
necessary resources for increased stability and job reliability, including housing, clothing, and
transportation. Two employers thought it would be beneficial to their community and
organization to have WRCPs engaged in public outreach to educate on the merits of hiring FII.
Two employers wanted WRCP provision of mental health resources and referrals to all staff.
Two employers would like a WRCP to provide free or subsidized childcare to all staff. One
employer wanted a WRCP to assist in free healthcare for all staff, if possible. One employer
shared that they have had FII applicants who did not speak English, but were otherwise qualified,
so they wanted a WRCP to provide them with translation services. One employer discussed a

129
need for a WRCP that could provide financial and other support services to all staff, not just FII
staff. One employer identified the potential benefit for a WRCP to establish a formal training
program for FII staff coming directly out of jail or prison. Finally, one employer found the
paperwork in applying for government funding for FII very difficult, so they hoped for a WRCP
to handle that paperwork piece of subsidized employment.

130
Table 11

Desired Employer Resources from WRCP

Desired Resource

Number of Employers with Response

General staff training for working with FII

Training/support for FII while incarcerated

Funding/subsidized employment

Basic resources for all staff

Applicant vetting/placement

Housing, clothing, transportation
resources/stability for FII

Public education on benefits of hiring FII

6

6

3

3

3

3

2

Mental health for all staff

2
Childcare for all staff

1
Free healthcare for all staff

Language translation for FII staff/employer

Providing supports/financial assistance to all
staff

Formal training program

Handle paperwork/technical assistance

1

1

1

1

1

Some employers interviewed focused on systemic change that would necessitate WRCP
involvement. One employer, Chuck, asked a few rhetorical questions that drove at the root of

131
what many FII quickly face when seeking employment post-incarceration, which he felt a WRCP
could alleviate. Chuck shared:
Obviously the WRCP is an organization that sort of embodies bringing convicted felons
into the working population. With how long that process is, can it be sped up? Like does
it have to go through all of this BS red tape in order for them to find themselves in the
working population again?
Chuck has seen the length of time it takes for FII to obtain jobs, which is dramatically slowed
down by background checks and other components of applying to and obtaining jobs, which he
felt could be sped up by a WRCP.
Other employers focused on specific resources that a WRCP could provide FII staff.
Poppy discussed the necessity for financial assistance from a WRCP, in order to offer more
employment opportunities to FII. Poppy shared:
Well, I hate to say funding, but it is all a matter of funding for us, but that is always the
case with everything. We are always looking for new funding sources, of course, and
there are different ways of doing things, so sometimes if we are doing something and just
can’t do it anymore, then we have to look for new ways to do it. So, I could see that.
As financial resources are scarce for Poppy’s smaller non-profit organization, what they can
offer to FII staff in terms of employment and resources is extremely limited, but a WRCP could
help address this issue.
Another employer, Lola, identified housing as a barrier for her FII staff, which a WRCP
could help with. Lola shared:
I think housing stability is a huge component of every worker’s ability to be
successful…and FII are a population that have extra sensitivity and challenges around

132
that, so having an organization that can help this person, these folks, have that sort of
personal stability, goes a long way towards having people being able to be successful
from a work stability standpoint...You get knocked off your stability and have that
domino effect of other things that follow along with that.
Lola has seen previous FII staff lose housing, which has impacted their ability to reliably show
up to work. If her FII staff were to receive housing assistance from a WRCP, she feels her
organization would also benefit, as FII staff would be less likely to miss work or quit due to
housing instability.
Nola also discussed stability, in terms of the necessity of FII staff having emotional and
mental health support upon release from incarceration, which a WRCP could provide. Nola
shared:
I think more general support. There is a lot of PTSD when you come back into the real
world, I know this…So, I think the emotional support, they [FII] need to stick with some
kind of counselor type of support, and then something like a lifestyle coach or something
of that nature to help them navigate through what it is like out there, you know other than
having someone like a PO [parole officer].
Nola has experienced previous FII staff needing additional support with mental health and other
facets of post-incarceration adjustment. While a parole officer can offer some support, she felt
that these services would more appropriately be provided by a WRCP.
Another known difficulty for FII is job placement and employers being willing to take a
chance on them, which WRCPs are known to assist with. Lola discussed how a WRCP could
assist during the hiring process:
I also think that placement for some of these individuals can be challenging because you

133
are talking about people who maybe don’t have a great work history, a recent work
history, so they might not be considered under a formal process, but with some third
party support, they might be able to be transitioned into being very successful.
By working with a WRCP, Lola envisioned WRCP vetting FII applicants who may have lapses
in work history or other barriers impeding job attainment. Lola continued her discussion,
focusing on how a WRCP could also benefit individuals while incarcerated:
I think I should say that it would be so amazing if there was a more formal back-of-house
culinary kitchen training for inmates, so they could be ready to take on some of those
jobs, while they are still incarcerated, so they could be ready to at least take on more
junior roles in the kitchen.
As an employer who manages several restaurants, Lola discussed the constant need for qualified
staff. If a WRCP were to work with FII while still incarcerated in gaining basic skillsets for
kitchen positions, she felt this could directly benefit potential FII applicants. Additionally, this
would allow for FII to secure higher paying jobs immediately, rather than entering into entry-
level positions that pay less.
Other employers discussed resources for non-FII staff. Alex discussed the desire for
WRCP training around effective engagement with FII staff. Alex shared:
I think that any area of the population that I am not familiar with, and to have resources
to be able to help me build that familiarity before stepping into it would be a very
valuable tool. I would say training on what to expect and how to deal with situations that
might be unique to FII potential applicants.

134
Alex touched on general training a WRCP could provide non-FII staff for working with FII staff,
as well as troubleshooting techniques for potential conflicts with FII staff that he and his other
non-FII staff are not currently equipped to handle.
Finally, some employers felt a WRCP could provide all staff with beneficial resources.
Jane discussed a desire to see a plethora of resources for all of her staff who face financial
barriers, “I would love to see more mental health resources, childcare resources, and things like
free socks, free menstrual products, and things that could be hard for folks to access.” While
these products are seemingly easy for most individuals to procure, Jane has seen both FII staff
and non-FII staff struggle with these basic resources, making it more difficult to work
comfortably throughout the day.
Employer advice on equitable hiring practices for FII. All 12 employers interviewed
recommended that other organizations hire FII in similar ways that they have. Poppy succinctly
noted, “I would say just be very transparent, that is the key.” Transparency was a regular theme
throughout Poppy’s interview. She felt candid conversations with FII applicants promotes honest
communication for both sides and benefits both the organization and FII applicant.
Additionally, Alice shared a few words, “Listen to their story.” Alice touched on the
point of withholding judgement of a FII applicant and providing a venue for the FII applicant to
explain past behaviors and their current situation.
Jane reiterated her rationale for treating FII just like you would treat any other applicant,
“My advice would be to treat everyone as people, and again, it doesn’t matter. Everybody
makes mistakes, we all make mistakes.” Jane felt not only should FII be treated with the same
respect you would treat a non-FII applicant but likened us all to humans who make mistakes.
Sarah shared Jane’s sentiments, but provided a little more detail in her response:

135
They [FII] shouldn’t be treated differently than anybody else; that they [employers]
should send them the expectations, should be that they have the same experience,
requirements necessary, as described in the job description, and as they go through the
interview process, they should not be singled out. True to that, if this is who they are,
they should fit into the employment team like any and everybody else.
Sarah not only advocated for treating FII applicants like any other non-FII applicant, but also
believed once hired, FII should continue to receive the same treatment from employers that they
would receive if they were non-FII staff.
Olive discussed accountability and transparency, which she maintains with all applicants:
Do your homework. Set your ground rules. Hold people accountable, and my favorite
phrase in life is, “clear is kind.” So, if you are clear in your message, that is the kindest
thing that you can do for the individual. It doesn’t mean you have to bend over and be
nicey nice, sugary sweet, it just means you are a clear communicator and you let people
know these are your expectations.
Olive advocated for employers to be prepared when integrating FII into their organizations, and
to also maintain the same professionalism and consistent messaging that employers should with
any applicant.
Alex shared similar feelings to Olive, but focused more on the training piece, rather than
recruitment and hiring. Alex shared:
In my experience, there hasn’t been anything outside of the normal steps you would take
when training an employee from any background, so I don’t think, other than that, that
would be it, just training them [FII staff] like you would any other employee.

136
Alex also advocated for treating FII staff just like you would any other staff, particularly in terms
of training, as it should be no different whether someone has a criminal history or not.
Finally, Lee shared his inspirational guidance for employers considering hiring FII that
seemed to embody and sum up what other employers felt during the interviews:
I would say do it. I would say stop worrying so much about the little things. I think some
of the fears that employers have are based on misconceptions. And I genuinely think that
if you haven’t considered hiring individuals with a background, then you are missing out
on hiring some really quality people and can make an impact on some people’s
lives…Take off the blinders and look at the individual. At the end of the day, people are
people. The most important thing I would like employers to know is that when an
individual has made the decision to come and go to work or step into an environment that
is new and strange to them, it is not so much about the background or the catches they
might have, they are just as uncomfortable being there are as you are…So, if you could
just look past your preconceptions, and see that there is an individual there that really
wants to do better in this opportunity.
Lee raised several points in his recommendations to other employers. He challenged employers
to look at their preconceived beliefs or feelings towards FII, and to consider what positive impact
they could have on a FII’s livelihood and rehabilitation. He also suggested more empathy from
employers towards this population and applauded the bravery that FII must exhibit in seeking
employment and altering other behaviors to be successful within the workplace.
In closing on employer recommendations, Nola shared her insight on not only
recommending that employers hire FII, but what additional positive ramifications can come
about when more employers hire FII. Nola shared:

137
I say do it. I think that the more we hire and the more we can see what is really going on
to help these folks be successful and we have more case studies about it, the more that
organizations are wanting them to be successful and helping them to be successful for
themselves, there will be more conversations like we are having right now about what is
needed for these individuals to be out, stay out, and be happy, and be productive
individuals in our society.
Nola touched on the necessity of hiring FII and through doing so, that we, as a society can
identify the needs and barriers of FII in terms of reintegrating them into the workforce post-
incarceration, and that this can spring forth more research studies similar to this study, focused
on successful reintegration for FII, while also reducing recidivism and promoting public safety.
Employers within this study could already grasp the importance of working with WRCPs
and had an understanding of what potential resources existed that WRCPs could provide their
organizations. During the interviews, several employers discussed how this study and the
conversations ensuing were inspiring them to more seriously consider WRCP collaboration, as
the potential benefits were promising. It seemed that employers understood the importance of
WRCP collaboration for increasing vocational opportunities for FII, but a disconnect in forming
these partnerships still existed.
Conclusion
This chapter presented the results and findings of the qualitative interviews conducted
with 12 participating Northern California employers, as they related to the three posed research
questions that guided this study. The results were presented with a discussion of the assumed
influences, corresponding literature, and conceptual framework presented in Chapter 2. The
findings helped present the unique viewpoints of the participating employers, and the various

138
needs and potential solutions for their organizations in continuing to provide employment
opportunities to FII.
In summary, the interviews gleaned valuable insight, directly contributing to answering
the research questions. In terms of knowledge and motivation needs, employers could benefit
from clarifying the specific qualities and criteria they would prefer in FII applicants. Whereas
several employers interviewed indicated that they desire the same qualities in all staff, regardless
if they are FII, it may be important to consider the unique employment characteristics of this
population. To inform desired hiring qualities for FII, employers should gain a deeper
understanding of specific barriers impacting FII, including legal restrictions, so as to hire
appropriately and set FII applicants up for success within the organization. In addition, to support
increased knowledge around employing and supporting FII, more knowledge around WRCP
offerings and how to strategically leverage WRCP resources is needed for employers. Generally,
employers were able to identify their own biases and have mitigated them through directly
working with FII, but the majority had not engaged in specific trainings around this topic,
suggesting a need for training development.
In terms of motivation, employers interviewed understood the value of hiring FII;
however, discussions centered more around the importance of inclusive hiring for all
demographics, so some development is needed to further acknowledge the value of hiring FII
specifically. As far as the value in WRCP collaboration, only four employers were already
collaborating with a WRCP, suggesting that WRCP outreach for expanding employer
partnerships to increase FII employment opportunities is needed. The conceptual framework
suggested that employer grasp of the necessary knowledge and motivation influences can
successfully lead to mastering the organization influences.

139
In terms of organizational influences, there is more development needed for employers in
creating supportive atmospheres for integrating FII staff. Amongst the employers interviewed,
there was very little collaboration between employers and WRCPs. In addition, there were few
examples of situations where organizations had a strong culture of trust and acceptance, which
could be promoted by WRCP collaboration. For the most part, employers interviewed were not
providing education and training relevant to working with FII, or mentorship and ongoing
support with a WRCP, both areas that could create more inclusive environments for FII.
Finally, in terms of solutions, all employers interviewed had more than one suggested
solution to the knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs discussed throughout the
interviews. Further, the majority of these solutions were resources that could be directly provided
by a WRCP. Chapter 5 will discuss recommendations informed by the validated needs of
employers during the interviews, as well as integrate suggestions from the literature and
conceptual framework.

140
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction and Overview
The purpose of this study was to conduct a needs analysis in the areas of knowledge and
skill, motivation, and organizational resources necessary to accomplish the goal of increasing the
numbers of FII participating in a WRCP and receiving one-year temporary positions designed to
provide an opportunity to transition into permanent employment if all conditions of the WRCP
agreement were met. This chapter discusses the recommended solutions to the identified and
validated needs, within the global context of Northern California employers actively hiring FII
and who were either already collaborating with a WRCP or were in the process of forming a
partnership with a WRCP. Implications for practice will also be presented, as well as an analysis
concerning implications for future research.
Discussion
This study found that employers interviewed were engaged in a variety of industries,
spanning across many sectors and demographics, yet all felt pulled towards employing FII within
their organizations. Although some employers interviewed lacked specific knowledge
surrounding successful employment of FII, every employer interviewed felt compelled to work
with this population. Additionally, each employer could clearly articulate the various merits
associated with hiring FII, whether they were based on economic advantages, fulfilling an ethical
or moral push, or having personal connections to this population.
Several themes surfaced within this study amongst the 12 employers interviewed, some
of which were expected, some of which were not. One surprising theme that came up with the
majority of employers interviewed (10 out of 12), was the idea that FII are exactly the same as
any other staff, resulting in almost identical recruiting and hiring processes. This is surprising, as

141
the literature suggests that FII are treated differently, yet the employers interviewed indicated
they do not treat their FII staff any differently. Employers generally explained their insistence on
holding all staff to the same levels of accountability, providing similar levels of support, and
having little to no concern about the FII’s background experience. As discussed in Chapter 2, FII
staff are not, in essence, the same as non-FII staff, and they likely will present as employees with
unique needs and barriers, which could necessitate individualized or additional support from
employers (Brown & Rios, 2014; Carter, 2009; Farabee et al., 2014; Feeny, 2008; Harley, 2014;
Holzer et al., 2001; Latessa, 2012; Newton et al., 2018; Pager, 2003; Raphael, 2011; Schmitt &
Warner, 2010; Snodgrass et al., 2017; Swensen et al., 2014; Thompson & Cummings, 2010;
Webster et al., 2014; Wifokk et al., 2012; Zweig & Yahner, 2011; Yang, 2017).
Another unexpected theme that developed with employers during the interviews
surrounded change at the personal level, but not necessarily at the organizational level. It was
expected at the inception of this study, that organizational change would have likely resulted
from integrating FII into workplaces. However, most employers interviewed (nine out of 12)
claimed that no organizational change had occurred since hiring FII other than increased staff
counts. What did change as a result of hiring a great number of FII staff, was on a personal level
for many of the employers interviewed. Only three of the 12 employers interviewed discussed no
change in beliefs or feelings towards FII since employing FII, but for the other nine employers,
notable reflections were shared. For some employers, after employing FII, they recognized that
many of their previously held stereotypes or preconceived notions about this population were
inaccurate. They also began to comprehend the multiplicity of factors that likely contributed to
an individual engaging in criminal behavior. Some employers understood how the role of

142
desperation, mental illness, or societal disadvantage might play into someone engaging in
criminal acts that lead to subsequent incarceration.
Of particular interest were the challenges employers typically experience not mentioned
by the employers interviewed. The literature suggested that employers are often challenged by
FII employees having impaired cognitive abilities, low education levels, murky legal standing,
exhibiting suspicious or untrustworthy behavior, or lacking in interviewing skills or confidence
(Batastini et al., 2017; Harley, 2014; Holzer et al., 2001) In this study, the interviewed employers
did not mention any of these challenges or concerns.
Many employers that participated were not yet working with a WRCP, and the few that
were did not seem to be reaping all of the benefits that WRCPs can offer. WRCPs are still a
somewhat new phenomena and there is very little research or literature on WRCPs in Northern
California. This study’s findings suggested that Northern California may be lacking a strong
WRCP presence. It could be that WRCPs are more prevalent in this area than was visible
through the sample of employers within this study, but perhaps WRCPs are not making
themselves known within the community, or they are still in more developmental phases, and do
not yet have the capability to engage in substantial employer outreach.
In alignment with limited resources and high costs of living and operating businesses,
many employers interviewed shared challenges with all staff experiencing housing and financial
instability, which their organizations are not equipped to provide support with. While WRCPs
outlined within the literature did not discuss provision of housing or financial resources to non-
FII staff, this was important to take note of, as it became clear throughout the interviews that
employers needed financial help and other resources for all of their staff, which goes beyond the
current purview of WRCPs. This pointed to a necessity for employers to work with their

143
development departments in seeking out potential grants or other funding resources that are not
specifically designed to benefit FII or other targeted populations within their organizations,
beyond the purview or in collaboration with a WRCP. What emerged from these interview
findings was that employers in Northern California were generally open to hiring FII, if they had
additional resources or support, which could be addressed through collaboration with a WRCP.
Beyond the obvious dedication and commitment to hiring FII, all employers interviewed
candidly discussed their experiences in working with FII and reflected on what they could do
better as employers, mainly through utilizing WRCPs more effectively. For the four employers
interviewed who were already working with a WRCP, the interactions were positive. Of the
remaining employers who were still in the process of connecting with WRCPs, as discussed in
Chapter 4, there were many benefits they could foresee a WRCP providing, predominantly
around resources, training, and support.
Based on employer discussions throughout the interviews, it appeared that WRCPs are in
fact, a viable option for employers who wish to hire FII and provide supportive environments to
both FII and non-FII staff, while serving as a positive asset towards FII rehabilitation, rather than
another barrier or roadblock.
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
There is not yet an existing organization or conglomerate of organizations of focus within
Northern California that involves employers collaborating with WRCPs with the goal of
providing vocational opportunities to FII. Therefore, the goal of this study was to broadly
increase the numbers of FII participating in a WRCP and receiving one-year temporary positions
designed to provide an opportunity to transition into permanent employment if all conditions of
the WRCP agreement were met. The hope was that by increasing FII involvement in

144
participating organizations that have partnered with local WRCPs, there will be reduced rates of
recidivism, higher job retention and lowered costs to employers, and increased public safety. The
literature review in Chapter 2 focused on barriers and associated needs for FII seeking
employment post-incarceration, as well as risk factors and barriers for FII associated with
employer hiring attitudes, bias, and other exclusionary practices utilized by employers when
considering hiring FII. Additionally, Chapter 2 considered promising practices utilized by
WRCPs, in collaboration with employers, which have increased inclusive hiring practices and
job retention for FII. Within the literature review, several assumed influences and possible
barriers to goal attainment were discussed and categorized within Clark and Estes’ (2008)
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization (KMO) framework. Addressing the barriers within the
KMO framework increases the likelihood of employers hiring additional FII while collaborating
with WRCPs and meeting the global goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). The following sections present
and discuss the recommendations for the assumed influences and barriers, through the lens of the
KMO framework (Clark & Estes, 2008), which is hoped to assist in creating innovative strategies
and solutions that WRCPs can implement to assist in rehabilitative programming for FII and
increased employer engagement.
Knowledge Recommendations
Clark and Estes (2008) asserted that there are four facets of assistance that organizations
can implement in supporting knowledge development: information; job aids; training; and,
education. Information relates to providing the necessary elements of knowledge that individuals
need to know in order to complete their tasks or duties. A job aid involves a deeper intervention
level than information alone, in the form of a checklist or formulaic outline of directions that
support task completion. Training moves deeper, where utilization of information and jobs aids

145
are likely present, but also involves direct hands-on supervision and feedback, to increase one’s
knowledge through the guidance of a trainer. Lastly, education involves provision of conceptual
and theoretical recognition of strategies that assist individuals in not only task completion but
responding to situations in creative ways that may otherwise put task completion at risk (Clark &
Estes, 2008). This study recommended an integrated model involving all four facets of
organizational assistance, including information, job aids, training, and education. This would
likely result in increased employer willingness to hire FII and collaborate with WRCPs, through
recognizing the benefits of hiring FII and accessing other potentially incentivizing facets of
WRCP programming.
Table 12 outlines knowledge influences within the study, which were shown to be
knowledge needs for employers. These declarative-conceptual, declarative-factual, procedural,
and metacognitive knowledge influences (Krathwohl, 2002) were most frequently discussed
within the literature review and during the qualitative interviews with employers. In order to
achieve organizational goals, knowledge needs must be identified and addressed, involving
stakeholders knowing what facts or procedures are necessary for goal completion (Clark & Estes,
2008). In addition to the validated knowledge influences, Table 12 outlines complementary
theoretical learning principles, as well as context-specific recommendations employers could
utilize and prioritize in conjunction with a WRCP. Following the table is a discussion of
recommendations utilizing related literature and theoretical principles.

146
Table 12
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations

Knowledge Influence

D = Declarative
C = Conceptual
F = Factual
P = Procedural
M = Metacognitive

Validated as
a Need?

Y =
Validated
P = Partially
Validated
N = Not
Validated

Principle and
Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation

Employers must know what
qualities and criteria they are
looking for in FII candidates. (D-
C)

P

Information
learned
meaningfully and
connected with
prior knowledge is
stored more
quickly and
remembered more
accurately because
it is elaborated
with prior learning
(Schraw &
McCrudden,
2006).

Provide information and
education that discusses
nuances and barriers
surrounding employment
of FII, in order to inform
employer development of
hiring criteria specific to
FII. Include a module
allowing employers to
discuss previous
experience employing
FII.

Employers must be aware of
legal restrictions pertaining to
certain industries or professional
licenses that could prohibit hiring
FII within their organizations.
(D-F)

P

How individuals
organize
knowledge
influences how
they learn and
apply what they
know (Schraw &
McCrudden,
2006).

Provide information
containing state and
federal regulations that
clearly outline and
explain vocational
restrictions and licensing
prohibitions for FII.

Employers must identify
strategies for leveraging WRCP
resources. (P)

Y

To develop
mastery,
individuals must
acquire component
skills, practice
integrating them,
and know when to
apply what they
have learned
(Schraw &

Provide information,
training, and education
focusing on WRCP
resources that employers
can utilize to promote
successful hiring
practices for FII and
seeking support from
WRCP, as needed.
Training can be provided

147

Knowledge Influence

D = Declarative
C = Conceptual
F = Factual
P = Procedural
M = Metacognitive

Validated as
a Need?

Y =
Validated
P = Partially
Validated
N = Not
Validated

Principle and
Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
McCrudden,
2006).

Effective
observational
learning is
achieved by first
organizing and
rehearsing
modeled
behaviors, then
enacting them
overtly (Mayer,
2011).

to individual employers
or to a group of
employers, who can
engage with each other
on strategies for WRCP
resource utilization and
best practices.

Employers must know how to
identify their own biases and
stereotypes towards FII, that
could be mitigated through
education and training. (M)

P

The use of
metacognitive
strategies
facilitates learning
(Baker, 2006).

Provide education and
training that focuses on
self-identification of
biases and prejudice
specific to FII
individuals, with methods
to employ for mitigating
and correcting
exclusionary practices or
behaviors. Training
components can include
topics such as:
implicit/explicit bias;
trauma-informed
management practices;
equity, diversity, and
inclusion (IDE)
strategies; and, exposure
tactics, which include
face-to-face contact with
FII.

148
Increasing declarative-conceptual knowledge of hiring qualities and criteria for FII.
The results and findings of this study indicated that the majority of employers needed more
developed declarative-conceptual knowledge in terms of knowing what qualities and criteria they
are looking for in FII candidates. For employers needing additional knowledge surrounding
hiring criteria, a solution rooted in information processing theory can address this declarative-
conceptual knowledge need. According to Schraw and McCrudden (2006), information learned
meaningfully and connected with prior knowledge is stored more quickly and remembered more
accurately because it is elaborated with prior learning. This suggests that providing information
that connects to one’s prior knowledge in a meaningful way assists in more accurate knowledge
acumen. The recommendation is then to provide information and education that discusses
nuances and barriers surrounding employment of FII, in order to inform employer development
of hiring criteria specific to FII. For example, employers could be provided with informational
materials that list common barriers to employment relevant to FII. Employers could also engage
in educational seminars that support reflection of lessons learned with previous FII staff and how
barriers experienced by FII could inform redeveloping policies around desired hiring criteria for
FII.
The goal of providing information and education to employers should be to contextually
consider hiring criteria that promotes equity and suitable job placement for FII (Swensen et al.,
2014). In order for employers to more carefully consider appropriate hiring criteria for FII, it
would be important for WRCPs, or the agency that provides information and education, to help
employers narrow down important points (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006), which in this case,
would involve unique barriers to FII that could inform hiring criteria. In addition, individuals can
construct meaning by connecting prior knowledge to new knowledge (Schraw & McCrudden,

149
2006). By providing opportunities for employer engagement to discuss and connect past
experiences employing FII where specific hiring criteria for FII did not exist, in conjunction with
the new information learned concerning barriers, employers may see the importance of
developing hiring criteria for FII.
Increasing declarative-factual knowledge of legal restrictions for hiring FII. The
results and findings of this study indicated that a proportion of employers needed more in-depth
declarative-factual knowledge about legal restrictions pertaining to certain industries or
professional licenses that could prohibit hiring FII within their organizations. A recommendation
rooted in information processing theory has been chosen to inform this declarative-factual
knowledge need. According to Schraw and McCrudden (2006), how individuals organize
knowledge influences how they learn and apply what they know. The recommendation is to
provide information containing state and federal regulations that clearly outline and explain
vocational restrictions and licensing prohibitions that may exist for certain FII. An example of
this could be provision of an infographic, which lists employment restrictions for FII, including
limited access to specific locations or client populations, industries or job sectors that exclude FII
staff, and professional licenses that FII may be prohibited from obtaining.
In order for employers to successfully hire FII staff while maintaining staff and client
safety, as well as organizational operations, employers should understand legal restrictions for
certain industries and licensing prohibitions for FII (Brown & Rios, 2014; Carter, 2009; Harley,
2014; Schmitt & Warner, 2010; Snodgrass et al., 2017; Thompson & Cummings, 2010). These
policies are important for employers to know, for reducing risks of jeopardizing their businesses
or causing safety concerns for staff and customers (Swensen et al., 2014). Presumably, most
employers care about the longevity and safety of their organizations, so connecting learning, to

150
employers’ business interests will help employers connect to the information in more meaningful
ways (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). Additionally, provision of worked examples assist in
information acquisition and retention (Mayer, 2011). Within the infographic, examples of
situations that would apply to FII staff may allow employers to better recognize appropriate staff
positions or site placement for FII employees.
Increasing procedural knowledge around how to leverage WRCP resources. As few
employers within the study were engaging with WRCPs, the findings suggested that employers
also needed more knowledge around identifying strategies for leveraging WRCP resources.
Another solution embedded within information processing theory has been determined to be a
mechanism for closing this knowledge need. Schraw and McCrudden (2006) suggested that to
develop mastery, individuals must acquire component skills, practice integrating them, and know
when to apply what they have learned. In addition, facets of social cognitive theory, mainly
utilization of modeling, further drives this solution (Denler, Wolters, & Benzon, 2014). Effective
observational learning is achieved by first organizing and rehearsing modeled behaviors, then
enacting them overtly (Mayer, 2011). This suggests that understanding a given topic develops
sequentially, through context-specific modeling, practice, and engagement. The recommendation
is thus to provide information, training, and education focusing on WRCP resources that
employers can utilize to promote successful hiring practices for FII and seeking support from the
WRCP, as needed. Training can be provided to individual employers or to a group of employers,
who can engage with each other on strategies for WRCP resource utilization and best practices.
An example could involve a group of employers engaging at a WRCP training in roundtable
discussions, where specific scenarios are introduced for employers to work together on solving,
utilizing information and educational resources provided by the WRCP.

151
Procedural knowledge can be conveyed efficiently through training (Clark & Estes,
2008). Employers not only need to know the process for making referrals to WRCPs but how to
effectively engage with service provision. WRCPs could hold monthly “mini-trainings,” on
targeted topics, rather than long, less frequent trainings, as shorter trainings are considered more
effective (Mayer, 2011). These trainings could include topics like how to apply for grants that
the WRCP provides, how to engage non-FII staff in training on difficult topics like cultural
humility, or how to access managerial support, all of which necessitate procedural knowledge
with contextual specificity. The trainings should begin with an overview of programmatic
offerings and processes for accessing services and then expand to more advanced topics. These
topics could include navigating conflicts between FII and non-FII staff or supporting FII staff
who have significant barriers that impact their stability at work, as training segmentation is
known to lead to more increased skill development and mastery of a topic (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006). Additionally, by providing specific examples of processes to execute when
particular situations come up, employers are more likely to engage with and retain the
information (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). During trainings, WRCP facilitators can also provide
feedback to employers on their ideas for leveraging WRCP services, which increases employer
knowledge and contextual decision making (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Increasing metacognitive knowledge around identification and mitigation of biases
and prejudices towards FII. The results and findings of this study indicated that employers had
significant metacognitive knowledge in terms of knowing how to identify their own biases and
stereotypes towards FII, and some skills around mitigation. Where some development could be
useful for metacognitive knowledge and increasing tools for mitigation of biases and stereotypes,
centers around education and training. A recommendation for increasing metacognitive

152
knowledge also springs from information processing theory. Baker (2006) suggested that the use
of metacognitive strategies facilitates learning. These strategies can include a provision of
opportunities for learners to engage in guided self-monitoring and self-assessment, as well as
debriefing the thought process upon completion of a learning task (Baker, 2006). This suggests
that learners can engage in self-reflection and dialogue with others to increase learning ability.
The recommendation is to provide employers with education and training that focus on self-
identification of biases and prejudice specific to FII individuals, with methods to employ for
mitigating exclusionary practices or behaviors. Training components can include topics such as:
implicit/explicit bias; trauma-informed management practices; equity, diversity, and inclusion
(IDE) strategies; and, exposure tactics, which include face-to-face contact with FII. An example
could be a training focused on implicit/explicit bias, where employers would be asked to
complete self-evaluation tools and then discuss what they learned about themselves with the
larger group. Afterwards, the group could strategize together on methods for overcoming some
identified biases or prejudicial thought patterns.
Effective leaders know how to engage their metacognitive knowledge in identifying their
own biases and prejudices, particularly when this may impact the organization in a detrimental
way. Additionally, effective leaders are adept at utilizing learned tools for mitigating potentially
negative behaviors that could spring forth and know how to identify and address similar patterns
from staff, despite the uncomfortable nature of the topic (Bensimon, 2005). Mastering these
tenets of effective leadership through developed metacognition involves training and education.
One way to do this is to ask learners to identify prior knowledge about a topic, and what they do
or do not know, before introducing new information (Mayer, 2011). In this case, WRCP
facilitators could ask employers to share their knowledge on biases and prejudices around FII

153
and how those beliefs may impact their hiring attitudes or treatment of FII staff, prior to
engaging employers in any education or training modules. During training components,
opportunities for employers to engage in self-monitoring and reflection on thought processes,
both individually and as a group, can increase metacognitive knowledge (Baker, 2006), all of
which should help employers combat any negative thoughts from potentially transitioning into
behaviors.
Motivation Recommendations
Table 13 outlines the validated motivation influences within the study. Expectancy value
theory (Eccles, 2006; Rueda, 2011) informed the motivational influences and was discussed
within the literature review and during the qualitative interviews with employers, within the
context of the global goal. In order to achieve organizational goals, motivation needs to be
addressed, in terms of one’s desire to start and complete a task, as well as believe in one’s ability
to complete it (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). In addition to the validated motivation
influences, Table 13 outlines complementary theoretical learning principles, as well as context-
specific recommendations that employers could utilize and prioritize in conjunction with a
WRCP. Following the table is a discussion of recommendations utilizing related literature and
theoretical principles.

154
Table 13
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations

Motivation Influence

Validated as a
Need?

Y = Validated
P = Partially
Validated
N = Not
Validated

Principle and
Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation

Employers need to see the
value in hiring FII (expectancy
value theory).

P

Rationales that
include a
discussion of the
importance and
utility value of the
work or learning
can help learners
develop positive
values (Eccles,
2006; Pintrich,
2003).

Modeled behavior
is more likely to
be adopted if the
model is credible,
similar (e.g.,
gender, culturally
appropriate), and
the behavior has
functional value
(Denler et al.,
2014).

Facilitate activities that
discuss benefits of hiring
FII at the individual,
organizational, and
societal levels. This can
be presented through
informational handouts,
as well as during
discussions with
employers.

Employers need to see the
value in collaborating with a
WRCP to support effective
relationships between
organization and FII and
navigating any issues that come
up with FII (expectancy value
theory).

P

Higher
expectations for
success and
perceptions of
confidence can
positively
influence learning
and motivation
(Eccles, 2006).

Feedback, as well
as actual success,
on challenging
tasks positively
influences

Provide periodic
coaching involving
positive reinforcement,
feedback, modeling, and
education sessions for
employers focused on
increasing confidence
and identifying value
around task
performance, effective
strategies for hiring and
supervising FII, and
navigating challenges
with FII staff through

155

Motivation Influence

Validated as a
Need?

Y = Validated
P = Partially
Validated
N = Not
Validated

Principle and
Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
people’s
perceptions of
competence
(Borgogni et al.,
2016).

collaboration with
WRCPs.

Increasing employer’s expectancy value in hiring FII. The results and findings of this
study indicated that most employers interviewed already saw the value in hiring FII. However,
this value was not necessarily tied to FII specifically, but to hiring practices that are inclusive of
all participants. Therefore, needs appear to exist for some employers interviewed in fully
understanding the value of hiring FII specifically. A principle rooted in expectancy value theory
has been selected to narrow this potential motivation need. Rationales that include a discussion
of the importance and utility value of the work or learning can help learners develop positive
values (Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003). In addition, a facet of social cognitive theory can
contribute to filling this motivation need. Modeled behavior is more likely to be adopted if the
model is credible, similar (e.g., gender, culturally appropriate), and the behavior has functional
value (Denler et al., 2014). This would suggest that dialogue and modeling around the value of
hiring FII can support employers’ knowledge and increase positive outlooks around hiring and
supervising FII staff. The recommendation is to provide information and education that discusses
the benefits of hiring FII at the individual, organizational, and societal levels. This can be
presented through informational handouts, as well as during discussions with employers. An
example of this could involve WRCPs hosting informational learning sessions for local

156
employers to engage in dialogue around the benefits of hiring FII and ways WRCPs can facilitate
positive experiences during the process.
Identifying positive correlations between the utility value in a given task and the belief
that one can successfully complete it increases the likelihood that the task can be completed
effectively (Clark & Estes, 2008; Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003). In framing the merits of hiring
FII, WRCPs can discuss and model the value of hiring this population, in domains including
financial opportunities for employers through available funding avenues for hiring FII, increased
public safety, and reduced recidivism. This would be important to consider, as rationales
concerning utility value of a task increase the likelihood of those completing the task finding it
valuable and worth engaging in (Pintrich, 2003). To further drive employer acknowledgement of
the value of hiring FII, activities, including modeling, facilitated by the WRCP should be
relevant to hiring FII and useful for employers, highlighting a connection between employer
interests (Pintrich, 2003); in this case the interest would likely involve any benefit to their
organizations or fulfilling personal or moral obligations to their communities. Finally, WRCPs
could be strategic in having their staff engage employers in modeling activities and other
educational opportunities around the value of hiring FII. In addition, WRCPs could call upon
employers who have already seen successes in WRCP collaboration, to engage potential
employer partners in discussing the perspective values they have identified in hiring FII through
employer collaboration. This will likely increase perceived value in hiring FII for employers not
yet working with a WRCP, as models who are credible and similar in demographics can help
facilitate fostering positive value identification (Pajares, 2006).
Increasing employer’s expectancy value around hiring, training, and navigating
issues with FII staff through WRCP collaboration. The results and findings of this study

157
indicated that most employers needed additional support in terms of hiring and training FII, and
further, how to navigate issues at their organizations that surface with FII staff. Higher
expectations for success and perceptions of confidence can positively influence learning and
motivation (Eccles, 2006). Additionally, feedback, as well as actual success on challenging tasks
positively influence people’s perceptions of competence (Borgogni, Martinez, Meneghel,
Miraglia, & Salanova, 2016). This would suggest that employers who receive positive
reinforcement and experience success are more likely to feel confident in their ability to
collaborate with a WRCP in terms of supporting FII staff during onboarding and navigating any
issues. The recommendation is to provide periodic coaching involving positive reinforcement,
feedback, modeling, and education sessions for employers focused on increasing confidence
around task performance, effective strategies for hiring and supervising FII, and navigating
challenges with FII staff through collaboration with WRCPs. An example of this could be to hold
a training session that covers effective hiring and supervision techniques employers can utilize
specifically for working with FII, including WRCP staff modeling depicting successful
supervision interactions between employers and FII.
Increasing motivation for employers to hire FII through collaboration with a WRCP
should involve a focus on expanding positive expectations of what employers can expect by
hiring this population. As previously suggested for promoting increased utility value, WRCPs
could call upon employers who already collaborate with a WRCP and who have experienced
success in hiring FII to demonstrate their organizational models of WRCP collaboration. This is
suggested because opportunities to observe credible or similar models of peer behavior are
known to promote self-efficacy (Pajares, 2006) and increases the likelihood of adopting similar
models themselves (Denler et al., 2014). Peer modeling could be expanded to peer mentoring

158
between employers as well. Employers already engaging with a WRCP can work alongside
employers who are still in the process of determining whether this would be advantageous for
their own organization. They can bounce ideas and feedback off of each other regarding best
practices for strengthening tailored approaches to hiring FII. This method of peer mentoring
would likely increase self-efficacy and confidence for employers who are learning the tenets of
WRCP collaboration and further ascertaining the potential benefits to their organization and
community (Consiglio et al., 2016).
Organization Recommendations
Table 14 outlines the validated organizational influences within the study. Two facets
informed the organizational influences, cultural models and cultural settings, which were both
discussed within the literature review and during the qualitative interviews with employers. In
order to achieve organizational goals and create an atmosphere welcome to hiring FII and
supporting all stakeholders involved, employers must cultivate an environment conducive to
creating safe and supportive cultural models and cultural settings (Clark & Estes, 2008). In
addition to the validated organizational influences, Table 14 outlines complementary theoretical
learning principles, as well as context-specific recommendations that employers could utilize and
prioritize in conjunction with a WRCP. Following the table is a discussion of recommendations
utilizing related literature and theoretical principles.

159
Table 14
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations

Assumed
Organization
Influence

Validated as
a Need?

Y =
Validated
P = Partially
Validated
N = Not
Validated

Principle and
Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation

Cultural Model
Influence 1: The
organization needs a
culture of
collaboration with a
WRCP.

Y

Effective change
efforts ensure that
all key
stakeholders’
perspectives inform
the design and
decision-making
process leading to
the change (Clark
& Estes, 2008).

Effective change
efforts use
evidence-based
solutions and adapt
them, where
necessary, to the
organization’s
culture (Clark &
Estes, 2008).

Employers and WRCPs should
collaborate in holding regular
meetings with organizational
staff that promote open idea-
sharing, training and education
around working with FII staff,
and information for staff to
assist in reaching out to WRCP
for support or other
collaborative opportunities.
Utilizing best practices and
other data from employer
organizations who already
collaborate with a WRCP can
assist in staff buy-in and
increasing a collaborative
culture.

Cultural Model
Influence 2: The
organization needs a
culture of trust and
acceptance among
staff.

Y

Effective
organizations
ensure that
organizational
messages, rewards,
policies, and
procedures that
govern the work of
the organization
are aligned with or
are supportive of
organizational
goals and values
(Clark & Estes,
2008).

Employers should hold regular
all-staff meetings or form
smaller workgroups concerning
integrating FII into the
organization while prioritizing
trust and acceptance amongst
current staff prior to FII
integration. These meetings can
involve motivational messages
from employers, as well as
information and education
from WRCPs to increase staff
buy-in. Staff should be
engaged with leadership on
providing feedback and
concerns, as well as

160

Assumed
Organization
Influence

Validated as
a Need?

Y =
Validated
P = Partially
Validated
N = Not
Validated

Principle and
Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
Effective leaders
demonstrate a
commitment to
valuing diversity
through inclusive
action. They
promote an
organizational
culture that
prioritizes equity
and inclusion and
cultivate an
atmosphere where
diversity is viewed
as an asset to the
organization and
stakeholders
(Prieto, Phipps, &
Osiri, 2011).

determining policies for FII
staff integration that align with
organizational goals that
promote inclusion, equity, and
appreciation for diversity.

Cultural Setting
Influence 1: The
organization needs to
provide education and
training relevant to
working with FII.

Y

Effective change
begins by
addressing
motivation
influences; it
ensures the group
knows why it needs
to change. It then
addresses
organizational
barriers and then
knowledge and
skills needs (Clark
& Estes, 2008).

Organizational
effectiveness
increases when
leaders ensure that
employees have the
resources needed to
achieve the
organization’s

Employers should provide
educational experiences for
non-FII staff through
workshops and modeling,
focusing on engaging FII staff
and collaborating with a
WRCP. In addition, employers
and the WRCP should listen to
staff around concerns while
assisting staff in gaining the
knowledge and other skills
needed to effectively work with
FII.

161

Assumed
Organization
Influence

Validated as
a Need?

Y =
Validated
P = Partially
Validated
N = Not
Validated

Principle and
Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
goals (Clark &
Estes, 2008).

Cultural Setting
Influence 2: The
organization needs to
provide mentorship
and ongoing support
opportunities from the
WRCP for effectively
working with FII.

Y

Effective change
efforts utilize
feedback to
determine when/if
improvement is
happening (Clark
& Estes, 2008).

Organizational
performance
increases when
individuals
communicate
constantly and
candidly to others
about plans and
processes (Clark &
Estes, 2008).

Employers and WRCPs should
regularly reach out to staff for
feedback and determine if they
are utilizing mentorship and
other support services from the
WRCP for effectively working
with FII. Feedback can be done
individually or in a group
setting but should always allow
feedback to come in
anonymously and/or
confidentially to promote trust.
The WRCP can also create
training and education
opportunities that integrate
staff feedback.

Increasing organizational culture of collaboration with a WRCP. The majority of
employers interviewed were not yet working with a WRCP (nine out of 12). As collaborating
with a WRCP will also likely increase trust and acceptance among staff towards FII, this would
suggest that employers should focus first on creating organizational collaboration with WRCPs.
A recommendation developed by tenets of effective change strategies by Clark and Estes (2008)
has been chosen to close this organizational need. Clark and Estes (2008) suggested that
effective change efforts ensure that all key stakeholders’ perspectives inform the design and
decision-making process leading to the change. This indicates that allowing staff of all levels to

162
participate in forming policies, procedures, and other processes will promote collaboration and
positive organizational change. Additionally, Clark and Estes (2008) claimed that effective
change efforts use evidence-based solutions and adapt them, where necessary, to the
organization’s culture (Clark & Estes, 2008). This suggests that integrating best practices known
to effectively work for other organizations or sources can increase effective change efforts for an
organization, which in this case would be promoting staff buy-in for collaborating with a WRCP.
The recommendation is for employers and WRCPs to collaborate in holding regular meetings
with organizational staff that promote open idea-sharing, training and education around working
with FII staff, and information for staff to assist in reaching out to the WRCP for support or other
collaborative opportunities. Additionally, utilizing best practices and other data from employer
organizations who already collaborate with a WRCP can assist in staff buy-in and increasing a
collaborative culture.
Collaboration with a WRCP is a key element to successful integration of FII into
organizational staff (Feeny, 2008; Harley, 2014; NIJ, 2013; Swensen et al., 2014). As discussed
in Chapter 2, when teams or individual staff have experts they can call upon for skill-building or
support, motivation for collaboration and contribution to organizational goals can be increased
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Additionally, effective change efforts ensure that everyone has the
resources (equipment, personnel, time, etc.) needed to do their job, and if there are resource
shortages, then resources are aligned with organizational priorities (Clark & Estes, 2008). In
addition to providing resources and services unavailable to organizations, WRCP staff can serve
as subject experts on the tenets of hiring FII, integrating FII into existing non-FII staff teams, and
providing tools for increasing collaboration between organizations and WRCPs.

163
Increasing organizational culture of trust and acceptance among staff. Some
employers interviewed shared that their non-FII staff have issues of trust and acceptance with FII
staff. In addition, FII staff have shared experiences where they felt isolated or mistreated as a
result of their background. A recommendation for closing this organizational need was also
developed by tenets of effective change strategies by Clark and Estes (2008). Organizational
culture can be improved when organizational messages, rewards, policies, and procedures that
govern the work of the organization align with or are supportive of organizational goals and
values (Clark & Estes, 2008). This suggests that the atmosphere can be improved within an
organization when the rules that govern it coincide with their goals and values. Effective leaders
demonstrate a commitment to valuing diversity through inclusive action. They promote an
organizational culture that prioritizes equity and inclusion and cultivate an atmosphere where
diversity is viewed as an asset to the organization and stakeholders (Prieto, Phipps, & Osiri,
2011). This would suggest that in terms of hiring FII and collaborating with a WRCP, employers
need to stress the importance of equity and inclusion within the organization and share the
benefits of hiring FII with staff. These facets are likely necessary elements for creating an
organizational setting that accepts FII staff in a trusting and supportive manner. The
recommendation is for employers to hold regular all-staff meetings or form smaller workgroups
concerning integrating FII into the organization while prioritizing trust and acceptance amongst
current staff prior to FII integration. These meetings can involve motivational messages from
employers, as well as information and education from WRCPs to increase staff buy-in. Staff
should be engaged with leadership on providing feedback and concerns, as well as determining
policies for FII staff integration that align with organizational goals that promote inclusion,
equity, and appreciation for diversity.

164
Empowering staff to share their ideas openly, without fear of repercussions, facilitates
effective organizational change (Clark & Estes, 2008). Additionally, open communication, as
well as sharing employer support for staff wellbeing, can help with increasing trust amongst staff
(Korsgaard et al., 2002; Schein, 2010). Employers can utilize several strategies for facilitating
open communication. This could include modeling examples of constructive dialogue, allowing
for friction between line-level staff up through leadership levels, providing multiple avenues for
employer feedback, both open and private, and engaging in spaces specifically allocated for
employees to voice their concerns or ideas. These methods can allow for trust establishment and
organizational growth in terms of wellbeing and collaboration (Senge, 2014). WRCPs can also
assist employers in ensuring these conversations are both constructive and informative for
increasing staff buy-in by utilizing evidence-based solutions that have worked for other
organizations who have transitioned FII into their workforce (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Increasing organizational culture of providing education and training relevant to
working with FII. The majority of employers interviewed shared insights regarding a need
additional education and training relevant to working with FII. Additional facets of Clark and
Estes’ (2008) effective change strategies were integrated in developing a recommendation for
closing this organizational need. Effective change begins by addressing motivation influences; it
ensures the group knows why it needs to change. It then addresses organizational barriers and
then knowledge and skill needs (Clark & Estes, 2008). Additionally, organizational effectiveness
increases when leaders ensure that employees have the resources needed to achieve the
organization’s goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). This would suggest that organizations should look at
current employee motivation and knowledge needs when assessing education and training needs,
in order to inform strategies for preparing staff for FII integration through appropriate resource

165
allocation and development. The recommendation is for employers to provide educational
experiences for non-FII staff through workshops and modeling, focusing on engaging FII staff
and collaborating with a WRCP. In addition, employers and the WRCP should listen to staff
concerns while assisting staff in gaining the knowledge and other skills needed to effectively
work with FII.
Developing education and training plans for non-FII staff, with modeling integrated, for
engaging non-FII staff effectively, can increase employee buy-in and promote a cultural setting
more welcoming to FII (Denler et al., 2014; Langley et al., 2009; Mayer, 2011). Information
processing theory can help inform training design for non-FII staff. According to Schraw &
McCrudden (2006), to develop mastery, individuals must acquire component skills, practice
integrating them, and know when to apply what they have learned. This can be done through
modeling, involving a focus on “how” and “when” to use particular strategies (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006). Designing training modules around typical barriers, and therefore behaviors,
that FII staff might elicit could help inform appropriate responses from non-FII staff. Role-
playing activities involving hypothetical situations that could come up with FII staff, followed by
discussions enable non-FII staff to respond appropriately in future situations that may arise with
FII staff.
Increasing organizational culture of mentorship and ongoing support opportunities
from WRCP. As only four of the 12 employers interviewed were already collaborating with a
WRCP, it is evident that organizations needed more development around providing mentorship
and ongoing support opportunities from WRCPs in effectively working with FII. Effective
change strategies were implored again from Clark & Estes (2008) to conceptualize a
recommendation for closing this final organizational need. Effective change efforts utilize

166
feedback to determine when/if improvement is happening. Building on that concept,
organizational performance increases when individuals communicate constantly and candidly to
others about plans and processes (Clark & Estes, 2008). The recommendation is for employers
and WRCPs to regularly reach out to staff for feedback and determine if they are utilizing
mentorship and other support services from the WRCP for effectively working with FII.
Feedback can be done individually or in a group setting but should always be done anonymously
and/or confidentially to promote trust. The WRCP can also create training and education
opportunities that integrate staff feedback.
When considering staff feedback and whether staff are utilizing WRCP resources,
principles of social cognitive theory can inform how WRCPs integrate feedback and provide
ongoing support to non-FII staff in effectively working with FII staff. For example, modeling to-
be-learned strategies or behaviors improves self-efficacy, learning, and performance (Denler et
al., 2014; Mayer, 2011). Employers and WRCP staff can engage non-FII staff who are not
utilizing WRCP resources effectively in modeling exercises around working with FII staff, to
help non-FF staff identify key behaviors that are not conducive to welcoming FII staff into the
organization. Staff can then prioritize changing their behavior to work more effectively with FII
staff and determine more opportunities to reach out to the WRCP for additional mentoring or
supportive services. In addition, employers and WRCP staff can provide timely feedback to non-
FII staff on behavioral changes, to increase continued staff performance (Shute, 2008), as well as
allow for regular staff feedback on their own processes or how the team can improve together
(Clark & Estes, 2008). This can create an atmosphere where FII staff feel welcome and
supported by integrating suggestions from the WRCP more consistently.

167
Implications for Practice
Although the stakeholder of focus within this study was employers, WRCPs played an
integral role in discussions during employer interviews, and as a topic of focus for increasing
vocational and other supportive opportunities to FII within the literature and conceptual
framework. Many employers interviewed were not yet working with a WRCP, however, all
employers interviewed identified perceived benefits of collaborating with a WRCP. Additionally,
employers interviewed discussed numerous areas in which WRCPs could work with FII on
alleviating identified barriers for successful job retention. For this reason, recommendations for
WRCPs, informed by findings from the interviews that also aligned with the literature and
conceptual framework suggested potential for WRCP collaboration with employers who hire FII.
Specifically, holistic or wrap-around WRCP service provision was identified to be the most
helpful type of programming suggested by employers interviewed, as well as identified within
the literature as the most promising practice (Bushway & Apel, 2012; Flatt & Jacobs, 2018;
Mohammed & Mohamed, 2015).
Holistic Service Provision
During the interviews, employers discussed barriers for FII and identified WRCPs as
potentially alleviating these barriers through provision of holistic services. It is suggested within
the literature that WRCPs designed to provide singular services, such as job searching or soft
skills training, are not known to be as effective as WRCPs that provide holistic, wrap-around
services (Cook et al., 2015; Feeny, 2008; Harley, 2014; Mohammed & Mohamed, 2015;
Raphael, 2011; Visher & Travis, 2011; Wifokk et al., 2012). Therefore, it is recommended that
WRCPs design their programming around providing multiple services concurrently to FII
participants. The multitude of potential service offerings WRCPs could provide were previously

168
discussed in Chapter 2, but specific services highlighted within the literature that may be most
effective in addition to vocational skills and job placement included: drug and alcohol treatment;
education (both providing education and enrolling FII into educational programs); and
therapeutic or mental health services (Newton et al., 2018). WRCPs that prioritize education
within programming are estimated to reduce rates of recidivism by up to 43% (Petersen, 2015).
Therefore, it is recommended that WRCPs integrate educational opportunities and attainment as
an integral part of their programming. In addition to reducing recidivism, education will also
likely increase self-efficacy for FII, as well as allow for increased job readiness and potentially
higher earning power, both of which will likely aid towards rehabilitation.
WRCPs that focus on mental health, including areas of stress, coping, juggling multiple
responsibilities, and emotional support, not only aid in rehabilitation, but promote job retention
and longevity (Holzer et al., 2001). Employers interviewed discussed situations when FII
employees did not have adequate access to mental health services, as well as supportive services
for transitioning back into society, affecting job performance and wellbeing. It is recommended
that WRCPs also prioritize service provision focused on emotional and psychosocial aspects of
FII rehabilitation when designing programmatic offerings. This can involve tailoring WRCP
programming around determining “why” FII committed crimes in the first place, and engaging
FII in identifying services and resources that can alleviate potential risks for recidivism
(Koschmann & Peterson, 2013). Mentoring is another WRCP service offering that can support
FII in building trust with non-FII staff, which involves therapy and emotional support, with
suspended judgment (Latessa, 2012; Wifokk et al., 2012). WRCPs aimed at permanently shifting
risky behavior and negative beliefs that FII may exhibit have also shown to lower recidivism and
increase job readiness (Latessa, 2012).

169
Consulting FII for Designing WRCP Service Delivery
A few employers interviewed discussed how WRCPs and other rehabilitative services
have failed to consult FII, as the experts of their own experience, in designing programmatic
services. Engaging participants or other stakeholders in program design, can lead to buy-in, as
well as offer alternative views for more effective service delivery (Salabarria-Pena, Apt, &
Walsh, 2007). Thus, it is recommended that WRCPs engage FII in designing WRCP service
delivery, to inform effective strategies for promoting FII participation, as well as empowering
FII to buy in to engagement. There are a few suggestions for engaging FII in WRCP service
delivery design. One suggestion is to discuss desired jobs or work experience FII would like
WRCPs to offer (Feeny, 2008), prior to engaging employers in recruitment, for diminished risk
of collaborating with employers who offer undesirable jobs for this population. In addition, some
FII may prefer alternatives to standard employment, and may want to start their own business
(Feeny, 2008), so engaging FII in discussing entrepreneurial opportunities WRCPs could offer,
or specific tailored trainings on this topic, could facilitate accommodations for increased
numbers of FII participation in WRCP programming.
Another suggestion is to discuss WRCP program design and tailored offerings with FII
while still incarcerated. FII will likely have varying priorities and needs post-incarceration (Cook
et al., 2015). Tailoring the re-entry process around their specific needs, rather than imposing
generic reentry plans that may not work for all FII participants, may increase FII buy-in, as well
as promote job retention and WRCP participation (Cook et al., 2015). Services that are
individualized and informed by FII needs directly, rather than “experts” guessing what needs FII
will have, are going to be more effective and to the benefit of FII participants (Lattimore et al.,
2009). Working with FII to assess what their values are and brainstorm future success, with co-

170
created goal formulation and set plans for attaining said goals, can minimize barriers for
successful reintegration and promote job obtainment and retention upon release (Snodgrass et al.,
2017).
Extended Service Provision Timeframes
It is estimated that within three years post-incarceration, that two-thirds of FII will
recidivate. However, employment significantly reduces this risk (Feeney, 2008). In addition, FII
who engage in supportive services through WRCPs are less likely to recidivate (Bushway &
Apel, 2012), and the longer that someone goes without committing a crime, the likelihood of
recidivation also decreases (Blumstein & Nakamura, 2009; Latessa, 2012; Lichtenberger, 2012;
Petersen, 2015). Therefore, it is recommended that WRCPs extend the length of time in which
they offer supportive services to FII, including service provision during incarceration and post-
incarceration. At a minimum, WRCPs should engage FII for at least six months prior to release,
and no less than two years after release, based on literature recommendations involving trends in
reducing risks of recidivism.
There are several suggestions WRCPs can employ for extending and expanding service
delivery to FII. One method WRCPs could employ when working with FII prior to release from
jail or prison, is to start engaging FII in designing a tailored reentry plan and providing services
that will more effectively prepare them for reintegration into society (Cook et al., 2015). The
initial reentry plan may be minimal, with acute focus on employment, housing, and
transportation attainment. Upon release, FII can shift into working on a post-incarceration plan,
focusing on additional needs, including health care, parenting classes, education, treatment for
alcohol or drug use, and other areas they will have an increased bandwidth to discuss, as they
already alleviated major needs prior to release (Harley, 2014; Visher & Travis, 2011).

171
Another suggestion may be more beneficial to FII who were incarcerated for extended
periods of time. During the interviews, some employers brought up job readiness, specifically in
terms of FII staff not possessing current knowledge around technology or culture, for quicker
assimilation upon release. While teaching job skills during incarceration will help, WRCPs could
dive deeper into job readiness by preparing FII to enter into a current society that may be very
foreign to them. Teaching basic tenets of using computers or mobile phones can assist in job
readiness, as well as prepare FII for what to expect when they reintegrate (Brown & Rios, 2013;
Whitlock, 2017).
A final suggestion surrounds WRCP engagement with internal and external players while
FII are still incarcerated. Correctional staff can play a pivotal role in preparing FII for release, as
well as supporting FII in obtaining jobs, housing, and other resources. WRCPs can work with
correctional staff on writing letters of recommendation, as well as teaching them supportive
techniques for working with FII in job search and preparedness while still incarcerated (Carter,
2009). Additionally, WRCPs can engage employers in going into jails or prisons for recruiting
FII prior to their release, which has shown promising results in recent years (Carter, 2009).
Shifting WRCP Philosophies and Program Focus
Although it is assumed that all WRCPs want to see FII succeed in gaining employment
while promoting other rehabilitative measures that reduce risks of recidivism, since WRCPs are a
relatively new phenomenon, there are some identified best practices around philosophical tenets
and program focuses that current and future WRCPs are recommended to explore. One
suggestion is for WRCPs to increase advocacy efforts at the public policy and legislative level.
There could be designated individuals within each WRCP that work on local policy initiatives
and engage criminal justice systems and other governmental entities in changing legal

172
parameters that act as barriers to employment and rehabilitation for FII (Harley, 2014). This
could include initiatives that allow for more forgiving criminal record expungement criteria or
banning employers from disqualifying FII from certain jobs. Another suggestion is to work with
employers who have more desirable and higher paying jobs to increase willingness to hire FII, as
FII are known to be more motivated to work and sustain employment when they feel they are
engaging in meaningful work (Feeney, 2008; Schnepel, 2016).
Many WRCPs have restrictive guidelines, where FII who do not adhere to the structure or
rules may be withdrawn from the program. While there may be rationale for this, programs
involving heavy monitoring or punitive philosophies are shown not to be as effective as WRCPs
that are more flexible in constructive approaches and providing second chances to FII
participants (Koschmann & Peterson, 2013; Latessa, 2012). Additionally, coping strategies,
emotional support, and family engagement, are not currently known to be huge focuses of
WRCP programming, but are predicted to increase buy-in and promote rehabilitation for FII
(Carter, 2009; Visher & Travis, 2011). Finally, WRCP staff utilization of a strength-based
approach, where FII can openly discuss their dream jobs or other long-term goals and are given
the tools needed to succeed, can promote job retention and reduce recidivism more effectively
(Carter, 2009; Derzis et al., 2017; Snodgrass, et al., 2017; Thompson & Cummings, 2010).
Youth Diversion Programming within WRCPs
A final recommendation for WRCPs is to integrate diversion modalities within
programming, specifically to youth populations (Raphael, 2011). Currently, WRCPs focus on
rehabilitation after someone has committed a crime and experienced incarceration. Creating a
program or facets of a program that engage community youth around avoiding committing
crimes in the first place, can prove beneficial to the community, in terms of lowered costs

173
associated with prosecution, incarceration, and ultimately, recidivism. It can also be a protective
factor for youth in identifying alternative pathways for future success, rather than detriments.
There may also be opportunities for WRCPs to receive additional grant funding for integrating
diversion activities into their existing program structures.
Implications for Future Research
To expand on the research that has already been conducted, more researchers should
consider the unique viewpoints of FII through engaging FII directly. The majority of current
research on WRCPs reviewed within this study involved surveys with employers, incarceration
and recidivism data, audits of job applications, and state or federal data. One study conducted by
Lattimore et al. (2009) directly surveyed FII to determine priorities and needs post-incarceration,
which proved beneficial for targeting services for this population. As FII are the experts on their
own experiences and needs post-incarceration, taking their direct feedback into account would
likely prove beneficial for effective service delivery and increasing the likelihood of participant
buy-in (Schmitt & Warner, 2010). In addition, publishing reputable research integrating the
unique needs and viewpoints of FII participants may help dispel negative myths or stereotypes
that are often held about this population (Petersen, 2015).
Although there has been some significant research conducted on employer perceptions
around hiring FII, further in-depth qualitative data surrounding employer experience after hiring
FII could prove beneficial for WRCP design, as well as navigating more specific issues that arise
for employers around supporting FII within their organizations. In addition, consulting with
employers across industries through interviews or focus groups, designed on gauging employer
needs for supporting FII staff could prove beneficial. This type of study could increase employer

174
buy-in for not only hiring FII, but for also collaborating with WRCPs, as different industries and
sectors may necessitate varying levels of WRCP support.
In a similar vein to approaching employers for more in-depth qualitative data, research
around staff feedback, involving both FII and non-FII staff, could also prove paramount in
informing future funding streams or opportunities for increasing staff services. In addition, direct
staff feedback could contribute to designing more effective service provisions by WRCPs.
Allowing for FII and non-FII staff to share their feedback and experiences around working
together can also promote inclusive working environments that have more established trust and
acceptance amongst staff, as well as appreciating diversity. Further, expanding research goals to
include staff voices could also open up additional research opportunities that focus on inclusion
efforts for other marginalized populations within an organizational perspective.
As WRCPs are a relatively new phenomena, there is not a plethora of established
research on the topic. Although more research and longitudinal data is needed to understand the
efficacy of WRCPs, the available literature suggested promising practices, particularly with
WRCPs that provide long-term, wrap-around services, for increasing vocational opportunities for
FII. In addition, when employers effectively engage in collaborative agreements with WRCPs,
there are a multitude of benefits beyond the immediate positive correlations for FII participants,
as discussed throughout this study. Thus, more extensive, long-term research should be
conducted on the benefits of WRCPs, as well as needed areas of development for WRCPs.
Based on the literature assessed in Chapter 2, some narrowed topics of future research
have been identified, which could prove beneficial for continuing to determine the benefits of
employer collaboration with WRCPs, as well as identifying best practices for serving FII with
the primary purpose of reducing recidivism. One study found that WRCPs are most beneficial to

175
drug offenders (Newton et al., 2018), whereas another study found that WRCPs are more
effective for individuals who have committed less serious crimes (Lichtenberger, 2012). In
addition, employers are most likely to hire FII with misdemeanor or non-violent charges within
their criminal history (Bushway & Apel, 2012). More research on WRCP outcomes for FII based
around specific crime types could spur additional information for future WRCP design and
recruitment. Further, this could lead to creating WRCPs that are tailored to FII with more serious
criminal histories and increase employment opportunities for this subset of the population that
are more likely to remain unemployed.
Another potentially beneficial focus for future research could look at the varying program
lengths of WRCPs. For example, longitudinal data on the short, medium, and long-term impacts
of WRCPs on FII who participate in shorter term programs, such as 2-6 months, in comparison
to longer term programs, from 1-3 years. Data points could be recidivism rates, job obtainment
and retention rates, mental health and other facets of stability, and so forth.
When designing future research projects concerning employer, staff, or organizational
practices around hiring FII, staff size and other demographic considerations should be more
narrowed than those involved in this study (with staff sizes ranging from 4-900 and a wide range
of organization types). There were no apparent differences during the interviews in this study
indicating that staff size or type of organization played a pivotal role in specific issues
experienced within one demographic that did not exist elsewhere. However, more narrowed
participant groups in future studies could further promote generalizability and identify whether
any specific nuances across demographics do indeed exist.
Finally, within this study, there was no discussion of WRCPs within the United States in
comparison to WRCPs in other countries. Like many topics of criminal justice reform, it could

176
prove beneficial to consider WRCPs in other countries, and how they are supporting FII
reintegration and employment post-incarceration. As the United States incarcerates more
individuals than anywhere else in the world and has overwhelming recidivism rates, it could
prove beneficial to identify best practices internationally and integrate feasible practices in future
WRCPs domestically (Wagner & Walsh, 2016).
Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to identify the resources necessary for increasing numbers
of FII obtaining gainful employment opportunities, in part facilitated by engaging employers in
collaborative efforts with WRCPs. The hope was that by increasing numbers of FII participating
in WRCPs and receiving temporary positions designed to transition into permanent employment
that recidivism rates will decline. Ultimately, this study recognized that employers play a vital
role in increasing job opportunities for FII, and WRCPs have been identified as a viable resource
for employers to utilize in supporting their employment of FII. This study examined this issue
from the perspective of multiple learning, motivation, and organizational change theories and
identified several promising practices for addressing employer collaboration with WRCPs in
supporting FII gaining employment and accessing other rehabilitative supports. The viable
recommendations presented in this study could support employers in integrating additional FII
staff into their organizations and collaborating with WRCPs. In addition, these recommendations
could promote FII staff retention by improving the workplace, as well as mitigating barriers to
employment.

177
References
Abramovitz, M., & Blitz, L. (2015). Moving toward racial equity: The undoing racism workshop
and organizational change. Race and Social Problems, 7(2), 97-110.
Agan, A, & Starr, S. (2017). The effect of criminal records on access to employment. American
Economic Review: Papers & Proceedings 2017, 107(5), 560-564.
Agocs, C. (1997). Institutionalized resistance to organizational change: Denial, inaction, and
repression. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 917-931.
Alexander, M. (2012). The New Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness.
New York, New York: The New Press.
Alper, S., Tjosvold, D., & Law, K. (2000). Conflict management, efficacy, and performance in
organizational teams. Personnel Psychology, 53(3), 625-642.
Amadeo, K. (2018). U.S. federal budget breakdown: The budget components and impact on the
U.S. economy. The Balance, 1-3. Retrieved from https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-
federal-budget-breakdown-3305789
Avery, D., McKay, P., & Wilson, D. (2008). What are the odds? How demographic similarity
affects the prevalence of perceived employment discrimination. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 93(2), 235-249.
Bakker, A., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands-Resources Model: State of the art. Journal
of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309-328.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 248–287.

178
Barber, A., & Bucknor, C. (2016). The price we pay: Economic costs of barriers to employment
for former prisoners and people convicted of felonies. Center for Economic and Policy
Research, 6, 1-26.
Batastini, A., Bolanos, A., Morgan, R., & Mitchell, S. (2017). Bias in hiring applicants with
mental illness and criminal justice involvement: A follow-up study with employers.
Criminal Justice and Behavior, 44(6), 777-795.
Bensimon, E. (2005). Closing the achievement gap in higher education: An organizational
learning perspective. New Directions for Higher Education, 131, 99-111.
Berbary, D., & Malinchak, A. (2011). Connected and engaged: The value of government learning.
The Public Manager, Fall, 55-59.
Berger, B. (2004). Read my lips: Leaders, supervisors, and culture are the foundations of strategic
employee communications. Research Journal of the Institute for Public Relations, 1(1), 1-
17.
Blumstein, A., & Nakamura, K. (2009). Redemption in the presence of widespread criminal
background checks. Criminology, 47, 227-259.
Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2013). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice and leadership (5
th
Ed).
San Francisco: CA: Jossey-Bass.
Borgogni, L., Martinez, I., Meneghel, I., Miraglia, M., & Salanova, M. (2016). From social context
and resilience to performance through job satisfaction: A multilevel study over time.
Human Relations, 69(11), 2047-2067.
Bradshaw, P, & Fredette, C. (2012). The inclusive nonprofit boardroom: Leveraging the
Transformative potential of diversity. Retrieved from: https://nonprofitquarterly.org
/2012/12/29/the-inclsive-nonprofit-boardroomleveraging-the-transformative-potential
-of-diversity/

179
Brown, M., & Rios, S. (2014). Can a workplace credentialing program improve inmate literacy?
Journal of Correctional Education, 65(2), 59-83.
Buckingham, M., & Coffman, C. (1999). First break all the rules. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Bumiller, K. (2015). Bad jobs and good workers: The hiring of ex-prisoners in a segmented
economy. Theoretical Criminology, 19(3), 336-354.
Bushway, D., & Apel, R. (2012). A signaling perspective on employment-based reentry
programming. Criminology & Public Policy, 11(1), 21-49.
California Employment Development Department (2018). Work opportunity tax credit.
Retrieved on October 30, 2018 from https://www.edd.ca.gov.job_and_training
/Work_Opportunity_Tax_Credit.htm
Carson, E., & Golinelli, D. (2014). Prisoners in 2012: Trends in admissions and release, 1991-
2012. Retrieved from http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p11.pdf
Carson, E., & Sabol, W. (2012). Prisoners in 2011. Retrieved from
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p11.pdf
Carter, F. (2009). Career development strategies for clients with criminal histories. Career
Planning and Adult Development Journal, 25(1), 188-196.
Clark, R. E. & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Colombo, H. (2019). Starved for staff, firms consider ex-offenders. Indianapolis Business
Journal, 40(10), 1-37.
Cook, P. Kang, S., Braga, A., Ludwig, J., & O’Brien, M. (2015). An experimental evaluation of
a comprehensive employment-oriented prisoner re-entry program. Journal of
Quantitative Criminology, 31(3), 355-382.

180
Crandall, C., & Eshleman, A. (2003). A justification-suppression model of the expression and
experience of prejudice. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 414-446.
Creswell, J. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
D’Amico, D. (2014). Four things you should know about mass incarceration. Foundation
for Economic Education. Retrieved from https://fee.org/articles/4-things-you-should-
know-about-mass-incarceration/
Denler, H., Wolters, C., & Benzon, M. (2014). Social cognitive theory. Retrieved from

http://www.education.com/reference/article/social-cognitive-theory/
Department of Justice. (2017). Prisoners and prison reentry. Retrieved from https://www.
justice.gov/archive/fcbi/progmenu_reentry.html
Derzis, N., Meyer, J., Curtis, R., & Shippen, M. (2017). An analysis of career thinking and career
interests of incarcerated males. Journal of Correctional Education, 68(1), 52-70.
Dobbie, W., Goldin, J., Yang, C.S. (2016). The effects of pre-trial detention on conviction, future
crime, and employment: Evidence from randomly assigned judges. American Economic
Review, 108(2), 201-240.
Doleac, J., & Hansen, B. (2017). Moving to job opportunities? The effect of “ban the box” on the
composition of cities. American Economic Review: Papers & Proceedings 2017, 107(5),
556-559.
Drucker, E. (2011). A plague of prisons: The epidemiology of mass incarceration in America.
New York, New York: New York Press.
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory. Retrieved from http://www.
education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/

181
Farabee, D., Zhang, S., & Wright, B. (2014). An experimental evaluation of a nationally
recognized employment-focused offender reentry program. Journal of Experimental
Criminology, 10, 309-322.
Feeny, J. (2008). The role of vocational training in pathways toward desistance. Politics and
Policy, 36(5), 880-896.
Fernandez, S., Resh, W., Moldogaziev, T., & Oberfield, Z. (2015). Assessing the past and
promise of the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey for public management research: A
research synthesis. Public Administration Review, 75(3), 382-394.
Fink, A. (2013). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide. (5
th
ed.). Thousand Oaks:
SAGE.

Fitzgerald, E., Chronister, K., Forrest, L., & Brown, L. (2012). OPTIONS for preparing inmates
for community reentry: An employment preparation intervention. The Counseling
Psychologist, 41(7), 1-21.
Flatt, C., & Jacobs, R. (2018). The relationship between participation in different types of
training programs and gainful employment for formerly incarcerated individuals. Human
Resource Development Quarterly, 29, 263-286.
Formon, D., Schmidt, A., & Henderson, C. (2018). Examining employment outcomes of
offender and non-offender vocational program graduates. International Journal of
Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(9), 2781-2800.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect

minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,

36(1), 45-56.

182
Glesne, C. (2011). Chapter 6: But is it ethical? Considering what is “right.” In Becoming
qualitative researchers: An introduction (4
th
ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Graffman, J., Shinkfield, A., & Hardcastle, L. (2008). The perceived employability of ex-
prisoners and offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative
Criminology, 52(6), 673-685.
Harley, D. (2014). Adult ex-offender population and employment: A synthesis of the literature

on recommendations and best practices. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling,

45(3), 10-21.
Hartney, C. (2006). US rates of incarceration: A global perspective. National Council on Crime
and Delinquency. Retrieved from http://www.nccdglobal.org/sites/default/files/
publication_pdf/factsheet-us-incarceration.pdf
Hjalager, A. (1999). Interorganizational learning systems. Human Systems Management, 18(1),
23-33.
Holzer, H., Raphael, S., & Stoll, M. (2001). Will employers hire ex-offenders?: Employer
preferences, background checks, and their determinants. In the Impact of Incarceration
on Families and Communities. New York, New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Johnson, R., & Christensen, L. (2015). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative,
and mixed approaches. (5
th
ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

Kapila, M., Hines, E., & Searby, M. (2016). Why diversity, equity, and inclusion matter.

Retrieved from https://independentsector.org/resource/why-diversity- equity-and-

inclusion-matter/

Kezar, A. (2001). Theories and models of organizational change. Understanding and facilitating
organizational change in the 21
st
century: Recent research and conceptualization.
ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 28(4), 25-58.

183
Kjellstrand, J. & Eddy, M. (2011). Parental incarceration during childhood, family context, and
youth problem behavior across adolescence. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 50(1),
18-36.
Korsgaard, M., Brodt, S., & Whitener, E. (2002). Trust in the face of conflict: The role of
managerial trustworthy behavior and organizational context. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 87(2), 312-319.
Koschmann, M., & Peterson, B. (2013). Rethinking recidivism: A communication approach for
prisoner reentry. Journal of Applied Social Sciences, 7(2), 188-207.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212–218.
Langley, G., Moen, R., Nolan, K., Nolan, T., Norman, C., & Provost, L. (2009). The
improvement guide (2
nd
ed.). Chapters 1 and 2, 15-47.
Latessa, E. (2012). Why work is important, and how to improve the effectiveness of correctional
reentry programs that target employment. Criminology & Public Policy, 11(1), 87-91.
Lattimore, P., Steffey, D., & Visher, C. (2009). Prison reentry experiences of adult males:

Characteristics, service receipt, and outcomes of participants in the SVORI multi-site

evaluation. Research Triangle Park: NC: RTI International.
Lawrence-Lightfoot, S., & Hoffman Davis, J. (1997). The art and science of portraiture.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lichtenberger, E. (2012). Offender workforce development specialists and their impact on the
post-release outcomes of ex-offenders. Federal Probation, 76(3), 31-54.
Maxwell, J. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3
rd
ed.). Thousand
Oaks: CA: SAGE.
Mayer, R. (2011). Applying the Science of Learning. New York, NY: Pearson.

184
McEwan, E., & McEwan, P. (2003). Making sense of research. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
McMullan, E. (2009). Jacksonville ex-offender employment opportunities study: Phase 1. Paper
presented at the 46
th
Annual Meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice services,
Boston, Massachusetts.
Merriam, S., & Tisdell, E. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation.
(4
th
ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mertens, D. (2010). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity
with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods (3
rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mohammed, H., & Mohamed, W. (2015). Reducing recidivism rates through vocational
education and training. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 204, 272-276.
Morrison, E., & Milliken, F. (2000). Organizational silence: A barrier to change and
development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 706-725.
Nally, J., Lockwood, S., Ho, T., & Knutson, K. (2014). Indiana industry sectors that hire ex-
offenders: Implications to correctional education programs. Journal of Correctional
Education, 65(3), 43-65.
National Institute of Justice. (2013). Research on reentry and employment. National Institute of
Justice. Retrieved from https://nij.gov/topics/corrections/reentry
/pages/employment.aspx
National Reentry Resource Center. (2014). Reentry Facts. Retrieved from
http://csgjusticecenter.org/nrrc/facts-and-trends

185
Newton, D., Day, A., Giles, M., Wodak, J., Graffam, J., & Baldry, E. (2018). The impact of
vocational and training programs on recidivism: A systematic review of current
experimental evidence. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative
Criminology, 62(1), 187-207.
Pager, D. (2003). The mark of the criminal record. American Journal of Sociology, 108(5), 937-
975.
Pager, D., Western, B., & Sugie, N. (2009). Sequencing disadvantage: Barriers to employment
facing young black and white men with criminal records. The Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science, 623, 195-213.
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/

reference/article/self-efficacy-theory/.
Patton, M. (2015) Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4
th
ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
Petersen, I. (2015). Toward true fair-chance hiring: Balancing stakeholder interests and reality in
regulating criminal background checks. Texas Law Review; Austin, 94(1), 175-203.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.
Raphael, S. (2011). Incarceration and prisoner reentry in the United States. The Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science, 635, 192-215.
Rath, T, & Conchie, B. (2009). Strengths-based leadership. New York, NY: Gallup, Inc.
Rubin, H., & Rubin, I. (2012). Chapter 6: Conversational partnerships. In Qualitative
interviewing: The art of hearing data (3
rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications.

186
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
Salabarria-Pena, Y., Apt, B., & Walsh, C. (2007). Practical use of program evaluation among
sexually transmitted disease (STD) programs. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention.
Sawyer, W., & Wagner, P. (2019). Mass incarceration: The whole pie 2019. Prison Policy
Initiative. Retrieved from: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2019.html
Schaufeli, W., Bakker, A., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a
short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 66(4), 701-716.
Schein, E. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership, 5
th
Edition. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Schmitt, J., & Warner, K. (2010). Ex-offenders and the labor market. Center for Economic
Policy and Research, 1-22.
Schneider, B., Brief, A., & Guzzo, R. (1996). Creating a culture and climate for sustainable
organizational change. Organizational Dynamics, 24(4), 7-19.
Schnepel, K. (2016). Good jobs and recidivism. The Economic Journal, 128, 447-469.

Schraw, G. (1997). The effect of generalized metacognitive knowledge on test performance and
confidence judgments. The Journal of Experimental Education, 65(2), 135-146.
Scott, J. (2015). Facilitating Interorganizational Learning with Information Technology. Journal
of Management Information Systems, 52(8), 81-113.
Senge, P. (1990). The leader’s new work: Building learning organizations. Sloan Management
Review, 32(1), 7-23.

187
Snodgrass, J., Jenkins, B., & Tate, K. (2017). More than a club, sister: Career interventions for

women following incarceration. The Career Development Quarterly, 65, 29-43.
Stake, R. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The
Sage handbook of qualitative research (3
rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
State of California. (2018). 2018-2018 Governor’s Budget. State of California. Retrieved from:
http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/budget/2018-19/#/Home
Stevens, F., Plaut, V., & Sanchez-Burks, J. (2008). Unlocking the benefits of diversity: All-
inclusive multiculturalism and positive organizational change. The Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science, 44(1), 116-133.
Stoll, M., Raphael, S., & Holzer, H. (2004). Black job applicants and the hiring officer’s race.
Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 57(2), 267-287.
Stone, D., & Heen, S. (2014). Thanks for the feedback: The science and art of receiving feedback
well. Introduction: From Push to Pull and Chapter 1: Three Triggers the Block Feedback.
Swensen, J., Rakis, J., Snyder, M., & Loss, R. (2014). Engaging employers and businesses in the
hiring of individuals with criminal records. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling,
45(4), 15-24.
Thompson, M., & Cummings, D. (2010). Enhancing the career development of individuals who

have criminal records. The Career Development Quarterly, 58(3), 209-218.
Tolman, D., & Brydon-Miller, M. (2001). From subjects to subjectivities: A handbook of
interpretative and participatory methods. New York, NY: New York University
Press.
Travis, J. (2005). But they all come back: Facing the challenges of prisoner reentry.
Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.

188
Uggen, C., Vuolo, M., Lageson, S., Ruhland, E., & Whitham, H. (2014). The edge of stigma: An
experimental audit of the effects of low-level criminal records on employment.
Criminology, 52(4), 626-654.
United States Census Bureau. (2014). State and county QuickFacts. Retrieved from
http://quickfacts .census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html
Visher, C., & Travis, J. (2011). Life on the outside: Returning home after incarceration. The
Prison Journal, 9(3), 1025-1195.
Wagner, P. & Walsh, A. (2016). States of incarceration: The global context 2016. Prison Policy
Initiative. Retrieved from: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/global/2016.html
Wang, X., Mears, D., & Bales, W. (2010). Race-specific employment contexts and recidivism.
Criminology, 48(4), 1171-1211.
Webster, J., Staton-Tindall, M., Dickson, M., Wilson, J., & Leukefeld, C. (2014). Twelve-month
employment intervention outcomes for drug-involved offenders. American Journal of
Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 40(30), 200-205.
Whitlock, J. (2017). Ex-offender program values work ethic, second chances. San Diego
Business Journal, 38(39), 1-4.
Wifokk, N., Linhordst, D., & Morani, N. (2012). Recidivism among participants of a reentry
program for prisoners released without supervision. Social Work Research, 36(4), 289-
299.
Yang, C. (2017). Local labor markets and criminal recidivism. Journal of Public Economics,
147, 16-29.
Young, N., & Powell, G. (2015). Hiring ex-offenders: A theoretical model. Human Resource
Management Review, 25(3), 298-312.

189
Zweig, J., & Yahner, J. (2011). For whom does a transitional jobs program work? Examining the
recidivism effects of the Center for Employment Opportunities program on former
prisoners at high, medium, and low risk of reoffending. Criminology & Public Policy,
10(4), 945-972.

190
Appendix A
Interview Protocol
1. Tell me about how your organization first came to hire FII.
2. How long has your organization worked with this population?
3. How many FII does your organization currently employ?
a. Tell me more about how FII staff counts have fluctuated, if at all, during this time.
4. How has your organization changed since hiring FII?
5. Walk me through organizational adjustments, if any, to integrate working with FII.
6. What were your expectations for employing FII within your organization?
7. Tell me about your experience working with FII.
8. Tell me about any discussions you had with staff prior to onboarding FII into the
organization.
9. Has your staff shared any feedback regarding working with FII?
a. If yes, please explain.
b. Has any organizational change resulted from it?
10. Have your FII employees shared any feedback about their experience in working with
your organization?
a. Has any organizational change resulted from it?
11. What have been the benefits of hiring FII, if any?
12. Walk me through areas for improvement, if any, within your organization in relation to
working with FII.
a. How have you navigated them?
b. Did you expect these areas for improvement to arise?
13. Since your organization started hiring FII, have you noticed a shift in any beliefs or
feelings you held about this population?
14. Have you noticed any differences in staff behavior since hiring FII?
15. Tell me about your organization’s recruiting and hiring process for FII.
a. If the same for all employees, explain what the process is.
16. Walk me through any barriers to employment for FII who apply to work with your
organization.
a. If yes, what are they?
b. Why are these barriers in place?
17. Tell me about the specific qualities that your organization looks for in applicants who are
FII.
18. Does your training for FII differ at all from training for your non-FII staff?
a. If yes, how so?
19. What were the main reasons that your organization decided to partner with a WRCP?
20. Share about your experience in collaborating with this agency.
21. Tell me about what kind of resources you have in place for FII working within your
organization.
a. Are these resources provided by your organization or the WRCP?
22. What kind of resources, if any, are available for your non-FII employees who are
working with FII?
a. Are these resources provided by your organization or the WRCP?

191
b. If WRCP, can you tell me about the services they provide to your staff?
c. Do you feel some services are more helpful than others?
23. What resources, if any, that are not currently available within your organization do you
think could be beneficial for your staff who engage with FII employees?
24. What resources, if any, outside of your organization that are not currently being utilized
do you think could be beneficial for your staff?
25. What resources, if any, do you personally utilize for providing managerial support in
working with this population?
26. What advice do you have for other organizations who are considering hiring FII?
27. Would you recommend that other organizations who hire FII collaborate with a WRCP?
a. If yes, please explain.
28. Is there anything else you can tell me that we haven’t already discussed about your
experience employing FII within your organization?
29. Is there anything else you can tell me about resources that you think would be helpful for
supporting your organization and your FII employees?

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Developing partnerships between education providers and Fortune 500 companies to increase the utilization of tuition assistance and quality digital education: an innovation study

PDF

Physical activity interventions to reduce rates of sedentary behavior among university employees: a promising practice study

PDF

Organizational design for embedding corporate social responsibility

PDF

Preparing Asian American leaders in higher education: an exploration study using Bronfenbrenner's ecological model

PDF

Bridging the employment gap for students of color: evaluating the effectiveness of internship programs and the level of engagement from employers

PDF

Women of color senior leaders: pathways to increasing representation in higher education

PDF

Transgender experience in the U.S. military: opportunities for effective inclusion

PDF

Underrepresentation of women in the U.S. banking industry’s top executive roles: why doesn’t the CEO look like me?

PDF

Father engagement in the child welfare system: a promising practice study

PDF

Manager leadership skills in the context of a new business strategy initiative: an evaluative study

PDF

School-based interventions for chronically absent students in poverty

PDF

Measuring the impact of short-term campus exchange programs: an evaluation study

PDF

Sustaining quality leadership at prep academy charter schools: promising practices for leadership development in public schools

PDF

Evaluation of a post work related injury total wellness program designed for fire and police department employees

PDF

Promising practices: promoting and sustaining a college-going culture

PDF

Attendance interventions to address chronic absenteeism

PDF

Promising practices for building leadership capacity: a community college case study

PDF

Preparing teachers to advance equity through deeper learning and antiracist practices

PDF

Evaluating the effectiveness of global residence in improving resident cultural intelligence

PDF

Workforce system collaboration

Asset Metadata

Creator Lawatsch, Elia Inglis (author)

Core Title Uncovering promising practices for providing vocational opportunities to formerly incarcerated individuals

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 06/16/2020

Defense Date 03/31/2020

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

Tag bias,criminal record,diversity,economic instability,employment,equity,formerly incarcerated individual,incarceration,inclusion,Jail,OAI-PMH Harvest,parole,Prison,Racism,recidivism,work readiness certification program

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Malloy, Courtney (committee chair), Canny, Eric (committee member), Stowe, Kathy (committee member)

Creator Email elialawatsch@gmail.com,elinglis@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-318300

Unique identifier UC11665978

Identifier etd-LawatschEl-8595.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-318300 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-LawatschEl-8595.pdf

Dmrecord 318300

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Lawatsch, Elia Inglis

Type texts

Source 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 a...

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