Prisoner incorporation: The work of the state and non-governmental organizations

Abstract

This article brings the concept of incorporation as used in studies of citizenship into the analysis of the reception of ex-prisoners by non-governmental organizations (NGOs). I introduce the concept of 'prisoner incorporation' to illustrate the ways in which NGOs, tasked with reentry work through devolution policies, include ex-prisoners as citizens. I use data from policy and organizational documents, interviews with staff at 18 NGOs, and program observations to demonstrate that incorporation varies by religious and political orientation and the receipt of Department of Corrections (DOC) funding. I distinguish between NGOs focused on 'classic reentry', which emphasizes treatment and work-focused economic incorporation, and those focused on 'broader incorporation', in which domestic labor, culture, religion, and politics warrant the inclusion of ex-prisoners as citizens in particular communities. Based on the results, I reconsider arguments that NGOs have a limited ability to shape the citizenship of criminalized people.

Prison Programs to Reduce Recidivism: What is the Ideal Structure of an Inmate Reentry Program?

“…There is a new industry emerging, the 'prisoner reentry' or 'prisoner reintegration' industry (Kaufman, 2015). NGO's run voluntary and mandatory programming for the growing number of released prisoners: approximately 7.7 million in the United States (Kaufman, 2015).…”

“…There is a new industry emerging, the 'prisoner reentry' or 'prisoner reintegration' industry (Kaufman, 2015). NGO's run voluntary and mandatory programming for the growing number of released prisoners: approximately 7.7 million in the United States (Kaufman, 2015). These programs are focused on modifying exprisoners' cognitive processes, skills, resources, opportunities, rights, and group memberships (Kaufman, 2015).…”

“…NGO's run voluntary and mandatory programming for the growing number of released prisoners: approximately 7.7 million in the United States (Kaufman, 2015). These programs are focused on modifying exprisoners' cognitive processes, skills, resources, opportunities, rights, and group memberships (Kaufman, 2015). Other resources for prisoners are nonprofit organizations, which are funded by grants and donations, both of which are limited.…”

Exploring Autonomy in the Finnish and New Zealand Penal Voluntary Sectors: The Relevance of Marketisation and Criminal Justice Policy Environments in Two Penal Voluntary Sector Organisations

“…One explanation for this may be that previous research has been dominated by Anglophone scholars, mainly from the UK and North America (for example, Corcoran , ; Corcoran et al . ; Kaufman ; Maguire ; Maurutto and Hannah‐Moffat ; Mills, Meek and Gojkovic ; Tomczak , ; Tomczak and Thompson ), who have examined the sector in a particular sociopolitical context, potentially hindering a more thorough examination of the structural factors such as funding arrangements, political context and economic histories that can influence its form and function. This article therefore aims to provide a broader understanding of how different political, economic, and ideological factors in the voluntary and criminal justice sectors can affect the position of VCOs in the penal voluntary sector, by contrasting the accounts of two organisations which work with offenders in Finland and in New Zealand – KRITS and NZPARS – through qualitative thematic documentary analysis of their annual reports.…”

The Criminal Justice Voluntary Sector: Concepts and an Agenda for an Emerging Field

“…Volunteers and voluntary organisations (with varying proportions of volunteer and paid staff) have been heavily implicated in criminal justice restructuring in, for example, England and Wales, the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, France, and the Nordic countries (Tomczak ). Restructuring has created complex, ill‐understood governance formations and partnership working (Goddard and Myers ; Kaufman ), overlaid upon long‐standing, similarly ill‐understood criminal justice volunteers and voluntary organisation (CJVVO) activity. For‐profit justice involvement has attracted wide‐ranging interest, for example in: policing (White ); court interpreters (Aliverti and Seoighe ); court escort (Whitehead ); prison (Burkhardt ); community supervision (Deering and Feilzer ); and electronic monitoring (Hucklesby ).…”