The Mechanics of Reform: Implementing Correctional Programmes in English Prisons

Abstract

Delivering correctional programmes in the prison environment has proved challenging, and desired outcomes have not always been achieved. Drawing on interview data, this article considers the mechanics through which programmes are introduced into English prisons and how the environment shapes what is accomplished. We argue that the operation of programmes is influenced by institutional features (such as values, priorities and resources), situational features (such as the challenges posed by operating in the secure environment), and interactional factors (such as the attitudes of prison staff and the nature of programme‐prison staff relations).

The road to develop prisoners’ skills and attitudes: an analytical study of contemporary prison-based rehabilitation programme in Sri Lanka

“…Ireland et al (2016) evaluated the cognitive skills programme of male prisoners in the UK prisons and highlighted that cognitive skills programmes may be best considered as precursors to longer term therapies, whereas activities should focus on improvement and not recovery. Bullock et al (2018) recently argued that the outcomes of prison-based correctional programmes have often fallen short of expectations, and the programmes are shaped by features of the organisational environment and how they interact with programme processes and staff. Further, authors indicated that the "what works" movement was propelled by findings from studies which demonstrated that well-designed programmes, especially those based on cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), could produce reductions in reconviction.…”

“…One of the issues in the constant argument over rehabilitations is that the prior studies have drawn very little attention on systematic empirical knowledge about the success or failure of rehabilitation programmes with different recreational activities and in different institutional settings. Further, prior studies were not well enough to focus prisoners' motivations to select their vocational training, how the organisational context of individual prisoners interacts with that govern programmes or their attitudes about their work or training (Bullock et al, 2018). Thus, this study contributes to the growing body of research with an evaluation of the rehabilitation programme that is offered in Sri Lankan prisons.…”

“…Rehabilitation is a term that is broadly accepted to mean a planned intervention which aims to bring about change in some aspect of the offender that is brought to cause the offender's criminality, such as attitude, cognitive processes, personality or mental health (Cullen and Gendreau, 2000). This fundamental principle is backed by many rehabilitation programmes for inmates around the world, and those programmes provide recreational activities, namely, furniture-making, soap-making, toilet roll production, manufacturing aluminium pots, masonry, carpentry, tailoring, metal works fabrications, worship services, religious courses, prayer services and scripture study courses and so on (Asokhia and Agbonluae, 2013;Al os et al, 2014;Bullock et al, 2018). Thus, rehabilitation covers a wide variety of activities such as education, vocational training and work in prisons.…”

“…A cursory review of the literature shows that a growing body of research has identified effective and ineffective prison-based rehabilitation programmes (Andersen and Skardhamar, 2015;Brewster, 2014;Bullock et al, 2018;Clark and Duwe, 2015;Patzelt et al, 2014;Rowe et al, 2018;Taylor, 2014). In line with that, some studies emphasise the success of these programmes and others find that their results are mixed.…”

‘The prison don’t talk to you about getting out of prison’: On why prisons in England and Wales fail to rehabilitate prisoners

“…While, as noted, prison-based OMPs can be effective, there has also been disappointment about what they have achieved (Hollin et al, 2004, Maguire et al, 2010). A range of implementation problems, such as resourcing and recruiting suitable staff, have negatively affected what has been achieved (Burdon et al, 2002; Harper and Chitty, 2005; Lin, 2002; Maguire, 2004), and establishing and sustaining OMPs in closed institutions is far from straightforward (Bullock et al, 2018; Lin, 2002). Prisons have also struggled to proactively respond to needs assessments and embed throughcare (CJJI, 2017; HMIPP, 2013, 2017; Maguire and Raynor, 2017).…”