Alabama measures recidivism of an offender by rearrests, reconviction, and return to prison during a three-year period following the offender’s date of release. Alabama is making a strong investment in adult education and workforce training for the Department of Corrections. This investment in educational programming is working to reduce the rate of recidivism.
During Fiscal Year 2019-2020 (October - September), there were 3,771 correctional students served in the Alabama Adult Education Program. The fiscal year is used to better align the data with the Alabama Department of Corrections (ADOC) reporting period. Of this number, 2,789 students were matched by the Alabama Department of Corrections. There have been 1,770 incarcerated students served in FY 2019-2020 who were released back into society and only 5 of those have been reincarcerated. This gives us a 3-year recidivism rate of 0.3%, which is an exceptionally low rate that reinforces the role education performs in reducing recidivism. The 2020 Alabama Department of Corrections Annual Report listed across all cohorts a 3-year recidivism rate of 28.74%.
Access to direct instruction has once again become available to incarcerated individuals at pre-Covid levels. Instruction has included access to enhanced distance education opportunities along with the ability to once again provide approved, proctored NRS assessments. Increases in adult education services is expected to be reported with the approval of Second Chance Pell and greater opportunities for accessing postsecondary education for the incarcerated population in PY2022-23.
||The Alaska Department of Corrections (DOC) measures recidivism as the percentage of individuals convicted of felonies who are released from DOC custody within a given year and who return to DOC custody within three years for any remand due to conviction (felony or misdemeanor) or probation/parole violation. Therefore, recidivism rates are looked at retroactively each year to measure the rate of those releasing three years prior.
Inmates are either referred by their Probation Officers to education based on risk-needs assessment or they voluntarily enroll in the program. All participation in programming is voluntary.
The DOC Reentry Unit reviewed data from adult education participants from Program Year 2018 (July 1, 2018 to June 30, 2019) to study if a correlation existed between program involvement, credential achievement and recidivism. PY 2018 data is the most recent data set available for analysis as it incorporates the three-year threshold required by Alaska statute to measure the recidivism rate. Full-time and part-time student participants’ information was extracted from AlaskaJobs, GED Manager, and the Alaska Corrections Offender Management System (ACOMS) to determine what education achievement was attained prior to, during, and post their adult education period of participation while incarcerated in PY 2018; in addition, credential achievement and participation was compared to their custody status over the three-year period to analyze what correlation may exist between the high school equivalency achievement and the rate of remand post-release. Those rates of recidivism are then compared to the known state recidivism rate of the general population of releasing offenders. Some individuals captured within the dataset were released at various times within the three subsequent years, not having completed a full three-year post-release period. Thus, the reported rate could potentially be higher.
The cohort data reflected in the chart above reflects the 345 individuals who participated in Adult Education in PY 2018. Of those, 64 have remained incarcerated with 22 having earned GEDs and 2 earned High School Diplomas. Of the 345 participants, 279 individuals released from custody with 179 of those individuals recidivating, which represents an overall 64 percent rate of recidivism for program participants.
The data also revealed that those who had released and had earned a GED while incarcerated had the same recidivism rate (79 of 123), 64 percent, to those who had not earned a GED while incarcerated (100 of 156). The rate of recidivism for those earning a GED was higher than the previous year’s cohort (52 percent) by 12 percent, whereas the overall program recidivism rate remained nearly constant (63 percent the previous year). The Department of Corrections 2021 Offender Profile details how recidivism rates have ranged from 60 percent to 66 percent from 2014-2018 years, indicating there is not a statistical significance, derived from the PY 2018 data, that neither participation in adult education nor credential attainment had an impact on recidivism.
||PROGRAMS FOR CORRECTIONS EDUCATION AND EDUCATION OF OTHER INSTITUTIONALIZED INDIVIDUALS
AELEL was in partnership with a non-profit faith-based organization in providing adult education literacy programs to individuals housed at the Tafuna Correctional Facility. Services are prioritized for those who are likely to leave the correctional institution within 5 years of participation in the program. It is a challenge to work with the Tafuna Correctional Facility officials who handle the data for the criminal offenders because they do not have a permanent person handling files and records at the institution. We are working on a proper solution to the problem and continuing to provide educational services to the participants. I am confident to say that there is a rate of recidivism of people whom the program serves. The past summer semester AELEL was able to serve participants at the Correctional Facility.
||The Arkansas Department of Corrections (ADC), which operates prison units, released an April 2022 report based on the findings from the 2017 Release Cohorts, which included all offenders released from ADC facilities. The report indicated that the ADC’s 3-year recidivism rate is 49.4% out of 10,795 offenders released during Correctional Year 2017.
In Arkansas, recidivism is calculated based on three major areas: re-arrest, re-conviction, and re-incarceration within three years of intake to supervision during a three-year period following release from custody. Recidivism rates are calculated using the nationwide correctional standard timeframes of 6-, 12-, and 36-month follow-up periods. When examining recidivism rates, in addition to personal characteristics, factors such as the released inmate’s inability to obtain employment, difficulty in finding a place to live, lack of support, association with other criminals, and lack of transportation influence the likelihood of a successful return to society, making the services provided by ADWS/AES critical.
Currently, ADWS/AES provides correctional services in 40 centers, including county jails, state and federal prisons, detention centers, reentry facilities, and community corrections centers. During the last three years, 329 incarcerated individuals passed the GED® with a 52.3% MSG rate for this cohort. In the 2021-22 fiscal year, there were 829 participants in correctional facilities with an MSG attainment rate of 58.8%.
||According to the Recidivism Report for Offenders Released from the California Department of Corrections in Fiscal Year 2015-16, published by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) in September 2021, the recidivism rate for the 33,756 offenders released between July 1, 2015, and June 30, 2016, was 44.6 percent. After reaching a high of 54.3 percent with the FY 2011-12 release cohort and subsequently declining to a low of 46.1 percent with the FY 2012-13 release cohort, the three-year conviction rate has been markedly stable. Following a slight increase with the FY 2014-15 release cohort (46.5 percent), the three-year conviction rate decreased to the current rate of 44.6 percent.
CDCR and other corrections agencies are now open, with many still operating on a limited basis and many opening later than other facilities. Incarceration rates decreased because of COVID-19; therefore, many education programs have undergone consolidation. In PY 2020-21, most facilities resumed pre- and post-testing, and all were running by PY 2021-22 (though many still on a limited basis).
More recently, CDCR has undertaken considerable efforts to increase access to educational technology by adding approximately 5,000 computers across all schools expressly for ABE and ASE courses. Online instructional tools include Reading Horizons Elevate, Spark3000, Achieve3000 Math, and Aztec Plus. Teachers receive training and support from academic coaches and participate in professional development in the use of the adopted textbooks and resources and how to integrate them as part of daily instruction to support students.
All Department of Developmental Services (DDS) and Department of State Hospital (DSH) facilities continue to face challenges as the result of COVID-19, especially in managing close living arrangements. All facilities have reopened their training/education programs outside the living residences; however, students are required to attend classes with their residential cohorts which limits the availability of educational offerings. Education program offerings continue to be expanded with the goal of reaching pre-pandemic levels, although vocational classes continue to be offered on a limited basis. Despite a surge of COVID-19 cases, because of the omicron variant, facilities successfully completed a majority of the WIOA Title II pre- and post-testing.
State hospitals continue to operate on a more limited basis as compared to the developmental centers. COVID-19 rates have been much higher for state hospitals; consequently, the level of restrictions have been correspondingly higher, with most state hospitals continuing more restrictive quarantine measures as necessary to ensure the health and safety of the individuals served.
||Community Education Outreach (CEO) was the only provider using Section 225 funds in 21-22. Their programs only offered Adult Basic Education services in 21-22. AEI has not been able to track rates of recidivism on correctional education participants in 21-22 or in prior years. The Colorado Department of Corrections (CDOC) defines recidivism as a return to prison or inmate status in Colorado within three years of release, which can be for either new criminal activity or a technical violation of parole, probation or non-departmental community placement. The team has not yet coordinated with CDOC to track prior year participants at this three-year mark to determine how many recidivated. We would also like to explore conversations with WIOA partners around if and how they are already tracking this data. Based on exit exclusions reported in LACES for correctional education participants in 20-21 and 21-22, so far less than five percent of correctional education participants recidivated.
|District of Columbia
||Due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, there was a significant reduction in the number of students participating in correctional education in FY22. Students previously receiving correctional education services resided in halfway houses in the city. However, due to increased health concerns about the number of residents contracting COVID-19, the declining state of the residences, and the inability of contracted service providers to meet the diverse needs of returning citizens during the pandemic, District residents were relocated to facilities outside of the city. Additionally, in FY22, state staff searched the Federal Bureau of Prison (FBOP) Inmate Locator, Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (MD PSCS) Inmate Locator, and the Virginia Department of Corrections Inmate (VA DOC) Locator to find out whether any of the students who exited the program during the reporting period had recidivated. None of the students appeared in the Inmate Locator search results.
Therefore, based on the reduced number of District residents receiving correctional education in FY22 and the fact that none of the students who exited the program appeared in the search results for the FBOP, MD PSCS, and VA DOC, OSSE AFE estimates that the relative rate of recidivism is 0 percent for offenders served.
The methods and factors used in calculating the rate for the reporting period include the following:
Methods - An analysis of 1) students populating NRS Table 10 – Outcome Achievement for Adults in Correctional Education; 2) employment and/or wage data via student follow-up survey data in the Literacy Adult and Community Education System (LACES), the state’s management information system; and 3) student enrollment data and instructional hours in FY22 in LACES. - A search for students who exited the program during the reporting period in the Federal Bureau of Prison (FBOP) Inmate Locator, Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (MD PSCS) Inmate Locator, and the Virginia Department of Corrections Inmate (VA DOC) Locator.
Factors - 1) The total number of students served in FY22 was 18 per NRS Table 10 – Outcome Achievement for Adults in Correctional Education. 2) Of the 18 students, 14 exited, achieving an outcome or median earning value in FY22 (based on aligned survey and data matching results). 3) Of the 18 students, the four students who did not exit from the program in FY22, re-enrolled and have instructional hours in FY23. 4) 14 + 4 (re-enrolled students with instructional hours) = 18 students that did not recidivate. 5) 18/18 = 100 percent of students did not recidivate. 6) 100 percent minus 100 percent = 0 percent (n = 0) of students recidivated. Additionally, none of the students appeared in the Inmate Locator search results.
There are several variables that may confound the validity of the recidivism rate when relevant data sets are missing.
||The Georgia Department of Corrections (GDC) has a distinct and independently funded education program for offenders. Since GDC’s funds are not enough to serve all offenders and all facilities, adult education local providers support these efforts by offering classes in prisons, local jails, day reporting centers, and substance abuse centers. During FY22, 24 adult education programs served 1,770 correctional students throughout the state. As programs worked to reopen classes in correctional facilities, enrollment in correctional facilities almost doubled (91% increase) compared to FY21. Corrections students earned 866 measurable skills gains in 1,795 periods of participation (48.25%), which was eight percentage points greater than the previous year, indicating a continued rebound from the COVID-19 pandemic.
Five local adult education providers were able to offer Integrated Education and Training (IET) as part of their educational services within correctional settings for inmates that were approaching re-entry. These programs served 222 inmates through IET offerings that included Forklift Operator and Welding. 184 inmates earned industry-recognized credentials.
GDC’s recidivism rate calculation looks at new arrests or parole violations with returns to prison within three years. During FY21, GOAE worked with the Technical College System of Georgia’s Data and Research team to establish a data sharing agreement with GDC to begin calculating recidivism rates specifically for GOAE correctional students. GOAE also began collecting GDC identification numbers for adult education students in GALIS to assist with the data match. GOAE is still working to improve the match rate, and during FY22, GOAE identified additional questions regarding the GDC data shared. As a result, the latest recidivism rate available based on FY18 releases for incarcerated adults completing GOAE programming (and who matched to GDC data) was 12%, compared to 29% for the general incarcerated population according to the latest report from GDC.
||This program year's plans to provide adult education services to the Department of Correction (DOC) inmates were postponed due to lockdowns and COVID-19 restrictions. Nonetheless, the local program successfully obtained a signed MOU with DOC, and arrangements were made to offer classes and services in the following program year.
According to DOC, there were 132 offenders released between July 1, 2021, and June 30, 2022. Of those released, 19.7% were confined prior to June 30, 2022, compared to last year’s rate (19.3%). The slight increase may be due to environmental factors such as more individuals being confined and the COVID-19 pandemic ending.
The local program is committed to reducing program participants’ recidivism by developing a robust educational program to improve educational outcomes, including regular tracking.
||In PY 2021 – 2022, programs for corrections education served felony offenders in all jails and prisons in Hawaii. Felonies, jails, and prisons are defined as follows:
A felony is classified as an offense with a possible penalty of more than one year in state or local confinement in Hawaii.
Adult education services offered by the local service provider as part of the program for corrections education include high school equivalency preparation and ABE activities. The programs and activities are administered year-round in all correctional facilities.
The recidivism rate for Hawaii is determined by the State of Hawaii Interagency Council on Intermediate Sanctions (ICIS). ICIS was created in 2002 to reduce offender recidivism. Membership includes the:
- Jails provide for the secure incarceration of pretrial and short-term sentence misdemeanant populations and the transitional sentence felon population, as well as those who have almost completed their felony sentences and are returning to the community. Jails are locally situated on each major island. Jail populations consist of both male and female inmates.
- Prisons are utilized for felony sentencing longer than one year. There are three prisons in Hawaii, all located on the island of Oahu.
ICIS defines recidivism as criminal rearrests (most recent charge after supervision start date), revocations, technical violations, and/or criminal contempt of court charges reported in the Hawaii Department of the Attorney General’s Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS). The study dataset includes fields from the following information systems: the CJIS; the Community Corrections Adult Assessment information system created by Cyzap Inc.; the Hawaii State Judiciary’s Caseload Explorer information system; and Public Safety Department’s Offender Track system.
The most recent overall recidivism rate for Hawaii is 53.8%, which was released in a report in March 2021. The Hawaii State Department of Education does not receive recidivism data and does not have an MOU in place with the agencies necessary to obtain this data. As a result, recidivism for AEFLA adult education participants is not reported. However, a goal for PY 2022 – 2023 is to explore the steps required to receive recidivism data.
- Hawaii State Judiciary;
- Department of Public Safety;
- Department of the Attorney General;
- Department of Health;
- Office of the Public Defender;
- Hawaii Paroling Authority;
- City and County of Honolulu Department of the Prosecuting Attorney; and
- Honolulu Police Department.
||The Idaho Department of Correction (IDOC) is the primary provider for institutionalized individuals in Idaho. IDOCs research division calculates the data used in this reporting period. Population data indicates that 91.5% of the general Idaho population has achieved either an HSD or GED, while IDOC residents. Data have consistently found that lower educational achievement plays a role in the risk of individuals becoming involved with the criminal justice system.
IDOC is committed to providing quality education to our Residents to reduce recidivism rates after their release.
13% of total individuals receiving ABE and released as of June 30, 2021, returned to incarceration compared to 20.9% in FY21. This represents a substantial decrease in recidivism for the ABE programming group, while the moderate and high needs groups remain relatively unchanged when compared to FY20-21. Of note, the ABE group is significantly younger than the comparison group, and it is well known that recidivism decreases with age, which might help explain the difference in recidivism for the ABE group and the comparison group in FY21-22.
Education Programming Recidivism Table.
Rider vs Termer by Education Programming Recidivism Table
% Based on Status Release Type
% Based on Program Type
Less than 20 hours of Education Programming
Less than 20 hours of Education Programming
* Riders may not require Education Programming other than Pre-Release based on LSI needs, as many come in with an HSD/GED and adequate work history, putting them in lower risk category and therefore would not exceed 20 hours of education programming
Risk Categories and Education Programming Table
Count & %
Count & %
Count & %
Count & %
168 - 35.3%
308 - 64.7%
13 - 7.7%
53 - 17.2%
49 - 34.5%
93 - 65.5%
8 - 16.3%
14 - 15.1%
217 - 35.1%
401 - 64.9%
21 - 9.6%
67 - 16.7%
37 - 11.0%
77 - 23.5%
* 2 residents did not have LSI-R scoring for Education/Employment
LSI-R score based on Education/Employment .40+ = Moderate to High
Comparison Group based on Release Type and Risk Category Table
Comparison Group Based on Release Type and Risk Category Table
Low Count & %
Moderate-High Count & %
Low Count & % Recidivism
Moderate-High Count & % Recidivism
112 - 33.3%
106 - 32.4%
12 - 10.7%
24 - 22.6%
213 - 63.4%
209 - 63.9%
24 - 11.3%
52 - 24.9%
11 - 3.3%
12 - 3.7%
1 - 9.1%
1 - 8.3%
336 - 51%
327 - 49%
37 - 11.0%
77 - 23.5%
* 10 discharged residents did not have LSI-R scoring for Education/Employment
2 termers did not have LSI-R scoring for Education/Employment
||The Illinois Department of Corrections has a current recidivism rate of 38.5% for fiscal year 2018. This is the most current data available. IDOC tracks recidivism rates on a three-year track. The individuals released in fiscal year 2018 are tracked for re-incarceration the following three fiscal years to determine the rate of recidivism. The next recidivism calculation results for the Illinois Department of Corrections for FY19 will not be calculated or published until late Spring of 2023. The recidivism rate for the Illinois Department of Corrections does not separate students served in the Adult Education program from individuals not served in the academic or vocational areas.
||Indiana measures recidivism by criminal acts resulting in rearrests, reconviction, and/or return to prison with or without a new sentence during a three-year period following the offender’s date of release from an Indiana Department of Correction (IDOC) facility.
In 2020, of offenders who recidivated, approximately 34.7 percent returned to IDOC for the commission of a new crime, compared to approximately 65.3 percent for a technical rule violation of post-release supervision. For the 2017 release cohort, 38.16 percent of those released were recommitted to the IDOC within three years of release, either for a new conviction or post-release supervision violation.
The Indiana experience indicated that a returning citizen who has not completed the HSE is 2.8 times more likely to become a recidivist than one who has achieved the HSE. Interestingly, research specific to Indiana also revealed –
- Incarcerated adults who attended correctional, academic adult education programs and achieved at least one academic gain have a recidivism rate of 29.7 percent.
- Those individuals who did not enroll in academic adult education programs had a recidivism rate of 67.8 percent.
(Unable to paste table showing 2014-2021 3-Year Adult Recidivism Rates.)
Combining workforce preparation and basic education is not an unusual concept to Indiana. Through partnerships with Indiana based colleges and universities, the Indiana Department of Correction provides formal education programming ranging from adult basic education, through the attainment of the HSE and onto high quality and high-demand industry-recognized certifications. The IDOC provides workplace soft skills training through the WIN Softskills program which is a required component of Literacy programming.
Continuing Impact of COVID 19 on IDOC’s Adult Schools
The Indiana Department of Correction implemented feasible protocols for the long-term management of COVID-19.
IDOC facilities are operating with guidance from department medical services leadership. Individual facilities may implement stricter protocols than their counterparts. Wardens and IDOC leadership in tandem may make decisions regarding the daily operations of prisons on an as needed basis. Individual facilities may implement one or more of the following –
- Continuing research specific to Indiana identified two of the most significant variables of decreasing recidivism are formal education attainment and post-release employment
Since January 2022, all facilities were operating at normal capacity with limited disruptions due to COVID-19 protocols. While attendance hours have increased, some facilities still have class size and housing unite co-mingling limitations. (The transition from ETS HiSET® to PSI HiSET® and TASC® to HiSET® in September/October 2022 resulted in a loss of several weeks of testing due to PSI scheduling, training, and platform issues. This is an ongoing issue that is not specific to IDOC but encountered statewide.
- Suspension of visitation;
- Quarantining of housing units;
- Prohibiting various housing units from congregating; and/or
- Restricting staff assignments to certain areas/dorms to reduce staff movement among various physical settings.
||The Association of State Correctional Administrators (ASCA) developed definitions and terms used in Iowa’s reporting on recidivism to establish standard performance measures. They defined a measure of recidivism—the return rate to prison—as the percent of offenders released from prison who return within three years. The releases tracked include parole; discharges due to end of sentence; and sex offender releases to special sentence supervision. The recidivism rate for FY 2022 in Iowa was 37.0 percent — a lower recidivism rate than observed in FY 2021 (38.7 percent). Iowa’s AEFLA funded providers enroll participants at state correctional institutions and local correctional and institutionalized facilities. Based on the terms of an MOU and the use of shared state leadership funds, all correctional education programs are accountable to the required WIOA performance, except when excluded, and they are subject to Iowa’s assessment policies.
Corrections and institutionalized individuals constituted 1,421 of the total periods of participation in adult education reported in Iowa and 61.6% of them achieved a measurable skill gain. Access to post testing opportunities due to closures during the pandemic continued to impact performance.
Future Directions in PY 2022-2023
- The Department will continue to work with the Iowa Department of Corrections as part of Ascendium Optimizing Post Secondary Education in Prison initiative to prioritize access to educational services which will include funding for education navigators;
- Clear pathways from basic skills to in-demand industry credentials will be developed expanding access to concurrent services with models of IET/IELCE piloted.
||In Kansas, the average recidivism rate for all offenders is approximately 36%. Adult Education participants who have been released generally show a much lower recidivism rate, which is calculated per program year and defined as the percentage of students who were released and reincarcerated on a new court commitment. The Kansas Board of Regents is working on an updated data-sharing agreement with the Kansas Department of Corrections which should allow for greater precision and detail in reporting this information.
KBOR found 204 Adult Education participants from PY2019 had been released. Of these, 28 reoffended, for a recidivism rate of 13.7%. A total of 98 participants from PY2020 were released, with 9 (9.2%) reoffending. For PY2021, 68 participants were released and 6 reoffended, for a recidivism rate of 8.8%.
Six Adult Education providers serve individuals in state correctional facilities. Two providers also offer services in county jails. These services include secondary-diploma preparation with GED® or the Kansas Pathway to Career, an alternate pathway to a high-school-equivalency diploma; English language acquisition; reading and numeracy skills; digital literacy; Integrated Education and Training; and transition to postsecondary education. Career Navigators provided by the facilities assist students in exploring possible careers, practicing job skills, and accessing training and education needed for a future career.
In PY2021, the Kansas High School Equivalency State Administrator launched a “3 of 4” campaign, targeting individuals who had successfully completed three out of the four GED® tests, with the goal to assist these students in finishing the final test and earning a diploma. This initiative has been duplicated in multiple states, with the work done in Kansas used as a template. Of the over 900 individuals identified across the state, 17.6% have completed the final test and earned a diploma thanks to the campaign. Of those completers, 32% were Corrections testers.
||The relative rate of recidivism for criminal offenders served in Kentucky is 29.17% (per KY DOC 2021 Annual Report, pg. 32) which is measured every two years. The following methods and factors were used in calculating the rate for this reporting period:
Recidivism is measured by criminal acts that resulted in rearrest, reconviction, or return to prison with or without a new sentence during a two-year period following the participant’s release. The recidivism rate for the population served under KRS Chapter 533 will be measured by: (a) The number of defendants assessed who did not meet the eligibility requirements for the program following the clinical assessment; (b) The specific offenses charged for each defendant and the classification of offenses charged; (c) The percentage of defendants participating in the program who successfully completed the program; (d) The percentage of defendants discharged from the program for noncompliance; and (e) The percentage of defendants who are arrested, convicted and incarcerated within six (6) months, one (1) year, and two (2) years of successful completion of the program.
In PY21, Corrections instruction was not consistent due to intermittent lockdowns. OAE facilitated three Corrections-focused Professional Learning elective courses titled, Corrections Instructional Strategies for Improved Student Outcomes. The courses emphasized social emotional, growth mindset, reading, vocabulary, mathematical operations, algebraic reasoning instructional strategies, and deepening understanding of Corrections-specific instructional technology including Online Proctored GED (OP GED) and Brainchild Study Buddies. A combined total of 31 participants (KY DOC Instructional Supervisors, KY DOC Instructors, and experienced KYAE Corrections Instructors) completed the cohorts.
Additionally, in PY21, KYAE served 1,455 participants in 68 local correctional facilities. During this period of participation, 835 participants earned an MSG; 341 participants earned an MSG through making a level gain; and 432 earned an MSG through obtaining their GED. Further, in PY22, OAE will work with the Kentucky Center for Statistics (KYSTATS) to assess data collected and track the recidivism rate for program participants. The data collected will be shared with WIOA core partners to strengthen partnerships and guide processes and policies for Corrections education.
||The WRU mission of providing quality educational programs that help incarcerated adults obtain the skills needed to acquire a high school equivalency diploma and transition to postsecondary education or training continued to be an important focus in FY 21-22.
The WRU network funded a total of six (6) Corrections Education and Education of Other Institutionalized Individuals programs providing adult education services in 21-22. Funded entities include the LA Department of Corrections, Community Colleges, and Community-Based Organizations. Services provided include Adult Education and Literacy, English Language Acquisition, Workforce Preparation, Integrated Education and Training, Peer Tutoring, Transition to Re-entry Initiatives and other Post-Release Services, Special Education, and Secondary School Credit Services.
Correctional education is a fundamental component of rehabilitative programming offered in juvenile justice confinement facilities, prisons, jails, and detention centers. Louisiana once again has the nation’s highest incarceration rate after Oklahoma briefly rose to the top in 2018. The state continued focusing on bipartisan criminal justice reform. These reform measures continued to focus on steering people convicted of less serious crimes away from prison, strengthening incarceration alternatives, reducing prison terms for those who can be safely supervised in the community, and removing barriers to re-entry.
The money saved from the criminal justice reforms put in place was reinvested in re-entry initiatives including bolstering education programs within the prison systems throughout the state. Funded providers worked to partner with the various parish prisons to offer educational services to those offenders.
The most current recidivism rate reported by the Louisiana Department of Public Safety & Corrections is the rate reported for state offenders released from adult institutions, local facilities, and transitional work programs that have completed an education class while incarcerated in a state facility. Recidivism is the return to custody following a conviction for a new felony or technical revocation of supervision after having been released from incarceration through a completed sentence, release on parole, conditional release, or split probation sentence. Offenders released on a detainer, released in error, deceased, or transferred to another jurisdiction are not included. An offender may be released multiple times but only counted once per release year. Offenders are tracked for a period of time from the date of release based on the year of return such as 12 months, 24 months, 36 months, 48 months, and 60 months.
1st Year Returns
2nd Year Returns
3rd Year Returns
4th Year Returns
5th Year Returns
The LA Department of Corrections (DOC) provides the following: Adult Education (Literacy, Adult Basic Education (ABE), and High School Equivalency Preparation), Post-Secondary Programming (Career and Technical Education (CTE), and College and Degree Programs), Workforce Preparation, Peer Tutoring Services, Re-entry and transitional services, special education services, and other post-release services. The DOC continues to implement programs at the local jail level to ensure that services are offered to all adult learners at each facility in which there is a Certified Education Program. Currently, WIOA Title II Services/Activities are offered at 8 state facilities, 20 local jails, 10 regional reentry centers (RRC), and 10-day reporting centers (DRCs). Many of DOC Certified Education Programs Instructor Aides are funded by Prison Enterprises and Justice Reinvestment Initiative. Because these positions are part-time, inmate tutors are necessary to assist in running these programs. Inmate tutors are selected by certified education staff and then tested, trained, and counseled prior to tutoring. These tutors provide one on one instruction to adult learners. These tutors are trained on how to work with adults and given best practices in terms of peer tutoring.
It is the goal of the DOC to provide adult education and literacy activities concurrently and contextually with workforce preparation activities and training for the purpose of career advancement post-release.The department has also worked hard to gain employers that are willing to hire individuals with felony convictions. DPS&C works with various community partners for employment, transportation, housing, food, etc. DOC also provides numerous post-secondary education and training programs, and offers the HiSET class in 8 state facilities, 30 local jails, 10 Regional Reentry Centers, and 10 Day Reporting Centers.
||The Correctional Education (CE) program is housed in the Department of Labor. It provides educational opportunities to over 9,000 inmates with services offered at each Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (DPSCS) State institution, the Patuxent Institution, and all pre-release units.
In Maryland, an offender is defined as an individual who has been committed by a judge to state prison and is in the custody of the Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (DPSCS).
DPSCS follows the rules established by the Association of State Correctional Administrators (ASCA) for use in its Performance-Based Measures System (PBMS). After the end of a fiscal year, a release cohort is created and processed against the Offender Case Management System (OCMS). Currently, the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services reports recidivism based on which inmates released from state custody return to sentenced state custody in either correctional or community supervision. The Department reports recidivism on a one-year timeframe, in keeping with state reporting requirements. The most recent report available measures recidivism between FY 2016-2019. In FY17, the recidivism rate for return to state custody in one year is 6.2%. This may be viewed as the most reliable baseline for Maryland’s recidivism trends. Subsequent cohorts are impacted by the COVID 19 pandemic’s disruption of normal criminal justice functions that impact measurable events. Because the pandemic may have delayed adjudication of recidivism activities or suppressed normal activity within the community, these years warrant a more longitudinal 5-year recidivism calculation to provide a more comprehensive measure of release outcomes over this time.
Within the FY 19 cohort, first year recidivism was largely in line with previous years and barely impacted by the pandemic. Record low numbers of individuals recidivated through the second-year post release with a 6.6% lower rate compared to the previous year. This roughly corresponds with the period between April 2020 and April 2021 and represents the largest single-year decline in three-year recidivism outcomes reported since 1990. It is possible, given the robust intake rates of FY 22 that some events occurring during this period may be pending final adjudication or were resolved without sentence to the state, underrepresenting the prevalence of new offences in this cohort. The large decrease in release cohort size, decrease of 22% from FY 19 to FY 22, is also a co-occurring difference beginning with the FY 19 cohort that is expected to continue for years with the multi-year trend in depressed intakes.
||In PY 2021, there were 30 adult education providers in Michigan that were approved for Institutional funding, including the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC); one federal prison - Milan Area Schools; and 27 school districts and 1 Michigan Works! Agency that provide services in county jails across the state. About a quarter of the providers were not able to enter the facilities to offer programming. For those that were allowed in the jails, there were additional restrictions on how services can be delivered, interruptions in the delivery of services due to quarantines and COVID-19 outbreaks, and a lack of access to technology and resources.
The data that is collected and available at the institutions on recidivism varies widely, as does the relationship between the school districts and each of the county jails. Of the recipients that operated in PY 2021, the majority reported not having any data related to recidivism currently available due to a lack of access to data or ability to determine whether an individual was housed at another facility. Other challenges shared were that the jail houses inmates from other areas of the state that are overcrowded, so it is difficult to track those individuals after their release, and areas of the state that border other states do not have a way to share data across states.
The Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC), which served almost 80% of the institutional participants in PY 2021, reported a recidivism rate of 23.6%. This rate captures the percentage of men and women that return to prison within three years of being released of all inmates released.
||According to the Minnesota Department of Corrections (MN DOC), the state’s adult prison population was 7,833 incarcerated individuals as of July 1, 2022. 96.89% were held in state prisons, and the remaining 3.11% resided either in county jails, a state juvenile facility, or other facilities. Of the new admissions during the year (July 2021–June 2022), 31% were release returns. In 2020, MN DOC calculated that 63% of incarcerated individuals did not return to prison (MN DOC 2020 Performance Report).
MN DOC utilizes the federal recidivism rate calculation, based on a three-year follow up period after release from prison. Minnesota’s rate of recidivism in 2020 was 37%, which is the latest data available. In a 2013 study (“The Effects of Minnesota Prison-Based Educational Programming on Recidivism and Employment,” Duwe and Clark), obtaining secondary credentials helped incarcerated individuals enter postsecondary education and gain employment, but diplomas alone were not the primary factor to reduce recidivism. The study found that “obtaining a [diploma] in prison significantly increased the odds of securing post-release employment by 59%” (3). Post-release employment data show that 60% of incarcerated individuals who earned diplomas in prison found employment within the first two years versus 50% in the comparison group. Earning a diploma is also critical as a prerequisite to postsecondary education. Obtaining postsecondary credentials in corrections resulted in reduced recidivism, higher numbers of hours worked, and increased wages (3). Obtaining a postsecondary credential reduced rearrest by 14%, reconviction by 16%, and new offense reincarceration by 24%. The employment rate for incarcerated individuals who earned post-secondary degrees (71%) was slightly higher than that of the prisoners in the comparison group (68%) (3). The study was completed with incarcerated individuals released in 2007 and 2008, which gives enough time to determine meaningful outcomes post-release. For learners served in corrections systems during this program year, it is difficult to determine recidivism rates as many are still incarcerated and others have been released only recently.
Approximately 20% of people in corrections in Minnesota do not have a secondary credential. Between July 1, 2021 and June 30, 2022 enrollees in corrections adult education programs generated 395,246.5 contact hours, and 23% of correctional students achieved a measurable skill gain. While adult education contact hours had dropped significantly (40%) between 2019–2020 and 2020–2021, with the decline attributed to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, MN DOC realized a slight (7%) increase in adult education contact hours between 2020–2021 and 2021–2022. However, contact hours were still down 35% when compared to 2019–2020.
MN DOC has an education-first policy, which means individuals who do not have a secondary credential (a high school diploma or high school equivalency diploma) are required to enroll in adult education and achieve a secondary credential through one of three options: High School Equivalency (i.e. GED) diploma, credit-based high school diploma, or Standard Adult High School diploma. Once learners complete a secondary credential, they are eligible for work assignments within the facility and/or to enroll into a post-secondary (career technical or credit-based) program. MN DOC is currently working to increase concurrent enrollment options for its population.
Sixty-two (62) Standard Adult High School Diplomas and thirteen (13) credit-based high school diplomas were earned by adult education students in Minnesota correctional facilities from July 2021–June 2022. Adult education students in Minnesota’s correctional facilities also performed well on the GED exam test battery, with 164 test-based high school equivalency diplomas issued in 2021–2022. From July 1, 2021–June 30, 2022, the GED pass rate for Minnesota testers in corrections was 81%. Adult education programming and assessment continued to be impacted by COVID-19 related restrictions throughout the program year.
Education within the Minnesota Department of Corrections is based on a vision of inclusive excellence. MN DOC’s intensive educational and training programs provide the opportunity for individuals to bridge into postsecondary career pathways options. MN DOC also offers mental health services and other support services to facilitate stability. These policies and strategies promote a robust system of adult education within Minnesota prisons. MN DOC funds their adult education program with state and federal adult education funding and supplemental corrections funding.
||The state’s current 36-month recidivism rate is 34.2% (based on FY2019 releases). MDOC tracks recidivism based on the number of inmates returning with a 3-year period. The majority of probationers were African-Americans at 51.74% (13,669) compared to Caucasians at 46.47% (12,276). African-Americans comprised the majority of parolees at 56.93% (4,619) compared to Caucasians at 42.18% (3,422). As of December 8th, there were 773 inmates having less than 180 days until flat-time; another 8,081 are candidates for discretionary release through parole and earned release supervision (ERS) within the next 12 months. This information is for all offenders in the state, and is not a representative for only those served in adult education.
Adult Education services are provided to offenders at the three state facilities: Parchman, Central MS Correctional Facility, and South MS Correctional Institution. In addition to these facilities, local programs provide adult education services in seven county/regional correctional facilities. An offender is any individual who is charged with or convicted of any criminal offence.
||Overall, the recidivism rate in Nebraska was 29.8% in state corrections with recidivism being defined by the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services as those individuals who return to incarceration within three years of release and in a given fiscal year. An individual’s earliest release within the year is the only one considered when calculating recidivism rates. The cited 29.8% is for FY2019 (July 1, 2018 – June 30, 2019). Information for this reporting period is not yet available.
||During the last program year, no AEFLA funds were used for Programs for Corrections Education and the Education of Other institutionalized Individuals. The competitive RFP released in 2023 will include the option to apply for corrections funding. State funding not connected to AEFLA has been used for Corrections Education. We will continue to explore the options for partnering with the existing state funded corrections education program during the coming years.
||The NJ Department of Corrections (NJ DOC) is a Title II provider awarded through the same competitive process for AEFLA funds. NJ OAL staff works to ensure all policies are implemented and that NJ DOC staff are included in trainings and professional development and are monitored accordingly.
- The NJ DOC provides mandatory education to inmates who do not have a high school diploma or a high school equivalency (HSE) degree. Under the State Facilities Education Act (SFEA) of 1979 (N.J.S.A. 18A:7B1 et seq.), all inmates under the age of 20, as well as those under age 21 with an Individualized Educational Plan (IEP), are provided traditional high school coursework. Students earn credits from their home school districts toward the fulfillment of their high school diplomas. Similarly, inmates who are over the age of 21 who do not have a high school diploma or HSE and have 18 months or more remaining on their sentence before a mandatory release date are eligible for mandatory education programming to obtain a HSE (N.J.S.A. 30:4-92.1 (P.L. 2009, c.330). Within the 2015 release cohort, there were a total of 351 inmates who participated in mandatory education programming during their stay of incarceration (https://njdoc.gov/pdf/offender_statistics/2015_Release_Recidivism_Report.pdf.)
- NJDOC follows the NJ State Assessment policy, utilizes LACES for tracking/data, and tests Title II students with CASAS.
- NJ DOC uses a return to DOC custody (i.e., a reincarceration) within three years as a measure of recidivism. For the 2015 release cohort, the reincarceration rate was 30.4%. Said another way, 30.4% of persons released in 2015 returned to DOC custody within three years. This is old data, but NJDOC does not collect Title II specific data follow-up of inmates for recidivism and the NJDOL State Director for adult education is working towards an amicable solution with the NJDOC Director.
||The New Mexico Corrections Department (NMCD) supplied us with the data below, indicating they had taken offenders from the LACES database NRS Table 4 FY 18-19 and compared them against the offender population released during FY19 to determine the population from NRS Table 4 that were released. They then calculated the recidivism rate for the overall population released in FY19, defined as individuals who returned to custody within 3 years.
Number of Offenders Released during Period: 3348
Not Meeting NRS Table 4 Criteria: 3067
Meeting NRS Table 4 Criteria: 281
Number of Offenders Returned within Specified Time Period: 1244
Not Meeting NRS Table 4 Criteria: 1113
Meeting NRS Table 4 Criteria: 131
Baseline Recidivism Rate (Returns / Releases): 37.16%
Not Meeting NRS Table 4 Criteria: 36.3%
Meeting NRS Table 4 Criteria: 46.6%
NMCD emphasized the following when they supplied this data: “Although the NRS 4 table participants have a higher recidivism rate, we are comparing it with a group that will include those who already have an HSD/HSE or other types of certifications. There are many other factors that can impact recidivism including demographics, level of education, participation in other programming pre and post-release, employment post-release, etc.”
Our Education & Workforce Development Systems Specialist, Michelle Ribeiro, has significant Corrections Education expertise and continued to spearhead much of our collaborative work with New Mexico’s Section 225 Adult Education providers and other partners. She also continued to support multiple initiatives and working groups on the national level, including a new appointment this year to COABE’s Prison Education task force.
||In North Carolina, the recidivism rate is calculated by the Commission and for the fiscal year that allows for the utilization of the Commission’s established fixed two-year lookback period. It is important to note that by statute, recidivism is only calculated every other year, and that rates are presently only calculated for adult offenders released in odd fiscal years.
Below is information regarding the recidivism rate in North Carolina from the Commission’s most recent report in April 2022.
The Correctional Program Evaluation released by the North Carolina Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission, in conjunction with the Division of Adult Correction and Juvenile Justice of the North Carolina Department of Public Safety, examined recidivism for Structured Sentencing Act (SSA) offenders who were placed on supervised probation or released from prison in FY 2017 (N=46,090). Recidivism was defined broadly as arrests, convictions, or incarcerations during a fixed two-year follow-up period. The North Carolina General Assembly directed the Sentencing Commission to measure the rates of recidivism of criminal offenders involved in state-supported correctional programs. The legislation calling for these measurements made it clear that recidivism meant repeat criminal behavior, and implied that measuring recidivism was to be a way of evaluating correctional programs and sanctions.
There is no official definition of recidivism. Researchers have used a variety of definitions and measurements, including recidivist arrests, convictions, and incarcerations, depending on their interests and the availability of data. Official records from police, courts, and correctional agencies are the source of most research on adult recidivism. For offenders involved in a recidivism study, different types of records will indicate different rates of recidivism. In its studies of recidivism, the Sentencing Commission uses arrests as the primary measure of recidivism, supplemented by information on convictions and incarcerations, to assess the extent of an offender’s repeat involvement in the criminal justice system. Arrests, as used in this research, consider not only the frequency of repeat offending but also its seriousness and the nature of the victimization (for example, crimes against the person, crimes involving theft or property damage, or crimes involving illegal drugs). The volume of repeat offending is handled by recording the number of arrests for crimes of various types.
The sample selected for the current study included all offenders released from state prison or placed on supervised probation during FY 2019 with some exceptions; offenders with a most serious conviction for Driving While Impaired (DWI), offenders with a most serious conviction for a misdemeanor traffic offense, and offenders released from prison with a misdemeanor conviction were excluded from the study. The final study sample includes 46,094 offenders sentenced under the SSA.
Two automated sources were used to provide comprehensive data on a sample of offenders. The North Carolina Department of Public Safety’s (DPS) Offender Population Unified System (OPUS) was used to identify offenders in the FY 2019 sample and to obtain information on demographic characteristics, offender RNA data, current convicted offense and sentence, 11 correctional sanction and treatment programs, and prior and recidivist probation and incarceration measures. The North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation’s (SBI) Computerized Criminal History (CCH) system was used to provide fingerprinted arrest records for prior and recidivist arrests, as well as recidivist convictions. The study excluded arrests for impaired driving or other traffic offenses, as well as noncriminal arrests (e.g., arrests for technical violations of probation). Each offender in the FY 2019 sample was followed for a period of two years to determine whether repeat criminal behavior occurred, with one-year and two-year recidivism rates reported. The two-year follow-up period was calculated on an individual basis using the prison release date plus two years for prison releases and using the probation entry date plus two years for probation entries. Of the 47,094 offenders in the FY 2019 sample, 41% had a recidivist arrest during the follow-up two-year period. The pandemic, in March 2020 had an immediate effect on the criminal justice system. The pandemic was not a factor for sample entry (FY2019), it affected the follow-up period.
In 2021-22, we served 1,632 in corrections (65 in jails and 1,567 in prisons). This was 4.3% of the total number of NRS participants (37, 42). In the previous year NC served a total of 1,081 in corrections (152 in jails and 929 in prisons) which was 3.5% of NRS participants (31,309). CCR programs continued to have limited access to correctional facilities in 2021. Title II personnel were prevented from entering the prisons to provide instruction and testing. The System Office allowed providers to continue using approved paper-based Alternative Learning Packet Courses. This was only allowed for instruction in correctional settings.
The NC Community Colleges System Office is continuing to host a section 225 advisory committee to provide guidance on program models.
|Northern Mariana Islands
||We were not able to serve any in the Department of Corrections (DOC). In addition to ongoing pandemic protocols, there are internal issues with staffing the institution and being short in manpower.
Our office, though, continues to work closely with the Drug Court System with them referring clients to our office to comply as a condition in lieu of being incarcerated. We send them regular progress reports.
We also remain steadfast in maintaining our services to the substance abuse rehabilitation center. It is a relatively new program, but because of our success with providing services to the drug court system, we were identified as a program that can assist clients in re-entering the community as productive citizens.
||In PY 2021 in Ohio, there were twenty-one AEFLA grantees that provided corrections education (CE) in 40 separate community based correctional facilities (CBCFs) and county jails. As per the Chief at the Bureau of Community Sanctions for the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections (ODRC), recidivism is only measured in the state prisons and not in the CBCFs or county jails. However, the recidivism report for the state of Ohio which was published in May of 2021 shows the 3-year recidivism rate in Ohio for those who were returned to prison because of the commission of a new crime was 20.8%. This number is down from 21.7% and represents the lowest recidivism rate for new crimes in more than 15 years.
2,025 participants were enrolled in CE during PY 2021. This represents a slight increase from PY 2020. Of the 2,025 participants, 1,090 or 53.83% achieved an outcome or median earnings value. 764 participants made an Educational Functioning Level (EFL) gain, 292 participants received a high school equivalence diploma, and 34 participants earned a recognized industry credential.
During PY 2021 CE participants received more than 98,000 hours of instruction in innovative programming including Integrated Education and Training (IET) programs, bridge programs, and traditional high school equivalency classes. These programs helped to better prepare participants for careers in in-demand jobs.
||Since 2019, Oklahoma’s recidivism rate has been under twenty percent. As recently as 2021, the recidivism rate according to the Oklahoma Department of Corrections is sixteen percent. This makes the rate of recidivism one of the lowest in the nation. According to a recent article in the Oklahoman (2022), this may be tied to harsher sentences, and certain individuals remaining in prison, as Oklahoma has had one of the highest incarceration rates per capita for several decades. Oklahoma is just now seeing inmates being released in higher numbers, as of 2019. Oklahoma’s department of corrections serves close to three thousand students a year. While incarcerated, these students are given opportunities to participate in educational courses to assist them in attaining a high school equivalency, college credit, and career readiness skills. AEFL state staff believes that the more opportunities given to a student, the less likely they are to return to a corrections center.
||Of the 2,635 learners served by the Department of Corrections Title II-funded programs in PY2021-22, 470 earned a GED certificate. Of those, 111 were released from incarceration and 3, or 2.7%, have been re-incarcerated. This information was provided by the Oregon State Department of Corrections using their standard recidivism calculation formula.
While this is a slight increase from the previous years, the effects of the pandemic continued, with outbreaks within facilities, resulting in “lock downs” which resulted in the loss of access to many Title II services for incarcerated participants.
||The DE-AEP implement an adult education effort for justice involved persons, island-wide in Puerto Rico. During the 2021-2022 program year a total of eight (8) prisons had adult education services for inmates, including the following: Ponce Correctional facility, Guayama, Correctional facility – 1000, Guayama, Correctional facility – 500, Guayama, Correctional facility – 296, Rio Grande, Zarzal, Correctional facility, Mayagüez Correctional facility, Aguadilla, Correctional facility and Arecibo, Sabana Hoyos, Correctional facility-216. During the PY 2021-2022 a total of 683 participants were served while in the correctional education program.
The AEP has a cooperative operations agreement with the Puerto Rico Correction Department to provide services to these adult participants. The services are provided to inmates who are expected to leave the correction institution in less than five (5) years. All the academic and career services provided to the regular participants are offered to this population, including ABE, ESL, and High School Equivalency testing and career services. After the pandemic COVID-19 this area of services has suffered a severe impact and challenges because visits to prisons were suspended and the distance education alternative is not a viable strategy because inmates are not allowed to use internet connection. During the PY2021 there was cero recidivism rate in justice involved offenders served.
||The table below outlines the SC Department of Corrections Recidivism Rates of Inmates released during FY2015 – FY2019 and the explanation of how the recidivism rate is measured.
Year of Release
Total Number of Releases
Percentage of Releasees who Returned to SCDC:
Recidivism Rate by Year of Release
Within One Year or Less
Within Two Years or Less
Within Three Years or Less
Within Four Years or Less
Within Five Years or Less
Comparison of 3-Year Recidivism Rates by Inmate Attributes
GED Earned in SCDC Education Program
Note: Adapted from South Carolina Department of Corrections Recidivism Rates of Inmates Released during FY2015 - FY2019, by L. Adams, 2022 (https://www.doc.sc.gov/research/SpecialReports/Recidivism_Rates_of_Inmates_Released_during_FY2015-FY2019.pdf). Copyright 2007-2022 by SCDC.
Note: Adapted from South Carolina Department of Corrections Data Summary, by L. Adams, 2022 (https://www.doc.sc.gov/research/SpecialReports/FY2017_Recidivism_Data_Summary.pdf). Copyright 2007-2022 by SCDC.
- Release/Releasee - An inmate becomes a releasee when conditionally released via placement on probation, parole, community supervision, supervised re-entry, or intensive supervision; or unconditionally released at sentence completion (maxout). Inmates who died, left SCDC for appeals, or whose sentences were remanded are not included in recidivism analysis.
- Release Cohort - Releasees can be grouped according to a common factor. In recidivism analysis, release cohorts are distinguished by the fiscal year during which their release occurred (a fiscal year being July 1st through June 30th)
- Recidivist - An SCDC releasee is considered a "recidivist" when he/she re-enters SCDC custody within 3 years of release (but excludes those inmates convicted and returned to prison for a past offense only, an offense that occurred prior to their release.)
- Recidivism Rate - This rate is the percentage of releasees who recidivated. A one-year rate is based on the number who returned within 12 months of release; a two-year rate is based on the number returned with 24 months; and a 3-year rate is based on the number returned within 36 months. Recidivism rate comparison among release subgroups is applied to the 3-year rate, which is a standard recommended by the Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals decades ago and subsequently applied by various correctional jurisdictions.
||The South Dakota Department of Corrections has the capacity to track recidivism data by program/fiscal year. DOC can isolate its release-data by those inmates who completed their High School Equivalency at any point while incarcerated, and who then were released during a particular program year. Therefore, the relative rate of recidivism for criminal offenders who earned a GED® credential while incarcerated in South Dakota, and who then were released at any point during PY2021-22, was 32.4%.
This figure (i.e., 32.4%) includes HSE-completers who served an expired or suspended sentence, as well as those granted parole in PY2021. Releases include those discharges having completed their sentence and those conditionally released to parole supervision; recidivists include those returning to custody upon conviction for a new felony [and resentenced to prison], as well as those with their parole revoked for a technical violation.
||In PY20, the pandemic drastically reduced access to serving corrections education students to 846 in correctional institutions during the year. However, in PY21, TDLWD-funded AE programs were able to increase the number of students served to 1,637. Programs were able to expand their reach to jail facilities by working to increase awareness of AE services to jail administrators and jail program coordinators. TDLWD also encouraged local providers to continue developing relationships with the local carceral facilities where there are no adult education services currently.
In PY21, TDLWD staff had several opportunities to present to the Tennessee Corrections Institute (TCI), the governing body for local county jails. These presentations served as a catalyst to share the multiple programs offered by adult education programs. We also leveraged our partnership with TCI to help with the implementation and expansion of the tablet-based program (via the vendor “APDS”), which has helped to increase our ability to provide services in facilities that limited our in-person access. In PY20, TDLWD implemented the APDS pilot program for corrections education which allowed incarcerated students to use Android tablets to access education and training resources. The pilot included 24 tablets at each of 3 county jails in Tennessee. In PY21 in partnership with TCI and TN Office of Criminal Justice Programs, we were able to expand the use of the tablets to 16 additional counties. The counties were able to purchase 363 total tablets. Of these 16 counties, 10 counties were able to fully implement programs during PY21. The other six counties were limited in their capacity to fully implement services due to Wi-Fi hardware issues in their facilities.
Unfortunately, TDLWD has not yet developed methods or metrics for determining the relative rate of recidivism for criminal offenders served in the AE program. The state’s overall recidivism rate was 47.1%. TDLWD’s partnership with TCI is helping to develop a method to track the recidivism rates in jails. Through this partnership and the procurement of new data software from TCI, we will have new tracking capabilities that will allow us to determine recidivism numbers for AE corrections students. Recidivism rates in Tennessee are based on a 3-year period, so it will take a few years until we have the full picture of recidivism of AE students. In the coming years, we also plan to begin programming for ESL corrections students and to expand workforce development initiatives for corrections students, including postsecondary dual enrollment and IET opportunities.
||Currently, TWC AEL has limited means to calculate a relative rate of recidivism for offenders served by 225 funds. This is primarily due to the lack of AEFLA funded services occurring in Texas within the state prison system. However, TWC AEL works closely with Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) and the state’s prisons education service provider, Windham School District (WSD).
Texas’ corrections education system is largely supported by Windham School District(WSD) who was not an AEFLA funded AEL provider in PY 21-22. The WSD was established by the Texas Board of Corrections in October 1969, as authorized by the Texas Legislature, to provide educational opportunities to students incarcerated in state prisons and is funded in large part through the state’s general revenue. TWC works closely with TDCJ and WSD on many initiatives that support incarcerated residents. TWC also offers the use of PD services to WSD staff as a partner organization and we see great value in developing pathways for WSD students who are part of re-entry initiatives. As such, In September 2021, TWC approved a state leadership–funded initiative to expand IET models in correctional facilities through a contract with WSD. The initiative will assist in the development of IET models for an estimated 500 incarcerated individuals who are within two years of release, provide reentry and post-release services to those individuals, and disseminate best practices on developing such models for AEL and workforce system stakeholders. While these re-entry services may not meet the criteria under Sec. 225, the efforts being supported by AEL providers post-release will hopefully play a role in the reduction of recidivism in the state. With this alliance, TWC will be pursuing an MOU with Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) and WSD to better track AEL students who are being served under 225 and 231 for recidivism, which is measured by rearrest, readjudification or conviction, and reincarceration. Texas reported an overall 20% recidivism rate attributed to the significant resources the state provides for educational programming during incarceration and more recent enhancements to re-entry initiatives. The report can be found at https://www.tdcj.texas.gov/documents/rid/RID_Reentry_Biennial_Report_09_2020.pdf. WSD also publishes progress reports detailing the outcomes of residents (https://wsdtx.org/reports).
Some AEL providers work with correctional facilities not supported by WSD. In PY 21-22, eleven (29.7%) AEL providers worked with state/county jails to support more than 800 incarcerated individuals. While the services are valuable, county jail facilities are much more fluid than state prisons and participants are often relocated/transferred after sentencing to state-operated facilities and as such, enrolled in WSD.
TWC has the desire to create opportunities for justice involved individuals in the state by establishing training, re-entry services, and building second chance employer pipelines that will hire justice involved individuals. TWC AEL staff participated in the first-ever TWC sponsored Growth through Re-entry to Advance Careers and Employment (GRACE) conference focused on informing employers of the benefits of hiring justice involved individuals. The conference highlighted the many programs TWC has to offer second chance employers, including AEL activities like workplace literacy. In addition, throughout PY22, AEL state staff participated with WSD and five other states as part of a cohort-based TA/PD effort by federal contractor RTI, Inc. under an OCTAE initiative to expand collaborations and statewide efforts for IET in Corrections. This participation provided the state office with an expanded partnership and capacity building opportunities with WSD, postsecondary partners, TDCJ, and other states to further remove barriers to cross agency collaboration and services to the incarcerated populations in Texas.
So while the use of 225 funds is not at the level we want to see, Texas AEL is heavily involved in state conversations and initiatives that support the success of justice involved.
||Recidivism is a permeating problem in the USVI's criminal justice system. The various factors that make individuals prone to criminal conviction: economic circumstances, racial inequalities, education gaps, mental illness, addiction, are often intensified or magnified by an initial criminal conviction. In 2017 the VI Bureau of Corrections (BOC) tracked a cohort of inmates who received services and were released into society for a period of three years ending in 2020. Data for this period showed that 35% of that cohort was rearrested for new offenses producing a recidivism rate of 35% for the review period. Of that cohort, 54% percent of new arrests were violent offenses; ranging from sexual assault to murder. In 2020, the Virgin Islands reported an annual incarceration rate of 542 per 100,000 population. The creation of a sustainable re-entry program for the territory was a high priority for the agency during this reporting period, as the BOC increased its focus on transforming the delivery of correctional services. The new BOC Re-entry Program serves to support a reduction of recidivism rates, improve public safety by fostering a reduction in crime, and save taxpayer dollars associated with re- incarceration costs.
The Re-entry Program Advisory Council focuses on the reduction of recidivism and victimization through addressing barriers that offenders/formerly incarcerated individuals may face. Focus areas include, but not be limited to, employment, mental health and substance abuse treatment, transportation, childcare services, legal support, vocational training, education and housing.
During the pandemic, the BOC continued offering adult literacy training programs virtually. However, there were significant deterrence’s during this reporting period. Specifically, since increased COVID-19 cases resulted in a lock down being enforced. Consequently, during this period, the BOC program faced notable challenges with outcomes.
||Currently, the Washington State Department of Corrections (WADOC) cannot disaggregate the recidivism rate for individuals who received educational services. Recently passed state legislation should provide this capability by FY 26 or sooner. The current 3-year recidivism rate for WADOC is 30.7%.
WADOC uses many definitions of recidivism. Recidivism provided in this report uses the standard definition of recidivism used in our Results DOC measure.
Definition: Re-incarceration as a Washington state inmate within 3 years of being released as a Washington state inmate.
Inmate is defined as an individual who is serving the confinement portion of their sentence under the jurisdiction of WADOC. The majority of inmates are incarcerated in a WADOC prison, however, included in this definition are individuals on work release, community parenting alternative, graduated/rapid reentry (electronic home monitoring), and jail, juvenile, and out-of-state facilities.
Violators are not included in our measure. A violator is someone who has a violation(s) on their terms of supervision that results in a brief stay(s) at either a jail or prison facility.
Release cohort is a group of individuals that were released from confinement during the same calendar year.
Counting Rules - in addition to the above, individuals are only counted once in each release cohort. For example, if an individual is released and re-incarcerated multiple times during the same calendar year they are only counted for the first re-offense. If an individual reoffends multiple times during the same calendar year but releases in a new calendar year, they are included in that release cohort. The three-year follow-up period restarts every time they are included in a new release cohort. Individuals are excluded if their release from incarceration was caused by death or execution. Some sentences may be revoked or returned, in which case an individual may return to prison as an inmate. These are counted as recidivism even though no new crime has been committed.
||Wisconsin has adopted the Wisconsin Department of Corrections (DOC) definition of recidivism for narrative reporting purposes. The Wisconsin DOC defines recidivism as a new offense resulting in a conviction and sentence to the Wisconsin DOC after release. While Wisconsin uses the DOC definition, it is important to note that all students served are in county jails.
There are three key components to the Wisconsin recidivism rate calculation: the starting point, the follow-up period, and the recidivism event. The starting point defines the cohort or group of offenders being examined to assess if they were recidivated. For example, offenders released from prison who received services during the 2016-17 program year. Wisconsin has also established that the released individuals must have received 12 hours of service or more in the program year to enter the cohort for tracking. The follow-up period defines the timeframe in which an offender may recidivate. The Wisconsin DOC has established the length of the follow-up period as being three years. If an individual recidivates during that three-year follow-up period, the date upon which the individual committed the recidivating offense is the date that is used to define the recidivism event when reporting.
A series of correctional education providers were awarded grant funds through Wisconsin’s recent AEFLA competition. The first year of funding is fiscal year 2021-22. Wisconsin’s AEFLA correctional education providers are currently collecting and tracking recidivism data for the first cohort served under the newly awarded grants. The Wisconsin AEFLA 2021-22 recidivism cohort will report first year recidivism outcomes on September 15, 2023. This data will be reflected in next year's narrative report.
Table 7. Wisconsin AEFLA Recidivism
% Recidivate within 1 Year
% Recidivate within 2 Years
% Recidivate within 3 Years
WI AEFLA 2021-22 Cohort
WI DOC Benchmark 2021-22
Data Not Received Yet (DNRY)
||The Corrections population in Wyoming consists of State correctional facilitates as well as local jails and half-way houses. Instruction at these centers focuses primarily on preparation for high school equivalency with employability skills being integrated as much as possible. Inmates in the pre-release stage are also taught employability skills, resume writing, and interviewing skills. This population continued to be affected by COVID restrictions as forced lockdowns prevented inmate participation in adult education classes. As a result, attendance and participation for this population was severely impacted in the beginning of the year. To address this challenge, Wyoming’s AE centers who served this population began utilizing distance learning options whenever possible. This gave many participants the ability to complete their HSEC.
Recidivism rates in Wyoming are not calculated separately for Adult Education participants. Instead, the rate represents all WY DOC individuals. The relative recidivism rate for Wyoming’s DOC is measured by the number of individuals who are re-arrested and placed into State prisons across a three year period. This rate for the period ending in FY 21/22 was 27%. The Wyoming FY 2020-21 Annual Report for Corrections provides details on the recidivism rates through Performance Indicators in their annual report. WDOC uses the Association of State Correctional Administrators’ measure of recidivism as an indicator of inmate rehabilitation. This performance indicator measures inmate and offender success rates, success rates are the opposite of recidivism. The first metric is focused on:
The second performance indicator metric is the percentage of probationers and parolees who successfully complete supervision and do not return to WDOC within three (3) years of discharge. This separation is necessary when measuring success of offenders on supervision because the dynamics of managing these populations vary depending on these categories. For example a parolee’s supervision conditions and discharge are guided by the Wyoming Board of Parole whereas probationers (both felony and misdemeanor) conditions and discharge are guided by District and Circuit Courts.
- the percentage of inmates who do not return to WDOC within three (3) years of release for a new felony and
- those who left a WDOC facility (either on parole or discharged his/her sentence while incarcerated, discharges include boot camp participants who discharged to probation) who did not return for any reason (this includes new felony convictions and failures on supervision).