Building Effective Partnerships for
High-Quality Postsecondary Education
in Correctional Facilities
JANUARY 2016

FACT SHEET

In 2015, the United States Department of Education announced the Second Chance Pell Pilot Program, aimed
at supporting postsecondary education programs for people in prison. The success of such programs and the
students they serve depends on the quality of partnerships between colleges and corrections agencies. To
support the implementation of new partnerships and strengthen existing ones, this fact sheet shares lessons
learned from the development and implementation of Vera’s Unlocking Potential: Pathways from Prison to
Postsecondary Education demonstration project, launched in 2012.

Pell Grants for Incarcerated Students
Starting in 1972, the federal Pell Grant provided need-based grants to low-income
undergraduate students, including students who were incarcerated. However, in
the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, eligibility for students
incarcerated in state and federal prisons was revoked. Twenty years later, the
Second Chance Pell Pilot Program aims to once again open Pell Grant eligibility
to incarcerated students, making college a possibility for thousands of students
in prisons across the country. To date, over 200 postsecondary institutions have
applied to participate. In spring 2016, the Department of Education will select
a limited number of postsecondary education institutions, in partnership with correctional facilities, to
participate in this initiative. Students in local jails and juvenile facilities continue to be eligible for Pell Grants.

WHY POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION FOR INCARCERATED PEOPLE MATTERS
>> Incarcerated people need educational opportunities. From 1972 to 2010, the number of people
incarcerated in prison increased 700 percent, from 174,379 to 1,403,091. A significant proportion of this
increase was concentrated among people with no college education1
>> Postsecondary education promotes safer communities. Incarcerated people who participate in prison
education programs are 43 percent less likely to recidivate than those who do not.2
>> Postsecondary education is cost-effective. It offers a 400 percent return on investment over three years for
taxpayers, or $5 saved for every $1 spent.3
>> Postsecondary education improves the quality of life for individuals, families, and communities. Those
who participate while in prison experience increased opportunities for employment and earnings, increased
intergenerational educational achievement, and more frequent and meaningful civic engagement.4
>> Postsecondary education in prison improves safety.5 Facilities with college programs report fewer
conduct issues and less violence, making the prison safer for staff and incarcerated people alike.

	

CENTER ON SENTENCING AND CORRECTIONS
233 Broadway, 12th Floor • New York, NY 10279 • (212) 334-1300 • www.vera.org

DEVELOPING COLLEGE-CORRECTIONS PARTNERSHIPS
To ensure growth and success, partnerships between institutions of higher
education and corrections agencies should have clear and purposeful
guidelines in place. These partnerships should aim to:
>> Develop a shared understanding of what is needed programmatically and
logistically to support a high-quality postsecondary education program.
>> Be clear, intentional, and honest about what can be done—don’t
overpromise or oversell deliverables.
>> Develop and execute a written agreement that details shared goals,
a commitment to partnering, and each institution’s roles and responsibilities
integral to the success of the program. This agreement should be reviewed
and updated annually based on actual implementation experience.

Only 35 to 42 percent
of state prison facilities
report providing college
courses to incarcerated
individuals.6

>> Develop and update policies, procedures, and processes that promote and
strengthen the efficacy of the partnership in supporting postsecondary education programs. These policies
should identify the specific needs of the correctional facility and participating college and corrections
organizations. (See “Teaching in Prison.”)
>> Implement and maintain regularly scheduled meetings between college and corrections representatives to
foster relationship- and trust-building, engage in ongoing planning, and troubleshoot emerging issues
and challenges.
>> Innovate, but learn from prior and existing efforts so as to avoid repeating unnecessary mistakes in
implementation and execution.

Teaching in Prison
Teaching in prison can come with unexpected challenges. For example, faculty will need to get security
clearance to enter the facility, which may take weeks and require corrections trainings. Once clearance is
acquired, both students and faculty members may still require escorts from corrections officers to reach their
classrooms. Because students in a classroom may not be allowed to wait unsupervised for the instructor to
arrive, even slight delays in arriving at the facility can wreak havoc on corrections schedules. This may result
in the facility cancelling the day’s class, leading to frustration for all parties involved.
College program administrators should also take into account facility transfers. People in prison do not typically
serve their full sentence in a single facility and transfers to other facilities can occur at any time during the
academic year. Transfers to facilities without college programs or that inhibit instructors from reaching their
students to complete coursework can stall or end academic progress, wasting program dollars or student
financial aid. Pending transfers are often kept confidential for security reasons, even from facility staff. Those
planning college programs should work with corrections partners to plan for the eventuality of facility transfers
well in advance. Where feasible, transfer “holds” should be utilized for enrolled students.
In addition, classroom space is often at a premium in facilities, where many educational and therapeutic
courses may be running at a given time. Scheduling class times can be challenging and should begin well
in advance of the semester start. The development of course schedules should also consider students’ work
schedules, as their limited wages are necessary to purchase food and other supplies, as well as to save
money in advance of release.

	
www.vera.org

CENTER ON SENTENCING AND CORRECTIONS

ENSURING QUALITY IN POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION PROGRAMS
To ensure that students are better able to seek admission to college programs postrelease, transfer credits, or be competitive with college graduates in the community, the
quality and content of college programming should be in all material ways equivalent to
that offered to students on campuses in the community. Thus, college faculty must view
the classroom in prison as an important space where students are challenged to think,
question, learn, and grow, just as they would in a classroom on any college campus in the
community. To achieve this, corrections and higher education partners should aim to:
>> Incorporate the students’ voices in program planning and as an important
component of continuous program improvement. This can be accomplished, for
example, through student advisory boards or councils.

In the academic year
2009 to 2010, fewer
than 71,000 prisoners
in 43 states participated
in postsecondary
education programs—
just six percent of
the total state prison
population in the
United States.7

>> Offer only credit-bearing courses that are transferable to colleges in the
communities to which incarcerated students return, and/or developmental courses
(ideally accelerated) that directly prepare students for credit-bearing work. Moving
students to credit-bearing coursework faster minimizes the risk of students giving
up out of frustration or being removed from the program because of release or
transfer prior to earning college credits. It also ensures that scarce program dollars
go to transferable, credit-bearing coursework that can be used toward a degree or other credential.

>> Establish clear articulation agreements ensuring credits can be transferred from in-prison courses to
community-based postsecondary institutions.
>> Plan courses that offer credits that build progressively (i.e., “stackable credentials”) so that students may
attain certificates and associate’s and bachelor’s degrees using placement tests and transcript reviews. For
career and technical education, consider workforce demands in the localities to which students will return in
determining course offerings.
>> Recruit instructors with equivalent credentials and experience as those on campuses in the community.
Whether adjunct or full-time, professors must have the experience and knowledge necessary to ensure
students in prison have equitable opportunities for education.
>> Develop a plan to provide academic support to students in prison, such as access to computers and Internet
research technology, access to library and other research materials, tutoring, and dedicated times or places
for study.
> P
 lan graduation and student achievement ceremonies well in advance, including a review of all relevant
academic and prison policies and procedures. Discuss expectations regarding event procedures and
requirements in detail.

SUPPORTING EDUCATION POST-RELEASE
Academic support is imperative for students to continue their college education after they are released from prison.
Stressors related to transitioning from life in confinement to life in the community complicate the other barriers
students face—such as academic preparedness, financial challenges, and a lack of social support. Corrections and
higher education partners should aim to:
> C
 ounsel students about enrolling in and transferring credits to postsecondary institutions following release
from prison, including assistance in filing college admissions applications, financial aid forms, and links to
post-release student support services on campus, such as tutoring and scholarship information.
> C
 onnect students to post-release reentry or basic needs support, such as substance abuse treatment,
health, housing, transitional jobs, etc. This should include identifying specific staff at colleges or reentry
organizations that can ensure the continuity of transition support.

	
www.vera.org

CENTER ON SENTENCING AND CORRECTIONS

>> Explain partnership goals to the relevant communitycorrections staff, addressing curfews that interfere with
evening class times, work requirements that supersede
educational goals, supervision meetings that occur during
class times, and other rules that can negatively impact
academic persistence and success. (For example, rules that
prohibit formerly incarcerated students from interacting with
each other discount proven research that peer support is vital
to adjusting to and successfully navigating the post-release
college environment.)
>> Explain partnership goals to the relevant communitybased college staff and identify champions on campus
who can mentor post-release students.
>> Develop peer networks for formerly incarcerated students
on college campuses to affirm identity and provide a means
to connect with others who have faced similar challenges in
returning home and continuing their education.

ENDNOTES
Jeremy Travis, Bruce Western, and Steve Redburn, eds., The Growth of Incarceration in the United States: Exploring Causes and Consequences (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2014), 64-68; Pew Charitable Trusts,
Prison Count 2010 (Washington, DC: Pew Charitable Trusts, 2010), 1.
1

Lois Davis, Robert Bozick, Jennifer Steele, Jessica Saunders, and Jeremy Miles, Evaluating the Effectiveness of Correctional Education: A
Meta-Analysis of Programs That Provide Education to Incarcerated Adults
(Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2013), 32.
2

3

Lois Davis et al., (2013), 36-40.

Lois Davis et al., (2013), 41-47; NCHEMS Information Center for Higher Education Policymaking and Analysis, “Wage and Earnings: Difference in Median
Earnings between a High School Diploma and a Bachelors Degree”; Anthony
Carnevale, Nicole Smith, and Jeff Strohl, Help wanted: Projections of jobs and
education requirements through 2018 (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce, 2010), 13; Le’Ann Duran, Martha
Plotkin, Phoebe Potter, and Henry Rosen, Integrated Reentry and Employment Strategies: Reducing Recidivism and Promoting Job Readiness (New
York, NY: The Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2013) 2; Wendy
Erisman and Jeanne Contardo, Learning to Reduce Recidivism: A 50-state
Analysis of Postsecondary Correctional Educational Policy (Washington, DC:
The Institute for Higher Education Policy, 2005), 8-11.
4

Laura Winterfield, Mark Coggeshall, Michelle Burke-Storer, Vanessa Correa, and Simon Tidd, The Effects of Postsecondary Correctional Education
(Washington, DC: 2009), 9. Michelle Fine, Maria Elena Torre, Kathy Boudin,
Iris Bowen, Judith Clark, Donna Hylton, Migdalia “Missy” Martinez, Rosemarie A. Roberts, Pamela Smart, Deobra Upegui, Changing Minds: the Impact
of College in a Maximum Security Prison (New York, NY: Ronald Ridgeway
Inc., 2001), 21-22; Correctional Association of New York, Education from the
Inside, Out: The Multiple Benefits of College Programs in Prison (New York,
NY: Correctional Association of New York, 2009), 8-9.
5

Laura E. Gorgol and Brian A. Sponsler, Unlocking Potential: Results of a
National Survey of Postsecondary Education in State Prisons (Washington,
DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy, 2011), 3.
6

7

For More Information
The Vera Institute of Justice is an
independent nonprofit organization
that combines research, demonstration
projects, and technical assistance to help
leaders in government and civil society
improve the systems people rely on for
justice and safety.
Through the Unlocking Potential: Pathways
from Prison to Postsecondary Education
Project, Vera is providing three competitively
selected states—Michigan, New Jersey, and
North Carolina—with incentive funding and
technical assistance to expand access to
higher education for people in prison and
those recently released.
For all college programs and their
corrections partners working with justiceinvolved communities, Vera provides an
online resource center, available through
the Expanding Access to Postsecondary
Education Project. There, policymakers
and practitioners interested in developing
or enhancing high-quality postsecondary
education programs in corrections
facilities and in the community can access
technical assistance tools, publications,
and webinars. Find resources and more at
www.vera.org/project/expanding-accesspostsecondary-education.
This project is supported by Grant No.
2014-DP-BX K006, awarded by the Bureau
of Justice Assistance. Points of view or
opinions in this document are those of the
authors and do not necessarily represent
the official position or policies of the U.S.
Department of Justice.
For more information about this and
other Vera efforts to expand access to
postsecondary education for incarcerated
and formerly incarcerated people, contact
Fred Patrick, director of Vera’s Center
on Sentencing and Corrections, at
fpatrick@vera.org.

Ibid.

	

CENTER ON SENTENCING AND CORRECTIONS
233 Broadway, 12th Floor • New York, NY 10279 • (212) 334-1300 • www.vera.org

www.vera.org