DOCSLIB.ORG

The Politics of Prison Privatization: Political Strategies of Business and Labor

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Politics of Prison Privatization: Political Strategies of Business and Labor The Politics of Prison Privatization: Political Strategies of Business and Labor By Thomas Michael Kelly A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Robert Van Houweling, Chair Professor Sarah Anzia Professor Ann Keller Professor Paul Pierson Professor Eric Schickler Summer 2019 The Politics of Prison Privatization: Political Strategies of Business and Labor Copyright 2019 by Thomas Michael Kelly Abstract The Politics of Prison Privatization: Political Strategies of Business and Labor By Thomas Michael Kelly Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science University of California, Berkeley Professor Robert Van Houweling, Chair What is the political impact of prison privatization? Does prison privatization introduce a new political interest group into the criminal justice sphere? Do private prison firms have an incentive to push for increased incarceration and do they have the power to succeed? How similar, or different, are the political goals and strategies of private prison firms from other groups interested in the operation of prisons, such as corrections officer unions? I argue that the structure of firms sets them apart from other interest groups. The benefits of growth flow to all shareholders in a firm, and all shareholders have a stake in the increasing profitability of the firm they own. This aligns the concerns of shareholders and reduces conflict. In contrast, other groups often have constituents and stakeholders with conflicting interests. Labor unions, another politically influential type of interest group, have a fraught relationship with growth. If a labor union grows in size, many of the benefits flow not to the incumbent union members, but rather to new union members. I argue that this distinction between firms and labor unions should manifest in different political strategies where firms are more likely to adopt pro- active political strategies aimed at increasing market share and profit, whereas labor unions will adopt defensive political strategies aimed at safeguarding the position of their current members. This implies that private prison firms have much more to gain from increased incarceration than do corrections officer unions. I compare the political activities of private prison firms and corrections officer unions and show that private prison firms do appear to value increased incarceration more than corrections officer unions. Drawing on a time series cross-sectional model, I show that privatization appears to drive increased incarceration in states within the United States. These results are robust to a variety of model specifications. These results are not driven by political shifts, crime rates, or cost savings. This dissertation also describes the results of a series of interviews with state legislators and lobbyists. Across states, these subject matter experts believe private prison firms are more politically proactive, more politically sophisticated, and more supportive of increased incarceration than are corrections officer unions. 1 Acknowledgments In the process of writing this dissertation, I have been greatly helped by my mentors. I am deeply grateful for the guidance and inspiration I have received throughout the process. Rob Van Houweling was an invaluable mentor throughout the writing of this dissertation. He was an advocate for the theoretical and substantive importance of this dissertation. He challenged me to respond to counter-argument after counter-argument. He suggested many additions and improvements. And he was always patient with all of my questions. I am indebted to him. Eric Schickler supported me since the beginning of graduate school. I benefited from his careful reading of my work, as well as his insistence that I not neglect either the specifics of the particular case on which I was working, or the broader implications of the claim I was making. Paul Pierson pushed me to consider the wider scope of the project, and always reminded me to think about how the manifestation of political power can change over time. His insight into how interest groups mobilize and exercise power was a great inspiration throughout the process of writing this dissertation. Sarah Anzia encouraged me to think more clearly about the similarities and differences of private and public sector unions, and how that shapes union behavior. I also would like to thank her for the often difficult, but always helpful, questions she posed to me throughout this process. Ann Keller, who served as the outside member of my dissertation committee, shared her expertise on cooperation and competition between interest groups across different policy settings. For their support, conversation and assistance, I would also like to thank Terri Bimes, Alice Ciciora, Sue Kelly, Elizabeth Kelly, and Michael Klaeren. i Table of Contents Chapter 1: The Politics of Prison Privatization ………………………………………………………………………… 1 Chapter 2: Different Goals of Unions and Firms ………………………………………………………………………. 8 Chapter 3: Political Expenditures …………………………………………………………………………………………… 15 Chapter 4: Privatization and Incarceration …………………………………………………………………………... .25 Chapter 5: Political Strategies of Private Prison Firms and Corrections Officer Unions …………… 50 Chapter 6: Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 78 References …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 87 Appendix A: Dates of Privatization ………………………………………………………………………………………….95 Appendix B: Formal Model …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 104 Appendix C: Interview Questions ………………………………………………………………………………………… 109 ii Chapter 1: The Politics of Prison Privatization Since the early 1980s, use of private prisons in the United States has gone from a historical relic to a mainstream practice. By 2016, almost 1.5 million prisoners were held in private prisons. These prisoners comprised 18% of federal prisoners and 7% of state prisoners. Private prison firms also staked out territory in immigrant detention centers. By 2017, private prison firms held a majority of immigrants detained by the U.S government (Cullen, 2018). The spread of private prisons has been controversial, and critics have attacked prison privatization on a variety of grounds. Critics have accused private prison firms of not investing in reducing recidivism (Anderson, 2010). Dolovich (2005) argued that resorting to privatization to cut operational costs precluded the broader examination of the legitimacy of incarceration. Mukherjee (2014) claimed that private prisons are more likely to issue citations to prisoners, thus increasing the average length of sentence served by denying time off for good behavior. One of the common claims, and the one of particular interest to political scientists, is that the spread of private prisons has introduced a new and powerful pro- incarceration political interest into the policy sphere. This charge has been leveled by both scholars and activists (Anderson, 2010; Ashton & Petteruti, 2011; Gottschalk, 2008; Hartney & Glesmann 2012; Mattera, Khan & Nathan, 2003; Sarabi & Bender, 2000). If this charge is true, then it may be important to understand the political activities of private prison operators when studying criminal justice policies, across the United States. The use of private prisons is not restricted to a particular region, nor to states of a certain partisan orientation. By 1998 the majority of states held at least some prisoners in for-profit private prisons. 1 Figure 1.1 Number of States Utilizing For-Profit Private Prisons Over Time 1983-2014 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1980 1990 2000 2010 Source: Author’s Calculation. Political Activity of Private Prisons In order to support these accusations, observers have tended to focus on either political expenditures by private prison firms or actions of their officers and founders. For instance, Sarabi and Bender (2000) described the participation of several Corrections Corporation of America (now CoreCivic) executives on the Criminal Justice Task Force of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), as well as ALEC’s past support of prison privatization, and suggested that private prisons used ALEC to push criminal justice policies that increase incarceration. Other critics such as Hartney and Glesmann (2012), and Ashton and Petteruti (2011) focused on the political expenditures on lobbying and campaigns that they argued are translated into political influence, that can be used to push pro-incarceration policies. Private prison firms, and others, challenge this characterization of private prison political activity. The largest private prison company in the United States, CoreCivic, unequivocally states that they do not “lobby for or against policies or legislation that 2 would determine the basis for, or duration of, an individual's incarceration or detention” (CoreCivic, 2015). Others who have rejected the claim that private prison firms are a source of pro- incarceration political pressure, emphasize that the most important pro-incarceration interest groups are corrections officer unions. Former New Mexico Governor, Gary Johnson, argues that: Never in that process did I experience any pressure to “fill beds” in the private prisons we built. And if I had, it wouldn’t have worked. It might happen elsewhere, but it absolutely did not happen in New Mexico when I was Governor. Anyone who has actually overseen a prison system and dealt with the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Building a New Identity: Race, Gangs, and Violence in California Prisons
    \\jciprod01\productn\M\MIA\66-3\MIA301.txt unknown Seq: 1 23-APR-12 13:53 Building a New Identity: Race, Gangs, and Violence in California Prisons DALE NOLL* TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .............................................................. 847 R II. BACKGROUND ....................................................... 850 R A. California Prison Populations...................................... 850 R B. Pre-Johnson Housing Process ...................................... 851 R C. Prison Gangs and Racial Makeup .................................. 852 R D. Racial Identification in Prison as a Social Construct .................. 853 R E. Race-Related Violence in California Prisons ......................... 855 R F. Johnson v. California ............................................. 856 R G. Duty to Inmates ................................................. 857 R H. CDC Reaction to Johnson – The Updated Housing Policy .............. 858 R I. The Texas Experience – Equal Status Contact Theory ................. 859 R III. DISCUSSION ......................................................... 860 R A. Use of Race as a Category Flawed ................................. 860 R B. Gang Identities Used to Promote White Supremacy .................... 862 R C. The Concept of Racially Motivated Violence is Skewed ................ 864 R D. Using Segregation to Prevent Violence is Illogical .................... 866 R E. Impact of Segregation in Prisons ................................... 870 R F. Was Johnson v. California a Liberal Victory? .......................
    [Show full text]
  • Covid Public Health & Safety Budget
    CALIFORNIA COVID PUBLIC HEALTH & SAFETY BUDGET A BUDGET TO SAVE LIVES 75 2020-2021 Fiscal Year Table Of Contents PAGE 3 Executive Summary PAGE 4 COVID-19 Threatens Public Health and Safety in California Page 4........ COVID-19 is already inside California’s carceral facilities Page 5........ Inhumane conditions put our entire state at risk Page 6........ Immediate action through five key proposals is necessary PAGE 9 Proposal 1: California must reduce its jail population Page 9........ Counties must reduce pretrial incarceration Page 10........ Counties must conduct post-conviction re-sentencing and vacations of judgment Page 11........ Counties must reduce harm inside of jails PAGE 12 Proposal 2: California must reduce its prison population PAGE 14 Proposal 3: California must reduce its immigrant detention population Page 14........ California can and must adopt a moratorium on all transfers to ICE Page 15........ California can and must halt the expansion of immigration detention facilities PAGE 16 Proposal 4: California must decriminalize and decarcerate its youth Page 16........ Youth can’t get well in a cell Page 17........ California must collect better data Page 18........ California must prioritize youth diversion Page 18........ California must divest from youth incarceration Page 20........ California must advance decriminalization Page 20........ California must decarcerate our youth Page 21........ Students need college preparation, not prison preparation Page 22........ Youth deserve cash assistance and other access to income PAGE 24 Proposal 5: Create and Fund Opportunities for Local Governments to Implement Community-Based Systems of Health, Reentry, and Alternatives to Incarceration Page 24........ Less People in the Jails Equals a Cost Savings Page 25.......
    [Show full text]
  • Gangs Beyond Borders
    Gangs Beyond Borders California and the Fight Against Transnational Organized Crime March 2014 Kamala D. Harris California Attorney General Gangs Beyond Borders California and the Fight Against Transnational Organized Crime March 2014 Kamala D. Harris California Attorney General Message from the Attorney General California is a leader for international commerce. In close proximity to Latin America and Canada, we are a state laced with large ports and a vast interstate system. California is also leading the way in economic development and job creation. And the Golden State is home to the digital and innovation economies reshaping how the world does business. But these same features that benefit California also make the state a coveted place of operation for transnational criminal organizations. As an international hub, more narcotics, weapons and humans are trafficked in and out of California than any other state. The size and strength of California’s economy make our businesses, financial institutions and communities lucrative targets for transnational criminal activity. Finally, transnational criminal organizations are relying increasingly on cybercrime as a source of funds – which means they are frequently targeting, and illicitly using, the digital tools and content developed in our state. The term “transnational organized crime” refers to a range of criminal activity perpetrated by groups whose origins often lie outside of the United States but whose operations cross international borders. Whether it is a drug cartel originating from Mexico or a cybercrime group out of Eastern Europe, the operations of transnational criminal organizations threaten the safety, health and economic wellbeing of all Americans, and particularly Californians.
    [Show full text]
  • Case 4:94-Cv-02307-CW Document 2996-2 Filed 07/14/20 Page 1 of 360
    Case 4:94-cv-02307-CW Document 2996-2 Filed 07/14/20 Page 1 of 360 1 DONALD SPECTER – 083925 RITA K. LOMIO – 254501 2 MARGOT MENDELSON – 268583 PRISON LAW OFFICE 3 1917 Fifth Street Berkeley, California 94710-1916 4 Telephone: (510) 280-2621 Facsimile: (510) 280-2704 5 MICHAEL W. BIEN – 096891 6 GAY C. GRUNFELD – 121944 THOMAS NOLAN – 169692 7 PENNY GODBOLD – 226925 MICHAEL FREEDMAN – 262850 8 ROSEN BIEN GALVAN & GRUNFELD LLP 9 101 Mission Street, Sixth Floor San Francisco, California 94105-1738 10 Telephone: (415) 433-6830 Facsimile: (415) 433-7104 11 LINDA D. KILB – 136101 12 DISABILITY RIGHTS EDUCATION & DEFENSE FUND, INC. 13 3075 Adeline Street, Suite 201 Berkeley, California 94703 14 Telephone: (510) 644-2555 Facsimile: (510) 841-8645 15 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 16 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 18 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 19 20 JOHN ARMSTRONG, et al., Case No. C94 2307 CW 21 Plaintiffs, [REDACTED] DECLARATION OF PATRICK BOOTH IN SUPPORT OF 22 v. PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO PROTECT ARMSTRONG CLASS 23 GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., MEMBERS DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC 24 Defendants. Judge: Claudia Wilken 25 26 27 28 Case No. C94 2307 CW DECLARATION OF PATRICK BOOTH IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO PROTECT ARMSTRONG [3577254.1] CLASS MEMBERS DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC Case 4:94-cv-02307-CW Document 2996-2 Filed 07/14/20 Page 2 of 360 1 I, Patrick Booth, declare: 2 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice before the courts of the State of 3 California. I am also an attorney at the Prison Law Office, counsel of record in Armstrong 4 v.
    [Show full text]
  • Naming Problems and Filing Grievances in California Prisons
    Inside the Pyramid of Disputes: Naming Problems and Filing Grievances in California Prisons Kitty Calavita, University of California, Irvine Valerie Jenness, University of California, Irvine Previous literature on disputing and legal mobilization suggests that stigmatized, self-blaming, and/or vulnerable populations often face insurmountable barriers to naming a situation as injurious and claiming redress. Contrary to what one would expect from this literature, prisoners in the United States—among the most stigmatized and vulnerable of populations—file tens of thousands of grievances annually. To explore this apparent paradox, we draw on an unprecedented data set comprised of interviews with a random sample of 120 men in three California prisons. Our data reveal that these prisoners are willing and able to name problems, and most of them have filed at least one grievance. While some expressed self-blame and most said there was retaliation for filing a grievance, the majority overcame these impediments to filing. We argue that the context of prison—a total institution in which law is a hypervisible force—enhances this form of legal mobilization by prisoners, trumping the social and psychological factors that the context otherwise produces and that in other populations tamp down claims making. The pattern of these prisoners’ claims, however, reveals that they are by no means immune to the countervailing pressures. While staff disrespect was named frequently as a problem in prison, grievances against staff were relatively rare. In conclud- ing, we note that the U.S. Supreme Court recently found California prisons violate the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment, a finding that reveals the inadequacy of the inmate appeals system despite prisoners’ repeated efforts to hold the state accountable.
    [Show full text]
  • Article Segregation by Citizenship
    VOLUME 132 MARCH 2019 NUMBER 5 © 2019 by The Harvard Law Review Association ARTICLE SEGREGATION BY CITIZENSHIP Emma Kaufman CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1380 I. THE RISE OF THE ALL-FOREIGN PRISON ................................................................... 1387 A. 1850–1980: Building a Bureaucracy ............................................................................. 1388 B. 1980–1999: Turf Battles .................................................................................................. 1394 C. 1999–2018: Segregated Prisons ...................................................................................... 1401 II. THE CONSEQUENCES OF SEGREGATION .................................................................... 1408 A. Conditions of Confinement ............................................................................................ 1409 B. Two-Track Criminal Justice ........................................................................................... 1412 C. Ethnic Segregation Reinvented ..................................................................................... 1414 III. THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF SEGREGATION .......................................................... 1418 A. Equality Norms ............................................................................................................... 1419 B. Deference Doctrines .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Pelican Bay Prison Express, July 1993 Page 3 Counseling and Encourage Prisoner-To-Prisoner Discus- from Others in Special Rooms That Contain the Spread of Sion
    You've all been convicted of crimes." I responded, "If you Mr. Bergman then inquired on "gang issues." I ex- are rich, white, and your families are profiting off this plained to him that I could not discuss these issues system, then you shouldn't be concerned. But if you're because I myself am not in SHU for any alleged gang impoverished or a person of color, then you should be very label, and I produced my documents that show I have no much concerned about all of this." I continued, This such affiliations, that I am a political prisoner whom system is intentionally perpetuating dysfunctional fami- prison officials have chosen to single out. lies by removing the father from his children, hundreds However, I did tell Mr. Bergman that a few of the of miles away, making visits pretty much impossible." highly respected Mexican convicts from various groups Basically, this destroys family ties. I told Mr. Bergman of were seeking the governor's and prison officials' coopera- my own situation as an example. I've been able to see my tion in providing a forum where they could gather for a own two children about four times in the past 14 years. I'd peace conference, but such efforts were met negatively. just barely started to see them in San Quentin when He then asked me for names. Unfortunately, I could not prison officials maliciously had me transferred to Pelican provide the names of the other prisoners. If he'd given me Bay SHU on "indeterminate" sentence. This was in ample notice, I'd have been able to confer with those retaliation for exercisingmy rights of access to the courts prisoners.
    [Show full text]
  • Pelican Bay, California Prisoner Hunger Strikes, Family Uprisings, and Learning to Listen
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE Unbroken Spirit: Pelican Bay, California Prisoner Hunger Strikes, Family Uprisings, and Learning to Listen A Dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Ethnic Studies by Angelica Camacho September 2017 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Dylan Rodríguez, Chairperson Dr. Fred Moten Dr. Andrea Smith Dr. Damien Sojoyner Copyright by Angelica Camacho 2017 The Dissertation of Angelica Camacho is approved: Committee Chairperson University of California, Riverside ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: First and foremost, I’d like to thank Creator. While I definitely put in work to get this thesis done, those little miracles along the way came through. A mis padres y familia, que han sido mis mas grandes maestros y ejemplos de fortaleza y perseverancia. Gracias por todo su apoyo. Espero que en mi, con gran alegria, encuentren el fruto de su labor. I especially want to give thanks to one of the first to believe in me and push me to pursue a Ph.D., Dr. Clyde Woods. You are greatly missed, and I have delivered my promise. While you are no longer here physically, I always carry the wisdom you shared with me. Further, Daniel Olmos, who’s been taking my abrupt phonecalls, breaking down theory, and listening to me rant since my youngin days as a freshman at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Thank you for the friendship, endless support, and patience. Others, who before I even embarked on this Ph.D. journey, I looked up to and inspired me to teach Ethnic Studies: Manuel Callahan, Cesar “Che” Rodriguez, Steven Osuna, Chela Sandoval, Teresa Gaye-Johnson, George Lipsitz, Cedric Robinson, Diane Fujino, Matef Harmachis.
    [Show full text]
  • The Prison Journal
    The Prison Journal http://tpj.sagepub.com Violence in the Supermax: A Self-Fulfilling Prophecy Kate King, Benjamin Steiner and Stephanie Ritchie Breach The Prison Journal 2008; 88; 144 DOI: 10.1177/0032885507311000 The online version of this article can be found at: http://tpj.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/88/1/144 Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com On behalf of: Pennsylvania Prison Society Additional services and information for The Prison Journal can be found at: Email Alerts: http://tpj.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://tpj.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Downloaded from http://tpj.sagepub.com at NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIV on April 8, 2008 © 2008 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. The Prison Journal Volume 88 Number 1 March 2008 144-168 © 2008 Sage Publications Violence in the Supermax 10.1177/0032885507311000 http://tpj.sagepub.com hosted at A Self-Fulfilling Prophecy http://online.sagepub.com Kate King Murray State University, Murray, Kentucky Benjamin Steiner University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio Stephanie Ritchie Breach Director, Third District Youth Court, Caldwell, Idaho The supermax prison was designed to control the most violent, assaultive individuals, gang members, and other prisoners who could not be managed in less secure settings. Pelican Bay State Prison, which houses California’s supermax, holds approximately 1,300 inmates in its security housing unit (SHU). This article examines the mission, architecture, and organization of Pelican Bay State Prison, the architecture and procedures in the SHU, the training and mind-set of correctional officers who work at Pelican Bay, the inmate culture and mentality, and the findings of the federal court in Madrid v.
    [Show full text]
  • “M”: Consequential Symbols in California Prison Gang Policy
    Stars, Dragons, and the Letter “M”: Consequential Symbols in California Prison Gang Policy Katie Lynn Joyce* California prison policy relies on symbols to identify prison gang affiliated inmates. This policy leads to many false positives and results in long-term solitary confinement of individuals who, in fact, are not affiliated with any gang at all. This Note examines the evolution of California’s symbol-driven policy, including regulations before 2012, after 2012, and the recent Ashker settlement. This Note finds that these symbols and their corresponding interpretations provide unreliable indicators of prison gang affiliation, resulting in unwarranted consequences for prisoners. By allowing prison officials to rely on nonindicative symbols in its process, California uses an unsound policy for managing prison gangs. Moving forward, the California Legislature should demand that prison officials limit their reliance on visual symbols when making prison gang identifications. California should implement a predominantly behavior-based process for identifying prison gang affiliates, with visual symbols used only to support the nexus between the behavior and a prison gang. The visual symbols that prison officials use to demonstrate this nexus should undergo public and prisoner comment before prison officials may use them. Furthermore, the Legislature should provide for annual commenting periods designed to foster critique and revision of symbolic meanings. Finally, prison officials should provide a full list of all nexus- demonstrating symbols to prisoners and the public to afford proper notice. By implementing these changes, California will take a step toward amending its faulty prison gang identification process by imposing consequences to only those prisoners who are truly prison gang members.
    [Show full text]
  • California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation: Although
    California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation: Although Building a Condemned Inmate Complex at San Quentin May Cost More Than Expected, the Costs of Other Alternatives for Housing Condemned Inmates Are Likely to Be Even Higher July 2008 Report 2007-120.2 C A L I F O R N I A STATE AUDITOR The first five copies of each California State Auditor report are free. Additional copies are $3 each, payable by check or money order. You can obtain reports by contacting the Bureau of State Audits at the following address: California State Auditor Bureau of State Audits 555 Capitol Mall, Suite 300 Sacramento, California 95814 916.445.0255 or TTY 916.445.0033 OR This report is also available on the World Wide Web http://www.bsa.ca.gov The California State Auditor is pleased to announce the availability of an on-line subscription service. For information on how to subscribe, please contact the Information Technology Unit at 916.445.0255, ext. 456, or visit our Web site at www.bsa.ca.gov. Alternate format reports available upon request. Permission is granted to reproduce reports. For questions regarding the contents of this report, please contact Margarita Fernández, Chief of Public Affairs, at 916.445.0255. Elaine M. Howle State Auditor CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR Doug Cordiner Chief Deputy Bureau of State Audits 555 Capitol Mall, Suite 300 Sacramento, CA 95814 916.445.0255 916.327.0019 fax www.bsa.ca.gov July 29, 2008 2007-120.2 The Governor of California President pro Tempore of the Senate Speaker of the Assembly State Capitol Sacramento, California 95814 Dear Governor and Legislative Leaders: As requested by the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, the Bureau of State Audits presents its audit report concerning California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations’ (Corrections) efforts to build a new condemned inmate complex (CIC) and the projected costs of building a new CIC.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Kairos Prison Ministry at California State Prison Sacramento: a Qualitative Case Study
    Evaluation of Kairos Prison Ministry at California State Prison Sacramento: A Qualitative Case Study A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty Of Drexel University by Philip Timothy Palacio in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education October 2012 © Copyright 2012 Philip Timothy Palacio. All Rights Reserved SIGNATURE PAGE This EdD Dissertation Committee from The School of Education at Drexel University certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Evaluation of Kairos Prison Ministry at California State Prison Sacramento: A Qualitative Case Study Philip Timothy Palacio Committee: ____________________________________ W. Ed Bureau ____________________________________ Holly Carpenter ____________________________________ Lois Lowe ____________________________________ Date Abstract Evaluation of Kairos Prison Ministry at California State Prison Sacramento: A Qualitative Case Study Philip Timothy Palacio, Ed.D. Drexel University, October 2012 Chairperson: W. Edward Bureau, PhD This qualitative case study examined Kairos Prison Ministry to see whether this volunteer, faith-based program has any impact on the men who take part in it at California State Prison Sacramento. The problem stated in this research is as follows: The effectiveness of the Kairos Prison Ministry’s faith-based intervention program is not clearly understood in terms of how it impacts the behavior of its program graduates at California State Prison Sacramento in Folsom, California. The research study was conducted as a qualitative case to collect and compare data among the inmates and staff of California State Prison Sacramento, as well as that of the members of the Kairos Advisory Council. The case study method provided the opportunity for triangulation of data from multiple sources of evidence, as this study utilized document collection, field observations and notes, semi-structured interviews, and two focus group interviews.
    [Show full text]