Prisons are NOT centers of rehabilitation. They should, an do, the best they can with what resources they have.
However, there are four key factors prisons cannot address in their rehabilitation efforts. (1) Prisons cannot identify who can and who can’t be rehabilitated. (2) Prisons cannot provide holistic rehabilitation programming. (3) Prisons struggle with the dual role of public safety provider and prisoner rehabilitator. (4) Prisons cannot measure their rehabilitation in real-time.
Addressing these four factors was the catalyst behind the creation of The Kronos Project.
(1) Bell Shape Curve: Prisoners, like all populations, can be distributed on a 20/60/20 bell shape curve.
20% of prisoners will not return to prison when released. This is the Top 20%. They have changed their thinking, and/or they have enough resources to stay out of prison in the future. 20% of prisoners are the reasons prison are built. They are the sociopaths and psychopaths of society. This is the Bottom 20%.
Prisons should not waste their valuable rehabilitation resources on this Top and Bottom 40%.
That leaves 60% of prisoners who fall in the middle of the bell shape curve. This is the Middle 60% of prisoners who can possibly be influenced to not recidivate. Prisons should target this sixty percent for their rehabilitation efforts, as it has the greatest impact on recidivism.
Kronos Opinion: This ‘Bell Shape Curve’ factor is ignored by prisons because prisons have no way to identify and separate the prisoners who can be rehabilitated from those who cannot.
(2) Big Six: Prisoners who do not recidivate when released have six common characteristics. The more of these six characteristics a prisoner has when released, the less chance of their recidivating. Those characteristics are (1) turning 25 years of age, (2) being in a committed relationship, (3) becoming literate, (4) receiving substance abuse/mental health treatment, (5) having a career path, and (6) believing in a higher power.
Kronos Opinion: This ‘Big Six’ factor is ignored in prison because current prison rehabilitation programming focuses more on improving a prisoner’s individual deficits. Prisons do not have the resources, nor can they restructure their rehabilitation programming to assimilate these six characteristics into any system of holistic programming.
(3) Dual Role: A prison’s purpose should be to maintain public safety first, while trying to help reintegrate its prisoners back into the community second. Prisons have difficulty separating this dual role of public safety protector and prisoner rehabilitator. The responsibility of changing one’s life should begin with the prisoner, not the prison.
Kronos Opinion: The ‘Dual Role’ mission should not be adopted by prisons. In reality, prisons should provide rehabilitative services as best they can with the hope that released prisoners have learned to work and play well with others on the outside. The criminal justice pun with insiders is that “the Master cannot prepare the Slave for freedom.” Many prisons are starting to realize that outside faith-based and community organizations can be an integral part of the prison rehabilitation efforts. There should be more outsiders coming inside to help.
(4) Real-Time Measurement: There is no real-time measurement of rehabilitation. Rehabilitation is currently measured by inmates not recidivating over a period of years after their release, not by an inmate’s internal change post rehabilitation programming. Successful rehabilitation requires a continuous improvement model, which means rehabilitation programming needs to be measured and addressed along the way, not by an external act years from now.
Kronos Opinion: The ‘Real-Time Measurement’ factor is ignored in prisons because prisons have no way to measure internal change in real-time, or implement a continuous improvement model into their prison programming.
Interested in being a Kronos parent company or host prison?