Abstract
Rising rates of recidivism in the United States have developed concerns pertaining to the effectiveness of prisons as correctional facilities. In this study, the focus is to assess the suitability of faith-based correctional methods in promoting inmates reentry into the society. Some discussed methods include Inner change programs, prison chaplaincy, and meditational strategies. Several studies have indicated significant declines in recidivism rates among inmates who participated in these initiates. For example, Duwe & Johnson (2013) found that inmates who engaged in Inner change programs in Minnesota were less likely to be arrested by at least 8% compared to their counterparts who underwent different programs. Johnson (2011) found this difference to be as high as 15% in Texas. Besides there being such successes, other studies have also identified a number of limitations that could undermine these success rates even further. Examples include inmate diversity (Armour, Cambria, Aguilar, & Taub, 2008) and implementation challenges (Mears, Roman, Wolff & Buck, 2006). Research gaps were then developed based on these shortcomings and the imminent need to align faith-based correctional methods to diversity and individual needs.
Spiritually-Based Programs as a Rehabilitation Method to Reduce Recidivism in the United States
Introduction
The crime rates in the United States have risen steeply during the 1970s, and all efforts for controlling crime through benevolent offender-treatment programs seemed blatantly unsuccessful. Eventually, new state policies of sentencing were ordained, and they shunned all efforts in terms of getting the delinquents to take responsibility for their own actions and tried controlling the crime by imprisoning more number of offenders for longer durations. Such policies, which continue to exist in many states of country even today, have caused the nation’s prisons to become overcrowded, United States having the highest rate of incarceration globally, corrections costs that have increased rapidly, and intense levels of racial as well as ethnic discrimination in prisons and in the entire system of justice at large.
Despite being a form of effective punishment at the beginning, imprisoning serious and dangerous criminals for longer periods of time and heavy reliance on incarceration among others, is a form of restricted and highly ineffective form of crime-control strategy that is being employed these days. Despite the existence of such measures and many other similar ones, the offender recidivism rates in the United States continue to raise dramatically. Almost three-fourth of state prison inmates are known to have been imprisoned for nonaggressive and not so serious offenses, which eventually has led to the overcrowding of the prisons, while serious and dangerous offenders are being given shorter prison terms. What is happening today in thte United States is that, the system of justice is over-incarcerate a few offenders, it is on the other hand, under-incarcerating a few others.
In contrast to the scenario that existed some thirty years ago, today there is a massive body of sophisticated study and enquiry which proves that unlike incarceration that is known to augment the offender recidivism in reality, appropriately designed and implemented recidivism reduction programs can bring in a considerable reduction in the recidivism rates in the United States. Such programs are deemed to be highly effective in bringing down recidivism rates, while also being cost-effective, when compared to incarceration.
Faith Based Correctional Programs
The partnerships between prison, religion and government are swiftly increasing. The beneficial effects of religious involvement can be numerous. Existing research generally shows, for example, that religiosity is associated with higher educational attainment, longer life span, increased levels of hope, purpose, and a strong sense of well-being, less depression, reduced hypertension, reduced likelihood of suicide, lower levels of drug and alcohol use and abuse, less immoral sexual behaviors, lower rates of divorce, and higher levels of satisfaction among married couples. Thus, the observed evidence suggests that religion not only promotes pro-social behavior but also serves as a shielding factor that buffers individuals from harmful outcomes (Grant Duwe, 2012). Simply put, cultivating and nurturing the spirituality of inmates is a proven way to help develop or re-awaken a moral and ethical foundation. Faith-based programs can not only extend hope but also lead to changes in thinking patterns, thereby helping inmates serve their time in fruitful ways as they prepare to lead consequential lives upon release (CCA, 2013).
Throughout the history of the United States, an exemplary record of community service has been established by the faith-based organizations. Their work is lasting, efficient and accomplished with an economy of scale which the government is unable to imitate (Robertson). A forerunner for this movement has been Florida where, it’s “Faith and Character Based Residential Program” (Stoddard, 2013) operates in sixteen prisons and dorms. A variety of religious and secular programming is offered by these correctional facilities to its inmates. According to one study, inmates from over 110 diverse religions have participated. The “secular programming” (Stoddard, 2013) includes classes such as financial management, parenting, computer literacy, anger-management and various other courses which are designed and created to help inmates adjust to life after prison. The “religious programming” (Stoddard, 2013) includes study groups for members of individual religions , various religious services, substance abuse programs and numerous other faith-based programs (Stoddard, 2013).
The supporters of faith-based corrections argue that the state should accommodate in-prison religious programming for various benefitting reasons which includes: it promotes a moral code that will lessen recidivism, it teaches inmates self-discipline, it increases inmate self-esteem, it can ease the state’s stressed financial capital by relying on volunteers to convey faith-based programming and because quite simply, it just works. “While over half of the prisoners that gets released from “traditional” prisons will return to prison within the next three years, recidivism rates in faith-based programs are reportedly as low as 13% (Stoddard, 2013).” The critics of faith-based prison programs are cynical of these claims. They argue that since faith-based prison programs are highly selective, faith cannot be isolated as the variable that reduces recidivism. By allowing only the best behaved inmates to participate (who are already having the lowest rates of recidivism) faith-based programs may be creating the notion that there is a strong correlation between low recidivism rates and religious programming (Stoddard, 2013).
Critics also argue that any program that will show compassion and kindness to inmates and helps them to prepare for life after prison will necessarily reduce recidivism. Secular programs are more advantageous and they hold because they can achieve similar results without breaching the healthy separation between state and religion. In addition, critics are also concerned about the “constitutionality of faith-based prison programs” (Stoddard, 2013) that favor religion over secularity or those who irrationally favor certain religions over others. The critics question if after all religious programming is one of the options or the best option for inmate rehabilitation? Is adopting this option not an unconstitutional endorsement of religion? (Stoddard, 2013)
The Need for Rehabilitation Programs
It is completely an innovative as well as interesting concept that the life of even the criminals who would have committed the most gruesome offence can be impacted positively and eventually bring about a change in them. Religious advocates and faith-based experts have long asserted this concept. A few of earliest American prisons were also based on the strong belief that crime was a subject that is both moral as well as spiritual in nature, and that prisoners required religion for reforming themselves and their lives. Eventually, rigorous religious instruction supported by training became an integral aspect of a few earliest correctional/rehabilitation facilities in the United States. Having stated so, it need not be surprising to learn that a considerable percentage of the contemporary prison vernacular and also philosophy draws out from myriad range of religious perspectives and notions, like for instance, “corrections, penitentiary, solitary confinement, reform, and restorative justice.”
People today are seeking a system of criminal justice that is highly effective and more importantly unbiased in terms of the policies and practices of sentencing that are followed, and lastly tough to the maximum extent, when there is need for ensuring public safety. However, they also want the system of be more lenient, with respect to the sentencing of offenders who are less dangerous and harmful to society or in situations where rehabilitation can be sought as a likely possibility in achieving better results when compared to the ones that is achieved through incarceration.
The modern day perceptions regarding sentencing that are held by the general public, and also about the role that judges play in fostering a sentencing reform, are evident from the results of a recent opinion poll survey that was conducted by the National Center for State Courts. “The survey of 1,502 adults conducted in the spring of 2006 by Princeton Survey Research Associates constitutes perhaps the most comprehensive single survey of public attitudes about sentencing ever conducted.” The survey disclosed extensive support that is being offered by the public in favor of rehabilitation and treatment programs for bringing down the offender recidivism rates, with specific interest to not so dangerous offenders, who are currently being victims of incarceration. 43% of the respondents of this survey favored dealing with offenders and crime through the use of prevention and rehabilitation programs rather than getting them imprisoned for longer duration of time.
Prison facilities exist to serve as correctional centers for criminal behavior in the society. Recent statistics, however, indicate that most of these services have failed to meet this mandate. Increase in recidivism rates is one of the largest indicators of the ineffectiveness of most correctional centers. For example, statistics indicate that at least 67.8% of all freed prisoners are re-arrested only within 3 years of release (Bureau of Justice Statistics). Lack of adequate rehabilitation programs in many prisons is one of the main factors contributing to this trend. Besides, there is also the chance that correctional strategies are ineffective, which highlights the need for developing new approaches. Further, the prison atmosphere has also been highlighted as a contributing factor since it tends to promote violent and aggressive behaviors among the inmates (Neff, Shorkey, & Windsor, 2006).
Several individual complexities have also been identified as potential recidivism risk factors. For example, the presence of criminals with mental disorders does contribute to the current increase in re-arrest rates of freed inmates. In fact, studies conducted in the U.S. indicate that the percentage of inmates with severe mental illnesses stands between 6% and 15%. Although there has not been identified any direct link between mental illnesses and criminal behavior, studies indicate that rehabilitating criminals with behaviors is often trying. For example, extending parole to these individuals does not act to contribute to their reformation since the chances of them violating supervision requirements are high (Johnstone, Glass, & Oliver, 2007). As a result, the need to come up with better and individualized correctional programs cannot be further illustrated. Besides, many inmates, as much as 80%, have also been diagnosed with self-regulation difficulties. This implies that such individuals cannot remain in control of their behaviors and emotions consistently. In fact, figures indicate that offenders who lack the capacity to self-regulate are at the greatest risk of recidivism since they are rearrested within the first year of release (Dafoe and Stermac, 2013). Again, these findings point to the direction of prioritizing the adoption of better criminal-behavior rehabilitation techniques that will address inmates’ needs at an individual level. Apparently, this is what has given rise to the emergence of faith-based methods, which are seen as pathways for assisting prisoners to delimit their pasts from their futures (Gardner, 2011).
What are Faith-Based Correctional Programs?
As possibly one of his first actions as the President of United States, George W. Bush signed an executive order which led to the creation of a White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives(OFBCI). The fundamental motive behind the creation of OFBCI was to create ‘‘a more open and competitive Federal grant-making process [that would] increase the delivery of effective social services to those whose needs are greatest.”
In order to enable the successful implementation of this faith-based initiative, several centers have been created in seven federal agencies that also includes “the United States Departments of Justice, Agriculture, Labor, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Education, and the Agency for International Development.” The principal task of these centers is to support faith-based initiatives, which encompass various supporting organizations offering aide in all forms for people in need, particularly those organizations that help the more susceptible youngsters, convicts, the elderly and homeless people, victims of substance abuse, as well as families of welfare-to-work.
The significance of employing faith-based rehabilitation techniques in dealing with recidivism is quickly gaining ground throughout the globe. Their impacts on inmates, benefits and costs, as well as effectiveness in controlling criminal behavior have all been widely documented in a bid to exemplify their importance in contemporary rehabilitation. Before delving deep into assessing the various constructs related to these programs, it is important to define the term “faith-based.” Direct as the term appears, no convergence on thoughts has been documented pertaining to a standard definition of the phrase. However, several studies have defined faith-based programs as those that receive financial and administrative support from established religious communities (Mears, Roman, Wolff, & Buck, 2006; Dodson, Cabage & Klenowski, 2011). Further, because “religious-based” and “faith-based” have been used interchangeably, it is also important to distinguish that the adoption of the latter in recidivism literature has been encouraged by the fact that its scope is broader and allows the inclusion of missionary-based organizations that may not have any direct link to any given religion (Cnaan, Wineburg, & Boddie, 2000). Still, regardless of such a position, O'Connor and Perreyclear, (2002) argue that in order for a rehabilitation effort to be classified as faith-based it has to manifest intent on propagating the penitence of sins. Additionally, these organizations must also have their main goal as that of facilitating the smooth reentry of freed inmates into the society. This then leads to the inclusion of secular organizations, those that offer such services as the training on family reunification and drug treatment, into the definition framework.
However, there are essentially five important aspects that are to be understood in relation to the Faith-based correctional programs. They are as follows:
As per the statistics of 2005, approximately 19 American states and the federal government had been implementing some of residential faith-based rehabilitation programs, whose primary aim was rehabilitating the inmates who take part in this program by offering them training in fields of ethical decision-making, anger management, and victim restitution, along with teaching them about substance abuse in union with the religious principles that are taught.
The InnerChange Freedom Initiative carried out in the state of Iowa was actually discontinued on the basis of the 2006 Establishments Clause. However, there are several other faith-based correctional programs that are being continued even today, including the InnerChange Freedom initiative in many other American states.
Faith-based prisons are being relentless promoted as favorable means for change, principally on the very premise that they boost the discipline levels inside the prison, thereby bringing down the recidivism rates.
Regardless of all the above, a wide majority of empirical studies that explored the degree of effectiveness of such faith-based prisons have serious practical issues involved and, this is to the degree where any positive effect of faith-based prisons that might have been identified by these studies, cannot be considered at face value.
Also, there are a few empirical studies that investigated the same subject and have concluded that faith-based correctional programs are sure to bring down the rates of recidivism.
The growing popularity of the faith-and-character-based entities is just one among the numerous example of the expansion of faith-based programs offered to the offenders in prison. “According to the Corrections Compendium (2003), all U.S. prison systems offer faith-based worship services and religious programs; 93 percent also offer prayer groups. Faith communities surrounding these institutions often play a vital role in the provision of spiritual and faith-based services to inmates.” Despite a wide range of faith-based services operated based on majorly Christian beliefs and tradition and religion, there are also a few other faiths that actively carry out in-reach and offer services to the individuals who have been incarcerated.
A few such initiatives include “the Gateless Gate Zen Center, Zen Mountain Monastery, and Assisting Incarcerated Muslims” that are known to be offering different programs to the Buddhist as well as Islamic prisoners. The National organizations like the Aleph Institute as well as the Muslim Alliance of North America also are known for their in-reach programs aimed at offering their services to the Jewish and Muslim prisoners, and in a few instances, these entities even conduct unique and distinct reentry programs for the prisoners. More often than not, these in-reach programs are conducted with the help of the local congregations, irrespective of the faith orientation of the group of prisoners that they serve. Due to this, it is possibly extremely difficult to measure the true degree of the in-reach services that are currently being offered to the prison inmates by the various faith-communities that exist today.
Potential of the Faith-based Correction Methods
Faith-based programs do possess equal potential as other conventional rehabilitation programs such as training in academics and vocational skills in reforming inmates. The Innerchange program, an approach that focuses on integrating the traditional correctional approaches with spiritual training, is one of the faith-based rehabilitation methods in use today. The approach is conducted through Prison Fellowship (PF) ministries, which have grown to become the most utilized penal ministry programs due to their moral and spiritually based interpretations of crime. PF mainly focuses on training inmates on goal-setting, with emphasize placed on self-development and social integration. Consequently, the program has made an effort to match each of its participants to a mentor who guides on the development of religious values and integration to the community. Until 2013, there were eight such programs in the U.S., with three of them dedicated to female inmates. The success of Innerchange as a correctional method is based on its relative effectiveness in reducing the cost of crime. Evidence indicates that inmates who graduate from this program are less likely to engage in criminal activities as compared to those rehabilitated using other approaches. Additionally, the method has also enhanced the employability rates of its participants by at least 10% (Duwe & Johnson, 2013)
Other than the Innerchange program, community chaplaincy is also another faith-based reformation strategy that is gaining significant appreciation across various societies (Sundt, Dammer, & Cullen, 2002). The development of this method was inspired by the realization that governments, by themselves, cannot succeed in reforming criminals within the society. For this reason, community chaplaincy can be described as a bridge between reform institutions and the society. Its role is to mentor and inculcate community values to freshly freed inmates. The strategy utilizes a methodology of extending theological-based services to former prisoners in a bid to ensure that they are not only accepted back to their societies, but also to ascertain that they conform to societal norms and values. Mentors used in these programs are mainly volunteers drawn from various religious communities within the society. The success of this method as a faith-based rehabilitation initiative is manifested in the fact that the practice is already more than three decades old, and that it is quickly gaining acceptance in various regions across the globe (Whitehead, 2011).
The use of meditation as a rehabilitation strategy is also receiving increasing attention across various correctional institutions. Apparently, the inclusion of meditation as a faith-based approach is inspired by the fact that it encompasses such religious acts such as prayer as well as reformation efforts that focus on rehabilitating drug users and training on positive self-esteem. Himelstein (2011) identifies three meditation styles that are differentiated as transcendental, vipassana and mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR). Transcendental meditation is a conditioned conscious seeking process. The approach encourages the regular reciting of a given mantra as a method of refocusing negative thoughts. Vipassana is a Buddhist inspired meditation method, which focuses on the need to observe and uphold moral actions. This method is mainly used to help inmates develop moral perspectives regarding such vices as drug abuse, violence and stealing. MBSR employs a technique of nonreactive attention to help individuals develop and enhance their self-awareness levels. The impact of this technique, especially in corrective efforts is that it facilitates relaxation, self-acceptance and self-control.
Dafoe and Stermac (2013) do also emphasize on the effectiveness of meditation as a correctional strategy. Their findings indicate that inmates who engage in mindful mediation stand at a better position of improving their self-regulation skills and ultimately their emotions and behaviors. The methodology applied in this technique focuses on training participants on the importance of developing thoughts of self-acceptance as a tool for dealing with anxieties. Conclusions from this study, however, indicate that meditation based approaches alone cannot be effective in reforming criminals. Thus, this leads to the importance of integrating them to other correctional strategies. The current study hypothesizes that the behavioral change efforts of faith-based initiatives can be better achieved if they are enhanced with meditation techniques.
Effectiveness of Faith-Based Methods
The probability that faith-based programs could be a whim in the criminal behavior correctional context has also inspired the conduction of several studies, most of which have focused on quantifying the success of this method. For example, Mears, Roman, Wolff, and Buck (2006) argue that there must be generally accepted criteria for assessing the effectiveness of these programs. Thus, as part of their recommendations, they developed three dimensions against which the success of faith-based programs can be ascertained. The first scope compares the rate of recidivism between faith-based enrolled inmates and those subjected to other reformation programs. The second dimension evaluates the extent to which faith-based programs produce better correctional results than it would have been if no action was taken. The third criterion focuses on comparing the outcome of this program against other similar ones, where success is identified if the outcomes are similar, or the faith-based outcomes are better.
The Faith-Based and Community Initiative is empowering faith-based organizations as well as the other grass-roots service providers to address the needs of their communities. Over the past seven years, “the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives and the Agency Centers oversees” (Secretary, 2008) have worked to build up both faith-based and community organizations and to expand their work in partnership with the government (Secretary, 2008).
What are the demonstrated outcomes of the faith programs and character based initiatives: is the big question now. The various faith programs and character based initiatives have shaped several positive outcomes. The initiative has definitely established positive effects on inmate institutional adjustment as well as on prison security and though a modest but positive impact on inmate recidivism. The reports state that it has improved prison safety. Improved Prison safety is suggested when the inmates in these programs have fewer disciplinary reports, a fact that this initiative did bring about. There have been fewer positive drug tests and contraband seizures in prisons served by the initiative. Also, the inmates served by the prison-wide initiative have shown somewhat lower recidivism as compared to similar inmates. (Michelle Harrison, 2009)
The initiative has also generated significant volunteer support for the programs of the department. Prison-wide programs have contributed in improving institutional safety. Both inmates and department staff report that such initiatives have resulted in a positive effect overall. Most of the prisoners also approved that such initiatives have dramatically boosted the quality of their lives, during their stay in the prison by way of helping them overcome all sorts of negative habits and also in helping them take on a more positive approach towards life. The staff also generally reported that the initiative has a positive effect on facility management including encouraging personal accountability and responsibility, facilitating inmate adjustment to prison life, and providing organization to leisure time (Michelle Harrison, 2009).
Also, it is observed that the initiative results in a safer environment as good inmate behavior is a basic requirement for participation. Reports show that inmates in such faith programs in the prison have lower rates of disciplinary reports than comparable inmates. Once they are placed in the program, the inmates can be removed from the “faith as well as the character based settings” (Michelle Harrison, 2009) even if they commit a single serious violation of prison rules (Michelle Harrison, 2009).
In addition, facilities with prison-wide programs indicate lower incidents of the discovery of identified contra-band than similar prisons that do not offer these programs. For Example, fewer incidences of weapon seizures and fewer positive inmate drug tests have been identified in prisons that run these programs than comparable prisons. These positive outcomes have occurred despite the fact that the prisons offering the initiative programs had considerably more volunteers visiting the facilities than the prisons in comparison and thereby more opportunities for the introduction of contraband (Michelle Harrison, 2009).
Besides all this, the prison-wide programs have generated increased volunteerism. The initiative has led to a substantial increase in the number of volunteer hours donated to prison programs. Inmates who are served in prison-wide programs are less likely to re-offend. Research also indicates that the inmates released from the institutions with faith-based programs have shown somewhat better post-release outcomes. (Michelle Harrison, 2009)
A study by Camp, Daggett, Kwon, and Klein-Saffran (2008), emphasizes that faith-based programs do, indeed, contribute to the reduction of serious prison misconducts. Quantification of success in this study was based on the comparative analysis of official data as it pertains to inmate misconduct in pretest and posttest groups. This assessment method can be likened to Mears, Roman, Wolff, and Buck (2006) second criterion since it particularly focused on mapping the behavioral differences that resulted from the utilization of faith-based correctional programs. Using a different approach known as the Maryland Scientific Methods Scale (SMS), Dodson, Cabage, and Klenowski, (2011) were also able to ascertain the positive correlation between faith-based rehabilitation and behavioral improvement. The SMS utilizes a scaling approach of Level 1 to Level 5 to ascertain the relative rigor of a given construct. In this particular study, various research publications were used to obtain constructs for evaluation. Results from a review of several of these studies indicated that faith-based programs contribute to the reduction of recidivism significantly. The approach used in this study can be related to Mears, Roman, Wolff, and Buck (2006) first criterion, which focuses on comparative analysis of different rehabilitation methods in order to determine the best-suited method. The table below illustrates some comparative statistics relating to traditional and faith-based rehabilitation methods in two different states.
Source: Duwe & Johnson (2013).
Shortcomings of Faith-Based Methods
Despite the apparently wide documentation on the success of faith-based rehabilitation methods, there have also been identified a number of shortcomings as it pertains to the effectiveness of this method. One main shortcoming of the technique is that its success rate varies with the religious beliefs of the offenders. A study by Armour, Cambria, Aguilar, and Taub (2008), for example, found out that non-Christian offenders were less likely to be affected by moral motivations. Similarly, Dodson, Cabage, and Klenowski, (2011) have also documented the existence of shortcoming in religion-inspired correctional strategies arguing that offenders who do not believe in supernatural powers are less likely to be impacted by faith-based rehabilitation efforts. The implication of these studies in the current research is that they point to the importance of delimitation in the employment of rehabilitation programs, as there exist diversity concerns among offenders.
According to Mears, Roman, Wolff and Buck (2006) the main disadvantage of the faith based initiatives lies in their implementation. Firstly, the existence of improperly articulated goals amongst these institutions leads to myopic implementation strategies that eventually result in failure. For example, many organizations pursuing this cause find themselves perplexed when they become cognizant of the broad scope of reducing recidivism. In order for this primary objective to be attained, these organizations are burdened with the problem of prioritizing the wide range of intended outcomes, which may include reducing substance abuse, providing housing, training on life development skills and reuniting families among other equally important goals. Further, because no standards exist on what is the best desired behavior, mentoring and meditation initiatives may suffer from outcome inconsistencies whereby some participants become better than others. Lastly, difficulties in soliciting and administering funds as desired do also pose detrimental challenges to many faith-based reentry programs
Research Gaps
The review of literature has identified the activities leading to the emergence of faith-based rehabilitation programs. In equal effort, the analysis has also highlighted some of the techniques that qualify to be classified as faith based; their strengths, as well as weaknesses have also been documented. Success rates of these methods have been illustrated and backed with statistical evidence. Nonetheless, outcomes of integrating meditation techniques with other correctional methods have not been well articulated. Furthermore, solutions to the problem of inmate diversity have also not been forthcoming. The fact that there exist religious differences and issues as mental challenges among inmates call for the appraisal of different adopted rehabilitation strategies.
Limitations of Research
Like any study, the findings of this study are a resultant of the questions asked and the data collected. The project’s survey of faith-based corrections programs sought to identify the key characteristics of these programs and to detect the manner and extent to which faith or spirituality manifested. However, it did not measure the effectiveness of these programs or attempted to isolate program impacts. Thus, Questions about the efficacy and effectiveness of faith-based programs cannot be answered until researchers obtain clear and convincing answers to the former (Janeen Buck Willison, 2011). To improve the initiative’s effectiveness in reducing recidivism, the department should monitor emerging research on other faith-based programs and other correctional initiatives and adopt best practices and evidence-based models as they become recognized to offer proven effects (Michelle Harrison, 2009).
Conclusion
Regardless of the fact whether it is generally agreed or not, faith based correctional measures are for sure to stay. Contrary to this, faith based corrections are becoming increasingly attractive because they promise to reduce congested prison populations at little or no cost to the state. Perhaps more expressively, they echo with the philosophy of accommodation that today dominates the debates on public policy. Proponents of housing argue that the government cannot adequately solve social problems such as crime without the spiritual and moral elements that only religion can provide and thus the government must welcome religion into the public open area (Stoddard, 2013). Also, the scope and funding issues raise a legitimate question of whether or not these faith-based initiatives to make government funds increasingly available to institutions have the potential to actually increase the amount of services provided (Wolfgang Bielefeld, 2013). Besides this, if government provides funding to thousands of faith based correctional measures and the establishments that are offering them, and seeks to demand from them in terms of completely giving up their religious activities, then the result is that while those institutions lose their effectiveness, there would also be a situation wherein their very existence would become questionable (Robertson).
References
Armour, M. P., Windsor, L. C., Aguilar, J., & Taub, C. (2008). A pilot study of a faith-based restorative justice intervention for Christian and non-Christian offenders. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 27(2), 159.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2014, April). Recidivism of prisoners released in 30 states in 2005: Patterns from 2005 to 2010. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rprts05p0510.pdf
Camp, S. D., Daggett, D. M., Kwon, O., & Klein-Saffran, J. (2008). The effect of faith program participation on prison misconduct: The Life Connections Program. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36(5), 389-395.
CCA. (2013). Faith for new beginnings. CCA, 1-2.
Cnaan, R. A., Wineburg, R. J., & Boddie, S. C. (2000). The newer deal: Social work and religion in partnership. New York: Columbia University Press.
Dafoe, T., & Stermac, L. (2013). Mindfulness meditation as an adjunct approach to treatment within the correctional system. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 52(3), 198-216.
Dodson, K. D., Cabage, L. N., & Klenowski, P. M. (2011). An Evidence-Based Assessment of Faith-Based Programs: Do Faith-Based Programs “Work” to Reduce Recidivism?. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 50(6), 367-383.
Duwe, G., & Johnson, B. R. (2013). Estimating the benefits of a faith-based correctional program. International Journal of Criminology and Sociology, 2, 227-239.
Gardner, J. (2011). Keeping Faith: Faith talk by and for incarcerated youth. The Urban Review, 43(1), 22-42.
Grant Duwe, M. K. (2012). Can Faith-Based Correctional Programs Work? International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 835-837.
Himelstein, S. (2011). Meditation research: The state of the art in correctional settings. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 55(4), 646-661.
Janeen Buck Willison, D. B. (2010). Faith-Based Corrections and Reentry Programs: Advancing a Conceptual Framework for Research and Evaluation. Washington D.C: Urban Institute - Justice Policy Center. Retrieved April 04, 2016, from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/234058.pdf
Janeen Buck Willison, D. B. (2011). Faith-Based Corrections and Reentry Programs:Advancing a Conceptual Framework forResearch and Evaluation. FBCRP Draft Final Report, 11-15.
Johnson, G. D. (2013). Estimating the Benefits of a Faith-Based Correctional Program. International Journal of Criminology and Sociology, 2, 227-239. Retrieved April 04, 2016, from http://www.baylorisr.org/wp-content/uploads/benefits_faith-based_correctional_program.pdf
Johnson, B. R. (2011). Can a faith-based prison reduce recidivism. More God Less Crime. Retrieved from: http://www.baylorisr.org/wp-content/uploads/Johnson_Jan2012-CT-3.pdf
Johnstone, B., Glass, B. A., & Oliver, R. E. (2007). Religion and disability: Clinical, research and training considerations for rehabilitation professionals.Disability and rehabilitation, 29(15), 1153-1163.
Kimberly D. Dodson, L. N. (2011). An Evidence-Based Assessment of Faith-BasedPrograms: Do Faith-Based Programs ‘‘Work’’to Reduce Recidivism? Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 50, 367-383. Retrieved Aoril 04, 2016, from https://www.academia.edu/4022384/An_Evidence-Based_Assessment_of_Faith-Based_Programs_Do_Faith-Based_Programs_Work_to_Reduce_Recidivism
Mears, D. P., Roman, C. G., Wolff, A., & Buck, J. (2006). Faith-based efforts to improve prisoner reentry: Assessing the logic and evidence. Journal of Criminal Justice, 34(4), 351-367.
Michelle Harrison, J. G. (2009). Faith- and Character-Based Prison Initiative Yields Institutional Benefits; Effect on Recidivism Modest . Office of Program Policy Analysis & Government Accountability(OPPAGA Report), 14-15.
Neff, J. A., Shorkey, C. T., & Windsor, L. C. (2006). Contrasting faith-based and traditional substance abuse treatment programs. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 30(1), 49-
O'Connor, T. P. (2004). What works, religion as a correctional intervention: Part I. Journal of Community Corrections, 14(1), 11−27.
Princeton Survey Research Associates International for the National Center for State Courts. (July 2006). The NCSC Sentencing Attitudes Survey: A Report on the Findings. Princeton Survey Research Associates International for the National Center for State Courts. Retrieved April 04, 2016, from http://www.ncsc.org/~/media/Microsites/Files/CSI/The%20NCSC%20Sentencing%20Attitudes%20Survey.ashx
Robertson, P. (n.d.). POLITICS FAITH-BASED INITIATIVES POSE SOME PROBLEMS. Pat Robertson, 1-2.
Ronel, N., Frid, N., & Timor, U. (2013). The Practice of Positive Criminology A Vipassana Course in Prison. International journal of offender therapy and comparative criminology, 57(2), 133-153.
Rothman, N. M. (1998). The Oxford History of the Prison: The Practice of Punishment in Western Society. New York: Oxford University Press.
Secretary, O. o. (2008). Fact Sheet: The Quiet Revolution: A Seven-Year Progress Report . The White House, 1-2.
Stoddard, B. (2013). Faith-Based Prisons: More Religion Equals Less Crime? The Martin Marty Center, 2-3.
Sundt, J. L., Dammer, H. R., & Cullen, F. T. (2002). The role of the prison chaplain in rehabilitation. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 35(3-4), 59-86.
Volokh, S. (2014, February 10). Do faith-based prisons work? The Washington Post. Retrieved April 04, 2016, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/02/10/do-faith-based-prisons-work/
Warren, R. K. (August 2007). Evidence-Based Practice to Reduce Recidivism: Implications for State Judiciaries. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice and the National Institute of Corrections. Retrieved April 04, 2016, from http://static.nicic.gov/Library/023358.pdf
Whitehouse. (2001). White House Faith-Based, & Community Initiative. . Retrieved from Whitehouse: http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/government/fbci/president-initiative.html
Whitehead, P. (2011). Faith Moves Mountains and Sometimes Reduces Recidivism: Community Chaplaincy and Criminal Justice Re-Formation in England and Wales. British Journal of Community Justice, 9(3), 27.
Wolfgang Bielefeld, W. S. (2013). Faith-Based Organizations as Service Providers and Their Relationship to Government. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 25-27.
