No single program or factor has been identified as the 'cure-all' responsible for reducing recidivism and improving exoffender employment opportunities. Martinson concludes that rehabilitative programs may fail because they (1) have no relationship to life outside the institution, (2) are incapable of overcoming the deleterious effects of imprisonment, (3) teach skills which are obsolete in the marketplace, and (4) may not counter the exoffender's proclivity for a life of crime. Further, a number of earlier studies by Adams (1974) found that correctional research is inaccurate, inconsistent, and of questionable reliability. Logan found that although education programs make the most claims of success, they fulfill the fewest methodological criteria required to support such claims. Recommendations offered by Jengeleski (1980) are helpful: (1) studies should be replicated longitudinally to determine long-term effects of program participation compared to similar groups that did not participate; (2) studies should assess possible differential treatment effects of exoffender programs; (3) studies should be conducted to assess the impact of exoffenders in youth advocacy roles; and (4) postrelease linkages between higher education programs, employment opportunities, and community resources should be established. Fifty-five references are listed.