skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 221897 Find in a Library
Title: Factories Behind Fences: Do Prison "Real Work" Programs Work?
Series: NIJ Update
Author(s): Marilyn C. Moses; Cindy J. Smith
Date Published: 2007
Page Count: 2
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
Washington, DC 20531
National Institute of Justice/NCJRS
Rockville, MD 20849
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/NCJRS
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Document: PDF
Type: Program/Project Evaluation
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This report presents evaluation findings for the Prison Industry Enhancement Certification Program (PIECP), which allows inmates to work for a private employer outside the prison and earn the prevailing wage (at least Federal minimum wage) for the specific work or occupation.
Abstract: The evaluation found the PIECP participants found jobs after release more quickly and held them longer than did inmates who were involved in traditional correctional industries (TI) and "other-than work" (OTW) activities such as a GED program, a vocational education program, a treatment program, or no program. Approximately 55 percent of PIECP workers obtained employment within the first 3 months after their release. Only about 40 percent of their counterparts in the TI and OTW groups found employment within that time. Nearly 49 percent of PIECP participants were employed continuously for more than 1 year; whereas, 40.4 percent of the offenders in TI and 8.5 percent of those in OTW programs were continuously employed for that length of time. Almost 14 percent of PIECP participants were employed for 3 years continuously compared with 10.3 percent of the other groups. Also, PIECP participants had lower rates of rearrest, convictions, and incarceration than those in the other groups at the end of the first year after release (82 percent compared with 77 percent and 76 percent). These findings suggest that PIECP is an underused rehabilitation option and that additional efforts should be made to increase the number of jobs under this program. The report cautions, however, that the evaluation findings do not definitively show that the better outcomes were caused by PIECP participation, because the individuals in the three groups were not randomly assigned. Inmates who worked in either TI or PIECP were "self-selected" and may have had different motivations and backgrounds than the OTW inmates. 1 table, 2 readings, and 4 notes
Main Term(s): Corrections effectiveness
Index Term(s): Comparative analysis; Correctional industries; Employment-crime relationships; Ex-offender employment; Recidivism; Work release
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.