Offender education programs and services

The evaluation team is grateful for the assistance provided by the Correctional Operations and Programs Sector, the Offender Programs and Reintegration Branch, the Reintegration Programs Division and the Education Programs team for their continued support with various aspects of this project. The evaluation team would like to express sincere appreciation to Emmanuel Rutsimbo and Sylviane Laferrière for their ongoing support throughout the evaluation project. The evaluation team also wishes to extend their appreciation to Alexis Batungwanayo, for his contributions in the initial stages of the evaluation. The evaluation team would like to thank all members of the consultative group including Mark Christie (Aboriginal Initiatives), Nathalie Bernard (Finance), Nicole Crutcher (Women Offender), Stacey Simard (Classification, Recruitment and Staffing Programs, Human Resources Management), Kathleen Thibault (Health Services), Guy Viau (Internal Audit), Stéphane Vautour (Performance Management), Amanda Nolan (Research Branch) and Mel Sater (Legal Services) for their collaboration and contributions throughout the evaluation.

The evaluation team would also like to thank the employees of the Union of Solicitor General including Kristel Henderson, Ken Friesen, Byron Duguay, and Claude Duchesneau for their collaboration and contributions throughout the evaluation.

The evaluation team would like to express its appreciation to all those who participated in the Evaluation of CSC's Offender Education Programs, including Regional Managers of Education Programs, Chiefs of Education, School Directors, and teachers who participated in the collection of data at various CSC institutions and providing valuable information that contributed to the evaluation of CSC's Education Programs and Services.

The evaluation team would like to extend their appreciation to all offenders who contributed to the evaluation by participating in interviews and sharing their overall experiences in the education program with evaluation staff members.

The evaluation team would like to recognize the contribution of Hortense Marie Kambou, Junior Evaluation Analyst, and the contributions provided by students working with the Evaluation Division, including Shanna Hickey, Michelle Alquiros, Marissa Sprott, Liza Clyne and Felicia Tse.

Approximately three quarters of federally sentenced offenders present a need for educational programming. Offenders' educational needs are assessed upon admission and if an offender has an education level less than grade 12 (or equivalent), education is identified as a need and included on their individualized Correctional Plan. In most CSC regions, offenders with an education need are referred to Adult Basic Education (ABE) programming and receive a high school diploma once they have completed the required ABE courses and program levels that satisfy the provincial diploma requirements. In addition, one region currently offers the General Education Development (GED) program which allows the offender to obtain a high school equivalency.

CSC's Education Programs are intended to address offenders' educational needs; increase offenders' basic literacy, social cognition, and problem solving skills; prepare offenders for participation in correctional programs; and, provide them with the knowledge and skills necessary to gain and maintain employment and lawfully reside in the community upon their release (Correctional Service Canada Review Panel, 2007; Nafekh, Allegri, Fabisiak, Batten, Stys, Li, et al, 2009; Sharpe & Curwen, 2012). Overall, the current evaluation found that educational programming had a positive impact on public safety outcomes, particularly for high and medium risk offenders who upgraded their education by more than 10 educational achievements.

In accordance with the 2009 Treasury Board Policy on Evaluation, this evaluation examined issues pertaining to the relevance and performance (effectiveness, efficiency and economy) of CSC's offender education programs and services. The findings and recommendations of the evaluation are presented under six key components: 1) Relevancy; 2) Effectiveness: Education Program Outcomes; 3) Cost-Effectiveness; 4) Efficiency: Optimizing the Delivery of Education Programs; 5) Institutional Libraries and Computer Resources; and, 6) Reporting of Education Data in OMS.

Offender participation in educational programming was found to have a positive impact on employment outcomes for medium and high risk offenders particularly for those who completed more than 10 educational achievements. Similarly, offenders who participated in educational programming had lower rates of conditional release failure compared to non-participants and these results were better for medium and high risk offenders who completed more than 10 educational achievements. The positive impacts of education program and nationally recognized correctional program participation were found to be independent of each other as statistical analyses revealed no significant interaction between the programs.

Addressing offenders' educational needs decreases the rate of conditional release failure which reduces reincarceration costs. As such, the current evaluation found that CSC provides education programming in a cost-effective manner given that education program participants typically recidivate at lower rates than non-participants. As well, the direct costs associated with the participant group (educational program costs plus potential re-incarceration costs) are less than those associated with the non-participant group (potential re-incarceration costs). It was also noted that opportunities exist for CSC to optimize the delivery of education programs which could enhance positive post-release outcomes for more offenders, thus enhancing overall cost-effectiveness.

In order to optimize the impact of education on post-release outcomes, the evaluation recommended that CSC should target higher risk offenders, and encourage regular and ongoing positive interactions in an environment that facilitates the development of cognitive as well as non-cognitive/social skills. The evaluation also recommended that CSC increase offender literacy levels from elementary to high school levels of education, and identify and accommodate the needs of offenders with learning disabilities. A Management Action Plan (MAP) addressing these issues was developed to ensure that the appropriate offenders are prioritized for educational programming, the appropriate delivery model is applied in each region, and there is clear direction on how learning disabilities will be assessed and accommodated.

The current evaluation found that the quality and quantity of library resources could be enhanced by providing reading materials that assist in addressing the education needs of offenders. In addition, more up-to-date and relevant material could be available to offenders in order to assist them in increasing their literacy level and provide opportunities for obtaining employment and successfully reintegrating them into the community. As such, the evaluation recommended that CSC ensure that the educational information needs of offenders are met through access to relevant and up-to-date reading material which supplements CSC's education program and prepares offenders for their release to the community. The MAP addressing these issues ensures that materials required in institutional libraries to support offenders in their education program are identified, best practices for tracking library materials are assessed, and additional opportunities to educate offenders in the full use of library resources are recognized.

The current evaluation found that software applications and functions available to offenders were limited, outdated, and did not meet labor market standards. It was also noted that increasing the use of computers and technology within CSC's education programs would supplement the curriculum and provide opportunities for offenders to enhance their computer and employability skills in preparation for release. As such, the evaluation recommended that CSC should consider supplementing educational program material with electronic resources to capitalize on the benefits of computer-assisted learning which will provide opportunities for offenders to gain computer skills needed for increasing literacy levels. The MAP addressing these issues examines the software and electronic resources currently used in CSC's institutions and examines best practices in this area to support offender education programs.

Data limitations make it difficult to report education program outcomes for offenders in a timely and accurate manner, despite improvements to infrastructure and the development of a national guide for entering educational data into OMS. As such, the evaluation recommended that CSC enhance the timeliness and consistency of educational data reporting and ensure that the national guide is followed when entering educational data into OMS. In addition, it was recommended that CSC clarify the roles and responsibilities for the assessment of learning disabilities to meet the educational needs of offenders. The MAP addressing these issues ensures that procedures for data entry are followed, and that there is appropriate monitoring and reporting on the timeliness and accuracy of data entry.

The education of inmates in federal correctional facilities is the responsibility of the federal government and CSC has a role and responsibility to deliver programming that contributes to offender rehabilitation including educational programming.

There is a demonstrable need for educational programming in Canadian federal institutions.

Offender participation in educational programming had an overall positive impact on public safety outcomes, particularly for high risk offenders who upgraded their education by more than 10 educational achievements.

When comparing high risk, non-Aboriginal offenders who completed GED to those who completed ABE IV, no significant differences were found for revocations with a new offence and employment outcomes. In addition, GED credentials were reported to be less valued in the community than a high school diploma. GED is also no longer recognized by the Ministry of Education in some provinces.

Addressing offenders' educational needs contributes to successful public safety outcomes. Using a rigorous approach to analyze the direct costs associated with education program delivery and correctional outcomes, the evaluation suggests that CSC's education programs are cost-effective.

Focusing on higher risk offenders with education needs and raising their education levels through the delivery of Adult Basic Education programming optimizes positive post-release outcomes and overall cost-effectiveness.

CSC's institutional libraries support offenders in their education program, however; the quality and quantity of library resources could be enhanced by providing reading materials that assist in addressing the education needs of offenders. Access to relevant and up-to-date reading material assists offenders in increasing their literacy level and increases opportunities for obtaining employment and successfully reintegrating into the community.

The current evaluation found that software applications and functions available to offenders participating in CSC's Education Programs are limited and are viewed by educational staff as out-dated and not meeting labor market standards. Staff indicated that computers and information technology could supplement the curriculum and provide opportunities for offenders to enhance their computer and employability skills in preparation for release.

Data limitations make it difficult for the timely and accurate reporting of education program outcomes for offenders. Despite recent infrastructure improvements and the development of a national guide for entering educational data, information is still entered inconsistently or not at all in CSC's Offender Management System.

In order to optimize the impact of education on post-release outcomes, CSC should target higher risk offenders, encourage regular and ongoing positive interactions in an environment that facilitates the development of cognitive as well as non-cognitive/social skills. CSC should also aim to increase offender literacy levels from elementary to high school levels of education, and identify and accommodate the needs of offenders with learning disabilities.

CSC should ensure that the educational information needs of offenders are met through access to relevant and up-to-date reading material which supplements CSC's education program and prepares offenders for their release to the community. In addition, institutional libraries should consider ways to control the flow of books in and out of the library (e.g., electronic catalogue and circulation system) to facilitate the tracking and management of CSC's libraries resources, and to increase opportunities to educate offenders in the full use of library resources.

CSC should consider supplementing educational program material with electronic resources to capitalize on the benefits of computer-assisted learning which will provide opportunities for offenders to gain computer skills needed for increasing literacy levels.

CSC should enhance the timeliness of educational data reporting and ensure that the National OMS procedures are followed when entering educational data into OMS. In addition, CSC should clarify the roles and responsibilities for the assessment of learning disabilities to meet the educational needs of these offenders.

The Management Action Plan (MAP) will ensure that the appropriate offenders are prioritized for educational programming, the appropriate delivery model is applied in each region, and there is clear direction on how learning disabilities will be assessed and accommodated.

The MAP will ensure that materials required in institutional libraries to support offenders in their education program are identified, best practices for tracking library materials are assessed, and additional opportunities to educate offenders in the full use of library resources are recognized. The MAP will also examine the software and electronic resources currently used in CSC's institutions and examine best practices in this area to support offender education programs.

The MAP will ensure that procedures for data entry are followed, and that there is appropriate monitoring and reporting on the timeliness and accuracy of data entry.

In accordance with the Five-Year Evaluation Plan, the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC)^{Footnote 3} conducted an evaluation of Offender Education Programs and Services. In agreement with the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat's (TBS) Policy on Evaluation (2009), the evaluation focused on two core objectives, namely: (1) the continued relevance of education programs, including a demonstrable need for educational programming, alignment with departmental/federal government priorities as well as federal roles and responsibilities; and (2) CSC's performance in delivering educational programs and services, including effectiveness, efficiency and economy.

The delivery of correctional education programs is aligned with CSC's priority to enhance public safety as lower education contributes to criminal behaviours. CSC's education programs have been developed to: address offenders' educational needs; increase offenders' basic literacy, social cognition, and problem solving skills; prepare offenders for participation in correctional programs; and, provide offenders with the knowledge and skills necessary to gain and maintain employment and lawfully reside in the community upon their release (Correctional Service Canada Review Panel, 2007; Nafekh, Allegri, Fabisiak, Batten, Stys, Li, et al, 2009; Sharpe & Curwen, 2012). One of CSC's corporate priorities is the safe transition to and management of eligible offenders in the community. Correctional education programs and services, including libraries and computer resources, are increasingly imperative in addressing offenders' educational needs, and thus, contribute to CSC's mandate to successfully reintegrate offenders into the community. As such, the goal of this evaluation is to determine whether CSC is meeting the educational needs of offenders to support their safe transition into the community. Ultimately, this report's results and recommendations will assist CSC's senior management with strategic policy and decision-making regarding CSC's education programs and services.

CSC contributes to public safety by assisting offenders in returning to the community as law-abiding citizens. Providing correctional interventions and programs contributes to this mission by focusing on offenders' dynamic criminogenic needs (i.e., factors contributing to criminal behaviours). Education represents an important area of need and has been highlighted in several empirical studies as a risk factor for criminal behaviour. Approximately 75% of offenders admitted to federal custody on their first sentence between April 1, 2008 and March 31, 2013,^{Footnote 4} self-reported that they did not have a high school diploma or equivalent (i.e., had a need for education programming). This proportion is very high in comparison to approximately 20% of the general population aged 15 or over who did not have a high school diploma in 2010 (Statistics Canada, 2012). Education is a dynamic criminogenic need that can be addressed through reintegration programs, and is therefore included within offenders' Correctional Plans.

CSC's education programs are intended to address offenders' educational needs and facilitate the transition of offenders into the community. Moreover, the sense of achievement and confidence obtained from successfully completing an educational program is intended to encourage offenders to make further positive changes in their lives (Sharpe & Curwen, 2012; Gendron & Cavan, 1990). Multiple studies have shown a link between education achieved while incarcerated and the increased likelihood of gaining and maintaining employment upon release (Cronin, 2011; Davis, Bozick, Steele, Saunders & Miles, 2013; Fabelo, 2002; Gillis & Andrews, 2005; Lockwood, Nally, Ho & Knutson, 2012; Matsuyama & Prell, 2010; Steurer, Smith & Tracy, 2001; Vacca, 2004).

Participation in correctional education has also been associated with reductions in recidivism (Cecil, Drapkin, MacKenzie, & Hickman, 2000 as seen in Tolbert, 2012; CSC, 2000; Gaes, 2008; Phipps, Korinek, Aos, & Lieb, 1999; Wilson, Gallagher, & MacKenzie, 2000; Davis et al., 2013). Multiple studies and meta-analyses have concluded that correctional education promotes successful reintegration. For example, the results of an examination of 97 articles published between 1969 and 1993 to determine the relationship between correctional education and recidivism rates revealed that there was a positive relationship between correctional education and lower recidivism (CSC, 2000). CSC (1998) conducted a two-year follow-up study of offenders who participated in CSC's education programs. It was found that offenders who had completed grade 8 or grade 10 had reduced rates of re-admissions, and re-offending when compared to non-participants.

According to the United Nations' report (2009) The Right to Education of Persons in Detention "all prisoners should have the right to take part in cultural activities and education aimed at the full development of the human personality (article 6, p. 9)". In Canada, education falls within the provincial/territorial jurisdiction (Constitution Act, 1867). However, according to the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC),^{Footnote 5} "the federal government is responsible for the education of Registered Indian people on reserve, personnel in the armed forces and the coast guard, and inmates in federal correctional facilities" (Council of Ministers of Education, n.d.). As such, CSC must adhere to the provincial and territorial curricula and guidelines when administering educational programs to inmates. Under section 3(b) of the Corrections and Correctional Release Act (CCRA), CSC is responsible for "assisting the rehabilitation of offenders and their reintegration into the community as law-abiding citizens through the provision of programs in the penitentiaries and in the community" (CCRA, 1992). Education is considered to be one of the seven criminogenic need domains, which when addressed contributes to CSC's mandate to enhance public safety.

In addition, the CCRA indicates that CSC should provide a range of programs designed to contribute to the successful reintegration of all offenders and specifically address the needs of women and Aboriginal offenders. Likewise, Commissioner's Directive (CD) 720- Education Programs and Services for Offenders states "the approaches used in education programs will include aboriginal, multicultural and gender competency considerations (e.g., methods and styles of learning) and will also address the specific needs of those identified as having potential learning disabilities, low cognitive functioning or physical disabilities" (CSC, 2007a, s.19).

In accordance with CD 720, education programs are delivered "to assist offenders to reintegrate into the community as law-abiding citizens by increasing education levels through the provision of provincially accredited or certified programs" (CSC, 2007a, s.1). In 2007, CD 720 was modified to increase the CSC standard of education from grade 10 to grade 12 or High School Diploma/equivalency^{Footnote 6} (CSC, 2007a). To achieve this academic requirement, Adult Basic Education (ABE) programming (grade 1 to 12 or its equivalent) is CSC's education priority and becomes a requirement of the Correctional Plan^{Footnote 7} for every offender whose grade level is below grade 12 or its equivalent (CSC, 2007a). There is no mandatory minimum grade level completion in order to participate in correctional programs but according to CD 720, "grade 8 or equivalent is the foundation for meaningful participation in other programs" (CSC, 2007a, s.13).

In addition, CD 720 states that institutional libraries are information centers that support education programs and have services and computerized resources comparable to those in community libraries, while considering the correctional environment and physical space available (CSC, 2007a). CSC recognizes the importance of computer skills in modern society and encourages the use of computer software through education programs and library services (Correctional Service Canada Review Panel, 2007).

CSC's education programs and services encompass three key activities to assist offenders in increasing their literacy levels; these include: 1) educational assessments and referral processes; 2) educational programming, and 3) library services and computer resources. The subsequent sections provide detailed descriptions of the key components of CSC's education programs and services.

Once admitted to federal custody, the educational needs of offenders are assessed during the intake process. An educational assessment is required for all offenders within 90 days of intake unless the offender is unwilling, unable (due to illiteracy, language barrier, visual impairment, medical reasons), or not required^{Footnote 8} to complete an assessment (CSC, 2007a). The educational assessment process varies across regions as different tests^{Footnote 9} are used to assess offenders' educational needs and grade level. Documented assessments (e.g., official transcripts, diploma^{Footnote 10}) and functional assessments (i.e., results of a standardized testing) are used separately or in tandem to determine the appropriate education level to place an offender. Education becomes an intervention need on individualized Correctional Plans when offenders do not possess a Grade 12 (or equivalent) level of education when entering the correctional system. If the offender's education level is determined to be below grade 12 or equivalent (using either a documented or functional assessment), the offender will be referred to an educational program.

In addition to the documented educational assessment (where educational staff request offenders' transcripts from schools in the community and/or access the information through the Ministry of Education) and the functional assessment (where educational staff conduct standardized testing to determine offenders' level of education), some offenders who are suspected of having learning disabilities undergo learning disability assessments. However, resources and processes for conducting specialized learning disability assessments differ regionally.

CSC's education programs, offer a variety of educational options (e.g., high school equivalency, high school diploma, GED) to meet the individualized educational needs of each offender. Although, educational programming options differ regionally, CSC has the responsibility of ensuring that all education programs offered meet their respective provincial requirements, so that all educational programs will meet the identified educational needs of offenders and lead to the formal recognition, certification or accreditation from an educational authority recognized by the province in which the program is being delivered (CSC, 2007a). For example, the curricula used in each region differ to meet respective provincial requirements. In regions that encompass multiple provinces, one provincial ministry of education certifies the curriculum. For example, in the Atlantic region the curriculum is developed by the contractor and certified by the New Brunswick Ministry of Education. Likewise, in the Prairie region the Alberta Ministry of Education curriculum is used. The respective provincial curricula are used in the Quebec, Ontario and Pacific regions.

Adult Basic Education (ABE) programming which is offered at each of CSC's institutions provides the opportunity for offenders to obtain a high school diploma or equivalency diploma. In addition, one region currently offers the General Education Development (GED) program which allows the offender to obtain a high school equivalency. For offenders who do not speak either official language, the English or French second language program is available. Depending on offenders' individual learning plans and level of education, pre-requisite programs are offered to offenders who wish to pursue specific employment opportunities, vocational programs or post-secondary studies^{Footnote 11} and special educational programs are available for those who have difficulties learning. The following sections will provide additional details on CSC's available educational options for offenders.

ABE programming (grade 1 to 12 or its equivalent) is available in all CSC institutions on a 12-month continuous intake basis (i.e., offenders who have education in their Correctional Plan or who require upgrading of skills as a pre-requisite to other continuing education or reintegration programs may begin and finish ABE programming at any given time during their incarceration). Although ABE is a CSC nationally mandated program, it is provincially accredited. Therefore, the content of ABE programming varies in each of CSC's regions to follow the provincial curricula and guidelines established by the respective Ministry of Education. The program has four levels, ABE I (Grades 1-5), ABE II (Grades 6-8), ABE III (Grades 9-10), and ABE IV (Grades 11-12); in the Quebec region the levels are broken down as ABE I (Grades 1-6), ABE II (Secondary I-II), ABE III (Secondary III-IV), and ABE IV (Secondary V). Offenders have met CD 720 requirements once they have completed compulsory courses or credits to obtain the high school diploma or equivalency diploma as required by the provincial Ministries of Education (CSC, 2007a).

There are four (4) core teaching areas in CSC's education curriculum which is based on provincial requirements: Literacy (English and French), Mathematics, Science, and Social Studies.^{Footnote 12} Like in the community, mature students in CSC may earn credits for prior learning, including recognition of the knowledge and skills that have been acquired, in both formal and informal ways. Generally, Prior Learning Assessment and Recognition (PLAR) credits can be granted for participation in select correctional programs and/or prior work experience, and these credits can contribute to obtaining a high school diploma. The criteria for granting credits for PLAR differ in each region depending on the provincial guidelines used.

In all regions, teachers adapt their teaching practices and provide additional assistance within the classroom to meet the specialized educational needs of the offender population. Additionally, some regions offer specialized educational programs for offenders with specific needs that cannot be met in an ABE program.

The General Educational Development (GED) program encompasses five tests in core subject areas are designed to measure general knowledge, ideas and thinking skills (Independent Learning Centre, 2007). This program, which provides offenders with a high school equivalency, is used in the Atlantic region. Similar to ABE, offenders attend class on a full-time or part-time basis to prepare for the GED exams. Teachers are available to assist offenders with the material and review as necessary.

Offenders who are unable to read, write or speak in either official language are offered English and French as a second language courses as part of CSC's education programs.

CD 720 requires that library resources be available in every federal institution to serve as information centers to support all institutional program needs and address offenders' needs for recreational, cultural, spiritual, educational and informative materials (CSC, 2007a). Library services vary depending on the individual institution; however, most include access to hard copy and electronic materials, which include but are not limited to: books, magazines, newspapers, and online material accessed through a librarian.

CD 720 indicates that knowledge about and the ability to use computers and information technology is an important component of living in modern society and will be encouraged and enhanced through education programs (CSC, 2007a). Computer access is also available in the library, and/or on the ranges at CSC's institutions. Institutional libraries and computer resources are managed at the regional level.

Please refer to Appendix A for CSC's education programs and services logic model which depicts how the previously described key activities are linked to their associated outputs, as well as immediate, intermediate, and long-term outcomes.

CSC's education programs are the responsibility of the Reintegration Programs Division (RPD) at National Headquarters (NHQ). CSC has one National Education Manager and five Regional Education Managers. Education programs in CSC institutions are managed regionally and differ regionally in terms of the service delivery model, resources and costs. Currently CSC's education programs in the Atlantic and Pacific regions are provided through a contract delivery model, the Quebec region provides education programs through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Ministre de l'Éducation, Loisirs et Sport (MELS), and in the Ontario and Prairie regions education programs are provided using a CSC indeterminate model.

According to the governance structure prepared by education programs at the regional level, Regional Administrators of Assessment and Interventions (RAAI) manage education programs on behalf of the Regional Deputy Commissioner (CSC, 2012). The RAAI manages regional operations, develops and implements standards for effective program delivery, monitors performance of education programs and directs training. In addition, the Regional Manager of Education Programs liaises between Regional and National Headquarters on matters related to education programs, ensures that education programs related data are accurately recorded in OMS, and ensures that the education curriculum in the institution is being administered in accordance with the guidelines from the respective Ministry of Education. In regions where education programs are primarily delivered by a contract agency (Pacific and Atlantic) or directly by the Ministry of Education (Quebec), the Regional Manager of Education Programs liaises between CSC and the contract provider (CSC, 2012).

At the institutional level, the Assistant Warden of Interventions (AWI) manages the Education Program on behalf of the Warden. The AWI is usually assisted by the Chief of Education who directly supervises teachers, librarians and clerical support. In the absence of a Chief of Education, the Manager of Programs assumes these roles and responsibilities. In regions where a contract service delivery model has been implemented, contract staff work in collaboration with the Manager of Programs to deliver Education Programs within the institution. Figure 1 presents the governance structure for Offender Education Programs.

Figure 1: Governance Structure for Offender Education Programs

Note:* In the absence of a Chief of Education, the Manager, Program assumes the roles and responsibilities.

Source: Correctional Service of Canada (2012). Education Programs: National Offender Management System (OMS) Procedures. Ottawa: ON.

A scoping exercise resulted in the determination of six key components:

• Component 1: Relevance
• Component 2: Effectiveness: Education Program Outcomes
• Component 3: Cost-effectiveness
• Component 4: Efficiency: Optimizing the Delivery of Education Programs
• Component 5: Institutional Libraries and Computer Resources
• Component 6: Reporting of Educational Data in OMS

The evaluation of CSC's Offender Education Programs and Services used a mixed-method research design, incorporating both qualitative and quantitative methodologies. Several lines of evidence were used to address the evaluation issues and questions including:

Literature and document review: An extensive examination of peer-reviewed literature on correctional education in Canada and in other jurisdictions was conducted.

• Documents from professional publication databases were used (PsychInfo, PubMed, Criminological Abstracts);
• CSC and other governmental documents/reports (e.g., legislation, policies, evaluations, research reports and other operational documents); and
• Environmental scan of correctional education in other jurisdictions.

Analysis of automated offender data: Various sources of automated data were used including:

• Offender Management System (OMS) data pertaining to education programs and correctional outcomes;
• Financial information for education programs expenditures retrieved from the Integrated Financial and Material Management System (IFMMS);
• Cost of maintaining offenders (COMO).

On-line survey with CSC staff/managers and contracted staff/contract owners: An electronic questionnaire was designed using SNAP surveys to collect the views and opinions of CSC staff and contract agencies involved in CSC's educational programs and services. The questionnaire was launched in January 2014. A total of 196 participants responded to the online questionnaire.

Interviews with offenders: Semi-structured interviews developed by the evaluation team were conducted with offenders who were participating or who had participated in CSC's education programs. Interview questions captured the offenders' experience within CSC education programs, and any impact that their participation may have had on other areas of their lives. Offenders also had the opportunity to identify areas where they perceived challenges, as well as identify areas of success. In total 250 interviews were conducted with offenders.

The release cohort used for the quantitative analyses of correctional outcomes comprised 4,526 federally-sentenced offenders released on day parole, full parole or statutory release from April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2013. The time period span was chosen because education information data has increase in quality in this specific time period. Data were extracted from the Offender Management System (OMS), a computerized case file database used by CSC to manage information on federal offenders.

The majority of offenders examined in this cohort were men (93.5%, n = 4,230) and Caucasian (61%; n = 2,761). Aboriginal offenders accounted for 22% (n = 979) of the sample and 17 % (n = 773) offenders presented other ethnicities. The average age at release was 37.3 years (SD = 11.9) with an average sentence length of 3.52 years and average 768.2 days incarcerated. The majority of offenders were released on statutory release (60%; n = 2706), 38% (n = 1,715) were released on day parole and 2.3% (n = 105) on full parole. Participants were released in the Atlantic (10.9%; n = 493), Quebec (22.5%, n = 1,018), Ontario (25.5%; n = 1153), Prairie (29.7%; n = 1,343), and Pacific (11.5%; n = 519) regions. In terms of security level, 33.6% (n = 1,491) of the retrospective cohort was released from minimum security institutions, 46.4% (n = 2,059) from medium security, 7.8% (n = 344) from maximum security and 12.3% (n = 547) from multi-levels institutions.

Financial data for were extracted from CSC's Integrated Financial & Material Management System (IFMMS) and analyzed by the evaluation team using Microsoft Excel to calculate the overall cost of education programs, as well as perform analyses on the cost-effectiveness of education programs.^{Footnote 13}

The purpose of structured-interviews was to capture offenders' perspectives and experience in CSC's education programs. A purposeful sample of offenders was selected and stratified according to region, gender, Aboriginal ancestry and security level. A total of 250 offenders were interviewed between January and February 2014. The evaluation team developed a questionnaire in collaboration with key stakeholders from NHQ and RHQ. The questionnaire included both open and close-ended questions. Data from the interviews were analyzed using various software programs (i.e., SNAP, SPSS, Microsoft Excel). A content analysis procedure was used by the evaluation team to analyze open-ended questions and identify emerging themes. Data obtained through close-ended questions were analyzed using descriptive analysis techniques.

CSC's institution, regional, and national managers and staff members, as well as contracted staff and contract owners involved in education programs were invited to complete an on-line questionnaire pertaining to education programs and services. Respondents were routed to specific questions depending on their position/role in education programs and services. In total, 196 individuals completed the questionnaire.

Two exposure variables were created to examine the impact of education on post-release outcomes:

1. The level of participation in education programs; and,
2. The number of achievements completed.

To determine the impact of the level of participation in education programs on post-release outcomes, offenders who reported an educational need at intake (did not possess a high school diploma or equivalent) were categorized in three groups:

1. Offenders who were never assigned to an education program;
2. Offenders who were assigned to an education program, but did not complete an education program level or GED; and,
3. Offenders who were assigned and completed an education level or GED.

The second measure of education program exposure refers to the number of achievements completed. Participants were categorized in four groups based on the number of educational achievements recorded in their file:

1. Completion of 1 to 5 educational achievements;
2. Completion of 6 to 10 educational achievements;
3. Completion of 11 to 15 educational achievements; and
4. Completion of more than 15 educational achievements.

Please note that an educational achievement could represent the completion of the following: a module, full course, and/or credits earned through PLAR. As such, it is possible to complete a number of educational achievements without having completed an education program level (e.g., ABE level or GED) depending on the type of achievement.

A dichotomous variable was created to examine community employment after release. For offenders who had more than one employment after release, the dates of the first employment were chosen for the analysis.

Two measures of revocation for conditional release violation were created: 1) any revocation; and 2) revocation for a new offence before reaching their warrant expiry date (WED). Offenders were not followed beyond WED. A follow-up period of one year was used to examine the impact of education on post-release outcomes.

The following scale was used throughout the current report to indicate the weight of emerging qualitative themes^{Footnote 14} and to facilitate the interpretation of evaluation results.

• a few/a small number of interviewees = less than 25 per-cent;
• some interviewees = 25 to 45 per-cent;
• about half = 45 to 55 per-cent;
• many interviewees = 56 to 75 per-cent;
• most interviewees = over 75 per-cent; and
• almost all interviewees = 95 per-cent or more.

Through the evaluation of CSC's Education Programs and Services, a number of data quality issues, namely in the area of data tracking and reporting, were identified with the educational data recorded in OMS, and should be taken into consideration when interpreting the results presented in the report. Also, given newly improved data quality, a recent release cohort was used for the current evaluation; limiting the follow-up time examined. Please refer to Component 6: Reporting on Educational Data in OMS which identifies the specific issues and the approach taken to mitigate these limitations. Component 6: Reporting on Educational Data in OMS identifies specific issues related to the timeliness and consistency of reporting educational outcome data and the assessment and recording of learning disabilities. The evaluation used this evidence to formulate a recommendation to enhance the overall reporting of CSC's educational data.

In conclusion, three-quarters of offenders have a need for educational programming and the current evaluation found that educational programs have a positive effect on post-release outcomes, specifically for medium and high risk offenders. These positive impacts contributed to overall improved public safety, as well as decreased financial burdens on CSC, its public safety partners and Canadians. In addition, several areas of opportunity were identified by the current evaluation to further optimize the outcomes and cost-effectiveness of CSC's offender education programs and services.

Aaltonen, M., Kivivuori, J., & Martikainen, P. (2011). Social determinants of crime in a welfare state: Do they matter? Acta Sociologica 54(2) 161-181.

Appleton, J., Christenson, S., Furlong, M. (2008). Student Engagement with School: Critical Conceptual and Methodological Issues of the Construct. Psychology in the Schools 45(5) 369-386.

Bonta, J. & Andrews, D. A. (2007). Risk-Need-Responsivity model for offender assessment and rehabilitation. Ottawa, ON: Public Safety Canada. Retrieved from http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/rsk-nd-rspnsvty/index-eng.aspx

British Columbia Ministry of Education (n.d.). General Education Development (GED). Retrieved September 2014 from http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/topic.page?id=AA7ED4837C9A4854B1E868DB829C39ED.

Colorado Department of Education (2013). Prison Libraries. Retrieved December 2013 from http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdelib/prisonlibraries/index.

Constitution Act, 1867 (UK), 30 & 31 Victoria, c 3.

Correctional Service Canada (1998). A two-year follow-up of federal offenders who participated in the adult basic education (ABE) program (No R-60). Ottawa, ON: Author.

Correctional Service Canada (2000). Forum on Corrections Research 12(2). Retrieved December 2013 from http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/research/forum/e122/e122g-eng.shtml.

Correctional Service of Canada (2005). The Impact of Community-Based Employment on Offender Reintegration. Retrieved September 2014 from www.csc-scc.gc.ca/research/forum/Vol17No1/v17n1c_e.pdf.

Correctional Service Canada. (2007a). Commissioner's Directive 720 - Education Programs and Services for Offenders. Canada.

Correctional Service Canada. (2007b). Commissioner's Directive 720 - Education Programs and Services for Offenders. Policy Bulletin 236. Internal Document.

Correctional Service of Canada (2012). Education Programs: National Offender Management System (OMS) Procedures. Ottawa: ON.

Correctional Services Canada (2013a). CS Functional Review. Internal Document.

Correctional Service Canada (2013b). 2013-14 Report on Plans and Priorities. Ottawa, ON: Author.

Correctional Service Canada Review Panel (2007). Report of the Correctional Service of Canada Review Panel: A Roadmap to Strengthening Public Safety. Ottawa, ON: Public Works and Government Services Canada.

Corrections and Conditional Release Act, S.C. 1992, c.20.

Costelloe, Anne & Langelid, Torfinn (2011). Prison education and training in Europe: A Review and commentary of existing literature, analysis and evaluation. Birmingham. United Kingdom. Directorate General for Education and Culture, European Commission.

Council of Ministers of Education Canada, Human Resources and Social Development Canada & Canadian Commission for UNESCO (2012). Adult Learning and Education. Canada progress report for UNESCO Global Report on Adult Learning and Education (GRALE) and the end of the United Nations Literacy Decade. Retrieved November 2013 from http://www.cmec.ca/9/Publications/index.html?searchCat=4&searchYr=2012.

Council of Ministers of Education (n.d.) Education in Canada: An Overview. Retrieved December 2014 from: http://www.cmec.ca/299/Education-in-Canada-An-Overview/.

Cronin, J. (2011). The Path to Successful Reentry: The Relationship between Correctional Education, Employment and Recidivism. Institute of Public Policy, (Report 15-2011), p.1-6.

Curry, A., Wolf, K., Boutilier, S. & Chan, H. (2003). Canadian Federal Prison Libraries: A National Survey. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 35(3).

Davis, L., Bozick, R., Steele, J., Saunders, J. & Miles, J. (2013). Evaluating the Effectiveness of Correctional Education: A Meta-Analysis of Programs That Provide Education to Incarcerated Adults. Retrieved October 2013 from http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR266.html.

Department of Justice Canada. (2008). Costs of crime in Canada. Retrieved December 2013 from www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/csj-sjc/crime/rr10_5/rr10_5.pdf.

Dunleavy, J. & Milton, P. (2009). What did you do in school today? Exploring the concept of Student Engagement and its implications for Teaching and Learning in Canada. Toronto: Canadian Education Association (CEA).

Employment and Social Development Canada (2014). Canadian Occupational Projection System: 10-Year Employment Growth Outlook for 33 COPS Industries. Retrieved March 2014 from http://www23.hrsdc.gc.ca/c.4nt.2nt@-eng.jsp?cid=39.

Erisman, W. & Contardo, J. (2005). Learning to reduce recidivism. A 50-state analysis of postsecondary correctional education policy. The institute for higher education policy. Retrieved December 2013 from www.ihep.org/assets/files/publications/g-l/LearningReduceRecidivism.pdf.

Fabelo, T. (2002). The Impact of Prison Education on Community Reintegration of Inmates: The Texas Case. Journal of Correctional Education, 53(3), 106-110.

Fisher, B. (2001). Education and Crime Prevention: using Mediated Learning in Correctional Settings in Canada. Presentation given at the International Conference and Training Workshops entitled "Unlocking the Human Potential to Learn (August 18-25, 2001)". Winnipeg, Manitoba. University of Manitoba. Subtract available at: http://www.umanitoba.ca/unevoc/conference/abstracts.html.

Fredricks, J. & McColskey, W. (2011). The measurement of student engagement: A comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 763-782). New York, NY: Springer.

Gaes, G. (2008). The Impact of Prison Education Programs on Post-Release Outcomes. Urban Institute, Reentry Roundtable on Education. Retrieved August 2013 from http://www.urban.org/projects/reentry-roundtable/upload/Gaes.pdf.

Gendron, D. & Cavan, J. (1990). Managing a Successful Inmate-Education Program: Why and

How? Community College Review 18 (1) p.31-38.

General Educational Development Testing Service (2014). Retrieved from http://www.gedtestingservice.com/testers/testonpaper.

Gillis, C. & Andrews, D (2005). Predicting Community Employment for Federal Offenders on Conditional Release. Research Branch of the Correctional Service of Canada, p. 1-99.

Government of Canada. (2013). Seizing Canada's moment: Prosperity and opportunity in an uncertain world. Speech from the Throne, October 16, 2013. Retrieved from http://speech.gc.ca/.

Heckman, J.J., Humphries, J.E. & Mader, N.S. (2010). NBER Working Paper Series: The GED. National Bureau of Economic Research. Cambridge Massachusetts. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w16064.

Human Resources and Social Development Canada (2008). A Look at Best Practices for Conducting Outreach for Literacy Programs. Retrieved from www.okanagan.bc.ca/Assets/Regions/Shuswap+Revelstoke+Region/Images/Best+Practices+Inventory.pdf.

Independent Learning Centre (2007). General Educational Development. GED: A Testing Service for Adult High School Equivalency. Retrieved March 2013 from http://www.ilc.org/pdfs/ged/ged_handbook_en.pdf.

Jackson, K. & Innes, C. (2000). Affective predictors of voluntary inmate program participation. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 30(3/4), p.1-20.

Kennedy, T. (2008). Keeping Libraries Alive Behind Bars: A Study of NSW Corrective Services Libraries. Eastwood, Australia: Brush Farm Corrective Services Academy, Department of Corrective Services.

Ktoridou, D., & Eteokleous-Grigoriou, N. (2011). Developing digital immigrants' computer literacy: the case of unemployed women. Campus -- Wide Information Systems, 28(3), 154-163.

Kuenne, R. (2003). Modernizing consumer theory: some modeling efforts. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, 18, p. 485-501

Loewen, R. (1997). Transition to the community: prison literacy programs and factors lead to success in the community. John Howard Society of Brandon, Inc. Manitoba. retrieved from http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk3/ftp05/mq23389.pdf.

Lehmann, V. & Locke, J. (2005). Guidelines for library services to prisoners. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) Professional Reports, No. 92 3^rd Edition.

Lockwood, S., Nally, J., Ho, T., & Knutson, K. (2012). The Effect of Correctional Education on Post release Employment and Recidivism: A 5-Year Follow-Up Study in the State of Indiana. Crime and Delinquency, 58(3), 380-396.

Matsuyama, K. & Prell, L. (2010). Education, Employment and Offender Reentry. Retrieved from: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/242672905_Education_Employment_and_Offender_Reentry.

Nafekh, M., Allegri, N., Fabisiak, A., Batten, D., Stys, Y, Li, H., et al. (2009a). Evaluation Report: Correctional Service Canada's Correctional Programs. Retrieved from: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/pa/cop-prog/cp-eval-eng.shtml.

Nally, J., Lockwood, S., Ho, T., & Knutson, K. (2012). The Post-Release Employment and Recidivism Among Different Types of Offenders With A Different Level of Education: A 5-Year Follow-Up Study in Indiana. Justice Policy Journal, 9(1), 1-29.

Phipps, P., Korinek, K., Aos, S. & Lieb, R. (1999). Research Findings on Adult Corrections' Programs: A Review. Retrieved January 2013 from www.wsipp.wa.gov/rptfiles/researchfindings.pdf.

Scafuri, J. (2012). Prison Libraries Make a Difference in Colorado. Corrections Today. American Correctional Association.

Sharpe, G. & Curwen, T. (2012). Adult education in Canada's penal system. International Review of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2(2) 185-189. ISSN 2248-9010.

Smith, T. (2003). Who values the GED? An examination of the paradox underlying the demand for the General Educational Development Credential. Teachers College Record, 105(3), p. 375-415.

Statistics Canada. (2010). Median(1) 2005 earnings for full-year, full-time earners by education, both sexes, total – age group 25 to 64, for Canada, provinces and territories – 20% sample data. Statistics Canada. Retrieved December 2013 from http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp-pd/hlt/97-563/T803-eng.cfm?Lang=E&T=803&GH=4&SC=1&SO=99&O=A.

Statistics Canada. (2012). Canada at a Glance – Education. Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/12-581-x/2012000/edu-eng.htm

Statistics Canada. (2014). Incident-based crime statistics, by detailed violations. (Table 252-0051) Retrieved from http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26.

Steurer, S., Smith, L. & Tracy, A. (2001). The Three State Recidivism Study. Correctional Education Association for the United States Department of Education Office of Correctional Education. Retrieved from http://msa.maryland.gov/megafile/msa/speccol/sc5300/sc5339/000113/002000/002212/unrestricted/20063150e.pdf.

Tolbert, M. (2012). A Reentry Education Model: Supporting Education and Career Advancement for Low-Skill Individuals in Corrections. U.S. Department of Education.

Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (2012). Policy on Evaluation. Retrieved from http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=15024.

United Nations. (2009). Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Including the Right to Development: The right to education of persons in detention. Human Rights Control, p. 1-26.

Vacca, J. (2004). Educated Prisoners Are Less Likely to Return to Prison. The Journal of Correctional Education 55(4).

Williams, V., Ponting, L., Ford, K. & Rudge, P. (2010). Skills for support: personal assistants and people with learning disabilities. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(1), 59–67.

Wilson, David B., Gallagher, Catherine A., & MacKenzie, Doris L. (2000). A meta-analysis of corrections-based education, vocation, and work programs for adult offenders. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. Retrieved from jrc.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE DE SHERBROOKE on November 2012.

Education falls under the jurisdiction of each province (Constitution Act, 1867); however, "the federal government is responsible for the education of ... inmates in federal correctional facilities" (Council of Ministers of Education, Canada, unknown).^{Footnote 1} As such, CSC's Education Programs are offered in all federal institutions to increase the literacy levels of offenders and support the safe transition of eligible offenders into the community.

Educational programming addresses the federal government's priority concerning education, literacy and economy. It also supports CSC's strategic priority to enhance public safety by facilitating the safe transition of eligible offenders into the community.

Furthermore, there is a demonstrable need for educational programming in Canadian federal institutions as approximately 75% of offenders admitted to federal custody reported that they did not have a high school diploma (or equivalent).^{Footnote 2}