The prison system in the United States is broken yet the underlying purpose of prison has remained the same: as it is centered retribution, criminal incapacitation, deterrence, and hopefully rehabilitation. As a nation, we have focused on retribution criminal incapacitation therefore the notion of deterrence and rehabilitation has suffered . We take criminals out of society during their formative years, then release them back into society year or decades later – with the clothes on their back, no training or education and expect them to succeed in a world that has drastically change during their incarceration, so many formerly incarcerated people fail to adapt to society return t crime and prison. twenty-five years ago, that wasn’t the
…show more content…
Access which option is the most cost-effective. i.e. continue ban or reinstate grants. Today it costs $ 71,000 annually to incarcerate an individual with added annual increases of prison operational costs and inmate populations increase Using the Pell Grant as a standard, it costs approximately $4,000 to $5k year to deliver educational services to each California inmates Access to correctional education could save taxpayer and prison budgets $71,000 per successful inmate re-entry into society.
Alternative Analysis LCTC not effective due to inmate costs, re-incarceration rates and ever increasing operational costs of running California prisons. LCTC not feasible as inmates released from prison without viable educations or vocational training have little prospects for employ causing them to return to crime.LCTC is not sustainable as it contributes to high taxes, inmate recidivism, an unsafe society and a need for more police, new prisons and prison …show more content…
Sustainability Pell grant reinstatement is sustainable as it results in huge tax savings of $71,000 per inmate’s successful re-entry back into society upon their release from prison. Pell grant reinstatement is also sustainable due to decreased recidivism rates which offer additional net benefits of less operational costs and tax dollars needed to build new prisons and hire more prison
Access which option is the most cost-effective. i.e. continue ban or reinstate grants. Today it costs $ 71,000 annually to incarcerate an individual with added annual increases of prison operational costs and inmate populations increase Using the Pell Grant as a standard, it costs approximately $4,000 to $5k year to deliver educational services to each California inmates Access to correctional education could save taxpayer and prison budgets $71,000 per successful inmate re-entry into society.
Alternative Analysis LCTC not effective due to inmate costs, re-incarceration rates and ever increasing operational costs of running California prisons. LCTC not feasible as inmates released from prison without viable educations or vocational training have little prospects for employ causing them to return to crime.LCTC is not sustainable as it contributes to high taxes, inmate recidivism, an unsafe society and a need for more police, new prisons and prison …show more content…
Sustainability Pell grant reinstatement is sustainable as it results in huge tax savings of $71,000 per inmate’s successful re-entry back into society upon their release from prison. Pell grant reinstatement is also sustainable due to decreased recidivism rates which offer additional net benefits of less operational costs and tax dollars needed to build new prisons and hire more prison