What the Research Says: Programs That Actually Work in Prisons

TL;DR

Research shows that proven programs can help people in prison build real skills and stay out once released. Programs that teach thinking skills cut return-to-prison rates by 20-30%. Education in prison cuts the odds of going back by 43%. Every $1 spent on prison education saves $5 in future prison costs. But most people in prison — 75-90% — have been through serious trauma, so programs must be built with that in mind.

Why This Matters

If your loved one is in a Georgia prison, you know the system often fails them. Programs are scarce. Waiting lists are long. Many prisons offer little beyond idle time.

But research is clear: the right programs change lives. They help people come home and stay home. They reduce harm. They save tax dollars.

This research was gathered to help build Forge, a new prison-based mentoring program. GPS compiled this data to make sure Forge is rooted in what actually works — not guesswork.

Here’s what the best studies tell us, and why it matters for your family.

Key Takeaway: Proven programs exist that help people come home and stay home — but too few prisons offer them.

Thinking Skills Programs: The Strongest Evidence

The most proven prison programs teach people new ways to think through problems. These are called cognitive behavioral programs. They work by helping people spot harmful thinking patterns and replace them with better ones.

Three main programs stand out:

1. Thinking for a Change (T4C)
– Free program from the U.S. Department of Justice
– 25 lessons, each lasting 1-2 hours
– Small groups of 8-12 people
– Runs for 12-30 weeks
– A 2009 study found that 23% of people who took T4C were re-arrested. In the group that didn’t take it, 36% were re-arrested.

2. Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT)
– Helps people build stronger moral reasoning
– Uses 12 steps that people work through at their own pace
– Takes about 3-6 months to finish
– Over 200 studies show it works — for as long as 20 years after release

3. Reasoning and Rehabilitation (R&R)
– 35 sessions in small groups of 6-8 people
– A shorter 16-session version also exists
– Studies from the UK, Spain, Australia, and more show it cuts re-offending by about 14%

Across all these programs, research shows a 20-30% drop in return-to-prison rates compared to people who don’t take part.

Key Takeaway: Programs that teach thinking skills are the most proven way to reduce return-to-prison rates — by 20-30%.

Education in Prison: It Works and It Saves Money

A major study by the RAND Corporation found powerful results for prison education:

• People who got education in prison had 43% lower odds of going back to prison
• They had 13% higher odds of finding a job after release
• Every $1 spent on prison education saved $5 in future prison costs

Job training programs also showed strong results:
– 15.6% drop in the odds of going back to prison
– 28% higher odds of finding work

A 2024 study found something striking. People who earned a bachelor’s degree in prison had 42% higher odds of getting called back by employers than those with only a GED.

73% of formerly jailed people who have GEDs earned them while locked up. Prison is where many people get their first real education. But GEDs alone aren’t enough.

The Vera Institute says that growing college programs in prisons could save $365.8 million per year.

Key Takeaway: Prison education cuts return-to-prison rates by 43% and saves $5 for every $1 spent.

How the Government Gutted Prison Education

In the early 1990s, there were about 350 college programs in prisons across the country. Then the 1994 crime bill took away Pell Grant funding for people in prison.

By 2005, only about 12 college programs were left. That’s a drop from 350 to 12.

The state stripped away the very tool that research shows works best. The damage lasted for decades. Families and communities paid the price through higher return-to-prison rates and less safety.

Key Takeaway: The 1994 crime bill destroyed prison college programs — dropping them from about 350 to just 12.

Trauma: The Hidden Crisis in Prisons

Research shows that 75-90% of people in prison have been through serious trauma. That’s 3 out of every 4 people, at minimum.

Prison itself can make trauma worse. The stress, the lack of control, the threat of violence — all of it can re-open old wounds.

This means any program that wants to work must be “trauma-informed.” That means:

• Making people feel safe
• Being honest and clear
• Using peer support
• Working with people, not over them
• Giving people voice and choice
• Respecting culture and history

One proven program is called Seeking Safety. It has 25 topics and over 40 studies behind it. It works in prisons, jails, and drug courts. It does not force people to share their trauma stories. It can be led by trained peers, not just doctors.

Key Takeaway: Up to 9 out of 10 people in prison carry serious trauma — and the prison itself often makes it worse.

Mentoring: Powerful but Must Be Done Right

Peer mentoring — where people in prison help guide each other — can be a powerful tool. But research warns that bad mentoring programs can actually cause harm.

Good mentor training takes time. Programs across the country typically require 40-80 hours of training before someone can serve as a mentor. That training covers:

• Active listening (8-16 hours)
• How to motivate others (8-12 hours)
• Setting limits and ethics (4-8 hours)
• Spotting a crisis and getting help (4-8 hours)
• Cultural awareness (4-8 hours)
• Keeping things private (2-4 hours)

One standout program — the Center for Employment Opportunities — showed 52% higher job rates at 12 months for people who took part.

The MENTOR framework has been built over 35 years and has 16 key parts that cover how to design, run, and measure a mentoring program.

Key Takeaway: Mentoring works — but only when mentors get 40-80 hours of real training first.

Restorative Justice: Healing Over Punishment

Restorative justice (RJ) is a different way of dealing with harm. Instead of only punishing, it brings together the person who caused harm, the person who was harmed, and the community.

Three main types exist:
– Victim-offender talks — guided meetings that take months to prepare for
– Healing circles — groups that use a talking piece so everyone gets heard
– Family group meetings — bringing families into the process

The results are striking:
– 80-90% of crime victims who took part in RJ were satisfied. That’s much higher than in regular court.
– RJ programs reduce re-offending. They work even better for violent crimes.
– People follow through on their agreements more than with court-ordered payments.

Programs like the Insight Prison Project and the Alternatives to Violence Project run in prisons across the country.

Key Takeaway: Restorative justice satisfies 80-90% of victims and cuts re-offending — especially for violent crimes.

The Reentry Crisis: What People Face Coming Home

Coming home from prison is one of the hardest things a person can face. The numbers show why:

• 27% of formerly jailed people are jobless — far higher than the general public
• Homelessness hits about 5,700 out of every 100,000 formerly jailed people
• Poverty is the strongest predictor of going back to prison
• 68% are re-arrested within 3 years
• 46-49% are sent back to prison within 5 years

Nearly half of all people who leave prison end up back inside within five years. This is not a failure of those people. It is a failure of the system to prepare them, support them, and give them a fair chance.

Life skills programs cover things like:
– Money skills: budgets, banking, taxes, saving
– Job skills: resumes, interviews, workplace habits
– People skills: listening, conflict resolution
– Health: physical and mental health, parenting
– Reentry planning: housing, ID papers, transit, health care

Key Takeaway: Nearly half of all people released from prison go back within 5 years — the system fails to support them.

Key Principle: Target the Right People

One of the most important findings in this research may surprise you. Putting low-risk people in intense programs can actually make things worse.

The Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) principle says:

1. Risk: Focus programs on people at moderate-to-high risk of re-offending
2. Need: Address the specific issues that drive criminal behavior — like substance use, lack of job skills, or harmful thinking
3. Responsivity: Match the program style to how each person learns best

This matters because prison systems often assign people to programs at random. Or they reward good behavior with programs. The research says the opposite: programs should go to those who need them most.

Key Takeaway: Programs must target people at higher risk — giving intense programs to low-risk people can backfire.

What This Means for Forge

GPS is using all of this research to build the Forge Mentorship Development Program. Here is what the evidence says Forge should look like:

Program layers:
1. Thinking skills foundation: 20-25 sessions
2. Mentor training: 40-80 hours
3. Trauma-aware practices: woven throughout, plus 6-12 focused sessions
4. Restorative justice: 12-16 sessions
5. Life skills: 12-20 sessions, flexible

Program structure:
– Groups of 8-12 people
– Sessions of 1.5-2 hours each
– Meeting 2-3 times per week
– Total program: 6-12 months
– Ongoing: weekly check-ins, monthly support groups

Good news for funding: Several key resources are free. The Thinking for a Change curriculum and training are free through the National Institute of Corrections. SAMHSA’s trauma framework is free. The MENTOR guide is free.

Key Takeaway: Forge will combine five evidence-based layers into one 6-12 month program rooted in what research proves works.

Glossary

• Cognitive behavioral programs (CBT): Programs that teach people to notice and change harmful thinking patterns
• Recidivism: When someone returns to prison or is re-arrested after being released
• Criminogenic needs: The specific problems — like substance use or lack of job skills — that drive criminal behavior
• Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR): A proven principle that says programs should target higher-risk people, focus on their specific needs, and match their learning style
• Thinking errors: Warped thinking patterns — like blaming others or ignoring consequences — that can lead to harmful choices
• Restorative justice: A way of handling harm that brings together the person who caused it, the person hurt by it, and the community — focusing on healing, not just punishment
• Trauma-informed care: An approach that understands most people in prison carry trauma, and that programs must avoid making it worse
• Meta-analysis: A study that combines the results of many studies to find the overall pattern
• Program fidelity: Running a program exactly as it was designed, so it keeps working
• Manualized curriculum: A program with written step-by-step instructions so it’s taught the same way every time
• SAMHSA: The federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
• Secondary traumatic stress: When helpers absorb stress from the people they work with — sometimes called burnout or compassion fatigue
• Motivational interviewing: A way of talking with people that builds their own desire to change
• Prosocial: Positive, helpful behavior that benefits others and the community
• Executive functioning: Brain skills like planning, focus, memory, and self-control

Read the Source Document

Read the full research compilation (PDF)

This document was compiled by the GPS Research Team on March 19, 2026, to support the design of the Forge Mentorship Development Program.

Other Versions of This Brief

We write for different audiences. Choose the version that fits your needs:

• Legislator Version — For lawmakers and policy staff
• Media Version — For journalists and editors
• Advocate Version — For organizations and legal advocates