From Ex-Offender to New Contributor: An Examination of How a Community-Based Reentry Program Assists Ex-Offenders to Combat Racial Barriers to Employment

Background and Purpose: Upon their release, formerly incarcerated individuals face major barriers to employment, hindered not only by their criminal record, but also oftentimes by racism and stigma. Prisoner reentry programs are therefore often charged with assisting them with navigating and negotiating barriers to employment. Yet, although a strong body of literature establishes the persistence of racial disparities and systemic biases in the U.S. criminal justice system and labor market, less is known about how racial barriers to employment are framed and negotiated in the context of community-based reentry programs.  In this paper, we examine if and how reentry instructors, who are predominately African American, frame their messages concerning opportunities and barriers to employment to formerly incarcerated men and women of color in reentry. Specifically we ask: What job search strategies do reentry instructors of color provide to formerly incarcerated adult men and women of color in the context of a reentry program? Do the instructors address racial barriers to employment? If so, how do they frame these messages? How do formerly incarcerated adult men and women of color respond to the messages embedded in the reentry program?

Methods: The methodology for this study was ethnography, consisting of eight weeks of observational field research. The first author and a graduate student researcher conducted 11 observations of a community-based reentry program in South Los Angeles, which has a population that is roughly 80% African American, 11% Hispanic and 9% other. The composition of the reentry classes, including instructors and program participants, reflected these demographics. During the observations, the researchers took detailed notes, which were then electronically recorded as field notes, including events, interactions, and impressions of the observed activities. Analysis consisted of an inductive coding of the field notes.

Results: Reentry instructors provided formerly incarcerated adult men and women of color with a range of employment, cognitive, and spiritually focused job search strategies. The instructors also constructed the men and women as self-transforming individuals who often limit their scope of employment opportunities by framing their thinking and job searches around structural barriers to employment. Instructors therefore encouraged them to rewrite their belief systems with regards to what it means to be a formerly incarcerated job seeker of color in order to increase their likelihood of obtaining legitimate forms of employment. The men and women typically bought into the instructors’ direct and subtle messages by acknowledging the value of personal reform over systems reform, and by motivating others in the reentry program and their communities. However, in a few instances, some men and women questioned the applicability of these strategies and messages outside the context of the reentry program.

Conclusions: The findings from this study make a valuable contribution to the literature on reentry and intervention programs geared to assist formerly incarcerated individuals of color with addressing structural barriers to post-release employment. The authors suggest the discourses embedded within this reentry program reflected a philosophy of personal responsibility and colorblindness. Future research should continue to examine reentry instructors’ discourses structural barriers.