Addressing Problems with Innovative Solutions in Prison: Results from a Community-Engaged Research Project

Background & Significance: Community-engaged research models are rooted in social justice and aim to flatten the power imbalance between researchers and communities by partnering with communities throughout the research process. Utilizing community-engaged approaches is one practice that can increase the accuracy of research, facilitate opportunities for the co-construction of knowledge, and create more equity across the research process. For many disciplines, research does not historically include participation from community members beyond being research subjects. This exclusion leads to translational and implementation challenges, but also increases the risk of harm to marginalized, under-represented, and historically oppressed communities. The risk is magnified in carceral settings, where power imbalances are heightened. We document a model developed to facilitate collaborative problem solving between staff and residents living and working in prison.

Method: Through community-engaged research strategies, a group of staff and residents co-developed a survey to measure prison climate and culture. All staff and residents living and working in this Midwestern, medium security prison were invited to complete the survey at three different time points: May 2021 (n = 606), November 2022 (n = 538), and October 2023 (n = 401). In parallel, groups of staff and residents (i.e., Innovation Advisors) met monthly with the research team and project manager to discuss survey results and develop innovations to address priority concerns identified in the survey. We hypothesized that Innovation Advisory groups and the associated changes in the living and working conditions would improve prison climate and culture over time. Survey data were analyzed by the research team using a combination of analyses including descriptive statistics and ANOVA. Data were co-interpreted with Innovation Advisors and prison administrators.

Results: Innovation Advisory groups remained intact over two years of collaborative work. Staff Innovation Advisors developed and implemented innovations to address challenges in training and exposure to stressful work conditions. Resident Innovation Advisors developed and implemented innovations to address access to fresh vegetables, visitation with family, and prison conditions. Innovations required approval, fiscal support, and extensive planning from the prison administration and Central Office and collaboration between staff and residents. Although response rates were lower than the target, the survey respondents were similar to the larger population in terms of age and race. For residents, prison culture, F(2, 1168) = 3.64, p = .027, and climate around health and safety, F(2, 1179) = 3.14, p = .044, and social interactions, F(2, 1128) = 28.68, p < .001, significantly improved. Similarly, for staff, prison culture, F(2, 225) = 4.77, p = .009, significantly improved. Social climate improved but only trending towards significance, F(2, 199) = 2.51, p = .084). Although not statistically significant, climate surrounding work factors increased in the hypothesized direction, F(2, 169) = 1.24, p = .292.

Conclusion: Creating opportunities for frontline staff and prison residents to be actively involved and engaged in problem solving to improve the living and working conditions is possible and does improve elements of prison climate and culture over time. This presentation discusses the limitations of this work and the model’s sustainability.