Education: Administration and Implementation

This Best Interest Determination (BID) Toolkit was created by the Vera Institute of Justice, in partnership with a BID Council and the members of the 2024 Corrections Education Leadership Academy (CELA), to be a resource for corrections agencies to prepare their BID system with all processes, procedures, and stakeholders in place, as necessary, to assess postsecondary institutions offering a PEP, according to federal regulations. To maintain their PEP status, postsecondary institutions must work with their correctional partner, otherwise known as the oversight entity, to complete a program review termed the Best Interest Determination (BID). The final regulations require that the BID must take place, at minimum, within two years of the PEP being approved by the U.S. Department of Education (ED) and must be repeated every time the postsecondary institution renews its Program Participation Agreement or earlier if required by the oversight entity. 

This Toolkit is designed to assist oversight entities with meeting the BID requirements, as outlined in 34 CFR
668.241 of the final regulations, ED’s FAQs that outline the BID process in more detail, and referenced in ED’s
optional form, “Best Interest Determination- Prison Education Program.” Some of the specific suggestions
outlined in this Toolkit are not required by regulations; however, based on a review of the regulations, Vera
recommends oversight entities create the following four tools: 

1. Create a policy describing how the BID will be conducted,
2. Develop template reports for postsecondary institutions offering approved PEPs to complete,
3. Design a BID feedback template for participating stakeholders to complete, and
4. Create a response letter to the postsecondary institution offering the PEP that documents the BID
   outcome.

A growing body of research documents the barriers faced by incarcerated students—such as limited access to technology and conflicts with correctional staff—but far less attention has been paid to the role of the built environment in shaping educational experiences. This project, led by Ennead Lab and Ithaka S+R, examines how spatial, architecture, and design features impact learning inside prisons. It draws on qualitative interviews with formerly incarcerated students and prison education program staff, and site visits to five correctional facilities, to advance both research findings and a portfolio of design interventions aimed at improving these educational environments. This report features a series of actionable strategies to integrate educational best practices in the redesign of these spaces. Ultimately, Ithaka S+R proposes that architects and designers working in correctional education should not just foster better learning experiences for incarcerated students, but shift the balance from punishment toward rehabilitation in carceral settings.

With generous support from Ascendium Education Group and over ten years of experience facilitating college programming in Tennessee’s prisons, THEI has created Navigating Forward, a collection of clear, digestible, and comprehensive college navigation materials explicitly designed for learners in the carceral context, with special consideration for the unique challenges and needs of Prison Education Program (PEP) students. Each collection comprises individual resources that can stand alone or be shared collectively. A Glossary of Terms also accompanies the three collections to help make the resources accessible for as many students as possible, regardless of their starting point. The collections include Navigating the College Landscape, Navigating Financial Aid, and Navigating the Transfer Process. 

PEPs that are new to supporting incarcerated students, or lack the time and capacity to develop their own resources, will also benefit from these ready-to-use tools. While a toolkit is no substitute for robust, direct support, THEI is grateful for this opportunity to lend support to strengthening the growing PEP community by informing and empowering students and other stakeholders.

This initiative follows the U.S. Department of Education’s reinstatement of Pell Grant eligibility for incarcerated students in 2023, which reversed a nearly three-decade Pell ban on Pell access for incarcerated students.

This research paper examines the development and administration of Hudson Link for Higher Education in Prison, an in-prison college program run and staffed primarily by its own formerly incarcerated graduates. This paper also explores the impact of lived experience on managing and teaching in the program, as well as strategies for academic partners looking to best support interventions led by those who are closest to the problem and, in turn, closest to the solution.

While correctional institutions provide orientation and training sessions to help instructors navigate the logistical and security aspects of teaching in such facilities, these efforts often have limitations. Notably, they tend to lack comprehensive guidance for instructors on effectively engaging students from a diverse range of cultural backgrounds and tailoring their pedagogical approaches to support students as they pursue their studies within the unique context of a correctional facility. 

In response to this identified gap, FICGN has collaborated with Jobs for the Future’s Center for Justice & Economic Advancement to support the development of high-quality postsecondary education programs in prisons that pave the way to economic advancement. Together, they have formulated this guidance to offer support to program staff members and instructors. The recommendations presented in this resource are designed to enhance the effectiveness of future orientation and training initiatives. Their aim is to ensure that these programs adequately address the needs of instructors and other key stakeholders who will directly interact with students who are incarcerated for the first time.  

This news article from Open Campus discusses the impact of prison closures on incarcerated students. 

As California closes three more prisons and downsizes six others, some prisoners aren’t ready to go. They are worried about the future of their education. California Governor Gavin Newsom is closing and downsizing prisons across the state, putting the future of over a thousand incarcerated students at risk. College administrators say they have few resources to help.

This news article from Open Campus discusses the potential affects of culturally relevant content on Indigenous students.

This news article from Open Campus takes us inside a prison education program in the Mississippi Department of Corrections.

This report details the scope of CUNY’s policies and programs for students impacted by the criminal legal system and explores opportunities for CUNY to better support those students. As an engine for upward social mobility, CUNY is well positioned to promote the educational and professional advancement of students who have been historically denied access to higher education, especially students who have been involved in the criminal legal system. Higher education transforms lives, creates opportunities, and mitigates the collateral consequences of mass incarceration. This report should serve as a catalyst and foundation for developing a more comprehensive and integrated approach to welcoming and supporting students with past criminal legal system involvement at the country’s largest urban university system.

Access to education is in high demand among the incarcerated population. There are clear benefits to students who are incarcerated, their families and communities, public safety, and safety inside prisons. Yet the gap in educational aspirations and participation has been largely driven by a lack of capacity due to limited funding.

The Manhattan District Attorney’s Criminal Justice Investment Initiative funded the College-in-Prison Reentry Initiative (CIP) to close this gap by expanding access to college education in prisons throughout New York State. This fact sheet unpacks the impact of participation in degree programs offered by seven colleges participating in CIP and reveal the effects that college in prison can have on in-facility behavior, recidivism, employment, and income after release.

In this research brief, researchers share findings from incarcerated students, alumni, and formerly incarcerated participants regarding their academic experiences during enrollment in postsecondary education and participation in Second Chance Pell. 

Passed in December 2020, the FAFSA Simplification Act amendments eliminate the 1994 ban on Pell Grants for students in state and federal prisons; incarcerated students who enroll in approved prison education programs will be able to access Pell beginning in 2023. From fall 2021 to spring 2022, the Research Collaborative on Higher Education in Prison at the University of Utah conducted 21 focus groups with over 100 currently or formerly incarcerated students and alumni. These students are among the few who have already received Pell Grants through the Second Chance Pell Experiment, launched in 2015. This document lays out the most frequently asked questions and answers from student and alumni focus groups, using the best available information as of October 2022. The larger project from which these data are drawn, Exploring the Experiences of Participants in Second Chance Pell, is a mixed-methods research study examining the implementation and facilitation of the Second Chance Pell Experiment.

The research team asked if institutional leaders provide tuition statements to incarcerated students. If so, the leaders were asked to provide de-identified student bills as part of their participation in the study. Five institutions provided these documents. If they responded, the researchers described what each institution offered to their team. It is important to note that their team received this information and documents from administrators, not students. Thus, they cannot make claims regarding whether incarcerated students actually receive institutional tuition or billing statements.

This research brief draws on focus groups conducted by the Research Collaborative on Higher Education in Prison at the University of Utah with incarcerated students and formerly incarcerated alumni of prison higher education programs. The researchers examine the perceptions of federal student aid among student participants in the Second Chance Pell Experiment across four institutions. Specifically, they share perceptions of the communications students receive from program staff and administrators regarding financial aid, including FAFSA, tuition statements, and refunds. 

This brief examines student and alumni understandings of federal student aid. Specifically, this brief explores their perceptions and understandings of the Pell Grant, eligibility for the Pell Grant—including lifetime eligibility used (LEU) limits—and how these perceptions might influence students' postsecondary educational journeys. 

This research brief draws upon three years of data collection through a national mixed-methods project, Exploring the Experiences of Participants in Second Chance Pell. It highlights the perspectives of Pell recipients enrolled at four institutions of higher education participating in the federal experiment. Specifically, it focuses on students’ perceptions of the costs of postsecondary education and the Pell Grant. Overall, students report that they incur many expenses to participate in postsecondary education that are not covered by Pell. 

This research brief draws upon three years of data collection through a national mixed-methods project, Exploring the Experiences of Participants in Second Chance Pell. It draws from the perspectives of higher education administrators and practitioners participating in the federal experiment. Specifically, it focuses on their perceptions and experiences as to whether the Pell Grant adequately covers the costs of providing high-quality postsecondary education in prison. Unquestionably, administrators and practitioners report that the Pell Grant alone is insufficient. In particular, they remark that various costs associated with the program cannot be covered by Pell, including one of their greatest needs: staff necessary to support existing and prospective students. Consequently, personnel in this sample often take on responsibilities with the prison higher education program that fall outside of their contracted duties with the college or university. 

The Second Chance Pell Experimental Sites Initiative, launched in 2015, has already impacted the landscape of prison higher education by increasing the number of colleges and universities providing in-prison postsecondary education. This research brief draws upon three years of data collection through a national mixed-methods project, Exploring the Experiences of Participants in Second Chance Pell. Here, we include data collected from the staff at four higher education institutions in financial aid, admissions, and the registrar or related unit. The larger study focused on nine institutions participating in the Second Chance Pell Experiment. This brief focuses on a subset of four institutions that had the capacity to provide the research team with de-identified student data in a timely manner.

Launched in 2015, the Second Chance Pell Experiment allowed a select number of institutions of higher education to provide Pell Grants to incarcerated students. Seven years later, and on the cusp of Pell expansion, there are a few noteworthy impacts of the federal experiment:
» As of 2022, up to 200 institutions of higher education can participate in the federal experiment.
» Over 28,000 unduplicated students enrolled in postsecondary education through the Second Chance Pell Experiment from 2016 through 2021.
» Across the pilot’s first 2 years, institutions awarded approximately $35.6 million in Pell Grants to about 8,800 incarcerated students.

A lesser known yet critical area of knowledge and understanding is how, specifically, some incarcerated students are able to participate in the experiment and others are not. At the heart of this inquiry is certainly a question about college admissions, but one that is uniquely rooted in the context of equity and opportunity during incarceration. Until recently, the ways that incarcerated people became part of the experiment were largely unknown beyond anecdotal information from practitioners and participants. Consequently, serious questions about the Pell Grant in prison and issues of equity and access persist.

Exploring the Experiences of Participants in Second Chance Pell is a mixed-methods research study examining the implementation and facilitation of the Second Chance Pell Experiment commenced in 2019, and includes data collected from staff, students, and alumni affiliated with nine higher education institutions. This brief provides an introduction and executive summary for all reports included in the series, titled Pell Is Not Enough.