cwc_report.qmd

# Center Wing Coalition Report

## Introduction

In recent years, there has been a growing push for reform within correctional systems aimed at rehabilitation and reducing recidivism rates. While these efforts are often well-intentioned, they come at a significant financial cost to taxpayers and lack substantial evidence of effectiveness. This report by the Center Wing Coalition aims to provide a data-driven justification for reducing the budget for GDOC’s correctional programs  and eliminating existing staff vacancies, arguing that resources could be better allocated for proven methods of crime reduction rather than for providing services for people in prison.

## Analysis of Programs' Effectiveness

The correctional programs in question has been in operation for several years with substantial funding allocated annually. However, comprehensive data analysis reveals several key shortcomings:

1. Recidivism Rates: Despite the programs' objectives, recidivism rates among participants, provided by GDOC’s own Research and Analysis team, remain at 47 percent.[^longnote] This suggests that programs may not be effectively addressing the root causes of criminal behavior.

[^longnote]: The following programs were analyzed by the CWC for program years 2017 through 2018:\
Anger Management\
Residential Drug Abuse Program\
Dialectical Behavior Therapy\
Challenge Program\
Steps Toward Awareness, Growth, and Emotional Strength Program\

2. Cost-Effectiveness: The cost to maintain staffing for the programs opens avenues for unnecessary spending. This raises questions about the programs' efficiency in using taxpayer dollars and the agency’s need for such significant funding.

3. Long-Term Outcomes: There are no proven long-term gains from these programs, and resources can be better put toward paying for staff training and retention.

## Budgetary Considerations

The financial resources allocated to these correctional programs could be reallocated to more cost-effective strategies to maintain public safety. Examples include the following:

* **Investment in Education:** Funding education and skill-building programs within prisons has shown a positive correlation with reduced recidivism rates and improved employability upon release.
* **Support for Community Reintegration:** Enhanced support for transitional housing, job placement services, and mental health programs in communities can provide a more holistic approach to reducing crime and improving public safety.
* **Front-end violent crime strategies:** Increased law enforcement presence will deter crime in our communities.

## Conclusion

This bipartisan coalition recommends reallocating funding away from the correctional programs in question based on program effectiveness analysis and budgetary considerations. Doing so would not only maximize the impact of taxpayer investments but also enhance public safety by addressing the root causes of crime more effectively. By making informed decisions supported by data-driven insights, policymakers can ensure that funding prioritizes interventions that yield tangible and sustainable benefits for individuals and society as a whole.