Agency Report

Page | 1

The HOPE Commission: Agency Report

Wilmington University Graduate Center

Professor: Dr. Adrienne Bey Spring 2012

Administration of Human Services AHS 8100

February 2012

By

Sharon A. Page

Introduction My internship at the HOPE Commission has given me a clear vision into the heart of their mission. From the outside looking in, it can appear that the

Commissions focus is centered on reentry; and to some degree that is true. But the Commission itself wears many hats, which are shown throughout the various communities that make up the City of Wilmington. Their main focus throughout its existence has been about making a change; making a change in the minds of the young who are vastly perpetrating violence as if it was a badge of honor; making a change in the minds of the community affected by the violence; and making a change in the minds of offenders reintegrating back into society ("Hope commission," 2011). This change is the beginning of a transformation of a once destructive community into a blossoming, inviting, and safe environment for all who remain. One such area where the Commission is attempting to enact change is with a program centered on our young children who are struggling in school due to the barriers that face our children when they have a parent who is incarcerated. The program is called HOPE Project: The Community Partnership ("Hope commission," 2011). Program Description The HOPE Project is a program that was developed in partnership with Delaware State Universitys School of Social Work and Wilmington Elementary Schools particularly Eastside Community Schools to select students with an incarcerated parent from Bancroft, Stubbs and Elbert Palmer Elementary. The school-based community team provides a combination of resources and support services from professionals and community members, customized for each student. The services provided are counseling and case management services to students and their families; they develop individual and

Agency Report

Page | 3

family goal plans; link students and their families to community resources; and visit families at home each month. The HOPE Project Community Partnership counselors work with the children and their teachers, (and counselors, if the child has one) to identify the childs individual needs and develop a family support program. There is also regularly scheduled family gatherings where parents and guardians can come together to enjoy education and informative programs and group support, and where children can enjoy fun activities. The program is funded through the Delaware Criminal Justice Council by the U.S. Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance. Often when a parent is unable to be with his or her child/children especially if the parents absence is due to incarceration the children can experience stress, anxiety and lower self-esteem. Children may not have the language or ability to express these scary and sad feelings and thus may begin to act out with negative behavior and do poorly in school and at home. Therefore, one of the HOPE Projects goals is to give children, and their families, extra help and support to enable each child to excel in school and in his or her personal relationships. Any student attending one of the partner schools, whose behavior is negatively affecting his or her ability to do well in school is eligible to participate in the program at no cost. Children can be referred by school staff or enrolled by a parent or guardian. The maximum number of students that can participate is 20 due to funding limitations. However, the programs administrators are aware that many of the children attending the target schools meet the criteria for services but reluctantly have to be turned away due to the programs inability to accommodate any additional participants because of lack of funding sources.

Program Management At the HOPE Commissions inception in 2006 and for the following six years, the Commissions goal has been in creating safer and healthier neighborhoods by collaborating with various community partners. Their community partnering and collaborations had them assisting

Neighborhood Houses Early Childhood Center in securing a $25,000 grant to keep their program running. The HOPE Commission provided support for a Family Crisis Therapist at Elbert Palmer for two years and then successfully advocated for this position to be permanently funded by the Department of Education. The HOPE Commission provided tutoring services to youth employees through the Youth Employment Program. They assisted with the implementation of the Redemption ONE Yoga project, a 10-week program that introduced youths to a different activity, the opportunity for healing, self-value and self-awareness, and the opportunity for youth teacher training. They was the lead agency of the 2010 Participatory Action Research (PAR) Safe Communities Employment and Training project, a 52-week project focused on engaging 15 residentsCHANGEMAKERSin the process of identifying and developing solutions to the root causes of crime and violence in Wilmington communities. They also partnered with the Delaware Childrens Museum to develop an ongoing partnership with the South Wilmington community to sponsor admissions for Elbert Palmer students and families (Hope commission, 2011). At present, the HOPE Commission still maintains their partnerships within the community. They still oversee and partner with the Department of Education on the Hope Project, a school based program for 20 inner city children with an incarcerated parent and showing signs of behavioral/academic issues attending Elbert Palmer, Bancroft, and Stubbs elementary schools. The programs goal is to improve academic and social performance, reduce the number of school absences and delinquent incidents for the children attending the program by providing mentoring, goal setting, and behavioral therapy that incorporate the families. Their other partnership, with the Southbridge HOPE Zone project, which was the catalyst for the HOPE Commissions start, provided models for effective ways to encourage, increase, and strengthen resident and business organizational and agency collaborations in order to reduce violence and crime while improving the quality of life for the residents residing within the Southbridge community (Hope commission, 2011). The HOPE Commission plans

Agency Report

Page | 5

to wean themselves from their involvement with the Southbridge Hope Zone, once it is believed that the Southbridge community can sustain without the need of the Commissions leadership. The sole focus of the Commission now consists of an evidence based practices approach for the purposes of establishing a successful reentry program that addresses offenders reentering society primarily within the City of Wilmington. The reentry strategy that seems to be the franchise project of the Commission appears to be a collaborative effort connecting the HOPE Commissions Board of Directors, American Civil Liberties Union of Delaware (ACLU), Delaware Center for Justice (DCJ), US Probation and Pretrial Services, and The Middle Atlantic States Correctional Association (MASCA). The programs focus is on a holistic approach to reentry and a continuum of care which has appeared to show successful rates in the reduction of recidivism in other parts of the United States. With the HOPE Commission being the lead partner, all of the day to day activities that go along with the implementation of a new program fall under Charles governance, and therefore the Commission will provide oversight of the daily operations, hiring, reporting, and technical support, however all final decisions, even as to the structure of the program agenda for the stakeholders reentry conference is based on the collaborative agreement of the partners. Mission/Vision The HOPE Commissions mission, along with its partners is to: (1) Develop, promote, evaluate and advocate for meaningful strategies and programs that focus on the revitalization of Wilmingtons underserved communities and (2) Motivate residents and community-based organizations to be actively engaged in the creation of safer, more vibrant, sustainable neighborhoods Their vision is a catalyst for change that strives to inspire and empower a collaboration of citizens, businesses, government agencies, social organizations, and faith based institutions throughout the City of Wilmington to work together in creating safe, vital neighborhoods that strengthen family bonds, promote civic pride and encourage residents to engage in community transformation. In order to fulfill their mission and vision, The HOPE Commission planned to implement nine

key recommendations that were outlined from the original report submitted to Mayor Baker by the appointed steering committee. These plans consisted of the following: 1. Expand the community policing philosophy as the department-wide approach to fighting and preventing crime. 2. Create a strong advocacy organization to improve the education of City children. 3. Establish HOPE Zones. 4. Improve economic development opportunities for businesses to thrive and for residents Citywide. 5. Establish a network of community workers known as HOPE Outreach Workers (youth and adults). 6. Coordinate the efforts of the faith-based community in education, youth outreach, violence prevention and ex-offender re-entry. 7. Strengthen ex-offender re-entry programs that promote positive reintegration into the community. 8. Embark on a Campaign of HOPE for the City of Wilmington. 9. Create a permanent HOPE Commission to ensure that the action plans in this report are implemented and sustained. Governance The HOPE Commission is governed by 24 diverse Board of Director members, ranging from judges, attorneys, psychiatrist, private business directors, police, probation, doctor, warden, politicians, community activist and a pastor. The Board of Directors appears to remain in the background while the Executive Director takes charge with the implementation of the programs. The HOPE Commission does not function with a strategic plan, believing that strategic plans are outdated. The Commission follows an operational plan that gets no objection from the Board of Directors. Although the HOPE Commission partners with over 60 community agencies, none of the funders directly dictates the programs being implemented other than they must address violence reduction within the City of Wilmington. With the climate of the Commission, an operational plan is more feasible than a detailed strategic plan, although some of the partnership programs do have a strategic plan that was put into place not by the HOPE Commission, but by the partners. The reentry strategy, which seems to be the franchise project of the commission, appears to be a collaborative effort connecting the Board of Directors, American Civil Liberties Union of

Agency Report

Page | 7

Delaware (ACLU), Delaware Center for Justice (DCJ), US Probation and Pretrial Services, and The Middle Atlantic States Correctional Association (MASCA). The programs focus is on a holistic approach to reentry and a continuum of care which has appeared to show successful rates in the reduction of recidivism in other parts of the United States. With the HOPE Commission being the lead partner, all of the day to day activities that go along with the implementation of a new program fall under Charles governance, and therefore the Commission will provide oversight of the daily operations, hiring, reporting, and technical support, however all final decisions, even as to the structure of the program agenda for the stakeholders reentry conference is based on the collaborative agreement of the partners. Structure/Staffing Due to the staff size of the HOPE Commission, the common practices that are carried out within a larger organization are not completely addressed within the agencys structure. For instance, The HOPE Commission never secured their own space. They share space with the United Way of Delaware utilizing two offices and one common area. The Executive Director and the Project Coordinator are the only two paid staff members with one additional staff member being an intern. Because of the size of the staff, the closeness that is shared is rather unique. The Executive Director includes everyone in the decision making process to a point and always keeps everyone up to speed on the progress of the agencys outside programs and partnerships. Staff coaching is done on a regular basis and the Executive Director stresses an open door policy. However, due to the rigorous partnering that is a major part of the Commissions mission and vision, direct supervision is sometimes sacrificed. However, with a leadership style that is a combination of authoritative and coaching, the Executive Director can appear to be very unapproachable. He seeks to empower people and looks at himself as having a visionary leadership style; however he allows people to be autonomous while performing their job duties. He will provide you with the tools, the means, and materials to complete a task, but he is

not a hands on manger that will continually look over your shoulder. Now although you are involved in every step of the project, he prefers to leave you to your own devices and expects the work to be completed by the deadline. For an established and well-polished employee, this style of leadership can be appreciated. However, for someone still wet behind the ears, this leadership style can be very frustrating and draining. Since the Organizations focus is on reentry strategies, there appears to be two separate management structures within the agency. Addressing the HOPE Commission in its entirety as a governing agency, it appears that the Executive Director Charles Madden has reign over the nuances of the commission. Although the Southbridge Hope Zone is set to be dissolved in the very near future as it pertains to the Commissions direct involvement, it is still being overseen by the Project Coordinator Rysheema Dixon, under the direct supervision of Mr. Madden. The HOPE Project, the other program that the HOPE Commission still oversees, is managed by the Project Assistant, Shefon Taylor, who is the Public Allies intern, also under the direct supervision of Mr. Madden. Reentry Service Center Organizational Chart

Expert Contractor Case Management (on-site)

HOPE Commission Board of Directors HOPE Commission Executive Director Wilmington Reentry Service Center Chief Administrator Community Partners (off-site)

State Agencies & Community Organizations (on-site)

The Wilmington HOPE Commissions Organizational Chart

Agency Report

Page | 9

Policies and Procedures Since the Commission has always been within the confines of United Way, they follow the policies and procedures as outlined by the United Way, including, but not limited to, their email practices, access badges, and computer/office equipment. The HOPE Commission does not have their own employee handbook, strategic plan, or code of ethics that directly addresses their commission or individual programs. Funding Mayor Bakers 2005 executive order was supported by an allocation of funds from the City of Wilmington and the State of Delaware. The HOPE Commissions funding was comprised of 71% from the City of Wilmington, 13% from the State of Delaware, with the remaining 16% from private donations. The City of Wilmington pledged $1.3million over the course of three years, with the State of Delaware giving $232.677, and the remaining $286,330 provided by private businesses, foundations, and individuals, with some of the investors including AstraZeneca, Bank of America, Christiana Care, ING, JP Morgan Chase, Verizon and WSFS. With the Commissions focus now on a reentry strategy, nearly $1,000,000 in financial support has been secured to assist with the construction costs of a reentry center with additional funding being sought for the day-to-day operations costs. With the HOPE Commission establishing partnerships with

state agencies including the Departments of Corrections, Health & Social Services, Education and Labor, Department of Justice, the U.S. Federal Office of Probation and Parole, Mayor James Baker and the City of Wilmington Police, the belief is the acquisition of additional funding can be addressed across a broader range of funding sources. Once the reentry center is established, the cost of running the program will range from $650,000 to $750,000. Relationship to Other Agencies Throughout its inception, the HOPE Commission has continually partnered with over 60 community and government agencies and has over 20 donors. In order for the reentry strategies to be effective, partnering with various agencies to provide a continuum of care is needed to see a change in current trends and having the backing of donors will provide the agency with some financial support to show the naysayers and the undecided that there are others who believe that its time to try something different, something that has been proven to be effective. Some of these partnerships include: DE Department of Correction (DOC); DE Department of Labor (DOL); DE Department of Education (DOE); DE Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS); the Wilmington Housing Authority (WHA); State Probation/Parole; U.S. Probation Office; Delaware State Housing Authority (DSHA); faith-based institutions throughout the City of Wilmington; Delaware Reentry Consortium; Community Health Centers; Delaware Center for Justice; and Stand Up For What Is Right and Just (SURJ). By partnering with the Department of Correction (DOC), offenders soon to be released will be referred by DOC staff based on the offenders classification to reoffend. By partnering with DOCs Individual Assessment, Discharge and Planning Team (IDAPT), this will afford the reentry center to partner with other state agencies associated with IADAPT, which will provide the ex-offender with services directly related to their individual needs upon release. By patterning with the courts, offenders facing incarceration will be referred to the center as an alternative. These types of direct partnerships will provide the reentry center with their primary population.

Agency Report

P a g e | 11

With the HOPE Project partnering with the Delaware State University and the Eastside Community Schools, this collaboration was critical in its belief that direct intervention was a means to avoid further school failure or delinquency. Strength, Trends, Challenges With Governor Markell making reentry a priority initiative for the State of Delaware, The HOPE Commissions vision to address reentry by the use of evidence based practices shows that the Commission continues to remain focused on reducing the violence that plagues the City of Wilmington. By choosing to go directly to the source, the offender, the HOPE Commission is making a profound statement that the way to strengthen a community is by is through addressing the needs that is plaguing the community by fostering healthier relationships for the people offending as well as the families who receive the offenders. The HOPE Commission is charting an ambitious course toward comprehensive reentry services for returning citizens who have paid their debt to society and are returning to the community. Therefore a major trend for the HOPE Commission is supporting their need for a reentry service center by using evidence based practices as their basis. Their goal is to establish a reentry service center that offers centralized programs and services needed for reentry success under one roof. A major challenge that the Commission will face will be the selling of the idea and program to the various constituents who mostly maintain a lock them up and throw away the key attitude, not comprehending that once an offenders time is served, they are free to reoffend. Another foreseen challenge will be an increase in the competition for funding that over the years has shown a gradual reduction. With many agencies competing for the same funding, the Hope Commission will have to separate themselves from the rest, therefore gaining the support of the key players could turn out to be the deciding factor on whether the Wilmington Reentry Service Center actually comes into fruition. Suggestions for Improvement

Although there is always room for improvement, I feel that the path the Commission is taking is a path that has been avoided for far too long. With the implementation of this type of program comes a partnering like no other, with the major stakeholders being political figures that can hold the success and/or failure of a program of this magnitude within the palms of their hands. Therefore, the Commission putting their entire focus on this project is merited, to say the least, but I would have strived to move forward with the Commissions original goals of implementing the Hope Zones in the remaining communities, believing that doing that would have been a benefit to the implementation of the reentry program. Serving each community successfully on a smaller scale, could have been a big help with securing the funding, the necessary stakeholders, as well as the clientele needed for the implementation of the reentry program. With the success of the Southbridge HOPE Zone Project, putting the same effort and fight towards the other communities that were supposed to get a HOPE Zone, could be a direct link to assist with the reduction of the recidivism rate (Hope commission, 2011). I would also introduce weekly one on ones between the director and each staff member in order to provide that supervisory support that is lacking. The meeting would be brief and consist of discussing outstanding tasks, tasks that are close to completion or have been completed, feedback on the workload, as well as concerns, questions, and suggestions. However, with the Commission having such a small staff while trying to implement such a profound program can be very demanding when the majority of the footwork is placed on the shoulders of one person, which is the Executive Director. Then to have staff members that may need your guidance just adds on to those demands. Therefore having the weekly sessions can help to avoid staff burnout and as well as allowing everyone to remain on the same page. I believe that putting more emphasis on marketing strategies could be a big help with the implementation of the reentry program as well as with the continuation of the various partnerships that

Agency Report

P a g e | 13

oversee external programs that benefit the community. However, if it wasnt for Dr. Bey connecting me with the HOPE Commission, I would have never known that the organization still existed. Making and keeping their presence known throughout the city of Wilmington as well as the neighboring communities by soliciting media coverage as with Comcasts Channel 28, designing a Facebook page, establishing a Twitter account, and developing a web page, can all be marketing strategies that will keep the public updated on the programs existence along with the services being offered. Interns Role My role at the HOPE Commission has been to alleviate some of the day to day activities that are afforded the Executive Director when starting up a new program. I am currently assisting with the coordination of a reentry conference that will bring high level stakeholders together under one roof to educate them on the success of the use of evidence based practices that address the reduction in recidivism. The other project that I will be working on will team me with an outside consultant who will be putting together an operations manual detailing the reentry centers plan of operation and the services provided. Conclusion In concluding, when discussing the need for social change and social justice, one cannot overlook the zealousness of the criminal justice system to prosecute rather than substitute. The HOPE Commissions idea to focus on the re-entry efforts that are needed, addresses the elimination of the revolving door syndrome that plagues the system by creating an alternative to incarceration for those who need treatment (Upchurch, 2011). The HOPE Commissions approach to this social stigma is long overdue. Evidence based practices makes rehabilitation and prevention programs the solution so that substance abusers and the mentally ill can make better informed decisions and become positive products of their community. These practices have proven to be the right road to recidivism rate reduction. By treating the person and not the behavior you will begin to see the difference in their

lives. Instilling pride and a sense of self-worth promotes change; and positive change within oneself promotes change to the community and the surrounding environment. Getting people connected to resources that will afford them the opportunity to become stable is a win/win. Its a win for the person, since they will have accomplished a change in their behavior which forces a lifestyle change; and its a win for society as a whole because crime is being reduced in the community. However, in order for a program of such magnitude to work, an active commitment and participation from all the key traditional and nontraditional stakeholderssuch as judges, prosecutors, public defenders, police and probation officers, political leaders, service providers, and community groups will be needed in order for any major progress to take place. Integrating all the key players and agencies in a collaborative effort to provide a more cost-effective approach should not be hard to do if the main goal is to eliminate the mass incarceration of this vulnerable population (Rich et al., 2011). The HOPE Commission brings HOPE to a community that has given up and providing the services that builds families and communities with the overall goal of addressing the problem from the inside out proves to be a step in the right direction toward social change (Hope commission, 2011).

Agency Report

P a g e | 15

APPENDIX A

Board of Directors
Gwendoline B. Angalet, Ph.D. (Vice Chair) Managing Director Office of Strategic Partnerships and Planning Nemours Health & Prevention Services Victor Ayala Captain Wilmington Police Department Reverend Silvester Beaman Pastor Bethel A.M.E Church John Carney Congressman U.S. House of Representatives Darryl L. Chambers Research Assistant University of Delaware Nnamdi Chukwuocha, MSW Author/Community Activist Daniel E. Cruce, Esq. Deputy Secretary/Chief of Staff Department of Education Penrose Hollins Councilman New Castle County Council Lynne Howard Consultant Chandlee Johnson Kuhn Chief Judge Family Court of the State of Delaware Leslie N. Johnson Senior Vice President Leadership Development Executive Bank of America John R. McDonough Chief, Federal Probation and Parole United States Probation and Pretrial Services Office Karryl H. McManus, J.D. Division Director DSCYC/DMSS

William S. Montgomery Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor Henry Smith, III, Ph.D. Deputy Secretary Department of Health and Social Services Perry Phelps Warden V James T. Vaughn Correctional Center Michael Purzycki, Esq. (Chair) Executive Director Riverfront Development Corporation of Delaware Larry Morris Community Activist/Event Speaker Monte T. Squire, Esq. Attorney Young, Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP Michelle Taylor President & CEO United Way of Delaware Alvin L. Turner, Ph.D. Licensed Psychologist Leroy A. Tice, Esq. Attorney Law Offices of Leroy A. Tice, Esquire Deborah T. Wilson President & CEO Metropolitan Wilmington Urban League

James A. Wolfe President & CEO Delaware State Chamber of Commerce

Agency Report

P a g e | 17

APPENDIX B

Partners

A Center for Relational Living, Inc. ACLU Delaware AIDS DE Bethel A.M.E Church Boneys Barbershop Brandywine Counseling and Community Services Christina Cultural Arts Center Churches Take a Corner City of Wilmington City of Wilmington Parks and Recreation Congressman John Carney Connections Community Support Programs, Inc. Criminal Justice Council Delaware Arts Alliance Delaware Center for Justice Delaware Childrens Museum Delaware Department of Corrections Delaware Department of Education Delaware Department of Labor Delaware Girls Initiative Delaware Reentry Consortium Delaware State Chamber of Commerce Delaware State University School of Social Work Delaware Technical Community College Department of Services for Children, Youth and Their Families Duffys Hope Inc. Eastside Community Schools- Bancroft, Stubbs and Elbert Palmer Elementary Schools Ezion Fair Baptist Church Family Court of the State of Delaware First State Community Action Agency Healthy Kids Delaware Henrietta Johnson Medical Center Honorable Mayor James Baker Kingswood Community Center Latin American Community Center Law Offices of Leroy A. Tice, Esquire Longshoremans International Hall Martin Luther King Center Metropolitan Wilmington Urban League Nehemiah Gateway CDC Neighborhood House Inc. Nemours Health and Prevention Services

Partners (Contd)

Agency Report

P a g e | 19

NOR Enterprises Northeast Planning NetworkOne Village Alliance PAID Program Peoples Settlement Police Athletic League (PAL) Public Allies Delaware Riverfront Development Corporation of Delaware South Wilmington Planning Network Southbridge Business Association Southbridge Civic Association Southbridge Faith Network Southbridge Youth Academy State of Delaware Department of Public Safety State of Delaware Youth Rehabilitative Services SURJ University of Delaware- Center for Drug and Alcohol Studies University of Delaware- Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice University of Delaware School of Public Policy and Administration Urban Promise US Department of Justice US Probation and Pretrial Services West End Neighborhood House Westside Family Healthcare William Hicks Anderson Community Center Wilmington Area Planning Council Wilmington City Council Wilmington Consortium Wilmington Housing Authority Wilmington Police Department Wilmington University WPD Community Policing Unit Y.E.S.S Program Young, Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP

APPENDIX C

Donors
AARP AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP Bank of America

Agency Report

P a g e | 21

Christiana Health Care System City of Wilmington Criminal Justice Council Delaware Community Foundation Delmarva Power Delaware Department of Health and Social Services- Division of Mental Health Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control Delaware Division of Public Health DuPont First State Community Action Agency ING Direct JPMorgan Chase & Co. Laffey-McHugh Foundation Longwood Foundation Inc. Plexus Fitness State of Delaware Southern Health Partners Inc. United Way of Delaware Verizon Welfare Foundation Wells Fargo Wilmington City Council WSFS

Reference Page
Bureau of Justice Statistics, (2007). Prison statistics. U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved from www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/ Durose, M. R., & Langan, P. A., (2001). State court sentencing of convicted felons, 1998 statistical tables. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Table 25. Retrieved from

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/scsc98st.htm Eichler, T. P. (2005). Race and incarceration in Delaware: a preliminary consideration Goodman; R. (2002). Drug law enforcement and racial disparities in the United States. Human Rights Watch Hope commission. (2011, November). Retrieved from http://wilmhope.org/ Khalek, R. (2011, July 21). 21st-century slaves: How corporations exploit prison labor. Retrieved from http://www.alternet.org/world/151732/21stcentury_slaves:_how_corporations_exploit_prison_labor/?page=entire Pizzi, W. T., Blair, I.V., & Judd, C. M. (2005). Discrimination in sentencing on the basis of afrocentric features Public allies delaware. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.publicallies.org/site/c.liKUL3PNLvF/b.3158757/k.CBCB/Delaware.htm Rich, J.D., Wakeman, S.E., Dickman, S.L. (2011).Medicine and the epidemic of incarceration in the United States. The New England Journal of Medicine. Retrieved from httpnejm.org Upchurch, K. (2011). New program aims to keep lawbreakers with mental, drug problems out of jail. Retrieved from http://hearldsun.com/printer_friendly/15220116 Walmsley, R. (2003). World prison population list. Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, fourth edition Retrieved from http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk /rds/ pdfs2/r188.pdf World prison brief: United states of america. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.prisonstudies.org/info/worldbrief/wpb_country.php?country=190