IMPROVING EFFICIENCY AND OUTCOMES THROUGHCOLLABORATIONS: AN NGO PERSPECTIVE
B. Diane Williams＊

I. INTRODUCTION
Safer Foundation (Safer) is a not-for-profit organization headquartered in Illinois but also operates either
directly or through technical assistance grants in three other Midwestern states, Iowa, Missouri and
Wisconsin. Its mission is to reduce recidivism by providing services to people with criminal records tohelp them become law abiding employed citizens. To accomplish its mission, Safer does not limit itself todirect services but also includes developing and leading public policy reform efforts. Its partnerships are
critical to every facet of its work.

Incorporated in 1972, Safer set the course for assisting justice-involved individuals. The organization
has avoided “mission creep” (pursuing projects that are not truly aligned to the organization’s mission) andstayed the course. Because of that level of discipline, thousands of people with criminal records are
employed, supporting their families, and contributing to their communities. Tax payers have saved millionsof dollars and while in the United States crime in some places has remained at unacceptable levels, there
are fewer victims because of Safer’s work. Also, because of Safer’s work fewer people return to Illinois’
prisons and jails. Employers have new employees who are excited about going to work and are thankful
for the opportunity. Tax collection revenue for state and federal governments is higher and local
merchants’ sales increase.
When considered in the context of the number of people under corrections supervision the results areeven more laudable. At the end of June 2014 (the most recent data available) the Illinois Department ofCorrections (IDOC) reported they had 48,921 adult inmates in its prisons of which 94.1 percent were malewith an average age of 37 years old.1 Adult parolees were numbered at 28,242 adults and 90.7 percent ofthem were male with an average age of 36 years old. 2 There were 10,200 IDOC staff and only 400 parole
officers.
Cook County Jail, the largest jail in Illinois that primarily serves as a remand facility, admits approximately 100,000 individuals annually and averages a daily population of 9,000 adults. 3 The jail is under thejurisdiction of the Cook County Sheriff’s office. According to the Circuit Court of Cook County, “the Adult
President Emeritus, Safer Foundation, Chicago, Illinois, United States.

＊

1 Illinois Department of Corrections Annual Report 2014, pp. 64-68.
2 Ibid.

58

162ND INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
Probation Department receives approximately 14,000 new probation supervision cases annually and has anactive caseload of approximately 25,000 probationers, 86 percent of whom have been sentenced for felony
offenses.”4 There are 387 adult probation officers in Cook County who are responsible for supervising individuals sentenced to probation. There are 101 additional counties in Illinois which have considerably
smaller jail populations.
The disproportionate ratios between the number of community supervision officers to the number ofpeople under community supervision makes evident the need for not-for-profit support in the community.
While government provides direct services to those under its supervision through parole, prison, andprobation staff, having effective partners at strategic points in the service continuum can improve the likelihood government will meet its goals to improve community safety, reduce recidivism and effectively
manage the cost to provide corrections services. Ideal candidates for strategic partnerships are Safer
Foundation and other not-for-profits.
This paper will look at Safer Foundation, it’s history, how its structured to serve the criminal justicepopulation, what it achieves and how, performance outcomes, partnerships, and finally, challenges facing
the organization. Know that there are differences in how not-for-profits are structured and how they dotheir work, but all are intent on providing societal benefit.

II. SAFER FOUNDATION’S HISTORY
Safer was founded in 1970 by two men working for the Portland Cement Association in Chicago. Under
contract with the Federal Bureau of Prisons, Portland Cement provided training in cement masonry infederal prisons in three states. Noting that inmates were not finding jobs upon release, the Federal Bureauof Prisons (BOP) asked the Portland Cement Association (the Association) to develop a programme to help
place men being released from federal institutions into construction industry jobs. The Association’s leadership accepted the challenge and assigned Bernie Curran, who worked in the external affairs department at
the time, and Gus Wilhelmy to manage the BOP job placement contract along with their other duties.
A year later, the Association’s leadership decided the programme was not a good fit and wanted to berelieved of its responsibility. Bernie and Gus believed in the mission and elected to lead the programme asa separate entity. They initially co-located with another not-for-profit focused on criminal justice issues andworked with the Association to secure 501C3 tax exempt status. The new entity was called “Safer” Foundation to represent the founders’ desire to keep communities safe.
During the early stage of the organization’s development, Safer only had the federal contract and,
therefore, only placed people from the federal system. The organization was mostly staffed with volunteers
though some of them “worked” full time. The volunteers were people with criminal records and othersfrom the community who cared about helping people change their lives. These individuals worked together,but not always peacefully. One of Safer’s long time board members recalls a time that one of the clients
physically attacked him. The board member was not hurt nor was he deterred from his commitment tosupport Safer’s efforts. After Safer received an increase in the amount of its federal grant, it began to hirepeople in paid positions.
As grant opportunities for state and local governments became available Safer expanded its reach, butstayed true to its mission to secure employment for people with criminal records and improve community
safety. Today Safer serves between 8,000 and 12,000 people each year with nearly 300 staff in communitybased residential, community-based non-residential and institutional settings. Its third and current
President and CEO has significant corporate experience and is leveraging that experience to expand how
Safer works with its clients and corporate partners.

3 Cook County Sheriff’s Office. Cook County Department of Corrections. Available at <http://www.cookcountysheriff.org/

doc/doc_main.html>.

4 State of Illinois Circuit Court. Adult Probation Department Profile. Available at <http://www.cookcountycourt.org/

ABOUTTHECOURT/OfficeoftheChiefJudge/ProbationDepartments/ProbationforAdults/AdultProbationDepartment/
Profile.aspx>.

59

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 99

III. SAFER STRUCTURE
A. Governing Board
United States federal tax law requires not-for-profits to have a volunteer board of directors who do not
personally benefit financially from their work on the board. Not-for-profits review the expertise needed todirect the activities of the organization and engage individuals who can and are willing to add their skills
and knowledge to the governance of the organization. Safer’s by-laws allow up to 30 board members, but
for practical reasons Safer does not seek 30 individuals. Safer’s board members have expertise in policing,banking, legal systems, business leadership, marketing, policy, finance, not-for-profit management, and somehave criminal records.
B. Funding and Endowment Board
Safer receives multi-year government funding for its Adult Transition Programmes and other initiatives. Many of the contracts, even though they are multi-year, require renewal annually and are based on
both outcome and budget management performance. In addition to government contracts, Safer receives
funding from private foundations which range in amounts as small as $5,000 to a five year grant of$5,000,000. Safer is very adept at recognizing what services need to be provided for its clients’ success.
The organization works to secure dollars from one source if possible but will blend funding streams whenappropriate and necessary. For example, some funders are willing to support educational programming
while others may only want to fund job training. Services for one client that include education services andjob training would be supported by both funding sources.
Safer’s financials are audited annually by external independent auditors to ensure government andfunder requirements are met. Safer has been recognized by government agencies and private foundations
as outstanding in the management of its financial resources. Early adoption of a cost accounting systemallows Safer’s funders to follow their grant dollars through the finance system and ensure that the dollars
are expended as directed.

Prior to 1995 Safer established an Endowment to hold all real assets (property) and to serve as a place
for collecting donations to be managed over more than one year. The Endowment exists only to serve
Safer. When projects warrant additional funding and support that cannot be attained anywhere else, theorganization can apply to the endowment for a grant. The Endowment also affords Safer a budget safetynet when grant and contract payouts are not timely. For example, today the State of Illinois is in its
seventh month of the fiscal year and it has not passed a budget. Some not-for-profits that have solely reliedon government contracts to pay for their services have had to close their doors because they could not60162ND INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
sustain themselves during these restrictive periods of time. Safer’s good credit standing and credit line,
access to discounted payouts, and funds that are available through the Endowment has made Safer astrong not for profit that can continue its operations at the same level year to year.
C. Staffing
Safer Foundation has nearly 300 employees and its operations and staffing structure reflects its blendedsocial-service, public policy-business model, and its internal structure and staffing reflects all three. Several
positions are direct reports to the President/CEO so that every aspect of the organization’s operations is
consistently given directly to the President/CEO.

All staff receive competitive compensation packages consistent with their positions. Healthcare, retirement assistance, the same number of paid holidays as their government counterparts, sick and vacation
time are available to employees. While Safer experiences turnover for lower-level jobs in the organization,
Safer is a stable organization with some employees having over 30 years’ tenure at Safer.
D. Safer Foundation Employment Model
Safer Foundation’s primary goal is to connect its clients to jobs that provide living wages that will allow
them to care for themselves and their families. Safer provides employment services exclusively to workers
with criminal histories and all of its services work together to achieve the goal of long-term employment.
Safer’s clients are predominantly male, minority (in the case of Safer, African American), undereducated,and come from communities with high rates of unemployment, high rates of crime, and single family
households.

61

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 99
According to a report from the Urban Institute, a three state study found approximately 40% of people
released from prison were employed at the time of arrest and the 60% who were not employed had neverheld legitimate jobs. 5 Most of the men are non-custodial parents. While a fair number of women havechildren for whom they resumed custody after release, many who come to Safer are in the midst offighting to regain custody of their children. Safer provides an array of services directly or in partnershipwith other community-based organizations that include:
Mentoring
Educational Intervention
Service Learning
Expungement and other civil legal service support
Follow-Up
Safer

Foundation’s

Screening

Employment Services
Industry Training
Mental Health Services
Substance Abuse Treatment

Process:

Retention

Services

Model

Private sector employment is the organization’s goal and is accomplished primarily from Safer’s demand-driven workforce development model where the agency helps employers find qualified workers,
retains them and increases their skills to increase their effectiveness on the job after placement. Safer’sorientation process includes assessing the client’s needs and identifying any issues that may impede its
ability to place the client in a traditional job. In this phase the client is also tested to determine his/her
aptitudes, interests, abilities, and pre-requisites. Clients are then placed on one of three pathways todetermine their employment service track: “job ready” with or without credentials; transitional employ5 Visher, C., Debus, S., & Yahner, J. (October 2008). “Employment after Prison: A Longitudinal Study of Releasees in Three

States.” Research Brief. Urban Institute. Available at <http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publicationpdfs/411778-Employment-after-Prison-A-Longitudinal-Study-of-Releasees-in-Three-States.PDF>.

62

162ND INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
ment; or supportive services to first address employment barriers. A “job ready” client who has credentials
and a work history is matched to current real-time job opportunities. Clients who do not have credentials
but some work history are placed in a skills training programme and connected to temporary employment
opportunities that fit around their training schedule. Clients who do not have any skills or work history areplaced in transitional employment that is time-limited, wage-paying jobs that combine real work, skill development and support services.
The transitional employment services provide an opportunity to help them overcome substantial
barriers to employment and establish a work record. The transitional jobs are through Safer’s staffing
company or through other subsidized employment opportunities. Upon completion of the transitional employment phase, the client’s pathway is reassessed for career planning to begin. All of Safer’s clients
receive job preparedness training and job coaching services in addition to the skill development.
Safer has strong relationships in most industries but a strategic decision was made to target industries
that needed skilled candidates and had opportunities that could be open to its clients if they received
important services like academic bridge programmes,6 job readiness training, industry recognized credentials and job placement services. Safer created a Demand Skills Collaborative that integrates both its demand-side and supply-side workforce development services. Safer uses an employer-driven employment
model that includes identifying high-growth occupations; preparing justice-involved individuals to compete
for those jobs by focusing on employers’ expectations for skilled, productive and dependable employeeswith good personal management skills; and providing industry-standard training and certifications.7 The
industries Safer focuses on are healthcare, manufacturing, agribusiness, food service/hospitality, transportation, and telecommunications. The industries are referred to as hubs.
Healthcare is a major industry hub, for example, because in Chicago, Illinois there are thousands ofopen healthcare positions. In fact, in the United States the healthcare industry is forecasted to have significant worker shortages because of a lack of skilled workers to meet the growing demand for healthcare
services. 8 High-tech manufacturing companies have expressed concern that there are not enough trained
workers to fill key positions. Therefore, with this industry and job analysis, Safer has identified several jobs
for which its clients have the opportunity to earn credentials and build careers. Their options are asdiverse as advanced manufacturing, commercial truck driving, welding, and new fields like cellular
wireless tower engineering and urban and rural farming.
The Demand Skill Collaborative partnership consists of businesses that have a demand for labor;training organizations that can deliver industry recognized credentials; a workforce development intermediary to identify and screen qualified candidates and deepen employer relationships; funders to bring
resources to the demand driven model; and industry experts who can provide understanding of terminology, trends, certifications and industry needs. The success of the Collaborative requires the partners tohave a deep (and mutual) understanding of the labor market, its needs, issues and potential solutions. This
workforce model provides a deeper level of employer engagement, is driven by employers’ need to increase
outcomes, and is designed to put candidates on a career pathway with a strong outlook that would lead tofinancial stability. Safer in the end can successfully train and place its clients in high demand, higher
paying occupations.

6 Academic bridge programmes provide students with opportunities to acquire knowledge and skills that will increase theirtransfer eligibility and academic success in a particular field or industry.

7 National Institute of Corrections. “The Employer-Driven Employment Model for Justice-Involved.” Accessed January 14,

2016. Web. <http://nicic.gov/employerdrivenemploymentmodel>.

8 Lennon, Chauncey. “Jobs in Health Care on the Rise, but Skills Gap Prevents Hiring: Companies and civil leaders need tocollaborate on employment-training opportunities.” Editorial. USNews.com. N.p., 17, Feb. 2015. Web. 14, Jan. 2016. <http://
www.usnews.com/news/stem-solutions/articles/2015/02/17/op-ed-jobs-in-health-care-on-the-rise-but-skills-gap-prevents-hiring>.

63

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 99
Safer’s Demand Skill Collaborative Model

E. Sheridan Prison Model
In 2004, then Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich re-opened the Sheridan Correctional Centre in an
attempt to make Illinois a national model for drug crime prevention within the correctional system. The
governor recognized that a high percentage of people in prison were drug addicted and, without access totreatment, they would resume the use of illegal drugs upon their release from prison. If the participants
were successful in this programme they would be less likely to recidivate by buying, using and selling
drugs.
Three not-for-profit agencies were selected to provide services that started inside the prison andsupported a seamless transition to community no matter where the inmates were released within thestate. Illinois Treatment Alternatives for Safer Communities (TASC) provided case management services,
WestCare Foundation provided substance abuse treatment services, and Safer Foundation delivered employment services. During the admission process inmates classified as medium security level were given
an opportunity to acknowledge a problem with drugs and/or alcohol and agree to treatment.
Inside the prison a modified therapeutic community model offered participants the chance to learn theskills, techniques and strategies to manage addiction challenges. Participants also learned how to workwith and depend on others. Case management staff, like the staff of the other programme segments had
assigned work spaces in the prison and met with their clients individually on a regularly scheduled basis
and in group sessions. An evidence-based curriculum was used to deliver skills training.
Safer used its screening and retention employment model that was discussed but a few additional components were added to support the programme features. A module on supervisory training for correctional
officers taught them how to set expectations, review performance against expectations and give feedback.
This was particularly important since one of the consistent problems for justice-involved individuals in theworkplace is accepting feedback and responding positively to criticism. Both correctional officers and64162ND INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
inmates appreciated this aspect of the training. Safer created evaluation checklists to facilitate the evaluation and feedback. Another change to the standard curriculum was the extensive use of role play withconstructive feedback, again giving participants an opportunity to practice both giving and receiving
feedback. Finally, employers were brought into the prisons to provide interview practice for some participants and actual job interviews for those that were going to be released from prison within a reasonable
period of time. Prior to the client’s release, case managers worked with the men to develop community
re-entry plans. Connection to treatment, mentors, employment services, and community-based case management were some of the components of the plan.
In the 2005 IDOC annual report, results from a one-year study comparing the first 150 inmates
released from Sheridan with a control group; “12 percent of Sheridan parolees were rearrested compared
to 27 percent of the other group (roughly 55 percent reduction); and that 2 percent of Sheridan parolees
were re-incarcerated compared with over 10 percent of the other group (a roughly 66 percent reduction).9
Evaluations were done at scheduled time intervals. While the percent difference between participants andcontrol groups fluctuated, inmates who engaged in the treatment programme recidivated at a lower rate
than those who did not.
Unfortunately, budgetary constraints and administration changes resulted in a shift from a facility
dedicated to treatment to one that was overcrowded. Employment services inside the prison were discontinued and overcrowding in the prison system has spilled over to Sheridan. However, this model when implemented properly does work and should be considered as an option.
F. Policy WorkAs a result of Safer’s long history, large service pool, and exclusive service experience with people withcriminal records the agency is invited often to sit on federal, state and local policy boards and task forcesthat are charged with developing programmes and policies that would have the greatest positive impact.
In 2001, Safer formed the Council of Advisors to Reduce Recidivism through Employment (CARRE), toorganize supportive communities of people and organizations working to support the re-entry needs of justice-involved individuals. CARRE is made up of 100 members representing leaders of support groups,
community organizations, employment and supportive service non-profits, government agencies, faith-based
groups, civil and human rights organizations, universities, and elected officials across the City of Chicago
that work together with public policy advocates, employers, and legislators to develop and implement strategies to reduce barriers to employment and encourage successful reentry.

9 Illinois Department of Corrections Annual Report Fiscal Year 2005, p. 12.

65

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 99
CARRE has worked together to successfully advocate for policy changes that support re-entry such as
expansion of the State’s expungement and sealing of criminal records to creating employment programmes
inside and outside of the jails and prisons. CARRE has also helped increase educational and employment
opportunities for formerly incarcerated individuals by working to build political will for support forre-entry and by eroding the stigma associated with criminal record. The group has produced and issued
policy papers and conducted campaigns that have effectively built public and political support for prisoner
re-entry programmes. These efforts have led to the creation of several new laws that created hiring
standards for the consideration of job candidates with criminal records, restoration of civil rights through acertificate of relief of disability, employer tax credit, and negligent hiring protections for businesses. The
group also works together to change the City of Chicago’s hiring standards and develop Cook County ordinances that increased housing and employment services in the county. CARRE secured nearly a quarterof a million dollars in grants for policy and advocacy groups that provide free legal services, housing assistance, and substance abuse treatment.
G. Partnership Structures
Traditional government and private sector partnerships have been contract-based with government
agencies adapting standard terms for all contractors. The government agency served as the “boss” in therelationship and all other parties’ thoughts, opinions, and knowledge were considered subservient to that ofgovernment project leaders. Partnerships were also formed based on funding. In some instances State Departments of Corrections secured federal funding that required partnerships with community-based organizations. In other situations not-for-profits secured private foundation funding that required government
partners. Although many of these partnerships accomplish the desired results, the struggle and tensionthat arise from the unequal power dynamics of the partnership significantly affects implementation andlong-term maintenance of the relationship.
Jennifer M. Brinkerhoff, Professor of Public Administration and International Affairs at George Washington University in Washington, DC in “Government-Nonprofit Partnership: A Defined Framework”
defines the ideal type of partnership:“Partnership is a dynamic relationship among diverse actors, based on mutually agreed objectives,
pursued through a shared understanding of the most rational division of labour based on the respective comparative advantages of each partner. Partnership encompasses mutual influence, with acareful balance between synergy and respective autonomy which incorporates mutual respect, equal
participation in decision making, mutual accountability and transparency.”10
She goes on to note that “Partnership is promoted both as a solution to reaching efficiency and effectiveness objectives…”11 Partnership as defined by Professor Brinkerhoff is exactly right. The best outcomesare generated when all participants are allowed to offer relevant input with an expectation of serious consideration of all participants’ suggestions.
Organizations like the Safer Foundation have established credibility and built relationships for over 40
years. When negotiating contract terms and conditions, performance measurements, and the process forcorrecting problems these agencies and the government body should work together to include specifics
that are relevant to work that will be done rather than using general terms set for all contracts.
Not-for-profits operating in the states are more likely to be involved in early discussions for new initiatives. However, if contracts are to be let as a result of those agreements, care has been taken to not give
any organization an unfair advantage. Today you are more likely to see early inclusion in planning particularly since many federal grants require it. In addition to government partnerships, not-for-profits partnerwith other not-for-profits that offer expertise in different areas as was noted in the discussion on Sheridan.
These partnerships may be formed to seek funding, but in many cases they are formed to better serve
their clients.

10 Brinkerhoff, J.M. (2002, March 12) “Government-Nonprofit Partnership: A Defined Framework.” Public Administration

Development. Vol. 22, n.1.

11 Ibid.

66

162ND INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
H. Performance Outcomes
Safer utilizes a scorecard to measure its effectiveness internally. The four major quadrants withmetrics are Mission, Internal-Human Capital Effectiveness, External Market Effectiveness, and Finance.
Quarterly reports are provided to the board and used as a management tool within the organization.
Measurements that are included but also reported externally are the number of Safer clients achieving
employment in a given year, three-year recidivism rates for Safer clients as determined by academic institutions focused on criminal justice programme evaluation.
Safer’s website (www.saferfoundation.org) proudly displays its success in placing people in jobs. The
banner reads “4,200+ Safer client job starts per year.” Client job retention rates are also reviewed at 30, 90,
180 and 365 day markers.
In 2011, Loyola University released a report on the recidivism rate of individuals who received employment services from the Safer Foundation. Loyola tracked clients from FY2008 to FY2011. The study
concluded that the recidivism rate for individuals who received Safer’s employment services and achieved
employment was 24.3 percent.12 The three-year recidivism rate for Safer Foundation clients who achieved
30-day employment retention was 17.5 percent, a 63 percent lower recidivism rate than the statewide recidivism rate of those released from prison during the same time period, 47.0 percent based on the IDOC
FY2011 recidivism percent for inmates released in FY2008 from the Illinois Department of Correction andre-incarcerated within three years of release. Among those who went on to achieve 360-day retention, only
15.7 percent recidivated in a three-year period after achieving the 360-day retention.
I. Organizational Challenges
There are internal and external challenges faced by not-for-profit organizations whose missions areprimarily to provide employment services for workers that have criminal histories. Employment organizations in general must understand and be able to navigate the multitude of laws and policies that may
impact their ability to place their clients in certain jobs. The negative perceptions and stigma faced bypeople with criminal conviction records often creates additional challenges with placing them in a wellpayed position. When the economy and the labor market are in a downturn, workers with criminal records
are rarely considered because there is significant competition for jobs.
Employment and housing are considered the biggest challenges that have the greatest influence overan individual’s success of remaining crime free. Nearly 50 percent of individuals in jails were unemployedat the time of their arrest and between 60 percent and 75 percent of formerly incarcerated people arejobless up to a year after release.13 Moreover, homelessness often precipitates incarceration. Individuals incarcerated in jails are 11.3 times more likely to be homeless than the general population and 15 percent ofpeople in prison previously experienced homelessness.14 While employment is a critical need, housing is themost immediate challenge faced by people leaving prison. The employment challenges faced by the people
with criminal records are unique to each individual, though there are some commonalities among various
subgroups. The level of difficulty faced by an individual during reintegration is often dictated by the
personal, criminogenic,15 and structural challenges that exist for that individual. However, the primarychallenge is making sure the organization is expending its resources with clients who want to live up to
the challenge of overcoming his or her circumstances.

12 Safer Foundation Three-Year Recidivism Study 2008. Loyola University tracked clients from FY2008 to FY2011. Web.

Access 2016, January 10. <http://www.saferfoundation.org/files/documents/Safer%20Recidivism%20Study%202008%20
Summary.pdf>.
13 Petersilia, J. When Prisoners Come Home: Parole and Prisoner Reentry. Chicago, Ill: University of Chicago Press, 2003;
Travis, Jeremy, But They All Come Back: Facing the Challenges of Prisoner Reentry, Washington D.C.: Urban InstitutePress, 2005.
14 Knopf-Amelung, S. Incarceration & Homelessness: A Revolving Door of Risk. In Focus: A Quarterly Research Reviewof the National HCH Council, 2:2. (November 2013). National Health Care for the Homeless Council. Available at: <www.
nhchc.org>.
15 Behaviors or activities associated with crime or criminality.

67

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 99

IV. CONCLUSION
In the United States, government agencies provide some direct services but they also rely upon community-based organizations to help provide re-entry assistance to the justice involved population becauseof the great numbers of people in need of service and the intensity of their service needs. Safer provides arange of programmes and services to help formerly incarcerated individuals find employment. Each year,
Safer Foundation helps thousands of people with criminal records choose a new direction of responsibility,
education, and productivity. Without intervention, 52 percent return to prison. By contrast, fewer than 22
percent of those receiving Safer’s services go back. Its partnership with government agencies and thecommunity at large is critical to improving the efficiency of the public safety plans for communities andimproving the outcomes that are necessary to change lives and ultimately reduce recidivism.
Re-entry services require the involvement of the entire community that is set to receive returning
citizens, and they must be engaged and prepared to positively impact prisoner re-entry to reduce recidivism. Safer Foundation will continue to be a part of collaborative efforts that involve law enforcement,
service providers, businesses and corrections to develop innovative approaches to prisoner re-entry and tocomprehensively address the transitional needs of both the returning clients and their community.

68