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 topeople with criminal records to help them become law abiding employed citizens. To
accomplish its mission, Safer does not limit itself to direct 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 theorganization’s mission) and stayed the course. Because of that level of discipline thousands ofpeople with criminal records are employed, supporting their families, and contributing to theircommunities. Tax payers have saved millions of dollars and while in the United States crime insome places have remained at unacceptable levels; there are fewer victims because of Safer’swork. 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 theopportunity. 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 are even more laudable. At the end of June 2014 (the most recent data available) the
Illinois Department of Corrections (IDOC) reported they had 48,921 adult inmates in its prisonsof which 94.1 percent were male with an average age of 37 years old. 1 Adult parolees were
numbered at 28, 242 adults and 90.7 percent of them 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 the jurisdiction of the Cook County Sheriff’s office. According to the
Circuit Court of Cook County, “the Adult Probation Department receives approximately 14,000
new probation supervision cases annually and has an active 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.
1

Illinois Department of Corrections Annual Report 2014, pp. 64-68.
Ibid.
3
Cook County Sheriff’s Office. Cook County Department of Corrections. Available at
http://www.cookcountysheriff.org/doc/doc_main.html
4State of Illinois Circuit Court. Adult Probation Department Profile. Available at
http://www.cookcountycourt.org/ABOUTTHECOURT/OfficeoftheChiefJudge/ProbationDepartments/Probationfor
Adults/AdultProbationDepartment/Profile.aspx
22

The disproportionate ratios between the number of community supervision officers to thenumber of people 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, and probation staff, having effective partners at strategic points in theservice 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 thecriminal justice population , what it achieves and how, performance outcomes, partnerships, andfinally, challenges facing the organization. Know that there are differences in how not for profits
are structured and how they do their 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 in federal prisons in three states. Noting that inmates were not finding jobs
upon release, the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) asked the Portland Cement Association (theAssociation) to develop a programme to help place men being released from federal institutions
into construction industry jobs. The Association’s leadership accepted the challenge andassigned 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.

3

A year later, the Association’s leadership decided the programme was not a good fit andwanted to be relieved of its responsibility. Bernie and Gus believed in the mission and elected tolead the programme as a separate entity. They initially co-located with another not for profit
focused on criminal justice issues and worked 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 werepeople with criminal records and others from the community who cared about helping peoplechange their lives. These individuals worked together, but not always peacefully. One of Safer’slong 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 to support Safer’s efforts.
After Safer received an increase in the amount of its federal grant, it began to hire people in paid
positions.
As grant opportunities for state and local governments became available Safer expanded
its reach, but stayed 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 yearwith nearly 300 staff in community based residential, community based non-residential andinstitutional 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 andcorporate partners.

4

II.
A.

SAFER STRUCTURE

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 to direct 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, businessleadership, marketing, policy, finance, not for profit management, and some have criminal
records.
B.

Funding and Endowment Board
Safer receives multi-year government funding for its Adult Transition Programmes andother 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 when appropriate 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 includes education services and job training
would be supported by both funding sources.

5

Safer’s financials are audited annually by external independent auditors to ensure
government and funder 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 system allows Safer’s funders to follow their grant dollars
through the finance system and ensure that the dollars are expended as directed.

Safer’s FY 15 budget was $24,728,008

Federal: $3,900,230
State: $13,901,230
Local Government: $918,869
Private: $5,937,977
Individual Giving: $69,043

Prior to 1995 Safer established an Endowment to hold all real assets (property) and toserve as a place for collecting donations to be managed over more than one year. The
Endowment exists only to serve Safer. When projects warrant’s additional funding and support
that cannot be attained anywhere else, the organization can apply to the endowment for a grant.
The Endowment also affords Safer a budget safety-net when grant and contract payouts are nottimely. For example, today the State of Illinois is in its 7th month of the fiscal year and it has notpassed a budget. Some not for profits that have solely relied on government contracts to pay for
their services have had to close their doors because they could not sustain themselves during
6these restrictive periods of time. Safer’s good credit standing and credit line, access todiscounted payouts, and funds that are available through the Endowment has made Safer a strong
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 structurereflects its blended social service- public policy-business model 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.

President/CEO

Chief Operating
Officer

Vice President/Chief
Financial Officer

Vice
President/Community
Corrections

Associate Vice
President/Policy andStrategy

Associate Vice
President/Human
Resources

Associat Vice
President/Modern
Development

All staff receives 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 of themselves and their families. Safer provides employment
7

services exclusively to workers with criminal histories and all of its services work together toachieve the goal of long-term employment. Safer’s clients are predominantly male, minority (inthe case of Safer, African American), undereducated, and come from communities with highrates of unemployment, high rates of crime, and single family households.

According to a report from the Urban Institute, a three state study found approximately
than 0% of people released from prison were employed at the time of arrest and the 60% who
were not employed had never held legitimate jobs. 5 Most of the men are non-custodial parents.
While a fair number of women have children for whom they resumed custody after release, many
who come to Safer are in the midst of fighting to regain custody of their children. Safer provides

5

Visher, C., Debus, S., & Yahner, J. (October 2008). “Employment after Prison: A Longitudinal Study of Releaseesin Three States.” Research Brief. Urban Institute. Available at
http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/411778-Employment-after-Prison-A-LongitudinalStudy-of-Releasees-in-Three-States.PDF

8

an array of services directly or in partnership with other community based organizations that
include:Mentoring

Employment Services

Educational Intervention

Industry Training

Service Learning

Mental Health Services

Expungement and other civil legal
service support

Follow-Up

Substance Abuse Treatment
Safer Foundation’s Screening 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 findqualified workers, retains them and increases their skills to increase their effectiveness on the job
after placement. Safer’s orientation process includes assessing the client’s needs and identifying
9any issues that may impede its ability to place the client in a traditional job. In this phase theclient is also tested to determine his/her aptitudes, interests, abilities, and pre-requisites. Clientsare then placed on one of three pathways to determine their employment service track: “jobready” with or without credentials; transitional employment; or supportive services to first
address employment barriers. A “job ready” client who has credentials and a work history ismatched to current real-time job opportunities. Clients who do not have credentials but somework 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 are placed in transitional employment that is time-limited, wage-paying jobs thatcombine 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 throughSafer’s staffing company or through other subsidized employment opportunities. Uponcompletion of the transitional employment phase, the client’s pathway is reassessed for careerplanning 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 totarget industries that needed skilled candidates and had opportunities that could be open to its
clients if they received important services like academic bridge programme, 6 job readinesstraining, 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 high6

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

10

growth occupations; preparing justice-involved individuals to compete for those jobs by focusing
on employers’ expectations for skilled; productive and dependable employees with 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, IL there arethousands of open 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 thegrowing 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 thisindustry and job analysis, Safer has identified several jobs for which its clients have theopportunity to earn credentials and build careers. Their options are as diverse 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 successof the Collaborative requires the partners to have a deep (and mutual) understanding of the labor

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 leadersneed to collaborate 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-risebut-skills-gap-prevents-hiring11

market, its needs, issues and potential solutions. This workforce model provides a deeper levelof employer engagement, is driven by employers’ need to increase outcomes, and is designed toput candidates on a career pathway with a strong outlook that would lead to financial stability.
Safer in the end can successfully train and place its clients in high demand, higher paying
occupations.
Safer’s Demand Skill Collaborative ModelE.

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 the12correctional system. The governor recognized that a high percentage of people in prison were
drug addicted and without access to treatment they would resume the use of illegal drugs upon
their release from prison. If the participants were successful in this programme they would beless likely to recidivate by buying, using and selling drugs.
Three not for profit agencies were selected to provide services that started inside theprison and supported a seamless transition to community no matter where the inmates werereleased within the state. 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 the skills, techniques and strategies to manage addiction challenges. Participantsalso learned how to work with and depend on others. Case management staff, like the staff ofthe 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 skill training.
Safer used its screening and retention employment model that was discussed but a few
additional components were added to support the program features. A module on supervisory
training for correctional officers taught them how to set expectations, review performanceagainst expectations and give feedback. This was particularly important since one of theconsistent problems for justice-involved individuals in the workplace is accepting feedback andresponding positively to criticism. Both correctional officers and inmates appreciated this aspectof the training. Safer created evaluation checklists to facilitate the evaluation and feedback.
13

Another change to the standard curriculum was the extensive use of role play with constructive
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 someparticipants and actual job interviews for those that were going to be released from prison withina reasonable period of time. Prior to the client’s release, case managers worked with the men todevelop community reentry plans. Connection to treatment, mentors, employment services, andcommunity 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 wererearrested 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 othergroup (a roughly 66 percent reduction). 9
Evaluations were done at scheduled time intervals. While the percent of difference between
participants and control 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 afacility dedicated to treatment to one that was overcrowded. Employment services inside theprison 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.
E.

Policy WorkAs a result of Safer’s long history, large service pool, and exclusive service experience

with people with criminal records the agency is invited often to sit on federal, state and local
9

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

14

policy boards and task forces that are charged with developing programmes and policies thatwould have the greatest positive impact.

In 2001, Safer formed the Council of Advisors to Reduce Recidivism throughEmployment (CARRE), to organize supportive communities of people and organizations
working to support the reentry needs of justice-involved individuals. CARRE is made up of 100
members representing leaders of support groups, community organizations, employment andsupportive service nonprofits, 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 toreduce barriers to employment and encourage successful reentry.
CARRE has worked together to successfully advocate for policy changes that support
reentry 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 helped15increase educational and employment opportunities for formerly incarcerated individuals by
working to build political will for support for reentry and by eroding the stigma associated withcriminal record. The group has produced and issued policy papers and conducted campaigns thathave effectively built public and political support for prisoner reentry 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 a certificate of relief ofdisability, 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 quarter of a million dollars in grants for policy and advocacy groups that provide freelegal services, housing assistance, and substance abuse treatment.
F.

Partnership Structures
Traditional government and private sector partnerships have been contract-based withgovernment agencies adapting standard terms for all contractors. The government agency served
as the “boss” in the relationship and all other parties’ thoughts, opinions, and knowledge wereconsidered subservient to that of government project leaders. Partnerships were also formed
based on funding. In some instances State Departments of Corrections secured federal fundingthat required partnerships with community based organizations. In other situations not for profits
secured private foundation funding that required government partners. Although many of thesepartnerships accomplish the desired results, the struggle and tension that arise from the unequal
power dynamics of the partnership significantly affects implementation and long term
maintenance of the relationship.

16

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 mutuallyagreed 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 a careful 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 andeffectiveness objectives…” 11 Partnership as defined by Professor Brinkerhoff is exactly right.
The best outcomes are 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, performancemeasurements, and the process for correcting problems these agencies and the government bodyshould work together to include specifics that are relevant to work that will be done rather thanusing 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 partner with other not for profits that offer expertise in10

Brinkerhoff, J.M. (2002, March 12) “Government-Nonprofit Partnership: A Defined Framework.” Public
Administration Development. Vol. 22, n.1.
11
Ibid.

17

different areas as was noted in the discussion on Sheridan. These partnerships may be formed toseek funding, but in many cases they are formed to better serve their clients.
F.

Performance Outcomes
Safer utilizes a scorecard to measure its effectiveness internally. The four major

quadrants with metrics are Mission, Internal-Human Capital Effectiveness, External Market
Effectiveness, and Finance. Quarterly reports are provided to the board and used as amanagement tool within the organization.
Measurements that are included but also reported externally are the number of Saferclients achieving employment in a given year, three year recidivism rates for Safer clients asdetermined 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

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%20Summary.pdf

18inmates released in FY2008 from the Illinois Department of Correction and re-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.
G.

Organizational Challenges
There are internal and external challenges faced by not for profit organizations whose

missions are primarily to provide employment services for workers that have criminal histories.
Employment organizations in general must understand and be able to navigate the multitude oflaws and policies that may impact their ability to place their clients in certain jobs.

The

negative perceptions and stigma faced by people with criminal conviction records often creates
additional challenges with placing them in a well-payed position. When the economy and thelabor market are in a down turn, 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 over an individual’s success of remaining crime free. Nearly 50 percent of individuals
in jails were unemployed at the time of their arrest and between 60percent and 75percent offormerly incarcerated people are jobless up to a year after release. 13 Moreover, homelessness
often precipitates incarceration. Individuals incarcerated in jails are 11.3 times more likely to behomeless than the general population and 15percent of people in prison previously experienced
homelessness. 14 While employment is a critical need, housing is the most immediate challenge
faced by people leaving prison. The employment challenges faced by the people with criminal

13Petersilia, 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 Institute Press, 2005.
14
Knopf-Amelung, S. Incarceration & Homelessness: A Revolving Door of Risk. In Focus: A Quarterly Research
Review of the National HCH Council, 2:2. (November 2013). National Health Care for the Homeless Council.
Available at: www.nhchc.org

19

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 dictatedby the personal, criminogenic, 15 and structural challenges that exist for that individual. However,the primary challenge is making sure the organization is expending its resources with clients whowant to live up to the challenge of overcoming his or her circumstances.

III.

Conclusion

In the United States government agencies provide some direct services but they also rely
upon community based organizations to help provide reentry assistance to the justice involved
population because of the great numbers of people in need of service and the intensity of thetheir service needs. Safer provides a range of programs and services to help formerly
incarcerated individuals find employment. Each year, Safer Foundation helps thousands ofpeople with criminal records choose a new direction of responsibility, education, andproductivity. 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 the community at large is critical improving the efficiency of the public safety plans forcommunities and improving the outcomes that are necessary to change lives and ultimately
reduce recidivism.
Reentry services requires the involvement of the entire community that is set to receive areturning citizens and they must be engaged and prepared to positively impact prisoner reentry to
reduce recidivism. Safer Foundation will continue to be a part of collaborative efforts thatinvolve law enforcement, service providers, businesses and corrections to develop innovative15

Behaviors or activities associated with crime or criminality

20

approaches to prisoner reentry and to comprehensively address the transitional needs of both thereturning clients and their community.

21