U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

National Institute of Justice

DEP

ARTMENT OF JUSTICE

OF

FIC

E OF JUSTICE PRO

GR

AM

S

BJA

N

IJOJJ DP BJS

OV

C

National Institute of JusticeP r o g r a m F o c u s

Project Re-Enterprise:A Texas Program

In Cooperation with the National Institute of Corrections, U.S. Department of Justice andthe Office of Correctional Education, U.S. Department of Education

2 National Institute of Justice

PROGRAM FOCUS

Project Re-Enterprise:A Texas ProgramBy Marilyn C. Moses

the years that might attract an em-ployer’s attention. The other womenwere nervous and empathized withtheir friend. One tried to offer somesupport, “Relax, we’ve been preparingfor this for weeks. We’ll all do justfine.”

Inside the multipurpose room repre-sentatives from more than 20 areaemployers gathered—Ed Moore from

On October 25, 1995 in Burnet, Texas, scoresof women, clutching painstakingly completed jobapplications, lined an unadorned hallway outsidethe multipurpose room, anxious for the Project Re-Enterprise (PRE) job fair to begin. One middle-agedwoman, terrified but guardedly optimistic about herfirst job interview, stated that, although never em-ployed, she had developed a number of skills over

HighlightsEfforts to turn around the lives of con-victed and sentenced offenders dependfor their success on the understanding andcooperative involvement of many indi-viduals and groups both within and out-side the criminal justice system. Thoseengaged in the difficult business of reha-bilitation recognize that offenders releasedinto the community have little chanceof remaining there unless they are givenopportunities to become productive andself-sustaining members of mainstreamsociety. This Program Focus describesProject Re-Enterprise (PRE), a Texas-based program administered by the CrimePrevention Institute (CPI) that enlists theparticipation of local business leaders inan educational initiative to hone the job-seeking skills of inmates. In the processof helping incarcerees, PRE offers em-ployers the chance to provide a publicservice, learn about an untapped source ofpotential workers, and broaden theirperceptions of criminals and the correc-tional community.

Of Special Interest:

■ PRE began as an experiment by twocriminal justice innovators—both advo-cates of prison-based drug abuse treat-ment—to try and interrupt the cycle ofrepeat offending to which drug offendersand other inmates are doomed unless,on release, they have viable employmentprospects.

■ In 4 years, the PRE program has grownfrom a pilot project involving one correc-tional institution and nine participatingemployers to a program that involves morethan 300 businesses in several correc-tional institutions across the State.

■ Employers who participate in PRE arenot pressured to hire the inmates theyagree to interview, nor are they asked tochange company personnel policies or makeany commitment beyond involvement inthe mock job fairs; program originatorscite this practical approach as key to gain-ing the business community’s support.

■ However, some employers have vol-untarily altered their policies and prac-tices with regard to hiring ex-offenders.Participation in PRE helped them see thatcrime adversely affected their businessesand professions, as well as their commu-nities; it also “humanized” both criminalsand corrections, removed the shroud ofsecrecy associated with hiring ex-offend-ers, and placed the corporate communityin a position to effect social change.

Although other corrections departmentshave indicated an interest in replicatingthe program, they should be aware of thecosts and time involved. PRE’s employerrecruitment has been labor intensive, withmore than 70 percent of the operatingbudget allocated to salaries and benefitsof staff and contractual employees. It hasalso required a leader with charisma andconnections to the business communityand public funding sources.

Program Focus 3

PROGRAM FOCUS

Tracor, Leroy Wormley from IBM,Etta Moore Aguilar from Lone StarGirl Scout Council, Ann Meuggefrom Burnet Dry Cleaners, and PeteWisener from Hill Country Health, toname a few. John Etchieson, presidentof Central Texas’ Better BusinessBureau,1 was working the crowd—many attendees were members of hisorganization. Employer representa-tives discussed last week’s Universityof Texas football game and the latesteconomic forecasts over a continentalbreakfast. After morning coffee, theyreviewed their interview schedules,took seats at their company tables,and signaled their readiness to begin.As the doors swung open, anticipationfilled the room.

To the keen observer, somethingclearly was unusual about this jobfair. The job seekers did not wanderfrom table to table; instead, on thehalf hour, they regularly moved tokeep prescheduled appointments withemployers. The eyecatching corporatebooths normally found at job fairswere not in evidence, and while thehuman resource officers representingeach firm seemed well prepared, thetypical company marketing materialswere noticeably absent.

At the end of the day PRE staff, em-ployer representatives, and job seekersagreed that the event had been suc-cessful—yet applicants received nojob offers. In fact, in the 16 job fairssponsored by PRE over 3 years, notone employer has hired an intervieweeon the spot.

This Program Focus defines the PREprogram and discusses its formation,operations, and funding of at least six

such fairs annually throughout Texas(see exhibit 1). It also highlights signsof the program’s success, questionsabout its future, and options for itsreplication elsewhere.

What Is ProjectRe-Enterprise?Although it seemed to share elementsof an employment program for dis-placed homemakers, the October 25event was actually a mock job fair forwomen offenders at the Burnet Unit,

one of Texas’ substance abuse felonypunishment facilities. PRE is an infor-mal education program administeredby the Crime Prevention Institute(CPI)2 for male and female inmates,employers, and the public. Althoughnot a job placement program, PREassists inmates in completing job ap-plications and provides interviewingpractice in the classroom as well as inthe intensive setting of the mock jobfair, where the norm is six interviewsper inmate with employers from thecommunity.

Exhibit 1. Schedule of Mock Job Fairs

Number of NumberDate Location Employers of Inmates

11/10/92 Kyle New Vision 9 6002/10/93 Kyle New Vision 13 3904/20/93 Kyle New Vision 19 8701/27/94 Kyle New Vision 29 9604/28/94 Jester 1 23 10507/07/94 Hackberry 32 7508/25/94 Jester 1 34 11310/06/94 Kyle New Vision 32 9611/10/94 Hilltop 31 10012/08/94 Jester 1 28 8801/19/95 Kyle New Vision 46 10603/02/95 Hackberry 36 8004/20/95 Jester 1 40 9406/22/95 Giddings St. School** 29 4507/13/95 Beaumont* 33 4010/25/95 Burnet 27 4502/07/96 Beaumont* 23 5503/21/96 Plane State Jail* 31 5605/09/96 Dominguez State Jail* 25 3906/20/96 Burnet 19 4107/25/96 Atascasita* N/A N/A09/19/96 Beaumont* N/A N/A

*These facilities are not in-prison therapeutic communities but are part of the StateJail Division.**This is a juvenile facility.N/A: not available.

4 National Institute of Justice

PROGRAM FOCUS

here, but let’s not kid ourselves. Weare going to have to call off the partysoon. It won’t be long before theseguys get out, and if they can’t findjobs, you can bet that, despite all wehave done, they will be back.”

Bonner and Southerland thought abouthow most people find jobs and howemployers recruit them. They consid-ered adapting the job fair conceptused by high schools and colleges to acorrectional setting, and Southerlanddeveloped a marketing strategy:

I knew that I couldn’t go to theemployment community and say,‘you should hire an ex-offenderjust because it is the right thingto do.’ But I thought the em-ployment community wouldbuy an educational opportunityfor themselves as well as forthe inmates. We could offer

PRE employers have an opportunityto provide a public service and learnmore about the skills and qualifica-tions of a potential labor pool; all of-fenders participating in PRE return totheir community within 60 days orless. The program puts a human faceon the criminal justice system. Eachbusiness owner or human resourceofficer3 who participates in PRE isalso a Texas citizen with an opinionabout offenders and the criminal jus-tice system. Through face-to-face in-terviews they learn that, along withcriminal backgrounds, inmates havenames, faces, and educational andwork histories. For many of these citi-zens, PRE provides their first “behindbars” experience, which may altertheir preconceptions about criminalsand corrections.

How ProjectRe-EnterpriseCame AboutPRE was the brainchild of RobbSoutherland, a former member of theTexas Commission on Alcohol andDrug Abuse (TCADA),4 and JohnBonner, then warden of the Kyle Unit,Texas’ first in-prison therapeutic drugtreatment facility.5 Southerland andother TCADA members worked hardto secure legislative passage of Texas’1991 drug treatment initiative, whichgave rise to the pilot program at Kyle.Having “labored in vineyards” to bringabout this policy change, Southerlandwanted to work with Bonner to followthe initiative through to implementation.

When the Kyle Unit opened in May1992, Bonner reflected, “We shouldbe proud of what we have put together

NIJ-NIC-OCE Collaborate on Offender ProgramsIn an earlier Program Focus, Work in Ameri-can Prisons: Joint Ventures With the PrivateSector, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ)and the National Institute of Corrections (NIC)announced a renewed commitment to worktogether on a number of initiatives to assistoffenders in learning job skills and ultimatelybecome employed. Since then, another ally—the U.S. Department of Education’s Office ofCorrectional Education (OCE), has joined inthis effort.

In the past year, the three agencies havedemonstrated the synergistic value of col-laboration. NIC’s Office of Correctional JobTraining and Placement has developed a database of more than one thousand agencies thatprovide job skills training and job counseling,development, and placement services. NIC isworking with NIJ, OCE, and other agenciesto develop a curriculum for service providers.

NIJ, NIC, and OCE have pooled limited fundsto jointly produce at least seven publications

highlighting promising approaches in offendertraining, life skills education, and job place-ment. This Program Focus is the first publi-cation in this series.

At the outset these agencies recognized thatsuccess would depend on involving otherFederal agencies, State and local govern-ments, and private and not-for-profit organi-zations. To this end, NIC convened severalmeetings with numerous agencies. These ses-sions have been critical to short- and long-term strategy development.

NIJ has engaged the most critical and histori-cally untapped partner to this effort—thecorporate community. In September 1996,NIJ will host a first-of-its-kind national con-ference, “It’s Our Business: A National Cor-porate Summit on Investment in CriminalJustice Solutions.” At this gathering, busi-ness leaders who have hired ex-offenders, areinvolved in offender training, or are engagedin private sector prison industries will

encourage their colleagues to follow theirlead. NIC and OCE will co-sponsor this event.

Last year we as directors of the three agen-cies asked our staffs to take a fresh look attraditional approaches. They have succeeded.At this juncture they—and we—are facedwith the challenge of sustaining movementon the continuum from this success to signifi-cant impact. We are committed to meeting thechallenge.

Jeremy TravisDirector

National Institute of Justice

Morris ThigpenDirector

National Institute of Corrections

Richard SmithDirector

Office of Correctional Education

Program Focus 5

PROGRAM FOCUS

employers an opportunity to testthe reality of the criminal justicesystem against their perceptions.I was sure that I could makethe sale as long as there wereno strings attached—no commit-ment to hire or to change theirpersonnel policies.

We had no idea whether or notthis idea was worthwhile, but weknew it was worth trying. Thefirst mock job fair held at Kylewas an experiment. The first cluethat we might be onto somethingwas when I noticed that someemployers, after winding up themock interview, gave their busi-ness cards to offenders so theywould have a community contactwhen released. At the end ofthe day, several employers askedus when we were going to dothis again. Of course, we hadn’tthought about that and really hadno plan.

Word of PRE’s simple but novel ap-proach has spread rapidly throughoutthe Texas business community andhas received considerable local andnational coverage from the print andbroadcast media.

What Does It TakeTo “Pull Off” aPRE Mock Job Fair?Big ideas, simple in concept, have away of luring people into the beliefthat implementation is easy. Anyoneconsidering instituting a PRE-likeprogram would do well to recognizethat a labor-intensive effort is required

Exhibit 2. Annual Budget Breakdown

Percentage Amount

Salaries/Fringe Benefits 73.0% $180,675(staff and contractual employees)*

Travel/Meals 7.0 17,325

Telephone, Fax, Voicemail 4.0 9,900

Rent/Office Space and Utilities 8.0 19,800

Postage/Printing 1.0 2,475

Office Furniture and Supplies 3.0 7,425

Equipment Rental 2.0 4,950

Miscellaneous, Accounting Services, 2.0 4,950Repairs, and Contingency

100.0% $247,500

*Program staff include a program director, assistant director, program specialist, programassistant, office manager, and part-time contractual staff as needed.

to carry out and sustain it over time.In fact, representatives from a fewcorrectional systems have visited PREwith the intention of replicating theprogram, but, to date, none has at-tempted to do so.6 The first challengemay be funding.

FundingSince the first mock job fair wasa “two-man show,” it required thatSoutherland take time from his per-sonal business endeavors to recruitemployers and that Bonner handleinstitutional logistics. When the busi-ness community expressed a desirefor the program’s continuation, bothmen knew that an effort beyond theircapabilities was required to sustainand expand it to other institutions.The Crime Prevention Institute appliedto the Texas Board of Criminal Jus-tice7 (TBCJ) for funding; in 1993, CPIwas awarded a $450,000, 22-monthcontract. PRE was launched.

On September 1, 1995, a 2-year renewalcontract was issued for $495,000, with

a string attached—CPI was requiredto raise $150,000 in private funds forfuture support of the program. PRE’sTBCJ contract renewal hearing wasatypical. In addition to Southerland,CPI’s chairman, two others testified:Red McCombs, a well-known Texasentrepreneur with letters of supportfrom the business community in hand,and Frank Henry, a crime survivor.Career correctional administratorsmight ask themselves if they can re-member any occasion when a memberof the business community and a vic-tim of crime testified for continuedfunding of a corrections program. TheTBCJ vote to renew PRE’s contractwas unanimous.

Other State and local jurisdictionsconsidering implementation of a simi-lar program might find the contract’scosts prohibitive. The budget shouldbe put in perspective (see exhibit 2).Moreover, the budget contained somestartup costs, for items such as furni-ture and equipment, that are one-time-only expenditures.

6 National Institute of Justice

PROGRAM FOCUS

said Houston. “The hurdle isto convince the correctionaladministration and staff thatthis is a necessity and that theircooperation is needed.”

The host facility is obligedto make several other arrange-ments: providing a continen-tal breakfast for corporatevolunteers during the morningorientation, beverages in theinterview area throughout theday, and a buffet-style lunch;setting up interview tables andhanging company signs in the

interview area; and setting up tablesand chairs, a microphone, and a po-dium in the breakfast and lunch area.After the event, a crew is also requiredto break down this furniture andequipment.

Security staff must provide employ-ers with safe parking and access totelephones and bathrooms, and theyare asked to be flexible with regardto inmate count time so that it doesnot occur during the fair. Finally,corrections staff need to ensure thatthe front-gate processing of corpor-ate representatives is accomplishedsmoothly. According to Houston:

The degree of institutionalorganization and cooperationvaries from facility to facility.With some it is just a matter ofrunning down a checklist theday before the event with acorrections administrator. Atthe other end of the spectrum,it may require an entire day ofnegotiation with the correctionsstaff to get things done.

Generally, CPI requires 4 weeks ofintensive preparation to stage each ofthe six mock job fairs held each year.The crux of the program is employerrecruitment. Although Texas is largerin geographic area than the 13 originalcolonies, institutions served by PREare found in an area not larger than therelatively small State of Maryland.Ultimately, significant cost reductionsfor program replication could resultfrom consideration of the followingquestions:

■ Currently, are there correctionalstaff whose job it is to find jobs foroffenders?

■ If so, could they be trained to takea different approach—working inclose partnership with the businesscommunity?

■ Is there a business leader or organi-zation that would be willing to take onthis program as a public service?

The key to the program’s operationis the interaction among the correc-tional institution, the program’s

administration (in Texas, the CrimePrevention Institute), and the businesscommunity.

The CorrectionalInstitution’s RoleOnce a warden agrees to having hiscorrectional institution become a PREhost site, CPI’s executive director,Melissa Houston,8 begins planningand scheduling to make the mock jobfair a reality. Houston, assisted byCPI staff, works in tandem with of-fenders participating in the programand with institutional custody, treat-ment, and education staff.

To host a mock job fair, correctionspersonnel need to accommodate cer-tain PRE requirements: inmates at-tending the event must wear laun-dered, pressed uniforms and be clean-shaven and neatly groomed; in addi-tion, releases must be signed andarrangements made for all inmatesto lunch at one sitting. “Contrary topopular perceptions, inmates knowthat their appearance is important,”

At PRE mock job fairs, inmates rotate every half hour to interview with approximately six volunteeremployers.

Ph

oto

by

Ma

rily

n C

. M

ose

s

Program Focus 7

PROGRAM FOCUS

The Crime PreventionInstitute’s RoleThe preparation for each mock job fairincludes employer recruitment, confir-mation, and orientation; inmate prepa-ration; coordination of inmate skillswith employer labor needs to set upinterview schedules; and orchestrationof an employer-participant lunchtimepresentation on the criminal justicesystem. After the mock interviewsare conducted, CPI staff evaluate theevent.

Employer recruitment. As one mightimagine, employer recruitment is themost challenging and time-consumingaspect of the PRE program. During thefirst 2 years, Southerland “knocked ondoors” and did all recruiting in person.

For those considering replication, akey question is whether this programis dependent on one dynamic leader.Approximately 20 business ownerswho were early PRE participantswere surveyed. One question askedwas, “Initially, if your local wardenhad called and asked you to spend 1day helping inmates hone their job-seeking skills, what would have beenyour response?” Every employer an-swered negatively. One said, “We getbeg calls all the time; we have to beselective as to how we spend our com-munity service time.” All indicatedthat Southerland’s personal requestwas responsible for their decision toparticipate.

Along with charisma and an unwaveringbelief in PRE, Southerland possessesthe ability to envision criminal justicesolutions—with the business commu-nity playing a key role—to the problem

of recidivism. He readily admits thathe used the statewide network of busi-ness and political connections that hehad developed over the years to recruitemployers for the program.

About midway through PRE’s thirdyear, Southerland began gradually toshift employer recruitment responsibil-ity to staff. By this time he had suc-cessfully recruited more than 150employers and received considerablemedia exposure; in addition, someemployers had begun to make word-of-mouth referrals to their colleaguesand associates. Thus, when Souther-land delegated recruitment responsi-bility to staff, he had already createdacceptance of the program within thebusiness community. Today, employerrecruitment is almost exclusively astaff function.

CPI’s employer recruitment is a full-time occupation, but it has shiftedfrom the in-person, one-on-one ap-proach to telephone soliciting. “Itis very difficult to do over the tele-phone,” says Houston. “There areabout five rejections for every em-ployer who accepts. Some recruitersare more successful than others. Thereis a real technique to it. The pitch isthat we are seeking a community ser-vice contribution that will take only1 day of an employer’s time; weare not asking that the company hirean offender or change its personnelpolicy, and we reveal the names ofother businesses in the communitythat are PRE participants.”

Presentations to civic and profession-al groups, large and small, are maderegularly throughout the year aspart of CPI’s education mission.

Experience has shown that few em-ployers volunteer in response to thisrecruitment approach. Currently, CPIis reassessing its employer marketingstrategy to determine how best toachieve optimum results. It appearsthat future efforts may involve ahybrid approach.

Inmate preparation. About 3 weeksprior to a scheduled mock job fair,CPI staff begin to prepare offendersfor the event. The process opens witha half-day session devoted to fillingout a “generic” job application form.During this time a number of inmatequestions are discussed, such as:

■ I have never had a job other thanin prison; what should I write on theapplication?

■ How do I answer the “felony”question?

■ What do I put down for salary?I don’t get paid for my prison job.

■ I left my last job because I wasarrested; how should I answer thequestion concerning my reason forleaving?

Offenders also have difficulty remem-bering dates and find this aspect ofcompleting an application form particu-larly stressful. At the conclusion of thefirst session, inmates complete a skillssurvey that is matched later to employerneeds. This practice helps to make theupcoming practice interviews moremeaningful to both parties.

Two weeks before the mock job fair,CPI staff meet with inmates for twoadditional half-day sessions duringwhich offenders receive assistance

8 National Institute of Justice

PROGRAM FOCUS

smoothly and professionally,”says Houston. “We know thatour employers will not return ifthey perceive disorganizationor feel that their time is beingwasted.”

Employer confirmation andscheduling. Confirming em-ployer participation prior to thePRE mock job fair is not a proforma task; it requires approxi-mately 3 working days. Someemployers may cancel, so re-placements must be recruited.Another 3 days are needed toschedule or match employerlabor need profiles to inmateskill surveys. CPI staff believethat computerizing this processwould save time.

Employer orientation. Businessowners or employer represen-tatives assigned to participatein the mock job fair receiveno training in advance of theevent. They simply receivemailed directions to the hostcorrectional facility, includingexpected time of arrival andother relevant information. Toensure that everything runssmoothly, CPI staff arrive atthe institution well ahead ofthe 8:30 a.m. start time. Arriv-ing employers are greeted byCPI staff in the visitor recep-

tion area and escorted to the roomwhere continental breakfast is served.

After welcoming remarks by CPI staffand correctional administrators, a brieforientation is provided. Employers aregiven a list of the applicants they are

Texas Benefits For Hiring Ex-OffendersRefunds and Credits for Hiring More WorkersReimbursements for Providing On-the-Job TrainingFree Fidelity Bonding for Unbondable Employees

An employer may become eligible for these benefits upon hiring an ex-offender. The tablebelow provides some basic information about nine employer benefit programs provided bythe Texas State and Federal Governments.

Some of the programs target ex-offenders explicitly. Others focus on populations in which ex-offenders are well represented. For example, almost 13 percent of the Texas Department ofCriminal Justice inmates are veterans. Similarly, many ex-offenders, especially women, havelow incomes and dependent children; they may be eligible to receive Aid to Families withDependent Children (AFDC). Thus, a new State program that allows employers who hireAFDC recipients to receive tax refunds is described.

Program Main Employer Benefits Target EmployeesTargeted Jobs Federal Income Tax Credit Ex-Offenders Tax Credit and Others

Federal Bonding Free Individual Fidelity Ex-Offenders Program Bond Insurance for Employee and Others

Dishonesty

Texas Enterprise State Sales and Use Tax Ex-Offenders Zone Program Refunds; State Franchise and Others

Tax Reduction

Credit for Wages State Franchise Tax Credit Inmates and Paid to Inmates Ex-Offenders and Former Inmates

Job Training Reimbursement of Training Ex-Offenders Partnership Act Wages and Others

Tax Refund for Refund of Various State AFDC Recipients Wages Paid to Taxes Including Franchise, AFDC Recipients Sales and Use, etc.

Service Members Reimbursement of Training Veterans Occupational Wages Conversion and Training Act Program

Job Training Reimbursement of Training Veterans Partnership Act, Wages Title IV-C, On-the-Job Training Program

Smart Jobs Fund Job-Related Skills Training Texas Program Grants Residents

in completing actual job applicationsprovided by each employer withwhom they are scheduled to inter-view. These applications are clearlystamped, “For Education Purposes.”Time is also spent role-playing theupcoming mock job interview.

The day preceding the PRE event,CPI staff meet a final time with in-mates to answer any last-minutequestions. They also meet with acorrections administrator to confirmthat all logistics have been taken careof. “It is critical that everything run

Program Focus 9

PROGRAM FOCUS

scheduled to interview and remindedthat adherence to the 30-minute inter-view schedule is essential. Employersare encouraged to be honest with in-mates and also cautioned against rais-ing unrealistic expectations throughremarks such as, “You’re really great;I’d hire you in a minute.”

The mock job interviews. Follow-ing orientation, employers report totheir interviewing stations, which aremarked by large signs hanging fromthe ceiling. While participating em-ployers are never asked to hire inmateson release, CPI provides each businessparticipant with information aboutexisting incentives to hire ex-offenders(see “Texas Benefits for Hiring Ex-Offenders” and “Federal BondingProgram”).

Each interview session lasts 30 min-utes. The first 20 minutes are spent onthe actual job interview, during whichemployers ask typical tough questions,e.g., “Why should we hire you overall the other people applying for thisjob?” In the final 10 minutes of theinterview, applicants are provided withfeedback on their performance. JohnEtchieson of the Better Business Bu-reau advised one woman during herinterview, “You appeared very ner-vous during the interview. I suggestthat you acknowledge that you arenervous and explain why. You mightsay, ‘I’m really talented and have a lotto offer, but I am not sure I can ex-press it to you.’” In addition, Etchiesonsuggested that the applicant concen-trate on communicating the work skillsthat would make her valuable for thejob and avoid discussing personalitytraits.

At the conclusion of the interview,the employer completes a short writtenevaluation of the applicant’s perfor-mance that is returned to the inmateon the following day in a classroomsetting. Evaluations are used as teach-ing tools.

Lunch. Midway through the interviewday, both employers and inmates breakfor lunch.9 During this time, employ-ers have an opportunity to exchangetheir impressions of the inmates andthe PRE experience in general. CPIalways arranges to have a lunchtimepresentation on some aspect of thecriminal justice system. At the October1995 Burnet PRE event, the womenput on a skit for the employers abouttheir recovery from drug addiction.

Evaluation. On the day following thePRE mock job fair, Houston returnsto the facility and meets with offend-ers for a final time. The purpose ofthis session is to review the employ-ers’ written evaluations of interviewperformances.

The BusinessCommunity RoleThe business community participateson a voluntary basis and is only askedto help offenders polish their job-seeking skills. As an ancillary resultof the PRE experience, some employ-ers voluntarily change their policiesand practices related to hiring ex-offenders, others do not, and somecannot due to the nature of their busi-nesses. But as the following exam-ples illustrate, PRE participation hasled to a deep commitment to theprogram.

Red McCombs Automotive Com-pany. Red McCombs’ career in theautomotive business began in CorpusChristi, Texas, in 1950. In 1958 herelocated to San Antonio, where hebecame partner and then owner ofRed McCombs Automotive Company.Today McCombs’ automotive opera-tions—ownership of 30 auto fran-chises and partnership in 10 others—are the largest in Texas and rank sixthin the United States. His business in-terest in the automotive industry con-tinues, but he expanded his portfolioto include sports, real estate, oil andgas, broadcasting, ranching, finance,and insurance operations.

McCombs became an ardent supporterof PRE after reading a newspaper arti-cle about the program:

I was so impressed with thesimplicity and practicality ofthe approach. After reading thearticle, I immediately pickedup the telephone, contacted theCrime Prevention Institute, andasked if I could help.

You are a business person withyour head in the sand if you arenot concerned about crime andits impact on your business, yourcustomers, and you as an indi-vidual. For about 5 years priorto reading the newspaper article,I had been concerned aboutcrime and the growth of theprison population. While I wasconcerned, I didn’t know of anyway to plug into the problemand make a difference—ProjectRe-Enterprise provided me withthat.

10 National Institute of Justice

PROGRAM FOCUS

Since his involvement with PRE,McCombs has raised the visibilityof the program in the businesscommunity and encouraged his col-leagues to become involved.10 “It isnot a hard sell. It is so practical. Lookat these people, they are dead in thewater without a job. Without a job,the taxpayers can count on supporting

them in correctional institutions indef-initely,” said McCombs.

Beyond promoting further businessinvolvement, McCombs has publiclycommitted to hiring 10 parolees peryear.11 “I am committed to PRE be-cause I know it is the right thing todo, and I feel good doing it,” said

McCombs. “However, I would belying if I said that altruism was myonly motivation. I have a professionalstake in doing what I can to reducecrime. I cannot tell you the number ofpeople that come into my showroomsand leave without a car. It is not be-cause they cannot afford the monthlycar payments. Car insurance premiums

U.S. Department of Labor’s Federal Bonding ProgramNo Bond; No Job!Barrier Removed

The Federal Bonding Program (FBP)provides individual fidelity bonds toemployers for job applicants who are(or may be) denied coverage by com-mercial carriers because of a:

■ Record of arrest, conviction, or impris-onment.

■ History of alcohol or drug abuse.

■ Lack of an employment history.

■ Dishonorable discharge.

What is Bonding?

Many employers carry insurance to pro-tect themselves against employee dishon-esty by purchasing insurance called fidel-ity bonding. However, this commercialinsurance usually will not cover ex-of-fenders and other persons whose personalbackgrounds are questionable. As a re-sult, these job applicants are labeled “notbondable” and routinely denied job op-portunities.

FBP coverage is provided at NO COSTto the employer or the job applicant.Any job can be covered. The bond is-sued has NO DEDUCTIBLE amountof liability for the employer to assume.

How Does the FederalBonding Program Work?

Eligibility: Fidelity bonding may be pro-vided for any individual who is not com-

the amount of the FBP coverage to theexact theft risk needs of the potentialemployee’s job.

The bond may cover a period of up to 12months. However, at the end of the FBPcoverage, if the employer cannot arrangefor bonding through his/her own insur-ance company or through another com-mercial underwriter, The Aetna Casualtyand Surety Company will make availablebonding at a regular commercial rate foranyone who has been bonded withoutdefault under the FBP.

How Successful is theProgram?

A recent report showed that:

■ About 33,000 bonds have been issued.

■ The default rate for the FBP is under 2percent. This means that claims havebeen paid on fewer than one in 50 bondees.

■ Employers of FBP bondees have ex-pressed a high degree of satisfaction withtheir performance.

For more information about any aspect ofthe FBP, you may call or write:

Joe Seiler, Program DirectorThe Federal Bonding ProgramThe McLaughlin Company1725 DeSales Street, N.W., Suite 900Washington, D.C. 20036202–293–5566800–233–2258

mercially bondable, not self-employed,has received a firm job offer (for a job thatoffers full-time, steady work with reason-able expectation of permanence), and isqualified for the job.

Application: Coverage is provided bythe Aetna Casualty and Surety Companythrough FBP, which is administered bythe State Employment Security Agency.Either the job applicant or the prospectiveemployer (on behalf of an applicant oremployee) may apply for fidelity bondinginsurance at any local office of the StateEmployment Security Agency. There aremore than 1,700 of these offices through-out the United States, its possessions andterritories. These offices often are identi-fied as the State Job Service or the StateEmployment Service.

Processing: The application procedure issimple and quick. Bonding coverage be-comes effective immediately when:

■ The authorized State or local employ-ment security office personnel have certi-fied the bond. The process usually takesonly a day or two.

■ The applicant has begun work.

Coverage: Coverage usually begins onthe first day of work for new employees.The bond is mailed to the employer byAetna.

A representative of your local employ-ment security office can help you match

Program Focus 11

PROGRAM FOCUS

kill a lot of my sales. Customers wouldbe shocked to learn how much oftheir insurance premiums are to off-set car-theft risk.”

Texas Instruments, Inc. Texas In-struments (TI) is a Dallas-based na-tional company that employs 31,000people in Texas. Keith Thomas, Hu-man Resources Director for TI-Austinpublicly announced that the companyhad changed its policy against hiringfelons as a result of its PRE experi-ence. “The old policy of not hiringanyone convicted of a felony for atleast 1 year after release has now beenchanged to consider applicants forimmediate employment if the felonyconviction did not involve violence.”12

Fluor Daniel. Fluor Daniel is an in-ternational construction engineeringcompany and a participant in the PREprogram. A human resource officerfor Fluor Daniel, Frank Henry, re-members that his first PRE encounterwas made with great reluctance. “Theonly reason I went was because mymanager asked me to,” said Henry.“I was none too thrilled about the idea.It would be my first time in a prison.I was not sure what I would be facedwith and how I was going to copewith it all, given what had happenedto Helen.” Helen, Frank Henry’s latewife, was murdered in July 1985 whenDavid Lee Holland, a 50-year-old un-employed man, robbed the JeffersonSavings and Loan in Beaumont, Texas.Holland was executed in 1993.13

At first I was really overwhelmedwith complex emotions too diffi-cult to explain. A change in per-spective came over me with each

interview. I was impressed withthe inmates’ openness, frankness,and the fact that they seemed soimpressed that people from pri-vate industry cared about them.I realized that these people werenot too different than me. Per-haps they had not had the bestguidance growing up, and theyhad definitely made the wrongchoices along the way. I left want-ing to do what I could to help.

Today, Henry not only attends severalPRE events each year, but on behalfof Fluor Daniel, he has hired 18 ex-offenders. “I have found them to beexcellent employees. As far as I know,none has gotten in trouble again. Allremain employed with us or havemoved onto jobs with some of ourcompetitors.”

Henry reflects on his change of heart.“My opinion used to be hardlined. Iwas a lock ‘em up and throw awaythe key guy. Now I realize that my

attitude was just not realistic. Mostof these folks are coming home andwill become our neighbors. If wedon’t get involved and attempt toturn this around, the alternative isthat they will clean our house out,rob us, or worse.”

Capitol Chevrolet. Capitol Chevroletin Austin, Texas, has been a family-owned business for 60 years. WilliamCromwell currently manages the busi-ness, which employs 135 employeesand sells over 2,500 new and usedvehicles annually.

William Cromwell could not haveknown that his initial PRE experiencewould be pivotal. As a first-time vis-itor to a prison, he was surprised byan atmosphere that was more pleasantthan anticipated and by the qualityof the inmates participating in theprogram. Other than these revelations,however, the day was rather uneventful.

Ed Moore from Tracor gives an encouraging smile to an inmate practicing her interviewing skillsat the Burnet Therapeutic Drug Treatment Unit.

Ph

oto

by M

arilyn

C. M

ose

s

12 National Institute of Justice

PROGRAM FOCUS

Current Employer-Participants in PRE3M-6B Enterprises ■ Advanced Micro Devices ■ Affiliated Placements ■ Alamo Community College District ■ Alamo Travel and Tours ■

American Personnel & Temps ■ American Value ■ AMOCO ■ Anjin Computing ■ APAC/Texas ■ Apple Computers ■ Apple Toyota ■ AssociatedBuilders and Contractors ■ ATDS Truck Driving School ■ Attorney General’s Office ■ Austin American Statesman ■ Austin Community College■ Austin Construction Steel Company ■ Austin Industrial ■ Backlog ■ Baptist Hospital ■ Baylor University ■ Beaumont Surgical ■ BetterBusiness Bureau ■ BFI-ACCO Recycling Center ■ BFF-Waste Services ■ Blinn College ■ Bluebonnet Electrical Cooperative ■ BorinquenInsulation ■ Brown and Root Building ■ Browning Ferris Industries ■ Burnet County ■ Burnet Dry Cleaners ■ Cajun Contractors ■ CampbellIndustries ■ Capital Metro ■ Capitol Bolt & Supply ■ Capitol Chevrolet ■ Career & Recovery Resources ■ Carrington Builders ■ CEN-TEXNissan ■ Central Texas Council of Governments ■ Central Transportation Systems ■ Chrysler Airborne ■ City of Austin ■ City of Beaumont■ City of Burnet ■ City of Gatesville ■ City of Houston ■ City of Marble Falls ■ Clayton Homes ■ Clean Cut ■ Clola Enterprises ■ Clorox■ Commercial Metals ■ Compaq Computers ■ Concepts of Care ■ Concrete Coring ■ Connecticut Mutual Insurance ■ Continental Airlines■ Conoco ■ Consumer Credit Counciling ■ Covert Ford ■ Covert Buick/Isuzu ■ Cypress Semiconductor ■ Dallas County-Dallas Morning News■ Dell Computers ■ Diamond Shamrock ■ Donna K’s Clothing ■ Doubletree Hotels ■ Droemer Industries ■ Dunhill Temporaries ■ EfficientSystems ■ Employment Resources ■ Enron Corporation ■ Entergy/GSU ■ Evins Temporaries ■ Exxon ■ Fabricon International ■ FaulknerConstruction Company ■ Fiesta Mart ■ Fluor Daniel ■ FMC ■ Fort Hood ■ FoxService ■ Fresh Start ■ Gateway Founda- tion ■ General Services Commission ■

Gilbane Building ■ Goodwill Industries ■ Goodyear Tire and Rubber ■ Greater Aus-tin Council on Alcohol & Drug Abuse ■ Green Oaks Apartments ■ Greenbelt Trans-portation ■ Guaranty Bank & Trust ■ Guest Quarters Hotel ■ Hamilton Valley Manage-ment ■ Harris County ■ Harry M. Stevens ■ Hart Graphics ■ HB Zackry ■

HEB(Austin, Beaumont, Gatesville, Hous- ton, San Marcos, Waco) ■ Heritage Insti-tute ■ Hill Country Community Health ■ Hilton Hotels ■ Hoover Building Supply ■

Hoover Construction Company ■ Houston Chronicle ■ Houston Community College■ Houston Lighting and Power ■ Hughes Manufacturing ■ Hyatt Regency Hotel ■

IBM ■ Jaeger’s John Deere ■ Jani-King ■ JC Evans Construction Company ■

Jefferson County ■ John Brown Engineer- ing and Construction ■ Johnson Ford ■

Katz’ Deli ■ Kay Micklitz Forensic Docu- ment Examiner ■ Kemper National Insur-ance Company ■ Killeen Daily Herald ■ Kinsel Motors ■ LF Manufacturing ■

Lamar University ■ Linbeck Construction ■ Lipshy Motorcars ■ Little Feet Industries■ Lockhart Technologies ■ Lone Star Girl Scout Council ■ Lone Star Ice & FoodStores ■ Longhorn Title ■ Lower Colorado River Authority ■ Luby’s Cafeteria ■ M&IElectric ■ M&M/Manpower International ■ Make Ready ■ Marble Falls/Lake LBJChamber of Commerce ■ Mars ■ Mary Kay ■ Marathon Oil ■ Marek EnterprisesManagement ■ Market Place ■ Mason Construction ■ MaxServ ■ McCabe House■ McGinnis Cadillac ■ McLane-McLennan Community College ■ Medical PlasticsLaboratory ■ Mid-Gulf Industrial ■ Mike Smith Auto Plaza ■ Minet Insurance Ser-vices ■ Mobil Oil ■ Modern Manufacturing ■ Morrow Enterprises ■ Motorola ■

National Bank ■ NationsBank ■ Nell Institute ■ NEODATA Services ■ NewDirections TTC ■ New Place ■ New Texas House ■ Ohmstede ■ Olmsted Kirk Paper■ Optical Corporation of America ■ Optiplex of Texas ■ Patriot Homes ■ PetroconEngineering ■ Planned Parenthood ■ Plan- tation Foods ■ Pizza Hut ■ Port ofBeaumont ■ Printworks ■ Program for Human Services ■ Pro Staff ■ Project RIO■ Providence Health Center ■ Questco ■ RMC/El Campo Aluminum ■ ROC CarbonCompany ■ Railroad Commission ■ Ram Threading ■ Randalls (Houston) ■ RedMcCombs Automotive ■ Robert C. Porter Catering ■ Safety Lights ■ SER/Jobs forProgress ■ Safway ■ San Antonio Express News ■ San Antonio Public Works Depart-ment-Scaffolding ■ Salvation Army ■ Schlotzsky’s ■ Scott & White Hospital ■

Seal Manufacturing ■ Sematch ■ Shell Oil ■ Sheraton Astrodome Hotel ■ Seton Hospital ■ Smart Mail ■ Social Security Administration ■Some Other Place ■ Southern Union Gas ■ Southwest Airlines ■ Southwest Constructors ■ Southwest Texas State University ■ SouthwesternBell Telephone (Houston) ■ Star Graphics ■ St. David’s Hospital ■ St. Edwards University ■ Stripling Blake Lumber Company ■ Superior Chair■ Surface Mount Taping Corporation ■ SYSCO Corporation ■ Taco Bell AUSTACO ■ Technical Resource ■ Tarleton State University ■

TempCraft/Austin ■ Temple Daily Telegram ■ Tenneco ■ TempCraft ■ Texans’ War on Drugs ■ Texas Apartment Association/Austin ■ TexasCommerce Bank ■ Texas Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse ■ Texas Comptroller’s Office ■ Texas Department of Mental Health/MentalRetardation ■ Texas Department of Insurance ■ Texas Department of Transportation (Austin and Houston) ■ Texas Disposal ■ Texas EmploymentCommission ■ Texas General Land Office ■ Texas Instruments ■ Texas Monthly Magazine ■ Texas Natural Resources and ConservationCommission ■ Texas Rehabilitation Commission (Austin, Gatesville, Houston) ■ Texas State Technical College/Waco ■ Texas Workers’Compensation Insurance Fund ■ Texas Youth Commission ■ Turner Construction Company/Houston ■ Thrift Mart ■ University of Texas ■ UrbanLeague/Austin ■ Tips Iron and Steel ■ Tracor ■ Transit Mix Concrete ■ Travis County ■ TRECO Janitorial Service ■ Upstairs Maid ■ ValeroEnergy ■ VIA Metropolitan Transit ■ Wackenhut Corrections Corporation/Kyle ■ Wal-Mart (Giddings) ■ White Elephant ■ Whitley PrintingCompany ■ Whole Foods/Texas Health Distributors/Austin ■ Worker’s Assistance Program/Austin

John Etchieson, president of Central Texas’Better Business Bureau, evaluates a jobapplication.

Ph

oto

by M

arilyn

C. M

ose

s

Program Focus 13

PROGRAM FOCUS

Cromwell’s last interviewee of theday was Robert Hall. The interviewwas quite unremarkable—much likeall the others that day. Hall was notscheduled for release in the near fu-ture, so Cromwell really did not givehim a second thought. Two or 3months later, on his first day of re-lease, Hall walked into the CapitolChevrolet showroom and asked tospeak to the owner. Cromwell said:

It was hard for me to place himat first. Hall wanted a job, and Idecided to give him a chance. Iadmired his courage and I feltthat, if I could get him into a jobthat would pay the bills, it wouldhelp him get out of this viciouscycle of drugs and crime.

The in-prison therapeutic com-munity at Kyle did a good jobwith Hall. He had a good atti-tude, he didn’t have a chip onhis shoulder, and he was clearlygrateful for a second chance.

We put him on as a porter.Through weekly payroll deduc-tions, we arranged for him to getan inexpensive used car so thathe would have reliable transpor-tation to and from work. It wasa good investment. Hall was anexcellent employee. It was a win-win situation for Capitol Chevro-let and Hall. He did so well thatwe later moved him to the luberack.

Three months later Hall reluctantlyreported to Cromwell’s office. “Hehad a rather sorry look on his face,”observed Cromwell. “Hall told me thathe got a better job offer from one of

that prison alive. But, I knew itwas an exciting new approachand that something good wouldcome from it. There was proof ofit at the end of day. You shouldhave seen the look on the em-ployers’ faces as they left; it wasa look of conversion. The expo-nential growth of public andprivate employer support for theprogram made the TBCJ vote torenew the contract an easy one.

While CPI does not ask employers toevaluate their PRE experience on site,in June 1995 RBH Direct15 surveyedparticipating employers16 regardingtheir PRE experience and reportedthese findings:

■ PRE was rated as somewhat orhighly effective by 96.7 percent ofemployers.

■ The possibility of hiring ex-offenders was rated as somewhat orgreatly enhanced, as a result of theirPRE experience, by 76.4 percent ofemployers.

■ Nearly all (98.9 percent) employersindicated that they would like to seethe PRE program continue; 97.8 per-cent said they would recommend theprogram to their business colleagues.

■ PRE was the first criminal justiceprogram in which 69.9 percent ofemployers had ever participated.

Because PRE is not an offender jobplacement program, the programcannot be evaluated on the basis ofpost-participation changes in person-nel policies or subsequent hires ofex-offenders. Neither can it equitably

my competitors. He said that he feltas though he was letting me down.Hall was a model employee—a realperformer. I was sad to lose him but,at the same time, happy that he wassucceeding and that life was turningaround for him.”

Hall and Cromwell have remainedfriends. “Not long after Hall left CapitolChevrolet, he got married. I receivedan invitation to his wedding and wasthrilled to go. Robert Hall, throughProject Re-Enterprise, has given methe opportunity to see one person onboth sides of the prison fence.”

Measures of SuccessTo the question of program evalua-tion, Southerland responds, “There area lot of things I cannot prove. Thereis one thing that I can. When the em-ployment community in Texas is givencredible information about the realitiesof the criminal justice system, thenoffered a way to participate, it willdo so voluntarily.” The growth of par-ticipating employers, from 9 to over300, in less than 4 years is evidenceof Southerland’s claim (see “CurrentEmployer-Participants in PRE”).

Another sign is the unanimous supportreceived from the Texas Board ofCriminal Justice for refunding the pro-gram. TBCJ member, Ellen Halbert,14

explains the board’s rationale:

As a board member I attendedthe first Project Re-Enterpriseevent at Kyle. It was interestingto see how terrified some of thecorporate executives were thatday. I could tell that manythought they would never leave

14 National Institute of Justice

PROGRAM FOCUS

is anyone given the chance to haveat least six practice interviews in 1day, with immediate performancefeedback. Educational institutionsand organizations serving displacedworkers could consider followingthis model.

OutlookProject Re-Enterprise is entering itsfifth year of sustained growth in em-ployer participation with many chal-lenges ahead.18 The decision to hire anex-offender takes place in the privacyof a company’s personnel office. Em-ployment of ex-offenders is a taboosubject for many reasons. Often thereis a legitimate fear that if the publicknows that a company employs ex-offenders, business might be lost. Oth-ers do not discuss it openly becauseof their desire not to undermine an ex-offender’s chance for a fresh start. Anobvious consequence of PRE is thatit allows the business community to“come out of the closet” safely. PREprovides an open forum for interestedemployers without the expectation tohire or change personnel policies. Thecloak of secrecy is removed at a PREmock job fair. While offering the in-mate a valuable learning experience,PRE gives employers the opportunityto work toward finding solutions toserious social problems in commoncause with their colleagues and thecriminal justice system.

Some departments of corrections mayfind the cost of the Texas programprohibitive.19 However, correctionaladministrators and business leadersshould be encouraged to think cre-atively and determine whether themodel can be implemented for less in

be evaluated on the basis of inmate jobplacements, job retention, or recidi-vism. PRE’s goal is simply to providean educational experience for both theemployer and offender. Consequently,the scope of a fair evaluation is quitenarrow.

Inmates GivePRE High MarksParticipating offenders are surveyedby CPI staff to determine their percep-tions of the PRE experience. A reviewof their written responses indicatesthat inmates derive great benefit, andcomments made by offenders in afocus group session held after theOctober 1995 PRE event supportthis claim. All agreed that exposureto different employer interviewingstyles was a challenge and that indi-vidual employer assessments of in-mate strengths and weaknesses werehelpful. Most inmates believed thatthey had fared better than expected.“After the second or third interview,it was smooth sailing for me,” saidVanessa.17

Offenders indicated that CPI hadprepared them well; they were cau-tioned that participating employerswere likely to be more pleasant thanthose they might encounter after re-lease. “Many of the company peoplewarned us of the same thing, and thatis good to remember. It is so easy toget discouraged by one bad experi-ence,” said Cheryl.

To its credit, PRE provides opport-unities to inmate participants thatnormally would be unavailable in thegeneral community. Rarely, if ever,

their jurisdictions. Beyond budgetaryconcerns, few criticisms of the pro-gram have been heard.

One criticism of PRE has been itsalmost exclusive focus on Texas’in-prison drug treatment facilities—without a commensurate effort in thegeneral prison population. Souther-land explains, “Some of the best ideasare sown and germinated by chance.Project Re-Enterprise was born at theKyle Unit, Texas’ first in-prison drugtreatment community. After it provedmeritorious, we found that treatmentfacilities were more willing to becomehost sites than were traditional institu-tions. And frankly, given my back-ground and TCADA service, my bestconnections were in the treatmentcommunity. The landscape is chang-ing; we are gradually moving intojuvenile facilities, the State Jail Divi-sion, and prisons. We would love toserve every correctional institutionin Texas, but, obviously, funding isa constraint.”

Another critic suggests that interview-ing without a commitment to hire isnot enough. Southerland responds,“Voluntary involvement without com-mitment was the key that opened thedoor and is responsible for the successof Project Re-Enterprise.”

Yet, some believe a stronger workingrelationship between Texas’ ProjectRIO20 and PRE should be encouragedby funders of both programs. WhileProject RIO provides an informationbooth at most PRE events, the twoprograms have not exchanged listsnaming PRE employers (who volun-tarily express a willingness to hire ex-offenders) and Project RIO employers

Program Focus 15

PROGRAM FOCUS

(who are known to employ offenders).Both programs could benefit from acloser, more cooperative association.

Most observers believe that PRE’ssuccess to date outweighs its short-comings, but the program is currentlyat a critical juncture. PRE faces fu-ture challenges: Can it become self-sustaining,21 expand to serve moreoffenders, and satisfy new demandsmade by participating employers?

Many corporate executives now in-volved in PRE are interested in invest-ing more heavily in criminal justicesolutions beyond mock job fairs. Tothis end, the State Comptroller wouldlike to channel the corporate interestcreated by PRE toward further devel-opment of private-sector prison indus-tries in Texas.22 Others would like tocultivate business involvement in vic-tim assistance, inmate vocational, andjuvenile mentoring programs.

As PRE gathers force and momentum,the Crime Prevention Institute is morethan willing to play matchmaker.“We are not going to turn this problemaround 50,000 people at a time. Itis going to be one-by-one,” advisesSoutherland. “Until we understandthis, we are doomed to repeat ourpast failures over and over again.”

Notes1 The Central Texas Better Business Bureauhas 2,500 members.

2 The Crime Prevention Institute, Inc. (CPI)was created in August 1992 as a nonprofitresearch and educational corporation thatseeks to address the underlying causes ofcrime. Through various projects, such asProject Re-Enterprise, CPI seeks to educate

the business community, media, policymakers,and the general public about the relationshipbetween drug addiction and crime.

3 CPI reports that human resource officersconstitute approximately 60 percent of PREparticipants, while business owners makeup the remaining 40 percent. It should alsobe noted that human resource professionalsrepresenting public and private employers,as well as those who are prohibited fromhiring ex-felons by statute or regulation,participate in PRE.

4 Robb Southerland is a lifelong resident ofTexas. In 1985, Southerland was appointedto the Texas Commission on Alcohol andDrug Abuse (TCADA). He was reappointedto the position in 1991. Southerland servedas both Chairman and Vice Chairman ofTCADA, as well as Chairman of the CriminalJustice Issues Committee, until his resigna-tion in August 1992. After his resignation,Southerland founded CPI.

5 The Kyle Unit previously operated as a pre-release unit in the Texas correctional systemand was privately operated by Wackenhut. InMay 1992 Kyle became Texas’ first in-prisontherapeutic drug treatment facility.

6 There appear to be two reasons that thwartreplication. First, correctional administratorsreport difficulty in gaining entry to thebusiness community (see “Employer Re-cruitment”). A second confounding factorappears to be the labor-intensive nature ofsustaining the program over time (see “TheCrime Prevention Institute’s Role”).

7 The Texas Board of Criminal Justice is com-posed of nine nonsalaried members appointedby the Governor, with the advice and consentof the Senate, to serve staggered 6-year terms.The statutory role of the Board is to governthe Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Itemploys the Department’s executive directorand develops and implements policies thatclearly define the respective responsibilitiesof the Department’s board and staff.

8 As executive director, Melissa Houstonimplements PRE in various correctionalinstitutions served by CPI.

9 Employers and inmates eat separately.

10 In February 1996 Red McCombs receivedthe Texas Department of Criminal JusticeGovernor’s Volunteer Service Award inrecognition of his employer recruitmentefforts and general support of Project Re-Enterprise in the business community.

11 McCombs reports that he will reevaluate thispolicy after 1 year.

12 See Johannes, Laura, “Mock Job FairYields Not-So-Mock Job for Prison Inmates,”The Wall Street Journal, Southwest Edition,August 31, 1994.

13 See Stewart, Richard, “Attitude Adjust-ment: Crime Hit Close to Home, But He HelpsConvicts,” Houston Chronicle, September 10,1995, 1E; and Henry, Frank, “ReclaimingLives: To Avoid Being a Victim, Help Changea Felon,” The Dallas Morning News, January29, 1995 (Home Final Edition), p. 6J.

14 In 1991 Ellen Halbert was appointed to theTexas Board of Criminal Justice (TBCJ). Shewas the first victim of crime to serve on theboard. Halbert’s presence on the board hasresulted in the expansion of victim servicesto probation, corrections, and parole. In 1992and 1993 the U.S. Department of Justice’sOffice of Victims of Crime presented Halbertwith an award for her outstanding service anddedication on behalf of crime victims.

15 RBH Direct is a private accounting andconsulting firm that conducts, inter alia,survey research.

16 RBH Direct conducted a telephone survey ofemployers who had participated as volunteerPRE interviewers. The survey was conductedbetween June 15 and 21, 1995. Of the 183companies who had participated in PRE, RBHidentified 137 employers who had conductedinterviews for inmates and eliminated 46companies from the sample who had onlyprovided information booths and not con-ducted interviews. Of the 137 employers whohad conducted inmate interviews, 93 weresurveyed.

17 Actual names of inmates are not used toprotect their privacy.

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

National Institute of Justice

Washington, DC 20531

Official BusinessPenalty for Private Use $300

BULK RATEPOSTAGE & FEES PAID

DOJ/NIJPermit No. G–91

18 Although employer participation has in-creased significantly, the number of inmatesserved appears to be on the decline. Almost675 inmates participated in PRE in 1994;in the following year, only 410 offendersreceived the benefit of the program.

19 CPI conducts six mock job fairs each yearfor an annual contract cost of $247,500. Usinginmate attendance figures for 1994 and 1995,on average, 542 offenders participate in theprogram on a yearly basis. Hence, the averagecost of administering the program per inmateis approximately $460.

20 Project RIO (Re-Integration of Offenders) isa multiagency initiative involving the TexasDepartment of Criminal Justice InstitutionalDivision, Pardons and Paroles Division, andthe Texas Employment Commission. ProjectRIO’s mission is to assist offenders in findingemployment through in-prison and commu-nity training, support services, and referrals.Project RIO derives its funding from theTexas Legislature’s general revenue funds.Project Re-Enterprise’s funding source is theTexas Board of Criminal Justice and privatedonations.

The National Institute of Justice is a compo-nent of the Office of Justice Programs, whichalso includes the Bureau of Justice Assis-tance, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office ofJuvenile Justice and Delinquency Preven-tion, and the Office for Victims of Crime.

The National Institute of Corrections isa component of the Federal Bureau ofPrisons.

The Office of Correctional Education is adivision of the Office of Vocational and AdultEducation, U.S. Department of Education.

NCJ 161448 August 1996

About this StudyThis Program Focus was written byMarilyn C. Moses, program manager,National Institute of Justice. To receivefurther information about Project Re-Enterprise, contact Ms. Moses at theNational Institute of Justice, 633 IndianaAvenue, N.W., Room 805, Washington,D.C. 20531. Telephone: 202–514–6205;e-mail: moses@ojp.usdoj.gov

On the Cover: Leroy Wormley ofIBM interviews inmate. (Photo byMarilyn C. Moses)

Findings and conclusions reported here arethose of the author and do not necessarilyreflect the official position or policies of theU.S. Department of Justice.

21 If PRE is to become self-sustaining, mone-tary and in-kind support from the privatesector must be cultivated. See “Funding.” Asa condition of CPI’s current TBCJ contract, itmust raise $150,000 from private sources tosupport PRE. In addition, Houston’s RotaryClub has recently announced that it will adoptPRE as one of its community service projects.

22 Sharp, John. Gaining Ground, A ReportFrom the Texas Performance Review: Pro-gress and Reform in Texas Government,Austin, Texas: Texas Comptroller of PublicAccounts, November 1994, Vol. 2, p. 425.