PhilanTopic

Achieving Real Justice: Funding Criminal Justice Reform

(Timothy P. Silard is president of the San Francisco-based Rosenberg Foundation, the largest California-based private funder of criminal justice policy reform advocacy. He was recently appointed co-chair of the Recidivism Reduction & Reentry committee of the new California Attorney General's Smart on Crime transition leadership team.)

An ambitious, multiyear plan to reduce the number of women behind bars.

A major push to expand job opportunities for Californians with past convictions by advocating with major businesses and state government to change hiring practices and combat employment discrimination.

An initiative to change the odds for children by preventing childhood exposure to violence and creating a seamless web of support and treatment to help child victims of violence heal and rebuild their lives.

These are just some of the innovative strategies being carried out by public agencies and local and national organizations to address one of California's biggest challenges -- a broken criminal justice system.

As we enter the second decade of the twenty-first century, there is no question that the Golden State's approach to keeping our communities safe desperately needs new thinking. In fact, fueled by decades of so-called "tough on crime" policies that have handcuffed politicians since the 1970s, it is woefully out of touch.

The result? The state has the largest prison population in the country, with more than 170,000 people behind bars. Eleven percent of the state budget goes to the prison system, yet California has the highest recidivism rate in the country; indeed, two-thirds of people released from prison in California are back behind bars within three years. Meanwhile, to balance a budget crippled by massive corrections expenditures lawmakers have been forced to slash funds for education and crucial social services.

The problem is not confined to California. As a country, we spend $212 billion annually on the criminal justice system. Americans comprise five percent of the world's population, but we have 25 percent of the world's prisoners. Nearly 2.4 million Americans are locked up in jails and prisons across the country, most for nonviolent offenses, and an enormously disproportionate number are poor and people of color. And there are now 2.7 million children with an incarcerated mother or father, a number that has quadrupled over the past 25 years. As the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to take up the issue of California's overcrowded prison system, it is clear that a fear-driven approach to criminal justice and public safety has taken a real toll on communities across the Golden State and the country.

Despite the formidable challenges, there are many successful, proven innovations in this arena, and there are opportunities for real criminal justice reform on the horizon -- and for California to lead the way nationally. California voters just elected a new governor and attorney general, both of whom take office as criminal justice reformers. In January, as part of his proposed budget, Governor Jerry Brown called for the the elimination of the youth prison system and for low-level offenders to be housed in county-run jails instead of the state’s prisons. Attorney General Kamala Harris has helped build a robust policy architecture around being "smart on crime," which in turn has emerged as a rallying slogan for reformers around the country.

Philanthropy has a major role to play in these efforts. Those of us in the field know that we cannot turn things around nationally or in California without the help of the dedicated advocates and organizations on the frontlines of criminal justice reform. These organizations are working hard every day to attack the issue from multiple angles -- from urging government officials to enact specific policy reforms, to providing direct services and a second chance at life to individuals who are reentering society from prison and jail, to changing the hearts and minds of citizens about the best ways to secure public safety. Yet these organizations and advocates cannot achieve lasting and comprehensive success in this area without significant investment and support from foundations and individual philanthropists.

While criminal justice is an area that has been chronically under-resourced in the past, there are signs of increased interest among funders. The Rosenberg Foundation is part of a newly formed national Criminal Justice Funders Network that counts a growing number of funders among its members, including the Open Society Foundations, Ford Foundation, Public Welfare Foundation, California Endowment, Fund for Nonviolence, Omnia Foundation, and Women's Foundation of California, among others.

We partnered in 2009 with the U.S. Department of Justice to convene a major meeting of national criminal justice funders at which more than eighty funders participated in strategic discussions with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and top staff from the Justice Department to identify priorities and areas of potential public/private cooperation. And in 2010, the Justice Department convened a group of funders focused on Reentry and Justice Reinvestment, two of the priority areas identified at the earlier meeting.

But more needs to be done. Because targeted investments by grantmakers in criminal justice reform can alleviate other, often-connected problems, we need to highlight the intersections between criminal justice policy and critical social justice issues such as racial inequality, education, community revitalization, child and family well-being, poverty, housing, and employment and workforce development.

In addition to investing dollars, funders have an unmatched ability to bring together both likely and unlikely allies -- not just reform advocates, but also businesses and community leaders, law enforcement, policy makers, and others -- ensuring that we move beyond issue silos to find common ground, share resources and ideas, and focus collectively on the task at hand.

In terms of facilitating knowledge sharing, funders also can identify and commission research and data on best practices and successes, and help disseminate that knowledge to a broad national audience.

Finally, funders can help to open doors for advocates by making sure that, in discussions and work with public and private partners, organizations and leaders on the frontlines always have a seat at the table.

There are myriad examples of innovative strategies from states and localities across the country that have taken up criminal justice reform, addressing both front-end alternatives to incarceration as well as successful reentry for those returning to their communities from prison and jail. We in philanthropy have the opportunity to lead the way in establishing these strategies as successes that can be replicated and built upon so that they become lasting solutions. It is the only way to achieve real justice and safety for our communities.

-- Timothy P. Silard

Quote of the Day (August 4, 2009)

"The continuing existence of race in the United States indicates conspiracy and cover-up. An attempt to make more palatable to ourselves, and anyone watching, the not-so-secret dirty secret shared by all Americans that our country, in spite of public professions to the contrary, entertains a deeply internalized, segregated vision of itself. We look at ourselves and believe we see White Americans or Black Americans. We perceive our problems as Black or White problems. The urgent task of redressing the shameful neglect of American children gets postponed by hand-wringing and finger-pointing at feckless black fathers and the damage they're inflicting upon their black offspring. Or sidetracked just as effectively by blaming society and exempting blacks because race tells us blacks are permanent victims, not agents of change. The truth of too many black boys in prison, too many black babies dying, too many hungry young black youngsters being raised in dire poverty, too many terrible black schools -- these truths misrepresented by discourses perpetuating the myth of separate races don't spur us to action but become an occasion for shedding crocodile tears, washing our hands of personal as well as collective responsibility. More than half a century ago James Baldwin outed this kind of hiding from the consequences of radicalized thinking as willed innocence. At this late date, displays of surprise or ignorance about how bad things are for our children suggest dishonesty, signify complicity, conscious or unconscious, with the cover-up...."

-- John Edgar Wideman, "Fatheralong," Harper's Magazine (August 2009)

July 20, 1969

(Kathryn Pyle is a regular contributor to PhilanTopic. In her last post, she wrote about the Robert Flaherty Film Seminar.)

Summer of '69, hitchhiking around Europe with a boyfriend. We'd just spent a quiet week drifting down the Loire River Valley in France, one cheap (and charming) hotel at a time, and found ourselves in a busy Barcelona packed with young American tourists like us. We located the ticket office for the boats that went to the Balearic Islands off Spain's Mediterranean coast and asked which one nobody went to. "Menorca," they said. "Nobody goes to Menorca."

The steerage section of the overnight ferry to Menorca was crowded with families, soldiers, and chickens, so we passed the time on the deck. A Spanish man our age approached us shyly and asked if we'd speak English with him. Sharing the post-midnight stillness (such as it was on that old ferry), we gradually learned about life under Franco, and by our dawn arrival in Mahon, the island's capital, we'd found out the real reason he wanted to talk: he was hungry for news of the world, something forbidden under Franco. The Spanish media was tightly controlled; our new friend had seen us reading magazines we'd brought from the States or bought in our travels. Would we give them to him?

Of course.

In appreciation, he invited us to join him and some friends at a café the next morning, July 21, to watch American astronauts land on the moon. The actual touch down was scheduled for the early morning hours, and Spanish television had decided to delay its broadcast of the historic event. We got there early, but the place was more crowded than the ferry had been, all the little tables filled and people standing along the walls and spilling out into the street. Waiters hustled around, bringing everybody what we came to recognize as the Menorcan breakfast: sections of black sausage flavored with fennel, wedges of the bracing "Mahon curado" cheese, bread, and strong coffee.

There was a huge black-and-white television suspended high above the tables and sure enough, suddenly, there was the surface of the moon -- with a man in a bulky spacesuit stepping gingerly onto its surface from an impossibly fragile ladder. We gaped upward with the rest of the awestruck crowd, taking in the sight as if it were magic, making a leap of faith the size of which I haven't experienced since. Like an eclipse of the sun, it left everyone speechless. For us: another American experience that aroused a strange mixture of pride and ambivalence.

Franco is gone, dead since 1975. Decades later, there is a fierce struggle in Spain over the historical memory of that period; over what was true and who should pay for the torture and deaths of so many people, including the great poet Lorca. Because of the efforts of people around the world, and a relative handful of persistent nongovernmental organizations (and the foundations that support them), once-immune leaders and their henchmen have been called to account in country after country, including Liberia, Sudan, and Cambodia. The International Center for Transitional Justice, Human Rights Watch, and Amnesty International are some of the leaders in this movement; "The Reckoning," about the creation of the International Criminal Court, is airing on PBS stations this month.

I'm thinking today about the young man on that ferry, risking arrest for possessing foreign news magazines. I wonder how he fared during those years and whether he's engaged in the continuing global debate about war crimes and justice. I hope so.

-- Kathryn Pyle

Targeting Grant Dollars by Population Group: The Debate Continues

(Larry McGill is the Foundation Center’s senior vice president for research. In a previous post, he wrote about the state of research on diversity in philanthropy.)

Ah, dueling research studies! Each making use of data from the same source -- the Foundation Center -- and each drawing different, yet not incompatible, conclusions. How can that be?

Published earlier this year, the NCRP report Criteria for Philanthropy at its Best analyzed available grants data coded by the Foundation Center as having benefited "marginalized populations" (as defined by NCRP using existing Foundation Center population group categories). The report noted carefully that it only counted grants explicitly targeted to serve such populations.

More recently, the Philanthropic Collaborative's Broad Benefits: Health-Related Giving by Private and Community Foundations analyzed both available grants data coded by the Foundation Center as well as a random sample of two hundred additional grants without population group coding. This allowed Phill Swagel, the report's author, to estimate the total benefit to marginalized populations of foundation giving in the field of health, whether or not these populations were explicitly targeted by grantmakers.

Both analyses make important points. If foundations aren't explicit about the intended beneficiaries of their grantmaking, then we can't know for sure that specific population groups have in fact been strategically targeted. NCRP argues that such strategic targeting is important.

On the other hand, even if foundations don't strategically target specific population groups, such groups may still benefit from their grantmaking. This is what TPC demonstrated in its report.

The third possibility, of course, is that foundations may not be telling us as much as they could about the population groups that benefit from their grantmaking. And that is surely true, as well.

And, by the way, let's remember that not all grantmaking should or even can be targeted to benefit specific population groups. NCRP's report recommends that grantmakers try to allocate at least 50 percent of their grantmaking to benefit marginalized populations, not all of it. That's an implicit acknowledgement that grantmaking cannot be reduced to simplistic equations such as “Grantmaking to Specific Population Groups = Good; “Grantmaking Not to Specific Population Groups = Bad.”

Fortunately, neither NCRP nor the Philanthropic Collaborative reduce the issue to such absurdities. My hat is off to both NCRP's Aaron Dorfman and Phill Swagel for the ways they have so effectively marshaled available data in the service of their respective causes. This is exactly the kind of conversation the Center's data on beneficiary populations should be generating.

-- Larry McGill

Grants That Make a Difference: The 'Men Read' Program

Several of you have shared stories about grants that have changed lives for the better. The latest, submitted by Jolene Constance, assistant warden at the C. Paul Phelps Correctional Center in Louisiana, focuses on a donation not of dollars but of books -- books that have been an instrument of change and opportunity.

Grant Recipient
C. Paul Phelps Correctional Center (state prison for adult males)
DeQuincy, Louisiana

Grantmakers
National Center for Family Literacy
Louisville, Kentucky
and
Verizon Foundation
Basking Ridge, New Jersey

About the Grant
Donation of 1,000 books

The donated books were given to children visiting their incarcerated fathers during National Family Literacy Day weekend and every other weekend during the month of November. The fathers read the books to their children during visits.

Impact of the Grant
The children of incarcerated parents are the silent victims of crime. They do not see their loved ones as convicted felons but as people they love, miss, and can only see during visits. In many situations they are only able to visit a few times a year due to financial and geographic constraints. When children’s fathers read to them during visits, it facilitates reconciliation and a bonding experience that is rare in a prison setting.

Not only do books bridge social barriers, they bridge literacy barriers as well. To prepare, offenders read the same books in literacy classes that they'll read to their children. The program has helped to remove the stigma associated with lower-level reading among the prison population; reading children's books is now respected because those who do are seen as caring parents. This is a wonderful secondary benefit of the program.

What makes this particular grant a good example of the effective use of philanthropic funds?

It has been proven that children of incarcerated parents are at greater risk of becoming offenders themselves. By breaking that link, we can save a whole generation of young people from becoming adjudicated offenders, reduce the number of crime victims, and save taxpayer dollars now spent to house offenders. Rebuilding relationships between offenders who are being discharged and their families is priceless. If offenders are committed to their families, they are less likely to recidivate and more likely to become productive members of society, which means one less single parent household due to incarceration, one less family seeking financial support from government entities, and one less victim of a senseless crime.

----------------------

Do you have a story about a grant that made a difference? Submit your story, and we will continue to feature them on a regular basis here on PhilanTopic, at one or more of our regional Philanthropy Front and Center blogs, and at other areas of our Web site. We also encourage you to submit stories of grants that are addressing needs associated with the current economic crisis.

Resource of the Day: Foundation Giving Forecast

The global financial crisis continues to wreak havoc on foundation endowments and the broader economy, and nonprofits are understandably nervous. Using original sources, related news from Philanthropy News Digest, and Foundation Center data, In Their Own Words: 2009 Foundation Giving Forecast provides a snapshot of the responses of some the nation's largest (by assets) foundations to the economic crisis as well as summary forecasts (where available) for their giving in 2009 and beyond. The table, one of many resources offered through the center's Focus on the Economic Crisis portal, is updated on a regular basis, so be sure to check it often for the latest information. And, if you have a minute, let us know how we can make it better.

'The Castle': Redemption on Riverside Drive

(Michael Seltzer is a regular contributor to PhilanTopic. In his previous post, he offered some strategies for nonprofits that are downsizing.)

In my A to Z Survival Guide for Uncertain Times, I noted how important it is in these recessionary times for nonprofits to collect and tell the stories of the constituents they serve.

Last Saturday, I witnessed a particularly powerful example of this practice in action. The Fortune Society, one of New York City's most important criminal justice organizations, presented (in association with Eric Krebs and Chase Mishkin) the play The Castle, which is based on the life stories of four ex-convicts who actually perform their own stories.

Even before the play began, I quickly realized from browsing the playbill that this was not going to be a routine theatrical outing. Among other things, I learned that:

• Close to 1.6 million Americans are in prison (not including the more than 700,000 in local jails) -- that's 750 out of every 100,000 citizens.
• One in nine black men between the ages of 20 and 34 is behind bars.

Telling and acting their own stories, Vilma Ortiz Donavan, Kenneth Harrigan, Angel Ramos, and Casimiro Torres shared the downs and occasional ups of their lives -- childhoods of absent and, in some instances, abusive parents; drug-infested neighborhoods; limited or nonexistent sources of love and support -- along with tales of dehumanizing youth detention facilities, homeless shelters, and prisons. The common thread running through the actors' stories was how each of them succeeded in turning around their lives and was now contributing in a positive way to the lives of others. And the intent of the evening was simple -- to convey the message that ex-offenders, with a little help from their friends, can change their lives.

The Fortune Society is no stranger to theater. David Rothenberg, its founder and first executive director, created the organization in his previous life as a theatrical publicist in 1967 when he was involved in the production of a similar play, Fortune in Men's Eyes. So it wasn't a stretch for Rothenberg to return to the dramatic form some four decades later when he conceived of and directed The Castle.

I found myself riveted as the four people on stage related their experiences of living on the streets, selling drugs, life in prison, and, finally, finding redemption through the efforts and support of Fortune Society staff at the organization's transitional residence in Upper Manhattan fondly known as "the Castle."

In the "talk back" segment with the cast after the performance, a few theater-goers were stunned to learn that the actors were relating their own life stories. Another noted how he was struck by the performers' eloquence, self-awareness, and wisdom. The sentiments expressed were unlike any I have heard after a theatrical performance. Audience members spoke up with helpful suggestions and offers of assistance: Are you producing a film of the production? How can I arrange a performance in my community? Others were eager to make a charitable contribution so that at–risk youth could attend a future performance.

After the discussion, the hundred or so people in the audience walked out into the crisp evening air a bit wiser. We had been privileged to experience, if only for an hour or two, the struggles of four remarkable individuals. As for myself, their stories will never leave me and I hope I'll be able to communicate to others my deepened understanding of the lot of the least fortunate in our midst.

Most importantly, since the play first opened eleven months ago it has helped to build public support for a new wave of "second chance" legislation designed to assist ex-offenders as they re-enter their communities. Last year, the play was performed in Albany for state legislators. Other venues have included maximum-security prisons, community colleges, and churches. Peggy McGarry, who served as the director of criminal justice programs at the JEHT Foundation, one of the largest private criminal justice funders in the country until it suffered significant losses in the Bernard Madoff Ponzi scheme and announced that it was closing, notes that "It is critically important to build greater public understanding of the challenges facing ex-offenders now that both the federal government and a number of states are enacting legislation in support of programs, such as those conducted by the Fortune Society."

Fortunately, even after the play ends its run, the real "Castle" on Riverside Drive in Harlem will continue to provide ex-offenders with a new lease on life.

-- Michael Seltzer

(For those living in or visiting New York City, The Castle is performed every Saturday at New World Stages, 340 West 50th Street in the theater district. Tickets are $45 and $30, and can be purchased through Telecharge, 212-239-6200. The producers and performers are also willing to bring the production to interested audiences, whereever they may be. For more information, contact Eric Krebs at 212-967-7079.)