San Quentin News

Written By Incarcerated - Advancing Social Justice

Education organizations trade ideas at national conference

by

Dmitry Orlov, Amy Jamgochian, and Allison Lopez

Dmitry Orlov, Amy Jamgochian, and Allison Lopez

Exchanging ideas on how to create educational opportunities for incarcerated people and reentry services was the topic of a national conference held in Texas last November.

“It was a chance for our different organizations to support each other and think together on how to expand this field of prison education,” said Jody Lewen, executive director of San Quentin’s Prison University Project (PUP). “We challenged our understanding of what we think is possible and how things impact our students.”

Multiple forums and discussions were held at the Seventh Annual National Conference on Higher Education in Prison, ranging from funding challenges to going digital in the classroom and working with people who have harmed others.

Some of the debates centered on how to apply admission standards for state college programs inside prisons.

Some of the programs screen for age, length of sentence and committed offense before a student-prisoner can enroll, PUP does not.

Many of the programs do not have college preparatory classes. However, PUP provides college prep classes to prepare the student-prisoner.

Building a College Preparatory Program Inside was presented by Allison Lopez, PUP’s preparatory program coordinator, and Dmitry Orlov, program assistant.

“The state typically spends $71,000 a year to house an inmate. It costs about $5,000 total to help put one [incarcerated] student through community college”, reports Fast Company.

“We discussed that there needs to be a way for students (prisoners) to get into the college credit courses where they can build confidence and take on the identity of a student without the pressure of a grade,” said Lopez.

“We talk about breaking down math terminologies in terms that the students already know, because some students have fears and anxiety about math. Math is just as important as the other courses,” added Lopez.

Amy Jamgochian, PUP’s academic program director, presented Authority in the Prison Classroom.

“Some teachers think they are being radical by abdicating authority in the classroom,” said Jamgochian. “That can be damaging. They have responsibility for the class.

“It’s a lot of new college programs just starting. I’m grateful that we can pass on our philosophy along the lessons we already learned,” added Jamgochian.

Aly Tamboura, former San Quentin News staff member and PUP board member, shared his experiences and the complexities of journalism inside prison and after incarceration.

Bill Keller, editor-in-chief of The Marshall Project, and Kelsey Kauffman, former director of Higher Education Program for Indiana’s Women’s Prison, sat on the panel.

David Cowan, San Quentin alumni and PUP’s operation manager, moderated a panel on reentry services at the conference.

Cowan’s panel discussed best practices to support people getting out of prison and wanting to continue their higher education in society.

The films Life After Life and The Return were screened.

Life After Life portrays three men setting out to have successful lives after spending decades behind bars. Director and producer Tamara Perkins, who taught yoga and meditation at San Quentin in 2006, held a discussion after the viewing.

The Return focuses on California’s amended Three Strikes Law under Proposition 36. According to the conference pamphlet, the film features a variety of scenarios: prisoners suddenly freed; reentry providers helping with their transition; attorneys and judges wrestling with the untested law. After the films, PUP staffer Bilal Chatman and Cowan moderated a discussion.

The newly formed Alliance for Higher Education in Prison, a body of educators and organization executives, planned and hosted the Nov. 2-5 event.

“We need to hear more from the people inside,” said Lopez. “Especially when the system affects you.” She emphasized that inmates need to request these opportunities and urged them to “not just to be institutionalized.”

Lewen added, “…people around the country are fighting for you. You guys are a part of this movement of higher education. More guys are getting out and getting involved in the field of higher education.”

http://sanquentinnews.com/optionb-org-support-group-overcoming-effects-incarceration/

White House award to Jody Lewen

Factores incrementan/disminuyen posibilidades

by

Recientes cambios legales y en materia de regulación han incrementado las posibilidades  de los presos cumpliendo una sentencia de vida a obtener su libertad condicional.

El período de “duros con el crimen” (tough on crime) implementado en California en décadas pasadas se podría comparar con un juego de fútbol. En éste deporte es muy difícil anotar un gol, de igual manera, los presos rara vez obtenían un día de salida.

CA supreme court

Debido a los recientes cambios en las leyes, actualmente existe una gran oportunidad de adquirir un día de salida. Aunado a ésto, tenemos un gobernador que en muy pocas ocasiones revoca la decisión de los comisionados.

A pesar de que no existen garantías seguras para obtener la libertad condicional, sí existen ciertos factores que podrían mejorar las probabilidades de adquirir un día de salida, según un reporte de la Universidad de Stanford publicado en abril del 2016 por el Federal Sentencing Reporter (Stanford Report). El reporte analizó 754 audiencias.

The Stanford Report utiliza un método de razonamiento estadístico para analizar los resultados del comité de audiencias. Éste método se basa en el uso de estadísticas y probabilidades para medir más de 150 factores diferentes para estimar que tanto valor el comité de audiencias le asigna a cada factor.

La preparación para el comité de audiencias (la tabla), es el evento más importante para los presos con sentencias indefinidas.

La mayoría de los presos que tienen que presentarse ante el comité de audiencias sienten que el proceso de preparación es muy estresante. Kim (All-Amin) McAdoo mencionó en un comunicado del Prison University Project en el mes de noviembre del 2014, “la preparación para mi audiencia representa el evento más importante de mi vida durante mi encarcelamiento. Es una gran oportunidad para volver a obtener mi libertad.”

Al no existir algún registro de las consideraciones finales de los comisionados, el equipo de investigación de Stanford identificó 12 factores y 152 variables en cada trascrito: información básica, antecedentes penales, el crimen cometido, comportamiento en la prisión, progreso adquirido durante el encarcelamiento, planes al ser liberado, reporte del psicólogo, declaración del Fiscal del Distrito, testimonio del preso, participación en los programas y las razones por la decisión del comité de audiencias.

Debido a que el índice de concesión en el año 2015 fue de casi un 30%, el entender el proceso de la toma de decisiones de la “tabla” adquiere gran importancia  para las personas que enfrentan sentencias indeterminadas.

Factores Importantes

De las variables demográficas (raza, sexo, edad, etc.), solamente la edad tiene un impacto importante. Entre más edad tenga un preso cuando asista a la “tabla”, sus posibilidades para obtener un día de salida aumentan. Por cada 10 años las probabilidades incrementan de 1.3 a 5 veces.   

Sin embargo, la edad en que se comete un crimen tiene un impacto negativo. Por ejemplo, cometer un crimen a la edad de 30 años en vez de 20 reduce las posibilidades de ser encontrado elegible a un 50%.

En una serie de estudios, el Stanford Report  mencionó que “la raza del preso o su género no son  factores determinantes” para otorgar o negar libertad condicional.

Comportamientos positivos o negativos en la prisión tienen un gran impacto para obtener un día de salida. La participación en programas de abuso de substancias tiene un impacto positivo. “Sorpresivamente, la participación en otros tipos de programas que incluyen educación y carreras técnicas, “no tuvieron un impacto muy significativo para obtener la libertad condicional. Según el Stanford Report.

El comportamiento negativo en la prisión fue medido por el número de acciones disciplinarias adquiridas. Los # 128 (no son considerados graves) en tanto que los # 115 (son acciones disciplinarias serias). Entre más #115 tenga el preso sus posibilidades de obtener un día de salida disminuyen drásticamente, comentó el reporte.

El reporte del psicólogo es muy importante para obtener un día de salida. “Los presos que reciben una puntuación baja (referente al riesgo de violencia) duplican sus posibilidades para adquirir su libertad, en comparación con un preso que recibe un reporte alto”, reveló el Stanford Report.

La conducta del preso durante la audiencia tiene un gran impacto para obtener un día de salida. El Stanford Report encontró tres categorías que aumentan las probabilidades del preso de recibir una decisión favorable: 1. Las características de la audiencia; 2. El testimonio del preso; y 3. Si la victima, familiares de la victima o conocidos hacen acto de presencia durante la audiencia.

El horario de la audiencia (mañana o tarde) no afecta las decisiones de los comisionados. Los presos tienen las mismas posibilidades de adquirir su libertad condicional, ya sea durante la primera o la última audiencia del día.

Las respuestas de los presos a las preguntas de los 12 pasos de A.A. demostraron si habían  participado en el programa. Los que no contestaron correctamente las preguntas como (“cual es el cuarto paso”) solamente tuvieron un 20% de oportunidad para conseguir su libertad comparado con aquellos que contestaron correctamente.

A pesar de que aproximadamente un 10% de los familiares de las victimas asisten a las audiencias, su presencia no afecta demasiado los resultados de la tabla.

Los Fiscales del Distrito asisten a la mayoría de las audiencias, regularmente para oponerse a la liberación del preso. En casos donde el Fiscal muestra su apoyo al preso o no se presenta a la audiencia, las probabilidades de adquirir un día de salida incrementan.

El término “entendimiento” (insight)  define de una manera clara los factores que pueden tener un impacto en la audiencia. “Uno de los retos que muchos de nosotros, los presos, enfrentamos es articular el entendimiento sobre nuestro crimen”, McAdoo enfatizó, “Una de las lecciones más importantes que he aprendido es ser responsable.”

Jody Lewen, Director General del Proyecto Universitario de la Prision (PUP) en San Quentin, quién trabaja diariamente con prisioneros, expresó el significado del concepto “entendimiento” en una carta informativa del (PUP), en el mes de abril del 2016, volumen 22, número 1.

“Una de las mayores ironías de San Quentin es el nivel de inteligencia emocional y responsabilidad personal que la mayoría de los presos de ésta institución han desarrollado, características que rara vez se observan fuera de la prisión. La mayoría de los presos han hecho su mayor esfuerzo a través de los años para adquirir un entendimiento personal y aceptar responsabilidad por el daño que han causado. Quizás es en parte, ése alto grado de responsabilidad personal lo que ocasiona que la audiencia sea un proceso abrumador.”

PUP fue galardonado con la Medalla Nacional de Humanidades en el 2015.

Una copia del Stanford Report esta disponible en el edificio de educación para los estudiantes del PUP.

La tasa de concesión de libertad condicional continua incrementando

Libertad condicional ya possible


http://sanquentinnews.com/optionb-org-support-group-overcoming-effects-incarceration/
https://sanquentinnews.com/abogado-senala-preparense-para-su-libertad/

San Jose Earthquakes – EQs visitan SQ


 
Boatwright

Higher age, fewer write-ups boost parole chances

by

Recent legal and regulatory changes have vastly improved the likelihood of an inmate being granted parole.

During the past decades of California’s “tough on crime” era it seemed like a soccer game. No one ever seemed to score a parole grant. It was not just the parole board “referees” calling it close. If you were breathing, it seemed like you were issued a red card and ejected from the match.

Sacramento, California
State’s Capitol

There is now a real chance of being found suitable for parole. In addition, we have a governor who is much less likely to revoke the board’s finding of suitability if you score a grant.Though there are no guarantees for getting a date, there are certain factors that can significantly improve your odds of being found suitable for parole, according to a Stanford University report published in the April 2016 Federal Sentencing Reporter (Stanford Report). The report reviewed 754 hearings.

The Stanford Report brings “Money Ball” style statistical reasoning to parole hearing outcomes. It uses statistics and probability to measure over 150 different factors and estimate how much weight the Board of Parole Hearings (BPH) gives each particular factor.

PREPARING FOR THE BOARD IS THE MOST IMPORTANT EVENT SINCE INCARCERATION

Most lifers find preparing for the Board very stressful. In the November 2014 Prison University Project Newsletter’s “What It’s Like Preparing for the Board of Parole Hearings,” Kim (All-Amin) McAdoo said it represents “the most important event of my life since being incarcerated. It is an opportunity where I can possibly regain my freedom.”

As there is no record of the actual final private deliberations of the Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner, the Stanford team identified 12 subjects and 152 separate variables in each transcript: basic information, background, crime, prior history, prison progress, exit plans, psychological report, District Attorney’s statement, inmate’s testimony, victim testimony, program participation and reasons for the Board’s decision.

With a 2015 grant rate near 30 percent, a better understanding of the BPH decision-making process becomes all the more relevant for those facing an indeterminate life sentence.

SIGNIFICANT FACTORS

Of the demographic variables  (race, sex, age, etc.), only age had a significant impact. The older an inmate is at a BPH hearing, the better their chances. For each extra 10 years of age, an inmate is 1.3 to 5 times more likely to earn a parole grant, according to the report. 

Age at crime commission, however, has a negative impact. For example, committing your crime at 30 instead of 20 reduced the likelihood of a parole grant by half.

Consistent with multiple studies, the Stanford Report “found no significant effects of an inmate’s race [or gender]” on either parole grant or denials.

Both positive and negative behavior in prison impacts parole grants. Participating in substance abuse programming has a positive impact. “Surprisingly, participation in other types of programs, which included educational and vocational programming, was not” significantly correlated to obtaining a grant, according to the report.

Negative behavior was measured by the number of # 128 (minor) and # 115 (major) rules violations an inmate had. The more # 115s you have, the lower the odds of earning a parole grant. “An increase of ten # 115s divided an inmate’s odds in half” the report said. 

Psychiatric evaluations were significant in suitability decisions. “An inmate who receives only scores of ‘low’ (with regard to risk of violence) is more than twice as likely to receive a grant, compared to an inmate who receives at least one score that is not ’low,’” the report discovered.

Conduct at the parole hearing itself may impact getting a date. The Stanford Report found three categories of factors that impacted an inmate’s odds of release: 1. Hearing characteristics; 2. Inmate testimony; and 3. Whether other people were present at the hearing.

Regardless of hearing start time (morning or afternoon), there was no difference in being granted parole. Inmates were almost as likely to be granted parole at the first hearing of the day as at subsequent hearings.

Inmate responses to questions demonstrated that if you have participated in a 12-step program, participants should know those steps. Those who failed a specific question (like being asked “What is step four?”), were only one-fifth as likely to be granted parole as those who answered correctly.

The fact that victims or victims’ next of kin attend about 10 percent of hearings, however, did not significantly impact hearing results.

District Attorneys (DA) attend a majority of hearings, typically to oppose release. Both DA non-attendance and the DA’s support of release improved the likelihood of a grant.

The term “insight” best defines the various intangibles that can impact a hearing. “One of the challenges that many of us inmates face at the board hearing is articulating insight,” McAdoo said.  “One of the biggest lessons I’ve learned is being both accountable and responsible.”

As someone who works with lifers every day, the Executive Director of the Prison University Project (PUP) at San Quentin, Jody Lewen, expressed the concept of “insight” in the April 2016 PUP Newsletter, Vol. 22, No.1, April 2016:

“One of the great ironies of San Quentin is how many people living there have developed a level of emotional mindfulness and sense of personal accountability that is rarely seen outside of prison. Many people have worked so hard, over years, to understand themselves, to take responsibility for harm that they have caused. Perhaps it is in part precisely that highly attuned sense of personal responsibility that can make the parole review process even more overwhelming.”

PUP was a 2015 recipient of the National Humanities Medal.

A copy of the above-mentioned Stanford Report is available to current students through the Prison University Project co-located in the education building.

https://sanquentinnews.com/study-explores-how-lifers-get-better-deal-from-parole-boards/

New Advocate Group Targets Parole Board


Boatwright

White House award to Jody Lewen

by

President Obama and Jody Lewen at the White House

As students with makeshift backpacks and see-through plastic folders hustle in and out of an education building, teachers greet their students by name. It is a college campus at San Quentin, where the Prison University Project works to transform inmates from convicts to college students.

President Barack Obama recently handed PUP Executive Director Jody Lewen the 2015 National Humanities Medal, recognizing PUP’s years of hard work and dedication.

“We did it,” Lewen told the students, “This is all our award.”

She said the award not only highlights the PUP staff and the many selfless volunteers and donors, but the hard work and commitment of the students.

Lewen brought in the medal and certificate so the college students could see, touch and have photos taken with it.

Lewen received the National Humanities Medal “for transforming the lives of currently incarcerated people through higher education and offering opportunity and inspiration to their students and providing an example for others to emulate,” according to the official citation.

“I was especially thankful to the White House and the National Endowment for Humanities for expressing what we do in such a public way,” Lewen said.

She added, “President Obama was really friendly. He told us to keep up the good work.”

Lewen has brought quality professors and education to PUP, including current San Quentin News adviser Professor William Drummond, who taught a journalism class in 2012. Last December, Drummond was at the White House to receive the 2015 John W. Gardner Legacy of Leadership Award.

SQN Adviser Professor William Drummond

SQN Adviser Professor William Drummond

Professor Dan Hammer also was a PUP teacher. Hammer is currently working at the White House as an adviser in the Office of Science and Technologies.

Three formerly incarcerated men, David Cowan, Pat Mims and Dmitriy Orlov, accompanied Lewen in Washington. Orlov did not make it past the Secret Service check to attend the award ceremony inside the White House. However, he was able to attend the honoree dinner held at the National Gallery of Art.

Mims and Cowan both served more than 20 years and have moved on to do public service work. Cowen was released in 2011 and now he is the operations manager for PUP, the first former student to reach a senior management role with the organization.

Cowen also is the co-founder and Director of Reintegration at Alliance for Change, a nonprofit organization that helps newly released inmates to integrate into Bay Area communities.

“I hope this encourage all the students to value their education,” said Cowan. “I don’t think I would be the man I am today without being around men in prison that was serious about their education, they help ground me, both emotionally and physically. I appreciate everybody.”

Mims has worked with Bay Area Women Against Rape. There he founded a program to help sexually exploited minors. Subsequently, in 2014 he received the FBI Director’s Community Leadership Award, the My Hero Award from the District Attorney Office of Alameda County, and the Stewardship Award from Freedom House, a safe-house for victims of human trafficking. 

He currently is assisting the homeless and formally incarcerated at Rubicon Programs as an Impact Coach.

Orlov was released earlier this year after serving five years; he worked as the PUP program clerk while inside. He is currently in college pursuing a business and engineering degree. 

“It was surreal going from being incarcerated at San Quentin to the White House,” said Orlov. “It feels good to be apart of history and represent the incarcerated nation. Being in prison it’s hard to gage the scope and this level of recognition.

“It’s so much bigger than your own education, even if you are just taking one class, you are apart of the conversation on education and prison reform at the highest levels as an example for the nation.”   

The PUP program started in 1996 with two classes. Lewen started teaching classes in 1999 and was running the program by 2000. Since its inception more than 150 prisoners have received an Associate of Arts Degree and thousands of inmates have taken at least one class.

There are currently 350 students for the fall semester and many inmates throughout the prison system are applying to come to San Quentin for the program.

The program is an extension of Patten University in Oakland. PUP is unique because inmates receive college-level education at zero cost. Books for the courses are also free. Academic professionals from throughout the Bay Area teach classes pro bono.

Lewen envisions adding more classrooms and expanding the math, science and Spanish programs.

“As a kid I didn’t like school,” said Lewen. “As an adult, I loved the idea to create an opportunity for those who are traditionally left out.” 

“That’s what I enjoy the most, giving them the tools and skills to make their voices heard.”

She believes that there should be universal education for those in and outside the walls.

www.prisonuniversityproject.org
 
http://sanquentinnews.com/game-theory/

Translate »