FACTORS INFLUENCING PERFORMANCE OF PRISONERS’ REINTEGRATION

PROGRAMMES: A CASE OF WOMEN PRISONERS IN MERU GOVERNMENT OF

KENYA PRISON, MERU COUNTY, KENYA

BY

MARY MAKENA MUTABARI

A Research Project Report Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for The
Award of the Degree of Master of Arts in Project Planning and Management of The
University of Nairobi

2017
 DECLARATION

I declare that this Research project report is my original work and has not been submitted for a
degree in any other university or college for examination or academic purposes.

Signature: …………………………………….. Date:…………………………

Mutabari Mary Makena
L50/83719/2015

This research projectreport has been submitted for examination with my approval as the
University Supervisor.

Signed……………………………………… Date ……………………………………

Dr., John M Wanjohi
School of Physical Sciences
University of Nairobi

ii
 DEDICATION

I dedicate this project to God Almighty my creator, my strong pillar, my source of inspiration,
wisdom, knowledge and understanding. He has been the source of my strength throughout this
program and on His wings only have I soared.

I also dedicate this work to my husband; Mathew Karauriwho has encouraged me all the way and
whose encouragement has made sure that I give it all it takes to finish that which I have started.
To my child Princess Mwendwa who has been affected in every way possible by this quest.
Thank you. My love for you all can never be quantified.

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I cannot express enough thanks to my supervisor DR. John Wanjohi for his continued support
and encouragement. I offer my sincere appreciation for the learning opportunities provided by
my lectures.

My completion of this project could not have been accomplished without the support of my
Boss, The Commissioner General of prison Isaya M. Osugo, CBS, Regional Commander Eastern
Region The deputy commissioner of Prison DancanOgore, The county Commander Meru
Region, Assistance Commissioner of Prison Benson Mbogori and my officer in-charge, Senior
Superitendent of Prison RoseMaryNjenga. Thank you for allowing me time to research and
write.

Finally, to my caring, loving, and supportive husband, Mathew: my deepest gratitude. Your
encouragement when the times got rough are much appreciated and duly noted. It was a great
comfort and relief to know that you were willing to provide management of our household
activities while I completed my work. My heartfelt thanks.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION ............................................................................................................................ ii
DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................... iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................................. iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................ v
LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................... viii
LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... ix
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ....................................................................................... x
ABSTRACT................................................................................................................................... xi
CHAPTER ONE:INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 1
1.1 Background of the Study ..................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem ..................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................ 5
1.4 Objectives of the Study ........................................................................................................ 5
1.5 Research Questions .............................................................................................................. 5
1.6 Significance of the Study ..................................................................................................... 6
1.7 Delimitation of the Study ..................................................................................................... 6
1.8 Limitations of the Study....................................................................................................... 6
1.9 Basic Assumptions of the Study .......................................................................................... 7
1.10 Definition of Significant Terms ........................................................................................... 7
1.11 Organization of the Study ................................................................................................ 8
CHAPTER TWO:LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................. 9
2.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 9
2.2 Capacity of Prison Officers and Performance of Prisoner’s Reintegration Programmes .... 9
2.3 Employment Opportunities and Performance of Prisoner’s Reintegration Programmes .. 10
2.4 Substance Abuse and Performance ofPrisoner’s Reintegration Programmes ................... 12
2.5 Education Programmes and Performance of Prisoner’s Reintegration Programmes ........ 14
2.7 Theoretical Orientation ...................................................................................................... 16
2.7.1 Relapse Prevention Theory ............................................................................................ 16
2.7.2 Ecological Theory .......................................................................................................... 17
2.7.3 Empowerment Theory .................................................................................................... 18
v
2.7.4 Rehabilitation Theory..................................................................................................... 19
2.8 Conceptual Framework ...................................................................................................... 19
2.9 Summary and Research Gaps ............................................................................................ 20
CHAPTER THREE:RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................ 22
3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 22
3.2 Research Design................................................................................................................. 22
3.3 Target population ............................................................................................................... 22
3.4 Sample size and Sampling Procedures .............................................................................. 23
3.4.1 Sampling Size................................................................................................................. 23
3.4.2 Sampling Procedures ...................................................................................................... 23
3.5 Research Instruments ......................................................................................................... 24
3.5.1 Pilot Testing ................................................................................................................... 24
3.5.2 Validity of Research Instruments ................................................................................... 24
3.5.3 Reliability of Research Instruments ............................................................................... 25
3.6 Data Collection Procedures................................................................................................ 25
3.7 Data Analysis Techniques.................................................................................................. 26
3.8 Ethical Considerations ....................................................................................................... 27
3.9 Operational Definition of Variables................................................................................... 27
CHAPTER FOUR:DATA ANALYSIS, PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION ........... 31
4.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 31
4.2 Response Rate .................................................................................................................... 31
4.3 Reliability Analysis ............................................................................................................ 31
4.4 Background Information of Respondents (Demographic characteristics) ......................... 32
4.4.1 Designation of the Respondent ...................................................................................... 32
4.4.2 Highest Level of Education of the Respondent .............................................................. 32
4.4.3 Time in Prison ................................................................................................................ 33
4.5 Variables of the study ........................................................................................................ 33
4.5.1 Capacity of Prison Officers ............................................................................................ 33
4.5.2 Employment Opportunities ............................................................................................ 34
4.5.3 Substance Abuse ............................................................................................................ 36
4.5.4 Prison Education Programmes ....................................................................................... 37
vi
4.5.5 Performance of Prisoner’s Reintegration Programmes .................................................. 38
4.8 Regression Analysis ........................................................................................................... 38
CHAPTER FIVE:SUMMARY, DISCUSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
....................................................................................................................................................... 41
5.2.1 Capacity of Prison Officers ............................................................................................ 41
5.2.2 Employment Opportunities ............................................................................................ 41
5.2.3 Substance Abuse ............................................................................................................ 41
5.2.4 Prison Education Programmes ....................................................................................... 42
5.3 Discussion .......................................................................................................................... 42
5.3.1 Capacity of Prison Officers ............................................................................................ 42
5.3.2 Employment Opportunities ............................................................................................ 43
5.3.3 Substance Abuse ............................................................................................................ 43
5.3.4 Prison Education Programmes ....................................................................................... 44
5.4 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 44
5.5 Recommendations .............................................................................................................. 45
5.6 Recommendations for Further Studies............................................................................... 47
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 48
APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................. 55
Appendix I: Letter of Transmittal............................................................................................ 55
Appendix II: Research Questionnaire ................................................................................... 56

vii
 LIST OF TABLES
Table 3. 1: Target Population........................................................................................................ 22
Table 3. 2: Sampling Frame and sample size ............................................................................... 23
Table 3. 3: Operationalization of variables ................................................................................... 28
Table 4.1: Response Rate ......................................................................................................... 31
Table 4.2: Reliability Analysis ................................................................................................. 31
Table 4. 3: Designation of the Respondent ........................................................................... 32
Table 4. 4: Highest Level of Education of the Respondent................................................... 32
Table 4. 5: Period Worked/Been in the Prison ...................................................................... 33
Table 4. 6: Extent of Capacity of Prison Officers Influence ................................................. 33
Table 4. 7: Extent Capacity of Prison Officers...................................................................... 34
Table 4. 8: Extent of Employment Opportunities Influence ................................................. 35
Table 4. 9: Extent of Influence of Employment Opportunities ............................................. 35
Table 4. 10: Extent of Substance Abuse Influence.................................................................. 36
Table 4. 11: Extent of Influence of Substance Abuse Aspects................................................ 36
Table 4. 12: Extent of Prison Education Programmes Influence ............................................ 37
Table 4. 13: Extent of Influence of Prison Education Programmes Aspects .......................... 37
Table 4. 14: Performance of Prisoner’s Reintegration Programmes ....................................... 38
Table 4. 15: Model Summary .................................................................................................. 38
Table 4. 16: Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) ......................................................................... 38
Table 4. 17: Regression Coefficients....................................................................................... 39

viii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................. 20

ix
 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

AIDS: Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome

Gk: Government of Kenya

HIV: Human Immunodeficiency Virus

NACOSTI: National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation

NICRO: National Institute for Crime Prevention and Reintegration of Offenders

SPSS: Statistical Package for Social Sciences

TC: Therapeutic Community

UN: United Nations

x
 ABSTRACT
Offenders released from confinement face a variety of challenges that may hinder their ability to
become law-abiding citizens. A key feature of successful reintegration is the attention to the
reintegration programmes for ex-prisoners into the community and the development of
interventions designed to reduce the levels of recidivism. The purpose of this study was to
establish factors influencing performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes focusing on
women prisoners in Meru Gk prison. The study sought to determine the influence of capacity of
prison officers, employment opportunities, substance abuse, and education programmes on
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes among women prisoners in Meru Women
Gk prison.The study is grounded on relapse prevention theory, supported by the empowerment
theory and the public participation theory.The study adopted descriptive survey research design.
The target population for this study comprised of all the 1259 inmates and 317 officers in the
prison according to prison records. The sample size for the study was309. Primary data
wasobtained using self-administered questionnaires. Further, the study usedsimple random
sampling to pick the respondents in each stratum.Data wasanalyzed using Statistical Package for
Social Sciences (SPSS Version 22.0). Descriptive statistics such as frequencies, percentages,
mean score and standard deviation wereestimated for all the quantitative variables and
information presented inform of tables. The qualitative data from the open-ended questions
wereanalyzed using conceptual content analysis and presented in prose form.The findings show
that capacity of prison officers greatly influences performance of prisoner’s reintegration
programmes.The findings reveal that the employment opportunities greatly influence
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. The results show that substance abuse
greatly influences performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. Therefore from the
above shows that prison education programmes greatly influence performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programme. The study concluded that capacity of prison officers greatly and
significantly influences performance of prisoner’s reintegration programme .The study further
concluded that employment opportunities greatly influence performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programme .The study also concluded that that substance abuse greatly and
significantly influences performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. Finally the study
concluded that prison education programmes greatly influence performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programme. The study recommended adequate budgetary allocation of resources to
various GK prisons which will in turn lead to efficient reintegration programmes.The study
recommended adequate budgetary allocation of resources to various GK prisons which will in
turn lead to efficient reintegration programmes.An improved Scheme of Service and
Establishment Structure for the Prisons Department needs to be put in place to facilitate the
recruitment, promotion and retention of adequate and relevantly trained/skilled personnel.

xi
 CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Throughout the world, many countries have been affected by the plague of crime. It is common
expectation and practice that those who commit transgressions against fellow citizens should be
punished for their transgressions (Usher, 2013). The Judiciary normally performs the task of
punishing. Different strategies and methods have been employed in trying to eradicate crime.
However, imprisonment remains one of the most popular sanctions. Though aimed at inflicting
punishment by curtailing the movement and freedom of the suspect or offender as well as
deterring others from offending, imprisonment has not met the objective. In fact, it only seems to
have achieved the first objective. This form of punishment, however, has over time been proven
to be ineffective as it is more retributive than reconciliatory (Phillips & Spencer, 2013).

Punishment, at the least, should accord the offender an opportunity to change and amend the
wrong done.Successful crime prevention strategies must address factors contributing to the large
number of crimes that are committed by individuals who have served a term of incarceration and
failed, upon their release, to integrate the community as law-abiding citizens (Rakis, 2015). In
the absence of material, psychological, and social support at the time of their release, offenders
may have a very difficult time breaking the cycle of release and re-arrest. Short-term prison
terms and extended terms of remand in custody provide limited opportunities for successful
treatment and interventions to prevent future recidivism (Feig, 2015).

The costs of this cycle of incarceration and reintegration are high from several perspectives. First
and foremost is the public safety dimension. Nearly two thirds of released prisoners are expected
to be rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanour within three years of their release. Such
high recidivism rates translate into thousands of new victimizations each year. Second, there are
fiscal implications. Significant portions of state budgets are now invested in the criminal justice
system. Increasingly there continues to be a public outcry to 'lock offenders up and throw away
the keys'. The calls are for tougher action, but without careful consideration of what the impact
of that may be (Vengeliene, Bilbao &Spanagel, 2014).

1
According to Muhlhausen (2010), releasing criminals back into society increases crime. Former
prisoners have high arrest rates after returning to society. Research indicates that two-thirds of
released prisoners are rearrested within three years. Therefore, Policymakers need to understand
the complicated nature of the reintegration process. In addition to reintegration public policies,
other factors that influence successful transition of offenders from prison to community are
individual characteristics, family and peer relationships, and community circumstances.
Establishing a law-abiding lifestyle after prison involves locating living quarters, obtaining
official identification, reconnecting with family, and finding legitimate employment.

The individual characteristics that influence recidivism include demographic characteristics,

prison experience, employment history, education level, criminal record, and substance abuse
dependence (Link, 2016). Family and peer support is also important to the reintegration process.
The same long-term longitudinal study also found that marriage was associated with reduced
recidivism. Muhlhausen (2010) also noted that former prisoners living with their families are less
likely to drop out of reintegration programs compared to their counterparts who do not live with
their families. However, family conflict can also harm the reintegration process, especially in the
case of juvenile offenders returning to poor family environments. Just like the family, the
influence of peers can influence the reintegration process. Association with criminal peers can
disrupt positive influences of the family.

In the United Nations (UN) area of prison reform, the principle objective is to contribute to the
successful reintegration of prisoners into society following their release (Baliga, 2013). Social
reintegration initiatives should start as early as possible within the criminal justice process in
order to have maximum effect. This means that diversion from the criminal justice process
(especially of vulnerable groups) to appropriate treatment programmes, non-custodial sanctions,
instead of isolation from society and purposeful activities and programmes in prisons, can all be
considered as elements of a comprehensivesocial reintegrationpolicy (Henrichson& Delaney,
2012). Interventions to support former prisoners following release from prison, continuum of
care in the community for those in need, will all be more effective if the period in prison is used
to prepare a prisoner for re-entry to society. This policy requires close coordination between
criminal justice institutions and social protection and health services in the community and
probation services where they exist.
2
In South Africa, according to National Institute for Crime Prevention and Reintegration of
Offenders (NICRO), between 7 000 and 9 000 prisoners are released from prison every (Naidoo
&Mkize, 2012). Despite this, there remains very little public or government interest about what
happens to these people when they come out and get back to society. NICRO often points out
that however long a person is sentenced for, unless they effectively serve a life term, they will
come out. When they come out, they are likely to be more damaged not only from having been
removed from society for so long but from the imprisonment itself (Naidoo &Mkize, 2012).

Managing reintegration to achieve long-term reintegration would have far-reaching benefits for
the families and communities most affected by reintegration, as well as for former prisoners.
These interrelated opportunities bring the stakes of reintegration into view (Omboto, 2010).
There is much to be gained. The costs and opportunities also raise important questions about
what we can do to prepare both ex-prisoners and their communities for their inevitable return
home. Research shows that a majority of convicted offenders in Meru County have at least one
prior conviction, either in juvenile or adult court and, among serial convicts, nearly one-third
have a prior conviction and nearly 75 percent have multiple prior convictions. Community safety
makes it imperative that government and community develop effective interventions that will
assist ex-prisoners to successfully reintegrate into the community and avoid further criminality
(Kaburu, 2013). Managed offender reintegration processes and programs are gaining acceptance
and may offer a cost effective way of preventing crime. There is therefore an increasing focus
among policy-makers and practitioners on identifying factors affecting performance of programs
and strategies put in place to help prisoners successfully reintegrate back into their communities
without re-offending.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Offenders released from confinement face a variety of challenges that may hinder their ability to
become law-abiding citizens. Of particular concern are high-risk offenders with lengthy records
of criminality. Travis, Solomon and Waul (2011) observed that, having spent longer terms
behind bars, less prepared for life on the outside and with less assistance in their reintegration,
these prisoners would often have difficulties reconnecting with jobs, housing, and perhaps their
families when they return home. This exposes them to substance abuse and health problems.
Most will be rearrested, and many will be returned to prison for new crimes
3
(Ostermann&Matejkowski, 2014). This cycle of removal and return of large numbers of
individuals, mostly men, is increasingly concentrated in a relatively small number of
communities that already encounter enormous social and economic disadvantages (Clear, 2009).

The reintegration of released prisoners is unfortunately not a matter of national priority as a

legitimate crime reduction intervention. The emphasis is rather placed on the prison construction
programme and how to deal with high risk prisoners (Otiato, 2014). A key feature of successful
reintegration is the attention to the reintegration programmes for ex-prisoners into the
community and the development of interventions designed to reduce the levels of recidivism
(Hunter, Lanza, Lawlor, Dyson & Gordon, 2015). The role of communities within punishment is
significant as they stand to benefit in the reduction of crime. In our society, this role is taken over
by the judiciary, which exerts retributive justice. The punishment is imposed on the offender and
the offender will experience the punishment without ever being challenged to take responsibility
for the crime that was committed (Zehr, 2015).

Several studies have been conducted on prisoner reintegration including Visher and Travis
(2003) who conducted a study on transitions from prison to community: understanding
individual pathways. Phillips and Spencer (2013) carried out a study on the challenges of reentry
from prison to society.Osayi (2013) evaluated socio-cultural factors affecting reintegration of
discharged prisoners in Anambra state, southeast, Nigeria. Ostermann and Matejkowski (2014)
explored the intersection of mental health and release status with recidivism. Feig (2015)
assessed a family-focused approach to criminal sentencing in Illinois. Hunter, Lanza, Lawlor,
Dyson and Gordon (2015) Proposed a Strengths-Based Approach to Prisoner Reentry Program
while Link (2016) reviewed an inside/out prison exchange program in a jail setting.

Locally, Omboto (2013) assessed the challenges facing rehabilitation of prisoners in Kenya and
the mitigation strategies. Kaburu (2013) studied factors influencing individuals to commit
robbery with a focus on convicted robbers at Kamiti and Langata prisons. Nyaura and Ngugi
(2014) carried out a critical overview of the Kenyan Prisons System focusing on understanding
the challenges of correctional practice. Otiato (2014) studied effective re-integration of ex-
offenders targeting Kenya policy analysis. Musili and Mbatia (2016) evaluated the Status of
HIV/AIDS Management Strategies in Correctional Settings in Kenya in Lang’ata Women and
4
Kamiti Maximum Prisons. However, none of the scholars has established factors influencing
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes among women prisoners in Meru Gk prison.
This study will therefore seek to fill this gap.

1.3 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to establish factors influencing performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners in Meru Gk prison.

1.4 Objectives of the Study

The study sought to achieve the following objectives;
i. To find out the influence of capacity of prison officers on performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes among women prisoners in Meru Gk prison.
ii. To evaluate the influence of employment opportunities on performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes among women prisoners in Meru Gk prison.
iii. To determine the influence of substance abuse on performance of prisoner’s reintegration
programmes among women prisoners in Meru Gk prison.
iv. To establish the influence of education programmes on performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes among women prisoners in Meru Gk prison.

1.5 Research Questions

The study sought answers to the following questions;
i. What is the influence of capacity of prison officers on performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes among women prisoners in Meru Gk prison?
ii. To what extent do employment opportunities influence of performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes among women prisoners in Meru Gk prison?
iii. In what ways does substance abuse influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration
programmes among women prisoners in Meru Gk prison?
iv. What is the influence of education programmes on performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes among women prisoners in Meru Gk prison?

5
1.6 Significance of the Study
There is no doubt that offender reintegration, as a strategy for crime prevention and reduction
should be regarded as priority in Kenya. Apart from reducing crime rate and recidivism, the
study will advocate for Practical and conscientious positive actions towards enhancing the
conditions of the discharged prisoners in Meru County. In practical terms, the findings of this
study couldbring to the fore the inadequacies, deficiencies, flaws and other problems inherent in
the process of reformation and rehabilitation of prisoners. The findings of this study will bring to
the fore various cultural sentiments that inform the various ways people perceive discharged
prisoners as well as emphasize the negative effects of cultural beliefs and practices on the
reintegration needs of the discharged prisoners.

The government and its agenciesmightfind the results of this studyrelevant in designing effective
intervention programmes that will promote the smooth reintegration of discharged prisoners into
the society in addition to helping to re-orientate family and societal members towards
changingtheir views and attitude towards discharged prisoners.The study will make significant
input in the body of knowledge on the factors that militateagainst the smooth reintegration of
discharged prisoners in Meru County. Finally, the findings of this studymayserve as a veritable
sourceof reference for students and researchers who are interested to embark on further studies in
the area of correctional studies.

1.7 Delimitation of the Study

Meru Gk prisonwaschosen as the study area since it is one of the women prisons where most
released women prisoners have been rearrested. The respondents for the study weredrawn from
the personnel at Meru Gk prison and the rearrestedconvicts themselves. The study
utilizedprimary data for a period of ten years from 2007 to 2016. The data wascollected within
the month of January 2017.

1.8 Limitations of the Study

The respondents comprised of management staff and convicts atMeru GK prison who are
generally rather unavailable due to the nature of their work and tight security at the prison. This
could lead to low response rate. To counter this challenge prison management was contacted in
advance andarrangements on how data would be collectedorganized. Further, questionnaireswere
6
dropped and picked later to give respondents adequate time to fill them up. Prior arrangements to
deliver and pick questionnaire were made to ensure the respondents were met at their
convenience.

Finally, the information sought by the study is rather confidential and personal at the same time.
The respondents could thusshy away from providing accurate information for fear of
victimization.This was addressed by first convincing the respondents that the information
provided would be treated with utmost confidentiality. Secondly, theintroduction letter from the
university was used to prove that the information provided would be used for academic purpose
only. In addition, a research permit from the National Commission for Science, Technology and
Innovation (NACOSTI) was carried all alone

1.9 Basic Assumptions of the Study

The study assumes that there would be no significant changes in the composition of the target
population that might affect the effectiveness of the study sample. This study also assumed that
the respondents would be honest, cooperative and objective in the response to the research
instruments and would be available to respond to the research instruments in time. Finally, the
study assumed that the authorities in the prison would grant the required permission to collect
data from the prison staff and convicts.

1.10 Definition of Significant Terms

Capacity: The ability to do something. This is the a mental, emotional, or physical ability of
Prison Officers to rehabilitate inmates.

EducationProgrammesis a program written by the institution or ministry of education which

determines the learning progress of each subject in all the stages of formal
education.

Employment Opportunities: A contract in which one person, the employee, agrees to perform
work for another, the employer.

Performance: The accomplishment of a given task measured against preset known standards of
accuracy, completeness, cost, and speed.
7
Prisoner: a person legally committed to prison as a punishment for a crime or while awaiting
trial.

ReintegrationProgrammesprograms aimed at transitioning an individual who was not a

functioning member of society into a state where the individual controls and
directs their own life.

Reintegration: The process of transitioning from a state in which an individual was not a
functioning member of society into a state where the individual controls and
directs their own life.

SubstanceAbuse: A patterned use of a drug in which the user consumes the substance in
amounts or with methods which are harmful to themselves or others, and is a form
of substance-related disorder.

1.11 Organization of the Study

The study is organized into five chapters. Chapter one contains the introduction to the study. It
presents background of the study, statement of the problem, purpose of the study, objectives of
the study, research questions, significance of the Study, delimitations of the study, limitations of
the Study and the definition of significant terms. On the other hand, chapter two reviews the
literature based on the objectives of the study. It further looked at the conceptual framework and
finally the summary. Chapter three covers the research methodology of the study. The chapter
describes the research design, target population, sampling procedure, tools and techniques of
data collection, pre-testing, data analysis, ethical considerations and finally, the operational
definition of variables. Chapter four presents analysis and findings of the study as set out in the
research methodology. The study closes with chapter five, which presents the discussion,
conclusion, and recommendations for action and further research.

8
 CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction
This chapter consists of the empirical review and theoretical framework that support the
variables under investigation for the study, review of the literature on variables, the conceptual
framework, critique of the existing literature summary and finally the research gap.

2.2 Capacity of Prison Officers and Performance of Prisoner’s Reintegration

Programmes
A major cause of prisons failure in rehabilitation rest on the people entrusted with the
responsibility to reform the prisoners (Mbugua, 2011). It is important to appreciate that officers
who come in contact with prisoners on a daily basis, both junior and senior officers, need to be
people of integrity who are well educated and specifically trained for this job. This is informed
by the fact that the job requires an in-depth understanding of human behaviour, human
motivation, human worth and human dignity. If this is missing then it is impossible for them to
rehabilitate the offenders (Ostermann&Matejkowski, 2014).

In terms of training for the job, the core function of reformation and rehabilitation require that
prison officers must first accept that prisoners are incarcerated as a punishment and not for
punishment, and they must have the ability to facilitate behaviour and attitude change (Hunter,
Lanza, Lawlor, Dyson & Gordon, 2015). This requires that professionals such as psychiatrists,
psychologists, pastors, professional counsellors, social workers, sociologists, criminologists and
other social scientists should serve as uniformed officers who come into contact with the
prisoners daily because only such experts have what it takes to make positive changes in the
human mind: where criminality is fostered. This is not the case as studies show that a good
number of prisoners have attained university and college education as compared to the prison
officers (Omboto, 2010).

On the integrity of the prison officers, it is worth to point out that prisons department like any
other organization has some dishonest employees, for example, the report titled “Warder seized
over bang smuggling “and another “Prison Officer is seized over robbery”confirm the existence

9
of such prison officers(Omboto, 2013). These dishonest officers have shamelessly enabled some
prisoners to continue with illegal activities such as drug abuse right inside jails as mentioned
earlier, therefore making rehabilitation of such offenders impossible. The use of mobile phones
by prisoners also is illegal but such officers have smuggled them into prison institutions thus
enabling prisoners to communicate freely with the outside world in the end maintaining criminal
links and carrying out criminal acts such as defrauding.

Another reason why our prisons cannot reform inmates established by Omboto (2010) is related
to the poor working conditions of the prisons staff. Morale of the lower cadre officers is at the
lowest ebb for the delicate work. Though the government slightly improved the salary, housing is
a serious problem while for security reasons, prison warders cannot rent houses outside the
prisons compound. In some rural prisons there are grass thatched mud walled houses, these very
structures are in most cases shared by at least two families (Musili&Mbatia, 2016). The new
recruits leave college to prison institutions to be housed in unpartitioned halls where privacy is
unaffordable luxuryevenwithout electricity provision.

On promotions officers complain that, in the prisons department, uniformed staff with similar
academic qualifications, experience and personal file records (i.e. whether they have breached
prisons‟ regulations or not) scatter in all ranks (Musili&Mbatia, 2016). For instance, it is not
surprising to find an A level with two principles, Division Three or a Kenya Certificate of
Secondary Education D+ mean grade holders, all with 10 years working experience who were
employed as warders in all ranks namely: warders (the lowest rank) , chief officers (five ranks
up) and even other ranks above. For example, some warders at the Youth Corrective Training
Centre had served the prisons department for over twenty years in that lowest rank (Otiato,
2014). This situation de-motivates and demoralises, it is worst when one realises that his/her
senior is of lower qualifications (academic and professional experience) therefore it a positive
step that the prison administration from the year 2008 has made efforts to steam line promotions.

2.3 Employment Opportunities and Performance of Prisoner’s Reintegration

Programmes
Employment provides more than the income necessary to support adequate material conditions.
It also provides structure and routine, while filling time. It provides opportunities to expand one's
10
social network to include other productive members of society. In addition to all this,
employment can contribute to enhanced self-esteem and other psychological health (Graffam,
Shinkfield, Lavelle & McPherson, 2014). Research has found that ex-prisoners who are able to
secure a legitimate job, particularly higher-quality positions with higher wages are less likely to
recidivate than those ex-prisoners without legitimate job opportunities.

The utility of holding legitimate jobs has been explained with the application of social control
theory, which posits that work operates as an informal mechanism of social control (Sampson
&Laub, 2014). The utility of legal employment in reducing the risk of re-offending is supported
by research conducted in the UK where an analysis of data gathered in the 2001. Resettlement
Survey found that offenders nearing release who had secured paying, post-release jobs, believed
that they were less likely to re-offend than offenders nearing release without post-incarceration
secured jobs (Niven& Olagundoye, 2012). Similar results have been achieved in the U.S. with
employment programs sponsored by the Safer Foundation.

In Canada, approximately 75 percent of offenders who enter the federal correctional institutions
are identified as having employment needs (Gillis and Andrews, 2015). Offenders released from
confinement encounter a myriad of challenges with respect to securing employment. These
include personal factors such as low self-esteem, low motivation, skills deficit, lack of training,
mental illness, and substance abuse; a lack of stable accommodation; social factors such as
negative peer influence, an absence of family support and a poor employment record (Rakis,
2015). Obtaining legal employment is one of the best predictors of the post-release success of ex-
prisoners.More importantly, offenders have identified employment as a key factor in post-release
success.

Although in theory it is believed that employment will decrease the likelihood that an offender
will re-offend, the link between employment and re-offending is unclear (Webster,Hedderman,
Turnbull & May, 2011). One analysis of the impact of community-based employment
interventions that used random assignment of participants to the programs on re-offending,
however, found no statistically significant effect on the likelihood that program participants
would be re-arrested (Visher, 2016). Similarly, quasi-experimental studies of community

11
employment programs have also failed to find significant reductions in recidivism for
participants in employment service interventions.

It has been suggested however, that the gains of employment with respect to reducing re-
offending may be linked to the quality of the job, rather than merely being employed (Niven&
Olagundoye, 2012). Furthermore, the relationship between legal employment and reduced
recidivism may be heavily influenced by the interaction of the following factors: stable
accommodation, having employment-related qualifications, not having substance abuse-related
problems, and being proactive in asking for help with job searches (Sampson &Laub, 2014).
Researchers have noted that it is vital that the individual needs of ex-prisoners be identified and
matched with specific services. Among the more important employment interventions are job
readiness classes, vocational education, certification, job training, job placement, and job
monitoring (Visher, 2016).

Although the empirical evidence does not demonstrate significant decreases in recidivism rates
for offenders participating in employment service interventions, there is little doubt that
legitimate employment is vitally important in the seamless reintegration of offenders back into
their communities (Rakis, 2015). It is important that employment-related services be provided on
a continuum from the time an offender enters prison until their release into the community.
Vocational assessment should occur early in an offender's sentence and should guide the future
employment-related services that are offered to the offender. The vocational assessment would
provide a series of benchmarks to assess the progress of an offender's employment-readiness
plan.The success of this continuum may be contingent upon the development of policies and
procedures that are developed among institutional corrections, community corrections, the
private sector, and community organizations (Naidoo &Mkize, 2012).

2.4 Substance Abuse and Performance of Prisoner’s Reintegration Programmes

Drug dependent offenders are caught in a vicious circle. Unless the treatment they receive in
prison for their addiction is maintained on their return to the community, the chances are that
they will relapse and begin offending again to support their drug use. Failure to access
appropriate support services in the community can result in offenders returning to prison time
and time again, as the cycle of offending is perpetuated (Burrows, Clarke, Davidson Tarling&
12
Webb, 2011).In Canada offenders in correctional institutions often share the common attributes
of high rates of drug use both prior to, and during, incarceration. Approximately 80% of
offenders admitted to Canadian federal penitentiaries are identified as having a substance abuse
problem that is associated with their criminal behaviour on admission to prison (Kinner, 2016).

In the UK, data gathered through the Prison Criminality Survey of self-reported drug and alcohol
use found one-half of the offenders surveyed reported that they had used heroin, crack, or
cocaine in the year prior to their incarceration. Further, over one-half of the offenders reported
that their criminal behaviour was linked to their drug use, in particular, to finance their habit
(Harper and Chitty, 2014). In comparison, a quarter of offenders who experienced alcohol abuse
problems reported a link between their drinking and criminal behaviour, which, they reported,
resulted from lapses in judgment as a consequence of drinking.

While numerous studies have found that substance abuse is associated with criminal offending,
less is known about the patterns of drug and alcohol use by offenders following release into the
community. There appear to be high rates of alcohol and drug use among ex-prisoners and this
may hinder their ability to secure legal employment and stable accommodation (Niven and
Olagundoye, 2012). There is some evidence to suggest that severely addicted persons are often
perennial offenders and this has led policy-makers to focus on drug-related rather than alcohol-
related offending (Harper and Chitty, 2004). This attention is also supported by evidence, which
suggests that drug offenders are the most likely to recidivate and that they also present the
greatest risk to fail to reintegrate (Belenko, 2008).

Research studies have found that the most successful approach in reducing recidivism among
offenders, both immediately upon release into the community and over the long-term, are prison-
based and community-based therapeutic community (TC) models (MacKenzie, 1997). One of the
most important recommendations from the literature describing the link between substance abuse
and criminal behaviour is that the gains made during in-prison treatment programs can only be
maintained if an offender is provided with sufficient aftercare support upon release (Harper and
Chitty, 2014). Further, recidivism outcomes are most favourable for offenders who participate in
both in-prison treatment programming as well as aftercare programming.

13
Prendergast, Hall, Wexler, Melnick& Cao, (2014) found that prisoners who participated in in-
prison and community aftercare programming had a three-year re-imprisonment rate of 27
percent. In comparison, prisoners who had failed to participate in aftercare treatment services,
and prisoners in the no treatment control group, had three-year re-imprisonment rates of 82, 79,
and 75 percent respectively. The findings from the five-year follow-up of these same offenders
indicated that prisoners who participated in aftercare programming had lower rates of re-
imprisonment, had higher levels of post-release employment, and were in the community for
longer periods of time before re-imprisonment (Visher, 2016).Similar findings have been
reported for programs that target probationers. A study of 134,000 'drug-involved' probationers
sentenced in Florida which examined the effects of non-residential substance abuse treatment on
arrest found a positive impact on recidivism rates. The number of individuals expected to
recidivate and the number of expected arrests was reduced for those involved in non-residential
treatment programming, as evaluated at the 24-month follow-up (Rakis, 2015).

Usher and Stewart (2014) compared women offenders who were substance abusers to those who
were not on a number of different criteria: risk and need variables, demographic characteristics,
and recidivism data. They found that almost 60% of those had successfully completed a
substance abuse treatment program at some point during their incarceration. There was a trend
for substance abusers to recidivate at a higher rate than non-abusers; however, this was not
statistically significant. Next, the released substance abusers that completed relevant institutional
programming were compared to their untreated counterparts on post-release outcome (Kelly
&Bogue, 2014). Although the recidivism rates for both groups were relatively low, those who
had participated in substance abuse programming were significantly less likely to return to
custody than their untreated counterparts.

2.5 Education Programmes and Performance of Prisoner’s Reintegration Programmes

Prisoners released without any education, employment and cognitive restructuring addressing
anti-social behaviour has a negative impact on the communities they are released in. Williams
and Rosenfeld (2016) points out that, in spite of their ‘get tough on campaign’ over recent years,
violet imprisonment and re-imprisonment of offenders,prisonersreleased, without the proper
preparation breeds recidivism.The available research indicate that certain carefully designed and
administered prison education programs can improve inmate behaviour and reduce recidivism.
14
For example, a recent study sponsored by the Virginia Department of Correctional Education
tracked reincarceration rates among offenders in Virginia over a fifteen-year period and found
that recidivism rates were 59 percent lower for those inmates who had participated in and
completed prison educational programs versus those who had not participated (Muntingh, 2011).
Preliminary results from the largest and most comprehensive correctional education and
recidivism study to date also show lower rates of recidivism among inmates who participated in
these programs, although the findings are not as dramatic as the Virginia study. In this study of
over 3,000 inmates, rates of reincarceration for offenders who participated in education programs
were 20 percent lower than inmates who did not. Moreover, certain studies that have attempted
to measure the effect prison education programs have on post-release employment also show
positive results (Joseph, 2010).

Gottschalk (2016) indicated that in three of the four studies under investigation prison education
programs significantly increased chances of securing employment following release from prison.
Despite these promising findings, evidence suggests that funding for these programs has not kept
pace with the recent expansion of the prison population. During the “get tough on crime”
environment that dominated the 1990s, many states cut existing prison educational programs,
often to fund new prisons (Joseph, 2010). In California, for example, the number of prison
teachers has dropped by 200 over the last 15 years, as the prison population grew from 30,000 to
160,000. Also, in 1994 inmates were declared ineligible for college Pell grants, leaving many
prisoners unable to pursue college degrees during their incarceration.

US Federal Bureau of prisons study found that, successfully completed educational programs for
six months confined, the lower the recidivism (Kelly &Bogue, 2014). In Nigeria, many prisoners
are illiterates and those literate with basic normal education do not have access to information
regarding to daily activities responsibilities. Thus, criminal behaviours and delinquency are
common occurrences in Nigeria. The recent cases experienced were; Rape, drug trafficking,
murder, armed robbery, fraud, traffic offences and theft have become more serious to tackle as
they have manifested with new methods and techniques. South Africa has estimated recidivism
15
at 66 percent and 94 percent (Muntingh, 2011).This shows recidivism figures are very high,
indicates rehabilitation has not been the main focus in the prisons.

Today, most Kenyan prison systems offer a wide range of educational programs, from vocational
training topost-secondary education courses. These diverse programs all aim to improve
prisoners’ behaviour while in incarcerated, by facilitating the maturation and conscientiousness
of the inmate, and to reduce recidivism, by improving employment prospects and by providing a
broader frame of reference within which to make important decisions (Omboto, 2013). Programs
within Kenya prison setting are categorized into formal and vocational training; education is the
acquisition of knowledge and ability through intellectual, moral and physical training. Inmates
get certificates after sitting various National examinations like Kenya certificate of primary
Education. The first candidate in Kisii prison scored 335 marks (Papa, 2015).

2.7 Theoretical Orientation

This section discusses the theoretical foundation on which the study is anchored. The study is
grounded on relapse prevention theory, supported by the empowerment theory and the public
participation theory.

2.7.1 Relapse Prevention Theory

The goal of the theory is to address the problem of lapse and to generate techniques of
prevention and managing its recurrence (Miller & Heather, 2013). This theory provides a
mechanism to assess the performances of rehabilitation programs on clients. Relapse prevention
is a cognitive behaviour model with origin in Banduras (1977) self-efficacy theory, which
presents a comprehensive and integrated framework for explaining the change process in
psychotherapy. This theory argues that techniques producing initial behaviour change may be
ineffective at maintaining that change over time and avoid relapse. Relapse prevention treatment
provides individuals with the behavioural and cognitive skills necessary to cope effectively with
high situations (temptations both intrapersonal and interpersonal situations (Witkiewitz, Bowen,
Douglas & Hsu, 2013). The strengths of the theory include good support system, good treatment
team, good insight, motivation to get better drawing upon a wide range of skills.

16
In contrast with traditional approaches that overemphasize initial habit change, RP focuses more
on the maintenance phase of the habit change process. From this perspective, relapse is not
viewed merely as an indicator of treatment failure. Instead, potential and actual episodes are key
targets for both proactive and reactive intervention strategies (Vengeliene, Bilbao &Spanagel,
2014). RP treatment procedures include specific intervention techniques designed to teach the
individual to effectively anticipate and cope with potential relapse situations. Also included are
more global lifestyle interventions aimed at improving overall coping skills and promoting health
and well-being. Important questions raised by this relatively recent alternative to traditional
approaches are discussed (Miller & Heather, 2013).

Despite the strength of the theory, there are also weaknesses like Perfectionism, putting insight
into action, dealing with changes. Strength and weakness will provide a framework for relapse
prevention plan (Witkiewitz, Bowen, Douglas & Hsu, 2013). Then above theory is related to this
study in such a way that rehabilitation programmes aims at changing the habits and characters of
the prisoners so that they become constructive persons in the community. In addition, the study
tries to look at the influence of the rehabilitation program on reducing the incidences of re
conviction of the prisoner after release (Miller & Heather, 2013). Hence all the above aims at
changing the prisoners from being social misfits to people of great value in the community and
also to make them change from the bad habits to useful people in the community.

2.7.2 Ecological Theory

The Ecological Theory supports the idea, that changes in social environment have a notable
influence on individuals. It is important to construct environments that support individuals post
incarceration, so that we as a society can prevent multiple offenses and reduce recidivism rates
and crime (Ugwuoke, 2010). By inference, assumption can be made that availability of
resources, treatment, and support services, societal attitudinal change etc, post-incarceration may
indeed have a significant impact in declining the current rates of recidivism.

Providing discharged prisoners with resources such as regular, stable employment will keep
them out of informal economies and secondary labour markets, where they are more vulnerable
to re-offend (Usher, 2013). It would also be very beneficial to supply inmates with resources and
education, provided by family educators that empower them to create healthier family and
17
community environment. Ecological Theory supports the idea that resource availability would
createa positive environmental support structure for post-incarcerated individuals and would be
very effective in reducing recidivism rates (Usher, 2013).

2.7.3 Empowerment Theory

The origin of empowerment as a form of theory is traced back to the Brazilian humanitarian and
educator, Paulo Freire (Hur& Suh, 2012). The Paulo Freire's, ‘The pedagogy of the oppressed’
(1970) provided the conceptual base for the debates on empowerment. However, according to
Bailey (2009), Ernst Friedrich Schumacher’s ‘Small is Beautiful', which came into circulation at
a similar time with Freire's piece, is also known to have influenced the debate on empowerment.
Empowerment theory postulates that participation in decision-making may enhance individual's
sense of empowerment and that empowered individuals are likely to be active in community
organisations and community activities.

Empowerment as a construct is multifaceted. Theories of empowerment touch on different

dimensions of life. Hur andSuh (2012) argues that empowerment theories are not only concerned
with the process of empowerment, but also with results that can produce greater access to
resources and power for the disadvantaged. An empowering intervention is that which builds
capacity of individuals to positively influence their wellbeing outcomes. Just like social capital,
empowerment is operative at various levels: personal or individual, interpersonal, organizational,
community, and collective (Hur& Suh, 2012). Zimmerman and Darnold (2009) observed that the
focus of both empowerment theory and practice is to understand and strengthen processes and
context where individuals gain mastery and control over decisions that affect their lives. Thus,
interventions that provide genuine opportunities for individuals to participate may help them
develop a sense of psychological empowerment (Maton, 2008). Typically, therefore, an
empowering development process might begin with an environmental assessment of the
opportunities to participate and develop strategies to include participants in the design,
implementation, monitoring and evaluation of interventions.

Empowerment, however, is not a panacea for all individual and social illness. It has been
criticized as overly individualistic and conflict-oriented, resulting in an emphasis on mastery and
control rather than cooperation and community (Kiraly, 2014). According to Turner
18
&Maschi(2015), although the practice of empowerment is effective for the removal of
powerlessness, certain factors still exist that may inhibit the manifestation of empowerment. He
cites organizational aspects, such as an impersonal bureaucratic climate, supervisory styles
described as authoritarianism and negativism as well as arbitrary reward systems as hindrances
to empowerment. The other argument against the empowerment theory is the 'loose' manner in
which empowerment as a concept is framed.

2.7.4 Rehabilitation Theory

Rehabilitation theory tries to justify essence of Rehabilitation theory by emphasizing treatment
of discharged offenders for smoother and more profitable reintegration for their benefit and that
of the society at large (Mealings, 2015). This theory has the prevailing modern view that
punishment should be reformative. The ultimate objective of punishment, in this view, is to bring
about social tranquillity. This theory argues that people are self-determinate beings whose ability
to freely choose is frequently obstructed by various social conditions such as unequal access to
social resources, poverty, unemployment, corrupt political system etc, which might lead to
alcoholism, drug addiction, psychosis and crime etc. Therefore, the theory emphasizes treatment
programmes that have the goals of making offenders law-abiding self-dependent member of the
society (Kayes, Mudge& Bright, 2015).

Treatment in this context is be defined as any and all efforts aimed at the remission of criminal
behaviour and the social reintegration of the offender within the community. Thus, rehabilitation
theory is all about the treatment and subsequent reintegration of the offender. It is motivated by
humanitarian’s belief in the worth and dignity of human person and the willingness to expand the
effort to re-claim the criminal for his own sake and not merely to protect the society,
(Chamberlain, 2015). The humanitarians fostered the belief that punishment should be
therapeutic rather than punitive in the interest of the offender and the society.

2.8 Conceptual Framework

The relationship between the variables is presented schematically in Figure 1.

19
 Independent variables

Capacity of Prison Officers Moderating variables

Availability of Psychologists
Professional counselling
Availability of Criminologists Personal characteristics
Availability psychiatrists Attitude
Adequate staffing Self-esteem
Motivation
Peer influence
Society altitude
Employment Opportunities
Legal employment Dependent variable
Community-based employment
Vocational assessment
Post-release job placement Performance of Prisoner’s
Post-release job monitoring Reintegration Programmes
 Behaviour change
 Successful reintegration
Substance Abuse  Reduction in Recidivism
Drug abuse (heroin, cocaine bang etc)  Reduced Crime rates
Alcohol abuse  Self-reliance
Frequency of drug use
Severity ofdrug addiction

Prison Education Programmes

Adult literacy classes
Primary and secondary education
Tertiary education
Vocational education
Life skills training
Figure 1

Figure 1 Conceptual Framework

2.9 Summary and Research Gaps

It is important to appreciate that officers who come in contact with prisoners on a daily basis,
both junior and senior officers, need to be people of integrity who are well educated and
specifically trained for this job. This is informed by the fact that the job require an in-depth
understanding of human behaviour, human motivation, human worth and human dignity.
20
Research has found that ex-prisoners who are able to secure a legitimate job, particularly higher-
quality positions with higher wages are less likely to recidivate than those ex-prisoners without
legitimate job opportunities are.

However, although in theoryit is believed that employment will decrease the likelihood that an
offender will re-offend, the link between employment and re-offending is unclear. There appear
to be high rates of alcohol and drug use among ex-prisoners and this may hinder their ability to
secure legal employment and stable accommodation. Evidence show that severely addicted
persons are perennial offenders. Prisoners released without any education, employment and
cognitive restructuring addressing anti-social behaviour has a negative impact on the
communities they are released in. Research indicates that certain carefully designed and
administered prison education programs can improve inmate behaviour and reduce recidivism.

In spite of the literature available on attempts by researchers to provide solution to the menace of
prisoner re-imprisonment less has been studied in Kenya on factors that influence the success of
prisoner’s reintegration programmes. Omboto (2013) assessed the challenges facing
rehabilitation of prisoners in Kenya and the mitigation strategies. Nyaura and Ngugi (2014)
carried out a critical overview of the Kenyan Prisons System focusing on understanding the
challenges of correctional practice. Otiato (2014) studied effective re-integration of ex-offenders
targeting Kenya policy analysis. This study will therefore seek to fill this gap by focusing on
women prisoners in Meru Gk prison.

21
 CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction
This chapter explains the methodology that was used by the researcher to find answers to the
research questions. In this chapter, the research methodology is presented in the following order,
research design, target population, sampling procedure, data collection methods, instruments of
data collection and the pilot study. The section also explains how data wasanalyzed to produce
the required information necessary for the study. Finally, the chapter provides the ethical issues
and operationalization of the variables.

3.2 Research Design

The study adopted a descriptive survey research design. This design was adopted because it
describes the state of affairs, as it exists at present in the study (Kothari, 2004). The researcher
intends to apply this design is to establish factors influencing performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners in Meru Gk prison. This design is very
useful in studying the inter-relations between the variables already mentioned in the conceptual
framework Mugenda and Mugenda, (2003).

3.3 Target population

Target population is a well-defined or specified set of people, group of things, households, firms,
services that are being investigated. This study was based in Meru Gk prison. Based on the
recommendations of Churchill and Iacobucci (2010) in defining the unit of analysis for a study,
the target population for this study the target population was all the 1259 inmates and 317
officers in the prison according to prison records as shown in table 3.1 below.
Table 3. 1: Target Population
Frequency Percentage
Officers 317 20.1
Prisoners released 752 47.7
Prisoners re-arrested again 507 32.2
Total 1576 100.0
Source: Prison Department (2016)

22
3.4 Sample size and Sampling Procedures
Sampling is a deliberate choice of a number of people who are to provide the data from which a
study will draw conclusions about some larger group whom these people represent. The section
focuses on the sampling size and sampling procedures.

3.4.1 Sampling Size

The sample size is a subset of the population that is taken to be representatives of the entire
population (Flick, 2015).
). A sample population of 309 wass arrived at by calculating the target
population of 1576 with a 95% confidence level and an error of 0.05 using the below formula
taken from Kothari (2004).

Where; n = Size of the sample,

N = Size of the population and given as 1576,
℮ = Acceptable error and given as 0.05,
∂p = The standard deviation of the population and given as 0.5 where not known,
Z = Standard variation at a confidence level given as 1.96 at 95% confidence level.
The sample size fits within the minimum of 30 proposed by Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill
(2012).
Table 3. 2: Sampling Frame and sample size
Management level Population Ratio Sample
Officers 317 0.20 62
Prisoners released 752 0.20 147
Prisoners re-arrested again 507 0.20 99
Total 1576 309

3.4.2 Sampling Procedures

The study used stratified sampling technique to select 20% (62) officers and 20% (247) of
inmates in the prison. Further, the study used simple random sampling to pick the respondents in
each stratum. Stratified random sampling iss unbiased sampling method of grouping
heterogeneous population into homogenous subsets then making a selection within the individual

23
subset to ensure representativeness. The goal of stratified random sampling is to achieve the
desired representation from various sub-groups in the population. In stratified random sampling
subjects are selected in such a way that the existing sub-groups in the population are more or less
represented in the sample (Kothari, 2004).

3.5 Research Instruments

Primary data was obtained using self-administered questionnaires. The questionnaire was made up
of both open ended and closed ended questions. The open ended questions were used so as to
encourage the respondent to give an in-depth and felt response without feeling held back in
illuminating of any information and the closed ended questions allowed respondent to respond from
limited options that had been stated. According to Saunders (2011), the open ended or unstructured
questions allow profound response from the respondents while the closed or structured questions are
generally easier to evaluate. The questionnaires were used in an effort to conserve time and money
as well as to facilitate an easier analysis as they are in immediate usable form.

3.5.1 Pilot Testing

Pilot testing refers to putting of the research questions into test to a different study population
with similar characteristics as the study population to be studied (Flick, 2015). Pilot testing of the
research instruments was conducted using staff in the prison that will have been left out of the
final sample. 30 questionnaires were administered to the pilot survey respondents who were
chosen at random. This is very important in the research process because it assists the researcher
in identification and correction of vague questions and unclear instructions. It is also a great
opportunity to capture the important comments and suggestions from the participants. This
helped to improve on the efficiency of the instrument (Saunders, 2011). This process was
repeated until the researcher is satisfied that the instrument does not have variations or
vagueness.

3.5.2 Validity of Research Instruments

Validity is the accuracy and meaningfulness of inferences, based on the research results. One of
the main reasons for conducting the pilot study is to ascertain the validity of the questionnaire
(Golafshani, 2012). The study used content validity, which draws an inference from test scores to
a large domain of items similar to those on the test. Content validity is concerned with sample-
24
population representativeness. Silverman (2016) stated that the knowledge and skills covered by
the test items should be representative to the larger domain of knowledge and skills. Expert
opinion was requested to comment on the representativeness and suitability of questions and give
suggestions of corrections to be made to the structure of the research tools. This helped to
improve the content validity of the data that was collected. Content validity was obtained by
asking for the opinion of the supervisor, lecturers and other professionals on whether the
questionnaire was adequate (Golafshani, 2012).

3.5.3 Reliability of Research Instruments

Reliability of the research instrument is the extent to which a research instrument produces
similar results on different occasions under similar conditions. It is the degree of consistency
with which it measures whatever it is meant to measure (Bell, 2010). Reliability is concerned
with the question of whether the results of a study are repeatable. The questionnaires were
administered to the pilot group of 25 randomly selected respondents from the target population
and their responses used to check the reliability of the tool. A reliability co-efficient (Cronbach
alpha) of 0.6 or above, is acceptable (Silverman, 2016). Reliability coefficient of the research
instrument was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha (α) which is computed as follows:
Α=k/k-1× [1-∑ (S2)/∑S2sum]
Where:
α= Cronbach’s alpha
k = Number of responses
∑ (S2) = Variance of individual items summed up
∑S2sum = Variance of summed up scores
A construct composite reliability co-efficient (Cronbach alpha) of 0.7 or above, for all the
constructs, was considered adequate for this study.

3.6 Data Collection Procedures

The researcher obtained an introduction letter from the university, whichwas presented to the
prison officials so as to be allowed to collect the necessary data from the respondents. Drop and
pick method was preferred for questionnaire administration so as to give respondents enough
time to give well thought out responses. The researcher booked appointment with prison officials
at least two days before visiting to administer questionnaires. The researcher personally
25
administered the research instruments to the respondents. This enabled the researcher to establish
rapport, explain the purpose of the study and the meaning of items that may not be clear as
observed by Best and Khan (2003). Where the prison officials restrict the researcher to
personally administer the research instruments, prison wardens themselves will administer them.

3.7 Data Analysis Techniques

Data wasanalyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS Version 22.0).
Descriptive statistics such as frequencies, percentages, mean score and standard deviation was
estimated for all the quantitative variables and information presented inform of tables. The
qualitative data from the open-ended questions wasanalyzed using conceptual content analysis
and presented in prose form.

Inferential data analysis was done using multiple regression analysis to establish the relations
between the independent and dependent variables. Multiple regression was used because it uses
two or more independent variables to predict a single dependent variable. Since there are four
independent variables in this study the multiple regression model generally assumes the
following equation;
Y= β0 + β1X1 + β2X2 + β3X3 + β4X4 + ɛ
Where:-
Y= Performance of Prisoner’s Reintegration Programmes
β0=constant
β1, β2, β3 andβ4 = regression coefficients
X1= Capacity of Prison Officers
X2= Employment Opportunities
X3= Substance Abuse
X4= Prison Education Programmes
ɛ=Error Term
In testing the significance of the model, the coefficient of determination (R2) was used. F-statistic
was also computed at 95% confidence level to test whether there is any significant relationship
between performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes and the factorsinfluencing it.

26
3.8 Ethical Considerations
The researcher collected sensitive information and therefore has a moral obligation to treat the
information with utmost care. The researcher assured the respondents confidentiality of the
information given to ensure that the respondents are not reluctant to give the information as
sought by the study. This was done by using the transmittal letter indicating that the data
collected was only for academic purposes.

3.9 Operational Definition of Variables

The operationalization of variables is shown in Table 3.3.

27
Table 3.3: Operationalization of variables
Measuring of Scale
Objectives Type of Indicator Tools of Type of
Indicators
Variable analysis analysis
To find out the Independent Availability of
Capacity of Prison Interval Percentages Descriptive
influence of Psychologists
Officers statistics
Ordinal Mean score
capacity of prison Professional counselling
Regression
officers on Availability of Interval
analysis
performance of Criminologists Interval
prisoner’s Availability psychiatrists
Interval
reintegration Adequate staffing
programmes
among women
prisoners in Meru
Gk prison.
To evaluate the Independent Legal employment
Employment Interval Percentages Descriptive
influence of Community-based
Opportunities statistics
Interval Mean score
employment employment
Regression
opportunities on Vocational assessment Ordinal
analysis
performance of Post-release job
prisoner’s placement
Ordinal
reintegration Post-release job

28
programmes monitoring
among women
prisoners in Meru
Gk prison.
To determine the Independent Drug abuse (heroin, Interval
Substance Abuse Percentages Descriptive
influence of cocaine bang etc) statistics
Interval Mean score
substance abuse on Alcohol abuse Regression
performance of Interval
Frequency of drug use analysis
prisoner’s Interval
reintegration Severity of drug
programmes addiction
among women
prisoners in Meru
Gk prison.
To establish the Independent Adult literacy classes
Education Nominal Percentages Descriptive
influence of Primary and secondary
programmes statistics
Nominal Mean score
education education
Regression
programmes on Tertiary education Ordinal
analysis
performance of Vocational education Interval
prisoner’s Life skills training
Nominal
reintegration
programmes

29
among women
prisoners in Meru
Gk prison.
Behaviour change
Dependent performance of Interval Mean score Descriptive
prisoner’s statistics
Successful reintegration Ordinal
reintegration Regression
programmes Reduction in Recidivism analysis

Reduced Crime rates

Self-reliance

30
 CHAPTER FOUR
DATA ANALYSIS, PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION

4.1 Introduction
This chapter begins by considering the response rate of questionnaires administered by the
researcher as well as the response of interviewees who were subjected to interview using a
written schedule. The background information of the respondents is also discussed in detail. Data
that was collected was analysed, presented and interpreted as guided by the research questions.

4.2 Response Rate

Out of 309 questionnaires administered the researcher managed to obtain 212 fully completed
questionnaires representing a 68.6% response rate which is within what Flick (2015) prescribed
as a significant response rate for statistical analysis and established at a minimal value of 50%.
Table 4.1: Response Rate

Questionnaires Response Rate

Response 212 68.6%
Non- Response 97 31.4%
Total 309 100

4.3 Reliability Analysis

A pilot study was carried out to determine reliability of the questionnaires. Reliability analysis
was subsequently done using Cronbach’s Alpha which measures the internal consistency by
establishing if certain items within a scale measure the same construct. Saunders (2011)
established the Alpha value threshold at 0.7, thus forming the study’s benchmark.
Table 4.2: Reliability Analysis
Cronbach's Alpha Decision
Capacity of Prison Officers .815 Accepted
Employment Opportunities .826 Accepted
Substance Abuse .713 Accepted
Prison Education Programmes .732 Accepted

Cronbach Alpha was established for every objective which formed a scale and the results showed
that employment opportunities was more reliable with a coefficient of 0.826 followed by
capacity of prison officers with 0.815 the prison education programmes with 0.732 while

31
substance abusewas least with .713. This illustrates that all the four variables were reliable as
their reliability values exceeded the prescribed threshold of 0.7 (Saunders, 2011). This, therefore,
depicts that the research instrument was reliable and therefore required no amendments.

4.4 Background Information of Respondents (Demographic characteristics)

In this part general information of respondents was analyzed by use of frequencies and
percentages.

4.4.1 Designation of the Respondent

Table 4.3 summarizes the designation of the Respondents who responded to the questionnaires
administered.
Table 4. 3: Designation of the Respondent
Designation Frequency Percentage
Officers 44 20.8
Prisoners released 109 51.4
Prisoners re-arrested again 59 27.8
Total 212 100.0

Table 4.3 shows that majority of respondents who participated in the study, prisoners released
were 51.4%, 27.8% were prisoners re-arrested again while out of 212 participating respondents,
there were only 44 officers. The respondents had a clue on the subject under study.

4.4.2 Highest Level of Education of the Respondent

Table 4.4 gives a summary of the highest level of education of both officers and inmates who
responded to the questionnaires administered.
Table 4. 4: Highest Level of Education of the Respondent
Frequency Percentage
Certificate 172 81.1
Diploma 37 17.5
Undergraduate 3 1.4
212 100

Out of 212 respondents involved in this study only 1.4% had an undergraduate level of
education. Other 17.5% of the total respondents had diploma while the majority as shown by
81.1% were certificate holders. This means that respondents who responded to the questionnaires
were aware of the information being sought.

32
4.4.3 Time in Prison
The research sought to know the time for which the respondent had either worked in the prison
or been in the prison as an inmate and the table 4.5 gives the results.
Table 4. 5: Period Worked/Been in the Prison
Frequency Percent
1-4 years 24 11.3
5-8 years 63 29.7
9-12 years 86 40.6
13- 16 years 27 12.7
17 years and above 12 5.7
Total 212 100.0

The results show that those who had worked or been in the prison for 1-4 years were 24, for 5-8
years were 63, for 9-12 years were 86, for 13- 16 years were 27 while those who had worked or
been in the prison for 17 years and above were 12. This implies that the respondents could
understand and give the information the respondent sought.

4.5 Variables of the study

The study focused on four factors derived from the objectives of the study. They are guided by
the research questions which were designed to address the statement of the problem and the
objectives.

4.5.1 Capacity of Prison Officers

The extent to which the capacity of prison officers influence performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners was sought and the respondents
opinions were presented in the table 4.6.
Table 4. 6: Extent of Capacity of Prison Officers Influence

Frequency Percent
Low extent 26 12.4
Moderate extent 63 29.9
Great extent 73 34.2
Very great extent 50 23.5
Total 212 100

33
The results reveal that majority of the respondents indicated that the capacity of prison officers
influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes in a great extent as shown by
34.2% (73). Further with 29.9% (63) indicated that in a moderate extent capacity of prison
officers influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. Again, 23.5% (50)
indicated that capacity of prison officers influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration
programmes in a very great extent, 12.4% (26) showed that capacity of prison officers influence
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes in in a little extent. Therefore from the
above findings it’s true that capacity of prison officers greatly influence performance of
prisoner’s reintegration programmes.

The influence of various aspects of capacity of prison officers on performance of prisoner’s

reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners was also sought and the respondents’
opinions were presented in Table 4.7.
Table 4. 7: Extent Capacity of Prison Officers
Mean Std. Dev.
Availability of Psychologists 2.460 0.499
Professional counselling 4.048 0.658
Availability of Criminologists 3.952 0.215
Availability psychiatrists 3.733 0.607
Adequate staffing 4.049 1.039

Adequate staffing (Mean=4.049) and professional counselling (Mean=4.048) were found to

influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes in a great extent.

Availability of criminologists (Mean=3.952) and availability of psychiatrists (Mean=3.733) were

also revealed to influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes in a great extent.
Finally availability of psychologists (Mean=2.460) influenced performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes in a little extent.

4.5.2 Employment Opportunities

The extent to which employment opportunities influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration
programmes focusing on women prisoners was sought and the opinions of the respondents were
used to come up with the findings in the Table 4.8.

34
Table 4. 8: Extent of Employment Opportunities Influence
Frequency Percent
Low extent 26 12.3
Moderate extent 52 24.6
great extent 84 39.6
Very great extent 50 23.5
Total 212 100

From the above results majority of the respondents indicated that the employment opportunities
influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners in a
great extent as shown by 39.6% (84). Further with 24.6% (52) indicated that in a moderate extent
employment opportunities influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes
focusing on women prisoners. Again, 23.5% (50) indicated that employment opportunities
influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners in a
very great extent, 12.3% (26) showed that employment opportunities influence performance of
prisoner’s reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners in a little extent. Therefore
from the above findings it’s true that the employment opportunities greatly influence
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes.

The respondents were also requested to rate various aspects of employment opportunities
influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners
using the likert scale 1- 5. Their responses were as shown in Table 4.9.
Table 4. 9: Extent of Influence of Employment Opportunities
Mean Std. Dev.
Legal employment 3.845 1.271
Community-based employment 4.021 0.703
Vocational assessment 3.690 0.605
Post-release job placement 2.910 0.619
Post-release job monitoring 4.197 0.749

Post-release job monitoring (Mean=4.197) and community-based employment (Mean=4.021)

were revealed to influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. Further legal
employment (Mean=3.845) and vocational assessment (Mean=3.690) were also found to greatly
influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. Post-release job placement
(Mean=2.910) again was revealed to moderately influence performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes.

35
4.5.3 Substance Abuse
The extent to which substance abuse influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration
programmes focusing on women prisoners was sought and the responses of the respondents were
presented in table 4.10.
Table 4. 10: Extent of Substance Abuse Influence
Frequency Percent
Low extent 22 10.2
Moderate extent 60 28.3
great extent 81 38
Very great extent 50 23.5
Total 212 100

From the above results majority of the respondents indicated that the substance abuse influence
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes in a great extend as shown by 38% (81).
Further with 28.3% (60) indicated that in a moderate extent substance abuse influence
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. Again, 23.5% (50) indicated that substance
abuse influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes in a very great extent,
10.2% (22) showed substance abuse influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration
programmes in a little extent. Therefore from the above shows that substance abusegreatly
influenceperformance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes.

The respondents were again requested to rate the influence of various aspects of substance abuse
on performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes using the likert scale 1- 5. Their
responses were as shown in table 4.11.
Table 4. 11: Extent of Influence of Substance Abuse Aspects
Mean Std. Deviation
Drug abuse (heroin, cocaine bang etc) 4.251 0.723
Alcohol abuse 4.021 0.950
Frequency of drug use 3.888 1.039
Severity of drug addiction 2.770 0.573

According to the results majority of the respondents indicated that drug abuse (heroin, cocaine
bang etc) (Mean=4.251), that alcohol abuse (Mean=4.021) and that frequency of drug use
(Mean=3.888) influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes greatly. They also
indicated that severity of drug addiction (Mean=2.770) moderately influence performance of
prisoner’s reintegration programmes.
36
4.5.4 Prison Education Programmes
The extent to which prison education programmes influence performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners was sought and the responses of the
respondents were presented in table 4.12.
Table 4. 12: Extent of Prison Education Programmes Influence
Frequency Percent
Low extent 24 11.2
Moderate extent 39 18.3
great extent 102 48
Very great extent 48 22.5
Total 212 100

From the above results majority of the respondents indicated that the prison education
programmes influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes in a great extent as
shown by 48% (102). Further with 22.5% (48) indicated that in a very great extent prison
education programmes influenceperformance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. Again,
18.3% (39) indicated that prison education programmes influence performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes in a moderate extent, 11.2% (24) showed substance abuse influence
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes in a little extent. Therefore from the above
shows that prison education programmes greatly influence performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes.

The respondents were again requested to rate the influence of various aspects of prison education
programmes on performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes using the likert scale 1- 5.
Their responses were as shown in table 4.13.
Table 4. 13: Extent of Influence of Prison Education Programmes Aspects
Mean Std. Deviation
Adult literacy classes 4.161 0.713
Primary and secondary education 4.221 0.940
Tertiary education 2.388 0.439
Vocational education 3.770 0.673
Life skills training 3.525 1.349

The results showed that primary and secondary education (Mean=4.221) and adult literacy
classes (Mean=4.161) greatly influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes.
Vocational education (Mean=3.770) as well as life skills training (Mean=3.525) were found to

37
greatly influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. Tertiary education
(Mean=2.388) however was found to lightly influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration
programmes.

4.5.5 Performance of Prisoner’s Reintegration Programmes

The findings on the extent of various aspects ratings on the performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programme were presented in table 4.14.
Table 4. 14: Performance of Prisoner’s Reintegration Programmes
Mean Std. Dev.
Behaviour change 4.021 0.933
Successful reintegration 3.675 0.712
Reduction in Recidivism 4.323 0.765
Reduced Crime rates 3.909 0.937
Self-reliance 2.562 0.880

The findings expressed that reduction in recidivism (Mean=4.323), that behaviour change
(Mean=4.021) and that reduced crime rates (Mean=3.909) were found to have improved.
Successful reintegration (Mean=3.675) was also found to have improved while self-reliance
(Mean=2.562) was found to have been constant.

4.8 Regression Analysis

The research study sought to establish factors influencing performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners in Meru Gk prison.
Table 4. 15: Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 0.810 0.656 0.638 0.113

The findings reveal that there was a strong positive relationship (R= 0.810) between the
variables. The study also revealed that 63.8% of the performance of prisoner’s reintegration
programmes could be explained by the independent variables under study as shown in Table
4.15.
Table 4. 16: Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
Model Sum of Df Mean Square F Significance.
Squares
1 Regression 1.946 4 0.487 36.762 3.64E-17

38
 Residual 1.019 77 0.013
Total 2.965 81

The Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) findings reveal that, at 95% confidence level, the variables
produce statistically significant values and can be relied on to explain performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes. The F-critical was 3.92 while the F-calculated was 37.762 as shown
in Table 4.16. This shows that F-calculated was greater than the F-critical and hence there is a
linear relationship between the independent variables and the dependent variable. In addition, the
p-value was 0.000, which is less than the significance level (0.05). Therefore, the model can be
considered to be a good fit for the data and hence it is appropriate in predicting the influence of
the independent variables on performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes.
Table 4. 17: Regression Coefficients
Un standardized Coefficients Standardiz t Significa
ed nce.
Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) 0.854 0.253 3.38 0.001
Capacity of Prison Officers 0.778 0.063 0.261 12.34 0.017
Employment Opportunities 0.677 0.07 0.152 9.67 0.001
Substance Abuse 0.614 0.054 0.014 11.37 0.008
Prison Education Programmes 0.883 0.072 0.457 12.26 0.016

The equation for the regression model is expressed as:

Y= 0.854+0.778X1 +0.677X2+0.614X3+0.883X4

Y= Performance of Prisoner’s Reintegration Programmes

β0=constant
β1, β2, β3 and β4 = regression coefficients
X1= Capacity of Prison Officers
X2= Employment Opportunities
X3= Substance Abuse
X4= Prison Education Programmes

From this analysis it was evident that at 95% confidence level, the variables produce statistically
significant values for this study (high t-values, p < 0.05). A positive effect is reported for all the
factors under study hence influencing performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. The
39
results of the regression equation below shows that for a 1- point increase in the independent
variables, performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes is predicted to increase by 0.854,
if all the other factors are held constant. Again a unit increase in the scores of capacity of prison
officers would lead to 0.778 increases in the performance of prisoner’s reintegration
programmes. Further a unit increase in the scores of employment opportunities would lead to
0.677 increases in the performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes.

Again unit increase in the scores of substance abuse would lead to 0.614 increases in the
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. Finally a unit increase in the scores of
prison education programmes would lead to 0.883 increases in the performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes. Overall prison education programmes had the greatest effect followed
by capacity of prison officers then employment opportunities while substance abuse had the least
effect on Performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes.

40
 CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, DISCUSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction
This chapter provides a summary of the findings of the research, discussion of the findings, the
conclusions and the study recommendations on the factors influencing performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programme.

5.2 Summary of Findings

The results obtained in this study are summarized here

5.2.1 Capacity of Prison Officers

The findings show that capacity of prison officers greatly influences performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes. Adequate staffing and professional counselling were found to
influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes in a great. Availability of
criminologists and availability of psychiatrists were also revealed to influence performance of
prisoner’s reintegration programmes in a great extent. Finally availability of psychologists
influenced performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes in a little extent.

5.2.2 Employment Opportunities

The findings reveal that the employment opportunities greatly influence performance of
prisoner’s reintegration programmes. Post-release job monitoring and community-based
employment were revealed to influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes.
Further legal employment and vocational assessment were also found to greatly influence
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. Post-release job placement again was
revealed to moderately influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes.

5.2.3 Substance Abuse

The results show that substance abuse greatly influences performance of prisoner’s reintegration
programmes. According to the results majority of the respondents indicated that drug abuse
(heroin, cocaine bang etc), that alcohol abuse and that frequency of drug use influence
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes greatly. They also indicated that severity of
drug addiction moderately influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes.

41
5.2.4 Prison Education Programmes
Therefore from the above shows that prison education programmes greatly influence
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. The results showed that primary and
secondary education and adult literacy classes greatly influence performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes. Vocational education as well as life skills’ training was found to
greatly influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. Tertiary education
however was found to lightly influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes.

5.3 Discussion

The results in the study are discussed here.

5.3.1 Capacity of Prison Officers

The findings show that capacity of prison officers greatly influences performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes. This correspond to Mbugua (2011) who claim that major cause of
prisons failure in rehabilitation rest on the people entrusted with the responsibility to reform the
prisoners.
Adequate staffing and professional counselling were found to influence performance of
prisoner’s reintegration programmes in a great extent. This concurs with Musili and Mbatia
(2016) who claim that in some rural prisons there are grass thatched mud walled houses; these
very structures are in most cases shared by at least two families.
Availability of criminologists and availability of psychiatrists were also revealed to influence
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes in a great extent. This is related to Omboto
(2010) who said that the reason why our prisons cannot reform inmates is related to the poor
working conditions of the prisons staff.
Finally availability of psychologists influenced performance of prisoner’s reintegration
programmes in a little extent. This concur with Musili and Mbatia (2016) who on promotions
officers complain that, in the prisons department, uniformed staff with similar academic
qualifications, experience and personal file records (i.e. whether they have breached prisons‟
regulations or not) scatter in all ranks.

42
5.3.2 Employment Opportunities
The findings reveal that the employment opportunities greatly influence performance of
prisoner’s reintegration programmes. Post-release job monitoring and community-based
employment were revealed to influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes.
This concurs with Sampson and Laub (2014) who claim that the utility of holding legitimate jobs
has been explained with the application of social control theory, which posits that work operates
as an informal mechanism of social control.
Further legal employment and vocational assessment were also found to greatly influence
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. This was in line with Niven and
Olagundoye (2012) who said that resettlement survey found that offenders nearing release, who
had secured paying, post-release jobs, believed that they were less likely to re-offend than
offenders nearing release without post-incarceration secured jobs.
Post-release job placement again was revealed to moderately influence performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes. This was in accordance to Visher (2016) who argue that among the
more important employment interventions are job readiness classes, vocational education,
certification, job training, job placement, and job monitoring.

5.3.3 Substance Abuse

The results show that substance abuse greatly influences performance of prisoner’s reintegration
programmes. This correlate with Burrows, Clarke, Davidson Tarling and Webb (2011) who
argue that failure to access appropriate support services in the community can result in offenders
returning to prison time and time again, as the cycle of offending is perpetuated.
According to the results majority of the respondents indicated that drug abuse (heroin, cocaine
bang etc), that alcohol abuse and that frequency of drug use influence performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes greatly. This similar to Kinner (2016) who said that approximately
80% of offenders admitted to Canadian federal penitentiaries are identified as having a substance
abuse problem that is associated with their criminal behaviour on admission to prison.
They also indicated that severity of drug addiction moderately influence performance of
prisoner’s reintegration programmes. This concurs with Niven and Olagundoye (2012) who
claimed that there appear to be high rates of alcohol and drug use among ex-prisoners and this
may hinder their ability to secure legal employment and stable accommodation.

43
5.3.4 Prison Education Programmes
Therefore from the above shows that prison education programmes greatly influence
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. This was similar to Williams and
Rosenfeld (2016) who points out that, in spite of their ‘get tough on campaign’ over recent years,
violet imprisonment and re-imprisonment of offenders, prisoners released, without the proper
preparation breeds recidivism.
The results showed that primary and secondary education and adult literacy classes greatly
influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. Joseph (2010) corresponds to this
finding by saying that certain studies that have attempted to measure the effect prison education
programs have on post-release employment also show positive results.
Vocational education as well as life skills’ training was found to greatly influence performance
of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. This was similar to Gottschalk (2016) who indicated that
in three of the four studies under investigation prison education programs significantly increased
chances of securing employment following release from prison.
Tertiary education however was found to lightly influence performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes. This conforms to Omboto (2013) who claim that diverse programs all
aim to improve prisoners’ behaviour while in incarcerated, by facilitating the maturation and
conscientiousness of the inmate, and to reduce recidivism, by improving employment prospects
and by providing a broader frame of reference within which to make important decisions.

5.4 Conclusion
The study concluded that capacity of prison officers greatly and significantly influences
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. In this case, it was deduced that adequate
staffing and professional counselling influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration
programmes in a great extent. The study also deduced that availability of psychiatrists greatly
influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes while availability of psychologists
influenced performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes in a little extent.

The study further concluded that employment opportunities greatly influence performance of
prisoner’s reintegration programmes. It was deduced that post-release job monitoring and
community-based employment greatly influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration

44
programmes. Further legal employment and vocational assessment were also found to greatly
influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes.

The study also concluded that show that substance abuse greatly and significantly influences
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes. The study deduced that drug abuse (heroin,
cocaine, bang etc) and that frequency of drug use influence performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes greatly. It was also indicated that severity of drug addiction
moderately influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes.

Finally the study concluded that prison education programmes greatly influence performance of
prisoner’s reintegration programmes. The study deduced that primary and secondary education
and adult literacy classes greatly influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes.
It was also found that vocational education greatly influence performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes. Tertiary education however was found to lightly influence
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes.

5.5 Recommendations

The following are some of the recommendations as pertains to the study;

1. The study recommended adequate budgetary allocation of resources to various GK
prisons which will in turn lead to efficient reintegration programmes. The prison
personnel should be well capacitated by being taken for special training with an aim of
satisfying the prisoners’ needs and wants. Hence prison officers should be taken to
trainings and workshops and even short courses in order to enhance effective
rehabilitation programme hence reduced incidences of recidivism.
2. Technology advancement should be used positively with an aim of improving the
effectiveness of the reintegration programmesand reduced incidences of recidivism. The
GK prisons should also acquire new modernized equipment’s and machines in order to
provide adequate skills which will lead to efficient reintegration programmesand reduced
incidences of recidivism. 48 The micro-environment of the GK prisons should be
improved with an aim of motivating the prison officers and also foster good learning
environment for the prisoners.

45
3. An improved Scheme of Service and Establishment Structure for the Prisons Department
needs to be put in place to facilitate the recruitment, promotion and retention of adequate
and relevantly trained/skilled personnel. The two working tools should ensure that the
promotions of prison officers are not guided by tribalism and nepotism but by merit and
they should not be delayed for long periods. They should also ensure that more vacancies
are created for recruitment of more expert prison officers to reduce the current heavy
workload on prison officers.
4. The Scheme of Service should provide for further professional training and refresher
courses and for retraining of prison officers in relevant skills and disciplines such as
counseling, psychology, psychiatry, sociology, penology, law, investigation, human
rights, criminology and the technical subjects for the industries and farms. The training
would enable the officers to handle and/or cope with the dynamic criminal behaviour of
modern offenders. The majority of our present prison staff does not have proper ideas of
how to go about with the proper reintegration programmes of offenders.
5. There is need to deploy a resident doctor in every prison and equip the prisons with
sufficient medical supplies in order to cater for the medical needs of prisoners and prison
officers. The present scenario in most prisons is that of First Aid Kits and Sick Bays
which are manned by unqualified personnel. The result of this shortcoming has been the
rampant disease outbreaks and unwarranted deaths of prison officers and prisoners which
could otherwise have been avoided.
6. The section would need to be manned by a special team of well-trained probation officers
to attend to ex-prisoners' population needs such as intervening with employers to ensure
that rehabilitated offenders who were formally employed before imprisonment reclaim
their jobs. With relevant stakeholders, the team could facilitate the formation of Ex-
prisoners Welfare Associations. Further, prisoners released on Presidential Amnesty or
remission of sentences before they take their Trade Tests could be assisted by the
proposed After-Care probation officers to continue with training and take the tests in
order to save on resources already utilized on the ex-prisoners while they were in prison.

46
5.6 Recommendations for Further Studies
The researcher’s point of departure was that future researchers should investigate the
relationshipbetween capacity of prison personnel and rehabilitation programme. A similar study
should be conducted to identify the factors influencing reintegration programmes performance
on in all GK prisons in Kenya.

47
 REFERENCES
Bailey, T. (2009). Challenge and opportunity: Rethinking the role and function of developmental
education in community college. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2009(145),
11-30.

Baliga, S. (2013). Shaping the success of social impact bonds in the United States: Lessons
learned from the privatization of US prisons. Duke LJ, 63, 437.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological

review, 84 (2), 191.

Belenko, S. (2008). Research on Drug Courts: A Critical Review. National Drug Court Institute
Review, 1(1), 1-42.

Bell, M. (2010). Institutional accountability In E. Ferlie,; L.E. Lynn, and C. Pollitt (ed.s), The
Oxford Handbook of Public Management, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Best, J. W. & Kahn, J. V. (2003). Research in Education. Boston: Library of congress

cataloguing in publication data.

Burrows, K., Clarke, A., Davidson, T., Tarling, R. & Webb, S. (2011). Research into the Nature
and Effectiveness of Drug Throughcare (PDF Version), Occasional paper, no. 68.
London: Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, Home Office.

Chamberlain, A. (2015). Rethinking Rehabilitation; Theory and Practice. Journal of

Rehabilitation Medicine, 47(9), 880-880.

Churchill, G. A., Iacobucci, D., & Israel, D. (2010). Marketing research: A south Asian
perspective. Cengage Learning, New Delhi.

Feig, L. (2015). Breaking the Cycle: A Family-Focused Approach to Criminal Sentencing in

Illinois.

48
Flick, U. (2015). Introducing research methodology: A beginner's guide to doing a research
project. Sage.

Gillis, C. A. & Andrews, D. A. (2015). Predicting Community Employment for Federal

Offenders on Conditional Release. Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada.

Golafshani, A. A. S. (2012). The relationship between spiritual well-being and quality of life in
nurses]. J North KhorasanUniv Med Sci, 3(4), 10.

Gottschalk, M. (2016). Caught: The prison state and the lockdown of American politics.
Princeton University Press.

Graffam, J., A. Shinkfield, B., Lavelle, B. & McPherson, W. (2014). Variables Affecting
Successful Reintegration as Perceived by Offenders and Professionals. Journal of
Offender Rehabilitation.40 (1/2), 147-171.

Harper, G. & Chitty, C. (2014). The Impact of Corrections on Re-offending: A Review of 'What
Works'. (PDF Version) Third edition. London, UK: Research, Development, and
Statistics Directorate, Home Office.

Henrichson, C., & Delaney, R. (2012). The price of prisons: What incarceration costs
taxpayers.Federal Sentencing Reporter, 25(1), 68-80.

Hunter, B. A., Lanza, A. S., Lawlor, M., Dyson, W., & Gordon, D. M. (2015). A Strengths-
Based Approach to Prisoner ReentryThe Fresh Start Prisoner Reentry Program.
International journal of offender therapy and comparative criminology,
0306624X15576501.

Hur, J. W., & Suh, S. (2012). Making learning active with interactive whiteboards, podcasts, and
digital storytelling in ELL classrooms. Computers in the Schools, 29(4), 320-338.

Joseph, T. D. (2010). Counselling for productive employment of prisons inmate. European

journal of educational studies, 2(3).

49
Kaburu, J. M. (2013). Factors influencing individuals to commit robbery: a case study of
convicted robbers at Kamiti and Langata prisons (Doctoral dissertation, University of
Nairobi).

Kayes, N. M., Mudge, S., & Bright, F. (2015). Rethinking rehabilitation theory and practice.

Kelly, J., &Bogue, J. (2014). Gender differences in criminogenic needs among Irish offenders.
Irish Probation Journal, 11, 87-102.

Kinner, S. A. (2016). Post-Release Experience of Prisoners in Queensland. Trends and Issues in

Crime and Criminal Justice, 325, 1-6.

Kiraly, D. (2014). A social constructivist approach to translator education: Empowerment from

theory to practice. Routledge.

Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. New Delhi: New Age
Publications.

Link, T. C. (2016). Breaking down barriers: Review of an Inside/Out prison exchange program
in a jail setting, Part 1. Journal of Prison Education and Reentry, 3(1), 50-55.

MacKenzie, D. L. (1997). Criminal Justice and Crime Prevention, in L. Sherman, D.

Gottfredson, D. MacKenzie, J. Eck, P. Reuter, and S. Bushway (Eds.), Preventing Crime:
What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising. Report to the United States Congress.
Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.

Maton, K. I. (2008). Empowering community settings: Agents of individual development,

community betterment, and positive social change. American journal of community
psychology, 41(1-2), 4-21.

Mbugua J. M. (2011). The Effects of Prisons reforms on inmates Discipline in Kenya.

50
Mealings, M. (2015). Rethinking social-relational perspectives in rehabilitation: traumatic brain
injury as a case study. In K. McPherson, B. E. Gibson, & A. Leplege (Eds.), Rethinking
Rehabilitation: Theory and Practice (pp. 137-162). CRC Press.

Miller, W. R., & Heather, N. (Eds.). (2013). Treating addictive behaviours: Processes of change
(Vol. 13). Springer Science & Business Media.

Mugenda, O., &Mugenda, A. (2003). Research Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative methods.
Nairobi, Rev editions.

Muhlhausen, D. (2010). The second chance act: More evaluations of effectiveness needed.
Before the Committee on the Judiciary of the United States Senate delivered July 21.

Muntingh, L. M. (2011). After prison: the case for offender reintegration (No. 52). Institute for
Security Studies.

Musili, L. W., &Mbatia, P. N. (2016). The Status of Hiv/Aids Management Strategies In

Correctional Settings In Kenya: A Case Study of Lang’ata Women and Kamiti Maximum
Prisons.

Naidoo, S., &Mkize, D. L. (2012). Prevalence of mental disorders in a prison population in

Durban, South Africa. African Journal of Psychiatry, 15(1), 30-35.

Niven, S. & Olagundoye, J. (2012). Jobs and Homes: A Survey of Prisoners Nearing Release
(PDF Version). Home Office Research Findings 173. London: Home Office.

Nyaura, J. E., &Ngugi, M. N. (2014). A Critical Overview of the Kenyan Prisons System:
Understanding the Challenges of Correctional Practice. International Journal of
Innovation and Scientific Research, 12(1), 6-12.

Omboto, J. O. (2010). Challenges facing the control of drugs and substance use and abuse in
prison institutions in Kenya: the case of Kamiti Prison (Doctoral dissertation, University
of Nairobi, Kenya).

51
Omboto, J. O. (2013). The challenges facing rehabilitation of prisoners in Kenya and the
mitigation strategies. International Journal of Research in Social Sciences, 2(2), 39-43.

Osayi, K. K. (2013). Socio-Cultural Factors Affecting Reintegration of Discharged Prisoners in

Anambra State, South East, Nigeria. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 4(10),
775.

Ostermann, M., &Matejkowski, J. (2014). Exploring the intersection of mental health and release
status with recidivism. Justice Quarterly, 31(4), 746-766.

Otiato, F. (2014). Effective re-integration of ex-offenders: Kenya policy analysis. International

Journal of Physical and Social Sciences, 4(4), 11-23.

Papa, E. (2015). Factors influencing rehabilitation programmes performance and recidivism of

male inmates. A case of GK prison in Kisiicounty, Kenya (Doctoral dissertation,
University of Nairobi).

Phillips, L. A., & Spencer, W. M. (2013). The Challenges of ReentryFrom Prison To Society.
Journal of Current Issues in Crime, Law & Law Enforcement, 6(2).

Prendergast, M. L., E. A. Hall, H. K Wexler, G. Melnick, & Cao, Y. (2014). Amity Prison-
Based Therapeutic Community: 5-Year Outcomes. The Prison Journal, 84(1), 36-60.

Rakis, J. (2015). Improving the Employment Rates of Ex-Prisoners Under Parole. Federal
Probation, 69(1), 7-12.

Sampson, R. J., &Laub, J. H. (2014). A Life-Course Theory of Cumulative Disadvantage and

the Stability of Delinquency. In T.P. Thornberry, (ed.), Developmental Theories of Crime
and Delinquency New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction.

Saunders, M. (2011).Choosing Research Participants. Qualitative organizational research: Core

methods and current challenges, 35-52.

52
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2012). Research Methods for Business Students. 6th
edition, Pearson Education Limited.

Silverman, D. (Ed.). (2016). Qualitative research. Sage.

Travis, J., Solomon, A. L., &Waul, M. (2011). From prison to home: The dimensions and
consequences of prisoner reentry.

Turner, S. G., &Maschi, T. M. (2015). Feminist and empowerment theory and social work
practice. Journal of Social Work Practice, 29(2), 151-162.

Ugwuoke, C. U. (2010). Criminology: Explaining Crime in the Nigerian Context. Nsukka: Great
AP Publishers LTD

Usher, A. M., & Stewart, L. A. (2014). Effectiveness of Correctional Programs With Ethnically
Diverse Offenders A Meta-Analytic Study. International journal of offender therapy and
comparative criminology, 58(2), 209-230.

Usher, M. B. (2013). Biological management and conservation: ecological theory, application

and planning. Springer.

Vengeliene, V., Bilbao, A., &Spanagel, R. (2014). The alcohol deprivation effect model for
studying relapse behavior: a comparison between rats and mice. Alcohol, 48(3), 313-320.

Visher, C. A. (2016). Effective Re-entry Programs. Criminology and Public Policy, 5(2), 299-
302.

Visher, C. A., & Travis, J. (2003). Transitions from prison to community: Understanding
individual pathways. Annual review of sociology, 89-113.

Webster, R., C. Hedderman, P. J. Turnbull, & May, T. (2011). Building Bridges to Employment
for Prisoners (PDF Version). London, UK: Research, Development and Statistics
Directorate, Home Office.

53
Williams, J. H., & Rosenfeld, R. (2016). The Impact of Neighborhood Status on Imprisonment
for Firearm Offenses. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 32(4), 383-400.

Witkiewitz, K., Bowen, S., Douglas, H., & Hsu, S. H. (2013). Mindfulness-based relapse
prevention for substance craving. Addictive behaviors, 38(2), 1563-1571.

Zimmerman, R. D., &Darnold, T. C. (2009). The impact of job performance on employee

turnover intentions and the voluntary turnover process: A meta-analysis and path model.
Personnel Review, 38(2), 142-158.

54
 APPENDICES

Appendix I: Letter of Transmittal

Mary Makena
P.O Box 5848-00200.
NAIROBI.

Dear Sir/Madam,
REF: Invitation to Participate in a Research

I am a Master of Arts in Project Planning and Management student at University Of Nairobi

conducting a research on FACTORS INFLUENCING PERFORMANCE OF PRISONER’S
REINTEGRATION PROGRAMMES: A CASE OF WOMEN PRISONERS IN MERU GK
PRISON. I humbly request that you spare a few minutes off your schedule to complete the
attached questionnaire. The questions seek your opinions regarding your organizationrelationship
marketing and customer satisfaction. There is no right or wrong answers; I just need your honest
opinion. Your anonymity is assured and the information you provide will remain confidential.

Thank you for participating in this study. Your cooperation and contribution in this research is
appreciated.

Yours faithfully,

Mary Makena

55
Appendix II: Research Questionnaire
Kindly answer the following questions by writing a brief answer or ticking in the boxes
provided.
PART A: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
1. What is your designation?
Officer [ ]
Prisoners released [ ] Prisoners re-arrested again [ ]
2. Which is your highest level of education?
Post Graduate [ ]
Undergraduate [ ]
Diploma [ ]
Certificate [ ]
Any other (specify)…………………………………………………………
3. How long have you worked/ been in this prison?
1-4 years [ ]
5-8 years [ ]
9-12 years [ ]
13- 16 years [ ]
17 years and above [ ]
PART B: Capacity of Prison Officers
4. To what extent do you think capacity of prison officers influence performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners in Meru Gk prison?
Very great extent [5] Moderate extent [3] Very low extent [1]
Great extent [4] Low extent [2]
5. To what extent do the following aspects of capacity of prison officers influence performance
of prisoner’s reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners in Meru Gk prison?
Very Great Moderate Low Very low
great extent extent extent extent
extent
Availability of Psychologists

56
Professional counselling
Availability of Criminologists
Availability psychiatrists
Adequate staffing

6. In your opinion, how does capacity of prison officers influence performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners in Meru Gk prison?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………….
PART C: Employment Opportunities

7. To what extent does employment opportunities influence performance of prisoner’s

reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners in Meru Gk prison?
Very great extent [5] Moderate extent [3] Very low extent [1]
Great extent [4] Low extent [2]
8. To what extent do the following aspects of employment opportunities influence performance
of prisoner’s reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners in Meru Gk prison?

Very great Great Moderate Low Very low

extent extent extent extent extent
Legal employment
Community-based employment
Vocational assessment
Post-release job placement
Post-release job monitoring

9. In your own opinion, how does employment opportunities influence performance of

prisoner’s reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners in Meru Gk prison?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
57
PART D: Substance Abuse
10. To what extent does substance abuse influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration
programmes focusing on women prisoners in Meru Gk prison?
Very great extent [5] Moderate extent [3] Very low extent [1]
Great extent [4] Low extent [2]

11. To what extent do the following substance abuseinfluenceperformance of prisoner’s

reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners in Meru Gk prison?

Very great Great Moderate Low Very low

extent extent extent extent extent
Drug abuse (heroin, cocaine bang
etc)
Alcohol abuse
Frequency of drug use
Severity of drug addiction
Severity of drug addiction

12. In your own opinion, how do the facets of substance abuse above influence performance of
prisoner’s reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners in Meru Gk prison?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
PART E: Prison Education Programmes
13. To what extent does prison education programmes influence performance of prisoner’s
reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners in Meru Gk prison?
Very great extent [5] Moderate extent [3] Very low extent [1]
Great extent [4] Low extent [2]

14. To what extent do the following influence performance of prisoner’s reintegration

programmes focusing on women prisoners in Meru Gk prison?
58
 Very great Great Moderate Low Very low
extent extent extent extent extent
Adult literacy classes
Primary and secondary education
Tertiary education
Vocational education
Life skills training

15. In your own opinion, how do the facets of prison education programmes above influence
performance of prisoner’s reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners in Meru
Gk prison?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
PART F: Performance of Prisoner’s Reintegration Programmes

16. To what extent is your organization rated in the following aspects of performance of
prisoner’s reintegration programmes focusing on women prisoners in Meru Gk prison?

Greatly Improved Constant Decreased Greatly

Improved decreased
Behaviour change
Successful reintegration
Reduction in Recidivism
Reduced Crime rates
Self-reliance

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION

59