Key Findings

Prisons and jails are extensions of federal, state, and local bureaucracies, and any partnerships, transactions, or other activities in this ecosystem require numerous layers of signoffs and approvals. Technology solutions must often be adapted to meet security requirements or accommodate capacity limitations. For example, hardware usually needs to be tamperproof and software systems should be capable of operating offline because internet access is often restricted or prohibited. Despite such challenges, many facilities do have the capacity to support tech deployments and corrections leaders and other stakeholders interested in expanding educational opportunities for people who are incarcerated are willing to partner with vendors to co-create edtech solutions.

Many of the largest providers of internet service in prisons, jails, and other carceral settings build networks that can only be used with their own platforms, applications, and content. This leaves corrections leaders and educators with limited—and expensive—options and prevents the vast majority of educational content providers from working with those facilities. Funding available through the Digital Equity Act could potentially be used to help rectify this issue, but a more comprehensive solution would be to enact state policies requiring internet infrastructure to be vendor-neutral.

Some departments of correction and individual prisons either have limited internet service or choose not to provide service to people who are incarcerated for security and other reasons. For some, it’s because they’re located in rural areas where internet service is generally poor. Edtech vendors serving these facilities must offer offline solutions or find innovative ways to work with limited infrastructure. But as more facilities embrace technology as a core resource in their education and training programs and more leaders recognize that internet service will expand access to quality applications and resources, business opportunities may increase for vendors with online solutions.

Most vendors need internet access to collect data about the impact of their programs, including number of users, demographic identities of users, learner performance metrics and completion rates, and outcomes data. But that level of access isn’t currently available in most prisons, and when data collection is possible, it can be difficult to analyze data in detail due to concerns about security and user privacy. Moreover, a lack of integrated tracking infrastructure makes it difficult to collect data on people after they complete their sentences and return to the community. Providers that offer open-access resources that can be used by different individuals at different times said it’s difficult to determine who’s using their systems. And those providing offline solutions said it’s difficult to get an accurate count of how many people are using a tool. With limited data-tracking infrastructure and a lack of sources providing secure data, it can be difficult to assess the impact of tech-enabled education and training programs.