Program planners should engage external organizations in the process of translating the screening and assessment data into programming options. The recent engagement of workforce organizations in the case management process provides a good model. Traditionally, departments of corrections did not partner with the workforce development system. More recently, however, many jurisdictions have seen an increase in the information sharing between the internal staff of correctional facilities and the staff of external workforce organizations. In some jurisdictions, corrections officers now sit on Workforce Investment Boards; the state Board of Education develops curricula unique to the incarcerated population; and correctional facilities employ vocational rehabilitation staff within the prison to support employment and training. This involvement contributes to shaping both individual case management plans and the programming and referrals that are available to individuals during incarceration and after release.

Example: Partnerships for Re-Entry Programming, Maryland Division of Correction

Partnerships for Re-Entry Programming (PREP) collaborates with community-based and government organizations to provide services to inmates including a coordinated pre and postrelease case management plan. PREP works with the Offender Employment Initiative, the Governor's Council on Management and Productivity, and state-use industries to develop a business mentoring program, expand the Prison-to-Work program, and generally improve offender employment opportunities.

Options for engaging community-based health providers in the development of programming plans for people with significant medical and mental health problems may pose different challenges in different jurisdictions. Program planners should seek to understand the structure and staffing of correctional health services programs and their systematic relationship to health services in the community. In North Carolina, for example, correctional mental health providers are licensed by the state mental health board and can share patient information with community-based mental health providers, while other health providers may not. The program planning team should engage community-based providers when possible, while respecting federal and state privacy regulations. (See Policy Statement 8, Development of Intake Procedure, for an explanation of such privacy protections.)