Practice Profile: Adult Boot Camps

Correctional boot camps (also called shock or intensive incarceration programs) are short-term residential programs that resemble military basic training and target convicted adults. The practice is rated Ineffective and found not to reduce recidivism. The likelihood of boot camp participants recidivating was roughly equal to the likelihood of comparison participants recidivating.

Practice Goals

Correctional boot camps (also called shock or intensive incarceration programs) are short-term residential programs that resemble military basic training and target convicted adults. The first boot camps began operation in the adult correctional systems of Georgia and Oklahoma in 1983. Boot camps are designed as alternative sanctions to reduce recidivism rates, as well as prison populations and operating costs. The aim is to reduce recidivism by modifying participants’ problem behaviors that likely contribute to their odds of reoffending. Behavior modification occurs through reinforcement of positive behavior and immediate punishment of negative behavior. In addition, prison populations could be reduced because incarcerated individuals are diverted from traditional incarceration facilities and receive shorter sentences as participants in a boot camp program. Correctional operating costs can therefore be reduced by decreases in both the prison population and recidivism rates.

Target Population

Most adult boot camp programs limit participation to young, first-time, nonviolent individuals who have committed a crime. However, the eligibility criteria and selection process can vary substantially by program.

Practice Activities

Typically, boot camp participants are required to follow a rigorous daily schedule of activities that can include drill and ceremony, manual labor, and physical training similar to a military boot camp. Participants are awoken early every morning and are kept busy with various activities throughout the day with little free time. Strict rules regulate all aspects of individual’ conduct and appearance. Correctional officers act as drill instructors and may be given military titles that participants are required to address them by. They use intense verbal tactics to discourage opposition and instigate behavior change. Punishment for misbehavior is usually swift and may involve some type of physical activity such as push-ups.

Often groups will enter the boot camp as squads or a platoon, and may participate in an intake ceremony where they are immediately required to follow the rules, respond to staff in an appropriate way, and stand at attention. At the end of an individual’s term, there may be a graduation ceremony for those who have successfully completed the program.

Although most boot camps contain similar basic characteristics, there is no standard boot camp model and therefore individual programs can differ greatly. For instance, the amount of time and focus placed on physical training and hard labor compared to the therapeutic components of the program (such as academic education, drug treatment, or life skills training) may vary. Some boot camps may also offer an aftercare or reentry program designed to help program participants adjust to the community following their release, while others offer no such service.

In addition, the programs may differ on whether they are designed to be an alternative to probation or to prison. For example, in some jurisdictions a judge may sentence an individual to serve time in a boot camp instead of probation. In other jurisdictions, those already serving time in prison may be identified by correctional staff to be transferred into a boot camp program.

In the report by Aos and colleagues (2001), the authors found that on average, adult boot camps are cheaper than standard incarceration. However, how much cheaper depends on the resources that boot camps can avoid. For example, if a boot camp program is used as an alternative to incarceration, Aos and colleagues estimated an up-front savings of $9,725 per person. On the other hand, if a boot camp program is only used as a partial diversion (for instance, the boot camp is used for those who would not have otherwise gone to prison), then the savings are less. The range of net benefits was found to be between $10,000 per boot camp participant for a true diversion from prison, to $3,500 per boot camp participant for partial diversion from prison (these estimates are based on the costs to Washington State taxpayers using dollar values from 1995).

These sources were used in the development of the practice profile:

Meta Analysis 1

Wilson, David B., Doris L. MacKenzie, and Faw Ngo Mitchell. 2008. Effects of Correctional Boot Camps on Offending. Campbell Systematic Reviews 1. View abstract

These sources were used in the development of the practice profile:

American Correctional Association. 1995. Standards for Adult Correctional Boot Camp Programs. Alexandria, VA: American Correctional Association.

MacKenzie, Doris L. and Eugene E. Hebert. 1996. Correctional Boot Camps: A Tough Intermediate Sanction. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.

Parent, Dale. 2003. Correctional Boot Camps: Lessons From a Decade of Research. Washington, DC: Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.

Aos, Steve, Polly Phipps, Robert Barnoksi, and Roxanne Lieb. 2001. The Comparative Costs and Benefits of Programs to Reduce Crime. Version 4.0. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy. (This meta-analysis was reviewed but did not meet CrimeSolutions' criteria for inclusion in the overall outcome rating.)

Wilson, David B., Doris L. MacKenzie, and Fawn T. Ngo. 2010. Effects of Correctional Boot-Camps on Offending. Crime Prevention Review No. 5. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

Following are CrimeSolutions-rated programs that are related to this practice:

Quehanna (PA) Motivational Boot Camp

Residential Aftercare Component of Quehanna (PA) Motivational Boot Camp Program

High Intensity Training (HIT) Regime at Thorn Cross Young Offenders Institution (England)

Challenge Incarceration Program (CIP)

Why might a practice's outcome ratings differ from the ratings of specific programs encompassed by that practice?