Budgets in Corrections

Are there any other words in administrative conversations that trigger a deeper collective groan? Probably not. Is “the budget” referenced almost daily—if not hourly—in our field? Absolutely. Do we blame nearly everything on waning budgets? Far more often than we’d like to admit. Do we have significant influence over how much is spent where? Almost never.

And yet, year after year, the amount of money spent on issues that were preventable is astronomical—far exceeding the costs of the proactive measures that could have stopped them in the first place.

Throughout my career, I’ve heard the reasons for delaying or denying preventative investments. I don’t dismiss those reasons; they’re valid, and they reflect real constraints. But there is a fine line between reasons and excuses. As a field, we have a long track record of finding money for the things we have to do.

Take PREA as an example. When we were told we had to comply—at our own expense—PREA audits, staffing adjustments, architectural modifications, and training suddenly found their way into budget line items. No one argued that compliance was unaffordable, because the alternative was exposure to liability, lawsuits, and watchdog scrutiny that no system wanted to defend. Agencies were given years to prepare, yet I vividly remember the chaos in many departments that delayed action—hoping the mandate might disappear, assuming budgets would eventually catch up, or quietly planning to retire before it became their responsibility.

Ultimately, it became clear that PREA implementation couldn’t happen in isolation. Systems needed vendors, experts, and external partners to get into compliance and to sustain improvements. Over time, that collaboration became normalized.

But when it comes to staff wellness, we treat the issue entirely differently.

Please note that this article is not intended to diminish the importance of PREA in maintaining facility safety and security, but rather to provide a comparative example of how departments establish budgetary priorities.

In just the last six weeks, I’ve heard multiple versions of the same refrain:

“If I include staff wellness training in next year’s budget, I’ll have to cut something else.”

“We didn’t get the grant, so we can’t move forward with the wellness program.”

The implication is always that the “something else” being threatened is equipment, facilities, programs, or other visible priorities. But the truth is this:

If you invest in high-quality, comprehensive staff wellness systems, you will remove things from your budget—but those things are silently draining your agency anyway.

You will reduce:

  • Turnover-related costs
  • Overtime tied to fatigue-related call-ins
  • HR time and resources spent on bullying, harassment, and workplace conflict
  • Liability from incidents involving negative or escalated staff–incarcerated interactions
  • Spending on public image repair and crisis communication

So, the real question becomes:

How much are those issues costing you—directly and indirectly—every single year?

When you say, “If I add staff wellness to the budget, I’ll have to take something out,” are you referring to those items?

Or are you convincing yourself that you’d be forced to cut resources, improvements or programs?

Because assuming the latter reflects a very short-sighted perspective.

Return on Investment: The Long View

One of the challenges in corrections is our desire for immediate data to justify spending. We want to see savings right away—this quarter, not next year. But corrections is not, and has never been, a system of immediacy.

If it were, people would spend far less time in custody before rehabilitation took hold, and our recidivism numbers would be enviable.

Staff wellness, like PREA implementation, requires time to see measurable progress. And it requires the willingness to make a genuine, sustained investment rather than a symbolic one.

Staff wellness is not:

  • A one-time injection of good feelings
  • A motivational speech
  • A “token” initiative to signal good faith while deeper cultural issues continue unaddressed

Staff wellness is:

  • A way of working
  • A structural change
  • A cultural shift
  • A commitment embraced at every level—from decision-makers to funders to frontline staff
  • An ongoing effort, day after day, month after month, year after year

It is not quick. It is not instant. But it is transformative—and ultimately cost-saving.

So… Can You Afford Not To?

The question is not whether your agency can afford to prioritize staff wellness.

The question—the one budget lines should reflect, the one administrators should wrestle with, the one boards and funders should sit with—is this:

Can you afford not to?

When we delay preventative systems for staff health, resilience, and wellbeing, we pay the price one way or another—financially, operationally, legally, reputationally, and morally.

Numerous correctional programs have taught us that when something becomes a “must,” systems find a way.

Staff wellness is a must.

Not because it is easy.

Not because it is free.

But because the cost of ignoring it is already far too high.

Contact us to explore options about your staff wellness programming.