C ONTRIBUTORS
Laura S. Abrams, Ph.D., is a professor of Social Welfare at the Luskin School of Public Affairs at the University of California, Los Angeles. Her research has focused on incarceration, reentry, and desistance from crime among youth and young adults. She is the author (with Ben Anderson-Nathe) of Compassionate Confinement: A Year in the Life of Unit C (2013) and is currently completing another book (with Diane Terry), Life After Juvie: Young Men and Women on Desistance, Survival and Becoming an Adult (forthcoming).
James Anderson is a prisoner at the Oregon State Penitentiary, serving a life sentence for a crime committed at the age of 17. He has been incarcerated for over 19 years straight. During his incarceration he has earned three college degrees, participated in numerous programs within the facility designed to better oneself, and achieved the goal of becoming a leader in both the Lifers’ Unlimited Club and the RISE UP! Youth Empowerment Program.
Nicholas Blagden, Ph.D., is a senior lecturer in Forensic Psychology at Nottingham Trent University. Key achievements include delivering keynote presentations for the National Association for the Treatment of Sexual Offenders and the National Offender Management Service. One of his primary focus areas is denial among sexual offenders. Other projects have included explorations of rehabilitative climate sex offender prisons, deviant sexual interest, crime desistance, and the therapeutic climate of secure units.
Joshua Cain currently holds the elected position of Secretary in the Lifers’ Unlimited Club at the Oregon State Penitentiary. He has been incarcerated since 1998 for a crime committed at the age of 18. During that time, he has earned an Associate’s Degree and is working toward a Bachelor’s. He also fulfills other
leadership roles in education, peer-based cognitive skills classes, and employment. He is passionate about family, education, and equality.
Dina Gojkovic, Ph.D., is a research and evaluation lead at Associate Development Solutions in the UK. She is a psychologist by training and holds a doctorate in mental health. Dina has dedicated her career to research in challenging and complex settings, including hospitals, prisons, shelters for homeless people, and children’s day care centers. She has published widely in international journals and authored a book on comparative offender rehabilitation.
Emma Hughes, Ph.D., is an associate professor in the Criminology Department at California State University, Fresno. She is the author of the book Education in Prison: Studying through Distance Learning published in 2012 and has contributed book chapters on offender rehabilitation to edited volumes. She is on the editorial board of the Howard Journal of Criminal Justice. She previously served as a lecturer at Birmingham City University, UK.
Michelle Inderbitzin, Ph.D., is an associate professor of Sociology in the School of Public Policy at Oregon State University. She primarily studies prison culture, juvenile justice, and transformative education. She is the lead author of the books Deviance and Social Control: A Sociological Perspective (2013) and Perspectives on Deviance and Social Control (2015). She regularly teaches classes and volunteers in Oregon’s maximum-security prison for men and in state youth correctional facilities.
Tobi Jacobi, Ph.D., is an associate professor of English at Colorado State University. She specializes in the work of incarcerated women writers and teaches classes on writing and literacy. She also directs the CSU Community Literacy Center and trains student and community volunteers to facilitate writing workshops with incarcerated adults and at-risk youth in Northern Colorado. Her edited collection (with Ann Folwell) Women, Writing, and Prison: Activists, Scholars, and Writers Speak Out was published in 2014.
Charles H. Lea III, M.S.W., Ph.D. (candidate) is pursuing his doctorate in Social Welfare at the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs. His primary research areas include juvenile justice, reentry, education, and racial equity. He is specifically interested in contextual and individual influences on crime involvement and criminal desistance among boys and young men of color, particularly African Americans, and the protective processes and mechanisms that facilitate positive development.
Rosie Meek, Ph.D., is head of the School of Law at Royal Holloway University of London and is a chartered psychologist and prison researcher. She is a Fulbright Distinguished Scholar (University of California, San Diego) and her most recent book Sport in Prison: Exploring the Role of Physical Activity in Correctional
Settings was published in 2014. She has published widely on the role of voluntary and community organizations in criminal justice, with a particular focus on the transition from custody to community.
Anita Mehay, M.Sc., Ph.D. (candidate) is currently completing her Ph.D. at Royal Holloway University of London. She is primarily interested in Health Literacy and Health Promotion in prison populations. She is funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) South-East Doctoral Training Centre under a CASE studentship, which is part funded by the National Health Service in England.
Reuben Jonathan Miller, Ph.D., is an assistant professor in the School of Social Work at the University of Michigan. He is broadly interested in punishment and social welfare policy, race and ethnic relations, and the urban poor. He has recently launched a study of prisoner reentry in Detroit, Michigan, and a study of the reintegration experience in the UK, Serbia, and Sweden.
Alice Mills, Ph.D., is a senior lecturer at the University of Auckland, New Zealand. She has extensive experience of researching voluntary and community sector involvement in criminal justice, including a 2-year project on the role of the third sector in criminal justice as part of the UK Third Sector Research Centre. More recently, she has completed research on the relationship between nongovernmental organizations and the state in criminal justice in New Zealand. She is currently examining the use of Tikanga Māori in indigenous youth courts and community sector housing support for ex-prisoners.
Christian Perrin, M.Sc., Ph.D. (candidate) is currently pursuing his doctorate at Nottingham Trent University in the UK. His research principally explores the application of peer-support schemes in prison, and how incarcerated sexual offenders make sense of meaningful roles while serving time. His varied role encompasses areas such as rehabilitative climates in prisons, resettlement strategies for sexual offenders, desistance, well-being in prisons, and sexual offender treatment.
Gwendolyn Purifoye, Ph.D., is an assistant professor of Sociology at Kent State University at Stark. She received her doctorate from the Loyola University Chicago Department of Sociology in 2014. Her research interests include social interactions, urban public spaces, and the criminalization of place.
Lara Rose Roberts is pursuing her Master’s Degree in English Literature at Colorado State University. She is a strong advocate for the idea that mental health should be discussed more often and more openly, especially in academia. Her literary interests include understanding how women have been portrayed as psychologically dysfunctional in Early American Literature.
Kristenne M. Robison, Ph.D., is an associate professor of Sociology and Criminal Justice Studies at Westminster College in Pennsylvania. Her primary research
interests include the intersection of gender with areas of the criminal justice system such as police work and prisons, as well as pedagogical issues in the criminal justice studies classroom. Robison is also active within the prison system teaching classes in both men’s and women’s prisons.
Abigail Tsionne Salole is a faculty member at Sheridan College, Canada. She is currently completing her Ph.D. in Criminology at Griffith University in Australia.
Jennifer R. Tilton, Ph.D., is an associate professor of Race and Ethnic Studies at the University of Redlands. She is the author of Dangerous or Endangered? Race and the Politics of Youth in Urban America and a contributor to Childhood, Youth and Social Work in Transformation. She is a founder of REACH, a communityservice learning program that brings college students to volunteer with young people in a juvenile hall in Southern California.
Trevor Walraven is the youngest Lifers’ Unlimited Club President in the history of the organization at the Oregon State Penitentiary extending back to 1968 when the club was founded. He was waived to adult court at the age of 14 and received a life sentence with the possibility of parole after 30 years. Trevor largely “grew up” inside, actively engaging in programs such as Inside-Out, club-related activities, family-orientated events, and youth-empowerment efforts. After a successful “second look,” Trevor, aged 31, was released from prison shortly before this book went to press. He is now getting a chance to practice his leadership skills in the outside community.
Introduction: The Significance of Voluntary Sector Provision in Correctional Settings
Laura S. Abrams, Emma Hughes, Rosie Meek, and Michelle Inderbitzin
The voluntary sector has had a long-standing relationship with prisons and prisoners in the USA and the UK and in many countries across the globe. Beginning with prison chaplains and later expanding to education, work training, and a range of rehabilitative services, the voluntary sector has played a significant role in providing programs for incarcerated people as well as in shaping the culture of penal institutions themselves. Yet never before has the study of the relationships between these sectors been more important or politically relevant.
L.S. Abrams ()
University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
E. Hughes
California State University, Fresno, CA, USA
R. Meek
Royal Holloway University of London, Egham, UK
M. Inderbitzin
Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2016
L.S. Abrams et al. (eds.), The Voluntary Sector in Prisons, Palgrave Studies in Prisons and Penology, DOI 10.1057/978-1-137-54215-1_1
3
More than 10.2 million people are incarcerated worldwide, one-fifth of whom hail from the USA. Put in perspective, the rate of incarceration in the USA is 712 per 100,000, while in England and Wales it is 148 per 100,000 persons, just slightly higher than the average of 144 per 100,000 persons worldwide (Walmsley, 2013). Although the USA is a clear outlier in criminal justice policies and incarceration rates, the overall global prison population has increased by over 25 % over the past 15 years. More and more individuals are affected by the institution of the prison; not only as inmates and their family members, but also as correctional and law enforcement officials, mental health professionals, educators, activists, and volunteers. The ripple effect of these unprecedented increases in the number of people either confined or under correctional supervision is virtually impossible to calculate in monetary or emotional value.
Based on its outlier status, the USA is currently facing the far-reaching consequences of “mass incarceration.” This collection of harsh sentencing policies, stemming in part from the movement known as the “War on Drugs” of the 1970s and 1980s, has destroyed families and communities, exhausted public budgets, and created a new group of (primarily) men of color who are marginalized from voting rights, employment, and mainstream civic life based on their criminal records (Alexander, 2010; Manza & Uggen, 2006; Western, 2006). No longer able to sustain itself, the mass incarceration bubble is bursting (United States Department of Justice, 2013). While the countries that comprise the UK are not experiencing a crisis of this magnitude, still the rate of imprisonment has skyrocketed over the past 20 years. The British government is currently constructing new prisons, and prison reform organizations and activists are increasingly concerned that what has happened in the USA could happen in Europe as well.
Currently in 2015, there is increasing public and bipartisan governmental recognition in the USA that War on Drugs policies have largely failed to halt crime or create a climate of public safety (Raphael & Stoll, 2009). As such, we are witnessing a significant shift toward beliefs long held in other nations—particularly in Western European and Scandinavian countries—that incarcerated people need education, skills, and other forms of rehabilitation in order to succeed upon their release and that humane treatment of prisoners may contribute to a more peaceful society as whole. As such, public discourses have turned increasingly to softer terms, such as prisoner rehabilitation, education, job training, reentry, and resettlement. These discourses represent a significant shift for the USA in
particular, where over the past several decades correctional facilities have become increasingly punitive and less rehabilitative at their core.
With the call for more supportive services in prisons and jails, one must recognize that a large portion of the rehabilitative umbrella in penal settings is currently provided by the voluntary sector, meaning individuals and groups who do not work directly for correctional agencies but who provide therapeutic, educational, skills training, spiritual, and an array of other supportive programs within prison and jail facilities. This sector encompasses unpaid volunteer work along with third sector nonprofit organizations that may or may not be contractually related to law enforcement or criminal justice agencies. While the voluntary (or “third”) sector is largely responsible for a diverse range of service provision, there is limited scholarly conversation about the nature or limits of the voluntary sector as it operates in penal settings. Many questions remain unanswered about these exchanges, such as the extent to which the voluntary sector is truly able to change the institutions or the people whom they work with for the better. We also know little about volunteers themselves, who they are, and what their experiences are as they navigate their role in correctional settings. Moreover, there is limited critical conversation about volunteerism within prisons and jails or the role of volunteerism within the larger prison regime.
This edited collection seeks to address these knowledge gaps by providing a multifaceted exploration of the programming that the voluntary sector provides in encouraging institutional change in prisons as well as providing individual services and support to those who are housed behind bars. Rather than explore the voluntary sector’s involvement with the criminal justice system more broadly (c.f. Hucklesby & Corocan, 2015), we have focused upon the sector’s engagement with men and women behind bars through services provided within jails and prisons and upon reentry to society. This volume spans the USA, the UK, and Canada, juvenile and adult facilities, and prisons and jails. In doing so, it collectively demonstrates the exciting, groundbreaking, and yet often unrecognized work that the voluntary sector is implementing in correctional facilities. Even as we highlight promising practices, we also pose critical questions about the use of and in some cases, dependence on programs provided by the voluntary sector. For example, rather than relying on the energy of volunteers, nonprofit agencies, or prisoners themselves, should some of these important programs be funded by and built into the institutions themselves? On the flip side, what are the consequences of the voluntary
sector becoming “too close” to the correctional sector? What does this clash and cooperation of sectors mean in an era of neoliberalism and more localized (i.e., state and county) control over services for offenders and ex-offenders?
We believe that the multiauthored nature of this collection, including two chapters coauthored with currently incarcerated men, is one of its unique strengths. There is a great diversity of programs created by the voluntary sector offered in correctional facilities in the USA, the UK, and beyond, and the chapters in this book offer insight into the current variety as well as the multiple possibilities that may exist for the future. In addition, the chapters contain rich diversity in regard to views, theories, and perspectives. The cross-national contributions include the perspectives of academics, some of whom are also volunteers (see Part IV of this volume). In Part II, we also uniquely highlight the essential but often unheard perspectives of incarcerated individuals as volunteers, some of whom are leading innovative programs within institutions themselves. Given that this volume considers the possibilities for personal change and institutional transformation through voluntary sector provision, there is particular significance when the programs are self-directed by those who are actually incarcerated. To our knowledge, this is one of few scholarly collections to consider the perspectives of prisoners themselves as volunteers, organizers, and leaders.
This volume also attempts to signal the positive efforts made to enhance the opportunities for incarcerated men and women to engage in constructive and rehabilitative activities while incarcerated and upon their reentry to society. All too often these stories of small gains are overlooked, contributing to correctional systems and volunteer programs operating in silos and reinventing the wheel when seeking to try new methods of programming or intervention. This book seeks to breakdown these boundaries, encouraging dialogue and discussion about the innovative work being carried out by volunteers in correctional facilities, programs that can help to offset the negative aspects of institutionalization that can hinder personal growth.
That said, the authors recognize the potential challenges and obstacles that can develop when nonstate actors provide programs within correctional facilities. The interface between the nonprofit and criminal justice sectors will be considered with this caution in mind and analyzed most specifically in Part III of this volume. As the hybridization of voluntary and penal sector services increases, the potential for correctional
discourses of punishment and social control to influence voluntary service provision poses a potentially problematic set of consequences for workers, clients, and receiving communities. Still, the overall collection of essays will demonstrate the vulnerability of such programming if not properly acknowledged and supported by correctional staff, correctional officials, and policymakers. The potential consequences of a loss of such programming for the offenders themselves, and for society as a whole, are crucial. While rehabilitative endeavors are increasingly seen as necessary by governments, correctional systems, and the general public in the USA and the UK, vital questions must be asked about how such endeavors are best provided, supported, and sustained. This volume thus provides an important and timely contribution to a rigorous examination of these pressing social concerns.
BACKGROUND TO THIS COLLECTION
The idea for this edited collection originated from a series of papers presented at an “Innovation in Prisons” workshop held in April 2014 at the University of California’s (UCLA) Luskin School of Public Affairs in Los Angeles, California, in the USA. The UK’s Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) funded the workshop through a grant to Professor Rosie Meek, head of the School of Law at Royal Holloway University of London. The workshop activities were designed to appeal to policymakers, practitioners, academic leaders and activists in summarizing, discussing, and expanding on an existing but highly dispersed and fragmented body of academic and policy research on the changing role of the voluntary (or third) sector in criminal justice institutions. Thirteen academics from the USA, the UK, and Canada were invited to present at the workshop following a widespread call for papers via LISTSERVs and scholarly networks. Our exploration of third sector involvement in prisoner rehabilitation seeks to contribute to increased effectiveness of public services and policy, with a commitment to the process of generating impact (utilizing existing networks and collaborations, leading to high-impact opportunities to continue to provide formal advice and guidance to policymakers and practitioners), the context in which the academic messages are delivered (this subject area is especially relevant in the current economic and political climates of Europe and the USA), and the content of the scientific meetings, which encourage and build ongoing collaborations and relationships between researchers, policymakers, and practitioners.
The changing role of third sector involvement in criminal justice institutions in the UK and North America provides an especially significant and timely area of academic research. The workshop fueled rigorous discussions surrounding each paper, and the chapters proposed for this volume are, with a few exceptions, based on the papers presented at UCLA. The excitement generated by the original research shared at the workshop led to our decision to seek publication of this collective body of work. Thus nearly all of the evidence in this book is based on real-life examples, including empirical, ethnographic and qualitative case study research that “brings to life” the voices of volunteers and service providers as well as those who are recipients of these services.
There are also several areas not included in this fairly compact volume, but these deserve future attention. For example, with the exception of Emma Hughes’s work (Chap. 2), we do not have many voices of religious volunteers, who comprise perhaps the largest sector of volunteers in prisons and jails around the globe. We also have limited information on arts and theater-based programs, animal-assisted therapies and programs, sport and numerous other examples of creative work in prisons. We hope that these and other types of voluntary sector programs will continue to be studied in a global context, as the scope of innovative programming in correctional facilities is rapidly evolving.
In addition, we want to make clear that we in no way wish to use this book as a platform to promote prisons as an optimal place to provide education, job training, health and mental health care, or other services to individuals in need. On the contrary and from a deeply held social justice perspective, we firmly believe that the voluntary sector should indeed reach people outside of prison and focus more on prevention than intervention. Indeed, the programs examined in this volume exist in the midst of complex and often damaging webs of social institutions. However, we believe that the voluntary sector has and will continue to have a role in making prisons and jails more humane and educational and less mundane and cruel. Deeply exploring these services is a worthy endeavor and one we are pleased to tackle in this volume.
THE USA AND THE UK: RELEVANT CONTEXT FOR THE STUDY OF THE VOLUNTARY SECTOR IN PRISONS
In 2004, Tewksbury and Dabney, writing in the Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, identified a substantial need for further research on the role and effectiveness of volunteer programing in prisons and the experiences
and perspectives of the volunteers themselves. Over 10 years later, with few notable exceptions, this call has gone largely unheeded, particularly within academic work generated in the USA (for two examples of US-based studies examining prison volunteerism see Camp, Klein-Saffran, Kwon, Daggett, & Joseph, 2006; Kort-Butler & Malone, 2014). Yet as Tewksbury and Dabney (2004) anticipated, “It is clear that there is an increased reliance on prison volunteers. It is also clear that this trend will continue to grow” (p. 181). While Tewksbury and Dabney wrote with specific regard to the USA, their call is applicable on a wider scale, and this growing level of interest is apparent in the UK where third sector involvement has recently received increased academic and policy attention. Indeed, as previously noted, the UK’s ESRC funded the workshop on which this volume is based.
While little is known about the role and reach of volunteers in prisons, substantially more research has been accomplished in the UK in understanding the role of the voluntary sector in the criminal justice system. In Britain, third sector organizations (hereafter TSOs) currently provide a range of services to offenders and ex-offenders, including advice and advocacy, mentoring schemes, education and training, and watchdog and advocacy functions. TSOs are very much involved in the provision of core rehabilitative and resettlement services (such as drug and alcohol treatment, employment and training, housing aid and advice), and in some areas (such as debt and finance and assistance to offenders’ families) services are almost entirely provided by TSOs.
Previous and current British governments have initiated a range of policies to facilitate and encourage third sector participation in services hitherto provided largely by the state (Home Office, 2005; NOMS, 2005), and the Ministry of Justice/National Offender Management Service has sought out numerous consultations with TSOs concerning their role in the criminal justice system. Recent legal changes (Offender Management Act, 2007), policy documents (NOMS, 2005), and initiatives such as “contestability” or tendering for the provision of a range of criminal justice services—including building and managing prisons, the provision of unpaid work, bail support, and resettlement services—signal a clear intention that core criminal justice services will be provided by a range of organizations outside the state sector, including TSOs (Neilson, 2009).
The benefits of the involvement of TSOs in criminal justice are gradually becoming more visible in the literature (Bryans, Martin, & Walker, 2002; HMPS/Clinks, 2002; Martin, 2002; Meek, Gojkovic, & Mills, 2010; Mills, Meek, & Gojkovic, 2012; Neuberger, 2009; NOMS/IVR, 2007; NPC, 2009; Silvestri, 2009). As several chapters in this volumes elucidate (e.g., see, Chaps. 2, 5, and 6), TSOs have a number of strengths in
working with offenders, including diversity of provision and cost-effectiveness, independence, an increased ability to respond to the needs of service users, a more diverse workforce, and engagement with the views of service users at the planning stage of provision. However, these developments have not been without contention and controversy, as some professional criminal justice officials, such as correctional or probation officers, negatively view the contracting out of services that are historically in the law enforcement domain (Mills et al., 2012; Silvestri, 2009). Recognizing these potential complications, Part III of this volume grapples with an emerging concern about the infusion of the government’s law enforcement agenda and mentality into a traditionally more independent, and potentially critical, voluntary sector.
Compared to the UK, it is harder to form an overall picture of official developments in regards to voluntary sector engagement in prisons and jails in the USA. This is partially due to the overwhelmingly large scope of the penal system and its fragmentation across 50 independent state prison systems, thousands of autonomous county-run jails, and an entirely separate federal prison system with facilities spread throughout numerous states. Published research has surveyed probationers and/or parolees in various cities to assess geographic access to services such as substance abuse, mental health, health care and/or job training programs, and the influence of such access on recidivism outcomes (Kubrin & Stewart, 2006; Taxman, Perdoni, & Harrison, 2007; Wallace & Papchristos, 2014). While making important strides in understanding key issues related to service access and provision, these are localized and point in time projections of how prisoners interface with the various types of social services and care providers upon release. Given the variation in political, cultural, and budgetary forces operating on each of these systems, it is not surprising that little is known about the size, character, and functioning of the voluntary sector in correctional settings in the USA as whole. To further complicate this scenario, a diverse range of local, state, national, and international voluntary and nonprofit organizations operate within these settings. While it is clear that efforts to undertake a national survey on voluntary sector provision in prisons and jails may be a valuable and fruitful area for future enquiry, the current volume cannot reasonably cover all of the variations in voluntary sector provision across federal, state, and county systems. However, we do include perspectives from five different states to provide just a glimpse of the possibilities for examining regional differences within the USA. While regional differences surely exist, it would be naïve to suggest that no broader perspective can be achieved in regard to the US voluntary
Another random document with no related content on Scribd:
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
