Programs supporting incarcerated and previously incarcerated indigenous peoples: a scoping review protocol

ABSTRACT

The overincarceration of Indigenous peoples and its impacts on individual and community health is a growing concern across Canada and the United States. Federally run Healing Lodges in Canada are an example of support services for incarcerated and previously incarcerated Indigenous peoples to reintegrate into community and support their healing journey. However, there is a need to synthesise research which investigates these programmes. We report a protocol for a scoping review that is guided by the following research question: What is known about culturally informed programmes and services available to incarcerated and previously incarcerated Indigenous peoples in Canada and the US? This scoping review will follow guidelines published by the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews. This review will only identify programmes that are guided by Indigenous ways of being and knowing in order to best serve Indigenous communities and our community partners. The results of this review will support the development of programmes that are necessary for understanding and addressing the diverse needs of incarcerated and previously incarcerated Indigenous peoples.

KEYWORDS:

• Indigenous
• health
• incarceration
• reintegration
• healing lodges
• scoping review

Introduction

Indigenous peoples are vastly overrepresented in criminal justice systems in Canada and the US. In 2020, Indigenous peoples accounted for approximately one-third of all adult admissions to federal as well as provincial and territorial custody, while only representing 5% of the Canadian adult population [1]. Similar patterns of overincarceration are faced by Indigenous peoples in the US [2]. The overincarceration of Indigenous peoples is the result of historic and modern colonial policies and structures, including displacement from traditional territories, intentional dismantling of cultural continuity, the residential school legacy, the Indian Act, disenfranchisement of Indigenous women, the Sixties Scoop and ongoing child apprehension, social inequities, and systemic racism in criminal justice systems [3–8].

Incarceration is an intermediate social determinant that has both immediate and long-term impacts on health [9,10,21]. Following release from prison, people face a higher risk of death compared to the average risk of death in the general population, largely due to substance abuse, cardiovascular disease, and suicide [11,12]. Incarceration negatively affects Indigenous peoples who are justice-involved, which is further compounded by anti-Indigenous systemic racism [6,13,14]. Less frequently discussed but equally important are the impacts of incarceration on Indigenous-specific determinants of health [15,16]. Incarceration severs ties to land and community, thereby restricting access to Elders, ceremony, and Indigenous ways of healing [17–19]. Thus, a vicious cycle is created where limited access to social determinants puts previously incarcerated Indigenous peoples at risk of re-involvement in the criminal justice system [20,21]. Furthermore, incarceration of Indigenous parent-figures disrupts parent–child bonds and has severe consequences for the wellbeing of the child throughout the life course [22,23]. Clearly, the years of life lost to incarceration, as well as its downstream impacts on health, are barriers to achieving wholistic health and wellbeing for Indigenous peoples [21].

Considering the devastating health impacts of incarceration, both at the individual and community level, there is an urgent need to support the wellbeing of Indigenous peoples exiting prison. Access to culturally appropriate services for First Nations, Inuit, and Métis is a key factor that supports healing and reintegration [24]. Furthermore, gender-specific healing supports are necessary for supporting the diverse needs of Indigenous men, women, and Two-Spirit peoples, including those who are parent-figures [14,23,25,26]. In Canada, government-funded Healing Lodges are correctional institutions that serve as an alternative to traditional prisons. The goal of Healing Lodges is to prepare Indigenous peoples pre- and post-release for reintegration by providing access to cultural protocols and activities [27]. There are also community-led initiatives in Canada and the US which provide resources to Indigenous peoples before and after release from prison, such as family reunification, mental health, traditional counselling, housing, education, and employment services [28,39]. Mapping the research on programmes available to incarcerated and previously incarcerated Indigenous peoples will identify key areas of improvement and effective practices for supporting this population.

Rationale

To our knowledge, there are no published literature reviews on programmes supporting incarcerated or previously incarcerated Indigenous peoples in Canada or the US. We anticipate this scoping review will map the available literature on this topic and assist researchers and Indigenous community organisations in identifying research gaps, disparities in the provision of programming, and effective practices supporting incarcerated and previously incarcerated Indigenous peoples. This scoping review protocol provides an outline of how we will conduct the full scoping review about Indigenous peoples and cultural programming during and following incarceration. We anticipate this scoping review will point to future research investigations and the development of programmes that are necessary for understanding and addressing the diverse needs of incarcerated and previously incarcerated Indigenous peoples. In addition, this proposed scoping review will provide themes and knowledge for the Kijibashik: Engaging in Early Partnerships, or KEEP2 project, which is funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). As part of the KEEP2 project, we are engaging previously incarcerated Indigenous men, women, and 2SLGBTQIA+ people in kitchen-table interviews. The findings from this proposed scoping review will inform the interview questions for the KEEP2 project and provide background information on the healing lodges and cultural programming at provincial/territorial and federal penal institutions.

Objectives

The proposed scoping review aims to summarise existing qualitative research on programmes and services available to incarcerated and previously incarcerated Indigenous peoples in Canada and the United States (US). The review is guided by the following research question: What is known about culturally informed programmes and services available to incarcerated and previously incarcerated Indigenous peoples in Canada and the US?

Methods & analysis

Protocol & registration

This scoping review will follow guidelines published by Joanna Briggs Institute [29]. We will report the review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) [30]. This protocol has been registered in the Open Science Framework: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/QJADP

Eligibility criteria

Our inclusion criteria are provided in Table 1. Programmes are included if they are guided by Indigenous ways of being and knowing or a mix of both Western and Indigenous knowledges. This includes Healing Lodges as well as programmes which are grounded in Indigenous teachings, ceremonies, healing methods, and philosophies. Only programmes offered in Canada, or the US will be included, as these countries have similar criminal justice system processes, histories of colonisation, and Indigenous health outcomes [31–33]. To capture a broad range of evidence, we will include primary research, programme evaluations, and grey literature. To find grey literature, we used Google to locate websites and other sources of information about healing lodges and programmes offered to incarcerated and previously incarcerated Indigenous peoples that are guided by Indigenous knowledges. This review will be limited to works published after 2000, as recent works are more likely to centre Indigenous perspectives in the research process [34,35]. This timeframe also ensures that early evaluations of Indigenous correctional programming in Canada are captured [36]. Our exclusion criteria are programmes offered to individuals prior to or in lieu of incarceration, such as sentencing circles and diversionary programmes. Secondary sources such as literature reviews, commentaries, and research briefs will also be excluded.

Table 1. Scoping review inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Inclusion Criteria	Exclusion Criteria
The article investigates or evaluates a specific program, intervention, or service	Does not investigate a specific program, intervention, or service
The program/service/intervention is offered in Canada or the US	Not offered in Canada or the US
The program/service/intervention or a component of the program is guided by Indigenous ways of being or knowing	The program/service/intervention is solely based on Western knowledge
The target population of the program are incarcerated individuals or previously incarcerated individuals who access Indigenous-guided programs/services/interventions	The target population are individuals who are accessing sentencing circles or programs prior to or in lieu of incarceration
Program evaluations and primary research, including peer-reviewed publications and government research reports; unpublished theses and dissertations are included if they investigate programs not described in published literature	Secondary sources such as literature reviews, commentaries, and research briefs
Published on or after 1 January 2000	Published prior to 1 January 2000
Full-text available in English	Not available in English
Available electronically	Not available electronically

Information sources

A research librarian was consulted to identify information sources that index articles related to Indigenous and correctional health. Four databases were chosen to search for academic journal articles: Scopus, APA PsycINFO, Criminal Justice Abstracts, and Informit Indigenous Collection. To find relevant government reports, programme evaluations, and dissertations, grey literature searches were conducted using targeted web searches on Google, Google Scholar, and through the handsearching of the Correctional Service of Canada website [37] and Government of Canada Publications online catalogue [38].

Search strategy

The search strategy for academic databases was developed in collaboration with a research librarian. We took an iterative approach to refine the search strategy. Preliminary searches were conducted in early January 2023 to identify relevant keywords and index terms. Complete searches were conducted on Scopus, APA PsycINFO, Criminal Justice Abstracts, and Informit Indigenous Collection between January and March. Grey literature searches were also conducted during this time. Articles selected for full-text screening, including relevant literature reviews and environmental scans, will have their reference lists checked to identify additional sources.

The search strategy for academic databases included the following concepts: 1) Indigenous peoples, 2) Canada/US, and 3) incarceration/reintegration. The search strategy for grey literature included the following terms: Indigenous, healing lodge, programme, prison, and incarceration. In addition, the names of specific healing lodges [36] and federally funded Indigenous community corrections initiatives [39] in Canada were used as search terms in Google and Google Scholar.

Study selection

Following the database search, sources will be collected using RefWorks and then imported into Covidence for deduplication and independent review. Independent screening will be conducted by two reviewers (AF and GBT) Title/abstract screening will be conducted to identify studies that are potentially relevant according to the inclusion criteria, followed by full-text screening. Any discrepancies will be resolved through discussion or with a third reviewer (AMP). Results of the search will be presented using PRISMA flow diagram and tables.

Data charting

The data extraction chart will be created in Microsoft Excel to enable data charting and synthesis of results. We will take an iterative approach to refine the data charting tool. Two reviewers (AF and HMB) will pilot the chart on at least three sources to ensure extraction of all relevant results and update the charting tool accordingly. Once the chart is finalised, two reviewers will extract data for all included articles, and a third reviewer (GBT) will verify the data. Although scoping reviews do not typically assess the quality of studies, we recognise that research and evaluation reports conducted by government agencies may be biased due to competing interests. Therefore, potential conflicts of interest will be identified during data charting. We plan to extract the following information: 1) authors, 2) Indigenous authorship (yes/no), 3) research funding (yes/no), 4) programme name and location, 5) target population of programme, 6) programme description, 7) study aim, 8) study sample, 9) study design, 10) key findings of the study, and 11) relevant quotes from study participants.

Data presentation

Data will be summarised in the text according to PRISMA-ScR guidelines [30]. Data will be analysed thematically and presented narratively, with a focus on Indigenous concepts which guide pre- and post-release programmes, services, and interventions. We will highlight gaps in knowledge, identify evidence for practice, and make recommendations for future research.

Discussion

To our knowledge, this will be the first scoping review to identify and review research on programmes available to incarcerated and previously incarcerated Indigenous peoples. A strength of this review is that the search strategy includes both academic databases and grey literature sources, enhancing the comprehensiveness of this review. Additionally, this review will only identify programmes that are guided by Indigenous ways of being and knowing in order to best serve Indigenous communities and our community partners. A limitation of this is that other programmes that incarcerated and previously incarcerated Indigenous peoples participate in are not captured in this review. Lastly, since this scoping review will only include programmes offered in Canada or the US, the generalisability of the findings for other countries such as Australia and New Zealand may be limited.

Findings from the completed scoping review will inform the development of the individual interview guide for the KEEP2 project and determine how data from the KEEP2 project will be analysed. Hearing from Indigenous peoples who have experienced incarceration is crucial for making recommendations for policy and practice; thus, we will provide these recommendations following the KEEP2 project in collaboration with our community partners. Findings from this scoping review will be disseminated through both academic publication and a report that will be provided to our community partners. Our community partners will be invited to contribute to analysis and be included in authorship if desired.

Author contributions

AF developed the research questions and methods, registered the protocol, conducted the database searches, and wrote the paper. GBT edited the draft paper and assisted with planning the search strategy and study selection. HMB assisted with planning the data charting tool and edited the draft paper. SS refined the research questions and edited the draft paper. AMP conceptualised and supervised the project, provided guidance on all aspects of the protocol, and reviewed the draft paper.

Ethics

Ethics approval is not required for this scoping review. Findings will be disseminated through publication in an academic journal and professional networks and shared with our community partners. The final publication will be provided in lay terms to Indigenous communities, organisations, and governments of interest.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Katie Merriman, research librarian at the University of Toronto, for her guidance on the scoping review process.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work is supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) grant #[468108].