The PFM and Prison Fellowship International (PFI) were founded by Charles Colson, who served seven months in prison for his Watergate crimes in the 1970s and then remade himself as an advocate for the redemptive power of evangelical Christianity on criminals.  

InnerChange is a 24-hour immersion program in collaboration with the Department of Corrections that begins 18 to 24 months before an inmate is released.  PFM administers entire wings of men's medium security prisons in Texas, Minnesota, Iowa, and Kansas.  Inmates two years away from parole who attest to being born-again Christians and agree to the religious beliefs of IFI are eligible to join InnerChange.  They participate in a highly structured program of reading biblical scripture, practicing gospel music, studying for their high school equivalency exam, and learning life skills.  After their release, the program provides a Christian mentor for six to twelve months during which a participant must hold a job and be an active church member.  

By joining an InnerChange program, inmates can transfer from more dangerous parts of the prison system.  They have access to privileges such as keys to their cells, private bathrooms, big-screen televisions, and family visits.  Completing the InnerChange program usually means that inmates have an easier time with the Parole Board, and graduates are guaranteed a space in work-release as well as help finding a job and housing.  InnerChange offers substance-abuse treatment and free computer training. As one man who is not in InnerChange, noted,

The Christians do lots of stuff the state used to do, like vocational programs, but now they're only for believers.

Colson and Mark Early, the head of InnerChange, have launched a campaign to discredit the rulings and solicit private funding to keep the programs in place. They are also planning to appeal the court decision.  Colson and Early claim that the ruling hurts prisoners because it prevents them from experiencing what they call a "heart change" and truly becoming rehabilitated.  Early writes,

Without programs like IFI, British offenders, like their American counterparts, will be released from prison to once again prey upon the public; all of this in the name of... an Orwellian notion of "diversity."

Colson and Early also claim that the IFI program is a matter of religious freedom, reiterating almost identical language used by President Bush to justify the faith-based initiative program.  

Prison Fellowship wants to see a level playing field for people of faith. People of faith should not be excluded from providing services in the public square to those who have volunteered to receive them. We want prisoners to be able to take part in a program--yes, even a Christ-centered one--that will help them change their lives for the better if they desire to do so.

Neither Colson nor Early see a problem with federal money supporting a program that advocates the superiority of Christianity over all other religions. And, despite pleas for religious freedom, neither envisions an equal playing field for all faiths in prison.   In a recent column Chuck Colson warned about the dangers of radical Islam in America's prisons, asserting that prisons are "breeding grounds for future terrorists."  Early writes,

Their zeal to implement the "multi-faith agenda" has apparently blinded them to the true religious threat in British prisons: radical Islam.

Where does Colson draw the line between providing social services and proselytizing to a captive population?  The message of the InnerChange programs is that rehabilitation occurs through redemption from Jesus, challenging the assumption that rehabilitation is and should be secular.  The premise of the faith-based policies is a theology of social action that claims religion itself is the solution for socioeconomic problems.  As the chief counsel for Americans United writes, "The government has no business treating some inmates better than others on the basis of religious belief."   However, Colson would disagree:

What's at stake is not just a prison program, but how we deal with social problems in our country. Do we do it through grassroots organizations or big government? We know what works.

I've visited and taught in several prisons, and there is an overwhelmingly need for programs for men and women to transition out of prison.  Prison Fellowship Ministries has received an influx of government money while most prisons have eliminated education and job-training programs.  Instead of federal and state funding for religious programs, the federal government should direct that money to GED and college programs as they did before Congress eliminated the Pell Grant program in 1994.  There are underfunded programs already doing excellent work like the Prison University Project at San Quentin and the Learning Center for Women in Prison.

It is crucial to question the logic that becoming a born-again Christian is more transformative than an education and skills that enable incarcerated men and women to obtain lasting and meaningful employment.  Otherwise, the solution that the federal government and Chuck Colson see to imprisonment is simply conservative Christianity with a political agenda aligned with the Christian Right.