Beyond Misconduct: Experimental and Qualitative Evidence on Daily Life, Perceptions of Correctional Officers, and Reform in a Restrictive Housing Step-Down Program

Restrictive housing reforms have spread across U.S. prisons, but evidence evaluating their effectiveness remains limited. The studies that do exist have focused largely on institutional outcomes, rather than investigating whether reforms change the experience of confinement. Using data from a randomized controlled trial of Oregon’s restrictive housing step-down program (SUP) that randomly assigned incarcerated men to either transfer to the SUP or remain in the business-as-usual Intensive Management Unit, we integrate intent-to-treat, local average treatment effects, and qualitative analyses to compare daily life in restrictive housing, perceptions of correctional officers, and participants’ recommendations for restrictive housing reform. Those assigned to the SUP reported more time out-of-cell and greater interaction with other prisoners, both of which were described as meaningful improvements to their daily life. Perceptions of correctional officers depended more on interpersonal interactions than housing assignment. Participants also identified greater opportunities for movement, social interaction, and meaningful programming as priorities for reform. The findings suggest that step-down programs can improve the experience of confinement without fundamentally changing the function of restrictive housing, while also underscoring the importance of evaluating reforms through a combination of institutional outcomes and prisoner lived experiences.