First Nations rehabilitation programs aren’t keeping people out of prison. Here’s what would help

There are unprecedented numbers of First Nations people in prisons. In Australia, 37% of adults and 60% of young people aged 10-17 behind bars are First Nations, despite making up 3.4% and 6.2% of the Australian population respectively.

But what happens to people when they return to the community? There were 19,898 people released from Australian prisons between October and December 2025. More than half of them will return to prison, most within two years.

In 2025, 60% of people in prison had been previously imprisoned. For First Nations people, the figure is 78%.

These statistics demonstrate that prisons are not living up to their ideals of rehabilitation and reintegration, especially in relation to First Nations people. In fact, prisons are highly criminogenic – that is, making prisoners very likely to be reimprisoned.

Under the Closing The Gap targets, each state and territory must have appropriate support and rehabilitation programs in place to help former detainees once they are back in the community and reduce reoffending.

But a recent audit programs in New South Wales found they had “little to no impact” on First Nations reoffending rates. It identified that the few initiatives on offer amounted to “business as usual” and didn’t address systemic and structural issues in prisons that undermined these programs.

But the evidence shows there are programs making a meaningful difference. Here’s what we should do instead.

Driving a widening gap

Despite each jurisdiction’s commitments under Closing The Gap, the situation is getting worse.

Target 10 and Target 11 seek to reduce the rate of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults held in incarceration by at least 15% and children by 30% by 2031.

Yet, governments’ “tough on crime” policies, investment in law enforcement and prisons, and relative lack of funding for housing, mental health and alcohol and other drug services as well as cultural programs, have widened the gap.

Read more: ‘Tough on crime’ policies are causing Indigenous people to die in custody

According to the most recent review in 2022 Target 10 was assessed as “not on track” for adults and “on track” for young people.

Subsequent punitive laws for young people, especially in relation to bail and sentencing, will likely detract from any gains made.

Failing to reduce reoffending

The NSW auditor-general recently reviewed the effectiveness of NSW Closing The Gap justice strategies.

It found the programs run by Corrective Services NSW and Youth Justice NSW were ad hoc and lacked shared decision-making with First Nations people. They also didn’t have a healing framework or a therapeutic model of care, as required by Closing The Gap.

There was also no governance or evaluation frameworks and no transparency in relation to funding commitments.

Not only did the auditor-general find programs were failing to reduce reoffending, but prison time was driving more recidivism.

Of the First Nations people incarcerated in NSW, 62% of adults and 73% of young people reoffended within 12 months.

These findings are consistent with other state and territory Closing The Gap failures in relation to reducing First Nations mass imprisonment.

So, what works?

Evaluations of First Nations prison programs across Australia rarely measure effect on recidivism.

An exception is The Torch in Victoria. It’s a First Nations-led organisation that has delivered Indigenous arts programs in prisons and the broader community since 2011.

It supports First Nations people’s creative skills and connection to culture and earning an income through artwork, with 100% of the art sale price going to the First Nations person.

Participants in the program in 2017-18 had a reimprisonment rate of 11%. This was much lower than the state average recidivism rate of 53.4% for First Nations people.

The Torch is effective because it provides ongoing support in and out of prison, opportunities for First Nations people to connect to culture and ways to make an income. Its First Nations leadership means the program is sensitive to the needs of community and accountable for delivering outcomes for its people.

Beyond recidivism

There are risks in attributing reoffending or not reoffending to specific programs alone. If initiatives don’t field the results desired, policymakers may adopt a “nothing works” mentality. This can make funding too short-term, especially when First Nations programs are under disproportionate scrutiny.

Programs such as Dreaming Inside in Junee prison (NSW) and Listening to Country in Brisbane Women’s prison (Queensland) are run without the administration of corrections staff.

Dreaming Inside comprises creative writing and reading workshops run by respected Wadi Wadi Elder Barbara Nicholson (Aunty Barb with First Nations men). The workshops had a positive impact on the men’s self-esteem, cultural engagement and strengthening cultural identity, according to an evaluation.

Listening to Country is an art-based program that explores acoustic ecology, soundscape and deep listening to culture and Country. The evaluation found it enhanced participants’ wellbeing and enabled connection to culture, which are protective factors against reoffending.

While these evaluations did not assess reoffending because it could not exclude variables affecting re-criminalisation, including the role of policing and adverse conditions in the community, they identified the important role of First Nations-led cultural programs in strengthening and healing First Nations people in prison.

Encouraging First Nations leadership

First Nations people in prisons have distinct needs compared to non-First Nations people. Programs need to be culturally safe and tailored to experiences of trauma, racism and socioeconomic inequality.

Apparent in the NSW auditor-general’s findings is that there are very few First Nations programs. Only three operate across four of the 39 prisons in NSW, Australia’s most populous state. Of those operating, they are not run by or co-designed with First Nations people or organisations.

Imposing requirements to reduce recidivism can place an undue burden on fledgling programs, which can preclude First Nations self-determination over design and outcomes.

It also deflects attention from the contribution of prisons to First Nations reoffending rates, including due to inequitable access to programs, treatment and work.