[gremlinsinc]

Do you think a not-for-profit company could start a prison, modeled after a nordic 'open' prison, as a sort of 'trial' and get support in a state to try it out?

I think the only way to make inroads might be to somewhat circumvent the government. Build something that has a track record of true reform, and maybe eventually hold a monopoly on prisons that actually work and serve the purpose of reform over 'penance'.

[iguy]

This is an interesting thought. If the US is going to contract out its prison-keeping (as it does, and at spectacularly high costs) then it would be great if this could allow for a wide variety of experiments. Charter Prisons, perhaps.

I don't know exactly how you'd organise this, I guess you want to score them by recidivism rates (and high-school diplomas?) with massive penalties for escapes / deaths etc? Unlike charter schools you could assign prisoners truly randomly, statewide, for good statistics.

No doubt there are lessons to be learned from many countries' systems. Maybe we should encourage foreign companies to enter this market. I'm personally dubious that the Nordics have some secret sauce (to adapt Milton Friedman's quip, have you heard about the Swedish-American prison gangs?) but would love to be proven wrong.

[gremlinsinc]

I like the idea of a more-ethical not-for-profit, that is required to spend or lose all money at end of year, and has a CEO cap of say 150x employee average. Could have some sort of investment scheme setup too, that inmates can buy into, and some of the 'left-over' could go into that giving them a little nest egg when they get out to cushion themselves and prevent recidivism.

The 'bonus' could be tied to performance/behavior/etc... and it could be 'will-able'.. in case you're a lifer, or die in prison, your family will have some benefit. A lot of poverty is because the breadwinner is in prison...if the breadwinner could still win bread while in prison it might positively effect poverty quite a bit.

[Kalium]

Without commenting on the rest of your ideas, requiring a not-for-profit to spend all its money each and every fiscal year strikes me as a ideal that feels great but is perhaps impractical. There is already a sizable number of non-profits that devote much of their energy and resources to fundraising, generally at the expense of their core mission. One that has to re-raise its entire operating budget every year is likely to struggle to do anything to advance its core mission.