The Hidden Executive Function Crisis in Corrections

Reflections From the Inside

When I first began working in correctional settings as a Literacy Facilitator and Coordinator with the Calgary John Howard Society, supporting adult men and women in developing their literacy skills, I expected to encounter challenges related to reading, writing, and educational opportunity.

What I did not expect was the significant role executive function challenges would play in shaping nearly every aspect of learning, participation, and success.

I began to realize that many of the struggles I was observing were not simply literacy challenges. I was seeing people work hard, show genuine desire to succeed, and still encounter barriers that seemed largely invisible to those around them. That realization stayed with me because I could see how easily these challenges could be misunderstood, and how much was at stake when they were.

Individuals would express genuine motivation to attend sessions and ask for continued support, yet not return the following week. Some struggled to begin tasks independently between sessions, even when they had verbally committed to completing them. Others arrived wanting to engage, but were mentally consumed by more immediate concerns: court dates, family crises, housing uncertainty, interpersonal conflict, safety concerns, emotional overwhelm, or simply surviving the day within the correctional environment. 

If we look at this through a neurotypical lens, our human response might be to remove an  incarcerated individual from our visiting list after they’ve rejected sessions a few times, as we assume there is a lack of interest because “if this mattered to them, they would show up, right?” 

The more I worked within correctional education, the more I realized I was not simply observing literacy challenges. I was observing executive function challenges that were influencing behaviour, learning, emotional regulation, and follow-through. What struck me most was that many of these challenges were invisible but very real for the individuals experiencing them. Because executive function difficulties often exist beneath the surface, they can be easily overlooked or misunderstood when we are supporting others, leading us to focus on behaviour rather than the underlying skills and supports that may be needed.

What is Executive Function?

To understand these patterns more clearly, it helps to first understand executive function. Executive function (EF) is not a simple born-with-it-or-without-it concept. These skills are developed in the front of our brain, also known as the prefrontal cortex. Everyone has a prefrontal cortex, but experiences such as chronic stress, trauma, inconsistent environments, and neurodevelopmental differences can affect how EF skills develop and how consistently they can be accessed.

EF skills are the brain-based skills that help us get things done. They help us plan, organize, regulate emotions, manage time, remember information, start tasks, shift attention, solve problems, and follow through toward goals. These are many of the exact skills correctional systems, educational programs, probation conditions, and reintegration processes quietly depend upon every day.

We are not born with fully formed EF skills. We are born with the capacity to build them over time, but their development is shaped by more than age alone. Relationships, environment, emotional safety, opportunities for practice, direct teaching, chronic stress, trauma, and neurodevelopmental differences all influence how these skills grow and how consistently they can be accessed.

EF skills do not develop in isolation. They strengthen gradually through everyday experiences, supportive relationships, guided practice, problem-solving opportunities, and repeated chances to observe, reflect, and try again. This is one reason executive function is so deeply connected to both education and parenting.

For correctional educators and support professionals, this suggests that executive function skills may need to be intentionally taught, practiced, and reinforced rather than assumed to be in place already.

For some individuals, many of these skills develop almost invisibly because their environments consistently support them. Predictable routines, emotionally safe relationships, strong modelling, supportive schools, and opportunities for reflection can all help strengthen planning, emotional regulation, organization, and follow-through over time. For many incarcerated individuals, these types of consistently supportive environments may have been limited, disrupted, or absent during important developmental years.

For others, attaining these skills may require far more intentional support and direct instruction. Skills such as planning ahead, managing time, regulating emotions, organizing information, initiating tasks, monitoring progress, and adapting flexibly to challenges often require explicit teaching, practice, and scaffolding. These are many of the same skills individuals are expected to use when participating in correctional programming, meeting institutional expectations, and preparing for successful community reintegration.

Historically, schools often assumed these skills would develop naturally. However, growing research suggests many learners benefit from direct EF support, particularly individuals navigating ADHD, FASD, trauma histories, learning disabilities, autism, chronic stress exposure, disrupted attachment, or inconsistent educational experiences.  Many of these same experiences are disproportionately represented among individuals who later become involved in the correctional system.

Typically, EF systems continue to develop until the mid-to-late 20s, and sometimes later for some individuals. It’s also important to recognize that these skills do not develop evenly. Someone might have stronger skills in one area and not another.

Additionally, stress, trauma, sleep deprivation, substance use, anxiety, depression, and environmental instability can significantly interfere with access to EF skills, even in adulthood. This is particularly relevant in correctional environments, where many individuals are navigating multiple stressors simultaneously while being expected to learn, make decisions, and follow through on important responsibilities.

The good news is that EF skill development remains teachable throughout life because the brain retains neuroplasticity. Brains build pathways much like muscles strengthen through repeated use. The brain is more changeable than many people realize. With the right support, people can continue developing skills throughout adulthood. An important point to note is that neuroplasticity does not mean change is quick or easy. It means change remains possible. This offers an important message of hope for correctional education and rehabilitation efforts because executive function skills can continue to develop throughout adulthood.

This matters because

In correctional settings, these difficulties may be interpreted as non-compliance, lack of motivation, or resistance to change when underlying executive function challenges are also contributing factors. 

ADHD, Trauma, FASD, Chronic Stress, and Incarceration

Research increasingly suggests that EF challenges may play a far greater role in incarceration and recidivism than many systems currently recognize.

ADHD is significantly overrepresented in incarcerated populations compared to the general population, with research linking symptoms such as impulsivity, disorganization, difficulty sustaining attention, and inconsistent follow-through to underlying EF challenges (Young et al., 2015).

FASD is also consistently overrepresented within correctional and forensic settings. Canadian research has identified significant difficulties in planning, working memory, cognitive flexibility, emotional regulation, and decision-making among justice-involved adults with FASD (McLachlan et al., 2019; MacPherson et al., 2011).

At the same time, many incarcerated individuals have extensive histories of trauma and chronic stress. Research shows that prison populations experience rates of trauma and PTSD far above those found in the general population (Baranyi et al., 2020). Chronic stress and trauma can significantly interfere with the brain’s ability to access EF skills, particularly under pressure.

Research examining both ADHD and FASD has consistently found challenges in areas such as planning ahead, regulating emotions, managing impulses, shifting attention, remembering information, and following through toward goals (Kingdon et al., 2016; Green et al., 2019). These are many of the exact skills correctional systems, educational programs, probation conditions, and reintegration processes quietly rely upon every day.

This does not remove accountability. However, it does raise important questions about whether our systems are designed in ways that recognize and support the EF demands they place on individuals, particularly those already navigating neurodevelopmental differences, trauma, chronic stress, and disrupted life experiences.

In practical terms, this means many individuals may struggle not because they lack intelligence or desire, but because the cognitive systems required for consistency, planning, regulation, and follow-through are under significant strain.

This has important implications for everyone involved in rehabilitation and reintegration, as expectations related to programming, community integration, employment, housing, recovery, and supervision often depend on the very skills that may be under significant strain.

The Gap Between Intention and Action 

When we think of a bridge between the two concepts of intention and action, we can appropriately name it “Executive Function” because these are the skills we use to turn intention into action. EF skills are what help us move from ‘I want to do this’ to ‘I can successfully carry this through.’ They help us remember appointments, manage emotions under stress, begin tasks even when they feel overwhelming, organize steps, shift attention, solve problems, and persist through frustration or setbacks. 

For example, a person may genuinely intend to attend a literacy session, complete probation paperwork, apply for housing, or follow through on a goal they care deeply about, yet still struggle to begin, organize, remember, regulate emotions, or sustain action long enough to follow through.

When these skills are overwhelmed, underdeveloped, or difficult to access under stress, the bridge between intention and action can begin to break down. As a result, individuals may struggle to consistently meet expectations related to programming, education, supervision, recovery, and community reintegration despite genuinely wanting to succeed.

Adult Learning and Correctional Environments Connection

In correctional and adult learning environments, this gap between intention and action often becomes highly visible, yet frequently misunderstood. Many incarcerated individuals genuinely want to improve their lives, strengthen their literacy skills, reconnect with family, complete programming, maintain employment after release, or avoid returning to the justice system. However, wanting change and consistently sustaining the actions required to make it happen are not always the same thing.

Correctional systems and adult learning programs quietly rely on EF every day. Attending classes consistently, remembering schedules, managing paperwork, regulating emotions during conflict or frustration, organizing responsibilities, following multi-step instructions, transitioning between tasks, and persisting after setbacks all depend heavily on executive function.

For individuals navigating ADHD, FASD, trauma histories, chronic stress, disrupted education, substance use, mental health challenges, or unstable environments, these demands can become overwhelming, particularly under pressure.

From the outside, missed appointments, incomplete assignments, impulsive reactions, inconsistent attendance, or difficulty following through may appear to reflect a lack of motivation or unwillingness to change. However, in many cases, these behaviours may also reflect struggles with planning, working memory, emotional regulation, cognitive flexibility, task initiation, or sustaining attention long enough to bridge intention into action.

This is where adult learning and correctional systems have an important opportunity. If EF skills are essential for rehabilitation, reintegration, education, employment, and long-term stability, then these skills cannot remain invisible expectations. They must become part of what we intentionally teach, support, scaffold, and strengthen.

As a result, many behaviours in correctional adult learning environments can be easily misunderstood. Difficulty following through may be interpreted as laziness. Inconsistent attendance may be viewed as a lack of interest. Emotional reactions may be seen as defiance. Repeated mistakes may appear to reflect unwillingness rather than difficulties with memory, regulation, planning, or cognitive overload.

When EF challenges remain invisible, systems may respond ineffectively to behaviour because the underlying skill demands are not fully understood. As a result, individuals may be viewed as unwilling rather than unsupported, leading to missed opportunities for growth, rehabilitation, and successful community reintegration.

Shifting Our Responses 

Supporting executive function also requires a shift in how systems and professionals interpret behaviour.

When these challenges are not understood, behaviours are often viewed through a lens of defiance, resistance, laziness, manipulation, or lack of motivation. As a result, responses may focus primarily on punishment, withdrawal of support, or increasing consequences.

An EF lens encourages us to pause and ask different questions.

This does not remove accountability or responsibility. Rather, it recognizes that successful accountability often depends upon executive function skills such as planning, emotional regulation, organization, self-monitoring, cognitive flexibility, and persistence.

When systems respond with understanding, scaffolding, and skill development rather than assuming unwillingness, individuals are often given a far greater opportunity to experience success, build confidence, strengthen self-awareness, and sustain long-term change.

What Might We Do Differently? 

If EF plays such a significant role in behaviour, learning, emotional regulation, decision-making, and follow-through, then these skills cannot remain invisible expectations within correctional systems. They need to become part of what we intentionally teach, support, and strengthen.

One important starting point may be to help incarcerated individuals better understand executive function, including their own areas of strength and challenge. When individuals begin to recognize patterns related to planning, organization, emotional regulation, impulse control, working memory, attention, or task initiation, behaviour can begin to make more sense through a skills-based lens rather than a shame-based one.

From there, specific strategies and supports can be introduced to strengthen areas of difficulty. This may include direct instruction, coaching approaches, scaffolding, visual supports, routines, emotional regulation strategies, planning systems, repetition, and opportunities to practice these skills within real-life situations.

This matters because many correctional, educational, and reintegration programs already rely heavily on these specific skills. Addiction recovery, literacy development, CAEC completion, upgrading, employment readiness, probation requirements, housing stability, and reintegration all require individuals to plan, regulate emotions, organize information, manage time, persist through frustration, and follow through consistently under stress.

When EF skills are better understood and intentionally supported, individuals may be better equipped to access and sustain success within these programs. Rather than expecting the skills to already be in place, systems have an opportunity to actively help build the very skills rehabilitation often depends on.

If EF is developmental, then many individuals will require support, practice, repetition, and scaffolding while those skills strengthen over time. In the same way, we would not expect someone to master literacy without instruction and support; we cannot assume EF skills will develop automatically simply because they are needed.

Scaffolding means temporarily providing external supports to help individuals successfully complete tasks they may not yet consistently manage on their own. Over time, as skills strengthen, supports can gradually shift or reduce.

Within correctional education and reintegration settings, scaffolding executive function skills might include:

Correctional Adult Education

• breaking assignments into smaller, manageable steps

• using visual schedules, checklists, and written routines

• explicitly teaching planning, prioritization, and study strategies alongside academic content

• incorporating direct instruction around time management, emotional regulation,

• organization, and task initiation

• modelling thinking processes out loud during problem-solving activities

• building predictable classroom routines to reduce cognitive overload

• providing guided practice before expecting independent work

• offering frequent opportunities for repetition and review

• helping learners identify their own EF strengths and challenges

• normalizing the use of supports and strategies rather than viewing them as signs of weakness

• creating low-shame opportunities for learners to re-engage after absences or setbacks

• teaching self-monitoring and reflection skills through coaching-style conversations

• allowing space for trial and error so individuals can discover which strategies best fit the way they think, learn, communicate, and regulate themselves

Reintegration and Community Programs

• helping individuals break large reintegration goals into smaller action steps

• supporting calendar use, appointment tracking, and reminder systems

• practicing how to prioritize competing demands such as housing, employment, probation conditions, and recovery supports

• using visual planning tools for release preparation

• incorporating EF skill-building into employment and life-skills programming

• offering coaching or mentorship support during transitions after release
  helping individuals anticipate barriers and create backup plans

• practicing emotional regulation and stress-management strategies in real-life scenarios
  building routines gradually rather than expecting immediate independence

• supporting re-engagement after missed appointments instead of immediately removing services

• reducing unnecessary paperwork complexity and cognitive overload where possible

• creating collaborative accountability systems rather than relying solely on punitive responses

• encouraging experimentation with different tools, systems, and routines so individuals can identify supports that are realistic, sustainable, and personally meaningful

Importantly, scaffolding is not about lowering expectations. It is about increasing access to success while skills continue to develop.

This also means recognizing that executive function support is not one-size-fits-all. Strategies that work well for one individual may not work for another. Part of strengthening EF involves creating opportunities for individuals to reflect, adapt, and problem-solve, gradually discovering which systems and approaches work best for their brains, experiences, and environments.

References: 

Young, S., Moss, D., Sedgwick, O., Fridman, M., & Hodgkins, P. (2015). A meta‑analysis of the prevalence of attention‑deficit/hyperactivity disorder in incarcerated populations. Psychological Medicine, 45(2), 247–258.

MacPherson, P. H., Chudley, A. E., & Grant, B. A. (2011). Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder in a correctional population: Prevalence, screening and characteristics (Research Report No. R‑247). Correctional Service of Canada.

McLachlan, K., McNeil, A., Pei, J., Brain, U., Andrew, G., & Oberlander, T. F. (2019). Prevalence and characteristics of adults with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder in corrections: A Canadian case ascertainment study. BMC Public Health, 19, 43.

Popova, S., Lange, S., Bekmuradov, D., Mihic, A., & Rehm, J. (2011). Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder prevalence estimates in correctional systems: A systematic literature review. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 102(5), 336–340.

Kingdon, D., Cardoso, C., & McGrath, J. J. (2016). Executive function deficits in fetal alcohol spectrum disorders and attention‑deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A meta‑analysis. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 57(2), 116–131.

Green, C. R., Lebel, C., Rasmussen, C., Beaulieu, C., & Reynolds, J. N. (2019). Neurodevelopmental profiles of children with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder: A review of the neuroanatomical and neurocognitive evidence. Child: Care, Health and Development, 45(2), 197–211.

Baranyi, G., Cassidy, M., Fazel, S., Priebe, S., & Mundt, A. P. (2020). Posttraumatic stress disorder in prisoners. Epidemiologic Reviews, 42(1), 26–37.

Marshall, A. (2018). Early adversity and executive dysfunction in children with attention‑deficit/hyperactivity disorder (Doctoral dissertation). Antioch University.

Correctional systems often evaluate behaviour, while executive function challenges frequently influence the ability to consistently meet behavioural expectations.

Instead of:

“Why are they not doing this?”

Instead of:
“They already know what to do.”

Instead of:
“They failed again.”

If rehabilitation, education, recovery, and reintegration all depend heavily on executive function, are we intentionally teaching and supporting these skills, or simply assuming they are already in place?