 Hello and welcome to San Francisco Public Libraries, Jail and Reentry Services Department training series. This is part of our Mellon Foundation funded work on the grant expanding information access for incarcerated people. Today's training is on digital literacy access and additional considerations during and after incarceration. This is a training series that covers a number of topics, including bringing information about library services for incarcerated people into the library and information services classroom. Library services that are specifically designed for people in the process of reentry, legal and law library services for incarcerated people and more. You can find all of these trainings in our YouTube channel as well as on the webpage for the grant. And you can also find the trainings if you'd like to receive a certificate for participation in the American Library Association's learning management system. That'll be linked in the description of the video when we post it to YouTube. Today we will be hearing from a number of practitioners and specialists who have been providing digital literacy support for people who have been negatively impacted by incarceration. And we'll also hear some of the broad topic concerns around technologies and how it impacts entire communities that are negatively affected by incarceration. Thanks so much for joining us and we'll start today by hearing from Steven Jackson about some of his own experiences. Hello, I am Steven Jackson, the director of equity and anti racism at O park of the library in Illinois. I want to share with you a few things in particular about the library. The library has changed my life about 13 years ago, a few days in a few days, I will have been home for 13 years, and the library was pivotal in my transition home. When I was introduced to the library, I was running my own business at the time a consulting firm. And the library decided old public library decided to hire the nation's fourth social worker. A friend of mine. He was hired by the library and shortly thereafter, I was hired at the local library which is very unique because of my background. I had several jobs and all of them, all of the jobs, my background posed as a barrier eventually I got in the door was my, but my background inhibited me from maintaining employment. So once I was in the library, I had received two associate's degrees, while incarcerated and for trades. But I didn't really have the resources to go to school. The library was very pivotal in assisting me with going to school so I returned to school in 2016 2017. I graduated I graduated in 2019, and then I then went into the graduate program and got my master's degree in clinical mental health counselor to be a counselor therapist. It was very pivotal in that the library assisted me in supporting my academic endeavors and every role that I had throughout the library initially when I came in I was a social services specialist work with the social services department. And those who were experiencing homelessness, those with substance abuse issues and several other issues we had about eight domains that were predominant with the population and demographic that we were dealing with. I worked with with that department for about three years. We got the model up and running. And then, at that point, I then transitioned into the team services which did make that the time. And so I pivoted to team services broke team services department and built the team. We created a team space, and then we're then trying to then I then transitioned into the entire the role of directing equity and anti racism. That's the role that I am at now. I use every opportunity to share my story, especially with those who are returning citizens because there are very few places in our communities that will accept us when we do come home. Understanding and knowing our background and still allowing and supporting us the opportunity to serve the community. One of the main people to do is to check with your local library and see what type of services they offer libraries most libraries across the country are very open we are one of the last public servants in the community. So I implore, especially returning citizens there are a lot of libraries across the country that are very, very friendly to returning citizens. And even thank you so much for sharing your story and your experiences and especially for your advocacy of the role that library can libraries can play for people as they're getting out of carceral facilities and after they've experienced incarceration. So many libraries have so many resources, especially that are in the reentry training in this series that are either specifically tailored for people who have been incarcerated, or are available to the broader public, and are very useful for people who have experienced disabilities who haven't been able to access technology or the internet, or even just keep pace with changing trends. And I'm really excited to move to our speakers for today because the work that they're doing provides really really valuable tools in context for librarians and information workers who are trying to envision their own role in supporting people's digital literacy. So with this opportunity to discuss our evidence based technology education for women transitioning from incarceration. I'm Hyun Jin Seo professor and director of Center for Digital Inclusion at the University of Kansas. In this presentation, I will cover a brief overview of center activities related to digital inclusion, our research findings related to technology learning among justice involved women, and our evidence based technology education for women transitioning from incarceration in the US Midwest. The Center for Digital Inclusion facilitates scholarship education and collaborative partnerships designed to enhance citizen's digital access and skills, especially among underserved and marginalized populations. And through these programs, we support citizen's engagement in social, economic, civic and cultural activities, and diversity, equity and inclusion is at the core of what we do. The Center's programs include digital skills training for low income adults ages 65 or older, specifically black, indigenous and people of color, so that they can safely navigate health and other information. We also offer technology skills program for refugees who recently arrived in the US to support their adjustment in the new environment. This is a technology education program for justice impacted communities. All of these projects, my discussion today focuses on technology education for women transitioning from incarceration, that is women who are about to be released from jail or prison and women who have been recently released from jail or prison. And this program has been supported by the National Science Foundation, Kansas Health Foundation, Google and National Endowment for the Arts. And before getting into the specifics of this particular program, I want to share some background information related to the importance of supporting digital skills among women transitioning from incarceration. And specifically, there are several important reasons why we work with women transitioning from incarceration. First, while men continue to comprise the vast majority of the prison population in the US, women's rates of imprisonment have been growing since 2000. And recent reports show that women have become the fastest growing segment of incarcerated population. Even as recent prison reforms have reduced a total number of people in incarceration since 2009. One million women under criminal justice provision on a given day, more over about 60% of women in incarceration have at least one child under the age of 18, which makes it essential that they be equipped with technology skills supposed to support education of their children and to find jobs after leaving incarceration. However, there are very few programs designed to respond this increasing rates of women imprisonment in recent years, as most re-enter programs are designed for men. And due to technology isolation during incarceration, women leaving jail or prison face significant challenges in accessing and using technologies once they are released. And US reports the highest incarceration rate in the world. And from diversity, equity and inclusion perspective, women in incarceration or leaving incarceration are marginalized at the intersection of gender, race, ethnicity, education and income. The best majority of women in or leaving incarceration are women of color or low income. And compared with men, women have been more marginalized in digital access and use and women are underrepresented in the technology sector. So we have identified sustainable ways and sustainable and scalable ways of supporting these women in their re-entry to an increasingly digital society. And this of course includes supporting their employment opportunities. And there are three interrelated aspects to our project. Community-based research, evidence-based education and DEI community partnership. In terms of research, we conduct interviews and surveys collecting data before, during and after education programs to understand the effects of our education on technology learning and self-efficacy. In the long term, we examine the effects of technology education on employment and recidivism. Based on these empirical studies, we have built an education program which has multiple phases covering introductory to advanced topics in the technology related to employment. And our community partners work with us in recruitment and to provide us holistic support to women transitioning from incarceration. In this project, we have a total of 18 members representing six different disciplines, including communication, computer science, education, health, women and gender studies. And two of our team leaders are formerly incarcerated women. And we have published multiple journal articles and conference papers based on our interview and survey research with our program participants. And our longitudinal and cross-sectional research shows that women transitioning from incarceration have a wide array of experiences in terms of digital access and use. While in prison, women's access to technology is extremely limited, even though an increasing number of correctional facilities in the US have started offering some types of digital technologies such as tablets or intranet access. And as noted earlier, correction education programs in this area are very limited. And when women are released, they face challenges in accessing and using digital technologies due to their precarious financial and housing situations as well as a lack of digital experiences while being incarcerated. Additionally, laws of efficacy related to digital use and lack of support and mentoring in this area, additional barriers. And our research participants also expressed concerns that they are not confident in protect protecting themselves online as they have not received training on online security and privacy issues. And with regard to our education program itself, our participants who successfully completed our technology education program said peer mentors and trusted relationships with the project team were essential for their success. And our research informs our education program, as I noted earlier, and based on our empirical research with justice involved women and community partners, we developed our learning framework and education content. Specifically, in developing our curriculum, we adopt an interest driven learning design framework. And we use a participatory design approach where our community partners and program participants are actively involved in improving the curriculum. The tailored placement and advancement in the program provides flexibility in participants learning. In addition, we developed our online learning management site to respect the privacy and security concerns of our participants. And our stackable certificate program motivates our participants to advance through phases based on their interests and needs in learning about technology. The topics covered in our education program include online information, literacy, privacy, Microsoft Office programs, Google programs, resume building website and digital content creation, computational thinking skills, coding skills and business communication. Before these topics were determined based on our empirical research, as well as close collaborations with program participants and community organizations including public libraries and workforce centers. This is a screenshot of our online learning management site. The primary focus in designing this learning management site was to support users in reaching their expected learning outcomes in addition to online modules and online interactions with instructors. Our participants have opportunities to attend regular in-person office hours at public libraries. And we also nurtured leadership and networking and digital inclusion for marginalized populations by convening summits of community organizations where we shared lessons learned through our digital navigator programs for just involved women and inclusion of librarians, graduate, undergraduate students, we are also educating future leaders in this area. There cannot exist without close collaborations with our community members, including public libraries, local governments, nonprofit organizations and industry partners, they work to enhance diversity, equity and inclusion. We also work directly with departments of corrections for recruitment, and we have signed MOUs with several departments of corrections in cases and misery. And our protocols related to research and education activities have been reviewed and approved by the University of Kansas Institutional Review Board to ensure that program participants' rights are protected. And despite the pandemic over the past three years, a total of 350 women participated in our research aimed at developing education content and more than 250 women have participated in our education program and over 100 certificates of completion have been issued to our participants. And many of our participants reported gaining employment as direct results of participating in the technology education program, and some started their own businesses utilizing skills they learned through this program. In longer term, we are measuring the impact of the program on reducing recidivism and how this education program affects our participants' education for their children. Some participants say the program had changed their lives and opened doors for other opportunities. For example, one participant said, and I quote, I did some time, was in a bad marriage, then left and was not sure I could achieve anything without him, but this class has changed my mind. Another participant said, I want to get as many people involved in this program as possible. I contribute my sobriety to this program. The treatment facility I came from, there are only about three of us that remain sober. And I just want to help other women who are struggling too. A 27-year-old participant said, I'm so glad I joined. I now have a professional resume and have learned so much more. This is a great way to further your education, especially if you have things holding you back like I do. Some of our program participants now work as paid peer mentors or digital navigators and support other women's technology learning, and our digital navigators complete training both in digital skills and instructional skills. And our lead digital navigators, Jody and Tunisia, are playing central roles in our program, and we are continuing to expand the number of paid peer mentors in our program. And our program also includes a podcast project called Open Doors, breaking the cycle of incarceration through technology education, which is aimed at sharing technology learning experiences of women transitioning from incarceration. And this podcast project is initiated and run by our digital navigators. And we have taken several steps to enhance sustainability and scalability of our program, and we are working directly with local government organizations, nonprofit organizations and industry partners to help build an ecosystem that allows us to provide a more holistic support for women transitioning from incarceration. And this expanded collaboration covers legal and health areas, as well as technology and employment aspects. And in terms of technology education, we have built a coalition of community partners that are working with us to provide technology education for women transitioning from incarceration and other marginalized populations. And our train, the trainer model contributes to sustaining and scaling up the program by identifying program participants who show potential in teaching other women, and thus inviting them to serve as digital navigators and peer mentors for other participants. And building on our external grants from various institutions, including National Science Foundation, Kansas Health Foundation, National Endowment for the Arts and Google, we are expanding our reach to additional partners who share our concerns for diversity and equity. Unfortunately, we aim to expand our program to offer technology education scholarships for women transitioning from incarceration and their children. And this is the end of my presentation. If you have any questions, please contact me at hseo at ku.edu and looking forward to connecting with you. Thank you. Thank you so much for allowing me to be part of this important webinar. My name is DVRI Storf, and I'm an associate professor at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. Today, I will be talking with you about some of the core findings of my research and why digital literacy is so important for currently and formerly incarcerated people. I will go over the most pressing issues related to digital literacy and access during and post incarceration, and I will briefly cover some of the trends both concerning and exciting ones in this area. Finally, I will share some advice for librarians and other practitioners who work in the space based on the research my colleagues and I have conducted over the last eight years. In what we call the global north societies are increasingly and heavily dependent on the use of digital technologies and the Internet. The majority of services including crucial government services are only or mainly available online so that a lack of access to devices and the Internet, a lack of skills and a lack of usage opportunities presents a major disadvantage, regardless of whether people have been justice involved or not. The Internet can no longer be considered a luxury and said it has become a tool that is absolutely fundamental to full participation in our society. As you may know already digital inequalities are not randomly or equally distributed in our society. Those who are already better off disproportionately also have better and more access points higher digital literacy. They use the Internet more frequently and for a broader variety of uses, and they also benefit more from using the Internet. For example by saving time or saving money by finding a better paying job, etc. We call this the sequential and compound model of digital inequalities. That means that access skills use and outcomes build on one another, and in equities in one area will translate into additional inequities in the other areas. It is important to note that those who are most likely to be digitally excluded are the same demographics that are also most likely to be disproportionately justice impacted. That is those with lower incomes for education and black and Hispanic communities are both most likely to experience digital inequalities, and they are most likely to be overrepresented among incarcerated and justice impacted populations. Due to digital deprivation during incarceration returning citizens experience what we call supercharged digital exclusion, which amplifies the digital exclusion that most formerly incarcerated people already experienced prior to their time in prison. Because technology is developed at such a rapid speed even a comparatively short sentence of say a year or two can have a detrimental effect. Prior research has shown that because of a lack of digital literacy, formerly incarcerated people experience more adverse events when they're online such as becoming victims of scams or fraud, for example when they fall victim to fake job ads that ask for money when you apply for a job. Another study has also shown that the digitization of the criminal record and the ability to screenshot things has made the criminal record more sticky, and that it can show up anywhere on the Internet. So even if someone has the skills to know how to get the record expunged, it is still likely to show up somewhere else. This means that moving forward can become more difficult, unless returning citizens know how to get such content removed. My own research and the data that I will share next are based on three different studies that I conducted together with my colleagues in 2015, 2018, and most recently in 2020. I will not go into a lot more detail than the slides provide for the methods but overall, we were able to have conversations and collect data for both men and women who were either formally or currently incarcerated at the time of our research. The most recent study also included an intervention from a local nonprofit that provided digital literacy classes in jail, and participants also received refurbished laptops together with their belongings on the day of their release. Unfortunately, this study was interrupted by COVID-19, so we were not able to collect as much data as we had hoped and the nonprofit had to stop providing these classes due to lockdowns. The core findings from these three studies show three types of barriers that currently informally incarcerated people have to deal with the most. First, barriers to access of internet and devices both during and post incarceration. Second, barriers in terms of a lack of skills and skills training again both during and after incarceration. And finally barriers with regard to support in terms of access and skills post incarceration. All three areas had a big impact on what people felt able to do. For example, having their own device that they could mess with without worrying that they might break it for someone else made a huge difference for our participants in the third study. They felt free to try and fail at things rather than not even trying them in the first place. Similarly, even the short training that our participants received in the third study increased their overall confidence and allowed them to explore things they had not learned in the class once they came home. For participants of all of our studies having people around them that could support them with both access and skills also made a very big difference. When we look at different groups of people we see some key differences. For example, our younger participants were able to readjust to the digital world more easily than our older participants. This also went hand in hand with sentence length. So those who were incarcerated for longer had the most issues. In terms of genders, we did not find considerable considerable differences in access or skills barriers, but women tended to talk more about the support they had available through family, friends, and especially children and grandchildren. Interestingly, race did not seem to make a difference in terms of the experienced barriers. But this is different from the general population where we see racial differences in terms of digital inequalities. However, the resources that people had available made a very big difference. So for example, whether someone had employment, a steady income, higher educational qualifications, etc. The most pressing issues we found were related to getting reintegrated back into society and the most basic needs that needed to be covered. Those included finding work and being able to apply for work, writing and uploading resumes, how to write an email, how to fill in a job application, and so forth. Finding permanent housing was a big issue as well. A lot of our participants lived in temporary housing. We found information, for example, around finding a provider treatment options, insurance and Medicaid, those were all big issues. And then finding other useful information that we might not think about on a day to day basis such as how to navigate a city how to navigate a new place, how to use a public transit system. And finally, learning from apps like YouTube and TikTok were incredibly popular with our participants. Many of them described that once they figured out how to use it, they could learn anything from YouTube. So this was considered a treasure trove of relevant information. So don't disregard things that might sound unimportant like YouTube or TikTok. Finally, a lot of our participants wanted to learn about how to reconnect with family and friends and how to act on social media and also protect their own privacy while on social media. Moving on to some concerning trends that I've been seeing, I'm worried that people think that prison tablets can address digital inequality for currently informally incarcerated people. Let me be very blunt about this, prison tablets are not going to fix the issue, as functionalities are very limited. And in addition, charging the most vulnerable people for things like educational content, reading books, entertainment, connecting with a family and friends, is just unconscionable to me. Another trend that worries me is the provision of half hearted, what I call half hearted digital skills training. This was mentioned by almost all of our participants. If they got any training at all, it was usually on old and outdated computers and in some cases, participants just were given a book instead of using computers at all, and this is not helpful. The final trend that I'm seeing that is a bit concerning is to focus on only offering digital skills training post incarceration. Well, this is absolutely better than no training at all. It is almost too late at that point. And returning citizens have so many other issues to worry about that fitting the training into their busy schedules, dealing with transportation, etc. Is presenting a real challenge. So exciting trends. So first I have noticed an increasing interest in the provision of digital skills training from nonprofits libraries and other practitioners, both post and pre release. And I've also seen increasing interest from facilities to participate in these kinds of trainings. This is very promising, although the landscape right now appears to be a bit of a patchwork with varying degrees of training length and training depth. This is increasing interest from the research community. And while this may not seem important on the surface, good data on what is actually happening will provide us with the evidence that we need to implement the best kinds of services and this is most definitely true for digital literacy and digital access as well. The final promising trend I am seeing is that more and more practitioners are including currently or formerly incarcerated people both in the design phases and the running of digital skills training. This is absolutely fantastic and I encourage this because we're building on the expertise of those we are trying to serve, and allows to really tailor the training to the most pressing needs of returning citizens. In terms of advice for librarians and other practitioners. First of all, I want to give a big shout out to everyone who works in this space, because you are already providing absolutely crucial services, and your work is being seen and appreciated. Thank you. In terms of advice or recommendations there are a few things that I consider important moving forward, if at all possible and I know there's a lot of red tape around this. Try to work with with facilities so that you can provide digital skills training during incarceration and try to start the training at least six months prior to release. This gives returning citizens a good amount of time to familiarize themselves with devices and important skills. Again, if you can try to use up to date devices that are actually connected to live websites that have been pre approved and are relevant to returning citizens from a cybersecurity standpoint we know this is possible but it requires a bit of work from the facilities. Other areas would be related to learning the Google suite email etiquette how to draft share Google doc, how to search and apply for jobs, general digital skills, social media etiquette, and other important resources that are needed post incarceration. The second point would be to meet your clients where they are a one size fits all approach will not work here unfortunately, as your clients will come in with varying degrees of knowledge and needs. The second point is, if you can provide your clients with devices that they can keep post incarceration. We worked with several nonprofits who are very happy to do these kinds of things so make connections with other nonprofits that can help with those things. And finally, and this is actually a really important point. So it's last but not least, remind your clients that you are not part of the Department of Corrections. Every single one of our participants emphasize that they do not trust their punisher, and that they do not perceive them to be there to help them at all. So this lack of trust will have an impact on what your clients will learn during any training. Thank you so much for having me if you have any questions at all, please feel free to reach out to me by email or on Twitter and I will get back to you as soon as I can. Thank you. Hello, I'm control Owens. I'm a researcher at the University of Washington and security and privacy research lab. Today I'm going to be talking to you about digital literacy for understanding and reacting to surveillance. There is a number of you have my talk or someone to talk about the importance of digital literacy, especially in this context. I'll talk about some research findings of some work we did studying surveillance of incarcerated people's communication. Talk about some trends, both concerning and exciting ones and give some advice to librarians and others. The technology is being rapidly developed and deployed in business jails around the US. Some of this technology is not undergoing proper testing or verification before being used, we've been using these high risk settings. And this doesn't even mention whether or not the technology should be used in the first place with technology that is being used, often as an undergo underground testing or verification. And there's some technology that you might be more familiar with that's used for surveillance for this other technology such as emotion prediction using wearables and voice analysis of people while they're on phone calls. And in these things are allegedly used to predict a self harm and intervene so that it doesn't happen. Right. And so incarcerated people and their friends and friends that you just these technologies. And they need to understand sort of what the risks are when you're communicating using these technologies and what the differences are between the different. So this presentation is a largely based on the work I did with Camille Cobb and Lori Praner. I can always getting my master's degree at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. First I'll start off with an overview of the prison telecom landscape, and it's mainly dominated by two companies. There's GTL technologies, which recently rebranded as bypass technologies. There's a curious technologies and JPA technologies which are under the same parent company. And people typically communicate with incarcerated people through five different methods. There's the phone is physical mail. There's electronic electronic messaging, aka email is video visitation. And the specific communication methods available at a given facility might vary widely within the same city, county, state and country. And so we interviewed family members of incarcerated people. We asked them the following questions know what what are their privacy concerns preferences when they use prison communication services and how do they react to surveillance. We interviewed 16 family members of people incarcerated in Pennsylvania where I was located at the time in December 2019. And I should say the 16 people is common for qualitative studies. Interview studies are often often require some rigorous qualitative coding at the place where we submitted this paper, the average number of people being interviewed is 12. We went above that. And we asked people about their perceptions of data collection, retention, use and surveillance and privacy. And so here's some findings from our interview study. Participants often incorrectly believe that they were they were legal practical and technical barriers that limited surveillance that they could experience. People expressed concerns about misrepresentation of their words when communicating with someone incarcerated. People mentioned their privacy preserving strategy. And this included using the most private communication method in their mind, and so censoring a certain topics to try to mitigate legal risk. And they raised numerous others, numerous other non surveillance or privacy related issues that impacted their choice of communication. And this included things like cause convenience, accessibility, whether or not the facility have a method and prior trauma in prison. So one person that we interviewed had was formerly incarcerated themselves. And he specifically mentioned how he didn't go in person because he didn't want to be around a prison or can only use digital communication method. And using digital communication methods, of course, expose themselves to more data collection. Right. So in addition to these, these are privacy and legal risk that came up in this study. They're also a cyber security risk for people who want to communicate with incarcerated people and incarcerated people who want to communicate with people out on the outside. Right. And so these telecom companies from the ones I mentioned before. They often do this large scale mass surveillance and it makes their databases these high value target and introduce risks to the people that are surveilled themselves. So some examples of this include the curious, which is one of the phone, one of the companies that I mentioned before. They were hacked and 70 million phone calls for release and these are audio recordings along with additional metadata were exposed. And these included actually phone calls between people talking to their attorney which violated attorney client privilege. And a different incident tell me, which is under the GTL umbrella was was was found to be compromised. They exposed the database publicly, including hundreds of thousands of private messages and personal info of millions of people in their contact. And so I know people often send very sensitive messages over over electronic messaging platforms between things like social security numbers, etc. For people to get stimulus checks and other things. Right. And so people who have to use these these platforms because it's the only one that they're being provided with. They have to consider the legal risk of things that they say things that they do how they might be misinterpreted may be using in them or their incarcerated relatives. They also have to consider the security risk, the privacy risk, the financial risk to them when these platforms don't have good security practices. And so here's some trends to watch out for. Attorney ones include this increased digitization of mail book in a visitation and this visitation is often proposed with the replacement of non digital options. In 2019, the Pennsylvania Department of Protection transition from physical mail to only allowing a scans of digital mail to be viewed on a tablet screen. Different facilities and this is becoming increasingly popular in the US. Some facilities are moving away from physical books trying to only use ebooks. Other facilities are trying to get rid of in person visitation and only use video visitation. So that's quite concerning. Some are related companies try to lock people into using their services and hide other options. So J pay, which is under the event of technology umbrella is it can be used for sending commissary money to people in some facilities have JP is their exclusive vendor. But they try to absorb it at the between 20 and 40% often. But there's a much cheaper option that people can use. They can use money orders to mailing to send via mail to their incarcerated relative. And if you go to the US Postal Service, it's called $2 for money order. But if you look at the facilities website and you look at J Facebook site, it's really hard to get information about this right. The people are unaware unaware of the cheaper options available than because of deceptive and unfair practices by these companies. And the last concerning trend I'll talk about is this growth of smartphone electronic monitoring upon release. People release from probation for role immigration detention, which is currently the largest use case in the US are instead of just being released and allowed to go free. They're being required to install these apps smartphone apps on their phone that tracks them. And they have to do check in via these apps, et cetera, right? So this is this increasing digitization, increasing, increasingly, widening net of surveillance that's currently happening is quite concerning. But I'm an optimist. There's a lot of really exciting things that are happening right now. And some of this involves a lot of local organizing. And I think organizing has prevented some facilities from replacing in person visitation with a video visitation that's famously happened in Dallas County and Dallas County County Jail. The city was trying to expedite a procurement process and activists intervened that no, we want in person visitation. And similarly exciting librarians have advocated pretty strongly for free physical and digital resources for people incarcerated. Most recently in May, 2023, San Francisco Public Library came up with a one of a kind agreement with the city in the county, offer free ebooks, audio books, music, and other content that's incarcerated people. So these are really exciting things that I hope that we continue to see more of this. So some advice for librarians and others for incarcerated people and their friends and families, I would say, keep doing what you're doing and using the most private communication method. For other people who don't want their face or voice captured that meant using physical mail, right? Only communicating the physical mail. For other people who wanted their conversations to be more private and were at a facility where there were contact visits allowed and they could sit right next to their incarcerated one. In person visitation was the most secure option for them. But figuring out which option is best for you might require this technique that we use a secure new privacy called threat modeling. The EFF has a really great guide on how to go about this. And for librarians, honestly, doing a lot of great stuff already, keep it up. But something that might additionally be helpful that you might be uniquely positioned for is helping increase transparency in this ecosystem. You could compile informational resources and present those effectively to people. And I think specifically because of your physical access to some facilities, you can gather information directly. Maybe what it isn't available online or someone can't get it by calling in. And an example of what does it look like the form we made this to help people who might have someone at Allegheny County Jail, which is in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania that they're trying to contact. But something like this could be quite useful for incarcerated people themselves, but also their friends and families trying to talk to. I hear more resources based on things I mentioned in the presentation. Thank you for your time. Feel free to reach out with any questions or comments. Thanks.