Hear Our Voices: Women Inside MCI-Framingham Speak on Prison Construction

In June 2025, Governor Healey announced a $360 million construction project for the only state prison for women in Massachusetts, MCI-Framingham. Since then, its Brewster and Modular buildings have been demolished and the Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance (DCAMM) is soliciting for a construction manager to oversee the project. Meanwhile, the architecture firm HDR, Inc. (HDR) meets regularly with state officials from the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security, the Department of Correction (DOC), and DCAMM. HDR’s design contract has been extended multiple times through several rounds of additional service approvals, and the firm has drafted proposed site plans with projected costs.

To this day, the Governor has released very little information about the project to legislators, incarcerated women, or the public, including how the project is being financed. There has been no assessment of the current population for potential release nor alternative placements. The planned project includes demolition, major renovation of multiple buildings, and the construction of two new buildings. The project is slated to take six to eight years.

In September 2025, Families for Justice as Healing commissioned student attorneys from the Boston College Law School Civil Rights Clinic to conduct a listening tour with women inside MCI-Framingham. This project was designed to understand their thoughts about the prison construction, and gain insight into their needs. The listening tour included 32 women who are currently incarcerated at MCI-Framingham.  The vast majority (84%) of women expressed concerns about proceeding with this construction project and 75% oppose the project outright.

Interviewers’ conversations revealed that women inside MCI-Framingham generally share the view that spending $360 million on building construction is a waste of taxpayer dollars. The current population of MCI-Framingham is a little over 200 incarcerated women, 169 of whom are serving state sentences. Women shared the belief that many of them could be in community placements or minimum security facilities if they were available, and if the Department of Correction did not consistently manually override women's minimum-security level scores from the classification tool. Other women are eligible for medical parole or good candidates for clemency based on the Governor’s guidelines. For the remainder of these women, prison construction will not address many of their concerns, such as better quality programming, practical job training, educational opportunities, effective substance use support, programs for survivors of domestic and sexual violence, and reforms to the culture of coercion and punishment within MCI-Framingham.

There were four main takeaways from these conversations. First, the $360 million would be better spent on measures that address the root causes of incarceration and help women reenter the community after incarceration. Second, incarcerated women described a culture of negligence, humiliation, and collective punishment at MCI-Framingham that will not be remedied by new construction. Third, women want more job training, education, and healing programming while incarcerated. The DOC plans to build a new programming building, with no commitment to provide additional programming or expand industries. Fourth, to the extent that physical repairs are necessary, there must be transparency and public accountability to avoid repeating the Department of Correction’s prior instances of hazardous conditions and mismanaged repairs.

Overall, women spoke about a wide range of concerns and raised the alarm that no one is listening to what they truly need for rehabilitation and successful return to the community. Without meaningfully engaging with women inside MCI-Framingham, the Administration cannot responsibly manage the existing prison or such a large capital investment in a prison project. This poses grave concerns for moving forward with the Governor’s proposed plan.

“Throwing money at a situation doesn’t fix it unless you know all the problems and solutions. We need a committee formed from the inside.” - Patricia Olsen

“This is no way to live; it would be more humane to offer people a way out. Everything goes on without you. You die a little every day.” - Anonymous

METHODOLOGY 

Between September and November 2025, four student attorneys from the Civil Rights Clinic at Boston College Law School reached out via Corrlinks and/or mail to approximately 110 women at MCI-Framingham to see if they would be interested in speaking with the clinic about their experience at MCI-Framingham. Based on responses to this outreach, the students conducted in-person and virtual interviews with 26 women currently incarcerated inside MCI-Framingham, and received mail survey responses back from an additional six women. The topics of the conversations included the women’s experiences while incarcerated, the impact of incarceration on their families, their priorities for what changes would improve their quality of life at MCI-Framingham and upon release, their opinions on the Healey administration’s prison construction project, and how they would meaningfully change the system of incarceration in Massachusetts. The students analyzed the interview transcripts and mail survey responses to identify how many women mentioned certain topics and views, and what key themes arose across the conversations.

WOMEN’S TOP PRIORITIES 

The interviews highlighted that while the Healey administration has demonstrated a desire to invest in incarcerated women, pouring $360 million into new construction is not what women need or want. Interviewers presented incarcerated women with a list of ten potential priorities for addressing problems that they experience in prison. Women were  asked  to identify their top three priorities out of a list that included “Building New Buildings / Renovating Existing Buildings”, as well as systemic and policy changes. Only five women, or 16%, ranked new construction and renovation in their top three priorities. Instead, the most commonly chosen priorities were “More access to quality healthcare” (56%), “Reentry services upon release” (53%), “Pathways to release women” (47%), “Policy changes like elder parole and the Mass. Survivors Act” (41%), and “Ending unnecessary strip searches” (38%).

Construction plans include a brand new medical building, yet women consistently expressed that their greatest barriers to care were not the facilities themselves. Rather, women emphasized the substandard and negligent care provided by VitalCore, the private healthcare contractor at MCI-Framingham, and the severely restricted access to external healthcare providers. None of these serious concerns would be addressed by a new healthcare building. Additionally, women’s top priorities are prison culture and policy issues that the new construction project is unlikely to address.

“More jail cells is not what we need. Everyone wants something new, brighter, but it’s not what we need.” - Stacey Honkala

The interviewees had deep insights into the root causes of incarceration.  59% of women discussed  the kind of support that would divert individuals from the path of incarceration. First, women named that many women at MCI-Framingham are survivors of domestic violence and expressed a need for safe housing for themselves and their children, and other support that would help them achieve financial independence from abusive relationships. Women emphasized that affordable housing, substance use support, mental health support, programs for youth, and entry-level jobs that pay a living wage would prevent people from going down a path that could end up derailing their lives.

“Instead of warehousing souls, we can use this $360 million to heal mental health ailments and mend the brokenness of the wounded.” - Champree Dinkins

Almost every incarcerated woman who interviewers spoke with (88%) emphasized the need for reentry support because they feel unprepared to reestablish their lives in the community. Women offered several recommendations for resources that will better prepare women to return to society and avoid reincarceration. Practical job training and job placement that would allow women to support their families came up repeatedly. Women emphasized a need for housing support because they have nowhere to live upon their release and expressed concerns about insufficient resources for those recovering from substance use. Women also brought up a need for affordable childcare.

“It feels like we’re being set up to fail.” - Anonymous

One third of women interviewed expressed deep frustration with the DOC classification system. Multiple women mentioned the finding published in Susan Sered’s paper “Women and Prison Security Classifications in Massachusetts” that 80% of women at MCI-Framingham had minimum security scores by the DOC’s objective point based system and one woman specifically cited the article. The DOC often reclassifies women with a minimum security score to medium security status based on subjective assessments or manual overrides despite women’s low risk level. 

In interviews, women noted the closure of the DOC minimum security facility for women. Women felt “stuck” due to a lack of “step downs” and minimum placements. Women repeatedly expressed concern that the $360 million construction plan will keep MCI-Framingham a medium security prison, severely and unnecessarily restricting opportunities for women to prepare for reentry, participate in work release, and reconnect with their children.

“They forget that the most difficult thing about being in here is being a mother and being separated from their children” - Anonymous

66% of women emphasized a need to expand viable and meaningful pathways for release — that is, something that they can work towards as part of their rehabilitation journey. Women suggest that some pathways for release include medical parole, passing elder parole legislation, and passing the Massachusetts Survivors Act for survivors of domestic and sexual violence. Several specifically spoke up for the elderly incarcerated women who are losing hope and approaching the end of their lives without their families.

“Grandmothers and older adults are dying without their families. Without dignity.” - Anonymous

“Older people are hopeless. People are losing faith in going to church. You want to invest money somewhere that there is no hope?” - Karen Edwards

Many conversations reflected the sentiment that new construction will not fix a broken prison culture. Unnecessary and humiliating strip searches were a common concern, with 41% of women mentioning them. Incarcerated women at MCI-Framingham are strip searched constantly, including after and sometimes before taking Zoom calls—entirely virtual interactions—with attorneys and family members. The strip searches make it harder to access loved ones, care, and services: some women declined meetings with the law students to avoid being strip searched, and one interviewee shared that women even refuse hospital visits because of them. One woman described the strip searches as “degrading,” and another was “disgusted” after overhearing officers talking about women’s naked bodies.

Nearly a third of women described how they struggled to stay connected to their communities while at MCI-Framingham because of arbitrary visitor list limits, and significant hurdles their families faced to visit them.

Over half of women raised concerns with staff behavior, training, and mismanagement of staffing assignments. Four women spoke about experiencing collective punishment from correctional officers, and eight shared examples of coercion and retaliation for things like cooperating with investigations of sexual abuse. According to five women with longer sentences, conditions have only gotten worse over time.

“Building new buildings and keeping the same people won’t fix anything.” - Sandra Dostie

One of the most consistent concerns among women was what they experienced as the negligent, coercive, and punitive nature of the medical care provided by the contractor VitalCore and managed by DOC. Of the 88% of interviewees who brought up the poor quality of healthcare at the prison, 75% described the care as negligent or coercive. One woman could no longer write with an injured hand after being denied care for two months. Another was not brought to the hospital for eight days after breaking her leg. One could not get insulin for a full week, while another waited four months for antibiotics. Another woman, a trained healthcare professional, has witnessed women have seizures after receiving the wrong medication.

Additionally, 28% brought up their frustration with how difficult it was to access external healthcare providers, describing routine wait times of up to 1.5 years. One woman has not been able to see an outside provider in person to manage her chronic condition in over ten years. Another woman noted a need for “competent nurses” and to “untie the hands of [contracted prison] clinicians” to connect women with necessary care outside the prison. 

“I have never seen so much negligence in my life.” - Anonymous

Three women were particularly disturbed by the overprescription of medication-assisted treatment (MAT) at the prison for issues other than substance use disorder. Women shared that while this treatment was useful for some women struggling with opiate addiction, it was also being offered and prescribed to those who were not in recovery as a replacement for basic healthcare services. They voiced concern that women who were not previously opiate users were given access to this treatment and then became dependent on it, and that medications were having a sedative effect on women that was not conducive to their self-development.

Women also reported that the health care situation was worsened by the severe lack of healthy food options available to them. One woman said that the only time women eat healthy is during the summer because they grow their own food in the prison garden.

Nearly half of women discussed the importance of improving mental healthcare at the prison, characterizing the current system as “horrible,” “a joke,” “not good,” and “not working.” Interviewers heard about women with severe mental illnesses being treated like “animal[s]” and “garbage.”

These interviews suggest that new buildings will not improve health outcomes as long as women receive negligent and coercive care, and women are denied access to external providers.

“This is not the place where people get better; this is a place where people come to die.” - Laurie Perro

A staggering 97% of women emphasized that the practical job training, education, and/or personal development programming at MCI-Framingham are inadequate to help them develop useful skills and return to society. Many women expressed frustration regarding the lack of healing programming for women who had suffered domestic and sexual violence, with seven women emphasizing the need for trauma support services. Some women explained that much of the programming was tailored to younger women and women who had shorter sentences. The emerging adults program, for example, is only available to women under 30.

59% of the women mentioned the need for more practical job training, particularly in the trades. Currently, MCI-Framingham only offers career training for cooking, cosmetology, and sewing. The sexist and dated nature of the already limited programming was not lost on women. Five women noted that the conditions at MCI-Framingham were notably worse than the men’s state facilities in terms of access to job training, programming, and activities.

“The job training we have access to is dated and kind of sexist … [we] need training in areas where people are gonna need us and want us.” - Tanicia Goodwin

Many of the women interviewed expressed frustration with the quality and variety of personal development programming at the prison. Programming attendance is a consideration for parole decisions, so women take programs over and over again as options are so limited. Several women specifically raised issues with the core program Pathways, calling it “a waste of time,” or “for kids.”

Women shared that severely restricted and poor quality programming and job training leaves them feeling unprepared to reestablish their lives after incarceration. While the planned construction will purportedly add more physical spaces for programming, there is existing and underutilized space that could be repurposed. One woman noted that DOC indeed held town halls about the planned construction, but when women asked what additional programs or trades were going in the new buildings that would help them succeed outside of prison, DOC representatives failed to provide any details. Women expressed the sentiment that the issue is not the buildings, but the programming itself.

“When [DOC was] asked what additional programs or trades were going in this new building that would help women succeed outside these walls, no one could give specifics.” - Patricia Olsen

Women did have concerns about their physical environment, but many were concerned that new construction would either not address them or would create new problems. Women noted issues with the existing physical infrastructure such as temperature, contaminated water, air quality, mold, and general cleanliness. But these needed repairs would not cost $360 million. One reason for women’s distrust of the project was their experience with the DOC covering up problems instead of actually fixing them. One woman shared that the prison had once screwed a vent over a cinderblock in a room in the Smith building where a vent was required to be installed for safety. Another woman described how staff addressed black mold:

“They have had [incarcerated women] take paintbrushes to paint over the black mold in the showers. When the mold bleeds through they paint it white again.” - Lisa Lambert

Women expressed a high level of anxiety about this project because they did not receive clarity on how long it would take and whether they could still have access to outdoor spaces and different buildings during and after construction. 28% of women mentioned their fear that the project would further restrict their movement within the prison. One woman shared that the facility goes into lockdown every time a construction truck comes through. She was not able to attend her first scheduled visit with a student attorney as part of the listening tour because of a construction-related lockdown during the demolition of the Brewster and Modular buildings.

Seven women expressed concerns about the demolition’s effect on air quality for themselves and the surrounding community. Two women spoke about previous experience with a window renovation project at MCI-Framingham where demolished lead tiles polluted the air for them and their neighbors around the prison. Some women indicated that their safety is already being disregarded in preparation for demolition. Two of the women interviewed were sent into the condemned buildings to clean them before demolition without personal protective equipment (PPE). They came back with red eyes and were visibly sick for days.

While some interviewees appreciated an allocation of funds to MCI-Framingham, 75% of interviewees oppose the project and 41% of women stated that this construction plan is a waste of resources and that the money could be spent more effectively. Of the eight women who supported the project, three still had concerns about construction safety, and only five women out of 32 ranked construction among their top priorities for issues that they want the state to address regarding their incarceration.

Overall, women generally called on the Governor and the DOC to be publicly transparent and accountable about any planned renovations or construction to prevent shortcuts and ensure the health and safety of women inside MCI-Framingham.

CONCLUSION

The vast majority of women interviewed for the listening tour expressed concerns about the construction project. While some women think that it is important to make repairs, women repeatedly emphasized that the reforms MCI-Framingham needs most are cultural, not physical. The information gathered from this listening tour indicates that the $360 million could be much better spent on effective interventions such as community placements based on accurate security classifications, useful programming, job training and education, reentry services, and support in the community that addresses the root causes of incarceration. Additionally, women asked for full transparency and public accountability for  any repairs and renovations to ensure that they are performed safely.

Incarcerated women repeatedly expressed their belief that Governor Healey wants to help them, but that she does not understand the real problems nor their priorities because she has failed to genuinely listen to them. This poses grave concerns about moving forward with the $360 million construction project. The Administration must pause construction and re-evaluate how this money can be better spent in consultation with incarcerated women.

Governor Healey has a real opportunity to shift how we treat some of the most vulnerable members of society. Women know what they need, and are asking for their voices to be heard.

“[The governor] means well but needs to be educated on why it’s a waste of money.” - Katherine McGlincy

“I’ve spoken to the Governor myself and I feel that she does care about us. I just question who is talking to her now, and do they really know what is needed?” - Patricia Olsen

This report was written by student attorneys with the Boston College Law School Civil Rights Clinic based on their analysis of their interviews and surveys of women in MCI-Framingham. Families for Justice as Healing collaborated on editing the final report. While their comments have been summarized and collected here for ease of reading, women inside MCI-Framingham are the true experts on the conditions of the prison and we are grateful for their insights.