I know several stories of reintegration. I must say that I prefer the word “healing”, even if the word “reintegration” fits better in this system. We are always talking about healing. Since this is a process, it is difficult to measure.
Beneficial activities, such as a sharing circle, are offered by the Montreal Native Friendship Centre, for example. I believe that the gaps lie in the lack of permanence of these services. These services should also be directed specifically to the population that has been incarcerated, for example to women in prison. Some existing services are very good for women in general and could incorporate more culturally appropriate services.
The example of the Elizabeth Fry Society transition house may be relevant, except that there is a gap in the lack of culturally appropriate services for indigenous women who were incarcerated. Services exist, but they are not always relevant to indigenous women. Will they feel that they are part of something? Will they feel that we don't judge them?
We always think in a spirit of healing and not in a spirit of reintegration. Reintegration can mean many things to different people. Although it is difficult to measure, if the person initiates a healing process or if they say they have completed their healing process, it is a success.