Evaluating the Long-Term Effects of Prisoner Reentry Services on Recidivism: What Types of Services Matter?

Abstract

We analyzed data collected for a large multi-site evaluation of 12 prisoner reentry programs in 12 states to examine the impact of pre-release services on time to rearrest and number of rearrests up to 56 months post-release for male offenders. A two-stage matching quasi-experimental design was used to define the comparison groups and multivariate models were used to examine the relationships among service and program receipt and recidivism. Participation in the reentry program was associated with longer time to arrest and fewer arrests after release. However, the specific services delivered as part of the program showed modest or inconsistent impacts on recidivism. Services that focused on individual change were more beneficial than services that focused on practical skills and needs. Practitioners should consider careful sequencing of program and service delivery in prison, linking in-prison services to post-release assistance, and evaluating all services and programs for fidelity and effectiveness. © 2015 Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences.

Keywords

Author Keywords

reentry Evaluation services recidivism SVORI

Index Keywords

Author Affiliations

University of Delaware, Newark, DE, United States

RTI’s Center for Justice, Safety and Resilience, United States

RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, United States

Funding & Acknowledgements

U.S. Department of Justice, DOJ

This project was sponsored by [grant number 2003-RE-CX-K101], [grant number 2004-RE-CX-0002], [grant number 2009-IJ-CX-0010] awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

National Institute of Justice, NIJ

This project was sponsored by [grant number 2003-RE-CX-K101], [grant number 2004-RE-CX-0002], [grant number 2009-IJ-CX-0010] awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Office of Justice Programs, OJP

This project was sponsored by [grant number 2003-RE-CX-K101], [grant number 2004-RE-CX-0002], [grant number 2009-IJ-CX-0010] awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

References 10 References

1 Psychology of Criminal Conduct, (2003)

2 Andrews, Donald A., DOES CORRECTIONAL TREATMENT WORK? A CLINICALLY RELEVANT AND PSYCHOLOGICALLY INFORMED META‐ANALYSIS, Criminology, 28, 3, pp. 369-404, (1990)

3 Evidence Based Public Policy Options to Reduce Future Prison Construction Criminal Justice Costs and Crime Rates, (2006)

4 Austin, James, The limits of prison based treatment, Victims and Offenders, 4, 4, pp. 311-320, (2009)

5 Austin, Peter C., Estimating multilevel logistic regression models when the number of clusters is low: A comparison of different statistical software procedures, International Journal of Biostatistics, 6, 1, (2010)

6 Belenko, Steven R., Understanding the Impact of Drug Treatment in Correctional Settings, The Oxford Handbook of Sentencing and Corrections, (2012)

7 Trends and Issues Australian Institute of Criminology, (1999)

8 Binswanger, Ingrid A., Release from prison - A high risk of death for former inmates, New England Journal of Medicine, 356, 2, pp. 157-165, (2007)

9 Prisoners in 2012 Trends in Admissions and Releases 1991 2012, (2013)

10 Statistical Analysis of Recurrent Events, (2007)

Evaluating the Long-Term Effects of Prisoner Reentry Services on Recidivism: What Types of Services Matter?

How to Cite