Date: November 22, 2024 Fri

Time: 11:54 am

Results for prisoner reentry

258 results found

Author: Penfold, Clarissa Title: Homelessness Prevention and Meeting Housing Need of (Ex)Offenders: A Guide to Practice Summary: This guide to practice in homelessness prevention and meeting housing need for (ex) offenders was commissioned by Communities and Local Government and overseen by a steering group including representatives from the Ministry of Justice (MoJ), Home Office and Youth Justice Board (YJB). It is based on research undertaken by the National Centre for Social Research (NatCen) in collaboration with Nacro and the Centre for Housing Policy (University of York). The guide is intended to help local authorities and their local partners address the housing needs and prevent homelessness of (ex)offenders. This guide should be read alongside the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities (Communities and Local Government, 2006a) issued by the Secretaries of State, which local authorities must have regard to by law when exercising their homelessness functions, and Homelessness Prevention: A Guide to Good Practice (Communities and Local Government, 2006b) which provides non-statutory, good practice guidance for preventing homelessness through a range of activities commonly operated by local authorities. Also of relevance to this guide is non-statutory guidance published by Communities and Local Government and the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF), Joint working between Housing and Children's Services: Preventing homelessness and tackling its effects on children and young people (Communities and Local Government & DCSF, 2008). This includes specific guidance on joint working to prevent and tackle homelessness for 16 and 17 year olds and young people leaving care. This guide is intended to complement existing guidance by providing further detail on promising practice relating to assistance for (ex)offenders. This introductory chapter provides: - a brief overview of the policy context for the research - a description of the research methodology - an outline of the structure of the guide Details: London: Great Britain, Department for Communities and Local Government, 2009. 89p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 17, 2018 at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/595212/Homeless_prevention_and_meeting_the_needs_of_ex-offenders_archived.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/595212/Homeless_prevention_and_meeting_the_needs_of_ex-offenders_archived.pdf Shelf Number: 117122 Keywords: Ex-Offenders Homelessness Housing Prisoner Reentry

Author: La Vigne, Nancy Title: Release Planning for Successful Reentry: A Self-Assessment Tool for Corrections Summary: This self-assessment tool is designed to aid correctional administrators in evaluating and improving their release planning practices. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, Justice Policy Center, 2010. 97p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 117806 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry

Author: Braga, Anthony A. Title: Controlling Violent Offenders Released to the Community: An Evaluation of the Boston Reentry Initiative Summary: The Boston Reentry Initiative (BRI) is an interagency initiative to help transition violent adult offenders released from the local jail back to their Boston neighborhoods through mentoring, social service assistance, and vocational development. This study uses a quasi-experimental design and survival analyses to evaluate the effects of the BRI on the subsequent recidivism of program participants relative to an equivalent control group. The study found that the BRI was associated with significant reductions -- on the order of 30 percent -- in the overall and violent arrest failure rates. Details: Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, Kennedy School of Government and the Rappaport Institute for Greater Boston, 2008. 24p. Source: Accessed May 8, 2018 at: https://www.hks.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/centers/rappaport/files/braga_BRI_final.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: https://www.hks.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/centers/rappaport/files/braga_BRI_final.pdf Shelf Number: 116690 Keywords: Mentoring Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Reintegration Violent Offenders (Boston) Vocation Education and Training

Author: Lattimore, Pamela K. Title: Prisoner Reentry Experiences of Adult Males: Characteristics, Service Receipt, and Outcomes of Participants in the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation Summary: The Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) funded 69 agencies in 2003 to develop programs to improve criminal justice, employment, education, health, and housing outcomes for released prisoners. This report presents findings for the adult male participants in 12 programs selected for the impact evaluation (863 SVORI participants; 834 comparison men). Details: Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International, 2009. 153p., app. Source: Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 116309 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Rehabilitation Reintegration

Author: Lattimore, Pamela K. Title: The Multi-site Evaluation of SVORI: Summary and Synthesis Summary: The Serious and Violent Reentry Initiative (SVORI) funded 69 agencies in 2003 to develop programs to improve criminal justice, employment, education, health and housing outcomes for released prisons. This report provides an overview of all findings from the SVORI Multi-site Evaluation. Details: Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International, 2009. 138p., app. Source: Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 117307 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Rehabilitation Reintegration

Author: Cowell, Alexander J. Title: An Economic Evaluation of the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative Summary: The Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) funded agencies in 2003 to develop programs to improve criminal justice, employment, education, health, and housing outcomes for released prisoners. This report presents a detailed analysis of costs of programming before release and a cost-benefit analysis comprising costs and benefits from both before and after release. Details: Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International, 2009. 58p., app. Source: Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 117348 Keywords: Cost-Benefit Analysis Prisoner Reentry

Author: Hamilton, Zachary Title: Do Reentry Courts Reduce Recidivism? Results from the Harlem Parole Reentry Court Summary: The Harlem Parole Reentry Court was established in June of 2001 in response to the high concentration of parolees returning to the East Harlem neighborhood of Manhattan. The Reentry Court provides intensive judicial oversight, supervision and services to new parolees during the first six months following release from state prison. This report assesses the impact of the Harlem Parole Reentry Court following program modifications that were implemented after an initial formative evaluation. Details: New York: Center for Court Innovation, 2010. 40p. Source: Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 118154 Keywords: Parolees Prisoner Reentry Reentry Courts

Author: Pager, Devah Title: Investigating Prisoner Reentry: The Impact of Conviction Status on the Employment Prospects of Young Men Summary: This research addresses the problem of prisoner reentry by focusing on the employment of ex-offenders shortly after release. The authors completed a three-part project to study the employment barriers facing men with criminal records. The empirical core of the project is a randomized field experiment that sent matched teams of testers to apply for hundreds of entry-level jobs in New York City. The experiment observed how employers respond to applicants who are equally qualified but vary by race, ethnicity, and criminal record. Because the research design allowed the researchers to finely control charcteristics of job seekers, and randomly assign criminal records and job openings, the experimental data yields unusually clear and convincing evidence of the impact of a criminal record. The audit study alone would provide a powerful method for studying the employment barriers to ex-offenders, but it is complemented here by a telephone survey of the same employers, and in-depth qualitative interviews with an additional subset. Combining experimental measures with interview data offers a unique opportunity to study the hiring process from both the job seeker's and the employer's point of view. Policies supoprting prisoner reentry and ex-offender employment are directly informed by the rich data resulting from the multi-stage investigation. Details: Unpublished Report to the U.S. National Institute of Justice, 2009. 42p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 118564 Keywords: Ex-Offender, Employment Prisoner Reentry

Author: Visher, Christy A. Title: Life after Prison: Tracking the Experiences of Male Prisoners Returning to Chicago, Cleveland, and Houston Summary: This research brief describes the experiences of 652 male prisoners in Illinois, Ohio, and Texas, who participated in the Urban Institute's longitudinal study of prisoner reentry, Returning Home: Understanding the Challenges of Prisoner Reentry. The men were surveyed shortly before release from prison and interviewed two times following their release -- at two and seven months after release. This research brief describes characteristics of the men and their reentry experiences - including program participation, housing, family relationship, substance use, employment, reoffending, and reincarceration. The brief also summarizes findings from previoius Returning Home reports regarding predictors of reintegration outcomes. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2010. 6p. Source: Internet Resource; Research Brief, May 2010 Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 118741 Keywords: Employment of Ex-Offenders Longitudinal Studies Prisoner Reentry Reintegration Reoffending

Author: Latessa, Edward J. Title: Community Corrections Centers, Parolees, and Recidivbism: An Investigation into the Characteristics of Effective Reentry Programs in Pennsylvania Summary: This report reviews the methodology, analysis, findings and recommendations related to the evaluation of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections Community Corrections Centers and Facilities. Specifically, the research study was designed to examine the link between program integrity and effectiveness. Other than identifying the program characteristics associated with measures of effectiveness, the intention of this study was to: 1) provide information about the effective of the Community Corrections Centers (CCC) and Community Contract Facilities (CCR) in Pennsylvania; 2) identify strengths and weaknesses in CCCs and CCFs; 3) provide a blueprint for developing more effective programs in Pennsylvania; 4) develop a protocol for matching parolees to programming based on risk and need; and 5) assist the state in identifying programming characteristics to be considered when making program funding decisions. Details: Cincinnati, OH: University of Cincinnati, Division of Criminal Justice, 2009. 206p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 119161 Keywords: Community Based Corrections Parolees Prisoner Reentry Redidivism

Author: Muntingh, Lukas Title: A Societal Responsibility: The Role of Civil Society Organisations in Prisoner Support, Rehabilitation and Reintegration Summary: Civil Society Prison Reform Initiative (CSPRI) and the Institute for Security Studies (ISS) conducted a survey of 21 organisations working in the offender reintegration and prisoner support field. This report presents an analysis of the results which are based on in-depth interviews with practitioners and managers working in these organizations. It is a central finding of the survey that there is great diversity amongst organizations in respect of nearly every issue dealt with in the survey. On the one hand this indicates the willingness of the sector to engage in innovative approaches and incorporate a wide range of modalities in service delivery. On the other hand, it is also testimony to a fairly fragmented sector in which there has been limited debate on what offender reintegration is, what is effective and what should be avoided. Details: Pretoria, South Africa: Institute for Security Studies, 2008. 33p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2008 Country: South Africa URL: Shelf Number: 119291 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Rehabilitation

Author: Muntingh, Lukas Title: Prisoner Re-Entry in Cape Town - An Exploratory Study Summary: "Every month in South Africa approximately 6000 sentenced prisoners are released, some on parole and some on expiry of sentence. After serving their prison sentences it is society’s expectation that they will refrain from committing crime and be productive citizens. They are expected to find employment, rebuild relationships with their families and communities, and cease from engaging in certain activities and avoiding the risks that caused their imprisonment in the first instance. Unfortunately, it is the case that many released prisoners commit further offences and find their way back to prison, some in a remarkably short period of time while others return after several years. This study is concerned with the immediate post-release period and asked a very simple question: “What happens to people immediately after they have been released from prison?” The question is aimed at gaining a deeper and empirical understanding of what prisoner re-entry and reintegration into society mean and what the obstacles are to successful reintegration. When people’s lives have effectively been put on hold for several months or years, how do they pick up the strings where they had left them, if there are indeed strings to pick up? " Details: Bellville, South Africa: Civil Society Prison Reform Initiative, 2008. 37p. Source: Internet Resource; CSPRI Research Paper No. 14 Year: 2008 Country: South Africa URL: Shelf Number: 119383 Keywords: Ex-Offenders, Services for Prisoner Reentry Prisoners Recidivism Rehabilitation

Author: Muntingh, Lukas Title: Ex-Prisoners' Views on Imprisonment and Re-Entry Summary: "In the past 15 years much research has been conducted on the prison system in South Africa focusing on governance, law reform and human rights. It is, however, of particular concern that the voices of prisoners and ex-prisoners had not been heard in the current discourse, one that has been dominated by the Department of Correctional Services (DCS), Parliament, service delivery organisations, academics and human rights activists. In essence, there has been a lot of talk about prisoners and ex-prisoners but there has been little listening to prisoners and ex-prisoners taking place." Details: Bellville, South Africa: Civil Society Prison Reform Initiative, 2009. 27p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2009 Country: South Africa URL: Shelf Number: 119385 Keywords: Ex-Prisoners (South Africa) Imprisonment Prisoner Reentry Prisons

Author: Shelupanov, Anton Title: Turning the Corner: Beyond Incarceration and Re-Offending Summary: This report makes the case for innovation in the justice sector - at policy, strategic and implementation levels, both locally and nationally. There is now widespread agreement that the system needs to change radically. But unfortunately there is not a sufficient number of proven alternatives to what exists which can simply be implemented and scaled up. Instead the system needs to become much more adept at designing, rapidly testing and then scaling new innovations in everything from helping former offenders into jobs to effectively supervising people on community sentences. This report assesses the current situation in terms of what the existing systemic challenges there are, what is being attempted to address them and how recent political and economic upheavals have affected the efforts of the justice system to reduce offending and strive for a safer society. Prison numbers are exceptionally high and the system is very expensive. At the same time major budget cuts mean that unless the system innovates, it may not be able to perform its function of keeping crime low and keeping the public safe. The Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke has signalled that he wants to see a rehabilitation revolution. Such a revolution would mean a radically new approach, rather than doing more of the same. In this report we propose a number of new ideas: A greater role for innovation in justice; Social Impact Bonds; and Enhancing the employment prospects of former offenders by introducing Deployers. Details: London: The Young Foundation, 2010. 104p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 19, 2010 at: http://www.youngfoundation.org/files/images/Turning_the_Corner.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.youngfoundation.org/files/images/Turning_the_Corner.pdf Shelf Number: 119640 Keywords: Criminal Justice Policy (U.K.) Ex-Offenders, Employment Prison Reform Policy Prisoner Reentry Rehabilitation

Author: Sample, Lisa L. Title: Final Report for the Evaluation of Nebraska's Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Program Summary: The purpose of the evaluation of the NDCS Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Program was to assess the success of the program in three areas. First, an evaluation of the process was conducted to determine if a reentry program had indeed been created by the NDCS. Second, a cost benefit analysis was conducted to determine the economic savings that a reentry program could promote for the state of Nebraska. Finally, an outcome evaluation was conducted to determine if the reentry program was successful in its goal of reducing recidivism among serious and violent offenders in the state. Below are the key findings of each of these three evaluation components. Process Findings: • Although the selection of program participants has evolved since the inception of the program, NDCS has targeted serious and violent offenders with a high risk of reoffending for pilot program participation. • There was community and agency support for the reentry program from its inception through its implementation. • NDCS had implemented the program components intended for Phase I of the reentry program, including the creation of personalized reentry plans for inmates and the creation of programs to address the mental health, substance abuse, and general living skills needed among the inmates. • The programs offered in Phase I of the reentry program are being delivered to inmates in Phase II thereby providing a seamless delivery of services as originally intended in the program's inception. • Overall, there is much consistency between what inmates perceive they need to live a crime-free life upon leaving prison and the services that are being delivered by NDCS. • Participants generally believed that the services they are receiving from NDCS are beneficial in helping them successfully return to society. • Overall, participants reported a positive attitude toward the services provided in Phase I and II of the reentry program and found the support provided to them by their transition mangers as most effective in bringing about their success in the program. • NDCS has not appeared to establish a graduated sanction or reward system to induce compliance with program requirements, manage problem behaviors, or minimize termination from the program. Cost Benefit Analysis Findings: • Those assigned to the re-entry program account for -96 fewer misdemeanor and -28 fewer felony arrests (per 200 participants) during a 12-month follow-up period. 6 • Based on average process costs incurred by misdemeanor arrests ($6,014) and felony arrests ($21,156), the fewer misdemeanor arrests result in annual outcome cost savings of $577,344 (-96 X $6,014), while fewer felony arrests save $592,375 (-28 X $21,156), or a total annual recidivism-outcome cost savings of $1,169,719 (per 200 participants). • The average annual recidivism-outcome cost savings per reentry program participant is $5,849. • Victimization costs include tangible costs (lost wages, medical and mental health care costs) and intangible costs (pain suffering and lost quality of life). The average estimated cost per violent victimization in the U.S. is $42,098, while the average cost of property victimizations is $1,313. • The annual victimization cost savings due to the lower rates of recidivism of 200 re-entry participants are $884,058 for violent crimes (-21 X $42,098) and $73,528 (-56 X $1,313) for property crimes, or a total societal-victimization cost savings of $957,586. • This equates to an average annual societal-victimization cost savings per reentry program participant of $4,788. • When recidivism-outcome and societal-victimization costs are combined, the total annual savings due to the NDCS Re-Entry Program are $10,637 per reentry participant. Outcome Evaluation • In order to assess outcomes, the 19 reentry participants were compared to a control group of 53 offenders who received “traditional” correctional treatment. • Each offender in both groups was interviewed in the month prior to their release to determine the degree of similarity between the two groups. • Based on this interview data, the two groups were remarkably similar on measures of race, age, prior criminal history, prior drug use and family relationships. • Recidivism was assessed using two measures: whether the offender was arrested during the 6 months following release, and the mean number of arrests during the six-month follow-up period. • 26% of the control group, but only 21% of the reentry participants were rearrested during the 6 month follow-up period. • The mean number of new arrests for reentry participants was .26 compared to .58 for control participants. Details: Omaha, NE: School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Nebraska at Omaha, 2008. 139p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 1, 2011 at: http://www.unomaha.edu/reentry/final_report_2008.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.unomaha.edu/reentry/final_report_2008.pdf Shelf Number: 120647 Keywords: Cost-Benefit Analysis Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Rehabilitation Violent Offenders

Author: Brown, Geneva Title: The Intersectionality of Race, Gender, and Reentry: Challenges for African-American Women Summary: This Issue Brief is divided into three sections. The first identifies the trends of mass incarceration in the African-American community, and discusses reentry policies and the challenges created by such policies. The second elucidates intersectionality through the lives of African-American women offenders and the problems that African-American women offenders have with reentry. The third section concludes with reviewing legislative trends and proposals for gender and race-based treatment considerations for reentry. Details: Washington, DC: American Constitution Society, 2010. 18p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 1, 2011 at: http://www.acslaw.org/files/Brown%20issue%20brief%20-%20Intersectionality.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.acslaw.org/files/Brown%20issue%20brief%20-%20Intersectionality.pdf Shelf Number: 120648 Keywords: African-Americans Female Offenders Gender Prisoner Reentry Race/Ethnicity

Author: Jannetta, Jesse Title: The Elected Official's Toolkit for Jail Reentry Summary: Nine million individuals are released from local jails each year, many struggling with mental illness, homelessness, and substance abuse. Jail reentry initiatives work to address these needs, thereby reducing both recidivism and criminal justice costs. The Elected Official's Toolkit for Jail Reentry provides information and resources for local elected officials interested in launching or expanding a jail reentry initiative. The Toolkit includes an overview of jail reentry, first steps for developing a context-appropriate jail reentry initiative, essential facts and data to engage stakeholders, sample legislation, profiles of elected officials who have championed jail reentry, and a guide to additional resources. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute Justice Policy Center, 2011. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: accessed February 14, 2011 at: http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/412287-Elected-Officials-Reentry-Toolkit.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/412287-Elected-Officials-Reentry-Toolkit.pdf Shelf Number: 120762 Keywords: Jails Prisoner Reentry

Author: Bobbitt, Mike Title: Safe Return: Working Toward Preventing Domestic Violence When Men Return from Prison Summary: Strong family connections have been found to improve reentry outcomes, but they can be difficult to achieve. People returning from prison often face shifts in power dynamics with partners, changes in family structure, or unrealistic or unfulfilled expectations. In many cases, conflicting expectations and high levels of mistrust and frustration can contribute to tension and violence with intimate partners. The Safe Return Initiative focuses on strengthening domestic violence services for African American women and their children when they are facing the return of an intimate partner from prison. It does this by building culturally specific technical capacity within and cooperation among justice institutions and community-based and faith-based organizations. Its goals are to keep women and their children safe and improve the odds of successful reentry by offering peer-based learning, training, information sharing, and on-site assistance designed to help criminal justice and community-based organizations better serve African Americans dealing with prisoner reentry. Details: New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2006. 19p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 12, 2011 at: http://www.vera.org/download?file=3031/SRIRoundtable_Final.pdf Year: 2006 Country: United States URL: http://www.vera.org/download?file=3031/SRIRoundtable_Final.pdf Shelf Number: 121322 Keywords: African American Women Battered Women Domestic Violence Family Violence Intimate Partner Violence Prisoner Reentry

Author: Alexander, Elizabeth Title: Michigan Breaks the Political Logjam: A New Model for Reducing Prison Populations Summary: The United States has adopted a set of criminal justice policies that has produced a tidal wave of imprisonment in this country. Between 1970 and 2005, the number of men, women, and children locked up in this country has grown by an historically unprecedented 700%. As a result, the United States locks up almost a quarter of the prisoners in the entire world. In fact, if all our prisoners were confined in one city, that city would be the fourth largest in the country. This tidal wave of mass incarceration has a devastating effect on those communities, mostly poor and minority, whose residents so disproportionately end up in our prisons. Of course, it is critical to prevent crime, but we need to ask if mass incarceration is really necessary to protect our public safety. Michigan’s experience offers a persuasive answer to that question. Between March 2007 and November 2009, Michigan did something remarkable. It reduced its prison population by roughly 8% during an era in which our incarcerated population continues its unprecedented growth nationally. Perhaps equally remarkable, Michigan accomplished this feat of “breaking the political logjam,” as the Deputy Director of the Department of Corrections phrased it, without provoking a backlash that public officials have been insufficiently “tough on crime.” Because these changed policies will also result in increased public safety, Michigan for the first time provides a possible model for other states seeking a smarter and more affordable criminal justice policy. This report examines the measures that Michigan took to bring about that turn-around. Most significantly, these changes did not require the legislature to change the statutory penalties for criminal offenses. Michigan’s successful reforms primarily involve the parole process, based on research that has identified practices and techniques that increase the accuracy of predicting which offenders can be safely released. The changes involve, however, far more than simply encouraging the parole board to increase its rate of approval of discretionary parole. The new policies are designed to provide offenders with individualized programing in prison, and re-entry services upon release, that are most likely to assure success on parole, based on evidence of what works to reduce crime and save money. Because Michigan’s reforms are designed to fit into the specific structure of its system, they cannot simply be replicated in states lacking discretionary parole. The Michigan reforms are nonetheless important, because the nation’s current level of incarceration is morally wrong and bad public policy, and because we can no longer afford to incarcerate 2.3 million people. Our nation’s criminal justice policy requires fundamental change, and Michigan provides one example of how that change can work. Details: New York: American Civil Liberties Union, 2009. 19p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 28, 2011 at: http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/2009-12-18-MichiganReport.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/2009-12-18-MichiganReport.pdf Shelf Number: 121567 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Costs of Criminal Justice Incarceration (Michigan) Parole Prisoner Reentry Prisons Risk Assessment

Author: Hiller, Matthew L. Title: Kentucky Reentry Courts: Evaluation of the Pilot Programs Summary: As record numbers of offenders return from prison to the community each year, many policy makers and stakeholders are beginning to realize that “they all come back.” Not only do they come back, but many of them also return to the community having had little or no help for their drug and psychological problems while they were behind bars, and they are unlikely to get treatment services after they return to the community. Without treatment many of these individuals likely will return to prison. Reentry Courts represents an important step toward developing innovative programming for drug-involved offenders. In Kentucky, the Reentry Court model program that was developed combined 6-months of in-prison treatment with at least 1 year of treatment in an established Drug Court upon return to the community. A growing body of literature strongly suggests that these programs are effective independently, and that combining them might increase the effectiveness of each. Initial findings concerning the during-program performance of 6 clients admitted to the Kentucky Reentry Court pilot program were encouraging. As of November 21, 2001, 5 of the 6 clients were still active in treatment (1 had absconded). These individuals showed high levels of behavioral compliance with treatment expectations. Several were promoted to either phase 2 or phase 3 of the Drug Court, none had tested positive for and illicit drug on urine tests, none had received a new criminal charge, and most were employed; whereas, the majority were unemployed prior to entering Drug Court. Nevertheless, the Kentucky Reentry Court program was discontinued due to funding concerns, namely federal funding was not readily available to continue these efforts. For program like this to impact a large number of lives, federal funds need to be made available to expand the capacity of both corrections-based programming and Drug Courts. By doing so, it might be possible to begin to slow the revolving door that many drug-involved offenders to repeatedly recycle through the courts and corrections. In addition, to examining the preliminary outcomes of those who were admitted to the Kentucky Reentry Court program model, a substudy also was conducted for developing a Treatment Screening Questionnaire. This questionnaire was designed to facilitate criminal justice decision making regarding referrals to programs like Reentry Courts. The screener emphasized a number of offender attributes (like drug use severity, mental health history, motivation for treatment, criminal history, and treatment history), highlighted by Peters and Peyton (1998) as important characteristics for Drug Courts to consider when making decisions for placing individuals in rehabilitative programming. A standardized set of instruments were included in the Treatment Screening Questionnaire, including the Simple Screening Instrument, Texas Christian University Drug Screen II, Salient Factor Score, and the Desire for Help Scale from the Texas Christian University Treatment Motivation Assessment. Initial finding from pilot data collected from 39 residents of a corrections-based therapeutic community (a program that was used by some of the Reentry Court clients in this evaluation) were encouraging. Overall, residents were willing to provide detailed information on their drug use and drug use problems, mental health problems, criminal history, and treatment motivation. Their responses on the questionnaire were internally consistent, indicating high levels of reliability. Self-reported information also demonstrated a high level of agreement with information abstracted from official records, suggesting good validity. Therefore, it appears that the Treatment Screening Questionnaire may be a useful tool for helping correctional and Drug Court managers to determine who might warrant further assessment and entry into a treatment program. In conclusion, the Kentucky Reentry Court Pilot program was grounded in the literature that shows residential treatment and Drug Courts are effective for reducing recidivism and relapse among drug-involved offenders. Initial findings from analysis of during-program performance indicators showed that most of the clients admitted to the Reentry Court program were doing well in it. Therefore, additional federal monies should be made available to more thoroughly test innovative programs for helping offenders reenter and reintegrate into the community, like the one described in the current report. Details: Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky, Center on Drug and Alcohol Research, 2002. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 18, 2011 at: http://courts.ky.gov/NR/rdonlyres/D5F5A4FD-DA42-4E38-B204-B15593E2EA99/)/KentuckyReentryCourtEvaluationofthePilotProgramsJuly2002.pdf Year: 2002 Country: United States URL: http://courts.ky.gov/NR/rdonlyres/D5F5A4FD-DA42-4E38-B204-B15593E2EA99/)/KentuckyReentryCourtEvaluationofthePilotProgramsJuly2002.pdf Shelf Number: 122097 Keywords: Drug Courts (Kentucky) Drug Offender Treatment Drug Offenders Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Rehabilitation

Author: Janetta, Jesse Title: Promoting Partnerships between Police and Community Supervision Agencies: How Coordination Can Reduce Crime and Improve Public Safety Summary: The past two decades have witnessed a period of revitalization for the field of law enforcement, marked by the emergence of a new paradigm of policing that embraces data-driven decision-making, emphasizes partnerships with the community, and underscores the belief that policing can be effective in making neighborhoods safer. During the same period, community supervision agencies have experienced a parallel shift in focus and philosophy, suggesting the potential for such agencies to enhance their role in improving public safety. The reenergizing of community supervision could not come at a more opportune time because it is needed to meet the challenges of the tremendous volume of people sentenced to probation or returning from prison. At any given time, 4.2 million adults are on probation supervision in the United States. Approximately 735,000 prisoners are released from state and federal prisons annually, and more than 500,000 are released to parole supervision. Adjudicated juveniles place an additional strain on community supervision agencies because approximately 42 percent of all petitioned cases result in an order of probation supervision. Moreover, 47,000 individuals (39,100 probationers and 7,900 parolees) were under community supervision in tribal areas in 2008, equaling a 7.9 percent increase from 2007. The potential impact that these supervisees have on public safety is undeniable: over two-thirds of released adult prisoners are arrested for a new crime within three years of release. While supervised populations may pose significant challenges for police and community supervision agencies, a partnership between the two can help them improve public safety. A community policing orientation, with a focus on building partnerships and engaging in problem-solving efforts to address crime, social disorder, and the fear of crime proactively, provides a strong foundation for collaboration between police and community supervision agencies. The two are allies and partners in the work of reintegrating parolees into their communities and managing probationers so that they refrain from criminal activity. Each agency can bring its skills, competencies, resources, and knowledge to a partnership. Police understand crime prevention and neighborhood dynamics; this knowledge can be valuable to community supervision agencies as they shift their focus toward preventing supervisees from committing a violation of their probation or parole conditions (as opposed to simply responding to violations once they occur). In turn, community supervision agencies know their supervisees, including the risks they present, potential triggers to reoffending, and interventions necessary to keep them in compliance. Building on the distinct strengths of both police and community supervision agencies, such partnerships can aid in the prevention of crime and enhance public safety. This guidebook is intended for all levels of police and community supervision personnel, as agency executives, supervisors, and line officers all have an opportunity to contribute to and benefit from partnering. The first section of this guidebook discusses why police and community supervision agencies should be interested in developing partnerships and what each partner can contribute to them. The second section discusses the key elements of partnership, specifically intelligence and information sharing, case planning and supporting behavior change, problem-solving approaches, targeted interventions for special populations, and focused deterrence efforts. Throughout the guidebook, examples of partnerships in the field are provided to offer tangible illustrations of how police/community supervision collaboration can be structured. While many of these examples focus on urban areas, the principles discussed throughout this guidebook are equally relevant for police and supervision agencies in rural areas where large agency boundaries can pose significant challenges for supervising probationers and parolees. These challenges only increase the need for interagency coordination and partnerships. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2011. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 19, 2011 at: http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/412362-promoting-partnerships-police-community-supervision-agencies.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/uploadedpdf/412362-promoting-partnerships-police-community-supervision-agencies.pdf Shelf Number: 122113 Keywords: Collaboration Community Corrections (U.S.) Community-Oriented Policing Law Enforcement Offender Supervision Parolees Prisoner Reentry Probationers Public Safety

Author: Goldkamp, John S. Title: Parole and Public Safety in Pennsylvania: A Report to Governor Edward G. Rendell Summary: This report describes the results of a review of the public safety implications of the correctional and parole processing of offenders returning to the community that was requested by Governor Edward G. Rendell. The Governor initiated the review on September 28, 2008, in reaction to violence by persons under parole or correctional pre-release supervision that resulted in killings of police officers in Philadelphia. The purpose of the review was to identify current policies or practices that could be improved in the processing and handling of offenders returning to Pennsylvania communities after incarceration in state corrections facilities with the goal of reducing the chances that such incidents could occur again. At the same time the Governor requested this review, he also sought a temporary moratorium on all parole releases. The Parole Board then held a special executive meeting and supported the Governor‘s call for such a moratorium pending recommendations from the review. The moratorium, which became the backdrop against which this inquiry was conducted, subsequently was lifted in stages until full parole processing was restored in the early spring of 2009. The problems facing corrections and parole in Pennsylvania are not unique but are shared by many other states with large populations of offenders under correctional supervision, most of whom eventually return to the community. In general, because of the policies fostering the incarceration of large numbers of offenders during the 1970‘s, 80‘s and 90‘s, large numbers of offenders are returning to communities across the nation, many of whom may be unprepared for life outside of incarceration. For example, California has recently been confronted with court-ordered release of large numbers of inmates before expiration of their sentences in order to address serious overcrowding in its correctional institutions, posing major challenges for its parole system. The Pennsylvania Senate Judiciary Committee conducted hearings about Pennsylvania‘s overcrowded institutions (housing 51,000 inmates in institutions with a capacity designed for roughly 44,000 persons) as recently as November 16, 2009. This has prompted a great deal of thinking and innovation focusing on ― prisoner reentry — aimed at developing ways in which successful and crime-free return to the community can be promoted by addressing a variety of needs for support services as well as by effective supervisory measures. At the same time, this development has forced reexamination of parole and other versions of supervised release nationwide to develop the capacity to deal with issues related to the return of released offenders most requiring attention. As the recent dramatic economic recession has exacerbated these and related challenges facing corrections and parole systems, the large volume of returning prisoners has highlighted the critical need for effective public safety and support strategies that will best facilitate crime-free transitions from prison to community. In short, in this time of strained resources for basic government functions, and sparked by the recent killings of police officers by persons under correctional pre-release and parole supervision, Pennsylvania, like other states, is faced with a growing need for enhanced post-incarceration transition and supervision systems. Though now taking on added importance and urgency, these challenges relating to successful prisoner reentry and public safety are longstanding and have been at the heart of correctional and parole strategies in Pennsylvania and other states for decades. The recommendations we present as a result of this inquiry are made with an awareness that violent crime among parolees falls within the larger category of violent crime generally — and that the factors contributing to crime are complex and often outside of the power of corrections and parole to affect alone. We have tried to limit the report‘s focus to formulating practical suggestions for system improvements that could help minimize threats to public safety posed by potentially violent offenders who reenter the community on parole. The scope of this inquiry is limited to the segment of the justice process that begins with admission of a convicted and sentenced offender to the custody of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections and ends with termination of parole after completion of the term of incarceration. The primary focus is on returning offenders who are subject to supervision, monitoring and transitional services in the community. The focus of this inquiry‘s recommendations for improvement therefore mostly involves two key agencies of government: Corrections and Parole. The institutional relationship between corrections and parole agencies varies from state to state. In Pennsylvania both the Department of Corrections (Corrections or DOC) and the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole (Parole or PBPP) are executive branch agencies, though the PBPP is independent of Corrections, with authority by law to determine release of parole-eligible offenders from state institutions and to set conditions of that release. We would like to point out that this inquiry did not consider a particularly significant category of higher risk returning offenders — those released without parole supervision after completion of maximum sentences (unconditional or ―maximum releases). These offenders returning from prison without constraint form roughly one-fourth of all those gaining release from prison and represent an important area for policy review and crime prevention approaches. We further note that this review also did not focus on a variety of issues that are closely related to those addressed, but which do not center directly on new crimes among paroled offenders. For example, technical infractions not involving new crimes are not covered in this report. Although concern about increased potential for, or unproved involvement in criminal behavior may prompt the filing and handling of violation actions by parole agents and board members, this inquiry focused on arrests of paroled offenders for new criminal charges rather than charges of parolee misconduct that resulted solely in technical violations being lodged. Details: Philadelphia: Temple University, Department of Criminal Justice, 2010. 106p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 29, 2011 at: http://www.temple.edu/cj/news/documents/GOLDKAMPPAROLEREPORTFINAL2010.PDF Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.temple.edu/cj/news/documents/GOLDKAMPPAROLEREPORTFINAL2010.PDF Shelf Number: 122184 Keywords: Parole (Pennsylvania) Parolees Prisoner Reentry

Author: Gojkovic, Dina Title: Offender Engagement with Third Sector Organisations: A National Prison-Based Survey Summary: This paper is the second in a series that investigates the involvement of the third sector in the resettlement of prisoners. Working paper 57 found that nearly 20,000 third sector organisations reported engagement in work with offenders through seven resettlement pathways. The current paper scopes prisoners’ experiences of these organisations by presenting key findings of an all-prisoner short survey distributed in eight prisons nationally. The findings indicate that prisons engage with an average of 20 organisations, but respondents are aware of an average of only four organisations and report engaging with no more than one. There is an apparent mismatch between the stated involvement of TSO in work with offenders in prisons and prisoners’ awareness and use of their services. The main policy and practice implications of these findings are discussed, including one proposed solution to introduce more systematically third sector co-ordinators in prisons, who could improve marketing as well as access to these services. Details: Birmingham, UK: Third Sector Research Centre, University of Birmingham, 2011. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper 61: Accessed August 2, 2011 at: http://www.tsrc.ac.uk/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=unbXHcQkUCs= Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.tsrc.ac.uk/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=unbXHcQkUCs= Shelf Number: 122249 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Prisoners (U.K.)

Author: Center for Employment Opportunities Title: The Power of Work: The Center for Employment Opportunities Comprehensive Prisoner Reentry Program Summary: States and localities across the United States are feeling the after-effects of a 25-year incarceration binge. In a period of just 15 years, from 1980 to 1995, the number of people incarcerated in federal and state prisons and local jails more than tripled, from about 500,000 to more than 1.5 million. Today, more than 2 million people are behind bars nationwide. Since almost all prisoners are eventually released, an incarceration boom necessarily translates into a reentry boom. In fact, more than 600,000 people are released from prison each year. Unfortunately, most end up back in the criminal justice system before long. With state and local budgets strained by the high cost of incarceration, breaking the cycle of recidivism is one promising way to shrink the prison population — as well as to increase public safety and to improve the well-being of former prisoners, their families, and their communities. Ex-prisoners face a daunting set of obstacles to reentry, but securing employment may be the biggest challenge of all. The unemployment rate of formerly incarcerated people one year after release may be as high as 60 percent, and there is an increasing reluctance among employers to hire people with criminal histories. Further, studies show that inmates reentering communities are most vulnerable to failure in the early stages after release from jail or prison. Since the late 1970s, New York City’s Center for Employment Opportunities (CEO) has addressed the relationship between work and crime. Through a highly structured program of pre-employment training, immediate short-term transitional employment, and full-time job placement services, CEO helps close to 2,000 men and women each year to take the crucial first steps toward staying out of prison and returning to their families and communities. Details: New York: Center for Employment Opportunities, 2006. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 3, 2011 at: http://www.mdrc.org/publications/426/full.pdf Year: 2006 Country: United States URL: http://www.mdrc.org/publications/426/full.pdf Shelf Number: 122297 Keywords: Ex-Offenders, Employment Prisoner Reentry

Author: Brown, Russell R., III Title: Expungement and Collateral Sanctions. The Other Side of Justice: A Look at Rehabilitated and Otherwise Harmless Persons And The Long Term Effect Of Having a Criminal Record Summary: Two strikes and you’re out! In Ohio, because expungements are reserved for first time criminal offenders only, one may be treated as a career criminal after the second conviction of a misdemeanor and/or felony offense. In many states one may be treated as such even after his or her first criminal offense where expungement is not available at all. Because there are no restrictions on the use of a person’s conviction status, the state of Ohio and its employers may exclude a person from employment and other opportunities based solely upon their conviction status, whether one is truly a career criminal or not. Within this loose standard, the author explores specific research on: (1) the opinions of Ohio municipal court judges on the policy and practice of expungement and (2) the rate of expungements granted for persons convicted of a first offense in the Cleveland Municipal Court Selective Intervention Program. The goal of the research is to observe both how the justice system sees and responds to rehabilitated and otherwise harmless persons with a criminal record and what effect having the criminal record has on those persons’ ability to compete for available job opportunities. This research also identifies what support there is for ending indefinite punishment placed on those rehabilitated and otherwise harmless persons who may be denied employment opportunities based solely upon their having a criminal record. The significance of this research is that it addresses the fact that years after their last conviction, rehabilitated and otherwise harmless persons with criminal records who are otherwise qualified for a job, are often treated by employers, the justice system, and society the same as if they were habitually criminal persons because of their convictions status. Details: Williamsburg, VA: Institute for Court Management, Court Executive Development Program, 2006. 134p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 9, 2011 at: http://www.ncsc.org/~/media/files/pdf/education%20and%20careers/cedp%20papers/2006/brownrussellrcedpfinal0506.ashx Year: 2006 Country: United States URL: http://www.ncsc.org/~/media/files/pdf/education%20and%20careers/cedp%20papers/2006/brownrussellrcedpfinal0506.ashx Shelf Number: 122336 Keywords: Criminal Records (Ohio) Ex-Offenders, Employment Expungement Prisoner Reentry

Author: American Bar Association, Commission on Effective Criminal Sanctions and the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia Title: Internal Exile: Collateral Consequences of Conviction in Federal Laws and Regulations Summary: This study collects and describes the collateral consequences of a criminal conviction that arise under federal statutes and regulations. A joint project of the ABA Commission on Effective Criminal Sanctions (Commission) and the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia (PDS), it is an outgrowth of both entities’ work on the effect of a criminal record on the availability of a wide range of benefits and opportunities, which in turn determines a person’s likely ability to rebuild his or her life after a criminal conviction. While the study is first and foremost a compilation, and its presentation primarily descriptive rather than analytical, we hope that it will serve as a useful tool for criminal justice practitioners (including defenders, judges, and prosecutors); for persons seeking information about the legal rights and responsibilities of people who have a conviction record; and for advocates, legislators, and policymakers in determining which collateral consequences are reasonable and appropriate responses to public safety concerns, and which are not and what can or should be done to avoid or mitigate them. Details: Chicago: American Bar Association, 2009. 246p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 11, 2011 at: http://www.pdsdc.org/Resources/Publication/Collateral%20Consequences%20of%20Conviction%20in%20Federal%20Laws%20and%20Regulations.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://www.pdsdc.org/Resources/Publication/Collateral%20Consequences%20of%20Conviction%20in%20Federal%20Laws%20and%20Regulations.pdf Shelf Number: 122368 Keywords: Ex-Offenders, Legal Rights Prisoner Reentry

Author: Holl, Douglas B. Title: Evaluation of the Prisoner Re-Entry Initiative: Final Report Summary: As part of a presidential initiative to reduce recidivism and the societal costs of reincarceration by helping inmates find work when they return to their communities, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Employment and Training Administration (ETA) joined the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and other Federal partners in 2005 to create a demonstration program: the Prisoner Re-Entry Initiative (PRI). The initiative seeks to strengthen urban communities affected by large volumes of returning prisoners through employment-centered projects that incorporate job training, housing referrals, mentoring, and other comprehensive transitional services. Although it is designed to offer ex-offenders an array of services to meet their diverse needs, this initiative is based on the core premise that helping ex-offenders find and maintain stable and legal employment will reduce recidivism. The PRI draws upon the strengths and skills of faith-based and community organizations (FBCOs) to provide re-entry assistance to returning ex-offenders. FBCOs are respected in their communities, have experience in providing social services to some of the hardest-to-serve populations, have access to sizable networks of volunteers, and provide enthusiastic support to many of their undertakings (Soukamneuth 2006). In June 2005, DOL selected Coffey Consulting, LLC (Coffey) and its subcontractor Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. (MPR) and consultants, Johns Hopkins University and Douglas W. Young, to evaluate the demonstration program. In November 2005, DOL announced grant awards averaging approximately $660,000 in year one funding to 30 FBCOs to initiate PRI services. The 30 projects are located in urban areas in 20 states around the country. The organizations chosen as grantees were expected to develop relationships with corrections agencies, the publicly-funded workforce investment system, other community organizations, and employers in order to help their projects meet the program goals. In September 2006, DOJ announced grant awards to Departments of Corrections (DOCs) located in the 20 states with PRI projects to provide pre-release services for inmates who, upon release, would be referred to DOL PRI sites for post-release assistance. Although not a direct subject of this evaluation, the activities conducted under these grants support the objectives of the re-entry initiative and might benefit some of the individuals who enroll in PRI. The objective of this evaluation is to assess the extent to which the community agencies receiving DOL PRI grant awards successfully developed employment-centered approaches for ex-offenders that focused on stable jobs and housing in their neighborhoods and communities. This report is the culmination of a three-year effort to evaluate the first two years of PRI project operations. Ultimately, DOL wanted to know whether employment-centered programs could be developed to help ex-offenders find work, keep their jobs, and avoid recidivism. Details: Bethesda, MD: Coffey Consulting, 2009. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 11, 2011 at: http://www.doleta.gov/RExO/PDF/PRI_Final_Report_011309.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://www.doleta.gov/RExO/PDF/PRI_Final_Report_011309.pdf Shelf Number: 122372 Keywords: Employment, Ex-Offenders Ex-Offenders, Job Training Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Bellotti, Jeanne Title: Examining a New Model for Prisoner Re-Entry Services: The Evaluation Of Beneficiary Choice Summary: In July 2007, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), Employment and Training Administration created the Beneficiary Choice Program, a demonstration to help ex-offenders successfully enter and remain in the workforce and stay free of crime. DOL awarded five grantees a total of $10 million through two rounds of grants to serve approximately 450 participants each. To be eligible to receive services, ex-offenders had to be between the ages of 18 and 29, within 60 days after release of incarceration, and convicted of a federal or state crime. DOL contracted with Mathematica Policy Research to evaluate how the program unfolded over time. This report presents the findings of this evaluation. The evaluation was designed to describe the implementation of the program, the short-term outcomes of participants, and the costs of providing services. It addresses six research questions: (1) How do grantees plan for, implement, and operate the program? (2) How do grantees ensure that participants have a true and independent choice of providers? (3) How does performance-based contracting influence implementation? (4) What are the characteristics of participants and what services do they receive? (5) What are the employment outcomes and recidivism rates of participants? (6) What are the costs of the program? Details: Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., 2011. 138p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 16, 2011 at: http://www.dol.gov/asp/evaluation/reports/20110316.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.dol.gov/asp/evaluation/reports/20110316.pdf Shelf Number: 122409 Keywords: Ex-Offenders, Employment Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Rehabilitation

Author: Wilson, Kate J. Title: Literature Review: Wraparound Services for Juvenile and Adult Offender Populations Summary: It has long been recognized that prison inmates reentering the community often face multiple problems across diverse life domains — not simply issues related to employment, financial stability, and secure housing — but struggles with substance abuse, mental and physical health problems, and issues related to family reunification. Because criminal justice agencies alone cannot provide for the range of services an offender is likely to need during the short- and long-term process of reentry, it is thought that coordinated, comprehensive services that break down service-agency barriers and engage community-based providers can genuinely improve individual outcomes when key elements are addressed (Haimowitz, 2004; Lawrence et al., 2002; Rossman, 2001; Taxman et al., 2000). California’s recently passed Assembly Bill 900 (AB 900), which is designed to provide 53,000 additional beds to California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s (CDCR) adult State prison and jail system, also stresses the need to provide rehabilitative services to inmates. AB 900 specifically provides for the establishment of reentry program facilities in which offenders can receive risk and needs assessments, case management services, and wraparound services that provide a continuity of support between custody and parole. The purpose of the current report is to review extant research literature on the efficacy of wraparound services as applied to the community reentry of adult offender populations. The report begins by defining wraparound services and then provides an overview of evaluations of the wraparound approach conducted in other social service areas and with populations other than adult offenders. Unfortunately, research on wraparound services for adult offenders is, at the current time, scarce to nonexistent. Nevertheless, both the theory behind wraparound services and the evaluations that have been conducted with juvenile populations provide insight into the strengths and possible benefits of such an approach. Details: Davis, CA: Center for Public Policy Research, University of California, Davis, 2008. 17p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 22, 2011 at: http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Adult_Research_Branch/Research_Documents/Wraparound_Services_UCDAVIS_Jan_2008.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Adult_Research_Branch/Research_Documents/Wraparound_Services_UCDAVIS_Jan_2008.pdf Shelf Number: 122442 Keywords: Correctional Programs Juvenile Offenders, Rehabilitation Prisoner Reentry

Author: Center for Effective Public Policy Title: A Framework for Evidence-Based Decision Making in Local Criminal Justice Systems. A Work in Progress, Third Edition. Summary: The Framework identifies the key structural elements of a system informed by evidence. It defines a vision of safer communities. It puts forward the belief that risk and harm reduction are fundamental goals of the justice system, and that these can be achieved without sacrificing offender accountability or other important justice system outcomes. It both explicates the premises and values that underlie our justice system and puts forward a proposed set of principles to guide evidence-based decision making at the local level—principles that are, themselves, evidence-based. The Framework also highlights some of the most groundbreaking of the research — evidence that clearly demonstrates that we can reduce pretrial misconduct and offender recidivism. It identifies the key stakeholders who must be actively engaged in a collaborative partnership if an evidence-based system of justice is to be achieved. It also sets out to begin to outline some of the most difficult challenges we will face as we seek to deliberately and systematically implement such an approach in local communities. Details: Silver Spring, MD: Center for Effective Public Policy, 2010. 68p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 22, 2011 at: http://www.cepp.com/documents/EBDM%20Framework.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.cepp.com/documents/EBDM%20Framework.pdf Shelf Number: 122448 Keywords: Correctional Administration (U.S.) Evidence-Based Practices Pretrial Release Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Mills, Linda Title: Inventorying and Reforming State-Created Employment Restrictions Based On Criminal Records: A Policy Brief and Guide Summary: Gainful employment is essential to any strategy to reduce recidivism, and thus to reduce crime and make communities safer. However, among the many hurdles facing people coming home from prisons and jails in successfully reintegrating into society, getting a good job is often one of the most daunting. Equally daunting, for both the person with the record and for workforce staff who might attempt to help him search for jobs, is figuring out what occupations and places of employment are possibly open to people with criminal records. States increasingly have created hiring restrictions that may turn the fact of criminal record into a bar to employment. These restrictions, imposed on both the public and private sectors, vary widely and can affect the ability of the 71 million people in the U.S. (over 30% of the adult population) whose names are in criminal history databases to secure gainful employment. Sometimes the restrictions offer the employer a measure of hiring discretion after reviewing a background check. Sometimes they give the employer the right to assess the relevance of the past crime to the job. Sometimes they provide the job seeker with an opportunity to demonstrate their rehabilitation. But often the restrictions offer little flexibility to either employers or people looking for work. Each restriction has its own nuances. Some restrictions put jobs or places of employment off-limits to anyone with a record of a criminal conviction. Some put them off-limits only for those convicted of certain crimes. Sometimes the restriction creates a lifetime ban. Sometimes the restriction is time-limited. Sometimes the time limits depend on the crime. For employers, it’s a minefield. Hiring in violation of the restrictions can lead to a loss of a business license and other harsh penalties. For job seekers with a criminal record, it can be Kafkaesque, with the impact of restrictions often both unknown and unknowable until after incurring the costs of a course of study, tests and fees and the application for a job or license is finally reviewed. The lack of reliable information about what jobs can be pursued can lead to deadend efforts and frustrations that impede the self-confidence that is so important to job hunting success. It can also waste precious time during the weeks following release from prison or jail when getting a job is so critical to staying out of trouble. The confusing complexity of the restrictions is due to the fact that criminal history restrictions on employment have proliferated over many years and by many entities and in response to diverse events and shifting policy tides. Adopted by both legislatures and state agencies, typically they are spread over scores of chapters of state laws, buried in agency rules and lost in obscure agency policy memos; and sometimes they exist only on the face of a job or license application. Most states have not catalogued their restrictions. In the absence of a catalogue making restrictions accessible and transparent, employers, workforce and corrections agencies, and people with criminal records are left to their own devices to figure out what the restrictions are. If they don’t get it right, which is very difficult for any of them, myth and misinformation may prevail and the consequences can be serious and costly. Just as employers and job seekers need to know what the restrictions are, so, too, do the state and local agencies that administer the restrictions and are charged with understanding and interpreting them correctly. Some departments of corrections are developing individualized reentry plans that create post-release occupational goals and that assign training programs intended to achieve those goals. Additional training and job placement is then delegated to workforce agencies upon the prisoners’ release. If the occupations for which the training is provided are off-limits to people with criminal convictions, time and tax dollars are wasted and the people being trained can wind-up with useless credentials, leaving them unprepared to find work. If policymakers want to harmonize the restrictions that have been adopted piecemeal over so many years and develop a coherent policy thread that ties them together, they need to understand their state’s restrictions, too. Inventorying the existing restrictions is an essential first step for states interested in creating consistent and meaningful employment policies that protect public safety while also reducing recidivism by opening employment opportunity. Details: Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2008. 59p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 26, 2011 at: http://www.aecf.org/~/media/PublicationFiles/Employment%20Restrictions%20Policy%20Guide%20Sept%2008.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.aecf.org/~/media/PublicationFiles/Employment%20Restrictions%20Policy%20Guide%20Sept%2008.pdf Shelf Number: 113255 Keywords: Criminal Records Ex-Offenders, Employment (U.S.) Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: California State University, San Bernardino. Center for the Study of Correctional Education Title: Service Provision for Inmate/Parolee Families: A Review of the Literature Summary: This paper reviews research illustrating the need for working with children and families of incarcerated adults and provides a set of recommendations for best practices in addressing this population. Details: San Bernadino, CA: Center for the Study of Correctional Education, 2009. 11p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 26, 2011 at: http://coe.csusb.edu/programs/correctionalEd/documents/Service_Provis.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://coe.csusb.edu/programs/correctionalEd/documents/Service_Provis.pdf Shelf Number: 122553 Keywords: Children of Prisoners Families of Inmates Prisoner Reentry Rehabilitation

Author: Black, Kendall Title: New Beginnings: The Need for Supportive Housing for Previously Incarcerated People Summary: Persons exiting the criminal justice system contribute significantly to the growing number of homeless individuals throughout the United States. Supportive housing has proven itself the most cost effective strategy to end homelessness, but the supply of units is extremely limited. It is in the interest of city, state, and federal criminal justice systems to take the lead in providing capital and operating support to enable the creation of supportive housing for ex-offenders in partnership with non-profit organizations. Supportive housing for ex-offenders is critical at this time when homelessness is rising. The number of individuals released from prisons is 300% greater than it was twenty years ago. In order to prevent ex-offenders from further contributing to the overall homeless population, we must first understand why many re-enter communities with no housing or prospect of housing. Some of those reasons include: • Many are discharged without having received needed assistance, from the most basic, such as attaining photo identification, to the most specialized, including medical and mental health services. • Because the lengths of incarceration are longer than they were twenty years ago, persons exiting prisons have more difficulty readjusting to life outside a correctional facility. • Many are unable to cope with the new stresses and differences of life outside a correctional institution, which is often manifested in re-arrest. • Many are likely not to have participated in prison-based programs such as vocational training, education, or drug treatment, leaving them inadequately prepared to succeed on their own. • Many return to a relatively few disadvantaged urban communities where the prevalence of crime and lack of legal, living wage employment opportunities are disproportionately greater than in other areas of the U.S. In urban centers, such as New York City, between 30-50% of parolees are homeless. Many ex-offenders who always had stable housing in the past have a difficult time finding and keeping housing once released. With little to no discharge planning prior to release, many newly released prisoners tend to return to or enter the shelter system. Housing placement must be part of reentry services provided to released offenders. Without homes, ex-offenders struggle to tackle the many other issues that they face upon re-entry to the community. Persons in and exiting incarceration experience significant disadvantages: • 65% of state prison inmates have not completed high school. • Over one-third of all inmates report having some physical or mental disability. • 20-26% of all HIV/AIDS cases in the U.S. were releasees from correctional facilities; releasees with hepatitis B accounted for 12-16% of all cases in the U.S.; releasees with hepatitis C accounted for 29-32% of all cases in the U.S.; and those with tuberculosis accounted for 38% of all cases in the U.S. • 70-85% of state prisoners are in need of drug treatment, however only 13% receive it while incarcerated. As of December 31, 2002, 1,440,655 inmates were under federal or state jurisdiction in the United States. In 1999, nearly 600,000 individuals were released from state and federal prisons and returned to their communities. Of these individuals released, 67.5% were rearrested for a new crime and 51.8% were sent back to prison within 3 years after release. In New York City, nearly 75% of the inmates released from Rikers Island jail return within one year. According to the Vera Institute, approximately 350 inmates are released into New York City every day. In New York City, it is common for released prisoners to be dropped off at Queens Plaza in Queens or the Port Authority Bus Terminal in Manhattan before dawn with only a few dollars and subway fare. The immediate needs of ex-offenders, including food stamps, methadone, emergency cash, or a shelter bed therefore cannot be met. Supportive housing providers report that significant numbers of tenants are ex-offenders. Unfortunately, these numbers have not been formally tracked since the tenants came to supportive housing through the Department of Homeless Services (DHS), and historically, DHS does not keep records of the number of ex-offenders served. Nonetheless, ex-prisoners have been integrated into supportive housing and have thrived therein, along with the overwhelming majority of other supportive housing tenants. The success of supportive housing in helping ex-offenders become productive members of society demonstrates that it is an effective re-entry housing option for this population. Details: New York: Corporation for Supportive Housing and Common Ground, 2004. 63p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 31, 2011 at: http://www.commonground.org/org_info/media/press_releases/CGC_ex-offender.pdf Year: 2004 Country: United States URL: http://www.commonground.org/org_info/media/press_releases/CGC_ex-offender.pdf Shelf Number: 122577 Keywords: Ex-Offenders, Housing Parolees Prisoner Reentry

Author: Meehan, Andrew Title: Report on Pre and Post-Release Housing Services for Prisoners in NSW Summary: The purpose of this paper is to review recent literature in the area of housing for pre and post-release prisoners and to analyse the gaps in current NSW policy and practice. In doing so, it is hoped that this report will further inform community housing providers so that the housing needs of ex-prisoners are understood and considered as part of their policy and project development. The emphasis is on highlighting how affordable and appropriate housing is fundamental to prisoners’ reintegration into the community. In this way, the report contends that ex-prisoners are a high needs group for which community housing has an important role to play. This paper will draw on literature both nationally and internationally with an emphasis on that which is found in Victoria. The emphasis on Victorian policy is for two reasons. Firstly, local conditions for policy affecting prisoners in Victoria are similar to those of NSW. Secondly, housing policy in particular for pre and post-release prisoners in Victoria appears to be further developed than that of NSW and, as such, may offer a suitable model for NSW. Specifically, this paper will offer a comprehensive literature review that includes a summary of research findings on the issue of housing for pre and post-release prisoners, a review of other policy responses and a review of current NSW policy and practice relevant to the issue. Further, it will identify the shortcomings of current NSW policy and practice as part of a broad analysis of the issue. Although it is not in the scope of this paper to offer any comprehensive policy response to the issue it is hoped it will provide an overview from which to do so. Details: Sydney: Community Housing, 2002. 18p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 2, 2011 at: http://www.communityhousing.org.au/Publications/Reports_by_Fed/Full_Rpts/Research%20Reports/prisoners%20report.pdf Year: 2002 Country: Australia URL: http://www.communityhousing.org.au/Publications/Reports_by_Fed/Full_Rpts/Research%20Reports/prisoners%20report.pdf Shelf Number: 122610 Keywords: Ex-Offenders, Housing (Australia) Prisoner Reentry

Author: Larney, Sarah Title: Opioid Substitution Treatment in Prison and Post-Release: Effects on Criminal Recidivism and Mortality Summary: Heroin dependence is a chronic condition associated with significant health and social harms. The most effective treatment for heroin dependence is opioid substitution treatment (OST), in which long-acting opioid medications such as methadone or buprenorphine are prescribed with the goal of reducing heroin use and associated harms. Internationally, OST is rarely available in prisons, despite the high proportion of heroin users among prisoners. Furthermore, limited research attention has been given to examining how prison-based OST can reduce the harms of heroin dependence. This thesis reports on two systematic literature reviews and three data linkage studies on the effects of prison-based and post-release OST. The first systematic review found that there is good evidence that prison OST reduces heroin use and needle and syringe sharing among prison inmates. The second review found that the evidence relating to the effects of prison OST on post-release outcomes is inconsistent and has limitations. As such, four data linkage studies were undertaken to assess incarceration, offending and mortality outcomes for a cohort of 375 male heroin users recruited in prisons in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, in 1996-7. Data were linked for the nearly ten-year period 1 June 1997 – 31 December 2006. The first data linkage study assessed whether the baseline data for the cohort could be linked to other databases with sufficient sensitivity and specificity to obtain reliable and valid results regarding episodes of OST. Results showed that maximum sensitivity and specificity were achieved when participants’ aliases were included as identifiers during the linkage process, and that enrolment in OST during the observation period had been reliably ascertained by linkage. The second data linkage study demonstrated that exposure to OST while in prison did not in itself reduce risk of re-incarceration; rather, it was continuation of treatment as the individual returned to the community that reduced the risk of returning to prison. Among participants who remained in OST post-release, risk of re-incarceration was, on average, 80% that of participants not in OST. The third study, assessing re-offending, did not find a relationship between OST exposure and criminal convictions; however, there were indications of bias in the analysis as a result of informative censoring. The fourth data linkage study analysed mortality outcomes for the cohort. Participant mortality was six times that seen in the age-, sex- and calendar-adjusted NSW population, but was moderated while in OST and while in prison. Although mortality was elevated in the 28 days immediately after release from prison in comparison to all other time at liberty, this difference was not statistically significant; a larger sample size may have resulted in a significant finding in this regard. Although OST has been studied extensively, few studies have employed data linkage to examine long-term treatment outcomes, particularly in relation to treatment participation while in prison. The evidence presented in this thesis provides support for the provision of OST in prisons, and for programs that facilitate prisoners’ access to post-release OST. Integration of prisoner healthcare into public health systems may assist in improving continuity of OST as well as general standards of care. Future research should explore how the duration of pre-release treatment affects post-release outcomes and how OST can be combined with therapeutic approaches that address other risk factors for offending. Further follow-ups of the cohort would provide insights into the course and consequences of heroin use in Australia. Details: Sydney: National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, 2010. 192p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed September 3, 2011 at: http://www.idpc.net/sites/default/files/library/OST-in-prison-and-post-release-effects-on-criminal-recidivism-and-mortality.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Australia URL: http://www.idpc.net/sites/default/files/library/OST-in-prison-and-post-release-effects-on-criminal-recidivism-and-mortality.pdf Shelf Number: 122636 Keywords: Drug Abuse Treatment Drug Offenders Drug Treatment Programs Heroin Opioids Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Substance Abuse (Australia)

Author: Cobb, Kimberly A. Title: A Desktop Guide for Tribal Probation Personnel: The Screening and Assessment Process Summary: This guide is intended to provide tribal probation personnel with information on how the screening and assessment process can facilitate and promote offender accountability and long-term behavior change. This guidebook discusses the use of screening and assessment tools within the constructs of Risk-Need-Responsivity Model; the benefits of using screening and assessment tools; the challenges to using screening and assessment tools; and the factors to consider when choosing tools to use in your agency. Further, Appendix A of this guidebook provides tribal probation officers with an index of screening and assessment tools which were cataloged by the Reentry Policy Council. These tools are searchable by domains, or focus areas, including criminal thinking, employment & education, family relationships, financial status, housing, mental health, physical health, recidivism risk, and substance abuse. Appendix B provides screening and assessment tools for domestic violence. Details: Lexington, KY: American Probation and Parole Association, 2011. 80p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 3, 2011 at: http://www.appa-net.org/eweb/docs/APPA/pubs/DGTPP.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.appa-net.org/eweb/docs/APPA/pubs/DGTPP.pdf Shelf Number: 122638 Keywords: Indians of North America Parolees Prisoner Reentry Probation Officers (U.S.) Risk Assessment

Author: Heckbert, Doug Title: Turning Points: A Study of the Factors Related to the Successful Reintegration of Aboriginal Offenders Summary: This study examined the lives of 68 Aboriginal ex-offenders who, at one time, had been very serious offenders and who had turned their lives around to become law-abiding citizens successfully integrated into the community. A similar study (Hodgson & Heckbert, 1995) identified a number of factors associated with the successful integration of Aboriginal offenders. The present study served as a follow-up to examine these factors more thoroughly and to explore other factors associated with success. The sample, chosen from the Edmonton (Alberta) area had to meet three conditions: the participants had to be Aboriginal; they had to have served one or more sentences in a federal penitentiary; and, they had to have been out of trouble for at least two years. Twelve women and 56 men took part in the study. The participants were interviewed according to a questionnaire (Appendix A) that guided them through; their early years, getting into trouble, getting out of trouble and staying out of trouble. Each interview was tape recorded, the tapes were transcribed and the transcripts were used as the primary source of data, which is presented using basic statistical methods with excerpts from the interviews. The study found that the majority of the participants said that their childhood years were dysfunctional. Almost two-thirds (62%) described their childhood as negative and 81% described their adolescence as negative. They experienced unstable family environments and living conditions of abuse and neglect. For example, 40% said that they had lived in an orphanage or in foster care and 28% said that they had been placed in a residential school. In addition, 40% reported being abused (physically, mentally, and/or sexually). As a result of their early living conditions, many respondents resorted to crime and violence. The respondents reported committing a great number of offences and having spent large amounts of time in the correctional system. When asked what would have prevented them from getting into trouble in the first place, the two main factors were communication and family support. Gradually, however, the respondents turned their lives around. This process took many different forms and different lengths of time for each person. There were many variables that influenced their getting out of trouble, but some of the main influences were: controlling alcohol and drug use, family support, and feeling sick and tired of being in trouble. At this point in time, the participants have stayed out of conflict with the law for at least two years, but most have been crime-free for many years. There were many factors that influenced their life choices, but some of the main factors in staying out of trouble include: personal values and identity, family, staying clean and sober, self-improvement activities, and friends. For each respondent the pivotal turning point was different. For some, it was the combination of different variables. Change was often slow with many relapses, but change took place. This process of change was often personal, thus, difficult to quantify. This study also demonstrates that Aboriginal spirituality and cultural activities were a major factor in the respondents’ recovery. However, many respondents mentioned that these activities were not always respected while they were in jail. Details: Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada, 2001. 74p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 6, 2011 at: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/rsrch/reports/r112/r112_e.pdf Year: 2001 Country: Canada URL: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/rsrch/reports/r112/r112_e.pdf Shelf Number: 122649 Keywords: Aboriginals Indigenous Peoples (Canada) Offenders Rehabilitation Prisoner Reentry

Author: Rengifo, Andres F. Title: Context and Impact of Organizational Changes in State Corrections Agencies: A Study of Local Discourses and Practices in Kansas and Michigan Summary: Over the past five years, the states of Kansas and Michigan engaged in a comprehensive re-examination of their correctional systems, aiming for a better allocation of resources and more effective interventions to reintegrate offenders into the community. In Kansas, this process was largely known as the Kansas Offender Risk Reduction and Reentry Program (KOR3P); in Michigan, a similar set of reforms was developed as the Michigan Prisoner Reentry Initiative (MPRI). While research has documented the nature of such large-scale institutional reorganizations in corrections (Austin & Fabelo, 2004; Jacobson, 2005), little is known about the specific contexts in which corrections reforms are planned and executed (for exceptions see Zimring, Hawkins & Kamin, 2001; Clarkson & Morgan, 1995). In some jurisdictions, initiatives have been primarily motivated by state-wide efforts to reduce public spending. In other jurisdictions, reforms have emerged from within corrections through more substantive collaborations between corrections managers, staff, and key external partners—governors’ offices, legislatures, and agencies of technical assistance. The knowledge of "what works" in the process of planning, implementing, and executing of these system-wide reforms — as well as their challenges and pitfalls — has traditionally been limited to those directly involved in specific initiatives. From a broader perspective, it remains unclear to what extent the form and content of reform efforts are sensitive to the local social and institutional contexts in which corrections managers and staff operate. Such context may alter the structure of reforms, depending on levels of commitment and interest of key decision-makers. Local contexts can also alter the content of reforms via challenges in the implementation and execution of strategic programs. More generally, the sustainability and integrity of reforms depends on the relative availability of a wide range of internal and external resources – including leadership, technology, financial resources, and political and social support – that vary significantly across jurisdictions. This project documents the dynamics and context of organizational change within the Departments of Corrections (DOCs) of Kansas and Michigan, focusing on how these internal and external factors shaped the recent reforms. We conceptualize these two jurisdictions as laboratories of corrections policy innovation in which measures to control prison populations and enhance service delivery were implemented despite challenging institutional and social environments. As such, our study seeks to provide an empirical foundation for the development of more general propositions regarding the relationship between effective processes of organizational change within corrections and the social context in which these changes are implemented. Documenting the source, content, rationale, and context of these changes is important for disseminating policy innovations and expanding the existing framework for understanding corrections reform. The present report is divided into four chapters. Chapter 1 provides a brief history of corrections policy in Kansas and Michigan since the early 1980s. Chapter 2 examines the immediate context, and process of design and planning of the KOR3P and the MPRI in the early 2000s. Chapter 3 documents the process of implementation of these and other reforms guided by Evidence-Based Practices (EBP), including the realignment of internal processes as well as the overhauling of inter-institutional relations and community outreach. Chapter 4 then briefly examines the continuing internal and external challenges confronting KOR3P and MPRI. It discusses the impact of changing resource levels, staff resistance and fatigue, and evolving goals of other stakeholders on the sustainability of reforms. The last section of the report provides several recommendations for sustaining reform efforts in both Kansas and Michigan and other states. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Corrections, 2010. 65p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 24, 2011 at: http://static.nicic.gov/Library/025241.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://static.nicic.gov/Library/025241.pdf Shelf Number: 122898 Keywords: Correctional Administration Correctional Institutions (U.S.) Corrections Reform Prison Administration Prisoner Reentry

Author: Tran-Leung, Marie Claire Title: When Discretion Means Denial: The Use of Criminal Records to Deny Low-Income People Access to Federally Subsidized Housing in Illinois Summary: When the Secretary of U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) recently urged public housing authorities (PHAs) to use their discretion to admit applicants with past arrest and conviction records rather than simply exclude them from subsidized housing, we wondered: what happens when discretion means denial? In a report entitled “When Discretion Means Denial: The Use of Criminal Records to Deny Low-Income People Access to Federally-Subsidized Housing in Illinois,” the Shriver Center reviewed the criminal records policies of nearly all the public housing and Housing Choice Voucher programs in the state as well as over 100 properties participating in the project-based Section 8 program. Concentrating on areas where HUD give PHAs discretion to admit applicants with criminal records, the report identifies four areas where PHAs and project owners are most likely to abuse their discretion. The report also urges HUD to align its programs with its “belie[f] in the importance of second chances” by taking affirmative steps toward ending each of these abusive practices. Many PHAs and project owners fail to set reasonable limits on how far back to look when considering an applicant’s criminal history. Even though federal law requires PHAs and project owners to narrow their inquiries to criminal activity that occurred during a “reasonable time” before screening takes place, many admissions policies often give them license to look back as far as they want. These policies often: •Have no time limits and simply deny admission to applicants who have certain types of criminal history in their backgrounds. Without a specific look-back period as a guide, many applicants with criminal records do not bother applying. •Impose permanent bans on people who have been convicted of certain criminal activity. Given that the federal government has chosen to impose permanent bans in only two narrowly tailored instances, however, permanent bans in federally assisted housing should be sparsely used in only the most compelling circumstances. •Use excessively long look-back periods, which essentially function as permanent bans. In two particularly egregious cases, the written admissions policies actually allow owners look back 99 years and 200 years, sending a strong message to people with criminal records—and their families—that they are not welcome in federally subsidized housing. •Rely on minimum look-back periods rather than engage in the usual practice of setting maximum look-back periods. As a result, applicants are deprived of any notice of how long their criminal records will prevent them from accessing federally-assisted housing. PHAs often rely on arrests as sufficient proof of criminal activity, even where the charges were ultimately dismissed and the arrests never led to convictions. Federal law allows PHAs to deny admission to applicants who have engaged in “criminal activity.” But instead of determining whether criminal activity actually occurred, many PHAs substitute a criminal arrest for criminal activity. This administrative shortcut often deprives people of housing when no wrongdoing may have ever taken place. Moreover, its effect on reducing crime is questionable. What is certain, however, is that arrest record screening impedes the fair housing choice of racial minorities disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system and therefore highly suspect under the federal Fair Housing Act. What do these policies look like? About one out of every ten public housing programs in Illinois define “criminal activity” simply by the number of arrests on a person’s criminal record, even if no conviction resulted. The Housing Authority of Edgar County and Massac County Housing Authority, for example, go so far as to deny public housing applicants for a single arrest within the past decade. More common are PHAs that consider arrests as evidence of criminal activity. Although about half of these admissions policies add that “a conviction for drug-related or violent criminal activity will be given more weight than an arrest for such activity,” the authority to deny admission on the basis of mere arrests remains. As a result, these PHAs are susceptible to violating their duty not to discrimination and their duty to affirmatively further fair housing under the Fair Housing Act. Some PHAs and project owners use categories of criminal activity so vague that neither applicants nor administrators fully understand how to apply these standards. Admissions policies usually refer to the three types of criminal activity listed in HUD regulations: drug-related criminal activity, violent criminal activity, and other criminal activity that threatens the health, safety, and right to peaceful enjoyment of other residents. Sometimes, PHAs and project owners supplement this list with vague categories of criminal activity that provide little notice to applicants of the housing provider’s actual standard, such as crimes of “moral turpitude,” an imprecise term that is not defined in the Illinois Criminal Code. Other amorphous categories include criminal activity “that indicates that the applicant may be a threat and/or negative influence on other residents” and “criminal activity that will adversely affect the reputation of the Development.” Neither standard reflects any language found in federal statutes or regulations, making them vulnerable to abusive application. Furthermore, a standard based on a building’s reputation strays from a property owner’s legitimate interest in resident safety, further increasing the potential for abuse. A number of housing providers underuse mitigating circumstances, thus depriving applicants of the opportunity to overcome their past arrest and conviction records. Although HUD regulations require PHAs to consider the time, nature, and extent of a public housing applicant’s conduct, including the seriousness of the offense, more than half of the written admissions policies in Illinois gloss over the fact that applicants could—and in some cases, have the right to—present mitigating circumstances upon being denied for criminal history. Without notice of how to challenge a denial based on a criminal record, many applicants are likely to select themselves out of the admissions process. In the project-based Section 8 program, consideration of mitigating circumstances is encouraged but not required. One out of four tenant selection plans reviewed explicitly stated that the project owner would not consider an applicant’s mitigating circumstances, thus stacking the odds of admissions against anyone with a criminal record. Together, HUD, PHAs, and project owners need to ensure that criminal records screening respects the applicant’s right to be free from unwarranted discrimination. More than simply pulling a person’s criminal history, proper screening requires thoughtful consideration and proper balancing of various factors, such as the nature and severity of the offense, the time elapsed since the commission of the offense, and its relationship to a person’s tenancy. In the quest for bright-line rules, however, policies in Illinois today instead allow PHAs and project owners to abuse the discretion given to them by HUD. For proper screening to happen, HUD must make clear that housing providers need to look beyond the criminal history or face potential consequences. To help ensure that people with criminal records are not unnecessarily barred from federally subsidized housing, we recommend that HUD, PHAs, and project owners: 1.reign in unreasonable look-back periods; 2.end the use of arrests as conclusive proof of criminal activity; 3.enact clear standards for reviewing criminal history that have a basis in federal law; and 4.ensure that applicants can overcome criminal records barriers by presenting evidence of mitigating circumstances. Only when HUD, PHAs, and project owners take these affirmative steps can discretion lead to admission, not just denial. Details: Chicago: Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law, 2011. 37p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 6, 2011 at: http://www.povertylaw.org/advocacy/housing/when-discretion-means-denial.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.povertylaw.org/advocacy/housing/when-discretion-means-denial.pdf Shelf Number: 123000 Keywords: Criminal Background Ex-Offenders, Housing (Illinois) Prisoner Reentry

Author: Draine, Jeffrey Title: Social Capital and Reentry to the Community from Prison Summary: Each year over 600,000 men and women return to the community from prison, a number that is expected to grow with legal and economic pressures to shrink the size of prison populations. This process of egress is referred to as prison reentry, or just “reentry” and it implies that these individuals are leaving prison and reentering the community. The “community” to which these individuals are returning is unclear both in terms of its spatial and social geography. For many returning individuals, the geographic location of their communities is uncertain. Some do not know the state, county, or city to which they will return in the months and weeks preceding their release. Where they will live depends on the conjoint decisions of family, friends, the returning person, and the parole board (for those leaving prison under parole supervision). These housing decisions often rest on shifting sands that set only in the days prior to release. The social geography of the “community” is also uncertain. Community, as a social concept, implies relationships with individuals, with institutions, and a whole set of family and social ties that work together. The resources connected to many of these ties stretch beyond the concept of social support. They are part of the economic fabric of a community that connects community members to jobs, housing, and health. Research shows that people leaving prison disproportionately return to at-risk communities; that is, communities characterized by high rates of unemployment, crime, drug use, and poverty (Rose & Clear, 1998). People returning to these communities find themselves entering places where resources are already strained by social problems and their social ties to these resources have been weakened by time incarcerated. Access to housing, employment, and health resources has the potential to help vulnerable people with health and behavioral health problems succeed in community living. While it is well-recognized that resources matter in terms of successful reentry, very little conceptualization has underpinned this conclusion. Researchers at the Center, using a social conceptualization process, developed a framework for understanding “community” and its role in the reentry process for people with behavioral health problems. Details: New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Behavioral Health Services & Criminal Justice Research, Rutgers University, 2009. 4p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Brief: Accessed October 7, 2011 at: http://cbhs.rutgers.edu/pdfs/Research%20Brief_Social_Capital.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://cbhs.rutgers.edu/pdfs/Research%20Brief_Social_Capital.pdf Shelf Number: 123008 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Social Capital

Author: Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law Title: Lifelines: Linking to Federal Benefits for People Exiting Corrections Summary: This three volume set offers state and local officials and corrections administrators a blueprint for linking inmates of jails and prisons who have psychiatric disabilities to federal benefits promptly upon their release back into the community. The text walks users through steps for aligning the complex rules of federal benefit programs to state and local policies in order to create a system of services and support for released inmates. A plan for action at the facility level lists steps that administrators can take within existing rules to address re-entry issues for inmates with psychiatric disabilities. Volume 1 makes the case for action. Volume 2 details what state and local governments and corrections facilities need to do to enable incarcerated individuals with mental illnesses to access essential benefits and services upon release. Volume 3 is an appendix with resource materials and links to online sources. Details: Washington, DC: Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, 2009. 110p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 21, 2011 at: http://www.bazelon.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=-_dbVoVTKis%3d&tabid=104 Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://www.bazelon.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=-_dbVoVTKis%3d&tabid=104 Shelf Number: 123075 Keywords: Mental Health Services Mentally Ill Offenders (U.S.) Prisoner Reentry

Author: Parkman, Tiffaney S. Title: The Transition to Adulthood and Prisoner Reentry: Investigating the Experiences of Young Adult Men and their Caregivers Summary: The issue of reentry has become an important topic to criminal justice scholars and to law makers due to the sheer number of incarcerated individuals being released and the rate in which they cycle back to incarceration. Despite the attention reentry issues have received recently in the areas of policy and criminal justice and recommendations offered to ameliorate problems associated with reentry, the landscape of reentry remains largely unchanged in that many prisoners are released from prison and significant numbers of them return (Austin, 2001). Approximately 700,000 inmates were released from prisons and jails to their families and communities in 2005 (Harrison & Beck, 2006). Of those inmates, roughly 1/3rd were young adults aged 24 or younger (Mears & Travis, 2004). The outcomes for young adults (age 18-24) incarcerated at such young ages put them at overwhelming risk of a life course trajectory that includes cycles of future imprisonment and poor life outcomes such as economic hardship, poor mental and physical well being and lower life expectancy (Mears & Travis, 2004; Uggen, 2000; Western, 2002) . This study examined the meanings of formerly incarcerated young adult men and their caregivers made in regard to reentry, caregivers’ ability to meet reentry needs, perceptions about reliance on family and the implications of a young adult child “returning home” within the context of release from incarcerative sentencing. This goal was achieved through conducting in-depth semi-structured interviews with formerly incarcerated men between the ages of 18 and 24 and their caregivers for a total of 18 individual interviews that reflect nine young men-caregiver dyads defined as families for this study. This qualitative study was informed using an integration of family life course perspective, symbolic interactionism and ecological theory. The theoretical amalgam provided the ability to examine the life course transitions of families impacted by incarceration, the perceptions and meanings made based upon the experience with incarceration while being imbedded within a socially stigmatized context of having a felony. The findings from this study suggest that upon reentry young adult men and their caregivers experienced ambivalence, happiness yet anxiety in moving forward after incarceration. This ambivalence was a major theme that was found not only in reunification, but in relying on family and in fostering independence. Caregivers were emotionally distressed as they juggled their feelings of wanting to help the young men with meeting the multiple demands placed on the family system with their concerns that he might return to his “old ways.” Young men were particularly distressed as they negotiated transitioning from a state of independence (prior to incarceration) to dependence as a prisoner in the criminal justice system, to depending on caregivers upon reentry. The young men in this study reported achieving financial independence from their families prior to incarceration as adolescents through illegal means which gave them adult status in their families. These “off-time” transitions before and after incarceration fueled the ambivalence and ambiguity in the young men-caregiver dyads, specifically in terms of the meanings these families made when thinking about reunification, relying on family and in fostering independence. Details: Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 2009. 188p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed October 25, 2011 at: http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-04172009-123438/unrestricted/TIFFANEYSPARKMAN.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-04172009-123438/unrestricted/TIFFANEYSPARKMAN.pdf Shelf Number: 123126 Keywords: Families of Inmates Family Process Prisoner Reentry Prisoners

Author: Northern Ireland. Criminal Justice Inspection Title: An Inspection of Prisoner Resettlement by the Northern Ireland Prisons Service Summary: The purpose of ‘resettlement’ is to help prisoners deal with problems that have contributed to their offending. These can include issues such as health, education, criminal attitudes, relationships and employment. Resettlement services are therefore an important part of helping to reduce re-offending behaviours and it is a considerable challenge for the Northern Ireland Prison Service (NIPS) to deliver them effectively. This inspection is a follow-up to the last report on the Northern Ireland Prisoner Resettlement Strategy completed in 2007. The context for resettlement has changed considerably with the commencement of the Criminal Justice (Northern Ireland) Order 2008. It requires prisoners to address their offending behaviours if they are to persuade the Parole Commissioners for Northern Ireland (PCNI) that they can be safely released. In turn the NIPS need to provide more opportunities for these prisoners to undertake offending behaviour programmes that will enable them to resettle successfully. The inspection report shows the resettlement process has benefitted from the resources that were provided to implement the Criminal Justice Order. Improvements have been indentified in relation to the appointment of additional staff, co-located offender management teams that were working well together, a better environment for some life sentence prisoners, better engagement with the voluntary and community sector and greater effort to address the resettlement needs of short-term and remand prisoners. Whilst the resettlement process had improved, better outcomes for prisoners were less obvious. This was partly a reflection of the NIPS inclination to measure inputs rather than outcomes which are the real test of whether services are being delivered successfully. In addition the successful delivery of resettlement remained hampered by working practices within the Service and its dominant security ethos. Every aspect of prisoner life contributes to the resettlement agenda and it is important that the Strategic Efficiency and Effectiveness (SEE) programme currently being developed by the Prison Service to enable reform, explicitly deals with the resettlement agenda. Our recommendations for change need to be folded into the reform agenda. Details: Belfast: Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland, 2011. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: accessed October 28, 2011 at: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/c2/c2d298bb-f13b-45ce-91e4-b040074e1383.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/c2/c2d298bb-f13b-45ce-91e4-b040074e1383.pdf Shelf Number: 123160 Keywords: Ex-Offenders, Rehabilitation Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Resettlement Prisoners (Northern Ireland) Prisoners Reintegration

Author: Shanahan, Ryan Title: Close to Home: Building on Family Support for People Leaving Jail Summary: Most research and programming about incarcerated people and their family support systems focus on prison settings. Because jail is substantially different from prison — most notably, time served there is usually shorter — it is not clear that policies and practices that work in prisons can be applied successfully in jails. This report describes the Family Justice Program’s Close to Home project, which implemented the Relational Inquiry Tool (RIT) — a series of questions originally designed for and tested in prisons to stimulate incarcerated people’s thinking about supportive family members as a resource — in three jails in Maryland and Wisconsin. The report also discusses the results from qualitative and quantitative research at the three facilities, aimed at gauging the attitudes of jail staff, incarcerated men and women, and family members toward the RIT. Details: New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2011. 18p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 1, 2011 at: http://www.vera.org/download?file=3377/Close%2520to%2520home_report_v.5.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.vera.org/download?file=3377/Close%2520to%2520home_report_v.5.pdf Shelf Number: 123190 Keywords: Families of Inmates Jail Inmates Prisoner Reentry Prisoners

Author: Meyerson, Jessica Title: Strengthening Families Impacted by Incarceration: A Review of Current Research and Practice Summary: In early 2009 the Volunteers of America announced plans to launch a new nationwide “Family Strengthening” initiative. The purpose of this initiative is to strengthen and support families affected by parental incarceration. Five pilot sites, Volunteers of America Dakotas, Volunteers of America Illinois ,Volunteers of America Indiana, Volunteers of America Northern New England, and Volunteers of America Texas have been selected to design and implement the new initiative. In February 2009, Volunteers of America asked Wilder Research to conduct a thorough literature review to identify any research-based programs or practices that could be incorporated into the new Family Strengthening model. The literature reviewed for this report includes:  Research-based analyses and scholarly articles by leaders in the reentry field (e.g., Petersilia, 2004 and Travis and Waul, 2003);  Studies commissioned by governmental agencies (e.g., U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of Labor, the U.S. Department of Justice, etc.)  Reports by leading organizations committed to the issue of reentry, child well-being, or crime reduction (e.g., Public/Private Ventures, the Urban Institute, Family Justice, National Crime Prevention Council, Annie E. Casey Foundation, the Family Corrections Network, etc.)  Well-established “best practices” and “evidence-based programs” directories and compendia (e.g., SAMHSA’s National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices, OJJDP’s Model Programs Guide, the Children Bureau’s Child Information Gateway, etc.) Unfortunately, rigorous evaluations of what works in the arenas of prisoner reentry and working with families affected by incarceration are notoriously scarce. One meta-analysis of the reentry field found that for the entire 25 year period from 1975-2000, when “hundreds of work release programs, halfway houses, job training education programs, prerelease classes, and so forth, were implemented in the U.S., the literature contains only nine credible evaluations” (Petersilia, 2004). Indeed, as far as the authors of this report could determine, no “evidence-based” program currently provides truly comprehensive, long-term supportive services to entire families affected by incarceration. However, there are several prisoner reentry programs that have successfully incorporated some elements of family support into their approach (e.g., Family Justice’s La Bodega de Familia program and the Osborne Association’s FamilyWorks program). There are also a number of positive youth development programs and child welfare approaches (such as one-on-one mentoring for high-risk youth, and family group conferencing and wraparound services for families in crisis) that appear to hold some promise for prisoners and their families. Finally, several programs have demonstrated significant success in partnering with the faith-based community to provide support to prisoners and their families. Each of these programs and approaches could serve as a partial model for organizations seeking to implement family-centered reentry programs. In addition, the existing body of research strongly supports several basic practices that could be used to guide the development and implementation of a comprehensive, long-term support program for families affected by incarceration. For example, there is significant evaluation research to support the use of cognitive behavioral therapy to address families’ social and emotional dysfunction, and there is a strong expert consensus for involving the families of prisoners in pre-release planning. To incorporate the broad and diverse range of research that speaks to families affected by incarceration, the remainder of this literature review is organized into three sections:  A brief review of the service needs of families affected by incarceration  A review of the most widely agreed upon research-based “practices” related to families affected by incarceration  An inventory of specific evidence-based programs, service models, and curricula that have been used to provide supportive services to incarcerated parents, their children, and their children’s caregivers This organizational structure is intended to offer an accessible, practice-focused overview of both specific programming options and broad practices and principles that are relevant to supporting families affected by incarceration. An extensive bibliography and resource list are included at the end of this report. Details: St. Paul, MN: Wilder Research, 2008. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 1, 2011 at: http://www.wilder.org/download.0.html?report=2180 Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.wilder.org/download.0.html?report=2180 Shelf Number: 123191 Keywords: Children of Prisoners Families of Inmates Prisoner Reentry

Author: American Bar Association. Criminal Justice Section Title: Dialogue On Strategies to Save States Money, Reform Criminal Justice & Keep the Public Safe Summary: The American Bar Association has chosen to focus on five key issues where states can implement changes that will promote public safety, reduce recidivism, and save money. These five issues cover a range of criminal justice topics, but the goal is the same: to create an effective, low-cost system that improves our current justice system. Below is a brief description of each policy. PRE-TRIAL RELEASE REFORM According to the United States Department of Justice, over 500,000 men and women sit in jail awaiting trial. Two-thirds of these people are low bail risk, meaning they have been deemed by a magistrate to pose no significant risk to themselves or the community, as well as representing a low risk of flight. Often, these inmates will sit in jail for over a year before standing trial. While these non-violent offenders are in jail, taxpayers provide them with food, clothing, healthcare, and security – last year alone the United States spent $9 billion on services for those who could not afford bail. With the development of better tools, methods, and technologies to supervise non-violent offenders, states will be able to save money on pretrial detention and reduce risk to the community. Those who pose the lowest risk can be identified, released before trial, and then appropriately monitored and supported so they do not become a risk. Under these narrow circumstances, not only do taxpayers save money, but the community is not put in danger. DECRIMINALIZATION OF MINOR OFFENSES State budgets have very limited resources. Because of these limits, police and prosecutors simply cannot bring justice to all culprits. By declassifying certain minor crimes, law enforcement and attorneys can focus on more serious offenders. A large portion of low-level cases in this country go unsolved – declassification would not only direct more resources toward the investigation of serious crimes, but it would also provide states with a steady stream of income in from applicable civil fines. EFFECTIVE REENTRY PROGRAMS Recidivists account for a significant portion of the United States’ prison populations – it is estimated that over half of former inmates are re-arrested and incarcerated within three years following release from prison. A key component to combating these high numbers is to more effectively choose those inmates who are prepared for release and to create programs that provide those released with useful counseling and vocational training. Without guidance, former inmates are often left without necessary support and job training and quickly return to a life of crime. With the costs of incarceration skyrocketing, states simply cannot afford to repeatedly house the same prisoners. At a reduced cost, states can implement programs that provide former inmates with the tools necessary to become successful, productive members of the community. INCREASED USE OF PAROLE & PROBATION Unnecessary inctiaornce irsa a tremendous expense to the taxpayer, and can do more harm than good with regards to an offender’s rehabilitation. Lengthy periods of incarceration should therefore be reserved for offenders who commit the most serious offenses and pose the greatest danger to the community. In contrast, alternatives to incarceration should be provided for those offenders who pose minimal risk to the community and appear likely to benefit from rehabilitation efforts outside a correctional institution. Recognizing that few convicted persons require lengthy incarceration and many require none, the ABA’s Criminal Justice Standards on Sentencing call for sentencing schemes that allow administrative parole boards to decide when individuals incarcerated under inadequately determinate sentences should be released. The Standards also include probation options for the courts, substantial “good time” credit for individuals sentenced to total confinement, and the assertion that violations of parole and probation for non-violent offenders should not automatically result in incarceration. COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PROGRAMS Community corrections consists of any number of sanctions served by an offender within the community where that offender either (a) committed an offense, or (b) currently resides. The objectives of community corrections include punishing an offender in the least restrictive setting consistent with public safety and the gravity of the crime; providing offenders with education, training, and treatment to enable an individual to become a fully functional member of the community upon release from supervision; and making offenders accountable to the community for criminal behavior. Community corrections envisions a wide-range of locally implemented, non-incarcerative sanctions such as probation, day-reporting centers, community service, home confinement with or without electronic monitoring, drug and alcohol treatment, means-based fines, and restitution to both the victim and the community. Details: Washington, DC: American Bar Association, 2011. 170p. Source: Interent Resource: Accessed November 1, 2011 at: http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/events/criminal_justice/dialogpacket.authcheckdam.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/events/criminal_justice/dialogpacket.authcheckdam.pdf Shelf Number: 123205 Keywords: Bail Community Corrections Costs of Criminal Justice Criminal Justice Policy (U.S.) Criminal Justice Reform Decriminalization Parole Pretrial Release Prisoner Reentry Probation

Author: Council for Court Excellence Title: Unlocking Employment Opportunity for Previously Incarcerated Persons in the District of Columbia Summary: In the District of Columbia today a criminal record is an enormous impediment to employment. Nearly half of previously incarcerated persons in the city may be jobless with little prospect of finding consistent work. Without a job, the path toward rehabilitation and economic security is far more challenging, increasing the likelihood of repeat offenses that keep individuals trapped in a revolving cycle of incarceration. This problem has implications for our city as a whole. At a time when the unemployment rate in the District’s lowest-income wards has soared as high as 25%, joblessness among the previously incarcerated is exacerbating overall employment problems and threatening the long-term economic health and security of our neighborhoods. A steady flow of individuals into our communities who are short on skills and face barriers to getting a job is likely to create unemployment challenges for years to come. The possibility of criminal behavior related to lack of opportunity could present ongoing challenges in preserving public safety. An estimated 60,000 people in the District have criminal records and about 8,000 of them return to the city each year after serving sentences in prison or jail. After just three years, some 4,000 will be back behind bars. While the lack of a job is only one factor leading to recidivism, research shows that when the previously incarcerated have stable employment they are less likely to return to crime and public safety improves. The Council for Court Excellence (CCE) surveyed 550 previously incarcerated persons in the District of Columbia to assess the employment challenges facing them upon leaving prison or jail. Among the key findings: • Forty-six percent of those surveyed said they were unemployed. • Seventy-seven percent said they received no assistance from “anyone at the facility” in helping them look for a job. • Eighty percent of respondents said they were asked “all the time” about their criminal records when looking for a job. • Just 50 percent of those who received an education or training certificate while they were incarcerated said it helped them find work after their release. • There was little or no difference in employment rates for those who earned a GED or job certificate before or after prison and those who did not earn a GED or job certificate. CCE also conducted surveys and in-depth interviews with a diverse group of nearly 20 District employers ranging in size from 15 to nearly 700 employees, and also with representatives of DC business associations. Their responses indicate that a variety of obstacles stand in the way of hiring previously incarcerated persons. Most (80%) said they do not have a policy in place for hiring previously incarcerated persons and instead rely on application forms that ask about criminal history. Although one-third of respondent employers said they had hired a previously incarcerated person in the past or would do so if the opportunity arose, more than 50% said factors such as legal liability protection, certificates of good standing or rehabilitation and industry-specific skill training would “significantly increase or influence hiring.” Details: Washington, DC: Council for Court Excellence, 2011. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 19, 2011 at: http://www.courtexcellence.org/PublicationsNew/CCE_Reentry.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.courtexcellence.org/PublicationsNew/CCE_Reentry.pdf Shelf Number: 123371 Keywords: Ex-Offenders, Employment (Washington, DC) Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Haas, Stephen M. Title: Implementation of the West Virginia Offender Reentry Initiative: An Examination of Staff Attitudes and the Application of the LSI-R Summary: Preparing prisoners for release continues to be of utmost importance to many jurisdictions in the United States. This is partly due to a sustained increase in prison populations across the country. Over the past decade, the number of persons incarcerated in U.S. prisons and jails rose from 1.6 million in 1995 to over 2.1 million persons by midyear 2005 (Harris and Beck, 2006). A consequence to this growth has been a greater number of inmates being released from correctional facilities each year. Although admissions to state correctional facilities continue to outpace releases, there has been a sustained increase in the number of prisoners released over the past several decades. Moreover, according to figures released by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), this trend has continued since 2000. In a recent BJS publication on incarceration, Harris and Beck (2006) report that 672,202 prisoners were released from state prisons in 2004, up from 604,858 in 2000. This translates into an increase of 11.1% in the number of inmates released from state prisons over this five year period. Moreover, it is estimated that roughly half of all these prisoners will be reincarcerated within three years of their release (Langan and Levin, 2002). West Virginia has contributed to the national trend in prison population growth over the past decade. In fact, WV had one of the fastest growing prison populations in the nation in recent years. According to a recent report published by the BJS, WV was ranked third in the nation with an average annual growth rate of 8.2% between 1995 and 2004 (Harrison and Beck, 2005; 2006). As a result, WV's state prison population reached 5,312 inmates at the end of 2005. Moreover, the state's prison population is forecasted to continue growing at a rate of 3.2% per a year on average, reaching 6,010 inmates in 2009. As the prison population in WV continues to grow, the need for effective reentry programming and postrelease supervision becomes even more salient. This is primarily due to the large number of serious, highrisk offenders being released into communities across the state every year. In 2005, the Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) estimated that 2,157 inmates were released from WVDOC custody, up from 1,278 in 2000. As a result, the state of WV experienced a 68.8% increase in the number of prisoners released from WVDOC custody between 2000 and 2005 (Lester and Haas, 2006). Such increases have led to a record number of offenders being released to parole supervision in the state. In a single year, the number of offenders released from WVDOC custody to parole services increased by 35.6%. Between 2004 and 2005, the number of inmates paroled in WV increased from 773 to 1,048 inmates. Thus, nearly one-half (48.6%) of the 2,157 inmates released from WVDOC custody in 2005 were released on parole (Lester and Haas, 2005). Additionally, with a recent increase in the number of parole board hearings as well as continued growth in the number of WVDOC commitments and admissions, these release trends are expected to continue for some time into the future. Against this backdrop, the WVDOC began implementing a new offender reentry program across the state in 2004. The West Virginia Offender Reentry Initiative (WVORI) provides a continuum of services to offenders as they transition from prison to the community. To provide a systematic mechanism for the delivery of transitional services, the WVDOC developed a new case management system that incorporates the use of empirically-based offender assessments as well as innovative prisoner programs and services. WVDOC's Prescriptive Case Management System (PCMS) is designed to enhance inmate readiness for release by prescribing institutional programming and transitional services based on the individual needs of offenders. WVDOC's approach to offender reentry is guided by a body of research that is generally known as the "what works" literature. This literature describes a series of evidence-based practices that have come to be known as the principles of effective correctional intervention. These principles identify various characteristics of effective treatment programs, including aspects of proper program implementation and service or treatment delivery. Moreover, this research views the assessment of offender risk and needs as the first step in identifying appropriate interventions and the development of effective treatment and supervision plans. As a result, the assessment of offender risk and needs serves as the foundation for the WVDOC's PCMS. However, the implementation of a new program is a complex endeavor — even if the new program is rooted in sound, evidence-based practices. Many barriers or impediments to implementation can come into play when an organization begins to launch a new initiative. In the implementation of any new program or approach, it is necessary to obtain agency-wide commitment. An organization must work to get staff buy-in and ensure that staff are adequately trained on the system and processes. In addition, it is critical that an agency ensure that staff can appropriately apply and implement the strategies or approaches that make up the new program (Street, 2004). Research has consistently shown that the proper implementation of programs is critical for achieving positive outcomes. For instance, those programs or interventions that depart substantially from the principles known to inform effective correctional programming are much less likely to observe reductions in recidivism (Hubbard and Latessa, 2004; Lowenkamp and Latessa, 2005; Wilson and Davis, 2006). As Rhine, Mawhorr, and Parks (2006: 348) point out, "If a program has been unable to adhere to the salient principles in a substantive meaningful way, the expectation of observing a significant decrease in reoffending is predictably diminished." Such departures include the failure to properly assess offenders using valid risk and needs assessments, the inability to maintain staff buyin or conformity to the new approach, and the inability to provide adequate training, monitoring and supervision of staff responsible for administering the program (Rhine et al., 2006). Given that staff such as case managers, counselors, and parole officers interact with prisoners on a daily basis, it is critical that they are supportive of new organizational initiatives and are adequately equipped to perform the tasks necessary for proper implementation. Research has consistently shown that staff have the capacity to influence the success or failure of any initiative undertaken by a correctional organization (Cameron and Wren, 1999; Flores, Russell, Latessa, and Travis, 2005; Cagan and Hewitt-Taylor, 2004; Moon and Swaffin-Smith, 1998). Thus, this process evaluation focuses on the impact of both staff attitudes and performance on the implementation of the WVORI. More specifically, this study examines two factors known to influence the successful implementation of programs — the attitudes of correctional staff and the reliable and valid application of offender risk and needs assessments to inform case planning and programming decisions. Details: Charleston, WV: Mountain State Criminal Justice Research Services, 2006. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: West Virginia Offender Reentry Initiative: Report II: Accessed November 23, 2011 at: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/evaluation/program-corrections/wv-implementation.pdf Year: 2006 Country: United States URL: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/evaluation/program-corrections/wv-implementation.pdf Shelf Number: 123430 Keywords: Corrections Officers Prisoner Reentry Rehabilitation Reintegration

Author: Haas, Stephen M. Title: The Use of Core Correctional Practices in Offender Reentry: The Delivery of Service Delivery and Prisoner Preparedness for Release Summary: The substantial increase in incarceration in West Virginia and across the nation over the past two decades has turned the attention of policymakers toward the consequences of releasing large numbers of prisoners back into society. As prison populations continue to rise, more and more offenders are making the transition from prison to the community every day. The U.S. prison population continues to grow at startling rates each year. According to a recent publication released by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), the number of persons incarcerated in U.S. prisons and jails reached a record high of 2,186,230 inmates by midyear 2005 (Harrison and Beck, 2006). This record number of persons in our nation’s prisons and jails has resulted in more prisoners than ever before being released from incarceration. In 2004, 672,202 sentenced inmates were released from state prisons in the U.S., resulting in an increase of 11.1% since 2000 (Harrison and Beck, 2006). WV has also experienced tremendous growth in the number of inmates confined in state correctional facilities. Between 1995 and 2005, WV had the second fastest growing prison population in the nation. As of December 2005, WV’s correctional population was over two and one-half times its size in 1993 (Lester and Haas, 2006). At the end of 2006, a record 5,312 prisoners comprised WV’s state correctional population. With the ever growing prison population, however, there is increased pressure on the part of prison administrators and parole board members to get offenders out of custody and into the community. As a consequence, this has led to a greater number of releases and has further highlighted the need to identify effective reentry strategies and services. Both parole grant rates and the number of prisoners being released from state prisons in WV have increased in recent years. Between 2004 and 2005, there was a 10.0% increase in the number of cases being granted parole, which was the largest percent increase in parole grant rates since 2000 (Lester and Haas, 2006). The growth in the prison population, coupled with the increase in parole grant rates, has resulted in many more prisoners being released into our communities. In fact, in the first half of this decade the number of prisoners released from WVDOC custody increased by 68.8%, from 1,336 inmates released in 2000 to 2,157 in 2005 (Lester and Haas, 2006). The sheer number of WV prisoners reentering society has further underscored the need for effective transitional services. Prior research has shown that upon release from prison, these ex-offenders will encounter many barriers to successful reintegration as they try to reenter society. These barriers to reentry can manifest themselves in seemingly basic or practical needs of offenders (e.g., having social security cards reissued, obtaining a driver’s license, securing social or veteran benefits, etc.) or more arduous problems associated with mental illness or substance abuse issues. Unfortunately, the extent to which offenders are successful in dealing with these known barriers to reintegration will ultimately determine whether or not they will return to the criminal justice system. As a result, the West Virginia Division of Corrections (WVDOC) developed a comprehensive offender reentry program with the anticipation that it would significantly reduce the number of barriers that offenders will have to face upon release and thereby increase their chances for successful reintegration. The West Virginia Offender Reentry Initiative (WVORI) is designed to provide a continuum of reentry services to offenders as they transition from prison to the community. Similar to other reentry programs, a key aspect of the WVORI is its focus on providing transitional services to inmates preparing for release. While offender reentry services begin as the inmate is admitted into the institution, this report centers on the community-based transition phase. During the transitional phase of the WVORI, correctional staff work closely with each other and the inmate to provide prerelease services in an effort to prepare the offender for release while identifying available community resources and programs to address the individual offender’s needs after release. Thus, a central purpose of the current study is to examine the extent to which these services are reaching a sample of prisoners nearing release. As part of a broader process evaluation, however, this report is equally interested in examining the quality of services that are being provided to inmates. While many researchers rush to examine whether reentry programs will lead to reductions in recidivism, there is also an enduring need to study whether these programs are being delivered in a manner that can be expected to work (i.e., reduce recidivism). Indeed, there is a growing body of research which illustrates that how things are done may be as important as what is done. In fact, emerging empirical evidence suggests that how correctional services are delivered can have a substantive effect on offender outcomes (Leschied, 2000). Accordingly, this report also examines how reentry services are being delivered to a sample of soon-to-be-released prisoners. Details: Charleston, WV: Mountain State Criminal Justice Research Services, 2007. 46p. Source: Internet Resource: West Virginia Offender Reentry Initiative: Report III: Accessed November 23, 2011 at: Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 123431 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Rehabilitation Reintegration

Author: Visher, Christy A. Title: The Impact of Marital and Relationship Status on Social Outcomes for Returning Prisoners Summary: A large body of empirical literature shows that marriage reduces criminal activity. However, many of these studies were done on the general population or used data that are now decades old. Little research has examined whether relationship status affects social outcomes, including crime and employment, among a contemporary cohort of ex-prisoners. Using data collected from over 650 male former prisoners returning to three large U.S. cities between 2002 and 2005, we tested the short-term impact of marital and intimate partner status on recidivism, substance use, and employment. After statistically adjusting for self-selection into marriage or into unmarried relationships, we found that former prisoners who were married or living as married had half the odds of self-reporting a new crime and/or drug use as did those in casual, unmarried relationships. Marriage’s effect on drug use was strongest for older ex-offenders (those over age 26), suggesting that committed relationships are more beneficial for those already in the process of aging out of crime. Moreover, higher quality partnerships were associated with lower odds of drug use. Former prisoners in casual, unmarried relationships experienced outcomes similar to those with no intimate partner. Overall, the findings suggest that in-prison programs that strengthen the quality of married relationships may improve recidivism and substance use outcomes after release. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2009. 9p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed on January 27, 2012 at Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 123792 Keywords: Crime and Marriage Family Relationships Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Substance Abuse

Author: Solomon, Amy L. Title: Putting Public Safety First: 13 Parole Supervision Strategies to Enhance Reentry Outcomes Summary: In 2007, the Urban Institute convened two meetings with national experts on the topic of parole supervision. The goal of the meetings was to articulate participants’ collective best thinking on parole supervision, violation, and revocation practices and to identify policies and strategies that would help policymakers and practitioners improve public safety and make the best use of taxpayer dollars. This paper, the result of those meetings and a review of the research literature, describes 13 key strategies to enhance reentry outcomes along with examples from the field. Details: Washington, DC: Justice Policy Center, The Urban Institute, 2008. 72p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed on January 28, 2012 at http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/411791_public_safety_first.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/411791_public_safety_first.pdf Shelf Number: 123851 Keywords: Offender Supervision Parole Parole Supervision Parolees Prisoner Reentry Public Safety

Author: Niven, Stephen Title: Jobs and homes - a survey of prisoners nearing release Summary: 2,011 prisoners in the last three weeks of their sentence were interviewed in November and December 2001 about their expectations concerning employment, training and housing after release. The main aim of the survey was to identify the proportion of prisoners expecting to take up employment or training soon after release. It also examined related factors such as previous employment, qualifications, housing plans and activities in prison. This Findings summarises the key results of this ‘Resettlement Survey’. Details: London: Home Office, 2002. 4p. Source: Findings 173: Internet Resource: Accessed on January 31, 2012 at Year: 2002 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 123913 Keywords: Employment Housing Prisoner Reentry Reentry (U.K.) Reintegration, Offenders

Author: Silverii, Louis Scott Title: Policy Alternatives for Reducing Recidivism in Lafourche Parish Summary: The current correctional philosophy of intense sentencing, incarceration and supervision has failed to produce successful reentry programs that reduce recidivism and calm the public’s fears of victimization. Therefore, the issue of prisoner reentry, theprocess of leaving prison and returning to society was addressed by this project. This project presented a comprehensive evaluation of the correctional system’s philosophy of prisoner reentry and its effect on recidivism. The goal of this project wasto assist Lafourche Parish governing authorities reduce the average rate of recidivismamong those prisoners sentenced to incarceration within the Lafourche ParishCorrectional System (LPCS), identified as the Lafourche Parish Detention Center,Lafourche Parish Work Release Center and the Lafourche Drug Court.The research question was formulated to focus the attention of the research and tomore directly arrive at a conclusion relative to initiatives that have a positive effect onreducing Lafourche Parish recidivism. The research project asks, “Will prisoner reentry programs reduce recidivism among inmates incarcerated in the Lafourche Parish Correctional System?” Details: Unpublished, 2006. 41p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed on January 31, 2012 at http://www.scribd.com/Silver2/d/7621805-Policy-Alternatives-for-Reducing-Recidivism-in-Lafourche-Parish Year: 2006 Country: United States URL: http://www.scribd.com/Silver2/d/7621805-Policy-Alternatives-for-Reducing-Recidivism-in-Lafourche-Parish Shelf Number: 123916 Keywords: Evaluative Studies Prisoner Reentry Public Safety Recidivism (Louisiana)

Author: MacDonald, Stephen Title: Industry Recognized Certification: A Pathway to Reentry Summary: This report indicates that industry recognized certifications are effective in reducing recidivism by providing inmates with the skills and qualifications that industries look for in their employees; by providing a pool of skilled workers for industries, particularly in high-growth occupations; and can be an effective tool for correctional systems to increase the rate of successful reentry of inmates by providing a foundation upon which a released inmate can build and demonstrate to employers that they are ready to work in their field and add value to the business. Inmates who gain a certification increase the probability of gaining employment and reducing the risk of re-offending. Information is provided on the need for skilled labor, the need for certification, incorporating certifications into a correctional facility, currently available certifications, and possible certifications that will be available in the future. Details: Centerville, UT: MTC Institute, 2010. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 10, 2012 at Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 124422 Keywords: Correctional Education Ex-Offenders, Employment Prisoner Reentry Vocational Education and Training

Author: Crookes, Lee Title: "The Long and Winding Road": Pathways to Settled Accommodation for Offenders in the North West Summary: The purpose of the qualitative research presented in this report was to examine the barriers encountered by adult offenders (over the age of 21) in accessing social housing and other settled forms of accommodation in North West England. The report is divided into two parts. Part I comprises two introductory chapters (including the current chapter) which introduce and contextualise the research. Chapter I provides a description of the research and the methodological approach. Chapter 2 reviews the theoretical background and policy context for offender accommodation. Part II presents our research findings. The literature review and findings suggested a format where the evidence on the barriers facing offenders was presented in terms of five ‘routes’ to settled accommodation. Chapters 3 to 7 therefore ‘unpack’ the accommodation pathway to focus separately on these five routes: - Keeping existing accommodation - Supported accommodation, including family support - Homelessness applications - General needs social housing - The private rented sector These five routes are not rigidly determined and individuals may switch between different routes over time. Resettlement workers may well have to work through all five to access accommodation for offender clients. Some of the routes lead to different tenure outcomes. Nevertheless, this routes-based approach provides a logical and convenient way for organising the research findings, focusing attention on particular areas of concern and, ultimately, providing a possible framework for action, the reporting and monitoring of progress and increased levels of accountability. The research also identified several broader issues that cut across the specific routes. These cross-cutting issues are described in Chapter 8. Chapter 9 summarises the research findings and presents our conclusions and recommendations. Details: Manchester, UK: Manchester Metropolitan University, 2010. 100p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 30, 2012 at: http://www.hssr.mmu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Long-and-winding-road-full-report.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.hssr.mmu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Long-and-winding-road-full-report.pdf Shelf Number: 124777 Keywords: Ex-Offenders, Homelessness Ex-Offenders, Housing (U.K.) Prison Resettlement Prisoner Reentry

Author: Kester, Kyra Title: Housing Sex Offenders in the Community; Results of a Literature Search Conducted for the Washington State Sex Offender Policy Board Summary: The primary issue in investigating housing for sex offenders returning to the community is that little research exists that demonstrates the specific effect of housing on sex offender transition. This is not to say that there is no evidence at all regarding sex offender housing, rather that it is too indiscrete (housing is one of many social support or environmental issues linked together) and there is simply too little altogether to be a compelling body of evidence. Research on sex offender housing does little to depict the availability of housing generally in a community nor to demonstrate a relationship between homelessness and sex offense recidivism. Analysis also suffers from the heterogeneity of sex offenders and the scarcity of longitudinal study. Lacking a compelling body of empirical data addressing the topic, policy makers rely on “evidence” regarding the importance of housing in sex offender transition from: • General correlations between housing and crime or housing and offender transitions. According to the Justice Policy Institute, of the ten states that spent the largest proportion of their total expenditures on housing, all ten had re‐incarceration rates lower than the national average. A study of offenders leaving an Illinois correctional institution for structured housing found a 30 percent reduction in recidivism compared to offenders not in the program. And California’s efforts to provide housing for the mentally ill observed a reduction in days of incarceration (and increase in days of full employment.) • The testimony provided by sex offenders themselves, who regularly cite a lack of housing as one of the difficulties they face on release from prison. How severe this problem appears to be relative to other problems reported by transitioning sex offenders varies, particularly among regions. This is not surprising given considerable differences in social‐political attitudes that would affect the likely reception and support of sex offenders in American communities. Economic stresses, climate, transit and housing availability will be significantly different among regions as well. • Theories such as social disintegration, which profiles environmental conditions that are conducive to crime and therefore to recidivism. When sex offenders are faced with housing limitations they may be more likely to find themselves in socially disrupted neighborhoods, heightening the risk of reoffending. How well social disintegration pertains to sex offenses, however, is not well documented. The theory began as an analysis of juvenile delinquency and remains most often applied to general lawlessness. No psychological information yet connects to the specific crimes of the sex offender. Initial studies are intriguing, and further inquiry may clarify the community characteristics that correlate with high or low sex offender recidivism. Still, the conditions of release that now exist for sex offenders in the community are such that housing dilemmas must result. Whether or not the suspect conditions prove to be critical to recidivism, sex offenders certainly do face obstacles to finding accommodation, which is a logical component of reintegration into a community. Details: Olympia, WA: Washington State University, Social & Economic Sciences Research Center-Puget Sound Division, 2009. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: accessed April 6, 2012 at: http://www.ilvoices.com/media//DIR_109112/e8cdcb74bf2b54beffff8825ffffe415.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://www.ilvoices.com/media//DIR_109112/e8cdcb74bf2b54beffff8825ffffe415.pdf Shelf Number: 124880 Keywords: Housing Prisoner Reentry Sex Offender Registration Sex Offenders

Author: Patel, Roopal Title: Criminal Justice Debt: A Toolkit for Action Summary: Criminal justice debt is a huge problem for the overwhelmingly indigent population of the United States criminal justice system. States charge a number of fees at every stage of criminal processing: fees for public defenders, jail fees, prison fees, court administrative fees, prosecution fees, probation fees, parole fees, etc. When these fees are applied without considering if a person can actually pay them or not, it can create enormous costs for the individuals ensnared in the criminal justice system. Many offenders now serve multiple sentences because they cannot afford to pay. They often face another physical sentence, or as they struggle to make payments, they may suffer a host of collateral consequences that create barriers to re-entering society and raise the specter of re-imprisonment. Criminal Justice Debt: A Toolkit for Action examines the myriad problems that criminal justice debt collection policies create for the individuals in the criminal justice system, the communities they reside in, and the states who attempt to make money off of them. The report also analyzes the impact these charges have had on the states that attempt to collect fees from people who cannot pay them. The authors propose areas that advocates can target for reform, and present action materials that advocates can use to build a successful campaign to fight for more just policies. Details: New York: Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law, 2012. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 13, 2012 at: http://brennan.3cdn.net/4c14b93f5afee89bd5_zfsm6v848.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://brennan.3cdn.net/4c14b93f5afee89bd5_zfsm6v848.pdf Shelf Number: 125612 Keywords: Criminal Justice Debt Fees Indigents (U.S.) Poverty Prisoner Reentry

Author: Estep, Ben Title: Economic Study of Integrated Family Support Programme (IFS) Summary: nef consulting (the consultancy arm of UK think thank the new economics foundation) was asked in March 2012 to assess the potential socio-economic impact of the Prison Advice and Care Trust’s Integrated Family Support (IFS) programme. This assessment focuses on the economic impact of the work carried out by the programme on behalf of prisoners and their families. Our research is based on case studies, administrative data provided by the programme and interviews with programme staff. There is a sizeable body of literature on the varied needs of prisoners and their families and a growing recognition that these needs, particularly those related to the maintenance of productive family ties, are closely associated with successful resettlement. The importance of prisoner and family support work is underscored by the rapidly growing prison population. At the time of writing, there are just under 87,000 people in prison in England and Wales, an increase of 23 per cent over the last ten years and a population that has nearly doubled over the last two decades. Whilst delivering economic savings is not the primary motivation of IFS, in a climate of both reduced social spending and increasing prison populations this is an important and under-evidenced question to consider. For purposes of this analysis, we focus on IFS work in three prisons: HMP Swansea, HMP Wandsworth, and HMP Eastwood Park, and in three different areas: visits (including help arranging and supporting visits between offenders and their families and intermediary work between offenders and families); support to families (including provision of information, emotional support, referral to services and interfacing with social services); and resettlement-focused help (including housing and employment support, and benefits and debt advice). Based on our review of the support that IFS offers and accounting for multiple scenarios, we estimate that IFS delivers potential benefits to the State of between £515,465 and £3,479,294 over a one year period. Based on an annual cost per programme site of £40,368 in London and £35,972 elsewhere, and using our middle estimate, this represents a value of £1,281,240 or return of £11.41 for every £1 invested. The predominant source of this impact is in cost savings from reductions in reoffending due to IFS work toward the encouragement and supporting of visits, and the consequent maintenance of family ties. Potential social and health care savings related to prisoner’s families have also been identified, as well as cost avoidance based on resettlement-focused planning. It is worth noting that there are a number of other probable impacts connected to IFS that are beyond the scope of this study, and the existing literature, to capture. This includes the future potential positive impacts on children and their life chances, amongst others. This assessment demonstrates that IFS provides good value for money for the taxpayer. As IFS’s work continues, we would encourage recording client outcomes systematically and longitudinally in order to evidence the socio-economic impact of the programme. The way in which the support offered contributes separately and collectively to changes for offenders and families is in need of deeper investigation. A better understanding of the way in which individual IFS sites are developing their model to create change will both contribute to the on-going development of the programme and help its wider impact. This conservative assessment has been prepared using a portfolio analysis approach informed by Social Return on Investment (SROI) principles and cost-benefit analysis. Beyond the areas of support on which we focus here, case studies and conversations with IFS staff, as well as evidence in the research literature, suggests that IFS’s work also has a material impact on the well-being of prisoners and families. Moving forward, IFS may consider adopting a full social value analysis which could help evidence and value these additional benefits. Details: London: nef (new economics foundation), 2012. 35p Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 16, 2012 at: http://www.prisonadvice.org.uk/files/nef_Pact%20IFS%20Economic%20study.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.prisonadvice.org.uk/files/nef_Pact%20IFS%20Economic%20study.pdf Shelf Number: 125593 Keywords: Cost-Benefit Analysis Families of Inmates (U.K.) Prisoner Reentry Prisoners Visitation

Author: Potter, Phoebe Margaret Title: Employment and the Desistance Process: The Effect of Employment Status and Wages on Criminal Recidivism among Young Adults Summary: Every year, thousands of ex-convicts in the United States undergo the challenging process of reentering society. Contact with the criminal justice system can disrupt critical developmental experiences for young adults, often resulting in these individuals continuing a life of crime. The purpose of this study is to determine if employment is an effective way for young adults to re-transition into society after being convicted for a crime, and therefore increases the likelihood of desistance from crime. Using data from the NLSY 1997 cohort, the effects of employment status, weekly employment hours, and income on the length of time before an individual recidivates are estimated with Cox proportional hazard models. The results suggest that employment and income both have statistically significant negative relationships with recidivism. These findings are robust even when controlling for other factors that may be spuriously related to both employment and recidivism. Details: Washington, DC: Georgetown University, 2012. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed July 24, 2012 at: http://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/553877/potterPhoebe.pdf?sequence=1 Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/553877/potterPhoebe.pdf?sequence=1 Shelf Number: 125749 Keywords: Ex-Convicts, Employment Ex-Offenders, Employment Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Morenoff, Jeffrey D. Title: Final Technincal Report: Neighborhoods, Recidivism, and Employment Among Returning Prisoners Summary: The rising number of individuals being released from prison has prompted renewed interest among researchers, policy makers, and practitioners in reintegrating former prisoners. Yet relatively little is known about the communities into which former prisoners return and how they affect the likelihood that former prisoners will secure stable employment or return to prison. This research fills an important gap in the literature on prisoner reentry by focusing on the role that community context plays in the labor market outcomes and recidivism of former prisoners. A rich set of longitudinal administrative records were assembled on individuals paroled in Michigan during 2003, including records from corrections, police, and unemployment insurance databases. This report describes the data collected and presents results indicating that neighborhood context predicted both the recidivism and labor market outcomes of former prisoners. The analysis considered the association between baseline neighborhood characteristics (first post-prison neighborhood) and cumulative exposure to neighborhood conditions during one’s time on parole. The analysis of baseline neighborhood characteristics was based on the full population of 11,064 people released on parole in Michigan in 2003, whereas the analysis of time-varying neighborhood characteristics was based on a 1/6 sample (n=1,848). Returning to a more disadvantaged baseline neighborhood was associated with higher risks of absconding and returning to prison for a technical violation, a lower risk of being arrested, and more adverse labor market outcomes, including less employment and lower wages. Cumulative exposure to disadvantaged neighborhoods was associated with lower employment and wages but not related to recidivism. Returning to a more affluent baseline neighborhood was associated with a lower risk of being arrested, absconding, and returning to prison on a technical violation, and more positive labor market outcomes, including greater employment and wages. However, cumulative exposure to affluent neighborhoods was not significantly related to any of the recidivism or labor market outcomes when the full set of controls were added to models. Returning to a more residentially stable baseline neighborhood was associated with a lower risk of absconding and returning to prison for a new conviction, but not with any labor market outcomes; nor was cumulative exposure to residentially stable neighborhoods associated with any recidivism or labor market outcomes. Returning to a baseline neighborhood with a younger age structure was negatively related to the odds of returning to prison on a technical violation, but when measured as cumulative exposure it was associated with an increased risk of being arrested, absconding, and being returned to prison for either a new commitment or technical violation. Being employed substantially reduced the risk of all recidivism outcomes, but there was no evidence that employment mediated the association between neighborhoods and recidivism. Together, these results suggest that the neighborhoods parolees experience during parole were strong predictors of recidivism and labor market outcomes, but there is not a simple answer to the question of what neighborhood characteristics constitute “risky” environments for parolees. Neighborhood socioeconomic composition was a strong predictor of labor market outcomes, as parolees residing in disadvantaged neighborhoods had difficulty securing employment and escaping poverty. For recidivism, the protective effect of living in a residentially stabile neighborhood and the risks posed by spending more time in neighborhoods with higher densities of young people were the most robust predictors. From a policy perspective, these findings suggest that parole outcomes might be improved through more careful evaluation of a parolee’s neighborhood context when approving new residences, placement of institutional housing for former prisoners in more advantaged neighborhoods, inclusion of neighborhood context in risk assessments to better target services to former prisoners in high risk neighborhoods, and place-based parole strategies involving geographically based agent caseloads. Details: Ann Arbor, MI: Population Studies Center and Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, 2011. 132p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 1, 2012 at https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236436.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236436.pdf Shelf Number: 125825 Keywords: Ex-Offenders, Employment Neighborhoods Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Reintegration, Offenders

Author: Minnesota. Department of Corrections Title: An Outcome Evaluation of the InnerChange Freedom Initiative in Minnesota Summary: This study evaluated the effectiveness of the InnerChange Freedom Initiative (InnerChange), a faith-based prisoner reentry program, by examining recidivism outcomes among 732 offenders released from Minnesota prisons between 2003 and 2009. Results from the Cox regression analyses revealed that participating in InnerChange significantly reduced reoffending (rearrest, reconviction, and new offense reincarceration), although it did not have a significant impact on reincarceration for a technical violation revocation. The findings further suggest that the beneficial recidivism outcomes for InnerChange participants may have been due, in part, to the continuum of mentoring support some offenders received in both the institution and the community. The results imply that faith-based correctional programs can reduce recidivism, but only if they apply evidence-based practices that focus on providing a behavioral intervention within a therapeutic community, addressing the criminogenic needs of participants, and delivering a continuum of care from the institution to the community. Given that InnerChange relies heavily on volunteers and program costs are privately funded, the program exacts no additional costs from the State of Minnesota. Yet, because InnerChange lowers recidivism, which includes reduced reincarceration and victimization costs, the program may be especially advantageous from a cost-benefit perspective. Details: St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Department of Corrections, 2012. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 3, 2012 at: http://www.doc.state.mn.us/publications/documents/2-12-DOC_IFI_Evaluation.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.doc.state.mn.us/publications/documents/2-12-DOC_IFI_Evaluation.pdf Shelf Number: 125859 Keywords: Cost-Benefit Analysis Faith-Based Correctional Programs Mentoring Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Rehabilitation Religion

Author: Antkowiak, Bernard Title: Process Evaluation and Outcomes Analysis: Twin Cities RISE! Performance-Based Training and Education Demonstration Project Summary: In August 2008, the Employment and Training Administration (ETA) contracted with Coffey Consulting, LLC to conduct a process and outcomes evaluation of three ETA grants to TCR! awarded between January 2007 and February 2009. The stated goals of Twin Cities Rise! (TCR!), are to maintain a market-driven, outcomes-based approach that puts the needs of employers first and places emphasis on the achievement of a “gold standard” job, which is career-focused and pays a living wage. Founded in 1994, the mission of TCR! is to provide employers with skilled workers – primarily African American men in the Twin Cities area – by training underemployed and unemployed adults for skilled jobs that pay a living wage of at least $20,000 annually with benefits. The process evaluation documented program procedures and services and identified key implementation lessons. Outcomes considered included program retention, job placement and quality. The report contains an executive summary, an overview of TCR!, a summary of grant performance and outcomes, and a discussion of findings and implications. Information for the report came from three site visits that took place between September 2009 and December 2010 and included classroom observations as well as interviews with key informants. For the analysis of participant outcomes, the research team used aggregate data from the programs funded by the original Demonstration Grant and individual records for the Continuation and Earmark Grants. Data were most complete for the Earmark Grant. Details: Bethesda, MD: Coffey Consulting, 2011. 128p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 6, 2012 at: http://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/ETAOP_2012_05.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/ETAOP_2012_05.pdf Shelf Number: 125869 Keywords: Employment Programs, Ex-Offenders Prisoner Reentry Unemployment

Author: Homeless Link Title: Better Together: Preventing Reoffending and Homelessness Summary: Homelessness and re-offending have a complex link where, for many individuals, each is both a cause and a result of the other. Among people who are homeless there is a vast over-representation of offending backgrounds. Over 75% homelessness services in England support clients who are prison leavers. One in five clients using homelessness services has links with the probation service. In turn, homelessness increases the chances of re-offending. Ex-prisoners who are homeless upon release are twice as likely to re-offend as those with stable accommodation. Offenders who are homeless upon entering prison have a much higher reconviction rate within one year of release, with 79% being reconvicted, compared to 47% who have accommodation. While the links between homelessness and offending have been well documented, less attention has been given to the role that the homelessness sector plays in preventing reoffending, or their working relationships with the criminal justice sector. Too often the homelessness sector has been viewed as synonymous only with ‘housing’ rather than for the wider role that it plays in addressing a whole range of other needs, including preventing re-offending. Our aim was to explore these issues, along two key strands:  How the homelessness sector can play a more active role in supporting clients with offending histories, and in preventing re-offending; and  Ways to build strong partnerships between the homelessness and criminal justice sectors, in order to reduce the re-offending rate of homeless clients. Details: London: Homeless Link, 2011. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 7, 2012 at: http://homeless.org.uk/criminal-justice-project Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://homeless.org.uk/criminal-justice-project Shelf Number: 125894 Keywords: - Housing Homelessness (U.K.) Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Reoffending

Author: Gormally, Brian Title: Thematic Evaluation of Funded Projects: Politically-motivated Former Prisoners and their Families Summary: This thematic evaluation focuses on the work of projects which work in the border areas with politically motivated ex-prisoners and their families. Many of these projects have already been individually evaluated in terms of the details of their work and indeed those evaluations form part of the key data drawn upon in the current report. However, the function of this report is to draw out more general themes of broader applicability in assessing the peace and reconciliation outcomes and the impacts of the projects. This review encompasses nine, separate -- indeed sometimes very different -- projects providing services and support for the ex-prisoner community of the Border Region of Ireland and beyond. The projects reviewed include seven, primarily local projects in the border area: Abhaile Aris based in Letterkenny; Expac based in Monaghan; Failte Abhaile based in Dundalk; Failte Chluain Eois based in Clones; La Nua based in Ballinamore, Co Leitrim; Tus Nua Sligeach based in Sligo; and Teach na Failte based in Strabane. In addition, the thematic review also covers the all-Ireland work of Coiste na n-Iarchimi, the central co-ordinating organisation for Republican ex-prisoner projects, as well as The Educational Trust, a project run by the Northern Ireland Association for the Care and Resettlement of Offenders that offers grants to individual ex-prisoners or their family members enabling them to take accredited educational courses throughout Ireland. Details: Belfast: Institute of Criminology and Criminal Justice School of Law Queen’s University Belfast, 2007. 77p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 7, 2012 at: http://www.seupb.eu/Libraries/Peace_Network_Meetings_and_Events/PN__Thematic_Evaluation_of_Funded_Projects_Politically_motivated_former_prisoners_and_their_families__020210.sflb.ashx Year: 2007 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.seupb.eu/Libraries/Peace_Network_Meetings_and_Events/PN__Thematic_Evaluation_of_Funded_Projects_Politically_motivated_former_prisoners_and_their_families__020210.sflb.ashx Shelf Number: 125902 Keywords: Educational Programs Ex-Offenders Ex-Prisoners (Northern Ireland) Families of Prisoners Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Rehabilitation

Author: Lowen, Matthew Title: Lifetime Lockdown: How Isolation Conditions Impact Prisoner Reentry Summary: Imagine living completely alone 23 hours a day for several months or years, then being placed in a three-person cell in an overcrowded, noisy dormitory, or worse, released directly into society with no chance to adjust. This is the reality faced by many people in Arizona state prisons. In recent years, prisoner reentry has emerged as an area of concern for social service agencies, prisoner advocates, religious congregations, neighborhoods, and advocacy organizations across the country. Much of the discourse about prisoner reentry and recidivism has focused on what are referred to as “collateral consequences”: the structural barriers erected by institutions that bar people with criminal convictions from voting, housing, employment, welfare assistance, and other factors critical to ensuring success upon release. Rarely is there discussion of the direct impact that prison conditions have on a person’s cognitive, emotional, social, and behavioral functioning and therefore, on that person’s ability to function as a member of society post-incarceration. Yet, a growing body of research clearly demonstrates the deleterious mental health impacts of incarceration in super maximum-security—or “supermax”—environments, commonly referred to as “lockdown,” the “SHU,” or “Ad-Seg.” While there is some variation, these units generally employ long-term solitary confinement—prisoners are housed alone in small cells for 23-24 hours per day with no activities with other inmates (meals, recreation, etc.), for years at a time. These conditions amount to sensory deprivation and have been widely documented to produce a set of mental health symptoms that can be extremely debilitating to prisoners, including visual and auditory hallucinations, hypersensitivity to noise and touch, paranoia, uncontrollable feelings of rage and fear, and massive distortions of time and perception. Studies have found that supermax confinement increases the risk of prisoner suicides, and this research is borne out here in Arizona. A recent investigation found that Arizona's official prison-suicide rate is 60 percent higher than the national average, and that the majority of suicides took place in supermax units.1 Combining these crippling symptoms with the extensive legal and structural barriers to successful reentry is a recipe for failure. Prisoners in supermax are deeply traumatized and essentially socially disabled. When their sentence ends, they are given little or no preparation for release, and then return to their communities where they are expected to obtain housing and employment. This report represents the first effort to directly link conditions in Arizona’s supermax prisons with the state’s high recidivism rate. Because the statistical evidence of this link is already available, the basis of this report is qualitative research conducted by an anthropologist, Dr. Brackette F. Williams. Dr. Williams interviewed newly released individuals who had spent a significant portion of their time in prison in supermax facilities. This research demonstrates the “why” and “how” of this causal relationship, illustrating the impacts of long-term solitary confinement on actual re-entry experiences. The findings are a wake-up call to corrections officials, state leaders, and social service agencies, who are often completely unaware of the prison experiences of their clients or how to assist them in this transition. The American Friends Service Committee hopes that this research will add to the growing body of evidence that the practice of long-term solitary confinement in supermax units creates more problems than it is purported to solve and should be abolished. Details: Tucson, AZ: American Friends Service Committee, Arizona Office, 2012. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 11, 2012 at: http://afsc.org/sites/afsc.civicactions.net/files/documents/AFSC-Lifetime-Lockdown-Report_0.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://afsc.org/sites/afsc.civicactions.net/files/documents/AFSC-Lifetime-Lockdown-Report_0.pdf Shelf Number: 125981 Keywords: Maximum Security Prisons Prisoner Reentry Prisoners Solitary Confinement (Arizona) Supermax Prisons

Author: Yahner, Jennifer Title: Which Components of Transitional Jobs Programs Work Best? Analysis of Programs for Former Prisoners in the Transitional Jobs Reentry Demonstration Summary: Different components of transitional jobs (TJ) programs may improve employment and recidivism outcomes among former prisoners. Using data from the Transitional Jobs Reentry Demonstration evaluation, we found that former prisoners who spent 30 workdays or more in a TJ were 14 percent more likely to obtain an unsubsidized job in the subsequent six months (45% vs. 31%). No other TJ program components (e.g., job development, case management, retention bonuses) individually affected employment or recidivism. Although non-experimental, analyses incorporated regression-based adjustments for selection bias. Future research evaluating different components of TJ programs via random assignment design is recommended. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2012. 17p. Source: Research Brief: Internet Resource: Accessed August 14, 2012 at http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412571-TJRD_Special_Report_May-2012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412571-TJRD_Special_Report_May-2012.pdf Shelf Number: 126028 Keywords: Evaluative Studies Ex-Offenders, Employment Ex-Offenders, Reintegration Prisoner Reentry

Author: Howard League for Penal Reform Title: Young, Adult and No Support: The Entitlements of Young Adults to Care in the Community Summary: Since 2002 the Howard League has provided a legal service to children in prison. In 2007 the Howard League expanded its service to provide the only dedicated legal service for young adults in prison. ‘Young adults’ are defined by the prison service as a prisoner between the ages of 18 and 20 years. This report is produced by the Howard League’s young adult legal team based on the experience and evidence from our casework. Our young adult team undertake groundbreaking work which begins to assert and clarify the rights and entitlements of this neglected and ignored group. A considerable part of our work has focused on ensuring that there is an appropriate and detailed plan for the young person when she or he returns to the community. This transition is known as ‘resettlement’ and the right plan can be critical to obtaining release from custody and a safe return to the community. This publication is intended to be a guide for any practitioners who work with vulnerable young adults. We hope that this will be a useful guide for people to understand the rights and entitlements of young adults and assist in enabling practitioners to promote access to suitable support for young adults. Details: London: Howard League for Penal Reform, 2010. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 27, 2012 at: http://www.t2a.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Howard-League-Young-Adult-and-No-support.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.t2a.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Howard-League-Young-Adult-and-No-support.pdf Shelf Number: 126121 Keywords: Homelessness Housing Prisoner Reentry Resettlement Young Adult Offenders (U.K.)

Author: Feldbaum, Mindy Title: The Greening of Corrections: Creating a Sustainable System Summary: Although the primary goal of corrections is safety for the community and for those housed and working within the facilities, increasingly, sustainability goals and strategies are being integrated into policies and plans within the corrections community. Accordingly, more and more leaders within corrections are evaluating the long-term impacts of its buildings, operations, and programs on the environment, community, and economy, and are making decisions on management, resource allocation, and programming based on green principles and practices. The greening of corrections provides an extraordinary opportunity to create more efficient, resilient, and sustainable prisons and jails, with benefits that include reducing the financial and human capital costs of prisons through reduced energy and resource consumption and engaging inmates in hands-on work experiences and education and training to prepare them for jobs in the emerging green economy. The paper focuses on the greening of correctional facilities and their operations; the education and training of inmates to prepare for reentry, including environmental literacy; the current landscape of the greening of correctional industries through processes, products and partnerships; and the greening of reentry programs. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Corrections, 2012. 75p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 27, 2012 at: http://static.nicic.gov/Library/024914.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://static.nicic.gov/Library/024914.pdf Shelf Number: 126122 Keywords: Correctional Facilities Correctional Programs Employment Programs Prisoner Reentry Prisons

Author: John Howard Society of Ontario Title: Effective, Just and Humane: A Case for Client-Centered Collaboration: Case Study of John Howard Society of Toronto’s Housing Program Summary: Access to safe and affordable housing is a cornerstone of healthy communities. Failure to provide this necessary foundation for individuals who are vulnerable to homelessness results in a population that faces enormous health disparities, not to mention massive costs to health care and social service systems. Health disparities or inequities are differences in health outcomes that are avoidable, unfair and systematically related to social inequality and disadvantage. The literature is quite clear in this regard: homelessness is inexorably linked with significantly poorer health outcomes, including, but certainly not limited to: being at a higher risk for communicable diseases, acute and often life-threatening conditions, victimization and extremely high mortality rates. Social determinants of health such as poverty, lack of social supports, unemployment and lack of stable housing all increase an individual’s likelihood of becoming homeless. In fact, the underlying determinants of homelessness tend to be the very same factors that predict involvement in the criminal justice system. Indeed, there is a significant bidirectional relationship between homelessness and involvement in the criminal justice system, whereby precariously housed or homeless individuals are more likely to come into conflict with the law and be incarcerated, and once incarcerated, risk of homelessness becomes greater upon eventual release. Not surprisingly then, simply providing housing will not eliminate the existence of homelessness, given all of its associated complexities. It is also necessary to provide resources that address the underlying causes of homelessness, which are manifold (Tremblay, 2009). It is evident from the current literature that the challenges of homelessness require a comprehensive and multi-sectoral solution, which not only addresses the issue of lack of safe and affordable housing, but also targets other intersecting determinants of health inequities experienced by the homeless population. Despite this need, there generally exists a lack of, or inadequate mechanisms for, effective communication between community organizations, government agencies, and other key stakeholders in coordinating the multiple services often required by individuals who are homeless. This need is especially salient for homeless populations who have been recently released from correctional institutions, or who have had previous contact with the criminal justice system, as this population tends to have added challenges that cross-cut any one service sector. Details: Toronto: John Howard Society of Ontario, 2012. 47p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 18, 2012 at: http://www.johnhoward.on.ca/pdfs/FINAL%20Community%20Report%20May%202012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Canada URL: http://www.johnhoward.on.ca/pdfs/FINAL%20Community%20Report%20May%202012.pdf Shelf Number: 126369 Keywords: Crime Prevention Ex-Offenders Homeless Persons Homelessness Prisoner Reentry Supportive Housing (Toronto, Canada)

Author: Luby, Jane Title: Finding and Sustaining a Home in the Private Rented Sector: The Essentials. A Guide for Frontline Staff Working with Homeless Offenders Summary: The aim of this guide is to provide frontline Prison Service and Probation Trust staff with the knowledge and tools to help people with a history of offending find, and keep, a home in the private rented sector (PRS). It provides a combination of detailed guidance and practical tools, as well as case study examples that can help you find suitable and sustainable homes in the PRS for former offenders. It will help you to better understand: • What is different about the PRS compared to other types of accommodation; • The pros and cons of the PRS compared to other types of accommodation; • The barriers to accessing the PRS and how you can help offenders overcome them; • What you need to do to give offenders the best possible chances of getting landlords to take and keep them as tenants; • How you need to tailor your support for people with specific needs, such as women, MAPPA offenders, people with no recourse to public funds, and those with substance misuse problems or mental health needs; • How to create partnerships with others and/or develop your service where there are gaps in what you currently deliver; and • How to access other national and local resources. Details: London: Crisis, 2012. 72p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 21, 2012 at: http://www.crisis.org.uk/data/files/publications/SupportingOffendersInThePRS.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.crisis.org.uk/data/files/publications/SupportingOffendersInThePRS.pdf Shelf Number: 126395 Keywords: Ex-Offenders (U.K.) Homelessness Housing Prisoner Reentry

Author: Warwick, Kevin Title: Case Management Strategies for Successful Jail Reentry Summary: In 2007, the National Institute of Corrections partnered with the Urban Institute to develop and test a comprehensive Transition from Jail to Community (TJC) model for effective jail-to-community transition. The TJC model and initiative advance systems-level change and local reentry through collaborative, coordinated jail-community partnerships. This brief presents the TJC Initiative’s approach to case planning and community handoff, drawing upon the implementation experiences of six TJC learning sites, all of which implemented elements of the TJC case management process and were continuing to work toward a more seamless and integrated process at the close of the TJC technical assistance period. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute; National Institute of Corrections, 2012. 10p. Source: Transition from Jail to Community Initiative Practice Brief: Internet Resource: Accessed October 7, 2012 at http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412671-Case-Management-Strategies-for-Successful-Jail-Reentry.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412671-Case-Management-Strategies-for-Successful-Jail-Reentry.pdf Shelf Number: 126575 Keywords: Jails Offender Management Offender Reintegration Prisoner Reentry Reentry

Author: Christensen, Gary Title: The Role of Screening and Assessment in Jail Reentry Summary: In 2007, the National Institute of Corrections partnered with the Urban Institute to develop and test the Transition from Jail to Community (TJC) model for effective jail-to-community transition. The TJC model and initiative advance systems change and local reentry through collaborative, coordinated jail-community partnerships. This brief details the two-stage screening and assessment process to determine risk and need levels in the jail population. It describes the importance of screening and assessment in an evidence-based jail transition strategy, including: selecting screening and assessment instruments; implementing a screening and assessment process; and integrating risk and need information into comprehensive jail intervention strategies. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute; National Institute of Corrections, 2012. 11p. Source: Transition from Jail to Community Initiative Practice Brief: Internet Resource: Accessed October 7, 2012 at Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 126576 Keywords: Evidence-Based Practices Jails Prisoner Reentry Reentry Risk Assessment

Author: Wei, Qing Title: Using Administrative Data to Prioritize Jail Reentry Services: Findings from the Comprehensive Transition Planning Project Summary: This research brief describes the results of a partnership between Vera’s Substance Use and Mental Health Program (SUMH) and the New York City Department of Correction (DOC), the agency responsible for operating the city’s jail system. Faced with a huge demand for jail reentry services the DOC sought a way to target social services and treatment toward those who most needed support to address problems that contributed to their involvement with the justice system. SUMH researchers used information that the DOC maintained in its administrative data systems to develop a tool to assess people’s risk of recidivism—the Service Priority Indicator (SPI). The SPI draws information on charge, age, and prior jail admissions to assign everyone entering the jail to one of five service priority levels. A validation of the SPI found that 84 percent of those in the highest service-priority category were re-incarcerated within a year of release compared to 24 percent of those at the lowest service-priority level. The DOC is currently using the SPI to inform its decisions about who gets reentry services, as it implements its new, innovative discharge planning process. Details: Washington, DC: Vera Institute of Justice, 2012. 8p. Source: Research Briefing: Internet Resource: Accessed December 2, 2012 at http://www.vera.org/download?file=3593/CTPP-research%2520brief.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.vera.org/download?file=3593/CTPP-research%2520brief.pdf Shelf Number: 127099 Keywords: Ex-Offenders, Services for Prisoner Reentry Reentry, Jail

Author: Minnesota. Department of Corrections Title: An Outcome Evaluation of Minnesota Circles of Support and Accountability (MnCoSA): Preliminary Results from a Randomized Experiment Summary: In 2008, the Minnesota Department of Corrections (DOC) implemented MnCoSA, a sex offender reentry program based on the COSA model developed in Canada during the 1990s. Using a randomized experimental design, the DOC evaluated the effectiveness of MnCoSA by conducting a cost-benefit analysis and comparing recidivism outcomes in the MnCoSA (N = 31) and control groups (N = 31). The average follow-up period for the 62 offenders in this study was nearly two years. KEY FINDINGS • Compared to sex offenders in the control group, MnCoSA participants had lower rates of recidivism for all five measures. o Rearrest: 39% MnCoSA vs. 65% Control  No MnCoSA participants were rearrested for a new sex offense compared to one sex offender in the control group o Reconviction: 26% MnCoSA vs. 45% Control o New Offense Reincarceration: 10% MnCoSA vs. 26% Control o Technical Violation Revocation: 48% MnCoSA vs. 68% Control o Any Reincarceration: 48% MnCoSA vs. 61% Control • Participation in MnCoSA significantly decreased three of the five measures of recidivism. The reductions in recidivism risk were: o 62 percent for rearrest o 72 percent for technical violation revocation o 84 percent for any return to prison • Due to less recidivism, MnCoSA has reduced costs to the State of Minnesota. o MnCoSA has produced an estimated $363,211 in costs avoided o The benefit per MnCoSA participant is $11,716 o For every dollar spent on MnCoSA, the program has generated a benefit of $1.82 (an 82 percent return on investment). Details: St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Department of Corrections, 2012. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 10, 2012 at: http://www.doc.state.mn.us/publications/documents/9-12MnCOSAOutcomeEvaluation.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.doc.state.mn.us/publications/documents/9-12MnCOSAOutcomeEvaluation.pdf Shelf Number: 127196 Keywords: Cost-Benefit Analysis Prisoner Reentry Randomized Experiment Recidivism Sex Offender Treatment Sex Offenders (Minnesota, U.S.)

Author: Bath, Chris Title: Unlocking Credit Unions: Developing Partnerships Between Credit Unions and Criminal Justice Agencies Summary: Financial exclusion compounds the social and economic disadvantage of people within the criminal justice system who are seeking to desist from crime and re-establish themselves in society. Since the mid-2000s, many prisons and banks have developed partnerships which enable people to open a bank account prior to release. However, some prisons have turned to credit unions to provide financial services both post release and during a sentence. This report is based on a research study undertaken by Unlock and the Research Unit for Financial Inclusion in 2012 into the benefits, barriers and strategic options for credit unions in the development of financial services for people in the criminal justice system in England and Wales. It identifies how credit unions, prisons, probation and other agencies can work together to support the reduction of re-offending. Credit unions, prisons and criminal justice agencies Credit unions are not banks, but rather are not-for-profit financial co-operatives with a mission to serve their members and a culture based in community engagement. The appeal of credit unions to prisons and criminal justice agencies was their wide experience of the needs of low income individuals and of assisting people excluded from the mainstream financial system on a pathway to financial stability and security. A small but growing number of credit unions offer savings accounts and/or current accounts to people in and leaving prison, as well as a wider range of financial services to people serving community sentences and to the families of people in the criminal justice system. In total the study identified 22 credit unions engaged with criminal justice agencies. Credit unions were prepared to offer savings accounts to people in prison. All 13 credit union and prison partnerships in the study promoted the value of saving for release in order to financially support the return to society. It is often a lack of funds to manage the first few weeks out of prison that leads many people to re-offend. About a third of credit union and prison partnerships offered a current account to people on release or in open prisons. Others were able to offer savings accounts that could receive any mix of wages and welfare benefits. Around two thirds of credit unions working with prisons saw the most important benefits of the partnership in terms of the reduction of the risk of re-offending and the improvement of their rehabilitation and resettlement services. Details: Snodland, UK: Unlock, 2013. 78p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 25, 2013 at: http://www.unlock.org.uk/userfiles/file/creditunion/unlockingcreditunions.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.unlock.org.uk/userfiles/file/creditunion/unlockingcreditunions.pdf Shelf Number: 127401 Keywords: Credit Unions Criminal Justice Partnerships Ex-Offenders, Financial Services (U.K.) Financial Assistance, Prisoners Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Rehabilitation

Author: Leshnick, Sukey Soukamneuth Title: Evaluation of the Re-Integration of Ex-Offenders (RExO) Program: Interim Report Summary: The Reintegration of Ex-Offenders (RExO) initiative was launched in 2005 as a joint initiative by the Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration (ETA) and the Department of Justice. RExO was set up to strengthen urban communities heavily affected by the challenges associated with high numbers of prisoners seeking to re-enter their communities following the completion of their sentences. It does so by funding employment-focused programs that include mentoring and capitalize on the strengths of faith-based and community organizations (FBCOs). In June 2009, ETA contracted with Social Policy Research Associates (SPR), and its subcontractors MDRC and the National Opinion Research Center (NORC), to conduct a random assignment (RA) impact evaluation of the 24 RExO grantees that had been in operation for more than three years. The RA study largely took place during the fifth year of these grantees' operations. A critical component of this evaluation is an implementation study, which includes two rounds of site visits to each of the 24 RExO grantees and alternative providers in their communities. This report summarizes the key findings from this implementation study; including findings on the community context and general structure of the RExO grantees; their recruitment, intake and enrollment strategies; the RA process itself; the services RExO grantees and their partners provide; the specific partnerships in place to provide services; and the services available through alternative providers (to which comparison group members were referred) in the 24 communities. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor/ETA, 2012. 167p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 14, 2013 at: http://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/ETAOP_2012_09.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/ETAOP_2012_09.pdf Shelf Number: 127615 Keywords: Community Organizations Ex-Offenders, Employment Faith-Based Organizations Offender Reentry (U.S.) Prisoner Reentry Reintegration

Author: U.S. Government Accountability Office Title: Inmate Reentry Programs: Enhanced Information Sharing Could Further Strengthen Coordination and Grant Management Summary: About 700,000 inmates are released from federal and state custody each year, and another 9 million are booked into and released from local jails. Former inmates face challenges as they transition into, or reenter, society, such as finding housing and employment. According to the most recent data available, more than two-thirds of state prisoners are rearrested for a new offense within 3 years of release, and about half are reincarcerated. Federal reentry grants are available for state and local providers, as successful reentry reduces rearrest or reincarceration, known as recidivism. GAO was asked to review (1) the extent to which there is fragmentation, overlap, and duplication across federal reentry grant programs; (2) the coordination efforts federal grant-making agencies have taken to prevent unnecessary duplication and share promising practices; and (3) the extent to which federal grant-making agencies measure grantees’ effectiveness in reducing recidivism. GAO identified and analyzed the grant programs and agencies that supported reentry efforts in fiscal year 2011; analyzed agency documents, such as grant solicitations; and interviewed agency officials. What GAO Recommends GAO recommends that DOJ, Labor, and HHS enhance their information sharing on approaches for determining how effectively grantees reduce recidivism. In response, DOJ, Labor, and HHS reported that they would take actions to address our recommendation. Details: Washington, DC: GAO, 2012. 64p. Source: Internet Resource: GAO-13-93: Accessed February 21, 2013 at: http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/650900.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/650900.pdf Shelf Number: 127691 Keywords: Federal Prisoners (U.S.) Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Jacobs, Erin Title: Returning to Work After Prison: Final Results from the Transitional Jobs Reentry Demonstration Summary: More than 1.6 million people are incarcerated in prisons in the United States, and around 700,000 are released from prison each year. Those released from prison often face daunting obstacles as they seek to reintegrate into their communities, and rates of recidivism are high. Many experts believe that stable employment is critical to a successful transition from prison to the community. The Joyce Foundation’s Transitional Jobs Reentry Demonstration (TJRD), also funded by the JEHT Foundation and the U.S. Department of Labor, tested employment programs for former prisoners in Chicago, Detroit, Milwaukee, and St. Paul, using a rigorous random assignment design. MDRC led the evaluation, along with the Urban Institute and the University of Michigan. The project focused on transitional jobs programs that provide temporary subsidized jobs, support services, and job placement help. Transitional jobs are seen as a promising model for former prisoners and for other disadvantaged groups. In 2007-2008, more than 1,800 men who had recently been released from prison were assigned, at random, to a transitional jobs program or to a program providing basic job search assistance but no subsidized jobs. The research team tracked both groups using state data on employment and recidivism. Because of the random assignment design, one can be confident that significant differences that emerged between the groups are attributable to the services each group received. This is the final report in the TJRD project. It assesses how the transitional jobs programs affected employment and recidivism during the two years after people entered the study. Key Findings •The transitional jobs programs substantially increased employment early in the study period by providing jobs to many who would not otherwise have worked. However, the gains faded as men left the transitional jobs, and the programs did not increase regular (unsubsidized) employment either during or after the program period. At the end of the second year, only about one-fifth of each group were employed in the formal labor market. Earnings impacts may have been somewhat larger when economic conditions were relatively poor and members of the job search group had more difficulty finding jobs. •The transitional jobs programs did not significantly affect key measures of recidivism over the two-year follow-up period. About half each group were arrested, and a similar number returned to prison. Most of the prison admissions were for violations of parole rules, not new crimes. Overall, these results point to the need to develop and test enhancements to the transitional jobs model. For example, future tests could include enhancements such as extending the period of the transitional job, including vocational training as a core program component, or focusing more on the transition to regular employment by offering stronger financial incentives for participants. (Findings from the TJRD evaluation suggest that these financial incentives may improve earnings impacts.) Researchers and practitioners should also test other strategies to improve employment and recidivism outcomes for reentering prisoners. Details: New York: MDRC, 2012. 78p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 27, 2013 at: http://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/full_626.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/full_626.pdf Shelf Number: 127730 Keywords: Ex-Offender Employment Prisoner Reentry Transitional Jobs Reentry Demonstration

Author: Visher, Christy A. Title: Workforce Development Program: Experiences of 80 Probationers in the U.S. Probation Office, District of Delaware Summary: Individuals returning home from prison face several common issues including finding housing, creating ties with family and friends, finding a job, abstaining from alcohol and drug abuse, resisting peer pressure to continue involvement in crime, and supervision requirements (Petersilia 2001; Seiter & Kadela 2003). One issue that has been receiving increased attention is employment and job readiness. Previous research has identified unemployment as an important predictor of recidivism (Seiter & Kadela, 2003; Uggen 2000; Visher, Debus, & Yahner 2008). However, for many ex‐offenders, finding a job after being released from prison can be a very stressful and difficult process. In some cases, they may have not had a legitimate job prior to incarceration, or they may have not been able to keep a legitimate job for a long period of time. Sometimes they may lack the necessary education or skills to obtain employment that will provide them enough income to sustain themselves. The additional burden of a criminal record also limits their prospects for many types of jobs. These individuals also face difficulties staying employed; adjusting to a new schedule, changing attitudes, and dealing with a greater level of responsibility can often be very challenging (Buck, 2000; Harris & Keller, 2005; Holzer, Raphael & Stoll, 2002). Over the past several years more research has been geared toward program evaluation and outcome assessment to determine what types of prisoner reentry programs, policies, and services work and which do not. Results from these studies help to develop evidence‐based practices that can lead to great efficiency and accountability for programs aimed at assisting men and women in their transition from prison back into the community. One specific program developed for ex‐offenders is the federal Workforce Development Program. This initiative has been piloted in several federal probation offices and involves providing men and women under community supervision with assistance to increase their job readiness (including education and vocational skills), identify potential employers, and develop resumes and interview skills with the goals of obtaining full‐time employment and reducing recidivism. While this initiative is still fairly new, preliminary research has found the program to increase employment and reduce recidivism in several jurisdictions including Missouri, Louisiana, and Vermont. In late 2006, the U.S. Probation Office, District of Delaware in Wilmington, Delaware decided to implement this program to improve employment and decrease recidivism for a group of higher risk probationers. Several recent reports on reentry programs and policies suggest that targeting high‐risk individuals is an important component of an evidence‐based reentry strategy (National Research Council 2007; Solomon et al. 2008). The purpose of this report is to present results of a pilot study to track the progress of federal probationers1 under the jurisdiction of the Delaware office after one year of being involved in the workforce development program, and assess the program’s effects on employment and recidivism. The report includes a description and assessment of the Workforce Development Program in Delaware and a comparison of the Workforce Development participants with probationers in two districts without workforce development programs. Details: Newark, DE: Center for Drug and Alcohol Studies University of Delaware, 2009. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 1, 2013 at: http://madcp.dreamhosters.com/sites/default/files/3E%20Workforce%20Dvlpmnt%20Issues%20Final%20Report.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://madcp.dreamhosters.com/sites/default/files/3E%20Workforce%20Dvlpmnt%20Issues%20Final%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 127752 Keywords: Employment Prisoner Reentry Probationers (Delaware, U.S.) Rehabilitation Programs Vocational Education and Training

Author: Papachristos, Andrew V. Title: Desistance and Legitimacy: The Impact of Offender Notification Meetings on Recidivism among High Risk Offenders Summary: Objective: Legitimacy-based approaches to crime prevention operate under the assumption that individuals — including violent offenders — are more likely to comply with the law when they believe that the law and its agents are legitimate and act in ways that seem inherently “fair” and “just.” While mounting evidence finds an association between such legitimacy-based programs and reductions in aggregate levels of crime and violence, no study has investigated whether such programs influence individual offending. This study evaluates the effectiveness of one such program — Project Safe Neighborhoods’ (PSN) Offender Notification Meetings — at reducing individual recidivism among a population of returning prisoners in Chicago. Methods: This study uses a quasi-experimental design and two types of survival analyses (Cox hazard models and competing risk models) to evaluate the effects of PSN on the subsequent recidivism of program participants relative to the control group. Results: Cox hazard models and competing risk models suggest that involvement in PSN significantly reduces the risk of subsequent incarceration. In fact, participation in PSN Offender Notification Forums is associated with a significant lengthening of the time that offenders remain on the street and out of prison. Conclusion: This study provides some of the first individual-level evidence of the efficacy of such programs on patterns of individual offending. Results suggest that interventions such as these do indeed reduce rates of recidivism in the treatment group. Details: Working Paper, 2013. 41p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 12, 2013 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2240232 Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2240232 Shelf Number: 128349 Keywords: Crime Prevention Legitimacy Offender Notification Meetings Prisoner Reentry Project Safe Neighborhoods Recidivism

Author: Pawasarat, John Title: Wisconsin’s Mass Incarceration of African American Males: Workforce Challenges for 2013 Summary: Among the most critical workforce issues facing Wisconsin are governmental policies and practices leading to mass incarceration of African Americans men and suspensions of driving privileges to low-income adults. The prison population in Wisconsin has more than tripled since 1990, fueled by increased government funding for drug enforcement (rather than treatment) and prison construction, three-strike rules, mandatory minimum sentence laws, truth-in-sentencing replacing judicial discretion in setting punishments, concentrated policing in minority communities, and state incarceration for minor probation and supervision violations. Particularly impacted were African American males, with the 2010 U.S. Census showing Wisconsin having the highest black male incarceration rate in the nation. In Milwaukee County over half of African American men in their 30s have served time in state prison. This report uses two decades of state Department of Corrections (DOC) and Department of Transportation (DOT) files to assess employment and training barriers facing African American men with a history of DOC offenses and DOT violations. The report focuses on 26,222 African American males from Milwaukee County incarcerated in state correctional facilities from 1990 to 2012 (including a third with only non-violent crimes) and another 27,874 men with DOT violations preventing them from legally driving (many for failures to pay fines and civil forfeitures). Prison time is the most serious barrier to employment, making ex-offender populations the most difficult to place and sustain in full-time employment. When DOT driver’s licensing history is also considered, transportation barriers make successful labor force attachment even less likely. Yet, most of the recent state policy discussions about preparing the Wisconsin workforce and debates over redistribution of government job training dollars have largely ignored African American men and relegated ex-offender populations to a minor (if not invisible) place in Wisconsin’s labor force. • This paper quantifies Milwaukee County African American male populations in need of increased workforce policy attention and program support. • Proposed changes in state policies and legislation have been brought forward by religious groups, the Milwaukee County District Attorney, The Sentencing Project, and others to reduce Wisconsin’s levels of incarceration. They deserve serious consideration. • Programs to address reentry and workforce needs are currently operated by the Department of Corrections and non-profit organizations but serve only a small portion of those in need. These should be expanded and tested for their effectiveness. • Recognizing that there is no quick fix for ex-offender populations, the cost savings from reductions in the prison population should be used to fund employment and training programs for those in and out of corrections and to support programs to assist those without driver’s licenses, an essential employment credential. • The Windows to Work, a joint effort between the DOC and workforce investment boards, should be expanded. If successful, these efforts will save the state money, help ensure public safety, and reduce recidivism. Details: Milwaukee: Employment and Training Institute, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 2013. 33p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 8, 2013 at: http://www4.uwm.edu/eti/2013/BlackImprisonment.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www4.uwm.edu/eti/2013/BlackImprisonment.pdf Shelf Number: 128680 Keywords: African Americans Ex-Offender Employment Inmates Prisoner Reentry Prisoners (Wisconsin, U.S.) Vocational Education and Training

Author: Gaebler, Helen Title: Criminal Records in the Digital Age: A Review of Current Practices and Recommendations for Reform in Texas Summary: “Smart on Crime” reentry reforms have tended to focus on problems arising after criminal records are already publicly available. This is too late. Once criminal records have been released and incorporated into online databases it is difficult, if not impossible, to put the genie back in the bottle. It is time to broaden the reentry discussion and take a comprehensive look at how criminal records are accessed, disseminated, and utilized in this digital age and to find ways to make the criminal justice system more effective at providing meaningful opportunities for successful and lasting reintegration into our communities. Across the United States criminal records are increasingly available to the public through government repositories and commercial vendors alike. The opportunities and benefits lost as a result of a criminal record create lifelong barriers for anyone attempting to overcome a criminal past.  Easy access to records means that most employers and landlords routinely request criminal history information when screening applicants.  A criminal record severely restricts most employment opportunities and can entirely eliminate the opportunity to work in hundreds of licensed professions.  A criminal record makes it significantly harder to find housing, whether with private landlords or in publicly subsidized housing, with some offenses requiring lifetime bans.  Government benefits, including, cash assistance, food stamps, and student loans, may be denied or restricted because of a criminal history. More than 65 million adults nationwide have a criminal history; the numbers in Texas are equally alarming, with an estimated 4.7 million adults possessing a criminal record. These numbers continue to increase as more people are arrested and drawn into the criminal justice system. In Texas alone, law enforcement makes more than 1 million new arrests annually. All of these individuals are at risk for the long term negative collateral consequences that flow from a criminal record. With the rise of the Internet and the emergence of electronic databases, more than 40 million criminal background checks are performed annually for non-criminal justice purposes. But despite the technological advances that make criminal records so easy and cheap to access, little oversight exists to ensure that the information being reported is accurate and legally compliant. Equally problematic is that efforts to minimize collateral consequences by limiting access to the criminal records are undermined by the absence of uniform statewide release procedures. Widespread access to criminal records has serious long-term societal implications:  Employment and housing are determinant factors in assessing recidivism risks, with the first year following release being the most critical time for reentry.  Collateral consequences affect everyone in contact with the individual, including families and children. Many communities most affected already contend with high rates of unemployment, homelessness, and crime.  The overrepresentation of African Americans and Latinos at every level of the criminal justice system puts these individuals at greater risk of harm. The risk of recidivism and danger to public safety are the most common concerns voiced by those advocating for increased access to criminal records, but such fears are overstated. Few, if any, contend that criminal history information is never a relevant factor to be considered. Problems arise, however, when policies and practices allow searches to include any past criminal involvement or law enforcement contact, regardless of offense, circumstance, and time passed. Restricting all opportunity for those living with a criminal record does not enhance public safety. A review of legislative efforts from across the US illustrates the complex nature of these problems. Lawmakers must combine many small solutions to create comprehensive system-wide reform to better control access to and use of criminal records and to minimize downstream reentry barriers. It is time for Texas to engage in this same process. Details: Austin, TX: William Wayne Justice Center for Public Interest Law The University of Texas School of law, 2013. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 9, 2013 at: http://www.utexas.edu/law/centers/publicinterest/research/criminalrecords_report.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.utexas.edu/law/centers/publicinterest/research/criminalrecords_report.pdf Shelf Number: 128687 Keywords: Criminal Records (U.S.) Ex-Offenders Prisoner Reentry

Author: McCullough, Alison N. Title: An Evaluation of the Pre-Release Planning Program of the Georgia Department of Corrections and a Qualitative Assessment of Reentry Experiences of Program Participants Summary: Higher rates of HIV are seen within correctional systems across the United States. Georgia has one of the largest correctional populations in the country and HIV rates among prisoners are elevated when compared to the state as a whole. In 2008. 2.1% of state prisoners in Georgia were living with HIV. A focal point for the public health system is the moment of release and reentry into the community. Prison systems are responsible for the healthcare of persons in their custody and the public health system typically has limited access to this population until release. Federal programs like Ryan White seek to address the needs of underserved populations with limited access to HIV care. The Ryan White system has facilitated access to Georgia prisoners prior to release by funding the Pre-Release Planning Program, which provides case management and linkage to medical care for persons living with HIV in Georgia state prisons. The purpose of this project was to evaluate the Pre-Release Planning Program of the Georgia Department of Corrections and to identify reentry needs unique to persons living with HIV. An assessment of the program was conducted to determine strengths, weaknesses and areas for improvement. This assessment was informed by the post-release experiences of program participants who described their own reentry journeys through semi-structured qualitative interviews. Methods: For the purpose of this study secondary analysis was conducted on qualitative interviews. A convenience sample consisting of 45 Pre-Release Planning Program participants was recruited to complete a semi-structured qualitative interview following their release in 2009-2010. All 45 persons recruited consented to be contacted for an interview three to 12 months after release. A research interviewer successfully located 25 members of the original sample and they all agreed to participate. They completed an informed consent and were compensated with a cash incentive for their time. The interviews covered a broad range of topics related to: general reentry challenges, HIV, health, risk behaviors, and feelings about the Pre-Release Planning Program. In addition a structure and process evaluation of the Pre-release Planning Program was conducted within the framework of a quality improvement perspective. A stakeholder analysis identified persons and organizations best equipped to promote quality improvement efforts for this program. Recommendations for improvement were developed from the program evaluation and qualitative analysis of participants‟ reentry experiences. Results: Areas for improvement were identified for the Pre-Release Planning Program in both structure and process. The program is understaffed and incapable of reaching every person living with HIV in the Georgia Department of Corrections, more concrete linkages to community resources are sorely needed, and data collection and management activities are deficient. For former program participants three central needs were identified: housing, health (HIV, chronic conditions, and mental) and income (employment or benefits). Stigma (HIV and felony status) and risk behaviors (sexual and substance misuse) negatively impacted stability of housing, health and income. Overall the Pre-Release Planning Program was incapable of addressing most post-release barriers to HIV care and successful reentry. Strengths of the program included linkage to a Ryan White Clinic, provision of prison medical records, referrals to general social service agencies and its acceptability among interviewed participants. Participants reported appreciating the services available pre-release and were able to reflect on specific examples of how they were helpful. Conclusions: Qualitative analysis indicated that participants appreciated the Pre-Release Planning Program and deeply desired to address their health needs post-release. However, their reentry narratives illustrated a need for far more comprehensive pre-release and post-release services to ensure continuity of HIV care and successful reintegration into their home community. The structural and individual challenges faced by persons living with HIV leaving the prison system demand comprehensive integrated services to assure access to HIV care and avoid recidivism. Minimally, housing, health and income must be addressed to ensure successful reentry. To holistically attend to the needs of this population multiple forms of stigma and risk factors in the community must be mediated by working with the individual and promoting systemic changes. Social determinants of health affecting reentry experiences in Georgia must be addressed through policy changes which have the capacity to reach farther than a single Pre-Release Planning program nestled in the Department of Corrections. Details: Atlanta: Georgia State University, 2011. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed May 30, 2013 at: http://digitalarchive.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1197&context=iph_theses Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://digitalarchive.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1197&context=iph_theses Shelf Number: 128856 Keywords: Health Care HIV (Viruses) Prisoner Reentry Prisoners (Georgia, U.S.) Prisons

Author: Roguski, Michael Title: He Pūrongo Arotake 2: Hard to Reach Youth (CART) Evaluation Report 2: Hard to Reach Youth (CART) Summary: In 2006 the government launched its Effective Interventions (EI) policy package. The package was established to identify and support options for reducing offending and the prison population, thereby reducing the costs and impacts of crime on New Zealand society. An important component of the EI package was the need to enhance justice sector responsiveness to Māori. As such, Te Puni Kōkiri (TPK) and the Ministry of Justice developed and Programme of Action for Māori (later known as the Justice Policy Project with the change of government) which comprised the following three elements:  ongoing engagement with Māori communities;  supporting learning from promising and innovative providers; and  enhancing information gathering and analysis across the sector about effectiveness for Māori. Under the Justice Policy Project, Te Puni Kōkiri invested in a small number of interventions (up to June 2008) that were designed, developed and delivered by Māori providers and test facilitators of success for Māori in the justice sector. This work has contributed to an initial platform for developing an empirical evidence base about „what works‟ for Māori, while agencies develop options for sustainable funding streams. At the direction of the Minister of Māori Affairs, several providers were selected as candidates whose programmes have potential to impact on Māori rates of offending, re-offending and imprisonment. This project aims to gather detailed information on two of the six initiatives. The objectives of this evaluation are to:  gather quantitative information to augment the process evaluations undertaken after one year of operation;  document in narrative form, at least two of the six intervention initiatives, providing at least two examples of successful transition from involvement in crime and the criminal justice sector into pro-social living and a life without offending, utilising networks gained through the first evaluations; and  to go beyond documenting problems and gaps, towards providing examples of Māori succeeding as Māori. The key questions that this evaluation aimed to answer were:  What has Te Puni Kōkiri learnt from Māori designed, developed and delivered initiatives within the criminal justice sector?  What are the facilitators of success for Māori in the justice sector? Details: Wellington, NZ: Te Puni Kökiri, 2011. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 3, 2013 at: http://www.tpk.govt.nz/en/in-print/our-publications/publications/addressing-the-drivers-of-crime-for-maori/download/tpk-evaluation-report-2-hard-to-reach-youth.pdf Year: 2011 Country: New Zealand URL: http://www.tpk.govt.nz/en/in-print/our-publications/publications/addressing-the-drivers-of-crime-for-maori/download/tpk-evaluation-report-2-hard-to-reach-youth.pdf Shelf Number: 129257 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Evidence-Based Practices Juvenile Offenders (New Zealand) Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Rehabilitation Treatment Programs

Author: Goodwill Industries International Title: Working beyond Conviction: Goodwill Industries’ Call to Action to Ensure Successful Re-Entry for Ex-Offenders Summary: As of mid year 2007, more than 2.3 million people were incarcerated in federal and state prisons, and local jails, and the U.S. Department of Justice has concluded that nearly every person incarcerated in jail, and 95 percent of state prison inmates, will someday be released. Yet ex-offenders are often released from prison without a transition plan and little more than the clothes on their back, a bus ticket home and a mandate to report to the local parole office the next business day. As the nation’s largest provider of job-training services, Goodwill Industries is uniquely positioned to be a leader in the successful reintegration of ex-offenders and former prisoners into mainstream society. A number of Goodwill agencies already run a variety of programs that are designed to help ex-offenders and former prisoners find and keep jobs, and provide help for housing, substance abuse, and health and mental health issues. Details: Raleigh, NC: Goodwill Industries International, 2009. 67p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 9, 2013 at: http://www.goodwill.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/06-15-09-Road-to-Re-Integration.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://www.goodwill.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/06-15-09-Road-to-Re-Integration.pdf Shelf Number: 129344 Keywords: Ex-Offender Employment Prisoner Reentry

Author: Meyerson, Jessica Title: Childhood Disrupted: Understanding the Features and Effects of Maternal Incarceration Summary: Between 1991 and midyear 2007, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported the number of mothers in federal and state prisoners had increased a staggering 122 percent. During the same period, the number of children with mothers in prison had more than doubled, rising to almost 150,000 children nationwide. (BJS, 2008) Unfortunately, when women with children are incarcerated, their arrests and imprisonment often have a profound, negative impact on their families. Most children of incarcerated parents are at risk of poverty, instability and problem behaviors; but children with incarcerated mothers are especially vulnerable. Mothers in prison are more likely than fathers to enter incarceration with an identified mental illness. They are more likely to be drug users, to live in poverty and to be victims of physical or sexual abuse. (Travis and Waul, 2003) These factors substantially increase the chances that their children will experience their own emotional and psychological difficulties. (Ingram and Price, 2000; U.S. Surgeon General, 1999) Children whose mothers are incarcerated are also more likely to witness their parents’ arrests and to experience significant trauma and household disruption as a result of those arrests. When a father goes to prison, his children usually remain in the care of their mother; but when a mother is incarcerated, her children are likely to be transferred to the care of a non-parental caregiver. Most often this caregiver is a grandparent or relative, but, in about 11 percent of cases, children of incarcerated mothers are placed in the foster care system—separating them, in many cases, not just from their parents, but also their siblings, other family members and the only homes and communities they have ever known. (BJS, 2008; Mumola, 2000; Travis and Waul, 2003) Despite the explosive growth in the number of mothers who are in prison—and the potentially devastating effects of this incarceration on future generations—there are, at present, only a handful of prisoner reentry programs in the U.S. that are specifically designed to support incarcerated mothers and their families. The purpose of the Look Up and Hope initiative is to address this critical gap in services. Five pilot sites with a strong history of service to incarcerated women and their families—Volunteers of America Dakotas, Volunteers of America Illinois, Volunteers of America Indiana, Volunteers of America Northern New England and Volunteers of America Texas—are currently involved in designing and implementing the initiative. With support from the Annie E. Casey Foundation, Volunteers of America National Office and a variety of federal, state, and local grants, these sites are attempting to provide comprehensive, coordinated, longterm services for incarcerated mothers, their children and their children’s caregivers. Some of the supportive services currently being offered to LUH participants include substance abuse and mental health counseling, vocational training and employment services, rapid re-housing assistance, parenting classes, individual and family therapy, case management services (including home visits from trained clinical social workers), family group conferencing, after school and summer programming for youth and concrete supports (such as assistance with food, clothing and transportation). In designing and implementing the Look Up and Hope initiative, Volunteers of America has partnered with Wilder Research, an independent nonprofit research group in St. Paul, Minn. that specializes in applied social science research. Wilder’s chief role in the initiative has been assisting Volunteers of America in ensuring that their approach to addressing maternal incarceration is strongly research-based and builds on the best available evidence-based practices. In late 2009, Wilder’s research staff collaborated with the field staff of the five pilot LUH sites to carry out one of the nation’s first multiple site, qualitative studies of the strengths and needs of families affected by maternal incarceration. The purpose of this study was to (1) better understand the needs of the specific families being served at the five Look Up and Hope sites, (2) assess the extent to which their needs match those described in the extant literature on families affected by maternal incarceration and (3) recommend any modifications to the LUH program model that might be necessary based on the study results. Wilder’s findings are the focus of this report. Details: Alexandria, VA: Volunteers of America, 2010. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 20, 2013 at: http://www.voa.org/Childhood-Disrupted-Report Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.voa.org/Childhood-Disrupted-Report Shelf Number: 129473 Keywords: Children of Prisoners (U.S.) Families of Inmates Female Inmates Prisoner Reentry

Author: Hickert, Audrey O. Title: Evaluation of Oxbow and Re-Entry: Final Follow-up Report Summary: The Salt Lake County Division of Criminal Justice Services (CJS) asked UCJC to evaluate the CATS drug treatment program at Oxbow and Re-entry services through Criminal Justice Services (CJS). The Oxbow Jail, which re-opened in July 2009, provides a “therapeutic campus” to expand education and rehabilitation programs to minimum security inmates requiring substance abuse treatment (CATS). The Oxbow portion of this evaluation examines whether or not offenders who receive substance abuse treatment while being housed in the therapeutic community at Oxbow have different outcomes than those who receive substance abuse treatment while being housed at the Adult Detention Center (ADC), after controlling for individual differences. The second portion of this evaluation examines CATS inmates who receive re-entry services from a team at CJS. Details: Salt Lake City: University of Utah, Utah Criminal Justice Center, 2012. 37p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 5, 2013 at: http://ucjc.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/Oxbow_FinalReport_061912.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://ucjc.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/Oxbow_FinalReport_061912.pdf Shelf Number: 129529 Keywords: Correctional Treatment Programs Drug Offenders (Utah, U.S.) Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Rehabilitation Substance Abuse Treatment

Author: Lindquist, Christine Title: Strategies for Building Healthy Relationship Skills Among Couples Affected by Incarceration Summary: Very little programming has focused on strengthening families affected by incarceration, despite the importance of familial ties for incarcerated persons and the many challenges to maintaining family relationships during incarceration and reentry. Strong partnerships and parenting relationships are linked to reentry success, including decreased recidivism, among justice-involved men (Bersani, Laub, & Nieuwbeerta, 2009; Visher, Knight, Chalfin, & Roman, 2009). Yet little attention is given to the need for learning skills that can strengthen marriages and other intimate relationships. Incarceration offers an opportunity for confined individuals and their partners to learn relationship skills that may allow them to better communicate, resolve conflicts, and increase their commitment to one another. These skills could play an important role in maintaining healthy relationships throughout incarceration and during the challenging reentry process. The Responsible Fatherhood, Marriage and Family Strengthening Grants for Incarcerated and Reentering Fathers and Their Partners (MFS-IP) were designed to support healthy relationships, parenting, and economic stability for families affected by incarceration. Under the MFS-IP initiative, 12 organizations were funded from fiscal years 2006 through 2011 to provide services that promote or sustain healthy relationships and strengthen families in which one parent was incarcerated or otherwise involved with the criminal justice system (e.g., recently released from incarceration or on parole or probation). Grantees were required to deliver services to support healthy marriage and could also choose to provide services intended to improve parenting and build economic stability. This brief describes implementation findings from the evaluation of Responsible Fatherhood, Marriage and Family Strengthening Grants for Incarcerated and Reentering Fathers and Their Partners (MFS-IP). It documents approaches to teaching relationship skills among incarcerated and reentering fathers and their families. Details: Washington, DC: Administration for Children and Families/Office of Family Assistance, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Washington, DC, 2012. 14p. Source: Internet Resource: ASPE Research Brief: Accessed August 7, 2013 at: http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/08/mfs-ip/RelationshipSkills/rb.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/08/mfs-ip/RelationshipSkills/rb.pdf Shelf Number: 129565 Keywords: Children of Prisons Families of Inmates Parenting Skills (U.S.) Prisoner Reentry

Author: McKay Title: Parenting from Prison: Innovative Programs to Support Incarcerated and Reentering Fathers Summary: This brief describes efforts of the national MFS-IP initiative to build collaborations between the criminal justice system and human service agencies to provide family support services to incarcerated fathers, their children, and their co-parents. These grants fund efforts to strengthen father-child bonds through parenting, co-parenting, and relationship-building classes; child-friendly visitation; communication support; and auxiliary services. Eleven of the 12 MFS-IP grants provide parenting as well as couple support. Grantees combine established approaches to parenting skills training with innovative efforts to improve relationships between co-parents and increase father-child contact during incarceration. Recognizing the importance of material stability for successful parenting, many programs also work to address their participants’ vocational, financial, and housing needs through education, case management, and job placement assistance. Participation in all programs is voluntary. Furthermore, in the interest of protecting children and preventing domestic violence, many programs impose exclusion criteria that limit the participation of fathers convicted of sex offenses or child abuse, or of those subject to protective orders prohibiting contact with their co-parents or children. We draw on data from a national implementation evaluation of these grantees, including site visits and interviews with key stakeholders from the MFS-IP programs during Years 1 to 3 of program delivery. We also present preliminary, descriptive data from baseline interviews with incarcerated fathers and co-parents involved in a multisite, longitudinal impact study. While programs funded under this mechanism will continue serving families through September 2011, this brief describes their efforts through Year 3 of the grant period (ending September 2009). Details: Washington, DC: Administration for Children and Families/Office of Family Assistance, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2010. Source: Internet Resource: ASPE Research Brief: Accessed August 7, 2013 at: http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/08/mfs-ip/Innovative/rb.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/08/mfs-ip/Innovative/rb.pdf Shelf Number: 129570 Keywords: Children of Prisoners Families of Inmates Parenting Skills (U.S.) Prisoner Reentry

Author: Harding, David J. Title: Making Ends Meet after Prison: How Former Prisoners Use Employment, Social Support, Public Benefits, and Crime to Meet their Basic Material Needs Summary: Former prisoners are at high risk of economic insecurity due to the challenges they face in finding employment and to the difficulties of securing and maintaining public assistance while incarcerated. This study examines the processes through which former prisoners attain economic security, examining how they meet basic material needs and achieve upward mobility over time. It draws on unique qualitative data from in-depth, unstructured interviews with a sample of former prisoners followed over a two to three year period to assess how subjects draw upon a combination of employment, social supports, and public benefits to make ends meet. Findings reveal considerable struggle to meet even minimal needs for shelter and food, although economic security and stability can be attained when employment or public benefits are coupled with familial social support. Sustained economic security was rarely achieved absent either strong social support or access to long-term public benefits. However, a select few subjects were able to leverage material support and social networks provided by family and partners into trajectories of upward mobility and economic independence. Implications for the wellbeing of former prisoners and their families are discussed. Details: Ann Arbor, MI: Population Studies Center, University of Michigan Institute for Social Research, 2011. 41p. Source: Internet Resource: Population Studies Center Research Report 11-748: Accessed August 19, 2013 at: http://www.psc.isr.umich.edu/pubs/pdf/rr11-748.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.psc.isr.umich.edu/pubs/pdf/rr11-748.pdf Shelf Number: 129656 Keywords: Ex-Offenders, Employment Prisoner Reentry Social Networks, Ex-Offenders

Author: Abramsky, Sasha Title: A Second Chance: Charting a New Course for Re-Entry and Criminal Justice Reform Summary: "A Second Chance" examines the impact of four barriers that make re-entry more difficult and recidivism more likely - predatory prison phone rates; inadequate access to education; restrictions on employment; and restrictions on voting. The report discusses the consequences of these practices and makes a series of policy recommendations regarding their reform. Details: Washington, DC: Leadership Conference Education Fund, 2013. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 23, 2013 at: http://civilrightsdocs.info/pdf/reports/A_Second_Chance_Re-Entry_Report.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://civilrightsdocs.info/pdf/reports/A_Second_Chance_Re-Entry_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 131680 Keywords: Criminal Justice Reform Ex-Offender Employment Felony Disenfranchisement Prisoner Reentry Prisoners (U.S.) Vocational Education and Training

Author: Elliott, Ian A. Title: Evaluability Assessments of the Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA) Model: Cross-Site Report Summary: According to the U.S. National Reentry Resource Center (NRRC) at least 95% of state prisoners are released back to their communities after a period of incarceration. Both criminal justice agencies and the general public are conscious of the issue of sex offenders returning to the community because of the potentially negative biological and psychiatric outcomes for victims (e.g., Andersen et al., 2008; Chen et al., 2010). Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA) is a restorative justice-based reentry program for high-risk sex offenders with little or no pro-social support. There have been no rigorous large-scale outcome evaluations of COSA conducted to date. A weighted average of three significant estimated reductions attributable to COSA from smaller evaluations suggest a reduction of 77% in sexual recidivism. However, because of the varying quality of these studies it could be argued that this figure should be considered only an estimate of effectiveness. Therefore, at this time there is not enough evidence to confidently state that COSA is proven to be effective in reducing sexual recidivism. This report outlines an evaluability assessment of COSA across five sites with the goal of assessing the readiness of COSA provision in the U.S. for rigorous evaluation. The assessment aimed to clarify program intent, explore program reality, examine program data capacity, analyze program fidelity, and propose potential evaluation designs for future evaluation. An 'intended model' was developed, adapted from the Correctional Services Canada model (CSC, 2002; 2003) that sought to illustrate the espoused theory of COSA. COSA program reality was established via site visits to five locations delivering, or intending to deliver, COSA programs in the U.S.: Fresno, CA; Denver, CO; Durham, NC; Lancaster, PA; and Burlington, VT. During these site visits in-person interviews were conducted with key program personnel, other stakeholders, and any documented materials related to COSA policies and procedures were collected. All of the sites have implemented versions of the CSC model, adapted to suit their needs. The site reports suggest that VT-COSA alone could be considered to have high program fidelity, with COSA Fresno and COSA Lancaster demonstrating adequate fidelity, and Colorado COSA and COSA Durham demonstrating low fidelity. It is concluded that there are five potential obstacles that need to be addressed in order to conduct a successful experimental evaluation of COSA: (1) choice of outcomes; (2) significant differences in program implementation; (3) core member selection issues; (4) sample size, site capacity, and low baselines of recidivism; and (5) ownership of data. It is concluded that there is no methodological or ethical reason why a randomized control trial of COSA provision in the U.S. could not be conducted. The obstacles to an RCT are all such that they can be addressed with a combination of realistic tightening of program implementation, rigorous experimental control, and an increase in real-world resources. Finally, three action recommendations for future evaluative activity are presented: (1) conduct an experimental evaluation of the Vermont COSA program alone; (2) conduct an experimental evaluation that combines the Vermont COSA and COSA Fresno programs; or (3) allow the fledgling sites to develop and conduct a multi-site evaluation of COSA in the future. Details: State College, PA: Pennsylvania State University, 2013. 93p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 23, 2013 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/243832.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/243832.pdf Shelf Number: 131686 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Reintegration Restorative Justice Sex Offenders

Author: Willison, Janeen Buck Title: FY 2011 Second Chance Act Adult Offender Reentry Demonstration Projects Evaluability Assessment, Executive Summary Summary: Prisoner reentry remains a pressing national and local policy issue. In 2008, more than 735,000 prisoners were released from state and federal prisons across the country (West, Sabol, and Cooper 2009), and another 10 to 12 million cycle through the nation's jails each year (Beck 2006). Chances of successful reentry are low: close to 68 percent of prisoners are re-arrested within three years of release (Langan and Levin 2002).Numerous factors contribute to these high recidivism rates. In 2008, the Second Chance Act (SCA): Community Safety Through Recidivism Prevention was signed into law with the goal of increasing reentry programming for offenders released from state prisons and local jails, and improving reentry outcomes for both the criminal justice system and the individuals it serves. Since 2009, the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) has awarded dozens of SCA adult offender demonstration grants to communities across the nation. The goals of the SCA projects are to measurably (1) increase reentry programming for returning prisoners and their families, (2) reduce recidivism and criminal involvement among program participants by 50 percent over five years, (3) reduce violations among program participants, and (4) improve reintegration outcomes, including reducing substance abuse and increasing employment and housing stability. In the summer of 2012, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) commissioned a four-month, intensive evaluability assessment (EA) of eight FY 2011 SCA adult offender reentry demonstration sites selected by BJA for further study. EA is crucial in determining if a project is a candidate for meaningful evaluation (Wholey, Hatry, and Newcomer 2004). At a minimum, an evaluable program must have well-defined program goals, target populations, and eligibility criteria, as well as reliable and accessible performance data, and a defensible counterfactual (Barnow and The Lewin Group 1997). Given NIJ's interest in some level of evaluation in all eight adult SCA sites, EA data collection was designed to support more nuanced evaluation recommendations than "Evaluate: Yes or No." Specifically, the EA aimed to answer two questions: is the program evaluable and if so, how, and at what level of effort. Design options were expected to address both the recommended level and type of evaluation, including the suggested mix of process, outcome, impact, and cost analyses. In addition to these EA tasks, the solicitation also requested information about site training and technical assistance (TTA) needs that BJA and the Council of State Government's National Reentry Resource Center could use to improve the provision of both. Lastly, the solicitation specified two sets of deliverables: site-specific EA reports and one cross-site final EA report. The Urban Institute (UI), and its partner RTI International, were selected to conduct the EA following a competitive process. While eight sites were initially targeted for the EA, this number expanded to ten in the spring of 2013: 1. Beaver County (PA) ChancesR: Reentry, Reunification, and Recovery Program; 2. Boston (MA) Reentry Initiative; 3. Hudson County (NJ) Community Reintegration Program; 4. Johnson County (KS) Reentry Project; 5. Minnesota Department of Corrections High Risk Recidivism Reduction Demonstration Project; 6. Missouri Department of Corrections Second Chance in Action Program; 7. New Haven (CT) Reentry Initiative; 8. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction Healthy Environments, Loving Parents Initiative; 9. Palm Beach County (FL) Regional and State Transitional Ex-Offender Reentry Initiative; 10. Solano County (CA) Women's Reentry Achievement Program. While each program targets adult offenders under state or local custody (and about to return to the community) for comprehensive reentry programing and services designed to promote successful reintegration and reduce recidivism, there is considerable variation among the sites. Three sites focus exclusively on female offenders (Ohio, Missouri, and Solano County). One project targets individuals re-incarcerated for supervision violations (Minnesota) while another focuses on individuals with substance abuse and co-occurring disorders (Beaver County). Half of the sites target prisoners returning from state departments of correction (Connecticut, Florida, Missouri, Minnesota, Ohio), while the rest address local jail transition (Beaver County, Boston, Hudson County, Johnson County; and Solano County). Some programs front-load case management services, while others emphasize community and family supports. The composition and structure of the FY 2011 SCA projects also vary by jurisdiction with agencies outside the criminal justice system leading three of the projects (Boston, Beaver County, and Solano County). These variations in program design and intended client population type underscore the critical importance of the evaluability assessment commissioned by the NIJ. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, Justice Policy Center, 2013. 12 p., app. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 28, 2014 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/243978.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/243978.pdf Shelf Number: 131812 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Reintegration Second Chance Act

Author: Kilmer, Beau Title: Offender Reentry: Correctional Statistics, Reintegration into the Community, and Recidivism Summary: The prison population in the United States has been growing steadily for more than 30 years. The Bureau of Justice Statistics reports that since 1990 an average of 590,400 inmates have been released annually from state and federal prisons and almost 5 million ex-offenders are under some form of community-based supervision. Offender reentry can include all the activities and programming conducted to prepare ex-convicts to return safely to the community and to live as law-abiding citizens. Some ex-offenders, however, eventually end up back in prison. The most recent national-level recidivism study is 10 years old; this study showed that two-thirds of ex-offenders released in 1994 came back into contact with the criminal justice system within three years of their release. Compared with the average American, ex-offenders are less educated, less likely to be gainfully employed, and more likely to have a history of mental illness or substance abuse - all of which have been shown to be risk factors for recidivism. Three phases are associated with offender reentry programs: programs that take place during incarceration, which aim to prepare offenders for their eventual release; programs that take place during offenders' release period, which seek to connect ex-offenders with the various services they may require; and long-term programs that take place as ex-offenders permanently reintegrate into their communities, which attempt to provide offenders with support and supervision. There is a wide array of offender reentry program designs, and these programs can differ significantly in range, scope, and methodology. Researchers in the offender reentry field have suggested that the best programs begin during incarceration and extend throughout the release and reintegration process. Despite the relative lack of research in the field of offender reentry, an emerging "what works" literature suggests that programs focusing on work training and placement, drug and mental health treatment, and housing assistance have proven to be effective. The federal government's involvement in offender reentry programs typically occurs through grant funding, which is available through a wide array of federal programs at the Departments of Justice, Labor, Education, and Health and Human Services. However, only a handful of grant programs in the federal government are designed explicitly for offender reentry purposes. The Second Chance Act (P.L. 110-199) was enacted on April 9, 2008. The act expanded the existing offender reentry grant program at the Department of Justice and created a wide array of targeted grant-funded pilot programs. Details: Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 2014, 34p. Source: Internet Resource: RL34287: Accessed March 14, 2014 at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34287.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34287.pdf Shelf Number: 131911 Keywords: Ex-Offenders Prisoner Reentry Prisoners Recidivism Rehabilitation Second Chance Act

Author: Decker, Scott H. Title: Criminal Stigma, Race, Gender, and Employment: An Expanded Assessment of the Consequences of Imprisonment for Employment Summary: Employment is a key feature of American life. Not only does it provide the instrumental benefits associated with an income, but it also serves to structure life, create social relations, and provide fulfillment. But work has an additional important benefit - it reduces involvement in crime. This consequence makes it important that individuals leaving prison find work. For a variety of reasons, however, this group finds it difficult to secure employment. The ability to find work is not equally distributed across race and ethnic groups; blacks and Hispanics experience more difficulty in gaining employment than do whites. Further complicating the problem is the fact that these two minority groups comprise the largest and fastest growing segment of the prison population. A number of studies have examined the impact of a prison sentence on employment. This work consistently finds that individuals with a prison record fare worse on the job market. However, this finding is conditioned by race and ethnicity, with whites bearing far less stigma from a prior prison sentence than blacks or Hispanics (Pager, 2003). The majority of this research has been conducted with men, comparing blacks and whites, and been completed in Midwestern or eastern cities. This leaves a substantial gap in our understanding of the role of race/ethnicity and prison record on employment chances. Women are a measureable and growing segment of the prison population in the US and their employment prospects are important to understand given their role in families. Hispanics are the fastest growing segment of the US prison population and the number of incarcerated Hispanics is growing rapidly. Further, the southwest is the fastest growing region of the country, with different dynamics, including the border with Mexico, as well as an economy not structured around industrial production. In addition to these substantive reasons to expand our understanding of the role of a prison record and race/ethnicity in employment, there are methodological reasons to expand the study of these relationships. The job market itself is dynamic and the majority of entry-level jobs are advertised online and require the submission of online applications, which may include resumes. To address these concerns, we completed a three-year study of the impact of a prison record on gaining employment. We included two separate experiments and an employer survey in our research. The first involved the submission of more than 6,000 online applications for entry-level jobs. The second experiment sent individuals (auditors) to apply for 60 jobs in-person. This allows us to compare the results of two different methods of job applications. The third research method was a survey conducted among 49 employers, all of whom were included in the second experiment. For each of the first two experiments, we had six different pairs of job applicants, comprised of black men, black women, Hispanic men, Hispanic women, white men and white women. One member of each pair had a prison record included on their resumes.In every other respect, the resumes. were identical. Race/ethnicity was cued through the use of first and last names on the resumes. sent to employers. In each case, a binary dependent variable was used, whether the individual was offered an opportunity to talk further with the employer in the case of the online applications, in the case of the in-person applications, the outcome measure was whether they were called back to interview or offered a job. Consistent with prior research, we find differences by race/ethnicity, with blacks and Hispanics generally faring more poorly than whites. The differences for the online application process were not as large as for the in-person process, but, nonetheless, we did find that a prison record has a dampening effect on job prospects, particularly in the low-skill food service sector, where ex-prisoners are likely to seek employment during reentry. The employer survey revealed strong effects for criminal justice involvement, with employers expressing preferences for hiring individuals with no prior criminal justice contact. Employers associated prior prison time with a number of negative work-related characteristics including tardiness and inability to get along with co-workers. We conclude this report with a number of policy recommendations regarding the job preparation, application, and interview process. In particular, we highlight the importance of preparing individuals in prison for the online world of job applications and resumes. creation. This, like other aspects of the reentry process, should be done as early as is feasible, but certainly before release from prison. It is also important that former prisoners expand their network of contacts to increase their awareness of jobs and the process associated with applying for those jobs. We believe it is important for job applicants with a prison record to be prepared for a good deal of failure, as fewer than ten percent of our testers received a callback. Former prisoners are more likely to gain employment if they are judged on the merits of their qualifications, excluding their prior imprisonment. For this reason we believe that efforts to remove - prior arrest or conviction - from initial job applications should be supported. Details: Phoenix, AZ: Arizona State University, 2014. 112p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 14, 2014 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/244756.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/244756.pdf Shelf Number: 131913 Keywords: Ex-Offender Employment Prisoner Reentry Race/Ethnicity Racial Disparities

Author: National Justice Chief Executive Officers Group Title: Staying Strong on the Outside: Indigenous Young Adults: Final Report Summary: The Staying Strong on the Outside project, an initiative of the National Justice Chief Executive Officers (NJCEOs) Group, sought to identify factors that contribute to positive outcomes for Indigenous young adults aged 18 to 25 years released from custody and to highlight programs and initiatives that offer promise in this area. - The Project was undertaken in 2008 to 2009 and had three components: a review of research; a practice survey distributed throughout Australia and New Zealand; and a Forum attended by more than 80 policy-makers and practitioners from both countries. - The over-representation of Indigenous persons in custody has been well documented. The Australian Bureau of Statistics National Prisoner Census indicates that on 30 June 2008, 24% of the adult prisoner population were Indigenous, despite this group making up only 2% of the Australian population. There were 1,795 Indigenous persons aged 18 to 24 years in custody, which equates to 6.5% of the total prison population. Around one third of these young adults were imprisoned in New South Wales. Māori, particularly young adults, are also over-represented within the New Zealand prison population. - Stakeholders engaged through this project supported the decision by the NJCEOs to focus on Indigenous young adults, given this is a pivotal point marked by the transition to adulthood and in light of the intergenerational effects of Indigenous incarceration. They also highlighted the importance of considering the needs of particular sub-groups within this population, including young women and persons from rural and remote locations. - The practice survey identified 36 programs in Australia or New Zealand that offer re-entry services to Indigenous young adults. Of the 36 programs, only two were aimed exclusively at the 18 - 25 year age group. Both programs were in New South Wales. Nevertheless, most of the programs aimed to offer an individualised and holistic service, and were therefore able to address the specific needs of Indigenous young adults. - While generally focused on any adult prisoner, the 36 practice examples considered for this project were highly diverse. They addressed a variety of risk factors, involved a range of partners, had varied funding and had been operating for different time periods. Programs ranged from initiatives to create pathways to employment (Western Australian Mining Industry Employment Linkages); to provision of identification to exiting prisoners (Larrakia Nation Proof of ID); to programs to address offending behaviour in a cultural context (Queensland's Ending Offending Program). - Nine of the 36 examples had been evaluated and four of the nine evaluation reports were provided to the Project Team. While some of these evaluations are now quite dated, the findings were generally positive. Nine of the 36 initiatives commenced in 2008 and therefore it is too early for any evaluation results to be available. This applied to the Bugilmah Burube Wullinje Balund-a (Tabulam) centre in New South Wales and the Konnect Program in Victoria. - A number of key principles were identified through the three components of the project as important contributors to the successful reintegration of Indigenous young adults. These are: - interventions should address the cognitive and behavioural causes of offending. Research suggests that cognitive-behavioural skills programs are among the most effective in offender rehabilitation. - programs should be designed, developed and delivered in a culturally appropriate manner. Evidence suggests that participants in programs that are delivered in a culturally appropriate manner are more likely to complete the program and less likely to re-offend. - services aimed at reintegration should be provided from the beginning of a sentence and continue post-release (throughcare). - interventions should be holistic and, in particular, should ensure that practical health and welfare needs are met so that the client can effectively address behavioural change. -interventions should acknowledge the strengths of Indigenous young offenders, recognizing achievements, ability and potential, while addressing the need to build capacity. - interventions should empower individuals by imparting practical 'life skills', building self-sufficiency and encouraging active participation in rehabilitation. - effective partnerships, information sharing and joined up service delivery are fundamental to the success of initiatives. - the needs of victims should be recognised and addressed, particularly where the victim lives in the same community as the offender. - The project identified the following as key areas of need that should be addressed by interventions: - ensure that connections are made with education, vocational training and employment services; - where possible, maintain, re-establish and strengthen family and community relationships, and involve family members in the reintegration process; and - address substance abuse, as drug and alcohol abuse are risk factors for offending. - The project also identified those features of program delivery that contribute to better outcomes for young Indigenous offenders: - trained and committed staff; - programs targeted at high risk offenders; - treatment styles matched with the learning styles of participants; and - investment in lengthy and intensive programs. - Program evaluation is necessary to identify obstacles to implementation and to determine whether the desired outcomes are achieved. Allied to this issue is the need to provide adequate and long-term funding for programs to ensure a degree of continuity and allow sufficient time for those programs to develop, mature and show results. Details: Canberra(?):Indigenous Justice Clearinghouse, 2009. 93p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 17, 2014 at: http://www.indigenousjustice.gov.au/stayingstrong.pdf Year: 2009 Country: Australia URL: http://www.indigenousjustice.gov.au/stayingstrong.pdf Shelf Number: 131939 Keywords: Indigenous Peoples Interventions Prisoner Reentry Rehabilitation Young Adult Offenders

Author: Duwe, Grant Title: An Evaluation of the Minnesota Comprehensive Offender Reentry Plan (MCORP) Pilot Project: Final Report Summary: Using a randomized experimental design, this study evaluated the effectiveness of the Minnesota Comprehensive Offender Reentry Plan (MCORP), a prisoner reentry pilot project implemented in 2008. In an effort to reduce recidivism, the MCORP pilot project attempted to increase offender access to community services and programming by producing greater case management collaboration between caseworkers in prison and supervision agents in the community. Results from Cox regression models showed that MCORP significantly reduced four of the five recidivism measures examined, although the size of the reduction in hazard ratios was relatively modest (20-25 percent). The findings further suggested that MCORP reduced costs. Sensitivity analyses showed, however, that the cost avoidance estimates were not robust across all assumptions that were examined. Details: St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Department of Corrections, 2013. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 31, 2014 at: http://www.doc.state.mn.us/pages/files/8913/8142/3580/MCORP_Evaluation_Final_DOC_Website.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.doc.state.mn.us/pages/files/8913/8142/3580/MCORP_Evaluation_Final_DOC_Website.pdf Shelf Number: 132030 Keywords: Case Management Offender Supervision Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Flowers, Shawn M. Title: Baltimore City Jail Reentry Strategies Project: Final Report Summary: Choice Research Associates (CRA) was engaged by the Office of Human Services, Office of the Mayor, Baltimore MD to develop strategies to meet the needs of three primary offender populations at the Baltimore City Detention Center (BCDC) and Baltimore City Central Booking and Intake Center (BCBIC): 1) Individuals detained in Central Booking for short periods (e.g., 24 to 48 hours); 2) Detainees housed for longer periods (e.g., up to 1 month); and 3) Populations who remain in the facility for several months (31 days or more). The objective of the Baltimore City Jail Reentry Strategies project was to work collaboratively with the Mayor's Office, representatives from the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (DPSCS), and to review the extant literature to incorporate evidence based strategies in the proposed reentry model. Multiple sources of data were utilized to inform this project including Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS) official criminal history data, arrestee self-report of the Proxy Risk Assessment Tool, Offender Case Management System (OCMS) data providing release time and dates and release status, survey data from the Window Replication Project, and LSI-R assessment data of BCDC inmates and detainees. One of the challenges in jail reentry is to target those most in need of services. The key to overcoming this challenge in formulating this reentry strategy was to gain a better understanding of the population that flows in and out of the BCBIC and BCDC by conducting a pilot of the proxy risk assessment tool. The proxy is a screening tool currently used by a number of jails involved in National Institutes of Corrections/Urban Institute Transitions from Jail to the Community study. The proxy provides a rough proximate of risk level for designation of an arrestee for provision of information, additional assessment, and reentry services. The proxy risk assessment tool consists of 3 questions: 1) what is your current age?; 2) how old were you the first time you were arrested?; and 3) how many prior arrests do you have? (both questions including juvenile arrests). A total score is developed from that information which ranges from 2 to 8, with higher scores indicating an individual is a greater risk for recidivism. Over the week of October 21 to October 28, 2012, 1,028 individuals were arrested and booked in Baltimore City. Of those, 577 completed the proxy, of which 37% scored from 2 to 4 points and were categorized as low risk; 45% scored 5 to 6 points so were medium risk, and 18% scored 7 or 8, and labeled high risk. The State Identification (SID) numbers of the 1,028 individuals arrested that week were then submitted to be matched to CJIS records and 956 (93%) had records in CJIS. The criminal history data were combined with demographic data to provide a descriptive portrait. Arrestees were on average 33.56 years old, 79% were male, 83% were African American and 16% were Caucasian. The most common type of offender is a person offender (56%), followed by drug (34%), sex offender (5%), and property (4%), based on most serious conviction. On average, arrestees had been criminally involved over 10 years, with an average of 9 arrests (ranging from 1 to 74), 3.7 prior convictions and an average conviction rate of 33% overall. Data from CJIS were also used to compare the population by risk level. In general, those in the low and medium risk groups were older (which is expected given that older offenders score lower on the proxy than younger offenders). There were also more women in the low risk group compared to the medium or high risk groups. Further, as it takes time to accrue a criminal career, the low and medium risk populations had longer criminal careers than the high risk group. However, the high risk group as a whole consisted of more serious offenders with a higher average incarceration rate and more felony charges and convictions than the low risk group. The low risk group also had fewer weapons charges than the other groups and was more likely to be convicted of crimes classified as "other" - principally nuisance or quality of life type offenses such as rogue and vagabond, pandering, urination in public, trespassing, and consuming alcohol in public. It is also important to note that among the high risk group are low-level habitual misdemeanor offenders (HMOs). HMOs fall into the high risk group due to their repeated cycling in and out of the jail. The inability of the proxy tool to distinguish between the HMO and other high risk individuals supports the contention that those who are classified as high risk should be triggered to complete a more comprehensive assessment tool because HMOs likely need different and/or additional services to address the causes of their repeated offending than others in the high risk group. The next step was to incorporate CJIS data with release data from the Offender Case Management System (OCMS) to calculate the length of stay in the facility and to further inform the reentry plan based on the flow of individuals out of the facility (e.g., when and what time released; whether released on bond, from court, etc) and further define the population. Not surprisingly, the population and criminal history characteristics of those detained for up to 48 hours were significantly different than those in the facility for longer periods of time on a number of factors. For example, those held more than 31 days in the facility had significantly more serious criminal careers overall. They had longer criminal careers (averaging 12 vs. 10 years); a higher total number of prior arrests (12.06 compared to 8.29 for those released within 48 hours); higher career conviction rates (42% vs. 30%); incarceration rates (72% vs. 49%); and the number of times incarcerated for more than 1 day (5.3 vs. 2.9). In addition, there were significantly fewer women detained in the facility for 3 or more days. Specifically, in the first 48 hours after arrest, the population was 77% male and 23% female; beyond 48 hours, 92% of the population was male and 8% of the population was female. Further, by incorporating both the risk level assignment and release data, the length of stay is consistent with what one would expect -- more low risk individuals are released, and released at an earlier time, than those who are medium and/or high risk. Another concern with providing reentry services in a jail setting is that individuals may be released at any time of the day or night, particularly within the first 48 hours. This is a barrier for service providers who wish to connect with individuals as they are leaving the facility. Using OCMS data, the day and time of release were examined for those leaving the facility in the first 48 hours. Those results indicate that if service providers wish to staff an information booth at the Eager Street lobby, they should have staff present from 6 PM to Midnight on Sunday, Monday, Thursday, Friday and Saturday, when the highest percentage of those released within 48 hours will leave the facility. Over half (54%) of those released on Sunday leave in this time frame 38% leave during these hours on Saturday, as do approximately 33% of those on Monday, Thursday and Friday. Providers might also consider keeping staff available at the jail until 3 AM as the majority of individuals (94%) released after 31 days are released between 9 PM and 3 AM. OCMS data was then explored by length of stay and by risk level to specifically observe release patterns for medium and high risk individuals. These individuals may be of the most interest to service providers, particularly for those who have begun to establish a relationship through in-reach, and wish to engage the individual immediately into services. The data show that the best times to staff the jail are between 9 PM and 3 AM, when 60% of medium and high risk individuals are released. Further, the best days to staff the Eager Street Lobby would be Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Saturday evenings. Self-report data from the Window Replication Study and LSI-R assessments provided specific information on self-defined needs and criminogenic risks of those in BCDC. Data from the Window Replication Study included two populations - 142 individuals surveyed within hours of release from the Eager Street Lobby and Jail Industries Building, and among 200 male detainees housed in the Jail Industries Building in 2009. The 142 individuals in the release sample were on average 35 years old (ranging in age from 16 to 71), 86% were male, 82% were Black, and 16% White. The average length of stay for the release sample (from date of arrest to date of the survey) was 32 days, ranging from 1 to 325 days, with the majority (71%) released either on bond or own recognizance; 27% left time served; and 2% had charges dropped. The release population self-defined needs were then examined by length of stay. Among the 76 individuals pending release after 48 hours in the facility, transportation was ranked as the most useful service (42%). This was followed by employment (33%), job training (30%) and education/GED (24%). Housing was the next useful service (18%), then food (16%), drug treatment (16%), legal services (12%), mental health care (11%), and basic health care (9%). The 200 male detainee respondents were on average 39 years old (ranging in age from 18 to 62), 84% were Black, 11% White and 5% identified as other. The majority of detainees (59%) were single, never married; and 75% were fathers. The average length of stay for the detainee sample (from date of arrest to date of the survey) was 67 days, ranging from 1 to 1,024 days. The Window Replication detainee survey also contained the 3 proxy risk assessment questions, allowing categorization of self-defined needs by risk level. While the suggested reentry strategy is to focus resources on medium and high risk individuals, the data helps to inform which services and/or service providers should be targeted for kiosk and/or resource wall materials provided to all those processed and released in Baltimore City. For example, among the 62 individuals classified as low risk, 38 (61%) wanted housing, 34 (55%) employment and 29 (47%) cited dental care. Community organizations providing these and other services such as transportation, food banks, basic health care, and clothing should be the primary target for obtaining and disseminating resource information. For the medium to high risk individuals, community organizations that provide employment and job training services, housing, dental and basic health care, applying for TANF, food stamps, and health care benefits, food, and transportation should be engaged to conduct in-reach sessions. Details: Greenbelt, MD: Choice Research Associates, 2013. 102p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 5, 2014 at: http://www.choiceresearchassoc.com/documents/final_jail_reentry_strategies_report_09_01_2013.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.choiceresearchassoc.com/documents/final_jail_reentry_strategies_report_09_01_2013.pdf Shelf Number: 132249 Keywords: Jail Inmates Prisoner Reentry Risk Assessment

Author: Flower, Shawn M. Title: Community Mediation Maryland: Reentry Mediation Recidivism Analysis Summary: The CMM Reentry Mediation model responds to a need identified through research and through the experiences of staff and volunteers who have worked in prisons and with people returning from prison, or have family members incarcerated and experience the reentry process first-hand. Reentry Mediation supports inmates and their families or other support people to discuss their past experiences, to build understanding, and to jointly plan for reentry into the family structure and community before the inmate is released. The Abell Foundation in Baltimore City Maryland funded this analysis of the effect of prisoner reentry mediation on recidivism. This study examines 123 individuals who received mediation (the treatment group) to 497 that requested and were eligible to participate, but did not receive mediation (the comparison group) between February 2009 and June 2012. These groups are compared to discover whether there were significant differences between the groups. The method of analysis used to assess post-release outcomes is logistic regression, which provides a predicted probability of the outcomes (measured by arrest, conviction and incarceration) and is calculated based on all of the factors in the regression model. Cox Regression survival analysis was also used to compare the treatment and comparison groups in their time to failure (defined here as a post-release arrest or conviction). The survival analysis seeks to determine whether those who did not mediate "failed" (e.g., were rearrested) sooner than those who did mediate. Key findings of this study are as follows: - Demographic and criminal history differences between the treatment group and comparison group are few; those who participated in mediation are generally of the same age and gender, have similar criminal backgrounds based on both self-reported data at intake (e.g., age at first involvement in crime) and State of Maryland Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS) data; while this does not obviate concerns surrounding selection bias, the similarities between the treatment and comparison group build a strong case of comparability between the two groups; - There were differences among the treatment and comparison groups on several questions concerning quality of the relationship with the person the inmate participant wishes to mediate with (referred to as the "outside participant"). Those who mediated were more likely to view the outside participant as playing a more positive role in their life, expressed a higher degree of happiness with this person, and said they confided in each other more often than those who did not mediate. However, these factors were not significant on any measures of recidivism; - One question was predictive of both participating in mediation and arrest post-release was "I feel I have no control over this relationship".Participants are asked their level of agreement with this statement on a scale of 1 to 5 (set up so that higher values indicating a more positive response) or a greater level of empowerment in their relationship with the other participant. Inside participants who felt they had greater control in the relationship were significantly more likely to go to mediation and were also more likely to be arrested post-release. Comparisons by race and gender on this measure indicate non-whites reporting higher degree of control compared to white subjects; there were no differences by gender. While we theorize this question measures positive feelings of empowerment in a relationship, perhaps this measures some another attribute (e.g., overconfidence) that may operate differentially for those who mediate versus those who do not. - Participation in reentry mediation has a significant impact on the likelihood that an individual will be arrested post-release. After controlling for key factors that may otherwise explain this finding (e.g., length of criminal career, gender, age, race, days since release), the predicted probability1 of arrest for those who participate in mediation is 21% vs. 31% for those who do not participate in mediation; - The number of sessions is also a significant factor - with each additional mediation session, the probability of arrest is reduced by 6%; - There was no impact of mediation on post-release conviction or incarceration once crucial factors were controlled in the model, which may be related to the small sample size and the low rates of conviction overall during the time period examined; and - The Cox Regression survival analysis reveals that mediation reduces the hazard (or risk of arrest) by 37% compared to those who do not mediate. Each additional mediation session reduces the risk of arrest by 23% compared to those who did not mediate. The key to understanding the saliency of these findings is that the greatest limitation of mediation may also be its greatest strength - it is a short-term "intervention". In fact, the majority of the 123 mediation participants had but one 2 hour session. The impact of mediation is believed to be indirect and akin to a critical course correction to turn an individual away from a criminal trajectory through the improved relationship with family and support persons and adherence to agreements and plans negotiated during mediation. Details: Greenbelt: MD: Choice Research Associates, 2013. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 6, 2014 at: http://re-entrymediation.org/PDFS/CMM_Recidvism_Final_04_18_2013.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://re-entrymediation.org/PDFS/CMM_Recidvism_Final_04_18_2013.pdf Shelf Number: 132254 Keywords: Community Mediation Families of Inmates Family Interventions Family Mediation Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Bouffard, Jeffrey Title: Reentry Services Project. Process and Outcome Evaluation - Final 2 Year Report Summary: Background on RSP: In July 2003, the Clay County Joint Powers Collaborative (CCJPC) was awarded funding by the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Office of Drug Policy and Violence Prevention to develop and implement a Reentry Services Project (RSP). The CCJPC also provided matching funds to begin the RSP program. Two Transitional Coordinators began providing Reentry Services in July of 2003, and evaluation of the program by the North Dakota State University evaluation team began in September of 2003. RSP Goals: In general, the RSP prepares juvenile offenders for successful reentry to the Clay County community after returning from various out-of-home placements. The program aims to achieve its goal by assisting youthful offenders in becoming productive, responsible, and law abiding citizens through strategic and comprehensive reentry plans. These plans address the following Reentry components: 1. Obtaining and retaining long term employment, if appropriate; 2. Maintaining a stable residence by providing intensive services to high risk juvenile offenders leaving out-of-home placements, with an emphasis on seamless and comprehensive treatment, intensive case management, and the involvement of local communities; 3. Successfully addressing substance abuse issues; 4. Successfully addressing physical and mental health issues; and 5. Establishing a meaningful and supportive role in the community. Details: Fargo, ND: North Dakota State University, Department of Criminal Justice and Political Science, 2005. 119p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 10, 2014 at: http://www.claycountycollaborative.org/meetings/files/RSP2003-2005FinalReport.pdf Year: 2005 Country: United States URL: http://www.claycountycollaborative.org/meetings/files/RSP2003-2005FinalReport.pdf Shelf Number: 147750 Keywords: Aftercare Prisoner Reentry Treatment Programs Young Adult Offenders

Author: Foley, Jillian Title: Gender-Responsive Policies and Practices in Maine: What Incarcerated Women at the Women's Center Say They Need from the Criminal Justice System Summary: Female offenders have unique experiences that have led to their incarceration compared to men. Maine women offenders are no exception to this fact. These women, while incarcerated are still mothers, grandmothers, daughters, friends, business owners, students, and members of our community. Incarcerated women need the same things we all need: to feel respected, to have hope for the future, to be able to support themselves financially, and to feel connected to their families, friends, and community. Research shows that some of the most important factors that can help reduce recidivism among women is to ensure they can support themselves and their families through gainful employment, have a support system in place to deal with any mental health, trauma related, or substance abuse issues, and have a pro-social peer and family support network. Corrections facilities are designed with the purpose to "correct" the criminal behavior that has resulted in incarceration, and therefore should focus their policies, practices, and programs on those risk factors and needs that will help to achieve this goal. In order to reduce recidivism and truly help these women, criminal justice systems must implement gender-responsive policies that address the distinct needs and experiences of incarcerated women. The purpose of this study was to give a voice to Maine's incarcerated women and potentially influence the ongoing policy revision process in Maine. The researcher conducted 3 focus groups with 18 residents of the Women's Center- a gender-responsive facility that houses about 70 to 80 incarcerated women at the Maine Correctional Facility in Windham, ME. Researchers wanted to know what works well at the women's center, what does not work, and how the women felt the policies could be improved to better fit their needs as incarcerated women. The perspectives of the participants varied, however, the findings of the study were largely in line with the literature guidelines for gender-responsive policies and practices. The participants expressed a desire for an environment where they can feel safe, respected and empowered to change their lives for the better. In order to live independent, crime free lives after they leave, the participants said they need more hands on, concrete re-entry planning and help finding supports in the community they are returning to. The women also expressed a need for job training and experience. For many of these women the most important motivation to change was the connection to their families and the hope for re-unification. In order to address these needs, gender-responsive policies and practices need to be developed and consistently implemented. Details: Portland, ME: Muskie School of Public Service, University of Southern Maine, 2012. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: http://usm.maine.edu/sites/default/files/cmhs/Jillian%20Foley%20Capstone.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://usm.maine.edu/sites/default/files/cmhs/Jillian%20Foley%20Capstone.pdf Shelf Number: 132359 Keywords: Correctional Program Female Inmates Female Offenders (U.S.) Female Prisoners Gender Specific Responses Prisoner Reentry

Author: Cox, Stephen M. Title: The Final Report of the Evaluation of the Court Support Services Division's Probation Transition Program Summary: The Judicial Branch's Court Support Services Division (CSSD) began accepting probationers into the Probation Transition Program (PTP) on October 1, 2004 in five probation offices. The PTP targeted inmates who had probation sentences that followed their prison sentence and subsequent release from the Department of Correction (DOC). The overarching goal was to reduce the technical violation rate of split sentence probationers by helping them re-enter their community following prison release. In theory, the lower caseloads would allow PTP officers to spend more time assessing probationers, helping them find appropriate services, and monitoring their behavior. Legislative funding to the Judicial Branch to hire more probation officers led to the statewide expansion of the PTP in February of 2007. Faculty from the Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice from Central Connecticut State University were contracted to evaluate the PTP expansion. The following report summarizes the findings and conclusions of this evaluation. Details: New Britain, CT: Central Connecticut State University, 2010. 57p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 15, 2014 at: http://www.ccsu.edu/uploaded/departments/AcademicDepartments/Criminology__criminal_justice/Cox/Probation_Transition_Program_Final_Report_(2010).pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.ccsu.edu/uploaded/departments/AcademicDepartments/Criminology__criminal_justice/Cox/Probation_Transition_Program_Final_Report_(2010).pdf Shelf Number: 132366 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Probation Caseloads Probationers (Connecticut)

Author: Stys, Yvonne Title: Federal Offenders with a High Reintegration Potential (RP): Characteristics and Community Outcomes Summary: Correctional systems are tasked with managing a diverse population of offenders from those who could be released from custody early in their sentence, without risk of re-offence; to those who may never be safely released. The challenge is to identify those suitable for early release through an effective assessment process. In addition to individual measures of risk, the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC or the Service) calculates a reintegration potential (RP) score; this RP classification forms the basis of the offender's correctional plan and paves the way for a specific correctional path. Given the potential value of effective assessment for identifying lower risk offenders, it is important to know whether the expected differences in the flow of offenders through correctional systems can actually be demonstrated. To do so, this research examined the characteristics of 21,746 offenders admitted to the CSC between 2002 and 2006 and recorded the success of their releases into the community until January 2010. Of this group, a total of 8,824 offenders identified at admission as being lower risk (high RP) were followed through the system from admission to release (and for those who were not successful, back to custody) in order to investigate the characteristics of these offenders and to determine if they are following a correctional trajectory that is consistent with what would be expected for this group. A profile of offenders with a high RP was created through the examination of admission information, institutional experiences, and community outcomes. These results were then compared against those who were designated as offenders with medium or low RPs in order to identify the distinct attributes of the high RP cohort. Analyses were conducted separately for four groups of offenders (study groups); non-Aboriginal males (n=16,815), Aboriginal males (n=3,731), non-Aboriginal women (n=876) and Aboriginal women (n=324). At the time of admission, both high RP non-Aboriginal offender groups were found to be significantly older than their medium and low RP counterparts. Generally, males with a high RP tended to be admitted for shorter sentence lengths than the medium and low RP groups, although this relationship did not always hold true for the women's groups. Offenders with a high RP were also generally less likely to be admitted with a violent offence, and more likely to be admitted for a drug-related offence than offenders with medium or low RPs. Examination of institutional experience revealed that only non-Aboriginal women offenders with a high RP differed from their medium RP counterparts in institutional program participation - they were more likely to start and complete programs - and only non-Aboriginal male offenders with a high RP were less likely than their low RP counterparts to complete programs. Where there were significant differences in institutional employment, the high RP groups were always employed for significantly fewer days than the other RP levels, even when time served in the institution was taken into account. The high RP Aboriginal groups did not differ from the medium RP groups and the high RP Aboriginal women group did not differ from the low RP group in terms of involvement in institutional incidents, however in all other instances, the high RP groups were significantly less likely than the medium and low RP groups to be involved in institutional incidents as the instigator/associate. When considering release types, results indicated that offenders with a high RP were generally more likely than offenders with medium and low RPs to participate in escorted and unescorted temporary absences (ETAs and UTAs), with limited exceptions for women offenders. Overall, offenders with a high RP were significantly more likely than the other RP levels to be granted day or full parole as their first release from custody, again with limited exceptions for women offenders - for example there was no significant difference in this regard when comparing high and medium RP Aboriginal women. All four high RP offender groups served a significantly smaller percentage of their sentence prior to their first release than offenders in the medium and low RP groups. Finally, survival analyses conducted to determine differences in the risk of failure upon release for the three RP levels found that for all four interest groups, offenders with a high RP were significantly more likely to be successful on release, and less likely to experience a revocation or a new offence upon release. Specifically, being an offender with a medium RP rather than an offender with a low RP was found to increase the hazard of return to custody by between 1.52 (Aboriginal males) and 2.39 (non-Aboriginal males), and being an offender with a low RP rather than an offender with a high RP increased the hazard of return to custody by between 1.93 (Aboriginal males) and 3.37 (non-Aboriginal males). In conclusion, based on these outcomes, it would appear that the designation of high reintegration potential is associated with better access to correctional resources and earlier release from prison to serve the balance of the sentence in the community. Offenders with a high RP are generally following a correctional trajectory appropriate for that RP level and are performing as would be expected in the community. However, it should be noted that not all offenders who are identified as having a high RP are actually released early, nor do they all succeed after release. This demonstrates the variability of risk within the high RP group and suggests that reintegration potential may require some adjustments to the scoring which serves to define the levels for the three groups. Details: Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada, 2012. 122p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Report No. R-260: Accessed May 15, 2014 at: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/lbrr/archives/cn21494-eng.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Canada URL: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/lbrr/archives/cn21494-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 132371 Keywords: Early Release Parole Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Reintegration Reoffending Risk Assessment (Canada)

Author: Pew Charitable Trusts Title: Max Out: The Rise in Prison Inmates Released Without Supervision Summary: Despite growing evidence and a broad consensus that the period immediately following release from prison is critical for preventing recidivism, a large and increasing number of offenders are maxing out-serving their entire sentences behind bars-and returning to their communities without supervision or support. These inmates do not have any legal conditions imposed on them, are not monitored by parole or probation officers, and do not receive the assistance that can help them lead crime-free lives. An analysis of this trend by The Pew Charitable Trusts found that: - Between 1990 and 2012, the number of inmates who maxed out their sentences in prison grew 119 percent, from fewer than 50,000 to more than 100,000. - The max-out rate, the proportion of prisoners released without receiving supervision, was more than 1 in 5, or 22 percent of all releases, in 2012. - Max-out rates vary widely by state: In Arkansas, California, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Oregon, New Hampshire, and Wisconsin, fewer than 10 percent of inmates were released without supervision in 2012. More than 40 percent of inmates maxed out their prison terms and left without supervision in Florida, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Utah. - Nonviolent offenders are driving the increase. In a subset of states that had data available by offense type, 20 and 25 percent of drug and property offenders, respectively, were released without supervision in 2000, but those figures grew to 31 and 32 percent, or nearly 1 in 3, in 2011. The increase in max-outs is largely the outcome of state policy choices over the past three decades that resulted in offenders serving higher proportions of their sentences behind bars. Indeed, "truth-in-sentencing" laws, limits on release eligibility, and the outright elimination of parole in some states added nine months to the average prison time served by offenders released in 2009, compared with those released two decades earlier. Details: Washington, DC: Pew Charitable Trusts, 2014. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 16, 2014 at: http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/PCS_Assets/2014/MaxOut_Report.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/PCS_Assets/2014/MaxOut_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 132468 Keywords: Criminal Justice Policy Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Council of State Governments Justice Center Title: Reducing Recidivism: States Deliver Results Summary: In Reducing Recidivism: States Deliver Results, the National Reentry Resource Center (NRRC) highlights eight states that have achieved reductions in statewide recidivism in recent years: Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Wisconsin. The report focuses on statewide recidivism data for adults released in 2007 and 2010 with a three-year follow-up period, offering a current snapshot of criminal justice outcomes in these states. The report also features examples of recidivism-reduction strategies and programs that the states have undertaken in this timeframe, as well as additional data on the state's criminal justice populations through 2013. This report follows a 2012 National Reentry Resource Center report featuring seven additional states that had lowered recidivism since 2005. Highlighting an interesting cross-section of states representing different regions of the nation, sizes in prison populations, and correctional systems, the two reports demonstrate it is possible for states to achieve significant reductions in statewide recidivism through system-level change. Details: New York: Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2014. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 17, 2014 at: http://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/ReducingRecidivism_StatesDeliverResults.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/ReducingRecidivism_StatesDeliverResults.pdf Shelf Number: 132482 Keywords: Criminal Justice Reform Criminal Justice Systems Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Pew Charitable Trusts Title: Mandatory Reentry Supervision: Evaluating the Kentucky Experience Summary: In 2011, the Kentucky Legislature passed the Public Safety and Offender Accountability Act (HB 463), which sought to earn a greater public safety return on the state's corrections spending. The historic measure included a mandatory reentry supervision policy that required every inmate to undergo a period of post-release supervision so that no inmates would be released from prison to communities without monitoring or support. This brief summarizes recent state corrections data and an independent evaluation of the policy commissioned by The Pew Charitable Trusts, which found that mandatory reentry supervision: - improved public safety by helping reduce new offense rates by 30 percent. - resulted in a net savings of approximately 872 prison beds per year. - saved more than $29 million in the 27 months after the policy took effect. Details: Philadelphia: Pew Charitable Trusts, 2014. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 9, 2014 at: http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/Assets/2014/06/PSPP_Kentucky_brief.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/Assets/2014/06/PSPP_Kentucky_brief.pdf Shelf Number: 132635 Keywords: Offender Supervision Parole Supervision Parolee Prisoner Reentry

Author: Council of State Governments Justice Center Title: Reentry Matters: Strategies and Successes of Second Chance Act Grantees Across the United States Summary: With over 95 percent of people in the nation's state prisons expected to be released at some point, officials at all levels of government recognize the need for initiatives to support the successful reentry of these individuals to their communities. For the estimated 60,000 youth incarcerated in juvenile detention and correctional facilities on any given day, there is a particular urgency to help them avoid crime and improve their prospects for a successful future when released. In 2008, Congress responded to these needs by passing the Second Chance Act, first-of-its-kind legislation that was enacted with bipartisan support and backed by a broad spectrum of leaders in law enforcement, corrections, courts, behavioral health, and other areas. The legislation authorizes federal grants that support reentry programs for adults and juveniles, nearly 600 of which have been awarded to government agencies and nonprofit organizations in 49 states by the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Justice Programs. The program snapshots below illustrate the positive impact these reentry initiatives can have by focusing on areas vital to reintegration back into the community, including employment, education, mentoring, and substance abuse and mental health treatment. Also highlighted are programs that address the needs of a particular population, such as youth, women, and tribal communities. Representing a wide range of populations served, these programs also demonstrate the diversity of approaches that can address recidivism and increase public safety. Details: New York: Council of State Government Justice Center, 2013. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 16, 2014 at: http://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/ReentryMatters.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/ReentryMatters.pdf Shelf Number: 132690 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Reintegration Recidivism Rehabilitation Programs Second Chance Act

Author: Formerly Incarcerated Convicted People's Movement Title: Communities, Evictions, and Criminal Convictions: Public Housing and Disparate Impact: A Model Policy Summary: This report is broken into five primary pieces, along with an Introduction and conclusion. Section I: Introduction provides a starting point on the topic of public housing and criminal conviction policies, rooting this issue in one particular city. New Orleans tangles with the most intense incarceration in America, and thus the world. Seemingly innocent programs related to criminal convictions, can take on a primary role in a city such as New Orleans, where one in seven Black men is either in prison, on parole or probation. To fully grasp the community impact of affordable housing barriers in this sphere, one must account for arrest, incarceration, and poverty rates. Particular to civil rights law, one should factor in the proportionality between recognized ethnic and language groups. It is no mystery that in New Orleans, policies that affect people impacted by the criminal justice system (both individuals and families) are disproportionately affecting people of Color- especially African-Americans. The contrasting affect is most glaring when comparing the drug enforcement policies of densely populated, overwhelmingly White, college students. The excuse of 'experimentation' has been reserved for a certain segment of young drug users. Public housing exclusion standards apply to entire families, thus the impact is far broader than the tens of thousands who are formerly convicted, whether incarcerated or not. Statistics typically fail to account for those who are no longer serving a punishment, yet they too have a criminal history that impacts their ability to obtain housing or employment. Hurricane Katrina exasperated the dilemma of a public housing shortage, and rebuilding efforts have intentionally been below previous capacity. There are now over 27,000 households on the waiting list for affordable housing, putting pressure on other services to deal with homelessness. In Section II, this report provides a brief overview on housing and policing policies within the context of The War on Drugs. The primary method of encouraging 'drug free' behavior has been punishment, while the primary mode of enforcement has been to focus on densely populated low-income communities of Color. The exclusions and evictions from public housing has been accelerated along with the escalation of the War on Drugs. Accordingly, it may make sense for a recession of the punitive policies to span all fronts as widespread de-escalation is afoot in response to the growing sentiment that the War on Drugs has been a failure. The goal of Forced Sobriety has justified highly-policed communities and a massive construction boom (and employment growth) associated with prison expansion. The Department of Justice estimates that nearly 7% of all people born after 2001 will serve time in state or federal prison; this is on top of the 65 million people who currently have been convicted of a crime. If current rates continue, about 1 in 17 White men, 1 in 6 Hispanic men, and 1 in 3 African American men are expected to serve prison time in their lifetime. It is difficult to imagine anyone in the public sphere being satisfied with these statistics. The history of public housing, and HUD, includes an acknowledged discrimination over time. The 1.1 million remaining public housing units, and 2.2 million households assisted by vouchers, must be implemented in a manner consistent with HUD's mission to support community development. HUD has long been a partner with local policing efforts. This partnership deserves scrutiny in the same manner as the police, as overly aggressive tactics have become (in some opinions) more destructive than the harms they purport to reduce. Section III looks at how government actors are evolving on criminal justice, and new policies are competing with the 'Tough on Crime' reactionary rhetoric. The National Reentry Council is an interagency approach to confront the effects of mass incarceration. The most active agency among them, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, has been dealing with employment issues for decades, and the agency's 2012 policy change regarding the use of criminal records in hiring is a major breakthrough. The EEOC provided one of the most significant advances in recent Civil Rights law, and they make specific findings regarding national data. Specifically, the EEOC finds that the criminal justice system disproportionately impacts Black and Latino people in America. This is significant when assessing a neutral policy under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1965, and any blanket policy using criminal history alone to exclude people will run afoul of Title VII. The EEOC provides a framework to guide policies in both the public and private sector. Courts have held that the various Civil Rights statutes are intended to work as a unified framework, thus developments in employment law can be persuasive regarding similar issues in housing law. Section IV lays out the complex web of laws that serve as Congressional guidance to local public housing authorities (PHA), regarding the exclusions and evictions from subsidized programs. Ultimately, HUD allows broad discretion to the local PHA. By comparing policies to the HUD requirements, and comparing them to each other, it is clear that overly restrictive, and extremely vague, policies are guiding decisions that have a far-reaching affect on community housing. When HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan put out a clear statement, that only two types of crimes are barred from HUD, few local agencies took any action. Only people convicted of sex offenses, and on a Registry for life, along with those who manufactured methamphetamines on federal property, are barred from public housing. Congress makes particular exclusions optional beyond that, generally related to drug use. If someone was previously evicted for a drug related crime, they are faced with a three-year ban unless the offending family member is in prison, dead, or completed a drug rehabilitation program. However, community members around the country have been dealing with policies that don't provide for those nuances. A model admission and eviction policy is included. This policy is currently being used as a starting point for changes in New Orleans, and has gotten past a public hearing stage. It addresses the need for the PHA to be part of a system where mentally ill and addicted people are directed towards help rather than prisons and homelessness. The phrase 'Reasonable Time' is reasonably defined, eliminating the extreme lengths of time people are facing around the country before eligibility for affordable housing. The Housing Authority of New Orleans is currently working to develop and finalize a policy in accordance with these principals. Section V is a detailed assessment of housing discrimination under federal law. It also includes a proposed change (as of this writing) of HUD's policy, by finally providing a federal code regarding disparate impact in housing. Disparate impact is when a neutral policy becomes discriminatory- such as using drug convictions to exclude people from public housing. Whereas studies indicate drug use is similar across all identified races, the chosen policing patterns result in an overwhelming percentage of drug convictions concentrated in Black and Latino communities. All additional penalties attached, based on those convictions, will disproportionately impact Black and Latino people. Thus, 'Disparate Impact.' Courts have long transferred disparate impact theory between employment and housing, but at times differed on the proper standards and process. It is important for advocates to gain a full understanding of disparate impact theory. This is likely to serve as a legal framework for pushing back against a myriad of criminal justice policies that have resulted in the systemic loss of economic and political power among Black and Latino communities. The EEOC has found four key factors so that employers may design an acceptable 'targeted screen,'rather than a blanket policy subject to civil rights lawsuits. These factors are (1) Nature of the crime; (2) Time elapsed; (3) Nature of the job; and (4) Individual assessment. Housing providers, particularly where there is a documented shortage of affordable housing (i.e. New Orleans), should develop a similar screen suitable to residential life. Section VI focuses on the key elements to make a legal case for dispirate impact in the courts. Those who are not interested in litigating a claim will nonetheless want to appropriate some of the standards and justifications that the courts have developed as consistent with the constitution. One complication in presenting 'impact' data is that many people with criminal records (and their families) do not apply for public housing. Most people have 'heard' you can't get in with a felony, to some degree of accuracy or another. Even if they were fully knowledgeable about the waiting periods, it is impossible to know how many are foreclosed because they would need to not know the policy, apply anyway, and be denied. Thus, data of this sort may require a study of the potential (rather than actual) applicants who are deemed ineligible solely due to criminal convictions. If Black residents have a rate below 80% of the White residents' rate, it is likely to be deemed sufficiently 'disparate.' Under disparate impact litigation, housing providers would need to present the court with their substantial, legitimate, nondiscriminatory interests being served by the exclusion policies. Furthermore, they will be tasked to show that the exclusions actually serve the goal: Resident safety. This cannot merely be speculation. Finally, reformers can still prove victorious by showing that the interests (i.e. resident safety) can be achieved in a less discriminatory manner. PHA's who understand this civil rights litigation framework are more likely to recognize that a court may ultimately order them to a negotiating position exactly like the one being offered at the outset. Delaying the adoption of a new policy by requiring the court order is the least cost-efficient way forward. This report recognizes that there is a movement to repeal Civil Rights protections for people of Color in America. Although Justice Antonin Scalia famously referred to the protection of voting rights as 'just another racial entitlement,' the sentiments of state and federal policymakers suggest that Civil Rights are not going to be eroded. Racial disproportion is one manner of addressing the problems of discrimination, and is the primary path outlined in this report. As criminal records impact a larger swath of America, however, new legal arguments will emerge regarding the rationale to continue, or repeal, this framework that supports two separate citizenships. The Appendix provides the complete proposed policy for the Housing Authority of New Orleans, and a nationwide sample snapshot of six other cities. Details: Formerly Incarcerated & Convicted People's Movement, 2013. 68p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 23, 2014 at: http://ficpmovement.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/communities-evictions-criminal-convictions.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://ficpmovement.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/communities-evictions-criminal-convictions.pdf Shelf Number: 132744 Keywords: Ex-Offenders Ex-Offenders, Housing Prisoner Reentry

Author: Goliday, Sean J. Title: Reentry in the District of Columbia: Supporting Returning Citizens' Transitions into the Community Summary: Each year an estimated 2,000 - 2,500 offenders return to the District of Columbia from prison and roughly 17,000 cycle through the D.C. Department of Corrections. These individuals face a number of challenges upon their return, not the least of which are finding and sustaining adequate housing and meaningful employment. As is known, many offenders disproportionately return to a small number of neighborhoods, which are struggling with high unemployment rates, lack of affordable housing, and strained resources. This is, perhaps, useful for understanding why roughly 2/3rds of returning citizens recidivate upon their return to the community. We find that both locally and nationally, these rates have been fairly consistent over the last several decades. Given these high rates of recidivism coupled with the knowledge that the overwhelming majority of those individuals who are incarcerated eventually get released, the idea of reentry transitional planning becomes ever so important. Details: Washington, DC: District of Columbia Criminal Justice Coordinating Council, 2013. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 28, 2014 at: http://cjcc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/cjcc/page_content/attachments/ReentryGrantReportFinalReportDecember2013.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://cjcc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/cjcc/page_content/attachments/ReentryGrantReportFinalReportDecember2013.pdf Shelf Number: 132787 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Malloch, Margaret Title: The Elements of Effective Through-Care. Part 1: International Review Summary: This report forms Part 1 of a two-part review of the elements of effective through-care. It examines the international evidence in order to identify practice that appears to be effective, alongside areas that may hinder effective interventions. Part 2 examines this evidence alongside a review of practice in Scotland. The available evidence, consisting of international research and practice evaluations, clearly highlights the practical issues that prisoners experience at the point of release and transition into the community. These issues often appear more entrenched for short-term prisoners for whom rates of reconviction are highest. The review confirms that already existing difficulties in areas such as accommodation, income, employment, drug and alcohol problems can actually deteriorate after release from custody, and imprisonment may serve to further marginalise particular groups (for example women, young and elderly prisoners, and minority ethnic groups). While programmes in prison may help prepare prisoners for release, according to international research and evaluations these programmes will have greater impact if stable accommodation and employment opportunities are available in the community. Reductions in reoffending appear to be directly related to the availability of support following release, with international evidence suggesting that after-care may be as important as the provision of interventions during the period of custody. Through-care is intended to ensure processes are in place to support prisoners as they move back into their local communities and, to some extent, mitigate the worst effects of detrimental social and economic factors which affect the lives of many people processed by the criminal justice system. There is significant variation regarding the legislative context of through-care provision which can consist of both policy and statutory bases; varying across countries but also across regions and local states within a national framework. The provision of support at this transitional stage can reduce the likelihood of reoffending. Internationally, challenges to the provision of through-care arise from fragmentation of services, under-funding and a limited evidence base for service development. While this review drew on an extensive range of international literature, there are a number of limitations in the evidence available and very little evidence of outcomes obtained as a direct result of through-care services. Differences are evident between academic or independent reviews of through-care provision and project evaluations or policy analysis. Different methodological approaches can also hamper attempts to consider evidence comparatively and an over-reliance on reconviction data often obscures many of the 'softer' measures which are present in the process of (re)-integration. However, despite these caveats, there is sufficient evidence from which a number of conclusions may be drawn with regard to through-care provision. Details: Edinburgh: Scottish Centre for Crime & Justice Research, 2013. 66p. Source: Internet Resource: Report No. 03/2013: Accessed July 28, 2014 at: http://www.sccjr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/International_Through-care_Review.pdf Year: 2013 Country: International URL: http://www.sccjr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/International_Through-care_Review.pdf Shelf Number: 132806 Keywords: Aftercare Ex-Offender Employment Ex-Offenders, Housing Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Reintegration

Author: Anderson, Simon Title: Evaluation of the Community Reintegration Project Summary: This is an evaluation of the Community Reintegration Project (CRP), which formed part of the Scottish Government's wider Reducing Reoffending Programme (RRP) and focused on addressing the needs of offenders serving prison sentences between six months and less than four years. Executive Summary - All four prison sites operated a process that was consistent with the broad CRP model - in that it involved structured engagement with offenders through five broad stages, referral to CJSW and relevant services - but there was considerable variation in how activities were delivered. - The number of offenders eligible for - and participating in - the project was relatively small in all prisons except HMP Perth, raising questions about whether the pilot reached 'critical mass'. - Meaningful engagement with the CRP (participation in a Comprehensive Screening) appears to have happened in around half of all eligible admissions, but there was a high degree of attrition beyond this with many scheduled meetings not taking place. - Practitioners were generally supportive of the principle of the CRP but were concerned about particular aspects of the process, such as the paperwork and training. There was also evidence that systems for monitoring progress were not always effective. - There is some evidence that the CRP facilitated progress towards short and medium-term outcomes for organisations and staff, though there remains scope for further improvements in joint working and engagement and motivation of eligible offenders. At this stage there is limited evidence about the impacts of the CRP on individual offenders, though some qualitative accounts indicate the potential to achieve the intended long-term outcomes. - Key contextual factors shaping implementation and impact included the 'crowded landscape' of overlapping (and potentially competing) service provision; broad cultural and strategic shifts within SPS; and the physical and organisational contexts within specific sites. - The CRP process could be optimised through improvements to the paperwork and training; greater clarity about inter-agency roles and communication channels; a distinctive 'brand' identity for the project; and creative responses to the constraints of individual sites. - There is evidence that the CRP's underlying theory of change remains broadly plausible, but throughput needs to be increased and attrition reduced - and community-based services adequately resourced - for it to achieve impact on a significant scale. Details: Edinburgh: Scottish Social Research, 2014. 115p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 11, 2014 at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0045/00456670.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0045/00456670.pdf Shelf Number: 132971 Keywords: Male Offenders Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Reintegration (Scotland) Recidivism Reoffending

Author: Olson, Richard Title: The Safer Foundation: An In-Depth Program Evaluation and Recidivism Study Summary: The Safer Foundation is a non-profit organization in the Chicago area. Its primary mission is to reduce recidivism among formerly incarcerated persons (FIPs) by supporting, through a full spectrum of services, their efforts to be employed, law-abiding members of the community. The organization has been working toward this goal for more than forty years and regularly reshapes and reimagines their programming in order to best serve the changing needs of the community. An multi-method process and outcome evaluation of the Safer Foundation was conducted to understand the extent to which the foundation is achieving desired outcomes as well as to collect and synthesize staff and client input in order to improve client services. Under the direction of Safer administrators, this evaluation was completed with a number of aims. We have identified three primary objectives and their expected outcomes. First, it was predicted that clients enrolled in services at the Safer Foundation will have significantly lower rates of recidivism than formerly incarcerated persons not enrolled in Safer services. Second, data collected from clients and staff will contribute to the understanding of the service model and how efficacy and efficiency can be improved. Finally, we predicted that time spent in Safer Foundation programming will correlate positively with scores on two measures of work self-efficacy. Details: Chicago: Loyola University Chicago, 2013. 100p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed August 22, 2014 at: http://ecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2468&context=luc_theses Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://ecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2468&context=luc_theses Shelf Number: 129975 Keywords: Ex-Offender Employment (Chicago) Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Safer Foundation

Author: Grommon, Eric Title: Understanding the Challenges Facing Offenders Upon Their Return to the Community: Final Report Summary: One of the greatest contemporary challenges for public policy is in the reintegration of offenders released from prison back into local communities. There are well over a million individuals currently incarcerated in state and federal prisons in the United States. Only 7% of prisoners are serving death or life sentences and only a small fraction of inmates die in prison, thus 93% of these individuals will be returning home. About 650,000 individuals are released from prison each year or approximately 160 per day. Perhaps even more dramatic is the fact that the current average length of prison sentence is only 2.4 years and, given that, 44% of state prisoners will be released within a year (Petersilia, 2003). In Michigan, more than 100,000 individuals are released from prison each year; 85% of whom are released under parole supervision. Further exacerbating this situation is the fact that the rate of successful returns of offenders to the community is declining. There are an increasing number of individuals sent to prison as a result of parole violations. Parole violators now account for about a third of all prison admissions (Travis, 2000). Furthermore, the rate of "failure" among released individuals is increasing. In 1984, 70% of those discharged from parole were deemed to be "successful." By 1996, less than half were determined to be successfully discharged (Petersilia, 2000). Similarly, Hughes and Wilson (2003) noted that of state parole discharges in 2000, less than half successfully completed their term of supervision. In Michigan, there is a similar situation with approximately 48% of offenders being returned to prison within a two year period. With recognition of these trends and an increased understanding of the dynamics of prisoner reentry, there has been a growing movement to better prepare offenders for the situations they will face upon returning to their communities (Nelson & Trone, 2000; Travis, 2000). Currently, almost every state and federal correctional system has some form of reentry programming designed to facilitate the prisoner's transition back to society. Reentry efforts have sought to create a more systematic preparation of offenders for their return home by addressing the critical areas that research has demonstrated are related to successful community reintegration. Among these critical areas are housing, employment, substance abuse, and family (social support) (LaVigne & Cowan, 2005). Documented reentry efforts have created extensive research on recidivism and its correlates. However, there has been relatively little research on the dynamics of the adjustment process inmates experience when they are released from prison (Petersilia, 2000, 2003; Visher & Travis, 2003). Many studies have found correlations between recidivism and factors such as finding and maintaining employment, locating stable housing, reuniting with children, family and significant social support networks and continuity of substance abuse treatment (if needed). However, there has been little research that explores the manner in which offenders personally deal with the challenges presented in each of these critical areas of reentry. To address this gap in the literature, this study involved a qualitative examination of the challenges offenders face as they make the transition from prison back to the community. The principal objective of this research was to increase our understanding of the reentry process from the perspective of offenders as they confront these challenges during their first year on parole after release from prison. It was envisioned that information from this research could produce a more comprehensive understanding of the reentry process which in turn may enable correctional agencies to better assist offenders in their adjustment to life outside of prison. Increasing this positive adjustment may produce lower recidivism rates. When recidivism rates are high, scarce economic resources that are needed elsewhere are often spent on corrections. In the United States is costs about $25,000 per year to incarcerate one person, and the total amount spent on corrections has risen to more than $50 billion annually (Petersilia, 2003; Stephan, 2004). In addition, imprisonment negatively impacts many families. More than half of all male inmates are fathers of minor children, while two-thirds of female inmates are mothers (Mumola, 2000; Petersilia, 2000). Thus obtaining a better understanding the dynamics of successful as well as unsuccessful reentry outcomes has considerable potential for creating interventions to improve these programs and reduce correctional expenditures. Details: East Lansing, MI: Michigan Justice Statistics Center, School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University, 2012. 59p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 2, 2014 at: http://cj.msu.edu/assets/MI-SAC_Reports_Reentry-Interview-Tech-Report_final.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://cj.msu.edu/assets/MI-SAC_Reports_Reentry-Interview-Tech-Report_final.pdf Shelf Number: 133162 Keywords: Parole Supervision Parole Violations Parolees Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Rehabilitation Recidivism

Author: Sohoni, Tracy Title: The Effect of Collateral Consequence Laws on State Rates of Returns to Prison Summary: Formal restrictions on a person following arrest or conviction are referred to as "collateral consequence laws" and exist in all states in the US. In recent years, scholars, policy makers and advocacy groups have expressed concern that many of these laws hinder reintegration, increasing the likelihood of future crime. In addition, these laws may interfere with the ability of former offenders to meet conditions of release following incarceration, such as maintaining stable employment and housing or paying child support. In this dissertation I examine the effect of states' collateral consequence laws in the categories of voting, access to public records, employment, public housing, public assistance, and driver's licenses. I examine the impact of these laws on state rates of returns to prison, as measured by percent of prison admissions that were people on conditional release when they entered prison, the percent of exits from parole that were considered unsuccessful due returning to incarceration; the percent of exits from parole that were returned to incarceration for a new sentence, and the percent of exits from parole that were returned to incarceration for a technical violation. I also run an additional fixed effects analysis on the effect of restrictions on Temporary Assistance for Needy Children (TANF) over a seven year period. Ultimately, limitations in the data restrict the conclusions that can be drawn regarding the impact of these laws. Results from the analysis are mixed, indicating that these laws may not have a uniform impact. Surprisingly, these analyses give some indication that collateral consequences may be related to lower rates of returns to prison for technical violations, however future research is needed to confirm this relationship. Possible explanations for these relationships are discussed, as are future research possibilities that would address limitations in the data. Data from the fixed-effects analysis does indicate preliminary support that states that imposed harsh restrictions on TANF saw an increase in state rates of returns to prison, however the analysis will need to be expanded to include state-level controls in order to draw any firm conclusions. Details: College Park, MD: University of Maryland, College Park, 2013. 181p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed September 11, 2014 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/247569.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/247569.pdf Shelf Number: 133277 Keywords: Collateral Consequence Laws (U.S.) Ex-Offender Employment Housing Parolees Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Kerr, Jacqueline Title: The [re]settlement of women prisoners in Northern Ireland: From rhetoric to reality Summary: Penal practices in Northern Ireland are fashioned around the legacy of civil unrest and the imprisonment of politically affiliated prisoners. Women represent a small percentage of the prison population, and most are sentenced for minor 'offences', including non-payment of fines. Women exiting prison share histories of severe social exclusion and complex unmet needs in relation to housing, employment, income, education, training, and mental and physical health. Recently, the introduction of a strategy for the management of women who offend, gender specific standards for working with women prisoners and the establishment of the probation-led Inspire Women's Project, have marked an acknowledgement of women's penality by the Department of Justice. This paper draws upon primary qualitative research data on women's resettlement experience in Northern Ireland to consider the correlation between gender responsive measures and the increasing criminalisation and imprisonment of severely disadvantaged and marginalised women. It explores the failure of gender responsive initiatives to reduce the Northern Ireland female prison population, it examines professional discourse which privileges the responsibilisation of women and the language of choice and reflects upon the up-tariffing of women on the basis of their unmet need rather than the seriousness of their offending. Details: London: Howard League for Penal Reform, 2014. 17p. Source: Internet Resource: Howard League What is Justice? Working Papers 8/2014: Accessed September 12, 2014 at: https://d19ylpo4aovc7m.cloudfront.net/fileadmin/howard_league/user/pdf/Research/What_is_Justice/HLWP_8_2014.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://d19ylpo4aovc7m.cloudfront.net/fileadmin/howard_league/user/pdf/Research/What_is_Justice/HLWP_8_2014.pdf Shelf Number: 133300 Keywords: Female Offenders (Northern Ireland) Gander-Based Programs Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Resettlement

Author: Indianapolis-Marion County City-County Council Title: Indianapolis-Marion County City-County Council Re-Entry Policy Study Commission Report Summary: The statistics spoke loudly: data from the Indiana Department of Correction and the Marion County Jail indicate that approximately 5,000 men and women are released into Marion County from prisons and jails each year. During the last few years, approximately 51% of those released into Marion County have returned to incarceration within three years of their release date. The average annual cost for an incarcerated offender is more than $25,000. Reducing the rate of recidivism would have significant economic and public safety benefits in addition to increasing the number of productive members of our community. In response, the City-County Council decided to take action to address issues that we found. In partnership with our public safety partners, members of the Marion County Re-entry Coalition, the Greater Indianapolis Chamber of Commerce and other community organizations, the Council's Re-Entry Policy Study Commission began its work to examine, on a local level, the number of men and women incarcerated, the number released and the number who recidivate, costs associated with offenders as they move through the prison system and to develop policies to address concerns about our county's high recidivism rate as identified by local business, policy groups, community organizations and social service agencies . These numbers, coupled with the costs to local government, challenge the Council's ability to adequately fund and address concerns raised by our public safety partners, county residents, and to realize the successful outcomes of those re-entering our community from incarceration. The Re-entry Policy Study Commission was created and amended by Council Resolutions 80, 2012 and 90, 2012, respectively. Under the authority of the Council, its purpose is to examine and investigate current policies and procedures relating to the re-entry of ex-offenders and the economic and community impact of reducing recidivism in Marion County. From November, 2012 through April of 2013, the Commission held 10 public hearings, received presentations from subject matter experts and testimony from members of the public. The information provided was both informative and enlightening to members and the public, and central to the content of this Commission Report, which includes findings and recommendations for policy improvements regarding re-entry. The powers and duties as prescribed by the enacting Council resolutions required the Commission to: 1. Review current practices surrounding offender sentencing, incarceration, release and re-integration into the county, 2. Review sentencing practices/guidelines and their role in supporting or crippling successful re-integration, 3. Review costs associated with the processing, prosecution, incarceration, release, probation, and community supervision of the offender, and determine how the funds are utilized and their efficiency and effectiveness as measured by the successful re-integration of the re-entrant population, 4. Review sources of payment of these costs and how they are utilized, 5. Create community goals/targets for successful re-integration of re-entrants into the community and study the potential impact on the city's economic development, 6. Review national best practices for successful re-integration, including use of public funds utilized in the process of prosecution, sentencing, incarceration, and release of offenders, 7. Review the service provider entities which have been most successful in lowering recidivism rates and recommending means of streamlining and possibly eliminating those which have not, 8. Analyze economic cost/benefit to the city and county of incorporating any new policies, 9. Review current barriers to re-entrant employment, housing, and other necessities, 10. Review best practices to encourage more private sector employers to review their hiring and screening policies and provide more non-discriminatory hiring opportunities, 11. Review and analyze our current supportive services (housing, workforce development, etc.) and ways to improve their role in successful re-integration; and 12. Establish a periodic review of the county's recidivism rate and create a method of measuring and tracking successful performance and re-integration of the re-entrants. Details: Indianapolis: The Council, 2013. 51p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 15, 2014 at: http://www.indy.gov/eGov/Council/Committees/Documents/RE-ENTRY/Re-entry%20Policy%20Report.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.indy.gov/eGov/Council/Committees/Documents/RE-ENTRY/Re-entry%20Policy%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 129921 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Reintegration Recidivism

Author: Kirkwood, Steve Title: Supported Accommodation Services for Offenders Summary: This paper examines the links between homelessness and offending and provides a description of supported accommodation services provided by Sacro for offenders in Scotland and a summary of some of the main findings from research on the impact of supported accommodation for offenders. Finally, the paper identifies a set of 'critical issues' for the consideration of practitioners that arise from the research and which may hinder the ability of the ex-offender to 'move on'. These critical issues are: the financial insecurity of many offenders; the relevance of family breakdown; multiple deprivation; over-dependence; the negative effects of hostel accommodation; and offender diversity. These issues highlight the need for more research to explore the short and long-term effectiveness of supported accommodation services in Scotland, taking into account different models of service provision, the individual circumstances of homeless ex-offenders and the social and economic contexts of their lives. Details: Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, 2008. 13p. Source: Internet Resource: CJSWDC Briefing Papers, 11: Accessed September 24, 2014 at: http://www.research.ed.ac.uk/portal/files/9848060/KIRKWOOD_2008_supported_accomodation_services_for_offenders.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.research.ed.ac.uk/portal/files/9848060/KIRKWOOD_2008_supported_accomodation_services_for_offenders.pdf Shelf Number: 133407 Keywords: Ex-Offenders (U.K.) Homelessness Housing Prisoner Reentry

Author: University of Edinburgh Title: Evaluation of Routes Out of Prison: Summary Report Summary: The Wise Group's Routes out of Prison project helps prisoners get the life, social and employment skills they need to rejoin family life and society. Life Coaches, being ex prisoners themselves, use their own experiences in turning their life around to help others do the same. Life Coaches: - work with prisoners serving three month to four year sentences, for four weeks before they leave prison - prepare an action plan for release including arranging help with housing, debt, benefits, addiction, training, education and work experience - provide one-to-one support after release to help people gain life, social and employment skills Details: Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, Criminal Justice Social Work Development Centre for Scotland, 2011. 11p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 25, 2014 at: http://www.thewisegroup.co.uk/content/mediaassets/doc/RooP%20Evaluation%20Summary%20Report%202011.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.thewisegroup.co.uk/content/mediaassets/doc/RooP%20Evaluation%20Summary%20Report%202011.pdf Shelf Number: 133417 Keywords: Ex-Offenders (Scotland) Mentoring Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Rehabilitation

Author: Randall, Megan Title: From Recidivism to Recovery: The Case for Peer Support in Texas Correctional Facilities Summary: Transforming the relationship between criminal justice and mental health in Texas requires innovative policy and program models that successfully integrate the principles of mental health recovery into the criminal justice system - countering the traditionally punitive criminal justice framework with the recovery-oriented principles of hope, wellness, personal responsibility, and empowered self-direction. In this paper, we explore the use of mental health peer support services as one way to support recovery, improve continuity of care, and reduce recidivism for inmates with mental illness during the re-entry process. We present a successful peer support re-entry program model, established in Pennsylvania, and offer preliminary suggestions for a Texas pilot project. We also offer policy recommendations that, if implemented, would broadly improve access to mental health services, ease re-entry transitions for inmates with mental illness, and enhance the viability of peer support re-entry programming. We intend for our recommendations to be a first step toward more extensive stakeholder discussion and research on this issue. It is our hope that this paper will catalyze conversation about the steps Texas must take to integrate recovery into its justice system and provide national policy leadership in a growing field at the pivotal intersection between mental health and criminal justice. Details: Austin, TX: Center for Public Policy Priorities, 2014. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 9, 2014 at: http://forabettertexas.org/images/HC_2014_07_RE_PeerSupport.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://forabettertexas.org/images/HC_2014_07_RE_PeerSupport.pdf Shelf Number: 133625 Keywords: Mental Health Services Mentally Ill Offenders Prisoner Reentry Prisoners (Texas)

Author: Doherty, Sherri Title: An Examination of the Effectiveness of the National Substance Abuse Program Moderate Intensity (NSAP-M) on Institutional Adjustment and Post-Release Outcomes Summary: What it means The findings suggest that the National Substance Abuse Program - Moderate Intensity (NSAP-M) reduced the risks associated with substance use and criminality. The offenders with partial exposure to the program showed the poorest outcomes with respect to return to custody. The results also demonstrate the value of participating in community maintenance even with limited exposure to NSAP-M. Unfortunately, only a small percentage of offenders participated in community aftercare. What we found The occurrence of institutional misconduct was not significantly reduced by NSAP-M participation. Offenders who fully completed NSAP-M were as likely to engage in serious institutional misconduct as offenders who failed to complete all sessions of the program or offenders who had been assigned to NSAP-M but who had not enrolled in the program. Offenders who completed NSAP-M were less likely to be readmitted to prison during the 24-month follow-up period. In fact, offenders who partially completed were 25% more likely to return to prison compared to those who completed NSAP-M. The Not Enrolled group did not differ from program completers in likelihood of returning to custody. At the end of the 2 year follow-up period, 52% of both the Complete and Not Enrolled groups remained in the community, compared to 39% of the Incomplete group. When participation in the National Maintenance Substance Abuse Program delivered in the community and release type were considered, the association between NSAP-M and return to custody was no longer significant, suggesting that release type and community aftercare may be key variables in the pathway between program exposure and returning to custody. Overall, offenders who did not participate in community aftercare were 41% more likely to return to custody than those who had some exposure to the program; offenders who were released on a non-discretionary basis were 53% more likely to return to custody. Why we did this study Ensuring the safety and security of staff and offenders within the institution environment and the safe reintegration offenders into the community are key priorities of Correctional Service Canada (CSC). Correctional interventions can help address offender behavior associated with criminal activity. Given that 80% of the federal offender population has a substance use problem, it is imperative that effective substance abuse interventions are available to these offenders. The current study examined the effectiveness of NSAP-M in addressing the needs of federally incarcerated male offenders who have an identified substance abuse problem. What we did The study examined the effect of NSAP-M on institutional misconduct and return to custody. The study sample consisted of 8,121 male offenders who had accessed NSAP-M between June 2004 and December 2009. Details: Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada, 2014. 59p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Report No. R-290: Accessed October 9, 2014 at: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/research/005008-0291-eng.shtml Year: 2014 Country: Canada URL: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/research/005008-0291-eng.shtml Shelf Number: 133639 Keywords: Correctional Programs Drug Abuse and Addiction (Canada) Drug Abuse and Crime Drug Abuse Treatment (Canada) Drug Offenders Prisoner Aftercare Prisoner Misconduct Prisoner Reentry Prisons Recidivism Rehabilitation

Author: Eurasian Harm Reduction Network Title: Overdose prevention services upon release from prison: Best practices from Scotland, Denmark, Italy and Spain Summary: This 'Fact Sheet' reports on good practice models in four European Union (EU) countries - Scotland, Denmark, Italy and Spain (more specifically, the Catalonia region) - on overdose prevention and management programs upon release from prison. Information gathered includes programme descriptions; evidence of effectiveness; functioning; and involvement of people who use drugs. A separate, complementary mapping report describing the situation in the target countries (Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland and Romania) regarding overdose prevention services upon release from prisons was also produced within Workstream 3: 'Overdose prevention services upon release from prison: Estonia, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland and Romania'. Details: Vilnius: Eurasian Harm Reduction Network (EHRN), 2014. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 17, 2014 at: http://harm-reduction.org/sites/default/files/pdf/fact_sheet_best_practices_overdose_prevention.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Europe URL: http://harm-reduction.org/sites/default/files/pdf/fact_sheet_best_practices_overdose_prevention.pdf Shelf Number: 133803 Keywords: Drug Abuse and Addiction (Europe) Drug Abuse Treatment Drug Offender Treatment Drug Overdoses Prisoner Reentry Substance Abuse Treatment

Author: Hudson, Kirsty Title: Evaluation of the 'Going Straight Contract' Pilot Project. Final Report Summary: The Going Straight Contract was first mentioned in the Social Exclusion Unit's report - Reducing Re Offending by Ex-Prisoners (2002:7). In line with recent developments in the management of offenders (NOMS 2005), the report stipulated that prisoners who engaged with the Going Straight Project should be given the opportunity to obtain direct access to services to address their needs both in and out of custody, as well as being offered continued contact with project staff after release. In response to the Social Exclusion Unit's recommendations, the Home Office produced the 'Reducing Re-Offending National Action Plan' (July 2004) setting out a clear plan for delivery, including action points for implementation of a 'Going Straight' Pilot Project. A sub-regional GSC Pilot Project was thus developed by South West Integration (SWing), in partnership with the Home Office and Her Majesties Prison and Young Offender Institution Guys Marsh (HMP & YOI Guys Marsh), in an attempt to utilise and test this 'end to end' resettlement strategy. This report presents an evaluation of the Going Straight Contract, in which a total of 168 prisoners took part. Structure of the report The report is structured as follows. The remainder of this chapter provides a descriptive overview of the organisational structure of the GSC and the arrangements that surrounded its implementation within HMP & YOI Guys Marsh. It also sets out the methodology used to evaluate the pilot project. Chapter 2 presents findings that relate to how successfully the GSC was integrated within the prison as a whole. First, attention is paid to attempts to integrate the ideals surrounding the Going Straight Contract across the prison as a whole, through changes in the induction process and the use of motivational training, and then ways in which the Pilot Project itself was integrated into the prison, for example, through the incorporation of the personal Officer Scheme. Chapter 3 then presents a profile of the type of prisoners who engaged with the GSC Pilot Project. Details presented include their age and ethnicity, offending behaviour, initial CRIME-PICS II assessment scores, and their problems and needs, as measured by the South West - Offender Management Record (SWOMR - these research tools will be discussed in more detail later in this chapter). Chapter 4 looks at the role of offender management as tasked by the project's Intensive Support Worker (ISW). This chapter also explores how successful the ISW was at linking up with other agencies working in the area of resettlement both in custody and in the community. In doing so it provides further evidence of how well the Project was integrated within the rest of the prison and within the local community. Unlike in chapter two, particular attention will be on the different agencies working relations with the pilot and their perceived advantages of the pilot for offenders. Chapter 5, by an analysis of interviews with prisoners , then focuses on the offenders' views of the pilot as a whole. Chapter 6 presents findings relating to the impact and outcomes of the pilot. This includes levels of continuity of service (as already discussed in chapter 4), as well as changes in crime related attitudes and self assessed problems as measured by the CRIME-PICS II instrument, and changes in employment and accommodation status following intervention by the GSC Pilot Project, as measured by the SW-OMR. Finally, chapter 7 draws together the main research findings from the study and offers some broad conclusions. It also provides recommendations in relation to the future delivery of the national offender management model (NOMM) that could eventually be absorbed (without major upheaval) into the NOMS system. Details: Cardiff: Cardiff University, 2007. 80p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 17, 2014 at: http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/socsi/resources/GSC.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/socsi/resources/GSC.pdf Shelf Number: 133736 Keywords: Offender Management (U.K.) Offender Treatment Prisoner Reentry Probation Supervision Probationers Re-Offending Recidivism

Author: Willison, Janeen Buck Title: Evaluation of the Allegheny County Jail Collaborative Reentry Programs: Findings and Recommendations Summary: This study evaluates two of Allegheny County (PA)'s programs to improve the successful reintegration of jail inmates following their return to the community. Both programs were designed to reduce re-offending through the use of risk/needs assessment, coordinated reentry planning, and the use of evidence-based programs and practices. Urban researchers conducted process and outcome evaluations of these programs to answer critical questions about program performance and effectiveness. The process evaluation examined alignment with core correctional practices, while the outcome evaluation examined rearrests for reentry program participants and two comparison groups of offenders (total N=798). Analyses indicate that both reentry programs reduce rearrest and prolong time to rearrest. These findings are supported by ample evidence of strong program implementation. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2014. 70p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 27, 2014 at: http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/413252-Evaluation-of-the-Allegheny-County-Jail-Collaborative-Reentry-Programs.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/413252-Evaluation-of-the-Allegheny-County-Jail-Collaborative-Reentry-Programs.pdf Shelf Number: 133821 Keywords: Evidence-Based Programs Jails Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Hopkins, Kathryn Title: Prisoners' experience of prison and outcomes on release: Waves 2 and 3 of SPCR Summary: This report presents the findings from Wave 2 (in-custody, pre-release) and Wave 3 (post-custody) of Surveying Prisoner Crime Reduction (SPCR), a longitudinal cohort study of male and female adult prisoners sentenced to between one month and four years in England and Wales between 2005 and 2007. Prisoners were interviewed in prison and in the community between 2005 and 2010 and re-offending was followed-up using police records for two years after release. The report describes prison routine, prisoners' expectations of life after custody and actual outcomes on release, including employment, accommodation, drugs and alcohol, and finance, benefits and debt. It is not an exhaustive account of SPCR Wave 2 and 3 data, but rather aims to summarise the key results from these waves. Results from Wave 1 of the survey (administered on reception to custody) have already been published. This report is based on self-reported survey questions from a representative sample (SPCR Sample 1) of 1,435 prisoners, most of whom (76%) were sentenced to less than 12 months. Some missing data (due to survey attrition) has been recovered, and some supplementary material from longer-sentenced (18 months to four years) prisoners (SPCR Sample 2) is also reported. Comparisons with earlier prisoner surveys are also made. Prisoners were asked about their time in custody during the Wave 2 interviews, which were conducted shortly before release, and about their outcomes on release during the Wave 3 interviews, which were conducted shortly after release. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2014. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Analytical Series: Accessed November 3, 2014 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/368164/prisoners-experience-of-prison-and-outcomes-on-release-waves-2-and-3-spcr.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/368164/prisoners-experience-of-prison-and-outcomes-on-release-waves-2-and-3-spcr.pdf Shelf Number: 133937 Keywords: Longitudinal Cohort Study (U.K.) Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Reintegration Prisoners Re-Offending Recidivism

Author: Victoria. Ombudsman Title: Investigation into the rehabilitation and reintegration of prisoners in Victoria Summary: As this paper notes, Victoria's prison population has grown exponentially in the past few years, and with the impact of recent parole and sentencing reforms further growth is inevitable. In short, the prison population of 4,350 in June 2009 is projected to reach 7,169 in June 2015. The short and medium term consequences of that growth are equally inevitable. Although a massive building program has begun to increase bed capacity across the prison system, the expansion in prisoner numbers has resulted in backlogs in assessment, and affected the availability of programs and support both before and after release. It is also apparent that the reforms to the parole system are having unintended consequences - with the increasing difficulty in obtaining parole, an increasing number of prisoners are leaving without it, at the end of their full sentences, and therefore without the monitoring and reporting requirements that parole would impose. Nor will they necessarily have attended programs designed to reduce offending behaviour, one of the requirements for parole. It is not surprising, when a prison system is required to expand to the degree we are seeing in Victoria today, that the aspirations of the system as reflected in guidelines and procedures are not always met. This is in no way a reflection on the leadership of Corrections Victoria or the many dedicated people who work within the system. Details: Melbourne: Victorian Ombudsman, 2014. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: Discussion Paper: Accessed November 12, 2014 at: https://www.ombudsman.vic.gov.au/getattachment/280f4a06-5927-4221-bf64-d884ba6abaf9//publications/discussion-papers/discussion-paper-investigation-into-the-rehabilita.aspx Year: 2014 Country: Australia URL: https://www.ombudsman.vic.gov.au/getattachment/280f4a06-5927-4221-bf64-d884ba6abaf9//publications/discussion-papers/discussion-paper-investigation-into-the-rehabilita.aspx Shelf Number: 134064 Keywords: Correctional Programs Prison Administration Prison Conditions Prisoner Reentry Prisoners Prisons (Australia) Rehabilitation

Author: Great Britain. Ministry of Justice Title: Peterborough social impact bond: HMP Doncaster: payment by results pilots: final re-conviction results for cohorts 1 Summary: This statistics bulletin presents the final outcomes for cohorts 1 of the Payment by Results (PbR) pilots for both the Social Impact Bond (SIB) at HMP Peterborough and the PbR pilot at HMP Doncaster. The frequency of re-conviction events for the Peterborough SIB cohort 1 is 8.4% lower compared to a matched national control group (142 re-conviction events per 100 offenders in Peterborough's cohort 1 compared to 155 re-conviction events per 100 offenders nationally). This means that the provider is on track to achieve the 7.5% reduction target for the final payment based on an aggregate of both cohorts, but that the pilot did not achieve the 10% reduction target for cohort 1. The cohort 1 re-conviction rate for offenders released from HMP Doncaster was 5.7 percentage points lower than the 2009 baseline year (from 58.0% in the 2009 baseline year to 52.2% in cohort 13). This is a successful outcome for the provider, Serco, because the 5.0 percentage point threshold has been achieved, and they therefore retain the full core contract value for this pilot year. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2014. 15p. Source: Internet Resource: Statistics Bulletin: Accessed November 26, 2014 at: http://socialwelfare.bl.uk/subject-areas/services-client-groups/adult-offenders/ministryofjustice/166708pbr-pilots-cohort-1-results.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://socialwelfare.bl.uk/subject-areas/services-client-groups/adult-offenders/ministryofjustice/166708pbr-pilots-cohort-1-results.pdf Shelf Number: 134258 Keywords: Adult Offenders (U.K.) Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Reconviction Social Services

Author: Social Innovation Partnership Title: Unlocking Offending Data (Women's Information and Resettlement for Ex-offenders): Evaluation Report Summary: The evaluation, carried out by The Social Innovation Partnership (TSIP), in conjunction with academics at the University of Cambridge and London Metropolitan University, tracked the reconviction rates of 104 women who engaged with the service and for whom offending history data was available. The results indicated that the women's offending rate halved in the 12 month period after engagement with WIRE. It has also highlighted: - The high levels of demand for WIRE - A highly flexible, needs-led approach - Intensive work with clients in the early stages from the moment of release - A possible need to resource a longer term service for the clients to aid long-term resettlement The researchers also gathered the perspectives of clients and partner agencies as a part of their research. These concluded that clients regarded WIRE as playing a vital role in helping them resettle into the community. Partner agencies valued WIRE's ability to relieve some of their pressures and work effectively with some of their most chaotic clients. The service was perceived as being particularly successful in sourcing accommodation for women who are generally difficult to house. Details: London: St. Giles Trust, 2012. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 10, 2014 at: http://www.stgilestrust.org.uk/stats-and-info/p192682-support-for-female-prison-leavers-reduces-re-offending.html Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.stgilestrust.org.uk/stats-and-info/p192682-support-for-female-prison-leavers-reduces-re-offending.html Shelf Number: 134302 Keywords: Female Offenders (U.K.) Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Lowen, Matthew Title: Still Buried Alive: Arizona Prisoner Testimonies on Isolation in Maximum-Security Summary: Still Buried Alive: Arizona Prisoner Testimonies on Isolation in Maximum Security (2014) highlights the voices of maximum-security prisoners and catalogues their testimonies describing those experiences. The report, a critical follow-up to Buried Alive (2007) and Lifetime Lockdown (2012), was released on the same day that the Arizona Department of Corrections (ADC) opened 500 newly constructed maximum-security prison beds in ASPC Lewis in Buckeye, Arizona. Details: Tucson, AZ: American Friends Service Committee, Arizona, 2014. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 15, 2015 at: http://afsc.org/sites/afsc.civicactions.net/files/documents/Still%20Buried%20Alive%20FINAL%2011.30.14.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://afsc.org/sites/afsc.civicactions.net/files/documents/Still%20Buried%20Alive%20FINAL%2011.30.14.pdf Shelf Number: 134314 Keywords: Maximum Security Prisons Prisoner Reentry Prisoners Solitary Confinement (Arizona) Supermax Prisons

Author: Gilbert, Jarrod Title: Reintegration Services in the Canterbury Region Summary: The idea for a study of reintegration services came from the work of the Howard League in Canterbury prisons. In particular, prisoners often worried that there were inadequate programmes and services to help them leave prison and prevent them from returning. We began with a focus on the relationship between prisons and NGO services, and this focus was maintained throughout the study. Further themes emerged, especially the broad philosophical, targeted service reorganisation taking place within the Department of Corrections. We found ourselves researching within a maelstrom of changing systems and relationships, which were often imperfectly articulated and imperfectly understood by various participants in the prison and community sectors. Key findings arising from the study include: - There is a consensus in the Department of Corrections management in Canterbury that cooperation between the Department and NGOs is desirable to assist in the rehabilitation and reintegration of prisoners, with the ultimate goals of reducing prisoner numbers and creating fewer victims of crime. - This cooperation between state and independent agencies is mirrored in certain jurisdictions around the world, and from these we can gain certain insights, namely: the importance of mutual 'buy-in' to end goals and the means to achieve them; the necessity for clear and honest lines of communication; and a need for NGO professionalism to be balanced against the risk of NGOs losing their unique and important points of difference that make them effective. - Corrections management have embraced a culture of change and their thinking is sophisticated, though the process is ongoing. - Much of this culture change can generally be understood as moving away from a system with a focus on confinement and toward one with a greater focus on rehabilitation and reintegration. The latter is captured by use of the term 'transitioning' to describe the move from prison to the community. - Acknowledging financial constraints, there was a desire among management to offer more services to prisoners and to 'front load' services rather than waiting until the end of the sentence is nearing, and to engage with prisoners on short sentences. - Management realised that there was a need for better engagement with NGOs. - Prisoners interviewed for this project included men and women with a range of sentences and risk profiles. - The vast majority of prisoners reported a willingness to change away from criminality, with 80 percent of the prisoner sample reporting that they wanted to change 'a lot' about their lives. Recidivism rates, however, show that most will fail. - These prisoners said offending occurred for a number of psychological and practical reasons, many of which can be targeted by programmes and interventions. - The three most prominent types of assistance required were: support and counselling, employment, and alcohol and drug support. - Among prisoners, there was a low level of understanding about what support was available and often there was conflict reported between what prisoners thought they needed and what Corrections was offering them. - The majority of prisoners reported that they heard about programmes or courses mainly from other prisoners, and only a third through Corrections or Probation. - Relationships with Case Officers were largely good, but relationships with Case Managers were mixed, and included a number of very negative experiences. Details: Canterbury, NZ: Howard League for Penal Reform, Canterbury Branch, 2014. 67p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 3, 2015 at: http://www.howardleague.org.nz/uploads/1/1/6/3/11633778/final_report.pdf Year: 2014 Country: New Zealand URL: http://www.howardleague.org.nz/uploads/1/1/6/3/11633778/final_report.pdf Shelf Number: 134518 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Rehabilitation Prisoner Reintegration (New Zealand) Recidivism Reoffending

Author: Jackson, Brian A. Title: Fostering Innovation in Community and Institutional Corrections: Identifying High-Priority Technology and Other Needs for the U.S. Correctional Sector Summary: The agencies of the U.S. corrections enterprise manage offenders confined in prisons and jails and those who have been released into the community on probation and parole. The enterprise is one of the three central pillars of the criminal justice system, along with police and the courts. Corrections agencies face major challenges from declining budgets, increasing populations under supervision, problems of equity and fairness in administrating justice, and other concerns. To better achieve its objectives and play its role within the criminal justice enterprise, the sector needs innovation in corrections technology, policy, and practice. This report draws on published literature and new structured deliberations of a practitioner Corrections Advisory Panel to frame an innovation agenda. It identifies and prioritizes potential improvements in technology, policy, and practice in both community and institutional corrections. Some of the top-tier needs identified by the panel and researchers include adapting transcription and translation tools for the corrections environment, developing training for officers on best practices for managing offenders with mental health needs, and changing visitation policies (for example, using video visitation) to reduce opportunities for visitors to bring contraband into jails and prisons. Such high-priority needs provide a menu of innovation options for addressing key problems or capitalizing on emerging opportunities in the corrections sector. This report is part of a larger effort to assess and prioritize technology and related needs across the criminal justice community for the National Institute of Justice's National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center system. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2015. 133p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 3, 2015 at: http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR820.html Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR820.html Shelf Number: 134524 Keywords: Computer Technology Correctional Administration (U.S.) Jails Prisoner Reentry Prisons

Author: Vallas, Rebecca Title: One Strike and You're Out: How We Can Eliminate Barriers to Economic Security and Mobility for People with Criminal Records Summary: Between 70 million and 100 million Americans-or as many as one in three-have a criminal record. Many have only minor offenses, such as misdemeanors and non-serious infractions; others have only arrests without conviction. Nonetheless, because of the rise of technology and the ease of accessing data via the Internet-in conjunction with federal and state policy decisions-having even a minor criminal history now carries lifelong barriers that can block successful re-entry and participation in society. This has broad implications-not only for the millions of individuals who are prevented from moving on with their lives and becoming productive citizens but also for their families, communities, and the national economy. Today, a criminal record serves as both a direct cause and consequence of poverty. It is a cause because having a criminal record can present obstacles to employment, housing, public assistance, education, family reunification, and more; convictions can result in monetary debts as well. It is a consequence due to the growing criminalization of poverty and homelessness. One recent study finds that our nation's poverty rate would have dropped by 20 percent between 1980 and 2004 if not for mass incarceration and the subsequent criminal records that haunt people for years after they have paid their debt to society. Failure to address this link as part of a larger anti-poverty agenda risks missing a major piece of the puzzle. It is important to note that communities of color-and particularly men of color-are disproportionately affected, and high-poverty, disadvantaged communities generate a disproportionate share of Americans behind bars. As Michelle Alexander argues in her book The New Jim Crow,mass incarceration and its direct and collateral consequences have effectively replaced intentional racism as a form of 21st century structural racism. Indeed, research shows that mass incarceration and its effects have been significant drivers of racial inequality in the United States, particularly during the past three to four decades. Moreover, the challenges associated with having a criminal record come at great cost to the U.S. economy. Estimates put the cost of employment losses among people with criminal records at as much as $65 billion per year in terms of gross domestic product. That's in addition to our nation's skyrocketing expenditures for mass incarceration, which today total more than $80 billion annually. The lifelong consequences of having a criminal record-and the stigma that accompanies one-stand in stark contrast to research on "redemption" that documents that once an individual with a prior nonviolent conviction has stayed crime free for three to four years, that person's risk of recidivism is no different from the risk of arrest for the general population. Put differently, people are treated as criminals long after they pose any significant risk of committing further crimes-making it difficult for many to move on with their lives and achieve basic economic security, let alone have a shot at upward mobility. The United States must therefore craft policies to ensure that Americans with criminal records have a fair shot at making a decent living, providing for their families, and joining the middle class. This will benefit not only the tens of millions of individuals who face closed doors due to a criminal record but also their families, their communities, and the economy as a whole. President Barack Obama's administration has been a leader on this important issue. For example, the Bureau of Justice Administration's Justice Reinvestment Initiative has assisted states and cities across the country in reducing correctional spending and reinvesting the savings in strategies to support re-entry and reduce recidivism. The Federal Interagency Reentry Council, established in 2011 by Attorney General Eric Holder, has brought 20 federal agencies together to coordinate and advance effective re-entry policies. And the president's My Brother's Keeper initiative has charged communities across the country with implementing strategies to close opportunity gaps for boys and young men of color and to ensure that "all young people ... can reach their full potential, regardless of who are they are, where they come from, or the circumstances into which they are born." Additionally, states and cities across the country have enacted policies to alleviate the barriers associated with having a criminal history. While these are positive steps, further action is needed at all levels of government. This report offers a road map for the administration and federal agencies, Congress, states and localities, employers, and colleges and universities to ensure that a criminal record no longer presents an intractable barrier to economic security and mobility. Bipartisan momentum for criminal justice reform is growing, due in part to the enormous costs of mass incarceration, as well as an increased focus on evidence-based approaches to public safety. Policymakers and opinion leaders of all political stripes are calling for sentencing and prison reform, as well as policies that give people a second chance. Now is the time to find common ground and enact meaningful solutions to ensure that a criminal record does not consign an individual to a life of poverty. Details: Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, 2014. 79p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 4, 2015 at: https://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/VallasCriminalRecordsReport.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/VallasCriminalRecordsReport.pdf Shelf Number: 134537 Keywords: Criminal Records Employment Ex-Offender Employment Ex-Offenders (U.S.) Prisoner Reentry

Author: McGuinness, Paul Title: The use and impact of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act (1974): Final Report Summary: 1. This research arises from a current Government review of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act (1974). It considers how recent changes to it may affect offender rehabilitation and employment opportunities, and how employers and ex-offenders perceive and are affected by the law. 2. Criminal convictions are an issue for a considerable portion of the Scottish population. Scottish Government analysts have analysed data from the Scottish Offenders Index to produce actual and estimated numbers of persons within the Scottish population having a criminal conviction. This analysis showed that over 38% of men and 9% of women born in 1973 are known to have at least one criminal conviction. Extrapolating to the population as a whole, at least one-third of the adult male population and nearly one in ten of the adult female population is likely to have a criminal record. 3. Criminal records checks are now a regular experience for many people. Currently over one million applications for basic disclosure of criminal convictions are processed every year by Disclosure Scotland. Recent changes have included the creation of a heightened checking scheme for people working with vulnerable groups. 4. Research and review have increasingly raised questions about the ability of the Act to support the smooth integration of people with historical criminal convictions. Rehabilitation periods set out in law have been criticised as too long in light of research on the declining risks of recidivism over time as well as research on the stigmatising effect of waiting for a criminal record to expire. Amendments to the Act have increased the range of professions and situations that are exempted from the Act. 5. Employment is one of the most strongly correlated predictors of reduced reoffending. Not only does it help establish financial stability, but also roots a range of positive social relationships and bases of identity. However, amendments to the ROA which increasingly exempt professions in health and social welfare sectors may be exacerbating barriers to employment for ex-offenders in a labour market where such professions are expanding relative to industrial and manufacturing jobs. 6. Surveys of employers regularly show a lack of knowledge about the ROA and a bias against recruitment of ex-offenders, although there are important exceptions to this particularly where an employer has had prior experience of interviewing or hiring ex-offenders. Most employers who have taken the time to interview or have employed ex-offenders reported positive experiences and a willingness to further recruit from this group. 7. Ex-offenders report experiences of feeling discouraged, stigmatised and being wrongly questioned about their backgrounds when attempting to gain access to employment and education. These perspectives show how legislative frameworks and employer attitudes which affect recruitment of ex-offenders have an effect not only on the employment rates of people trying to reintegrate into society but also on their long-term psychological and general well-being. 8. This report sets out three possible approaches to reform, graduating in the degree to which they would alter existing practices and presumptions. The most minimal modification of the Act's rehabilitation periods would reduce the passive waiting time. Providing a certificate of rehabilitation would create a more active mode of acknowledging restoration of a person's status as a welcomed member of society. Judicial imposition of occupational disqualification shift focus onto the specific exclusion from certain jobs where a case by case analysis determines this is appropriate. Details: Glasgow: Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research, 2013. 63p. Source: Internet Resource: Report No. 02/2013: Accessed February 7, 2015 at: http://www.sccjr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/SCCJR-ROA-Final-Report-26-June-2013.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.sccjr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/SCCJR-ROA-Final-Report-26-June-2013.pdf Shelf Number: 134557 Keywords: Ex-Offender Employment Offender Rehabilitation Offenders (U.K.) Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Nagrecha, Mitali Title: When All Else Fails, Fining the Family. First Person Accounts of Criminal Justice Debt Summary: The types of financial obligations owed to the state have proliferated, and the penalties for debt have been increasingly criminalized with harsh sanctions. In that sense, our interviews confirmed what other advocacy groups and individual scholars have recently found: There has been a surge in criminal justice debt and increasing state punitiveness meted out to those who fail to pay. Many incarcerated and formerly incarcerated individuals have been swept into what we have come to call a debt-enforcement regime. Punishment is everywhere and criminal justice debt can confine individuals to a liminal space where prison is never a thing of the past. Debt is paid not only by those convicted of crimes, but also by their families (or friends) who are the last stop before re-incarceration. Families and friends provide important assistance in staunching the debt that relatives or friends face when returning from prison, knowing that such debt can trigger punitive consequences, including reincarceration. Our interviews demonstrate that post-prison debt fulfillment is often family subsidized, as returning individuals struggle with criminal justice debt and other challenges of reentry. Even assuming that it is the returning prisoner who has "done the crime," it is often up to his or her friends and family members to help pay the time. This is the main finding of this study. Public policy aimed at collecting debt must ultimately be more closely tailored to the ability of an individual - not that of his or her family or network of friends - to pay what may be due. While families have an important role to play in the successful reintegration of their family member, they should not have to bear the burden of debt repayment as a means to avert the re-incarceration of their loved one. This is particularly important as the financial condition of families of formerly incarcerated people is often precarious even without their shouldering financial penalties. Details: Syracuse, NY: Center for Community Alternatives, 2015. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: accessed February 7, 2015 at: http://www.communityalternatives.org/pdf/Criminal-Justice-Debt.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.communityalternatives.org/pdf/Criminal-Justice-Debt.pdf Shelf Number: 134561 Keywords: Criminal Fees Criminal Fines Criminal Justice Debt (U.S.) Financial Sanctions Offender Finances Prisoner Reentry

Author: Nolan, Amanda Title: Community Employment Characteristics and Conditional Release Outcome among Federal Offenders Summary: What it means Results revealed that maintenance of a community job, but not skill level of the job, was related to a reduced likelihood of recidivism. This demonstrates the importance of a focus on assisting offenders in obtaining employment they can maintain. Furthermore, offenders identified as having the potential for difficulties with maintaining stable employment should be targeted for additional employment intervention to further help them with their reintegration efforts. What we found After controlling for other factors related to recidivism, offenders who were not employed with a stable job were 3.6 times more likely to return to custody for any reason and 2.5 times more likely to return to custody with a new offence than offenders who were employed with a stable job. Skill level of community employment, however, was not found to be significantly related to conditional release outcomes. In examining characteristics that best predicted an offender's likelihood of job stability, results revealed that being of Aboriginal ancestry, having a medium or high level of risk, a low level of motivation, and a moderate or high level of need in the areas of substance abuse and community functioning were meaningfully associated with a lower likelihood of having stable employment in the community. Why we did this study The role employment plays in reintegration and in reducing recidivism has been widely acknowledged. Much remains to be known, however, regarding what underlies this relationship and what variables are most likely to affect success. The purpose of the present study was to explore the relationship between characteristics of jobs obtained by recently released federal offenders and conditional release outcomes. What we did Participants were taken from all federal offenders released into the community on conditional release between April 1st, 2010 and March 31st, 2011. To be included, offenders had to be on the first term of their current sentence, have a follow-up time in the community of a minimum of 180 days, and be employed at least once during the follow-up period. Two community employment characteristics were examined: job stability (maintained at least one job in the community for 90 days or more) and employment skill level (had at least one job in the community that was rated as high-skilled). The total number of participants was 1,741; 94% were men and 13% were of Aboriginal ancestry. In terms of employment characteristics, 81% had at least one job that was considered stable, while 55% had at least one job that was considered high-skilled. Details: Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada, 2014. 1p., (Full report available upon request) Source: Internet Resource: 2014 No. R-316: Accessed March 4, 2015 at: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/005/008/092/005008-0316-eng.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Canada URL: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/005/008/092/005008-0316-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 134752 Keywords: Community Corrections (Canada) Conditional Release Ex-offender Employment Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Reintegration

Author: Disley, Emma Title: Phase 2 report from the payment by results Social Impact Bond pilot at HMP Peterborough Summary: At a time when government finances are stretched there is growing interest in finding new ways to fund public services. One new funding model currently being tested is a Social Impact Bond (SIB). A SIB is a form of payment by results in which funding is obtained from private investors to pay for interventions to improve social outcomes. If these interventions are effective, this should result in savings to government and wider benefits to society. As part of a SIB, the government agrees to pay a proportion of these savings back to the investors. If outcomes do not improve, investors do not receive a return on their investment. In September 2010 the first ever SIB was launched in the UK. Approximately L5 million was invested by private individuals and charities is being used to pay for interventions for offenders discharged after serving short prison sentences (less than 12 months) at HMP Peterborough, a prison in eastern England. RAND Europe has been commissioned to evaluate the development, implementation and operation of this first ever SIB. This report is the second from the independent evaluation. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2014. 62p., app. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Analytical Series: Accessed April 23, 2015 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/phase-2-report-from-the-payment-by-results-social-impact-bond-pilot-at-hmp-peterborough Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/phase-2-report-from-the-payment-by-results-social-impact-bond-pilot-at-hmp-peterborough Shelf Number: 135370 Keywords: Costs of Criminal Justice (U.K.) Interventions Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Social Impact Bonds

Author: Davis Y. Ja Associates Title: Peers Reaching Out Supporting Peers to Embrace Recovery (PROPSPER): A Final Evaluation Report Summary: The Peers Reaching Out Supporting Peers to Embrace Recovery (PROSPER) program, a 4-year federal demonstration project funded through the Recovery Community Services Program (RCSP) initiative of the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT)/Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), was a unique strength-based peer-to-peer recovery community for people who face the dual challenge of recovery and reentry into society from prison, and their family/significant others, in Los Angeles County. Governed and operated by peers, the program offered stage-appropriate holistic social support through a strategic mix of services comprised of a resource facility, support groups, peer-coaching, workshop/seminars, social and recreational activities, and community events. Featuring Recovery Support, Health & Wellness, and Skills to Prosper components, PROSPER enrolled and served at least 125 new Peers annually, for a total of over 500 Peers served during its four year duration. The project aimed to: - Provide a compelling alternative community to counteract negative forces in peers' lives - Build positive self concept and achievement motivation - Reinforce family/significant others' relationships and support - Amplify the treatment/recovery continuum for the target population. The goals of PROSPER's local evaluation were to: 1) assess the program's effectiveness, 2) identify best practices within the program, and 3) indicate possibilities for expanding and replicating PROSPER elsewhere in California. In addition, PROSPER's strength-based, peer-driven recovery community and the array of social supports (emotional, informational, instrumental, and associational) were designed to test the evidence that social support in the form of a peer support recovery community is a critical construct in providing the transitional resources necessary to reduce relapse and recidivism with this population. Details: San Francisco: Davis Y. Ja and Associates, 2009. 100p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 24, 2015 at: http://www.dyja.com/sites/default/files/u24/PROSPER%20Final%20Evaluation%20Report.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://www.dyja.com/sites/default/files/u24/PROSPER%20Final%20Evaluation%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 135384 Keywords: Drug Abuse and Addiction (U.S.) Drug Abuse and Crime Drug Abuse Treatment Drug Offenders Peers Prisoner Reentry Substance Abuse

Author: Pew Charitable Trusts Title: The Impact of Parole in New Jersey Summary: Nearly 700,000 offenders were released from U.S. prisons in 2011. Ensuring their successful re-entry into the community remains a critical issue for public safety. A new analysis of New Jersey data shows that inmates released to parole supervision are less likely to be rearrested, reconvicted, and reincarcerated for new crimes than inmates who serve, or "max out," their full prison sentences and are released without supervision. The two groups return to prison at nearly identical rates, however, because parolees can be sent back for technical violations-such as failing drug tests or missing meetings-that are not associated with committing new crimes. These findings demonstrate not only that supervision can make a decisive difference in controlling criminal behavior among released offenders, but also that technical revocations unrelated to new crimes reduce the cost savings of parole. This brief discusses the findings in depth and examines their implications for states' corrections policies. Details: Philadelphia, DC: Pew Charitable Trusts, 2013. 5p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue Brief: Accessed April 29, 2015 at: http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/legacy/uploadedfiles/pcs_assets/2013/PSPPNJParoleBriefpdf.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/legacy/uploadedfiles/pcs_assets/2013/PSPPNJParoleBriefpdf.pdf Shelf Number: 135415 Keywords: Parole Supervision (New Jersey) Parolees Prisoner Reentry

Author: Denman, Kristine Title: Prison Program Utilization and Recidivism among Female Inmates in New Mexico Summary: Successful reintegration into the community after prison is of great import for both offenders and the public as nearly all prisoners will eventually return to the community. Current estimates indicate that the number of individuals incarcerated nationally in 2013 was 1,574,700, up slightly from 2012 (Glaze and Kaeble, 2014). While females consistently comprised approximately 7% of the total number of individuals incarcerated in state facilities nationally between 2000 and 2013, the rate at which the population of females in state custody grew exceeded that of males (21% between 2000 and 2010 versus 15% of males during the same time period) (ibid). Unfortunately, the majority of former prisoners recidivate. Among a national sample of prisoners released in 2005, over two-thirds were re-arrested within three years of release and nearly 77% were re-arrested within five years; recidivism was highest for property offenders (Durose, Cooper, and Snyder, 2014). While females were re-arrested at lower rates than males, 68% of females were re-arrested five years post-release (ibid). New Mexico has consistently experienced an increase in its female prison population over the past several years. In 2011, the female prison population exceeded the prison capacity, forcing the women to temporarily use a segregated pod at the nearby men's prison. Since fiscal year 2010, the women's prison population jumped by nearly 14% (NMSC, 2014). In response, the New Mexico Women's Correctional Facility (NMWCF) increased its bed capacity to 744 to accommodate the additional inmates. This is not the first time, though, that New Mexico experienced such increases in its female population. Indeed, in response to a burgeoning population, in 2003 the NMCD initiated a gender-responsive model aimed at promoting successful female reentry through appropriate programming (Carr, 2007). Prison programming is important for inmates. Many enter prison with deficiencies in their education, job histories, and in other aspects of their personal lives. Indeed, appropriate in-prison programming can help prisoners successfully reintegrate into society. Details: Albuquerque, NM: New Mexico Statistical Analysis Center, 2015. 82p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 23, 2015 at: http://isr.unm.edu/reports/2015/prison-program-utilization-and-recidivism-among-female-inmates-in-new-mexico.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://isr.unm.edu/reports/2015/prison-program-utilization-and-recidivism-among-female-inmates-in-new-mexico.pdf Shelf Number: 135768 Keywords: Correctional Programs Female Inmates Female Offenders Female Prisoners Gender-Specific Programs Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Hopkins, Kathryn Title: The pre-custody employment, training and education status of newly sentenced prisoners Summary: This report provides a detailed summary of prisoners' employment status and training and education levels prior to coming into custody. It is based on the results of Wave 1 of a longitudinal cohort study (Surveying Prisoner Crime Reduction (SPCR)) of 1,435 prisoners in England and Wales newly sentenced (to between one month and four years) in 2005 and 2006. The study shows that SPCR prisoners experience unemployment, low pay, and low occupational status before custody, and demonstrates differences between men and women prisoners, young adult and older adult prisoners, and prisoners of different ethnic backgrounds. About one-third of prisoners reported needing a lot of help to find a job on release. Prisoners appeared motivated to improve their education and skills. Prison interventions may be able to exploit these circumstances to ensure that the net effect of imprisonment on employment is positive. Reduced reoffending on release was associated with higher education and employment status before custody Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2012. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Research Series 3/12: Accessed May 26, 2015 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/278832/newly-sentenced-prisoners.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/278832/newly-sentenced-prisoners.pdf Shelf Number: 131048 Keywords: Ex-Offender Employment Prisoner Reentry Vocational Education and Training

Author: Sarver, Christian M. Title: Prisoner Reentry Initiatives: Review of the Literature and Reentry in Utah. Summary: Nearly seven million adult offenders were under some form of correctional supervision in the United States (U.S.) in 2011, compared to less than two million in 1980 (Glaze & Parks, 2012). More than 1.5 million of those were incarcerated in state or federal prison, which represents a fivefold increase in just three decades (Travis, 2008). Dramatic growth in the prison population is largely a function of criminal justice reforms that started in the mid-1970s as states moved away from indeterminate sentencing models, which were flexible, individualized, and operated under the discretion of judges and parole boards. Indeterminate models were replaced with policies intended to standardize criminal justice processes, including "truth-in-sentencing," three-strikes, and mandatory minimum sentencing legislation (Campbell, 2008). Simultaneously, in an attempt to "get tough" on crime, many jurisdictions reduced, or entirely eliminated, the practice of discretionary parole release. As a result of these changes, offenders now receive comparatively longer sentences, serve more of that sentence in prison, and are less frequently under parole supervision when they are released (Burke & Tonry, 2006; Petersilia, 2011). Sentencing reform has been identified as the primary force behind rising prison expenditures, which averaged more than $30,000 per inmate annually in 2010 (Henrichson & Delaney, 2012). Efforts to lower prison costs include reducing the number of people who are incarcerated, a strategy that is complicated by the high re-incarceration rates of released offenders (Petersilia, 2004; Taxman, 2009; Travis, 2005). Recommitment rates are fueled by use of "get tough" approaches in parole, which result in offenders being returned to prisons not only for new crimes but, more frequently, for violating the conditions of supervision (Burke & Tonry, 2006). In 2011, more than 600,000 inmates were released from state and federal facilities (Carson & Sabol, 2012). Anywhere from one-half to two-thirds of those individuals will be returned to prison within three years of release (Langan & Levin, 2002; The Pew Center for the States (PCS), 2011). Of the more than 500,000 inmates who exited parole supervision in 2011, one-third of inmates were re-incarcerated within twelve months and 65% of those were for a technical violation (Maruschak & Parks, 2012). There are a number of explanations for the frequency with which offenders are recommitted to institutions, including the collateral impacts of cycling between prison and parole. The majority of offenders enter prison with significant deficits in terms of social and financial capital (Petersilia, 2004; Raphael, 2011; Seiter & Kadela, 2003) and lengthy or repeated episodes of incarceration further disrupt community ties, social relationships, and employment (Wolff, Schi, & Schumann, 2012). When compared to the non-prison population, offenders have lower levels of education, less stable employment and housing histories, less social support, and higher levels of substance abuse (Lynch & Sabol, 2001; Visher, Yahner, & La Vigne, 2010). While the majority of prisons operate programs to address these deficits, budget constraints have limited inmates' access to services (Crayton & Neustetter, 2008; Mumola & Karberg, 2006; National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (NCASA), 2010; Petersilia, 2003). Griffiths, Dandurand, and Murdoch (2007) argue that most offenders had never fully entered society prior to incarceration and conclude that, for many, the risk of recidivism will remain elevated until they "acquire the attitudes and behaviors that result in most people functioning productively in society" (p. 3). Rehabilitative approaches to crime prevention have been viewed with suspicion since Martinson's (1974) study, which appeared to demonstrate that corrections-based treatment programs did not work. And yet, the evidence clearly shows that criminal sanctions alone do not produce long-term behavioral change (Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Cullen & Gendreau, 2000; Stemen, 2007). In contrast, treatment-oriented interventions can have a significant, positive impact on recidivism (Andrews, Bonta, & Hoge, 1990; Aos, Phipps, Barnoski, & Lieb, 2001; MacKenzie, 2006). For example, substance abuse treatment, cognitive behavioral therapy, correctional education, and treatment-oriented intensive supervision are all associated with reduced rates of recidivism and overall cost savings (Aos et al., 2011; Aos, Miller, & Drake, 2006; Drake, Aos, & Miller, 2009; Lipsey, Landenberger, &Wilson, 2007). The combination of longer sentences and relatively limited rehabilitation services means that inmates exit prison with a risk of offending that is similar to, or even higher than, the risk when they were admitted (Petersilia, 2011). Ex-offenders have difficulty obtaining and maintaining employment and housing; they lack positive social support and community ties; and they struggle with substance abuse and mental illness (Gaynes, 2005; Visher et al., 2010). Compounding this situation are state and federal policies that restrict ex-offenders from certain types of employment and benefits programs, including public housing and welfare assistance (Visher, Palmer, & Roman, 2007). As a result, many offenders leave prison without the skills to lead a crime-free life and without access to resources and support to develop or maintain those skills. Details: Salt Lake City: Utah Criminal Justice Center, University of Utah, 2013. 78p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 27, 2015 at: http://ucjc.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/PrisonerReentry_final_090913.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://ucjc.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/PrisonerReentry_final_090913.pdf Shelf Number: 129964 Keywords: Parolees Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Sarver, Christian M. Title: Parole, Re-incarceration, and Desistance: Utah Parolees Summary: The current study complements the earlier literature review and survey of Utah reentry practices and is comprised of two parts. Part I provides a quantitative description for a cohort of Utah parolees, describing their demographic backgrounds, criminal history, and programmatic factors that predict parole violations and new criminal offenses. Part II, based on interviews with 50 Utah parolees, is a qualitative analysis of offenders' experience returning to the community after release from prison. In particular, the qualitative portion of the study explores parolees' perceptions of those things that foster and inhibit reintegration after incarceration. Details: Salt Lake City: Utah Criminal Justice Center, University of Utah, 2014. 79p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 28, 2015 at: http://ucjc.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/Reentry_Yr2.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://ucjc.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/Reentry_Yr2.pdf Shelf Number: 135793 Keywords: Desistance Parole Parolees Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Rehabilitation

Author: Roman, Caterina G. Title: Child Support, Debt, and Prisoner Reentry: Examining the Influences of Prisoners' Legal and Financial Obligations on Reentry Summary: Former prisoners are increasingly facing the burden of financial debt associated with legal and criminal justice obligations in the U.S., yet little research has pursued how - theoretically or empirically - the burden of debt might affect key outcomes in prisoner reentry. To address the limited research, we examine the impact that having legal child support (CS) obligations has on employment and recidivism using data from the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI). In this report we describe the characteristics of adult male returning prisoners with child support orders and debt, and examine whether participation in SVORI was associated with greater services receipt than those in the comparison groups (for relevant services such as child-support services, employment preparation, and financial and legal assistance). We also examine the lagged impacts that child support obligations, legal employment and rearrest have on each other. Results from the crossed lagged panel model using GSEM in STATA indicate that while having child support debt does not appear to influence employment significantly, it does show a marginally significant protective effect - former prisoners who have child support obligations are less likely to be arrested after release from prison than those who do not have obligations. We discuss the findings within the framework of past and emerging theoretical work on desistance from crime. We also discuss the implications for prisoner reentry policy and practice. Details: Philadelphia: Temple University, Department of Criminal Justice, 2015. 84p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 23, 2015 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/248906.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/248906.pdf Shelf Number: 136134 Keywords: Child Support Children of Prisoners (U.S.) Criminal Justice Debt Desistance Ex-Offender Employment Inmates Families Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Wadia, Avan Title: The Informal Mentoring Project: A Process Evaluation Summary: The Mentoring and Befriending Foundation define mentoring as "a voluntary, mutually beneficial and purposeful relationship in which an individual gives time to support another to enable them to make changes in their life". The Informal Mentoring Project was introduced by NOMS and Clinks with the aim of increasing the support available for offenders leaving prison, helping them to reintegrate into society and move towards desistance from crime. It was envisaged that the Informal Mentoring Project would: - provide short-term "light touch" mentoring so that offenders could receive one-to-one support following their release from prison and access services in the community - capacity build existing local organisations to provide mentoring for offenders and - enable offenders to build supportive, trusting relationships with local community members through using local volunteers (including ex-offenders) as mentors. Two organisations ran pilot projects, selected for their differing infrastructure models. Catch22, a national charity, worked with local providers to mentor offenders released from HMP Nottingham. Sefton CVS, a local infrastructure organisation, recruited mentors to work with offenders from HMP Liverpool resettling in the Liverpool and Sefton areas. This report summarises the findings from a process evaluation examining the set-up and implementation of the project. The evaluation ran from March 2011 to November 2012. Although the pilot and evaluation pre-date the Transforming Rehabilitation proposals, the lessons learnt are relevant for understanding the benefits and challenges of undertaking mentoring with offenders, and providing services "through the gate". Details: London: National Offender Management Service, 2015. 75p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 30, 2015 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/448803/informal-mentoring-project.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/448803/informal-mentoring-project.pdf Shelf Number: 136263 Keywords: Mentoring Prisoner Reentry Rehabilitation Voluntary and Community Organizations Volunteers

Author: Brooks, Andrew Title: An Investigation into the Effectiveness of the Focus on Resettlement (FOR) Programme: A Reoffending Study Summary: The FOR programme is a short cognitive-behavioural intervention attended by offenders in prison just prior to release and which aims to increase their motivation to engage with services providing assistance with resettlement. Initial contact is made with these agencies before release with follow up post release thus providing a bridge from custody back into the community. This study used propensity score matching (PSM) to measure the effectiveness of the programme in reducing one-year proven reoffending for the participants from 2004 when it was first implemented to June 2009. Treated and control groups of equal size were used: a male sample of 473 and a female sample of 266. The study aims to assess whether the resettlement programme can contribute to reducing reoffending. This is a historic look at data that had accumulated before significant changes to the content of the FOR programme were made, including an independent quality assurance process replacing peer audit, further training in writing objectives and a more robust framework for continuity between custody and community. Key findings There was no significant change in reoffending rates for males who attended FOR (59.5%) compared to a matched control sample (56.5%). There was no significant change in reoffending rates for females who attended FOR (40.6%) compared to a matched control sample (44.0%). There was no significant difference in the time to first offence between the FOR group and the matched control sample for either the male or female analyses. Details: London: National Offender Management Service, 2015. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Analytical Summary: Accessed July 30, 2015 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/449631/investigation-into-the-FOR-programme.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/449631/investigation-into-the-FOR-programme.pdf Shelf Number: 136264 Keywords: Cognitive Skills Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Rehabilitation Reoffending Treatment Programs

Author: Pearce, Simon Title: HMP Doncaster Payment by Results pilot: Final process evaluation report Summary: The Payment by Results (PbR) pilot provided 'through the gate' support to offenders released from Doncaster prison; the overall aim being to test the impact of a PbR model on reducing reconviction levels. This is the final report from the process evaluation examining the implementation of the pilot. The research explored how the introduction of PbR changed service delivery; stakeholder views on the strengths and weaknesses of the model; and areas of innovation and efficiency. Findings are based on qualitative interviews conducted in 4 phases between November 2011 and September 2014 with: -senior stakeholders -delivery staff -partner agencies -volunteers -offenders Lessons learnt have informed the delivery of the government's Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) programme, as well as future PbR projects and the commissioning of offender management services more generally. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2015. 59p. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Analytical Series: Accessed July 30, 2015 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/449494/hmp-doncaster-pbr-final-evaluation.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/449494/hmp-doncaster-pbr-final-evaluation.pdf Shelf Number: 136273 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Reconviction Rehabilitation

Author: Wiegand, Andrew Title: Evaluation of the Re-Integration of Ex-Offenders (RExO) Program: Two-Year Impact Report Summary: The Reintegration of Ex-Offenders (RExO) project began in 2005 as a joint initiative of the Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration (ETA), the Department of Justice (DOJ), and several other federal agencies. RExO aimed to capitalize on the strengths of faith-based and community organizations (FBCOs) and their ability to serve prisoners seeking to reenter their communities following the completion of their sentences. In June 2009, ETA contracted with Social Policy Research Associates (SPR) and its subcontractors MDRC and NORC at the University of Chicago to conduct an impact evaluation of 24 RExO grantees. The programs funded under RExO primarily provided three main types of services: mentoring, which most often took the form of group mentoring, but also included one-on-one mentoring and other activities; employment services, including work readiness training, job training, job placement, job clubs, transitional employment, and post-placement follow-up; and case management and supportive services. This report summarizes the impacts of the RExO program on offender outcomes in four areas: service receipt, labor market success, recidivism, and other outcomes. Using a random assignment (RA) design, the evaluation created two essentially equivalent groups: a program group that was eligible to enroll in RExO and a control group that was prevented from enrolling in RExO but could enroll in other services. Key findings can be summarized as follows: - RExO significantly increased the number and types of services received. Program group members reported having received, on average, a wider array of services than control group members. Program group members were more likely to participate in job clubs or job readiness classes and to receive vocational training, job search assistance, referrals to job openings, and help with resume development and filling out job applications. Program group members were also more likely to report participating in mentoring sessions and to declare that there was someone from a program who went out of their way to help them and to whom they could turn for advice on personal or family issues. Despite these differences, it is important to note that the program primarily provided work readiness training and support services; fewer than one in five RExO participants (and one in seven control group members) received any form of vocational or other forms of training designed to enhance their skills in in-demand industries. - The economic downturn placed additional pressures on ex-offenders. Unemployment rates in grantee communities were high. Data gathered as part of the evaluation's implementation study indicated that employers that previously hired ex-offenders subsequently had an abundant and overqualified pool of candidates vying for fewer jobs and were less willing to hire individuals with criminal backgrounds, potentially affecting study participants' ability to find and retain employment. In addition, cuts to state and local budgets as a result of the economic downturn reduced other services that could help ex-offenders smoothly re-enter society. - RExO significantly increased self-reported employment, within both the first and second years after RA. These increases were small (between 2.6 and 3.5 percentage points), but statistically significant. In addition, RExO significantly reduced the length of time between RA and self-reported first employment. At any given point following random assignment, program group members who had not yet found work were about 11 percent more likely to do so in the next time period than were control group members who had also not yet found work. However, there were no differences between the study groups in the total number of days employed in the two-year period following RA. - RExO had no effect on reported hourly wages, but did increase total reported income from all sources. There were no differences between the study groups in their reported hourly wages at either the first job obtained after RA or at their current or most recent job, but program group members reported higher average total income from all sources. It is not clear whether this higher average income is due to program group members working more total hours than control group members, obtaining more non-wage income, or some other reason, but program group members reported receiving approximately eight percent more income than control group members. - RExO had no effect on recidivism. Using both administrative data and survey data, program group members were no less likely to have been convicted of a crime or incarcerated than control group members. While results from the survey indicate that RExO reduced the arrest rate (in the first and second years after RA) among program group members, the administrative data found no such effect. Analyses of this discrepancy suggest this difference is driven by either recall bias or otherwise inaccurate reporting on the part of program group members. There was little evidence that RExO affected an array of other outcomes. RExO had no effect on self-reported mental health, substance abuse, housing, and child support. There was some evidence that RExO may have affected health outcomes, as program group members were less likely to report having made any visits to the emergency room (a difference of 4.2 percentage points) or that their physical health limited their work or activities in the most recent month (a difference of 4.7 percentages points). Given that RExO grantees only rarely provided services directly to address these issues, it is perhaps not surprising that there are no clear effects in these areas. Taken together, these findings present a mixed picture of the impact of RExO. On the one hand, it is clear that RExO increased the number and types of services received by program group members, and that it improved the self-reported labor market outcomes of participants as well. But there is little evidence this translated into any impacts on recidivism. Further, the impacts on employment, while statistically significant, are quite small in practical terms. Details: Oakland, CA: Social Policy Research Associates, 2015. 163p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 31, 2015 at: http://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/ETAOP_2015-04.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/ETAOP_2015-04.pdf Shelf Number: 136625 Keywords: Case Management Ex-Offender Employment Ex-Offenders Job Training Mentoring Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Rehabilitation

Author: Desai, Anita Title: Social Enterprise and Labour Market Integration for Individuals Exiting the Criminal Justice System: A Synthesis of Pilot Project Evaluations Summary: SLSC is pleased to present the Social Enterprise and Labour Market Integration for Individuals Exiting the Criminal Justice System: A Synthesis of Pilot Project Evaluations report. The objective of this report is to develop a synthesis of the findings of the 2013-14 evaluations of the five Federal Horizontal Pilot Projects (FHPPs) funded under the Homelessness Partnering Strategy (HPS) of Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC). On April 1, 2007, the Government of Canada introduced the HPS-Xa strategy aimed at preventing and reducing homelessness in Canada. Recognizing that homelessness is a shared responsibility, the HPS works to enhance partnerships with provincial and territorial governments and a wide range of community stakeholders to find longer-term solutions to homelessness, strengthen community capacity and build sustainability. Through work with other federal departments and agencies, the HPS explores innovative ways to prevent and reduce homelessness. The five FHPPs mentioned in this report were developed in partnership with ESDC (under the HPS), Correctional Services Canada (CSC) and Public Safety Canada. These projects aimed to explore how social enterprises can contribute to labour market integration for individuals exiting the criminal justice system who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. For the purposes of this project, social enterprises are defined as businesses owned by non-profit organizations, that are directly involved in the production and/or selling of goods and services for the blended purpose of generating income and achieving social, cultural, and/or environmental aims. Social enterprises are one more tool for non-profits to use to meet their mission to contribute to healthy communities. This definition, from the Social Enterprise Council of Canada, supports the way in which SLSC has observed social enterprise throughout the course of this research. It maintains a focus on the key components of target populations and mission, and reflects a national organization that has undertaken efforts to support the growth of social enterprises in Canada. The synthesis leverages collective knowledge on promising practices on social enterprise, especially in terms of sustainability and effectiveness, and aims to serve as a reference guide to support the creation of social enterprises to prevent and reduce homelessness. The report consists of the following components: - A synthesis of five FHPP Evaluations that addresses: key successes/challenges; lessons learned; strategies employed; and future directions; - A summary of available literature that focuses on: impacts, outcomes, sustainability challenges, and risks in relation to social enterprise and how different sub-populations i.e. mental health, criminal justice, and homelessness intersect with these topics; - A comparative analysis of how the five FHPP organizations' experiences relate to the literature findings; and, - Concluding thoughts to support policy development and knowledge dissemination activities related to social enterprise. Details: Ottawa: St. Leonard's Society of Canada, 2015. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 31, 2015 at: http://www.stleonards.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/SLSC_CDHPD_Social-enterprise-and-labour-market-integration-for-individuals-exiting-the-criminal-justice-system-a-synthesis-of-pilot-project-evaluations1.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Canada URL: http://www.stleonards.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/SLSC_CDHPD_Social-enterprise-and-labour-market-integration-for-individuals-exiting-the-criminal-justice-system-a-synthesis-of-pilot-project-evaluations1.pdf Shelf Number: 136636 Keywords: Ex-Offender Employment Homeless Persons Homelessness Prisoner Reentry Social Enterprise

Author: Erisman, Wendy Title: A Reentry Education Model Supporting Education and Career Advancement For Low-Skill Individuals in Corrections Summary: More than 700,000 incarcerated individuals leave federal and state prisons each year (Guerino, Harrison, and Sabol 2012), making reentry into the community a major concern for federal, state, and local governments. Too many of these individuals do not reintegrate successfully into society; within three years of release, four out of 10 prisoners will have committed new crimes or violated the terms of their release and be reincarcerated (The Pew Center on the States 2011). This cycle of catch-and-release costs states more than $50 billion annually (National Association of State Budget Officers 2011). Moreover, the number of those cycling in and out of our nation's prisons not only jeopardizes public safety, but also ravages families and their communities. According to a 2010 Pew Charitable Trusts report: - Approximately 2.7 million children have an incarcerated parent, and these children are more likely to be expelled or suspended from school than children without an incarcerated parent. - One in three black men, one in eight white men, and one in 14 Hispanic men between the ages of 20 and 34 without a high school credential are incarcerated. - Formerly incarcerated men earn approximately 11 percent less per hour and 40 percent less per year than those who have never been incarcerated. Unfortunately, many offenders are ill-equipped to break the cycle of catch-and-release because they lack the education and workforce skills needed to succeed in the labor market and the cognitive skills (e.g., the ability to solve problems and reason) needed to address the challenges of reentry. In fact, approximately 40 percent of federal and state prisoners lack a high school credential, compared to less than 20 percent of the general population. Even fewer have completed any college course work (Greenberg, Dunleavy, and Kutner 2007). Many prisoners also have limited work experience and struggle to find employment once released (Gould, Weinberg, and Mustard 2002; Yahner and Visher 2008). They also typically have cognitive deficits, which are associated with criminal behavior (Andrews et al. 1990; MacKenzie 2006; MacKenzie 2012). Although most state and federal prisons offer adult education and career and technical education (CTE) programs and some offer postsecondary education, participation in these programs has not kept pace with the growing prison population (Western, Schiraldi, and Ziedenberg 2003). Similarly, those under community supervision (parole or probation) often do not participate in education and training programs (Visher, Debus, and Yahner 2008). Possible reasons for these low participation rates include lack of programs or awareness of program opportunities; reduced services because of state budget constraints; insufficient personal motivation; and competing demands (e.g., employment) that may take precedence over pursuing education (Crayton and Neusteter 2008; Visher, De-bus, and Yahner 2008). It is not surprising, therefore, that formerly incarcerated individuals cited education, job training, and employment as vital needs not generally met during incarceration or after release (Visher and Lattimore 2007). Education and training opportunities for these individuals, who often move in and out of prison, can be further thwarted by a lack of coordination and communication among the institution and community-based education programs and their partners providing services. These disconnects include: - Differing standardized assessments and curriculum and lack of articulation agreements (a legal agreement matching courses between education institutions), making student transfers from one program to another difficult. - Misinterpretation of federal and state privacy laws and lack of links among data systems, making it difficult for programs to get a comprehensive picture of their students' backgrounds, avoid duplication of effort, and track outcomes. - A perception among corrections officials (e.g., wardens, parole and probation officers, and the court) and policymakers that individuals in corrections should not receive educational services; this, in turn, can make it difficult to enforce student participation and establish supportive education and reentry policies. - Inadequate staff training, resulting in ineffective instruction. - Limited funds, leading to long waiting lists for programs (U.S. Department of Education 2009; U.S. Department of Education 2011). Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2015. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 31, 2015 at: https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ovae/pi/AdultEd/reentry-model.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ovae/pi/AdultEd/reentry-model.pdf Shelf Number: 136639 Keywords: Correctional Programs Offender Reintegration Prisoner Reentry Vocational Education and Training

Author: Duran, Le'Ann Title: Integrated Reentry and Employment Strategies: Reducing Recidivism and Promoting Job Readiness Summary: THIS WHITE PAPER is written for policymakers and practitioners engaged in the corrections and workforce development fields who recognize the need for the two systems to collaborate more closely to improve public safety and employment outcomes for people who have been incarcerated or are on probation or parole. It promotes close collaborations with reentry service providers and provides guidance on prioritizing scarce resources to more effectively reduce rates of reincarceration and joblessness. The paper also outlines principles that should drive both supervision and service decisions - decisions that can help ensure that front-line personnel's efforts are having the greatest positive effect. Employment providers are already serving large numbers of individuals released from correctional facilities or who are required to find jobs as conditions of their probation or parole. Yet the corrections, reentry, and workforce development fields have lacked an integrated tool that draws on the best thinking about reducing recidivism and improving job placement and retention to guide correctional supervision and the provision of community-based services. To address this gap, this white paper presents a tool that draws on evidence-based criminal justice practices and promising strategies for connecting hard-to-employ people to work. It calls for program design and practices to be tailored for adults with criminal histories based on their level of risk for future criminal activity. Some people question why limited resources should be focused on employing men and women who have been in prison, jail, or are on probation or parole when unemployment rates remain high across the nation for law-abiding individuals. With mounting research, it is clear there are significant benefits for our communities in working with this population. Successful reintegration into the workforce can make neighborhoods and families safer and more stable. Linking individuals who have been involved with the corrections system to jobs and helping them succeed can reduce the staggering costs to taxpayers for reincarceration and increases contributions to the tax base for community services. If releasees and supervisees are working, their time is being spent in constructive ways and they are then less likely to engage in crime and disorder in their neighborhoods. They also are more likely to develop prosocial relationships when their time is structured with work and they are able to help care and provide for their families. Employment is a point at which the goals of the criminal justice, workforce development, family services, health and human services, and social services systems can converge. With budget cuts to all these systems, resources must be focused on the right individuals (i.e., people who would benefit the most from interventions), using the right strategies that are delivered at the right time. Improved outcomes for individuals returning to their communities, for their families, and for each system's investments can be realized by better coordinating the correctional supervision, treatment, supports, and other services being delivered at that point of intersection to individuals who have been incarcerated or are on probation or parole. This white paper is meant to facilitate discussions across systems by introducing a tool that can help put such a framework for coordination in place. Details: New York: Council of State Governments, Justice Center, 2013. 76p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 9, 2015 at: https://www.bja.gov/Publications/CSG-Reentry-and-Employment.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.bja.gov/Publications/CSG-Reentry-and-Employment.pdf Shelf Number: 130032 Keywords: Employment Evidence-Based Practices Ex-Offender Employment Jobs Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Reintegration

Author: Council of State Governments Justice Center Title: Justice Reinvestment in Kansas: Strengthening Probation Supervision and Promoting Successful Reentry Summary: Facing a projected 23-percent growth in the state prison population by FY2021, policymakers from across the political spectrum in Kansas enacted House Bill (HB) 2170 in April 2013. The law implements policy recommendations developed through "justice reinvestment," a data-driven approach designed to reduce corrections spending and reinvest savings in strategies that can reduce recidivism and improve public safety. Throughout the process, the state received intensive technical assistance from the Council of State Governments (CSG) Justice Center, in partnership with The Pew Charitable Trusts and the U.S. Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA). With continued support, Kansas leaders have been working to implement this legislation and track the impact of the new policies. This report reflects on the progress Kansas has made to date and the continued efforts that are necessary to meet the state's goals. Details: New York: Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2015. 4p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 25, 2015 at: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/JusticeReinvestmentInKansas.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/JusticeReinvestmentInKansas.pdf Shelf Number: 136877 Keywords: Criminal Justice Policy Criminal Justice Reform Justice Reinvestment Offender Supervision Prisoner Reentry Probation Probationers

Author: Judicial Council of California, Administrative Office of the Courts Title: Judicial Council Report to the Legislature: California Parolee Reentry Court Evaluation Report Summary: Judicial Council staff recommend that the Judicial Council receive the California Parolee Reentry Court Evaluation Report and direct the Administrative Director to submit this report to the California Legislature and Governor, as mandated by Penal Code section 3015. Under the statute, the Judicial Council is required to submit a final evaluation report that assesses the pilot reentry court program's effectiveness in reducing recidivism no later than three years after the establishment of a reentry court. The report was developed in consultation with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Details: San Francisco: Judicial Council of California, 2014. 35p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 20, 2015 at: http://npcresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/CA-Parolee-Reentry-Court-Evaluation-Report.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://npcresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/CA-Parolee-Reentry-Court-Evaluation-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 137177 Keywords: Drug Courts Parolees Prisoner Reentry Problem-Solving Courts Recidivism

Author: Yelowitz, Aaron Title: Prison-To-Work: The Benefits of Intensive Job-Search Assistance for Former Inmates Summary: Of the 650,000 inmates released from prisons and jails in the United States each year, as many as two-thirds will be arrested for a new offense within three years. This study evaluates the impact of enhanced job-readiness training and job-search assistance on reducing recidivism rates among ex-offenders. Programs offering enhanced job assistance are far from the norm. The program used in this study-developed by an employment agency that assists ex-offenders, welfare recipients, and other "hard-to-serve" clients-differs from other job services in scope and focus. The program, America Works, is condensed into an intense one- or two-week period. It uses a tough-love approach, stressing interpersonal communication and such "soft" skills as time and anger management. It places special attention on teaching practical skills that many former inmates never acquired, such as resume preparation, search strategies, and interview techniques. And it uses a network of employers, who are open to hiring ex-offenders and with whom it has long-term relationships, to place clients. Its goal is not only to help former inmates find jobs but also to keep jobs, and it provides follow-up services for six months. In 2005, the program provided job-readiness classes to 1,000 ex-offenders, placing 700 in jobs. America Works receives referrals from agencies in New York City, including the city government's Human Resources Administration (HRA), work-release centers, and the city's Rikers Island Correctional Facility. By contrast, typical services offered to ex-offenders provide far less job-readiness training over a less concentrated period. Instead of providing placement services, such programs generally limit assistance to self-directed job searches. This paper's key finding is that training designed to quickly place former inmates in jobs significantly decreases the likelihood that ex-offenders with nonviolent histories will be rearrested. Only 31.1 percent of nonviolent ex-offenders who received enhanced training were arrested during the 18 to 36 months in which they were tracked, compared with 50 percent of similar participants who received standard training. In contrast, former inmates with histories of violence were rearrested at virtually the same pace, whether they received enhanced training or not: 44.6 percent versus 42.6 percent, respectively. Findings for criminal convictions show similar patterns for arrests. These results suggest that extra help in looking for work upon release from jail or prison can pay off in a big way but not for all types of former offenders. Enhanced assistance is most effective for those without a history of violence and with few prior charges-while the additional help is far less effective for those with a more difficult history, including violence or many prior charges. Very little research has been conducted on this topic. The results of this study have important implications for government policymakers, public and private social welfare agencies, and, of course, employers. Indeed, at a time of ever-tightening federal and state budgets and ever-rising costs of incarceration, the Obama administration and many state governments are seeking ways to reduce swollen prison populations, particularly the number of nonviolent criminals, partly by using new guidelines for early release. Likewise, many states are scrambling to find programs to sharply cut the number of repeat offenders. Inmates nevertheless face formidable hurdles in securing employment following release back into society. Often lacking skills to find a job, they typically receive little help, increasing the odds, especially in a still-weak economy, that they will come up empty-and revert to a life of crime and return, eventually, to prison. By linking enhanced training to a targeted group of ex-offenders, this study points toward a breakthrough in reducing not only the rate of recidivism but also the cost to society. The program used by America Works, which has offices in New York and six other states and the District of Columbia, costs about $5,000 for each former inmate. While the benefits to society from averted crimes are very hard to calculate in dollar terms, the study estimated average savings of about $231,000 for each nonviolent ex-offender who received extra help, based on the lower crime record posted by the group as a whole, following training. This figure represents a 46-fold return on the cost of the training, not counting impossible-to-quantify benefits to individuals involved, their families, and communities. The intervention of enhanced services was conducted from June 2009 to December 2010, with a randomized trial involving 259 ex-offenders in New York. Participants, all men, had been released from a prison, jail, or youth correctional facility within six months of acceptance into the program. Approximately half of the participants received enhanced employment services from America Works while the other half received typical services, also provided by America Works. Criminal recidivism for 219 ex-offenders was measured from administrative records in July 2012, tracking arrests and convictions of participants in six-month intervals from the point they joined the study for up to 36 months. Enhanced services had no significant impact on recidivism for the group as a whole. Yet that result masked significant differences among varied segments that formed the group. As previously noted, former inmates with histories of violence were little affected by the extra help while those with nonviolent histories benefited substantially. Even within the latter group, however, significant differences appeared, offering additional clues about where to focus job-training dollars. Further exploration revealed that enhanced services had the largest impact among nonviolent criminals with the fewest prior charges. Differences were also found among the three subsets of nonviolent offenders: those who had committed offenses involving property, those who had committed crimes involving the sale or possession of drugs, and those who had been involved in minor offenses. Ex-offenders with property crimes and those with minor offenses were found to be most responsible for positive recidivism results. The subset with a history of drug crimes appeared to have no significant impact on recidivism results. Given the small samples, however, caution must be used when interpreting such results. Collectively, these results suggest that enhanced job-search assistance is most effective for the easiest of the hard-to-serve population - and that focusing future efforts on this group is the most cost-effective approach. Details: New York: Center for State and Local Leadership, Manhattan Institute, 2015. 68p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 11, 2015 at: http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/prison-work-5876.html Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/prison-work-5876.html Shelf Number: 137230 Keywords: Ex-Offender Employment Jobs Prisoner Reentry Vocational Education and Training

Author: Shelter Scotland Title: Preventing Homelessness and Reducing Reoffending - Insights from service users of the Supporting Prisoners; Advice Network, Scotland Summary: This reports details the findings of in-depth interviews with 16 service users of the Supporting Prisoners; Advice Network about their experience of housing, homelessness and the strong link with re-offending. Key themes include: -The importance of house as home - Belongings being at risk -The importance of friends and family in helping to maintain a tenancy -The right home prevents reoffending -Fear of hostels -Stress and depression -Lack of knowledge -Communication with professionals The report makes strategic and operational recommendations based on the insights form our service users and Shelter Scotland's 15 year history of delivering specialist services to this group. Details: Edinburgh: Shelter Scotland, 2015. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 24, 2015 at: http://scotland.shelter.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/1185787/Preventing_Homelessness_and_Reducing_Reoffending_092015_FINAL.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://scotland.shelter.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/1185787/Preventing_Homelessness_and_Reducing_Reoffending_092015_FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 137329 Keywords: Homelessness Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Reoffending

Author: Vallas, Rebecca Title: Removing Barriers to Opportunity for Parents With Criminal Records and Their Children Summary: Nearly four decades of mass incarceration and overcriminalization have made the United States the world leader in incarceration and arrests. The number of Americans in federal and state prisons and jails has quintupled over the past four decades - nearly 2.3 million Americans are behind bars today - leaving the U.S. incarceration rate at more than six times the average across developed nations. Communities of color - and particularly, men of color - are hit hardest, with black men six times more likely and Latino men two-and-a-half times more likely to be incarcerated than white men. An even greater share - between 70 million and 100 million Americans, or as many as one in three American adults - have some type of criminal record. Many have been convicted of only minor offenses, such as misdemeanors - and many only have arrests that never led to a conviction. But whether or not an individual has been incarcerated, having a criminal record often carries a lifetime of consequences, lasting long after someone has paid his or her debt to society. As discussed in a previous Center for American Progress report, "One Strike and You're Out," having even a minor criminal record can be a life sentence to poverty, presenting obstacles to employment, housing, education and training, public assistance, financial empowerment, and more. While the effects of parental incarceration on children and families are well-documented, less appreciated are the family consequences that stem from the barriers associated with having a criminal record, whether or not the parent has ever been convicted or spent time behind bars. A child's life chances are strongly tied to his or her circumstances during childhood. Thus, these barriers may not only affect family stability and economic security in the short term but also may damage a child's long-term well-being and outcomes. Our new analysis estimates that between 33 million and 36.5 million children in the United States - nearly half of U.S. children - now have at least one parent with a criminal record. In this report, we argue that parental criminal records significantly exacerbate existing challenges among low-income parents and their families. We explore the intergenerational effects of criminal records through five pillars of family well-being: - Income. Parents with criminal records have lower earning potential, as they often face major obstacles to securing employment and receiving public assistance. - Savings and assets. Mounting criminal justice debts and unaffordable child support arrears severely limit families' ability to save for the future and can trap them in a cycle of debt. - Education. Parents with criminal records face barriers to education and training opportunities that would increase their chances of finding well-paying jobs and better equip them to support their families. - Housing. Barriers to public as well as private housing for parents with criminal records can lead to housing instability and make family reunification difficult if not impossible. - Family strength and stability. Financial and emotional stressors associated with parental criminal records often pose challenges in maintaining healthy relationships and family stability. Because these challenges affect such a large share of our nation's children, we ignore these intergenerational consequences at our peril. In this report, we make the case for a "two-generation approach" to address barriers to opportunity associated with having a criminal record. We then offer policy recommendations to give both parents with criminal records and their children a fair shot. Details: Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, 2015. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 11, 2016 at: https://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/09060720/CriminalRecords-report2.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/09060720/CriminalRecords-report2.pdf Shelf Number: 137461 Keywords: Ex-Offenders Female Offenders Prisoner Reentry

Author: Broadus, Joseph Title: A Successful Prisoner Reentry Program Expands: Lessons from the Replication of the Center for Employment Opportunities Summary: This report presents results from a fidelity assessment and implementation analysis of five Center for Employment Opportunities (CEO) replication programs in New York, California, and Oklahoma. Between 2004 and 2010, MDRC conducted a rigorous random assignment evaluation of the original CEO program as part of the Enhanced Services for the Hard-to-Employ Demonstration and Evaluation funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The evaluation found that CEO was effective at reducing recidivism rates - the rates at which participants committed new crimes or were reincarcerated - among important subgroups of its participant population. Based in part on these findings, the CEO program was selected by the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation in 2011 to be part of its Social Innovation Fund and receive funding and technical assistance to expand and replicate the model in various locations across the United States. Based in New York City, CEO is one of the nation's largest transitional jobs programs for former prisoners. The program offers participants temporary, paid jobs, along with employment counseling and other services, all aimed at making them more employable and preventing their return to prison. The current study describes how the model was replicated in other locations, assesses its implementation in various contexts, and reports on findings from a qualitative study of participants' perceptions of and experiences in the CEO program. The findings presented in this report focus on the implementation of CEO's core elements at the replication sites and provide a description of participants' experience with the program. One additional goal of this study is to gain a deeper understanding of which aspects of the CEO model may have contributed to the reductions in recidivism found in the initial evaluation of the New York City program. This report's findings include the following: - Overall, the replication programs operated with high fidelity to the original program model. - Participants in replication programs engaged in CEO activities at similar rates as did participants in New York City, although replication programs did a better job of moving participants through the model's early stages and into working with the staff to obtain unsubsidized employment. - Participants said that the program's most essential and distinctive elements were its structure and the support of its staff members. - While CEO work crews offered some opportunities for skills training, they functioned primarily as jobs, with the habits and competencies that make for a good employee emphasized through the routine of reporting for work each day, cooperating with colleagues, and following supervisors' directions. Details: New York: MDRC, 2016. 114p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 22, 2016 at: http://mdrc.org/sites/default/files/CEO-PrisonerReentryReport.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://mdrc.org/sites/default/files/CEO-PrisonerReentryReport.pdf Shelf Number: 137586 Keywords: Employment Programs Ex-offender Employment Jobs Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Council of State Governments Justice Center Title: Bringing NIATx to Corrections: Lessons Learned from Three Pilot Studies Summary: To help connect people reentering their communities from jail or prison to substance use treatment, the CSG Justice Center partnered with NIATx-a learning collaborative that is part of the Center for Health Enhancement Systems Studies (CHESS) at the University of Wisconsin-Madison-to bring its process improvement model to corrections. Through a competitive application process, three pilot sites were selected to work with the CSG Justice Center and NIATx from 2011 to 2013: -DeKalb County, Georgia -Durham County, North Carolina -The State of Maryland This report documents the key lessons learned and recommendations to help criminal justice and substance use treatment systems improve transitions between institutional and community care. Details: Lexington, KY: Council of State Government Justice Center, 2016. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 27, 2016 at: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/BringingNIATxtoCorrectionsFullReport.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/BringingNIATxtoCorrectionsFullReport.pdf Shelf Number: 137693 Keywords: Drug Offenders Prisoner Reentry Substance Abuse Treatment Treatment Programs

Author: Disley, Emma Title: The payment by results Social Impact Bond pilot at HMP Peterborough: final process evaluation report Summary: Between 2010 and 2015, an intervention called the One Service operated at Peterborough Prison. This service provided 'through-the-gate' and post-release support to adult male offenders released from HMP Peterborough who had served prison sentences of less than 12 months, with an aim of reducing reoffending. The through-the-gate support provided by the One Service involved contacting offenders before release in order to introduce case workers, assess needs, and plan resettlement activities. The One Service then implemented these plans by working with offenders for up to 12 months following their release. If an offender returned to prison within this period, the One Service aimed to ensure that support services continued back in prison. The One Service was funded through a financing mechanism known as a Social Impact Bond (SIB), a form of payment by results. This is where private, non-government investors pay for an intervention, and if certain results are achieved, are paid back their initial investment plus an additional return on that investment.1 In the Peterborough SIB, the Ministry of Justice, supported by the Big Lottery Fund, entered into an agreement to pay a return to investors if targets for reducing reconvictions were achieved. This pilot was the first SIB to be established worldwide. The Peterborough SIB pilot was originally intended to operate until 2017, funding the delivery of the One Service to three cohorts of around 1,000 prisoners released from the prison. Support from the One Service was available to cohort members for a period of up to 12 months post-release, and engagement was on a voluntary basis. While the pilot operated on a payment by results basis under the SIB model for the first two cohorts of released prisoners, a third cohort received One Service support under a 'fee-for-service' arrangement, rather than under the original SIB funded payment by results model. This change to the model was due to the roll-out of Transforming Rehabilitation reforms to probation, which introduced mandatory statutory supervision for short-sentenced offenders - the target group for the Peterborough pilot - and also included a payment by results funding mechanism to incentivise providers to reduce reoffending. This meant that while the pilot was concluded early in order to avoid any duplication in services to the same population, the alternative fee-for-service funding arrangement for the third cohort enabled the pilot to continue operating until the new Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) providers implemented their approach to rehabilitation. This report presents findings from a process evaluation of the Peterborough pilot, commissioned by the Ministry of Justice in 2010. It is the third and final output from the process evaluation, and addresses the following five research questions: 1. How, if at all, did the pilot lead to better outcomes of reduced reoffending (including the role played by voluntary and community sector organisations and partner agencies)? 2. What wider costs and benefits, if any, do stakeholders feel were incurred through the implementation of the SIB? 3. To what extent did stakeholders feel that the SIB led to greater innovation and/or efficiency? 4. What were the strengths and weaknesses of the SIB contractual model as implemented? 5. What key messages can be taken from the Peterborough pilot that offer useful learning points for future payment by results models and SIBs? Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2015. 73p. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Analytical Series: Accessed February 2, 2016 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/486512/social-impact-bond-pilot-peterborough-report.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/486512/social-impact-bond-pilot-peterborough-report.pdf Shelf Number: 137742 Keywords: Costs of Criminal Justice (U.K.) Interventions Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Rehabilitation Social Impact Bonds

Author: Cook, Foster Title: The Burden of Criminal Justice Debt in Alabama: 2014 Participant Self-Report Survey Summary: Across the country the criminal justice system has increasingly looked to defendants to finance the courts and court related programs. In Alabama, the legislature has reduced funding for courts and court related services. To offset this loss, court costs and associated fees have risen. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the success of this approach and the impact of these policies in Alabama. With the general knowledge that increased court costs have not produced projected revenue, we sought to understand why by surveying defendants across the state. We thank the Community Corrections Directors in the counties represented, the staff that administered the surveys and the Alabama Department of Probation and Parole. Three goals of this study: 1. Explore the "ability to pay" question 2. Understand the dynamics of the collection process 3. Understand the consequences criminal justice debt has to: - Defendants under court supervision - The purposes of the justice system - The public - Recidivism - Persons in the criminal justice system living in poverty Methods of this study: 1. This study was initially designed as an anonymous survey for Jefferson County/TASC, and Probation and Parole 2. Other Alabama counties expressed interest and participated in the study 3. Those populations have been combined in the following outcomes: a. 13 counties b. 943 participants under supervision for a felony were surveyed 4. Primarily Quantitative: descriptive statistics 5. Secondarily Qualitative: comments recorded from the participants Details: Birmingham, Alabama: TASC Jefferson County's Community Corrections Program, University of Alabama, 2015. 27p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 8, 2016 at: http://www.uab.edu/medicine/substanceabuse/images/The_Burden_of_Criminal_Justice_Debt_in_Alabama-_Part_1_Main_Report.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.uab.edu/medicine/substanceabuse/images/The_Burden_of_Criminal_Justice_Debt_in_Alabama-_Part_1_Main_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 137794 Keywords: Criminal Debt (U.S.) Criminal Fees Criminal Fines Criminal Justice Debt Financial Sanctions Offender Finances Prisoner Reentry

Author: Siegel, Jonah Aaron Title: Prisoner Reentry, Parole Violations, and the Persistence of the Surveillance State Summary: The revolving door of the state and federal prison system may be the most persistent challenge faced by criminological practitioners and scholars. Following release from custody, the majority of former prisoners end up back in the system within three years, suggesting that correctional involvement is not an isolated incident for most offenders. Through its analysis of parole violations and sanctions, the current dissertation project offers important new insights on this "revolving door" between prisons and high-risk communities. To do so, each of three empirical chapters looks at a different phase in the cycle of recidivism: offending behavior, institutional responses to offending behavior, and the consequences of institutional sanctions for offenders' well-being. The first analytic chapter examines how geographical proximity to social service providers is related to the risk of recidivism. The findings suggest that the observed impact of contextual conditions on recidivism depends on how expansively one defines the "community" in which parolees are embedded and further demonstrates the importance of capturing the effect of service accessibility on offending behavior within the larger ecological context of where parolees live. The second analytic chapter explores how "supervision regimes," the legal, political, and cultural factors that shape the way supervision is practiced across jurisdictions, influence the risk of recidivism. The analysis demonstrates that regional and county-level attributes shape local templates for decision-making among parole officers in ways that affect not only whether parolees are revoked to prison, but also the use of alternative sanctions, such as stricter community supervision and incarceration in short-term correctional facilities such as jails or detention centers. The final analytic chapter offers a rigorous assessment of the causal impact of incarceration on labor market outcomes through an examination of whether return to short-term custody interferes with the ability of parolees to find and maintain work. Findings indicate that the experience of short-term re-incarceration dramatically increases the risk of unemployment among parolees in the months during and following their incarceration. Taken as a whole, the analyses shed light on how offending behavior, institutional decision-making, and the experience of incarceration combine to perpetuate the cycle of recidivism. Details: Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, 2014. 147p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed February 9, 2016 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/248412.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/248412.pdf Shelf Number: 137815 Keywords: Decision-Making Ex-Offender Employment Offender Supervision Parole Officers Parole Violations Parolee Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Gordon, Liz Title: Formative Evaluation report Summary: This brief formative evaluation examines issues arising from the development of a Pillars family/whanau re-integration programme in May and June 2011. The evaluation report is to be submitted to the Department of Corrections along with the written programme and materials that have been developed into the Close to Home package. Most prisoners are parents, and most do not keep in good touch with their children and whanau through the sentence. Yet the research makes it clear that prisoners who get good support from their families/whanau are far less likely to re-offend than those who do not. A range of programmes were researched in developing the programme, and include information on what kind of programme, eligibility issues, length, content and actual and expected outcomes for the courses. This information was used in developing the structure and content of Close to Home. The programme was developed over 6-8 weeks and has been written as a programme workbook for delivery. It is summarised in this report. Features of the programme include: the use of high quality assessment tools and workbooks that have been developed for other programmes; a significant amount of work with the prisoner and whanau present; a strong focus on planning reintegration; and the use of a range of agencies through the Strengthening Families process to facilitate prisoner re-entry. This approach allows for the particular issues facing individual families to be addressed, and for families/whanau to have access to the resources of a wide range of agencies. The programme The programme involves significant pre-release work and also post-release guiding and support. Stakeholders support family/whanau re-integration, although they have a range of different views as to what it entails. There is acknowledgement that prisons currently have not focussed adequately on the role of the family/whanau, nor on the prisoner as a parent. The project materials were analysed. A wide range of good quality materials are available and will be used at various points through the pilot project. Core tools include the Time's Up workbook and the assessment tools, among others. The main findings of the formative evaluation are that a very effective programme has been assembled using a range of resources from a variety of sources. Key risks include the need to bring in a new staff member for the pilot programme phase, and the difficulties in tailoring courses to individual needs. The main risk for the pilot programme is timeliness, as all aspects of the programme will need to be complete within three months. Details: Christchurch, NZ: Pukeko Research Ltd., 2012. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 10, 2016 at: http://www.pillars.org.nz/images/stories/pdfs/formative_evaluation_of_close_to_home.pdf Year: 2012 Country: New Zealand URL: http://www.pillars.org.nz/images/stories/pdfs/formative_evaluation_of_close_to_home.pdf Shelf Number: 137834 Keywords: Children of Prisoners Correctional Programs Families of Inmates Male Inmates Male Prisoners Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Rehabilitation Reintegration

Author: Irish Penal Reform Trust Title: The Vicious Circle of Social Exclusion and Crime: Ireland's Disproportionate Punishment of the Poor Summary: The purpose of this Position Paper is to emphasise the complex matrix between social exclusion and crime, in order to impress on policy makers that an effective response to crime must, at the front end, involve investment in early intervention to combat social and educational disadvantage to prevent vulnerable young people embarking on criminality in the first instance. At the back end - i.e. post imprisonment - appropriate measures should be put in place to reintegrate ex-prisoners back into society, including comprehensive assistance with housing and work or training, for the benefit of the individuals themselves, as well as the communities to which they are returning. Details: Dublin: IPRT, 2012. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 10, 2016 at: http://www.iprt.ie/files/Position_Paper_FINAL.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Ireland URL: http://www.iprt.ie/files/Position_Paper_FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 137835 Keywords: At-Risk Youth Offenders Poverty Prisoner Reentry Prisoners Reintegration Social Exclusion Socio-economic Conditions and Crime

Author: Mc Hugh, Rosemarie Title: Tracking the Needs and Service Provision for Women Ex-Prisoners Summary: This paper presents the findings of research conducted with female prisoners serving short sentences in the Dochas Centre. The research focussed in particular on the needs of this cohort of women upon leaving prison. 16 women were interviewed within the Dochas Centre; the study was primarily a qualitative one which aimed to understand the subjective experiences of the women and communicate their stories by giving primacy to the women's own 'voices'. Findings While each individual woman's story is unique there were significant patterns across the group. The profile of the group and the women's individual recounts of their life histories and experiences demonstrate a high incidence of deprivation, disadvantage, vulnerability and marginalisation. In this study this marginalisation was characterised by some or more of the following - unstable family backgrounds, care outside the home, homelessness, poor schooling, early engagement with the criminal justice system, childhood sexual abuse, intimate partner abuse, other sexual and physical abuse, little or no employment history, substance abuse, inability to care for their children, hospitalisation and treatment units, and significant mental and emotional health needs. The majority of women had little or no formal educational qualifications and little or no histories of employment, with social welfare being the main source of income for the vast majority of women. 14 of the 16 women had experienced homelessness at some point in their lives with the vast majority experiencing repeat incidences of homelessness. 13 of the 16 women had a substance abuse problem at some stage in their lives, often commencing at an early age, with many having long term substance abuse problems. Three quarters of the women had experienced violence or abuse of some form either as a child or as an adult, with three quarters of these, in turn, experiencing repeat victimisation. The women also revealed significant mental and emotional health needs including a high incidence of depression. This study also found that these women demonstrated a resource-poor network. This was demonstrable within the women's stories by the low level of contact with family members and the low volume, frequency and expectation of visits while imprisoned. It was also demonstrable in the lack of knowledge of supports available within the community and the fact that many referred to learning about available services and feeling more supported within the prison. Many of the women had extensive engagement with the criminal justice system from an early age and over a long period of time. However, the majority of crimes were low level addiction related crimes - theft, public order and drug offences. The majority identified themselves primarily as addicts as opposed to offenders and described their offending histories as inherently tied to their addictions, suggesting a sense of control over their offending but not their substance abuse. The culmination of the above means that the needs of the majority of these women, whether in prison or in the community, were multiple, complex and highly intertwined. Thus, their post release needs are extensive and challenging. The study suggests that we may need to reconceptualise what can, or should be, expected in terms of individual desistance from these women, who have been cycling in and out of criminal justice involvement from an early age, often with significant substance abuse problems, high incidences of trauma and victimisation and considerable mental and emotional health needs. It also poses questions, based on the women's own understanding and experiences, as to the adequacy of supports and services available to these women within the community. The findings of this study also align with international research that both the triggers of female offending and the post release needs are extremely different for female offenders compared to that of their male counterparts and further emphasises the need for a gender specific approach. Details: Dublin: Association for Criminal Justice Research and Development, 2013. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 25, 2016 at: http://www.acjrd.ie/files/Tracking_the_needs_and_service_provision_for_women_ex-prisoners_-_Final.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Ireland URL: http://www.acjrd.ie/files/Tracking_the_needs_and_service_provision_for_women_ex-prisoners_-_Final.pdf Shelf Number: 137969 Keywords: Female Ex-Offenders Female Offenders Female Prisoners Gender Specific Responses Prisoner Reentry

Author: George, Anitha Title: Evaluation of day one mandation of prison leavers to the Work Programme Summary: The Work Programme is an active labour market programme launched in Great Britain in June 2011. Since 1 March 2012 prison leavers claiming Jobseeker's Allowance (JSA) have been mandated to join the Work Programme immediately on release from custody. This was based on the recognition that prison leavers' extensive barriers to employment suggest a greater need for employment assistance. A key feature of the policy is the facility for prisoners to make an advance JSA claim from up to five weeks pre-release. The evaluation examined the policy implementation and programme delivery of day one mandation. Key findings Advance JSA claims were seen as beneficial by payment group 9 (PG9) claimants and Employment and Benefit Advisers (EBAs). They made the process easier and quicker, as well as helping to prevent financial hardship. The introduction of PG9 did not result in substantial changes to providers' models. Providers reported lower than expected referral numbers and hence financial constraints to providing dedicated PG9 support. However, some changes did occur including: some prerelease work (though this was not extensive); the training or increased use of ex-offender specialist advisers and/or subcontractors; and greater provision of in-work support for the group (as PG9 claimants, in general, were seen to be more in need of this than other claimants). Results from the survey of claimants did not suggest intensive support for the group. Survey findings of note include the low proportion of respondents who stated having had a skills assessment (43 per cent) or drawing up an action plan (49 per cent). Respondents found seeing the same adviser all or most of the time to be helpful in order to build a trusting relationship. Additionally, prison leavers are a heterogeneous group, some of whom have extensive barriers to employment, making it difficult for them to find work in the two years of the programme. Details: London: Department for Work & Pensions, 2014. 179p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 2, 2016 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/399519/rr897-evaluation-day-one-mandation.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/399519/rr897-evaluation-day-one-mandation.pdf Shelf Number: 138028 Keywords: Employment Programs Ex-offender Employment Prisoner Reentry Work Programs

Author: Care After Prison Title: Care After Prison: Three Year Impact Report, 2011-2014 Summary: Over 60% of ex-prisoners reoffend within 3 years of their release. This poses a real challenge for those providing services to people leaving prison. In 2011, Care After Prison (CAP) was founded to help break this cycle. CAP takes a completely new approach: peer-led and non-judgmental. It meets ex-prisoners in the middle by providing credible support built through experience and education. It is this unique perspective that distinguishes CAP from other services and makes it the effective intervention that it is. The benefits of CAP's success in rehabilitating ex-prisoners are three-fold: ex-prisoners have benefited by reintegrating into society, crime by ex-prisoners has been reduced and, as a result, tax payers have saved money. In 2014, CAP staged 439 interventions in the community alone. Of those, the majority were related to prison-in reach visits, peer advice and homeless or accommodation issues. In addition, through the Community Support Scheme (CSS), CAP worked with 211 offenders on structured Release and referred 134 to additional services. The top referrals were for addiction services, education and training and employment. As CAP service users' average recidivism rate is significantly lower than the national average, CAP delivers a considerable saving to the Exchequer. Details: Dublin: Care After Prison, 2015. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 14, 2016 at: http://careafterprison.ie/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Care-after-prison-report-web.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Ireland URL: http://careafterprison.ie/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Care-after-prison-report-web.pdf Shelf Number: 138212 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Rehabilitation Recidivism

Author: Clark, Valerie A. Title: An Evaluation of Minnesota's Second Chance Act Adult Demonstration Grant: The High-Risk Revocation Reduction Reentry Program Summary: This research assessed whether a reentry program targeted towards high-risk short-term prison inmates significantly reduced recidivism. Adult male release violators serving incarceration periods of two to six months in two Minnesota state prisons were randomly assigned to either the control group (n = 77) or the High-Risk Revocation Reduction (HRRR) program (n = 162). The latter group was provided with enhanced case planning, housing assistance, employment assistance, mentoring services, cognitive-behavioral programming, and transportation assistance, while the former group was given standard case management services. After one to two years of post-release follow-up time, event history analysis was used to predict the following four measures of recidivism: supervised release revocation, rearrest, reconviction, and new offense reincarceration. The Cox regression analyses revealed that participation in the HRRR program significantly lowered the risk of supervised release revocations and reconvictions by 28 and 43 percent, respectively. Regardless of treatment or control group membership, receiving more reentry assistance significantly reduced supervision revocations as well as rearrests. Analyses also revealed that employment assistance, including subsidized employment, was especially effective at reducing recidivism. Targeting resources towards this previously under-served population may be useful for lowering recidivism as well as promoting public safety. Details: St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Department of Corrections, 2014. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 22, 2016 at: http://www.doc.state.mn.us/PAGES/files/8214/1340/4401/Evaluation_of_HRRR_Program_-_October_2014.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.doc.state.mn.us/PAGES/files/8214/1340/4401/Evaluation_of_HRRR_Program_-_October_2014.pdf Shelf Number: 138362 Keywords: Parole Revocations Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Second Chance Act Supervised Release

Author: Ortiz, Natalie Rose Title: Second Chances, Safer Counties: Workforce Development and Reentry Summary: Getting formerly incarcerated individuals into good paying jobs helps the local economy and efforts to reduce recidivism. This month, NACo released Second Chances, Safer Counties: Workforce Development and Reentry, research examining how counties intersect workforce development and reentry. The study shows that reentry programs offer a way for counties to reintegrate formerly incarcerated residents into the labor market to keep them in the community and out of jail. The study finds that reentry programs are largely supported by the federal government, through the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA). WIOA is the federal statute that supports and governs the funding of a public workforce development system. WIOA expands workforce opportunities by increasing labor market access for individuals with employment barriers such as a criminal record. Local workforce development boards (local WDBs) put WIOA into action. Counties are involved in more than 90 percent of the nation's 557 local workforce development boards. With the support of the National Association of Workforce Boards, NACo surveyed local WDBs to better understand how counties collaborate in reentry programs developed by local WDBs. Nearly half (47 percent) of local WDBs responding to NACo's survey operate a reentry program. Federal funding helps local WDBs and counties to innovate and provide reentry programs that improve county economies and reduce crime. Two-thirds of local WDBs with a reentry program receive more than 50 percent of program funding from the federal government, according to this new research. WIOA provided more than $3.2 billion to states and local areas in 2015 for education, training and employment services that grow county economies. County governments benefit directly from reentry programs. County jails assist local WDBs by providing inmates with information on workforce services available in the community. A large majority (92 percent) of responding local WDBs with reentry programs indicate that individuals who are incarcerated or released from county jails or juvenile detention centers receive program services. Reentry programs report success in increasing the number of formerly incarcerated individuals employed and reducing recidivism, including new arrests and incarceration. Funding is vital to the ability of counties to improve their economies and reduce crime. More than half of local WDBs identify funding as a major challenge to creating or maintaining reentry programs that reintegrate formerly incarcerated individuals. The issue of funding will only become more serious for counties as the federal government and many states have recently enacted, or are currently considering, policies that reduce incarceration. These policies would enable prisoners to return to their communities, which will increase the demand for reentry services. A decline in funding for reentry programs would reduce resources at a time when reliable and adequate funding is necessary to meet public safety and policy goals. Local workforce development boards partner with a wide network of agencies and organizations to improve reentry and employment for formerly incarcerated individuals. The reentry program in Clackamas County, Ore. is a joint effort between the Clackamas Workforce Partnership, the Clackamas Health, Housing and Human Services Department and the Clackamas County Sheriff. In 2012, the three agencies received a Department of Labor grant to provide formerly incarcerated women with educational and employment opportunities. The grant has since expired, but the program continues to be funded by the Clackamas Workforce Partnership. Bridget Dazey, executive director, Clackamas Workforce Partnership, said, "Through our partnerships, we now have one workforce system to serve our population rather than three disjointed programs, making us better able to support our residents." Counties are centrally situated in the workforce development and justice systems to help realize the public safety and economic benefits of reentry and employment. The county role in local WDBs facilitates the partnership that implements and delivers reentry programs to reintegrate individuals into the workforce and reduce recidivism. Reentry programs are part of larger county efforts to maintain public safety while reducing the jail population and jail costs, including preventing jail inmates from cycling in and out of county jails. - Details: Washington, DC: National Association of Counties, 2016. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 28, 2016 at: http://www.naco.org/resources/second-chances-safer-counties-workforce-development-and-reentry Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.naco.org/resources/second-chances-safer-counties-workforce-development-and-reentry Shelf Number: 138446 Keywords: Employment Programs Ex-Offender Employment Prisoner Reentry

Author: W. Haywood Burns Institute Title: San Francisco Justice Reinvestment Initiative: Racial and Ethnic Disparities Analysis for the Re-Entry Council Summary: In February 2011, the Reentry Council of The City and County of San Francisco (Reentry Council) submitted a letter of interest to the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) to participate in the local Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI). In May 2011, following BJA's selection of San Francisco as a JRI site, the Crime and Justice Institute (CJI) at Community Resources for Justice (CRJ) began working with and providing technical assistance to the Reentry Council. From CJI's presentations to the Reentry Council, and based on these preliminary findings, the Reentry Council identified three policy areas with potential for achieving cost savings and reinvestment opportunities: 1. Eliminate disproportionality in San Francisco's criminal justice system 2. Create a uniform early termination protocol for probation 3. Maintain and expand pretrial alternatives to detention Reducing the disproportionate representation of people of color in San Francisco's criminal justice system remains a priority in JRI activities. Learning more about these disparities was a priority for Phase II. In November 2014, CJI contracted BI to provide an analysis of whether and to what extent racial and ethnic disparities exist at the five following key decision making points: - Arrest - Bail and Pretrial Jail - Pretrial Release - Sentencing - Motion to Revoke Probation (MTR) The analysis in this report describes the nature and extent of racial and ethnic disparities in the decision making points above. The analysis does not explore the causes of disparities. BI did not perform statistical analyses to isolate the extent to which race/ethnicity - rather than a variety of other factors - predicts justice system involvement. Additionally, the analysis does not explore the extent to which individual bias impacts the disproportionate representation of people of color in the justice system. Details: Oakland, CA: The Institute, 2015. 49p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed march 30, 2016 at: https://www.burnsinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/SF_JRI_Full_Report_FINAL_7-21.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://www.burnsinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/SF_JRI_Full_Report_FINAL_7-21.pdf Shelf Number: 138477 Keywords: African Americans Ethnic Disparities Justice Reinvestment Prisoner Reentry Racial Disparities

Author: Disley, Emma Title: Using Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements to manage and supervise terrorist offenders: Findings from an exploratory study Summary: Since 2000 Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) have been used to manage violent and sexual offenders on release from prison. Under these arrangements, offenders are identified, assessed and subject to supervision and monitoring in order to protect the public. Central to MAPPA is that key agencies - including police, probation, housing, social services, education and health - are under a statutory duty to share information and cooperate. In 2009 these arrangements were extended to cover those convicted of terrorist offenders. RAND Europe conducted an exploratory study in 2011 to examine potential challenges in applying MAPPA to terrorist offenders and the readiness of those involved to do so. The research aimed to identify priorities for further attention by policymakers and researchers looking at the effectiveness of post-release supervision of terrorist offenders. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2016. 58p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2016 at: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR400/RR441/RAND_RR441.pdf Year: 2016 Country: International URL: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR400/RR441/RAND_RR441.pdf Shelf Number: 138705 Keywords: Offender Supervision Prisoner Reentry Terrorism Terrorists

Author: Dougherty, Jamie Title: Survey Reveals Barriers to Successful Ex-Offender Re-Entry Summary: A total of 6,025 men and women were released from incarceration to Monroe County in 2011, according to correctional facility and probation/parole administrations. 113 were released from federal prisons, 1,038 from state prisons, and 4,874 from Monroe County Jails. Thousands more in our community have been incarcerated in the past or carry a conviction history. Many community organizations assist people in establishing productive, law-abiding lives when they return home from incarceration. It is becoming increasingly obvious to all those involved in re-entry that ex-offenders need much more than rules and punishment to prevent them from unnecessary frustration and from committing more crimes. Like all people, ex-offenders need safe and affordable housing; the opportunity for education, training, and employment; food and health care; and a supportive community that encourages personal growth, goal attainment, positive relationships, and civic engagement. The challenge is that those trying to re-establish their lives after incarceration often start building from bare ground with very limited resources. Also, having a criminal record carries with it unforeseen societal consequences long after a person has completed his or her sentence. Many people are not aware of these consequences, but such repercussions often prevent successful reintegration and may hinder goal achievement for the rest of an ex-offender's life. The Voices of Re-Entry Project aims to shed light on these issues by gathering information and opinions from ex-offenders in the Rochester community. Our survey was developed to assess the needs and goals of those who have returned to the Rochester after incarceration and to assess their satisfaction with local supportive services they have received. We evaluated the systemic barriers our respondents faced when trying to reach their goals. We want to convey the goals and struggles of those with criminal histories to help human service agencies provide more effective services and help our community make better policies with regards to ex-offenders. We encourage all readers to challenge their opinions about what it means to carry the burden of a past mistake. This survey was conducted by the Judicial Process Commission (JPC), a small grassroots nonprofit agency in Rochester, NY that has supported ex-offenders for over forty years. JPC provides a wide range of personalized, voluntary services to assist individuals in re-establishing their lives, reaching their goals, and becoming positive contributors to our community. Services include criminal record review and correction, advice for navigating the job market while having a criminal record, assistance applying for certificates that increase employability and reinstate civic rights, client advocacy, and assisting with obtaining identification. Clients are often referred to educational programs, job training, food and clothing pantries, mental health and addiction treatment providers, legal assistance, housing programs, and more. JPC runs a mentoring program for individuals coming out of incarceration, as well as a weekly workshop where representatives from other agencies give presentation on their services or health and wellness information. JPC also provides support services to twenty mothers who have a high risk of re-incarceration and their children, as well as a small Shelter Plus program to help transition ex-offenders out of homelessness. The Judicial Process Commission works closely with many agencies, such as the Monroe County Legal Assistance Center, Monroe County Sheriff's Department, and RIT's Center for Public Safety Initiatives. Since JPC works with people at all stages of their lives after incarceration, we have a unique opportunity to explore the needs of those with a criminal history - no matter how old. A criminal record is a burden you must carry for life in New York. Therefore, JPC clients consist of some people who have been recently released, some who have been arrested but have never been to jail, and some who haven't been involved in the criminal justice system for many years. Yet many opportunities such as employment, housing, and sometimes even obtaining student loans and voting are limited by law or policy for those with past criminal records, and it can be very difficult for ex-offenders to meet their basic needs long after they serve their sentences. In our conversations with community partners, it is apparent that there is very little data about the needs of those with older criminal records. The formal criminal justice system follows people only while they are incarcerated, on probation, or on parole. Post-release supervision sentences are generally not more than 5 years, though we demonstrate below the very long-term effects of having a criminal history, since over a third of our respondents have been out of jail for more than 5 years. Individuals often seek supportive services from a wide range of human service agencies, and there is usually very little communication between service providers. We offer this and future data to the community in its efforts to conduct more effective, meaningful programs and services for those returning from incarceration, or ideally before they ever get involved with the criminal justice system. Details: Rochester, NY: Judicial Process Commission, 2013. 14p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 23, 2016 at: https://www.rit.edu/cla/criminaljustice/sites/rit.edu.cla.criminaljustice/files/docs/WorkingPapers/2013/Survey%20Reveals%20Barriers%20to%20Successful%20Ex-Offender%20Re-Entry.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.rit.edu/cla/criminaljustice/sites/rit.edu.cla.criminaljustice/files/docs/WorkingPapers/2013/Survey%20Reveals%20Barriers%20to%20Successful%20Ex-Offender%20Re-Entry.pdf Shelf Number: 138785 Keywords: Ex-Offenders Prisoner Reentry

Author: Great Britain. HM Chief Inspector of Prisons Title: Report on an unannounced inspection of HMP & YOI Bronzefield Summary: HMP Bronzefield is a complex closed women's local prison run by Sodexo Justice Services. It holds up to 527 women, with all categories represented - those remanded by the courts, those serving short sentences and a number serving life. Ages range from 18 to over 70. It is also one of two prisons in the female estate that holds restricted status women, or women who are deemed to require special management due to the level of risk they present, or the notoriety of their offences. The catchment area of the prison is huge and the mix of women held continues to present an almost unique blend of complexity and vulnerability. Around a third of women reported having a disability and 90% said they arrived with problems, including 44% who felt depressed or suicidal. For over half it was their first time in prison and a similar number had children under the age of 18. Over 40% indicated they had a problem with drugs and 66% said they had emotional wellbeing or mental health problems. The proportion of women reporting these types of problems was significantly higher than at our last inspection. It was encouraging to see, therefore, that despite this increased complexity of the challenge faced, the prison had continued the improvement we reported at the last inspection in April 2013. Arrangements to support women on arrival and during their early days at the prison were good, and for those with substance misuse problems, some of the best we have seen. Processes to keep women safe and to deal with the high levels of self-harm and vulnerability were well developed. There was little violence and few serious incidents, but despite this, many women still complained that they had felt unsafe at some time while at the prison and that they had been victimised by both other prisoners and staff. The reasons for this were not clear but, the complex mix of women held at Bronzefield, a recent tragic self-inflicted death, the first such death at the prison, allied to a zero tolerance approach being adopted to tackle poor behaviour when it occurred, were likely to be contributory factors to these perceptions. At the last inspection we were critical of some aspects of the work with the small number of women who had a combination of very challenging and sometimes dangerous behaviour and vulnerabilities, including personality disorder and mental health conditions. Work in this area had improved significantly and while we were still concerned about two women who had been managed in the separation and care unit (SCU) for over two years, the care they were receiving and specialist input to manage their progression and reintegration was good, and would be developed further with soon to be piloted interventions addressing personality disorder. Safeguarding arrangements in general were well developed and fully embedded across the prison. Security was proportionate, including for those women who were restricted status. Work in the SCU had developed since the last inspection and was now much more progressive. Use of force was not excessive, although some aspects of oversight needed attention. Substance misuse support was very good. The general environment was very good and care was taken to keep the prison decent. Staff-prisoner relationships were very good and the custody support officer scheme worked well, including effectively supporting resettlement work. Again, despite some negativity in our surveys, work to support the diverse range of women held, including the quarter who were from black and minority ethnic communities, and the 24% who were foreign nationals, was good. The mother and baby unit provided excellent care and support to those using the facility, and maternity care was very good. Health services were good overall, including for the high number of women with mental health problems. As at the last inspection the weakest outcomes were in the provision of purposeful activity. Time out of cell was reasonable although we found some women locked up during the day who could have been more purposefully occupied. The range of vocational training had improved and there were sufficient activity places for all those held. However, the quality of teaching and learning remained too variable and outcomes in the key area of functional skills needed to be better. Managers had a plan to address these deficiencies but this had not yet come to fruition. In contrast, resettlement work had improved significantly. Excellent support was now provided to women in maintaining contact with their family and friends, and also for those who had been abused, trafficked or who were sex workers. The prison had started to use release on temporary licence to support reintegration work, including for employment and family contact and relationship reasons. Offender management work had been re-organised since the last inspection and was now better than we usually see with evidence of regular and meaningful contact between women and specialist staff. Public protection arrangements were robust. The new community rehabilitation companies (CRCs) were still bedding in and there was confusion about how they worked alongside Sodexo resettlement staff. Nevertheless, support in the reducing reoffending pathways was generally strong although factors outside the control of the prison were resulting in too many women being released without settled accommodation. HMP Bronzefield was a very good and improved prison. Outcomes for the highly complex population were at least reasonably good or better in all our healthy prison tests, with the quality of respect and work to resettle prisoners particularly strong. It is a credit to the very capable leadership within the prison, and the committed and motivated staff group that the challenges they face continue to be met in such a positive and caring way. Details: London: Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Prisons, 2015. 119p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 26, 2016 at: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2016/04/Bronzefield-web2015.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2016/04/Bronzefield-web2015.pdf Shelf Number: 138822 Keywords: Correctional Programs Female Inmates Female Offenders Prisoner Reentry Women Prisoners

Author: McHardy, Fiona Title: Out of Jail But Still Not Free: Experiences of temporary accommodation on leaving prison Summary: This report focuses on the experiences of ten ex-offenders, all part of the Wise Group's Routes out of Prison partnership (RooP), from across local authority areas in the west of Scotland. All were homeless on release from prison. Using a community research approach, research was conducted into their experiences of temporary accommodation on leaving prison. The research set out to: - Examine ex-offenders' experiences of temporary accommodation ; - Understand how experiences of temporary accommodation affected the transition to permanent housing ; - Discover best practice in the provision of temporary accommodation ; - Provide policy recommendations which could alleviate poverty amongst ex-offenders. The key findings of this research were: - Obtaining good housing is a cornerstone for individual well-being. - This housing must be appropriate for the individual's needs and circumstances. - Unsuitable or poor temporary accommodation impacts negatively on reintegration and rehabilitation. - Hostel accommodation is rarely suitable for exoffenders, especially for those with drug and alcohol problems. - Those whose housing circumstances had been unstable before incarceration were the most apprehensive about housing after release. - Housing services and support varied across local authorities; in general, however, support for ex-offenders was poorly integrated across service providers. - Advocacy services for ex-offenders are crucial, especially in the period immediately after release. - Delays in the welfare benefits system represent a serious failing and result in some ex-offenders having no money and or running up debts. For example, it can take between six to eight weeks before someone leaving prison receives full benefits. Details: Glasgow: Poverty Alliance, 2012? 42p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 5, 2016 at: http://www.povertyalliance.org/userfiles/files/EPIC/Reports/EPIC_ResearchReportROOP.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.povertyalliance.org/userfiles/files/EPIC/Reports/EPIC_ResearchReportROOP.pdf Shelf Number: 138945 Keywords: Ex-Offenders Housing Prisoner Reentry

Author: Lindquist, Christine Title: Multi-site Family Study on Incarceration, Parenting and Partnering: Change in Father-Child Relationships Before, During and After Incarceration Summary: Understanding what supports strong relationships formerly incarcerated men and their children could have an impact on individual, interpersonal, and community safety and well-being. The information in this research brief is drawn from a couples-based longitudinal study of families affected by incarceration, focusing on 772 fathers who were incarcerated at the beginning of the study and released prior to the completion of the final study interviews. This brief examines several aspects of the fathers' relationships with their children after their release from incarceration, including fathers' residential arrangements and financial support for their focal children and dimensions of the quality of the relationships the fathers reported having with their children after their release. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation/Office of Human Services Policy, 2016. 449p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Brief: Accessed May 16, 2016 at: https://aspe.hhs.gov/system/files/pdf/257881/MFSIPImpactReport.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://aspe.hhs.gov/system/files/pdf/257881/MFSIPImpactReport.pdf Shelf Number: 139048 Keywords: Children of Prisoners Families of Inmates Parenting Prisoner Reentry

Author: Reichert, Jessica Title: Evaluation of St. Leonard's Ministries: Case studies of former residents of St. Leonard's House and Grace House Summary: This report, the first in the series for the St. Leonard's Ministries' evaluation, focuses on five case studies. Researchers conducted in-depth interviews with three men who were former residents of St. Leonard's House and two women who were former residents of Grace House. The goal was to learn about the life experiences of program participants before, during, and after the program. The following are some key findings: - At the time of the interview, the five research subjects were 34 to 70 years old - the average age was 46 years old. Three research subjects reported their race as African American, one as Caucasian, and one as Hispanic. - All of those interviewed had been incarcerated in Illinois prisons - the average number of prior incarcerations was three. - The length of stay in the residential programs ranged from six months to eighteen months. - Of those interviewed, the range of time since leaving the residential program was five months to two years; the average was 11 months. - At the time of the interview, all of the research subjects were living in Chicago in rental apartments. Three of those interviewed were unemployed, and two were employed. - At the time of the interview, four of the research subjects were never married, and one was married. Four of the five research subjects had children. - Four of the five research subjects were former addicts of cocaine, heroin, alcohol, marijuana, and ecstasy. - Overall, the men and women interviewed for this study thought the program facilities were adequate. In general, all interviewed thought that staff were supportive. - The women recommended more consistency in enforcement of program rules at Grace House. In addition, one of the men reported staff did not always enforce program rules at St. Leonard's House. - In general, the women liked all the services and activities of Grace House, in particular, the psychological services. - Two research subjects recommended having more consistency with counselors because the psychology interns often changed. - In general, interviewees would recommend St. Leonard's House and Grace House to others. Details: Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2015. 66p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 10, 2016 at: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/assets/pdf/ResearchReports/SLM_Case_Study_Report_051115.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.state.il.us/assets/pdf/ResearchReports/SLM_Case_Study_Report_051115.pdf Shelf Number: 139371 Keywords: Halfway House Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Rehabilitation Programs Residential Programs

Author: Latessa, Edward J. Title: The Ohio Risk Assessment System Misdemeanor Assessment Tool (ORAS-MAT) and Misdemeanor Screening Tool (ORAS-MST) Summary: In 2006, the University of Cincinnati (UC) Center for Criminal Justice Research (CCJR), in partnership with the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (ODRC), developed the Ohio Risk Assessment System (ORAS), a system designed to assess risk, need, and responsivity factors of offenders at each stage in the criminal justice system (see Latessa, Smith, Lemke, Makarios, & Lowenkamp, 2009). The ORAS is comprised of five validated risk assessment instruments: 1) Pretrial Tool (PAT), 2) Community Supervision Tool (CST), 3) Prison Intake Tool (PIT), 4) Reentry Tool (RT), and 5) Supplemental Reentry Tool (SRT)1, as well as two screening tools: 1) Community Supervision Screening Tool (CSST) and 2) Prison Intake Screening Tool (PST). Since its' inception, the ORAS has been implemented across the state and is used in municipal and common pleas courts, community based correctional facilities (CBCFs), and ODRC institutions. Details: Cincinnati: University of Cincinnati, Center for Criminal Justice Research, 2014. 27p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 11, 2016 at: https://ext.dps.state.oh.us/OCCS/Pages/Public/Reports/ORAS%20MAT%20report%20%20occs%20version.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://ext.dps.state.oh.us/OCCS/Pages/Public/Reports/ORAS%20MAT%20report%20%20occs%20version.pdf Shelf Number: 139392 Keywords: Community Supervision Misdemeanors Offender Risk Assessment Pretrial Detention Pretrial Supervision Prisoner Reentry Risk Assessment

Author: Yamatani, Hide Title: Overview Report of Allegheny County Jail Collaborative Evaluation Findings Summary: Allegheny County is a national leader in formulating and implementing a collaboration-based jail inmate reintegration program called the Allegheny County Jail Collaborative. This unique human service system is co-chaired by the Director of the Department of Human Services, the Warden of the Allegheny County Jail (ACJ), and Director of the Department of Health. Researchers from the Center on Race and Social Problems, housed in the School of Social Work University of Pittsburgh, evaluated the ACJ Collaborative. The major purpose of this study was to examine the extent to which the Collaborative achieved successful community reentry goals among released male jail inmates. On a typical day, over 700,000 individuals are incarcerated in US jails. Yet potential benefits of the investment in best practice reintegration and crime reduction interventions are relatively unknown. Evaluation Findings. The three-year evaluation study findings reflect the ACJ Collaborative's capacity to generate impressive positive results including: (a) a significantly lower recidivism rate among inmate participants; (b) similar service benefits across racial groups; and (c) successful reintegration into community life among a high majority of participants. More specifically, major outcome findings are as follows: 1. Allegheny County is saving over $5.3 million annually by the ACJ Collaborative serving 300 inmates per year; 2. The greatest cost-savings generated by ACJ Collaborative is in areas of public safety and reduced victimization among county residents; 3. Cost-savings ratio is approximately 6 to 1 (i.e., for a dollar investment to the ACJ Collaborative, the cost-savings return is approximately $6); 4. At 12 months post-release the Collaborative inmates are achieving a 50% lower recidivism rate compared to matched comparison group (i.e., 16.5% vs. 33.1%, respectively); 5. In contrast to historical trends nationally, there were no statistically significant differences in the recidivism rate between Black and White Collaborative inmate participants. The findings shown above were derived using a cost-savings analysis strategy selected by the Urban Institute (Roman & Chalfin, 2006). This strategy includes estimates of (1) cost of jail stay; (2) cost of processing offenders in the criminal justice system; (3) costs of crime victimization; (4) cost of providing services at the jail; and (5) cost savings associated with Collaborative participants' recidivism reduction. The differential recidivism rate was derived based on a stratified and matched sample group comparison method. During the 12 months after release from ACJ, intermediary process outcomes among Collaborative consumer inmates showed positive transitions to community life including: (a) higher enrollment in various community-based service organizations; (b) improved housing obtainment for both racial groups; and (c) increased employment rates among former White offenders. Other areas that remained relatively unchanged (but did not significantly deteriorate) included drug and alcohol usage rate, Black employment rates, and mental and physical health treatment needs. Details: Pittsburgh: Center on Race and Social Problems, School of Social Work, University of Pittsburgh, 2008. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 29, 2016 at: http://www.crsp.pitt.edu/sites/default/files/ACJ_Report.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.crsp.pitt.edu/sites/default/files/ACJ_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 139535 Keywords: Cost-Benefit Analysis Costs of Corrections Jail Inmates Jails Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Hanby, Laura J. Title: A Longitudinal Study of Dynamic Risk, Protective Factors, and Criminal Recidivism: Change Over Time and the Impact of Assessment Timing Summary: Risk assessment and risk management are central to most decisions made about offenders, particularly when considering community release after a period of incarceration. Although the field of risk assessment has progressed considerably, there remain limitations within current practices. The present research uses a variety of sophisticated statistical techniques to examine the systematic assessment and reassessments of risk in a large sample (N = 3498) of New Zealand parolees. The validity of the Dynamic Risk Assessment for Offender Re-entry (DRAOR), a measure of dynamic risk and protective factors, was assessed across time in all offenders released on parole. The measure demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties, although future research should seek to refine the subscales as suggested by its factor structure. Beyond validating the DRAOR, this study showed that reconvictions and criminal reconvictions during a two-year follow-up period can be accurately predicted from dynamic risk factors and protective factors (as measured by the DRAOR). Stable and acute dynamic risk scores decreased over time while protective factor scores increased, suggesting that the DRAOR is sensitive to change. Recidivists differed from non-recidivists in stable dynamic risk and protective factors in the month prior to follow-up end and in acute dynamic risk in the second month prior to follow-up end. Reconvictions were accurately predicted from monthly average Stable Risk beginning at parole start and continuing for 12 months of assessments, while Protective Factors were predictive for the first 4 months only. These results indicate that the DRAOR has promise as a valid tool for risk assessment and risk management. The findings of this study highlight the mechanisms by which risk changes over time and provides support for a transitional model of offender re-entry focusing on dynamic risk and protective factors. Details: Ottawa: Carleton University, 2013. 225p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed July 11, 2016 at: https://curve.carleton.ca/system/files/etd/b6aa7d5d-f44b-48d6-9ea9-5d0f92b8f7a7/etd_pdf/a7fc1a78dfe694530e8937c422d4851e/hanby-alongitudinalstudyofdynamicriskprotective.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Canada URL: https://curve.carleton.ca/system/files/etd/b6aa7d5d-f44b-48d6-9ea9-5d0f92b8f7a7/etd_pdf/a7fc1a78dfe694530e8937c422d4851e/hanby-alongitudinalstudyofdynamicriskprotective.pdf Shelf Number: 139593 Keywords: Offender Risk Assessment Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Reconvictions Risk Management

Author: Byrd, Renee M. Title: 'Punishment's Twin': Theorizing Prisoner Reentry for a Politics of Abolition Summary: Punishment's Twin: Theorizing Prisoner Reentry for a Politics of Abolition investigates prisoner reentry as a discursive formation which shores up the naturalization of the contemporary prison as a means of managing populations deemed disposable through the vicissitudes of neoliberal globalization. Using a combination of ethnography and critical discourse analysis, my project argues that prisoner reentry is deployed using a vocabulary, which mimics a critique of mass imprisonment, in order to expand the punishment system and render it more flexible, cost effective and legitimate. In the chapter, titled "`Where Ministry and Economics Meet': The Convergence of Neoliberal and Evangelical Rationalities within Prisoner Reentry," I analyze how neoliberal and evangelical Christian rationalities come together in prisoner reentry discourse. I intervene in the theorization of neoliberal political rationalities by showing how neoliberalism borrows from other ideologies in order to find purchase in a particular locale and that this borrowing is profoundly implicated with regimes of race and gender. Drawing on interviews with formerly imprisoned women in the Twin Cities, Chapter Three grapples with the politics of representation in prison activist scholarship. This chapter highlights two key findings from my interviews: 1) Using Priti Ramamurthy's concept of subjects-in-perplexity, I argue that the representation of the women's prison as an empowering space in Minnesota, as opposed to the disciplinary nature of residential reentry programs, naturalized the prison as the proper place where women prisoners could find help, healing and support; and 2) I found that the barriers attached to felony status often (re)produce the very vulnerability expected in accounts of imprisoned women's lives. Finally, the dissertation argues that in order to genuinely transform the conditions of mass imprisonment's emergence, prisoner reentry must be situated within a politics of abolition. Chapter Four provides a broad critique of `prisoner reentry' as a discursive formation. Chapter Five theorizes the concept of "abolitionist reentry praxis." "Punishment's Twin..." serves as a call to prison activists to be alert to the potentially dangerous development that mainstream articulations of prisoner reentry represents and imaginative in constructing reentry work for a world without prisons. Details: Seattle, WA: University of Washington, 2013. 113p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed July 11, 2016 at: https://gwss.washington.edu/graduate/punishments-twin-theorizing-prisoner-reentry-politics-abolition Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://gwss.washington.edu/graduate/punishments-twin-theorizing-prisoner-reentry-politics-abolition Shelf Number: 139594 Keywords: Abolition Mass Incarceration Prisoner Reentry

Author: Marks, V Title: Lessons in Reentry from Successful Programs and Participants The Final Report of the Reentry Employment Opportunities Benchmarking Study Summary: This report summarizes observations and findings from a yearlong benchmarking study of the Reentry Employment Opportunities (REO) program and highlights successful REO grantees and their practices in connecting justice-involved youth and adult returning citizens to work, education, and training programs. ICF International, with the support from the Ford Foundation, partnered with the Union Theological Seminary, Exodus Transitional Community, and Operation New Hope conducted this year-long benchmarking study to the Department of Labor's (DOL) employment-focused reentry programs. The REO grant programs help justice-involved youth and formerly incarcerated adults reengage society and the workforce, ultimately striving to minimize the economic and social costs to individuals, families, and communities associated with incarceration and recidivism. This study sought to answer several key questions: Which are the highest performance faith-based community (FBCO) REO grantees? What research-informed or promising practices are they using? What recommendations do FBCOs (and their youth and adult participants) have to improve services as new REO grant funding is considered? This final report encapsulated the key observations and takeaways from this benchmarking process and provides an overview of existing research on reentry best practices in four common REO practice and policy areas. It also describes specific FBCO program examples of how select high-performing organizations are implementing these practices in the field. Details: Fairfax, VA: ICF International, 2016. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 11, 2016 at: http://www.icfi.com/insights/reports/2016/lessons-in-reentry-from-successful-programs-and-participants Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 139608 Keywords: Employment Ex-Offender Employment Prisoner Reentry

Author: Troshynski, Emily Title: Prisoner Reentry in Nevada: Final Report on the Hope for Prisoners Program Summary: This document examines Hope for Prisoners - a prisoner reentry program in Nevada. Specifically, the research focuses on the impact of the program on participant employment and recidivism outcomes. The research procedures involved both quantitative and qualitative methods; data were gathered from case files and interviews with program participants and program mentors. The sample consisted of 1,186 individuals who completed intake interviews at Hope during an 18- month period (January 2014 - June 2015). The sample was ethnically diverse (approximately 30% White) with an average age of 37. 78% were male and 84% were single. For those who self-reported their most recent offense, 43% indicated violence, 28% reported property crime, 20% reported drug offenses, and 9% indicated a sex crime. Of the 522 individuals who completed the job readiness training course, 64% found stable employment. Of those employed, 25% found employment within 17 days of the training course. Only 6% of these 522 individuals were reincarcerated during the 18-month study period. For participants, Hope for Prisoner's mentor program appears to be a key component of the reentry initiative. Analyses demonstrate that participants with mentors were more likely to find employment. Interview data confirm the importance of mentors in terms of finding employment and also suggest the value of mentors in terms of preventing recidivism. Details: Las Vegas, NV: University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Center for Crime and Justice Policy, 2016. 10p. Source: Internet Resource: CCJP 2016-01: Accessed July 23, 2016 at: https://www.unlv.edu/sites/default/files/page_files/27/PrisonerReentry.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.unlv.edu/sites/default/files/page_files/27/PrisonerReentry.pdf Shelf Number: 139803 Keywords: Ex-Offender Employment Mentoring Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Vocational Education and Training

Author: Prison Reform Trust Title: Working it out: Employment for women offenders Summary: Executive summary - Employment outcomes for women following short prison sentences are three times worse than for men - fewer than one in ten women have a job to go to on release - Lack of childcare support, lack of qualifications, and low pay are barriers to employment for many women offenders - Employment is one of the nine pathways to reducing reoffending for women but much more can be done to tackle employer prejudice and reluctance to employ former offenders - Lack of women-only unpaid work placements constrains the use of appropriate community sentences for women - Community services such as women's centres are uniquely placed to help women offenders, and those at risk of offending, address individual barriers to employment and support them to build the skills, training and confidence they need to get ready for work - Women are more likely than men to have claimed out-of-work benefits prior to, and post, time in custody - In a recent survey of women prisoners, 61% said they would like paid employment of some kind on release, with a further 27% wanting to do voluntary work - The release on temporary licence (ROTL) scheme facilitates day-release for women in prison to undertake work and training opportunities in the community and reduces the risk of reoffending but is underused and under threat - The new statutory provision requiring probation and resettlement services to identify and address women's specific rehabilitation needs must be carefully monitored to ensure it delivers the intended improvements, particularly to employment opportunities and outcomes - The government should implement a strategy to increase employment opportunities and programmes for women with criminal convictions - this should include employer incentives. Details: London: Prison Reform Trust, 2015. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 25, 2016 at: http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/Women/Employmentbriefing.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/Women/Employmentbriefing.pdf Shelf Number: 139851 Keywords: Ex-Offender Employment Female Offenders Gender Specific Responses Prisoner Reentry

Author: U.S. Department of Justice Title: The Federal Interagency Reentry Council: A Record of Progress and a Roadmap for the Future Summary: The report of the Federal Interagency Reentry Council (Reentry Council) that provides an overview of the Council's accomplishments to date and lays out a path forward. Originally an informal collaboration among federal agencies, President Barack Obama formally established the Reentry Council in 2016 with a mission to make communities safer by reducing recidivism and victimization; help those who return from prison and jail to become productive citizens; and save taxpayer dollars by lowering the direct and collateral costs of incarceration. The report charts a course for implementing policy changes and ensuring the council's efforts continue to serve as a guide to the reentry field. "All too often, returning citizens face enormous barriers that persist long after they have paid their debts to society - and with over 600,000 people released from federal and state prisons every year, how we treat reentering individuals is a question with far-reaching implications for all of us," said Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch. "That's why the Reentry Council is dedicated to expanding access to the foundations of a stable life - employment, education, housing, healthcare, and civic participation - so that formerly incarcerated individuals can receive a true second chance, and so that every American can enjoy stronger and safer communities." Comprised of more than 20 federal agencies, the Reentry Council works to improve outcomes related to employment, education, housing, health and child welfare. Reentry Council agencies coordinate and leverage existing federal resources; dispel myths and clarify policies; elevate programs and policies that work; and reduce the policy barriers to successful reentry. The Justice Department first convened the Reentry Council in 2011, in an effort to engage a wide range of federal agencies in developing and advancing innovative and comprehensive approaches to reentry. Over the last five years the Reentry Council has continued to meet in order to expand the range of tools that the government uses to ensure that individuals returning to the community from prison or jail have a meaningful chance to rebuild their lives and reclaim their futures. On April 29, 2016, President Obama issued a Presidential Memorandum formally establishing the Reentry Council, recognizing the work that the council has achieved thus far, and enabling the council to continue its work going forward. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, 2016. 208p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 27, 2016 at: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/FIRC-Reentry-Report.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/FIRC-Reentry-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 140057 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Rehabilitation

Author: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, Evaluation and Inspections Division Title: Review of the Federal Bureau of Prisons' Release Preparation Program Summary: During the past 3 years, the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) released nearly 125,000 inmates from its custody into Residential Reentry Centers (RRC), into home confinement, or directly into communities in the United States. While not all of these inmates will re-offend, analyses of historical data have shown that many of them will. For example, the U.S. Sentencing Commission recently evaluated recidivism rates for federal offenders released in 2005 and found that nearly half of them were re-arrested within 8 years of their release for committing a new crime or for violating their supervision conditions. To help inmates successfully transition back into the community and to help reduce the likelihood that they will re-offend, the BOP operates, among various reentry efforts, the Release Preparation Program (RPP), which was the focus of this review. The BOP requires every institution to provide an RPP, and most sentenced inmates at BOP-operated institutions are required to participate in the RPP. The RPP consists of classes, instruction, and assistance in six broad categories: (1) Health and Nutrition, (2) Employment, (3) Personal Finance and Consumer Skills, (4) Information and Community Resources, (5) Release Requirements and Procedures, and (6) Personal Growth and Development. The RPP has two segments: the Institution RPP, developed by each institution's RPP committee based on the general release needs of the institution's inmate population, and the Unit RPP, developed by the institution's unit teams based on the needs of the individual inmate. Inmates must complete both segments for the BOP to consider them to have completed the RPP and to be better prepared for their eventual transition back into society. This review examines the BOP's effectiveness in fulfilling the RPP's established program objectives. These objectives are to enhance inmates' successful reintegration into the community through RPP participation; to enter into partnerships with various groups to provide information, programs, and services to releasing inmates; and to reduce inmate recidivism. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, 2016. Source: Internet Resource: Evaluation and Inspections Division 16-07: Accessed September 2, 2016 at: https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2016/e1607.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2016/e1607.pdf Shelf Number: 140124 Keywords: Federal Bureau of Prisons Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Reintegration Prisoner Release Recidivism

Author: Ward, Kyle C. Title: Rural Jail Reentry: Perceptions of Offender Needs and Challenges in Pennsylvania Summary: Research on prison and jail reentry related barriers typically addresses employment, housing, mental health, and substance abuse issues associated with returning prison inmates. Historically, these challenges are discussed from the perspective of offenders returning to urban areas. This dissertation explored challenges inmates experience leaving jail and returning to rural areas. Utilizing a mixed-method approach, this study examined the challenges associated with rural jail reentry perceived by probation/parole officers (N = 411), current inmates (N = 200), and treatment staff (N = 21). Survey methodology was employed for the probation/parole and inmate samples, and semi-structured interviews were utilized for treatment staff. Results showed that consistent with prior research, returning rural inmates face challenges related to employment, housing, transportation, substance abuse, and mental health treatment. There is some evidence that inmates and practitioners differ in their priorities of reentry. Inmates view structural barriers (e.g., ability to pay fines or court fees, low wages, limited employment opportunities, lack of transportation, and finding housing) to be the most challenging, while practitioners found the biggest challenges to be within the inmates themselves (e.g., poor work ethic, lack of motivation, return to substance abuse, drug and alcohol abuse, associating with the wrong people/peer pressure). Policy implications and recommendations for future research are also included. Details: Indiana, PA: Indiana University of Pennsylvania, 2015. 243p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed September 14, 2016 at: https://dspace.iup.edu/handle/2069/2383 Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://dspace.iup.edu/handle/2069/2383 Shelf Number: 147866 Keywords: Jail Inmates Jails Prisoner Reentry

Author: Pettus-Davis, Carrie Title: Conceptual Model to Guide Practice and Research in the Development of Trauma Interventions for Men Releasing from Incarceration Summary: A significant treatment gap exists for incarcerated men with lifetime traumatic experiences. A small research base for trauma interventions for incarcerated women is emerging, but incarcerated men have largely been ignored. Men comprise 90% of the incarcerated population and are at the greatest risk to be re-arrested for a new crime after release. One of the most ignored, but highly influential factors in poor post-release outcomes of formerly incarcerated men are unaddressed symptoms resulting from lifetime traumatic experiences. Studies of incarcerated men report up to 98% have had at least one lifetime traumatic experiences - many have experienced multiple traumas. With nearly 600,000 men releasing from correctional facilities each year, there is an urgent need to develop targeted interventions for incarcerated men. We propose a conceptual model of a multi-phased trauma intervention to guide practice and research on adapting existing trauma treatment approaches to the special circumstances of men releasing from incarceration. We divide up key treatment ingredients to respond to the complexities and stages of reentry from incarceration back to communities. We conclude with critical next steps needed to advance the practice and research of trauma intervention implementation for incarcerated men nearing release. Details: St. Louis: Concordance Institute for Advancing Social Justice, George Warren Brown School of Social Work, Washington University in St. Louis, 2016. 47p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper #CI080316: Accessed September 17, 2016 at: https://concordanceinstitute.wustl.edu/SiteCollectionDocuments/Conceptual%20Model%20to%20Guide%20Practice%20and%20Research%20in%20Trauma%20Interventions%20for%20Men%20Releasing%20from%20Incarceration.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://concordanceinstitute.wustl.edu/SiteCollectionDocuments/Conceptual%20Model%20to%20Guide%20Practice%20and%20Research%20in%20Trauma%20Interventions%20for%20Men%20Releasing%20from%20Incarceration.pdf Shelf Number: 147943 Keywords: Correctional Treatment Programs Mental Health Prisoner Reentry Prisoners Trauma

Author: Pettus-Davis, Carrie Title: Deterioration of Social Support Post-Incarceration for Emerging Adults Summary: Millions of emerging adults (ages 18-25) come into contact with the criminal justice system each year. Over 2.5 million emerging adults were arrested in 2013 (FBI, 2013) and approximately 188,092 were incarcerated in state and federal prisons (Carson, 2014). Emerging adulthood is a critical time in an individual's life when social roles, occupational directions, and behavioral choices have profound and long-lasting implications (Arnett, 2000). Thus, incarceration during this developmental period of a person's life can have drastic and negative impacts on the individual's transition to adulthood. Non-incarcerated emerging adults spend their late teens and early 20s navigating new social roles with employment and education, developing adult relationships outside the family unit, and exploring long term intimate partnerships that might lead to marriage and children. In contrast, incarcerated emerging adults spend this time confined in a volatile and often dangerous environment with few opportunities to connect to the outside world or excel in adult roles such as stable and fulfilling employment. Moreover, research shows that emerging adults leaving incarceration face substantially reduced social, occupational, and civic opportunities (Steinberg, Chung, & Little, 2004) further limiting their chances for post-incarceration success and a healthy transition into adulthood (Bonnie, Stroud, & Breiner, 2015; Sullivan, 2004). While post-incarceration success is challenging for individuals of all ages, the possibility of a successful transition may be particularly challenging for emerging adults as evidenced by the high rates of recidivism. A five-year national study of formerly incarcerated persons found that 75.9% of former prisoners age 24 or younger were arrested for a new offense within three years, compared to 69.7% of those aged 25 to 30 and 60.3% of those 40 or older (Durose, Cooper, & Snyder, 2014). The rate of over three-quarters of emerging adults presumably re-engaging in criminal behaviors after an initial incarceration is profound. Indeed, many factors influence the likelihood of continued criminal behavior after a period of incarceration. Two decades of research suggest eight critical risk factors for future criminal behavior among criminally-involved individuals (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). These factors include a prior criminal history, antisocial personality traits, criminogenic thinking patterns, associations with others who engage in crime, substance abuse, low employment/education histories, lack of prosocial leisure activities, and poor family and other social relationships - many of which are in a state of flux during emerging adulthood making emerging adulthood a particularly influential period (Arnett, 2004). Importantly, social support from others becomes a significant linchpin for helping emerging adults navigate their changing social roles in positive and prosocial ways (Bonnie, et al., 2015). The importance of social relationships in well-being is empirically documented in major research areas such as mental health, stress, criminology, chronic illness, and substance abuse (Cohen, Underwood, & Gottlieb, 2000; Sarason & Sarason, 2009). In fact, the research base is replete with evidence "showing that social ties and social support are positively and causally related to mental health, physical health, and longevity" and that "social support buffers the harmful physical and mental health impacts of stress exposure" (Thoits, 2011b, p.145). Thus, relationships with caring adults help encourage compliance with social norms and regulate behavior even in the face of adversity. Unfortunately, incarceration disrupts social support networks and some research suggests that the longer an individual is incarcerated, the more social support is allowed to atrophy (Martinez & Abrams, 2013). Increasingly, researchers and program developers are seeking to build post-incarceration interventions designed to target naturally occurring social support relationships and establish or re-establish stable social support systems (Pettus-Davis et al., 2015). Moreover, many of these interventions concentrate on the period immediately after release because the first six months following post-incarceration is the period in which people are most likely to re-engage in crime or become re-incarcerated (Altschuler & Brash, 2004; Bullis, Yovanoff & Havel, 2004). Published evaluations of social support interventions for formerly incarcerated persons have been on short-term demonstration projects and results have been mixed in terms of effectiveness at lowering criminal recidivism (Fontaine, Taxy, Peterson, Breaux, & Rossman, 2015; Sullivan, Mino, Nelson, & Pope, 2002; Wilson & Davis, 2006). However, anecdotal observations from the lead author's intervention development work for formerly incarcerated persons suggests that initial spikes in social support for those leaving prison are followed by slow but steady declines in that social support beginning after the first six months post-incarceration. Thus, if social support deteriorates over time, these short lived interventions are likely not sufficient. These interventions may not be long enough or don't focus enough on stability or retention of social support for long enough. Details: St. Louis: Concordance Institute for Advancing Social Justice, George Warren Brown School of Social Work, Washington University in St. Louis, 2016. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper # CI42616: Accessed September 17, 2016 at: https://concordanceinstitute.wustl.edu/SiteCollectionDocuments/Deterioration%20of%20Social%20Support%20Post-Incarceration%20for%20Emerging%20Adults.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://concordanceinstitute.wustl.edu/SiteCollectionDocuments/Deterioration%20of%20Social%20Support%20Post-Incarceration%20for%20Emerging%20Adults.pdf Shelf Number: 147944 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Social Services Social Support Trauma

Author: Tesfai, Afomeia Title: The Long Road Home: Decreasing Barriers to Public Housing for People with Criminal Records Summary: Housing is a fundamental necessity to effectively integrate formerly incarcerated individuals with their families and communities. Lacking stable housing negatively affects mental and physical health, employment, income, access to healthcare services, family unity, and recidivism. Research and analysis reveal that historical policies have created racial inequities in housing and health outcomes, and that public housing admissions screening policies play an important role in creating the conditions for successful reentry of those people who were incarcerated. In a survey from the 2015 Ella Baker Center for Human Rights and Forward Together report, "Who Pays? The True Cost of Incarceration on Families", 79% of people who had been incarcerated were either ineligible or denied public housing as a result of criminal history. More than half of those released from jail or prison have unstable or nonexistent housing. This report assesses the health and equity impacts of public housing admissions screening policies that exclude people with a criminal history from public housing, using the Oakland Housing Authority (OHA) in Oakland, California as a case study. Having housing improves health directly and indirectly, decreases recidivism, improves the chance of becoming employed and having more income, and helps with family reunification. These factors, known in public health as the "social determinants of health", create opportunities to succeed and are known to be important for health and wellbeing. For example: - Moving often affects recidivism. The odds of recidivism increase by at least 70% for every time someone who is formerly incarcerated changes their residence. - Six randomized control trials analyzed supported employment in public housing against other approaches to help residents find jobs, and found 58% of public housing program participants obtained employment compared to 21% in the control group. - More than 70% of those leaving prison indicated that family is an important factor in keeping them out of prison, and up to 82% of people leaving prison or jail expect to live with or get help from their families. - Having stable housing upon leaving jail or prison decreases a person's chance of having their probation revoked. The outcomes stemming from having stable and affordable housing are clear: research shows that lack of stable and affordable housing forces families to frequently move and live in unhealthy and crowded environments, increases stress and depression, and can lead to homelessness. Homelessness brings higher rates of infectious diseases; substance use and mental health disorders; exposure to violence; overexposure to cold and rain; and suicide. Studies show that between 25% - 50% of people who are homeless have a history of involvement with the criminal justice system. Those who have been involved with the criminal justice system are disproportionately people of color, low income, and mentally ill and, due to the intersection of these factors, are at high risk for housing instability and negative health outcomes. The United States has a history of racial discrimination and unjust treatment towards people of color, dating back to slavery, Black Codes, and Jim Crow laws. With the War on Drugs in the 1970's, 80's and 90's, this history is currently manifested in criminal justice policies that have led to vastly disproportionate outcomes by race. The 2013 National Survey on Drug Use and Health shows that 9.5% of whites and 10.5% of Blacks used illicit drugs in the last month, but drug-related arrest rates are 332 per 100,000 residents for Whites and 879 per 100,000 for Blacks. Compared to their White counterparts, Blacks are more likely to be incarcerated for the same crime and receive longer sentences. A series of federal laws enacted in the 1990's led to decreased access to public housing for people with a criminal history. In 2002, for example, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld PHAs' authority to evict an entire household based on the criminal activity of one member or guest without specific proof that the tenant had any knowledge of the activity. Statistics and historical policies like these have resulted in the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) releasing guidance on April 4, 2016 explicitly stating their goal of increasing access to safe, secure, and affordable housing for formerly incarcerated people. The 2016 guidance states that, due to the extreme over-representation of people of color in the criminal justice system, the consideration of criminal histories in screening procedures used by housing providers, including Public Housing Authorities, may lead to violations of the Fair Housing Act. This report examines the Oakland Housing Authority as a case study. We consider OHA's screening policies and practices and specifically how they consider the presentation of "mitigating circumstances" for people with a criminal history during the application process. In Alameda County in 2014, there were almost 4,800 people returning from state prison, 3,200 people were in county jail on any give day, and 1 out 4 people have a criminal record. We estimate that at least 20,000 people are currently at risk of residential instability because of their criminal history. Because they are vastly over-represented in the criminal justice system, this places an inequitable burden on Blacks. Details: Oakland, CA: Human Impact Partners, 2016. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 26, 2016 at: http://www.ellabakercenter.org/sites/default/files/media/OHA-HIA-Final-Report.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.ellabakercenter.org/sites/default/files/media/OHA-HIA-Final-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 146144 Keywords: Criminal History Ex-Offenders Housing Prisoner Reentry Retrictive Housing

Author: Prison Reform Trust Title: Home truths: housing for women in the criminal justice system Summary: The failure to solve a chronic shortage of suitable housing options for women who offend leads to more crime, more victims and more unnecessary and costly imprisonment. Safe, secure housing is crucial in breaking that cycle and the harm it causes to our communities, to the women involved and to their families. Many women lose their homes while in custody and 60% of women prisoners may not have homes to go to on release. - Because women are often imprisoned further from their homes than men, they can have more difficulty in retaining a 'local connection', which is a common precondition for local authority housing. - A lack of appropriate and safe accommodation increases the risk of (re)offending - without stable housing it is harder to engage in employment and training, or to access support services. - Hostel accommodation may expose women to potentially risky situations. - Suitable accommodation options for women, especially those with children or those affected by substance misuse, mental health problems, or domestic abuse are in short supply. Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic women are over-represented in prison, and face additional barriers to housing. - There is a lack of clarity and consistency about responsibility for the housing of women offenders. - Women in prison need more timely advice about their housing options and support to sustain tenancies or apply for housing. - Communication, cooperation and joined up working between prison authorities, probation services, housing providers, and local authorities needs to be urgently improved. Details: London: PRT, 2016. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 27, 2016 at: http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/Home%20Truths.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/Home%20Truths.pdf Shelf Number: 146149 Keywords: Female Offenders Homelessness Housing Prisoner Reentry

Author: LeCroy & Milligan Associates, Inc. Title: Compass Behavioral Health Care Greater Arizona Reintegration Services Project (GARSP) Bi-annual Report October 2012 Summary: This bi-annual report presents the findings of the Greater Arizona Reintegration Services Project (GARSP) evaluation for the cumulative Year 2 time-frame of October 1, 2011 to September 30, 2012. GARSP is a project of Compass Behavior Health Care (CBHC) and is funded by a grant from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). The report presents data required by SAMHSA, results of the implementation study, recommendations for continued program improvement, and next steps of the evaluation. CBHC was awarded an Offender Reentry Program (ORP) grant from SAMHSA to expand and enhance substance abuse treatment and related recovery and reentry services to adult offenders (ages 18 and over), returning to Pima County from several Arizona prisons. GARSP has four primary goals: 1) to increase statewide collaborative efforts to reduce recidivism, substance abuse/use and increase self-sufficiency and stability among the offender population; 2) to promote sobriety and improved mental health status among participants; 3) to provide participants with a continuum of treatment and supportive services; and 4) to provide treatment and support services with evidence-based practices to improve the ability of each individual to achieve self-sufficiency and stability. Details: Tucson, AZ: LeCroy & Milligan Associates, 2012. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 12, 2016 at: http://www.lecroymilligan.com/data/resources/compassgarspyear-2-annual-reportfinal10-22-2012-1.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.lecroymilligan.com/data/resources/compassgarspyear-2-annual-reportfinal10-22-2012-1.pdf Shelf Number: 145404 Keywords: Drug Treatment Mental Health Services Prisoner Reentry Substance Abuse Treatment

Author: Cleary, Andrew Title: Surveying Prisoner Crime Reduction (SPCR) Wave 1 (Reception) Samples 1 and 2 Technical Report Summary: Surveying Prisoner Crime Reduction (SPCR) is a longitudinal study which aimed to track the progress of 4,000 newly sentenced prisoners in England and Wales from 2005 to 2010. At the time it was the largest survey of prisoners ever undertaken in Britain. Ipsos MORI was commissioned to carry out the survey by the Research Development and Statistics Directorate (RDS) National Offender Management Service (NOMS) at the Home Office, now Offender Management and Sentencing Analytical Services (OMSAS) at the Ministry of Justice (MoJ). The broad aim of SPCR was to explore how interventions might work in combination to address the range of prisoners' needs. More specifically, SPCR aimed to assess prisoners' problems and needs on reception, how these are addressed during and after custody and the combined effect of any interventions on offending and other outcomes, in light of prisoners' background characteristics, after release from prison. This report focuses in detail on the first stage of interviews ("reception" stage) of the study, undertaken with an overall sample of 3,849 prisoners in two parts: a representative sample of 1,435 prisoners (Sample 1) sentenced up to four years, and a sample comprising 2,414 prisoners sentenced to between 18 months and four years (Sample 2). The rationale of Sample 2 was to interview more prisoners who had been in custody long enough to undertake prison interventions. In addition to this element the study involved three further stages of interviews (a longitudinal design): - pre-release interviews, conducted shortly before release - post-release two-month interviews, conducted in the community one to two months after release - post-release six-month interviews, conducted in the community six months after release (Sample 2 only). Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2012. 135p. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Research Series 5/12 : Accessed October 21, 2016 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/278843/surveying-prisoner-crime-reduction-wave-1.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/278843/surveying-prisoner-crime-reduction-wave-1.pdf Shelf Number: 131154 Keywords: Interventions Prisoner Reentry Prisoners Recidivism Treatment Programs

Author: Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services Title: Review of Virginia's Pre- and Post-Incarceration Services Summary: Virginia’s offender reentry program history can be traced back to the civil rights era of the late 1960s. A 1968 prison strike at the State Penitentiary in Richmond, Virginia inspired several local churches to convene a conference on Churches and the Correctional System. Following that effort, Colonel Jay Worrall, Jr. founded the OAR movement, which at the time stood for Offender Aid and Restoration. It was his vision of citizen visitors helping jail inmates that formed the original premise for the creation of OAR organizations around the country. A few years later, as part of their anti-poverty efforts, Total Action Against Poverty (TAP), a Roanoke Community Action Agency, began providing reentry assistance through a small counseling-based "self-awareness" program. By the mid seventies, TAP had developed the STOP-GAP program to formalize service provision to recently released inmates, including life skills training, job placement, and counseling, among others (Department of Criminal Justice Services [DCJS], 1982, 3-6). OAR programs and other reentry services became established throughout Virginia in the early to mid 1970s. The reentry programs funded by DCJS have at various times been identified as "Pre-release and Post-incarceration Services" (PAPIS), "Offender Reentry and Transition Services" (ORTS), and the Virginia Prisoner Reentry Program. To reduce confusion, they will be consistently referred to throughout this report as PAPIS programs. Details: Richmond: The Department, 2013. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 8, 2016 at: https://www.dcjs.virginia.gov/sites/dcjs.virginia.gov/files/publications/corrections/2013-review-virginias-prerelease-and-post-incarceration-services-papis.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.dcjs.virginia.gov/sites/dcjs.virginia.gov/files/publications/corrections/2013-review-virginias-prerelease-and-post-incarceration-services-papis.pdf Shelf Number: 141034 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry

Author: Lai, Keith Title: Does Supervision After Release From Prison Reduce Re-offending? Summary: Currently, in England and Wales, adult prisoners serving a sentence of 12 months or more are supervised by the Probation Service "on licence" upon release from custody, whilst those serving a sentence of less than 12 months are not. This paper summarises work exploring the use of a Regression Discontinuity Design to assess the impact of this supervision on re-offending rates. The analysis compares the re-offending rates of offenders either side of the 12 month licence supervision threshold. It is based on offenders with one or no previous convictions and sentenced to around a year in custody. © Crown copyright 2013 You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives. gov.uk/doc/open-governmentlicence/ or email: psi@nationalarchives.gsi. gov.uk Where we have identified any third party copyright material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. First published July 2013 ISBN 978-1-84099-606-7 Contact info: mojanalyticalservices@ justice.gsi.gov.uk Key findings  For offenders with one or no previous convictions, the one-year re-offending rate is between 14 and 17 percentage points lower for offenders on licence than similar offenders not on licence.  Extending the analysis to a two-year re-offending rate increased the difference between the offenders on licence and offenders not on licence to between 16 and 20 percentage points.  These estimates are statistically significant at the 5% level. Whilst none of the results relating to the three-year re-offending rate were statistically significant at the 5% level, the size of the re-offending reductions are only a little smaller in absolute terms than for the one and two year re-offending reductions. More generally, the estimates are less reliable and subject to more uncertainty the longer the time period from release.  The analysis suggests that a period of probation supervision after release from custody reduces the re-offending rate of offenders sentenced to around one year in custody and with one or no previous convictions. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2013. 3p. Source: Internet Resource: Analytical Summary: Accessed November 11, 2016 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/224557/supervision-after-release.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/224557/supervision-after-release.pdf Shelf Number: 130133 Keywords: Offender Supervision Prisoner Reentry Probation Recidivism Reoffending

Author: Taliaferro, Wayne Title: From Incarceration to Reentry: A Look at Trends, Gaps, and Opportunities in Correctional Education and Training Summary: With record levels of men and women incarcerated—totalling 2.2 million—the United States places more people in prison at a higher rate than any other developed nation. That total also represents 20 percent of the world's prison population, which is disproportionately high considering that the U.S. makes up less than 5 percent of the world’s population. For low-income communities, the disparities are even more alarming. In 2014, the median annual income for people prior to incarceration was less than $20,000. Furthermore, Blacks and Latinos, who are disproportionately impacted by poverty, also have the highest rates of imprisonment and account for more than half of all prisoners. However, the context surrounding this crisis tells a much larger story, which is partly rooted in educational inequities. More than two-thirds of state prison inmates do not have a high school diploma. The roots of these disparities are complex. Pipelines to prison have historically been concentrated in low-income communities of color. From an early age, many youth in these spatially segregated communities experience economic and environmental injustices, underfunded and under-resourced schools, harsh school discipline policies, and exposure to crime and violence in ways that create diminished opportunities for economic and educational mobility. These realities are a deeper reflection of historic and present injustices ingrained in larger systems of governance. The criminal justice system often reinforces these embedded structures of inequality. Over-criminalization, implicit bias, harsh sentencing policies, and judicial and prosecutorial discretion disproportionately affect Black and Latino communities, having directly shaped the system of mass incarceration we know today. Together, these disparities create conditions of enhanced susceptibility to criminal justice system involvement for people of color that can be characterized as targeted and concentrated more than anything else. Although mass incarceration does not solely affect communities of color, they experience inequitable impacts from its pervasively harsh outcomes. Similarly, people of color suffer disproportionately from the collateral consequences imposed on individuals with a criminal record who return to society after serving their time in prison. Collateral and systemic barriers, such as disenfranchisement, legalized discrimination in housing and public benefits access, and biases in hiring, along with impediments to educational opportunities, make it especially difficult for returning citizens to gain employment, stability, and an overall fair chance upon reentry. These diminished economic opportunities contribute to the cycle of recidivism, resulting in three-quarters of returning citizens re-offending within five years. Taking this entire context into account, this report examines correctional education, as it is a critical aspect of the complex mass incarceration system that can make a real difference in reversing this vicious cycle. While correctional education and training is by no means a panacea for the grave injustices of this system, it can play an important role in improving the educational and employment trajectories of the returning citizens who face greatly restricted opportunities to participate in our economic mainstream.While the quality and accessibility of correctional education and training opportunities vary largely across states, as does the consistency of accessible and well-articulated education and training opportunities for returning citizens upon release, there is room for significant innovation and improvement. Doing so will require reforms across multiple systems to address these disparities. With that in mind, we focus on the state of correctional education funding streams, program offerings, and the continuum of education and training opportunities upon release. Details: Washington, DC: CLASP, 2016. 25p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 14, 2016 at: http://www.clasp.org/resources-and-publications/publication-1/2016.10.27_fromincarcerationtoreentry.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.clasp.org/resources-and-publications/publication-1/2016.10.27_fromincarcerationtoreentry.pdf Shelf Number: 146973 Keywords: Correctional Education Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Rehabilitation Racial Disparities Vocational Education and Training

Author: Cleary, Andrew Title: Surveying Prisoner Crime Reduction (SPCR): Waves 3 and 4 (Post-release): Samples 1 and 2 Technical Report Summary: Surveying Prisoner Crime Reduction (SPCR) is a longitudinal study which aimed to track the progress of 4,000 newly sentenced prisoners in England and Wales from 2005 to 2010. At the time it was the largest survey of prisoners ever undertaken in Britain. Ipsos MORI was commissioned to undertake the survey by the Research Development and Statistics Directorate (RDS) National Offender Management Service (NOMS) at the Home Office, now Offender Management and Sentencing Analytical Services (OMSAS) at the Ministry of Justice (MoJ). The broad aim of SPCR was to explore how interventions might work in combination to address the range of prisoners' needs. More specifically, SPCR aimed to assess prisoners' problems and needs on reception, how these are addressed during and after custody and the combined effect of any interventions on offending and other outcomes, in light of prisoners' background characteristics, after release from prison. 1.2 Research Design This report describes the data collection for the Waves 3 and 4 interviews, each of which was conducted after release from prison for the SPCR sentence. Wave 3 field work was conducted from April 2006 to April 2010 and Wave 4 from May 2007 to October 2010. Separate reports provide the sampling and data collection information for the Wave 1 and Wave 2 interviews (Cleary et al. 2012a; 2012b). SPCR consists of an overall sample of 3,849 prisoners in two parts: a representative sample of 1,435 prisoners (Sample 1) sentenced to between one month and four years (76% were sentenced to less than 12 months), and a sample comprising 2,414 prisoners sentenced to between 18 months and four years (Sample 2). The rationale for Sample 2 was to interview more prisoners who had been in custody long enough to undertake prison interventions. Both samples followed the same four-stage longitudinal design: 1. Wave 1 (reception) interviews, conducted shortly after prisoners' reception into custody 2. Wave 2 (pre-release) interviews, conducted shortly before release, or at the same time as the reception interview (using a "combined" version of the questionnaire) for those Sample 1 prisoners on shorter sentences (mostly sentenced to less than six months) 3. Wave 3 (post-release two-month) interviews, conducted one to two months after release 4. Wave 4 (post-release six-month) interviews, conducted six months after prisoners' release (Sample 2 only) 1.3 Structure of the Waves 3 and 4 Technical Report This report describes the methodology and processes employed during setup, field work, data processing, and data outputs processes for the Waves 3 and 4 (post-release) stages of SPCR. Survey results from Waves 3 of SPCR are available on the MoJ website (e.g. MoJ, 2010, Sadlier 2010, Williams et al., 2012a, Williams et al., 2012b, Cunniffe et al., 2012, Hopkins, 2012, Boorman & Hopkins, 2012; Light et al., 2013; Brunton-Smith & Hopkins 2013; 2014; Hopkins & Brunton-Smith 2014). It is structured into the following sections: Section 2: Sample eligibility and tracing procedures - keeping in contact with eligible prisoners. Section 3: Field work - interviewer briefings, field work procedures and survey response rates. Section 4: Waves 3 and 4 interviews - topics covered and procedures used. Annex: Waves 3 and 4 questionnaires. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2014. 70p. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Analytical Series : Accessed November 15, 2016 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/296776/spcr-waves-3-and-4-technical-report.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/296776/spcr-waves-3-and-4-technical-report.pdf Shelf Number: 146642 Keywords: Interventions Prisoner Reentry Prisoners Recidivism Treatment Programs

Author: Rampey, Bobby D. Title: Highlights from the U.S. PIAAC Survey of Incarcerated Adults: Their Skills, Work Experience, Education, and Training: Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies: 2014 Summary: he U.S. PIAAC Survey of Incarcerated Adults was designed to provide policymakers, administrators, educators, and researchers with information to improve educational and training opportunities for incarcerated adults and foster skills they need in order to return to, and work successfully in, society upon release from prison. This report highlights data from the survey's extensive background questionnaire and direct assessments of cognitive skills. It examines the skills of incarcerated adults in relationship to their work experiences and to their education and training in prison. Results for incarcerated adults on the literacy and numeracy domains are presented in two ways: (1) as scale scores (estimated on a 0-500 scale), and (2) as percentages of adults reaching the proficiency levels established for each of these domains. The report includes results for groups of incarcerated adults by various characteristics, including employment prior to incarceration, experiences with prison jobs, skills certifications, educational attainment in prison, and participation in academic programs and training classes. Details: U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, 2016. 70p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 21, 2016 at: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2016/2016040.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2016/2016040.pdf Shelf Number: 140238 Keywords: Correctional Programs Educational Programs Ex-Offender Employment Prisoner Reentry Vocational Education and Training

Author: Hill, Leslie Brooke Title: Becoming the Person Your Dog Thinks You Are: An Assessment of Florida Prison-Based Dog Training Programs on Prison Misconduct, Post-Release Employment and Recidivism Summary: Dog Training Programs have recently become a popular rehabilitative program within correctional facilities. They are present in all 50 states as well as many other countries. However, the empirical literature on the effectiveness of these popular programs is sparse. Using a cohort of inmates released from Florida prisons between the years of 2004-2011 (n=181,547) this study examines the effectiveness of dog training programs on prison misconduct, post-release employment and recidivism. Findings indicate that participation in a dog training program can lead to reductions prison misconduct and reductions in the likelihood and timing of re-arrest. Among those who participated in dog training programs, longer duration, recency of participation, continuity of treatment and being in the program at release emerge as predictors of reductions in prison misconduct and re-arrest and increasing obtaining employment upon release. Due to promising findings, policy implications are discussed as well as potential avenues for future research. Details: Tallahassee: Florida State University, 2016. 186p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed December 14, 2016 at: http://fsu.digital.flvc.org/islandora/object/fsu%3A360369 Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://fsu.digital.flvc.org/islandora/object/fsu%3A360369 Shelf Number: 140442 Keywords: Correctional Programs Dog Training Programs Ex-Offender Employment Prison Programs Prisoner Misconduct Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Rehabilitation Programs

Author: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, Audit Division Title: Audit of the Federal Bureau of Prisons' Management of Inmate Placements in Residential Reentry Centers and Home Confinement Summary: The Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) provides a variety of reentry programming to help incarcerated inmates successfully transition back into society. As part of its release preparation, BOP has the authority to place inmates in residential reentry centers (RRC), also known as halfway houses, and/or home confinement while serving the remainder of their sentences. BOP may determine that an inmate should not be placed into either an RRC or home confinement because, for example, the inmate poses a significant threat to the community. An inmate placed in an RRC and/or home confinement remains in BOP custody. RRCs provide a supervised environment that support inmates in finding employment and housing, completing necessary programming such as drug abuse treatment, participating in counseling, and strengthening ties to family and friends. Home confinement provides similar opportunities, but is used for inmates BOP believes do not need the structure provided by RRCs. Inmates placed in home confinement are monitored and are required to remain at home when not working or participating in release programing and other approved activities. Pursuant to the Second Chance Act of 2007, all federal inmates are eligible for RRC and home confinement placement. However, BOP's placement decisions are supposed to be driven by an individual assessment weighing an inmate's need for reentry services against the risk to the community. Inmates can be placed in RRCs for up to 12 months but can only spend a maximum of 6 months, or 10 percent of the term of imprisonment, whichever is shorter, in home confinement. In fiscal year 2015, the BOP spent $360 million on RRC and home confinement costs and, as of September 2016, BOP reported having 181 RRCs operated by 103 different contractors. The Office of the Inspector General assessed BOP’s RRC and home confinement programs, including its placement policy and practices, program capacity planning and management, and strategic planning and performance management. The audit covers inmates released from BOP custody from October 2013 through April 2016, either directly from BOP institutions, RRCs, or home confinement. Based on our analysis, we found that 94,252 inmates released from BOP custody during the scope of our audit were eligible for placement in an RRC and/or home confinement. BOP placed 79 percent of these eligible inmates into RRCs and/or home confinement - 75 percent were initially placed in RRCs and only 4 percent went directly into home confinement. The remaining 21 percent were released directly from a BOP institution. Our audit found that BOP's RRC and home confinement placement policies and guidance, which are designed to identify individual inmate risks and needs while simultaneously weighing these against the safety of the community and available resources, appear reasonable. In our judgment, the inmate's security level at the time of placement is the best indicator of inmate risk and need for transitional services because it incorporates key recidivism risk factors, as well the inmate's behavior during incarceration. As a result, we analyzed BOP’s RRC and home confinement placement practices based on the exit security level of inmates released from BOP custody during the scope of our audit. Our analysis determined that, contrary to BOP policy, BOP guidance, and relevant research, BOP's RRC and home confinement placement decisions are not based on inmate risk for recidivism or need for transitional services. Rather, we found that BOP is placing the great majority of eligible inmates into RRCs regardless of inmate risk for recidivism or need for transitional services, unless the inmate is deemed not suitable for such placement because the inmate poses a significant threat to the community. As a result, low-risk, low-need inmates are far more likely to be placed in RRCs than high-risk, high-need inmates. Specifically, we found that of the 94,252 inmates released between October 2013 and April 23, 2016, 90 percent of minimum security and 75 percent of low security inmates are placed in RRCs and/or home confinement. However, only 58 percent of high security level inmates were transitioned into the community through RRCs, while 42 percent were released into the community directly from a BOP institution. We recognize this may be a result of the fact that many of the high security inmates were considered a public safety risk. Nonetheless, at the time they would be placed in an RRC, on average these inmates are within 4 months of being released into the community upon completion of their sentence. Thus BOP must weigh the immediate risk of placing high-risk inmates in RRCs against the risk of releasing them back into society directly from BOP institutions without transitional reentry programming. It also appears that BOP is underutilizing direct home confinement placement as an alternative to RRC placement for transitioning low-risk, low-need inmates back into society. This underutilization of direct home confinement placement was evident when we reviewed data on placement of minimum and low security inmates and found that BOP placed only 6 percent of even those lower risk inmates directly into home confinement, despite BOP policy and guidance stating that direct home confinement placement is the preferred placement for low-risk, low-need inmates. This is particularly concerning given that BOP guidance, as well as the research cited in the guidance, indicates that low-risk inmates do not benefit from and may in fact be harmed by RRC placement because, among other things, of their exposure to high-risk offenders in those facilities. Moreover, the underutilization of direct home confinement for low-risk, low need inmates results in fewer RRC resources being available for high-risk, high-need inmates since the RRC inmate population is already at or in excess of BOP’s contracted capacity. In addition, this practice may also further strain high security BOP institutions that are already well above capacity. We found that, from October 2013 through March 2016, the RRC population has remained at about 101 percent of contracted capacity, while the home confinement population averaged nearly 159 percent of contracted monitoring capacity, despite BOP’s apparent underutilization of it as an alternative to RRC placement. The home confinement capacity issues resulted, at least in part, from BOP’s policy to aggressively pursue transitioning inmates from RRCs to home confinement as soon as possible in an effort to increase RRC capacity. This reduces the capacity for direct home confinement placements and, additionally, may result in inmates being transitioned from RRCs to home confinement too early, as evidenced by the fact that 17 percent of inmates were placed back into RRCs for violating home confinement program rules. We also found that BOP lacks adequate performance measures to evaluate the success of its RRC and home confinement programming. Although BOP has RRC and home confinement placement targets, these targets do not measure the effectiveness of RRC and home confinement programs. Additionally, the placement targets – 85 percent from minimum, 75 percent from low, 70 percent from medium, and 65 percent from high security level institutions – appear to encourage institutions to maximize the number of inmates placed in RRCs or home confinement, regardless of transitional need. In fact, the issues we identified with BOP’s current placement practices may be driven, in part, by its RRC and home confinement placement targets. The success of BOP’s RRC and home confinement programs relies on the quality of programming provided by its RRC contractors, all of whom also provide services to and monitor inmates in home confinement. However, we found that BOP’s policy for monitoring its RRC contractors focuses on assessing compliance with the contractual Statements of Work, rather than assessing the quality of services provided by the RRC contractors. Specifically, we did not identify any requirement that RRC contractors or BOP collect, retain, and report any statistics pertaining to RRC or home confinement program performance or success or failure rates. If these measures were available, BOP could then incorporate these figures into its strategic planning, which might assist it in assessing its programs and RRC contractors based on measurable qualitative achievements as opposed to simply trying to meet numerical quotas. Our report makes five recommendations to improve BOP’s management of inmate placements in RRCs and home confinement. Details: Washington, DC: Office of the Inspector General, 2016. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Audit Division 17-01: Accessed December 21, 2016 at: https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2016/a1701.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2016/a1701.pdf Shelf Number: 147774 Keywords: Federal Bureau of Prisons Halfway Houses Home Confinement Offender Management Prisoner Reentry Residential Facilities

Author: Plotkin, Martha Title: Critical Connections: Getting People Leaving Prison and Jail the Mental Health Care and Substance Use Treatment They Need: What Policymakers Need to Know about Health Care Coverage Summary: State legislators, corrections directors, and health systems administrators often face significant challenges in helping connect the large number of people with behavioral health disorders who are leaving prisons and jails to health care and supportive services.* Much of this difficulty lies in determining the policies and practices that can be the most effective in helping people obtain the health insurance and other federal benefits they need to access appropriate and affordable care upon their return to the community. These are longstanding problems that have taken on new dimensions as an increasing share of treatment and services needed by the reentry population are covered under Medicaid if eligible individuals are enrolled.† As the single largest payer of mental health services and increasingly of substance use treatment,1 Medicaid is a system becoming more focused on care management, service coordination, and treatment for people with complex needs. Any state that wants to make an impact on addressing the behavioral health needs of people who are in frequent contact with the justice system should consider how Medicaid and other federal programs can be leveraged. A coordinated state response involves knowing how to:‡ • Identify people in the criminal justice system who are likely eligible for Medicaid and other publicly funded benefits such as Social Security Administration benefits and U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care and benefits; • Facilitate or reinstate enrollment of people in prisons and jails in Medicaid and other benefits; and • Engage in cross-sector collaborations to – Review and revise Medicaid state plans to cover the types of behavioral health care and supportive services needed by people leaving prisons and jails§ – Shape service delivery to encourage a “whole person” integrated approach to health care and supportive services. – Inventory and expand needed community care and supportive services, including the number, range, and availability of behavioral health treatment providers who have the requisite skills and experience to work with the reentry population. Details: New York, NY: Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2017. 158p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 30, 2017 at: https://www.bja.gov/publications/Critical-Connections-Full-Report.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.bja.gov/publications/Critical-Connections-Full-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 140755 Keywords: Criminal Justice Policy Health Care Health Services Mental Health Services Prisoner Reentry Substance Abuse Treatment

Author: Reichert, Jessica Title: Housing and Services After Prison: Evaluation of the St. Leonard's House Reentry Program Summary: More than 500,000 individuals are released from prison each year. As they return to their communities, they face obstacles in finding employment and housing, as well as significant debt, outstanding fines, and restitution payments. Two-thirds of this population are arrested again within three years. St. Leonard's House in Chicago offers voluntary, supportive housing for men exiting prison. Program clients receive housing, substance abuse treatment, psychological services, life skills, mentoring, and education and vocational services. Authority researchers used qualitative and quantitative methods of data collection, as well as quasi-experimental design and advanced statistical analysis, to examine outcomes after program participation, including arrests, convictions, incarcerations, and employment. Details: Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2016. 109p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 1, 2017 at: http://www.icjia.org/assets/articles/SLH%20FINAL%2011-16-16.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.icjia.org/assets/articles/SLH%20FINAL%2011-16-16.pdf Shelf Number: 146033 Keywords: Ex-Offenders, Housing Housing Prisoner Reentry

Author: Family Justice Title: Enhancing Rural Reentry Through Housing Partnerships: A Handbook for Community Corrections Agencies in Rural Areas Summary: Family Justice initiated the project "Housing Partnerships to Enhance Reentry Outcomes" in response to rural community corrections officers grappling with housing families involved in the criminal justice system. Time and again community corrections officers cited the same challenges. With support from the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Family Justice explored the challenges of rural housing and reentry, as well as opportunities for collaboration that could yield creative solutions. The Handbook Rather than dictating a course of action, this handbook is meant to spur consideration and collaboration and share what Family Justice has learned about rural housing and reentry. The following pages discuss potentially beneficial partnerships that community corrections departments can cultivate to fully tap resources and expertise. The handbook also suggests various strategies to increase housing options for people coming home from jail and prison—and for their families. This manual offers community corrections: Strategies for partnering with families and supporting them through the reentry process Strategies for broad-based collaboration to address affordable-housing access issues Information about housing laws and policies that affect people involved in the justice system in rural areas Information about rural housing programs and low-income housing tax credits This handbook can also serve as a resource for housing professionals by providing information about the potential benefits and challenges to housing families involved in the justice system. The handbook describes opportunities for collaboration with community corrections agencies in rural communities to enhance public safety. Details: New York: Family Justice, 2009. 51p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 3, 2017 at: https://www.appa-net.org/eweb/docs/appa/pubs/ERRTHP.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: https://www.appa-net.org/eweb/docs/appa/pubs/ERRTHP.pdf Shelf Number: 145385 Keywords: Housing Prisoner Reentry Rural Areas Rural Corrections

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Work and Pensions Committee Title: Support for Ex-offenders. Fifth Report of Session 2016-17 Summary: The Government's own assessment of the prison system is that it fails to rehabilitate or make sure criminals are prevented from reoffending. The cost to the taxpayer of reoffending stands at around L15 billion per year. It is in society's interest to bring this cost down. Members of this Committee have assisted constituents with firsthand experience of failures in rehabilitation; individuals leaving prison with no fixed accommodation, no financial support and no prospect of finding work. Employment significantly reduces the chances of reoffending. It can also lead to other positive outcomes that have been shown to reduce reoffending, such as financial security and finding a safe and permanent home. We have heard from businesses who have successfully worked with prisons to get ex-offenders into jobs but more employers must follow suit. Individuals entering prison have a range of complex needs. Nearly one-third report a learning difficulty or disability and almost half report having no school qualifications. They enter a prison system where the landscape of education and employment support is fragmented, and good practice is patchy and inconsistent. Added to this are the challenges of rising levels of violence in prisons, a reduction in prison officer numbers and pressure on capacity. Education and employment in prison The problem of employment support in prison is partly one of coordination. Currently, there is no clear strategy for how different agencies, in different prisons, should work together to achieve the common goal of getting ex-offenders into work. We urge the Government to state clearly who has ultimate responsibility for helping prison leavers into work. The Government, charities, employers and ex-offenders themselves all agree that the 'gold standard' of employment support involves employers working in prisons and offering work placements through Release on Temporary License. Over the course of this inquiry, we have seen many examples of good practice, such as work done by Blue Sky, a company that works to understand employer's labour needs, delivers training in prisons and places ex-offenders into jobs. Details: London: House of Commons, 2016. 51p. Source: Internet Resource: Fifth Report of Session 2016-17; HC 58: Accessed February 11, 2017 at: https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmworpen/58/58.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmworpen/58/58.pdf Shelf Number: 145020 Keywords: Correctional Programs Ex-offender Employment Inmate Work Programs Prisoner Education and Training Prisoner Reentry Rehabilitation Programs Reoffending

Author: Martin, Karin D. Title: Shackled to Debt: Criminal Justice Financial Obligations and the Barriers to Re-entry They Create Summary: The authors discuss the long-term and unintended consequences of criminal justice financial obligations (CJFOs): fines, forfeiture of property, court fees, supervision fees, and restitution. The authors find that CJFOs are imposed at multiple stages of justice involvement, generating complexities that are difficult to navigate for both individuals and system actors alike. Additionally, financial sanctions are usually imposed without regard for individuals' ability to pay, and yet failure to pay can trigger additional monetary and criminal sanctions. This means that relatively minor initial infractions can result in large debt accrual and escalating involvement in criminal justice systems. Current systems of criminal justice financial obligations can also generate perverse incentives for justice-involved individuals - who may forego pursuing long-term sustainability in favor of being able to pay off their criminal justice debt quickly – and for system actors. Probation and parole officers, for example, may find that their ability to foster trust and positive behavior change in the lives of those they supervise is compromised by the role of debt collector. Consequences of criminal justice debt can undermine post-incarceration re-entry goals such as finding stable housing, transportation and employment. Failure to achieve these goals is costly not only for justice-involved individuals, but also in terms of public safety outcomes. To address the complexity, perverse incentives, and individual and social costs of CJFOs, the report presents recommendations in seven areas: (1) Factor in ability to pay when assessing CJFOs; (2) Eliminate “poverty penalties” (e.g. interest, application fees for payment plans, late fees, incarceration for failure to meet payments); (3) Implement alternatives to monetary sanctions where appropriate (i.e. community service); (4) Provide amnesty for people currently in debt due to CJFOs; (5) Deposit any CJFOs that are collected into a trust fund for the express purpose of rehabilitation for people under supervision; (6) Establish an independent commission in each jurisdiction to evaluate the consequences of CJFOs; and (7) Relieve probation, parole, and police officers of the responsibility of collecting debt. Details: Cambridge, MA: Harvard Kennedy School, Program in Criminal Justice Policy and Management, 2017. Source: Internet Resource: New Thinking in Community Corrections, no. 4: Accessed February 15, 2017 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/249976.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/249976.pdf Shelf Number: 140932 Keywords: Asset Forfeiture Court Fees Criminal Debt Criminal Justice Fines Financial Sanctions Monetary Sanctions Poverty Prisoner Reentry Restitution

Author: McKay, Kyle A. Title: Evaluating Social Impact Bonds as a New Reentry Financing Mechanism: A Case Study on Reentry Programming in Maryland Summary: Social impact bonds (SIBs) represent a relatively new concept for financing and contracting for the delivery of social service programs. They are designed with the intention of shifting the financial risk of performance-based payments from providers onto investors. This allows governments to, in theory, increase the portion of funding linked to the achievement of an outcome without damaging the funding of service providers. Although actual bonds are not typically issued, the government contracts with investors, a program manager, and nonprofit service providers for a SIB program. If an independent evaluator finds that the SIB program produced outcomes equal to or greater than the targeted levels, then the government reimburses the investors for their capital, along with a return on investment. In the event that the program does not produce the targeted outcomes, then the investors receive no compensation from the government and lose their capital investment. The Department of Legislative Services (DLS) has conducted a review of the feasibility, potential benefits, and risks associated with financing reentry programs using SIBs. Reentry programs are of particular interest to the Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (DPSCS) based on its mission. Reentry programs are also generally considered a strong candidate for SIBs due to the potential for large cost savings to the government through the successful reduction of re-imprisonment. Based on the benefits commonly associated with SIBs, DLS evaluated the potential of SIBs to generate cost savings, help finance social programs, shift outcome risk, increase innovation in reentry programming, and build more rigorous evidence for policy decisions. Even when using a set of highly optimistic assumptions, it is clear that pilot reentry programs cannot self-finance their operations. Because pilot programs cannot create a large enough reduction in demand to close a facility, the cost dynamics are driven by much smaller marginal cost savings. As a result, a program that produces a 10% reduction in recidivism for 250 prisoners per year over five years will only result in minimal avoided imprisonment costs. Before including the cost of direct services, the fixed costs of designing the contract, compensating a third-party intermediary, and conducting an independent evaluation, at $700,000 collectively, would alone exceed the fiscal benefits. Including service costs of $2,500 per participant, the program would result in a net fiscal impact of -$3.9 million. Doubling the size or assumed effectiveness of the program would not result in a positive net fiscal impact. These results indicate that the additional costs of a SIB program cannot be justified by offsetting savings. Other potential benefits do not justify the cost or complexity of a SIB program either. Given the difficulty of linking the evaluation of a social program to a highly complex contract centered on an outcome payment, the government may actually increase its operational risks in undertaking a SIB. The government would also need to budget upfront for the contingent liabilities of outcome payments. As a result, a SIB program would increase both budgetary pressure and operational risks. Reentry programs can have great social value independent of their fiscal impact. The decision to finance them should be made independent of whether or not they can be self-financed through cost savings and a SIB mechanism. Because they are especially valuable and effective when integrated and combined with larger scale policies aimed at reducing recidivism and increasing public safety, DLS recommends that DPSCS continue to directly finance reentry programs while pursuing other organizational and policy changes likely to have greater impacts while posing less risk than a SIB financed program. Details: Annapolis, MD: Maryland Department of Legislative Services, Office of Policy Analysis, 2013. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 17, 2017 at: http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/Pubs/BudgetFiscal/2013-Evaluating-Social-Impact-Bonds.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/Pubs/BudgetFiscal/2013-Evaluating-Social-Impact-Bonds.pdf Shelf Number: 146668 Keywords: Criminal Justice Funding Partnerships Prisoner Reentry Private Investment Social Impact Bonds

Author: Centre for Justice Innovation Title: Point me in the right direction: Making advice work for former prisoners Summary: People released from prison face myriad obstacles on the hard road towards a new life. They will need to overcome a shortage of affordable housing, mistrust and discrimination from employers, and a complex and inflexible benefits system. Social welfare advice services such as Citizens Advice Bureaus, Law Centres and independent advice providers can help with these issues. But due to far-reaching cuts, these services often don't work for former prisoners who don't know the services, find it hard to get appointments, and face a sense of stigma about their offending past. This report looks at how we can make advice work better for people who have been in prison. Life after prison Housing and employment play a key role in helping people to build crime free lives. Prisoners who find a stable place to live shortly after release are 15% less likely to reoffend, while those who find paid work are 9% less likely. However, our research uncovered numerous examples of former prisoners encountering many obstacles with even these basics: One person was living in private rented accommodation which was so damp it was making him ill. When he complained to the landlord, he was told that his criminal background was frightening his neighbours and was pressured into leaving. A second person had been employed for several years when a change of role within her organisation triggered a new criminal record check. She was wrongly accused of lying about her convictions and dismissed. A third was required to stay in a probation hostel after leaving prison but was dependent on benefits to pay his rent. When he was sanctioned for missing an appointment he was left without income and threatened with eviction, which could mean being recalled to custody. He was left with a stark choice - reoffend to raise his rent money or risk ending up in prison. Advice for former prisoners Social welfare advice services specialise in helping people deal with these kinds of issues. They offer free advice to help people understand and defend their rights. However, our research suggests that people who have been in prison face three barriers to accessing them: Awareness: Many of the service users we spoke to were not aware of the existence of advice service or the ways that they could help. Access: Recent cuts to legal aid and other funding and increases in demand have increased waiting times and reducing the help that's on offer. Stigma: Former prisoners we spoke to felt that services would not welcome them because of their criminal past. As one put it: "as an ex-con, they'll do nothing for you." Making advice work We have identified four ways in which social welfare advice can be improved for former prisoners: Advice clinics in prison to help prisoners with issues like benefits and housing as they prepare for release. Training and resources for probation officers to help them to identify when social welfare advice can be helpful and to refer clients into these services. Better online directories of advice service can help service users find advice, and let services signal that they welcome people who have been in prison. New advice services which specialise in working with offenders and which employ people with experience of the justice system as staff and offer a more wide-ranging and long term support. However, many of these options will cost money. And even those with no direct cost may be swimming against the tide of the advice sector which, faced with an increasing gap between demand and supply, is struggling to cope with existing client groups rather than seeking out new ones. For this reason, we would urge commissioners of offender services – such as the National Offender Management Service, individual probation providers or newly empowered prison governors – to actively seek to include social welfare advice services in their commissioning processes and supply chains. Details: London: The Centre, 2016. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 17, 2017 at: http://justiceinnovation.org/portfolio/point-right-direction/ Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://justiceinnovation.org/portfolio/point-right-direction/ Shelf Number: 146968 Keywords: Ex-Offenders Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Reoffending

Author: Cronin, Jake Title: The Path to Successful Reentry: The Relationship Between Correctional Education, Employment and Recidivism Summary: Nearly all Missouri inmates will be released from prison, but the majority of them will reoffend and return to prison. To combat this problem, prisons have implemented educational programs to help offenders successfully reenter society. Using data from the Missouri Department of Corrections, this study evaluates the impact of these educational programs in terms of post-prison employment rates and recidivism rates. The results show that inmates who increase their education in prison are more likely to find a full-time job after prison, and those with a job are less likely to return to prison. Details: Columbia, MO: Institute of Public Policy, Truman Policy Research, Harry S Truman School of Public Affairs, 2011. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Report 15-2011: Accessed February 18, 2017 at: https://ipp.missouri.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/06/the_path_to_successful_reentry.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: https://ipp.missouri.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/06/the_path_to_successful_reentry.pdf Shelf Number: 146683 Keywords: Correctional Education Educational Programs Ex-Offender Employment Prison Education Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Growns, Bethany Title: Supported Accommodation Services for People Released from Custody: A systematic review to inform the development of the Rainbow Lodge Program Summary: A 2015 report by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare estimated that there were 51,000 instances of people being released from Australian prisons in 2014 (AIHW, 2015). There is a substantial need for programs that provide support and services to people at this vulnerable time. Securing safe and secure accommodation is one of the most critical challenges that people leaving custody face; however, obtaining housing can be problematic due to interpersonal conflict, lack of family, complex treatment needs and limited finances (Fontaine & Biess, 2012; Graffam & Shinkfield, 2012; Roman & Travis, 2004). Therefore, people recently released from custody may rely on other options, such as supported accommodation programs or homeless shelters (Clark, 2015). These can take many forms, including 'halfway houses', where people live in a house as a group, sometimes following a therapeutic program; or scattered site supported housing programs, where people are provided with their own accommodation (i.e. a house or apartment), while also receiving therapeutic support in the form of home visits and/or participating in other therapeutic activities (e.g. attending a day centre). There is a growing demand within the field of criminal justice for more rigorous research and evaluation of interventions (Wright, Zhang, Farabee, & Braatz, 2014). Demonstrating the effectiveness of criminal justice interventions is critical in developing and producing evidence-based programs that can produce tangible outcomes for individuals. There is some evidence that interventions for people released from prison that include an accommodation component are effective in reducing re-offending and the severity of future re-offending (Seiter & Kadela, 2003; Somers, Rezansoff, Moniruzzaman, Palepu, & Patterson, 2013). A recent narrative review examined the efficacy of a variety of post-release programs, including programs that included a residential component, provided counselling services, vocational training, education or aftercare. Programs that included some kind of a residential component were found to produce the most positive results overall (Wright et al., 2014). Existing reviews have not looked at specific forms of supported accommodation for people released from prison, nor identified elements of supported accommodation services that contribute to positive outcomes. Objectives of this study The Rainbow Lodge Program is a non-profit organisation in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, that provides a responsive, intensive and supportive service to male Corrective Services clients assessed with having high needs, a strong risk of re-offending and homelessness, in order that they effectively re-enter and integrate into the community. This study has been undertaken to: Document the Rainbow Lodge Program; and Identify opportunities for the development of the Rainbow Lodge Program as an evidence-informed service. To these ends, this report includes: A description of the Rainbow Lodge Program, developed in consultation with staff and management of the Program; The results of a systematic review aimed at assessing the evidence on effectiveness of post-release supported accommodation programs similar to Rainbow Lodge, and identifying elements of such programs that contribute to positive client outcomes; and Implications of the findings of the systematic review for the Rainbow Lodge Program. Results of the systematic review The systematic review identified only nine publications meeting the eligibility criteria for inclusion (evaluation of a post-release supported accommodation program similar to the Rainbow Lodge Program). Studies were frequently methodologically flawed, and few consistent findings were evident, with regards to either effectiveness of post-release supported accommodation programs in reducing recidivism, or program characteristics associated with positive participant outcomes. Recommendations for the Rainbow Lodge Program Given the inconclusive findings of the review, it is difficult to identify recommendations for the day-to-day operations or components of the Rainbow Lodge Program. What is clear from the review is that there is a need for methodologically rigorous, comprehensive research on this type of post-release program, particularly outside the United States. Ideally, an outcome evaluation would be undertaken to assess the impact of the Rainbow Lodge Program on recidivism and other outcomes. However, there are important challenges to consider in proposing an outcome evaluation: identification and recruitment of an appropriate comparison group, and recruitment of sufficient numbers of participants to detect any effect that may exist. Given the challenges of undertaking an outcome evaluation (which will require further planning to be overcome), in the short-term, a process evaluation may be a more feasible option for further research on the Rainbow Lodge Program. This could include a retrospective file review, as well as quantitative and qualitative data collection with current residents. In order to enable future research, it is recommended that the Rainbow Lodge Program introduce a “Consent to research” form at program entry. This will allow client assessments to be used in research, and data linkage into the future. Details: Sydney: National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, 2016. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: NDARC Technical Report No. 335: Accessed February 21, 2017 at: https://ndarc.med.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/ndarc/resources/NDARC%20Technical%20Report%20No%20335.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: https://ndarc.med.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/ndarc/resources/NDARC%20Technical%20Report%20No%20335.pdf Shelf Number: 141142 Keywords: Community Interventions Halfway Houses Housing Prisoner Reentry Prisons

Author: Rossman, Shelli B. Title: Second Chance Act Adult Offender Reentry Demonstration Projects, Evidence-Based Practices: Case Management Summary: This report from RTI International and the Urban Institute is one in a series from the Cross-Site Evaluation of the Bureau of Justice Assistance fiscal year 2011 Second Chance Act Adult Offender Reentry Demonstration Projects (AORDPs). The report describes the use of case-management practices among seven grantees that implemented adult reentry programs using Second Chance Act funding. Findings are based on information collected in 2014 through semi-structured interviews with AORDP staff and organizational partners, as well as through a web-based survey administered in spring 2014 to key reentry stakeholders at each site. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute; Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International, 2016. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 22, 2017 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/250470.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/250470.pdf Shelf Number: 141146 Keywords: Case Management Evidence-Based Practices Prisoner Reentry Second Chance Act

Author: diZerega, Margaret Title: Report to the New York City Housing Authority on Applying and Lifting Permanent Exclusions for Criminal Conduct Summary: The New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) is conducting an internal review of its policies related to permanent exclusions for criminal conduct on NYCHA property. Permanent exclusion (PE) occurs when a NYCHA tenant - rather than risk eviction - enters into a stipulation that those associated with the resident who have engaged in non-desirable behavior are barred from entering the apartment. It also occurs as a result of an administrative hearing where NYCHA seeks an eviction, but the hearing officer opts to preserve the tenancy and bars the offending person from the apartment. To inform this policy review, NYCHA partnered with the Vera Institute of Justice and John Jay College of Criminal Justice. The review sought to understand how NYCHA could better balance its commitments to the safety of the community, the stability of its tenants' families, and the successful reentry of formerly incarcerated people. The following recommendations reflect an extensive review of existing policies and practices around PE, interviews with NYCHA staff, a meeting with NYCHA residents, and social science research on risk mitigation and future offending. Details: New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2017. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed march 6, 2017 at: https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/report-to-the-new-york-city-housing-authority-on-applying-and-lifting-permanent-exclusions-for-criminal-conduct/legacy_downloads/nycha-lifting-permanent-exclusions-for-criminal-conduct-v3.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://storage.googleapis.com/vera-web-assets/downloads/Publications/report-to-the-new-york-city-housing-authority-on-applying-and-lifting-permanent-exclusions-for-criminal-conduct/legacy_downloads/nycha-lifting-permanent-ex Shelf Number: 145582 Keywords: Disorderly Conduct Housing Prisoner Reentry

Author: Willis, Matthew Title: Supported Housing for Prisoners Returning to the Community: A Review of the Literature Summary: Commissioned by Corrections Victoria to inform its future strategies for delivering housing support strategies to people leaving the prison system, this report presents a literature that builds on two earlier reviews conducted in 2010 and 2013. Those earlier reviews identified a range of models and approaches to delivering housing support that represented the key elements of good and promising practice. In the period since 2013 new literature has become available that builds on this evidence base, reasserting some of the earlier findings, adding clarity to others, and expanding into new considerations. Several recent studies have reinforced the need to provide housing assistance for people leaving prison. Interviews with police detainees showed that nearly one quarter had been homeless or experiencing housing stress in the month before being arrested. A study by the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute emphasised the role of demographic factors in contributing to homelessness, with 42 percent of homeless people across Australia being found in just 10 percent of Australian regions. The demographic factors that contribute to homelessness tend to be the same as those that contribute to engagement with the criminal justice system and there are substantial cross-overs between homeless and correctional populations. A number of other recent studies have highlighted the value of meeting the need for housing support. Studies conducted in the United Kingdom (UK) have shown that the costs of even resource intensive housing assistance are substantially less the cost of imprisonment and harms resulting from reoffending. Other studies have reinforced earlier findings on the association between housing stability and reductions in recidivism, with former prisoners in stable housing much less likely to reoffend than those in circumstances of homelessness or unstable accommodation. While research has shown all program elements used in aftercare programs for ex-prisoners have the potential to be effective, including housing components together with aftercare support enhanced ex-prisoner's chances of successfully reintegrating with the community. Consistent with the risk principle of correctional programming, housingrelated services produced the most effective outcomes, in terms of reduced offending and order revocations, for medium- and high-risk offenders. Despite the demonstrated needs and value of providing housing assistance to released prisoners, recent evidence points to the likelihood of community resistance to establishing transitional or other support housing. A United States (US) survey of attitudes towards re-entry initiatives found a moderate degree of public support for the provision of housing assistance to offenders. This support diminished rapidly when the assistance was intended for serious or repeat offenders, or when the hypothetical notion of a housing facility being established in the respondent's own neighbourhood was raised. The study found very little public support for transitional housing for violent and sex offenders. Models of housing support identified in the literature included models with differing degrees of control or choice by clients. Custodial housing applications are most applicable for people with severe mental illness who require strict controls, limited or absent choice, and housing that is tied directly to treatment. The terms supportive housing and supported housing tend to be used interchangeably in the literature. Attempts to establish different definitions of the terms have tended to place supportive housing in the realm of rehabilitation, with clients being allowed increasing degrees of control and choice as they transition through different levels of supervision. Conversely, supported housing tends to be used more for approaches focused on recovery in which clients live independently and exercise choice in regard to the range of flexible and individualised supported services available to them. However, not only is the terminology often used interchangeably, different models are not considered mutually exclusive, and some programs will often a blend of supportive and supported housing, sometimes including emergency crisis accommodation and transitional housing in their mix of services. Evaluations of supportive and supported housing programs have shown they have a potential to deliver positive outcomes for clients, including physical and financial security, greater social inclusion, greater feelings of stability and control and increased well-being. These evaluations and related discussions of housing models emphasise their application to psychiatric populations and care should be taken in assessing the applicability of any given approach to other vulnerable populations, including offenders. In Australia, two dominant models of supportive housing have emerged. The Common Ground model is based on congregated housing with onsite support and social services. It has been implemented through an alliance of housing providers across five states, including Victoria. Scattered-site housing models utilise geographically dispersed accommodation with clients receiving support services through outreach from allied organisations. Neither of these models should be considered as fixed or rigid, with many different approaches and designs being implemented within these broad models. One of the characterising features of both models is the flexible and individualised support provided to clients. The nature and intensity of the support can vary widely across programs and between individuals, but the most effective models appear to be those that allow clients to determine the services they receive. One of the important areas of development in the recent literature is the emergence of difference financial models, including social impact investment approaches. Often aligned with strategies such as Justice Reinvestment, social impact investments have taken forms such as Social Impact Bonds and Payment by Results methods. Each of these strategies aims to deliver social reforms and interventions without substantial up-front costs or risks to government, through investment arrangements with commercial or philanthropic organisations. Social impact investments potentially represent a way for government to deliver costly housing initiatives without impacting on other areas of need or government expenditure. A range of different housing support models are in place across Australia, each aiming to provide stable and secure accommodation for offender clients at high risk of experiencing homelessness or housing instability. In many ways the Australian implementations have similarities with those implemented in the US and UK, even though the elements and approaches vary between programs and locations. Quite different approaches are in place in some European countries, resulting from the different ways offenders are managed in those countries. Practices in countries such as Germany and the Netherlands emphasise rehabilitation and normalisation, aiming to have the experiences of life in prison parallel those in the community as much as possible. People leaving prison in those countries have typically had substantial opportunities to maintain family relationships and maintain or secure accommodation well before they are released. There remains little clear evidence of the application or effectiveness of different housing models and approaches to vulnerable groups within correctional populations. The evidence shows that sex offenders, particularly sexually violent offenders with strict limitations on their residence and movements are at heightened risk of homelessness on release from prison. International experience shows that attempts to establish housing options for sexually violent offenders are likely to meet with substantial resistance from communities as well as local authorities. Little attention appears to have been paid in the literature to the housing support needs of Indigenous Australians. Overall, a review of the recent literature on supported housing for correctional populations highlights the importance of flexible and individually oriented approaches to delivering housing assistance. Good practice in housing support focuses on individual needs and the provision of appropriate degrees and types of individual choice and control. Holistic and integrated wraparound services delivered through collaborative, multi-agency approaches that span the range of individual support and treatment needs remain an integral part of good practice housing support interventions. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2016. 41p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 6, 2017 at: http://assets.justice.vic.gov.au/corrections/resources/19acadf4-576b-4fd8-9158-b3c3248a6c77/literature_review_prisoner_housing_model.pdf Year: 2016 Country: International URL: http://assets.justice.vic.gov.au/corrections/resources/19acadf4-576b-4fd8-9158-b3c3248a6c77/literature_review_prisoner_housing_model.pdf Shelf Number: 141353 Keywords: Housing Prisoner Reentry Supported Housing

Author: Crow, Iain Title: Resettling Prisoners: A Review Summary: The resettlement of citizens coming out of prison is an important part of the Government's Reducing Re-offending Action Plan. This review looks at the available research to see what can be learned about the most promising approaches to resettlement. Concern about the resettlement of offenders goes back many years, at least to the end of the nineteenth century, and one its most constant features is the high proportion of exprisoners who re-offend, some of them returning to prison several times. Recent concern about resettlement has been fuelled both by the intractable nature of the problem, and by the increasing numbers needing to be resettled. There is particular concern about the resettlement of certain groups within the prison population, including short-term prisoners and women prisoners. Although the available research has its limitations, there are a number of pointers to the lessons that can be drawn from what we know. • Offenders often have a mixture of factors contributing to their offending behaviour. Those leaving custody are likely to have several inter-related resettlement requirements (accommodation, employment, training, health issues). Research evidence underlines the importance of multi-modal action addressing the full range of offenders' needs. • Offenders need continuity of engagement, and not just to be moved about from one person and agency to another. Good linkage between agencies is important. Integrated case management is one of the fundamental principles of NOMS, an aspiration that needs to be achieved for successful resettlement to become a reality. • Important though practical interventions are, successful resettlement is not just about practical support. Several studies refer to the importance of personal determination and resilience in resisting re-offending on release. Agencies can play a part in encouraging and reinforcing ex-prisoners’ own efforts. Not all offenders are equally capable of helping themselves, but this suggests a twin-track strategy of supporting those who have the capacity to help themselves, while targeting resources more effectively on those who are less capable. • Families and friends can play a vital role in providing supportive relationships, and the connections needed to obtain jobs. Research underlines the importance of sustaining those relationships through imprisonment, and on release. • The available literature points to the importance of not only addressing the needs of the offender, but also paying attention to the communities from which they come. Researchers point to the fact that commonly the communities to which prisoners return are disadvantaged, and need support in re-integrating offenders. This highlights the role that restorative justice might play in offender re-integration: a community which feels there has been some restoration and that there is the potential for offenders to contribute to community well being is more likely to support exoffenders. The NOMS vision agreed by the Chief Executive and Board in January 2005 refers to, ‘Engaging local communities in the management and resettlement of offenders’. In this context the voluntary and community sector has a crucial role to play, and the success of NOMS will be judged not only on how well the former prison and probation services work together, but the extent to which the VCS, and employers, become effective partners. • There is a need to extend provision for women offenders in the light of a significant increase in the numbers sent to, and leaving prison in recent years. Research highlights the need of women returning to the community for both practical support, and to repair, or sometimes avoid, damaged relationships. • For the majority of prisoners with mental health problems there is little follow-up post-release. Positive approaches to improving access to healthcare services for prisoners on release are needed. • There is a significant likelihood of people returning to drug use and crime quite soon after release if there is nothing in place at the time of release. The extent of drug misuse, and its close relationship to re-offending, means that treatment in prison needs to be linked directly to aftercare. • Recent research has focused on efforts to understand what factors have been instrumental in desistance from crime: what happens when people cease to offend. Although research in this area is still very much in progress, it indicates the importance of a holistic approach to offenders, and suggests that, as with re-entry courts in America, it is important to recognise the achievements of offenders who desist, as well as punishing failure. • A viable resettlement strategy needs to consider not only individual offenders, but also the social context in which resettlement takes place. This means combating social exclusion by ensuring that there is an adequate supply of social housing, of training opportunities relevant to the needs of offenders, and work with employers to ensure that job opportunities are available to ex-prisoners. Concern about resettlement has been fuelled by changes in sentencing and supervision in recent years, which have contributed to an increase in the numbers released from prison, from 45,557 in 1992 to 88,104 in 1999. Put simply, the larger the prison population, the bigger the problem of re-integration. Reducing the size of the prison population is therefore an important pre-requisite for a successful resettlement strategy Details: Layerthorpe, York. UK: York Publishing, 2006. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 6, 2017 at: http://canatx.org/rrt_new/professionals/articles/CROW-RESETTLING%20PRISONERS.pdf Year: 2006 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://canatx.org/rrt_new/professionals/articles/CROW-RESETTLING%20PRISONERS.pdf Shelf Number: 141356 Keywords: Offender Rehabilitation Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Reintegration Prisoner Resettlement

Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Prisons Title: Resettlement Provision for Adult Offenders: Accommodation and education, training and employment Summary: In April 2015 far reaching changes will be introduced to 'transform' the way that offenders are rehabilitated and to reduce the risk they reoffend. Offenders serving sentences of less than one year will be subject to statutory supervision. Support and supervision of low- and medium-risk offenders will pass from the probation service to voluntary and private sector providers commissioned through regional Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRC). Higher-risk offenders will be supervised by a new national probation service. Offenders serving short sentences and those with less than three months to serve should be held in ‘resettlement prisons’, in or linked to the area in which they will be released. Resettlement services should be organised on a 'through the gate' basis, making greater use of mentors than at present and with providers paid in part according to the outcomes they achieve in reducing reoffending. The primary aim of this report is to inform the development of these new services by examining the effectiveness of existing arrangements to help offenders obtain suitable and sustainable accommodation and education, training and employment (ETE) on release as part of wider resettlement provision. The report follows a cohort of 80 offenders from prison through the gate into the community and identifies their accommodation and occupation status shortly before release, on release and one and six months later. The offenders in this study were chosen because they were already subject to statutory supervision on release as they were serving sentences of one year or more. We are confident that in the key areas there is a direct parallel with provision for offenders serving shorter sentences, although care should be taken in interpreting the results. It is important to recognise where there are differences, not least to ensure that the requirements of offenders serving longer sentences do not get overlooked in the pressure to establish the new arrangements. Many previous studies have highlighted the importance of accommodation and ETE to reducing reoffending. The Social Exclusion Report of 2002 indentified them as two of the critical resettlement pathways that have been the focus for much effort since, and the ‘Surveying Prisoners Crime Reduction’ survey a decade later unsurprisingly came to similar conclusions. Offenders themselves consistently tell us during inspections how important having somewhere secure and stable to live, and something constructive to do, is to staying out of trouble after they are released. The findings of this report are striking. Most importantly, it absolutely confirms the central importance of an offender’s family and friends to their successful rehabilitation. Of course, sometimes an offender’s family may be the victims of their crime and sometimes they may be a negative influence that contributes to their offending behaviour – we found a small number of examples of this in this inspection. However, overwhelmingly, this inspection confirmed our view that an offender’s family are the most effective resettlement agency. More than half the offenders in our cohort returned home or moved in with family and friends on release, even if this was only a temporary measure. The few who had a job on release had mainly arranged this with the help of previous employers, family or friends. Helping offenders maintain or restore relationships with their family and friends, where this is appropriate, should be central to the resettlement effort. But too often, these relationships are seen simply as a matter of visits which may be increased or reduced according to an offender’s behaviour. We found no evidence that families were involved in sentence planning for instance, even when an offender said they were relying on them for support after release. Too little account was taken of whether initial arrangements were sustainable and what continuing support might be needed. Of the 48 offenders who moved into their own home or with family and friends on release, a fifth had needed to move in with different family/friends when we checked on them after six months. What should happen, where possible, is resettlement work which helps the offender and his or her family to maintain or rebuild relationships; an assessment of any offer of support; and, where appropriate, involvement of the family in plans for release. We are concerned that work on family relationships that will continue to be provided, if at all, directly by the prison will not be integrated with work done by resettlement service providers. In contrast to the support provided by offenders’ family and friends, our findings in this report reinforce the criticism we have previously made about formal offender management arrangements in prisons1. We found that contact between offenders and offender supervisors or managers varied considerably and even where there was good contact, this had little impact on accommodation and ETE outcomes at the point of release, although contacts were more effective post-release. Sentence planning and oversight were weak and resettlement work in prisons was insufficiently informed either by an individual assessment of the offender concerned or a strategic assessment of what opportunities would be available to offenders on release, with input from relevant organisations and employers. Information sharing across prison departments was poor overall but better in open prisons and those preparing long-term offenders for release. It will be important that those prisons designated as ‘resettlement prisons’ in the new arrangements urgently begin to create the ‘whole prison’ approach to resettlement that is too often lacking at present. It would certainly help address these problems if prisons had a better understanding of current accommodation and ETE outcomes. At present they rely heavily on self-reported information from offenders at the point of release with no follow-up on longer-term accommodation and ETE outcomes, which as our findings demonstrate, is an ineffective way of judging the effectiveness of resettlement services. Offenders who posed a high risk of harm were placed in approved premises where their risk could be appropriately managed. Offenders expressed concerns to us about the adverse influence of other residents of approved premises, and two of the nine offenders who went to approved premises on release were subsequently recalled, but others had progressed six months later. Shortages of affordable rented accommodation, references, a lack of resources to pay deposits and rent in advance, and the practical problems of arranging accommodation from inside prison, meant that rented accommodation in the private or social housing sectors was not an option for any of the offenders we followed. Often offenders were able to move in with family/friends on release, even if just as a temporary measure, but the three in our sample who did not have this option were forced to rely on emergency shelter immediately after release. Access to affordable rented accommodation will be a significant challenge for new providers and it is likely that there will need to be an expansion of rent deposit and guarantee schemes and other provision if it is to be met. Some offenders in our cohort such as young adults who had been in care as ‘looked after children’ and women offenders who took over the sole care of their children after release had entitlements to housing that needed to be identified and met. Of course, finding and sustaining accommodation is not simply a question of paying the rent but also of having the skills necessary to live independently. For those who might struggle to live independently because of their age and lack of maturity, such as young adults, or older offenders who had become institutionalised by long sentences, some form of supported accommodation was necessary if they were not placed in approved premises. Details: London: Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons, 2014. 68p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 6, 2016 at: https://socialwelfare.bl.uk/subject-areas/services-activity/resettlement/criminaljusticejointinspection/1693032014_Resettlement-thematic-for-print-Sept-2014.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://socialwelfare.bl.uk/subject-areas/services-activity/resettlement/criminaljusticejointinspection/1693032014_Resettlement-thematic-for-print-Sept-2014.pdf Shelf Number: 141360 Keywords: Ex-offender Employment Offender Resettlement Prisoner Reentry Supported Housing

Author: Scott, Mindy E. Title: An Experimental Evaluation of a Family Strengthening Intervention to Enhance Post-release Adjustment for Reentering Fathers and Improve Child Well-Being Summary: In 2009, the National Institute of Justice awarded Child Trends a grant to conduct an experimental evaluation of the Strengthening Families Program for Parents and Youth 10-14 (SFP) for fathers returning from prison. The SFP is a seven-session intervention aimed at improving family relationships, parenting skills, and social and life skills among youth ages 10 to 14, and has been found to be effective among low-income families. However, this intervention has not been evaluated with a reentering population. The current evaluation focused on assessing the impact of adding a family-focused intervention to existing reentry services for fathers residing in the Midwestern part of the United States that traditionally focus on job training and economic stability. Paternal incarceration has been found to have negative consequences for children at all developmental stages, resulting in negative emotional and behavioral functioning with implications for long-term well-being and achievement, as well as a higher risk of criminality. Despite growing evidence of the negative implications of parental incarceration for both children and parents and the challenges associated with prisoner reentry, few family-focused reentry programs have been rigorously evaluated. This study addresses this important gap in the scientific knowledge by testing the impacts of a family strengthening intervention for reentering fathers and their children. This report presents key findings from the evaluation including information on the demographics of the families in the program, the program's implementation and effectiveness, and recommendations for improving future family strengthening programs for reentering fathers and their families. Details: Final report submitted to the National Institute of Justice, 2016. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 7, 2017 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/250568.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/250568.pdf Shelf Number: 146412 Keywords: Children of Prisoners Families of Inmates Family Programs Parenting Programs Prisoner Reentry

Author: Jackson, Osborne Title: The Effect of Changing Employers' Access to Criminal Histories on Ex-Offenders’ Labor Market Outcomes: Evidence from the 2010–2012 Massachusetts CORI Reform Summary: How to best reintegrate large numbers of ex-offenders into civil society is an important challenge for U.S. public policy. In 2006, the Department of Justice estimated that over 30 percent of the U.S. adult population has some type of criminal record; the percentages are even higher for some minority groups. Having a criminal record can impose lasting costs, particularly for anyone seeking job, as gaining legal employment is usually the best chance an ex-offender has to effect a positive change in his or her life. In an effort to reduce some of barriers to employment that may arise from having a criminal record, some states and localities have adopted a policy widely known as ban the box, which prohibits employers from asking about an individual's criminal history on an initial job application. In November 2010, Massachusetts implemented a version of ban the box as the first step in reforming its laws governing Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI). The second step, effective in May 2012, changed who can access the state's CORI database, enacted limits on the information that can be obtained, and imposed a time limit regarding how long misdemeanor and felony convictions will be reported on standard employer requests. On the whole, the Massachusetts CORI Reform is widely regarded as a national model to help improve ex-offenders' labor market outcomes. This study uses a unique and confidential large dataset and rigorous econometric techniques to test how well the intended reforms have worked in practice. The results may help guide and improve upon similar reform efforts in other states. Details: Boston: Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, 2017. 67p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper no. 16-31: Accessed March 21, 2017 at: https://www.bostonfed.org/publications/research-department-working-paper/2016/the-effect-of-changing-employers-access-to-criminal-histories-on-ex-offenders-labor-market-outcomes.aspx Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.bostonfed.org/publications/research-department-working-paper/2016/the-effect-of-changing-employers-access-to-criminal-histories-on-ex-offenders-labor-market-outcomes.aspx Shelf Number: 144532 Keywords: Criminal Records Ex-Offender Employment Ex-Offenders Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Malta Justice Initiative Title: Connecticut Employment Survey: Practices and Attitudes Regarding the Hiring of Formerly-Incarcerated Persons and Recommendations for Driving Better Outcomes Summary: The prison system both in the United States and Connecticut is a constant revolving door through which thousands pass each and every year. Unfortunately, many of those entering our prisons are formerly-incarcerated individuals returning after failing to make it on the outside. In Connecticut, over half of released prisoners return within three years of their release, thereby costing taxpayers millions of dollars. This revolving door is powered by the many difficulties faced by the formerly-incarcerated upon their release. The primary obstacle is finding a job. Research has shown that a criminal record reduces a job applicant's chances of being hired by 15% to 30%.1 A history of incarceration also reduces the number of weeks worked annually by 6 to 11. It has been reported that as many as 60% of ex-offenders do not hold legitimate employment one year after their release from prison. While the Bureau of Labor Statistics does not keep track of ex-offenders' employment numbers, a January, 2011 New York Times article referenced various studies that such unemployment rate is 50% or higher one year after release. Statistics compiled by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts in Washington, D.C. indicate that employment is the critical factor in whether released inmates succeed with re-entry. Of the 262,000 federal prisoners released between 2002 and 2006, 50% of those who were not able to secure employment during the period of their supervised release (generally 2-5 years) committed a new crime or violated the terms of their release and ended up back behind bars. However, 93% of those who found jobs throughout their supervised release period did not return to prison. This statistic is astounding. It suggests that our corrections system should be laser focused on securing employment for those released from prison. The under-employment of those under the supervision of our criminal justice system has severe economic consequences given the sheer number of ex-offenders in the United States. In 2008, there were an estimated 5.4 to 6.1 million ex-prisoners and 12.3 to 13.9 million ex-offenders (those with a criminal record who did not do time) in the United States. The under-employment of this segment of the workforce, most of whom are male, was estimated to result in the loss of 1.5 to 1.7 million workers in 2008, which equates to a 0.8 to 0.9 percentage point drop in the overall employment rate. The consequences of such a large percentage of the formerly-incarcerated being unable to find and hold down jobs upon their re-entry is staggering. The CEPR Study estimated that the United States economy loses $57 to $65 billion annually due to the inability of ex-offenders to find jobs. Society's failure to successfully reintegrate incarcerated individuals also perpetuates the cycle of dependence and poverty in our inner cities and places a tremendous strain on Connecticut's state budget The direct and indirect financial and human costs of mass incarceration, high recidivism and failed reentry warrant taking a much closer look at why the formerly-incarcerated face higher obstacles to finding employment and what, if anything, can be done to reverse the sobering reality of Connecticut's revolving prison doors. This survey seeks to first identify the current practices and prevailing attitudes of large and small employers in Connecticut regarding the hiring of formerly-incarcerated job applicants. In particular, the survey endeavors to understand the perceived risks or impediments that influence hiring decisions involving persons with a criminal history. The survey also examines what incentives or other factors might enhance the prospects of ex-offenders landing jobs. Lastly, the survey considers possible reforms or initiatives that might drive better outcomes in terms of reducing recidivism and turning Connecticut's formerly-incarcerated population into productive, taxpaying members of their communities, thereby relieving some of the strains on Connecticut's criminal justice and correction budgets. Details: Southport, CT: The Initiative, 2016. 58p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 27, 2017 at: http://maltajusticeinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/MJI-Employer-Survey-Full-Text-December-2016-1.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://maltajusticeinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/MJI-Employer-Survey-Full-Text-December-2016-1.pdf Shelf Number: 144589 Keywords: Costs of Criminal Justice Employment Ex-Offender Employment Prisoner Reentry

Author: Griffiths, Andrew Title: Evaluation of ACT Extended Throughcare Pilot Program Final Report Summary: This report presents the findings of the evaluation of the Extended Throughcare program (the Program) provided by ACT Corrective Services. Extended Throughcare is a voluntary program that provides support to detainees returning to the community at the end of their custodial sentence at the Alexander Maconochie Centre (AMC; the ACT's only adult correctional facility). ACT Corrective Services clients can be characterised as experiencing multiple disadvantages, including mental health issues, substance abuse issues, low levels of literacy and numeracy, interrupted education and sporadic employment history, as well as high level of homelessness. The findings of this report highlight clients' experiences with the Program, the impact of the Program in key areas, the strengths of the Program, and areas for improvement. It also details the perspectives of stakeholders with regard to the aims and impact of the Program and the effectiveness of the Program's governance. Objectives of Extended Throughcare The Program aims to reduce reoffending, improve community integration post-release, and improve the social and health outcomes of clients. Ultimately, the Program is designed to reduce recidivism and its associated costs. The Program, which commenced in June 2013, is tailored to each individual, commences pre-release, and continues for a period of 12 months post-release with the support of community organisations. The Program provides coordinated and continuous support, and aims to reduce duplication and gaps in services, to help detainees reintegrate into the community and to reduce the risk of homelessness, poor physical and mental health, drug and alcohol abuse, and premature death. The Program is similar to other Throughcare programs in Australia in that it provides person-centred case management and support in five core areas: accommodation, health, basic needs, income and community connections. Extended Throughcare is a voluntary program and is not mandated as part of any supervision order. Initially, the Program was limited to supporting prisoners prior to their release. The extension of the model to supporting the client into the community after their release was first funded in the ACT 2012-2013 budget. While this post-release care model is not unique to the ACT, the Extended Throughcare model is unique in offering support for 12 months and in offering this service to ex-detainees without ongoing supervision orders. Details: Sydney: Social Policy Research Centre, UNSW Australia, 2017. 120p. Source: Internet Resource: (SPRC Report 02/17).Accessed April 8, 2017 at: https://www.sprc.unsw.edu.au/media/SPRCFile/Evaluation_of_ACT_Extended_Throughcare_Pilot_Program.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: https://www.sprc.unsw.edu.au/media/SPRCFile/Evaluation_of_ACT_Extended_Throughcare_Pilot_Program.pdf Shelf Number: 144750 Keywords: Aftercare Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Throughcare

Author: Monnery, Benjamin Title: Prison, reentry and recidivism: micro-econometric applications Summary: his PhD dissertation investigates the linkages between prison, reentry and recidivism. Eachof the four chapters contributes to the growing field of the economics of crime, applying a series of econometric methods on French data to answer highly policy-relevant questions.Chapter 1 explores the dynamics of the risk of recidivism after prison release. This article is the first to document the shape of the hazard of recidivism over time in France (a fastlydiminishing function) and to explore the key individual characteristics explaining the level and dynamic of this risk over time.Chapter 2 investigates the causal effect of sentence reductions on recidivism. This article is the first to explicitely account for the key mediating role of anticipations and adaptation by prisoners. By exploiting the French collective pardon of July 1996 as a natural experiment, the article finds strong evidence supporting the importance of the concrete design of sentence reductions.Chapter 3 offers the first evaluation of the causal effects of a major penal policy in France, the introduction of Electronic Monitoring (EM) as an alternative to short prison sentences. Using the staged rollout of EM across courts and over time, the paper finds evidence of significant beneficial effects of EM on recidivism, compared to incarceration.Finally, Chapter 4 measures the deterrent effect of fast versus slower incarceration on future crime. This article is the first to estimate the large beneficial impact of using fast-track procedures, instead of longer procedures, on recidivism after release. Details: Lyon, France: Universite Lumiere Lyon 2 and GATE (CNRS), 2016. 183p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed May 15, 2017 at: https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01452006/ Year: 2016 Country: France URL: https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01452006/ Shelf Number: 145477 Keywords: Economics of Crime Ex-Offenders Prisoner Reentry Recidivism (France)

Author: Fontaine, Jocelyn Title: Promoting the Economic Stability of Fathers with Histories of Incarceration. Activities and Lessons from Six Responsible Fatherhood Programs Summary: People return from incarceration with limited resources, accumulated debt, weak employment histories, and no means of supporting themselves financially (McLean and Thompson 2007; Visher, Debus, and Yahner 2008; Visher, Yahner, and La Vigne 2010). For many of these people, their ability to achieve economic stability in the community is exacerbated by other reentry challenges they might face that may preclude or hinder their ability to find and maintain employment (La Vigne and Kachnowski 2005; La Vigne, Shollenberger, and Debus 2009; La Vigne, Visher, and Castro 2004; Visher and Courtney 2007; Visher et al. 2004, Visher, Yahner, and La Vigne 2010). Adding to the importance of their achieving economic stability, the majority of people returning to their communities after incarceration also have minor children and/or family members who rely on them financially and emotionally (Fontaine et al. 2015; Glaze and Maruschak 2008). Furthermore, the communities where people with criminal justice histories are concentrated are often economically disadvantaged (Fontaine et al. 2015; Lynch and Sabol 2004; Rose and Clear 1998). Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2017. 21p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 16, 2017 at: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/89781/economic_stability_brief_1.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/89781/economic_stability_brief_1.pdf Shelf Number: 146211 Keywords: Employment Ex-offender Employment Ex-offenders Parenting Prisoner Reentry

Author: Fontaine, Jocelyn Title: Encouraging Responsible Parenting among fathers with Histories of Incarceration. Activities and Lessons from Six Responsible Fatherhood Programs Summary: The massive growth in incarceration rates in the United States has had significant consequences for families. Over the past four decades, incarceration rates have more than quadrupled (Travis, Western, and Redburn 2014). In 2007, the most recent year for which national statistics are available, an estimated 53 percent of the more than 1.5 million individuals incarcerated in state and federal prisons were parents of minor children (Glaze and Maruschak 2008). As of 2012, between 5 and 10 million children in the United States had lived with a parent who had been incarcerated at any point in the child's life (Murphey and Cooper 2015; Schirmer, Nellis, and Mauer 2009). Given that rates of incarceration are higher among nonwhites than whites, a higher percentage of minority children, particularly black children, have experienced parental incarceration in their life. Approximately 7 percent of all children in the United States have had a parent spend time in prison or jail, ranging from 6 percent of white children to nearly 12 percent of black children (Murphey and Cooper 2015). Similarly, children from economically disadvantaged families are more likely to experience parental incarceration than those from families of higher socioeconomic status (Murphey and Cooper 2015). Children left behind because of parental incarceration experience worse life outcomes relative to their peers, including economic hardship caused by the loss of a parent's income (Phillips et al. 2006), residential instability (Geller et al. 2009), academic difficulties (Parke and Clarke-Stewart 2003), mental health problems (Murray and Farrington 2008), and behavioral problems (Dannerbeck 2005; Murray, Farrington, and Sekol 2012; Wildeman 2010). Details: Washington, DC; Urban Institute, 2017. 17p. Source: Internet Resource: OPRE Report #2017-2: Accessed June 16, 2017 at: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/89771/responsible_parenting_brief_1.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/89771/responsible_parenting_brief_1.pdf Shelf Number: 146213 Keywords: Families Parenting Prisoner Reentry

Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Probation Title: An Inspection of Through the Gate Resettlement Services for Prisoners Serving 12 Months or More Summary: Until 2014, probation services in England and Wales were delivered by local Probation Trusts. Reoffending rates for released prisoners were high. It was recognised that issues including homelessness, unemployment, mental health and substance misuse contributed to reoffending. The government's Transforming Rehabilitation strategy aimed to reduce reoffending rates by opening up the probation market to new providers, encouraging innovation and creativity. A new National Probation Service and 21 Community Rehabilitation Companies were set up on 01 June 2014. Cases allocated to the NPS included high risk of serious harm offenders and those subject to Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements. CRCs were to manage most other medium and low risk of serious harm offenders, and were to be given: 'flexibility to do what works and freedom from bureaucracy' (Ministry of Justice, 2013). The Transforming Rehabilitation programme introduced Through the Gate resettlement services into prisons in England and Wales. Through the Gate services were intended to be delivered by the local CRC to help prisoners maintain or find accommodation; provide assistance with finance, benefits and debt; and to support them to enter education, training and employment. Additional support was to be provided for those prisoners who had been sex workers or had experienced domestic abuse. These services had existed in prisons previously, but in a more fragmented way. The aim of Through the Gate was to provide a seamless transition between prison and the community. Through the Gate arrangements The prison estate was reorganised in November 2014, with 89 of the 120 prisons in England and Wales designated as resettlement prisons. All female prisons were so designated. The aim is for 80% of prisoners to be moved to a resettlement prison local to their home area at least three months before release. Prison staff screen all new prisoners to discover what needs they have, and CRCs are expected to plan to meet any immediate resettlement needs at the start of sentence, and then to review the plan 12 weeks before release putting in place assistance required at that point. CRCs have Through the Gate resettlement teams located within all designated resettlement prisons, consisting either of direct CRC employees or staff working for organisations in a contractual arrangement with the CRC. CRCs receive a 'fee for service' for providing core Through the Gate services, which should include assistance to maintain or find accommodation; assistance with finance, benefits and debt; education, training and employment; release coordination; and support for those who have been sex workers or have experienced domestic abuse. When CRCs bid for the contracts, they set out their broad intentions about how they would deliver Through the Gate services, but the detailed content is not specified. Through the Gate services are available to all prisoners, irrespective of whether their cases are to be managed upon release by a CRC or the NPS. The CRC contracts are managed by HMPPS, and the only performance target for CRCs relating to Through the Gate is to complete resettlement plans in the prescribed timescale. There is no contractual obligation to address the needs that have been identified. We visited nine prisons, where Through the Gate services were being delivered by eight different CRCs with seven different corporate owners. We looked at the cases of 98 prisoners, before and after release. What prisoners need to help them resettle We found, as anticipated, that many prisoners needed substantial help before they were released. Finding somewhere to live was a common problem, along with finding work or making a benefits claim, and getting assistance with substance misuse or mental health problems. We found that many of these needs were not recognised when prisoners first went into custody. Problems that should have been obvious to prison staff were not identified. Where problems were picked up, they were not well-recorded, so that Through the Gate staff did not have enough information to make a good plan about what help was needed. If urgent issues were identified at the start of a sentence, the speed with which prisoners were transferred to other prisons meant that they were unlikely to receive early help, for example to sort out debts or maintain accommodation. There was then a time delay until they could access Through the Gate services, 12 weeks before release. Most prisoners did have plans drawn up for them before release, though not always in the required timescale. The quality of the plans was variable. Necessary actions were not always identified. Moreover, many of the actions in plans consisted of no more than referring the prisoner on to other services, with little or no follow-up. The delays in completing plans sometimes meant there was not enough time left to deal with issues that arose. Outcomes for prisoners receiving Through the Gate services Too many prisoners (more than one in seven) were released not knowing where they would sleep that night. Only two prisoners were found accommodation via Through the Gate arrangements. Three more were placed in short-term accommodation provided by HMPPS for home detention curfew. Work that could and should have been done by Through the Gate services in prison was left for responsible officers to pick up after release. Five prisoners only found accommodation on their day of release. This increased the anxiety of those prisoners and placed a heavy burden on staff in the community trying to make arrangements for housing on the day of release. The rate of homelessness varied from prison to prison, but ten of the cases we looked at started off their licence period with no fixed address. The impact of Through the Gate services on education, training and employment was minimal. No prisoners were helped by Through the Gate services to enter education, training or employment after release. All except one of the prisons we visited were able to set bank accounts up for prisoners, but even where this service was available, some prisoners were still released without bank accounts. Other work on finance, benefits and debt was not being delivered to any great extent. When Through the Gate was introduced there was much talk about the use of mentors to provide intensive support to prisoners around the time of release. The use of mentors had not been developed as anticipated, and only one prisoner had received support through a mentor scheme introduced under Through the Gate. After release, all of the prisoners in our sample would be supervised for at least 12 months. We thought it was important that their responsible officers in the community received full information at the point of release, about the prisoner's behaviour and experience in prison. Ideally this would include details of all handover arrangements, including appointments made at Jobcentre Plus, and with drug treatment and mental health services. This could be done either by prison staff or Through the Gate workers, but in many prisons communication and information sharing was poor. Public protection Public protection is the business of everyone working with the prisoner. Most of the Through the Gate staff we met were ill-informed about public protection issues in the cases they were working with. We observed shortcomings in the work of prison staff, and of responsible officers in the CRCs and in the NPS. Too many prisoners had inadequate assessment of their potential to cause harm, and too little was done to mitigate these risks. Poor communication was often a factor, and there was not enough evidence of a 'whole system' approach to managing risk of harm. Design and evaluation of Through the Gate services Prison places are not evenly distributed across the country, so layering Through the Gate onto the prison footprint was never going to be straightforward. Other pressures in the prison system mean that the catchment areas for some resettlement prisons are very wide. We only saw a few prisons where there was a clear benefit from having the 'local' CRC delivering Through the Gate services. No clear guidance has been given on how Through the Gate services should align with sentence planning arrangements. For many prisoners, no sentence planning takes place at all because of operational difficulties within prisons, while others only receive a risk assessment due to the current Offender Assessment System prioritisation policy. The Through the Gate resettlement plan may be the only record of work that needs to be done with them, and it is not sufficient for that purpose. The complexity and incompatibility of the IT systems used by staff in preparing prisoners for release were major obstacles to effective working. Either staff waste time entering the same information in multiple places, or they just record in one or two places, with the consequence that others are not able to find out about relevant work. While many CRCs have contracted well-respected voluntary organisations to deliver Through the Gate services, the focus has been on completion of resettlement plans and so the potential for these more diverse providers to improve the overall quality of resettlement work is not being realised. The few examples of innovation we saw were on a very small scale, so are likely to have no more than a negligible impact on reducing reoffending. The CRC contracts incentivise the completion of resettlement plans, not the improvement of prisoners' situations. CRCs are generally struggling financially and it is not surprising, then, that most have invested little in services beyond the minimum contractual expectation. Those that are doing more - Durham Tees Valley CRC for example - told us that they are doing so at a loss. It is hard to see any impact of the prospect of future payment by results for reducing reoffending rates. The consequence is that Through the Gate services as delivered now are not likely to reduce rates of reoffending. For technical and legal reasons it is impossible for CRCs to track any difference Through the Gate has made for the prisoners they have worked with, such as finding accommodation or work. This makes it hard for them to evaluate the impact of their work. The staff we met in prisons working for Through the Gate were keen and committed, and were clearly very busy writing resettlement plans to meet contractual targets. Many of them, and some of their managers, were unaware that the work they were doing was having little or no impact on the eventual resettlement of prisoners. Details: Manchester: Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Probation, 2017. 51p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 23, 2017 at: http://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/cjji/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2017/06/Through-the-Gate-phase-2-report.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/cjji/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2017/06/Through-the-Gate-phase-2-report.pdf Shelf Number: 146349 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Probation Probationers Re-offending Recidivism Resettlement

Author: Fontaine, Jocelyn Title: Supporting Health Marriages among Fathers with Histories of Incarceration: Activities and Lessons from Six Responsible Fatherhood Programs Summary: After incarceration, fathers must overcome several reentry barriers, including reconnecting with their spouse, partner, or co-parent. To help fathers reunify with and support their families, six Office of Family Assistance-funded Fatherhood Reentry programs implemented a range of healthy marriage activities aimed to strengthen fathers' relationships with their partners or coparents, encourage effective co-parenting, and prevent domestic violence. This implementation evaluation documented the array of healthy marriage services offered to participating fathers, such as relationship classes, family activity days, coached telephone calls, special events, assistance navigating child support issues, and domestic violence screenings and programming. Drawing on the six programs' implementation experiences, this brief recommends that providers consider partner/co-parent interaction activities as a targeted and meaningful component of any family-focused reentry program and that providers work with partners on family reunification when they are ready. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2017. 15p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 24, 2017 at: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/89776/healthy_relationships_brief_0.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/89776/healthy_relationships_brief_0.pdf Shelf Number: 146212 Keywords: Families Fathers Parenting Prisoner Reentry

Author: Nelson-Dusek, Stephanie Title: Look Up and Hope: Final Evaluation Report Summary: Since its founding in 1896, Volunteers of America has supported and empowered America's most vulnerable populations, including those returning from prison. The past several decades have seen a particularly staggering rise in the growth of mothers affected by incarceration. Between 1991 and midyear 2007, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported that the number of mothers in federal and state prisons had increased 122 percent. During the same period, the number of children with mothers in prison had more than doubled, rising to almost 150,000 children nationwide. To address this issue, Volunteers of America launched Look Up and Hope, an innovative initiative that works with the whole family - mother, caregiver, and child - to improve the lives of those affected by maternal incarceration. Over the past five years, Wilder Research has evaluated Look Up and Hope to determine the impact that the program has on families. This final evaluation report illustrates the successes and challenges of those participating in the program. Successes - Strengthened families: After participating in Look Up and Hope, families appear to have stronger connections - meaning increased quantity and quality of contact between mothers, children, and caregivers. For example, 61 percent of children were either living with their mother or had increased contact with her, and 60 percent were reported to have an improved relationship with their mother. - Positive school outcomes: The majority of school-aged children (6+ years old) either increased or maintained their grades, attendance, and behavior. Most prominently, nearly four in ten (37%) children had improved their grade point average by their follow-up assessment, according to family coaches. - Healthy children and caregivers: Overall, the children and caregivers served by the program were relatively healthy. The majority of children (61%) were reported to be in good health at both their baseline and follow-up assessments, and family coaches assessed nearly all children (94%) and caregivers (93%) to have their basic needs met. - Improved parenting skills: Nearly all (97%) of the mothers who received parenting education or training showed improved knowledge of parenting skills. - Improved employment status for mothers: The majority of mothers with available follow-up data experienced a change in employment status from baseline to follow-up. For those who did, over four in ten went from unemployment to either full-time or part-time employment. In addition to the annual report, Wilder Research conducted a Social Return on Investment (SROI) study to estimate some of the potential long-term cost savings that the Look Up and Hope program could eventually provide to society. The study found that, even if the only benefits the program produced were improved long-term outcomes for some participating children (e.g., avoidance of out-of-home placements and school failures), the net cost savings to society could be as much as $48,495 per child. This represents a potential return on investment of $14.31 for every dollar invested. The full SROI (including the limitations of the analysis) is appended. Details: St. Paul, MN: Wilder Research, 2016. 144p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 28, 2017 at: https://www.wilder.org/Wilder-Research/Publications/Studies/Strengthening%20Families%20Impacted%20by%20Incarceration%20-%20Evaluation%20of%20Volunteers%20of%20America%20Programs/Look%20Up%20and%20Hope%20Final%20Evaluation%20Report,%20Full%20Report.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.wilder.org/Wilder-Research/Publications/Studies/Strengthening%20Families%20Impacted%20by%20Incarceration%20-%20Evaluation%20of%20Volunteers%20of%20America%20Programs/Look%20Up%20and%20Hope%20Final%20Evaluation%20R Shelf Number: 146447 Keywords: Children of Prisoners Cost-Benefit Analysis Families of Inmates Female Offenders Parenting Prisoner Reentry Volunteers in criminal Justice

Author: Evans, Ryan Title: Ujamaa Place: Evaluation of 2013 & 2015 Participant Outcomes Summary: Wilder Research examined the impact of programming delivered by Ujamaa Place, an organization that serves primarily African American men (age 17-29) who have multiple barriers to becoming stable, productive members of the community. For this evaluation, Wilder Research obtained entry and follow-up data for 59 participants who received day program services in 2015. As part of the evaluation, Wilder Research conducted a return on investment (ROI) analysis of Ujamaa Place day programming for the 90 total participants that received services in 2015 (extrapolated from the 59 participants for whom data was available, which assumes that all 90 participants received similar services). An ROI analysis suggests a return of $5.49 for every dollar invested in Ujamaa Place, as well as an estimated net gain for society of $3,389,594 during 2015. Details: St. Paul, MN: Wilder Research, 2016. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 28, 2017 at: https://www.wilder.org/Wilder-Research/Publications/Studies/Ujamaa%20Place/Ujamaa%20Place%20-%20Evaluation%20of%202013%20and%202015%20Participant%20Outcomes.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.wilder.org/Wilder-Research/Publications/Studies/Ujamaa%20Place/Ujamaa%20Place%20-%20Evaluation%20of%202013%20and%202015%20Participant%20Outcomes.pdf Shelf Number: 146449 Keywords: African American Men Cost-Benefit Analysis Males Prisoner Reentry Treatment Programs

Author: Fair, Helen Title: Peer relations: Review of learning from the Winston Churchill Memorial Trust Prison Reform Fellowships - Part IV Summary: This Briefing is concerned with the broad theme of 'connections'. Its particular focus is on interventions visited by the Churchill Fellows which aim to harness the power of peer relations towards positive goals. - This report looks at the importance of positive peer relations at all stages of the criminal justice programme, specifically: - Peer relations as a tool to support desistance and diversion - Promoting positive peer relations in prison - Peer support on release from prison - Research has long documented the enormous influence of peer pressure - whether positive or negative - on offending behaviour. Positive peer pressure is utilised in work with young fathers and programmes which help to develop youth leadership, while work to reduce gang violence aims to counteract the negative effects of peer pressure. - In England and Wales, the growing use and benefits of peer support across the prison estate have been recognised by inspectors. Mentoring roles encompass the provision of emotional support, advising, and facilitating self-help or learning. - Examples of peer support programmes visited by Fellows include a programme run by ex-prisoners in the US which encourages the peer-led and grassroots education of prisoners; the use of drama to promote positive behaviour in prison in South Africa; and a programme in the US which uses life sentence prisoners as 'social mentors' to help new prisoners to adapt to prison life. - The importance of peer support for those leaving prison and re-entering the community is widely recognised, and is increasingly viewed by the UK government as a key means of ensuring continuity of support for those released from prison. - Examples of such 'through the gate' support was seen in Finland, where former prisoners work with those being released from prison to help them access the services they need to resettle back into the community, and in the US through the Delancey Street Foundation, which is entirely staffed by people who have been through the prison system, and teaches marketable skills to recently released prisoners. Details: London: Prison Reform Trust, 2017. 14p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 1, 2017 at: http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/WCMT/peer_relations_FINAL.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/WCMT/peer_relations_FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 146485 Keywords: Correctional Programs Inmates Peer Relations Peer Support Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Rehabilitation Prisoners Volunteers in Criminal Justice

Author: John Jay College of Criminal Justice. Prisoner Reentry Institute Title: Building Communities, Changing Lives: The NYC Justice Corps Community Benefit Projects Summary: The NYC Justice Corps aims to change the dynamic between justice system-involved young adults and the communities in which they live. At the heart of the program are community benefit projects - from renovation and restoration projects to educational and arts initiatives - designed and carried out by Corps members. Community beneft projects promote transformation on several levels. By taking the lead in all aspects of creating and completing their service projects, Corps members learn the hard and soft skills needed for their return to education or entry into training and the workforce. As they seek input from Community Advisory Board members and carry out projects in community centers, parks, and other important local sites, Corps members come to view themselves as contributors to the vibrant fabric of their neighborhoods, developing a stronger connection to the physical landscape and people around them. As one Corps member said: "So [we] give back to them and put ourselves in a different light, definitely. It's wonderful." Neighborhoods, too, beneft from transformational physical improvements and the positive engagement of their young people. One community leader noted that Justice Corps members had come at the "opportune time" and "stepped up" to complete their service project. Community benefit projects have the potential to pave the way for a shift in community members' perception and experience of young people with criminal histories. Young adults aged 18-24 returning to their communities after criminal justice involvement are at a turning point. As criminologist Shadd Maruna notes, individuals at the reentry "'threshol... shed their former identities, but what they shall become is not yet known. They stand outside the normal structures of society in a liminal state characterized by jeopardy and promise." The NYC Justice Corps ofers young people a chance to change their paths through youth-led, collaborative service work in the form of community benefit projects, structuring their program participation to reduce the "jeopardy" and maximize the "promise" of reentry. Details: New York: The Institute, 2017. 72p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 29, 2017 at: https://kf4fx1bdsjx2as1vf38ctp7p-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/NYC-Justice-Corps-Community.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://kf4fx1bdsjx2as1vf38ctp7p-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/NYC-Justice-Corps-Community.pdf Shelf Number: 146932 Keywords: Community-Based Programs Prisoner Reentry Rehabilitation Programs Work Programs Young Adult Offenders

Author: Lindquist, Christine Title: Change in Couple Relationships Before, During, and After Incarceration Summary: Understanding what supports strong relationship quality among formerly incarcerated men and their partners could have an impact on individual, interpersonal, and community safety and wellbeing. The information in this research brief is drawn from a couples-based longitudinal study of families affected by incarceration, focusing on 641 couples where the male partner was incarcerated at the beginning of the study and released prior to the completion of the final study interviews. The findings give insight into issues facing couples before, during, and after incarceration and identify key factors that predict stronger couple relationships after release. Details: Washington, DC: Administration for Children and Families/Office of Family Assistance, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2016. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: ASPE Research Brief: Accessed September 7, 2017 at: https://aspe.hhs.gov/system/files/pdf/202081/MFSIP_CoupleRelation.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://aspe.hhs.gov/system/files/pdf/202081/MFSIP_CoupleRelation.pdf Shelf Number: 147151 Keywords: Children of Prisoners Families of Inmates Prisoner Reentry

Author: Umez, Chidi Title: Mentoring as a Component of Reentry: Practical Considerations from the Field Summary: The impact of mentoring for adults returning to their community from incarceration is dependent on how well reentry programs structure the mentoring component of the program, which involves collaborating with correctional facilities, thoughtfully selecting and matching mentors and participants, and effectively concluding the mentoring relationship. An integral part of the process also involves the understanding that mentoring should serve as a supplement to services that address other critical reentry needs, such as housing, health care, substance use treatment, and employment. Despite growing interest and investment in mentoring as a component of reentry, there is only a small body of research to support the value of mentoring services in reducing recidivism among criminal justice populations. The research related to adult reentry mentoring that does exist rarely addresses participants' criminogenic risk levels and other factors that are known to be important in recidivism-reduction strategies. In the absence of research, reentry programs and corrections agencies are looking for guidance on how mentoring and correctional evidence-based practices (EBPs) can be integrated. This publication from the National Reentry Resource Center offers five broad, field-based practical considerations for incorporating mentoring into reentry programs for adults. Although the primary audience for this publication is community-based reentry organizations that are incorporating adult mentoring into their portfolio of reentry services, corrections agencies, other organizations, and legislative officials may also find this publication useful for gaining a better understanding of the components of adult mentoring in reentry. Details: New York: The Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2017. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 7, 2017 at: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/6.27.17_Mentoring-as-a-Component-of-Reentry.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/6.27.17_Mentoring-as-a-Component-of-Reentry.pdf Shelf Number: 147156 Keywords: Mentoring Prisoner Reentry

Author: San Francisco. Office of the Controller. City Services Auditor Title: Adult Probation Department Reentry Division CASC Program Analysis Summary: In preparation for the San Francisco Adult Probation Department's (APD) upcoming Request for Proposal (RFP) for reentry services, APD requested that the Controller's Office, City Performance Unit, conduct a program assessment of services provided at the Community Assessment and Services Center (CASC). The CASC, which opened in June 2013, is a one-stop reentry center that bridges APD probation supervision with comprehensive services including case management, cognitive behavioral interventions, employment, education, barrier removal, health care enrollment and income benefits acquisition assistance. City Performance developed an analytical approach to assess reentry services at the CASC. The approach consisted of the following four elements: 1. Research on evidence-based practices in the field of reentry services and other related fields. 2. Benchmarking and best practice interviews with peer probation systems that share a commitment to implementing evidence-based practices. 3. Interviews and focus groups with key stakeholders from APD, the current CASC vendor - Leaders in Community Alternatives (LCA), the Department of Public Health (DPH), the Human Services Agency (HSA) and partner organizations that provide on-site and off-site support. 4. Interviews with CASC clients. Based on this assessment, City Performance found several areas where CASC service provision could be enhanced to strengthen adherence to evidence-based practices and improve client outcomes. The recommendations included in this report reflect findings based on research done from July to September of 2016. New information gathered outside of the original time period can be found in footnotes throughout the report. Stakeholders report that San Francisco has a challenging reentry environment due to a large number of high risk probationers with high rates of homelessness, mental health issues and drug addiction. In this environment, the CASC has struggled to motivate clients to maintain the necessary attendance levels that allow for many evidence-based practices to have an impact on recidivism rates. Furthermore, City Performance found other areas where the CASC could improve adherence to best practices in the field including during case planning, client tracking, and mental health and substance abuse support. Finally, the CASC has struggled to maintain a consistent and effective data tracking system across programs which has affected its ability to monitor program performance and measure impact. The first three years of the CASC focused on initiating a wide array of new community services while aligning law enforcement and support services. The recommendations in this report can serve as a guide for Adult Probation Department to deepen the work of the CASC as it matures as the cornerstone of reentry services in San Francisco. This report provides six high level recommendations based on findings from City Performance research, interviews, and focus groups that APD can incorporate into the upcoming RFP for reentry services. City Performance recommends that the CASC adopt the following practices: 1. Increase client engagement hours. a. Enhance intrinsic motivation through using the therapeutic community model. b. Require case managers to spend more time with clients outside of the CASC. c. Increase case manager engagement for clients in custody. d. Require case managers to assume intake responsibilities at the CASC. e. Choose dosage targets and use in probation plans. 2. Ensure that CASC case planning and services address the criminogenic needs of clients. a. Require alignment between Individual Treatment and Rehabilitation Plan (ITRP), Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions (COMPAS) assessment and all other client reentry planning. b. Host joint training sessions for CASC case managers, APD staff and subcontractors to ensure that all parties have a uniform understanding of program goals. c. Provide CASC case managers with greater access to the client's COMPAS assessment. d. Provide greater access for subcontractors to the criminogenic and mental health needs of their clients before the client accesses their services. e. Require case managers to attend all collaborative meetings about clients, including case conferences and bi-weekly client case management meetings. 3. Enhance the CASC's capacity to handle clients with mental health and substance abuse issues. a. Expand and streamline CASC capacity for handling clients with mental health issues. b. Hire case managers that have more experience handling mental health cases. c. Train current case managers in de-escalation tactics and mental health awareness. d. Collaborate with county jails, APD Probation Officers, and CASC case management to develop a standard process for transferring clients with mental health issues to ensure continuous care. 4. Develop and implement an effective data reporting system. a. Create and maintain a data dictionary. b. Track and analyze client level dosage data. c. Track data points that give information on program performance. 5. Conduct annual fidelity assessments of the CASC. 6. Long Term: Create specialized client tracks for service provision. a. Create client tracks based on criminogenic risk level. b. Pursue programming by gender as outlined in the Women's Community Justice Reform Blueprint and consider creating client tracks by gender. c. Create client tracks by age. Details: San Francisco: Office of the Controller, 2017. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 23, 2017 at: http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Adult%20Probation%20Department%20Reentry%20Division%20CASC%20Program%20Analysis.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Auditing/Adult%20Probation%20Department%20Reentry%20Division%20CASC%20Program%20Analysis.pdf Shelf Number: 147432 Keywords: Alternatives to Incarceration Community Supervision Offender Supervision Prisoner Reentry Probation Probationers

Author: John Jay College of Criminal Justice. Prisoner Reentry Institute Title: A Place to Call Home: A Vision for Safe, Supportive and Affordable Housing for People with Justice System Involvement Summary: Everyone should have a safe, stable place to live - not just access to shelter, but to a place to call home. Housing is a fundamental human need that lays the foundation for success in every aspect of our lives. When we have a home, we have a safe space to lay our head at night, store our personal belongings, a kitchen where we can cook our meals, and a launch pad from which we can seek jobs, attend school, and connect with our friends and family. Having a place to call home defines our place in the world, our sense of belonging, and our relatedness to others. People with past involvement in the justice system need housing in order to reconstruct their lives. In many cases, they were previously experiencing homelessness or are unable to return to the place they lived before. As they look for a home, however, they find the doors to housing closed at every turn. Too often, they are denied this basic need because of their criminal justice history. They face discrimination in the private housing market, scarcity of subsidized housing, lack of affordable places to live, and bans from public housing, all of which puts a stable place to call home out of reach. The result? The system relegates people with criminal justice involvement to the streets, to shelters, and to unregulated substandard housing - options that don't provide the support necessary for them to achieve their potential. Shelters are often overcrowded and unsafe. They are temporary, causing the stress that comes from living a transient life. People living in such places often have no refrigerator where they can store fresh food. They can't hang their clothes in closets in preparation for job interviews or work. They have no secure space to keep their valuables, photographs, or family keepsakes. They have no permanent address for job or school applications. Rather than providing the basis for success, these types of shelter more often lead to a cycle of homelessness and repeated jail or prison stays. On October 27, 2016, stakeholders from the public and nonprofit sectors gathered at John Jay College of Criminal Justice for Excluded: A Dialogue on Safe, Supportive and Affordable Housing for People with Justice System Involvement, co-hosted by the Prisoner Reentry Institute of John Jay College, The Fortune Society, the Corporation for Supportive Housing (CSH), and the Supportive Housing Network of New York. It was a day of conversation about the importance of housing to successful reentry for people who have been involved in the criminal justice system. It was a day to talk about shared values and second chances, and to outline the obstacles preventing people from finding housing. It was a day to focus on model solutions that have been proven to work so that everyone, no matter what their needs, has access to a place to call home. Increasing access to safe, affordable and supportive housing for people with criminal justice histories furthers the shared values that Americans have held dear since the founding of this country. As a nation, we share a desire for a just society with opportunity for all. We believe that everyone deserves a fair chance to achieve their potential. We believe in redemption, the idea that people should be given the chance for a new start after they falter, and merit patience and compassion as they do so. We believe that individuals can change, given the opportunity to start over in society after making amends. We believe in community - that we are better off when everyone can contribute and participate. Housing builds such opportunity and, where there is more opportunity, life improves for all of us. This document makes the case for providing dignified housing that meets the needs of those with criminal justice histories, and providing it as quickly as possible upon reentry. Details: New York: The Institute, 2017. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 6, 2017 at: https://kf4fx1bdsjx2as1vf38ctp7p-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Place_to_Call_Home_FINAL-DIGITAL.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://kf4fx1bdsjx2as1vf38ctp7p-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Place_to_Call_Home_FINAL-DIGITAL.pdf Shelf Number: 148047 Keywords: Ex-Offenders Housing Prisoner Reentry

Author: National Reentry Resource Center Title: Making People's Transition from Prison and Jail to the Community Safe and Successful: A Snapshot of National Progress in Reentry Summary: One of the most significant developments in criminal justice policy over the past 15 years has been a fundamental shift in thinking about the primary purpose of prisons and jails. Not long ago, elected officials saw the principal responsibility of corrections administrators as providing for the care, custody, and control of people who are incarcerated. Today, there is widespread agreement that government has a responsibility to ensure that when people are released to the community from jail or prison, they are less likely to reoffend than they were at the start of their sentence. Although no single event is associated with this change in philosophy, a key milestone stands out. Late in 2004, Congress set to work on the Second Chance Act, which the House and Senate later passed with overwhelming bipartisan support. Elected officials in the nation's capital had made clear that ensuring people's safe and successful transition from prison and jail to the community wasn't a partisan issue, but simply good, smart policy - because anything short of that objective compromises public safety, wastes taxpayer dollars, and undermines the well-being and stability of communities. A decade since the passage of the Second Chance Act, it is time to consider a critical question: Have local, state, and federal efforts to improve reentry outcomes for people under correctional supervision yielded sufficient results? This brief highlights five ways in which state and local governments' approaches to reentry and recidivism reduction are fundamentally different today than they were a decade and a half ago. Details: New York: National Reentry Resource Center, 2017. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 7, 2017 at: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/6.8.18_A-Snapshot-of-National-Progress-in-Reentry1.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/6.8.18_A-Snapshot-of-National-Progress-in-Reentry1.pdf Shelf Number: 148048 Keywords: Criminal Justice policy Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Rehabilitation Recidivism

Author: Delay, Dennis Title: Evaluating Corrections Reentry Programs: The Experience of the Hillsborough County Reentry Program Summary: Analysis and evaluation of the Reentry Program was significantly hampered by the fact that a standard data collection process was not utilized. Any future re-entry work should mandate the collection of consistent data across programs and across participants. As part of this evaluation the Center, in consultation with the Council of State Governments Justice Center, developed a database and data collection instrument for the Reentry Program. The partners believe that this data collection instrument can not only assist in the evaluation of the Reentry Program, but also serve as a resource applicable to evaluate other community corrections and reentry programs. As such, this database approach developed by the Center and the Justice Center should serve as a model for future reentry programs administered by the Department of Corrections and other criminal justice agencies in New Hampshire. While our analysis allows us to understand some of the characteristics of participants and begin to formulate questions about the factors which contribute to success or failures, a more comprehensive analysis is necessary to understand the true value of the program, and the value of services provided within those programs. Details: Concord, NH: New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies, 2010. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 18, 2017 at: http://www.nhpolicy.org/UploadedFiles/Reports/reentryevalplusapp.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.nhpolicy.org/UploadedFiles/Reports/reentryevalplusapp.pdf Shelf Number: 148248 Keywords: Community Correctioins Prisoner Reentry

Author: Pham, Duy Title: Incarceration to Reentry: Education & Training Pathways in Indiana Summary: Because the social, economic, political, historical, and racial context that shapes the criminal justice system is both complex and extensive, individuals who have been incarcerated face limited opportunities - particularly for education and training - both during and after incarceration. Historical investments in corrections and policies that prioritize punishment over prevention and rehabilitation have been unsuccessful in improving public safety and have greatly marginalized low-income communities and communities of color. Research has shown, however, that correctional education and training can significantly improve the outcomes of those returning to society. These positive outcomes are leading to increased federal and state momentum to improve postsecondary access for prisoners and are lifting this issue higher on reform agendas. Nonetheless, the education and training needs of prisoners are far more complex than what traditional postsecondary education can meet, and linking those needs to training that articulates to post-release opportunities is essential for successful reentry. Building on the theme of continuity from incarceration to reentry, these briefs will highlight the continuous improvement stories of states that are moving toward this type of alignment. This brief will focus on Indiana. Details: Washington, DC: CLASP, 2017. 14p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 20, 2017 at: https://www.clasp.org/sites/default/files/publications/2017/11/2017_incarcerationtoreentryindiana.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.clasp.org/sites/default/files/publications/2017/11/2017_incarcerationtoreentryindiana.pdf Shelf Number: 148272 Keywords: Correctional Education Educational Programs Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Rehabilitation Vocational Education and Training

Author: Solomon, Amy L. Title: Life After Lockup: Improving Reentry from Jail to the Community Summary: Each year, US jails process an estimated 12 million admissions and releases. Substance addiction, job and housing instability, mental illness, and health problems are daily realities for a significant share of this population. Given that more than 80 percent of inmates are incarcerated for less than a month, jails have little time or capacity to address these deep-rooted and often overlapping issues. Life After Lockup synthesizes key findings from the Jail Reentry Roundtable and examines opportunities on the jail-to-community continuum where reentry-focused interventions can make a difference. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2008. 189p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 7, 2017 at: https://www.urban.org/research/publication/life-after-lockup-improving-reentry-jail-community/view/full_report Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: https://www.urban.org/research/publication/life-after-lockup-improving-reentry-jail-community/view/full_report Shelf Number: 110498 Keywords: Jail Inmates Jails Prisoner Reentry

Author: Hunt, Priscillia Title: Breaking Down Barriers: Experiments into Policies That Might Incentivize Employers to Hire Ex-Offenders Summary: The rate of criminal punishment in the United States has had far-reaching economic consequences, in large part because people with criminal records are marginalized within the labor market. Given these negative economic implications, federal, state and local officials have developed a host of policies to encourage employers to hire ex-offenders, with varying degrees of success. To inform policies and programs aimed at improving employment rates for ex-offenders, we examined employer preferences regarding policy options targeted to incentivize hiring individuals with one nonviolent felony conviction. In our experiments, we found employers were 69 percent more likely to consider hiring an ex-offender if a hiring agency also provides a guaranteed replacement worker in the event the ex-offender was deemed unsuitable and 53 percent more likely to hire an ex-offender who can provide a certificate of validated positive previous work performance history. Having consistent transportation provided by a hiring agency increased the likelihood of being considered for hire by 33 percent. Employers also were found to be 30 percent more likely to consider an ex-offender for hire if the government increases the tax credit from 25 percent of the worker's wages (up to $2,500) to 40 percent (up to $5,000) - double the current maximum amount allowed by the Work Opportunity Tax Credit - and 24 percent more likely to hire an ex-offender if the government completed all tax-related paperwork. Key Findings Worker Replacement and Fee Discounts Increase Hiring Prospects for Ex-Offenders With a baseline policy of a discount on a staffing agency fee set at 25 percent of the hourly wage and post-conviction certification verifying adherence to company rules or code of safe practices, 4.3 out of 10 employers would consider hiring an ex-offender. With the same baseline policy and a guaranteed replacement worker program, in which an agency would send a replacement worker if the ex-offender is unsuitable, that number rises to 7.3 out of 10. Six in ten employers would advance a candidate with this professional and criminal background if the candidate used a staffing agency with a 50-percent discount instead of a 25-percent discount. Tax Credits Have a Similarly Positive Effect With a baseline policy of a tax credit for 25 percent of a worker's wages (up to $2,500) after a worker has put in 120 hours and a post-conviction certification verifying adherence to company rules or code of safe practices, 5.9 out of 10 employers would consider hiring an ex-offender. With the same baseline policy and a 40-percent tax credit (up to $5,000), the number rises to 7.7 employers out of 10. Seven in ten employers would advance the candidate if the government, rather than the employer, completed the relevant tax forms to receive the tax credit. Employer Access to Previous Performance Could Factor into Hiring With the same baseline policy as considered for tax credits and a certificate of validated work performance history, that number rises from 5.9 out of 10 employers to 8.1 out of 10. Employer Concerns in Hiring Ex-Offenders From a specific list provided in the survey, the top-cited concern was "any violent felony conviction," which was chosen as the most important issue by 53.3 percent of respondents and as the second most important issue by 24.5 percent of respondents. This may partially reflect concerns related to negligent hiring liability, but it may reflect other issues, as well. Another primary concern stated by employers was "skills to get the job done," which was ranked as the first or second most important issue to consider by 45.4 percent of respondents. Recommendations Staffing agencies and reentry or reintegration programs could increase the likelihood of employment for people with a criminal record if they guarantee prospective employers a replacement employee. State policymakers should consider expanding post-conviction certification programs. Across both the tax credit and staffing agency discount experiments, employers demonstrate a clear preference for wanting to know whether an ex-offender job candidate has a consistent work history and verifiable positive employment references versus simply knowing whether the person follows company codes of conduct. Tax agencies should consider reducing the paperwork that companies have to fill out for credits. Government agencies could also consider providing help to prepare and submit the forms. Ensuring reliable transportation to and from a job site for candidates with a criminal record increases the likelihood an employer will support hiring such individuals. As with reducing paperwork, the impact of this policy is more limited than many of our other tested policy features. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2018. 28p., app. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 19, 2018 at: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2142.html Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2142.html Shelf Number: 148870 Keywords: Employment Ex-Offender Employment Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Western, Bruce Title: Formerly-Incarcerated Parents and their Children Summary: The negative effects of incarceration on child well-being are often linked to the economic insecurity of formerly incarcerated parents. Researchers caution, however, that the effects of parental incarceration may be small in the presence of multiple partner fertility and other family complexity. Despite these claims, few studies directly observe either economic insecurity or the full extent of family complexity. We study parent-child relationships with a unique data set that includes detailed information about economic insecurity and family complexity among parents just released from prison. We find that stable private housing, more than income, is associated with close and regular contact between parents and children. Formerly-incarcerated parents are less likely to regularly see their children in contexts of multiple partner fertility and in the absence of supportive family relationships. Significant housing and family effects are estimated even after controlling for drug use and crime which are themselves negatively related to parental contact. The findings point to the constraints of material insecurity and family complexity on the social support provided by formerly incarcerated parents to their children. Details: Cambridge, MA: Department of Sociology, Harvard University, 2017. 35p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 8, 2018 at: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/brucewestern/files/formerly-incarcerated_parents_and_their_children.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/brucewestern/files/formerly-incarcerated_parents_and_their_children.pdf Shelf Number: 149070 Keywords: Child Welfare Children of Prisoners Ex-Offenders Families of Inmates Prisoner Reentry

Author: Simes, Jessica T. Title: Neighborhood Attainment After Prison Summary: Each year over 600,000 people leave prison and become residents of neighborhoods across the United States. Neighborhoods are spatial contexts to which people are socially connected, but imprisonment is fundamentally segregative. When this period of total institutionalization ends, people leaving prison have to forge new relationships to the labor market, with family and friends, the welfare system, the political system, as well as neighborhoods and communities. Due to challenges in observation and measurement, we do not fully understand how individuals establish relationships with place after prison. Combining census data and prison records with a longitudinal survey of people leaving prison and returning to the Greater Boston area, this paper examines mechanisms explaining the disparities in neighborhood attainment after a period of imprisonment. In the context of Greater Boston, black and Hispanic men and women leaving prison move into significantly more disadvantaged areas than their white counterparts, even after controlling for levels of pre-prison neighborhood disadvantage. Mitigating factors such as histories of employment and moving away from former neighborhoods improve neighborhood quality immediately after release from prison. Household dynamics are an important neighborhood sorting mechanism: living in concentrated disadvantage was more likely for those living in non-traditional households or group quarters. While 40 percent of respondents initially moved to only one of two neighborhoods in Boston, nearly 25 percent of respondents left prison and entered formal institutional settings, returned to prison, or lived in extreme social marginality throughout various locations in Greater Boston. Racial and ethnic differences in neighborhood sorting by household type- and the conditions of extreme marginality-are key mechanisms of neighborhood attainment during the precarious of period reentry. Details: Cambridge, MA: Department of Sociology, Harvard University, 2016. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 8, 2018 at: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/brucewestern/files/neighborhood_attainment_after_prison.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/brucewestern/files/neighborhood_attainment_after_prison.pdf Shelf Number: 149072 Keywords: Neighborhood Attainment Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Reintegration

Author: New York University Center on the Administration of Criminal Law Title: Disrupting the Cycle: Reimagining the Prosecutor's Role in Reentry: A Guide to Best Practices Summary: The report provides concrete recommendations that prosecutors can implement in order to focus on reentry and target the risk of recidivism. The report proceeds in four parts: PART I focuses on reforms that prosecutors can implement at the "front end" of the process, including considering how prosecutorial discretion at various stages of a criminal case can impact defendants' risk of recidivism and affect their reentry process. This includes using discretion to make screening and charging decisions, considering diversion and other alternatives to incarceration, supporting pretrial release of defendants where appropriate, and considering the use of creative sentencing alternatives; PART II focuses on reforms that prosecutors can implement at the "back end" of the process to begin preparing for an incarcerated individual's eventual reentry to their community. This includes prerelease reentry planning, and removing barriers that interfere with their ability to reintegrate into their communities, such as obtaining identification and drivers' licenses, providing them opportunities to expunge their convictions and reduce fines that may burden them upon release, and collaborating with employers and community-based resources; PART III focuses on the prosecutor as office leader and highlights office-wide reforms that can shift office culture to include anti-recidivism concerns as part of a broader focus on public safety; and PART IV focuses on the prosecutor's role in the larger community and how he or she can use his or her power to engage a diverse group of stakeholders in outreach and education initiatives, including legislative reforms designed to target recidivism at the front and back ends of the justice system. Details: New York: NYU Center on the Administration of Criminal Law, 2017. 110p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 22, 2018 at: http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/upload_documents/CACL%20Report.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/upload_documents/CACL%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 149228 Keywords: Offender Reintegration Prisoner Reentry Prosecutorial Discretion Prosecutors Recidivism

Author: Chapman, Jason E. Title: Quasi-Experimental Evaluation of Reentry Programs in Washington and Linn Counties Summary: Justice reinvestment is a data-driven approach to improve public safety, examine corrections and related criminal justice spending, manage and allocate criminal justice populations in a more costeffective manner, and reinvest savings in strategies that can hold offenders accountable, decrease recidivism, and strengthen neighborhoods. In 2010, the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) launched the Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI), with funding appropriated by the U.S. Congress in recognition of earlier successes of justice reinvestment efforts. JRI provides technical assistance to states and localities as they collect and analyze data on drivers of criminal justice populations, identify and implement changes to increase efficiencies, and measure the fiscal and public safety impacts of those changes. Oregon is one of several JRI-involved states. In Oregon, JRI-related activities were formalized in 2013 with the passage of HB 3194. Among other things, this bill established a grant program to strengthen local public safety capacity, which is overseen by the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission (CJC). In the 2015 legislative session, the Oregon legislature approved 38.7 million dollars for the CJC to grant to counties for JRI-related programs. The law includes a provision that 3% of these monies be used for rigorous evaluations of the JRI programs that each county adopted. The CJC has identified three promising areas to target for JRI program evaluation efforts; Reentry programs represent one of those three targeted areas. Thus far, although considerable research exists on Reentry programs, a clear set of evidence-based best practices has yet to emerge due to the diversity of Reentry programming features. Reentry programs are widely considered to be effective at reducing recidivism and prison usage. Ndrecka conducted a meta-analysis of Reentry programs nationwide. The study synthesized results from 53 independent evaluations of Reentry programs and revealed an overall effect size of .06, meaning that on average, these programs reduce recidivism by 6%. Moderator analyses indicated that Reentry programs are more effective when services begin while offenders are still incarcerated and continue through their release to the community, versus being limited to just pre- or post-prison release. Considering these findings, the CJC sought to determine the effectiveness of Reentry programs funded by Justice Reinvestment in Oregon, to inform future funding decisions and to further the body of criminal justice knowledge. Researchers at the Oregon Social Learning Center (OSLC) submitted a proposal and were selected to conduct this research on Reentry programs. Specifically, OSLC Investigators conducted a quasi-experimental study of the Reentry programs in Washington and Linn Counties. These counties were chosen by the CJC for evaluation because they implement similar Reentry services and because they directed their JRI dollars toward funding their Reentry programs. Further, and as described next, their services span pre- and post-prison release, consistent with evidence on "what works" from the above-mentioned meta-analysis. In general, Reentry programs are designed to facilitate an offender's release from prison and successful integration back into the community. Neither Washington nor Linn County have a fully detailed manual for their Reentry programs, but they were able to describe the components they generally provide. Of note, the program provided in each county is structured such that every offender receives a few key components, but some components are provided on an as-needed basis. - Services begin with an in-person "Reach-In" meeting with offenders prior to their release from prison: -- The Reach-In is a 30-60 minute in-person visit with the offender that happens after Community Corrections receives a prison release plan. The Reach-In tends to happen 90 days prior to prison release. -- During this Reach-In, a Reentry specialist employed by Community Corrections assesses each offender's needs and develops an individualized post-release case plan. -- A key goal of the Reach-In is to help alleviate the offender's anxiety about being released and about working with their Community Corrections officer post-release.- Other targets of the Reach-In may include planning for housing, basic needs, treatment needs, employment/education, transportation, or other needs the offender anticipates facing post-release. - Mentoring services are frequently provided to the offender, although there are slight differences across Washington and Linn Counties. - In Washington, all offenders are provided mentoring services. In Linn, all female offenders are provided mentoring, while male offenders are provided mentoring services whenever mentors are available. - Mentoring begins with one to four mentoring sessions occurring prior to prison release and generally continues for at least three months post-release. - Mentors are sometimes contracted directly by Community Corrections and are sometimes provided by community organizations, treatment providers, or volunteer groups. - The mentor communicates directly with the Community Corrections officer, either through individual communication or at weekly "staffing" meetings between the officer, treatment provider, and mentor. - A Community Corrections officer provides enhanced supervision post-release. Both Washington and Linn Counties incorporate a Motivational Interviewing approach into their supervision. They also develop holistic supervision plans that aim to identify an offender's goals, address barriers to these goals, and facilitate prosocial thinking. The officer may provide assistance with housing, basic needs, treatment needs, employment/education, transportation, or other needs that arise for the offender, in an effort to help the offender avoid re-engaging in criminal activity. - Offenders may receive a range of supportive services for several months following release from prison: -- When needed, offenders receive rapid access to comprehensive substance abuse and/or mental health treatment. Treatment providers meet regularly with the offender's Community Corrections officer to coordinate services. -- When needed, offenders receive access to short-term housing services, including sober living homes (i.e., group homes for people who are recovering from addiction). -- Offenders may receive assistance from an employment specialist who works directly with Community Corrections and is specialized in assisting offenders to find employment. A quasi-experimental study was conducted to evaluate the impact of the Reentry programs in Washington and Linn Counties. The primary outcome for this analysis was recidivism as defined in Oregon (i.e., arrest, conviction, or incarceration for a new crime within 3 years of prison release). Reentry services have been provided in Washington and Linn Counties since approximately 2007, but when JRI funding became available, Washington and Linn Counties decided to use the JRI funding to pay for the costs of their Reentry programs. Thus, although the JRI funding was not available until later, the data since 2007 could be included in the evaluation to help expand the number of years with eligible data (i.e., offenders who had 3 years post-release data). In addition, data prior to 2007 were utilized as a comparison window, or "baseline phase" that was the time period prior to the Counties' Reentry programs beginning. The CJC provided OSLC investigators with the recidivism data, and the current report summarizes the results of the Reentry program evaluation. Details: Eugene, OR: Oregon Social Learning Center, 2017. 59p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 8, 2018 at: http://www.oslcdevelopments.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Quasi-Experimental-Evaluation-of-Reentry-Programs-in-Washington-and-Linn-Counties-Final-Report.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.oslcdevelopments.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Quasi-Experimental-Evaluation-of-Reentry-Programs-in-Washington-and-Linn-Counties-Final-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 149396 Keywords: Costs of Criminal Justice Justice Reinvestment Mentoring Programs Prisoner Reentry Reentry Programs

Author: DeVeaux, Mika'il Title: Fitting-in: How Formerly Incarcerated New York City Black Men Define Success Post-Prison Summary: The problem of community reintegration emerged following the rise of the US prison population, which began in in the 1970s, disproportionately affecting US-born African American men. In this qualitative study, the researcher examined the perceptions of 17 formerly incarcerated New York City African American men to understand how they defined post-prison success after having been in the community at least three years in the wake of the era of mass (hyper) incarceration. During the study, the researcher employed a constructivist grounded theory (Charmaz, 2006) approach using data from semi-structured interviews to identify factors that enabled these African American men to make the social and psychological adjustments needed to get on with their lives post-release. Success, as defined by the men in the study, meant fitting-in to their home communities as if they had never been in prison. The findings of this study demonstrate that success is a construct inclusive of material, social, and psychological components. A number of themes emerged from the data that respondents attached importance to that the researcher linked to each component of success and subsequently related to the fitting-in process. The eligibility requirements for this study, which limited participation to men who had been out of prison at least three years, restricted generalizability of the results and suggest that length of time since release likely influenced definitions of success. This dissertation concludes proposing research to examine potentially influencing issues related to time upon definitions of success, post-prison achievements, and the psychological effects of the incarceration experience and its relationship to African American men's post-prison experiences. These findings can enhance social work practice with justice-involved African American men, enable social workers to better understand this population, and encourage the development of additional methods to address the psychological challenges related to post-prison adjustment likely to contribute to their well-being. Details: New York: City University of New York, 2017. 243p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed March 23, 2018 at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/1822/ Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/1822/ Shelf Number: 149548 Keywords: African American Men Ex-Offenders Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Rehabilitation Reintegration

Author: Holmberg, Stina Title: Reintegration assistance after prison: Follow-up on the Prison and Probation Service's work with special reintegration assistance measure Summary: Within three years of release from prison, two out of five persons commit a new offence sanctionable by prison or probation. For most of these individuals, recidivism occurs within several months after they have left prison (Bra 2017). In order to reduce the risk that individuals who are released commit new offences in connection with release, the Swedish Prison and Probation Service can grant reintegration assistance at the end of their sentence. These measures smooth the transition between prison and life at liberty, and entail a gradual reduction of the Prison and Probation Service's control over the client. The four so-called special reintegration assistance measures are: - day release; - treatment period; - halfway house; - enhanced day release. Bra has been instructed by the Government to follow up on the Prison and Probation Service's work with reintegration assistance. In conjunction with this instruction, the Government instructed the Prison and Probation Service at the end of 2015 to develop and strengthen its work with reintegration assistance. Bra's instruction requires us to follow up on the progress of the Prison and Probation Service's development work and to track the scope and nature of the reintegration assistance. We are also meant to report on any impediments to well-functioning and knowledge-based reintegration assistance work. Special attention is to be paid to any differences in working methods in various parts of the country, differences between men and women, and differences for persons from different language backgrounds. The crime victim aspects are to be highlighted, where relevant. Finally, Bra is, as necessary, required to suggest ideas for further development of the reintegration assistance efforts. As a basis for the study, Bra has visited 13 different facilities ' prisons with various security classifications, detention centres, day release offices, halfway houses, and treatment homes. We have interviewed a total of 100 individuals, both staff and clients, at these facilities. Interviews have also been conducted with a number of individuals at the headquarters of the Prison and Probation Service, as well as with other strategically important individuals. In addition, Bra has had continual contact with representatives from the Prison and Probation Service's working group for the development work. Our quantitative source material includes both the Prison and Probation Service's existing statistics and a special order in respect of clients who were released from prison. Bra has also been given access to unpublished data from a study which was conducted on the Prison and Probation Service's research unit. In addition to the above, a survey of the literature in the form of previous studies and evaluations has been conducted. Details: Stockholm: Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (Bra), 2018. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: English summary of Bra report 2017:15: Accessed April 4, 2018 at: https://www.bra.se/download/18.10aae67f160e3eba62919667/1517917740405/2017_15_Reintegration_assistance_summary.pdf Year: 2028 Country: Sweden URL: https://www.bra.se/download/18.10aae67f160e3eba62919667/1517917740405/2017_15_Reintegration_assistance_summary.pdf Shelf Number: 149687 Keywords: Parolees Prisoner Reentry Probationers Recidivism Rehabilitation Reintegration Reoffending

Author: Helmus, Leslie Title: Temporary absences reduce unemployment and returns to custody for women offenders Summary: Temporary absences (TAs) allow offenders to leave the institution for short periods of time to attend to administrative matters, perform community service, strengthen family contacts, receive medical attention, attend to parental responsibilities, engage in personal development, and/or attend rehabilitative programming in the community. TAs are intended to assist in community reintegration by allowing gradual and conditional access to the community while supporting offender rehabilitation efforts. This report focused only on the rehabilitative types of TAs, excluding those granted for medical or administrative purposes (as there is less discretion in granting these absences). The purpose of the current study was to examine who received TAs and to explore the impact of participating in TAs on community outcomes for women offenders. The final sample included 1,683 women offenders released to the community between April 1, 2005 and March 31, 2011. Outcomes included unemployment, any return to custody, return to custody with a new offence, and return to custody without a new offence. Overall, 44% of women offenders received a TA during their sentence. Women who received a TA were generally more likely to be higher risk, higher need, have lower Reintegration Potential, and were serving a longer sentence. Participation in TAs was also related to community outcomes. A significant dosage effect was found for returns to custody for any reason and returns to custody for a new offence: the more TAs an offender received, the lower the chances of returning to custody. For unemployment and returns without an offence, merely participating in a TA (yes/no) demonstrated a significant reduction in negative outcomes. These findings indicate that higher risk women are more likely to participate in TAs, and according to the risk principle of effective correctional practice, they stand to benefit the most from them. Additionally, participation in TAs reduces unemployment and returns to custody. Consequently, TAs play a valuable role in gradual reintegration to the community, and generally, the more the offenders participate, the greater the benefits. Details: Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada, 2015. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Report No. R-354: Accessed April 5, 2018 at: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/scc-csc/PS83-3-354-eng.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Canada URL: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/scc-csc/PS83-3-354-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 149701 Keywords: Ex-offender Employment Female Offenders Prisoner Reentry Temporary Release Unemployment Women Offenders

Author: Thielo, Angela J. Title: Redemption in an Era of Penal Harm: Moving Beyond Offender Exclusion Summary: For nearly forty years, the United States was in the grips of punitive thinking and mired in an era of mass imprisonment. The hallmarks of this paradigm were the embrace of policies and practices that systematically excluded convicted offenders from full participation in civic, social, and economic life. In recent years, however, it appears that American corrections has experienced a historic transformation that involves efforts to foster offender inclusion in society. Thus, policymakers are increasingly questioning the use of mass imprisonment and are embracing a campaign to downsize American prisons. Similarly, they are advocating for reentry services for released offenders and calling for reductions in the collateral consequences that attach to a criminal conviction. Punitive rhetoric seems in decline, replaced by discussion of the importance of offender rehabilitation and, ultimately, redemption. This dissertation is an attempt to explore these developments. Specifically, based on a 2017 national, opt-in Internet survey of 1,000 respondents, the study investigates the extent to which the American public rejects the exclusion of offenders and supports their inclusion. In this regard, public support of four aspects of offender inclusion was assessed: the (1) rehabilitation, (2) reentry, (3) reintegration, and (4) redemption of individuals with criminal records. The results reveal that support for offender inclusion is extensive. First, regardless of how it is measured, support for rehabilitation is strong. Americans see rehabilitation as a central goal of prisons, support treatment programs, and favor the new innovation of problem-solving specialty courts. This embrace of treatment is long-standing and must be considered a core American cultural belief or what Alexis de Tocqueville called a "habit of the heart." Second, the respondents endorsed the concept of prisoner reentry programs, supporting the delivery of an array of supportive services to inmates released to the community. Third, the sample members recognized that collateral consequences could be barriers to offender reintegration, stating that such legal restrictions should be disclosed to criminal defendants, reviewed regularly by legislators, and eliminated if not shown to prevent criminal conduct. The respondents favored voting rights for ex-offenders but were divided on access to jury duty. Support for ban-the-box statutes was high. The subjects were split on the policy of the expungement of records, apparently trying to balance concerns of public safety with concerns over offenders being allowed to resume a prosocial life. It appears that the extent to which citizens permit record expungement is conditioned by how long offenders have been crime free and the dangerousness of the crime committed. Fourth, the public manifested a realistic assessment of the extent to which offenders are capable of leaving a life in crime. Still, about four in five supported rehabilitation ceremonies that would declare ex-offenders "rehabilitated" and the granting of official "certificates of rehabilitation" that could be used when seeking employment, licenses, and other social goods. Taken together, these findings reveal that the American public possesses a "sensibility" (to use Michael Tonry's term) that is far more inclusionary than exclusionary. Although not necessarily demanding a transformation of correctional policy, it is clear that the citizenry is open to a range of progressive policy initiatives that seek to foster offender redemption in this era of penal harm. Details: Cincinnati: University of Cincinnati, 2017. 179p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed April 30, 2018 at: https://etd.ohiolink.edu/pg_10?210335119405562::NO:10:P10_ETD_SUBID:148896 Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://etd.ohiolink.edu/pg_10?210335119405562::NO:10:P10_ETD_SUBID:148896 Shelf Number: 149966 Keywords: Collateral Consequences Offender Rehabilitation Offender Reintegration Prisoner Reentry

Author: Willis, Matthew Title: Supported housing for prisoners returning to the community: A review of the literature Summary: Commissioned by Corrections Victoria to inform its future strategies for delivering housing support strategies to people leaving the prison system, this report presents literature that builds on two earlier reviews conducted in 2010 and 2013. Those earlier reviews identified a range of models and approaches to delivering housing support that embodied the key elements of good and promising practice. Since 2013, new literature has become available that builds on this evidence base-reasserting some of the earlier findings, adding clarity to others, and introducing new considerations. Several recent studies have reinforced the need for housing support for people leaving prison. Interviews with police detainees show nearly a quarter were homeless or experienced housing stress in the month before arrest. A study by the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute emphasized the role of demographic factors in contributing to homelessness, with 42 percent of homeless people found in just 10 percent of Australian regions. The demographic factors that contribute to homelessness tend to be the same as those that contribute to engagement with the criminal justice system, and there are substantial crossovers between homeless and correctional populations. Other recent studies have highlighted the value of meeting the need for housing support. Studies conducted in the United Kingdom (UK) have shown that the costs of even resourceintensive housing support are substantially less than the costs of imprisonment and the harms that result from reoffending. Other studies have reinforced earlier findings on the association between housing stability and reduced recidivism, with former prisoners in stable housing much less likely to reoffend than those who are homeless or in unstable accommodation. While research has shown that all of the elements used in aftercare programs for ex-prisoners have the potential to be effective, including housing components-together with other aftercare support-enhanced an ex-prisoner's chances of successfully reintegrating into the community. Consistent with the risk principle of correctional programming, housing services produced the most effective outcomes for medium- and high-risk offenders in terms of reduced offending and order revocations. Despite the demonstrated need for, and value of, providing housing support to released prisoners, recent evidence suggests the community is resistant to establishing transitional or other supported housing. A United States (US) survey of attitudes towards re-entry initiatives found a moderate degree of public support for the provision of housing support to offenders. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2018. 51p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Report 07: Accessed May 7, 2018 at: https://aic.gov.au/publications/rr/rr7 Year: 2018 Country: Australia URL: https://aic.gov.au/publications/rr/rr7 Shelf Number: 150069 Keywords: Homeless Persons Housing Prisoner Reentry

Author: Leslie, Dacia Latoya Title: Criminal Recidivism in the Caribbean: improving the Reintegration of Jamaican Ex-Prisoners Summary: Finding ways to reintegrate ex-prisoners into Jamaican society is a pressing but complex social, economic and moral issue. This is due, not least, to the financial costs of prison recidivism and growing concern over the Jamaican state's capacity to meet the needs of a large number of its citizens subject to forced repatriation to their homeland by overseas jurisdictions due to their offending. The absence of a mature and reliable evidence base about the extent and nature of criminal recidivism in Jamaica also contributes to the challenges faced by policy makers and service providers seeking to reduce incidence of crime. This is in part related to the dearth of research on what is a sizeable and multi-faceted subject matter which has impeded a more decisive and progressive political and policy response. While there are generic criminological themes in regard to recidivism, desistance and reintegration of offenders that cross international boundaries (see Harriott 2000; Headley 2006), there remains the not inconsiderable challenge of identifying culturally specific features that bear upon crime and the policies and programmes that might encourage sustained abstinence from offending and which could be better served by a distinctive Caribbean criminological epistemology. To that end, this exploratory study seeks to offer insights into the social worlds of male and female offenders in Jamaica in order to better understand what they deem to be the influences that led them to crime and those which might at least assist them in desisting from law-breaking. The study is based upon a largely qualitative research design comprising semi-structured interviews and focus groups. Some 54 inmates participated who had received more than one prison sentence and in that sense are termed here a 'recidivist', albeit the contested nature of this term and related key concepts such as desistance and reintegration will be subject to scrutiny in the early chapters of this thesis. One other inmate who could not be regarded a prison recidivist mainly because he was awaiting trial on this his second time in prison was interviewed in prison and added to the study. All 55 interviews and most focus groups were conducted with persons being held in three of Jamaica's maximum security correctional facilities. In addition, eighteen other individuals who had managed to stay out of prison following their release were interviewed within the community. A further set of interviews were conducted with 17 organisational leaders and spokespeople representing state and voluntary agencies engaged in the process of offender reintegration. Their perspectives reveal illuminating contrasts with those provided by the ex-prisoners about the likely ingredients of an effective return to a life without serious offending. The findings will hopefully assist policy makers and professionals in thinking about the steps that might be taken to tackle Jamaica's high rate of serious crime. As the findings will suggest, such steps must involve a renewed understanding, sense of belief and commitment towards effective reintegration. Additionally, there needs to be a more robust conviction that persons leaving prison can indeed change but that they face embedded hostility and exclusion from a number of quarters. This study provides insights into why ex-prisoners believe that there is resistance amongst influential others in the community to accepting them as 'reformed'. Such perspectives should assist local agencies in better understanding the impact of negative community attitudes and point to ways to counter social exclusion and help promote effective reintegration. Moreover, the findings point to the importance of strategies at national and local level that can bestow upon ex-prisoners a more meaningful sense of belonging and positive citizenship that can help reinforce the reintegration process. Throughout, the voices and experiences of the ex-prisoners come to the fore to challenge accepted policy and criminological wisdoms and to point out the need for more creative and determined initiatives to help people from prison find a new and better future. Details: Cardiff, UK: Cardiff University, 2016. 382p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed May 7, 2018 at: http://orca.cf.ac.uk/93842/ Year: 2016 Country: Jamaica URL: http://orca.cf.ac.uk/93842/ Shelf Number: 150084 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Reintegration Recidivism

Author: Oliver, Ashley Title: Employment Barriers and Attitude to Employment for Male Ex-offenders Summary: Working is a central aspect of life, as employment is a means of survival and it allows for both social interaction and self-determination. One group in particular has historically struggled to obtain employment, namely ex-offenders. Despite the large number of unemployed ex-offenders, counseling psychology has not paid much attention to the specific vocational needs for this particular population. This study describes the difficulties that male ex-offenders have when trying to obtain employment. Specifically, the relationship between perceived barriers to employment and job search attitudes are examined in an adult male non-violent and violent offender population. The participants included 150 English-speaking adult males with a criminal record, aged 18 and older, and who were currently unemployed. Results supported that there is a relationship between their perceived barriers to employment and job search attitude. Results also supported a relationship between type of offense committed (violent vs. non-violent), total number of criminal convictions, and highest level of education completed and their Barriers to Employment Success overall score and Job Search Attitude overall score, with the most significant relationship being between highest level of education and one's overall barriers to employment. Results suggest that vocational programs should take more of a holistic approach, and incorporate interventions that are targeted at improving offenders' attitudes, such as motivational interviewing, because it may help decrease their employment concerns and perceived employment barriers, and improve their attitudes. Details: Cleveland,: Cleveland State University, 2017. 164p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed May 8, 2018 at: https://etd.ohiolink.edu/!etd.send_file?accession=csu1503315587714708&disposition=inline Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://etd.ohiolink.edu/!etd.send_file?accession=csu1503315587714708&disposition=inline Shelf Number: 150112 Keywords: Employment Ex-offender Employment Jobs Prisoner Reentry

Author: Garcia-Hallett, Janet Title: The Navigation of Motherhood for African America, West Indian, and Hispanic Women in Reentry Summary: Though women are less likely than men to be incarcerated and are disproportionately outnumbered in United States jails and prisons (Guerino et al., 2011; Minton, 2013), women in state facilities are more likely to report being parents (Glaze & Maruschak, 2008; Mumola, 2000) and most plan to rekindle maternal relationships with their children upon their release (Barnes & Stringer, 2014; Hairston, 1991). Research demonstrates that women face substantial burdens during their reentry into the community, but reentry burdens may be more challenging to women of color who stand at the intersection of sexism and racism (Brown, 2010; Roberts, 1993). Ethnic differences among Black women are overlooked, however, as existing knowledge of women's experiences is often constructed along a Black/White dichotomy. Furthermore, selfconceptions as mothers, social expectations of mothers, and attempts to mother may place additional burdens on formerly incarcerated women with children. Yet, motherhood is still understood as a motivating factor in women's lives post-incarceration (Brown & Bloom, 2009; Hayes, 2009). This study investigates how formerly incarcerated women navigate motherhood and how this process influences mothers' reintegration after their release from imprisonment. The research draws on 37 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with formerly incarcerated mothers. These women's narratives focus on the role that maternal desires, decisions and behaviors play across various aspects of life post-incarceration: parenting, employment and finances, living arrangements, custody of children, as well as recovery from histories of addiction. This study utilized a comparative sampling strategy to unpack the experiences of groups viewed collectively as ―minorities‖ and to examine similarities and differences among African American, West Indian and Hispanic formerly incarcerated mothers. There is also a comparative feature across varying degrees of contact with children (both minor and adult children) - specifically, mothers living with their children, mothers not living with their children but remaining in contact, and mothers without contact. This study not only examines post-incarceration reintegration for formerly incarcerated mothers but it captures the intersectionality of criminal status, gender, and race/ethnicity. Furthermore, its comparative features go beyond common racial-ethnic labels and classifications of mother-child relationships in understanding the role of navigating motherhood in women's reintegration after incarceration. Details: Newark, NJ: Rutgers University, School of Criminal Justice, 2017. 268p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: accessed May 23, 2018 at: https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/54125/PDF/1/play/ Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/54125/PDF/1/play/ Shelf Number: 150333 Keywords: Children of Prisoners Female Offenders Minority Groups Motherhood Parenting Prisoner Reentry

Author: Northern Ireland Criminal Justice Inspection Title: Resettlement: An Inspection of Resettlement in the Northern Ireland Prison Service Summary: A core function of the prison service was to reduce reoffending and provide resettlement services for prisoners being released back into the community. The Northern Ireland Prison Service (NIPS) could not deliver resettlement alone - prisons had a duty to accept people committed by the courts and many had chronic mental health and learning difficulties, drug and alcohol addictions and chaotic lifestyles. The NIPS and the Probation Board for Northern Ireland (PBNI) had to work with the South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust (SEHSCT), addiction services and other social and voluntary and community service partners to help prisoners address these problems during the time they were incarcerated. There had been a significant change in the NIPS since the publication of the Prison Review Team (PRT) Report in 2011, including to resettlement practice. The offender management model was based on the PRT recommendation and was delivered through the Prisoner Development Model (PDM). This was a structured framework, and provided the individual prisoner focus, to identify and assess a prisoner's risks, needs and strengths. A Prisoner Development Plan (PDP) was developed with the prisoner to support his/ her resettlement back into the community. This defined the purpose of work, actions taken and support provided for an individual to: - reduce their risk of harm; - reduce their likelihood of reoffending; and - prepare them for return to the community. This work included interventions to address offending behaviour, maintain family contact, gain skills and qualifications to help access employment, together with practical assistance and support with housing, finance and debt, health and addictions. The PDM was jointly delivered by the NIPS and the PBNI. CJI would be very supportive of this collaborative working model as having the potential to produce the best outcomes for prisoners. However a change in working practices had reduced joint working and impacted on the operational delivery of the model, and Inspectors were concerned that it was not operating as effectively as it could. Working practices between the NIPS and the PBNI needed to adapt to address prisoner need and increase the effectiveness of joint delivery. There were significant resources deployed to provide resettlement services for prisoners. The PDM had been in place since 2015 and there was a broad provision of specialist support by voluntary and community sector (VCS) and statutory organisations to support prisoner need. The NIPS, PBNI and VCS staff worked hard to provide support, sometimes for very difficult prisoners, many of whom had complex and multiple needs. Inspectors were impressed by the attitude, knowledge and commitment of many of the prison and probation officers and VCS staff that we met during the inspection. There was an effective system to measure resettlement processes and activities, but measurement of the impact of these on outcomes for prisoners was less well developed. CJI saw a need for meaningful performance measures of outcomes, over the longer-term, to allow both the NIPS and the PBNI management to assess the effectiveness of resettlement provision, and to allow planning for future delivery and resourcing. Previous reports have highlighted the need for a more integrated psychology provision across the criminal justice agencies, and whilst work had been progressed there was a need for the outstanding work to be completed. The PDM was a comprehensive process which covered the prisoner's journey from committal to release, and recent prison inspections have found this to be the area where the NIPS performed most strongly. Inspectors would be of the view that implementation of the model could be improved in a number of areas and have recommended the introduction of a system of supervision for NIPS staff in their casework with individual prisoners. The NIPS also needed to do more to fully integrate the important role of residential officers to contribute to the PDM and successful prisoner resettlement. The NIPS recognised that there had been limitations in the prisoner assessment process and this had led to an internal review which Inspectors welcomed as an opportunity to reexamine its effectiveness. For prisoners to address their offending behaviour was crucial to successful resettlement and to reduce the reoffending and recall rate. Inspectors were concerned that the schedule for the delivery of programmes significantly underestimated the needs of the prison population and the demand for interventions. Programmes should be delivered on the basis of need with suitable interventions for short-term prisoners, a streamlined process for referral and assessment, and the ability to fast-track and prioritise prolific offenders. There was also a need to assess the outcomes of programme delivery to inform future provision. There was some good work to target and provide support for the wider needs of prisoners serving short-sentences and the NIPS should take action to target resources to reduce the reoffending rates for this group. The transfer of prisoners between Maghaberry and Magilligan could be disruptive and unsettling for prisoners and their families, and were primarily for population management rather than to further prisoners' resettlement prospects. It was the view of Inspectors that the NIPS should review its transfer policy to prioritise resettlement opportunities. Details: Belfast: Criminal Justice Inspection, 2018. 88p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 31, 2018 at: http://cjini.org/getattachment/1ded7a6c-034e-4a62-bf02-96ee30584645/picture.aspx Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://cjini.org/getattachment/1ded7a6c-034e-4a62-bf02-96ee30584645/picture.aspx Shelf Number: 150416 Keywords: Correctional Programs Prisoner Reentry Prisoner Rehabilitation Prisoner Resettlement Resettlement

Author: Link, Nathan Wong Title: Paid Your Debt to Society? Legal Financial Obligations and their Effects on Former Prisoners Summary: Within the last decade, scholars and practitioners alike have noted a surge in the use of legal financial obligations (LFOs) in criminal justice processing. These include fines, fees, and costs that are applied to defendants' cases from "upstream" agencies such as police departments to "downstream" agencies including jails, prisons, probation and parole agencies, and treatment centers. Legal financial obligations can be large, and the result is that outstanding balances often accumulate into unwieldy amounts of criminal justice debt. Recently, a small handful of qualitative studies have shown that these LFOs and debts can have adverse impacts on returning prisoners and their families, including increased stress, strained family relationships, worsened depression, and longer periods spent under criminal justice surveillance for those too poor to pay off outstanding balances. In addition, some of this work suggests that these financial obligations can increase the likelihood of returning to crime. This dissertation expands on the major contributions of these recent qualitative works by addressing the lack of quantitative research in this area. Toward this end, longitudinal data from the Returning Home Study (n = 740) and structural equation modeling (SEM) techniques are used to test whether LFOs and debt indeed have adverse impacts on key outcomes of interest in reentry research, including family relationships, depression, justice involvement/entanglement, and recidivism. Findings reveal partial support for past research and theory. Legal financial obligations do not appear to have impacts on depression, family conflict, and several measures of recidivism on average. However, outstanding debt owed to community supervision agencies (i.e., probation/parole/mandatory community supervision) significantly increases the likelihood of remaining under supervision, which, in turn, increases the likelihood of returning to prison. Implications for decision-making bodies from state legislatures to corrections agencies are discussed. Details: Philadelphia: Temple University, 2017. 192p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: accessed June 6, 2018 at: https://search.proquest.com/docview/1952046335?pq-origsite=gscholar Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://search.proquest.com/docview/1952046335?pq-origsite=gscholar Shelf Number: 150499 Keywords: Court Fines and Fees Criminal Justice Debt Fees Financial Sanctions Fines Prisoner Reentry

Author: Lindquist, Christine Title: Cross-Site Evaluation of the Bureau of Justice of Justice Assistance FY 2011 Second Chance Act Adult Offender Reentry Demonstration Projects: Final Report Summary: The cross-site evaluation of the Adult Offender Reentry Demonstration Projects (AORDP) was a seven-site designed to 1) describe the implementation and sustainability of each AORDP project through a process evaluation, 2) determine the per capita program costs of each AORDP project through a cost study, and 3) determine the effectiveness of the programs through a multicomponent outcome study assessing the extent to which recidivism reductions were achieved in each site and program participation was associated with increased access to services and improvements in self-reported outcomes in several reentry domains across sites.  The process evaluation found that grantees selected program interventions and services matched to the unique needs of their respective target populations, delivering a comprehensive mix of services. Numerous systems-level improvements were attributed to SCA funding, and prospects for sustaining at least some portions of the AORDP projects were promising in most sites.  The cost study documented that the seven AORDP sites accessed a total of $37.7 million in federal and local resources and that case management comprised the sites' main spending priority (44% of program expenditures). Across the sites, the average per participant cost was $6,778.  The prospective outcome study found that AORDP enrollment clearly increased access to services, with the greatest impact found for pre- as opposed to post-release services. However, the treatment group did not appear to have better rearrest or other reentry outcomes than the comparison group, although they had more positive trajectories over time for housing independence and employment.  The site-specific recidivism analyses generally found null treatment effects for rearrest and reincarceration, with some scattered effects found - both positive and negative. No clear pattern of consistent positive effects were found in any site. Similarly, no site had consistently negative effects. The findings suggest that program developers should look for opportunities to provide long-term, post-release supports that are informed by reassessment results, as most grantees had relatively short post-release service periods and few participants received post-release services. In addition, policymakers must promote realistic expectations for incremental improvements among individuals reentering from jail and prison. Finally, researchers should examine multiple outcomes (beyond recidivism) consistent with reentry success, and explore service dosage (i.e., intensity of services delivered) in addition to service profiles (i.e., whether individuals received a particular type of service) to arrive at a better understanding of how the duration, intensity, sequencing and combination of services and programming contributes to reentry outcomes. Details: Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International; Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2018. 512p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 12, 2018 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/251703.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/251703.pdf Shelf Number: 150522 Keywords: Evidence-Based Practices Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Second Chance Act

Author: Drummond, Caroline Title: 'Have you got anybody you can stay with?' Housing options for young adults leaving custody Summary: Safe and stable housing is a critical factor in reducing reoffending rates for young people leaving custody. It provides the foundations for a young person to rebuild their life and move forward into a positive future away from crime. However, many young custody leavers face severe challenges in accessing accommodation on release; a situation which can push them into homelessness, chaotic housing situations and reoffending. Centrepoint and Nacro have conducted this research to examine the housing options and support in place for young people as they leave the prison system. The research is based on interviews with young custody leavers aged 18 to 25, and interviews with the practitioners who support them across a range of agencies. This research was carried out in late 2017, before the implementation of the Homelessness Reduction Act (HRA) and before the clarification from Government that all young people under 21 who have secured accommodation would be able to claim housing costs through Universal Credit. Our analysis highlights three thematic requirements and associated barriers which we believe need to be addressed to enable young people to access safe and secure accommodation on release from custody. While we continue to call for a joined up, cross government Housing Strategy which meets the needs of vulnerable people, including young people that leave the criminal justice system each year, we have identified some practical solutions, that if adopted in the current system could make a real difference to young people leaving custody and experiencing barriers to accessing safe and stable housing. a) Young people leaving custody need the right preparation: - Young people leaving custody should have a resettlement plan to ensure that their housing needs are met and necessary services are in place prior to their release; however, many of the participants in the research reported that planning was insufficient and not done far enough ahead of their release to be effective. - Disruptions such as transfers to different prisons during a sentence can hinder effective pre-release planning and mean that young people miss out on the engagement and support they need. - Inconsistencies in joint working between prisons, community rehabilitation companies (CRC) and the National Probation Service (NPS) make it difficult to offer consistent pre- and post-release preparation and assistance. Practitioners also highlighted high workloads and insufficient resources as barriers to providing meaningful support. - Young people in custody for short periods or recalled to custody may not have the opportunity to engage with housing and post-release planning, increasing the risk of poor housing outcomes and reoffending upon release. - Home Detention Curfew (HDC) can ease the transition from custody, improve access to employment and training opportunities and assist resettlement in general. However, practitioners expressed concerns that some young people who would be eligible cannot access HDC because they do not have housing to go to or provide unsuitable home addresses. b) Young people leaving custody need access to a safe and stable home with an ongoing support network: - Too many young people experience homelessness after leaving custody. Across Centrepoint's accommodation, young custody leavers are almost twice as likely to have slept rough as those without experience with the prison system. This risks them turning to negative support networks and reoffending in order to secure a bed for the night. - Historically some local housing authorities have not assessed young people until they have left custody, even though pre-release work with probation and rehabilitation services may begin months before. This means young people are only able to engage at a point of crisis, undermining efforts to prevent homelessness. - Prior to the HRA some young custody leavers are seen as having made themselves 'intentionally homeless' by their local authority on the basis of having been convicted of a crime, and in general are not seen as being in priority need for homelessness assistance despite their vulnerability. The implementation of the HRA provides an opportunity to ensure this is no longer possible. - While supported accommodation is often the most suitable option for young people leaving custody, proposed changes to funding may put services at risk, particularly those that support people without a statutory right to housing. - The private rented sector is largely inaccessible for young custody leavers, with high upfront costs which are unaffordable for many prison leavers. Interviewees also highlighted landlords' reluctance to let to young people in general and especially young custody leavers. - Returning to the family is often a young person's best accommodation option after leaving custody and the retention of family links throughout a sentence can decrease the chance of reoffending. However, this does not work for those young people who have come from an unstable family situation, and should not be assumed as the best option in every case. c) Young people leaving custody need financial security: - Making a claim for Universal Credit can be difficult while in custody, where access to the internet and Job centre Plus work coaches is limited and inconsistent and where young people may not have the documentation they need to complete an application. However, these barriers are leading to unacceptable delays in receiving essential financial support after release. - Lower entitlements to benefits make it much more difficult for custody leavers to access appropriate housing they can afford. The Shared Accommodation Rate (SAR) drastically limits the accommodation available and can force custody leavers into shared housing which may not be appropriate for their needs. - The discharge grant someone receives when leaving prison has remained at L46 for over 15 years. For young custody leavers trying to make a fresh start whilst looking for employment or waiting for benefits to be processed, this amount is not enough for them to get back on their feet. - Finding and sustaining employment is key to securing accommodation and reducing reoffending. The research highlights some innovative and effective training programmes, building in wraparound support around employment, but found that provision is inconsistent across the wider prison and probation estate. - Criminal records present a major barrier for young custody leavers looking to access employment, with both employers and applicants unsure what legally needs to be disclosed. Details: London: Nacro; Centre Point, 2018. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Policy Report: Accessed June 15, 2018 at: https://www.nacro.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Nacro-Centrepoint-Report-Have-you-got-anybody-you-can-stay-with-June-2018.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.nacro.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Nacro-Centrepoint-Report-Have-you-got-anybody-you-can-stay-with-June-2018.pdf Shelf Number: 150557 Keywords: Housing Juvenile Reentry Offender Resettlement Prisoner Reentry Young Adult Offenders

Author: Valentine, Erin Jacobs Title: Implementing the Next Generation of Parole Supervision: Findings from the Changing Attitudes and Motivation in Parolees Pilot Study Summary: One strategy for addressing persistently high recidivism rates among individuals leaving prison is to incorporate interventions into the parole supervision process. This paper presents findings from the Changing Attitudes and Motivation in Parolees (CHAMPS) study, which examined the implementation of a pilot of one parole-based intervention, known as the Next Generation of Parole Supervision (NG), in three sites: Dallas, Denver, and Des Moines. NG is intended to improve parolee outcomes by enhancing parole officers' knowledge and the strategies they use during their regular supervision meetings with parolees. The study uses a range of qualitative and quantitative data, including assessments of the knowledge and skills of parole officers who were trained in NG and a second group of officers who represented business-as-usual supervision, to assess the implementation of NG. Results from the study show that, while there was some variation across sites, parole officers in the CHAMPS sites generally already knew many of the concepts that were part of NG, and changes to officers' supervision practices were limited. Only in Dallas did NG-trained parole officers exhibit practices that were substantially different from those observed among untrained officers, perhaps because the Dallas parole agency's supervision culture and parole officer training started out least aligned with NG, allowing more room for change. The results in Dallas also suggest that coaching may be important to successfully implementing an intervention that involves changing parole officers' skills and practices. While NG-trained parole officers exhibited small changes in their supervision practices early in the study period, there were more noticeable changes once coaching was introduced. However, despite coaching for the entire study period in Des Moines and Denver, little change was observed there, suggesting that the presence of a coach is not sufficient to lead to change. Overall, this study shows that parole officers are amenable to training and coaching to help them improve their supervision practices, but that consistent implementation can be challenging. Details: New York: MDRC, 2018. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 21, 2018 at: https://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/CHAMPS_full%20report_FINAL_0.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/CHAMPS_full%20report_FINAL_0.pdf Shelf Number: 150630 Keywords: Offender Management Parole Officer Training Parole Supervision Parolees Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Couloute, Lucius Title: Nowhere to Go: Homelessness among formerly incarcerated people Summary: It's hard to imagine building a successful life without a place to call home, but this basic necessity is often out of reach for formerly incarcerated people. Barriers to employment, combined with explicit discrimination, have created a little-discussed housing crisis. In this report, we provide the first estimate of homelessness among the 5 million formerly incarcerated people living in the United States, finding that formerly incarcerated people are almost 10 times more likely to be homeless than the general public. We break down this data by race, gender, age and other demographics; we also show how many formerly incarcerated people are forced to live in places like hotels or motels, just one step from homelessness itself. Details: Northampton MA: Prison Policy Initiative, 2018. 18p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 4, 2018 at: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/housing.html Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/housing.html Shelf Number: 151825 Keywords: Homeless Persons Homelessness Housing Prisoner Reentry

Author: Couloute, Lucius Title: Out of Prison & Out of Work: Unemployment among formerly incarcerated people Summary: Formerly incarcerated people need stable jobs for the same reasons as everyone else: to support themselves and their loved ones, pursue life goals, and strengthen their communities. But how many formerly incarcerated people are able to find work? Answering this fundamental question has historically been difficult, because the necessary national data weren�t available � that is, until now. Using a nationally representative dataset, we provide the first ever estimate of unemployment among the 5 million formerly incarcerated people living in the United States. Our analysis shows that formerly incarcerated people are unemployed at a rate of over 27% � higher than the total U.S. unemployment rate during any historical period, including the Great Depression. Our estimate of the unemployment rate establishes that formerly incarcerated people want to work, but face structural barriers to securing employment, particularly within the period immediately following release. For those who are Black or Hispanic � especially women � status as �formerly incarcerated� reduces their employment chances even more. This perpetual labor market punishment creates a counterproductive system of release and poverty, hurting everyone involved: employers, the taxpayers, and certainly formerly incarcerated people looking to break the cycle. Fortunately, as the recommendations presented in this report illustrate, there are policy solutions available that would create safer and more equitable communities by addressing unemployment among formerly incarcerated people. Details: Northampton, MA: Prison Policy Initiative, 2018. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 4, 2018 at: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/outofwork.html Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/outofwork.html Shelf Number: 151826 Keywords: Ex-offender Employment Jobs Prisoner Reentry

Author: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, Audit Division Title: Audit of the Federal Bureau of Prisons' Residential Reentry Center Contracts Awarded to Reynolds & Associates, Inc., Washington, D.C. Summary: Objective - The Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) awarded three contracts valued at nearly $18 million to Reynolds & Associates, Inc. (Reynolds), to provide residential reentry services from 2011 to 2021 for female offenders at its Fairview facility in Washington, D.C. The objective of this audit was to assess the BOP's contract administration, as well as Reynolds' performance and compliance with requirements applicable to these residential reentry center (RRC) contracts. Results in Brief - The audit found that the BOP needs to strengthen its process to ensure price analysis documents show that the contract prices were fair and reasonable, did not adequately plan for the most recent firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract, and could improve its monitoring of Reynolds' compliance with the RRC requirements. While Reynolds met a number of important RRC requirements, it did not keep records required to support all paid services, and its Fairview facility experienced staffing challenges that contributed to repeated BOP-identified deficiencies. Lastly, we identified that Reynolds did not consistently track or collect subsistence payments from RRC residents. We believe that the BOP needs to strengthen RRC contract award procedures and oversight and Reynolds must improve how it documents its performance of many core RRC functions. Recommendations Our report includes 16 recommendations to the BOP to improve its RRC contract awarding and monitoring procedures, particularly with regard to Reynolds' Fairview RRC. We requested a response to our draft audit report from the BOP and Reynolds, which can be found respectively in Appendices 2 and 3. Our analysis of those responses is included in Appendix 4. Details: Washington, DC: OIG, 2018. 95p. Source: Internet Resource: Audit Division 18-30: Accessed October 5, 2018 at: https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2018/a1830.pdf#page=1 Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2018/a1830.pdf#page=1 Shelf Number: 152946 Keywords: Federal Bureau of Prisons Female Offenders Prisoner Reentry Prisoners

Author: Willison, Janeen Buck Title: Second Chance Act Adult Offender Reentry Demonstration Projects: Implementation Challenges and Lessons Learned Summary: This brief is one in a series from the Cross-Site Evaluation of the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) FY 2011 Second Chance Act (SCA) Adult Offender Reentry Demonstration Projects (AORDP). This report describes the implementation challenges and successes among seven grantees who implemented adult reentry programs using SCA funding. Findings are based on information collected through semi-structured interviews with AORDP staff and organizational partners during early 2014, as well as through a Web-based survey administered in spring 2014 to key reentry stakeholders in each site. Details: Washington, DC, 2018. 25p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 11, 2018 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/249188.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/249188.pdf Shelf Number: 152883 Keywords: Adult Offender Reentry Prison Programs Prisoner Reentry Reentry Program Second Chance Act

Author: Lattimore, Pamela Title: Desistance from Crime over the Life Course: Final Summary Report Summary: PURPOSE: The Desistance from Crime over the Life Course study focused on 479 men and women from South Carolina who were enrolled as participants in a multi-site reentry program evaluation shortly before prison release in 2004-2005. The study goals were to (1) update information on current status across multiple domains, including housing, employment, and substance use; (2) collect additional recidivism data to examine long-term offending patterns; and (3) acquire information about factors individuals associated with decisions to desist from further criminal activity. RESEARCH SUBJECTS: Between 2004 and 2005, 345 men, 79 boys, and 55 women incarcerated in South Carolina were interviewed about 30 days before release from prison/juvenile detention for inclusion in the multi-site evaluation of the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI). The male subjects (men and boys) were about 27 years and the female subjects were about 30 years of age at the time of release. The men were most likely to be black (63%) while the women were equally likely to be black or white (46%). The women were less likely than the men to report having been employed during the 6 months prior to their original incarceration but were more likely to report having a high school diploma or equivalent. Overall, the participants had extensive criminal histories and about 33% reported having received drug treatment prior to the interview. METHODS: Arrest records through December 31, 2015 were obtained from the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division for all 479 subjects. The interview instrument included modules from the original SVORI interviews, new modules focused on factors linked to emerging theories of desisting behavior, and a life event calendar captured details of their experiences between their original release from prison and the interview. Interviews were conducted between 9/10/2016 and 3/3/2017 with 208 individuals (174 men and 34 women). Quantitative analyses included (1) descriptive analyses of interview data to identify the current status of individuals; (2) lognormal survival, negative binomial, and logistic recidivism analyses; and (3) qualitative analyses of responses related to the factors associated with criminal persistence and desistance. RESULTS: Recidivism, measured as at least one new arrest, was experienced by 90% of the sample. On average, individuals had about 7 arrests (with an average of 11 charges) after their SVORI incarceration. Majorities of the sample had at least one post-SVORI charge for a person, property, and public order/order offense, while 49% had at least one new drug charge. Results from sequential lognormal survival models predicting time to first arrest, second arrest, and so forth following the original release show those older at release had, on average, longer times to rearrest following the first arrest, while property priors were associated with shorter times. Consistent with previous findings, those with more prior arrests had shorter times to subsequent arrests and those who were older at first arrest had longer times to subsequent arrests. Negative binomial model results show that having completed high school at the time of the SVORI-related release predicted fewer post-SVORI arrests, while being younger at first arrest and having more priors predicted more post-SVORI arrests. Interview results suggest that individuals were somewhat less likely to be working in 2016-2017 than they were immediately following their SVORI release 10 years or so prior. They were also more likely to report drug use and having engaged in criminal behavior over this much more extensive period than during the 3-15 months following the original release. A similar percentage (18%) was incarcerated at the time of the 2016-2017 interview as was incarcerated during original follow-up interviews. Qualitative findings were consistent with other recent research on desistance. Common reasons stated for not committing crimes included incarceration having a deterrent effect, consideration for children and family, changes in the way individuals think about and perceive crime, a change in lifestyle, employment, religion, and sobriety. Conversely, events that were more likely to encourage criminal involvement included financial or employment issues, drugs and alcohol use, stressful events including the death of a family member, and antisocial peers. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the 479 subjects had been arrested at least once following their participation in the SVORI evaluation, with little variation in arrest patterns between the male and female participants. Criminal history indicators were the strongest predictors of recidivism, while completing 12th grade was the only non-criminal factor consistently significant in the analyses with those with more education doing better. The qualitative analyses provide support for recent work examining the factors associated with desistance that suggests identity transformation may be necessary (if not sufficient) to facilitate movement away from criminal behavior. The quantitative findings with respect to education also provide support for this work as education is a traditional pathway to new opportunities.The findings point to the need for additional work to identify interventions that may facilitate desisting behavior through individual transformation as opposed to interventions that address specific needs. The research is limited by several factors. First, the subjects were individuals recruited for a prisoner reentry program evaluation in 2004-2005 in South Carolina; results may not be generalizable to other populations (or even to a more general South Carolina prisoner population). The interview findings are further limited to the roughly 50% of the original sample who were located and interviewed. Although analyses comparing these respondents to non-respondents using the original SVORI data revealed no significant differences between the two groups, there is always a possibility that those who were located and consented to a new interview differ from those who were not on unobservable measures. Details: Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International, 2018. 35p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 15, 2018 at:; https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/252080.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/252080.pdf Shelf Number: 152936 Keywords: Desistance Life Course Criminology Prisoner Reentry Recidivism

Author: Bellotti, Jeanne Title: Developing American Job Centers in Jails: Implementation of the Linking to Employment Activities Pre-Release (LEAP) Grants Summary: To help individuals successfully reenter society after time in jail, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) awarded $10 million in grants to 20 local workforce development boards (LWDBs) in June 2015 for the Linking to Employment Activities Pre-Release (LEAP) initiative. Central to the LEAP initiative was creating jail-based American Job Centers (AJCs) with direct linkages to community-based AJCs. A complex array of factors including jail and local community characteristics influenced the development and operations of jail-based AJCs as well as the experiences and outcomes of participants. The overarching goals were to increase participants' work readiness at the time of release, increase employment after release, and reduce recidivism; additional goals for the pilot initiative included demonstrating that corrections and workforce agencies could effectively collaborate to provide pre-release services, generate lessons learned around promising strategies and common challenges that could inform future efforts; and identify ways for grantees to sustain the jail-based AJCs when the DOL-funded grant ended. The grants covered 9 months of planning and 15 months of service delivery, with many grantees receiving up to a one-year no-cost extension to finish spending down remaining grant resources. Grantees were geographically diverse, located in 13 states across 5 DOL regions, and involved a total of 22 county jails. In September 2015, DOL's Chief Evaluation Office contracted with Mathematica Policy Research and Social Policy Research Associates to conduct a 36- month evaluation of the Employment and Training Administration's Linking to Employment Activities Pre-Release (LEAP) grants. The evaluation examined the early-start up and implementation of 20 LEAP pilots, which created jail-based American Job Centers (AJCs) to support the successful reentry of participants and directly link them to community-based AJCs upon release. Through site visits, phone interviews, focus groups, and the grantees' quarterly performance reports, the evaluation examined the LEAP pilots� approaches to providing services before and after incarceration at all 20 sites. Beyond this report, the evaluation also produced: - A series of 5 early-planning issue briefs that explore lessons from the planning phase (first 9 months) of the LEAP grants. - A series of 5 implementation issue briefs that explore lessons from the operation (last 15 months) of the grants. - A compendium that presents a summary of findings from both the planning and implementation phases of the LEAP pilots, and includes the 10 issue briefs, organized around key themes. These reports are available online at: https://www.dol.gov/asp/evaluation/CompletedS tudies.htm. Details: Princeton, NJ: Mathematica policy Research, 2018. 125p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 8, 2019 at: https://www.dol.gov/asp/evaluation/completed-studies/LEAP-Final-Report.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.dol.gov/asp/evaluation/completed-studies/LEAP-Final-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 154887 Keywords: Employment Services Ex-Offender Employment Jail Inmates Jail-Based Services Jobs Prisoner Reentry

Author: Walters, Jennifer Hardison Title: FY 2011 Second Chance Act Adult Offender Reentry Demonstration Projects: Evaluability Assessment of the Minnesota Department of Corrections High Risk Recidivism Reduction Demonstration Project Summary: In 2008, the Second Chance Act (SCA): Community Safety Through Recidivism Prevention was signed into law with the goal of increasing reentry programming for offenders released from state prisons and local jails. Programs funded through Title I of the SCA must create strategic, sustainable plans to facilitate the successful reentry of individuals leaving incarceration facilities. Other key requirements include collaboration among state and local criminal justice and social service systems (e.g., health, housing, child services, education, substance abuse and mental health treatment, victim services, and employment services) and data collection to measure specified performance outcomes (i.e., those related to recidivism and service provision). Further, the SCA states that program reentry plans should incorporate input from local nonprofit organizations, crime victims, and offenders' families. It also requires that grantee programs create reentry task forces-comprised of relevant agencies, service providers, nonprofit organizations, and community members-to use existing resources, collect data, and determine best practices for addressing the needs of the target population. Consistent with the objectives of the Second Chance Act, the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) funded 22 adult offender reentry demonstration grants in FY 2011. Eight FY 2011 SCA projects were selected by BJA for this evaluability assessment (EA). These projects target adult offenders under state or local custody (and about to return to the community) for comprehensive reentry programing and services designed to promote successful reintegration and reduce recidivism. Intended to proactively address the multiple challenges facing former prisoners upon their return to the community, the grants may be used to provide an array of pre-and post-release services, including education and literacy programs, job placement, housing services, and mental health and substance abuse treatment. Risk and needs assessments, transition case planning, case management, and family involvement are key elements of grantees' SCA projects. The goals of the SCA projects are to measurably (1) increase reentry programming for returning prisoners and their families, (2) reduce recidivism and criminal involvement among program participants by 50 percent over five years, (3) reduce violations among program participants, and (4) improve reintegration outcomes, including reducing substance abuse and increasing employment and housing stability. The MN DOC's High Risk Recidivism Reduction Demonstration Project is a new reentry program developed by DOC's Community Services Division to serve release violators - a unique, high-risk population, including sex offenders, that historically has not received reentry support services. The overarching case management framework used in the program's design is the National Institute of Corrections' Transition from Prison to Community (TPC) model. MN DOC's focus on reentry increased around 2005 with the introduction of the TPC model by the National Governor's Association and the formation of a unit dedicated to reentry services. The design of the SCA grant program was influenced by preceding reentry initiatives including the Serious and Violent Reentry Initiative, the MN Comprehensive Offender Reentry Program, and the Prisoner Reentry Initiative. The SCA program serves release violators committed to the Minnesota Correctional Facility (MCF)-Lino Lakes who will be returning to Anoka, Dakota, Hennepin, or Ramsey County under community supervision. Eligible participants receive individualized transition planning and case management from a reentry coordinator for two to six months prior to release. Soon after enrollment, participants attend an orientation group session during which they are introduced to the program's services and expectations and meet key community partners. Upon release, a reentry team meeting is held to review client goals and to set up a schedule of services. Post-release services are offered through a community hub for 6 to 12 months. Co-located services include case management, employment assistance (including wage subsidies for transitional employment), transitional housing assistance, bus cards, and weekly life skills and mentoring groups. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2013. 25p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 18, 2019 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/243984.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/243984.pdf Shelf Number: 155012 Keywords: Adult Offender Reentry Prison Programs Prisoner Reentry Recidivism Reentry Program Second Chance Act

Author: Pettus-Davis, Carrie Title: The Psychological Toll of Reentry: Early Findings from a Multistate Trial Summary: The incarceration experience is highly destabilizing for most individuals. For individuals who have never directly experienced incarceration, it is easy to understand the power of this physical disruption when it is framed in concrete terms: the distance between the prison and an incarcerated person's home and family, the number of birthdays an incarcerated parent misses, the loss of a job, the foreclosure of a home, or the repossession of a car. However, incarceration also creates a cognitive and emotional disruption for many men and women who must grapple with the fact that not only has the world changed dramatically during their incarceration, but they have also been forever changed by the incarceration experience. For many, leaving incarceration initiates a phase of psychological turmoil. Men and women returning home must quickly adapt to the changes they see all around them - in the world, in their families, and in their communities - and they yearn to rapidly move toward independence and self-sufficiency. For those individuals with strong support systems, this transition may be relatively smooth - at least initially. However, the vast majority of individuals who release from incarceration find themselves in survival mode, acutely aware of how they no longer quite fit into the life they led prior to incarceration. These men and women struggle to meet multiple demands. Some of these demands are imposed by the state - attending drug treatment, abiding by the rules of a halfway house, or wearing an ankle monitor. Other demands are self-imposed - finding employment to make up for lost wages and provide for one's family, staying in recovery from a substance use disorder, or healing broken family bonds. When these men and women describe their lives during reentry, the stories they tell are permeated by worry. They worry about having been away and they worry about being back home. They worry about finances and feeding their children and they worry that work takes them away from the children they are so desperate to spend time with. They worry about what it means for them to need help from a service provider and some worry that they will not survive unless they beg for that help. Unfortunately, leaving incarceration is an incredibly common experience as more than 10,000 individuals leave prisons each week across the United States. They return to families who also experience the burden of incarceration and the reentry of their loved ones. Therefore, the psychological turmoil inherent to the reentry experience is created for huge segments of the American public every single year. This report is the second in a series of public reports on a multistate, multisite study of a reentry services model referred to as the 5-Key Model for Reentry, or the 5-Key Model for short. In the first report, we described the internal and external barriers that 5-Key Model participants faced in the early days and weeks of incarceration. In this report, we describe whether and how our participants are accessing services and the landscape of reentry that exist in the absence of the 5-Key Model intervention. We do this by reporting on the experiences of those study participants who were randomly assigned to receive whatever reentry supports currently exist in both the correctional systems with which they are involved and in their communities. We then describe our commitment to rapid translation of research findings into real world policies and practices and the feedback loop that we are using to increase the impact of research as we learn. We end by describing what we expect to see next in the study and with our participants, and pose questions we hope our communities will grapple with when thinking about what it means for all of us when those who have been incarcerated succeed. Details: Tallahassee: Florida State University, College of Social Work, Institute for Justice Research and Development, 2019. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 10, 2019 at: https://ijrd.csw.fsu.edu/sites/g/files/upcbnu1766/files/media/images/publication_pdfs/5Key_QR2_Psychological_Toll_of_Reentry.pdf Year: 2019 Country: United States URL: https://ijrd.csw.fsu.edu/sites/g/files/upcbnu1766/files/media/images/publication_pdfs/5Key_QR2_Psychological_Toll_of_Reentry.pdf Shelf Number: 155739 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry Social Services Social Support Trauma

Author: Rich, Michael J. Title: Prisoner Reentry in Atlanta: Understanding the Challenges of Transition from Prison to Community Summary: The report builds upon the Urban Institute's 2004 report, "Prisoner Reentry in Georgia" that analyzed recent trends in incarceration and prisoner releases in the state, examined the characteristics and geographic distribution of returning prisoners, and the challenges and opportunities faced by some of the communities that were home to the highest concentrations of returning prisoners. Our report drills down from the state level to the local level to look more in-depth at the issue of prisoner reentry in metropolitan Atlanta. Details: Atlanta, GA: Emory University, 2008. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 23, 2019 at: https://www.academia.edu/5794139/Prisoner_Reentry_in_Atlanta_Understanding_the_Challenges_of_Transition_from_Prison_to_Community Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: https://www.academia.edu/5794139/Prisoner_Reentry_in_Atlanta_Understanding_the_Challenges_of_Transition_from_Prison_to_Community Shelf Number: 156035 Keywords: Prisoner Reentry