Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 10:50 pm
Time: 10:50 pm
Results for residency restrictions
6 results foundAuthor: Mack, Elizabeth A. Title: Sex Offenders and Residential Location: A Predictive Analytic Framework Summary: Despite the growing body of research dealing with sex offenders and the collateral consequences of legislation governing their post release movements, a complete understanding of the residential choices of registered sex offenders remains elusive. The purpose of this paper is to introduce a predictive analytical framework for determining which demographic and socioeconomic factors best forecast the residential choices of convicted sex offenders. Specifically, using a derived index of social disorganization (ISDOR) and a commercial geographic information system (GIS), we implement both linear statistical and non-linear data mining approaches to predict the presence of sex offenders in a community. The results of this analysis are encouraging, with nearly 75% of registered offender locations predicted correctly. The implications of these approaches for public policy are discussed. Details: Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University, GeoDa Center for Geospatial Analysis and Computation, 2010. 37p. Source: Internet Resource: Working Paper No. 2010-03: Accessed October 14, 2010 at: http://geodacenter.asu.edu/drupal_files/2010-03_0.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://geodacenter.asu.edu/drupal_files/2010-03_0.pdf Shelf Number: 119955 Keywords: Data MiningGeographic StudiesGeospatial AnalysisGISResidency RestrictionsSex OffendersSocioeconomic Status |
Author: Socia, Kelly M. Title: Residence Restriction Legislation, Sex Crime Rates, and the Spatial Distribution of Sex Offender Residences Summary: Residence restrictions are one of the most recent, and most controversial, public policies seeking to protect community members from registered sex offenders (RSOs) reentering society following incarceration. Residence restriction policies prohibit RSOs from living within a given distance of certain places where children might gather (e.g., schools, daycares, parks, and playgrounds). In doing so, the expectation is that RSOs will have a harder time finding and approaching young children whom they can sexually assault, thus driving sexual recidivism rates down. These policies, first passed in 1995 at the state level and in 2005 at the county and local level, have become extremely popular throughout the United States, but without proof that they are effective. To date, the research on these policies has been extremely limited, and has largely focused on the unintended consequences that these policies cause for RSOs, typically as a result of reduced housing options. This study addresses this lack of research by examining four issues: 1) the characteristics of counties passing these policies, 2) the efficacy of county residence restrictions to reduce sex crime rates in New York State, 3) whether these policies are associated with the spatial distribution (i.e., clustering or dispersion) of RSO residences in upstate New York neighborhoods, and 4) whether this spatial distribution is in turn associated with differences in county-level recidivistic sex crime rates. In doing so, this study draws on a number of diverse literatures, including the diffusion of policy innovations, incapacitation and deterrence theories, reentry and rehabilitation research, and the conceptualization and measurement of the spatial distribution of ex-offender residences. Results indicate that political competition is very influential in passing a county residence restriction and that a nearby residence restriction may dissuade others from passing their own policies. Further, while these restrictions do not reduce recidivistic sex crimes, they may generally deter some individuals who are not yet RSOs from sexually victimizing adults. Finally, results indicate that while a residence restriction is in some cases associated with the within and between-neighborhood spatial distribution of RSOs, there is no indirect effect on recidivistic sex crime rates. Details: Albany, NY: School of Criminal Justice, University at Albany, 2011. 190p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 29, 2011 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/235979.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/235979.pdf Shelf Number: 123174 Keywords: Residency RestrictionsSex Crimes, PreventionSex Offender RegistrationSex Offenders |
Author: Gobeil, Renee Title: Offenders with Long Term Supervision Orders Assigned Residency Conditions at Release Summary: Why we did this study A very small number of offenders present a high risk of re-offence even after the end of their sentence. Legislation exists to allow for these offenders to be imposed a long term supervision order (LTSO), a period of additional community supervision of up to 10 years at the end of their sentence. In addition, many offenders with LTSOs are given a residency condition at release - that is, are required to live in a halfway house. In the last decade, the number of offenders with LTSOs has increased, as has the proportion who receive residency conditions. What we did We therefore conducted a study to better understand if and how residency conditions contribute to the management of the risk presented by offenders with LTSOs. We examined all offenders with LTSOs released to the community by August 2011. The 347 with a residency condition were compared to the 120 without one in areas such as demographics, risk and need, and both suspensions and returns to custody (that is, revocation of conditional release as well as breach of LTSO and other new offences). What we found In general, offenders with and without a residency condition were very similar. This was true for demographic characteristics, victim information patterns, and mental health. However, those assigned a residency condition were judged by their parole officers to present higher levels of risk and of need, though the two groups returned to custody (due to revocations of conditional release or breaches of LTSO and other new offences) at the same rates. After statistically controlling for differences in reintegration potential, offenders with LTSOs with a residency condition may be less likely to be suspended. Nonetheless, the overall pattern of findings suggests that residency conditions are not contributing to managing the risk presented by offenders with LTSOs. Notably, two factors which were peripheral to the offender - the region where release occurred and how recently the offender was released - were both also related to whether residency was imposed. What it means Findings suggest that decisions to impose residency conditions may not be sufficiently rooted in risk. From a correctional theory perspective, imposition of restrictive conditions should be based on sound principles and research, and there may be room for improvement in this area with respect to the imposition of residency conditions on offenders with LTSOs. The Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) has undertaken relevant initiatives in this domain (specifically, education programs) that may lead to improvements if they are expanded. Details: Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada, 2012. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Report No. R-285: Accessed August 23, 2014 at: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/005/008/092/005008-0285-eng.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Canada URL: http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/005/008/092/005008-0285-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 133126 Keywords: Community SupervisionHigh-Risk OffendersHousing RestrictionsOffender Supervision (Canada)ParoleesRecidivismResidency Restrictions |
Author: Huebner, Beth Title: Evaluation of Sex Offender Residency Restrictions in Michigan and Missouri Summary: Sex offender residency restrictions are a specific form of specialized sex offender legislation which prohibits registered sex offenders from residing within a certain distance from places where children congregate, such as schools or daycare centers. Residency restrictions were designed to enhance public safety by neutralizing the risk of recidivism posed by registered sex offenders released into the community (Levenson & Cotter, 2005; Sample, Evans, & Anderson, 2011; Simon, 1998; Socia, 2011). The assumption behind this legislation is that sex offenders choose their victims from the available population of the area in which they reside. Thus, attempts by the criminal justice system to increase the distance between registered sex offenders and potential targets should correspond to a decrease in recidivism among this group (Kang, 2012). Statewide residency restrictions have been adopted in some form by at least thirty states and at the municipal level in several others (Meloy, Miller, & Curtis, 2008). While empirical research on sex offender residency restrictions has grown, most current work has centered on documenting the unintended consequences of these policies. For instance, several studies have examined the potential for residency restrictions to adversely shape the availability of housing for registered sex offenders. Socia (2011) observed that in Upstate New York the neighborhoods least restricted by residency restrictions - and thus the areas that registered sex offenders would be allowed to live in - were less affordable, had fewer vacancies, and were concentrated in less dense, rural areas compared to restricted neighborhoods. Additionally, researchers have documented the effect of these laws on quality of life outcomes and reintegration (Levenson & Hern, 2007; Mercado, Alvarez, & Levenson, 2008). To date, there has been little research on the efficacy of residency restrictions in reducing recidivism among registered sex offenders. Very few studies were identified that directly examined the impact of these laws on sex offender recidivism (Blood, Watson, and Stageberg, 2008; Kang, 2012; Nobles, Levenson, and Youstin, 2012; Socia, 2012). Kang (2012) used individual-level data to follow cohorts of sex offenders and non-sex offenders released both before and after the implementation of residency restrictions, no attempt was made to account for selection bias arising either between the sex offender and non-sex offender cohorts. Overall, the research has not substantiated a link between residency restrictions and reduced crime; however, most of the work has examined crime rates and has not used an adequate comparison group. The goal of the current study is to build on extant research and consider the efficacy of residency restrictions enacted in Missouri and Michigan. Details: Final Report to the U.S. National Institute of Justice, 2013. 92p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 26, 2015 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/242952.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/242952.pdf Shelf Number: 129681 Keywords: Child MolestersChild Sexual AbuseResidency RestrictionsSex Offenders |
Author: Kansas Sex Offender Policy Board Title: Kansas Sex Offender Policy Board Report Summary: The Governor and the 2006 Legislature authorized the creation of the Sex Offender Policy Board (SOPB) under the auspices of the Kansas Criminal Justice Coordinating Council (KCJCC). Senate Bill 506 (2006 Session Law, Chapter 214, Sec. 14) established the SOPB to consult and advise the KCJCC on issues and policies relating to the treatment, sentencing, rehabilitation, reintegration and supervision of sex offenders and to report its findings to the KCJCC, Governor, Attorney General, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives and the Secretary of the Senate. The SOPB members consist of the Secretary of Corrections, Commissioner of Juvenile Justice Authority, Secretary of Social and Rehabilitation Services, Director of the Kansas Bureau of Investigation and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or the Chief Justice's designee. The KCJCC appointed the mental health service provider and the representative engaged in the provision of services involving child welfare or crime victims. The SOPB first report, due the first day of the 2007 Legislative Session, examines four topics, utilization of electronic monitoring, public notification pertaining to sex offenders, management of juvenile sex offenders and restrictions on the residence of released sex offenders. The second report, due the first day of the 2008 Legislative Session will address the topics of treatment and supervision standards for sexual offenders, suitability of lifetime release supervision and safety education and prevention strategies for the public. The SOPB held its first meeting on August 1, 2006 and has met seven times. The SOPB members reviewed research materials and articles related to the subject matter and heard testimony from those knowledgeable about the subject. A joint meeting was held with the Special Committee on Judiciary regarding the testimony on residency restrictions. Notices of each meeting were published in the Kansas Register. The recommendations in this report reflect the SOPB members’ intention to keep the safety of Kansas citizens at the forefront. The SOPB recognizes that the study of sex offenders is a vast and ever-changing topic and that additional time is needed to thoroughly study the many issues in addressing sex offenders. Due to new and emerging research on this topic, the Legislature should continue to address this subject in the future. Details: Topeka: Kansas Sex Offender Policy Board, 2007. 75p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 28, 2016 at: http://www.calcasa.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/sopbreport.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: http://www.calcasa.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/sopbreport.pdf Shelf Number: 138829 Keywords: Electronic Monitoring Offender Supervision Residency RestrictionsSex Offender Treatment Sex Offenders |
Author: California. Office of the Inspector General Title: Special Review: Assessment of Electronic Monitoring of Sex Offenders on Parole and the Impact of Residency Restrictions Summary: Proposition 83 ("Jessica's Law"), passed by California voters in 2006, requires that all convicted sex offenders paroled from prison and required by law to register with local law enforcement shall be subjected to monitoring by global positioning technology (GPS) and to restrictions on where they may reside. The Office of the Inspector General conducted a review of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation's electronic monitoring of sex offender parolees and the impact of residency restrictions on sex offender parolees at the request of the Senate Rules Committee. The review found: - The annual costs of GPS tracking has decreased over the past five fiscal years. In fiscal year 2009-10, the department spent $12.4 million to monitor sex offender parolees with GPS. By fiscal year 2013-14, these costs were $7.9 million. - There exists little objective evidence to determine to what extent, if any, GPS tracking is a crime deterrent, although a small 2012 study funded by the National Institute of Justice of 516 high-risk sex offenders found that offenders who were not subjected to GPS monitoring had nearly three times more sex-related parole violations than those who were monitored by GPS technology. Despite the rarity of studies defending GPS as a crime deterrent, the OIG's interviews with parole agents and local law enforcement personnel found that they value GPS technology as a tool for its ability to locate parolees, track their movements, and provide valuable information in solving crimes. - GPS technology adds to parole agents' workloads in certain aspects, while affording time-savings in others. For example, agents spend approximately two hours reviewing and analyzing parolees' tracks for a single-day period. On the other hand, GPS facilitates mandatory face-to-face contacts between parole agents and parolees by allowing the agent to locate parolees more quickly than might be the case in locating a non-GPS parolee. - Over 60 percent of parole agents who supervise sex-offender parolees have caseloads exceeding established departmental ratios (parolee-to-agent) when taking into consideration the mix of high-risk vs low-risk parolees per caseload. In addition, the department has a disparity of caseloads across its parole units, with 14 of the 37 parole units that supervise sex offenders reporting caseload sizes exceeding the department's established ratios for all agents assigned to those units. Simultaneously, five other parole units report caseload sizes below the department's established ratios for all of their parole agents. - Field agents whom the OIG interviewed consistently expressed their concerns that the department-issued laptops used for tracking parolee movements in the field should be replaced by smaller hand-held devices such as smart phones, stating that the laptops were not only cumbersome, but may inhibit officer safety in certain situations. Many agents the OIG encountered were using their personal smart phones for GPS mapping and tracking in the field. - The residency restrictions imposed by Jessica's Law, which prohibit paroled sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or park where children congregate, contribute to homelessness among paroled sex offenders. According to the California Sex Offender Management Board, there were only 88 sex offenders on parole statewide who were registered as transient when Proposition 83 was passed in November 2006. As of June 2014, there were 1,556 sex offender parolees identified as transient by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. While this represents 3.38 percent of all parolees, the incidence of homelessness is 19.95 percent (approximately one in five) among the subset of parolees who are sex offenders. - Transient sex offender parolees are more "labor intensive" than are parolees who have a permanent residence. The OIG interviewed parole administrators in 12 parole districts, who said that because transient sex offenders are moving frequently, monitoring their movement is time consuming. Transient sex offenders must register with local law enforcement monthly (as opposed to yearly for those with permanent residences), thus requiring more frequent registration compliance tracking by parole agents. Adding further to the workload associated with monitoring transients, agents are required to conduct weekly face-to-face contacts with them. - Transient sex offender parolees are more likely to violate the terms of their parole than those who have a permanent residence. Transient sex offenders have committed a majority of parole violations (which include technical violations as well as new crimes) among parolee sex offenders over a recent five-year period. Less than 1 percent of those violations were for sex-related crimes. In the most recently completed fiscal year (2013-14), over 76 percent of the sex offender parolees whom the department charged with violating their parole terms were transient. - While Jessica's Law leaves open the option for local governments to impose their own restrictions on paroled sex offenders, parolees are finding relief from residency restrictions through the courts. Several counties have issued stays suspending the blanket enforcement of residency restrictions to those who petition the local court, and San Diego County has issued a stay suspending the blanket enforcement of residency restrictions on sex offenders pending the outcome of the California Supreme Court's decision of the matter In re Taylor (2012) 209 Cal.App.4th 210, review granted January 3, 2013, S206143. - The California Sex Offender Management Board's findings and recommendations remain largely unaddressed. While some of the board's recommendations have been implemented, most recently with CDCR's implementation of the sex offender containment model, major recommendations, such as tiering registration requirements, reevaluating residency restrictions, and applying best practices for GPS monitoring, have not. Details: Sacramento: Author, 2014. 85p. Source: Internet Resource: accessed May 15, 2019 at: https://www.oig.ca.gov/media/reports/Reports/Reviews/OIG_Special_Review_Electronic_Monitoring_of_Sex_Offenders_on_Parole_and_Impact_of_Residency_Restrictions_November_2014.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://www.oig.ca.gov/media/reports/Reports/Reviews/OIG_Special_Review_Electronic_Monitoring_of_Sex_Offenders_on_Parole_and_Impact_of_Residency_Restrictions_November_2014.pdf Shelf Number: 155844 Keywords: Costs of Criminal JusticeElectronic MonitoringGlobal Positioning Technology (GPS)Offender MonitoringParoleesProposition 83Residency RestrictionsSex Offender RegistrationSex Offenders |