Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 9:38 pm
Time: 9:38 pm
Results for second chance act
9 results foundAuthor: 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 ReentryRecidivismReintegrationSecond 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-OffendersPrisoner ReentryPrisonersRecidivismRehabilitationSecond Chance Act |
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 ReentryPrisoner ReintegrationRecidivismRehabilitation ProgramsSecond Chance Act |
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 RevocationsPrisoner ReentryRecidivismSecond Chance ActSupervised Release |
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 ManagementEvidence-Based PracticesPrisoner ReentrySecond Chance Act |
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 PracticesPrisoner ReentryRecidivismSecond Chance Act |
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 ReentryPrison ProgramsPrisoner ReentryReentry ProgramSecond Chance Act |
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 RecidivismReentry Program Second Chance Act |
Author: Willison, Janeen Buck Title: FY2011 Second Chance Act Adult Offender Reentry Demonstration Projects: Evaluability Assessment of the Missouri Department of Corrections Second Chance in Action (SCIA) Program 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. (See Appendix A for the initiative's SCA logic model.) Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2013. 33p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 14, 2019 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/243985.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/243985.pdf Shelf Number: 156992 Keywords: Evaluation Incarceration Recidivism Reentry Second Chance Act |