Prisoner reentry

Last updated

Prisoner reentry is the process by which prisoners who have been released return to the community. [1] Many types of programs have been implemented with the goal of reducing recidivism and have been found to be effective for this purpose. [2] [3] Consideration for the conditions of the communities formerly incarcerated individuals are re-entering, which are often disadvantaged, is a fundamental part of successful re-entry. [4]

Contents

A 2006 study done by the Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation [5] statistically evaluated the effectiveness of prisoner reentry programs on the criteria scale of working, not working, promising, and unknown. Findings classify employment-oriented programs as working, drug rehabilitation programs as working, educational programs as promising, and halfway house programs as working. [6]

A 2015 article from The New York Times Magazine commented, "It wasn't until the mid-2000s that this looming 'prisoner re-entry crisis' became a fixation of sociologists and policy makers, generating a torrent of research, government programs, task forces, nonprofit initiatives and conferences now known as the 're-entry movement'." [7] At the end of 2001, there were approximately 5.6 million U.S. adults who had been in the incarceration system. [8] By the end of 2004, more than 3% of U.S. adults were incarcerated or on probation or parole. [8] With prisons becoming overcrowded, there is more political focus on depopulating prisons. In 2016, approximately 600,000 individuals were released from prison and millions were in and out of county jail systems. [9]

The abrupt re-entrance into society means formerly incarcerated individuals require support to reintegrate. The United States federal government allocates some funding for re-entry programs, but there is currently a lack of sufficient resources. Re-entry programs are now receiving more attention from public policy and criminal justice scholars. [10]

Resources for prisoner re-entry programs

In the past few decades, correctional institutions have seen a shift, with prisoners serving indeterminate sentences and release being assessed by parole boards, to offenders being released from prison after serving determinate sentences. [2] However, those released are not receiving sufficient preparation for returning to their communities due to limited in-prison and post-release reentry programs; this inadequate structure for re-entry directly influences the possibility of recidivism, also referred to as the "revolving door". [11] United States spending for corrections is approximately $80 billion a year, with re-entry receiving the least amount of fiscal attention relative to other parts of the criminal justice system process. [12] [ circular reference ] From 2001 to 2004, the United States' federal government allocated over $100 million for reentry programs. [1] Without increased resources for this target area proportional to that spent on control-oriented aspects of incarceration, the issue that remains is the expansion of access and participation for inmates. While the area of reentry program development is still growing, assessments demonstrate their efficacy for transitioning ex-offenders back into society and reducing recidivism. The potential for well-resourced reentry program has yet to be realized, but public policy and criminal justice scholars believe this to be a deserving area for funding to be re-allocated and prioritized. [6]

Types of re-entry programs

There are different types of re-entry programs that aim to help formerly incarcerated individuals transition back into society. These programs come in different forms to meet specific needs and challenges faced by returning citizens. Education and vocational training programs are important in equipping individuals with the necessary skills for reintegration. GED programs and college classes provide academic support, allowing participants to earn diplomas or pursue higher education. Similarly, vocational training programs offer practical skills in trades like carpentry, welding, and automotive repair, improving job opportunities after release. Re-entry programs also focus on securing stable housing, healthcare services, and some programs serve sub-sectors of the formerly incarcerated population such as women or juveniles. By addressing these challenges, re-entry programs aim to empower individuals and reduce recidivism rates, promoting successful community reintegration. Halfway houses are a tool for reentry into society. Halfway houses are typically mandated upon early release. They can also be sentenced to complete the remainder of their time there. The goals of the halfway houses is to provide a substance free, healthy, safe and family like environment to support recovery. [13]

Education and Vocational Training Programs for Reentry

Recently, there has been a growing recognition of the importance of education and vocational training for prisoners reintegrating into society. These programs, along with efforts to address employment, housing, and healthcare, are crucial in equipping incarcerated individuals with the skills and qualifications needed for successful community reintegration. Many correctional institutions now offer educational opportunities like GED programs and college classes, providing inmates with academic skills and qualifications necessary for further education or employment after release. Vocational training programs within prisons also offer practical skills and certifications, these programs not only provide inmates with valuable hands-on experience and industry-specific knowledge but also help reduce the likelihood of reoffending by fostering a sense of purpose and self-worth. Empowering incarcerated individuals with education and vocational skills not only improves their chances of a successful transition back into society but can also contributes to long-term public safety. [14]

GED Programs and College Classes

Prison education programs are gaining traction in research on reducing recidivism rates. On average, around $12 million is allocated to correctional education programs across all states. [15] These programs have the potential to increase an inmate's structured time during incarceration and help them find employment or pursue higher education after release. These benefits should ultimately lead to a decrease in subsequent offending. Most prisons offer GED classes, vocational training, apprenticeships, and even college classes that can help inmates earn degrees after release. Studies have shown that these education programs have positive outcomes for inmates and cost taxpayers very little. In fact, investing $1,149 in education can save taxpayers over $5,800 in crime-prevention resources. [16]

Studies indicate that participating in such programs reduces the likelihood of reoffending. Some states, like Ohio, mandate these programs to address inmates' educational needs and facilitate successful reentry at a low cost. [15] Recent research has focused on the effectiveness of these programs, showing lower recidivism rates for participants. [16] However, while postsecondary programs consistently show benefits, the effectiveness of GED programs varies. [17]

Efforts to evaluate these programs are increasing, but further research on outcomes is necessary. Ohio's prison education programs, part of the reentry-focused initiative, offer incentives for participation and completion, potentially reducing sentence lengths. [15] Overall, these programs play a crucial role in addressing the educational needs of incarcerated individuals and reducing recidivism rates.

Vocational Training

The National Institute of Justice Crime Solutions website contains information from a study on Corrections-Based Vocational Training Programs. [18] Vocational training programs in correctional facilities aim to help incarcerated individuals with job skills, reducing their chances of reoffending and improving their chances of employment after release. These programs cover various industries like carpentry, electrical work, cooking, and auto repair. By teaching valuable skills, vocational training not only prepares individuals for work but also keeps them busy with productive activities, which can help reduce behavioral issues in prison. [19] However, despite the potential benefits, participation rates in these programs may be dropping due to reasons like lack of awareness, interest, or funding. [20]

Several studies have shown that vocational training is effective in lowering recidivism rates and increasing employment opportunities. [19] discovered that inmates who participated in vocational training were much less likely to reoffend compared to those who didn't, with a significant 12.6 percent decrease in recidivism rates among participants. [21] Similarly, Davis and his team reported that vocational education programs significantly increased the chances of finding a job after release, with participants being twice as likely to secure employment compared to non-participants. [22]

Different institutions may have different requirements for vocational training programs. These requirements can include factors like age, current offense, time until release, and educational background. Some facilities may even require individuals to have a high school diploma or GED before they can participate in vocational training. [23] Overall, vocational training programs are important because they provide incarcerated individuals with the opportunity to gain employment skills and reintegrate into society successfully. This ultimately helps to reduce the likelihood of reoffending and improves public safety.

Integration into Existing Reentry Programs

Integrating prison education programs in reentry initiatives is essential for meeting the educational needs of incarcerated individuals and lowering recidivism rates. These programs, like those in Ohio, [14] offer incentives for participation and completion, potentially shortening sentences. [15] By addressing criminogenic needs and offering structured education and training, these programs help inmates prepare for successful reentry into society. Research shows that education and employment play key roles in reducing reoffending. [22] The positive outcomes linked to program participation highlight their significance in aiding the transition from incarceration to community life. [16] Therefore, integrating prison education programs into reentry initiatives is a promising approach to breaking the cycle of recidivism and supporting successful rehabilitation and reintegration.

Reentry Resources after Incarceration

Employment

With approximately 2 million people [12] incarcerated, the prison population constitutes a large portion of the U.S. labor force. An essential argument for putting prisoners to work is in-prison productivity translating to preparation for entering the workforce post-release. Prison labor is cost-effective for tax payers, allows prisoners to contribute to their families from inside through the generation of income, and can be a form of restorative justice [24] [ circular reference ] for victims. Poor resources and a prison infrastructure unfit for large-scale labor serve as barriers for establishing effective employment re-entry programs in-prison and post-release, which would include making livable wages, vocational training, education, and skill development accessible to the U.S. prison population. [4] Current funding levels only have the capacity to provide a small percentage of prisoners the opportunity to engage in "commercially rewarding work." [4]

In a study done, employers noted what they were looking for when hiring previously incarcerated individuals. They expressed how they are looking for dedicated and honest employees, They also strive for social rehabilitation, they want and encourage employees to be involved with others. There are two main things employers desire when hiring previously incarcerated: to give back to the community and an explicit belief in forgiveness and the importance of giving offenders a second chance. [25] They also emphasized the importance to keep their staff safe.

The "Returning Home Study" conducted by the Urban Institute from 2001 to 2006 found that ex-prisoners who worked before imprisonment, and those who find employment soon after release, are less likely to be re-incarcerated within a year of release. The same study found that releasing prisoners to parole supervision both reduces the likelihood that they will engage in substance use and makes it easier for them to find employment after release. [26]

Programs assisting ex-offenders to find employment [4]

Housing

Finding housing after being incarcerated can be very difficult. Research shows that the earlier in life that one is incarcerated the more likely you are to be homeless. [27]

In a study from New Zealand, the ability to secure stable housing was found to reduce the likeliness of recidivism by 20 percent. [28] Housing providers struggle to make housing available to ex-offenders because of safety concerns and failure to accommodate to the specific needs of formerly individuals without guaranteed income or access to social welfare support. [28] In New York City, "more than 54 percent of people released from prison moved straight into the city's shelter system in 2017." [29]

Across the country, initiatives are being made to assist ex-offenders find housing. [29]

Healthcare

Other reentry programs focus on improving health among ex-prisoners, which tends to be significantly worse than that of people who have never been imprisoned. [8] While incarcerated, prisoners face higher rates of chronic and infectious diseases, mental illness, and substance use disorders. [31] After release, the difficulties faced during reentry exacerbate these health conditions, which is demonstrated by a link between incarceration history and poorer physical and mental health. Formerly incarcerated individuals face a lack of access to primary care services, mental health conditions, low health literacy, and difficulty obtaining medication access after release. [9] Along with these reintegration barriers, formerly incarcerated individuals also face toxic social stress since they have to adjust to a new life and the transitional period is very unstable. The challenges reconnecting with their communities lead to a lack of social support, which is usually crucial to preventing negative health outcomes. [9] These factors create a specific need for healthcare services during the period of reentry. A 2007 study found that, during the first two weeks after release, the risk of death for formerly incarcerated individuals was 12.7 times that of general community members. [8]

Healthcare-focused reentry programs are designed to aid in the transition back to society, improve health outcomes for the formerly incarcerated population, and reduce recidivism.

Healthcare reentry programs can focus on factors such as discharge planning, substance use disorder treatment, or mental health. A 2020 study evaluated three types of healthcare reentry programs: a swift, certain, fair (SCF) program for drug-involved probationers; an aftercare program for drug-involved offenders; and, a comprehensive reentry program. In the SCF approach, patients were given graduated punishments that target abstinence through frequent drug tests and monitoring, and this model was found to be less effective in reducing recidivism. [32] The second program was a residential program of recovery homes for individuals dealing with substance use disorder. Residents live together and provide a supportive, sober social network. [32] This program increased employment and reduced substance use, but it did not affect incarceration levels. [32] The third program provided holistic health services through institutional caseworkers and supervision agents in the community. [32] It provided planning, support, and direction for individuals to address their needs. This type of program was found to be most effective in reducing recidivism. [32]

Additionally, healthcare reentry programs vary in their timing. Some begin only after release, while others begin while the individual is still incarcerated. A 2013 study evaluating best practices in healthcare-focused reentry programs found that programs that began discharge planning prior to release and were based in the individual's community were more successful in improving health outcomes. [33] Discharge planning aids in continuity of care since individuals are transitioning from the prison healthcare system to their community healthcare system. Success of this practice was seen in the Connecticut Building Bridges Community Reentry Initiative (CRI) in 2004. [33] The program included personal meetings with case managers months before release to discuss the individual’s goals for their health and to assess any potential risk factors for health issues after reentry. [33] By addressing holistic health needs one month before release, the program had over 60% of its participants meet goals related to health supports and their recidivism rate was only 16%. [33]

Since healthcare during incarceration is managed by the government, there is debate surrounding responsibility for healthcare during the reentry period. In 1976, the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Estelle v. Gamble stated that the government has an obligation and responsibility to provide adequate medical care to the incarcerated population, but there was no mention made of responsibility for healthcare on discharge or after release. [34] One perspective is that the government does have an obligation to ensure continuity of care after release. [34] Another perspective is that reentry should be based in the community and supported by private providers. Private providers have greater independence to make quick decisions since they can avoid bureaucracy. [34] Private providers are also “not constrained by civil service rules and salary scales”. [34] One compromise position in this debate is to use government funding and grants to establish connections to private/community-based programs upon release.

Some healthcare reentry programs are independent organizations, while others are directly integrated in healthcare systems. One example of a healthcare-focused reentry program is the Transitions Clinic Network. Funding for this program is from a variety of sources, including different government funds and grants. This organization aims to build a healthcare model for individuals returning to the community from incarceration. [35] They work with primary care clinics across the country to adopt a model of healthcare that improves health and reentry outcomes. [35] They employ community health workers with a history of incarceration to work with patients, which helps ensure that the lived experiences of the incarcerated community are incorporated in the development of the program. [35]

Some existing healthcare organizations and hospitals offer healthcare reentry services:

Treatment for men and women

Challenges to finding treatment can often be financially not being able to do it. Another challenge is having support. Not everyone has the support from family or friend to seek help after being released. Depending on where the person is located they may not have access to treatment. Here are a few different treatment options that have helped many people after returning to society.

Re-entry for women prisoners

Women prisoners and formerly incarcerated women are advocating for the need for gender-specific re-entry programs in-prison and post-release, specifically focused on healthcare, substance abuse, mental illness, and family reunification. [36]

For women prisoners concerned about family reunification post-release, comes with challenges of securing housing and employment, necessary for meeting child welfare requirements. In cases where these requirements cannot be met, women ex-offenders claim to benefit from rehabilitative counseling to deal with the strain incarceration has on the relationship between mothers and children. [37]

Juvenile Re-entry

Juveniles in the justice system often require different treatment and consideration than their adult counterparts. While there is constantly ongoing debate about the ways in which juvenile punishment should be given (whether it should be the same level of severity or differ in approach), often in the form of policy and moral debate, one of the most common methods of responding to juvenile offense is placing juveniles in re-entry programs.

Juvenile Reentry is a culmination of services, often presented in the form of programs, that help to reintegrate displaced juveniles back into the community. These programs are often designed to discourage juvenile delinquency and prevent such crimes from happening again. [38]

Juvenile Re-entry programs involve many stages with each stage playing its own role in helping the juvenile to reform. There is the entry phase, placement phase, transitional phase, and community-based aftercare phase. Each of these stages involves varying degrees of supervision over the juvenile while the delinquent is given safer surroundings and taught valuable lessons and ways of life that ultimately will help them to be a more valuable and safe addition to the community. [39]

See also

Related Research Articles

Criminal psychology, also referred to as criminological psychology, is the study of the views, thoughts, intentions, actions and reactions of criminals and suspects. It is a subfield of criminology and applied psychology.

The Department of Corrections is the public service department of New Zealand charged with managing the New Zealand corrections system. This includes the operations of the 18 prisons in New Zealand and services run by Probation. Corrections' role and functions were defined and clarified with the passing of the Corrections Act 2004. In early 2006, Corrections officially adopted the Māori name Ara Poutama Aotearoa.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Incarceration in the United States</span> Form of punishment in United States law

Incarceration in the United States is one of the primary means of punishment for crime in the United States. In 2023, over five million people were under supervision by the criminal justice system, with nearly two million people incarcerated in state or federal prisons and local jails. The United States has the largest known prison population in the world, it has 5% of the world’s population, and 20% of the world’s incarcerated persons. China, with four times more inhabitants, has fewer persons in prison. Prison populations grew dramatically beginning in the 1970s, but began a decline around 2009, dropping 25% by year-end 2021.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Recidivism</span> Person repeating an undesirable behavior following punishment

Recidivism is the act of a person repeating an undesirable behavior after they have experienced negative consequences of that behavior, or have been trained to extinguish it. Recidivism is also used to refer to the percentage of former prisoners who are rearrested for a similar offense.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Prison education</span> Educational activities inside prisons

Prison education is any educational activity that occurs inside prison. Courses can include basic literacy programmes, secondary school equivalency programmes, vocational education, and tertiary education. Other activities such as rehabilitation programs, physical education, and arts and crafts programmes may also be considered a form of prison education. Programmes are typically provided, managed, and funded by the prison system, though inmates may be required to pay for distance education programmes. The history of and current practices in prison education vary greatly among countries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rehabilitation (penology)</span> Process to re-integrate a person into society

Rehabilitation is the process of re-educating those who have committed a crime and preparing them to re-enter society. The goal is to address all of the underlying root causes of crime in order to decrease the rate of recidivism once inmates are released from prison. It generally involves psychological approaches which target the cognitive distortions associated with specific kinds of crime committed by individual offenders, but it may also entail more general education like reading skills and career training. The goal is to re-integrate offenders back into society.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wisconsin Department of Corrections</span> Wisconsin state government department

The Wisconsin Department of Corrections (WIDOC) is an administrative department in the executive branch of the state of Wisconsin responsible for corrections in Wisconsin, including state prisons and community supervision. The secretary is a cabinet member appointed by the governor of Wisconsin and confirmed by the Wisconsin Senate.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Second Chance Act (2007)</span>

The Second Chance Act of 2007, titled "To reauthorize the grant program for reentry of offenders into the community in the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, to improve reentry planning and implementation, and for other purposes," was submitted to the House by Representative Danny Davis (D-IL) to amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to reauthorize, rewrite, and expand provisions for adult and juvenile offender state and local reentry demonstration projects to provide expanded services to offenders and their families for reentry into society. H.R. 1593 was signed into law April 9, 2008.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Prison</span> Institution in which people are legally physically confined

A prison, also known as a jail, gaol, penitentiary, detention center, correction center, correctional facility, or remand center, is a facility where people are confined against their will and denied a variety of freedoms under the authority of the state, generally as punishment for various crimes. Authorities most commonly use prisons within a criminal-justice system: people charged with crimes may be imprisoned until their trial; those who have pled or been found guilty of crimes at trial may be sentenced to a specified period of imprisonment.

The National Criminal Justice Association (NCJA) is a Washington, D.C. based organization that represents a variety of local, state, and tribal governments on crime prevention and control issues. The organization primarily works as a public policy liaison that promotes understanding of the best criminal justice practices between federal and state governments.

Prison overcrowding in the United States is a social phenomenon occurring when the demand for space in a U.S. prison exceeds the capacity for prisoners. The issues associated with prison overcrowding are not new, and have been brewing for many years. During the United States' War on Drugs, the states were left responsible for solving the prison overcrowding issue with a limited amount of money. Moreover, federal prison populations may increase if states adhere to federal policies, such as mandatory minimum sentences. On the other hand, the Justice Department provides billions of dollars a year for state and local law enforcement to ensure they follow the policies set forth by the federal government concerning U.S. prisons. Prison overcrowding has affected some states more than others, but overall, the risks of overcrowding are substantial and there are solutions to this problem.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Incarceration prevention in the United States</span> Methods to reduce prison populations in America

Incarceration prevention refers to a variety of methods aimed at reducing prison populations and costs while fostering enhanced social structures. Due to the nature of incarceration in the United States today caused by issues leading to increased incarceration rates, there are methods aimed at preventing the incarceration of at-risk populations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Relationships for incarcerated individuals</span> Familial and romantic relations of individuals in prisons or jails

Relationships of incarcerated individuals are the familial and romantic relations of individuals in prisons or jails. Although the population of incarcerated men and women is considered quite high in many countries, there is relatively little research on the effects of incarceration on the inmates' social worlds. However, it has been demonstrated that inmate relationships play a seminal role in their well-being both during and after incarceration, making such research important in improving their overall health, and lowering rates of recidivism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal justice reform in the United States</span> Reforms seeking to address structural issues in criminal justice systems of the United States

Criminal justice reform seeks to address structural issues in criminal justice systems such as racial profiling, police brutality, overcriminalization, mass incarceration, and recidivism. Reforms can take place at any point where the criminal justice system intervenes in citizens’ lives, including lawmaking, policing, sentencing and incarceration. Criminal justice reform can also address the collateral consequences of conviction, including disenfranchisement or lack of access to housing or employment, that may restrict the rights of individuals with criminal records.

Women in American prisons encounter numerous difficulties that often involve mental health problems, drug and alcohol issues, and trauma. These challenges not only make navigating the criminal justice system more difficult for women but also highlights broader societal issues such as, gender-based violence, economic inequalities, and lack of mental health support. People in prison are more likely than the general United States population to have received a mental disorder diagnosis, and women in prison have higher rates of mental illness and mental health treatment than do men in prison. Furthermore, women in prisons are three times more likely than the general population to report poor physical and mental health. Women are the fastest growing demographic of the United States prison population. As of 2019, there are about 222,500 women incarcerated in state and federal prisons in the United States. Women comprise roughly 8% of all inmates in the United States. This surge is largely attributed to the rising use of imprisonment for drug-related offenses rather than violent crimes. A considerable portion of incarcerated women are serving time for drug-related offenses, with the proportion increasing significantly between 1986 and 1991. Even among those in maximum security facilities, a majority are not imprisoned for violent felonies. The data also reveal that in states like New York, a substantial proportion of incarcerated women are serving time for drug-related offenses, with a smaller percentage incarcerated for violent crimes or property offenses.

Gender-specific prison programming in the United States are programs created to prepare incarcerated women for successful reentry, and minimize recidivism. Prison programming and how it is structured has changed significantly over the decades to fit the needs of women in gender-specific programming. Focus on gender-specific programming increased during the 1970s and 1980s, an era marked by a substantial increase in the female prison population. Traditional programming in female correctional facilities have been deemed ineffective since most were structured to fit men's needs. For example, women's pathways to prison typically involve drugs, while men are typically involved in violent crimes. Additionally, women are more likely to have experiences of sexual and/or physical abuse relative to men.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Incarceration in Norway</span> Overview of incarceration in Norway

Norway's criminal justice system focuses on the principles of restorative justice and the rehabilitation of prisoners. Correctional facilities in Norway focus on maintaining custody of the offender and attempting to make them functioning members of society. Norway's prison system is renowned as one of the most effective and humane in the world.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Decarceration in the United States</span> Overview article

Decarceration in the United States involves government policies and community campaigns aimed at reducing the number of people held in custody or custodial supervision. Decarceration, the opposite of incarceration, also entails reducing the rate of imprisonment at the federal, state and municipal level. As of 2019, the US was home to 5% of the global population but 25% of its prisoners. Until the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. possessed the world's highest incarceration rate: 655 inmates for every 100,000 people, enough inmates to equal the populations of Philadelphia or Houston. The COVID-19 pandemic has reinvigorated the discussion surrounding decarceration as the spread of the virus poses a threat to the health of those incarcerated in prisons and detention centers where the ability to properly socially distance is limited. As a result of the push for decarceration in the wake of the pandemic, as of 2022, the incarceration rate in the United States declined to 505 per 100,000, resulting in the United States no longer having the highest incarceration rate in the world, but still remaining in the top five.

Prison-to-college programs exist around the world, providing prison education to incarcerated and formerly incarcerated individuals access to increase employment opportunities and reduce post-release recidivism rates. In the United States, programs have expanded in prisons, jails, and juvenile detention centers across the country amid calls for criminal justice reform and improving outcomes for justice-involved individuals.

References

  1. 1 2 Travis, Jeremy; et al. (1 June 2001). "From Prison to Home: The Dimensions and Consequences of Prisoner Reentry". Urban Institute. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.212.6235 .
  2. 1 2 Seiter, Richard P.; Kadela, Karen R. (1 July 2003). "Prisoner Reentry: What Works, What Does Not, and What Is Promising". Crime & Delinquency. 49 (3): 360–388. doi:10.1177/0011128703049003002. S2CID   55736383.
  3. ↑ Petersilia, Joan (2004). "What Works in Prisoner Reentry - Reviewing and Questioning the Evidence". Federal Probation Journal. 68 (2).
  4. 1 2 3 4 Travis, Jeremy (October 1999). "Prisons, Work, and Re-Entry". Corrections Today. 61: 102–105, 133.
  5. ↑ "MDRC | Building knowledge to improve social policy". 2018.
  6. 1 2 Seiter, Richard (January 2004). "Inmate Re-Entry: What Works and What to Do About It". American Correctional Association. 29: 1–5, 33–35.
  7. ↑ Mooallem, Jon (2015-07-16). "You Just Got Out of Prison. Now What?". The New York Times Magazine . ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2017-11-28.
  8. 1 2 3 4 Binswanger, Ingrid A.; Stern, Marc F.; Deyo, Richard A.; Heagerty, Patrick J.; Cheadle, Allen; Elmore, Joann G.; Koepsell, Thomas D. (2007-01-11). "Release from Prison — A High Risk of Death for Former Inmates". The New England Journal of Medicine. 356 (2): 157–165. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa064115. ISSN   0028-4793. PMC   2836121 . PMID   17215533.
  9. 1 2 3 Semenza, Daniel C.; Link, Nathan W. (2019-12-01). "How does reentry get under the skin? Cumulative reintegration barriers and health in a sample of recently incarcerated men". Social Science & Medicine. 243: 112618. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112618. ISSN   0277-9536. PMID   31665655. S2CID   204965417.
  10. ↑ Seiter, Richard P.; Kadela, Karen R. (1 July 2003). "Prisoner Reentry: What Works, What Does Not, and What Is Promising". Crime & Delinquency. 49 (3): 360–388. doi:10.1177/0011128703049003002. S2CID   55736383.
  11. ↑ Shawgo, Ron (March 2008). "The Revolving Door of Re-Entry". Corrections Forum. 17: 74–80.
  12. 1 2 "Incarceration in the United States".
  13. ↑ "What's a Halfway House? A Transitional Living Option in Recovery". AddictionHelp.com. 2024-04-12. Retrieved 2024-05-02.
  14. 1 2 Pompoco, Amanda; Wooldredge, John; Lugo, Melissa; Sullivan, Carrie; Latessa, Edward J. (May 2017). "Reducing Inmate Misconduct and Prison Returns with Facility Education Programs". Criminology & Public Policy. 16 (2): 515–547. doi:10.1111/1745-9133.12290. ISSN   1538-6473.
  15. 1 2 3 4 Brazzell, Diana; Crayton, Anna; Mukamal, Debbie A.; Solomon, Amy L.; Lindahl, Nicole (2009). "From the Classroom to the Community: Exploring the Role of Education during Incarceration and Reentry". PsycEXTRA Dataset. doi:10.1037/e692852011-001 . Retrieved 2024-04-10.
  16. 1 2 3 Drake, Elizabeth K.; Aos, Steve; Miller, Marna G. (2009-02-13). "Evidence-Based Public Policy Options to Reduce Crime and Criminal Justice Costs: Implications in Washington State". Victims & Offenders. 4 (2): 170–196. doi:10.1080/15564880802612615. ISSN   1556-4886.
  17. ↑ Batiuk, Mary Ellen; Lahm, Karen F.; Mckeever, Matthew; Wilcox, Norma; Wilcox, Pamela (February 2005). "Disentangling the effects of correctional education". Criminal Justice. 5 (1): 55–74. doi:10.1177/1466802505050979. ISSN   1466-8025.
  18. ↑ "Practice Profile: Corrections-Based Vocational Training Programs | CrimeSolutions, National Institute of Justice". crimesolutions.ojp.gov. Retrieved 2024-04-10.
  19. 1 2 Wilson, David B.; Gallagher, Catherine A.; MacKENZIE, Doris L. (November 2000). "A Meta-Analysis of Corrections-Based Education, Vocation, and Work Programs for Adult Offenders". Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. 37 (4): 347–368. doi:10.1177/0022427800037004001. ISSN   0022-4278.
  20. ↑ "Home | Bureau of Justice Statistics". bjs.ojp.gov. Retrieved 2024-04-10.
  21. ↑ Aos, Steve; Phipps, Polly; Barnoski, Robert; Lieb, Roxanne (2018-03-08), "The Comparative Costs and Benefits of Programs to Reduce Crime", Costs and Benefits of Preventing Crime, Routledge, pp. 149–175, doi:10.4324/9780429501265-6, ISBN   978-0-429-50126-5 , retrieved 2024-04-10
  22. 1 2 Davis, Lois; Steele, Jennifer; Bozick, Robert; Williams, Malcolm; Turner, Susan; Miles, Jeremy; Saunders, Jessica; Steinberg, Paul (2014). How Effective Is Correctional Education, and Where Do We Go from Here? The Results of a Comprehensive Evaluation. doi:10.7249/rr564. ISBN   978-0-8330-8493-4.
  23. ↑ "The Practice and Promise of Prison Programming | Urban Institute". www.urban.org. 2002-05-30. Retrieved 2024-04-10.
  24. ↑ "Restorative justice".
  25. ↑ Goodstein, Jerry D.; Petrich, Damon M. (2019-04-03). "Hiring and retaining formerly incarcerated persons: An employer-based perspective". Journal of Offender Rehabilitation. 58 (3): 155–177. doi:10.1080/10509674.2019.1582572. ISSN   1050-9674.
  26. ↑ "Returning Home Study: Understanding the Challenges of Prisoner Reentry". Urban Institute. Retrieved 6 May 2016.
  27. ↑ Cox, Robynn; Lahey, John; Rhoades, Harmony; Henwood, Benjamin; Wenzel, Suzanne (2021-09-19). "Does the Timing of Incarceration Impact the Timing and Duration of Homelessness? Evidence from "The Transitions to Housing" Study". Justice Quarterly. 38 (6): 1070–1094. doi:10.1080/07418825.2019.1709883. ISSN   0741-8825. PMC   9499373 . PMID   36161221.
  28. 1 2 Mills, Alice (2013). "Housing ex-prisoners: the role of the third sector". Safer Communities. 12: 38–49. doi:10.1108/17578041311293134.
  29. 1 2 Pew Research Center (April 23, 2019). "Where 'Returning Citizens' Find Housing After Prison". Pew Trusts.
  30. ↑ "Criminal History Protections - CivilRights | seattle.gov". www.seattle.gov. Retrieved 2024-03-20.
  31. ↑ Binswanger, I. A.; Krueger, P. M.; Steiner, J. F. (2009-11-01). "Prevalence of chronic medical conditions among jail and prison inmates in the USA compared with the general population". Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health. 63 (11): 912–919. doi:10.1136/jech.2009.090662. ISSN   0143-005X. PMID   19648129. S2CID   206990171.
  32. 1 2 3 4 5 Doleac, Jennifer L.; Temple, Chelsea; Pritchard, David; Roberts, Adam (2020-06-01). "Which prisoner reentry programs work? Replicating and extending analyses of three RCTs". International Review of Law and Economics. 62: 105902. doi:10.1016/j.irle.2020.105902. ISSN   0144-8188. S2CID   214513688.
  33. 1 2 3 4 Woods, LaKeesha N.; Lanza, A. Stephen; Dyson, William; Gordon, Derrick M. (2013-05-01). "The Role of Prevention in Promoting Continuity of Health Care in Prisoner Reentry Initiatives". American Journal of Public Health. 103 (5): 830–838. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2012.300961. ISSN   0090-0036. PMC   3698835 . PMID   23488516.
  34. 1 2 3 4 Mellow, Jeff; Greifinger, Robert B. (2007-01-01). "Successful Reentry: The Perspective of Private Correctional Health Care Providers". Journal of Urban Health. 84 (1): 85–98. doi:10.1007/s11524-006-9131-9. ISSN   1468-2869. PMC   2078255 . PMID   17131191.
  35. 1 2 3 Wang, Emily A.; Hong, Clemens S.; Samuels, Liz; Shavit, Shira; Sanders, Ronald; Kushel, Margot (2010-03-01). "Transitions Clinic: Creating a Community-Based Model of Health Care for Recently Released California Prisoners". Public Health Reports. 125 (2): 171–177. doi:10.1177/003335491012500205. ISSN   0033-3549. PMC   2821844 . PMID   20297743.
  36. ↑ Diggs, Michelle M. (January 2014). "ESTABLISHING SELF-SUFFICIENCY—REENTRY AND INCARCERATED WOMEN: A GRANT PROPOSAL PROJECT". UMI Dissertation Publishing: iii-44 – via ProQuest.
  37. ↑ Moses, Gloria (March 2014). "FEMALE EX-OFFENDERS AFTER INCARCERATION: A STUDY OF THE RE- INTEGRATION EXPERIENCES OF FEMALE EX-OFFENDERS THREE YEARS AFTER RELEASE FROM PRISON". UMI Dissertation Publishing: iv-119.
  38. ↑ "Practice: Juvenile Reentry Programs - CrimeSolutions.gov". www.crimesolutions.gov. Retrieved 2020-04-15.
  39. ↑ "Reentry | Youth.gov". youth.gov. Retrieved 2020-04-15.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.