National Offender Tracking System: Reducing Recidivism

The United States has the highest rate of incarceration in the world (Walmsley, 2013). One of the greatest known factors that indicate the potential for an individual to be incarcerated is a previous incarceration. Rates of recidivism are as high as 78% can occur within five years of release from prison (Jonson, 2010). Many programs have been reported such as drug courts, electronic monitoring and treatment programs to lower recidivism rates; however many do not include statistics over a two-year period (Jonson, 2010). As costs of incarceration inhibit another public spending, focusing on reducing recidivism would lessen the burden to taxpayers while providing offenders with the ability not to offend. Determining methodologies to veer

Two issues must be resolved to understand recidivism fully; one is a national offender tracking system (database), and the other is for offender programs to be focused on reducing criminality, thereby lessening recidivism. This essay will discuss a tracking system, offender programs as well as the idealized new model for criminal justice. The issue of a national offender tracking system will be addressed first.

Currently, the United States has a national system database system that could be enhanced to track offenders’ movements throughout the criminal justice system. Offenders are fingerprinted and compared against the national fingerprint index. Records are checked for outstanding warrants as well as other arrests. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) maintains an automated fingerprint indexing system (AFIS) that can be correlated to the FBI’s crime index. It is up to states and jails to send to the FBI updates in offender sentencing, such as convictions, sentencing and discharges are to be reported. In 2005 when the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)

Jails and prisons have a greater responsibility that incapacitation. The focus should be placed on factors that the most significant factors that are attributed to criminal conduct. After the determination of the risks of the offender, the focus should be placed on factors that are the most important influences that are attributed to criminal conduct. Many issues may be considered a factor; however, priority should be put on those that are known to reduce recidivism. According to O'Riordan and O'Connell (2014), personality factors are much more linked to a crime that socio-economical class (98). Personality contributes to crimes two times more that social class. Working with offenders to develop other personality traits such as conscientiousness may have more profound and long-lasting benefit as opposed to other programs. Therefore, is would be two-time more beneficial for an inmate to improve their personality before focusing on programs such as work release {O'Riordan and O'Connell 2014). Offenders incarceration plans would address needs based on the risk of criminality as opposed to any other method, therefore as mentioned above personality development would be achieved before the economic status of the offenders. Since most offenders are in jail before going to prison or release, programs that influence personality could begin in prison. However, despite