As we have discussed I have done some research on ways to prevent recidivism among our medium to high risk offenders and whether it would be beneficial for Community Corrections departments to implement evidence-based programs in the case management of these offenders. To obtain data for this report I referred to government and professional publications; I also conducted various interviews with individuals who are knowledgeable of these practices. This report addresses whether certain programs used in community corrections are an effective practice for the medium to high risk criminal population. I am going to provide three different programs and their costs that could be implemented in community based corrections. Significance of Problem: …show more content…
Nationwide, 58 percent of the criminal justice population is supervised under community corrections. (The National Institute of Justice, 2016). As the criminal population increases and the cost of incarcerating inmates continues to rise each year, community based corrections offenders should engage in MRT because it helps enhance social, moral and positive behavioral growth. Research concludes that MRT-treated offenders in community corrections have lower recidivism for periods as long as 20 years after treatment. Those studies show MRT-treated offenders have re-arrests and re-incarceration rates 25 percent to 75 percent lower than those in traditional community corrections programs (Antonowicz & Parker, 2012, p 183). Offenders participating in MRT are able to identify responsibility for their behavior. They become more pro-social and gain life skills such as anger management, job placement, sobriety maintenance and parenting skills. Implementing MRT into community corrections significantly lowers prison populations. (Car & Thies, 2005, p 37). According to Allen Bergstrom, Parole and Probation officer with Klamath County Community Corrections, their agency uses MRT for all felony offenders presenting with medium to high risk criminogenic factors (traits relating to the likelihood of committing a new crime) and substance abuse issues. Bergstrom found with his caseload that MRT effectively reduced recidivism for his offenders. He estimated that 15-20% of the offenders on his caseload that successfully engaged and completed the MRT programs were less likely to commit new crimes and engage in criminal activity (personal communication, May 3,
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
It is clear that we have not embraced the theory of rehabilitation because we still use prisons to “warehouse” offenders. The concern with “warehousing” is that the offender will more than likely end up back in prison. We have learned that recidivism is a major concern facing society today because offenders have little chance of employment, no funds or housing, and often time’s very little support from family or friends. I stand behind rehabilitation for offenders because I feel like it is the only way to truly stop crime. In
The article “Prisoner Reentry in a Small Metropolitan Community: Obstacles and Policy Recommendations” by Brett Garland, Eric J. Wodahl, and Julie Mayfield explains how the study proves that rehabilitation services provided during imprisonment for inmates that are going to reentry society are beneficial. In the study 43 male offenders were asked to identify which programs help them or that can help them to reentry society. It is mention in the article that the main obstacles male offenders face after reentering includes employment and reconnection with their
The idea behind these program was to help treat the offenders for their substance abuse disorders while still holding them accountable for the crime that they had committed (Lutze & Wormer, 2013). Many studies have been conducted in order to assess the effectiveness of drug court programs across the country. In a qualitative study done by Gallagher 100 participants of the drug court program were examined. This study found that of the drug court participants, seventy-nine percent were not rearrested in the follow-up period. Twenty-one percent of those participants were rearrested (Gallagher, 2014).
Similarly, specialty court recidivism research needs to do the same. This prompted the authors to measure specialty court’s influence on clients who did not complete the program. This data is and should be required to determine specialty court’s efficacy. This approach to measure unsuccessful clients is essential and should not be discarded. The authors measured other factors besides recidivism, time to recidivism, and drug use.
The Drug Treatment Alternative-to-Prison Program is another attempt to provide better treatment for people who are convicted. The study showed that drug offenders who underwent a treatment program outside of prison had a 26 percent less rate of re-arrest after two years than a control group that was sent to prison (Justice Policy Institute, 2010). Rehabilitative programs like the Second Chance Act and the Drug Treatment Alternative-to-Prison Program has shown to growth and positive
A compilation of 6 different studies provided by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention found that not only did juveniles have a higher recidivism rate, but they were also more likely to recidivate sooner and more often after being released (Scialabba). Recidivism shows the immaturity of juveniles and how sentencing them as adults will not rehabilitate them nor teach them a
The fundamental basis of the reentry collaboration is that each constituent of the criminal justice system (e.g., law enforcement, the courts, institutional and community corrections) plays a role not only in immediate offender processing and control (e.g., arrest, conviction, incarceration, release), but also in longstanding offender change (e.g., employment, family, mental health, substance abuse, criminality). Since 1999, the Office of Justice Programs has been instrumental in the development of a series of system-wide reentry initiatives, including the Reentry Partnership Initiatives (RPI) (NCJRS, 2002). Many offenders are maxing out and being returned to the community without the supervision through probation or parole; ergo, law enforcement
Although some may believe that incarceration may be the most concrete way to stop recidivism, there are other alternatives that have had success as well. One in particular is the diversion program. The Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice states that “processing certain youth through the juvenile justice system may do more harm than good”. There can be many reasons why it can do more harm, one being that they may have committed a petty crime and now they are being placed among more dangerous influential offenders. Offenders may also have a bad record due to a petty act which is something that can be avoided by completing the diversion program.
Changing criminal behavior, not pausing it while incarcerated is what is needed to keep the public safe, making offenders aware of the destruction they have caused to society, and making them accountable via treatment programs and discipline. Unfortunately, upon release an offender may have set backs, being in a structured, disciplined environment, followed by complete freedom may prove bad for some. Many halfway houses are located far away from an offender’s residence, therefore even if employment is secured during treatment when released they return home to no job, or support, and are put back in the same situation. Community support is imperative in the effectiveness of halfway houses, sadly, many communities refuse halfway houses in their communities, lack of education and fear have been a huge
A therapist ONLY addressing an offender 's mental illness may be problematic because offenders have criminogenic needs that need to be treated in order to reduce criminal behavior. The Risk-Needs-Responsivity (RNR) model of corrections and rehabilitation was designed by Andrews, Honta, and Hoge in 1990. This model has demonstrated the strongest research-support on its ability to explain and treat criminal behavior. Andrews and Bonta have shown that in order to produce a successful rehabilitation program, the program must "respect the individual, have a psychological theory basis, and should work in junction with the enhancement of preventative services". This model reveals the importance of going beyond ONLY addressing an offender 's mental illness and providing treatment relevant to
For offenders, community corrections involves serving their sentence in a way in which they are not fully disconnected or removed from their community, whether it be for work release, sober living arrangements, probation, or other forms, it allows for an offender to maintain their bonds to society or have a better chance at completely transitioning back to society if they are placed on parole. Because of this, offenders may have better odds at refraining from recidivating back into the crime and back into the cogs of the criminal justice system. This connects to another idea of criminal justice, Social Control Theory, which in my opinion, is one of the most important theories discussed in courses. SCT posits that as a person’s bonds to their society decrease or break, the more likely they are to engage in deviant acts or illegal behavior. This is important, especially with the increase in the importance of community
Consequently there are only six juvenile prisons remaining for serious juvenile offenders, and there are currently 1,600 juveniles in state facilities in comparison to the federal facilities costing on an average of $250,000 per juvenile offender (Kelly, 2012). Therefore, In the effort to address as well as resolve the problems with both adult and juvenile prison overcrowding, bother programmers as well as researchers believed that correctional facilities obtained the abilities in identifying high risk offenders and allocating appropriate rehabilitative services in accordance to their criminal needs while assessing their potential for recidivism, at which point the Risk-need responsivity (RNR) model was implemented in 1990 as a means of identifying high risk offenders in need of rehabilitative
A program’s considered ineffective if it does not have a positive impact on a juvenile’s recidivism rate. Studies have shown that juveniles that attend ineffective programs have higher rates of going back to the prison system. Boot camps, intensive parole and probation supervision programs have a negative impact on juveniles and no reduction in recidivism rates. Programs such as deterrence, scared straight, and teaching the juvenile discipline actually have an increase in recidivism (Wilson, 2011, p. 106). Lipsey (2009) notes that discipline interventions had the largest negative effects on recidivism with an increase of 8%, with deterrence interventions, increasing recidivism by 2% (Bostic, 2014).
Selective sampling is recommended for this research by choosing men and women within Texas prisons committed to the Prison Fellowship program. The gender variable is valuable to generalize the prison population and show any differences between the two. The sampling method is also significant, because it 's selective to first time offenders to maintain a non-bias study. Unlike the previous studies this particular study will focus on social aspects and mental health issues. By examining participants over the course of a two year time frame data will become more accurate.
A community model of corrections provides offenders with the necessary support to reintegrate successfully in to the community. Although some offenders are successful during reentry some become homeless, violate terms of their parole of re-offending out of desperation; financially they have no means or they’re looking for a faster way to obtain