About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

70 Fed. Probation 19 (2006)
How to Prevent Prisoners Re-Entry Programs from Failing: Insights from Evidence-Based Corrections

handle is hein.journals/fedpro70 and id is 189 raw text is: December 2006 PrFog[rms Fromn Fih1lng nsightsFromr*, Shelley Johnson Listwan Department of Justice Studies, Kent State University Francis T Cullen Division of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati Edward . Latessa Division of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati AT ONE POINT in our history, nobody would have imagined releasing a prison inmate into society with little supervision or support. As Simon (1993) shows, well into the 1950s, such a practice would have been unthinkable. From the implementation of parole as a widespread correctional policy, a key component of release from prison was securing employment. It was assumed that offenders would be disciplined-kept under control-by the supervision and structured life inherent in holding a steady job. If no job could be found, then parole was seldom an option. This model of industrial parole, howev- er, became increasingly suspect due to three interrelated developments. First, as the Unit- ed States moved into a post-industrial econ- omy, the availability of steady employment for those at society's bottom reaches-the stratum from which inmates are dispro- portionately drawn-gradually deteriorated. In Simon's view (1993, p. 65), there was a decoupling of the labor market for low- skilled labor from the economy as a whole. Second, the growth of minority populations in prisons-again, a group most hard-hit by economic distress-further undermined the notion that all offenders could secure a job upon return to society. Third, the seven-fold overall rise in state and federal prison populations in the three decades after 1970 created a surplus population of tens of thousands of offenders that prisons could no longer afford to keep locked up, but who had dim prospects for employment. In post-industrial parole, the control or discipline over offenders thus shifted from a meaningful reintegration into the com- munity to supervision by parole officers. This supervision has varied from a clinical model emphasizing rehabilitation to a polic- ing model emphasizing deterrence. But in either case, parole had largely forfeited its for- mer role of working with offenders to allow them to assume meaningful roles in the com- munity upon their re-entry (Simon, 1993). Recently, however, there has been a grow- ing recognition that it is irresponsible to simply release tens of thousands of inmates from prison and to place them into parole officer caseloads that are too high to allow for meaningful intervention and re-entry. In a way, this has been corrections' dirty little secret-a practice that simply is indefensi- ble from a public policy standpoint. Beyond lack of resources, there is no way to justify the unsystematic dumping of offenders back into society, since it jeopardizes both the successful reintegration of offenders and the protection of public safety. Fortunately, reacting to this public policy debacle is a movement to identify strategies to guide prisoner re-entry. In this article, we attempt to add our voice to this conversation. Although many persuasive ideas are being put forward and promising programs implemented, we are concerned that insufficient attention is being given to an important development in cor- rections: the increasing knowledge about what works to change offender conduct, knowledge that is based on the principles of effective correctional intervention (Cullen & Gendreau, 2000). Informed by this perspec- tive, we attempt to outline how this knowl- edge base can help inform current attempts to design and implement efficacious re-entry programs. We also caution that a failure to heed evidence-based correctional practice is likely to result in re-entry programs that do not reach their full potential and, perhaps, simply do not work (MacKenzie, 2000; Lates- sa, Cullen, & Gendreau, 2002). The Re-Entry Crisis There is little dispute that inmate re-entry is a potentially serious social problem that can no longer escape attention. The sheer num- ber of people involved is one factor precipi- tating a crisis in this area. At mid-year 2004, there were an estimated 2.1 million adults serving time in prison (Harrison & Beck, . Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Shelley Johnson Listwan, Department of Justice Studies, Kent State University, 113 Bow- man Hall, Kent Ohio 44242. Email: slistwan@kent.edu

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most