If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.
You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

Prisoner Re-Entry - USA

Page history last edited by Renato Nuñez 3 years, 8 months ago

Front Page / Issue Briefs / Justice, Crime and Public Safety / Prisoner Re-Entry / USA

Issue Brief

Prisoner Re-Entry - USA

Scope of the Problem factual statements on the extent of the problem in the past, current, or future

In the United States today, 7 million Americans are either incarcerated or on probation or parole.^[1]

That makes 1 in every 45 Americans.^[2]
Between 1973 and 2009, the nation’s prison population grew by about 705%.^[3]
There are over 3,200 jails throughout the United States, the vast majority of which are operated by county governments. Each year, these jails will release more than 10,000,000 people back in the community, of which nearly 27% are expected to be homeless.^[4]

95% of inmates in American will return home at some point.^[5]
The Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics found that 51.8% of released offenders in 1994 were back in prison within 3 years.^[6]

In 1999, 45.5% of released offenders were re-incarcerated.^[7]
In 2004, 43.3% of released offenders were re-incarcerated.^[8]

It costs an average of $78.95 per day to keep an inmate locked up, more than 20 times the cost of a day on probation.^[9]
Across the 33 states that reported for studies conducted by the PEW Center of the States in 1999 and 2004, the average recidivism rate declined slightly (4.8%) between the two periods.^[10]

The rate of re-incarceration for a new crime increased by 11.9% while the re-incarceration for technical violations decreased by 17.7%^[11]

Throughout the nation’s prisons, only 9% of the prison population is engaged in full-time job training or educational programs. 24% of the prison population is largely “unoccupied during their time of incarceration.”^[12]

Past Policy & Program Milestones key legislation and milestones including significant policy and funding shifts, major studies, etc.

University of Chicago Criminologist, Joan Petersillia stated that "by 1865, American penal reformers were well aware of the reforms accomplished in the European prison systems, particular in the Irish systems. Therefore at the Cincinnati meeting of the National Prison Association in 1870, a paper by Crofton was read, and specific references to the Irish system were incorporated into the Declaration of Principles, along with such other reforms as indeterminate sentencing and classification for release based on a mark system." ^[13]
On January 18, 1989, the abandonment of rehabilitation in corrections was confirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court. In Mistretta v. United States, the Court upheld federal "sentencing guidelines" which remove rehabilitation from serious consideration when sentencing offenders. Defendants will henceforth be sentenced strictly for the crime, with no recognition given to such factors as amenability to treatment, personal and family history, previous efforts to rehabilitate oneself, or possible alternatives to prison. The Court outlined the history of the debate: "Rehabilitation as a sound penological theory came to be questioned and, in any event, was regarded by some as an unattainable goal for most cases." The Court cited a Senate Report which "referred to the 'outmoded rehabilitation model' for federal criminal sentencing, and recognized that the efforts of the criminal justice system to achieve rehabilitation of offenders had failed."^[14]
Since the mid-1970s, the U.S. incarceration rate has increased over fourfold largely due to policy choices pertaining to sentencing and the post-release monitoring of parolees.
In 1994, George Allen, former Governor of Virginia supported the aboloshiment of parole under the argument that it would lead to longer prison sentences and greater honesty in sentencing decision. He felt that easy release programs prevented judges and juries from accommodating the communities judgment for illegal conduct. Correctional experts saw this as "good politics" but bad correctional practices because it eliminates the monitoring of offenders and the opportunity to question their motives prior to permanent release. ^[15]
Parole regulation has contributed to the creation of prison reentry and rehabilitation programs to combat prison recidivism and enhance the process of being released back into society; jobless, powerless, and confused. Over time, the postitivistic approach to crime and criminals viewed offenders are "sick" and in need of help-which also contributed to parole release and supervision programs. This rising approach throughout the 1960's produced acceptance of the belief that the purpose of incarceration was to change the behavior and rehabilitate the individual from their offense, rather then to simply punish. ^[16]
The use of parole release grew beyond being used as a "special privilege" and was now extended as a standard mode of release from prison, often approved after serving a minimum term of confinement. This initiated a practical mechanism for states to control prison growth, which ultimately developed a need for distinctive rehabilitative rationale, providing prison officials with the objective to help, assist, and surveillance offenders release back into society. ^[17]
Therefore by the late 1970's, more then 70% of all inmates released from prison were released as a result of a parole boards discretionary decision. ^[18]
Tough on Crime Movement (late 1960's-early 1970's): The “tough on crime” movement refers to a set of policies that emphasize punishment as a primary, and often sole, response to crime. Mandatory sentencing, Three strikes, truth-in-sentencing, quality of life policing, zero tolerance, and various other proposals that result in longer and harsher penalties and the elimination of rehabilitation and other programs are all contemporary examples of “tough on crime” policies. ^[19]

Current Policy & Programs summary of current policies in the form of legislation, programs, and funding

Second Chance Act (Public Law 110-199): Signed into law on April 9, 2008, the Second Chance Act was designed to improve outcomes for people returning to communities from prisons and jails. This first-of-its-kind legislation authorizes federal grants to government agencies and nonprofit organizations to provide employment assistance, substance abuse treatment, housing, family programming, mentoring, victims support, and other services that can help reduce recidivism.

The Second Chance Act of 2008 (H.R. 1593): Full Description Found Here

"Community Safety Through Recidivism Prevention"
The goal of the Act is 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. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled."
Purposes of the act are-

to break the cycle of criminal recidivism, increase public safety, and help States, local units of government, and Indian Tribes, better address the growing population of criminal offenders who return to their communities and commit new crimes;
to rebuild ties between offenders and their families, while the offenders are incarcerated and after reentry into the community, to promote stable families and communities;
to encourage the development and support of, and to expand the availability of, evidence-based programs that enhance public safety and reduce recidivism, such as substance abuse treatment, alternatives to incarceration, and comprehensive reentry services;
to protect the public and promote law-abiding conduct by providing necessary services to offenders, while the offenders are incarcerated and after reentry into the community, in a manner that does not confer luxuries or privileges upon such offenders;
to assist offenders reentering the community from incarceration to establish a self-sustaining and law-abiding life by providing sufficient transitional services for as short of a period as practicable, not to exceed one year, unless a longer period is specifically determined to be necessary by a medical or other appropriate treatment professional; and
to provide offenders in prisons, jails or juvenile facilities with educational, literacy, vocational, and job placement services to facilitate re-entry into the community.

Appropriations Update:

In fiscal year 2009, $25 million was appropriated for Second Chance Act programs (CFDA 16.812), including $15 million for state and local reentry demonstration projects and $10 million for grants to nonprofit organizations for mentoring and other transitional services. For non-profit organizations looking to start a prison reentry program, The Second Chance Act initiative are viewed as currently the best option. There are provisions of the act which regulate a time frame for spending the grant monies, what the funds can used, and a reporting how effective or usual for the grant funds were.

In fiscal year 2010, $114 million was appropriated for prisoner reentry programs in the Department of Justice, including $14 million for reentry initiatives in the Federal Bureau of Prisons and $100 million for Second Chance Act grant programs:

$37 million for reentry demonstration projects under Sec. 101 of the Second Chance Act
$15 million for mentoring grants to nonprofit organizations under Sec. 211
$10 million for reentry courts under Sec. 111
$7.5 million for family-based, substance abuse treatment under Sec. 113
$2.5 million for grants to evaluate and improve education in prisons, jails, and juvenile facilities under Sec. 114
$5 million for technology careers training demonstration grants under Sec. 115
$13 million for reentry substance abuse and criminal justice collaboration under Sec. 201
$10 million for reentry research under Sec. 245 ^[20]

US Second Chance Adult Mentoring Grantees: Found Here

Fiscal Year 2009 Second Chance Highest Grantee's:

10,000,000/Total Funds Allocated. Award Amount
Alaska Native Justice Center Inc, AK: $300,000.00
SOAR Career Solutions, MN $300,000.00
Career Opportunity Development Inc, NJ $300,000.00
PB& J Family Services, Inc , NM $300,000.00
Fund for the City of New York, NY $299,999.00
Pennsylvania Prison Society, PA $299,990.00
Families of Incarcerated Individuals, Inc, TN $300,000.00
OAR of Fairfax County, Inc , VA $300,000.00
Kanawha Institute for Social Research & Action, WV $300,000.00

Key Resources of the Second Chance Act .

Office of Justice Programs — 2010 Program Plan for Managing Offenders To Reduce Recidivism and Promote Successful Reentry

OJP, through a number of its bureaus, is working to reduce recidivism and its attendant fiscal and social costs and increase the safety of our communities. This is a high priority of the Obama administration and Attorney General Holder. One of the largest efforts is the Second Chance Act of 2007.
Through the provisions of this statute, OJP is able to increase its support of reentry demonstration projects that use validated assessment tools to determine the risks and needs of offenders. BJA is overseeing projects designed to provide offenders in prisons or jails with necessary services, including educational, literacy, vocational, and job placement services to facilitate reentry into the community; substance abuse treatment and services that represent a full continuum of treatment services during incarceration and in community-based settings upon release; and coordinated supervision and comprehensive services for offenders upon release from prison or jail, including housing and mental and physical health care to include veteran specific services.
OJP addresses the challenges that returning sex offenders bring to their communities through the Adam Walsh Act Implementation Grant Program. This program assists states, the District of Columbia, territories, and tribal jurisdictions with developing and/or enhancing programs designed to implement the requirements of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006.

Discretionary Programs

Second Chance Act Adult and Juvenile Offender Reentry Demonstration Projects

Grantee Competitive; FY 2010 Funding $37,000,000
The Second Chance Act authorizes grants to state and local governments and federally recognized Indian tribes for demonstration projects to promote the safe and successful reintegration of incarcerated individuals into the community. Allowable funding uses include employment services, substance abuse treatment, housing, family programming, mentoring, victim services, and methods to improve release and revocation decisions using risk assessment tools.

Second Chance Mentoring Program

Grantee Competitive; FY 2010 Funding $15,000,000
The Second Chance Act authorizes mentoring grants for nonprofit organizations and federally recognized Indian tribes. Project initiatives include mentoring adult offenders and offering transitional or other services to promote the safe and successful reintegration of formerly incarcerated individuals back into the community.

Adam Walsh Act (AWA) Implementation Grant Program

Grantee Competitive; FY 2010 Funding $9,250,000
Grant projects must further jurisdiction compliance and clearly demonstrate specific requirements of SORNA that will be implemented as a result of funding support. Activities supported by this program may include the following:

Developing or enhancing jurisdiction-wide SORNA sex offender registration programs or functions.
Enhancing infrastructure to assist implementation of SORNA, such as for the collection, storage, submission or analysis of sex offender biometric data (finger and palm prints) and DNA.
Developing or enhancing law enforcement and other criminal justice agency information sharing at the jurisdiction level, as well as between jurisdiction-level agencies and local-level agencies, as it relates to SORNA sex offender registration and notification compliance and accountability.
Implementing records management and conversion projects.
Providing support for coordinated interagency efforts to comply with SORNA.
Developing and implementing training for law enforcement and other criminal justice agency personnel responsible for sex offender registration and compliance related to SORNA implementation.

See Also:

Second Chance Act Adult and Juvenile Offender Reentry Demonstration Projects (See Section 3: Preventing and Intervening in Juvenile Offending and Victimization)
National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC) System National Center (See Section 9: Advancing Technology To Prevent and Solve Crime)

Training and Technical Assistance

Program Name Comprehensive Approaches to Sex Offender Management (CASOM) Training and Technical Assistance Program

Grantee Competitive

FY 2010 Funding $3,300,000

OJP Sponsor SMART Office

Web Link www.ojp.gov/smart

Program Contact Jackie O’Reilly, (202) 514-5024, jacqueline.o’reilly@usdoj.gov

Program Description

The CASOM program assists state, local, and tribal jurisdictions in improving their adult and/or juvenile sex offender management policies and practices by critically examining existing approaches to monitoring and managing the population; identifying significant gaps and needs in the monitoring and management of sex offenders programs; and developing programs to address the needs identified in existing programs.

Program Name Second Chance Act: National Reentry Resource Center

Grantee Council of State Governments Justice Center (Justice Center) (Continuation)

OJP Sponsor BJA

Web Link www.nationalreentryresourcecenter.org

Program Contact Thurston Bryant, (202) 514-8082, Thurston.Bryant@usdoj.gov

Program Description

The Justice Center recently established a National Adult and Juvenile Offender Reentry Resource Center (Reentry Resource Center) on behalf of BJA to provide education, training, and technical assistance for states, tribes, territories, local governments, service providers, nonprofit organizations, and corrections institutions on issues related to adult and juvenile offender reentry. The Justice Center will collect data regarding offender reentry from demonstration grantees and other agencies and organizations and will disseminate information to states and other relevant entities about best practices, policy standards, and research findings. The Reentry Resource Center will provide a "one-stop" location where the reentry field can easily obtain appropriate tools and materials; connect with peers across the country; identify and promote evidence-based practices; translate reentry research into user-friendly materials; deliver individualized, targeted technical assistance to BJA grantees to maximize the likelihood that they achieve proposed results; and advance the adult and juvenile reentry field generally.