Cited by 30Criminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisCrime Patterns and InterventionsUrban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies

The impact of residential change and housing stability on recidivism: pilot results from the Maryland Opportunities through Vouchers Experiment (MOVE)

Open access
Kirk, David S., Barnes, Geoffrey C., Hyatt, Jordan M., Kearley, Brook W.·2018·Journal of Experimental Criminology

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This article provides a description and preliminary assessment of the Maryland Opportunities through Vouchers Experiment (MOVE), a randomized housing mobility program for former prisoners designed to test whether residential relocation far away from former neighborhoods, incentivized through the provision of a housing subsidy, can yield reductions in recidivism. METHODS: The MOVE program was implemented as a randomized controlled trial. Participants were recruited from four different Maryland prisons and randomly assigned to experimental groups. In the first iteration of the experiment, treatment group participants received 6 months of free housing away from their home jurisdiction and control group participants received free housing back in their home jurisdiction. In the second iteration of the experiment, the treatment group remained the same and the control condition was redesigned to represent the status quo and did not receive free housing. Analyses were conducted of one-year rearrest rates. RESULTS: With respect to reductions in recidivism, pilot results suggest that there is some benefit to moving and a benefit to receiving free housing. Rearrest was lower among the treatment group of movers than the non-movers, and was also lower for non-movers who received free housing versus non-movers who did not receive housing. CONCLUSIONS: To the extent that pilot results can be validated and replicated in a full-scale implementation of the MOVE program, policies that provide greater access to housing assistance for formerly incarcerated individuals may yield substantial public safety benefits, particularly housing opportunities located far away from former neighborhoods.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11292-017-9317-z

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A pilot study providing housing vouchers to 30 individuals upon release was shown to be feasible and promising; in the year following release, there were only 2 arrests among those randomized to a housing voucher and 9 among those who did not.

    “The intervention was shown to be feasible and promising; in the year following release, there were only 2 arrests among those who were randomized to a housing voucher, and 9 among those who did not.”

    From Community investment interventions as a means for decarceration: A scoping review (2022) · cites this paper as [42]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The MOVE program pilot study demonstrated the feasibility of providing housing on release from prison; despite encouraging results, a larger intervention trial has not materialized due to lack of funding.

    “This is exemplified by the MOVE program pilot study, which demonstrated the feasibility of providing housing on release from prison. Despite encouraging results, a larger intervention trial has not materialized due to lack of funding.42”

    From Community investment interventions as a means for decarceration: A scoping review (2022) · cites this paper as [42]

    The Discussion says the pilot showed that implementation challenges were not insurmountable and reports preliminary, encouraging results from a small sample. Pilot results says the authors were seeking funding for full-scale implementation. The paper does not establish that a larger trial subsequently failed to materialize because of a lack of funding. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 32 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Kirk, D. S. (Forthcoming). Home free: Residential change and redemption after Hurricane Katrina. New York: Oxford University Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kirk, D. S., Barnes, G. C., Hyatt, J. M., & Kearley, B. W.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • Drexel University (US)
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
Corresponding author
Kirk, David S.
Venue
Journal of Experimental Criminology
Published
2017-12-15
Volume
14
Issue
2
Pages
213-226
ISSN
  • 1572-8315 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3750
OpenAlex
W2772691532
Cited by
30
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2
FWCI
4.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Criminology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R03HD081515)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Urban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies
Keywords
recidivism, residential mobility, formerly incarcerated individuals, housing vouchers, housing subsidies, rearrest rates, prisoner release, public safety, MOVE! program

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review