Cited by 16Criminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisCrime Patterns and InterventionsSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

Community investment interventions as a means for decarceration: A scoping review

Open access
Hawks, L, Lopoo, E, Puglisi, L, Cellini, J, Thompson, K, Halberstam, AA, Tolliver, D, Martinez-Hamilton, S +1 more·2022·The Lancet Regional Health - Americas

Abstract

There is growing support to reverse mass incarceration in the United States, especially in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Little is known about what types and scale of community investments are most effective to support mass decarceration. Using a public health prevention framework, we conducted a scoping review to examine community-based programs that reduced criminal legal involvement. We searched PubMed, Embase and three EBSCO databases from 1990 through September 2019 for all experimental or quasi-experimental studies testing interventions pertaining to education, housing, healthcare, employment, or social support services and how they affected an individual's criminal legal outcomes. Our review identified 53 studies that demonstrated the efficacy of early childhood educational interventions and nurse-family partnership programs, post-secondary education for incarcerated students, navigation programs linking incarcerated people to community resources, and peer support upon release to reduce criminal legal system exposure. In concert with legislative action to end mass incarceration, additional research is needed to test interventions designed to achieve mass decarceration which cross multiple domains, interrogate community-level impacts and ascertain long-term outcomes.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This scoping review synthesizes experimental and quasi-experimental evidence on community investment interventions—outside the criminal legal system—that may reduce individual criminal legal involvement and support decarceration. It identifies 53 studies covering 43 interventions, with the strongest evidence for early childhood education, nurse-family partnership, post-secondary education in prison, navigation/reentry programs, and peer support.

Key findings

  • The review identified 53 articles describing 43 interventions: 14 targeted primary prevention of incarceration and 29 targeted secondary prevention; 28 were RCTs and 15 were quasi-experimental.
  • Early childhood education showed durable effects: High/Scope Perry Preschool participants had lower rates of five or more arrests after two decades (7% vs. 35%); Chicago Child-Parent Center participants had lower arrest rates at 24 years (17% vs. 25%, p<0.01); Fast Track produced a 34.7% relative decline in substance-related convictions and 30.9% relative decrease in violent crime convictions at age 25.
  • Nurse-Family Partnership reduced criminal legal outcomes for girls and mothers: in Elmira, girls in the treatment group were less likely to have an arrest (10% vs. 30%) or conviction (4% vs. 20%) after nearly two decades; mothers had fewer arrests 15 years later (adjusted incident rates 0.18 vs. 0.90, p<0.05).
  • Post-secondary education during incarceration and navigation/reentry programs reduced reincarceration: one study found a 53% reduction in rearrest at 3 years (9% vs. 17%, p<0.001); the Boston Reentry Initiative found lower rearrest at 3 years (77.8% vs. 87.7%, p<0.01) and lower violent rearrest (27.8% vs. 39.2%, p<0.05); the Transitions Clinic Network in New Haven found fewer days incarcerated (101.4 vs. 187.4, p<0.0001) and fewer probation/parole violations (17% vs. 33%, p<0.05), though no arrest difference.

Methods

  • Scoping review using a public health prevention framework (primary, secondary, tertiary), with tertiary/prison-based interventions excluded; protocol developed a priori using Joanna Briggs Institute Scoping Review Template Guidelines.
  • Searched PubMed, Embase, and three EBSCO databases (ERIC, PsycINFO, Criminal Justice Abstracts with Full Text) from January 1990 through September 2019, plus reference lists and expert recommendations; included experimental or quasi-experimental US studies of education, housing, healthcare, employment, or social support interventions affecting individual-level criminal legal outcomes.
  • Initial search identified 31,780 abstracts, 23,066 after duplicate removal, 674 full-text reviews, 49 included articles plus 4 additional articles, totaling 53 articles and 43 interventions; data were extracted with a uniform form covering design, sample, outcomes, findings, and funding.

Limitations

  • The authors state the review was limited to peer-reviewed experimental or quasi-experimental studies, excluded observational studies, correctional risk-needs-responsivity programming, non-peer-reviewed economic working papers, and studies of community-level crime or violence outcomes; they also note few primary prevention studies without impact, suggesting publication bias.
  • The authors state that most included studies had less than five years of follow-up, despite potential long-term or intergenerational benefits, and that there were too few community-level experimental evaluations.
  • Evident from the text: secondary prevention studies were heterogeneous in execution, some interventions were underpowered (e.g., the MOVE housing pilot with N=30 was not powered to detect differences), and several authors disclose direct involvement with Transitions Clinic Network design and study.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.lana.2021.100150

Cites

83 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

25 of 78 cited sources checked · 6 supported · 1 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Findingcitation

    Three additional studies evaluating SVORI-funded programs providing broad case management services were shown to be effective.

    “Three additional studies, all evaluating SVORI-funded programs which provided broad case management services, were shown to be effective.57,58,66”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [57] Duwe, 2012, Evaluating the Minnesota Comprehensive Offender Reentry Plan (MCORP): Results from a Randomized Experiment, JQ: Justice Quarterly source

      The Introduction says MCORP received $1.9 million in Minnesota state funds, distinguishing it from the earlier federally funded SVORI projects. The paper does support the other elements: it evaluates a case-management reentry program and reports reduced reoffending. But it contradicts the claim that this particular program was SVORI-funded. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [58] Veeh, 2017, Evaluation of a Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) Program in a Midwest State, Criminal Justice Policy Review source
    • cites [66] Clark, 2015, Making the most of second chances: an evaluation of Minnesota's high-risk revocation reduction reentry program, Journal of Experimental Criminology source
  • Findingcitation

    The Abecedarian Project RCT found no significant difference between intervention and control groups in conviction or incarceration as late as 30 years from the intervention.

    “An RCT evaluating The Abecedarian Project, an intensive early childhood education targeting children considered at risk for academic failure found no significant difference between intervention and control groups in conviction or incarceration as late as 30 years from the intervention.25”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [25] Campbell, 2012, Adult outcomes as a function of an early childhood educational program: an Abecedarian Project follow-up, Developmental psychology source
  • Findingcitation

    Navigation programs including case management services and peer support during incarceration and bridging to the community have been shown to reduce rates of return to jail.

    “Navigation programs which include case management services and peer support during incarceration and bridging to the community have also been shown to reduce rates of return to jail.55,57,58,66”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [55] Braga, 2009, Controlling violent offenders released to the community: An evaluation of the Boston reentry initiative, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency source
    • cites [57] Duwe, 2012, Evaluating the Minnesota Comprehensive Offender Reentry Plan (MCORP): Results from a Randomized Experiment, JQ: Justice Quarterly source

      The Introduction describes MCORP as case management spanning incarceration and community reentry, and the Conclusion links community mentoring and support programming with reduced reoffending. But the Results find a significant reduction in reincarceration for new offenses, not in any return to prison; they do not establish a reduction in returns to jail generally or describe peer support during incarceration as a tested component. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.87)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [58] Veeh, 2017, Evaluation of a Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) Program in a Midwest State, Criminal Justice Policy Review source
    • cites [66] Clark, 2015, Making the most of second chances: an evaluation of Minnesota's high-risk revocation reduction reentry program, Journal of Experimental Criminology source
  • Premisecitation

    Incarceration and any exposure to the criminal legal system is deleterious to individual health.

    “Mounting evidence finds that incarceration – indeed, any exposure to the criminal legal system – is deleterious to individual, family, and community health.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [2] Binswanger, 2009, Prevalence of chronic medical conditions among jail and prison inmates in the USA compared with the general population, J Epidemiol Community Health source
    • cites [3] Binswanger, 2007, Release from prison—a high risk of death for former inmates, New England Journal of Medicine source

      The Results and Discussion report substantially elevated mortality among people released from Washington State prisons, and the Discussion suggests that reentry contributes to that risk. The study does not establish that incarceration itself—or any exposure to the criminal legal system—is deleterious to individual health. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [4] Palepu, 2004, Initiating highly active antiretroviral therapy and continuity of HIV care: the impact of incarceration and prison release on adherence and HIV treatment outcomes, Antiviral therapy source

      The Conclusions (page not specified) report that, among HIV-infected people starting HAART, a history of incarceration was associated with poorer adherence and a lower probability of viral suppression, particularly after release. The paper does not establish that any exposure to the criminal legal system harms individual health generally; it also describes incarceration as a probable marker of life instability rather than establishing it as the cause. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [5] Wildeman, 2019, Age-Standardized Mortality of Persons on Probation, in Jail, or in State Prison and the General Population, 2001-2012, Public Health Reports source
  • Premisecitation

    Negative health outcomes and lower well-being are found in those who live in communities with high rates of incarceration.

    “Negative health outcomes and lower well-being are found in family members of those incarcerated6 and even those who live in communities with high rates of incarceration.7”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [7] Holaday, 2021, Association of census tract-level incarceration rate and life expectancy in New York State, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health source
  • May combine two claims. 44
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 18
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The Nurse-Family Partnership has been rigorously studied and reproduced in multiple regions across the United States with over a decade of participant follow-up.

    “The Nurse-Family Partnership, in which a nurse attended multiple in-home visits to low-income, first-time pregnant mothers, has been rigorously studied and reproduced in multiple regions across the United States with over a decade of participant follow-up.30,32,33”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [30] Kitzman, 2019, Prenatal and Infancy Nurse Home Visiting and 18-Year Outcomes of a Randomized Trial, Pediatrics source
    • cites [32] Olds, 1998, Long-term Effects of Nurse Home Visitation on Children's Criminal and Antisocial Behavior15-Year Follow-up of a Randomized Controlled Trial, JAMA source
    • cites [33] Eckenrode, 2010, Long-term effects of prenatal and infancy nurse home visitation on the life course of youths: 19-year follow-up of a randomized trial, Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med source
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The Fast Track Prevention program resulted in a 34.7% relative decline in substance-related convictions and a 30.9% relative decrease in violent crime convictions at age 25.

    “This program resulted in a 34.7% relative decline in substance-related convictions and a 30.9% relative decrease in violent crime convictions at age 25.20”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [20] Dodge, 2015, Impact of early intervention on psychopathology, crime, and well-being at age 25, Am J Psychiatry source

      The Results > Crime passage reports that Fast Track reduced the expected severity-weighted drug conviction index by 35% and violent crime conviction index by 31%, consistent with the claim’s approximate magnitudes. Our copy does not establish the more precise 34.7% and 30.9% figures, and the reported outcomes are severity-weighted indices rather than counts of convictions. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    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”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [42] Kirk, 2018, The impact of residential change and housing stability on recidivism: pilot results from the Maryland Opportunities through Vouchers Experiment (MOVE), J Exp Criminol source

      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
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    A New Haven TCN study of 188 reentering adults found those receiving TCN services experienced fewer days incarcerated (101.4 vs 187.4, p<0.0001) and fewer probation and parole violations (17% vs 33%, p<0.05) compared to a propensity-matched group in the 12 months following release, but no difference in arrest rates.

    “A subsequent study of 188 reentering adults in New Haven, CT, concluded that those receiving TCN services experienced fewer days incarcerated (101.4 versus 187.4, p<0.0001) and fewer probation and parole violations (17% versus 33%, p<0.05) compared to propensity-matched group in the 12 months following release,47 but, similar to the California study, no difference in arrest rates.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [47] Wang, 2019, Propensity-matched study of enhanced primary care on contact with the criminal justice system among individuals recently released from prison to New Haven, BMJ Open source

      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
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Several non-peer reviewed economic working papers and one paper published after the search evaluated the role of federal economic policies and were not included in the review.

    “Additionally, several non-peer reviewed economic working papers82,83 and one paper published after our search84 evaluated the role of federal economic policies were not included in our review.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [82] Lenhart, 2021, Earned income tax credit and crime, Contemporary Economic Policy source

      The Introduction identifies this as a study of EITC policy and crime, but specifies that it examines higher state EITCs. The Discussion and Conclusions likewise says it uses state-level variation in EITC rates, so describing this paper as evaluating federal economic policy is imprecise. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [83] Vogler J. Access to health care and criminal behavior: Short-run evidence from the ACA Medicaid expansions. Available at SSRN 3042267.2017. source
    • cites [84] He, 2020, The effect of health insurance on crime: Evidence from the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion, Health Economics source
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Important intervention components across all navigation studies included a low caseload for caseworkers (20-30 clients per 1.0 FTE), services starting in prison and bridged to the community, and a target population of individuals who had committed violent crimes.

    “Important intervention components across all studies included a low caseload for caseworkers (20-30 clients per 1.0 FTE), services starting in prison and bridged to the community, and a target population of individuals who had committed violent crimes.57,58,66,67”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [57] Duwe, 2012, Evaluating the Minnesota Comprehensive Offender Reentry Plan (MCORP): Results from a Randomized Experiment, JQ: Justice Quarterly source

      The Introduction describes MCORP services beginning during incarceration and continuing into the community, and says supervision agents had reduced caseloads. But it gives those caseloads as approximately 35–40 offenders, not 20–30; institutional caseworkers remained at 80–90. Its offense categories include property, drug, and DWI offenses, so it does not support describing people who committed violent crimes as the target population of this study. The paper also cannot establish what was true across all the cited studies. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [58] Veeh, 2017, Evaluation of a Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) Program in a Midwest State, Criminal Justice Policy Review source
    • cites [66] Clark, 2015, Making the most of second chances: an evaluation of Minnesota's high-risk revocation reduction reentry program, Journal of Experimental Criminology source
    • cites [67] Cook, 2015, An Experimental Evaluation of a Comprehensive Employment-Oriented Prisoner Re-entry Program, Journal of Quantitative Criminology source

      The Introduction describes services beginning about six months before release and continuing afterward, and a target group with a history of violence or gang involvement. It does not establish a caseload of 20–30 clients per full-time caseworker. Nor does it say that every participant had committed a violent crime, or establish these features across all the studies cited in the sentence. (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The review identified few primary prevention studies which did not demonstrate impact, suggesting publication bias, which undermines the ability to assess unsuccessful interventions.

    “Finally, we identified few primary prevention studies which did not demonstrate impact25,34,36 suggesting publication bias, which undermines our ability to assess unsuccessful interventions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [25] Campbell, 2012, Adult outcomes as a function of an early childhood educational program: an Abecedarian Project follow-up, Developmental psychology source

      The Results (no page supplied) report no treatment difference in criminal activity, so this paper provides an example of a prevention study with a null outcome. But the Results also report significant educational gains, so it is not an example of an intervention that showed no impact overall. The paper does not assess the citing review’s study count or its suggestion of publication bias. (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [34] Zun, 2006, The effectiveness of an ED-based violence prevention program, The American Journal of Emergency Medicine source
    • cites [36] Weiss, 2013, An independent randomized clinical trial of multisystemic therapy with non-court-referred adolescents with serious conduct problems, J Consult Clin Psychol source

      The Discussion (Primary intervention outcomes; page unavailable) reports no significant effect on teacher-reported problems or arrests, but significant improvement on two other primary outcomes. The study enrolled adolescents who already had serious conduct problems (Discussion, Secondary intervention outcomes; page unavailable), so it does not establish an unsuccessful primary-prevention study. The publication-bias suggestion is the citing authors’ inference, not a finding attributed to this trial. (LLM, conf=0.82)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    One review explored neighborhood-level interventions shown to reduce violence and emphasized the positive effect of neighborhood greening of vacant lots.

    “One explored neighborhood-level interventions shown to reduce violence and emphasized the positive effect of neighborhood greening of vacant lots,86”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [86] Kondo, 2018, Neighborhood Interventions to Reduce Violence, Annual Review of Public Health source
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    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.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [42] Kirk, 2018, The impact of residential change and housing stability on recidivism: pilot results from the Maryland Opportunities through Vouchers Experiment (MOVE), J Exp Criminol source

      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
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingcitation

    A study examining a similar hospital-based violence intervention found the program had no impact for primary prevention of incarceration.

    “A study examining a similar intervention found that the program had no impact for primary prevention of incarceration; the authors hypothesized this may be due to the low enrollment numbers when the study lost funding.46”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [46] Wang, 2012, Engaging individuals recently released from prison into primary care: a randomized trial, Am J Public Health source

      The Results (Return to Jail; page unavailable) found no significant difference in return-to-jail rates between the two groups. But this was a primary care trial involving people already released from prison, not a hospital-based violence intervention testing primary prevention of incarceration. The Discussion reports high participation, and our copy does not support the explanation that low enrollment followed a loss of funding. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The review identified pitfalls to research on decarceration and specifically the lack of institutional investment in this work.

    “Our review also identified pitfalls to research on decarceration and specifically the lack of institutional investment in this work.78”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [78] Ahalt, 2015, The State of Research Funding From the National Institutes of Health for Criminal Justice Health Research, Annals of Internal Medicine source

      The Results section (page unavailable) documents low NIH investment in criminal justice health research, supporting the point about limited institutional investment. It does not establish a lack of investment specifically in decarceration research. “Our review” refers to the citing authors’ own work, not a finding attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A second review examined the violence interruption model, Cure Violence, which has been replicated and demonstrates a violence-reducing effect.

    “and a second examined the violence interruption model, Cure Violence, which has been replicated and demonstrates a violence-reducing effect.85”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [85] Butts, 2015, Cure Violence: A Public Health Model to Reduce Gun Violence, Annual Review of Public Health source

      The Existing Research Evidence section describes evaluations of Cure Violence programs in several cities, supporting that the model has been replicated. But Evaluation Challenges and Limitations calls the evidence “mixed at best,” and the Conclusion says the studies could not clearly separate program effects from broader declines in violence. The paper therefore does not establish an unqualified violence-reducing effect. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    These papers support the implementation of the Earned Income Tax Credit and the expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act as crime-reducing measures.

    “These papers support the implementation of the Earned Income Tax Credit and the expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act as crime-reducing measures.82,84”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [82] Lenhart, 2021, Earned income tax credit and crime, Contemporary Economic Policy source
    • cites [84] He, 2020, The effect of health insurance on crime: Evidence from the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion, Health Economics source
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    A Washington state study found that expedited referral to Medicaid and linkage to care for those with serious mental illness resulted in increased rates of recidivism at 12 months (55% vs 46%, p<0.01), mostly explained by technical violations.

    “Finally, a study from Washington state which examined the effect of an expedited referral to Medicaid and linkage to care for those with serious mental illness found the treatment group had increased rates of recidivism at 12 months (55% versus 46%, p<0.01), mostly explained by technical violations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [44] Domino, 2019, Do timely mental health services reduce re-incarceration among prison releasees with severe mental illness?, Health Serv Res source

      Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [45] Grabert, 2017, Expedited Medicaid Enrollment, Service Use, and Recidivism at 36 Months Among Released Prisoners With Severe Mental Illness, Psychiatr Serv source

      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
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Girls in the Elmira study treatment group were less likely to have an arrest (10% versus 30%) or conviction (4% versus 20%) after nearly two decades of follow-up.

    “Girls in the Elmira study treatment group were less likely to have an arrest (10% versus 30%) or conviction (4% versus 20%) after nearly two decades of follow-up.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Of the 43 interventions, 14 targeted primary prevention of incarceration and 29 targeted secondary prevention.

    “Of the 43 interventions, 14 targeted primary prevention of incarceration20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 and 29 targeted secondary prevention (Tables 1, 2 and 3).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Neither the Minnesota post-secondary degree study nor another study examining receipt of high school diploma or GED established an effect on reduced future criminal legal involvement.

    “Interestingly, neither this study nor another examining the effect of receiving high school diploma or GED established an effect on reduced future criminal legal involvement.40”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [38] Duwe, 2014, The effects of prison-based educational programming on recidivism and employment, The Prison Journal source
    • cites [40] Zgoba, 2008, The influence of GED obtainment on inmate release outcome, Criminal Justice and Behavior source
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    In Moving to Opportunity stratified analyses, girls in the treatment arm experienced a one-third relative reduction in risk for arrest for violent and property crime (p<0.05), while boys experienced a non-significant decrease in arrest for violent crime and a 33% relative increase in property crime (p<0.10).

    “Stratified analyses found that while girls in the treatment arm experienced a one-third relative reduction in risk for arrest for violent and property crime (p<0.05), boys experienced a non-significant decrease in arrest for violent crime and a 33% relative increase in property crime (both of marginal significance, p<0.10).28”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [28] Kling, 2005, Neighborhood effects on crime for female and male youth: Evidence from a randomized housing voucher experiment, The Quarterly Journal of Economics source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    An additional 4 articles were identified, totaling 53 included articles.

    “We identified an additional 4 articles in references or by expert recommendation, totaling 53 articles.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Secondary prevention intervention studies more often used a quasi-experimental design and were heterogenous in their execution.

    “Unlike intervention studies focused on primary prevention, those focused on secondary prevention of incarceration more often used a quasi-experimental design and were heterogenous in their execution.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Twenty-eight included studies were randomized controlled trials and 15 employed quasi-experimental design.

    “Twenty-eight were designed as randomized control trials (RCTs),20,23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34,36,37,42,43,46,48,50,53,54,56,57,60, 61, 62, 63, 64,66, 67, 68 and 15 employed quasi-experimental design,21,22,35,38, 39, 40, 41,44,45,47,49,51,52,55,58,59,65 predominantly using propensity-score matching.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning

    All primary prevention interventions took place in the community.

    “By definition, all primary prevention interventions took place in the community;”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Other studies did not find any benefit of employment programs; the STRIVE model, which provided soft-skills training and access to a computer lab after release but no connection to a job, was one example.

    “Other studies did not find any benefit of employment programs; one example was the STRIVE model, which provided soft-skills training and access to a computer lab after release but no connection to a job.50”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [50] Farabee, 2014, An experimental evaluation of a nationally recognized employment-focused offender reentry program, Journal of Experimental Criminology source
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Most secondary prevention interventions were community-based (N=17) or served as a bridge between incarceration and return to the community (N=8).

    “most secondary prevention interventions were community-based (N=17)41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48,50,53,54,59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64,68 or served as a bridge between incarceration and return to the community (N=8).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Seven studies tested the effect of employment-based interventions on return to incarceration, and three documented reductions in future criminal legal system contact.

    “Seven studies tested the effect of employment-based interventions on return to incarceration,48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54 three of which documented reductions in future criminal legal system contact.49,51,54”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The National Supported Work Demonstration Project found an age-varying effect: participants 26 or younger experienced no reduction in rearrest rates at three years (55% vs 54%, p>0.05), while participants ages 27 or greater experienced an 11% decrease (p<0.001) in rearrest rates.

    “This study found an age-varying effect of the intervention: those 26 years old or younger experienced no reduction in rearrest rates at three years (55% versus 54%, p>0.05) but participants ages 27 years or greater experienced an 11% decrease (p<0.001) in rearrest rates.54”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [54] Uggen, 2000, Work as a turning point in the life course of criminals: A duration model of age, employment, and recidivism, American sociological review source
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    EMPLOY participants (232) experienced reduced rearrest rates (42% vs 50%), reconviction rates (25% vs 31%), reincarceration rates (9% vs 14%), and revocation rates (21% vs 38%) compared with 232 propensity-score matched eligible nonrecipients.

    “The study found that the 232 participants in the treatment group experienced reduced rearrest rates (42% versus 50%), reconviction rates (25% versus 31%), reincarceration rates (9% versus 14%), and revocation rates (21% versus 38%), compared with 232 participants in the propensity-score matched group who were eligible but did not receive EMPLOY services.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [49] Duwe, 2015, The benefits of keeping idle hands busy: An outcome evaluation of a prisoner reentry employment program, Crime & Delinquency source
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Mothers in the Nurse-Family Partnership had a longer interval to their next pregnancy and female children were more likely to be older at the time of their first pregnancy.

    “Mothers had a longer interval to their next pregnancy and female children were more likely to be older at the time of their first pregnancy.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The effects of Moving to Opportunity were strongest in the two years immediately after the intervention and more durable for violent crime outcomes relative to property crime.

    “The effects were strongest in the two years immediately after the intervention and more durable for violent crime outcomes relative to property crime.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Ten interventions fell within education, 3 within housing, 7 within healthcare, 8 within employment, and 15 within social support.

    “Ten interventions fell within education,20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27,38, 39, 40 3 within housing,28,29,41,42 7 within healthcare,30, 31, 32, 33, 34,43, 44, 45, 46, 47 8 within employment,37,48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54 and 15 within social support.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    There are evidence-based interventions in education, housing, employment, healthcare, and social support programs which can catalyze decarceration and have not been widely scaled.

    “Further, there are evidence-based interventions in the domains of education, housing, employment, healthcare, and social support programs which can catalyze decarceration and have not been widely scaled.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    While state and federal governments funded more than half of the studies included in the review (N=27), the majority included less than five years of follow-up.

    “While state and federal governments funded more than half of the studies included in this review (N=27), the majority included less than five years of follow-up, even though many of the interventions’ benefits may be realized decades after implementation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    In a hospital-based violence intervention study of 100 individuals randomized to participation, the control group experienced increased odds of violent arrest (OR 3.2, p<0.001), any crime conviction (OR 2.3, p<0.001), and violent crime conviction (OR 4.4, p<0.001) compared to the treatment arm.

    “Of 100 individuals randomized to participation, those in the control group experienced increased odds of violent arrest (OR 3.2, p<0.001), any crime conviction (OR 2.3, p<0.001) and violent crime conviction (OR 4.4, p<0.001) compared to individuals in the treatment arm.43”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [43] Cooper, 2006, Hospital-based violence intervention programs work, J Trauma source
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The review identified promising interventions across a number of domains which have not been implemented to scale, documented a conspicuous paucity of rigorous studies to date, and noted the limitations of short-term funding structures for research.

    “We identified promising interventions across a number of domains which have not been implemented to scale, documented a conspicuous paucity of rigorous studies to date, and noted the limitations of short-term funding structures for research.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    An RCT of 200 reentering adults in San Francisco found TCN program participation reduced emergency department use but did not impact arrest rates (58% vs 53%, p=0.46) twelve months after enrollment.

    “An RCT of 200 reentering adults in San Francisco, CA, found that TCN program participation reduced emergency department use but did not impact arrest rates (58% versus 53%, p=0.46) twelve months after enrollment.73”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [73] Wang, 2011, Effect of providing tailored primary care on health care utilization and return to jail among recently released prisoners: A randomized controlled trial, Journal of General Internal Medicine source
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The Boston Reentry Initiative, among 108 participants and 309 propensity score-matched people released in the year prior to intervention start, had lower rearrest rates at three years in treatment (77.8% vs 87.7%, p<0.01), with a greater reduction for violent crime rearrest at three years (27.8% vs 39.2%, p<0.05).

    “Re-arrest rates at three years were high in both groups, but lower in the treatment group (77.8% versus 87.7%, p<0.01). The reduction was greater for violent crime re-arrest at three years (27.8% versus 39.2%, p<0.05).55”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [55] Braga, 2009, Controlling violent offenders released to the community: An evaluation of the Boston reentry initiative, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency source
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Common themes in unsuccessful employment and social support interventions included not considering the participants' strengths or interests, starting in the community (as opposed to during incarceration), or offering employment opportunities limited to only low-skill, minimum wage work.

    “Common themes in unsuccessful employment and social support interventions included not considering the participants’ strengths or interests, starting in the community (as opposed to during incarceration) or offering employment opportunities limited to only low-skill, minimum wage work.48,50,52,54”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [48] Bond, 2015, A Controlled Trial of Supported Employment for People With Severe Mental Illness and Justice Involvement, Psychiatr Serv source
    • cites [50] Farabee, 2014, An experimental evaluation of a nationally recognized employment-focused offender reentry program, Journal of Experimental Criminology source
    • cites [52] Northcutt Bohmert, 2012, Minnesota's Affordable Homes Program: Evaluating the Effects of a Prison Work Program on Recidivism, Employment and Cost Avoidance, Criminal Justice Policy Review source
    • cites [54] Uggen, 2000, Work as a turning point in the life course of criminals: A duration model of age, employment, and recidivism, American sociological review source
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Three healthcare interventions identified in the review-Nurse-Family Partnership, the Transitions Clinic Network, and hospital-based violence reduction programs-show evidence of reducing criminal legal system contact but have not been systematically scaled, in part due to barriers funding non-physician labor in the health sector.

    “For instance, three healthcare interventions identified in this review– Nurse-Family Partnership, the Transitions Clinic Network, and hospital-based violence reduction programs—show evidence of reducing criminal legal system contact but have not been systematically scaled, in part, due to barriers funding non-physician labor in the health sector.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    E.W., L.P., J.C., and L.H. developed a protocol a priori using the Joanna Briggs Institute Scoping Review Template Guidelines.

    “E.W., L.P., J.C., and L.H. developed a protocol a priori using the Joanna Briggs Institute Scoping Review Template Guidelines.18”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [18] Peters M, Godfrey C, McInerney P, Munn Z, Tricco A, Khalil H. Chapter 11: Scoping Reviews (2020 version). JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. https://synthesismanual.jbi.global/. Published 2020. Accessed 13 Jan 2021. source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Premisecitation

    Reducing the number of people incarcerated will require targeted investments in the community safety net to support those impacted by mass incarceration.

    “Scholars argue that reducing the number of people incarcerated will require targeted investments in the community safety net to support those impacted by mass incarceration,12”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [12] Davis, 2003

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Data were extracted from each eligible study using a uniform extraction form.

    “The following information was extracted from each study deemed eligible for inclusion, using a uniform extraction form (missing data were documented):”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Thick public safety-the community services required to afford a stable and safe livelihood-is a necessary prerequisite for avoiding initial and repeated criminal legal contact.

    “In his book Homeward, sociologist Bruce Western introduced the idea of “thick public safety”—the community services required to afford a stable and safe livelihood—as a necessary prerequisite for avoiding initial and repeated criminal legal contact.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [17] Western, 2018
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Two authors independently reviewed all full-text articles.

    “Two authors (L.H. and E.L.) independently reviewed all full-text articles.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The finalized protocol was not registered but has been included in supplementary materials.

    “Because PROSPERO did not accept protocols for scoping reviews as of January 2021, this finalized protocol was not registered but has been included in supplementary materials (Appendix A).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Notable similarities of the effective early childhood programs were involvement of parent and child, sustained programmatic funding, and generation of positive outcomes measured decades after the intervention.

    “Notable similarities of these programs were involvement of parent and child, sustained programmatic funding, and the generation of positive outcomes measured decades after the intervention.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Discrepancies were decided by consensus after additional discussion with authors L.P. and E.W.

    “Discrepancies were decided by consensus after additional discussion with authors L.P. and E.W.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The review protocol only included studies that examined the individual-level outcome of criminal legal system involvement.

    “Further, our protocol only included studies that examined the individual-level outcome of criminal legal system involvement.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Recent legislative changes returned the right of incarcerated individuals to receive Pell grants and have the potential to drastically improve their access to college education.

    “Recent legislative changes, which returned the right of incarcerated individuals to receive Pell grants, have the potential to drastically improve their access to college education.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The Michigan-based Maternal and Infant Health Program, similar in design to the Nursing Family Partnership, is funded by Medicaid and is a home-visiting service available to all Medicaid-eligible pregnant women in the state.

    “Also, the Michigan-based Maternal and Infant Health Program, similar in design to the Nursing Family Partnership, is funded by Medicaid and is a home-visiting service available to all Medicaid-eligible pregnant women in the state.76”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [76] Willems Van Dijk, 2011, The Impact of Prenatal Care Coordination on Birth Outcomes, Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic & Neonatal Nursing source
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Secondary education is a necessary but insufficient potentiating step in creating a stable pathway post-release.

    “This suggests that secondary education is a necessary but insufficient potentiating step in creating a stable pathway post-release.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    An entire field of research devoted to the risk-needs-responsivity model of correctional programming was not included because this model centers on correctional programming, not community resources.

    “An entire field of research is devoted to the risk-needs-responsivity model of correctional programming81, which was not included here because this model centers on correctional programming, not community resources.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [81] Taxman, 2006, Risk, needs, responsivity: In action or inaction?, Crime & Delinquency source
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The review did not include studies which evaluated levels of neighborhood crime.

    “As such, we did not include studies which evaluated levels of neighborhood crime, which has been reviewed in two recent articles.85,86”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The review is unique due to its focus on community-based investments and exclusion of observational studies.

    “We note that prior work has evaluated recidivism reduction, especially employment and education,79,80 but our study is unique due to its focus on community-based investments and exclusion of observational studies.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In most states, public health insurance, especially Medicaid, does not cover services that fall outside of traditional clinical services, though this is slowly changing.

    “In most states, public health insurance, especially Medicaid, does not cover services that fall outside of traditional clinical services, though this is slowly changing.74”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [74] Spencer, 2015

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A federal law passed in 1994 withdrew Pell grant accessibility for incarcerated individuals, reducing the number of college programs within prisons from 772 in 1990 to eight in 1997.

    “A federal law passed in 1994 withdrew Pell grant accessibility for incarcerated individuals, reducing the number of college programs within prisons in our country from 772 in 1990 to eight in 1997.77”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [77] Sawyer, 2019, Since You Asked: How did the 1994 crime bill affect prison college programs?, Prison Policy Initiative

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Unsuccessful interventions for education, employment, and social support suggested that the dose of the intervention matters; a comprehensive, well-resourced intervention which provides access to future material needs for well-being is more likely to prevent future criminal legal contact.

    “Unsuccessful interventions for three domains (education, employment, and social support) suggested that the dose of the intervention matters; a comprehensive, well-resourced intervention which provides access to future material needs for well-being is more likely to prevent future criminal legal contact.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    If college programs are scaled to match demand, this has potential to substantially impact the success of students after release.

    “If college programs are scaled to match the demand, this has potential to substantially impact the success of students after release.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
57 of 57
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Little is known about what types and scale of community investments are most effective to support mass decarceration.

    “Little is known about what types and scale of community investments are most effective to support mass decarceration.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There is neither a blueprint nor consensus for how to reduce carceral populations beyond criminal legal system reform.

    “However, there is neither a blueprint nor consensus for how to reduce carceral populations beyond criminal legal system reform.”
2 of 2

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Timmons-Mitchell study has conflicting publication years

    Minor

    Table 3 labels this study as 2010, while its bibliography entry gives 2006.

  • Hospital-based primary-prevention study is cited as a different intervention

    Minor

    The discussion cites reference 46 for a hospital-based primary-prevention intervention. Reference 46 is the Transitions Clinic Network study; Table 2 identifies the unsuccessful hospital-based primary-prevention study as Zun et al.

  • Heller study has conflicting publication years

    Minor

    Table 2 labels the Heller study as 2016, while its bibliography entry gives 2014.

3 of 3

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Walmsley R. World Prison Population List—Twelfth Edition. Inst Crim Policy Res Web site. https://www.prisonstudies.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/wppl_12.pdf. Published 2018. Accessed 18 Nov 2020, 12.
  2. Wang, 2011, Effect of providing tailored primary care on health care utilization and return to jail among recently released prisoners: A randomized controlled trial, Journal of General Internal Medicine, 26, S251
  3. Albritton, 2016, How states can fund community health workers through Medicaid to improve people's health, decrease costs, and reduce disparities, Families USA. 2019
  4. Sawyer, 2019, Since You Asked: How did the 1994 crime bill affect prison college programs?, Prison Policy Initiative

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hawks, L., Lopoo, E., Puglisi, L., Cellini, J., Thompson, K., Halberstam, A., Tolliver, D., Martinez-Hamilton, S., & Wang, E.
Affiliations
  • Medical College of Wisconsin (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
  • Yale University (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Hawks, L
Venue
The Lancet Regional Health - Americas
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-04
Volume
8
Pages
100150
ISSN
2667-193X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4200193860
Cited by
15
References
80
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3
FWCI
0.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet Regional Health - Americas (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Yale University
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL137696)
  • National Cancer Institute (R01CA230444)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
mass incarceration, decarceration, community investment, community-based intervention, criminal legal system involvement, early childhood education, Nurse-Family Partnership, peer support, reentry, public health prevention, social support services, employment programs, housing programs

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-28.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-28.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

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