Controlling violent offenders released to the community: An evaluation of the Boston reentry initiative
Abstract
Despite the high level of funding and policy interest in prisoner reentry, there is still little rigorous scientific evidence to guide jurisdictions in developing reentry programs to enhance public safety, particularly for managing those who pose the greatest safety risks. The Boston Reentry Initiative (BRI) is an interagency initiative to help transition violent adult offenders released from the local jail back to their Boston neighborhoods through mentoring, social service assistance, and vocational development.This study uses a quasi-experimental design and survival analyses to evaluate the effects of the BRI on the subsequent recidivism of program participants relative to an equivalent control group. The authors find that the BRI was associated with significant reductions—on the order of 30 percent—in the overall and violent arrest failure rates.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
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”
From Community investment interventions as a means for decarceration: A scoping review (2022) · cites this paper as [55]
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”
From Community investment interventions as a means for decarceration: A scoping review (2022) · cites this paper as [55]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 48 · Cited by 142
- Authors
- Braga, A. A., Piehl, A. M., & Hureau, D.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
- Corresponding author
- Braga, Anthony A.
- Venue
- Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2009-09-30
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 411-436
- ISSN
- 0022-4278 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-731X
- OpenAlex
- W2147247344
- Cited by
- 142
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 14.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Boston Foundation
- Rappaport Institute for Greater Boston, Harvard Kennedy School
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
- Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
- Keywords
- prisoner reentry, violent offenders, recidivism, post-release supervision, mentoring, career development, jail release, public safety, inter-agency cooperation
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
