Cited by 48Criminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisCriminal Justice and PenologyCrime Patterns and Interventions

The Impact of Prison Reentry Services on Short-Term Outcomes: Evidence From a Multisite Evaluation

Lattimore, Pamela K., Visher, Christy A.·2013·Evaluation Review

Abstract

Background: Renewed interest in prisoner rehabilitation to improve postrelease outcomes occurred in the 1990s, as policy makers reacted to burgeoning prison populations with calls to facilitate community reintegration and reduce recidivism. In 2003, the Federal government funded grants to implement locally designed reentry programs. Adult programs in 12 states were studied to determine the effects of the reentry programs on multiple outcomes. Research design: A two-stage matching procedure was used to examine the effectiveness of 12 reentry programs for adult males. In the first stage, “intact group matching” was used to identify comparison populations that were similar to program participants. In the second stage, propensity score matching was used to adjust for remaining differences between groups. Propensity score weighted logistic regression was used to examine the impact of reentry program participation on multiple outcomes measured 3 months after release. Subjects and data: The study population was 1,697 adult males released from prisons in 2004–2005. Data consisted of interview data gathered 30 days prior to release and approximately 3 months following release, supplemented by administrative data from state departments of correction and the National Crime Information Center. Results and conclusions: Results suggest programs increased in-prison service receipt and produced modest positive outcomes across multiple domains (employment, housing, and substance use) 3 months after release. Although program participants reported fewer crimes, differences in postrelease arrest and reincarceration were not statistically significant. Incomplete implementation and service receipt by comparison group members may have resulted in insufficient statistical power to identify stronger treatment effects.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0193841x13519105

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • One study synthesizing results from multiple additional SVORI programs found only a small drop in future criminal legal system involvement.

    “However, one study synthesizing results from multiple additional SVORI programs found only a small drop in future criminal legal system involvement.65”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 50 · Cited by 48

Authors
Lattimore, P. K., & Visher, C. A.
Affiliations
  • RTI International (US)
  • University of Delaware (US)
Venue
Evaluation Review
Published
2013-06
Volume
37
Issue
3-4
Pages
274-313
ISSN
  • 0145-4692 (ISSN-L)
  • 0193-841X
  • 1552-3926
OpenAlex
W2170515127
Cited by
48
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1
FWCI
8.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Evaluation Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Department of Justice
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
Keywords
prisoner reentry programs, prisoner rehabilitation, post-release outcomes, recidivism, reincarceration, employment, housing, substance use, community reintegration, program effectiveness
MeSH terms
Adult, Crime, Humans, Male, Prisons, United States, Program Evaluation, Criminals

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