The DOI matches its Crossref record; its reference list is not available.
Evaluation of a Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) Program in a Midwest State
Abstract
The Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI) paved the way for a new era of rehabilitation in corrections’ programming. However, published outcome evaluations of SVORI programs and their progeny are limited in number. The current article presents the multiyear outcome evaluation of one prisoner reentry initiative established in a Midwestern state, which was developed within the framework of the SVORI program model. A comparison group was identified using propensity score matching to evaluate program effectiveness on the recidivism outcomes of returns to prison and new convictions. Cox proportional hazards modeling found program participants to have significantly lower hazard to incur a new conviction than the comparison group but no difference in the hazard for reincarceration. The implications of these mixed findings in recidivism outcomes are discussed for the reentry program initiative.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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 [58]
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”
From Community investment interventions as a means for decarceration: A scoping review (2022) · cites this paper as [58]
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”
From Community investment interventions as a means for decarceration: A scoping review (2022) · cites this paper as [58]
Citations
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 19 · Cited by 9
Research works printed but not linked: 19
- Andrews D. A., 2010, The psychology of criminal conduct
- 10.1002/pst.433 · DOI · Paper page
- Bouffard J. A., 2007, Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 44, 1, 10.1300/J076v43n02_01 · DOI
- 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19981015)17:19<2265::AID-SIM918>3.0.CO;2-B · DOI
- 10.1177/0306624X12439397 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2006.09.007 · DOI
- Guo S., 2010, Propensity score analysis: Statistical methods and applications
- 10.1037/1082-989X.12.3.247 · DOI
- 10.1086/227905 · DOI
- 10.1080/15564886.2010.485907 · DOI
- Lawrence A., 2008, Probation and parole responses: State responses
- Lipsey M. W., 1998, Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful intervention, 86
- 10.1093/aje/kwt212 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1198/jasa.2010.tm09570 · DOI
- Sample L. L., 2008, Final report for the evaluation of Nebraska’s serious and violent offender reentry program
- 10.1080/10509674.2011.582931 · DOI
- Shadish W. R., 2002, Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference
- Tabachnick B. G., 2013, Using multivariate statistics
- 10.1177/0032885514548007 · DOI
Metadata
- Authors
- Veeh, C. A., Severson, M. E., & Lee, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Denver (US)
- University of Kansas (US)
- Texas Tech University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Veeh, Christopher A.
- Venue
- Criminal Justice Policy Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-07-25
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 238-254
- ISSN
- 0887-4034 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-3586
- OpenAlex
- W1969820359
- Cited by
- 9
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 2.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Criminal Justice Policy Review (publishedVersion)
- 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, recidivism, reincarceration, offender rehabilitation, correctional programming, program effectiveness
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
