Jail Re-Entry Report

Many offenders who are released from prison encounter many obstacles which hinder their progress towards community re-entry. On their own, many fail to secure employment, housing, or complete education or training programs. Without guidance or assistance many offenders return to crime to support themselves. Fortunately there are number of organizations that see the need for services to assist offenders on their path back into the community. One such organization that has proven to be successful is the Safer Foundation.

By the lack of rehabilitation programs in the state and federal prison systems, the chances of convicts releasing and returning back to prison increases rapidly. The lack of rehabilitation is one of the most leading causes to an offenders relapse or to a new crime that will be committed within 3 years from the offender’s release. A rehabilitation program

Many would say that offenders are hopeless and if one looks at the rate of recidivism, one would definitely think that our nation’s offenders are indeed hopeless. However, what if there was a way to reduce the rate of recidivism and at the same time rehabilitate offenders in order to make them functioning members of the community? Reentry programs that are implemented correctly cannot only reduce the rate of recidivism but at the same time help to rehabilitate an offender through education, treatment, and therapy. The Second Chance At is a law that went into effect April 29, 2008 (P.L. 110-199) and it allows government agencies to provide services to offenders that will help to reduce the rate of recidivism as well as improve the

In the United States, each day approximately 1,600 adults are released from state and federal penitentiaries to reintegrate back into the community (Gunnison & Helfgott, 2013). Reentry programs have been created all over the nation to help offenders successfully transition from prison into society. Offenders are confronted with numerous obstacles when attempting to reintegrate back into society. Ninety-five percent of offenders are released to reintegrate back into the community (Davis, Bahr, & Ward, 2013). Upon release, ex-offenders realize that despite the fact that they are no longer incarcerated, they face many restrictions. The restorative justice development rose to address the disappointment of the criminal justice framework to manage victims, offenders, and communities in an integrated way. A core focus of this development has been to expand the role of the community in advocating changes that will avert the issues and conditions related with crime and the demand for a criminal justice intervention (Hass & Saxon, 2012).

The organizational functions that would be integral to the positive development of a new reentry program start with sitting down with community leaders to determine what needs are being met, and where shortfalls in the system lie. Once needs are locked in, set up funding, through local, state, or federal means, determine how many employees will be needed and gather a list of potential candidates. Taking the candidates aside at the initial interview/selection, determine assets that can be applied to the program, along with educational and experience. Sometimes needs can be met by individuals that have experience in the reality that is life in prison, these candidates can be brought in and trained to handle responsibilities and build knowledge with time. Creating an outlet for improvement begins with building trust, contacts, and employers willing to work with the system and create

During the past decade, there has been a newly found interest in prisoner reentry. This is due to a change in many of the factors surrounding the release of convicted felons and their reentry into to the community (Visher, C. A., & Travis, J. 2003). The number of people incarcerated in the United States prisons has quintupled and correctional facilities are working on getting them back into the community. Over half of the convicted felons that are released from prison return to correctional systems within one year of their release date. One of the most common reasons for their return into the prison systems is because many

The problem with prison reentry has been going on for many years in the United States, as I discussed in assignments one and two. Recidivism issues can often be linked with reentry issues because when offenders are returning to society, they need to be prepared, which is something that our current criminal justice system is not trying to achieve. In order to create some defensible solutions for prison reentry and the recidivism issues linked to prison reentry, the criminal justice system has to realize that there is no one overall solution because every offender have different offenses, different stories, different outcomes, and different prison sentences. Because of this, each offender's return to society will be different, and the reentry

Community Based Corrections programs, also known as halfway houses or Residential Reentry facilities, were established as an alternative for prisoners to complete their term of incarceration in a community setting. Residential Reentry facilities provide a structured environment for low, minimum, and high-risk offenders while allowing them to integrate back into society. Specifically, Residential Reentry facilities provide offenders the opportunity to gain employment, establish financial responsibility, and obtain suitable housing. With the overcrowding of prisons, the ability to participate in Community Based Correction programs enables the convicted criminals as well as prison staff to lessen the loads that come with working in a prison as well as improve the lifestyle that comes with incarceration. As with all things in life, there are positive as well as negative outcomes to the participation of these convicted criminals in community-based programs. In viewing the positive and negative outcomes, the end

The United States of America is phrased by many, as being “the land of the free.” Yet, the Unites States currently has the highest per capita prison population than any other country. The United States makes up only 5% of the world’s population and of that 5%, 25% of our overall nation’s population is currently incarcerated. A few factors that attribute to our high rates of incarceration include, sentencing laws: such as mandatory- minimum sentencing, lack of initial deterrence from crime, the war on drugs and the presence of recidivism. With our ever growing incarceration rates and the cost of housing individual offenders averaging $22,000 a criminal justice agenda. Recidivism refers to a person 's relapse into criminal behavior resulting in rearrests, reconviction or return to prison with or without a new sentence during a three-year period following the prisoner 's release (National Institute of Justice.) Many programs have been implemented in our prison system to help reduce the recidivism rates. Programs such as educational/ vocational programming, reentry programs, substance abuse programs and subsidized employment are among many programs in which have been proven effective. Yet, due to costs deficits, the clock is ticking to find evidence based programs to invest in. So, the question currently being sought after is, which method is most effective in reducing recidivism rates?

In Maryland, public assistance programs as well as housing programs are able to deny assistance to individuals with incarceration histories or convictions on their records. “The Corporation for Supportive Housing estimates that 10 to 12 percent of former inmates are homeless. Other studies put the count at between 15 and 27 percent” (Law). With such a large percentage of inmates being released to the streets, it is no wonder that rates of recidivism are so high.

To support my assumption there is an immediate need for the implementation of a reentry plan; I have reviewed the opinions of other criminologist such as Reginald A. Wilkinson (2008). Wilkinson (2008) has written several articles on the need for incarcerated offender reentry plans. In one of his articles entitled "Incarceration and Beyond: A Personal Perspective” (2008), Wilkinson states, “the overarching idea is that prison reentry programming should commence upon each offender’s admission to the reception center” Wilkinson goes on to say that those released without a reentry plan will affect the percentage of those returning to incarceration and have a negative effect on a communities budget and security”. Consequently, I can assume that if a reentry plan is implemented immediately, the department will save and better spend its budget dollars and stop what I call “the swinging door effect”. I define the “swinging door effect” as the repeated return of offenders into incarceration within a short period of time such. Based on personal interviews along with release document reviews, I can assume a reentry plan was not implemented and likely created the “swinging door effect”. Consequently, I have found the repeated return of offenders into incarceration within a short period of time is a problem that keeps tax dollars from being spent wisely and will affect a community’s economy and security.

Many criminals are sent to jail on a day to day basis. Once they have completed their sentence they are faced with many problems once they are “free”. These problems can be but are not limited to housing, employment, and substance abuse. The prisoner, once they are released, has a tendency to go back to their old ways and to continue the life of crime they were a part of prior to prison. To avoid this, while a prisoner is in prison, the staff creates a reentry program for the prisoner. The reentry program takes affect once the prisoner leaves prison. These programs are created within the community to help the offender from committing new crimes and to integrate them back into society. These programs are also created to help with

Ex-offenders face many challenges after being released into society after prison. This prolonged issue has gone on for quite some time in the United States, and it has been since recent decade that the United States has discovered reentry for prisoners (Johnson & Cullen, 2015). In 2007, the Second Chance Act of 2007 was introduced to break the cycle of recidivism; to rebuild ties between offenders and their families before and after incarcerated to encourage and support offenders; to protect the public; to provide and promote law-abiding conduct; to assist offenders in establishing a self-sustaining and law-abiding life providing sufficient transition

strengthening re-entry programs in federal prisons designed to reduce recidivism and enhance reintegration into the workforce after

In our prison system today, they want to ensure the safety of the community by keeping the offenders incarcerated while some are in rehabilitation. The prison administration are devoted to help to improve the opportunities for offenders such