Quasi-Experimental Design

While evaluating the drug court programs several types of dependencies were discovered. One dependency was created because of multiple measures of criminal behavior during the same time of the follow-ups. Each evaluation had to utilize a particular research sample so that statistical independence could be maintained. An odds-ratio effect size was used because this type of format is most appropriate effect size for the outcomes referring to recidivism. The coding of the effect size was done in such a way that positive effect sizes indicated the treatment group had more of a favorable outcome than the comparison group. The researchers coded an effect size that quantified each court's effects on recidivism. There was also the coding of drug court programs, research methodology, and samples (Mitchell et al., 2012). The results of the study showed that participants in the drug court programs have lower recidivism rate than nonparticipants. These rates show to be less following their removal from the drug court programs. These findings express the need for continuous funding, development, and operation of drug court programs as they prove a reduction in recidivism. However, when it comes to drug courts in the juvenile judicial system, the finding are considerably less than adult drug

In order to determine whether or not focusing on re-entry services helps reduce overcrowding in prisons a longitudinal outcome evaluation study will be used. The study will be completely voluntary and consent will be required at the beginning of the study. Participants are not required to complete the study; however, a monetary reward will be given for successful completion. Other than the monetary reward, no other incentives will be offered to participants. The focus will be on two prisons, one prison will have already implemented the re-entry services policy and the other will not. Our sample will consist of inmates who have served five to twenty years in prison and will soon be released. The ideal sample would consist of at least 50 inmates from each facility. Various demographic information will be collected such as, age, race, gender, highest level of education, and home city at time of arrest. Other basic information that will be gathered will include, whether or not they had familial support while incarcerated, and whether or not they have familial support upon release.

Of these inmates 60, 35 men and 25 women. The experiment assured that the research was representative. The participants in this study originally resided in one female prison and 5 prisons of North Carolina. All Inmates were high custody prisons serving high risk offenders (Stevens & Ward, 1997, p.108). The treatment group were those who did not have any college degree when they were convicted, sent to prison, and earned a degree prior to be released. The college degree in this study includes a one-year college certificate, an associate’s degree, or a bachelor’s degree. The comparison group were those who held a high school diploma or did not have any education while incarcerated. After the participants were released, they were tracked for a three-year period (Kim & Clark, 2013, p. 199). The participants were sent to search for jobs. The study took into consideration who had more opportunity to find a job, and the reasons the employers considered before hiring or not hiring the individual. The study also collected employer’s information about the individual’s performance at work. The expert kept tracking the recidivism’s rate among the participants. The recidivism rate was measured by any arrest for a crime occurring within the three-year period (Kim & Clark, 2013, p. 199). Finally, the researchers compared the records of inmates who completed a degree with the inmates who earned a HSD/GED or did not completed any program at

America sends more of its citizens to prison than any other country in the world. The United States, though only five percent of the world’s population, incarcerate 25 percent of the world’s prisoners. America is supposed to be the land of the free, not the land of the incarcerated. About 6,937,600 offenders were under the supervision of adult correctional systems at year end 2012. Around two-thirds of the prison population which is released annually (637,400) will recidivate within the first three years of release (Glaze, 2013). The prisoner re-entry programs that are currently in place are clearly ineffective and insufficient. A reallocation of the budget is the first step towards fixing our re-entry programs. Once the budget is under control, the government needs to have a complete overhaul of system. There are many prisoner re-entry programs that have shown promise which means there is already a blueprint to success available.

In this table, the authors are describing the characteristics (gender, race, age, priors, offense, and education) of the sample of Ohio inmates who completed the various correctional educational programs included in their study (college, GED, vocational, and high school) and those who did not participate in correlational educational programs (non-education).

A large number of incarcerated people leave the state and federal prisons every year. It becomes a major concern for federal, local, and state government when they reenter into the community. Most of these individuals do not fit into the community and after a short period of time, some of them would have committed new crimes or have violated terms in which they were released and thus re-incarcerated. This issue brings about many

Inmates are released with few if any resources and usually end up returning to the institution after failing to reestablish productive lives in the community. This alarming reality is both a fiscal and social problem: state budget deficits bring enormous prison expenditures to light as social injustices in the system persist. Reforming the system to end the cycle of incarceration will have positive effects on the bottom line while reducing crime and thereby increasing public safety. Clearly, the deterrence effects of harsh prison sentences have not been effective. It may be time to once again embrace and expand the rehabilitative capacity of the criminal justice system.

California has one of the nation’s highest recidivism rates, which has been a well-known problem for many years. The rate has been steadily dropping. However it is still about 15% higher than the national average of 43.3% (McDonald, “California’s Recidivism Problem”). The recidivism problem in California is caused by rehabilitation programs not being effective enough to keep ex-convicts out of prison. Keeping prisoners in the California prison system is an enormous waste of taxpayer money. Instead of spending more and more on prisons, the money could be used elsewhere such as lowering college tuition for students. The government could easily save money for other purposes such as this by changing rehabilitation to make it more effective. In order to reduce spending on prisons and recidivism, prisons need to have better rehabilitation programs to make ex-convicts into productive members of society.

More than 700,000 prisoners are discharged from Federal and state prison every year, while another nine million cycle through regional prisons. Surprisingly, more than two-thirds of these inmates are arrested again within three years of their discharge and many of them end up reincarcerated (White House, 2011). Such high rates of relapse and recidivism are adding a huge burden on the current criminal justice system, calling for the public support for improvements and promotion of effective offender reentry programs in local communities.

would teach offenders a lesson and reduce their chances to recidivate. Stevens and Ward (1997) said that “retuning unprepared, uneducated, and unusually individuals to the community is the biggest threat to the public safety” (p. 106). Stevens and Ward conducted an experiment to examine the effects of education on incarcerated offenders. The experiment contained 60 student-inmates who had earned their associate or bachelor degree while incarcerated. The participants were inmates release from the North Carolina Department of Corrections (p. 108). The participants were tracked and their recidivism rate were compared with nonstudent inmates. Also, they gathered data from education and recidivism studies of thirty states. The result demonstrated

Each participant who completes their participation in this study is awarded early release from prison

Incarceration has been the primary means of punishment for criminals who have been convicted of felony offenses. While prisoners are serving the term of incarceration they face many difficult situations. Some of these situations can include committing new crimes within the system which could lead to prolonging the current sentencing. Those who are able to make parole after meeting the requirements set in place by the court are faced with new difficulties when trying to reintegrate in society. While inmates complete sentences ordered by the court, they have the opportunity to take advantage of Federal Aid including continued education, job skill training, employment opportunities and support programs. These programs are designed to lessen the struggle offenders’ face as they reintegrate into society by offering a positive direction upon their release. The overall goal is to achieve a reduction in the rate of recidivism.

Reducing the recidivism rate is necessary for citizens, inmates, families. The residents will feel safe knowing that the prisoner that was released won’t try to harm them. The inmates so that they can travel down a different path in life and learn how to support themselves without the aid of criminal activities. The families so that their lives can be less stressful fearing that something may happen to their husband, father, mate, brother or sister. There are challenges for the inmate when they re-enter society, fear of returning to prison, of not being able to find work, and being in the control by the criminal justice system if they’re on parole or probation. The programs that are available may have limited space or the inmates don’t know about them. The former inmate will need guidance for them to navigate the challenges of being released from prison and without it there is the reality of returning to jail.

“Students who participated in programs graduated from college at a rate 11 per cent higher than peers who did not. Their high school graduation rate was six per cent higher. Drug use and behaviour problems were six per cent lower for program participants, arrest rates 19 per cent lower, and diagnoses of mental health disorders 13.5 per cent lower” (Taylor et al 1170). This is important because the same type of programs are available for older children and adults, but the improvements are not as drastic as seen in those treated at a young age. The learning interventions used in this study are the same that would be used for inmates in the prison system, and should be used in schools as a requirement rather than only for at-risk youth because of the lower effectiveness as a child becomes a teenager or adult. The methodologies of the studies in Taylor’s tests were focused on youth in a meta-analysis which had followed participants throughout at least their early twenties, so this information was detailed, and needing to have the challenges to remain unbiased, the review notes that studies with smaller sample sizes were identified and the effect size estimated in a procedure called trim-and-fill analyses to ensure that results were as accurate as possible.

Convicting, sentencing, and imprisoning are just the first few steps of reducing crime. All the effort, time, and money that go into keeping criminals locked up and off the streets are really for nothing in the end if he or she commits the same crime again after release. James Haley, who is the book editor of “Prisons” points out, “Every year, close to six hundred thousand inmates are released from state and federal prisons around the country. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, two-thirds of former convicts commit new crimes and one-half are re-incarcerated within three years of being released from prison” (138). Are US prisons truly effective when so many prisoners are committing new crimes upon release? It is for the better interests of American safety that some prisoners are locked up for life, but this should not include the constant return of re-offenders. The life of most convicts involves committing a crime and being sentenced to jail only to repeat the same process again. Many re-offenders see incarceration as a ticket to a place to sleep and food to eat.