Team Policing: Case Study

The tension between rehabilitation and punishment has been increasing dramatically. This is because there have been sharp rises in the prison population and repeat offender rates. When one area is over emphasized in relation to the other, there is the possibility that imbalances will occur. Over the course of time, these issues can create challenges that will impact the criminal justice system and society at large. (Gadek, 2010) (Clear, 2011) (Gatotch, 2011)

Consider an example, if an offender is originally classified at higher levels of security, the process of reintegration should be reflected in successive reductions in security until release of this offender into the community. Likewise, reclassification and prompt transfer of an offender to the “least restrictive” level of imprisonment improves the likelihood of that offender being considered favourably for discretionary release. Based on the research it was concluded that that there is a strong association between security level placement and discretionary release, even when controlling for

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?

The primary interest within the independent variable is to determine whether participation in drug courts decreases the probability of recidivism. To evaluate this concern, the current study will analyze whether receiving treatment in a drug court versus the comparison group of probationers will affect various outcomes. Finally, gender, race, age, and education will also be included in the analysis as control variables.

A provision in the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 banned access to Pell Grants for incarcerated adults. At the time, Pell grant usage among inmates constituted less than 1 percent of Federal Pell spending, but its removal all but eliminated postsecondary opportunities for inmates. Since that time, research has found that access to correctional education (i.e. adult education, postsecondary courses, and workforce training) correlates with significantly reduced chances of recidivism, increased employment prospects, and greater public safety. Under the Obama Administration the Department initiated a pilot program reinstating some incarcerated individuals’ access to Pell Grants to pursue higher education. Do you have an opinion on whether providing postsecondary for prisoners helps reduce recidivism, increase employment, and

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

The incarcerated population are typically of low socioeconomic and low education levels. (4) Interestingly, low socioeconomic status and education levels on their own are directly linked with poor health. (5) When these social determinants of health are combined with prisonisation; the adaptation process in which incarcerated individuals adjust themselves to behavioural standards within the institutions which are not comparable with those of life outside prison.(6) This confines the already vulnerable to an environment of violence and drug use, which leads to further decline in health status while serving sentences. (1) In addition to the low socioeconomic status and education level of prison inmates, we can also establish that inmates are predominately male when compared to the

At intake, all inmates are assessed for mental illness, potential mental health issues, need for treatment, and to identify inmates who are likely to be a danger to themselves or others (Adams & Ferrandino, 2008). The risk assessment process is an important factor in placing inmates within the facility and should be assessed thoroughly by a trained staff member. Monahan (1996) asserts that actuarial models are more accurate than clinical models and should therefore be used to determine who is more likely to be violent and should take the place of clinical approaches. However, Banks, Robbins, Silver, Vesselinov, Steadman, Monahan, and Roth (2004) used a multi-test approach, where several instruments were used to assess offenders rated as high or low risk. The idea is that several instruments are used to assess at an individual level rather than a group level, in turn providing a more accurate probability of risk of offending. The assessment process is an important tool to assess each of the special inmate populations throughout their sentence of incarceration. Each correctional facility within the state of Florida will provide drug and alcohol counseling

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

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.

. .The recidivism rate for juveniles served by the higher rated programs, however, was 12 percentage points lower than expected on the basis of their risk level. The results were virtually the same for juveniles with 12-month recidivism data” (Lipsey and Howell

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).

Over many years there has been great debate about whether rehabilitation reduces the rate of recidivism in criminal offenders. There has been great controversy over whether anything works to reduce recidivism and great hope that rehabilitation would offer a reduction in those rates. In this paper I will introduce information and views on the reality of whether rehabilitation does indeed reduce recidivism. Proposed is a quasi-experiment, using a group of offenders that received rehabilitation services and an ex post facto group that did not? I intend to prove that rehabilitation services do

Current statistics indicate that rates of recidivism predict that released inmates will return to prison for a violation of the terms of their release or for a new offense within three years of their exit from a correctional facility (The Sentencing Project, 2003, p. 2). These recidivism rates are fairly substantial, and will more than likely need to be addressed just to accommodate the

Research on recidivism reveals a variety of different ways to define and measure its effectiveness on the outcome. One instrument widely used in assessing offenders is the Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R). The LSI-R was developed with short-term offenders and community supervisees. It assesses largely risk factor for recidivism and is designed to inform parole management decisions (Manchak et al., 2008). The 54 items of the LSI-R assess ten “risk-needs” factors: criminal history, education/employment, financial, family/marital, accommodation, leisure/recreation, peers/companions, alcohol/drug problems, emotional/personal, and attitude/orientation (p. 478). Results indicate that the LSI-R moderately predicts general, but not necessarily violent recidivism (p. 477). The utility of the LSI-R in predicting community recidivism is well established for probationers and minor offenders.