M-A-D Prison Ministry
http://lasvegassun.com/news/2012/aug/23/re-entry-programs-give-former-prisoners-hope-real-/
https://nevada211.communityos.org/zf/profile/service/id/647136
Returning to the community from jail or prison is a complex transition for most offenders, as well as for their families and communities. Upon reentering society, former offenders are likely to struggle with substance abuse, lack of adequate education and job skills, limited housing options, and mental health issues.
Congress recognized the importance of this issue by passing the Second Chance Act of 2007 (SCA). SCA provides federal grants for programs and services that work to reduce recidivism and improve offender outcomes. Federal grants are also provided to support research and evaluation on a variety of aspects related to offender reentry.
Offender reentry, the transition from life in jail or prison to life in the community, can have profound implications for public safety. M-A-D Prison Ministry continues to support research and evaluation of reentry-related issues, such as statewide reentry initiatives and research that examines the process of reentering society within the context of the community, neighborhood and family into which the former offenders return.
Given the number of individuals under criminal justice supervision in the community, offender reentry continues to garner considerable attention from researchers and practitioners alike. Much of this attention has been paid to more traditional approaches to reentry programming — for example, job training and substance abuse programs. In recent years, several federal initiatives, including SCA and the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI), have redirected research attention to coordinated approaches for offenders returning to communities.
Neighborhoods, Recidivism and Employment Among Returning Prisoners
Jeffrey Morenoff and David Harding of the University of Michigan examined the association between neighborhood context and the outcomes related to recidivism and employment among a cohort of prisoners released from Michigan state prisons in 2003 (award number 2008-IJ-CX-00018).
Returning to a more disadvantaged neighborhood was associated with higher risks of absconding and returning to prison for a technical violation, a lower risk of being arrested, and more adverse labor market outcomes, including less employment and lower wages. Cumulative exposure to disadvantaged neighborhoods was associated with lower employment and wages but not related to recidivism. Returning to a more affluent neighborhood was associated with a lower risk of being arrested, absconding, and returning to prison on a technical violation, and more positive labor market outcomes, including greater employment and wages. Being employed substantially reduced the risk of all recidivism outcomes, but there was no evidence that employment mediated the association between neighborhoods and recidivism.
Taken together, these results suggest that the neighborhoods parolees experience during parole were strong predictors of recidivism and labor market outcomes, but there is not a simple answer to the question of what neighborhood characteristics constitute "risky" environments for parolees. This project was the first to assemble and analyze a rich dataset of administrative records on individual parolees and to link these records with data on neighborhood context.
Conviction Status Impacts the Employment Prospects of Young Men
Finding employment after being incarcerated can be an important step in a former inmate's reintegration into the community. Yet this is frequently one of the most difficult tasks former offenders undertake. Survey results suggest that between 60 and 75 percent of ex-offenders are jobless up to a year after release. [1]
Most employers are reluctant to hire applicants with criminal records. NIJ-funded research has shown that most employers are reluctant to hire applicants with criminal records. In a study conducted in New York City, for example, a criminal record reduced the likelihood of a callback or job offer by nearly 50 percent (28 percent for applicants without a criminal record versus 15 percent of applicants with). The negative effect of a criminal record was substantially larger for black applicants. The penalty for having a criminal record suffered by white applicants was approximately half the size of the penalty for black applicants with a criminal record.[2]
Employment prospects improve when applicants interact with the hiring manager. In the New York City study, employment prospects for applicants with criminal records improved when applicants had an opportunity to interact with the hiring manager, particularly when these interactions elicited sympathetic responses from the manager. Although individual characteristics of employers were significant, the researchers concluded that personal interaction between the applicant and prospective employer was in itself a key factor in a successful hiring.[3]
About the Research
Devah Pager of Princeton University was competitively awarded funds to conduct a randomized field experiment in Milwaukee to identify the barriers that former offenders face when seeking employment shortly after their release from prison (award number 2002-IJ-CX-0002). Pager and her colleague Bruce Western of Harvard University were awarded funds to replicate the study in New York City (award number 2005-IJ-CX-0019). Both studies produced similar results.
The researchers sought to determine how employers responded to applicants who were equally qualified but varied by race, ethnicity and criminal record (assigned randomly by the researchers). Matched teams of testers applied for hundreds of entry-level jobs. Testers were matched according to a number of criteria (e.g., verbal skills, physical attractiveness and interaction styles). They were assigned fictitious resumes and passed a common training program to ensure uniform behavior in the interviews.
In 2010, Scott Decker of Arizona State University (award number 2010-MU-MU-0004) was funded to replicate the experiment a third time, with several enhancements, including testing the online application process.
Potential for Redemption in Employment in an Era of Widespread Criminal Background Checks
It can be difficult for someone with a criminal record to find employment. More than 80 percent of U.S. employers perform criminal background checks on prospective employees.[4]
Is there a point at which a former offender should be considered "redeemed" for employment purposes and relieved of the handicap imposed by his or her stale criminal record?
Researchers Al Blumstein and Kiminori Nakamura believe there is and that when that point is reached, a potential employer should no longer consider an ex-offender's record relevant. Why? Because at that point, an ex-offender is no longer more likely to commit a crime than other similar individuals of the same age in the general population.[5]
The concept of redemption or the expungement of a criminal record has important implications beyond employment. A redemption date or expungement of a criminal record may be relevant to other aspects of daily life, such as the ability to get public housing, receive certain public benefits, and obtain admission to and financial aid for college.
About the Research
Blumstein and Nakamura's method for estimating when redemption occurs depends on two factors: the arrestee's age at the time of the first arrest and the type of crime committed. In their first study, based on an examination of 80,000 rap sheets for individuals first arrested in 1980 and after in New York, they found that, in general, the younger an offender was when he or she committed the first offense, the longer he or she had to stay "clean" to reach that redemption point.
The actuarial model created by Blumstein and Nakamura provides empirically based guidance for employers and others to help them determine the point at which a former offender poses no greater risk of recidivating than any other demographically similar person. At that point, Blumstein and Nakamura argue, the ex-offender's criminal history is no longer relevant.[6]
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/230460.pdf
Employing Ex-Offenders:
The Results of the Study The researchers looked at three types of crime (robbery, burglary and aggravated assault) and three different ages at first arrest (16, 18 and 20 years old). Comparing this data for the 88,000 ex-offenders in the study group to data (based on FBI Uniform Crime Reports) for people the same age in the general population, they found: • The risk of recidivism of someone arrested for robbery when he was 18 years old declined to the point where it was the same as the risk of someone of the same age in the general population committing a crime at age 25.7 — or 7.7 years after the redemption candidate’s crime (in this example, an arrest in 1980 for robbery). This means that after approximately 8 years, the probability of the robbery ex-offender committing another crime is lower than the probability of other 26-year-olds in the general population committing a crime. • The risk of recidivism of someone who was arrested for burglary when he was 18 years old declined to the same risk as someone the same age in the general population at age 21.8, or 3.8 years after the crime. • The risk of recidivism of someone who was arrested for aggravated assault when he was 18 years old declined to the same risk as the general population at age 22.3 or 4.3 years after the crime.
The researchers found that people who were arrested for robbery at age 18 had to stay clean longer than those who were arrested for burglary or aggravated assault to reach the same risk of arrest as same-age people in the general population. The following figure illustrates this concept: how the probability of a new arrest for offenders declines over the years and eventually becomes as low as the risk of arrest for the general population. With respect to the factor of an arrestee’s age at first arrest (again, remember that the researchers used data for 88,000 ex-offenders who were first arrested in New York in 1980), the researchers found that: • People who were first arrested for robbery when they were 18 years old had the same risk of arrest after 7.7 years as sameage individuals in the general population; • People who were first arrested for robbery at age 16 had the same risk of arrest after 8.5 years as same-age individuals in the general population; and • People who were first arrested for robbery at age 20 had the same risk of arrest after 4.4 years as same-age individuals in the general population.