Prison Rehabilitation and Recidivism Reduction. Nicole J. Guyette & Group. Virginia Tech

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Prison Rehabilitation and Recidivism Reduction. Nicole J. Guyette & Group. Virginia Tech"

Lauren McDaniel
5 years ago
Views:

1 Running Head: PRISON REHABILITATION AND RECIDIVISM REDUCTION 1 Prison Rehabilitation and Recidivism Reduction Nicole J. Guyette & Group Virginia Tech

2 Running Head: PRISON REHABILITATION AND RECIDIVISM REDUCTION 2 The United States has seen an unprecedented increase in the number of people incarcerated within the last two decades. In 2001, on average, two million men and women were sentenced to reside in state and federal prisons. 1 In 2006, it was revealed that the cost per one incarcerated inmate for just one year was $27,588 in the Colorado Department of Corrections (CDOC). 2 Also, the Colorado General Fund over the past 20 years has risen from $86 million in 1988 to greater than $636 million in This staggering amount of money being spent on prisoners every year proves that programs need to be implemented to reduce crime rates and help released prisoners integrate into society. Prison rehabilitation has been the subject of numerous investigations throughout the 21 st century as the number of convicted criminals has gone up. Assessment, goal setting, intervention, and evaluation are all essential components that make up the process of rehabilitation. 4 Assessment refers to the recognition of the offenders difficulties relevant to their conviction, and how those factors can be prevented. 1 Goal setting allows for offenders to create realistic goals and expectations for their behavior beyond the program. The progression of the intervention allows for offenders to either receive treatment, support, or combination of the two. 1 And finally, the evaluation of the offenders behavior and changes accesses the success of not only the rehabilitation program, but also the offenders ability and desire to change. 1 These components that are found within the program are required to maintain a high success rate; however, the implementation of the program is equally important. A successful implementation requires sincere motivation at implementation, support at the top of leadership and each group whose cooperation is required for full implementation, staff 1 James P. Lynch & William J. Sabol, Prisoner Reentry in Prospective, 3 CRIME POL Y REP. 15 (Sept. 2001) 2 Colorado Department of Corrections. Annual Statstical Report, FY Page Colorado General Assembly Joint Budget Committee. (December 20, 2007). FY Staff Budgeting Briefing Department of Corrections. Page 6. 4 Ward, T., & Maruna, S. (2007). Rehabilitation. (pp. 5-6). New York, NY: Routledge.

3 Running Head: PRISON REHABILITATION AND RECIDIVISM REDUCTION 3 competence, a surplus of benefits over costs, clarity of goals and procedures, and clear lines of authority. 5 Motivation requires the offenders to have the desire to change while the staff also requires the desire to help them change. The staff needs to be able to support the offenders throughout the total duration of their rehabilitation program with competence, while also being able to define their authority over the offenders. While goal setting was stated as a requirement for rehabilitation programs, it would be irrelevant and would have no effect if it were not implemented clearly and efficiently. This clarity reassures that the offenders have a precise understanding of what their goals are and how they can be reached. Many offenders do not have a surplus of finances; therefore it is critical that a successful implementation of a rehabilitation program must be without severe financial costs to the offender. A rehabilitation program is most successful when a low percentage of graduates do not reenter the federal prison system, this is known as reduced recidivism. Recidivism is the act of relapsing into criminal behavior, often resulting in the rearrest, reconviction, or return to prison with or without a new sentence during a three-year period following a prisoner s release. 6 The definition of recidivism is often a controversial topic due to the fact that it only includes crimes that have been reported to the police. 7 Some studies show the recidivism rate is not the best measurement of the effectiveness of a reentry program. Better measurement methods may come 5 Bernfeld, G., Farrington, D., & Leschied, A. (2001). Offender rehabilitation in practice: implementing and evaluating effective programs. (p. 10). West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 6 Bureau of justice statistics reentry trends in the u.s.: Recidivism. (2010, May 12). Retrieved from 7 Travis, J., & Visher, C. (2005). Prisoner reentry and crime in america. (p. 6). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

4 Running Head: PRISON REHABILITATION AND RECIDIVISM REDUCTION 4 out of the study of positive psychology. 8 Positive psychology is a study of improving the quality of life of an individual by the recontextualisation of life experiences in a positive manner. 9 A study done at the University of New Brunswick experimented on the predictors for recidivism. 10 This meta-analysis revealed the strongest variables that will lead to an increased recidivism rate as criminal history, age, family factors, gender, substance abuse, and social achievement. 6 In our study, we will take these variables into consideration when selecting the participants. In 2002, the Bureau of Justice Statistics did a study on the recidivism patterns of inmates from 15 prisons in Their study had a final sample of 30,431 cases to represent the population of 243,334 prisoners. They counted the number of arrests for violent property and drug related offenses during a three-year period following release from prison. The study produced mathematical models to predict the number of recidivism cases, which showed a negative binomial regression was preferable over a Poisson binomial method. 12 It was found in this study that the prisoners who were released were 45 times more likely to get arrested than the rest of the general population. 4 A general finding from a study of 30 metanalysis, found in Table 1, state the impact of treatments of offenders after leaving a federal institute. 13 The findings were that the influence of having a treatment, on average, is positive. This means that there was a decrease in recidivism 8 J. Stephen Wormith, Richard Althouse, Mark Simpson, Lorraine R. Reitzel, Thomas J. Fagan and Robert D. Morgan. Criminal Justice and Behavior : May doi: / Seligman, Martin E.P. & Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. Positive psychology: an introduction. American Psychologist, Vol55(1), Jan 2000, doi: /0003/066x Gendreau, P., Little, T., & Goggin, C. (1996). A meta-anaylsis of the predictors of adult offender recidivism. Criminology, 34(4) 11 Langan, Patrick A., and David J. Levin Recidivism of Prisoners Released in Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice 12 Long J. Scott Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage 13 McGuire, J. (2002). Offender rehabilitation in treatment: effective programmes and policies to reduce re-affending. (pp ). West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

5 Running Head: PRISON REHABILITATION AND RECIDIVISM REDUCTION 5 in the experimental group versus the control. While the mean effect may be seen as minimal, this study comprises data from all types of interventions, including those to have zero effects. If these interventions with zero effects were disregarded, the mean effect of the remaining studies would be much higher. Table 1: A Summary of meta-analytic reviews of tertiary prevention Source Number of Computer Mean Effect Size (ES) Outcomes (k) Garrett (1985) Total k = 121, 34 on recidivism Gensheimer et al. (1986) weighted mean ES Mayer et al. (1986) Weighted mean ES Gottschalk et al. (1987a) Gottschalk et al. (1987b) Losel & Koferl (1989) Whitehead & Lab (1989) Andrews et al. (1990) d = 0.53 for appropriate treatment Izzo & Ross (1990) 46 Cog > non-cog 2.5/1 Roberts & Camasso (1991) 46 Range +0.6 to 0.81 (no mean ES given) Lipsey (1992, 1995) Hall (1995) Wells-Parker at al. (1995) 215 8%-9% Gendreau & Goggin (1996) Pearson, Lipton, & Cleland 822 No mean ES given (1997) Redondo, Garrido, & Sanchez Meca (1997) Lipsey & Wilson (1998) 200 Institutions: Community: Alexander (1999) Dowden & Andrews (1999a) 24 Not applicable Dowden & Andrews (1999b) Gallagher et al. (1999) 25 d = Polizzi, MacKenzie, & Hickman (1999) 13 No mean ES given: ES range from to Redondo, Sanchez-Meca, & Garrido (1999) 32 d = r = Dowden & Andrews (2000)

6 Running Head: PRISON REHABILITATION AND RECIDIVISM REDUCTION 6 Petrosino et al. (2000) Wilson, Gallagher, & MacKenzie 53 Odd ratio: 1.52 (2000) Wilson & Lipsey (2000) Gendreau et al. (2001) Lipsey, Chapman, & 14 Odds ratio: 0.66 Landenberger (2001) MacKenzie, Wilson, & Kider (2001) 44 Odds ratio: 1.02 Based on this information on recidivism, it is apparent that treatment is necessary for offenders integration back into society. The EXIT program is a 90-day transitional program in Ohio that assists offenders with housing and other necessary skills to allow them to live a more society-approved lifestyle. 14 This program contains such assistance as housing, security and monitoring, community linkage and referral, bank services, case management, cognitive behavioral treatment, sex offender specific treatment, computer lab, employment assistance, food and clothing pantry, transportation, community service projects, and electronic monitoring. 8 Though we see the importance of why housing is a primary focus of the program, we suggest the expansion of other aspects of the program, specifically the cognitive behavioral treatment and even employment assistance. Research has shown that vocational training and post-treatment employment has significantly reduced the rate of recidivism. 15 With other programs, the combination of costs and public opinion has caused a decrease in prison vocational training. The EXIT program has tried to restore the work preparedness program and has seen vast improvement within the years it has existed. In order to participate in this program, an offender must be convicted of a crime in the state of Ohio for which you are currently being 14 Welcome to the exit program. (n.d.). Retrieved from 15 Joan Petersilia, Parole and Prisoner Reentry in the United States, in PRISONS 479, 519 (Michael Tonry & Joan Petersilia eds.., 1999) [hereinafter Parole and Prisoner Reentry].

7 Running Head: PRISON REHABILITATION AND RECIDIVISM REDUCTION 7 supervised. 8 County probation is also accepted as long as they are under supervision. Resident accountability is very important to the program. Within the duration of the program, each offender must document their departure from the facility, including their name, date, time, and an acceptable reason for leaving, and they must document their arrival back. Many rules are emplaced to ensure the safety of the staff and offenders. If a resident disobeys these rules, a number of consequences may occur such as housing restriction, being issued a sanction, being rearrested, or being discharged from the program. We hypothesize that if we enact this program into the federal prison system nationwide, then recidivism will decrease because offenders will be given the appropriate support and resources in order to successfully integrate back into society. Methods Participants In the experiment, the sample size will be 900 federally convicted prisoners. These offenders are male, ranging in age from These males will be of different ethnical backgrounds, including African American, Caucasian, Hispanic, and Asian American. Their convictions will have resulted from crimes that have included, but are not restricted to: drug trafficking, violent offenses, sex-related offenses, and illegal property crimes. We will be choosing offenders from three different Federal Correction Institutes (FCI) of medium security that are located in three different regions of the country. These prisons include Herlong FCI located in California, Fairton FCI in New Jersey, and El Reno FCI in Oklahoma. There will be two groups from each prison: the control and the experimental. Each group will contain 150 offenders. Materials and Procedure

8 Running Head: PRISON REHABILITATION AND RECIDIVISM REDUCTION 8 The experimental groups from each prison will participate with an expanded version of the EXIT program. Their treatment will consist of cognitive behavioral treatments that include anger management, person-situation interactions, and confidence building exercises. This will also be supplemented with rewards for positive behavior and punishments for negative behavior. Their cognitive behavioral treatment will be a combination of behavior therapy, social skills training, self-instructional training, rational emotive therapy, cognitive therapy, and self efficacy training, social support, and problem solving training. The anger management portion of their treatment would include using reducers, for example, deep breathing. For person-situation interactions the program would provide role-playing activities such as job interviews, family and friend interactions, and the ability to cope with labeling. The confidence building aspect of their treatment will consist of one-on-one therapy sessions that will focus on their personalized confidence issues as well as lessons to improve their competence in daily life activities. Throughout this process, these offenders will also be provided with housing as well as food and clothing as necessary. This treatment plan will last 90 days. The control group would not be subjected to any form of treatment and would be released to society with no form of support or resources provided by the government. Three months after the program has been completed data will be collected to determine how many participants from the experiment, from the control and experimental group, have been reconvicted of a crime. This will occur every six months following the initial data collection until the three-year recidivism definition term has been met. Table 1 below highlights the data to be obtained by the procedure listed above.

9 Running Head: PRISON REHABILITATION AND RECIDIVISM REDUCTION 9 El Reno, OK Herlong, CA Farton, NJ Period 1 (First 6 months) *A denotes Control group **B denotes Experimental group Table 2: Amount of Control vs. Experimental Reconvictions Period 2 (1 one year) Period 3 ( 1 year and 6 months) Period 4 (2 years) Period 5 (2 years and 6 months) Period 6 (3 years) A B A B A B A B A B A B Exhibit 1 shown above is a likely statistical analysis of how the results of experiment would be compiled. Although our study is not limited to drug treatment, the consistencies of

10 Running Head: PRISON REHABILITATION AND RECIDIVISM REDUCTION 10 such findings have been relevant to reduction of recidivism across the country, thus we expect our resulting data to be parallel. Statistics The purpose of our study is to come to the conclusion that recidivism will be reduced using the Exit program. The expected data should result in a rejection of the null hypothesis because the variability between the two groups should be significant. The expected T-test should show the high variability between the control group and the experimental group. We would determine the sample mean, standard deviation, sample size, and the specified value. After calculating these numbers we would then use the equation in Equation 1 to determine the t value. Equation 1: Sample T-test equation 16 Likely Results and Conclusion We expect consistent or improved results with prior studies. It is well documented that former prisoners who undergo rehabilitation, specifically cognitive-behavior treatment have reduced recidivism rates. We expect our results to fall along the same continuum that on average 66% of prisoners who are released without treatment will be rearrested. The treatment services issued to the experimental control group will not only enhance the length of crime-free time for 16 Graeme D. Ruxton. The unequal variance t-test is an underused alternative to Student's t-test and the Mann Whitney U test Behavioral Ecology (July/August 2006) 17(4): first published online May 17, 2006 doi: /beheco/ark016

11 Running Head: PRISON REHABILITATION AND RECIDIVISM REDUCTION 11 these ex-offenders, but will also diminish the incidence of criminal behavior. Other treatment programs include only cognitive-behavior treatment and/or limited employment and housing assistance. The EXIT program includes additional channel factors not present in other rehabilitation programs such as cost-free housing, employment assistance, clothing, monitoring, and a structured accountability system. Through provided cost free housing, this invokes reciprocity and counter-labeling. By supplying housing to the former prisoners, they develop a sense of needing to give back to the program s mission. As a result of allowing them to reenter into society they are now labeled as a community member, rather than a prisoner. The employment assistance will also decrease the likelihood of recidivism by teaching self-promotion and monitoring skills, as well as keeping a commitment to the employers and themselves. Selfpromotion not only increases their status, but the way they view themselves in society, and is rewarded by the community at large. If the former inmates have access to clothing, they are stereotyped in positive ways and labeled as a productive member of society. Also, many addicts or ex-criminals are notorious for dropping out their specific treatment program if they are given constant support or positive reinforcement. By implanting the principle of self-promotion, the drop of rate of these programs will hopefully reduce and the success rate of those such as the experimental group will continue to grow. Stereotyping plays a rather large role in whether a released prisoner returns to his or her old lifestyle. If they are released back into the same community and environment, they will be likely to fall back into old habits. Fortunately, the experimental groups will be able to learn how to overcome these challenges and make a positive behavioral change where they will not need to commit crimes to survive. In addition, the

12 Running Head: PRISON REHABILITATION AND RECIDIVISM REDUCTION 12 monitoring aspect of the program imposes authority over the former inmates, particularly the experimental group, to where they can be conditioned to behave in appropriate manners. The primary goal for this experiment is to measure how likely a prison rehabilitation program with significant housing and employment assistance is going to reduce the amount of recidivism and crime in a community. With the expected results of the experimental group having a higher success rate than the control group, this will reduce the overall financial burden to the federal prison system. With less offenders returning to prisons, this will reduce overcrowding in the system and decrease the operational expenses for each prisoner. The reduction in crime rate will have a positive effect on the community by having increased productivity and taxpayers. With reduced crime in neighborhoods, the younger generations might be prevented. For overall success of this experiment, it is crucial for the staff of the treatment program and the patient to work together to accomplish the common goal of reducing their chance of reentry or rearrest. With 650,000 ex-offenders being released each year, the chance of recidivism increases more and more. Hopefully, with the implementation of these treatment programs and their psychological principles, change will occur and the lives of these ex-offenders will improve as a whole.

Best Practices for Effective Correctional Programs

Best Practices for Effective Correctional Programs VOLUME 1, ISSUE 1 SUMMER 2016 PREPARED BY: LAQUANA ASKEW Inside this issue: Risk 1 Need 2 Responsivity 2 Model of Change 3 Dynamic Risk Factors 3 Range