Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pftt2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-21T22:59:57.133Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

When Frontloading Backfires: Exploring the Impact of Outsourcing Correctional Interventions on Mechanisms of Social Control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Michael Ostermann  and
Jordan M. Hyatt
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study demonstrates the effects of frontloading rehabilitative services to parolees through third-party residential and community-based programs. Although outsourcing treatment responsibilities to contracted reentry facilities is an increasingly common feature of postrelease supervision, the role these facilities play in reentry management and recidivism outcomes remains largely unexplored. Here, several common recidivism outcomes for parolees who attended private treatment facilities upon release are compared to those of parolees who did not. We conducted Correctional Programs Checklist assessments on each treatment site to investigate whether recidivism outcomes vary by level of programmatic quality. Our findings indicate that parolees who receive frontloaded services are significantly less likely to be rearrested or reconvicted for new crimes within eighteen months of release. These findings held across levels of programmatic quality, with larger reductions observed for programs of higher quality, and align with broader emphases in community corrections on risk assessment and organizational demands for efficiency.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 43 , Issue 4 , Fall 2018 , pp. 1308 - 1339
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackerman, A. R., Sacks, M., and Furman, R. 2014. The New Penology Revisited: The Criminalization of Immigration as a Pacification Strategy. Justice Policy Journal 11 (1): 1–20.Google Scholar
Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., and Hogue, R. D. 1990. Classification for Effective Rehabilitation: Rediscovering Psychology. Criminal Justice and Behavior 17:19–52.Google Scholar
Apel, R., Blokland, A. A. J., Nieuwbeerta, P., and vanSchellen, M. 2010. The Impact of Imprisonment on Marriage and Divorce: A Risk Set Matching Approach. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 26:269–300.Google Scholar
Becker, S. O., and Caliendo, M. 2007. Sensitivity Analysis for Average Treatment Effects. Stata Journal 7:71–83.Google Scholar
Beckett, K., and Murakawa, N. 2012. Mapping the Shadow Carceral State: Toward an Institutionally Capacious Approach to Punishment. Theoretical Criminology 16 (2): 221–44.Google Scholar
Burton, V. S., Latessa, E. J., and Barker, T. 1992. The Role of Probation Officers: An Examination of Statutory Requirements. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 8 (4): 273–82.Google Scholar
Caplan, J. M. 2006. Parole System Anomie: Conflicting Models of Casework and Surveillance. Federal Probation Journal 70:32–36.Google Scholar
Cheliotis, L. K. 2006. How Iron Is the Iron Cage of New Penology? The Role of Human Agency in the Implementation of Criminal Justice Policy. Punishment & Society 8 (3): 313–40.Google Scholar
Clark, C. B., Hendricks, P. S., Lane, P. S., Trent, L., and Cropsey, K. L. 2014. Methadone Maintenance Treatment May Improve Completion Rates and Delay Opioid Relapse for Opioid Dependent Individuals Under Community Corrections Supervision. Addictive Behaviors 39 (12): 1736–40.Google Scholar
Clear, T. R., and Latessa, E. J. 1993. Probation Officers' Roles in Intensive Supervision: Surveillance Versus Treatment. Justice Quarterly 10 (3): 441–62.Google Scholar
Cohen, M. A., Piquero, A. R., and Jennings, W. G. 2010. Studying the Costs of Crime Across Offender Trajectories. Criminology & Public Policy 9 (2): 279–305.Google Scholar
Cohen, S. 1979. The Critical Discourse on “Social Control”: Notes on the Concept as a Hammer. International Journal of the Sociology of Law 17 (3): 347–57.Google Scholar
Cohen, S. 1985. Visions of Social Control: Crime, Punishment and Classification. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Cropsey, K. L., Binswanger, I. A., Clark, C. B., and Taxman, F. S. 2012. The Unmet Medical Needs of Correctional Populations in the United States. Journal of the National Medical Association 104 (11–12): 487–92.Google Scholar
Cullen, F. T., and Jonson, C. L. 2013. Labeling Theory and Correctional Rehabilitation: Beyond Unanticipated Consequences. In Labeling Theory: Empirical Tests, ed. Farrington, D. P. and Murray, J., 63–88. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
Demone, H. W., and Gibelman, M. 1990. “Privatizing” the Treatment of Criminal Offenders. Journal of Offender Counseling Services Rehabilitation 15 (1): 7–26.Google Scholar
Dowden, C., and Brown, S. L. 2002. The Role of Substance Abuse Factors in Predicting Recidivism: A Meta-Analysis. Psychology, Crime and Law 8 (3): 243–64.Google Scholar
Durose, M. R., Cooper, A. D., and Snyder, H. N. 2014. Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 30 States in 2005: Patterns from 2005 to 2010. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
Duwe, G., and Clark, V. 2015. Importance of Program Integrity: Outcome Evaluation of a Gender-Responsive, Cognitive-Behavioral Program for Female Offenders. Criminology & Public Policy 14 (2): 301–28.Google Scholar
Feeley, M. M. 2002. Entrepreneurs of Punishment: The Legacy of Privatization. Punishment & Society 4 (3): 321–44.Google Scholar
Feeley, M. M., and Simon, J. 1992. The New Penology: Notes on the Emerging Strategy of Corrections and its Implications. Criminology 30:449–74.Google Scholar
Feeley, M. M., and Simon, J. 1994. Actuarial Justice: Power/Knowledge in Contemporary Criminal Justice. The Futures of Criminology. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Garland, D. 1990. Punishment and Modern Society. A Study in Social Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Garland, D. 1997. Governmentality and the Problem of Crime: Foucault, Criminology, Sociology. Theoretical Criminology 1 (2): 173–214.Google Scholar
Garland, D. 2001. The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Gendreau, P. 1996. The Principles of Effective Intervention with Offenders. In Choosing Correctional Interventions that Work: Defining the Demand and Evaluating the Supply, ed. Harland, A. T., 117–30. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Gendreau, P., Goggin, C., and Smith, P. 1999. The Forgotten Issue in Effective Correctional Treatment: Program Implementation. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 43 (2): 180–87.Google Scholar
Gilbert, M. J. 1997. The Illusion of Structure: A Critique of the Classical Model of Organization and the Discretionary Power of Correctional Officers. Criminal Justice Review 22 (1): 49–64.Google Scholar
Glaze, L. E., and Kaeble, D. 2015. Correctional Populations in the United States. NCJ 248479. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
Gordon, R. M., and Verdun-Jones, S. N. 1986. Privatization and Protective Services for the Elderly: Some Observations on the Economics of the Aging Process. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 8 (3): 311–25.Google Scholar
Gottschalk, M. 2008. Hiding in Plain Sight: American Politics and the Carceral State. Annual Review of Political Science 11:235–60.Google Scholar
Grattet, R., and Lin, J. 2016. Supervision Intensity and Parole Outcomes: A Competing Risks Approach to Criminal and Technical Parole Violations. Justice Quarterly 33 (4): 565–83.Google Scholar
Grattet, R., Lin, J., and Petersilia, J. 2011. Supervision Regimes, Risk, and Official Reactions to Parolee Deviance. Criminology 49 (2): 371–99.Google Scholar
Grattet, R., Petersilia, J., Lin, J., and Beckman, M. 2009. Parole Violations and Revocations in California: Analysis and Suggestions for Action. Federal Probation Journal 73:1–11.Google Scholar
Harcourt, B. E. (2007). Against Prediction. Profiling, Policing, and Punishing in an Actuarial Age. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hart, O., Shleifer, A., and Vishny, R. W. 1997. The Proper Scope of Government: Theory and an Application to Prisons. Quarterly Journal of Economics 112 (4): 1127–61.Google Scholar
Herberman, E. J., and Bonczar, T. P. 2014. Probation and Parole in the United States, 2013. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, US Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Hurtig, J. E., and Lenart, L. M. 2011. The Development of the Evidence-Based Practice Blue Print and Where We Are Now. Federal Probation Journal 75:35–36.Google Scholar
Kinnevy, S. C., and Caplan, J. M. 2008. Findings from the APAI International Survey of Releasing Authorities. Philadelphia, PA: Center for Research on Youth and Policy.Google Scholar
Klockars, C. B. Jr. 1972. A Theory of Probation Supervision. Journal of Criminal Law Criminology and Police Science 63 (4): 550–57.Google Scholar
Latessa, E. J. 2013. Evaluating Correctional Programs. New York: UN Asia and Far East Institute for the Prevention of Crime and Treatment of Offenders.Google Scholar
Latessa, E., Lovins, L., & Smith, P. 2010. Follow-Up Evaluation of Ohio's Community Based Correctional Facility and Halfway House Programs—Outcome Study. Cincinnati, OH: University of Cincinnati Press.Google Scholar
Latessa, E. J., Lowenkamp, C. T., and Bechtel, K. 2009. Community Corrections Centers, Parolees, and Recidivism: An Investigation into the Characteristics of Effective Reentry Programs in Pennsylvania. Cincinnati, OH: Center for Criminal Justice Research.Google Scholar
Latessa, E. J., Smith, P., Schweitzer, M., and Brusman Lovins, L. 2009. Evaluation of Selected Institutional Offender Treatment Programs for the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections. Harrisburg, PA: Prepared for the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections.Google Scholar
Latessa, E. J., and Travis, L. 1991. Halfway House or Probation: A Comparison of Alternative Dispositions. Journal of Crime and Justice 14 (1): 53–76.Google Scholar
Lipsky, M. 1980. Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in the Public Sector. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Loughran, T. A., Wilson, T., Nagin, D. S., and Piquero, A. R. 2015. Evolutionary Regression? Assessing the Problem of Hidden Biases in Criminal Justice Applications Using Propensity Scores. Journal of Experimental Criminology 11:631–52.Google Scholar
Lowenkamp, C. T., Flores, A. W., Holsinger, A. M., Makarios, M. D., and Latessa, E. J. 2010a. Intensive Supervision Programs: Does Program Philosophy and the Principles of Effective Intervention Matter? Journal of Criminal Justice 38 (4): 368–75.Google Scholar
Lowenkamp, C. T., and Latessa, E. J. 2004. Increasing the Effectiveness of Community Programming Through the Risk Principle: Identifying Offenders for Residential Placement. Criminology & Public Policy 4 (1): 501–28.Google Scholar
Lowenkamp, C. T., and Latessa, E. J. 2005. Developing Successful Reentry Programs: Lessons Learned from the “What Works” Research. Corrections Today 67 (2): 72–77.Google Scholar
Lowenkamp, C. T., Latessa, E. J., and Holsinger, A. M. 2006. The Risk Principle in Action: What Have We Learned from 13,676 Offenders and 97 Correctional Programs? Crime & Delinquency 51 (1): 1–17.Google Scholar
Lowenkamp, C. T., Latessa, E. J., and Smith, P. 2006. Does Correctional Program Quality Really Matter? The Impact of Adhering to the Principles of Effective Intervention. Criminology & Public Policy 5 (3): 575–94.Google Scholar
Lowenkamp, C. T., Makarios, M. D., Latessa, E. J., Lemke, R., and Smith, P. 2010b. Community Corrections Facilities for Juvenile Offenders in Ohio: An Examination of Treatment Integrity and Recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior 37 (6): 695–708.Google Scholar
Lundahl, B. W., Kunz, C., Brownell, C., Harris, N., and vanVleet, R. 2009. Prison Privatization: A Meta-Analysis of Cost and Quality of Confinement Indicators. Research on Social Work Practice 19 (4): 383–94.Google Scholar
Lynch, M. 1998. Waste Managers? The New Penology, Crime Fighting, and Parole Agent Identity. Law & Society Review 32 (4): 839–70.Google Scholar
Maltz, M. D. 1984. Recidivism. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Mantel, N., and Haenszel, W. 1959. Statistical Aspects of the Analysis of Data from Retrospective Studies. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 22:719–48.Google Scholar
Maruna, S., Dabney, D., and Topalli, V. 2012. Putting a Price on Prisoner Release: The History of Bail and a Possible Future of Parole. Punishment & Society 14 (3): 315–37.Google Scholar
McCollister, K. E., French, M. T., and Fang, H. 2010. The Cost of Crime to Society: New Crime-Specific Estimates for Policy and Program Evaluation. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 108 (1): 98–109.Google Scholar
McMahon, M. 1990. Net-Widening: Vagaries in the Use of a Concept. British Journal of Criminology 30 (2): 121–49.Google Scholar
Miller, J. 2015. Contemporary Modes of Probation Officer Supervision: The Triumph of the “Synthetic” Officer? Justice Quarterly 32 (2): 314–36.Google Scholar
Miller, W. R., and Moyers, T. B. 2006. Eight Stages in Learning Motivational Interviewing. Journal of Teaching in the Addictions 5 (1): 3–17.Google Scholar
Ostermann, M. 2013. Using Day Reporting Centers to Divert Parolees from Revocation. Criminology & Public Policy 12 (1): 163–71.Google Scholar
Ostermann, M., and Caplan, J. M. 2013. How Much Do Crimes Committed by Released Inmates Cost? Crime and Delinquency 62 (5): 563–91.Google Scholar
Ostermann, M., and Hyatt, J. M. 2014. Is Something Better than Nothing? The Effect of Short Terms of Mandatory Parole Supervision. Justice Quarterly 33 (5): 785–810.Google Scholar
Ostermann, M., Salerno, L. M., and Hyatt, J. M. 2015. How Different Operationalizations of Recidivism Impact Conclusions of Effectiveness of Parole Supervision. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 52 (6): 771–96.Google Scholar
Petersilia, J. 2000. When Prisoners Return to Communities: Political, Economic, and Social Consequences. Federal Probation Journal 65:1–7.Google Scholar
Petersilia, J. 2003. When Prisoners Come Home: Parole and Prisoner Reentry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Petersilia, J. 2007. Employ Behavioral Contracting for “Earned Discharge” Parole. Criminology & Public Policy 6 (4): 807–14.Google Scholar
Piqero, A. R. 2011. Personal communication on June 7.Google Scholar
Rengert, G. F., Piquero, A. R., and Jones, P. R. 1999. Distance Decay Reexamined. Criminology 37 (2): 427–46.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, P. R. 2002. Observational Studies. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, P. R. 2005. Sensitivity Analysis in Observational Studies. In Encyclopedia of Statistics in Behavioral Science, ed. Everitt, B. S. and Howell, D. C., 1809–14. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Rosenfeld, Richard, Joel, Wallman, and Robert, Fornango. 2005. The Contribution of Ex-Prisoners to Crime Rates. In Prisoner Reentry and Crime in America, ed. Travis, J. and Visher, C., 80–104. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sampson, R. J., and Groves, W. B. 1989. Community Structure and Crime: Testing Social Disorganization Theory. American Journal of Sociology 94:774–802 Google Scholar
Simon, J. 2007. Governing Through Crime: How the War on Crime Transformed American Democracy and Created a Culture of Fear. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Simon, J., and Feeley, M. 2003. The Form and Limits of the New Penology. In Punishment and Social Control, ed. Blomberg, Thomas G. and Cohen, Stanley, 75–116. New York: Transaction.Google Scholar
Skeem, J. L., and Manchak, S. 2008. Back to the Future: From Klockars' Model of Effective Supervision to Evidence-Based Practice in Probation. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation 47 (3): 220–47.Google Scholar
Skeem, J. L., Winter, E., Kennealy, P. J., Louden, J. E., and Tatar, J. R. II. 2014. Offenders with Mental Illness Have Criminogenic Needs, Too: Toward Recidivism Reduction. Law and Human Behavior 38 (3): 212–24.Google Scholar
Solomon, A. L., Kachnowski, V., and Bhati, A. 2005. Does Parole Work? Analyzing the Impact of Postprison Supervision on Rearrest Outcomes. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.Google Scholar
Spivak, A. L., and Damphousse, K. R. 2006. Who Returns to Prison? A Survival Analysis of Recidivism Among Adult Offenders Released in Oklahoma, 1985–2004. Justice Research and Policy 8 (2): 57–88.Google Scholar
Steen, S., Opsal, T., Lovegrove, P., and McKinzey, S. 2013. Putting Parolees Back in Prison: Discretion and the Parole Revocation Process. Criminal Justice Review 38 (1): 70–93.Google Scholar
Taxman, F. S. 2002. Supervision—Exploring the Dimensions of Effectiveness. Federal Probation Journal 66:14–27.Google Scholar
Taxman, F. S., and Belenko, S. 2012. Current State of EBP in the Community Corrections Field. In Implementing Evidence-Based Practices in Community Corrections and Addiction Treatment, 151–88. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Taxman, F. S., and Marlowe, D. 2006. Risk, Needs, Responsivity: In Action or Inaction? Crime & Delinquency 52 (1): 3–6.Google Scholar
Whitehead, J. T., and Lindquist, C. A. 1986. Correctional Officer Job Burnout: A Path Model. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 23 (1): 23–42.Google Scholar