M i c h i g a n S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y Eric Grommon I n d i a n a U n i v e r s i t y -P u r d u e U n i v e r s i t y I n d i a n a p o l i s Breanne Pleggenkuhle S o u t h e r n I l l i n o i s U n i v e r s i t y -C a r b o n d a l e Research SummaryWe evaluated the efficacy of sex offender residence restrictions in Michigan and Missouri using a quasi-experimental design with propensity score matching. First, we examined the implementation of the laws and found that sex offenders in both states were less likely to live in restricted areas after the implementation of the laws than the prerestriction sample, but the differences were not statistically significant. In our outcome analysis, we find little evidence that residence restrictions changed the prevalence of recidivism substantially for sex offenders in the postrelease period. In Michigan, trends indicate that the implementation of the laws led to a slight increase in recidivism among the sex offender groups, whereas in Missouri, this effect resulted in a slight decrease in recidivism. Technical violations also declined for both groups in Missouri. The small effect sizes, inconsistent results across states, and the null results between sex offender and non-sex offender models cast doubt on the potential usefulness of the laws to influence individual patterns of recidivism broadly. Policy ImplicationsThe results caution against the widespread, homogenous implementation of residence restrictions. Instead, we advocate individualization in sex offender programming and call for the development of risk-centered models of residence restrictions that draw on the established literature. In addition, the research highlights the practical challenges in defining restricted areas, enforcing restrictions, and promoting successful returns to the community. Furthermore, a call for reframing the focus of sex offender reentry to include collaborative treatment groups and enhanced communication and services between key stakeholders is made. Finally, we close with a discussion of several best practice models that provide alternative housing sources for individuals sentenced under residence restrictions without a suitable home plan.Keywords residence restrictions, recidivism, parole, sex offenders, geographic information systems, collateral consequences of incarceration. taken place in the absence of the legislation. We use a quasi-experimental design with propensity score matching to estimate the efficacy of residence restriction legislation. This research design allows for a multistate evaluation of policy further increasing the internal and external validity of the research observations (Shadish, Cook, and Campbell, 2002). Data, Sample Selection, and MeasuresData for the current study were obtained from two sources. Recidivism and parolee movement information were culled from official records maintained by the Michigan and Missouri Department of Corrections. Address data for schools and childcare facilities were obtained from the Missouri State Police, the Missouri S...

BackgroundIn an effort to reduce the increasing number of persons with mental illness (PMI) experiencing incarceration, co-responding police-mental health teams are being utilized as a way to divert PMI from the criminal justice system. Co-response teams are typically an inter-agency collaboration between police and mental health professionals, and in some cases include emergency medical personnel. These teams are intended to facilitate emergency response by linking patients to mental health resources rather than the criminal justice system, thus reducing burdens on both the criminal justice systems as well as local healthcare systems. The current study examines the barriers and facilitators of successfully implementing the Mobile Crisis Assistance Team model, a first-responder co-response team consisting of police officers, mental health professionals, and paramedics. Through content analysis of qualitative focus groups with team members and interviews with program stakeholders, this study expands previous findings by identifying additional professional cultural barriers and facilitators to program implementation while also exploring the role of clear, systematic policies and guidelines in program success.ResultsFindings demonstrate the value of having both flexible and formal policies and procedures to help guide program implementation; ample community resources and treatment services in order to successfully refer clients to needed services; and streamlined communication among participating agencies and the local healthcare community. A significant barrier to successful program implementation is that of role conflict and stigma. Indeed, members of the co-response teams experienced difficulty transitioning into their new roles and reported negative feedback from other first responders as well as from within their own agency. Initial agency collaboration, information sharing between agencies, and team building were also identified as facilitators to program implementation.ConclusionThe current study provides a critical foundation for the implementation of first-responder police-mental health co-response teams. Cultural and systematic barriers to co-response team success should be understood prior to program creation and used to guide implementation. Furthermore, attention must be directed to cultivating community and professional support for co-response teams. Findings from this study can be used to guide future efforts to implement first-response co-response teams in order to positively engage PMI and divert PMI from the criminal justice system.

Prisoner reentry programs continue to be developed and implemented to ease the process of transition into the community and to curtail fiscal pressures. This study describes and provides relapse and recidivism outcome findings related to a randomized trial evaluating a multimodal, community-based reentry program that prioritized substance abuse treatment.Results from analyses suggest negligible effects for participants of the program across multiple outcome indicators. Avenues for further exploration are provided, with a cautionary emphasis on the continued expansion of multimodal community-based reentry programs.3

No abstract