Investigating the Effect of Post-Release Housing Mobility on Recidivism: Considering Individuals Convicted of Sexual Offenses

Rydberg, Jason; Huebner, Beth M.; Grommon, Eric; Miller, Amanda

doi:10.1177/10790632221127980

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 98 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some other research has focused more explicitly on postrelease recidivism which reflects offending that occurred once an individual has been released from a community corrections program. These studies have found that postrelease recidivism was correlated with the security level where the individual was incarcerated (Gaes & Camp, 2009), prison misconduct (Cochran et al, 2014), education (Lockwood et al, 2016; Nally et al, 2012; Roessger et al, 2021), employment (Nally et al, 2014; Skardhamar & Telle, 2012), and housing stability (Rydberg et al, 2023). These studies illustrate how factors that influence recidivism transcend community supervision.…”

Section: Measuring Recidivismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agency Directors’ Reflections on “Success” in Community Corrections: The Role of Traditional and Alternative Measures

Alexander,

Nowacki,

Opsal

et al. 2023

Criminal Justice Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community corrections has risen in popularity as a method to reduce incarcerated populations. Although researchers have pointed to the value of thinking about success outside of the traditional recidivism metric, many of the agencies that engage in this sort of work are evaluated by oversight agencies based on traditional metrics such as recidivism and program completion. To understand how alternative measures of success are integrated into different dimensions, we surveyed a sample of leaders across community corrections agencies in six states and asked them to share their perceptions about the goals of their agency, the programming they offer, and the metrics to which they are held accountable; we also examined their mission statements. Responses from more than 30 agencies indicate there is a cultural space and a pragmatic use for agencies to integrate alternative measures more formally into their assessment processes but that strictures from oversight agencies are a notable obstacle.

show abstract