Prisoner Reentry Porograms

Khaled Elsharkawy

            Prisoner reentry means continuity of institutional programs to control and supervise the prisoners after their release until they integrate into society. The reentry is defined as prisoners released from federal or state prisons include parole release and probation. The prisoners can face many personal and physical challenges after their release, such as lack of health insurance, mental health problems, substance abuse problems, lack of housing, lack of employment, and lack of family support (Wheeler & Patterson, 2008). A reentry involves any program, initiative, or dealing with stage partnership to ensure that no return to crime after release (Wheeler & Patterson, 2008). When there is a release of large numbers of prisoners and reintegration into society, promoting and evaluating strategies of reentry programs will ensure the safety of the community and reduce the recidivism (Wikoff et al., 2012). Most of the former prisoners did not complete high school, the majority of them do not have the high labor skills, the few remaining have little laboring skills, most of them have a history with drug abuse, as well as suffering from health problems (Wheeler & Patterson, 2008). Ex-prisoners may be infected with diseases such as HIV, AIDS or hepatitis due to the possibility of an outbreak of these diseases and other infectious diseases in prison. If any ex-prisoner has one or more of these diseases it will be a big challenge and must take into account in the reentry programs (Wheeler & Patterson, 2008). The prison experience may help to create the conditions for negative psychological and physical worsen throughout the duration of the prison until the release. The released prisoners are loaded with these mental and physical conditions, such as health, employment, education, housing, and infectious diseases, and mental illness are all represent significant challenges for integration in society (Visher et al. 2011).

Reentry - reintegration into community

            Most prisons have rehabilitation programs to improve the skills of prisoners and prepare them for a successful life outside prison. Some researchers have found that most of the inside prison rehabilitation programs are effective in terms of benefit, cost, and preparing prisoners to integrate into society after they release (Lattimore et al., 2010). In contrast, other researchers have found that rehabilitation programs inside the prison did not come to fruition (only individual cases) due to the influence of other prisoners. It seems that within the prison rehabilitation programs need effective interventions. These interventions are more effective when good management and adoption of intervention through supervision in the post-release (which is reentry programs) (Lattimore, et al., 2010; Visher et al., 2011).

            Reentry means a range of services process and programs that help ex-prisoners face serious challenges (drug abuse, unemployment, mental illness, education, housing, and infectious diseases) for their integration in the society (Wheeler & Patterson, 2008). The U.S. Department of Justice defined reentry as all activities and programming conducted to prepare ex-convicts to integrate into society as law-abiding citizens (Wheeler & Patterson, 2008). According to Visher et al. (2011), reentry is not a legal status or program, but it is a process. Reentry is the procedure to integrate the former prisoners in to community. Reentry procedures include the evaluation, monitoring, programming, and implementation services that help ex-prisoners to reintegrate into society and considered them as good citizens (Myers & Jeremy, 2013). There are external influences that may impact on reentry such as the prisoners’ participation in vocational education, substance abuse treatment, or participation in religious organizations while they were in prison (Visher et al., 2011). Reentry is the philosophy of the integration of ex-prisoners into the community including activities, procedures, and programs extending from the moment of entry to prison until after release. The success of the reentry processing achieved through official institutions, NGOs, families, criminal justice professionals who are planning, programming, evaluation, intervention, and supervision (Petersilia 2009; Visher et al., 2011). Therefore, the reentry has two main phases: the first phase is the treatment which usually begins at the moment the offenders enter into prison and the second phase is the integration of ex-prisoners into the community (Visher et al., 2011).

Reentry programs

            According to Lattimore et al. (2010), several researchers have found that ex-prisoners may return to crime within three years of release.  The statistics in 2000 have shown that two-thirds of the released were arrested within three years of release. Most researchers have found that an increase in the term of imprisonment after recidivism may lead to increased crime and that development of reentry programs could lead to increased public safety. Therefore, the official institutions should develop new strategies for reentry programs (Lattimore, et al. 2010). Many of the effective programs are likely to begin in prison and continue an effective approach to society. The federal, states, and local policy-makers have embraced the emphasis on rehabilitation programs and drafters reentry strategies, which includes correctional and community agencies (Lattimore, et al. 2010).

            According to Bynum (2013), the reentry programs are reducing the recidivism and improving public safety. Reentry programs help prisoners return with successful integration into their society after they are released. The reentry programs vary greatly in structure, in the provisions of services, and clients served despite the fact that most of the work is done with the prisoners before they are released. Many of the reentry programs begin with the entry of the prisoner through rehabilitation programs and will continue after the release until integration in society occurs. Returning programs are divided into (1) correctional programs that focus on how transitioning a prisoner from prison to community (parole release and probation) and (2)  treatment programs which include treatment of the prisoners to facilitate their integration into society (educational , housing, drug abuse, and employment) (Wikoff et al., 2012). Some of these programs focus on specific personal needs, such as housing, education, employment, or drug abuse treatment while other programs offer a variety of services to meet the needs of the participants. Also, some of these programs begin in prison and continues after release from prison, such as drug abuse treatment and sex offenders (Wikoff et al., 2012).

Social learning theory

            Ex-prisoners need to reintegrate successfully into community, which provide training and skills through reentry programs (Taxman, 2011). Social learning theory promotes the idea that learning occurs in a social context and people learn from observing the behaviors of others . Social learning theory believes that the formation of one's identity consists in response to social stimuli. This theory is concerned with the societal context of socialization rather than the individual (Taylor & Cranton, 2012). According to the social learning theory a person's behavior is learned, and this means a type of external power paved the way for these different skills (Kiltz, 2010; Lundberg et al., 2008). The social learning theory is based on three mechanisms 1 - promoting differential or differentials reinforcement (The reinforcement occurs when a behavior is reinforced by what is going on or reward or punish while interacting with others), 2 - ratification beliefs (Individuals can learn by learning behavior or beliefs of ratification), or 3 - ideal model (Individuals often in the tradition of a particular model or behavior) (Taylor & Cranton, 2012). This is underlying assumption of prevention and treatment programs that have relied on the application of social learning theory. Behavior modification programs are based on learning theory and include both group and individually focused techniques, are operating in correctional, treatment, and community facilities (Akers & Sellers, 2009, p. 101-102). Social learning theory may have a positive impact by providing opportunities for prisoners to engage in education and rehabilitation programs in prison so that they can successfully integrate into society after their release (Orrick et al. 2011). Social learning theory may have a negative impact, whereas the theory is based on the traditional behaviors of others, prisoners may learn criminal behavior from their peers in prison or associate with criminal behavior after their release, thus this could lead to recidivism (Goto & Martin, 2009; Orrick et al., 2011). Social learning theory encourages the bonus as a means of strengthening the incentive to stop criminal behavior. The rehabilitation programs can provide reinforcements to the prisoners by (1) giving them information about successful models of ex-prisoners who have been their integration in the community, (2) making them feel that rehabilitations or reentry programs have positive results, (3) providing the necessary documents (birth certificate and Social Security number) that they need to apply for job after their release, which may take a long time for the ex-prisoners to get (Goto & Martin, 2009; Kiltz, 2010).  The drug addicts’ rehabilitation programs should be available within the prison by giving the prisoners information about the negative effects of drug abuse (Petersilia, 2009). This information is given through the guidance of mentors, advisers through the process of self-monitoring of prisoners. Therefore, the social learning theory can be applied for all prisoners’ rehabilitations programs inside the prison and reentry programs after they release and integrate into community (Petersilia, 2009).

Elements of effective model for parolee community reintegration

            According to Severson et al. (2011), reentry program designs consist of two phases, starting while the inmates is incarcerated and continued them through the issuance of reintegration into society. The first phase of the program is the completion of the experimental evaluations reentry within correctional programming. The second phase includes identification of resources for crisis and referred to the release of the participants. Here is the development of a continuum of services offered and delivered, which follows the offender from the institution in the community, and provides support and purpose necessary to achieve success, and reentry plan that includes plugging services between the institutions and the community (Morani et al., 2011).

The modern reentry movement was founded on the basis that reentry programs alleged cause of the society understanding public views on reentry programs requires a collaborative response between correctional organizations and communities (Garland, Wodahl & Schuhmann, 2013). Over the past decade the federal and state governments have been developing many of the reentry and reintegration programs (Myers & Jeremy, 2013).

            The elements required for reintegration into the community are employment after release, housing, educational, mental health, and drug abuse treatment.There is also federal legislation that provides funding to help reentry reintegration, which is known as Second Chance Act (Diallo, 2008; Garland et al., 2013).

Employment after prison

            According to Visher et al. (2011), finding jobs for ex-prisoners is a good way to reduce the recidivism.  Most researchers suggest that getting a job is a basic feature of successful reintegration. Finding and maintaining stable employment may serve as an informal social control that help to prevent criminal behavior (Visher et al., 2011). According to the views of the former prisoners they find a stable job as the staple ingredient to adapt their new lives after prison (Visher et al., 2011). Ex-prisoners always face the prospect of dwindling stable jobs with appropriate wage because employers are reluctant to hire people with criminal records. Finding a sufficient source of income for the former prisoner is a major and important factor to integrate into society. Most researchers have found that lack of access to find a job or reducing wages typically leads to the ex-prisoners to do illegal activities to increase their earnings (Visher et al.,

2011). There are many reasons for ex-prisoner difficulty to find jobs (1) lack of education, (2) lack of work experience and skills, (3) age, and (4) in some states, ex-prisoners are prohibited from working in jobs such as law, medicine, nursing, real estate and education (Visher et al., 2011). Ex-prisoners are likely to have other factors such as criminal behaviors hinder them to finding a job. Former prisoners, who continue in drug use, admit a willingness to continue criminal behavior, and who look to the judicial system as unfair may find it impossible to find jobs (Visher et al., 2011).

            However, the reentry programs in many states have become more modern and sophisticated in providing expectations in the field of ex-prisoners employment. Development interest, active participation, and job training are factors that lead to reductions in recidivism.  It is important to positively participate in society for a lifestyle change away from criminal activities (Myers & Jeremy, 2013; Visher et al., 2011)

Housing Programs

            According to NJCG (2010) each year more than 735,000 people are released from prison and nine million are released from jails. A reentry prisoner to integrate successfully into the community often depends on finding stable housing. Family and friends may be unwilling to accommodate these individuals. Private rental housing may not be an option because the cost is high or landlords do not want to rent to people with criminal records. Providing housing for prisoners after release is crucial for successful integration into society. Many studies have shown that the first month after the release of the prisoner, if he/she becomes homeless, it is easy to return to crime again. Therefore, there are many difficulties facing the ex- prisoners to find housing: (1) they do not have the money to get housing after their release, (2) the landlords refuse to rent to people with criminal records, (3) In some cases, public housing may not be an option for the perpetrators of certain crimes, and (4) some families and friends do not accept the ex-prisoner to live with them (Bynum, 2013; Reentry housing options, 2011). There is a housing program for prisoner reentry in most states to provide adequate housing at reasonable and affordable prices to help them fully integrate in society .The possibilities of developing shelters and access to affordable housing options for ex-prisoners may have a positive impact in reducing recidivism (Reentry housing options, 2011).

Education program

            Correction facilities in the United States have a long history in the provision of education and vocational training as part of the rehabilitation programs (Raphael, 2011).

The correctional education programs in order to be successful must be part of a systematic approach that includes recruitment, training, social skills, and related to vocational and job training (Raphael, 2011).

Mental health problems and drug rehabilitation

            Ex-prisoners reentry into community requires considering their health and how it affects the health of their families and their communities (Woods et al., 2013). According to Mears & Cochran (2012), there is no systematic way at the federal level or at the state level to identify and monitor the exact reasons for the large numbers of the mentally ill. The reentry programs have focused their attention on ex-prisoners who suffer from mental illnesses. The attention to the mental health of ex-prisoners reduces the risk of recidivism and helps to increase public safety (Mears & Cochran, 2012).

            One of the challenges the prisoners face upon their release is substance-abuse problems. Substance abuse problems are prevalent amongst prisoners, but most of them do not receive any treatment while they are in prison (Branham, 2009, p.415). Ex-prisoners’ drug abuse is a serious phenomenon with significant implications. Therefore, the drug abuse treatment is an effective way to reduce ex-prisoners criminal activities. According to many researches there are two positive ways effect to reduce drug abuse first, cognitive behavioral interventions, which are based on social learning theory. The second is therapeutic programs treatment (Branham, 2009; Mears & Cochran, 2012). The reentry programs of drug abuse involve the ex-prisoners as a team based on respect for the participants, showing the pros that they will enjoy when they stop drug use, urge them to resist drug sources, and introduce them to what to expect from the treatment of drug abuse (Mears & Cochran, 2012).

Sex offender parolee

            Sex offender reentry program is the toughest one in supervision. The program begins with sentence to parole and treatment (Lasher & McGrath, 2012). All states have adopted sex-offender registration and community-notification law. Most states have treatment programs to deal with a large number of sex offenders. The reentry programs for sex offenders are different from one state to another (Branham, 2009 p.429).

            Among professionals in charge of management of sex offenders, law enforcement officials have shown notification, believing that it leads to better control of the community from sex offenders and deters them from re-offending (Lasher & McGrath, 2012). Treatment programs for sex offenders go through four stages (1) treatment in prison, (2) treatment under the supervision of the community (3) reentry programs, and (4) periodic follow-up after the merge into the society. During the previous four stages of evaluation, analysis of existing treatment and reentry practices must be done. Most researchers have found the sex offender reentry programs reduce the recidivism (Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2012).

Political rights

            Political rights are examples of the legal impediments that make it difficult for ex-prisoners to put their criminal past behind them. One of the most common forms of political rights is voting (Branham, 2009, p.417) In Richardson v. Ramirez (1974) California disenfranchising criminals who were released and paroled from the vote does not constitute a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. The Supreme Court distinguished Richardson v. Ramirez when holding a voting restriction unconstitutional in Hunter v. Underwood (Branham, 2009).  Giving the former prisoners the right to vote is can be a signal that they have paid their debts to society and they become equal citizens (Hinchcliff, 2011).  Branham (2009) views the right to vote as the essence of democratic society and voting is a fundamental right (p.421).

Reentry court

            Reentry courts have the same features of drug courts which have been proven to help reduce recidivism (Vance, 2011). In reentry court the judge work as reentry manger. At the time in sentencing the judge will tell the offender the goal of being under community supervision which is to admit him or her back into society after pay the debt for his/her offense. The judge also will convene the stakeholder who will be responsible for offender’s reentry. When released, the offender will be back again to the court and the judge will declare the success of the next step depending on the jurisdiction system. In general the offender would have to remain drug free, make restitution to his/her victim and reparation to his/her community, and participate in programs that had begun in prison and continue during the reentry programs (Branham, 2009, p.454-457). The offenders would be required to appear in court every month to demonstrate how their plan is working. The community justice officer would keep the court appraised of neighborhood developments involving the offender. The judge would be responsible for making sure that government agencies and supporting systems were doing their part and also by involving family members and friends in the reentry plan, it expands the reach of positive influences upon the offender (Branham, 2009, p.454-457)

The purposes of the prisoner reentry programs

            In recent years, reentry programs have become of interest to policy-makers and practitioners at the federal and the state levels (Petersilia, 2009). The purposes of the prisoner reentry programs are (1) to enhance public safety, (2) reduce the recidivism, and (3) decrease the crimes (Bynum, 2013). The reentry programs will help former inmates return to a productive life after their release and thus helps the community to save tax dollars (Wynn, & Writer, 2012). The reentry programs have increased attention on the basis of the principles of sound and accurate assessment.  Most researchers have found that reentry programs help to reduce recidivism (Wikoff et al., 2012).

Evaluate the efficacy of current intervention in the treatment and supervision

            Most researchers evaluate the reentry programs use recidivism as the standard of measurement. The main objective of the program is the reintegration of ex-prisoners into the community to reduce recidivism (Taxman, 2011). According to Taxman (2011), reentry processes fail for several reasons:  (1) not enough programming, (2) lack of resources, (3) the punitive approach, and (4) mixed messages for all types of stakeholders. The contradictory messages of the current programming just delegitimize the reentry programs contribution to the irony of returning programs and make society unwilling to the success of ex-prisoners reintegrating into society (Taxman, 2011). There are a number of measures taken by the federal government and state governments that historically have made reentry programs worse, for failing to provide training, cutting off food stamps and housing aid, and allowing employers to refuse to find jobs for them because of criminal records (Taxman, 2011).

            There are approximately 650,000 prisoners released from federal and States prisons every year, with large numbers of them reentering and integrating into the communities, but it is still about 50% of them return back to prison for a parole violation or for committing a new crime within three years (Garland et al. 2013). Ex- prisoners’ reentry and integration into society always interface great obstacles, such as housing, employment barriers, blocking access to substance abuse, mental health condition, and the difficulties of psychological and social adjustment (Garland et al., 2013).

Intervention

            Most researchers have found that in order to achieve the success of the reentry programs there must be a focus on the individual within the program not on the program itself. Treatment interventions should be used depending on the individual characteristics such as age, severity of criminal, mental and neurological status, and the degree of thinking. Effective intervention may reduce the recidivism (Steiner et al., 2011; Wikoff et al., 2012).

            The results of evaluations of reentry programs mostly appeared with positive outcomes (Wikoff et al., 2012) successful reentry programs integrate behavioral and cognitive approaches to encourage intensive prosaically behavior (Wikoff et al., 2012). The evaluations of reentry programs require the amount of exposure to a single individual has to intervene with what is necessary to lead to a reduction in recidivism (Severson et al., 2011). The preventive interventions prevent disturbances, risk reduction, health promotion, taking into account the cultural context and the society in which interventions are performed (Woods et al., 2013).

            Some results of evaluations appeared with negative outcomes. The negative views, researchers explain, are a basic requirement for prisoners to return and integrate into society. They are jobs, housing, treatment of drug addiction, treatment of mental illnesses, and family and community support. The problem in many states is in the financial support for reentry programs. The spending for these programs may be unavailable or inadequate because the high cost of these programs (Garland et al., 2013).

Supervision
            Most researchers have found that the mere supervision parole with deterrence when its violation does not lead to reduce the recidivism. In contrast, the supervision includes levels of rehabilitation and treatment programs help to reduce recidivism (Steiner et al., 2011). There are many efforts at the federal and state levels to supervise the returning prisoners. First, one of these efforts in federal level is the Second Chance Act of 2007. Under this Act the federal government decided to provide the necessary services for the implementation by States for reentry programs. The federal government decided that the Second Chance Act was put in to develop the correctional system by programs based on evidence. The purpose of the Second Chance Act is to increase the federal government's participation in the anti-recidivism. According to the Second Chance Act, the federal government will share successful policies, effective innovations, monitoring programs through repeated systematic documentation, and analysis of data with state governments to tackle the problem of recidivism. However, the federal government is responsible for assisting prisoners to return as good citizens in their community (Bush, 2008; Wikoff et al., 2012). Second, one of these efforts in the state level is the community policing. The community policing is an approach based on cooperation between partnerships, law enforcement agencies, and local residents to do a variety of efforts through enhanced surveillance, supervision, and reform of former prisoners to integrate successfully into society (Sozer, 2009; Steiner et al., 2011)

            There are modern and sophisticated methods to supervise and use new technologies such as electronic surveillance and global positioning system (GPS) to focus resources supervision and treatment probability so that we may be able to reduce recidivism. Supervision of parolees has a significant effect on the rates of the re-arrest of released prisoners (Schlager, 2008). Parole continues to be an important part of the prison system to improve the effectiveness and more pragmatic in helping supervise the released prisoners (Schlager, 2008). Parole officers’ attitudes are evaluative states which could create individuals to behave in certain ways. Parole officers hold attitudes that get rid of the acting in a documented, controlling manner, or using an approach which is more assistance oriented (Steiner et al., 2011).