urban institute serious and violent offender multi-site evaluation funded by nij grant no....

UrbanInstitute

Serious and Violent Offender Multi-site Evaluation

Funded by NIJ Grant No. 2004-RE-CX-0002

What Works in Reentry: Findings from the

SVORI Multi-site Evaluation

Christy A. Visher, Ph.D.University of Delaware and The Urban Institute

John Jay College of Criminal JusticePrisoner Reentry Institute

October 23, 2009

UrbanInstitute


Overview The Serious & Violent Offender Reentry Initiative

The evaluation design and data collection

Findings: Did “it” work?

Challenges finding what works—for programs, for evaluators

Lessons: Takeaways for reentry strategies & evaluations

UrbanInstitute

Serious and Violent Offender

Multi-site Evaluation

www.svori-evaluation.org

So What Was the SVOR Initiative?

In 2002, the US DOJ, DOL, ED, DHUD, and DHHS funded one round of three-year grants for state and local agencies to develop programs to improve criminal justice, employment, education, health, and housing outcomes for released prisoners

69 agencies received Federal funds ($500,000 - $2,000,000) to develop 89 programs that Targeted adult and juvenile populations Incorporated partnerships among state and local

agencies to provide comprehensive services to prisoners returning home

Were locally designed to meet local needs and organizational capabilities

UrbanInstitute




SVORI Logic Model

INPUTS: SVORI

· Federal Funds & Resources· Federal Grant Requirements· Technical Assistance

THROUGHPUTS

· Local Partnerships· State & Local Resources

OUTPUTS: IMPLEMENTATION

In Prison· Coordination/Supervision· Education/Training· Family Services· Health Services

(AOD Treatment)· Transition Services

Community· Coordination/Supervision· Education/Training· Family Services· Health Services


Post Supervision· Community Reintegration

Activities

INTERMEDIATE OFFENDER OUTCOMES

· Community Involvement· Employment· Family Contact/Stability· Health/Mental Health· Housing· Substance Use · Supervision Compliance

OFFENDER RECIDIVISM OUTCOMES

· Committed Any Crime (SR)· Committed Violent Crime (SR)· Any Jail/Prison (SR)· New Arrest (OR)· Readmitted to Prison (OR)

UrbanInstitute




SVORI Funding Came with Few Requirements

Unlike many Federal programs, SVORI grants imposed only a few requirements Focus on “serious and violent offenders” 35 years

of age or younger Address different stages of reentry through

services delivered (1) prior to release, (2) post release during supervision, and (3) post supervision

Base services on needs and risk assessments Include partnerships among state and local

agencies and community and faith-based organizations

UrbanInstitute




So…What was a “SVORI Program”?

SVORI programs were locally designed to meet local needs & organizational capabilities

Most programs used assessments to tailor services & programs for program participants

SVORI was not a program in the sense of traditional programs (e.g., cognitive behavior therapy or residential drug treatment)

SVORI was a funding stream that agencies used to enhance & expand existing programs or to develop new reentry programs

UrbanInstitute




Evaluation Challenge

“…determine whether the selected programs have accomplished the overall goal of the Reentry Initiative – increasing public safety by reducing recidivism among the populations served by the program – and determine the relative costs and benefits of the program.”

UrbanInstitute




Did SVORI Work?

What does that mean? Were agencies able to develop &

implement SVORI programs? What did those programs look like? Did program participants receive more

services than others? Did program participants have better

outcomes?

UrbanInstitute




SVORI Multi-site Evaluation

Implementation assessment collected multiple waves of survey data from all 89 SVORI program directors, as well as data from program participants & comparison subjects

Impact evaluation focused on SVORI participants and non-SVORI comparison subjects in 12 adult programs (11 for adult females) and 4 programs for juvenile males in 14 states

Interviews with individuals who entered SVORI programs and were released from prison between July 2004 and November 2005 30 days prior to release 3, 9 and 15 months post release

UrbanInstitute




SVORI Impact Evaluation Subjects12 Adult Programs; 4 Juvenile Programs

Wave Men Women Boys Total

S NS Total S NS Total S NS Total

Pre 863 834 1697 153 204 357 152 185 337 2391

3 M 529 455 984 110 134 244 105 131 236 1464

9 M 565 470 1035 119 134 253 108 131 239 1527

15 M 582 531 1113 124 152 276 107 141 248 1637

Total 2539 2290 4829 506 624 1130 472 588 1060 7019

Wave 1 response rate: 86% Wave 2: 58% (Men), 68% (Women), 71% (Boys)

Wave 3: 61% (Men), 71% (Women), 72% (Boys)

Wave 4: 66% (Men), 77% (Women), 74% (Boys)

UrbanInstitute




Population Characteristics30 Days Prior to Release

Men Women Boys

Age at release 29 32 17

Black 54% 41% 55%

Hispanic 4% 6% 20%

Currently married/steady relationship 40% 48% 43%

Children 63% 83% 9%

HS/GED 60% 62% 17%

Employed 6 m prior prison 66% 53% 38%

Supported self w/ job 6 m prior prison 61% 48% 29%

Age 1st arrest (years) 16 19 13

Prior arrests (number) 14 12 7

Person/violent crime (current) 41% 29% 46%

Lifetime illicit drug use 95% 94% 88%

AOD/MH treatment prior prison 51% 73% 43%

UrbanInstitute




Implementation

SVORI funds resulted in the development of local programs that provided an increase in programs and services for participants…

UrbanInstitute




Characterizing & ComparingSVORI Programs

Coordination & Supervision: risk assessment, needs assessment, treatment/release plan, and (post-release only) supervision

Employment/Education/Skills Building: education/GED/ tutoring/literacy, vocational training, employment referral/job placement, resume/interviewing skills, work release, cognitive skills development, life skills

Health Services: AA/NA, counseling, comprehensive AOD treatment, mental health, medical, dental, anger mgmt/violence counseling

Transition Services: legal, id assistance, benefits assistance, financial support/ emergency assistance, peer support, mentoring, housing, and (post-release only) transportation

Family Services: parenting skills, family counseling, family reunification, domestic violence servicesService Bundles

UrbanInstitute




Coordination Services Receipt: Men

Received Prerelease 3M Post

SN=863

NSN=834

SN=529

NSN=455

Reentry Plan? 57%* 25% n/a n/a

Met w/anyone re: release/reintegration?

66%* 31% 46%* 22%

Needs assessment for release? 49%* 23% n/a n/a

Met with case manager? 66%* 41% 58%* 34%

Note: Average bundle scores weighted to compensate for differences between groups.

* p < 0.05.

UrbanInstitute




Service Receipt: Men Coordination Services Bundle

6057

43

3033

40

31

24

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pre-ReleaseReceipt*

3-M Receipt* 9-M Receipt* 15-M Receipt*

SVORI

Non-SVORI

Needs assessment Case manager Treatment/release plan or help

reintegrating P/P supervision (post-release

only)


* p < 0.05.

UrbanInstitute




Selected Transition Services Receipt: Men

Received Prerelease 3M Post

SN=863

NSN=834

SN=529

NSN=455

Programs for release? 75%* 52% n/a n/a

Help obtaining job docs? 41%* 26% 25%* 16%

Help finding place to live? 28%* 13% 12% 11%

Help getting driver’s license? 22%* 8% 12%* 7%

Public health care access? 13%* 9% 11% 8%


* p < 0.05.

UrbanInstitute




Service Needs & Receipt: Men Transitional Services Bundle

28

64

139

6

17

62

97 6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pre-ReleaseReceipt*

Pre-ReleaseNeed

3-M Receipt* 9-M Receipt* 15-M Receipt

SVORI

Non-SVORI


* p < 0.05.

Legal Financial Health care Mentoring Employment documents Housing Transportation Driver’s license Clothes/food banks Program/class to prepare for

release (prerelease only)

UrbanInstitute




Employment/Education/SkillsBuilding Services: Men

Received Prerelease* 3M Post*

SN=863

NSN=834

SN=529

NSN=455

Any E/E/SB Service? 79%* 69% 50%* 31%

Any Employment Service? 37%* 20% 34%* 20%

Any Educational Service? 51%* 44% 11% 8%

Asst w/ Personal Relationships? 25%* 17% 7%* 4%

Trng Change Criminal Attitudes? 51%* 36% 18%* 10%


* p < 0.05.

UrbanInstitute




Service Needs & Receipt: Men Employment/Education/Skills Bundle

38

74

1411

8

24

74

8 86

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pre-ReleaseReceipt*

Pre-ReleaseNeed

3-M Receipt* 9-M Receipt* 15-M Receipt*

SVORINon-SVORI

Education/ vocational training Employment services Life skills Personal relationships Change criminal behavior

attitudes Money management


* p < 0.05.

UrbanInstitute




Implementation

SVORI funds resulted in the development of local programs that provided an increase in programs and services for participants…according to the SVORI Program Directors.

Our impact site respondents confirmed more services for those participating in programs.

Self-reported need was similar across sites…self-reported service receipt varied.

UrbanInstitute




Little Site Variation in NeedsEmployment/Education/Skills Bundle

74

6266

73 75 75 75 76 76 78 78 7984

73

67 68

7672 74

76

69

7873

7874

78

0

20

40

60

80

100

All 1 12

SVORI Non-SVORI

Source: Wave 1 interviews with adult males

UrbanInstitute




Much Variation in Service ReceiptEmployment/Education/Skills Bundle

39

1317 18

27 2733

40 40

59 6062

78

24 22

15

26

37

16

2630 31 30

25

18

35

0

20

40

60

80

100

All 1 12

SVORI Non-SVORI

Source: Wave 1 interviews with adult males

UrbanInstitute


Impact: Did the SVORI Programs Make A Difference?

UrbanInstitute




Remember the Logic Model

INPUTS: SVORI

· Federal Funds & Resources· Federal Grant Requirements· Technical Assistance

THROUGHPUTS

· Local Partnerships· State & Local Resources

OUTPUTS: IMPLEMENTATION

In Prison· Coordination/Supervision· Education/Training· Family Services· Health Services


Community· Coordination/Supervision· Education/Training· Family Services· Health Services


Post Supervision· Community Reintegration

Activities

INTERMEDIATE OFFENDER OUTCOMES

· Community Involvement· Employment· Family Contact/Stability· Health/Mental Health· Housing· Substance Use · Supervision Compliance

OFFENDER RECIDIVISM OUTCOMES

· Committed Any Crime (SR)· Committed Violent Crime (SR)· Any Jail/Prison (SR)· New Arrest (OR)· Readmitted to Prison (OR)

UrbanInstitute




Did SVORI Work? Approach

Overall, our SVORI and non-SVORI groups are similar although there are a few differences

Propensity score models were estimated to address observable differences in SVORI & Non-SVORI with respect to assignment to SVORI

Propensity score weighted models were estimated to determine effect of SVORI participation on outcomes

UrbanInstitute




Housing Independence

72%

82%86%

69%

83%80%

65%

78%82%

69%

77%73%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

3-M Post 9-M Post 15-M Post

M-S M-NS W-S W-NS

UrbanInstitute




Currently Support Self with Job

64%68%

71%

59%

68%

60%

53%

61%

68%

49%

56%

45%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


M-S M-NS W-S W-NS

UrbanInstitute




Job Has Benefits*

47%

53% 52%

39%42% 44%

41% 41% 42%

26%

33%37%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


M-S M-NS W-S W-NS

*Benefits = paid leave or health insurance

UrbanInstitute




Job Has Formal Pay

84%80% 78%

74%77%

74%

89% 90% 90%

74% 73% 74%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4

M-S M-NS W-S W-NS

UrbanInstitute




No Self-reported Drug Use Past 30 Days

79%

69%66%

77%

62% 62%

85%

69%

75%

81%

73%

63%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


M-S M-NS W-S W-NS

UrbanInstitute




No Self-reported Drug Use Past 30 Days Except Marijuana

88%

81% 82%

89%

79% 80%

92%

76%

82%87%

82%

74%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4

M-S M-NS W-S W-NS

UrbanInstitute




No Self-reported Drug Use Past 30 Days or Positive Test

54%

46%

52%

43%

67%

46%49%

38%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

3-M Post 15-M Post

M-S M-NS W-S W-NS

UrbanInstitute




No Self-reported Criminal Behavior Since Last Interview

79%

64% 66%

73%

59% 61%

78%

69% 70%

82%

75%

64%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


M-S M-NS W-S W-NS

UrbanInstitute




Recidivism: Men

68%

71%

42%39%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

3M 6M 9M 12M 15M 21M 24M

Arrest-S

Arrest-NS

Reinc-S

Reinc-NS

UrbanInstitute




Recidivism: Women

49%

60%

41%

22%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

3M 6M 9M 12M 15M 21M 24M

Arrest-S

Arrest-NS

Reinc-S

Reinc-NS

UrbanInstitute




Issues & Challenges: For Reentry Programs

Participant needs are multi-faceted

Implementation means identifying, developing, and providing a range of services often in collaboration and cooperation with multiple agencies and organizations—which is difficult

Services should be customized to individual participants based on needs and risks—there is no one “program” to be implemented

UrbanInstitute




Issues and Challenges: For Evaluators

Services are customized to individual participants based on needs and risks—there is no one “program” to be evaluated

Programs vary from location to location in response to available resources and service providers

Characteristics of participants across programs may vary, either because of targeting by administrators or underlying demographic differences in populations

UrbanInstitute




Conclusions SVORI: Ambitious effort to improve integrated,

individually targeted services through coordination of state & community agencies & organizations

SVORI participants were more likely to report receiving services pre and post release—although at levels far below 100%

From release through 15 months post release, SVORI participants are doing better—if only moderately so—across a wide range of outcomes

Official measures of recidivism show little difference in arrest & reincarceration rates, although we see slightly lower rearrest rates slightly higher reincarceration rates

UrbanInstitute




Lessons for the Field

Modest funding focused on improving coordination and developing reentry strategy can result in substantial increases in services.

Improvement in services leads to modest gains in outcomes.

Incomplete implementation of service components may explain modest outcomes.

Critical component: careful, systematic assessment of needs and matching of services

Continuity of service delivery!

SVORI was first major attempt to develop and deliver systematic reentry strategy.

UrbanInstitute




A Cautionary Note

“Services can assist the individual in sustaining recovery, but only if the client has the capacity and readiness to constructively utilize those services.”

George De Leon

UrbanInstitute




Post Script There are no “silver bullets”!

Federal funding has been a series of one-time efforts with different foci and population targets since 2001: SVORI (2002) -- DOJ Prisoner Reentry Initiative (2005) -- DOL Responsible Fatherhood, Marriage and Family

Strengthening (2006) -- HHS Second Chance (2009) -- DOJ

State funding for corrections has always been small & is now buffeted by budget shortfalls that threaten to eliminate gains in those states that have invested in reentry

SVORI was a good start – a place to build

UrbanInstitute




UrbanInstitute




For Women and Juvenile Males

Levels of self-reported need were similar for the SVORI and non-SVORI groups for both the adult females and the juvenile male subjects

Women participating in SVORI programs were much more likely to report receipt of services and substantial differences persisted for many services through the 15-month follow-up interview

Juvenile males, overall, reported much higher levels of service receipt than the adults—particularly, pre-release—and there were many fewer differences in the likelihood of service receipt between the SVORI and non-SVORI groups

urban institute serious and violent offender multi-site evaluation funded by nij grant no....

Documents

services programs

svori programs

federal programs

selected programs

worksfor programs

existing programs

violent offenders

local agencies