Defending and managing the pipeline: lessons for running a randomized experiment in a correctional institution

Roman, Caterina G.; Fontaine, Jocelyn; Fallon, John; Anderson, Jacquelyn; Rearer, Corinne

doi:10.1007/s11292-012-9155-y

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Eligible participants were then given a baseline survey, which took roughly 20 min to complete and contained 71 items covering housing, arrest history, financial support, mental health, physical health, substance abuse, criminal history, and sociodemographics. The refusal rate was 2.4% (Roman et al, 2012).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All eligible individuals had a current mental health diagnosis, two or more stays in a mental health inpatient program since 1980, two or more admissions to CCDOC since 2005, and a history of chronic homelessness (for a detailed description of the Chicago FUSE initiative, see Roman, Fontaine, Fallon, Anderson, & Rearer, 2012). Detainees were ineligible for the program and study if they were arrested or convicted of arson or sex offenses.…”

Section: Methods Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Identifying Discrete Subgroups of Chronically Homeless Frequent Utilizers of Jail and Public Mental Health Services

Harding

Roman

2016

Criminal Justice and Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A sizable group of individuals in the United States cycle in and out of jails, prisons, mental health hospitals, homeless shelters, and other expensive public institutions over time. This little-studied population represents significant unmet need and the inadequacy of services for complex consumers. The current study examined a sample (N = 161) of chronically homeless frequent utilizers of jail and mental health systems in Chicago, Illinois. Cluster analysis was used to differentiate the sample into four reliable subgroups based on measures for prior homelessness, jail incarcerations, mental health hospitalizations, poor current mood, and limitations due to physical health. Logistic regression revealed that clusters differed significantly on reincarceration at 6 months postrelease. Implications for programming and policy for each cluster are discussed, including suggestions for targeting services to distinguishing characteristics for each subgroup. These findings argue for the importance of coordinating efforts across services systems to better identify and serve shared clients.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methods Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying Discrete Subgroups of Chronically Homeless Frequent Utilizers of Jail and Public Mental Health Services

Harding

Roman

2016

Criminal Justice and Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Researchers need to stay attuned to amenability within corrections systems to rigorous research on father reentry and be ready to engage when this comes along. Even with support from multiple levels of leadership within a system, conducting RCTs within corrections can be challenging (e.g., Boruch, 2012;Eddy, Powell, Szubka, McCool, & kuntz, 2001;lobmaier, kunoe, & Waal, 2010;Roman, Fontaine, Fallon, Anderson, & Rearer, 2012). Despite this, such work is possible (e.g., Eddy et al, 2008), but requires presence, patience, and persistence over the long haul.…”

Section: Policymakersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Programs promoting the successful reentry of fathers from jail or prison to home in their communities.

Eddy¹,

Burraston²

2018

When Parents Are Incarcerated: Interdisciplinary Research and Interventions to Support Children.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Almost all incarcerated fathers will be released back to their communities. Once free, fathers ideally would be in a position to succeed in a prosocial manner not only as individuals but also as parents. Fathers would find a place to live, find a job, have positive relationships with family members, and make wise decisions at each crossroads they reach. Although some fathers do achieve these milestones, many continue to struggle to overcome the same problems (e.g., poverty, relational difficulties, substance abuse) they were facing at the time of incarceration, which are problems that likely played some role in their path to incarceration in the first place (Mumola, 2000;Travis, 2000). Moreover, virtually all fathers, even those who manage to succeed, deal with new problems that are by-products of being incarcerated, including, but not limited to, new (and opportunity-restricting) labels, new mental health problems, new problems in relating to others, a new repertoire of antisocial behaviors, enlarged deviant peer networks, and disenfranchisement from certain rights (e.g., voting) and benefits (e.g., access to public housing) that are available to other U.S. citizens (Nagin, Cullen, & Jonson, 2009).Given this plethora of challenges, it is not surprising that recidivism during the period of "reentry" is common, and that fathers remain at risk for a return to incarceration for an extended period of time. For example, most men (and fathers) are rearrested after release: 28% within the first 6 months, 58% within the first year, and 77% within the first 5 years (Durose, Cooper, & Snyder, 2014). In an attempt to remedy this situation and prevent the related pain, suffering, and societal expense, a significant number of federal, state, and local efforts have focused on the reentry period for fathers, with a particular focus on psychosocial intervention programs. A variety of "best practice" resources have been created to guide policymakers and practitioners in this work. Until recently, most of the information available has come from quasi-experimental research studies, with an emphasis on single group pre-post designs and on lessons drawn from anecdotal testimonials from individuals or small groups. A central problem with these source materials is that they provide an abundance of information on those who enroll and stay in reentry programs, but sparse information on those who either do not enroll in programs in the first place or who drop out and disappear from view. Improving outcomes during reentry will require serving each of these subpopulations effectively, and this might mean different programs for different people (see Paul, 1967).To better guide best practice decision making in the field, information is needed from a wider variety of sources and research designs (levant, 2005). Research designs that have been given less attention within the context of father reentry, but that have the potential to provide valid and reliable evidence to guide policy and practice, are fully experimental in nature, within which a...

show abstract

“…RCTs that bridge prison and community contexts usually require coordination with multiple prisons and community agencies to meet sample size and data needs (Prendergast et al, 2011;Roman, Fontaine, Fallon, Anderson, & Rearer, 2012). Recruiting in prison and providing an intervention after release leaves the study vulnerable to high attrition rates between release from prison and the first community-based study contact (Wilson & Davis, 2006).…”

Section: Pilot Rct Of Support Matters: Lessons Learned Challenges and Strategies Related To Rcts That Span Prisons And Communitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Randomized Controlled Trials to Evaluate Interventions for Releasing Prisoners

Pettus-Davis

Howard

Dunnigan

et al. 2015

Research on Social Work Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are rarely used to evaluate social and behavioral interventions designed for releasing prisoners. Objective: We use a pilot RCT of a social support intervention (Support Matters) as a case example to discuss obstacles and strategies for conducting RCT intervention evaluations that span prison and community contexts. Method: First, we summarize existing studies with current and former prisoner samples that highlight RCT methodological techniques. Then, we introduce the trial of Support Matters and discuss obstacles and efforts to overcome those obstacles. Results and Conclusions: We focus on factors related to sampling frame, participant eligibility, sample size, engagement, and attrition. We conclude with general recommendations related to project delays, compromised research sites, and retention. This article provides guidance based on lessons learned from an RCT of a social support intervention with releasing prisoners and their loved ones. Barriers discussed and recommendations presented here will help interventionists develop and implement RCTs in prison to community contexts.

show abstract

Defending and managing the pipeline: lessons for running a randomized experiment in a correctional institution

Cited by 3 publications

References 16 publications

Identifying Discrete Subgroups of Chronically Homeless Frequent Utilizers of Jail and Public Mental Health Services

Identifying Discrete Subgroups of Chronically Homeless Frequent Utilizers of Jail and Public Mental Health Services

Programs promoting the successful reentry of fathers from jail or prison to home in their communities.

Using Randomized Controlled Trials to Evaluate Interventions for Releasing Prisoners

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About