Expanding the focus of correctional evaluations beyond recidivism: the impact of halfway houses on public safety

Han, SeungHoon

doi:10.1007/s11292-018-9326-6

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is aimed simultaneously at former prisoners released on parole (Latessa and Allen, 1982), at convicts whose parole has gone wrong (White et al, 2011), and at other types of profiles such as convicts with psychiatric disorders (Gumrukcu, 1968;Carpenter, 1978). Moreover, existing papers use different outcomes to estimate the effect of semi-liberty: the probability of failing the measure and therefore of being re-incarcerated (Walsh and Beck, 1990), the probability of being sentenced again following a new offense (Constanza et al, 2015), or the crime rate at the local level following the opening of a new semi-liberty facility (Hyatt and Han, 2018). They typically use logistic regressions (Clark, 2016), propensity score matching (Hamilton and Campbell, 2014), or a combination of the two (Constanza et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prison, semi-liberty and recidivism: Bounding causal effects in a survival model

Monnery

Wolff

Henneguelle

2020

International Review of Law and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates the effect of semi-liberty as an alternative to prison on recidivism in France. Our analysis is based on a unique dataset comprising 1,445 offenders, all eligible to semi-liberty. In the absence of an instrumental variable affecting access to semi-liberty but unrelated to recidivism, we turn to selection-on-observable methods as well as sensitivity analyses to bound the causal effect of interest. Our results under treatment exogeneity (Cox regressions) and conditional independence (matching) show that semi-liberty is associated with a reduction of 22% to 31% in offenders' hazard of recidivism in the five years after release. The estimated effects decrease, but remain negative and significant when credible confounders are introduced. Overall, our analysis lends strong support for a beneficial effect of semi-liberty compared to prison.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prison, semi-liberty and recidivism: Bounding causal effects in a survival model

Monnery

Wolff

Henneguelle

2020

International Review of Law and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Defining and assessing vulnerability within law enforcement and public health organisations: a scoping review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Historically, police departments focused solely on criminal justice issues. Recently, there has been a dynamic shift in focus, with Law Enforcement professional groups assuming more responsibility for tackling mental health and distress-related issues (that may arise because of mental health related problems and learning disabilities) alongside Public Health departments. While Law Enforcement has become a ‘last line of support’ and an increasing partner in mental health support, there is partnership working between law enforcement, psychology, and health professions in training and mental health service delivery. The term vulnerability is frequently used across Law Enforcement and Public Health (LEPH) to identify those in need of these services. Effective vulnerability assessment is therefore expected to prevent unintentional harmful health and criminal justice consequences and manage the negative impact of such in cases where prevention is not possible. This scoping review aimed to identify how vulnerability is defined and assessed across LEPH organisations. Results Vulnerability is context-specific from a Law Enforcement perspective, and person-specific from a Public Health perspective. Definitions of vulnerability are at best fragmented, while models for assessing vulnerability lack uniformity across LEPH. The implications are two-fold. For “vulnerable groups”, the lack of an evidence-based definition and assessment model could prevent access to relevant LEPH services, exacerbating issues of multiple vulnerabilities, co-morbidity, and/or dual diagnosis. All could inadvertently enable social exclusion of vulnerable groups from political discourse and policy interventions. The lack of consistency regarding vulnerability may result in reactive crisis responses as opposed to proactive preventative measures. Conclusions This scoping review exposes the complexities associated with defining and assessing vulnerability from a LEPH perspective, which are perceived and prioritised differently across the organizations. Future research must bridge this gap. Building on the establishment of a definition of vulnerability within the empirical literature, researchers ought to engage with service users, LEPH staff, and those engaged in policy making to craft effective vulnerability definitions and assessment models. Only through evidence based, co-produced definitions and assessment models for vulnerability can we ensure that best-practice, but also meaningful and feasible practice, in vulnerability assessment can be achieved.

show abstract

Expanding the focus of correctional evaluations beyond recidivism: the impact of halfway houses on public safety

Cited by 2 publications

References 35 publications

Prison, semi-liberty and recidivism: Bounding causal effects in a survival model

Prison, semi-liberty and recidivism: Bounding causal effects in a survival model

Defining and assessing vulnerability within law enforcement and public health organisations: a scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About