Study
The randomized control study by D’Amico and Kim (2018) examined the influence of the Second Chance Act (SCA) Adult Reentry Demonstrations programs on recidivism and employment rates for recently released individuals at a 30-month follow up. The study looked at seven of the nine SCA programs implemented with funding from the Bureau of Justice Assistance FY 2009 grant. The seven grantees included the following state agencies: Kentucky Department of Corrections, Oklahoma Department of Corrections, and South Dakota Department of Corrections, and the following local agencies: Allegheny County, Pa., Department of Human Services; Marion County, Ore., Sheriff’s Office; San Francisco, Calif., Department of Public Health; and San Mateo County, Calif., Division of Health and Recovery.
The sample comprised 966 individuals, with 606 randomly assigned to the program group (individualized SCA services) and 360 assigned to the control group (services as usual). Participants were randomly assigned either well before or nearer to their release from prison. There were almost no statistically significant differences between the groups on baseline characteristics, except for time worked in the past, which was significantly different for the program group (93 percent), compared with the control group (88.8 percent). The program group was 78.2 percent male, 52 percent white, 31.2 percent African American, 13.2 percent American Indian or Alaska Native, 10.2 percent Hispanic, and 2.7 percent Hawaiian Native, Pacific Islander, or Asian. More than half (65.6 percent) were under the age of 30. Twenty-five percent had less than a high school degree or GED, 44.9 percent had their GED, 24.4 percent had their high school diploma, and 5.7 percent had some college. At the time of incarceration, 52.9 percent were not employed. Program participants were incarcerated for violent crimes (19.8 percent), property crimes (34.5 percent), drug crimes (43.9 percent), and public order offenses (26.9 percent).
The control group (n = 360) was 80.1 percent male, 49 percent white, 33.8 percent African American, 15.6 percent American Indian or Alaska Native, 9.2 percent Hispanic, and 4.1 percent Hawaiian Native, Pacific Islander, or Asian. More than half (66.1 percent) were under the age of 30. For highest degree attained, 23.2 percent had less than a high school degree or GED, 43.4 percent had their GED, 27.1 percent had their high school diploma, and 6.2 percent had some college. At the time of incarceration, 51.3 percent were not employed. Control group participants were incarcerated for violent crimes (19.5 percent), property crimes (29.9 percent), drug crimes (49.5 percent), and public order offenses (26.9 percent).
The study used data from numerous sources and assessment instruments. Grantees were allowed to choose which assessments they used, and sometimes different instruments were used at different times across sites. Some examples of assessments used include Addiction Severity Index (ASI), Correctional Assessment and Intervention System (CAIS), Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R), Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI), and the University of Rhode Island Change Assessment Scale (URICA). Across all sites, all participants completed a Baseline Information Form that collected background and criminal history (e.g., gender, age, race and ethnicity, level of education, employment history, type of crime for which the most recent incarceration occurred, length of sentence). Participants additionally provided identifying information, including a social security number and prison or jail identification number.
The grantee’s management information systems provided data on each participant’s date of SCA enrollment and date of last service and specified the pre- and postrelease services, including substance abuse treatment, mental health services, and employment services. Administrative data from state and local criminal justice agencies provided data on criminal history, from 10 years prior to each individual’s random assignment (RA) date to 30 months post-RA. The National Directory of New Hires (NDNH) provided information for study participants’ employment and earnings following RA. A follow-up survey was completed by 82.2 percent of the program group and 82.6 percent of the control group. The survey covered pre-RA characteristics (e.g., demographics, criminal history); services received since RA, whether from the SCA program or other sources; and outcomes. Outcomes included recidivism (arrests, convictions, and incarcerations), employment (whether worked since RA, whether currently employed, and wages and salary), health status, housing status, family status, substance abuse, fulfillment of child-support obligations, and other topics.
The study used an intent-to-treat approach to compare outcomes for those assigned to the SCA program group with the outcomes for those assigned to the control group. Regression analyses were used to assess the levels of statistical significance in estimating effects. The authors conducted subgroup analyses on gender, age, and risk at the 30-month follow up.
