The Recidivism of Drug Offenders Following Release from Prison: A Comparison of Kentucky Outcomes

References

• Alm, S. M. (2016). HOPE probation: Fair sanctions, evidence-based principles, and therapeutic alliances. Criminology & Public Policy, 15(4), 1195–1214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Austin, P. (2014). The use of propensity score methods with survival or time-to-event outcomes: Reporting measures of effect similar to those used in randomized experiments, Statistics in Medicine, 33, 1242–1258.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Austin, J., & Hardyman, P. L. (2004). The risk and needs of the returning prison population. Review of Policy Research, 21, 13–29.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, A. J., & Shipley, B. E. (1989). Recidivism of prisoners released in 1983. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
   Google Scholar
• Belenko, S. (2006). Assessing released inmates for substance-abuse-related service needs. Crime & Delinquency, 52(1), 94–113.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belenko, S., Foltz, C., Lang, M., & Sung, H. (2004). Recidivism among high-risk drug felons. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 40(1/2), 105–132.
   Google Scholar
• Blasko, B., Friedman, P., Rhodes, A., & Taxman, F. (2015). The parolee-parole officer relationship as a mediator of criminal justice outcomes. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 42(7), 722–740.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bouffard, J., & Richardson, K. (2007). The effectiveness of drug court programming for specific kinds of offenders – Methamphetamine and DWI offenders versus other drug-involved offenders. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 18(3), 274–293.
   Google Scholar
• Brownell, K. D., Marlatt, G. A., Lichtenstein, E., & Wilson, T. G. (1986). Understanding and preventing relapse. American Psychologist, 41(7),765–782.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bucklen, K., & Zajak, G. (2009). But some of them don’t come back (to prison): Resource deprivation and thinking errors as determinants of parole success and failure. The Prison Journal, 89(3), 239–264.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carson, A. E. (2015). Prisoners in 2014. Washington, DC: Bureau of Jusitce Statistics.
   Google Scholar
• Cullen, F., & Jonson, C. (2012). Correctional theory: Context and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Gendreau, P., Little, T., & Goggin, C. (1996). A meta-analysis of the predictors of adult offender recidivism: What works! Criminology, 34, 575–607.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glowicki, M. (2016, June 21). Q&A: Bevin’s criminal justice reform council. Retrieved from http://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/2016/06/21/q-bevins-criminal-justice-reform-council/86184388/
   Google Scholar
• Grattet, R., & Lin, J. (2016). Supervision intensity and parole outcomes: A competing risks approach to criminal and technical parole violations. Justice Quarterly, 33(4), 565–593.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grattet, R., Lin, J., & Petersilia, J. (2011). Supervision regimes, risk, and official reactions to parolee deviance. Criminology, 49(2), 371–399.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamilton, Z., Campbell, C., van Wormer, J., Kirgel, A., & Posey, B. (2016). Impact of swift and certain santions: Evaluation of Washington State’s policy for offenders on community supervision. Criminology & Public Policy, 15(4), 1009–1072.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hawken, A., & Kleiman, M. (2009). Managing drug involved probationers with swift and certain sanctions: Evaluating Hawaii’s HOPE. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
   Google Scholar
• Hawken, A., Kulick, J., Smith, K., Mei, J., Zhang, Y., Jarman, S., … Vial, T. (2016). HOPE II: A follow-up to Hawaii’s HOPE evaluation. Retrieved from http://ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/249912.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hiller, M., Knight, K., & Simpson, D. (1999). Prison-based substance abuse treatment, residential aftercare and recidivism. Addiction, 94(6), 833–842.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ireland, C. S., & Prause, J. (2005). Discretionary parole release: Length of imprisonment, percent of sentenced served, and recidivism. Journal of Crime & Justice, 28, 27–49.
   Google Scholar
• Justice Policy Institute. (2011). Due south: Kentucky: Overhauling the criminal justice system. Retrieved from http://www.justicepolicy.org/searchresults.html?q=Kentucky
   Google Scholar
• Langan, P. A., & Levin, D. J. (2002). Recidividism of prisoners released in 1994. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
   Google Scholar
• Lattimore, P., MacKenzie, D., Zajac, G., Dawes, D., Arsenault, D., & Tueller, S. (2016). Outcome findings from the HOPE demonstration field experiment: Is swift, certain, and fair an effective supervision strategy? Criminology & Public Police, 15(4), 1103–1141.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Legislative Research Commission. (2011). Report of the task force on the penal code and controlled substances act. Frankfort, KY: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Lowenkamp, C. T., & Latessa, E. J. (2005). Increasing the effectiveness of correctional programming through the risk principle: Identifying offenders for residential placement. Criminology & Public Policy, 4, 263–290.
   Google Scholar
• Lowenkamp, C. T., Latessa, E. J., & Holsinger, A. M. (2006). The risk principle in action: What have we learned from 13,676 offenders and 97 correctional programs? Crime & Delinquency, 52, 77–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowenkamp, C. T., Pealer, J., Smith, P., & Latessa, E. J. (2006). Adhering to risk and need principles: Does it matter for supervision-based programs? Federal Probation, 70, 3–8.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, S., O’Connell, D., Paternoster, R., & Bachman, R. (2011). Journal of Drug Issues, 41, 179–196.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martinson, R., & Wilks, J. (1975). Save parole supervision. Federal Probation, 41(3), 23–27.
   Google Scholar
• McVay, D., Schiraldi, V., & Ziedenberg, J. (2004). Treatment or incarceration? National and state findings on the efficacy and cost savings of drug treatment versus imprisonment. Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell, O., Wilson, D., Eggers, A., & MacKenzie, D. (2012). Assessing the effectiveness of drug courts on recidivism: A meta-analytic review of traditional and non-traditional drug courts. Journal of Criminal Justice, 40(1), 60–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nally, J., Lockwood, S., Ho, T., & Knutson, K. (2014). Post-release recidivism and employment among different types of released offenders: A 5-year follow-up study in the United States. International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences, 9(1), 16–34.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2008). Parole, Desistance from Crime, and Community Integration. Committee on Community Supervision and Desistance from Crime. Committee on Law and Justice, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• O’Donnell, D., Brent, J., & Visher, C. (2016). Decide your time: A randomized trial of a drug testing and graduated sanction program for probationers. Criminology & Public Policy, 15(4), 1073–1102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostermann, M. (2011). Parole? Nope, not for me: Voluntarily maxing out of prison. Crime & Delinquency, 57, 686–702.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostermann, M. (2012). Recidivism and the propensity to forego parole release. Justice Quarterly, 29, 596–618.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostermann, M. (2013). Active supervision and its impact upon parole recidivism rates. Crime & Delinquency, 59, 487–509.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostermann, M. (2015). How do former inmates perform in the community? A survival analysis of rearrests, reconvictions, and technical parole violations. Crime and Delinquency, 61(2), 163–187.
   Google Scholar
• Ostermann, M., & Hyatt, J. (2014). Is something better than nothing? The effect of short terms of mandatory parole supervision. Justice Quarterly, 33(5), 785–810. doi:10.1080/07418825.2014.980300
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostermann, M., Salerno, L., & Hyatt, J. (2015). How different operationalizations of recidivism impact conclusions of effectiveness of parole supervision. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 52(6), 771–796.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pew Charitable Trusts. (2014). Mandatory reentry supervision: Evaluating the Kentucky experience. Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Preston, D. (2011, June). Changes in criminal law or criminal procedure in HB 463. The Advocate. Retrieved from http://dpa.ky.gov/Public_Defender_Resources/Pages/advocate.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Pugh, R., & Jones, P. (2004). Survival anaysis in social work. British Journal of Social Work, 34, 907–914.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum, P., & Rubin, D. (1985). The bias due to incomplete matching. Biometrics, 41, 41–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rydberg, J., & Grommon, E. (2016). A multimethod examination of the dynamics of recidivism during reentry. Corrections, 1(1), 40–60.
   Google Scholar
• Schaffer, D. (2011). Looking inside the black box of drug courts: A meta-analytic review. Justice Quarterly, 28(3), 493–521.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlager, M. D., & Robbins, K. (2008). Does parole work? – Revisited: Reframing the discussion of the impact of post-prison supervision on offender outcome. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 50(6), 327–348.
   Google Scholar
• Shannon, L., Hulbig, S., Birdwhistell, S., Newell, J., & Neal, C. (2015). Implementation of an enhanced probation program: Evaluating process and preliminary outcomes. Evaluation and Program Planning, 49, 50–62.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spivak, A., & Damphousse, K. (2006). Who returns to prison? A survival analysis of recidivism among adult offenders released in Oklahoma, 1985-2004. Justice Research and Policy, 8(2), 57–88.
   Google Scholar
• Spohn, C., & Holleran, D. (2002). The effect of imprisonment on felony offenders: A focus on drug offenders. Criminology, 40(2), 329–358.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanton-Tindall, M., & Winston, E. (2015). Criminal justice Kentucky treatment outcome study. Frankfort, KY: Kentucky Department of Corrections.
   Google Scholar
• Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2014). Results from the National Survey on Drug Use and health: Summary of national findings. Rockville, MD: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Sullivan, C. J., Blair, L., Latessa, E., Sullivan, C. C. (2016). Juvenile drug courts and recidivism: Results from a multisite outcome study. Justice Quarterly, 33(2), 291–318.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taxman, F., Bryne, J., & Young, D. (2003). Targeting for reentry: Matching needs and services to maximize public safety. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
   Google Scholar
• Therneau, T. M., & Grambsch, P. M. (2000). Modeling survival data: Extending the Cox model. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Tripodi, S., Kim, J., & Bender, K. (2010). Is employment associated with recidivism? The complex relationship between employment and crime. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 54(5), 706–720.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Upton, C., & Sharp. (2009). The cost of incarcerating adult felons. Frankfort, KY: Legislative Research Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Veysey, B., Ostermann, M., & Lantermann, J. (2014). The effectiveness of enhanced parole supervision and community services: New Jersey’s serious and violent offender reentry initiative. The Prison Journal, 94(4), 435–453.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vito, G., Higgins, G., & Tewksbury, R. (2015). The effectiveness of parole supervision: Use of propensity score matching to analyze reincarceration rates in Kentucky. Criminal Justice Policy Review, advance online publication, 1–14. doi:10.1177/0887403415609717
   Google Scholar
• Vito, G., & Tewksbury, R. (1998). The impact of treatment - Jefferson County (Kentucky) drug court program. Federal Probation, 62, 46–48.
   Google Scholar
• Vito, G. F., Wilson, D. G., & Holmes, S. T. (1993). Drug testing in community corrections: Results from a four-year program. The Prison Journal, 73(3), 343–354.
   Google Scholar
• Wan, W.-Y., Poyton, S., van Doorn, G., & Weatherburn, D. (2014). Parole supervision and re-offending: A propensity score matching analysis. Canberra, Australia: Australian Institute of Criminology.
   Google Scholar