Although aftercare programs have been gaining popularity as a mechanism for helping offenders readjust to society, evaluations of their success remain varied. This is most likely due to the diversity of programs labeled as aftercare and the inability of research to isolate specific program components. The current study capitalizes on a natural experiment to examine the impact of one particular component, length of service delivery, on recidivism. The study employs survival analysis techniques on a population of inmates graduating from a motivational boot camp who either received no aftercare, 30 days of aftercare, or 90 days of aftercare (depending on the existing policy on their graduation date). Findings show that those receiving 30 days of aftercare services are indistinguishable from those receiving no aftercare services in terms of recidivism. Also, we find that although those receiving 90 days of aftercare did recidivate substantially less than those receiving 0 or 30 days of aftercare, after accounting for sample attrition, however, these findings also lacked statistical significance.
Altschuler, D.M., & Armstrong, T.L. (1994). Intensive aftercare for high-risk juveniles: A community care model. Washington DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention , National Institute of Justice.
2.
Altschuler, D.M., & Brash, R. ( 2004). Adolescent and teenage offenders confronting the challenges and opportunities of reentry. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2, 72-87.
3.
Brown, B.S., O’Brady, K.E., Battjes, D., Farrell, E.V., Smith, N.P., & Nurco, D.M. ( 2001). Effectiveness of a stand-alone aftercare program for drug-involved offenders. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment , 21, 185-192.
4.
Butzin, C.T., Martin, S.S., & Inciardi, J.A. (2005). Treatment during transition for prison to community and subsequent illicit drug use. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 28, 351-358.
5.
Blossfeld, H.P., & Rohwer, G. ( 2002). Techniques of event history modeling: New approaches to causal analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6.
Clear, T. ( 2002). The problem with addition by subtraction: The prison-crime relationship in low income communities. In. M. Mauer & M. Chesney-Lind (Eds.), Invisible punishment: The collateral consequences of mass imprisonment (pp. 181-193). New York, NY: New Press.
7.
Fader, J. J. (2008). You can take me outta the "hood, but you can’t take the "hood outta me": Youth incarceration and reentry. In E. Anderson (Ed.), Against the wall: Poor, young, black, and male (pp. 198-217). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
8.
Greenwood, P.W., Deschenes, E.P., & Adams, J. ( 1993). Chronic juvenile offenders: Final results from the Skillman Aftercare Experiment. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
9.
Goodstein, L., & Sontheimer, H. (1997). The implementation of an intensive aftercare program for serious juvenile offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 24, 332-359.
10.
Hammett, T.M., Roberts, C., & Kennedy, S. ( 2001). Health-related issues in prisoner reentry. Crime & Delinquency, 47, 390-409.
11.
Hiller, M.L., Knight, K., & Simpson, D.D. ( 1999). Prison-based substance abuse treatment, residential aftercare and recidivism. Addiction, 94, 833-842.
12.
Holzer, H.J., Raphael, S., & Stoll, M.A. ( 2006). Perceived criminality, criminal background checks and the racial hiring practices of employers. Journal of Law & Economics, 49, 451-480.
13.
Hubbard, R.L., Craddock, S.G., & Anderson, J. ( 2003). Overview of 5-year follow up outcomes in the drug abuse treatment outcome studies. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment , 25, 125-134.
14.
Hubbard, R.L., Marsden, M.E., Rachal, J.V., Harwood, H.J., Cavanaugh, E.R., & Ginzburg, H.M. (1989). Drug abuse treatment: A national study of effectiveness. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
15.
Inciardi, J.A., Martin, S.S., & Butzin, C.T. ( 2004). Five-year outcomes of therapeutic community treatment of drug-involved offenders after release from prison. Crime & Delinquency, 50, 88-107.
16.
Josi, D.A., & Sechrest, D.K. (1999). A pragmatic approach to parole aftercare: Evaluation of a community reintegration program for high-risk youthful offenders. Justice Quarterly, 16, 51-80.
17.
Kurlychek, M., & Kempinen, C. ( 2006). Beyond boot camp: The impact of aftercare on offender reentry. Criminology & Public Policy, 5, 363-388.
18.
Kempinen, C. ( 2007). The impact of a 30-day aftercare provision in the recidivism of Pennsylvania’s Boot Camp graduates: A summary of the 2007 legislative report. Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing Research Bulletin, 6(1). Retrieved from http://pcs.la.psu.edu/publications/research-bulletin/ResBulletin200702.pdf/view
19.
Langan, P.A., & Levine, D.J. ( 2002). Recidivism of prisoners released in 1994. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.
20.
Lynch, J.P., & Sabol, W.J. ( 2001). Prisoner reentry in perspective. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
21.
Maltz, M.D. ( 1984). Recidivism. Orlando, Florida: Academic Press, Inc.
22.
Martin, S.S., Butzin, C.A., Saume, C.A., & Inciardi, J.A. (1999). Three-year outcomes of therapeutic community treatment for drug-involved offenders in Delaware: From prison to work release to aftercare. Prison Journal, 79, 294-320.
23.
Maruna, C. ( 2001). Making good: How ex convict reform and rebuild their lives. Washington, DC: APA Books .
24.
Mitchell, O., Wilson, D.B., & MacKenzie, D.L. (2007). Does incarceration-based drug treatment reduce recidivism? A meta-analytic synthesis of the research . Journal of Experimental Criminology, 3, 353-375.
25.
National Institute of Justice. (2009). Solicitation: Crime and justice research (Funding Opportunity No. NIJ-2009-2007) . Washington, DC: Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.
26.
Petersilia, J. ( 2003). When prisoners come home: Parole and prisoner reentry . New York, NY: Oxford.
27.
Schmidt, P., & Witte, A.D. ( 1988). Predicting recidivism using survival models. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
28.
Sealock, M.D., Gottfredson, D.C., & Gallagher, C.A. (1997). Drug treatment for juvenile offenders: Some good and bad news. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 34, 210-136.
29.
Siegal, H.A., Wang, J., Carlson, R.G., Falck, R.S., Rahman, A.M., & Fine, R.L. ( 1999). Ohio’s prison-based therapeutic community treatment programs for substance abusers: Preliminary analysis of re-arrest data. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 28, 33-48.
30.
Simpson, D.D., & Sells, S.B. ( 1983). Effectiveness of treatment for drug abuse: An overview of the DARP research program. In B. Stimmel (Ed.), Evaluation of drug treatment programs (pp. 7-29). New York, NY: Haworth Press.
31.
Sontheimer, H., & Goodstein, L. ( 1993). An evaluation of intensive aftercare probation: Aftercare versus system response effects. Justice Quarterly, 10, 197-227.
32.
Travis, J. ( 2000). But they all come back: Rethinking prisoner reentry (Research in Brief). Washington, DC: Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.
33.
Weibush, R.G., Wagner, D., McNulty, B., Wang, Y., & Le, T.N. ( 2005). Implementation and outcome evaluation of the intensive aftercare program: Final report. Washington DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.
34.
Wexler, H.K., Falkin, G.P., Lipton, D.S., & Rosenblum, A.B. (1992). Outcome evaluation of a prison therapeutic community for substance abuse treatment. In C. G. Leukefeld & F. M. Tims (Eds.), Drug abuse treatment in prisons and jails (pp. 71-92). (NIDA Research Monograph 118, DHHS Publication No. ADM 92-1884). Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
35.
Zhang, Z., Friedmann, P.D., & Gerstein, D.R. (2003). Does retention matter? Treatment duration and improvement in drug use. Addiction , 98, 673-684.
