2008

Document Tag: 2008

Life After Lockup: Improving Reentry from Jail to the Community

Each year, US jails process an estimated 12 million admissions and releases. Substance addiction, job and housing instability, mental illness, and health problems are daily realities for a significant share of this population. Given that more than 80 percent of inmates are incarcerated for less than a month, jails have little time or capacity to address these deep-rooted and often overlapping issues. Life After Lockup synthesizes key findings from the Jail Reentry Roundtable and examines opportunities on the jail-to-community continuum where reentry-focused interventions can make a difference.

Managing Risk in Jails

This manual will help jails both to understand risk and its implication for jails and to develop a formal, effective risk management program that uses all of the jail’s basic resources (i.e., human, financial, property, partners, and reputation” (p. v). Chapters following an introduction are: understanding risk and its implications for jails; jail risk management issues and strategies; developing a risk management program; and organizational investments for managing risk. Appendixes provide recommended resources, worksheets (Risk Register, Risk Control Implementation Schedule, and Risk Control Action Plan), and evaluating financing options.

Utility of the Revised Level of Service Inventory (LSI-R) in Predicting Recidivism After Long-Term Incarceration

Assessing an inmate’s risk for recidivism may become more challenging as the length of incarceration increases. Although the population of Long-Term Inmates (LTIs) is burgeoning, no risk assessment tools have been specifically validated for this group. Based on a sample of 1,144 inmates released in a state without parole, we examine the utility of the Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R) in assessing risk of general and violent felony recidivism for LTIs (n = 555). Results indicate that (a) the LSI-R moderately predicts general, but not necessarily violent, recidivism, and (b) this predictive utility is not moderated by LTI status, and is based in part on ostensibly dynamic risk factors. Implications for informing parole decision-making and risk management for LTIs are discussed.