By Matthew Millings, Lol Burke, Harry Annison, Nicola Carr, Gwen Robinson & Eleanor Surridge.

This article presents findings from a major longitudinal research project of probation in England and Wales, arguing that the process of its ‘unification’ (re-nationalisation) continues to be a painful process whose end state remains elusive. Having previously articulated how practitioners experienced unification as ‘painful but necessary’, here, using the imagery of a journey, we argue that the speed and direction of travel have encountered a more perilous trajectory than expected as high workloads and staffing challenges have persisted. Second, we argue that enduring challenges in bedding in new working practices – and building the confidence of new and existing colleagues to deliver them – have acted as ‘hazards’ that have needed careful navigation. Third, we argue that staff experience a sense of individual and collective operational vulnerability, in the face of the relentless demands placed upon them. In conclusion, we identify a series of forks in the road that prompt profound questions about the delivery of probation services now and in the future.

Probation Journal 1–18 © The Author(s) 2025  

By Michelle Kirby

  The Family Violence Education Program is Connecticut’s pretrial program that gives eligible defendants the chance to attend programs that provide education about family violence instead of going to trial. Any defendant who wants to take part in the program must submit an application to the court. If the court grants the defendant’s application, he or she must take part in nine, 90- minute sessions of a psycho-educational class that is focused on reducing any future family violence. If the defendant completes this program successfully and follows any other conditions set by the court while he or she is taking part in the program, the court will dismiss the charges against the defendant. Classes are offered all over the state by judicial branch-contracted community providers  

OLR Research Report, Hartford:   Connecticut General Assembly ,  Office of Legislative Research , 2023. 4p.

By Jacquelyn Sicilia

Domestic violence has plagued society for years. However, until 1994, domestic violence was not federally criminalized. Today, domestic violence affects over ten million Americans per year. Because of the criminal justice system’s slow reaction to domestic violence, how the criminal justice system handles domestic violence cases is far from ideal. Pretrial release in domestic violence cases is one area of domestic violence that is ripe for research, guidance, and change. Pretrial release brings to light a unique balance; defendants are presumed to be innocent, but at the same time, the fact of arrest may point to an ongoing risk of harm to victims if defendants are released pre-trial. With little known about which pretrial conditions are successful in non-domestic violence cases, the answer of how to strike the necessary balance is even more challenging. This Note examines the different approaches states use to assign pretrial release conditions to domestic-violence defendants who are granted pretrial release and proposes a model statute to address—and effectively account for—the risk of re-abuse and the rights of criminal defendants in pretrial release.

66 St. Louis U. L.J. (2022)., 37p.

By Cassondra Warney, Ellen Whelan-Wuest, Madeleine Dardeau

This policy framework outlines policy options developed as part of a Justice Reinvestment Initiative effort in Vermont in 2019 in collaboration with Vermont’s Justice Reinvestment II Working Group. Many of the policies were reflected in legislation signed into law in 2020. The aim of these policies was to improve post-release supervision, achieve a more equitable criminal justice system, increase data collection and analysis, and, ultimately, reduce recidivism.

New York: The Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2022. 17p.

By Michelle Butler,, Catherine B. McName, Dominic Kelly

Despite its impact on imprisonment, no quantitative study has examined the factors related to people's status on prison incentive schemes. This study addresses this gap by using administrative data to explore the factors related to the status of 405 men on a prison incentive scheme. Results revealed that those who had a prior history of passing prison drug tests at time 1, and spent more time imprisoned during the follow-up period, were more likely to be on the highest level of the scheme one year later at time 2. In contrast, those who had a history of past involvement in misconduct, referrals for serious self-harm/attempted suicide in prison, not taken a prison drug test, property offences, and greater periods of custody at time  were more likely to be on the lower levels of the scheme at time . The potential implications for theory, policy, and practice are discussed.

  European Journal of Criminology 2024, Vol. 21(6) 887–907 

By Michelle Butler https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6983-6215michelle.butler@qub.ac.uk, Catherine B. McNamee, and  Dominic Kelly

The present study uses a prospective longitudinal research design to examine whether previously identified risk factors for prison interpersonal violence can predict violent prison misconduct in Northern Ireland (NI). Administrative data drawn from the records of 429 adult males imprisoned on November 22, 2017 were used to predict involvement in violent prison misconduct during a 1-year follow-up period. The results revealed that only a small number of previously identified risk factors were found to be significant in the NI context. Nationality, neighborhood deprivation, history of addiction, submission of prison complaints, past involvement in prison misconduct, and number of incarcerations emerged as significant, while religion, head injury/epilepsy, property offences, and prison visits were significant at the marginal level. Given the variation in risk factors identified as significant in the NI context compared to previous research, it is argued that cultural context matters when attempting to generalize the risk factors for prison interpersonal violence from one jurisdiction to another. These results offer some support for the importation theory, although it should be noted that the inclusion of prison environmental factors was limited due to the nature of the data. It is argued that specialist services and supports should be provided to address the factors contributing to interpersonal prison violence, including interventions to improve feelings of fairness, identify and treat underlying medical issues, as well as support visitation.

Journal of Interpersonal Violence 2022, Vol. 37(15-16)

By Johann Koehler https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1305-891 j.koehler@lse.ac.uand Friedrich Lösel

We synthesize 53 meta-analyses on the effectiveness of correctional treatment applied to a wide variety of offender groups delivered in either custodial or community-based settings. Those meta-analyses revealed positive overall effects on reoffending of correctional treatment delivered in both settings. However, the treatment setting is also associated with complex moderator effects. With respect to effect size, for most groups, community-based correctional treatment is associated with statistically significant larger reductions in reoffending than treatments delivered in custodial settings. With respect to effect precision, custodial treatments report more consistent effects on reoffending than community-based treatments. The findings extend and develop the insight that treatment flexibility, such as is found among community-based treatments, can optimize program effectiveness. Likewise, the opportunities for monitoring and treatment fidelity that custodial settings enable can homogenize outcomes. Nonetheless, the promising results observed among treatments delivered both inside and outside institutional settings implicate a complex policy tradeoff between prioritizing strong performance and consistent effects.

European Journal of Criminology 2025, Vol. 22(1) 3–29 , 2024    

By Amanda Wilson

Centering the perspectives and lived experiences of incarcerated persons, this article considers the ways food is used as a tool and site of contestation and possibility within federal prisons in Canada. Focusing specifcally on the implementation of and resistance to the Food Services Modernization Initiative, I explore food as “contested terrain” within carceral systems, making visible a range of tactics of resistance employed by incarcerated persons, from testimonials and ofcial complaints to direct collective action. In analyzing these actions and narratives, I refect on the importance of both food justice and prisoner justice to transforming carceral food systems and call for greater acknowledgment of carceral food systems within food movement discourses and campaigns.  

  Critical Criminology (2023) 31:83–104

By  Netanel Dagan and Shmuel Baron

Criminologists have criticized the gap between retributive theory and prison realities. In this study, we drew on qualitative findings from the Supreme Court judges of Israel to explore how judicial decision-makers construct the relationship between their retributive theory and their vision of prison life. We found that these judges perceived prison to be a disproportionate and cruel punishment. In responding to prison excessiveness, these judges constructed a “veil of ignorance” between the phases of sentencing and imprisonment by (a) re-theorizing retribution; (b) closing the gap between sentencing and prison, and (c) neutralizing responsibility. The findings shed light on the judiciary’s epistemology of prisons and its meaning for their retributive theory. In conclusion, the boundaries of retributive scholarship should be expanded to include more fully the problematic meaning of prison cruelties for judges’ philosophies and consciousness.

Critical Criminology, 2025, 18p.

By Ben Stickle, Steven Sprick Schuster

Recent expansions in prison school offerings and the re-introduction of the Second Chance Pell Grant have heightened the need for a better understanding of the effectiveness of prison education programs on policy-relevant outcomes. We estimate the effects of various forms of prison education on recidivism, post-release employment, and post-release wages. Using a sample of 152 estimates drawn from 79 papers, we conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the effect of four forms of prison education (adult basic education, secondary, vocational, and college). We find that prison education decreases recidivism and increases post-release employment and wages. The largest effects are experienced by prisoners participating in vocational or college education programs. We also calculate the economic returns on educational investment for prisons and prisoners. We find that each form of education yields large, positive returns due primarily to the high costs of incarceration and, therefore, high benefits to crime avoidance. The returns vary across education types, with vocational education having the highest return per dollar spent ($3.05) and college having the highest positive impact per student participating ($16,908).

American Journal of Criminal Justice, Volume 48, pages 1263–1294, (2023):

By Zarek Khan

This article is based on interview data (N = 16) collected in a medium security men’s English prison (HMP Wandsworth). It begins with an introduction of the Incentives and Earned Privileges scheme and outlines the amendments to Incentives and Earned Privileges that have transformed prisoners’ requirements for progression during their sentence. As the article demonstrates, the policy alteration increases the need for prisoners to be visibly compliant by staff in order to advance through the scheme; it is no longer sufficient to be invisibly compliant. To this end, I present a typology of visibility that illustrates prisoner compliance and outcomes to the Incentives and Earned Privileges scheme. The article situates the revisions made to Incentives and Earned Privileges against the backdrop of neoliberal informed penal politics. The article concludes by summarising the key theoretical and practical implications of the study.

Criminology & Criminal Justice 2022, Vol. 22(1) 97–114 , 2020  

By Joseph Hennessy

Mass incarceration is a uniquely American phenomenon. With roots in chattel slavery, modern mass incarceration truly exploded in the latter half of the 20th Century. As Reagan-era politicians advocated for fiscal conservatism on the one hand and heavy-handed responses to crime on the other, private prison pioneers saw an opportunity to derive profit from society’s most vulnerable. Today, private prisons house as much as half of some states’ total prison population, and private prison corporations have demonstrated an insatiable desire to expand their reach. This Note explores the unique social vulnerability of privately incarcerated people through a statutory and judicial lens. It highlights the unique burdens placed on private prisoners that put them at greater risk of personal harm and civil rights violations than their publicly incarcerated counterparts. This Note attempts to incentivize corporate officers of private prisons to maintain safer prisons by imputing to them criminal liability for their subordinates’ crimes. It does so by advocating for the prosecution of unscrupulous corporate officers via the responsible corporate officer doctrine in the 9th Circuit, which has been particularly receptive to expansions of that doctrine.

33 J. L. & Pol'y 203 (2024), 31p.

By Tamara Ryan and Cole Anderson   

Upon release, formerly incarcerated people often have few resources to get by while they are seeking employment. They struggle to find work because of criminal stigma, low education levels, and work history gaps. Supporting formerly incarcerated individuals upon their re-entry helps ensure they can take part in the activities needed for employment, such as resume preparation and learning job search skills. One key to improving the likelihood of employment post-incarceration is to ensure returning citizens have adequate financial resources and support to address their immediate needs and allow a focus on gaining employment. Moving more formerly incarcerated people into the workforce presents a massive opportunity for the state. Not having these individuals in the workforce is a lost opportunity for both employers and the state and increases the likelihood they will return to prison or will be rearrested, adding to the cost burden for the state. Key Findings • Formerly incarcerated people are 24% less likely to return to prison when they have acquired new skills and maintained employment during incarceration. • An estimated 6,000 individuals are released from Colorado prisons annually, a number that is roughly equivalent to 20% of the new entrants that are added to the state workforce each year. This number is also 1.5 times larger than Cherry Creek High School, the largest high school in the Denver area. • Breakthrough, a Colorado nonprofit that works with formerly incarcerated individuals, has helped those citizens achieve a 94% employment rate after their release. If Breakthrough’s results could be replicated for all applicable individuals exiting prison, 2,400 more individuals would be employed among each annual prison release cohort. Together those 2,400 individuals would contribute to GDP growth totaling more than $1 billion and a $650 million increase in personal income.  • Colorado’s current 3-year recidivism rate is 28%. Reducing that rate to Breakthrough’s 6% rate would save the state an estimated $55 million annually in recidivism-related costs, realized after the three-year recidivism measurement period. • Inmates working in Colorado’s prisons earn just dollars per day.i Marginally increasing the income inmates can earn while working in prison and on work release programs could help reduce the financial burden to the state through decreased public benefit use and lower recidivism rates. • There is a strong connection between employment and lasting economic benefits for formerly incarcerated individuals. • Colorado currently lacks any data to capture the outcomes, particularly the employment and earnings outcomes, of former inmates. This deficit makes it difficult to gauge the success of post-release programs. • Over the 5-year period prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, more than half of those who recidivated went back to prison because of technical violations such as possessing a firearm or failing to report to a parole officer, not commission of new crimes.  Employment for Returning Citizens Employment is a critical component of successful re-entry into the community after release from incarceration. A study by the Institute of Politics at the John F. Kennedy School of Government found a lack of employment was one of the most significant risk factors affecting successful re-entry.ii Researchers also found community organizations that offer returning citizens assistance with employment were most successful when they provided a holistic approach that included both training and job placement and emphasized high quality jobs with upward mobility potential. Positive benefits of employment include decreased reliance on state assistance, increased self-esteem, a more positive sense of identity, and a life made more stable because of income. Employers also benefit from successful reentry. Hiring formerly incarcerated individuals expands hiring pools at a time when businesses report difficulty finding talent, provides evidence of nondiscriminatory hiring practices, and creates potential tax credit and free bonding service opportunities. Additionally, employers could reduce training costs by hiring individuals who received training while incarcerated. Unfortunately, research shows a felony conviction or incarceration makes individuals significantly less employable. After release, finding a job can take six months or more.iii Providing resources for released individuals to get and keep a job decreases the risk of recidivism because it ensures these citizens are meeting the requirements of parole, contributing to their households, paying off fines or making restitution, and forming the prosocial connections that discourage re-offending. National data shows more than 27% of formerly incarcerated people are unemployed, a number that is higher than the U.S. unemployment rate at any time in history, including the Great Depression. Unemployment is worse for women than men, particularly for formerly incarcerated black women, whose unemployment rate is 43.6%.iv There is a clear connection between unemployment and likelihood to engage in crime. One study found that, among unemployed men in their 30s, more than half had been arrested or convicted of a crime. Additionally, it is important to remember the unemployment rate only measures people who are actively looking for work and does not include discouraged workers who have stopped looking for jobs. When these individuals are included in the calculation, the jobless rate reaches closer to 60%.

Greenwood Village, CO: Common Sense Institute, 2025. 18p.

By Andrew Garin, Dmitri K. Koustas, Carl McPherson, Samuel Norris, Matthew Pecenco, Evan K. Rose, Yotam Shem-Tov, and Jeffrey Weaver.

We study the effect of incarceration on wages, self-employment, and taxes and transfers in North Carolina and Ohio using two quasi-experimental research designs: discontinuities in sentencing guidelines and random assignment to judges. Across both states, incarceration generates short-term drops in economic activity while individuals remain in prison. As a result, a year-long sentence decreases cumulative earnings over five years by 13%. Beyond five years, however, there is no evidence of lower employment, wage earnings, or self-employment in either state, as well as among defendants with no prior incarceration history. These results suggest that upstream factors, such as other types of criminal justice interactions or pre-existing labor market detachment, are more likely to be the cause of low earnings among the previously incarcerated, who we estimate would earn just $5,000 per year on average if spared a prison sentence.

Working Paper 32747, ”National Bureau of Economic Research”, July 2024. 77p.

By Marco Castillo, Sera Linardi, Ragan Petrie

Many previously incarcerated individuals are rearrested following release from prison. We investigate whether encouragement to use reentry support services reduces rearrest. Field experiment participants are offered a monetary incentive to complete different dosages of visits, either three or five, to a support service provider. The incentive groups increased visits, and one extra visit reduces rearrests three years after study enrollment by six percentage points. The results are driven by Black participants who are more likely to take up treatment and benefit the most from visits. The study speaks to the importance of considering first-stage heterogeneity and heterogeneous treatment effects.

Munich : Munich Society for the Promotion of Economic Research - CESifo GmbH

Munich Society for the Promotion of Economic Research - CESifo, 2024. 46p.

By Charlie Taylor

The rate of self-harm among women in prison has rocketed in the last 10 years and is now 8.5 times higher than in men’s jails.

Rather than specific health care interventions, this thematic focuses on what practical support officers and leaders can offer women to reduce the likelihood that they will resort to self-harm.

We found that the paucity of regimes, the difficulties in enabling visits, and the lack of training or support for officers all contributed to a failure to help women cope. Staff spent a lot of their time helping women suffering acute crises, leaving little time to provide less intensive yet vital support for other women, which was taking a toll on the mental health of both staff and the women in their care.

London: HM Inspector of Prisons, 2025. 47p.

By Samuel A. Torres

This report investigates the alignment of scores on the Criminogenic Risk and Behavioral Health Needs Framework (“risk-needs framework”) with recidivism likelihood as part of a broader evaluation of the Resource Reentry Center (RRC) and Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Program (JMHCP) in Bernalillo County. Recidivism is operationalized as a subsequent arrest beyond an initial booking into the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC). The capacity of the risk-needs framework to predict new bookings is compared with that of the Proxy Risk to Recidivate Screener (“Proxy”), one of the screening tools used to construct risk-needs framework scores. Retrospective analysis of jail data over an eight-month period for over 6,000 inmates originally released between July and October 2019 indicates that risk-needs framework scores do not correspond to jail readmission rates or length of stay in a consistent manner. The Proxy scores align much more closely with subsequent bookings and length of stay. If the goal of the risk-needs framework is at least partly to predict recidivism risk, this report recommends the Proxy be used in lieu of the full framework to screen arrestees’ risk to reoffend.

Albuquerque: University of New Mexico, Institute for Social Research, Center for Applied Research and Analysis, 2021. 13p.  

By Elise M. Ferguson, Alise O’Connell 

 This report follows a cohort of more than 28,000 inmates released from the Metropolitan Detention Center in 2010 over a nine-year follow-up time period. Overall recidivism is described as well as recidivism by sex, race/ethnicity, and age at release. Also presented are cumulative recidivism rates and rates by year of first return to custody. 

 Albuquerque: University of New Mexico, Institute for Social Research, Center for Applied Research and Analysis, 2020. 80p

By E. Ferguson, H. De La Cerda, and P. Guerin 

This report reviews the impact of preventive detention motions on the Failure to Appear (FTA) and New Criminal Activity (NCA) rate for individuals in Bernalillo County charged with felony crimes and for which the Public Safety Assessment (PSA) was administered and used in the pretrial release decision making process from the Bernalillo County Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC). This report contains several sections. Following this introduction, we include a brief description of the sample of court cases used in this review. Next, we discuss PSA recommendations and crime types, the PSA and pretrial detention motions, pretrial detention motions and FTA and NCA rates, and NCA and charge levels. 

Highlights: • A Pre-Trial Detention motion was more likely to be granted for cases with more restrictive PSA recommendations. • Preventive Detention Motions were not associated with failure to appear to court or new criminal activity. • As PSA recommendation categories became more restrictive FTA rates and NCA rates increased. • The most serious charge for BCMC cases were violent (35%), property (30%), and drug (27%). • ROR release recommendations accounted for 32.7% of violent charges recommendations. RORs had an FTA rate of 8.5% and an NCA rate of 8.3%. • PSA recommendation categories were not evenly distributed between violent and non-violent charges. • Preventive detention motions have been filed for all PSA recommendation categories, including 18.7% with a ROR. • Higher FTA and NCA rates were associated with drug offenses, property offenses and public order offenses. • Overall, the new criminal activity rate was less than 20% and was primarily for charges of a lower or equivalent level as the assessed case. 

Albuquerque: University of New Mexico, Institute for Social Research , 2020. 16p.