Submitted by user on
Study Name
Second Chance Act (SCA) Adult Demonstration
Study Sharepoint ID
25163
Characteristics

Subgroups

Subgroup data - Female
Yes
Subgroup data - Male
Yes
Subgroup data - White
No
Subgroup data - Black
No
Count age
0
Count Young Adults
0
Count Hard-to-employ
0
Count Disability
0
Count chronically ill
0
Count mentally ill
0
Count substance dependent
0
Count formerly incarcerated
0
Count Justice involved
0
Count limited work history
0
Count homeless
0
Count immigrants
0
Count refugees
0
Count veterans
0
Count female
0
Count Male
0
Count Any postsecondary education
0
Count With a high school diploma or GED
0
Count No high school diploma or GED
0
Count Married
0
Count Parents
0
Count Single Parents
0
Count Non-Custodial Parents
0
Count Employed
0
Count Self employed
0
Count Unemployed
0
Count Disconnected/discouraged workers
0
Count general low-income population
0
Count Very low income (as classified by the authors)
0
Count welfare population
0
Count long-term welfare recipients
0
Count Asian
0
Count Black or African American
0
Count Hispanic or Latino of any race
0
Count American Indian or Alaska Native
0
Count Pacific islander
0
Count White
0
Count More than one race
0
Count Unknown race
0
Percent Disability
12.80
Percent fomerly incarcerated
100.00
Percent Justice involved
100.00
Percent female
21.10
Percent Male
78.90
Percent Any postsecondary education
6.10
Percent No high school diploma or GED
24.40
Percent With a high school diploma or GED
75.60
Percent Asian
1.10
Percent Black or African American
32.20
Percent Hispanic or Latino of any race
9.80
Percent American Indian or Alaska Native
14.10
Percent Pacific islander
2.10
Percent White
51.00
Group formation formatted

The study included seven sites, each of which used tailored random assignment and enrollment procedures. Across all sites, people were eligible to participate in the study if they were age 18 or older, had been convicted of a crime as an adult, were currently or had been recently imprisoned, and were classified as having a medium or high risk of recidivism (each site used a different assessment). Sites also selected a specific target population based on demographic characteristics (such as men, women, or people age 30 or younger), type of incarceration facility, expected time to release, and the community or neighborhood to which the individual was returning. Individuals were identified by referrals from probation or parole partners, word of mouth, flyers distributed in facilities to generate inmate interest, or lists of eligible participants generated by program staff using a full roster of inmates. After attending an information session, being confirmed as eligible, and agreeing to participate in the study, people were randomly assigned either to the intervention or the comparison group. Random assignment probabilities varied across sites. A total of 966 people were randomly assigned to either the intervention group (606) or the comparison group (360) from December 2011 to March 2013.

Study timing formatted

Evaluators randomly assigned people into groups for the study from December 2011 to March 2013. The study reports employment and earnings impacts up to two years after random assignment.

Study funding formatted

National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.

Sample Characteristics

The study examined formerly incarcerated people. Within the full sample, 86 percent of study participants had been incarcerated as of random assignment, and half had been incarcerated five or more times before random assignment. Most were male (79 percent), and 51 percent were White, 32 percent were African American, 10 percent were Hispanic, and 14 percent were American Indian or Alaska Native. Half were age 30 or younger, and one quarter were older than 40. One-quarter lacked a high school diploma or equivalent certificate, and 6 percent had attended college. Most (92 percent) had been employed in the past.

Implementing organization formatted

Lead implementors varied by site and included state departments of correction, local human services agencies, local health agencies, and a sheriff's office. Some services were also provided in partnership with corrections agencies, departments of correction, nonprofit organizations, departments of public health, community colleges, and other local agencies.

Program history

The program was newly developed, but the services expanded on existing reentry services offered by the implementing agencies.

Treatment condition formatted

Seven sites participated in the SCA Adult Demonstration, with each providing somewhat different services to the people in the intervention group. All sites provided case management and this served as the cornerstone service for six of the seven sites. Three sites provided education and training; six sites provided employment assistance, such as job search and placement assistance, resume and interview skills development, and soft-skills training; six sites provided substance abuse treatment services; five sites provided cognitive behavioral therapy, with three also providing additional mental health services; six sites provided services to encourage pro-social behavior, such as parenting classes or stress and anger management services; and five sites provided housing assistance or other supportive services. The program focused on currently incarcerated people and those who were recently released. Six sites served people before and after release, and one site served people only after their release.

Comparison condition formatted

People in the comparison group did not have full access to SCA case management or the other services provided by SCA, though they did have access to regular correctional system services and could attend workshops and other services provided by SCA to the public. In two sites, prerelease SCA services were available to many people in the comparison group, although preference was given to (1) people with a court order to participate in the services and (2) those in the intervention group. In all other sites, prerelease SCA services, except for case management, were generally available to the comparison group.

Mandatory services formatted

None.

Timing of study formatted

Most participants received services for more than six months (62 percent), and about one-quarter received services for more than one year.

Program funding formatted

U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance.

Setting details formatted

The program took place in seven sites, located in Allegheny County, PA; San Francisco, CA; San Mateo County, CA; Marion County, OR; Kentucky; Oklahoma; and South Dakota. Service provision occurred while people were incarcerated and after their release.

Secondary domains examined

Recidivism, Housing, Health, Substance use, Child support

Earliest publication year
2013
Most recent publication year
2018
Manuscripts
Check edits flag
No
Primary Service
Case management
Enrollment Period
December 2011 to March 2013
Intervention Duration
8.00
Subgroup data - Hispanic
No
Intervention Cost
$9437
Comparison cost
$6481