Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Planning for the Future of the US Correctional System

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Simulation Strategies to Reduce Recidivism

Abstract

This chapter will discuss the problems our correctional system faces after decades of growing prison populations. We focus specifically on examining the delivery of treatment in the criminal justice corrections system, a long neglected aspect of correctional planning, and promote the use of simulation modeling to explore the outcomes of implementing more cohesive treatment strategies on national and local levels. The treatment plan we advocate is guided by risk-need-responsivity 9RNR) principles that have been shown to impact recidivism levels. We discuss how the adoption of the RNR framework can inform simulation strategies. Throughout this book, authors focus on the various aspects of building appropriate simulation model inputs for national and local models. A discussion of the chapters included in this book will be presented and how each contributes to advancing our capacity to use simulation modeling for the purpose of correctional planning and management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Hoge, R. D. (1990). Classification for effective rehabilitation: Rediscovering psychology. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17(1), 19–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, J. S. (2006). The recent past and near future of risk and/or need assessment. Crime & Delinquency, 52(1), 7–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct. Elsevier Science Ltd.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). Rehabilitating criminal justice policy and practice. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 16(1), 39–55. doi:10.1037/a0018362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, D. A., Zinger, I., Hoge, R. D., Bonta, J., Gendreau, P., & Cullen, F. T. (1990). Does correctional treatment work? A clinically-relevant and psychologically informed meta-analysis. Criminology, 28(3), 369–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Auerhahn, K. (2003). Selective incapacitation and public policy: Evaluating California’s imprisonment crisis. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J. (2009). Reducing America’s correctional populations: a strategic plan. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Corrections.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J. (1990). America’s growing correctional-industrial complex. National Council on Crime and Delinquency. San Francisco, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biskupic, J. (2011, May 24). Supreme Court stands firm on prison crowding. USA Today.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourgon, G., & Armstrong, B. (2005). Transferring the principles of effective treatment into a “real world” prison setting. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 32(1), 3–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, T. (2012). Signaling and meta-analytic evaluations the presence of latent offender groups: The importance of coherent target group selection. Criminology & Public Policy, 11(1), 61–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caudy, M. (2013). Reducing recidivism through correctional programming: using meta-analyses to inform the RNR simulation tool. In simulation strategies to reduce recidivism: risk need responsivity (RNR) modeling in the criminal justice system. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clear, T., & Austin, J. (2009). Reducing Mass Incarceration: Implications of the Iron Law of Prison Populations. Harvard Law & Policy Review. 3, 307–324.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Clear, T., Waring, E., & Scully, K. (2005). Communities and reentry: Concentrated reentry cycling. In J. Travis & C. Visher (Eds.), Prisoner reentry and crime in America (pp. 179–208). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, F. T. (2005). The twelve people who saved rehabilitation: How the science of criminology made a difference. Criminology, 43(1), 1–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, F. T., & Jonson, C. L. (2011). Correctional theory: Context and consequences. SAGE Publications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farabee, D. (2005). Rethinking rehabilitation: Why can’t we reform our criminals? Washington DC: American Enterprise Institute Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedmann, P. D., Taxman, F. S., & Henderson, C. E. (2007). Evidence-based treatment practices for drug-involved adults in the criminal justice system. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 32(3), 267–277. doi:10.1016/j.jsat.2006.12.020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gendreau, P. (1996). The principles of effective intervention with offenders. In A. T. Harland (Ed.), Choosing correctional options that work: Defining the demand and evaluating the supply (pp. 117–130). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaze, L. (2011). Correctional population in the United States, 2010. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottschalk, M. (2010). Cell blocks & red ink: Mass incarceration, the great recession & penal reform. Daedalus-Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 139(3), 62–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillsman, S. T. (1990). Fines and day fines. Crime and Justice, 12, 49–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lacey, N. (2010). American imprisonment in comparative perspective. Daedalus-Journal of American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 139(3), 102–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langan, P. A. & Levin, D. J. (2002). Recidivism of prisoners released in 1994. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Special report. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latessa, E. J., Smith, P., Schweitzer, M., & Brusman Lovins, L. (2009). Evaluation of selected institutional offender treatment programs for the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections. Prepared for the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections in Harrisburg, PA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowenkamp, C. T. & Latessa, E. J. (2005). Developing successful reentry programs: Lessons learned from the “what works” research. Corrections Today, 67(2), 72–74; 76–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowenkamp, C. T., Latessa, E. J., & Smith, P. (2006). Does correctional program quality really matter? The impact of adhering to the principles of effective intervention. Criminology & Public Policy, 5(3), 201–220. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9133.2006.00388.

  • Lynch, J., & Sabol, W. (2001). Prisoner reentry in perspective (Crime policy report, Vol. 3). Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie, D. L. (2006). What works in corrections: reducing the criminal activities of offenders and delinquents. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. L., Lichtenstein, B., Jenkot, R. B., & Forde, D. (2012). They can take us over any time they want: Correctional officers’ responses to prison crowding. The Prison Journal, 92(1), 88–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinson, R. (1974). What works? Questions and answers about prison reform. The Public Interest, 35, 22–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mauer, M. (2011). Sentencing reform: Amid mass incarcerations-guarded optimism. Criminal Justice, 26(1), 27–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, N., & Tonry, M. (1990). Between prison and probation: Intermediate punishments in a rational sentencing system. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagel, S. S. (Ed.). (1977). Modeling the criminal justice system. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, T. (1992). The re-emergence of correctional intervention. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pattavina, A. (2009). Use of electronic monitoring as persuasive technology: Reconsidering the empirical evidence on the effectiveness of electronic monitoring. Victims & Offenders, 4(4), 385–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pattavina, A., & Taxman, F. (2007). Community corrections and soft technology. In J. Byrne & D. Rebovich (Eds.), The new technology of crime, law and social control. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petersilia, J. (2005). From cell to society. In J. Travis & C. Visher (Eds.), Prisoner reentry and crime in America (pp. 15–49). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pew Charitable Trusts (2011). State of recidivism: The revolving door of America’s Prisons. Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, M. S. (2011). Rehabilitation in the punitive era: The gap between rhetoric and reality in U.S. prison programs. Law & Society Review, 45(1), 33–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. (2010). Clearing the “troubled assets” of America’s punishment bubble. Daedalus-Journal American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 139(3), 91–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taxman, F. S., & Bouffard, J. A. (2003). Substance abuse counselors’ treatment philosophy and the content of treatment services provided to offenders in drug court programs. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 32(3), 267–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taxman, F., & Marlowe, D. (2006). Risk, needs, responsivity: In action or inaction? Crime & Delinquency, 25(2), 75–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taxman, F., Perdoni, M., & Harrison, L. D. (2007). Drug treatment services for adult offenders: The state of the state. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 32(3), 239–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taxman, F. S., & Belenko, S. (2012). Implementing evidence-based practices in community corrections and addiction treatment (2012th ed.). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Travis, J., Solomon, A., & Waul, M. (2001). From prison to home: The dimensions and consequences of prisoner reentry. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Travis, J., & Visher, C. (2005). Introduction: Viewing public safety through the reentry lens. In J. Travis & C. Visher (Eds.), Prisoner reentry and crime in America (pp. 1–14). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Uggen, C., Wakefield, S., & Western, B. (2005). Work and family perspectives on reentry. In J. Travis & C. Visher (Eds.), Prisoner reentry and crime in America (pp. 209–243). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Visher, C., & Kachnowski, V. (2007). Finding work on the outside: Results from the “returning home” project in Chicago. In S. Bushway, M. Stoll, & D. F. Weiman (Eds.), Barriers to reentry? The labor market for released prisoners in post-industrial America (pp. 80–144). New York, NY: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, T., & Maruna, S. (2007). Rehabilitation. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisburg, R. & Petersilia, J. (2010). The dangers of pyrrhic victories against mass incarceration. Daedalus-Journal American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 139(3), 124–133; 146–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welsh, W. N., & Zajac, G. (2004). A census of prison-based drug treatment programs: Implications for programming, policy, and evaluation. Crime & Delinquency, 50(1), 108–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Western, B. (2008). Reentry: Reversing mass imprisonment. Boston Review. Retrieved July 12, 2012 from http://www.bostonreview.net/BR33.4/western.php.

  • Western, B., & Pettit, B. (2010). Incarceration & social inequality. Daedalus, 139(3), 8–19. doi:10.1162/DAED_a_00019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zarkin, G., Dunlap, L., Hicks, K., & Mamo, D. (2005). Benefits and costs of methadone treatments: Results from a lifetime simulation model. Health Economics, 14(11), 1133–1150.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Criminology and Justice Studies, University of Massachusetts Lowell, 1 University Avenue, Lowell, MA, 01854, USA

    April Pattavina Ph.D.

  2. Department of Criminology, Law and Society, George Mason University, 10900 University Boulevard, Fairfax, VA, 20110, USA

    Faye S. Taxman Ph.D.

Authors
  1. April Pattavina Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Faye S. Taxman Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to April Pattavina Ph.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Criminology, Law, and Soci, George Mason University, University Blvd. 10900, Fairfax, 20110, Virginia, USA

    Faye S. Taxman

  2. , School of Criminology and Justice Studie, University of Massachusetts Lowell, University Avenue 1, Lowell, 01854, Massachusetts, USA

    April Pattavina

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pattavina, A., Taxman, F.S. (2013). Planning for the Future of the US Correctional System. In: Taxman, F., Pattavina, A. (eds) Simulation Strategies to Reduce Recidivism. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6188-3_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation